Another Black man killed by cops ... this time by accident?

[4everwarriors]

I've never understood celebrities who feel obligated to voice their opinions to the masses. By definition, they piss off at least 50% of those listening, depending on the the crowd.
As for all the philanthropic good some of these folks do, I must prefer those who are charitable in an anonymous way, rather than needing to stick their face and name on something. Just my style...different strokes for different folks, aina?

[Galway Eagle]

I've never understood celebrities who feel obligated to voice their opinions to the masses. By definition, they piss off at least 50% of those listening, depending on the the crowd.
As for all the philanthropic good some of these folks do, I must prefer those who are charitable in an anonymous way, rather than needing to stick their face and name on something. Just my style...different strokes for different folks, aina?

So I guess I'm just curious about this. At what point of celebrity do you start to believe this? I mean let's say you got put up for Head of the ADA, is that being a celebrity amongst your peers?

Is it an education thing? Then is it ok for some like Natalie Portman or Emma Waston who have been Ivy educated?

Is it a relating to common man thing?

Just trying to understand this viewpoint a bit better if you don't mind elaborating.

[MU82]

I've never understood celebrities who feel obligated to voice their opinions to the masses. By definition, they piss off at least 50% of those listening, depending on the the crowd.
As for all the philanthropic good some of these folks do, I must prefer those who are charitable in an anonymous way, rather than needing to stick their face and name on something. Just my style...different strokes for different folks, aina?

You and I voice our opinions here on Scoop. We don't have the soapbox that celebrities do. If we did, would we be content merely voicing our opinions here, especially if we truly felt our opinions could help make the world a better place?

Why are Tucker Carlson's and Rachel Maddow's opinions better or worse or more valuable than LeBron's or Nugent's? Carlson and Maddow are just celebrities, too.

Once upon a time, Walter Winchell was voicing his opinions to the masses. So were Mark Twain and Adolph Hitler. Celebrities all.

You and I have no idea how much charitable stuff any of these folks do when the camera's not on. For example, Cam Newton was extremely active in altruistic causes in Charlotte outside of public view; I know about it only because my wife is an RN at the children's hospital and saw it with her own eyes. Having said that, I'll take athletes, entertainers, politicians, etc doing charitable work even in the public eye because it's better than them not doing it.

Just my opinion, nu?

[tower912]

I live in an area with a DeVos Place convention center, a Van Andel Arena, a DeVos Children's Hospital, Meijer Gardens.   Sorry, dds, but rich folk have been engaging in public philanthropy since the times of the Vanderbilt's.   

It isn't the philanthropy that offends you.

[shoothoops]

shoothoops

I love all people, not just folks that agree with me.

I'm not going to get into a long back forth about it, but comparing LBJ to RL and TN is beyond my comprehension. RL publicly for example waa an extremely dangerous human being with little to zero redeeming qualities. That goes well beyond agree or disagree with someone views.

[The Lens]

If celebrities couldn't very, very, very publicly commit acts of charity, JJ Watt would cease to exist.

[Goose]

shoothoops

I compared feelings towards a person or a cause, not comparison of any two people. Your post proves my original point.

[MU82]

I live in an area with a DeVos Place convention center, a Van Andel Arena, a DeVos Children's Hospital, Meijer Gardens.   Sorry, dds, but rich folk have been engaging in public philanthropy since the times of the Vanderbilt's.   

It isn't the philanthropy that offends you.

Yeah, my favorite is when the billionaire sports team owner demands hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers, threatening to move his team if they don't comply.

Then, with those hundreds of millions of taxpayer $$$ in his pocket, he donates $5 million to a college and gets two buildings and an arena named after him. Jerry Richardson was famous (infamous) for that. What a fraud, as well as a creep.

But he's an old, rich white guy, so I guess his voice "matters" more than an athlete's or entertainer's does.

[shoothoops]

shoothoops

I compared feelings towards a person or a cause, not comparison of any two people. Your post proves my original point.

I read all of your posts in this thread. We have a non-starter here if you believe the public actions and character of Lebron James and Rush Limbaugh are in the same stratosphere. That isn't an apples to apples comparison.

I also don't agree that we can say the police officer in Minnesota that killed someone at a traffic stop should get no jail time, and, that it be considered an accident. We can go by what we see. The victim was not a threat, and, was trying to leave. The use of a taser there let alone a gun wasn't an appropriate use of force. This is why charges were quickly brought against her. She unnecessarily ended someone else's life.

So yes sometimes there are standards, even laws that get decide right and wrong. It isn't just a matter of well my philosophical viewpoint is this or that vs someone else who has a different viewpoint, in every example.

[Lighthouse 84]

I read all of your posts in this thread. We have a non-starter here if you believe the public actions and character of Lebron James and Rush Limbaugh are in the same stratosphere. That isn't an apples to apples comparison.

I also don't agree that we can say the police officer in Minnesota that killed someone at a traffic stop should get no jail time, and, that it be considered an accident. We can go by what we see. The victim was not a threat, and, was trying to leave. The use of a taser there let alone a gun wasn't an appropriate use of force. This is why charges were quickly brought against her. She unnecessarily ended someone else's life.

