Singer Bashes Bush gets booted

by **JimmyTango** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:29 pm

Originally posted by CodeRed68
The liberal media doesn't show Bush supportors on TV and in the news. Only anti-Bush and anti-American news make it to the airwaves.

Um, yet this whole thread started from a story in the NEWS which clearly shows BUSH SUPPORTERS.

:roll:

by **CodeRed68** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:40 pm

Originally posted by JimmyTango
Um, yet this whole thread started from a story in the NEWS which clearly shows BUSH SUPPORTERS.

true. in this case i concur.

by **Pierce** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:42 pm

was this on CNN? Just curious.

by **JimmyTango** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 4:10 pm

Originally posted by Pierce
was this on CNN? Just curious.

It is still on the main page of their website.

by **JimmyTango** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 4:13 pm

Originally posted by CodeRed68
true. in this case i concur.

This is just one instance of numerous instances where the so called 'liberal news' has reported on Bush supporters booing a performer for expressing their views.

by **CodeRed68** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:22 pm

Originally posted by JimmyTango
This is just one instance of numerous instances where the so called 'liberal news' has reported on Bush supporters booing a performer for expressing their views.

this one and the Dixie chicks fiasco are the only ones I have heard.
Although the news may have reported this, most of the reporting leans "liberal".

by **SavageParrot** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:02 pm

Ingus are you pro Bush? Just asking because from your signature quotes I would have thought you'd hate the man.

by **JimmyTango** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:02 pm

Originally posted by CodeRed68
this one and the Dixie chicks fiasco are the only ones I have heard.
Although the news may have reported this, most of the reporting leans "liberal".

Even in this thread people speak of other entertainers who have had reprecussions of some sort for speaking out against Bush, yet you have never heard of them? You also first claimed the 'liberal' news never even shows this stuff to begin with, even though this thread started with the 'liberal' news in fact reporting it.

Yet you are more than happy to say that the news is 'liberal' leaning when it has been proven beyond a doubt that you only hear and see what you want to. :roll:

by **Colonel Ingus** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:57 pm

Ingus are you pro Bush? Just asking because from your signature quotes I would have thought you'd hate the man.

I can definitely say he is no hero of mine. His domestic policies pretty much trash each and every one of those quotes. I do post stuff up bashing him but no one seems to back me up when I do. Maybe thats why I take shots at JimmyT. He has the Bush bashing quotes in his sigs and I get no help from the man!:D (course when you think about he might just read it and go yep, nothing more needs to be said ...hmm (or maybe he just goes sheesh Ingus is a fruitcake

) )

Largest expansion of Government programs/employment since FDR (and Bush's platform was smaller government?) What I like to call the Department of Homeland Gestapo (Security), The Patriot Act? WTH kind of name is that to strip citizens of their rights? And who in the hell would use the following logic. "I am going to take a pay cut, the amount of money I make, and then spend more than ever before!" There's more but that suffices for now.

My thinking is this. He's already f*#cked up the country domestically so 4 more years isn't going to change much. Kerry I fear would slack off foreign policy wise and that scares me. The past few democratic administrations have very clearly done this and I see no reason for it to change. I could be wrong but like I said. the record doesn't look good. Hell when Clinton got elected in '92 myself and a bunch of fellow sailors were jumping with joy. We KNEW a Democratic president was going to cut the military. I got a 6 month early out along with my LPO.

I hate how Bush's administration is trying to RUN the military (logistics, how the troops are paid, retention levels, the use of reserves (you want to have a lot of wars you better get a bigger army. Thats not what weekend warriors are for)) but I agree with Iraq, Afghanistan etc.

What to do? I think they BOTH suck huge amounts of ass and the only deciding factor for me will be who I think will be tougher on terrorism. I wish had something to vote for I actually believe in.

"I went to the grocery store the other day and found out they had 196 brands of cat food, 196! America! the Land of Choice! And we have only 2 political parties?" -George Carlin

I also don't believe in Democracy. Its failed everywhere it was tried, the jury is still out on us, and it don't look good. The Founding Fathers wanted a Republc not a Democracy.

