<p>If I paid $350-$700 for a ticket to hear Barbra sing, I’d be irritated to be subjected to her political commentary, but I’d also be irritated at an audience member disrupting her SINGING. Disrupting her political commentary? Not so much.</p>
<p>Her website gives no indication of the show’s program, so, unless someone was a fan, there’d be no way to know in advance that Babs would be up on a political soapbox.</p>
<p>I disagree, baseballmom. I don’t think that too many people are unaware of the political involvement of Barbra over the years, fans or not. I’ve attended a lot of concerts over the years, of varying types of performers, and I don’t recall even one where all it was was constant singing. There is always going to be some degree of chatter between songs, often reflecting current events or politics. This has become especially prevalent in the past three or four years, from everyone to Springsteen to Bono to even Harry Belafonte and John Mayer, getting in on the act! :)</p>
<p>She’s a professional singer and actress - and a good one, too. She’s not going to make it as the liberal version of Rush Limbaugh, she’s not that smart or funny (Yes, I know he gets on liberal’s nerves, don’t write back all upset I mentioned him).</p>
<p>Even hear Bob Hope’s politics? Me neither, but we all loved him - he could have been a Stalinist-type Communist for all I know (I seriously doubt it). The difference was, he was a professional - he kept his personal life personal. This is simply good marketing. You make more money this way. Keep religion and politics private and everyone will like you.</p>
<p>She’s too stupid to realize this, I suppose. Then she thinks HER politics matter. They don’t. No one cares. If she wants to make a difference, do it in private…give money - in private; ladle soup…in private; adopt crack babies…in private. Show grace, patience and courtesy in public - even with idiots who heckle you. The public will then love you forever…or at least respect you.</p>
<p>Ditto the Dixie Chicks, Susan Sarandon, Alec Baldwin and so on.</p>
<p>“Then she thinks HER politics matter. They don’t. No one cares.”</p>
<p>REALLY? 
at what point when you were typing this out, did you realize her opinion didn’t matter to anyone? It’s seems to matter to you doesn’t it?</p>
<p>Her politics just make me think less of her. That’s my point.</p>
<p>She’s turned a potential patron into a critic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I understand your opinion and preference for a singing artist to not espouse her politics in a concert, it simply means that it is not YOUR taste if a performer does so. By the way, most who pay the big bucks for a Streisand concert, are aware of her “act”. </p>
<p>Anyway, your point that keeping politics or personal life or opinions out of the performance will make her more money is rather funny to me in this situation. Ms. Streisand makes a LOT of money. I do not think the seats are empty at her shows. Those who enjoy her act, pay a lot to see it, and those who don’t like her “act” just stay away, as it should be. She is not losing money over folks like you who do not like her act (which you are entitled). Further, if someone inn the audience doesn’t like her speil, they don’t have a right to disturb the performance.</p>
<p>The “everyone will like” you…I commented on earlier…a performer’s goal is not for EVERYONE to like them. A performer shares her art, her message, and entertains. Their art may not be the taste of some people and that is fine. Their job is not to change their act. I hate heavy metal so I don’t go to those concerts. Who cares that those bands are not liked by everyone? The musicans don’t care as long as they have found THEIR audience. The goal is NOT to get EVERYONE to like you. Just because what Babs does on stage is not appealing to YOU, doesn’t make her less of a “professional.” She is laughing all the way to the bank. She is HUGELY successful and very talented and I understand she simply does not appeal to YOU. That’s your right. I might really dislike performing artists whom you enjoy.</p>
<p>I think it’s interesting when an artist uses his/her talent to make a political point, regardless of their particular stance. What is off-putting is when the artist makes a political point outside of his/her area of skill. At that point, he/she is no different from the crazy people at the bus stop or the CC forums.</p>
<p>let us see, she is making a fortune, she is comfortable, she is doing what she loves, and she is sharing her music…how dumb is she?</p>
<p>why should she do it in private, who says that only paid politicians have the right to say anything, is that what you are saying? that only those already in power have the right to discuss publically political issues? </p>
<p>I get it now, if you have other talents, ie art, music, etc., you shouldn’t talk about world events on the stage you created for yourself…</p>
<p>I used to watch a game show, the host never talked politics on the show, but I learned some of the causes he gave lots and lots of money to, and I didn’t like where his money went, so i stopped watching…simple</p>
<p>I don’tknow so much about Streisand although I remember actually enjoying * Yentl* ;)</p>
<p>But I know that even though I might roll my eyes- when Eddie goes off on a rant ( although he does it much less than he used to -) one of the reasons why I am a huge fan is because of his political & social ( and the whole bands) views and that they put their money and time where their mouth is
( I don’t know so much about Barbras, but then she isn’t local)</p>
<p>I like to know where my money and time is going
