I find it really funny that right wing gun slinging republican americans are morrissey fans..

[thefatbastard]

I bet Morrissey would probably find it quite funny too

 

[The Original J.T. Ripper]

> I bet Morrissey would probably find it quite funny too

Still don't get it. Consider:

1. I was for the Iraq war, anti-NAFTA/WTO, anti-United Nations, support a flat tax for every American, support the Defense of Marriage constitutional amendment, anti-affirmative action, anti-bilingual education, support a crackdown on illegal immigration, pro-2nd amendment rights (NOT including automatic weapons however!!), anti tax-and-spend, anti-hate crimes legislation, against the inclusion of Eastern Europe in NATO, against AIDS $$ for African nations, and generally promote the Western European Christian ideals under which this nation was founded and have ultimately made it (along with Britain) the pinnacles of freedom, democracy, and Western Civilisation.

2. I think Vauxhall and I is the sine qua non of rock/pop albums since the 1970s, a work of immaculate beauty, stunning lyricism, incredibly emotional passages, sublime instrumentation, haunting and melodic vocals, supremely confident guitar work, deep/chugging bass lines, and an overall cohesiveness resulting in the whole being much, much greater than the sum of its parts. I feel that Moz has a handful of spectacular albums, and everything he has released has at least some great track or two on it. His stage presence is stunning and captivating, he is stately and classy, and his blue eyes have a piercing quality that is not easily forgotten. His concerts are the stuff of legend. His work with the Smiths ranks amongst rock's best-ever, and comparisons of Moz/Marr to Lennon/McCartney, while inevitably falling short, are at least not laughable outright but worthy of at least SOME discussion. Morrissey is the voice for millions of fans worldwide, and seldom has rock seen such a polarising personality be so meaningful, so deeply important, so INGRAINED in his fans' lives and minds. People worship Morrissey more fully than most other rock stars' fans do. His poetry and wordplay during his Smiths' years were literate and charming, while his solo years found his lyrics focusing more directly on emotionally-charged subject matters. I love his Vauxhall/Boxers-era persona, and along with the Beatles, Jethro Tull, Jeff Buckley, and Lloyd Cole... he is amongst my all-time favourite artists. I can't imagine passing the days without his music as a central part of my life's soundtrack.

Upon reading all of that, do you get the bizarre feeling that (2.) is singularly unrelated to (1.)? Yep, so do I. Imagine that.

J.T.

 

[clownbait]

Upon reading all of that, do you get the bizarre feeling that (2.) is singularly unrelated to (1.)?

well they are unrelated so no. but you do support some ignorant stuff.

 

[The Original J.T. Ripper]

> Upon reading all of that, do you get the bizarre feeling that (2.) is
> singularly unrelated to (1.)?

> well they are unrelated so no. but you do support some ignorant stuff.

The fact that they are entirely unrelated was my point -- ie, that 'thefatbastard' shouldn't be surprised at all about Right-leaning people being Moz fans. It really has no bearing on Moz's music and whether one likes it or not.

As for your second statement... is it really "ignorant"? Or is it entirely plausible that those views aren't those of "ignorance", but purely different-yet-every-bit-as-viable views as yours?

I give you the benefit of the doubt until your posted reply, but my experience with left-leaning peoples on this forum has indicated a certain level of intolerance and vitriol towards anybody who doesn't agree with their leftist/rainbow-coloured worldview. Perhaps you are cut of a different cloth than they....

J.T.

 

[clownbait]

true, my ignorance comment can be construed as an act of ignorance in itself.

You say that you were for the Iraq war, if so that is fine, but if you still are you are supporting a false war and a lie that has thrown this country into a huge debt along with just about a 1000 soldiers dead. Please dont give me any spill about how bad saddam is cause the same thing is going on in several other countries and this administration does not give a damn and they did not give a damn before they went in there and it is not a fight against terrorism whatsoever.

You also state that you are anti-United Nations which without them then the US truly becomes the super power it's always wanted to be. Which will only lead to absolute disaster and the next major war.

And you support the amendment to the constitution. I understand if you are opposed to gay marriage. I know several close friends who are. I could really care less who gets married as long as they areant hurting anyone else. I think people should focus more on the children who are being raised in gay families. Parents are role models and their children look up to them, being raised in a gay family will teach a child that that is normal and quite possibly the right thing for them to do, but that may not always be the case. Anyways, the constitution should not be amended, the administration that is in power should never, ever, be giving the responsibility to determine the rights of the people after releasing such things as the 'patriot act'.

