It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Boycott of celebrities due to political affiliation.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Boycott of celebrities due to political affiliation is stupid to me. I am left leaning but I like a lot of movies right leaning actors have been in. Same goes for music.




posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: MagicCow


I'm positive you break from your "convictions" daily if not hourly.
Are you married? Do you have extramarital affairs?


That's a funny thing to throw out.

Are you just assuming that every married person must have had an affair?

What a poor choice and you know what they say about assumptions.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Nope won't do it! To each their own, everyone has their reason. People ask and I tell them I voted Trump. I always tell them...Donald is guilty of being an asshat and Hillary is guilty of [long list of items that we are all aware of].



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: defiythelie

Is that Napoleon?



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MagicCow


I'm positive you break from your "convictions" daily if not hourly.
Are you married? Do you have extramarital affairs?


That's a funny thing to throw out.

Are you just assuming that every married person must have had an affair?

What a poor choice and you know what they say about assumptions.


Not at all - not assuming anything - that's why it's a question.
Great way however to cherry pick pie the comment.
Your assumption on what I think says the same about you.
Poor choice indeed.

edit on 8-11-2016 by MagicCow because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SaturnFX

There is a difference IMO too between say ... catching a Matt Damon movie on TV and paying the money to directly see it first run at the box office or buying the DVD or BluRay.

And I'll listen to the radio all day too, even to music made by idiots. I'm just not necessarily going to purchase it with my own cash depending on what was said.

And even then, it's not about them disagreeing with me. It's about how offensive or obnoxious they get about it. Let's be honest. Most every celeb is liberal these days, but not every celeb is going to come right out and directly insult the portions of their fan base who don't think exactly like they do.


I think if you are in any sort of public related job, be it acting, pizzamaking, etc, its best to keep down the political and religious tones..but if someone is compelled to wear their politics and/or religion on their sleeve, then its best at that point to simply discuss the qualities of the thing you like verses as you point out try to demonize the opposition.

A good christian will stand and discuss the merits of christianity. the bad christian will say christianity is great because (list a ton of issues with islam).

But this is the difference between a negative attitude and a positive attitude. It will certainly cut the audience down some once you make stances that isolate possibly up to a third of the target audience or client.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Necrobile

He said something along the lines of "Anyone who supports the 2nd amendment right doesn't have a soul worth saving."


Not quite the same intent.

"Anyone who would run out to buy an assault rifle after the Newtown massacre has very little left in their body or soul worth protecting"



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:40 AM
link   
There's a couple of things in play here.

 


One is that many see the celebrities as very lucky people, and they are. They make massive amounts of money compared to the general population and do very little for it. Let's face it: an actor makes a living playing pretend. A supermodel makes a living wearing a fancy dress or bikini. A singer makes a living singing. A Kardashian makes a living... er... existing?

I'm glad they do entertain, and I appreciate their talent (or Kardashian-isticality), but they are typically out of touch with the population.

But when I hear one of these lucky, blessed people trying to say that they are somehow more important than I am, or that I am unenlightened or stupid or useless... yeah, that gets my goat. I don't care about their political opinion; I care when their opinion of others gets screwed on upside down. I don't want to look at their elitist face after that.

Cher is terrible at this. She's a good singer and I like her work, but she threatens to leave the country every four years because too many people disagree with her. Enough already! How about some follow-through?

 


There is some jealousy from common folk toward celebrities... Dolly Parton has a big chest and a great voice... and so do quite a few common folk. Why does she get her own amusement park (Dollywood)? That's a common attitude in this society where getting ahead equals tearing down others. So political statements become just another reason to dislike celebrities.

 


Me, I just ignore most of them. Shut up and act. Entertain me. I'll admit feeling a twinge of frustration when some make incredibly stoopid statements (Rosie O'Donnell) and get lauded by other celebrities like it came straight from DaVinci's lips. But, that's the exception. I can count on my fingers the number of celebrities I care to meet, and a small fraction of them that I could sit and talk to for five minutes without going insane(r).

