WTF! Slim-Fast drops Whoopi...

OpusP.Gladiator · Jul 14, 2004, 07:23 PM

according to reuters...

O.K. I'm not lusually one to comment on Crap like this, but since the Freakin Repubs are going nuts over this I feel the need to say sumthing!!! muhahaha....

Further Censorship of our rights to speak freely!!!!

FUCK BUSH does that get the idea across... are ya gonna throw me in jail now..... ooohhh I'm scared, now F.O..!!!!!

I'm so sick and tired of the political wranglings that are coming out of both camps daily... The Republicans must really be freakin scared if they have to try an slam someone like Whoopi, I'm sure she doesn't need the slim-fast money! Sounds like a boy-cott should happen.... unfortunately the only people who use the product are probably Heafty-right-wingers anyways...
but maybe a larger boycott of the parent co. Unilever plc.... oh ok f--- it who pays attention to boycotts anyways... I mean I think 3m made more money during africa's aparthied anyways.....

Here's a michael moorism for ya.... The Bushies must be connected to the Dutch(i.e. unilever) in sum way.... maybe that's how the Saudi's laundered sum money to them...hahahahaha

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...le_goldberg_dc

Nacht · Jul 14, 2004, 07:26 PM

uhh wtf. you have to make a point for debate...not flame..something. i dont even know what your stance is.

Falstaff · Jul 14, 2004, 07:57 PM

he's just rantin....lol

Judas · Jul 14, 2004, 08:23 PM

gaud.. i wish i coulda seen that... good for her!

Sturmbahn · Jul 14, 2004, 09:00 PM

I'm surprised they canned her for simply mouthing off! That was unwarrented. Oh well....

OpusP.Gladiator · Jul 14, 2004, 09:33 PM

That is my point.....

Seriously, more and more people are truly unaware they are losing their civil liberties every day! And the Patriot Act is not helping! All Whoopi was doin was havin sum fun at a party for dems.... so she is guilty of pandering to her audience?
Don't tell me they were offended because she used some profane language or something... I mean c'mon, let's not forget history and the likes of lenny bruce! (not that I'm comparing Lenny and Whoopi...haha)

So she made a few ill remarks.... why do a few suits up in some office decide to pull the plug and give sum lame ass excuse as having offended a few people...Palease.....Imagine if every company decided to change their spokesperson's due to bad publicity... Didn't they run ads featuring monica lewinsky, where are the morals or does race play an issue?

speaking of a poor choice of words... Our great state of california has a chief of educators appointed by the governator who told a little 6 yr old that she was dumb an dirty or something to that effect, and it was captured by tv cams... Yet he's still in office??? where does a comment like that originate from anyways? Republicanisms... a disease?
muhahaha

Nacht · Jul 14, 2004, 10:04 PM

this still has nothing to do with removing the freedom of speech IMO. you are talking about the company removing her for her conduct...not the government. there is nothing wrong with this.

Guidoo · Jul 14, 2004, 10:12 PM

Opus this really has nothing to do with the Patriot Act, although I do agree that the PA has some scary bits to it.....

Onto Whoopi and her situation.....slimfast is well within their rights to fire her, not saying it's fair mind you. But spokespeople usually have a clause in their contract allowing the company to end the contract for whatever reasons spelled out. What I find interesting are the following things.

A) When slimfast hired Whoopi they had to know (unless they have been living under a rock) that
Whoopi's humuor has been raunchy at times and will most likely always be so.

B) Did Whoopi go to far.....perhaps...but then again it does appear to me that she was playing to
her audience.

C) Where was this "public " outrage just a short time ago when VP Cheney told Sen Leahy to go
F.... himself. I expect raunch from comedians.....not politicians...dem or rep.

D) Good point about Monica Lewinsky...her only claim to fame was/is an adulterous affair. I don't
think race really comes into play....slimfast is trying to avoid controversy. Funny thing is by
bowing to one group they may well agitate another.