Also, I take it you are supporting Bush. I watched the entire Republican Convention. Could you please tell me one thing that they have gauranteed that they are going to do in the next 4 years besides attacking our enemies?

 

[Drew's MY man]

> Parents are role models and their children look up
> to them, being raised in a gay family will teach a child that that is
> normal and quite possibly the right thing for them to do

Now there's the ignorant comment. If your logic were true, there wouldn't be gay people in the first place. Having straight parents would've influenced us all to be straight. It's not something that's learned, you're either born gay or born straight. Period.

 

[Conservative Morrissey Fan]

> I bet Morrissey would probably find it quite funny too

Yes, there are Morrissey fans who are Republican, not "right wing gun slinging". I'm actually kinda curious what Morrissey will say when he goes through Texas (Bush's home state). I'm travelling from the Westcoast to go to the Dallas & Austin shows. And if Moz does say something about Bush, it will not bother me at all. I have my views & Moz has his.

Viva Morrissey - Viva Bush!!!!!!!!

 

[whassupwiththat]

> Viva Morrissey - Viva Bush!!!!!!!!

Good grief. I am sure you don't mean your president Bush, right?
Morrissey does not like bush either way.

 

[clownbait]

> Now there's the ignorant comment. If your logic were true, there wouldn't
> be gay people in the first place. Having straight parents would've
> influenced us all to be straight. It's not something that's learned,
> you're either born gay or born straight. Period.

no its not that simple as your comment. Many people turn gay from multiple things, mental abuse, sexual abuse, curiousity, it simply suits their fancy, or any other reason they choose. I know several gay people and have had conversations about this matter and I am not ignorant to homosexuals whatsoever. Also, in no way, by making that statement am I saying that every single child will grow up with that mentality. Absolutely not, but could it happen, yes, there is no way you could say otherwise, if its 1 in a 100 or 1 in a 1000, it does not matter, what matters is that everyone should have a choice as to what they prefer and should be raised to do what is best for them. How many parents in this world raise their children with their ideals? Millions. Could you possibly sit here and tell me that a gay couple would not do the same? Could you also tell me that a child growing up in that situation would not live their life in confusion from what they learned at a young age to be right even though it isnt right for them? Also if you want to get technical, your comment contains ignorance, as you happen to forget an entire class of homosexuality, Bi-Sexuality. So your little "you're either born gay or born straight. Period" comment is useless.

 

[Conservative Morrissey Fan]

> Good grief. I am sure you don't mean your president Bush, right?
> Morrissey does not like bush either way.

Of course I'm talking about President Bush. I know Morrissey doesn't like Bush & most Morrissey fans do not like Bush either, but that doesn't mean I don't like Morrissey's music or enjoy going to his shows (30 plus & counting btw). Morrissey also doesn't like meat & most of His fans are NOT vegetarian. See you at the next Morrissey show (CA, NV, IL, WI, IN, MI, TX).

VIVA MORRISSEY & VIVA BUSH!!!!!!!

 

[Archibald]

Old money

So
> your little "you're either born gay or born straight. Period"
> comment is useless.

Why dont you just say they`re as bent as nine bob notes and leave it at that?

 

[Archibald]

Sorry, couldnt resist that one.Its my old working class roots showing through.I`m more tolerant now.

 

[kerry is flipper]

cuz he is silly little singer and its nice on the ears...rights dont judge like...

he has proven to be a politcal infant however

face it right wingers dont judge like harsh petty lefties

 

[The Original J.T. Ripper]

> true, my ignorance comment can be construed as an act of ignorance in
> itself.

Yeah, it could. I mean, I guess technically it is since you don't have any true way of knowing whether I am ignorant or not, but that's semantics... I doubt you're ignorant, my hunch is that you have some seriously differing views on the subjects I mentioned.

> You say that you were for the Iraq war, if so that is fine, but if you
> still are you are supporting a false war and a lie that has thrown this
> country into a huge debt along with just about a 1000 soldiers dead.

