Robert,
for me its not a case of thinking that stars COULDN'T know things, at least as much as ME or YOU. It's that they are speaking from an authority position (being able to speak your mind in a major media outlet) without the appropriate career experience in politics and diplomacy.
Let's be realistic, be it Madeleine Albright, Condy Rice, or Jimmy Carter, Clooney or any other star simply does not get the same level of exposure to the people and information it takes to really understand political situations. And yet actors often get a lot more access to the public to speak their opinions on those subjects than the people who do know them, and then they speak on it as if they do have that knowledge.
Even the more actively political actors like Tim Robbins are restricted from knowing the politics biz like people in major positions of power and diplomacy.
quote:
Hell, take a look around the internet
Really now, does the "internet" in the vague chatroom/blog site sense have the kind of power to reach the masses that talking on Leno or in People does? You don't demand your right to get on national TV and talk politics, probably because you don't feel as though you are exceptional in your knowledge. That doesn't mean dumb, that just means that you realize you aren't an AUTHORITY, just a person with an opinion.
Clooney or whomever is not in that national spotlight position because of his political knowledge (typically), but rather because of his acting (or other) career.
It's a bit like Rumsfeld getting on Meet the Press and ranting about how letterboxing is a rip off because it doesn't use your whole screen and how DTS is really no better than Pro-Logic. Besides thinking he's wrong, you might also be inclined to say "how the hell does he know, is this something he knows a lot about?".
And THAT is what Trey and Matt are all wound up about when they attack stars in South Park/TA. It's not like these stars are humble about their OPINIONS normally. Acting like you really KNOW is obnoxious even when regular people do it to each other, as we see at HTF all the time.
Remember how people questioned Dennis Miller as a color commentator for Monday Night Football? Well if Miller has less insight to the NFL than someone who worked as a coach or player in the leauge, then isn't that the same sort of complaint?
And we haven't even touched on the fact that the entertainment industry is perhaps more tied to APPEARANCE than any other career (even politics). It's not unusual for someone to become a star without really having even average smarts. Certainly this is not a fast rule, but a ditzy star is not exactly unusual. And this only fuels the questioning of what part of being an actor makes someone qualified to discuss politics more than the average Joe.
Of course the irony here is that many politicians begin as stars of some sort and spin that name/image recognition into a political career. I would agree that initially a voter should be cynical about voting for a star
just because they are a star, but such a person can learn the politics biz by active participation at various levels (like Reagan starting with the Actor's Guild).
So Bill Bradley speaking now carries more weight than Sean Penn to me. But if Penn did take on a political career and put his money where his mouth is, I would respect and admire the effort. In that way a star like Robbins or Penn who take a much more active role have a lot more of my respect because at least they are trying.
