Take it for what it is.

9/3/2009 12:36:37 PM

I puked--just a little.

9/3/2009 1:16:41 PM

Yea, it's kind of cheesy, and it's a bunch of celebrities talking about how they're going to volunteer and do more service (which probably won't happen)....

But to be honest, I think that the idea of getting more people to be involved, to give a shit is right. No matter what party it's coming from. Getting involved in the community, giving back because you're more fortunate, doing something to make where you live a better place is noble and good.

And I'm talking about this in a broad sense, not policy wise or politically. Just giving back, getting involved and giving a shit about where you live and who lives there is a good thing.

9/3/2009 1:32:18 PM

Quote :

"But to be honest, I think that the idea of getting more people to be involved, to give a shit is right. No matter what party it's coming from."

^^ You mean like through tea parties and town-hall meetings?

9/3/2009 1:37:50 PM

There's a difference between having a rational, well-though out opinion and just screaming vitriolic rage while frothing at the mouth.

9/3/2009 1:44:14 PM

Because that's exactly what every person involved in these tea parties and town hall meetings is doing...

9/3/2009 1:50:28 PM

There are enough tea-party threads. Stick to the video.

9/3/2009 2:01:35 PM

Quote :

"You mean like through tea parties and town-hall meetings?"

No I didn't mean that, and I think you know that.

I'm talking about going in and volunteering on the weekends at a Habitat for Humanity house build, or finding a homeless shelter and helping there, or finding a USO location and helping answer phones for a few hours. Stuff like that. Actual service that doesn't require that much effort really, but might make a difference.

9/3/2009 2:05:53 PM

Quote :

"^^ You mean like through tea parties and town-hall meetings?"

Having an "I want to pay less taxes" party on tax day is entirely a different thing from a call to service in your own community no matter how cheesy that call to service is, even if the person is entirely justified in their wanting to pay less taxes.

People should express their views to the government & their representatives, even those whose views are "I don't like Obama" or "I want pay less taxes" or "I think health care reform is bad" or "I'm worried about death panels", it is the thing to do in a democracy, but I would still characterize sharing your opinions & your interests with your representatives as fundamentally different than service involvement within your community.

All that said, I don't think that cheesy video is going to be terribly effective at outreach other than maybe to a few celebratory struck high school girls.

The video could have been a little more oriented towards service America rather than service Obama, and it would have been better for it. I don't mind using the presidents words as a call to action in the beginning with the So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder, and look after not only ourselves but each other, but the guy kissing his guns & saying something like I serve Obama was a little much.

9/3/2009 2:05:54 PM

Quote :

"Having an "I want to pay less taxes" party on tax day is entirely a different thing from a call to service in your own community no matter how cheesy that call to service is, even if the person is entirely justified in their wanting to pay less taxes."

Could you expound on that a bit?

9/3/2009 2:08:26 PM

^sure

Expressing your views to your elected representatives, while it is a good & healthy thing to do in a democracy, is not the same thing as participating in community service within your community.

9/3/2009 2:14:20 PM

^ You're right. One is constitutionally protected and the other isn't.

9/3/2009 2:16:15 PM

^^ Not the same no, but as I understand it, you're implying that the latter is more noble than the former?

9/3/2009 2:21:00 PM

Not necessarily, I wasn't trying to compare the value of community service vs telling your representative your opinions, or rate them one against the other. I think making sure you representatives know what the people they think represents is a pretty vital part of democracy, but again I'm not trying to do a comparison.

Lunak said the video was cheesy, but helps give back to the community. Hooksaw said yeah just like tea party tax protests & these health care town halls, and I responded saying I don't think that is the best of comparisons & gave my reason why I think that.

At least that's how I've read this thread, if I've implied something other than that, then I didn't mean to.

9/3/2009 2:30:58 PM

Both are trying to affect change, just two very different ways of going about it

And I don't necessarily think that the video specifically will actually help to get people to volunteer, but I think that the overall movement towards volunteering and service is a good one.

9/3/2009 2:34:40 PM

Gotcha.

I mean, I've got the same generic problem with sanctimonious Hollywood PSAs . . .


But I think my bigger problem with the video is that it is representative of the cult of personality which surrounds Barack Obama. Demi Moore didn't pledge to be of service, she pledged "to be a servant to President Barack Obama." Whether or not that adulation is deserved, I'm disturbed by concept of service to a person, instead of an ideal. I realize that this seems a subtle distinction, but I do not think it is.

I was similarly disturbed by the deference given the office of the Presidency in the last administration or St. Reagan cult which pervades the GOP but this seems distinct from them in a number of ways. First, during the last presidency, even Bush himself implied or stated that that his power came from the office of the Presidency. Barack Obama's messianic image (to some, not all) pre-dates the office. Second, while the press did a piss poor job of calling the administration to task in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, no-one would argue that they were overtly friendly to George Bush post 2004. The opposition to this administration is limited to Fox News and pretty much everyone here is aware of the NEA call which referred to "speaking with the government."

