This is about as close to a news “article” that I’ve every come to, but I heard this on the radio this morning and I wanted to share it anyway. As I’ve posted before, there’s been an growing number of actors and actresses that have been coming out for causes lately. Susan Sarandon is by far the most vocal and supports just about anything that goes against the current government, and is supported by her whipping boy Tim Robbins, who still looks like he doesn’t have an independent thought in his head – I’ve often wondered, while watching “Bull Durham,” if he was or wasn’t acting in his rule of Nuke. Of course their latest “cause” is protesting the possible war against Iraq.
The first thing that crosses my mind, when I see one of the Hollywood types running around with their fists in the air, is “What the fuck are they doing?” I mean they’re popular, sure, but they’re actors. Are they “allowed” to protest? What I mean is that being a public figure of sorts, do they have to suspend their right to assemble? Of course not! They’re still citizens and should vocally shoot their mouths off whenever possible. My complaint of these people is that when they are interviewed about their cause – and because they are public figures they do get to express their opinions in a larger forum than the rest of us do, so they do have and added level of responsibility – they speak as if they’re experts on the topics that they support and this is rarely the truth of the matter. I believe these people are involved in these protests solely to increase the value of their own image – if they’re in the news, they’ll surely get more roles and at the least be recognized more. If it’s a noble cause, it helps to bolster their image as a “people person” and people will want to see them in movies more often. Basically, they’ve latched onto the cause to promote themselves. We’ve seen it already, with layman protesters this past month; they’re just out in the crowd to party and only a handful of people are actually committed to the protest itself.
And of course, now that an anti-war movement has started, all sorts of people are coming out of the woodwork. And it’s not even just anti-military action, but it’s anti-Bush now. It’s not just that these idiots don’t agree with the use of force to disarm Iraq, but they are out there slamming the President, whenever they can, like they’re running for office against him! I heard that Sheryl Crow, Richard Gere and Queen Latifah have jumped on the band wagon – Sarandon is obviously still running around, after her little commercial before the State of the Union. The more amusing one is Martin Sheen, who has been playing a US president on “The West Wing.” I’ve never seen the show – one of the few people in North America that hasn’t, I know – but I hear he’s a convincing actor in his role; I’ve always liked his characters in the movies I’ve seen him in – he’s a good actor. However, the dolt has forgotten that he’s just an actor! Lately he’s been tooling around Hollywood, barking “no fighting!” into any camera that holds still for him, and holding court like he’s actually our president. Kinda funny, actually.
Well, Visa must not like his views or his outspokeness on such matters, because they’re pulled his endorsement contract. Sheen’s people say it was because his “anti-war protests” but Visa’s people have denied that theory. In fact, they said that it had nothing to do with his protests, but they did pull the contract. Of course, this is only the beginning of this mess – it will snowball into a “What about Martin’s First Amendment rights” argument and “Why are we blacklisted from movies?” type questions are soon to come. Guess what, Mr. Sheen? You were employed by Visa at their discretion – they could fire you at any time, obviously, and if they don’t agree with you, they are allowed to! Your benefit to them was your image and it is your image that isn’t what it used to be, at least as far as Visa is concerned. You’ve begun to fling yourself all over the media, supporting an idea that the general population might not agree with, or at least is very controversial right now, and by representing Visa, the public will thing your thoughts are Visa’s thoughts! Ask Dell how much flack they took with their spokesman got busted for drugs – you know, “The Dell Kid.” Visa no longer have the image that they original contract to buy – you’ve changed and their cutting their losses! You can say whatever you want, as promised by the First Amendment, but in your field, if what you say makes you look like an irresponsible ass, you might not get any work – this is your choice that you’ve made.
And of course, not all of the actors in Hollywood are against disarming Iraq, right now, either. And yes, these fucks that are out there and rallying against anti-war at this point are anti-arming Iraq and pro-Saddam – how else could you describe it? For 12 years he hasn’t disarmed. He’s blocked UN inspectors from doing their UN-required job. He’s played games and hidden weapons. If you aren’t backing President Bush right now, you are pro-Saddam. Anyway, Jean Claude Van Dam has come out in support of not only the president, but he also agrees that Iraq has had more than enough time to disarm on it’s own. Bruce Willis would have already enlisted, but the Army won’t let him in because he’s beyond their recruiting age range.
I recently saw Richard Gere claiming that “10 million people in this country who say ‘No’, we still have a president who says ‘Yes’. In a democracy, something’s wrong here.” Yes, Dick, your math is wrong: if 10 million people are against the action, that means there’s another 270 million people in this country that aren’t against it, if not for it. Democracy is about the majority of votes passing laws and causing actions and not giving the squeakiest minority the most amount of power. This is the lame and weak type of argument that these protesters try to use to promote their causes – 10 million sounds like a lot, but it’s really just 4% of the whole of the American population.
For the anti-war protestors to get any more attention from me, they need to argue their stance on it’s merits, and not with emotion or bravado. Not a simple “war is wrong!” because there are times when there’s no other options left, i.e. World War II. They need to offer a better solution, in place of military action that might be required, other than “just wait and it will work itself out peacefully!” because that form of policy didn’t work well for Clinton, and it’s directly responsible for the mess the world now has in North Korea. And if the President does have to use his last resort of military action, get behind him and support him! It is quite easy to support the President without agreeing with him. In all of these protests, I’ve never heard “I don’t believe in what President Bush is doing or that he’s 100% right, but if he does send troupes to fight, I will support them all.” These self-rightous asses will end up protesting everything related and ostracized our own troupes who are risking their lives for our freedom.
I think some actors and actresses need a good flogging – they’ve spent too much time in their ivory towers to realize what the real world is like, but they’re still preaching to us to make us change. It’s like trying to learn Italian from someone that only speaks English.