Posted on 08/09/2002 6:58:34 AM PDT by Lazamataz
He's one of Hollywood's hottest actors and, with Natural Born Killers among his starring roles, is no stranger to controversy.
But now Woody Harrelson has taken another brave step - he's passionately defended George Michael over his anti-Bush and Blair single Shoot The Dog.
The 41-year-old star - currently appearing in On An Average Day opposite Kyle MacLachlan at the Comedy Theatre in London - has hit out at the backlash against the song's lyrics which criticise George Bush, Tony Blair and the war on terror since September 11.
At his play's after-show party on Wednesday night, Woody told Jessica: "I saw the Daily Mirror's front page on George Michael and I thought it was brilliant. I've always been a fan but he's right up there now. I think he's a great guy.
"I haven't seen the video for his song but I was fascinated by what he had to say.
"He's incredibly brave to have done that song. Especially when doing something like that could be considered very dangerous in today's world."
Harrelson - who is famous for his role as the dim barman Woody in Cheers and who stunned audiences with his powerful portrayal of a murderer in Natural Born Killers - is the first American to stand up and defend the 39-year-old British singer.
The former Wham! star caused outrage by using the Daily Mirror's Howdy Poodle front page, which poked fun at the special relationship between Britain and the US, on the single's cover.
"I can't believe he got so criticised in America for it. It's so unfair," said Woody. "I hear he's too scared to go over to the States now. What a joke. I'd really like to meet George.
"I want to congratulate him on standing up and speaking out.
"I totally support him and wish him all the best. It would really make my day if you could set up a meeting with me and George. I just want to shake that guy by the hand."
He also had nothing but praise for the Daily Mirror.
"I have one thing to say about the Mirror - it's amazing," he said. "The paper's stance on the war against terrorism is just right. It's so bold.
"The war against terrorism is terrorism. The whole thing is just bullsh*t. What you guys have done is very brave."
Woody - who was with his wife Laura and their two daughters Deni, nine, and five-year-old Zoe at the party at Adam Street private members' club - has been living in London for two months. He has homes in Hawaii and Costa Rica and proclaims to be a vegan, although he was gobbling up the canapes at the party.
"I love it over here, man," he grinned, sipping a pint of beer.
"I've been really busy but now the play has started I want to have a little fun. There's a little spot I go to but I'd rather not tell you where it is."
London cab driver Les Dartnell also attended the play.
In June Woody was wrestled to the ground by policemen and arrested after he went berserk in the back of Les's taxi. The cabbie said the star acted like a "caged animal".
Within minutes of Les picking the actor up from Chinawhite at 2am, Woody had trashed the cab. He then booted the door open and made a run for it.
Les dropped the charges after Woody paid him £542.96 and the two men shook hands after the play. "He said, 'No hard feelings'," said Woody. "He seemed like a nice guy. It's just one of those terrible circumstances."
And the demeanor you exhibit helps the war *how* exactly?
National unity and confidence is not enhanced by intimidation of those who have issues others refuse to address.
A calculated, effective and porportially appropriate response to the terror threat is the proper one, it is in our nations interest that an overzealous, unfocused response is not conjured up by blind-rage and special interests.
It is like we are being convinced that the proper thing to do is go pound on the ant-hill because we have been bitten by a couple of the ants. It is appropriate to ask ourselves 'who wants the dent in the sand of the ant-hill' and does that desire in those persons minds influence the rhetoric and decision-making process. Does it distort thier personal rationality and assessment?
99.999% of the people in the US as well as the world detest terrorism. It is patently absurd to assume that a dissenters concerns are driven by a traitorous hidden agenda.
People on the left deserve as much credit for putting aside party ideology as the people on the right. It is a hard thing to do, things like that largely are beyond our true concious control.
And that is the very issue when I talk about special-interests. There are those whose interests are furthered by a big war response, and those whose are furthered by a lessened response. The point is to understand that thier minds are naturally going to seek out justifications for decisions and stances that support thier interests, even when they conciously try not to.
It is a potentially fatal mistake to simply ignore that reality. If we do not attempt to assess it and factor it out of our decision making process we will not be able to reach the best decision.
This is a difficult task, beyond doubt, but if we permit and even advocate its suppression with intimidation, ridicule and hate the backlash will only further muddy the waters and foment distrust, confusion and disunity.
You can ignore reality, but reality will still inflict the consequences of that decision.
In a murder case we do not let emotions undermine the process that determines justice, nor in war should we allow our own fever to inspire an execution that is not the very best we can formulate.
I don't want to sing Kumbayah nor should you want to condemn a fellow American to hell for raising issues that they believe deserve consideration in determining the best path for the WOT.
As best I can accomplish it, my heart is pure and my mind clean -- I am not engaging in self-inflicted frenzy or blind commitment.
I am doing my best, and I understand your reaction though it is uncivil and exaggerates my position. But I cannot endorse it -- I have to condemn it NOT because it is uncivil or overblown, but simply because it is counter-productive to what should be our mutual aim: Protecting America.
His next good acting part will be his first.
What a loser.
Think of it as more of a 'fishing expedition' for rational dialog and/or sincerety. I think many essentially agree with at least part of what Im saying but do not dare publically affirm it.
My presence on your ignore list is, of course, not my concern. I've taken an unpopular but honest stance, I invite a civil engagement on it. I've got enough sense to know anything else is ineffectual.
The venting of frustrations is part of what I'm talking about, enough time has passed since 911 to allow sufficient expression of trauma for most of us to resume a cold, accurate rationality. But other frustrations have entered the picture -- these arise from an aggrevation driven by the backlash of the reluctance and demonization of those who bring forth 'questions' about 911 and the WOT.
My position is that this behavior is immature, counter-productive, divisive and recursively self-fomenting. Dumb. Maniacal.
Those who attempt to diffuse this phenomena deserve far more respect that those who reinforce it.
See #83 also.
Do you realize how much that description also fits Clinton?
Reality is not a black and white entity, there are composite truths surrounding 911. As I witness the national dialog, as well as FR postings, I am disgusted by the demeanor of my fellow Americans."
Of course reality is black and white. Three aircraft plow nose-first into three buildings at 450 knots, and over 3,000 fellow citizens died. There are no complex issues or shades of gray here, they wanted to kill Americans. There is no need to understand them, just to kill them.
Time and war heal all wounds. We are in the process of killing those who would kill us. Let the killing continue until they are dead or disuaded. No compassion, no understanding, no "rational" dialogue. Just "surrender or die". What's so hard to understand about that?
dvwjr
People who bring up reasonable issues, or would like to, about 911/WOT but are afraid to because of the demonization protocol.
Listen, people on the left may be 'wrong' or 'misled' or 'paranoid' but they are scared. Not every-single-one, but a substantial enough amount.
Im not saying we should 'coddle' people, nor sacrifice our goals to re-assure them. What I am saying is that the gun-ho absolutism of the right is fueling that fear. By doing that you are in part responsible for the very "paranoia" you ridicule.
I am not talking about dialog with gangsters- but it also must be acknowleged that even in criminal justice we bargain with perps to suit our overall efficiency.
The WOT is a just and noble cause, but we give no cause a blank check for unlimited perpetual execution irresponsive to inquiry or criticism.
There is a balance, Im saying that balance is out-of-kilter and endangering the prosecution of the war and even more importantly undermining the trust people have.
In a way, I almost want "you" to keep it up -- you are stimulating a lot of needed awareness out there. Im damn curious as to how thats going to be reflected come November.
He was pretty good in the roll in which he was cast on Cheers, then he found out he had a big mouth and hasn't shut it since.
He is boring and predictable as are many of Hellywood's "darlings" who in the main are all beating the same old liberal numb-noggin drum.
And just like any fart, eventually the atmosphere will cleanse itself of the stench of it and another odor takes its place.
Which oft times is as stinking as its predecessor.
That's Hellywood!!
Woody's speaking "tongue in cheek" as it were.
Gulp!
The perfect name for such a putz!
What a schmuck!
Woody. No one cares what you have to say unless it comes from a script, OK? Now SHUT UP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.