Who cares what Clooney thinks or says? Who cares what any actor thinks or says? Hollywood, and the NY/LA set. Why does this matter? Because they increasingly find themselves using their wealth and fame to advocate social change, causes celebre, and all-around try to change our nation to suit them.

The more hollywood opens its mouth, the more they need to be backhanded across it.

To which Anonymous responds:

You don't like Clooney or evil, liberal, influential Hollywood? Stick to sports and boycott the movies. Put your money where your mouth is and don't give them a dime - while you're at it, stop renting movies and cancel your HBO.
Otherwise, quit whining - Clooney doesn't give a crap about your opinion or Ben Stein's and nothing you or Peggy does will change his agenda.

Clooney and the rest of Hollywood say what they want, produce what they want and piss off whomever they want - after all, it's their money even if they made it off of you.

Hey, i've no problem with Clooney and other actors, when they're actually, y'know, acting. Or when they make light-hearted fare that don't include a heavy-handed approach to decades-old issues. And strangely enough, the kind of movies I spend my money on, and incidentally, those that make the most money, never seem to be the ones up for any major awards: The Chronicles of Narnia, Batman Begins, X-Men/Spiderman 1 & 2, the Harry Potters. (Ok, i'm a geek but that's besides the point, as all these movies had huge grosses).

It's just annoying when they attempt to speak from a position of trusted authority on subjects of which they draw all their knowledge of from within their distorted hollywood bubble.

For all their vaunted claims of heroism for addressing such hot-button social topics like homosexuality, or racism, I can only say: Yawn. Welcome to 2006. I daresay a vast majority of the American populace have already grown beyond intolerance of race or sexual orientation. We're already at the next phase, which is, merely, indifference.

I can't wait for hollywood's next important social issue movie, heroically bringing to light the persecution and discrimination of freckled, red-headed children.

Ann Coulter also notices being behind the times is par for the course in Hollywood:

Forget about Hollywood being ahead of the big issues: Hollywood has never even been on time for the big issues. This is why, for example, in the middle of an epic war with Islamic fascists, Hollywood is still making movies about the Nazis. Now and then, just for variety, they tackle a more current topic, like the Jim Crow era.

Even on AIDS – which is something you'd expect people like Clooney to know something about – Hollywood was about seven years behind. Wait, no – bad choice of words. Even on AIDS, Hollywood got caught with its pants down. Still no good. On AIDS, Hollywood got it right in the end. Oh, dear ... Note to self: Must hire two more interns to screen hate mail.

The point is: The Hollywood set didn't start wearing AIDS ribbons to the Oscars until 1992:

* 10 years after the New York Times described AIDS;

* seven years after AIDS was the cover story on Life magazine;

* seven years after AIDS was in People magazine;

* five years after Oprah did a show on AIDS.

Only recently has George Clooney heard about segregation. (He's against it.) But he still can't nail down the details of something that ended nearly half a century ago.

Contrary to Clooney's impassioned speech, no theaters ever forced black people to sit in the back. If you were trying to oppress people, you would make them sit in the front, which are the worst seats in the house. Or you'd just make them watch a George Clooney movie.