Stu Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by blakman211 What Elton is talking about is the fear factor associated with speasking one's mind in America. I remember in the mid 90's, Jordan said he didnt want to become political because he didnt want it to hurt the selling of his shoes. This is a choice that entertainers face today. Many put their careers on the line when they make a comment against the status quo. They get comments just like the people on this board that they're not smart enough to think like that or make that comment. THey're told to concentrate on what they do best and leave the politics to the politicians, stuff like that. Even People like O'Rielly say to boycott buying their albums or watching their movies because its unamerican. Somebody mentioned Mike Moore as an example to say that celebs are doing this, but what kind of a celebrity do you think that Mike Moore was? His fame is from documentaries. Why do you think that other people, other celebrities haven't said much about the things that they're against? Its cause the media has a field day with this kind of commentary. They will go into the celebrity's past and find incidents that they can use to discredit them, they'll make comments to lower their sales and marketing, and they'll bring on like 4 or 5 guys to their show to attack the statements to make the celebs look stupid. Thats called using free press to control free speech. It's called ramifications, pure and simple. If you want to swim in the deep end the pool, then you need to be ready for the sharks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Stu Negative. If you try to influence others into not seeing the movie, then that is exercising your right to free speech. The movie company, Disney in this case, is free to make the business decision on what is the most appropriate course of action for their bottom line; support the original statements or act on your free speech. Oh, if you want to try to convince other people not to see Moore's movie, then that's also your right. So is learning about all of the lies in the movie, so you'll be prepared when some sucker tries to regurgitate something that he swallowed from the movie. But, the example I chose wasn't an attempt to convince people not to see the movie. It was an attempt to prevent it from being shown at all. To use some other hypotheticals, if you want to set up a table in front of a theatre, and hand out literature that points out some of the lies in the movie, then you're educating people. (Although, I'd say the theatre owner has the right to kick you off of his property: He's invested money in generating publicity for that movie, and you're using his property and his publicity to push your cause. He's not required to provide you with a soapbox.) If, OTOH, your response to the movie (as has been done to many anti-war protestors) is to record the license plates of the cars in the parking lot, and then publish the names, home addresses, phone numbers, and the names, phone numbers, and addresses of their employers, for the sole purpose of encouraging people to pressure the employers of anybody who watched the movie into firing them, then you're no longer simply expressing an alternative viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Woofer Magoo To all of my friends here on extremeskins: I apologize for the above responses - I know they do not conform to my normal style. But when dealing with immature, ignorant, name-calling child brains such as these people have shown themselves to be, sometimes you have to lower yourself to their level. Otherwise, they don't understand. To present them with logical, calm, and reasonable responses is like reading Shakespeare to a dog. I feel bad about it. Again, I apologize. Wow. That is as insulting as anything anybody has said on this thread, maybe more. I do agree that it is more productive to have a reasonable discussions that to yell insults, but I don't think anybody on this site is too dumb to have an intelligent discussion. When someone makes a public statement, they should expect criticism, sometimes it only comes in the form of insults. For example: when a ref makes a bad call, sometimes even very smart people simply yell "booo...you stink ref" I'm sure you are better than that statement that you made, as I am sure the others are better than theirs. I certainly have no bad feelings towards you, and I hope nobody else does, either. As far as what Elton John said, he could very well be right, but it seemed to me like there were plenty of war protests since it began. Certainly now it is no longer taboo to speak against the war. Don't you agree? But really, anybody that earns their money from the public whether they be entertainers or coroporations makes a risk of boycott when they make a political statement. I don't think that will change. Also, I don't think the Bush adminstration themselves have enaged in censorship. Have they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 By the way, thank you to all those who made the effort to bring this into a discussion instead of insult swapping. :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Larry Oh, if you want to try to convince other people not to see Moore's movie, then that's also your right. So is learning about all of the lies in the movie, so you'll be prepared when some sucker tries to regurgitate something that he swallowed from the movie. But, the example I chose wasn't an attempt to convince people not to see the movie. It was an attempt to prevent it from being shown at all. As long as the government is not involved and we are not doing something illegal, we are absolutely within our rights to use our free speech to stop something from being shown, etc. Originally posted by Larry To use some other hypotheticals, if you want to set up a table in front of a theatre, and hand out literature that points out some of the lies in the movie, then you're educating people. (Although, I'd say the theatre owner has the right to kick you off of his property: He's invested money in generating publicity for that movie, and you're using his property and his publicity to push your cause. He's not required to provide you with a soapbox.) Agree totally. It