I buy fairtrade coffee- I dont’ shop at Walmart & I buy american motor vehicles- I think everything is connected- no matter how we might want to think it isn’t. I can’t seperate teh “art” from the person, I wont go see anything that Woody Harrelson is in for example, even though I think he is a good actor, because he is an ass , not that he cares- why should he?</p>
<p>( Leaves me more money to spend on Pearl Jam tickets 
)</p>
<p>So while someone might be turned off by artists advocating their causes, someone else might think that is great and be inspired to give more.</p>
<p>I wasn’t at the concert so I don’t know exactly how this particular incident went down, but if you have a cause you have been committed to- and you are passionate about it & you want more people to get involved in it, I think you have a mandate to use your public persona to give it more attention.</p>
<p>If people are turned off by that, they won’t buy your records or see your movies- but I don’t understand trying to put people in a box and saying they can “only” be artists, they can’t have opinions or be intelligent and informed.</p>
<p>Now I don’t watch Tv, not even the Today show & I have never thought Matt Lauer was particulary witty, intelligent or attractive, but I assumed that somebody did to give him that job. ( I do think Ann Curry is the above however) </p>
<p>I do think that was a pretty dumb statement to make about the heckler needing to take a long bathroom break- and I do agree that talking heads seem to be disassociated just a tad from “the common man”.</p>
<p>But stick anyone on tv or radio everyday and they are bound to make lots of dumb statements- I am just glad I don’t have my comments recorded to haunt me later! ( except for online)</p>
<p>You’re (cgm and soosie) making the Rush Limbaugh argument. He may be a butt-head, but he’s a rich butt-head. :)</p>
<p>Okay, fine. She’s a millionaire, and a butt-head, too.</p>
<p>This, frankly, is silly - for both Rush and Barbra. Both have huge amounts of talent that is wasted due to unnecessary divisiveness. Both have gifts that are wasted, due to selfishness. She could bring much more joy and happiness - plus be much more effective in her personal opinions - if she exhibited a modicum of grace and charm and less cerebral glutel cleft.</p>
<p>So she makes $10M a year (guesstimate)? She could make $100M by exhibiting some class that transcends politics.</p>
<p>By the way - performers feed on attention. The more the better, for them and their egos. Why irritate 50+% of the potential audience? Not smart.</p>
<p>so, you think she should just sing and be done with it, and not worry and try to change what she thinks is wrong, and that she should put money above her values, is that it?</p>
<p>so people should make as much as possible and ignore what they think is their responsiblity </p>
<p>interesting thought</p>
<p>and how much money is enough to make? how much should she make for herself before she should share her views to HER audience…</p>
<p>The only reason I even brought up money (which I don’t see as the issue) is because you mentioned that if she kept her politics and personal views quiet on stage, she could make more money and have everyone like her. My point was that it is not like she isn’t making enough now or not selling out the concerts. It is a nonissue. Also, her goal is not for everyone to like her. Her art and her politics attract some and are distasteful to others. So what? I understand your point of view that you wish she kept her mouth shut or that you don’t agree with what she has to say but I don’t think that is the issue. Even IF I hated everything she said, I have a choice in how to spend my entertainment money and I exercise that choice. It doesn’t mean that artists that I dislike are bad, but only that I don’t care for them or their act. So?</p>
<p>Sooo - be professional. Take that extra $50M you could make and give it to Florida State University* for Taxol (taxane) development that saves women from breast cancer or other cancers. Send more poor kids to college or trade school. Feed more hungry in Somalia.</p>
<p>Do good in a credible way. Do it with grace and class and your act will multiply goodness in others.</p>
<p>*shameless plug for my alma mater. :)</p>
<p>You girls are smart. You know all this already. (I rather like feisty women :))</p>
<p>parent2noles, have you considered that if she’s right and you’re wrong she’d be a coward to do as you suggest? As the saying goes, All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. If you’ll concede Streisand’s sincerity, wouldn’t it just be craven for her to “do nothing” just so as to earn that extra $90 Million?</p>
<p>There were talented artists in the Third Reich who are reviled today because they just went along with the program. Had they spoken up the way Streisand is they would be celebrated as courageous heroes today. Now before you fly off on a “He’s comparing Bush to Hitler!!!” tangent (I’m not) my point is, if you have a bully pulpit you can use it or not. If you believe you can make a difference for good, you really should. Of course, you’ll tick off everyone on the other side, but you are at least standing up for what you believe in, and not “doing nothing.”</p>
<p>The difference is the effectiveness of the message. Hell, if she were nice, she could personally lobby every Republican in Washington. Would that not be more effective?</p>
<p>No. Next question?</p>
<p>
Kluge, is it really possible that the complete idiocy of this statement has escaped you?</p>
<p>OOOH! I get it: <a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-reference[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-reference</a></p>
<p>I’ll take that as a yes.</p>