A Huge Strikeout.

[Dewjunkie]

This is silly:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030410/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_jim_litke_1

This is especially silly:

He said the actor's "very public criticism of President Bush helps undermine the U.S. position, which ultimately could put our troops in even more danger."

What?!  How?  Are Republican Guards in Iraq more motivated to fight now that they know Tim Robbins doesn't like the war?  Was Tim going to draw maps of troop movements during a party at the Baseball Hall of Fame?  Maybe he was going to divulge intel on the Achilles Heel of our ground forces in Iraq to the few hundred people and 7 reporters that would have been at this gathering.  To say that because an actor speaks out against something (his right to do so, last time I checked) will "endanger troops" is completely ignorant.  To cancel a party celebrating a classic baseball movie because that actor speaks out is even moreso.

It's a bit hypocritical for people to praise our liberation of the Iraqi people, and then condemn anyone in our own free nation who exercises their right to speak out against the majority.

Sad.  Very sad. 

  

 

 

[Memory's Flame]

I am SoOoOoOo sick of Hollywood Opinions! Actually just the way the media portrays them to be of such importance. In this case... I really hate to say it, but Tom Cruiz's Opinion is no more valuable than mine... or ANYONE elses...

 

[two feathers]

Today at 10:08 AM Dewjunkie said this in Post #1

It's a bit hypocritical for people to praise our liberation of the Iraqi people, and then condemn anyone in our own free nation who exercises their right to speak out against the majority.

Excellent point, Dew.

 

[Lanakila]

Yes they have the right to speak, but the media seems to think what they say is important. That is not necessarily so. My attitude is who cares that some actor, director, or comediene has to say. I don't, that is for sure.

 

[Didymus]

well we have only ourselves to blame we treat actors and other preformers like gods and then wonder why they have such huge egos and dont stay humble. if people were slobbering all over me and acting like i was the best thing since sliced bread i would probaly start to believe it after a while too.

 

[MSBS]

It's a bit hypocritical for people to praise our liberation of the Iraqi people, and then condemn anyone in our own free nation who exercises their right to speak out against the majority.

Sorry, but freedom of speech does not mean you get to say whatever you want without consequence. Everyone, including Tim Robbin's critics have the right to exercise free speech.

Why is it so disturbing to you when other people exercise their rights of freedom of expression in counter to what someone else says? Just because you agreed with the first statement and not the criticism of it? There is nothing here any worse than anyone else being publicly condemed for what they say in public, be it Tim Robins, Trent Lott, or Newt Gingrich.

Maybe the people that owns the baseball hall of fame just didn't want to have the Robbins there for no other reason then he doesn't like him for his political views-- hey this isn't a government owned agency, last I heard people that own things get to control it, it is a free country after all, right?

 

[Goldstein]

Today at 05:17 PM MSBS said this in Post #6

Sorry, but freedom of speech does not mean you get to say whatever you want without consequence.

Actually, yes it does. That is why the government can't jail you for political speech. No society has totally free speech, however, and there is only limited freedom of speech in private affairs here in the US.

 

[Gerry]

Yesterday at 09:08 AM Dewjunkie said this in Post #1

This is silly:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030410/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_jim_litke_1

This is especially silly:



What?!  How?  Are Republican Guards in Iraq more motivated to fight now that they know Tim Robbins doesn't like the war?  Was Tim going to draw maps of troop movements during a party at the Baseball Hall of Fame?  Maybe he was going to divulge intel on the Achilles Heel of our ground forces in Iraq to the few hundred people and 7 reporters that would have been at this gathering.  To say that because an actor speaks out against something (his right to do so, last time I checked) will "endanger troops" is completely ignorant.  To cancel a party celebrating a classic baseball movie because that actor speaks out is even moreso.

It's a bit hypocritical for people to praise our liberation of the Iraqi people, and then condemn anyone in our own free nation who exercises their right to speak out against the majority.

Sad.  Very sad. 

  

 

I agree! His opinions are of absolutely NO consequence. No thinking American could possibly care what any actor thinks about anything. Most of them don't have a real opinion anyway. They just "act" like they do because it is soooooooooooo cool to be anti American. Everyone knows that!

 

[two feathers]

I listen to all opinions, whether they pass through the lips of celebrities or through the thoughts of members on these forums. Every voice is important.

 

[Dewjunkie]

Yesterday at 06:17 PM MSBS said this in Post #6



Everyone, including Tim Robbin's critics have the right to exercise free speech.

You're right.  Mr. Petroskey has every right to disagree with Mr. Robbins' views on war and the Bush Administration.  His mistake is in using the troops' safety as the basis for his disagreement.  Had he just said "I don't like Tim Robbins because he's a Democrat and hates Bush", then at least he would have shown that this is a personal issue, not a matter of national security.  Mr. Robbins' expression of disdain for war and Republicans in general will in no way harm the troops.  I can guarantee the guys riding Bradleys down Saddam Blvd. could care less what he says.     

Why is it so disturbing to you when other people exercise their rights of freedom of expression in counter to what someone else says? Just because you agreed with the first statement and not the criticism of it? 

What is disturbing to me is the ignorance Mr. Petroskey displayed in his statements.  For the record, I don't agree with Tim Robbins, I have been in favor of action against Iraq from the start.  I don't agree with this form of criticism for his political beliefs, because it is blatant personal bias, and his use of "the troops" as justification for his actions is stupid and wrong. 

Maybe the people that owns the baseball hall of fame just didn't want to have the Robbins there for no other reason then he doesn't like him for his political views-- hey this isn't a government owned agency, last I heard people that own things get to control it, it is a free country after all, right?

Mr. Petroskey doesn't own the baseball Hall of Fame, he is the acting president.  There is also an acting board of directors, and I am curious as to whether they all agree with his decision or if they were consulted prior to the cancellation of the festivities.  And while the Hall may be privately owned, there were a lot of people who were looking forward to diverting their attention from the war for a weekend and just talk baseball and movies.  Mr. Petroskey, in his ignorance, made a rash decision that in the long run does nothing but point out his own shallowness and disregard for the people who support the Hall he presides over. 

 

 

[Dewjunkie]

Follow up:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030412/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_hall_cancellations_3

Here's where the hypocrisy rings loudest:

"As much as The Hall of Fame honors our armed forces, this institution should never be used as a platform for public pro-war sentiments — nor public anti-war sentiments. Given the track record of Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, and the timing — with our troops committed in Iraq — a strong possibility existed that they could have used The Hall of Fame as a backdrop for their views.

Isn't that exactly what Mr. Petroskey did by cancelling the festivities because he thought Tim Robbins would say something against the war? By cancelling the celebration because of Tim Robbins views he completely politicized the issue, and in doing so negated his own statement about the Hall not being a place for political views.

 

[seebs]

The more we discuss how much we don't care what actors think, the more we show that people *do* care what celebrities think. They're important to a lot of people, they have name recognition... Yeah, maybe we shouldn't listen to them, but people do.

I'm all for the guy having the right to have whatever opinions he wants, and if people want to buy newspapers with articles about it, fine. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him, or with anyone else.

 

[Gerry]

I'm all for the guy having the right to have whatever opinions he wants, and if people want to buy newspapers with articles about it, fine. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him, or with anyone else.

I would agree that this attitude should apply to all people everywhere and not just Michael Moore!

 

[Brimshack]

Excellent point Dew.