I generally don't jump in on politically oriented debates, as I don't feel there is ever a winner, but to address this comment:I agree with this and to carry it a bit further as I feel the perception applies to our President, too many people mistake mediocre public speaking skills as a sign of lack of intelligence.

As far as the Hollywood types go, I read an article about a Hollywood agent (I think) that was calling for a boycott on French wines because of their current political stance against a war in Iraq. Shouldn't this hypocrite call for a boycott of the celebrities from which he makes a living for the same reason?

 

Damn, I got too much education to figure out which side Steve is on.

I hate it when that happens!

 

the metaphysics and quantum mechanics comming out again Raoul?

 

Gee, I never thought President Bush had bad speaking skills, atleast not as bad as President Ford.

Isn't bad and mediocre the same thing?

 

I think Steve makes a great point. The hollywierd agent makes a stand on a specific issue but his values are weak and he does not make the connection to how these same values should relate to his livelihood.

While we may encourage others to share our values and beliefs, it is more important that we practice what we preach.

Ok, am I getting way to overboard for our fun little site?

 

"For man, when perfected, is the best of animals, but when separated from law and justice, he is the worst of all, since armed injustice is the more dangerous, meant to be used by intelligence and virtue, he is the most unholy and savage of all animals, and the worst of full of lust and gluttony"

 

You know, I see both sides of it politically, but I agree with Raoul. Each and every person in the country should have the right to speak their mind, no matter how crazy we may think they are. If one voice is shut out, then that is unconstitutional, and it is no longer a free country. The same reason I do not agree with censorship (and I mean 100% censorship, I do think that it is good that we have guidelines on what kind of language can be used on the radio and television, you know, but I don't think anything should be 100% unaccessible for whoever in this country that wants it). This is why I do not buy any music from Wal-Mart. They refuse to sell some records to people who are over 21, and they are blatant about not caring whether or not I have a choice of what I want to hear. The offensive records already have warning labels on them, so I know what I am geting into when I buy a cd, and if I don't want to hear offensive language, then I should not buy the cd. They should offer both versions, but instead, they want one version completely gone. If someone is an adult, they should have a choice of whatever, not just what certain people in power want me to see or hear. (Granted it is not for everyone, but if the identification is checked, then what's the problem? They do not seem to have any problems selling cigarettes...) When one side doesn't have a fair chance, then it is not a free contry, it is (in a small part, but still) ruled by one side. A republic (like the United States) is supposed to give everyone an equal chance, not give 100% power to the majority. If that is the case, then why do we have a government? We have seen how well the 'survival of the fittest' works in the dark ages, and I would like to think that we are more civilized than people were then. However strongly that anyone may feel about any subject, someone else feels just as strongly in the opposite direction, and they have the same rights as anyone else does, so agree or don't agree, but let whoever wants to speak do so. I think it was Thomas Jefferson (correct me if I am wrong) "I may not agree with what you say, but I will die defending your right to say it." Freedom is the idea this country was built on!

No flames intended towards anyone!

 

This pseudo-debate is very represtative of the principles that make this country great!


Mike -
Is it fair to "assume" this man is a hypocrit? It is entirely possible that he promotes similar beliefs in his work.

Larry Haggman like every one else is entitled to an opinion, regardless of social stature. (Regardless of how wrong )

 

Raoul -
You are the king of subtle humor!

 

I hope I haven't come across as being against someone here. I feel more kinship to those with opposing views than I do to one who is apathetic. I like to think of myself as a free thinker, judging each issue on it's own merit and not subscribing to any particular dogma.
That said, I find that most of the time I end up on the Right Wing side of an issue.

I listen for merits in the issues presented by both sides.
I dismiss discourse that attacks the messenger and not the message (Rush Limbaugh is notorious for this).
"He is a member of..."
"He is gay...."
"He lives in..."
"He came from..."
"He is an idiot..."
"They are like children who must be taught..."
(If you take all of that out, what was really said?)
That crap is dismissed and the orator losses points with me.

If you're points are strong enough to win, you don't need to attack, ridicule, belittle or be louder.
1)State your points
2)Compare them with the opposing points, siting differences
3)State any hidden agenda you believe the opposition has for their stand
(I will have to figure out for myself what your hidden agenda is, as I'm sure you won't reveal it.)