is his soapbox. Therefore if I convince him to not show a movie, etc by exercising my free speech then he can take that soapbox away from the "movie" as well based upon on either his opinion or the customer base he wants to serve. Originally posted by Larry If, OTOH, your response to the movie (as has been done to many anti-war protestors) is to record the license plates of the cars in the parking lot, and then publish the names, home addresses, phone numbers, and the names, phone numbers, and addresses of their employers, for the sole purpose of encouraging people to pressure the employers of anybody who watched the movie into firing them, then you're no longer simply expressing an alternative viewpoint. This is nonsensical behavior that I would not agree with, but it is not directed at those making the statement (i.e., the supposed target of "censorship".) While it may be a form of mild intimidation (and I would agree wrong), such activity does not amount to censorship. The movie still goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Here's the crux of celebrity political speak... These folks aren't used to being 'disagreed with'. Thats really what it boils down to. Elton John probably hasn't heard the word 'no' in 25 or 30 years. His every word is met with praise and agreement. Its that way with ALL celebrities. So when they say something controversial, and say it with all the volume and influence they possess, and are met with 'boo's' or scorn, they can't take it. Here's a newsflash...I get crap for something I SAY damn near every week I work...and so do most other citizens. Thats just the way it is. Sometimes our insight is crystal clear and indisputable, other times we miss the mark. No celebrity anywhere in the history of celebrity, has ever admitted to doing so. No surprises there. I don't see the controversy here. Some aging pop icon makes some grand sweeping statements about a country he clearly has only peripheral knowledge about. Who cares? I'll say it again though....why the absolute defense of someone like Elton John to speak his mind, but the desire to muffle and slap-down those here that want to speak their mind to disagree with him? Could it be that many really AREN'T in favor of free speech? Think hard before you answer. I've asked myself this same question quite a bit lately, and the answer hasn't always reflected favorably upon myself. If you REALLY believe in free speech, you have to be prepared to hear things that really piss you off, and then try and respond without belittling yourself in the process. I think we can all agree on one thing. This season cannot start soon enough. By the way, I hear it from reliable sources that Bernie Taupin thinks Elton is full of ****. And he would know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 I think that the position that those with opposing points of view should be booted from the country and shot for espousing an opposing view that is what some find disagreeable. Do I think that the poster literally meant he should be "shot with rubber bullets" I don't know, but he repeated the suggestion several times. Do you applaud the counter to free speech being violence and intolerance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Tarhog Here's a newsflash...I get crap for something I SAY damn near every week I work...and so do most other citizens. Thats just the way it is. Sometimes our insight is crystal clear and indisputable, other times we miss the mark. No celebrity anywhere in the history of celebrity, has ever admitted to doing so. No surprises there. A friend of mine once said, he knew a very powerfull executive, who said that every morning, as he's getting dressed for work, tells himself: Today, I'm going to make 10 decisions. Six of them are going to be right, and four of them will turn out to be wrong. And, sometime down the road, I'm going to get my behind chewed for two of the wrong ones, and one of the right ones. I'll say it again though....why the absolute defense of someone like Elton John to speak his mind, but the desire to muffle and slap-down those here that want to speak their mind to disagree with him? I think I should point out. Others have pointed out at least three posts advocating retaliation (in at least one case, involving firearms) against Elton John for his comments. Maybe it's just my bias on the subject, but I haven't seen any such "desire to muffle and slap-down those here that want to speak their mind to disagree with him?" All the folks advocating "repurcussions" seem to be on one side, here, and it's not the side you're critisizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Look...first of all Burgold, stop putting words in my mouth. You know I neither appreciate nor agree with over the top crap such as the 'rubber bullets' reference. The only thing I'm guilty of is not reading every word of this thread. In that regard thanks for pointing that particular comment out to me... Larry, you may have a point. But I'll simply say for the 3rd time that nearly everyone says they believe in 'free speech', and nearly all have the urge to muffle and shove back down into their hole those who espouse things which they vehemently disagree with. I've confessed my sins already. I'm working on being more tolerant. But by no means am I or those on the right on this board alone in that particular need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Great points Tarhog. I think people are confusing insults and disagreement with censorship. I think only the government can censor things. Boycotting and protesting (peacefully of course) are freedoms that Americans have. If Disney puts out a propoganda film and nobody sees it, that is not really censorship, just Americans exercising their freedom. Neither is protesting the movie or even yelling empty threats to the people that made it. However once those threats are acted on, then it is illegal. It don't think anyone here means to do any harm to Elton. Except maybe not buy his album, but that was going to happen anyway . