Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Colbert sparks debate about 'expert' celebrities | St. Louis News, Weather, Sports | KMOV.com | St. Louis Weather, News and More | Entertainment News


OK, so generally I find Stephen Colbert to be a frickin' hoot... BUT I watched his testimony and I was not only unimpressed, BUT I also did not really find it humorous. I realize that even in Congress we need some humor. That they asked?/allowed? him to show up and speak is a testimony to that. So, really what was his purpose? I thought that whatever he was going to say would have had me, not only in stitches as usual, but more curious about the topic he was speaking on.

Now there is a lot of publicity for him and others who were there, BUT really what was the actual effect? Did his appearance truly give us anything beneficial beyond media fodder? I cannot say for sure that I believe it did... I suppose we shall see.


Since this article names a bunch of celebrity people specifically, I will put my opinions about a few of them here:

With respect to the fact that there are celebrities waxing poetic about political stuff... I think that guys like Stephen Colbert (and John Stewart) are definitely humorists first, BUT they are also getting some people interested in what is happening when they might otherwise not be.

Then you have Angelina Jolie who is a media hussy, but pretends not to be. She thrives on the attention she gets and she has gone out of her way plenty to get attention. That does not make her a realistic source for political information and I would be hard pressed to think she was making a statement on any topic for any other reason than the attention she would get, especially if she has a movie coming out. Sadly, people whore after her, though she is hardly a role model or a hero, BUT I cannot really see reasonably smart people making political choices based on her opinions.

Elmo? He is a screeching annoying puppet and thousands of children adore him. But they do not vote yet and their parents should be educating them and teaching them to make choices and helping them grow into the political views they will eventually follow. That is NOT to say that their parents get to TELL THEM what to think/believe/choose. Sesame Street goes far to advocate for better education for our children and as a SHOW itself, the powers that be ought to be lobbying for better educational material and what-not, BUT leave Elmo and friends at home.

Bono? Well, he is first an entertainer and second a media hussy as well. BUT, he also seems to put himself out there and to be proactive in his causes. That said, I heard today that his charitable organization was audited and fell FAAAAAAAR sort of actually getting the money to where he is promising it. That is criminal! They need to OVERHAUL how they do what they do and streamline it so that the MAJORITY of your donations are used to accomplish what is promised. That pissed me off and really made me think again about the motives this guy has. After all as I said already, he is an entertainer and a media hussy. You don't get your band to be in the news ALL the time and sellout masses of concerts at masses of profit to yourself AND donations to your charity without being that way. Therefore your motives become suspect.

I guess that's enough on that topic... The problem with this is that it could go on and on and on... Ya know?

No comments:

Post a Comment