As for this particular thread, I didn't see or hear what Larry Hagman actually said. I have to use my own common sense and come to the conclusion that Mr Hagman did not walk up to a microphone and say "President Bush is a stupid man with no education" and then walk away. Obviously he said something else. What could it have been? Why is that kept from us?
I don't like being tricked.
The newspapers do it.
The TV does it.
Madison Avenue does it.
Limbaugh does it.
We do it to each other.

Nothing but love for my F150 buddies,
Raoul

 

Fine discussion, I'll toss my hat into the ring of this political fray.

Regardless of what you all say I still think that Barbara Eden was way hot, even if she was fron the middle east! Rush Limbuagh has nothing on "Jeanie"

This gentelmen, will be my contribution to world peace and harmonious relations.

 

I'll second that emotion.
I wonder how many future and potential Einsteins, presidents,and probably actors and human sheilds got flushed down the drain dreaming of that Jeanie while in puberty........

WT

 

I was 10 thru 15 when it was on.
I figure about 24,000 Raouls and 28,000 Raoulinas.

 

Oh the memories! The stuff that made TV great.

This has been a great discussion thread and it really seems that everyone who has posted has been of similar mindset. How we choose to address the issue is up to each one of us. Some may accept it as par for the course (which it seems to be) while the other extreme may find it offensive that the statement was made at all. While I would never challange anyone's right to say what they want, no matter how stupid I believe it is, and I would never want to take that right away, I also am thankful that I have the right to disagree and take the steps that I personally believe are appropriate for the situation. The steps that are right for me.

As for the validity or context in which the statement by Hagman was made, I really have no idea. It is not so much the specific remarks by Hagman that I find offensive as it is the general sentiment that comes from Hollywood. I had the honor of meeting Charlton Heston (Moses) a few years ago, and while he may have flipped his rocker now, he was an amazing man with values that I respect. I just wish there were more like him in the entertainment industry so that the values that I concure with had a voice equal to the others.

Limbaugh and Liddy and the others are really just as bad. I guess they are trying to fight fire with fire but listening to them makes me want to gouge my eyeballs out with an OEM tailpipe!

Listen, look for the truth, make your own choices, and then live by those values. And if they happen to not be like mine, I'll form a militia and bomb your sorry a$$ back to the stone age! LOL

 

I wish this thread had been named something else.
I've been skipping over it- The reason being I saw"Larry Hagman" and thought "Who gives a ***** about Larry Hagman??" The guy's a %uckin, wackjob, and /or bi-polar at the very least. ....."Not that there's anything wrong with that"......
I think part of undercurrent of what we're talking about is that people that have had a narcisitic bent or some sort of identity malady have been drawn to the performing arts.
(Michael Jackson is an extreme example as his identity issues have actually manifested themselves physically- He actually "SEES" something different in the mirror then we all SEE. This must happen to some dergee with all of us but it is particularly important to actors AND POLITITIONS.)
Once these people become "celebrated" and accumulate more and more points (dollars) they take this as positive re-enforcement of their significance on the world stage and that the values, ideolgies and idisynchosies that have developed as a result of surviving and "succeeding" in the cesspool worlds of acting, modeling, and, advertising (HOLLYWOOD in a word) are therefore sound and valid. Their inherent narcicism now drives them to say instead of "LOOK AT ME", " LISTEN TO ME"
and our media the other ****** in this relationship (actually pimps is probably more accurate) provide them with a venue, and unfortunetly alot of us eat it up- a symbiotic relationship .
I aggree with Raoul for the most part as that is a treatise on rational behaviour and thinking. What remains unclear to me is where do 1st Amendment rights stop and inciting to riot begin?? one a right, one a crime. I think that there is a large grey area and that is where these idiots are now hovering. Does anyone think that the world will not be a better place without Sadam Hussein? Does anyone not REALLY believe that the proliferation of WMD in the hands of terrorists is bad for the planet?. Sure there are other threats but you gotta start somewhere. I really think we need to stick together on this one. We gotta circle the wagons and repel all borders. Is there ANYONE else but us to whom this job should be entrusted ?? (Am I sounding narcicistic)

WT