Should celebrities use their fame to influence voters ?

...blasting, detonating, and preaching violence.

Poor cjhsa... born too late.
Had you been born in the early twentieth century... in Berlin... you could have thrown your support to a candidate that REALLY floated your boat!

Doll wrote

Indeed people should make up their mind based on issues. That said it is evident to all particularly the politicians that for sizable percentage of the electorate that is not true. Were that not so they would not spend millions on attack adds? I would not call them stupid just politically ignorant.

Curt Schilling has spoken out to vote for Bush. He is also campaigning for him in NH today. Honestly I don't see an issue with this. I think Schilling is an incredible pitcher and love him as a baseball player, but I would not vote for some one because the World Series winning team recommended him. I would, however, so up for a campaign even by a politician I didn't support to see Schilling.

This thread has touched upon so many different issues.

I think celebs, as anyone else, should voice their opinions as they like. I agree with Linkat, however, who wrote (above): "I also think that anyone that is influenced by a celebrity's opinion on politics would have to be a complete idiot though." I listen to a sports talk radio station, and whenever the guys try to transfer their status as sports experts to a status as political experts, I laugh, then I flip the dial. Recently, Kurt Schilling helped bring a championship to Boston, and for that I love the man. But it pretty much ends there, as the man basiclly cannot utter a complete sentence without using the word Lord or God, and is a vocal Bush supporter.

Lash (above) suggested that ALL churches ought to lose their tax-exempt status. I completely and emphatically agree.

And regarding those same churches having the right to influence their flocks, no problem, just, as Edgar says, don't try to use the government to impose the tenets of your particular religious persuasion upon me, ok? I think the problem with separation of church and state arises from the misconception that religion owns morality. We are a moral society, and our laws reflect common, universal, historical moral principles, such as "murder is wrong", but the law is based upon a moral objection to murder, not a religious one. A person can be moral without being religious.


Good discussion.

Yesterday someone pointed out that I should change my signature because David Gilmour or Roger Waters would not vote for Bush. But I don't care a whit what their political leanings are, so long as they aren't trying to convert me during a concert.

A celebrity telling me to vote for a particular candidate or cause is obviously not going to sway me. But I think celebrities, unfortunately, do sway some voters.

And I'll freely admit I've yet to see Mystic River because it has BOTH Sean Penn and Tim Robbins. One of these days I'll rent it, but right now I don't think I could sit throught the whole thing and keep my popcorn down.

Gosh Tico - don't tell me you'd prefer to rely on those in government who actually have intelligence-gathering agents or fact-finding groups, not to mention cabinet members who are briefed daily (if not hourly) on threats to our security.

After all, Sean Penn (with his high school diploma) was surely qualified to see himself as a diplomat (speaking on behalf of all Americans) in a country just weeks away from war, said country also controlled by a maniacal dictator. :wink:

Well, I suppose it doesn't matter whether he holds a college degree or not, as I'm sure there are a good many high school graduates or GED holders who would be capable of being good diplomats. (See how sensitive some of us on the right are?)

Well, let's see. Kerry had graduated from Yale when he went to Paris to negotiate with the N. Vietnamese, right?

No, Penn's going to Iraq was plain dumb. He shouldn't have done that. That's Bono's job.

In my opinion, celebrities should use their fame to influence voters, as long as I agree with them.

This is such a double edged sword of a sentence, its okay in your book, oh but then if you go to the next part only if they agree w/ you. Either you think they should or not

Exactly.

don't confuse the newbies Kicky ROFLMAO

Bad Kicky! Bad Kicky!

but when you're bad you're better :wink:

Kicky's pulling your chain doll.

Welcome to A2K.

Have fun.

I am having it would take more then a sarcastic comment that I could care less about to make me not have fun. Now have a super day everyone.

What the heck are you talking about? You really ought to buy a clue before you open your chops. Nugent preaches violence? Because he likes to kill stuff and eat it?

And as for your Hitler reference, my father fought in WWII flying B-17's, so you can take that and stick it where the sun don't shine.

In your defence what is the the difference to you people from someone else killing an animal for you then you eating it. But heaven forbid someone kill an animal themselves & eat it that must make them horrible human beings? Where in your mind does that make sense?

doll, I'm not sure where you're coming from. I support hunting and fishing.

there is none doll, this is verbal bitch slapping :-)