I think the first step is to decide if one is an isolationist or not. Because if you are, then the Iraq war was wrong categorically because they didn't actively threaten us. If one isn't isolationist, then it gets tougher. 1,000 soldiers are dead, yes... but the US lost 295,000 soldiers in World War 2. And Germany never really threatened the U.S., either -- they attacked Poland the way Iraq attacked Kuwait. Do you thus feel that the U.S. should have not intervened in WW2, because we wound up losing 295,000 soldiers? I'm not of the opinion that the # of dead soldiers consitutes an effective argument against war. Furthermore, say the U.S. didn't attack Iraq last year. So we don't lose those 1,000 soldiers. Is it any better that Saddam Hussein would be left in power, guaranteed to murder at LEAST 1,000 of his own citizens, and highly likely many times more than that. Are Iraqi lives worth less than American ones? Which leads us to your next point....

> Please dont give me any spill about how bad saddam is cause the same thing
> is going on in several other countries and this administration does not
> give a damn and they did not give a damn before they went in there

I've never understood this argument. It sounds cliche and facile, but my response is "so what?" Just because there's terror and murders worldwide doesn't mean you NEVER act against it. Just because we can't fix EVERY problem doesn't therefore mean we should never fix ANY problem.

And the U.S. DID give a damn before they went in -- think Kosovo, think Gulf War, think Panama, etc.

And.... Saddam really is bad news, man. I agree with you that I think Bush lied, or at least had his own agenda (finish his Dad's work, etc.). And that's wrong. But it's not a dealbreaker for me because the ends were still noble -- getting rid of Hussein was good for Iraq, and good for the world. If we hadn't acted, he'd be terrorising his own country still, imprisoning, torturing, and murdering thousands upon thousands more people. Is this somehow a preferable scenario?

> You also state that you are anti-United Nations which without them then
> the US truly becomes the super power it's always wanted to be. Which will
> only lead to absolute disaster and the next major war.

Hmmm.. well the U.S. already is the only superpower, the existence of the UN doesn't change that. But I think it's a vast mistake to entrust the security of U.S. troops to some leftist bureaucrats in Brussels, Belgium. As a nationalist, I think each European country should remain its own identity with its own defences -- the UN and EU are weak. I think the UN's existence is good, purely as a means of dialogue between disparate nations --- but to give it any sort of authority or military power is absurd.

> And you support the amendment to the constitution. I understand if you are
> opposed to gay marriage. I know several close friends who are. I could
> really care less who gets married as long as they areant hurting anyone
> else. I think people should focus more on the children who are being
> raised in gay families. Parents are role models and their children look up
> to them, being raised in a gay family will teach a child that that is
> normal and quite possibly the right thing for them to do, but that may not
> always be the case. Anyways, the constitution should not be amended, the
> administration that is in power should never, ever, be giving the
> responsibility to determine the rights of the people after releasing such
> things as the 'patriot act'.

I agree with you about children being raised in gay marriages -- but thus, what do we do about it? If you don't outlaw gay marriages, do you then at least outlaw their adopting children? I MIGHT be amenable to that idea, except I don't think it would work. From a legal standpoint, if the Gay Activists won their right to marry, then that would clear the path to Gay Adoption, with no way to fight it. The slippery slope concept.

My stance on this is: gays can live together and do whatever the heck they want in the privacy of their own homes - the U.S. gov't has no business butting into their private lives. But that doesn't mean the Gov't should have to recognise, or celebrate, gay unions. Tolerance is one thing, celebration is quite another.

Gays should be tolerated, respected as human beings, and not discriminated against. But their lifestyles should neither be legally recognised, encouraged, nor celebrated.

> Also, I take it you are supporting Bush. I watched the entire Republican
> Convention. Could you please tell me one thing that they have gauranteed
> that they are going to do in the next 4 years besides attacking our
> enemies?

I don't like Bush. I think he's intellectually dim, he's crass, his Texan swagger offends the sensibilities of our more valued (and classy) allies, he's a bit too unilateralist, and he really isn't fit to be leader of the Free World. But even worse, he's a disgrace to the Conservative name. His refusal to fix our immigration problem, his belief in NAFTA/WTO, his horrible horrible record against the environment, and his absolute utter disregard for fiscal responsibility..... that all just sickens me.

And yet, what is the alternative? John Kerry? God help us all. Yes I'll vote for Bush, and yes I'm going to hate every single minute of it. The paleoconservatives came so close in 1992 when Buchanan won that first primary... but ever since then, it's been neocons (read: sellouts) all the way.

And to answer your question: Yes i saw his speech. I guess I could say that he's guaranteed to fight against abortion and gay marriage... And I don't even support that first one, as I'm a pro-choicer.

J.T.