Gwynneth Paltrow gets a well deserved dressing down by Green Beret
Posted by Non_mooching_artist 9 years, 11 months ago to Entertainment
Well, this was an enjoyable read. Maybe she should keep her nose out of things she's utterly clueless about. What a complete moron to compare a "mean tweet" to war. She needs a good smack.
I was moved, but then I thought about it. No, words are more powerful. Not some twit of a word bite, but words get us into wars. Words are the way we shape most of our knowledge. Words are how we start a new nation and also how we destroy a free nation from within. Words are history.
Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words...start revolutions
She is a fool for thinking that a mean tweet and a war can compare.
Gwyneth Paltry - another total embarrassment
for America!
But I do not want to glorify being a soldier. I have tremendous respect for our vets and armed forces and how they keep us safe, but an Ayn Rand or an Aristotle or a John Locke are much more important to our freedom in the long run.
Once again we seem to be at odds because of the choice of your words. You state, "But I do not want to glorify being a soldier." Yet you claim to "respect vets and armed forces and how they keep us safe," That is certainly a contradiction in my understanding of the English language. While I don't disagree with the concept of words being important for freedom, however to dismiss the concept of a military to protect those freedoms is terribly naive.
As to Ms. Paltrow's tweet,I believe it's enough to say that she is the ultimate definition of a twit. These self indulgent "Hollywood celebrities" should be just ignored, unfortunately our youngsters worship these ignorant twits.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
Obviously you didn't bother to read the definition you sent me.
"glorify, to honor or praise." No one, especially those that have served in the military expects their service to be glorified. In fact most that have served in combat seldom speak of it. The word glorify was used by you and not by me. Perhaps it is only semantics that we argue about, but I believe in words having meaning and I objected to the context in which you used the word. i assure you that I nor anyone that has served would choose the word glorify to describe what soldiers do in the extraordinary context of combat.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
": to honor or praise (a god or goddess)
: to make (something) seem much better or more important than it really is"
I do not see any contradiction in my initial statement.
The real sad part is that it is obvious that you are not sure whether you are a liberal progressive or a conservative with real beliefs and principles.
Fred Speckmann
While I can appreciate your defense of khalling, I Don,t accept the premise of having posted for 2 years as some sort of expertise on anything.
I often ask about writers meaning and ask them for clarification. However as I'm fairly familiar with the English language
, I usually need no interpreters for what I read. I'm dismissing anything out of hand, but am responding to what I read. Whether I just "walked in" or not is totally or irellevent.
Fred
While I can appreciate your defense of khalling, I Don,t accept the premise of having posted for 2 years as some sort of expertise on anything.
I often ask about writers meaning and ask them for clarification. However as I'm fairly familiar with the English language
, I usually need no interpreters for what I read. I'm dismissing anything out of hand, but am responding to what I read. Whether I just "walked in" or not is totally or irellevent.
Fred
A sacrifice is not the measure of a Objectivist or an individual. I am impressed when individuals put their life on the line for ideas. My patience is at an end. You have not attempted to read the hundreds of posts I have put on this site or the thousands of comments. You, sir, do not know me at all.
Kaila
This will be my last post regarding anything you have to say. Yes, I was directing my last comment to you and as you have probably noticed, I usually write the words Re; khalling or to whomever I am responding to. I apologize for not having done so on the last post.
To get back to our points of discussion, I must strongly disagree with you about whether the sacrifice of an individual is the measure of an Objectivist or anyone else. Ayn Rand’s point in her comment regarding sacrifice for another man was dealing with being asked to do so by another man or even worse having it demanded of you. I’m talking about an individual’s willingness of his own accord to offer his sacrifice for someone else. Clearly we see Ayn Rand’s philosophy differently. In my humble opinion you have a strong misunderstanding of that philosophy. As an example, in Atlas Shrugged, Hank Rearden was willing to sacrifice his freedom on his own accord in order to supply Dagny Taggart with the rails she needed. He offered and she didn't ask but did accept his offer. Free will is what this philosophy is all about.
Every member of the military I have ever known, including myself, has fought for an idea. Sometimes they were misled by their leadership and were therefore betrayed. Sadly that has happened way too often. But it would be a misjudgment on your part to not admire their willingness to put their life on the line for their understanding of an idea. For example, I served in the Marine Corps because of my background as an immigrant who had escaped from East Germany and lived there under Communism, not a wonderful experience. I joined because I thought that we were fighting against Communism in Vietnam, but instead we were betrayed by our own government and pulled out instead of defeating the communist government of North Vietnam completely. We certainly could have done so. We never lost a single battle until the politicians decided to turn tail and run.
But this discussion will lead us nowhere, political, moral and economical integrity is a concept that I sincerely believe is beyond your comprehension. I truly wish to believe that I’m wrong about your position, but I truly doubt it.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
"glo·ri·fy
verb \ˈglȯr-ə-ˌfī\
: to honor or praise (a god or goddess)
: to make (something) seem much better or more important than it really is"
I disagree with khalling; without the soldiers in the short run, there will be no long run for Rand, Aristotle, or Locke to ponder.
"Ideology *counts*. But when it counts, it does the counting with a sword."
- King Arakal in "Ideological Defeat"
Paltrow's tweet was hyperbole, and for some bizarre reason I'm not as outraged by it as others.
You're not as outraged like most of us because you believe that what she wrote is hyperbole, I would disagree because spoiled brat twits like her actually believe what they say and write to be true. I can't prove it, but i have known many people like her who think that their s..t doesn't stink. I hope that you can forgive my language in expressing my disgust with a lightweight individual like her.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
Slammmm!
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
I would like to think she was being hyperbolic, but she has a reputation and this doesn't help.
Regards,
O.A.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpGN0RWd...
The operative word is the last one. It's just "play."
Actors are just people who sometimes have the ability to appearing convincingly to have talents they do not have in reality.
They should be appreciated for the acting ability as should all people for the talents they do have.
Some actors/actresses are affected negatively by the power they are given by the media attention and adulation they receive.
Sometimes they even act like idiots while acting the role of themselves.
Power corrupts even good actors and actresses.
It certainly has little in common with the effects of war on soldiers.
Bravo for your accurate analysis of the self anointed brilliance of Hollywood twits.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
She certainly could have used those words to describe a mean comment made on the internet. what makes her a twit is the comparison to the danger of warfare and to compare herself to suffering an insult to what a soldier experiences in war.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
Continuing with my campaign to only swear using words that are really bad [for example, "fuck you" is wishing someone a good time], I'm looking for something bad that starts with the letter A.
My John Galt t-shirt #12 says: "The evil of the world is made possible by nothing by the sanction you give it." People like what's-her-name is only famous [?] because we have put her there. Has she done anything of value? and yes, entertainment is valuable.
thx
It is interesting that the these same self absorbed Hollywood types criticized the acting of real Navy SEALs in the movie ACT OF VALOR several years ago, who were only "acting" in the non-action scenes. When they were portraying SEALs doing SEAL STUFF, they weren't acting, they were demonstrating perfection on camera, that no actor could ever come close to achieving. Ms Paltrow is a talented actress, and does a great job pretending to be someone else. But if you are going to live by the social media twitterverse, you can also die by the twitterverse.
Cheers