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmorris Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Tarhog But I'll simply say for the 3rd time that nearly everyone says they believe in 'free speech', and nearly all have the urge to muffle and shove back down into their hole those who espouse things which they vehemently disagree with. I've confessed my sins already. I'm working on being more tolerant. But by no means am I or those on the right on this board alone in that particular need. I appreciate your honesty. At the same time I agree with Larry's evaluation of this particular thread. Ive noticed that its easier to see contradictions and hypocritical comments when they are coming from those who are on the other side of the issues. I will also admit that its harder to be tolerant of a message when its filled with name calling and sprinkling of STFU's. If you come out with guns blasting, I wouldnt expect those who disagree to be subtle. That said, I've been guilty myself, but learning as I go. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Woofer? So in your post you are criticizing me as the peasant and Elton John as the king due to my post saying: He is making a PUBLIC statement about something that is proven to increase your income and notice of the moment... Which part of that can you really disprove? or are you trying to censure me? Pssst. Speaking out makes you big money.. It's proved over and over. So speaking out about speaking out may get people to talk about you too... Be specific please when you mention the people that didnt gain so far from speaking out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted July 19, 2004 Author Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear Woofer? So in your post you are criticizing me as the peasant and Elton John as the king due to my post saying: He is making a PUBLIC statement about something that is proven to increase your income and notice of the moment... Which part of that can you really disprove? or are you trying to censure me? I think what he's trying to say here, if there is dissention on a particular topic or administration, they should have the right to voice their opinion without being attacked, since the populus must undoubtably agree with the topic or administration in question. Another words, those factors are our voice so we have already spoken on the matter, therefore, we are not permitted to rebut the rebutal, if that makes any sense to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Well, I don't think Elton has made a legit point because the fact is that he DOES have the right to say his "anti war or Bush" opinion if he wishes to, no one is stopping him, but no one is stopping those who disagree with him from criticising him. It's a two way street, you can criticize, but you have to know that some may not agree with your criticism. I do agree with some of the points that Zuck brings up though... if Colin Powell's son is in a position to "retaliate" (I don't know this, I'm just making a point) against people on behalf of the government or a govt agency, then there is a problem. Too few companies own too much of the media IMO. I do believe that the media is becoming more of an opinion pusher rather than a reporting agency. Who ever owns the media can tell them what to report and how. No one has gone to jail over anti war comments, so really, Elton has no clue IMO, however, those on the right that are so positive that this war is the right thing, that are so positive that Bush is right, why havent you enlisted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted July 19, 2004 Author Share Posted July 19, 2004 No one has gone to jail over anti war comments, so really, Elton has no clue IMO, however, those on the right that are so positive that this war is the right thing, that are so positive that Bush is right, why havent you enlisted? I'm sure there are many positions that you champion regularly. Then I ask you, how many have you ACTIVELY participated in, and I don't mean through an internet MB? If you want to save the whales, do you actually venture out into the western Pacific on a fishing vessel armed with a megaphone and rude statements to stop the raping of this mamal by the Japanese? Nuff said!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Not to my post he didnt... I said: Pssst. Speaking out makes you big money.. It's proved over and over. So speaking out about speaking out may get people to talk about you too... What he said was: You are accusing Sir Elton John, the same man who donates most of his profits to AIDS Charity organizations, of being greedy? And don't come back and say "He's trying to get more money for chis charity" cause that just won't fly. I guess if someone gives 15 billion to Aids research and curing they must be right all of the time.. OHHHH I'm sorry, thats the President.. or in your case the censuring gov't... Or me... I gave over 3k last year to Charity so does that mean I never do anything wrong either??? Just because you love someone doesnt mean you can come in here and disparage me for disparaging him for disparaging the US. SIR woofer :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by phanatic I'm sure there are many positions that you champion regularly. Then I ask you, how many have you ACTIVELY participated in, and I don't mean through an internet MB? If you want to save the whales, do you actually venture out into the western Pacific on a fishing vessel armed with a megaphone and rude statements to stop the raping of this mamal by the Japanese? Nuff said!!! Nothing that I really champion involves Americans dying. I think that's a pretty big thing. I see so many people of the age that could be in the military but are not, but they have no problem driving down the road with bumper stickers saying "these colors don't run" or what ever, as long as they don't have to lay their life on the line, it's ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted July 19, 2004 Author Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear Not to my post he didnt... I said: What he said was: I guess if someone gives 15 billion to Aids research and curing they must be right all of the time.. OHHHH I'm sorry, thats the President.. or in your case the censuring gov't... Or me... I gave over 3k last year to Charity so does that mean I never do anything wrong either??? Just because you love someone doesnt mean you can