In a nation built upon the principle that the people are sovereign, and we delegate limited powers thorough the individual states to the Federal Government, this shift in language towards a benevolent state knowing and delegating what is best for the people is, frankly, disturbing.

9/3/2009 3:16:25 PM

Quote :

"no-one would argue that they were overtly friendly to George Bush post 2004. The opposition to this administration is limited to Fox News"

i wasn't aware it was 2012 already

9/3/2009 3:18:48 PM

Yeah, I can see where you're coming from, but the most controversial thing that Bush pushed in 2000 - 2001 was NCLB, which was co-written with Ted Kennedy. He didn't really rock the boat too much and played up the bi-partisan compassionate conservative bit.

On the other hand, Obama's either inability or unwillingness to keep the Democratic leadership in Congress on his message, ambitious government expansion, perpetual television appearances, and rapid attempt to expend his political capital has been a bit more controversial than Bush's first two years. Not to mention that Bush didn't exactly get favorable coverage during the 99-00 campaign.

9/3/2009 3:29:48 PM

he didn't, but pre-9/11 bush didn't do all that much period. he was seen as pretty harmless by most. and then post-9/11 he had a honeymoon period because a large portion of america was terrified/pissed off and willing to look the other way on many civil liberties questions.

9/3/2009 3:35:18 PM

This video sold me b/c the celebrities are so in touch with reality.

9/3/2009 3:38:29 PM

My favorite was the guy kissing his guns.

9/3/2009 3:51:00 PM

^^^ Right. Which is my point. The press did a disservice to the nation then and they're doing a disservice to the nation now. I'm not saying that they have to attack the president to be effective, but they should be skeptical and questioning . . . not genuflecting like Brian Williams.

9/3/2009 3:52:03 PM

Obama's speeches are really good and do provide a nice starting point for a PSA like this. But the imagery was way over the top.

I got the impression that a lot of those pledges were very personal, and I suspect they were also sincere. It's kind of hard to be a hypocrite when you're making fairly simple pledges: be a better mentor to my sisters, use less bottled water, sell a culture of intelligence (not ignorance), let kids in small towns know they can still dream big, support local food banks, donate to UNICEF, be a great mother, change myself before asking other people to change, etc...

I see what they're trying to achieve. They're trying to encourage people to give a shit about something, anything, one thing...but they laid the Obama shit on too thick. Yeah, we like the guy, and he inspires us, but his image isn't like the burst of lemon juice in the Red Lobster commercials when you're just like, "Oh fuck, must have now." The use of his image was a little creepy, something Obama managed to just barely avoid throughout his campaign.

Also the line about being of service to the President was really, really weird, and I'm shocked they put that in there. That was extremely dumb.

I am not concerned about this cult of personality or a shift in language towards a benevolent states knowing and delegating what is best for the people. It's a fucking lame PSA, dude...the commentary just isn't there.

9/3/2009 3:55:37 PM

^^ Demi moore and Ashton Kutcher != the press

but I hear what you're saying.

9/3/2009 3:58:19 PM

^^^I think the press is doing a fine job of questioning Obama. I mean, haven't Obama's approval numbers been dropping? Are we disapproving despite the press? And how can you use words like "messianic" and "cult of personality" when his approval rating is dropping?

[Edited on September 3, 2009 at 4:06 PM. Reason : ?]

9/3/2009 4:06:05 PM

Quote :

"be a better mentor to my sisters, use less bottled water, sell a culture of intelligence (not ignorance), let kids in small towns know they can still dream big, support local food banks, donate to UNICEF, be a great mother, change myself before asking other people to change, etc..."

Well I roll my eyes at most of these because you've got a collection of people with copious amounts of disposable income promising to do what normal people do on a daily basis.

Quote :

"It's a fucking lame PSA, dude"

It is. I'm not concerned about this specifically, I suppose I'm just looking at it in a larger context which others may or may not perceive.

Quote :

"Demi moore and Ashton Kutcher != the press"

Not remotely implying that they are.

Quote :

"I think the press is doing a fine job of questioning Obama."

Not hardly. Small example would be the administration's claim that they've saved XXX,000 jobs. They have no way of verifying this number, yet I see it repeated without comment. Another example would be the claims of overall budgetary savings that the healthcare reform is supposed to bring. They're essentially baseless, but except for mentioning a contradictory CBO number, they're given a free pass. The editorial sections on MSNBC and CNN are practically cheerleading for the President and, while I realize they're not hard news, their positions are still noted.

I've covered in other threads pretty substantially how biased the media is. The president himself recognized the overwhelming slant in his favor when he addressed the Washington Press Club with the line, "most of you voted for me, except Fox News."