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

Realistically speaking, there are plenty of celebs I disagree with, very few whose work I won't deal with due to their politics.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Elegant and thoughtful comment on the opinions of celebrities Red.
Thank you for joining the thread.
So if I understood correctly - no boycotting for you - just dance monkey dance for them to do?




posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagicCow

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MagicCow


I'm positive you break from your "convictions" daily if not hourly.
Are you married? Do you have extramarital affairs?


That's a funny thing to throw out.

Are you just assuming that every married person must have had an affair?

What a poor choice and you know what they say about assumptions.


Not at all - not assuming anything - that's why it's a question.
Great way however to cherry pick pie the comment.
Your assumption on what I think says the same about you.
Poor choice indeed.


However, your choice of wording (without clarifying) made it seem that you in fact made that assumption.



I'm positive you break from your "convictions" daily if not hourly.
Are you married? Do you have extramarital affairs?


That can be interpreted as "You break from your convictions daily, let me provide some examples, Are you married? (If so) Do you have extramarital affairs?" ... When read this way, the assumption is that since you are breaking from your convictions daily (because I say so) Then my examples must be accurate.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: MagicCow

I have always hated when a performer or actor gets political. Sure they have that right, but they alienate a portion of their fan base by doing so. Right wrong, or indifferent that is a fact.

Take Springsteen for instance. A talented musician. Quite possibly one of the best ever. I still love his music. It's what I grew up listening to. He's a whiny crybaby liberal, and I hate his politics, but I can still like his music. It was created by the part of his brain that is used to make things, not the part that excretes things. (that's the part that he uses to form his political opinions)



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

Who did that?



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

exactly.

Dance monkey, dance.




posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

So you posted a comment to an error in interpretation to
secure that it was in fact an error in interpretation.
RIGHT ON!!




posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: MagicCow

I have always hated when a performer or actor gets political. Sure they have that right, but they alienate a portion of their fan base by doing so. Right wrong, or indifferent that is a fact.

Take Springsteen for instance. A talented musician. Quite possibly one of the best ever. I still love his music. It's what I grew up listening to. He's a whiny crybaby liberal, and I hate his politics, but I can still like his music. It was created by the part of his brain that is used to make things, not the part that excretes things. (that's the part that he uses to form his political opinions)


LMAO LMAO



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagicCow
a reply to: alphabetaone

So you posted a comment to an error in interpretation to
secure that it was in fact an error in interpretation.
RIGHT ON!!



No, not really. In hopes that maybe you will learn that perhaps you should clarify your position before leaving it to others to make assumptions on what it is you're trying to convey to them.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

Impossible bud - that's why my statement points end with question marks.
They're not accusatory they are inquisitorial.
He laid his "CONVICTIONS" as his source of strength against the tyranny of celebrity opinion.
So I asked him questions regarding his strength.
If the shoe doesn't fit, it can't hurt him.
In fact the defense he's garnered makes me wonder if those questions should directed at others...



edit on 8-11-2016 by MagicCow because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: MagicCow

Trying to blind me with your projection?

I simply stated that boycotting entertainment is no different from boycotting a crappy fast food restaurant, due to the lack of substance in both.

It had nothing to do with my attire, vehicle, or marriage.

You tried to make it about that.

You tried to derail your own thread.

Funny stuff.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagicCow
a reply to: alphabetaone

Impossible bud - that's why my statement points end with question marks.
They're not accusatory they are inquisitorial.
He laid his "CONVICTIONS" as his source of strength against the tyranny of celebrity opinion.
So I asked him questions regarding his strength.
If the shoe doesn't fit, it can't hurt him.
In fact the defense he's garnered makes me wonder if those questions should directed at others...




Come on, be honest with yourself if not with us here.

All we have to go by to judge someone's intent is the written word and take it contextually...no inflection, no pauses without proper punctuation (proper being the key word here). So if a writer isn't necessarily clear on their intent, it's very easy to make judgements in error on them.

If someone actually deserves a defense I think they should have one....I don't know the guy you've responded to any more than I know you, but I agreed with him that your statement left it extremely vague, and there is no way for us to know if that was your intent or not.

Anyway, I don't care enough about whether or not you can be an effective communicator and I'm certain in the future (if you don't already now even in your personal life) you may have issues with other people simply because of ineffective communication.

Moving along....







 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join