[reeftool]

We're all better off when the Hollywood bunch sticks to their main business of mediocre entertainment.

We're all better off when the Hollywood bunch sticks to their main business of mediocre entertainment.

With all the "reality" shows we don't even need them for the crap their putting out.

[Artesian]

Don't count them out yet. They will be joining the environmental groups wiping oil off of turtles. It is tragic but the Hollywood regulars won't be doing it for people or animals only for there own thumping of their chests. Publicity.
A

[lmd91343]

At the risk of joining this conversation, which will devolve from lack of facts and unprovable points based on some of the participants previous behaviors to endless arguing, I will add the little I know.

Some folks in Marin (the most liberal part of Calif) are organizing a benefit concert for Gulf of Mexico residents. This is in addition to the one being planned in NOLA.

The earlier Farm Aid concerts had both "liberal" and country/western performers. I don't know about the ones over the last few years.

The Nashville tragedy is almost off the radar, hidden by the Gulf problem. There are benefit concert plans from from local country western performers. If the need for more help is evident a bit down the road, we will see what happens. It takes time to understand the problems and the needs after the initial emergency is met. It is unfair to judge ANYBODY at this point. The "Concert for Bangladesh", the first of the big time postwar show business benefits, did not happen immediately after the floods. It took a bit of time to piece it together.

The comment that the conservatives give quietly and the liberals don't is stupid, insulting and plain wrong headed. There is no evidence to back that up. It is just argumentative.

I live out here in "La La land" (you guys love to throw insults) and I don't remember any aid benefits after the Northridge earthquake. Neither liberal or conservative. We had the Red Cross here in 24 hours and FEMA in 48.

At the risk of joining this conversation, which will devolve from lack of facts and unprovable points based on some of the participants previous behaviors to endless arguing, I will add the little I know.

Some folks in Marin (the most liberal part of Calif) are organizing a benefit concert for Gulf of Mexico residents. This is in addition to the one being planned in NOLA.

The earlier Farm Aid concerts had both "liberal" and country/western performers. I don't know about the ones over the last few years.

The Nashville tragedy is almost off the radar, hidden by the Gulf problem. There are benefit concert plans from from local country western performers. If the need for more help is evident a bit down the road, we will see what happens. It takes time to understand the problems and the needs after the initial emergency is met. It is unfair to judge ANYBODY at this point. The "Concert for Bangladesh", the first of the big time postwar show business benefits, did not happen immediately after the floods. It took a bit of time to piece it together.

The comment that the conservatives give quietly and the liberals don't is stupid, insulting and plain wrong headed. There is no evidence to back that up. It is just argumentative.

I live out here in "La La land" (you guys love to throw insults) and I don't remember any aid benefits after the Northridge earthquake. Neither liberal or conservative. We had the Red Cross here in 24 hours and FEMA in 48.

Understood that it takes time. But what about this question

There are millions of poor, homeless people right here in the US of A. Why no benefit concert?

This has been going on for years. Why no concerts?

[shooz]

You just haven't looked.
What about the graphics concert?

[Phil1]

Speaking of a lack of facts, I seem to remember a number of these altruistic liberal 'benefit concerts' that heavily lined the pockets of the promoters, facilities and 'artists'. Anything coming out of the entertaiment/drug industry needs a real good sniff test. Better yet feel real good and make a donation through real charity avenues that meet with your approval and purpose. You don't have a ticket hassle and you can do it now and it won't get rained out. If you have to do a group thing to feel good, try a hot tub, nice company and some wine.

[lmd91343]

Understood that it takes time. But what about this question



This has been going on for years. Why no concerts?

The ones not given by the liberals or the ones not given by the conservatives?
The ones not given by the easterners or the westerners?
The ones not given by the blondes or the red heads?

The ONLY significant charitable giving "divide" in this country is affiliated religious vs. non religious.

OFF TOPIC - That is the best argument there is for religion. - OFF TOPIC

The ones not given by the liberals or the ones not given by the conservatives?
The ones not given by the easterners or the westerners?
The ones not given by the blondes or the red heads?

The ONLY significant charitable giving "divide" in this country is affiliated religious vs. non religious.

OFF TOPIC - That is the best argument there is for religion. - OFF TOPIC

See the thing is it's usually the libs doing the "benefits". With great fanfare and chest pounding.

---------- Post added 06-13-2010 at 05:57 PM ----------

You just haven't looked.
What about the graphics concert?

There of course won't be one. I give in anonymity. I don't need to pound my chest ans boost my ego or say "Look, see how much we've raised" Then again a graphics benefit wouldn't mean I actually gave. It would just mean I got someone else to give.

[shooz]

You're just lazy.

[Parallax]

Then again a graphics benefit wouldn't mean I actually gave. It would just mean I got someone else to give.

The "Prime Directive" of liberalism is "Always spend (or donate) someone else's money."

[Oldschool]

Geez, now we look at where the money came from. I think the 'libs' who do benefits are really just using leverage. I'm sure that raising money from some type of concert or show enables a lot more money to be raised than an individual donation.

When I look at the following list, I'm sure there are 'libs' and conservatives who just want to give back some of their good fortune.
The Philanthropy 50: Americans Who Gave the Most in 2009 - Philanthropy 50 - The Chronicle of Philanthropy- Connecting the nonprofit world with news, jobs, and ideas

[lmd91343]

See the thing is it's usually the libs doing the "benefits". With great fanfare and chest pounding.

---------- Post added 06-13-2010 at 05:57 PM ----------

Noted conservative entertainers who have given benefits or participated:
Kelsey Grammer
Wayne Newton
Bob Hope
Drew Carey

That's off the top of my head.

This entire point is silly at best. - People who help charitable causes as distinguished by political alignment.

[Nesster]

We're all better off when the Hollywood bunch sticks to their main business of mediocre entertainment.

...considering that Hollywood is one of the few global exports remaining for the USA - software, Apple, Harley being some of the other few - I'd be thankful that someone does what they do best to benefit others, every now and then.

Can you see the oil companies, for example, mounting a "fill er up for the Gulf" campaign, donating $.50 of each gallon of gas to help with the oil spill?

I suppose country music had its award show slate and so didn't want to mount a Fix Ol Opry... or maybe the Opry was simply well insured?
Ah but they are benefit concerting:
http://www.gactv.com/gac/pac_ctnt/text/0,,GAC_26058_98169,00.html

http://www.nashvillescene.com/nashville/ArticleArchives?tag=Nashville+flood+benefits

Even the bluegrassers are getting in on it:
http://www.thebluegrassblog.com/nashville-flood-relief-benefits-scheduled/

[JACOBY]

Thats always been are problem we help them out but they let us destroy ourselfs with no aid from them