2007-10-24 02:25:31 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Pro - he's insured and this was probably one house of many
(I save my sympathy for those who lose their PRIMARY house)
He has nothing holding him back from moving to Syria or Venezuela now.
Con - trees were killed in his yard. I feel bad for his trees.
2007-10-24 02:38:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It depends, it obviously has pro's for people with no brains as they get to come on here and chat sh*t about it to make themselves feel better. Just because Sean Penn happened to see clean through all the bullsh*t spun by this government doesn't make it a good thing that he has lost his home.
2007-10-24 02:35:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
This is terrible, as it is terrible that anyone loses their home to a natural disaster. It is unfortunate that of all the homes lost, we need to hear about this one. Sean Penn, insured or uninsured, will be able to be housed again without difficulty. Many of those losing their homes will not be so lucky yet we will only hear about those when "exposes" are performed by the media to make California or the federal government look like slackers in dealing with the problem.
Let me hear about those who are sacrificing to help others in this time of need. If Sean Penn volunteers to help and does not use his fame to "make points" in this disaster, I want to hear about it. If he chooses to spout off about governmental issues I will turn off the report.
2007-10-24 02:33:57 · answer #3 · answered by Matt W 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Having lost my home to a wind driven fire in 1998, I sympathize with anyone who loses their regardless of politics, race, financial status or celebrity.
Your home contains many irreplaceable things that constitute memories and no one wins when this happens.
Hating people who have different views, justs makes no sense, therefore there is no upside. Many people are losing their homes and personal belongings, it is a tragedy.
2007-10-24 02:37:59 · answer #4 · answered by rumbler_12 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Since when has someone losing their home been a "pro's & cons" thing - what a heartless question.
Maybe you'd like to ask all the other people who've lost their homes whether its a "pro" or a "con". Ask them about their posessions, their pets, their memories...............
Have you seen people weeping because the place trhey raised their family has been destroyed?
Sorry if I offended, but I've had friends lose their homes (and one his life) and to see it trivialised this way is astounding.
2007-10-24 02:32:37 · answer #5 · answered by fordfalcon1953 3 · 6⤊ 1⤋
As much as I disagree with Mr. Penn politically, there is NO "pro" that comes from one losing their home.
2007-10-24 02:33:27 · answer #6 · answered by Supercell 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I love to see the Compassionate Christians come out in favor of burning people out of their homes. At least there is no need for pretense anymore, this bunch is as compassionate as the lions in the Coliseum.
2007-10-24 02:43:54 · answer #7 · answered by justa 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are no pros to any American who has lost something in this event. The only pros I have seen though is Students, Church Groups, Red Cross, FEMA, National Guard, and local authorities are pulling together without prejudice helping Americans. This country rocks!
2007-10-24 02:29:41 · answer #8 · answered by rance42 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Its not cool to make fun of people losing their homes. Why is it that when I criticize the NO people for not adhering to evacuation ntoices I get violations, yet when you guys make fun of someone who actually pays taxes, you get cheered?
2007-10-24 02:34:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
He can always bunk with Hugo Chavez while the insurance company gets him a new one.
Hugo told him: "Mi casa es su casa"
2007-10-24 02:32:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