930 Forums

=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: eddie on February 23, 2003, 03:32:00 pm

Title: Required reading
Post by: eddie on February 23, 2003, 03:32:00 pm: There will be a quiz at the end of it all. <A HREF="http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=12880" TARGET=_blank>http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=12880[/url]
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 03:54:00 pm: Protest music may be dead, or at least out of the public eye, but if you can endure the annual trainwreck known as the Grammys tonight, I bet you'll be hearing a lot of political statements from musicians. (http://images.interscope.com/992/dec11dntbelive2crop.jpg)
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: vansmack on February 23, 2003, 09:58:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by ggw: Protest music may be dead, or at least out of the public eye, but if you can endure the annual trainwreck known as the Grammys tonight, I bet you'll be hearing a lot of political statements from musicians. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Thus far you're right - VH1 has taken over the Grammy's. James Taylor, Simon and Garfunkel (good to see on stage together though), John Mayer, Vanessa Carlton, Norah Jones, ZZzzzzzzThank god for yummy Gwen and No Doubt.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 10:04:00 pm: UMMM, yes Gwen did look a bit tasty tonight.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: vansmack on February 23, 2003, 10:22:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: UMMM, yes Gwen did look a bit tasty tonight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I was screamnig for her to take her jacket off - Anaheim wins grammy - woohoo!And then there was coldplay.....Two grammy's and we didn't see them. Interesting. But Politik sounds pretty damn good with the philharmonic.And of course the anti-war protest on Chris Martins hand and the side of the piano (so we don't get off topic).
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:27:00 pm: We need a soy bomb. (http://www.punkhart.com/dylan/images/soybomb2.jpg)
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: myuman on February 23, 2003, 10:33:00 pm: Misguided as usual.... hopefully miss crowe and others will rely on the "intelligence" that got them millions rather than their political lack of intelligence. I heard CBS is making a stand claiming they will pull the plug on any socialistic chatter coming out of the performers mouths. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by ggw: (http://images.interscope.com/992/dec11dntbelive2crop.jpg) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:38:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by myuman: Misguided as usual.... hopefully miss crowe and others will rely on the "intelligence" that got them millions rather than their political lack of intelligence. I heard CBS is making a stand claiming they will pull the plug on any socialistic chatter coming out of the performers mouths.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>CBS had to reverse themselves on that: <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/61601p-57554c.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/61601p-57554c.html[/url]
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 10:40:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by myuman: Misguided as usual. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>well yes, I wish CBS were around before your post.Isnt censorship great, which ammendment gives freedom of speech and since when was CBS the arbiter of good taste?
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 10:41:00 pm: thanks GGW, I hadnt seen that.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:41:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: well yes, I wish CBS were around before your post.Isnt censorship great, which ammendment gives freedom of speech and since when was CBS the arbiter of good taste?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think they are the arbiter of what you say on their network.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: jadetree on February 23, 2003, 10:47:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by ggw: I think they are the arbiter of what you say on their network.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't think it is as cut and dry as that, or the FCC would not get to regulate them. Does censoring anti-war language help them be considered a "good citizen".
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: vansmack on February 23, 2003, 10:50:00 pm: Fred Durst goes first.I lost in the pool - I had Chris Martin (maybe if we had seen their acceptance speech). It was voted that his "hand protest" didn't count. Bollocks!
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:50:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by jadetree: I don't think it is as cut and dry as that, or the FCC would not get to regulate them. Does censoring anti-war language help them be considered a "good citizen".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No it's not as cut and dry as that, but if they wanted to pull the plug on musicians spouting off at a music awards show, that would be within their rights.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:52:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by vansmack: Fred Durst goes first. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If Durst is the voice for the anti-war movement, Saddam should head for the bunker right now.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 10:55:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by ggw: No it's not as cut and dry as that, but if they wanted to pull the plug on musicians spouting off at a music awards show, that would be within their rights.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>wouldnt it defeat the hole purpose of having a music awards show?
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 10:57:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: wouldnt it defeat the hole purpose of having a music awards show?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>heh?
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 11:00:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by ggw: heh?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>dont rock stars always have to talk some shit about politics to self-grandiose, oh wait Bono isnt here this year and he is a big corporate whore now, nevermind.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: ggw on February 23, 2003, 11:09:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: dont rock stars always have to talk some shit about politics to self-grandiose, oh wait Bono isnt here this year and he is a big corporate whore now, nevermind.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>And then there was Bono, the Nobel Peace Prize nominee. "The war against terrorism is bound up with the war against poverty," said the U2 frontman, who was honored for his humanitarian work at the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences' MusiCares benefit at the Marriott Marquis. Bill Clinton also attended the celebrity peace rally. Introduced by Bono as "more of a rock star than any in this room," the former President said, "If you immediately think it's us versus them, then this will not be a world for your children to grow up in." Joining Clinton in the four-hour praise song to Bono were Carly Simon, Patti Labelle, Sheryl Crow, B.B. King, Wynonna Judd and her sister Ashley, Steve Van Zandt, Gwen Stefani, Jimmy Fallon, Salman Rushdie, Robert De Niro and a group of 20 Ugandan children, all orphaned by AIDS. Among those doing Bono's repertoire were Norah Jones (with a terrific cover of "Stuck in a Moment") and Mary J. Blige (who struggled with "One"). Bono himself was in Sinatra mode, covering "That's Life" and "Night and Day" with help from his band's guitarist, The Edge. Asked about his Nobel nod, the singer said, "It's just a huge honor to be even mentioned in the same list as people like Hans Blix and Pope John Paul." <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/61738p-57672c.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/61738p-57672c.html[/url]
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: markie on February 23, 2003, 11:12:00 pm: what does this actually mean?"The war against terrorism is bound up with the war against poverty,"He is an old corporate phoney, fuck him and his ilk.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: keithstg on February 24, 2003, 10:12:00 am: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: what does this actually mean?"The war against terrorism is bound up with the war against poverty,"He is an old corporate phoney, fuck him and his ilk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Of course, it doesn't mean anything - just armchair analysis. Was that tribute televised? Not that I have any interest in seeing four hours, let alone four minutes more of Bono as a Saint, but the covers would have been interesting....
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: starcrash on February 24, 2003, 11:11:00 am: Although I think US foreign policy is a complete joke, I can't stand celebrities talking about politics. The sad thing is politicians want to celebrities and celebrities want to be politicians. I also think Martin Sheen believes he really is President.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: not too shabby on February 24, 2003, 12:18:00 pm: What's worse is that probably at least 2% of Americans also think that Sheen is the real pres. If celebs want to talk politics, pull a Reagan or Sonny Bono and run for freaking office. I'll never understand why George Clooney's stance on the war is news.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: vansmack on February 24, 2003, 12:25:00 pm: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markie: what does this actually mean?"The war against terrorism is bound up with the war against poverty,"He is an old corporate phoney, fuck him and his ilk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It means the publication didn't print his full quote. The only worse then celebrities in politics is the media.And no matter what you say, Josiah Bartlet is my President.
Title: Re: Required reading
Post by: saco on February 24, 2003, 03:27:00 pm: I'm all for freedom of speech, and really appreciated the sign Mission of Burma had on stage friday, (perhaps CBS should read that) but thought this was a funny quote appropriate to this thread:"If Washington is a Hollywood for ugly people, Hollywood is a Washington for the simpleminded." -- Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), on the latest round of protests, Philadelphia Inquirer, 2/20