So yes sometimes there are standards, even laws that get decide right and wrong. It isn't just a matter of well my philosophical viewpoint is this or that vs someone else who has a different viewpoint, in every example.

Shoothoops, I don't think you're following what Goose is saying.  Two people can disagree with their feelings about different people or causes.  You like LBJ and think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.  Goose thinks Rush is all that and a slice o' cheese.  So when Rush died, you couldn't give a rat's a$$.  Hell, maybe you even celebrated it.  Goose is saying when LBJ dies, he may not give a rat's a$$, but he also won't celebrate it.   Each LeBron and Rush have said and done things that some find to be horrible and some find to be great.  Each has done philanthropic things and donated millions to various causes. 

Not to put words in Goose's mouth and not to answer for him, but the point simply is that one doesn't have to agree with or like a person or a cause in order to respect that person or cause.  As a friend of mine likes to say, that's why there's apple pie and cherry pie.  To each his own, pal.

[Goose]

Litehouse

Thanks for cleaning up my thoughts. You are about 98% spot on with my thoughts. Only minor tweak is I never thought Rush was all that, more a great success story and entertainer. Again, I do appreciate you cleaning up my words. I write like I talk (fast, fast, fast) and equally confusing when speaking my thoughts.

[Galway Eagle]

Shoothoops, I don't think you're following what Goose is saying.  Two people can disagree with their feelings about different people or causes.  You like LBJ and think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.  Goose thinks Rush is all that and a slice o' cheese.  So when Rush died, you couldn't give a rat's a$$.  Hell, maybe you even celebrated it.  Goose is saying when LBJ dies, he may not give a rat's a$$, but he also won't celebrate it.   Each LeBron and Rush have said and done things that some find to be horrible and some find to be great.  Each has done philanthropic things and donated millions to various causes. 

Not to put words in Goose's mouth and not to answer for him, but the point simply is that one doesn't have to agree with or like a person or a cause in order to respect that person or cause.  As a friend of mine likes to say, that's why there's apple pie and cherry pie.  To each his own, pal.

I don't think it's a very fair comparison. Rush said horrible things, and you can sit there and say "he didn't" or "it's comedy" but if I called your daughter a slut and prostitute for wanting birth control you'd be rightfully very pissed.

Now Lebron was flat out wrong here, but the difference is he deleted it and has tried walking back.

It's not a valid comparison. Rush vs Bill Maher is a fair comparison. Both are a$$es that have said asinine things trying to pass off as entertaining news. Heck I could even back the Nugent to Lebron comparison because they're both uneducated entertainers trying to take political stances.

[MU82]

Well, one person literally celebrated the deaths of innocent American citizens because he didn't like their lifestyle choices. And that one person wasn't LeBron. So there's that.

One literally spent several hours a day, 5 days a week, for years and years, spewing hate, fear, lies and divisiveness. The other is an athlete who every month or three twits out something controversial that rubs some the wrong way. So there's that, too.

I know Goose wasn't really commenting "about" them, per se, but one does not have to "like" or "dislike" these very public figures to realize they are not opposite sides of the same coin.

One is a decent (but flawed, as we all are) human being who has repeatedly proven that he cares about his fellow human beings; the other was Rush Limbaugh.

Saying all that doesn't mean I lack respect for Goose; indeed, I consider him an interwebs friend even though we often disagree politically.

[shoothoops]

Litehouse

Thanks for cleaning up my thoughts. You are about 98% spot on with my thoughts. Only minor tweak is I never thought Rush was all that, more a great success story and entertainer. Again, I do appreciate you cleaning up my words. I write like I talk (fast, fast, fast) and equally confusing when speaking my thoughts.

I don't consider RL a great success story and entertainer. It's pretty disingenuous to try to pass off RL as a harmless entertainer.

[MU82]

I don't think it's a very fair comparison. Rush said horrible things, and you can sit there and say "he didn't" or "it's comedy" but if I called your daughter a slut and prostitute for wanting birth control you'd be rightfully very pissed.

Now Lebron was flat out wrong here, but the difference is he deleted it and has tried walking back.

It's not a valid comparison. Rush vs Bill Maher is a fair comparison. Both are a$$es that have said asinine things trying to pass off as entertaining news. Heck I could even back the Nugent to Lebron comparison because they're both uneducated entertainers trying to take political stances.

Mostly reasonable ... except I'm trying to remember which people LeBron ever advocated exterminating, or when LeBron ever said that a then-U.S. Senator should "suck on my machine gun."

[Galway Eagle]

Mostly reasonable ... except I'm trying to remember which people LeBron ever advocated exterminating, or when LeBron ever said that a then-U.S. Senator should "suck on my machine gun."

