My Opinion of Dwight Schultz Just Went Through The Roof!

[QuasarVM]

I think Gallup disagrees with this one. It appears the only national-level Republican figure less popular than George Bush is Rush Limbaugh.

Oh come on...you know polls can be skewed...and they are. Look at the ratings. Also, look at the ratings of Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham...these people doing very well. You can't even begin to compare them with NPR or any of the extreme liberals like Al Franken...

Gallup is different. For one thing, it's the original, the standard, one that played a major, major role in every election season since its inception (including the last one), one that liberals and conservatives constantly cite together. We're not talking about a biased operation like MSNBC or Fox News, we're talking about a political institution that the Wall Street Journal and Time Magazine rely on (or, surprise, the one that Anderson Cooper, Jon Stewart, and Bill O'Reilly cite when formulating their arguments).

For another thing, in every single one of their polls, Gallup's researchers list their survey methods. That level of transparency is there to combat accusations of skewed results, while at the same time allowing people to keep Gallup honest should it come out skewed.

I love this whole "If it doesn't agree with me, it's wrong" mindset.

You're WRONG!!!

And UFOs are REAL!

 

[RAMA]

Oh come on...you know polls can be skewed...and they are. Look at the ratings. Also, look at the ratings of Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham...these people doing very well. You can't even begin to compare them with NPR or any of the extreme liberals like Al Franken...

Gallup is different. For one thing, it's the original, the standard, one that played a major, major role in every election season since its inception (including the last one), one that liberals and conservatives constantly cite together. We're not talking about a biased operation like MSNBC or Fox News, we're talking about a political institution that the Wall Street Journal and Time Magazine rely on (or, surprise, the one that Anderson Cooper, Jon Stewart, and Bill O'Reilly cite when formulating their arguments).

For another thing, in every single one of their polls, Gallup's researchers list their survey methods. That level of transparency is there to combat accusations of skewed results, while at the same time allowing people to keep Gallup honest should it come out skewed.

I love this whole "If it doesn't agree with me, it's wrong" mindset.

You're WRONG!!!

And UFOs are REAL!

UFOs are real, flying saucers and aliens are not.

 

[QuasarVM]

Gallup is different. For one thing, it's the original, the standard, one that played a major, major role in every election season since its inception (including the last one), one that liberals and conservatives constantly cite together. We're not talking about a biased operation like MSNBC or Fox News, we're talking about a political institution that the Wall Street Journal and Time Magazine rely on (or, surprise, the one that Anderson Cooper, Jon Stewart, and Bill O'Reilly cite when formulating their arguments).

For another thing, in every single one of their polls, Gallup's researchers list their survey methods. That level of transparency is there to combat accusations of skewed results, while at the same time allowing people to keep Gallup honest should it come out skewed.

I love this whole "If it doesn't agree with me, it's wrong" mindset.

You're WRONG!!!

And UFOs are REAL!

UFOs are real, flying saucers and aliens are not.

Oh? How do you know I'm not an alien? I could be an alien sent here to provoke political hostilities to study your race.

 

[RAMA]

You're WRONG!!!

And UFOs are REAL!

UFOs are real, flying saucers and aliens are not.

Oh? How do you know I'm not an alien? I could be an alien sent here to provoke political hostilities to study your race.

Are you Ronald Reagan?

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

If you disagree with the extreme left then you and I are closer in thinking than you might think.

I doubt it.

Mere disapproval of government policy is NOT what I am talking about. Naturally, as Americans, we have a right to dissenting viewpoints.

Which was not clear in your previous post, and a statement made in the most general of sense, and using a word with the strongest possible denotative and connotative meanings so as to strengthen it in the most superficial of ways.

But, by hobnobbing with Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and Mahmood Amadinejad, yes...I would say Sean Penn is treasonous. Surely even you, as a liberal can see my point on this one.

Nope. I can see it but I don't share in it.

I would also say that what Jane Fonda did during the Vietnam War was despicable and treasonous by hanging out with the Viet Kong while our troops were being shot at and killed.

Well, I never cared for her or her acting or her actions during that period of time. But she did say this:

I would like to say something, not just to Vietnam veterans in New England, but to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families. [...] I will go to my grave regretting the photograph of me in an anti-aircraft gun, which looks like I was trying to shoot at American planes. It hurt so many soldiers. It galvanized such hostility. It was the most horrible thing I could possibly have done. It was just thoughtless...

Although in Fonda's case, her actions in Vietnam, especially her pleas to the US soldiers to consider the consequences of their actions, could fall under sedition per the Espionage Act of 1917 -- disruption of US military operations.

These people who love enemies of the US more than their own country are NOT informed.

More like sadly deluded.

Words are one thing, but you cross the line when you venture to enemy states and trash talk the US.

That's an offence worthy of losing citizenship over in my opinion.

"Trash talking" is not the same as sedition or treason by the definitions in the U.S. Constitution or the Alien and Sedition Act or the Espionage Act of 1917; as it does not invite insurrection of the state.

