Political celebrity

In his best-selling book, "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America," Bernard Goldberg does exactly what he promises: he offers a list of people who "screw up" America. He cites important folks like Maury Povich, Anna Nicole Smith and John Green. (Don't recognize Mr. Green? Surely you remember the man who hucked his lager at Ron Artest.) Many on his list would probably be more likely seen in Entertainment Weekly than Time magazine. \nGoldberg's list, however, highlights the increasing anger at celebrities who affect the inseparable worlds of culture, society and politics. Goldberg derides what he terms "the United States of Entertainment," and apparently wishes that sensible, learned people who comprehend complicated issues should be the ones leading the country, not a horde of uneducated celebrity know-nothings. Surely, Goldberg argues, Ludacris and Sean Penn should shut up already and let the real leaders do the leading.\nYet perhaps the distinction between politicians and entertainers isn't diminished because Al Franken and Co. suddenly gained some sort of political credence, but because politicians are making their arguments indistinguishable from those of a cretin celebrity. \nCalifornians didn't want another greedy lawyer muddling up their state house, so they elected a movie action hero. Last presidential election was determined by which candidate could better dress up as a "war president." And when Americans voted to pick our "greatest American" on a Discovery Channel special, the winner was Ronald Reagan, an actor-turned-president.\nThese uncanny connections between politics and culture aren't that unreasonable when you think about it. When a candidate needs to be elected, what does he or she need? Political star power. When a musician is promoting a record, what does he or she need? A campaign. What is an election but a popularity contest?\nAmerican individualism, which allowed our country the remarkable success that we've had, also gives us a culture that worships the cult of celebrity. Surely a media organization has a choice between a celebrity's comments on the war in Iraq and an administration official. If Barbra Streisand's political views really were irrelevant, however, there wouldn't be ratings enough to justify running them. \nMaybe celebrities should provide better examples for us, but their views are only accepted because politicians have failed to prove that they are much different. With the shifting justification for the war in Iraq, the inability of Democrats to come up with better arguments than "Bush sucks" and the failure of government to provide during disaster, people have come to trust celebrities, whether political or cultural, as a pertinent voice in the greater discussion.\nAdmittedly, Goldberg's main tack in his book is to derail what he sees as a buildup of negative culture, but Babs is not to blame. He rejects arguments that we, the people, are the ones who screw up America, but if we accept the idea of a democratic nation, then we have only ourselves to blame. Shakespeare, the greatest entertainer and social commentator of all time, said it best through Cassius in Julius Caesar: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves"