Entertainers

I have always had a problem with entertainers who use their status as stars to try to influence people to take a certain stance in politics. These entertainers present themselves as enlightened individuals who are supposedly more socially and politically adept just because of their star status. Trust me when I say this: Ben Affleck and Barbara Streisand are no more enlightened than your next door neighbor. It is bad enough that the general media is already liberally biased, but they then plaster our "enlightened" entertainers all over their respective media to further their political point of view.

One only has to take a cursory glance at the last two elections to see how our Hollywood elite can make asses of themselves. Ben Affleck toured the country with John Kerry, hoping his "star" power would tilt votes. Ben should have spent more time taking acting lessons (Gigli, anyone?). Alec Baldwin said that if Bush beat Gore, he would leave the country. Well, I'm still waiting, you pompous ass! Plenty of airplanes available! Johnny Depp has no problem criticizing and badmouthing his own country while living in France (sorry, don't mean to snicker), but he sure as hell doesn't have a problem making good old fashioned American money.

Now, all of these so-called entertainers are holding a worldwide concert to influence the richer countries of the world to stop poverty in the poor countries. Well, isn't that nice. If these entertainers are so worried about the starving children, why don't they donate their millions to the cause? How hypocritical can you get? "Look, I just bought a $20 million home in Beverly Hills, and now I'm going to sing some songs to try to influence people to support poor, impoverished people." Many people are starving because of overcrowding. A little birth control now and then would be nice. Famine is nature's way of controlling populations. Now, we wouldn't want to disrupt nature's natural course, would we? Many millions starve because of their own governments, or the lack thereof. Now, here's an interesting dilemma: To feed these people, do we interfere, or even overthrow, their government? That would require military force, which would cause all of these bleeding hearts to gasp in horror! How dare the US use military force to push it's will on another country!? Remember Somalia in 1993: US soldiers were there as part of a disfunctional UN force (don't get me started on the UN!) trying to feed the poor, starving Somalis, and they repaid our kind generosity by trying to shove it up our ass!

Help the starving people in other countries? Who cares. Let's worry about our own people at home.