Guido

Falstaff · Jul 14, 2004, 10:56 PM

whoopi is outspoken and she has a reputation for doing what she wants to do..lol, so who cares...I want to see melanie griffith!!! By the way, I dont give actors any credit, they act and they earn and they pay taxes, I could care less about their political agenda. "Political tantrums are inevitable. You’re dealing with a class of people who have unchecked egos and who are invited on talk shows to be experts on everything from high art to pop culture." - Micheal Moore

ToshiroOC · Jul 14, 2004, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nacht
this still has nothing to do with removing the freedom of speech IMO. you are talking about the company removing her for her conduct...not the government. there is nothing wrong with this.

Nacht is correct. The first amendment protects you from the government passing laws and such that affect your freedom of speech, not from being fired by a private corporation.

Judas · Jul 15, 2004, 01:52 AM

strange... i understood... and i've seen were just because you were a bit "speaking freely"... they still shouldn't be able to fire you.... works differently i guess in various states...

The_Neon_Cowboy · Jul 15, 2004, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sturmbahn
I'm surprised they canned her for simply mouthing off! That was unwarrented. Oh well....

Nt really if your a represtitve of a company and they start S*** people belive thats your comanies stance. After all that is thier representive....

Quote:

Originally posted by OpusP.Gladiator
.....Imagine if every company decided to change their spokesperson's due to bad publicity

Wake up thats done all the time.

another good example Dell dude? busted for possesion of weed...

don't see him in comericals anymore do ya? -NO

Quote:

Originally posted by ToshiroOC
Nacht is correct. The first amendment protects you from the government passing laws and such that affect your freedom of speech, not from being fired by a private corporation.

tep, companies don't even need a reason! Thay can do anything they wan't with in the law of couse

Sturmbahn · Jul 15, 2004, 03:50 PM

I understood why Rosie O'Donnell was given the boot when she mouthed off about the evils of guns and yet did commercials for Kmart, the largest supermarket weapons dealers in the country (in comparison to their competitors Walmart and Target). That was very bad for one of the few still-flourishing sources of income for Kmart and they felt the blow when people left them for Walmart or Target. Remember the wave of Kmart store closures across the country?

Back to Whoopi, how many Slim Fast drinkers are sissy word-wounded Republican (Democrats would probably want Whoopi to get a raise) whiners? Sure it's Slim Fast's complete right to not keep sending wheelbarrow loads of cash to Whoopi, I fully agree with that. I just think that Slim Fast freaked out and jumped the gun. I almost always vote Republican (only Democrat I voted for lost anyway, Missouri state senator), but I can't say I would take my (non-existant) indignation out on Slim Fast for Whoopi's poor behavior.

OpusP.Gladiator · Jul 15, 2004, 03:53 PM

I know I can rant and sound like a lunatic sometimes...(i.e. M. Moore)
I guess I'm just wishing to live in a bit of a more respectable world... I like living in my fantasy land where everything's cozy and nice hehehahahoho

anyways, I understand companies will do whatever they wanna do concerning their celebrity spokespeople... Doesn't mean people should get shafted for speaking out politically unless there's an underlying agenda!!!!

Go Figure!

--that is all-- and thank you for your time...

OldBuzzard · Jul 16, 2004, 09:28 PM

Opus:

What happened to Whoopie is no different than what happened with Anita Bryant.

If you aren't old enough to remember, Anita Bryant was the spokesperson for the Florida Oriage Juice Assn, and she PUBLICALLY took a stand against homosexuals. That wasn't 'politically correct', and the liberals raised a big enough ruckus, that she lost her position.

Neither case has anything to do with 'Freedom of Speech". That only applies to the GOVERNMENT restricting one's speach. AN employerer may set the limits that they wish, and their employees must abide by them, or face the chance of dismissal. In any other situation (this forum for instance), the 'owners' of that venu may also restrict speech as they see fit. For instance, here, I am not allowed to call you a %^&* &*()%%$#. On a public street, I would be 'allowed' to do so.