Thats coming in the new space jam

[Goose]

82

I picked Rush to stir the pot. Could have been DJT, Tucker, Hannity or countless other folks. I felt like Rush has not been hated on for a few weeks on scoop and didn't anyone to forget about him.

shoothoops
Unlike some folks I take entertainers opinion about as seriously as I take some some scoopers opinion on MU basketball. You, like many on here, are a far bigger expert on the life and times of Rush than I am. I listened to him in the early 2000's when I started business and was in the car driving around he country trying to make a buck and probably a grand total of an hour over the last decade of his life.

[4everwarriors]

So I guess I'm just curious about this. At what point of celebrity do you start to believe this? I mean let's say you got put up for Head of the ADA, is that being a celebrity amongst your peers?

Is it an education thing? Then is it ok for some like Natalie Portman or Emma Waston who have been Ivy educated?

Is it a relating to common man thing?

Just trying to understand this viewpoint a bit better if you don't mind elaborating.

Fair question...I am not interested in actors/actresses, athletes, or others like ADA presidents expressing their public opinions on topics in which they have no expertise. Their value to me is solely centered on their ability to entertain or speak authoritatively on topics in their field. For example, I don't give a chit if Brett Favre thinks Chauvin should have been acquitted or if the current ADA president would think MLB's moving the All-Star game to Denver was a prudent move. On the other hand, Brett Favre speaking publicly about the lengthened NFL regular season, or the ADA president voicing his opinion on fluoride in the public drinking water, I'm all ears, hey?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Fair question...I am not interested in actors/actresses, athletes, or others like ADA presidents expressing their public opinions on topics in which they have no expertise. Their value to me is solely centered on their ability to entertain or speak authoritatively on topics in their field. For example, I don't give a chit if Brett Favre thinks Chauvin should have been acquitted or if the current ADA president would think MLB's moving the All-Star game to Denver was a prudent move. On the other hand, Brett Favre speaking publicly about the lengthened NFL regular season, or the ADA president voicing his opinion on fluoride in the public drinking water, I'm all ears, hey?

I agree with you....yet you were the one who brought Lebron into the discussion.

[Holy hell all time]

I was just thinking, I also strongly dislike LBJ, much like some on here disliked Rush. That said, I respect his right to say anything he feels helps his cause, regardless if I agree with him or not. If something bad happened LBJ I would not celebrate the event. Whether I think LBJ says things that hurt a cause or help cause really is my business, but it does not allow my the right to hate everyone that supports him. For the record, I think LBJ and Ted Nugent both should stick to their days jobs

"I respect LBJ's right to say anything he feels helps his cause."

"I think LBJ should stick to his day job."

Which is it?

[Galway Eagle]

Fair question...I am not interested in actors/actresses, athletes, or others like ADA presidents expressing their public opinions on topics in which they have no expertise. Their value to me is solely centered on their ability to entertain or speak authoritatively on topics in their field. For example, I don't give a chit if Brett Favre thinks Chauvin should have been acquitted or if the current ADA president would think MLB's moving the All-Star game to Denver was a prudent move. On the other hand, Brett Favre speaking publicly about the lengthened NFL regular season, or the ADA president voicing his opinion on fluoride in the public drinking water, I'm all ears, hey?

Interesting, I respect the opinion. Don't necessarily agree 100% but certainly agree to an extent. So following up on that, does that include politicians as well? I mean should every politician have either an Econ degree, Poli Sci degree, or be a lawyer? (Sure I'm forgetting options that may also be relevant)

Or is that a different status of celebrity?  Also since you agreed on my ADA comment does this apply to endorsements (not just political but even Aaron Rogers supporting State Farm) and Super PACs as well? Or because they're backing someone for a singular goal is that ok?

[4everwarriors]

As for Lebron, he's a great basketball player and should be grateful everyday that he lives in a country that affords him, and everyone else the opportunity to earn the enormous income for something so trivial as basketball, which adds absolutely nothing to the betterment of mankind other than its entertainment value, hey?

[4everwarriors]

82

I picked Rush to stir the pot. Could have been DJT, Tucker, Hannity or countless other folks. I felt like Rush has not been hated on for a few weeks on scoop and didn't anyone to forget about him.

shoothoops
Unlike some folks I take entertainers opinion about as seriously as I take some some scoopers opinion on MU basketball. You, like many on here, are a far bigger expert on the life and times of Rush than I am. I listened to him in the early 2000's when I started business and was in the car driving around he country trying to make a buck and probably a grand total of an hour over the last decade of his life.



Goose, Nads nos nothin' 'bout stirrin' da pot, aina?

[shoothoops]

82

I picked Rush to stir the pot. Could have been DJT, Tucker, Hannity or countless other folks. I felt like Rush has not been hated on for a few weeks on scoop and didn't anyone to forget about him.

shoothoops
Unlike some folks I take entertainers opinion about as seriously as I take some some scoopers opinion on MU basketball. You, like many on here, are a far bigger expert on the life and times of Rush than I am. I listened to him in the early 2000's when I started business and was in the car driving around he country trying to make a buck and probably a grand total of an hour over the last decade of his life.

Words matter.

Again, this is about basic human decency, dangers to society, vs more trivial differences of opinion of a topic. There is a colossal difference here.

[Goose]

I think some you guys should camp yourselves in 420 thread.