Sorry for the rambling, trying to post this while being annoyed by some damn customers at work. The nerve of some people.

by **Jim0322** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:11 pm

Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
I also don't believe in Democracy. Its failed everywhere it was tried, the jury is still out on us, and it don't look good. The Founding Fathers wanted a Republc not a Democracy.

So how do you align yourself Ingus? My impression from several of your posts is you are definitely not a democrat, you have some republican tendencies, and certainly some libertarian tendencies. Some of your political threads seem far more libertarian to me then republican or democratic actually.

Feel free to say it's none of my business if you wish. I am just curious.

Jim

by **Colonel Ingus** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:25 pm

No thats cool Jim I appreciate your intent.

I took that test that was posted a few weeks and scored dead center. I mean literally right at the cross of the axises.

People like to label me a libertarian but I am not really comfortable with that.

How's this short and sweet. Government is necessary for a MINIMUM amount of structure to allow us to co-exist peacfully and provide for the common good. Government should NEVER be the one to decide what that is or to change priorities.

And as far as democracies go look at Ancient Greece and you can see the problem there. Once people discover they can vote themselves procurement from the public largess then democracy goes downhill and fails. Kind of like... Oh I don't know Medicaire? Social Security?

I don't believe in one man one vote. A voting franchise should have to be earned by something more than having a birthday.

I am sure many of us know (or some of us here are) people who vote casually and don't study the issues. I know plenty of people who just vote the party line. They go to a booth and fill either all D's or all R's depending on their party. Hell there was a large number of women exit polled during Clinton's last election (which he did win) who voted for him because they thought he was good looking. Not a great criterion for deciding on the leader of the most powerful nation on earth methinks.

I have a framed poster sized copy of the Constitution on the wall right next to my monitor here. Although I may not agree with all the verbiage it is an excellent document to base a government upon. Too bad we never use it.

by **CharlieDontSurf** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:01 pm

Originally posted by shockwave203
in this case, censorship has nothing to do with the way people voice their opinions. Celebrities aren't being censored, rather the anti bush supporters are being booed off stage even though there are huge numbers of people against the war.

Man, where to start with this?

True, there are people against the war (albeit not as many as you would like to believe) but have you stopped to consider the fact that people go to concerts/events to be entertained by that artist's talent and not their political beliefs. They think they have a captive audience but when the consumers express their displeasure with the artist's rant, they cry censorship. Give me a f-n break. Artist gives rant = opinion/ consumers walk out/boo = opinion.

Entertain this analogy, Shockwave. I would like to attend the Masters Golf tournament next April but if Tiger Woods got on the first tee and started ranting about politics (even if he was conservative) I'd tell him to STFU and hit the ball.

Here's a tip for all the anti-Bush people that want to put their livihood at risk by expressing their political opinion: don't shit where you eat. Nuff said.

by **Pierce** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:41 pm

Originally posted by JimmyTango
It is still on the main page of their website.

Was it one of their main stories on the TV channel?

by **Colonel Ingus** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:55 pm

don't shit where you eat.

Roger that!

by **shockwave203** » Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:08 am

Originally posted by CharlieDontSurf
Man, where to start with this?

True, there are people against the war (albeit not as many as you would like to believe) but have you stopped to consider the fact that people go to concerts/events to be entertained by that artist's talent and not their political beliefs. They think they have a captive audience but when the consumers express their displeasure with the artist's rant, they cry censorship. Give me a f-n break. Artist gives rant = opinion/ consumers walk out/boo = opinion.

Entertain this analogy, Shockwave. I would like to attend the Masters Golf tournament next April but if Tiger Woods got on the first tee and started ranting about politics (even if he was conservative) I'd tell him to STFU and hit the ball.

Here's a tip for all the anti-Bush people that want to put their livihood at risk by expressing their political opinion: don't shit where you eat. Nuff said.

you missed the point completely. I said pro-bush entertainers can say all they want and nothing happens. anti-bush entertainers always get stung for it.

i agree that it's not their job to rant about political subjects when their job is to put on a show, but that's not the point I was making.

Singer Bashes Bush gets booted

Who is online