come in here and disparage me for disparaging him for disparaging the US. SIR woofer :notworthy Stop it! You're making too much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted July 19, 2004 Author Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama Nothing that I really champion involves Americans dying. I think that's a pretty big thing. I see so many people of the age that could be in the military but are not, but they have no problem driving down the road with bumper stickers saying "these colors don't run" or what ever, as long as they don't have to lay their life on the line, it's ok. So what you're saying is that there is somebody somewhere in our military that was forced to sign on and fight a war when they had no idea that they would ever have been put in that decision? I ask you, do you want a military where they actually decide, on an individual basis, whether or nor the war is just or necessary thus determining their participation in that conflict? What's wrong with the bumper sticker, BTW? Have you ever played proffesional football? Then why visit this site because your opinion obviously isnt worth $hit since you're speaking from a outsiders perspective. Let's keep going down the line. It's called support. Do you remember that or do you need the presidential dossiers on every military campaign before you'll give your support? EDIT* Or Gibbs' playbook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama Nothing that I really champion involves Americans dying. I think that's a pretty big thing. I see so many people of the age that could be in the military but are not, but they have no problem driving down the road with bumper stickers saying "these colors don't run" or what ever, as long as they don't have to lay their life on the line, it's ok. You should really stop.. There are sooo many people on here who have given the time... And unlike most other countries we dont do the 18 year olds 2 years of service routine... It voluntary and its relatively small. People fight and die all the time for your right to have any bumper sticker or say any asinine thing like Sir Elton John. Thats the point.... So to say you have a problem with people using the rights given to them with the blood of soldiers is kinda like an oxymoron..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by phanatic So what you're saying is that there is somebody somewhere in our military that was forced to sign on and fight a war when they had no idea that they would ever have been put in that decision? I ask you, do you want a military where they actually decide, on an individual basis, whether or nor the war is just or necessary thus determining their participation in that conflict? What's wrong with the bumper sticker, BTW? Have you ever played proffesional football? Then why visit this site because your opinion obviously isnt worth $hit since you're speaking from a outsiders perspective. Let's keep going down the line. It's called support. Do you remember that or do you need the presidential dossiers on every military campaign before you'll give your support? EDIT* Or Gibbs' playbook So phanatic, what do you do to support the troops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Thiebear, There are tons of extremeskins members that have served and I totally respect that. I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about the ones who havent but are 200 percent for the war, they are die hard and blindly support everything regarding our country's actions in Iraq, yet for all their resolve, they don't enlist themselves, they they just talk a good game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama So phanatic, what do you do to support the troops? I could care less if Phanatic goes to every Eagles game and says Bush is an Idiot and a Moron. Colin Powell and Condeliza Rice are uncle Tom's/Tommettes... This is where it comes back to the bumper stickers This is where it comes back to the statements This is where it comes back to freedom It costs alot, not for every single person all of the time... Only the ones that voluteer or get volunteered in specific times. I never got to go to War... I was one person short because we did Desert Storm too fast? Am i unhappy, hell no, not after all of the illnesses. Was I begging to go... Your dang skippy, and I was younger at the time and wanted the medals... So since I never actually SHOT at people and just supported them like everyone else... I don't get my Bush turned over 2 countries bumper sticker either? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted July 19, 2004 Author Share Posted July 19, 2004 I start by reading and informing myself with the actions and ongoings of our military campaigns on a daily basis. I read the stories of the fallen and email or address the family members and thank them for their servicres. I have donated money to provide air conditioners to the troops in Iraq. I shoot down idiots who try and blame the actions of few over the collective (250000) that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I hosted a party for a buddy who came back from Iraq (82nd Airborne) for him and his friends. I also keep them in my thoughts, daily (afraid to say prayers because of the religous ridicule in this country). There are issues that I disagree with this administration, not this war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmorris Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama Thiebear, There are tons of extremeskins members that have served and I totally respect that. I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about the ones who havent but are 200 percent for the war, they are die hard and blindly support everything regarding our country's actions in Iraq, yet for all their resolve, they don't enlist themselves, they they just talk a good game. Codeorama, There is nothing wrong with that in my opinion. They do have that right. The right to not enlist. The right to support blindly. But just as we have these rights, we also have the right to question if our military is fighting a just cause. That our members are fighting and dying for these freedoms, and not the stock value of an oil company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.