Thursday, August 05, 2004


Celebrity n. L. celeber "famous"

Is there anyone more qualified to make political statements than a musician or an actor? On the one hand, it is great that they can voice their opinions just like the media, bloggers, and people at cookouts in their backyards. On the other hand, what does it matter who Dave Matthews thinks should be the president? We each have just as many votes as he does. When Bruce Springsteen is on the radio, do we really need to associate him with a political party? Concert ticket prices cost a ridiculous amount of money for people, (Democrats, Republicans, Independents, or Communists) to attend. If they wanted to hear political rhetoric they would have paid a lot more money to attend their party's local fundraiser.

And what about the infamous? Should we also look to them for political statements. Maybe Scott Peterson should address the cameras each day after court adjourns.

Meanwhile, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs appears to be taking a much better approach. His purportedly non-partisan work, Citizen Change, and the interviews with him that I have seen appear to be a sincere effort to make a difference without stumping for a particular party. He seems genuinely concerned to promote voter turnout, especially among younger voters.

Don't blame the celebrities too much, though. The mouthpiece of propaganda, the media, has decided that stories about rock stars and movie stars are more weighty election material than renowned experts in such things as the economy, national security, or the law. Shouldn't the media be more concerned with the views to be presented by Thomas Sowell, William Cohen, or Alan Keyes?

Who is Chevy Chase going to vote for? What does Whoopi Goldberg think about the issues? What does Tommy Lee Jones think? I don't care.

No comments: