  I'm sure you have recently read the articles about how urlLink Slim Fast will not longer be showing ads featuring Whoopi Goldberg because of her recent statements at a Democractic rally against George W.  Bush. nbsp;  What baffles my mind is why Slim Fast cares. nbsp;  They promote their product and so does Whoopi.
nbsp;  They chose her as an a person to promote their product. nbsp;  Whoopi also has a life beyond Slim Fast and their ads,  and she has a right to express her opinions. nbsp;
 If Whoopi had committed a crime,  I can see why Slim Fast would want to not have a criminal promoting their products,  but for speaking her mind? nbsp;  Shouldn't Slim Fast promote every woman's right to an opinion and the right to express it along with their product? nbsp;
 Isn't that the best way to say that they are indifferent? nbsp;  They cut Whoopi because they don't want to take sides in a political election,  just as Walt Disney did when they didn't want to distribute Fahrenheit 9/ 11. nbsp;
 But isn't this move decidedly in favor of George Bush?  The same thing happened with urlLink this issue against the war with Clear Channel. nbsp;  Companies now regulate public opinion along with their products.  Thinking about this I've realized that most of the companies who have tried to remove themselves from political debate have done so in favor of Bush. nbsp;
 They haven't pulled anyone who promotes Bush and bashes Kerry. nbsp;  How many Kerry- bashers out there have been removed? nbsp;  Then I realized that there weren't a whole lot of Kerry-
bashers out there. nbsp;  Certainly its not because there aren't very many Bush supporters -  there's a country half- full of them. nbsp;
 It seems to me that 1.  Democrats/ Kerry supporters& nbsp; should take the high road and talk about the issues -  there certainly are plenty of them.
nbsp;  2.  Republicans/ Bush supporters need to stop pulling their wealthy strings and let people have the freedom of speech and make the election about issues and not gossip.  I would love to see someone run for President who says " Hey.
nbsp;  This is who I am,  this is what I think,  this is how I'm going to vote. nbsp;  If you agree with that,
 then I'm your guy. nbsp;  If you don't,  well then pick someone you like better. nbsp;  The election isn't about who's better but about who better reflects the views of Americans.
nbsp;  I wish they could be more upfront and say what they really think instead of having to try to say what they think people want to hear. nbsp;  Being President obligates them to do what the public wants and not their own agenda. nbsp;  I think that Bush has not done this.
nbsp;  I think his religion,  and personal beliefs have been his actions in office and not necessarily an image of public opinion. nbsp;  I think he went to Iraq without support of the public. nbsp;
 He's trying to pass the gay marriage ban without public support. nbsp;  The public says they are against gay marriage,  but they don't want to amend the Constitution. nbsp;  He should try to create a federal law that defines civil unions and enables gay couples to have all the same rights as married couples.
nbsp;  I don't agree with that completely either -  but at least its a compromise that might actually work without sacrificing someones rights. nbsp;  Just use a different word than " marriage"
 and the conservatives will be happy. nbsp;  Most of them anyway. nbsp;  I wonder when they're going to realize that homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time and no matter what they do its never going to go away.  Sorry.
 I got distracted.  Anyway. this is my ADD blog for the day.  Have a great weekend!
