Has anyone else noticed Drudge's lead for the past-I don't know-three days has been the Oprah/Obama love fest? Good no-God, I hate the attention focused on celebrity endorsements. The Washington Times reports that a celebrity endorsement of a presidential candidate does not influence the choices of the majority of voters, so why all the hooplah? Maybe we forget about the new majority(?). That section of the population who show no real interest in government leaders, but have already or soon will decide what box they'll check. You know one or more of these people. The ones the attack ads are created for (can't read fine print). The ones who pray before polling (not sorry for the no-God comment). The ones with Oprah's latest book club novel on their night stand (Uh-oh!). Ladies and gentlemen, meet my mother. But seriously, I'm not suggesting these are bad people, or even lazy-just disinterested and that's okay. Politics are brutish, cold, and often times confusing-that's not for everyone. What's not okay is the way these groups of people are mislead into believing they know their candidate.
So maybe celebrities do make a small difference, maybe they don't. I don't know. But let's not forget 2000-when a small number of votes made an awfully big difference.
Besides the horde of liberal Hollywooders supporting Kucinich, the only major players I've noticed are Oprah (Obama), Barbara Streisand (Clinton), and Chuck Norris (Huckabee)-if you can even call him a major player. Boy, I hope there aren't many Walker, Texas Ranger fans left.
*When using blogger on a Mac I can't use the font, spell check, or links options without html, otherwise I would have linked to the Washington Post article. Anyone know how I can view these options without a PC?