Perhaps you're right that my fears are perhaps groundless considering the recent drop in his polls. That being said, they haven't even begun to spend the $600B + which is left over from the stimulus and will likely be used to buy votes in shaky congressional seats.

9/3/2009 4:17:11 PM

SOCIAL ENGINEERING OMFG!@!!!!!

9/3/2009 7:28:53 PM

I pledge to keep making super-fantastic movies for everyone to enjoy.

I pledge to keep my hollywood divorce total under five.

I pledge to stop biting people's ears off.

I pledge to eat and purge so that my stomach holds no more food than those little African children.

I pledge to stop feeling so guilty about my gi-normous wealth -that I keep preaching to everyone else.

I pledge to ramp up the fake concern for the poor saps who can barely scrap together the $10 to see my latest film.

I pledge to have my people call your people.

9/3/2009 10:30:02 PM

lets see:

grouping up with a bunch of political activists to protest taxes so that you can keep more money for yourself

or

committing to charitable actions that directly impact people who are in need of some services.


yeah, thats' totally the same thing. Jesus was a tax patriot, he didnt give a damn about widows and children.

9/3/2009 11:17:36 PM

^I think the self interest vs helping others aspect was a part of the distinction I was trying to get at that I didn't articulate that well. Not that both things aren't good for our country in their own ways, but they are certainly different rather than being just like each other.

9/4/2009 1:10:13 AM

seems to go both ways, although I don't recall anybody getting upset when Bush was "being served"

Quote :

""I took an oath to the president [Bush], and I take that oath very seriously," Sara Taylor said in answer to a question early in the hearing. And right after a break, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked her if she was sure about that. "Did you mean, perhaps, you took an oath to the Constitution?" Leahy asked. It was a telling exchange."

Quote :

" "I felt it an honor to have served Ronald Reagan as his first attorney general." He added: "Those of us who served President Reagan by working for Bill Smith in the Department of Justice shared an extraordinary experience" "

Quote :

"According to the [Justice Department] OIG report released today, Angela Williamson, a deputy to Monica Goodling at the [Bush] DOJ, was intimately involved in her bosses' scurrilous hiring practices, attending interviews and often conducting interviews herself. Here's a sampling of the same questions that Goodling: .... [W]hat is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"

Quote :

"Prior to Goodling herself testifying before the House Judiciary Committee about her screening of prospective DOJ hires to make certain they were sufficiently devoted to serving George Bush, she shared with a Justice Department official this vow: "All I ever wanted to do was serve this president." "

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/09/02/bush/index.html

9/4/2009 1:19:10 AM

it could be worse...

9/5/2009 4:37:20 PM

^^ Yeah, I've got big problems with the adulation of Bush 43 and Ronald Regan by the GOP. Perhaps that is human nature though and our entire experiment is bound to fail on those grounds.

Quote :

"grouping up with a bunch of political activists to protest taxes so that you can keep more money for yourself or committing to charitable actions that directly impact people who are in need of some services."

The difference is that I have a moral right to that which I have legally gained. I don't think you're going this far, but if the argument is that charity is inherently better than demanding private property rights, then there is no reason we can't simply tax at 100% and distribute wealth equally to every individual in the nation.

As far as the actors discussing charity, I'd be interested in the % of their wealth which goes to charity. I don't ask this because I think they "owe" anything, but if they're going to make sanctimonious commercials about how I should pledge to help the world I'd like to know they're doing it themselves. Don't make an implicit connection between you smiling at your neighbor and me opening my wallet to support a government expansion which assuages your guilt about being wealthy.

9/8/2009 11:47:15 AM

We need to remove "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance already. This isn't 1950.

9/8/2009 11:55:21 AM

"Help serve your community by joining the armed rebellion!"

9/8/2009 3:00:28 PM

Quote :

"yeah, thats' totally the same thing. Jesus was a tax patriot, he didnt give a damn about widows and children."

You're trying to make Christians sound hypocritical by making comments like this but theres something you seem to not understand....

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ACT OF CHARITY AND FORCED GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN THE EYES OF TAXPAYERS.

9/8/2009 4:50:40 PM

Quote :

"We need to remove "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance already. This isn't 1950."

No, its 2009. Whats your point? FYI, the argument thats its XXXX time is about as weak as it gets.

9/8/2009 4:57:02 PM

The Founding Fathers did not intend for the Pledge of Allegiance to include reference to God.

9/8/2009 5:40:59 PM

I don't think the founding fathers ever heard of the Pledge, cause it hadn't been created yet. But I think you are trolling, so whatever

9/8/2009 5:49:08 PM

"Under God" was added in the 50s by liberal activists. Don't you want to go back to the old-fashioned, traditional, God-less pledge of allegiance?

9/8/2009 6:58:28 PM

yes. I want to be a god-less heathen, too!

9/8/2009 7:03:20 PM

i'll pledge if a couple of those womens s my d

9/9/2009 2:15:01 AM