As a fairly liberal fellow I know there can be consequences for criticizing liberal ideas, but I’ve never been a fan of the “you are with us or against us” dogma of the right and I refuse to follow it with the left.

A few weeks ago Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland because of 30+ years allegations of rape against a 13 year old. The facts of the case are pretty straight forward, since he left the United States after pleading guilty. With his arrest, there were many in Hollywood who signed a petition against the arrest. It seemed, to Middle America, that because Polanski was famous he should get a pass on facing the active charges. Many who signed the petition gave a weak response to the allegation, citing that because of the years involved and the films he had directed Polanski deserved a pass.

While it probably wasn’t meant to be seen that way, because many supported something that Middle America couldn’t fathom getting away with themselves there was a strong backlash against the perceived elitism. We can even put this in a less than epic situation. A few years ago Wesley Snipes was accused of dodging taxes in the tune of over 10 million dollars over a few years. Just a few days ago Nicholas Cage talked about the suffering he had because he is almost six million dollars behind in taxes. In both cases the men suggested it was bad business decisions and bad accounting that caused the tax issue.

For regular folks we can’t understand that. While we don’t make millions of dollars we know there isn’t a way for us to spend money without having it, especially to the tune of millions of dollars. Just a few days ago I was hit with a string of overdrafts because of the way money was taken out of my account. I got notices, checked my account to see the error and tried to lessen the damage to my account. There was no way I could blame an accountant because I don’t have one. It didn’t take thousands of dollars of being in the hole before I knew there was an issue. It took a few days before I got a notice in the mail and by email because of the damages.

Back to the Polanski story; now Emma Thompson has withdrawn her name from the petition and her reason for doing so might give pause to people who hang on the word of celebrities. It seems she signed the petition in the first place because she heard about the arrest and a friend asked her to sign the petition. Now, if it were me, and I think a lot of people would think this way, if a friend of mine asked me to sign a petition in support of an acquaintance I had, I would want to know what the acquaintance was accused of. If I heard the charge was rape, I probably would wait until I heard all the information. Rape is a serious charge and to be in support of someone to the point I would sign a petition I would have to be real sure I knew the facts.

It sounds like Thompson went on the word of a friend alone and the fact she worked with Polanski in the past.

According to the article, she changed her mind after meeting with a woman for 15 minutes. She was even written as expressing some dismay that she signed the petition. So from what we can gather from the article, Thompson was told by a friend to sign the petition, she did because of the rough childhood Polanski had (while I have no idea what that would have to do about raping a child) and after a 15 minute conversation with a stranger, she decides her strong support of a friend (Polanski) wasn’t such a good idea and has her name removed from the petition. How in the world can you listen to someone like that? People have stronger convictions about color choices they make for a room! How can you even attempt to follow someone that can be swayed in their strong convections after a 15 minute conversation with a stranger?

As silly as it sounds, its how many people make decisions in their lives, basing them on endorsements by celebrities.

UPDATE:

Little did I realize when I used Emma Thompson as an example I would get further evidence of celebrity hypocrisy. It turned out Thompson was on The View this morning.

First, there was no mention on The View about her recent recant of the letter she signed in support of Polanski. I’m giving them benefit of the doubt figuring it may have been ‘too new’ for the staff to pick up on.

Ironically she was on The View to talk about a program she’s involved with that helps protect women and children from being trafficked in sex exploitation. OK, so how ironic is it for Thompson to be involved in a program to protect children from being sex slaves yet she signs a letter in support of a person accused of raping a child? And, just like in her change of attitude with the letter she signed, in the interview she talked about how she got involved with the sex exploitation prevention program because of a woman coming over to her house and talking to her for 2 hours. Man, it almost makes me wish I was a Jehovah’s Witness because if I could get inside Thompson’s house to talk to her I’m sure I could convert her and get her to sign a letter and giving over money.

Again, many people put stock in endorsements by celebrities when they are easily manipulated. Makes you wonder if it is safe to put trust in them.