Do We Want Our Presidents Defined by Hollywood's Standards?

[VXerick]

Bill Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry have all sucked up to the Hollywood elite as a way to get to the Presidency. Only Clinton actually got there but the others thought they'd cash in on the same noteriety. Now Hillary is going the same route.

I know for me, seeing John Kerry on stage with the Hollywood bunch singing their praises as this is what America is all about, was nothing more than a groan. Do we really want our President's to be defined by Hollywood's standards? As much as we like to be entertained, surely most people would want a less flambouyant and more moral crowd to become close buddies of our Presidents.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...61,print.story

Hollywood rallies for Sen. Clinton By Anne-Marie O'Connor Times Staff Writer June 3, 2005 Conservatives may strive to portray New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as a polarizing figure, but she unified Hollywood Democratic political donors at a series of fundraisers that netted an estimated $1 million in a single evening, hosts estimated Thursday. In an industry where Democrats still like to describe themselves as in recovery from the reelection of Republican President Bush, the Clinton California swing this week was clearly a shot in the arm and spurred the inevitable talk of a possible presidential bid. From a $1,000-per-person soiree at the home of Warner Bros. chief Alan Horn to a late-night Young Hollywood shindig co-hosted by such performers as Christina Aguilera, Scarlett Johansson and Jake Gyllenhaal, organizers of the Wednesday night events had to turn away aspiring guests. One dinner at the home of radio syndication billionaire Norm Pattiz was expected to bring in $450,000 for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, organizers said. Clinton appeared at the event with Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.).>>>> cont.

[Agent007]

The notion that presidents can be chosen by Hollywood standards is somewhat possible in America. Since we live in a capitalist society, the only movies in Hollywood that will make a big impact are those viewed by many people and getting lots of revenue. These movies may define the archetype of a president; it would make a big impact only if people like it. In presidential elections, the candidate who most people like will win. One might argue that Hollywood films' viewers are made to blindly choose the certain films through advertisements; however, the same is true for presidential elections, in which campaigns and political advertisements influence the masses. Ultimately, I do not want presidents defined by Hollywood standards, but there is a bit of inevitability in the possibility.

[rcne]

What the Democrats hopefully have learned is that most people know that Hollywood isn't real. So when the Hollywood contingent comes into the political process as another PAC most Americans, other than the media don't apply much weight to their 'opinions'.

After all they live in a fantasy land where egos rule. An actor or actress is used to being idolized, but not for their political views.

Hollywood and their group think action with the Democratic party buying it was detrimental to the process.

So much the better for the GOP.