 

[Cyke101]

"Trash talking" is not the same as sedition or treason by the definitions in the U.S. Constitution or the Alien and Sedition Act or the Espionage Act of 1917; as it does not invite insurrection of the state.

This isn't directed at you, but it just reminded me of how one little line can go from unpatriotic and traitorous to national rally call for the good of the union in just two years, specifically "I hope the president fails." The line doesn't need that much context either.

We the public are a fickle bunch.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

"Trash talking" is not the same as sedition or treason by the definitions in the U.S. Constitution or the Alien and Sedition Act or the Espionage Act of 1917; as it does not invite insurrection of the state.

This isn't directed at you, but it just reminded me of how one little line can go from unpatriotic and traitorous to national rally call for the good of the union in just two years, specifically "I hope the president fails." The line doesn't need that much context either.

We the public are a fickle bunch.

And your example is something that is neither seditious or traitorous, but has been found to be. Yet, as you point out, depending on the time and context, it can also be a national rally call. I'm sure if we mine the political newspeak from conservatives and liberals and everyone in-between, we could find many, many more examples.

Fickle fo'sho.

 

[Cyke101]

"Trash talking" is not the same as sedition or treason by the definitions in the U.S. Constitution or the Alien and Sedition Act or the Espionage Act of 1917; as it does not invite insurrection of the state.

This isn't directed at you, but it just reminded me of how one little line can go from unpatriotic and traitorous to national rally call for the good of the union in just two years, specifically "I hope the president fails." The line doesn't need that much context either.

We the public are a fickle bunch.

And your example is something that is neither seditious or traitorous, but has been found to be. Yet, as you point out, depending on the time and context, it can also be a national rally call. I'm sure if we mine the political newspeak from conservatives and liberals and everyone in-between, we could find many, many more examples.

Fickle fo'sho.

Hey, I think we've all lost count of how many times the line "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" can go back and forth across the aisle...

 

[Forbin]

Well, by dint of my interests in entertainment, I've ended up hanging around with a lot of theater and film types - not Hollywood types, but New York theater and independent film types, both straight and gay. And yeah, as a republican the conversations at the diner have, on occasion, made me want to dump a plate of spaghetti on their heads and storm out.

My experiences are not unlike Dwight's in smaller scale. A few folks will try to engage in fairly reasonable conversation (though still with subtle signs of looking down on you), a few will go right for your throat and treat you like a rabid loon. None of them that I've hung with have shared my views, and most acted like they just tolerated me.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I suppose the best take on this comes from the Man in Black, Johnny Cash:

From "The One on The Right is on The Left"

Now this should be a lesson if you plan to start a folk group
Don't go mixin' politics with the folk songs of our land
Just work on harmony and diction
Play your banjo well
And if you have political convictions keep them to yourself

 

[Praetor]

This has all been very interesting.

If there is such a 'blacklist' as Schultz suggests, then it should be done away with. A person's beliefs should have nothing to do with the ability to get work. It reeks of the 'good ole boy club' concept. Perhaps I expect too much.

That said, I don't like celebrities using their position to publicly espouse particular political views of any kind. Simply because they have the media seemingly hanging on every word doesn't give me any inclination to listen to any opinion they have to say, as if they are in some way more enlightened than anyone else. I don't really give a damn about their personal lives and beliefs in any way. If I want to find out about a particular person, I will do the research to learn about them (which in this modern information age isn't all that difficult), and if I suspect I'd rather not 'taint' the character that a person plays by finding out there's something about the actor that I personally dislike, I'd like to be able to keep it that way.

If celebrities want to go into politics, fine, but don't use your careers as a soapbox.

Again, perhaps I expect too much...

 

[Nerys Myk]

Thats why there are off switches, mute buttons and channel changers. If I have a cause I believe in and my job allows me to draw attention to that cause why shouldn't I? If I have an informed (or uninformed for that matter) opinion why can't I share it? Because I'm an actor/singer/writer/talk show host/dancer/athlete? That doesn't seem right. Are they only allowed to make "statements" within the context of their artform? Appearing in a Movie about injustice= good. Speaking up at a rally about injustice= bad?

 

[Holdfast]

Keep the political jabs at each other to TNZ.

Discussing TNG actors' recent comments about their politics is fine of course, but this thread is rapidly becoming a) a more general argument about the role of actors in politics, and b) an argument about other posters politics. Neither of which is about TNG. Take those aspects to another forum.

First off, thanks to everyone for toning down the political jabs at each other as requested. It's appreciated.

Secondly, the thread (perhaps not unexpectedly, given the issues) is continuing to move further and further from TNG and onto broader, more generic actor/politics issues. I'm actually enjoying reading everyone's opinion on those issues, but this thread is not about TNG anymore, and not about Dwight Schultz any more either.

It's a great topic, but not for TNG. I'm going to put this topic on hiatus, though if the OP feels it would be better suited to another forum and wants it transferred I could do that too (just PM me), after double-checking with the relevant forum mods that they're happy to have it, topic-wise.