Sorry there is not too much diversity in the responses to Mike's last column. Seems like everyone wants to get the whole Brad Pitt statement out of their systems, so here's one big Grrr to Brad Pitt ... Lasette Canady, FOX News intern
Jen in Raleigh, N.C., writes: Well! I guess since Brad Pitt made such a statement, we Americans had better get off of our duffs and immediately contact our representatives, hold protest marches and not get married ourselves just because another hoity-toity celebrity has decided to try to be a humanitarian. I think he is doing this because he is not what's hot anymore and after his movie career has gone in the toilet he feels he needs to do something to stay in the spotlight. Mr. Pitt is making a mockery of marriage and parenthood, just like many other so-called celebs who do it for the publicity. I can assure you I don't base my life on what some Hollywood cad chooses to do.
D. Jansen writes: When I told my 17-year-old son about Brad Pitt’s statement that he would not marry Angelina Jolie until "everybody who wants to be married can do so legally," he remarked that he wants to be first in line to marry Angelina.
Michelle K. in Richmond, Va., Grrrs: It seems like ever since Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston split up he has become more bizarre. Is he that desperate for attention in the media? Who really cares what you think about gay marriage ... you are not even gay!!! I am so sick of celebrities politicizing everything and pushing their opinions on everyone. Guess what ... we don't care ... just entertain us! Bush won the election ... twice! Get over it!! If Pitt and other celebrities think our country is so screwed up, then why don't they do something about it? Like maybe donating some of their millions to charities here instead of on the other side of the world? I know that a lot of celebrities do good charitable things in this country and around the world, it just seems that they don't get the media attention that the annoying ones get. Oh well, at least Brad Pitt is still nice to look at.
Christine E. writes: You're way behind the times! Charlize Theron made the same exact statement more than a year ago when asked when she would wed Stuart Townsend. Maybe Brad deserves a Grrr for being unoriginal too?
Janet J. in Houston, Texas, writes: I laughed out loud when I heard of Brad Pitt’s statement about marriage. Do you think I am going to buy your inability to commit as a shining example of sacrifice? Do you think a divorced man, who has a baby out of wedlock, is actually someone’s opinion I want on marriage?? Give me a break. He has no idea what marriage is about. Sounds like Pitt is just trying to justify bad behavior. He is no shining example.
J. Stewart in Western Colorado writes: Perhaps Mr. Pitt should focus on doing what is best for his children before trying to influence the world. My message to Brad "Stay out of social issues: you are not qualified."
Kenneth S. in Port Charlotte, Fla., writes: What I find most humorous about this story is that in the ordinary world, this line wouldn't fly. I can't imagine "Joe Nobody" proclaiming this idea to his girlfriend, especially one he fathered a child with, and hearing back, "Oh, you sensitive, sensitive man. Yes. I'll wait with you until everyone has equal marriage rights." Even more ridiculous is that in the Hollywood universe, this pathetic line isn't just accepted, but may even be considered noble by the social elite. I also wonder how something like this was proposed. Perhaps over a nice candlelit dinner with Angelina Jolie, the conversation went something like this? "Oh Baby, you know I love you, but I just can't marry you until everyone has the right to marry. We'll live out our lives in protest ... protesting this inhumanity, this injustice, fighting for equal liberty for all ... until I finally get tired of you, and move on without the hassle of a divorce, lawyer fees, child support, alimony ... Oh, did I say that last part out loud?"
Loren S. writes: I just have a few comments on your "Grrr! Brad Pitt to the Rescue" article. As a gay man, I loved the statement. I know it won't hold as much power as it could, but maybe it will get the voters to go out and veto these homophobic laws saying marriage is a sacred institute between a man and a women. First off, half of marriages end in divorce so how sacred can it be? I figure I have the same right to be just as miserable or just as happy as you are.
Holly in Minneapolis writes about the Montana Wildfires: This grrr goes out to the reports that are only covering the wildfires that are threatening million-dollar mansions and celebrity homes. I read a story about a wildfire in Livingston, Mont., (29 miles away from where I grew up) that is threatening Tom Brokaw’s house. Don’t get me wrong, I feel really bad for Tom as he’s a nice man and even took time out of his busy schedule to speak at a high school graduation ceremony for a class of 40-something! However, what about the town of 1,600 that the fire is threatening?? If the fire gets into the Boulder Valley, there’s really no stopping it until it travels through the small town of Big Timber. I’m pretty sure that Tom could afford to build his home back to its original state, but there are many in this small town that would be devastated if their home and/or business went up in smoke. What about the umpteen million other fires that are burning throughout the Pacific Northwest? Only the fires in Los Angeles and of course this fire gets news coverage. It just grrrs me to no end that if there were no celebrities in the Boulder Valley this fire would probably not get any news reports at all. Since when are their homes more important than a town and its livelihood??
Micah writes: Mike, I originally became a fan and regular reader of your column when your complaints were valid, and chimed in with things that all of society has at one point GRRR'd about. Lately, though, you're as delusional as the folks you bash. So Pitt wants to make a statement about his position on same-sex marriages ... and you write an entire "column" (I'm using that term loosely) attempting to apply the same formula to every aspect of a person's daily life? Come on now. I'm sure you've made a few statements that were unique in their agenda, but don't use the same thought process with every other action of your daily home/work life. Aside from that ... your column is a conservative regurgitation of Tyler Durden's world views. Just because you have a crush on his current slice of love, there's no need to bash ... I believe the youth today call it "hating." To answer a quote from Fight Club, "If you could fight any celebrity, who would it be?" Personally, I'd fight Mike Straka. GRRR! Put some thought back into it, Mikey!
Janna in Minnesota: Mike, your grrrs about Brad Pitt were the best thing I've read since, oh, EVER!!! He's just another example of Hollywood trying to make sure we know that they know better. Thanks, Mike. Keep Grrring!
Scott G writes: Why the vindictiveness toward Brad Pitt? So Mr. Pitt apparently feels that gay people should have the right to marry, and he has apparently decided he won't marry until they can. So what? Why is that hypocritical? Because he was married? Is there room for his opinion to have evolved? Maybe it will change again, but again — who cares? Is it "hypocritical" for him to speak his own opinion on an issue, even if that current opinion isn't supported by his entire life history? Mr. Pitt uses his celebrity and wealth to fund environmentally friendly architecture designs and has adopted children from disadvantaged countries. Maybe he does more. Maybe not. So what if he also enjoys the perks that, rightly or wrongly, his career in our market economy has afforded him? You take him to task for doing some things for charity, but apparently not enough for your standards. You are a celebrity, albeit a bitter and minor one. How has your column advanced any cause but your own? Perhaps you are the hypocrite, chastising people for not doing enough so they don't notice that you do nothing at all.