Posted on 08/19/2004 10:00:54 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
Have heard of 3 of these nincumpoops but as far as I am concerned they seem to be supportive of terrorists, terrorists' supporters and terrorist-appeasers...
Beside, I don't have anything by any of these bozo-stealth-commies...and would dump it if I did!
You have to wonder what kind of person seeks the opinion of a rocker before they vote. That alone should disqualify them from the right to participate.
You know I have no problem doing business with a democrat or buying a product from some-one who supports Kerry. It is a little narrowminded to not associate with some-one just because they have different political beliefs....and narrowminded is left territory.
However, that is a far cry from actively supporting that persons beliefs. If Springstein wants to take some of the money he has earned from making records and quietly donate it to the Kerry campaign - I've got no real beef with that. If Springstein wants to donate his time to do a performance at a private benefit for Kerry that's fine too. However, if Springtein wants to use his fame (which is a soapbox we gave him) as a shill for Kerry, then I'm simply not going to contribute to that effort..... which means I won't be buying Springstein songs.
There is a difference between being a performer, who as a private person is active politicaly and being a political performer and these folks have crossed that line. When you make politics PART of your business you no longer have the right to complain if people don't want to do business with you for political reasons. It's that simple.
Take your tour and SHOVE IT.
By the way, you made me feel VERY old. I only know three of the names mentioned. *sigh*
BUT, like fine wine.......
I don't boycott people because they are liberal.
I boycott them when they cross a line. That line is formed when I can no longer enjoy their product without hearing their vile words in my mind. Note- I do not mean voicing disagreement, but rather forcing unelicited vicious commentary on my ears such as "Blood for Oil".
The only one in that group I have currently have is the Dixie Chicks, it was part of a movie soundtrack. I haven't listened to it since before they opened their mouths. Personally, my distaste of their group began with the "Hey Earl" hit. Though I was never a real fan either way.
I only have that CD because instant destruction would have been a momentary thrill. The day I stumble on a way to destroy the CD that wll bring me constant joy it will cease to exist.
gag me with a pitchfork ping
NY ping (O'Grady is an idiot)
LOL @ your comments!
Jazz......more music......less political ranting
BUMP. Apparently your logic is too "nuanced" for Roeper to grasp.
I sent Roeper the following e-mail (rroeper@suntimes.com):
Regarding the above-named article:
I understand your point that an absolutist boycott of everyone who doesn't share your political views would not be very practical. But here is my point, which I think most conservatives share:
I assume my favorite musicians are liberals until proven otherwise; and I don't mind as long as they're more or less quiet about it. I'm not saying they have no right to voice their views, only that I go to musicians for music, not for politics.
IN OTHER WORDS, it's fine if musicians (or actors for that matter) and I disagree about who to vote for. It gets to be a problem when they make so much noise about it that their politics starts to overshadow their music. It's not a question of the fact of disagreement but on the degree and manner of presentation.
If Springsteen & Co. occasionally mention in an interview on the talk show circuit or whatever that, hey, I'm for Kerry because this, this and this, fine. But if they make screeching at people like me what warmongering, bloodthirsty lowlifes we are for supporting Bush the centerpiece of their show, then a boycott by folks like me is not only principled and appropriate, it is a mark of sanity and self-respect. We are not masochists.
One question for you: Do you still think of John Rocker as just a baseball player you would have no problem watching?
Hey. John Rocker didn't merely express his political views. He called a teammate (unnamed in the article, but since revealed to be Randall Simon) a "fat monkey". He directed hate speech toward fellow players and a large percentage of the potential audience for his sport. MLB had every right to suspend him for that.
Trust me, as a lifelong Braves fan (look at my handle) and a big Rocker proponent, I was pretty pissed when that stuff happened. But as a business, MLB was completely justified in their reaction.
Well-stated.
I don't believe that when Tom Cruise tells us his belief in Scientology that he says that Methodists or Baptists or anyone else is evil and wrong. That's the difference as I see it. People like Springsteen and most of Hollywood have chosen to alienate a portion of their audience by speaking out against the President. I thought their job was to entertain us, not tell us how to vote. I don't think we'd go to rock singers for that.
You say it very well; the problem isn't that these people are for Kerry; it's their in-your-face, anyone-who-disagrees-with-me-is-evil approach, and their paranoia. Above all, it's the arrogance which says that America will be united if Bush loses, as if the rest of us are just going to drop off the face of the earth or smooch Kerry's ass.
"Of course, that would be an extremely silly thing to do -- to deny yourself the pleasure of listening to some of your favorite music because you don't agree with the political views of the artist."
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.