Micahel Stackpole and the 2004 Election

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-19 03:55am

For those that don't want to bother reading it: Stackpole is voting for Kerry.

vakundok · Post by **vakundok** » 2004-10-19 07:00am

Or more correctly against Bush.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-10-19 07:34am

This belongs in N&P.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-10-19 12:46pm

Vympel wrote:This belongs in N&P.

Sorry about that.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-19 12:56pm

Woohoo, another celebrity (sort of) on the soap box.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-10-19 01:10pm

Stormbringer wrote:Woohoo, another celebrity (sort of) on the soap box.

So what? He's actually bothered to construct reasonable arguments instead of just spouting drivel, so I don't see why he should be ridiculed or dismissed out of hand.

Edi

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2004-10-19 01:58pm

Edi wrote:So what? He's actually bothered to construct reasonable arguments instead of just spouting drivel, so I don't see why he should be ridiculed or dismissed out of hand.

Edi

Well, duh! He's just biased.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-19 02:33pm

Edi wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:Woohoo, another celebrity (sort of) on the soap box.
So what? He's actually bothered to construct reasonable arguments instead of just spouting drivel, so I don't see why he should be ridiculed or dismissed out of hand.

He hasn't said anything new or profound is his article. It's the usual Anybody But Bush stuff mixed with some off hand pontification about the War on Terror (a lot of which straight from Kerry soundbites). Just because it's coming from a minor celebrity doesn't give it any more value.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-10-19 04:20pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Edi wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:Woohoo, another celebrity (sort of) on the soap box.
So what? He's actually bothered to construct reasonable arguments instead of just spouting drivel, so I don't see why he should be ridiculed or dismissed out of hand.
He hasn't said anything new or profound is his article. It's the usual Anybody But Bush stuff mixed with some off hand pontification about the War on Terror (a lot of which straight from Kerry soundbites). Just because it's coming from a minor celebrity doesn't give it any more value.

So, the standard for a celebrity's opinion to carry any weight at all is that it must always contain something new, or something very profound? That's pretty much what the tone of your posts implies.

His arguments are sensible, and even though they are not news to most of us here, Stackpole's celebrity status does not somehow detract from the value of his arguments. You're right that his status does not confer any additional value to them either, but I'm getting fucking sick and tired of the attitude of "Oh, look, a celebrity stating a political opinion, but it can be ignored because he/she is a celebrity!" that has become very prevalent here. What the fuck happened to judging people by the content of their speech instead of how famous they are?

Edi

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-19 05:21pm

So, the standard for a celebrity's opinion to carry any weight at all is that it must always contain something new, or something very profound? That's pretty much what the tone of your posts implies.

No, I'm saying that a celebrity's opinion don't matter one damn bit more than an ordinary person's. And when the opinion is largely herd politics and sound bites I'm not impressed at all.

His arguments are sensible, and even though they are not news to most of us here, Stackpole's celebrity status does not somehow detract from the value of his arguments. You're right that his status does not confer any additional value to them either, but I'm getting fucking sick and tired of the attitude of "Oh, look, a celebrity stating a political opinion, but it can be ignored because he/she is a celebrity!" that has become very prevalent here. What the fuck happened to judging people by the content of their speech instead of how famous they are?

Quite frankly, I'm thoroughly sick of celebrities ponitificating and acting like they're some sort of hot shit. I'm sick and tired of the implicit appeal to popularity in the never ending string of celebrity endorsements for both side. I don't care about their opinions except in that they're informed and worthwhile; and quite frankly the average celebrity's opinions are just informed sound bite riddled drivel.

The AAB crowd has already flogged this dead horse and I fail to see why a C-leve celebrity parroting it makes it anything new or important.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-10-19 05:34pm

Stormbringer, shut up before I take that stick out of your ass and beat you over the head with it.

Thre's mindless drivel, and there's more mindless drivel. You just happen to be spouting the mindless drivel of the sort that has been found on the Republican side of the fence lately. You don't even seem to have even read the fucking article, so why the fuck are you blasting it?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-19 05:45pm

Crayz9000 wrote:Stormbringer, shut up before I take that stick out of your ass and beat you over the head with it.

Thre's mindless drivel, and there's more mindless drivel. You just happen to be spouting the mindless drivel of the sort that has been found on the Republican side of the fence lately.

Why because I'm not mindless praising a celebrity for having and opinion? Or because I don't reverance the celebrity endorsement? I simply fail to see why the fact that Michael Stackpole, third tier author, having a political opinion should constitute news. Or for that matter why it is I'm supposed to be impressed by celebrity endorsements to begin with.

Crayz9000 wrote: You don't even seem to have even read the fucking article, so why the fuck are you blasting it?

I'm not blasting the article so much as I am blasting the notion that the some celebrity's article is some how big news. I mean really, what the hell is it that makes this article special?

PS: I read about 2/3rds actually and even for ABB it's not that good.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-10-19 07:29pm

Stormbringer wrote:Why because I'm not mindless praising a celebrity for having and opinion? Or because I don't reverance the celebrity endorsement? I simply fail to see why the fact that Michael Stackpole, third tier author, having a political opinion should constitute news. Or for that matter why it is I'm supposed to be impressed by celebrity endorsements to begin with.

I'm not impressed by it either, but at least he's expressing a rational opinion unlike most celebrities. I mean, what would you prefer as news: Michael Stackpole explaining intelligently why he's voting for Kerry, or Paris Hilton being an airhead, or Michael Moore being a dumbass, or...

Stormbringer wrote:I'm not blasting the article so much as I am blasting the notion that the some celebrity's article is some how big news. I mean really, what the hell is it that makes this article special?

Just that he's at least trying to explain his position in an intelligent fashion. It's not much new -- we've seen the same sort of thing with johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com, written by a guy who's just a college student. (And that was news, too.)

I'd rather make fun of people who think that Michael Jackson's nose is news.

Stormbringer wrote:PS: I read about 2/3rds actually and even for ABB it's not that good.

Ok, ok, so you read about two-thirds. I'm impressed.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-10-20 01:59am

Stormbringer wrote:snip

I'm not blasting the article so much as I am blasting the notion that the some celebrity's article is some how big news. I mean really, what the hell is it that makes this article special?

PS: I read about 2/3rds actually and even for ABB it's not that good.

So what if he puts his opinion on the internet? Is someone forcing you to read it?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-10-20 04:06am

How is Stackpole writing his opinion on the web any less objectionable than the thousands of blogs out there?

Post by **Edi** » 2004-10-20 04:14am

HemlockGrey wrote:How is Stackpole writing his opinion on the web any less objectionable than the thousands of blogs out there?

Did you mean to say "any more objectionable"? Otherwise your post makes little sense if you agree with him. OTOH, if you find all blogs and such objectionable, then you are making sense, just, which one is it?

Edi

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-10-20 05:47am

Er, "anymore objectionable". I don't see any difference between this and all the other blogs out there.