Should Eddie Vedder, Bruce Springsteen and the like take Bill O Reillys advice?

muppet

Was having this discussion in the Porch. Artists like Eddie Vedder and Bruce Springsteen make a point of expressing their political beliefs at concerts and the like, but good old Bill O Reilly thinks thats irresponsible - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gD0PTQveMbA

What do you think? I hate O Reilly - he's a loudmouth bully. But I think he raises an interesting point.

catefrances

i don't think anybody should take bill o'reilly's advice on anything.

muppet

catefrances wrote:

i don't think anybody should take bill o'reilly's advice on anything.

Eh, a good point is a good point IMO, regardless of who it's from.

catefrances

muppet wrote:

Eh, a good point is a good point IMO, regardless of who it's from.

well imo if you got something to say then you should say it. just cause youre a musician or god forbid, an actor/actress doesn't mean you should just shut your mouth and play.

mammasan

I believe any individual can talk about their political beliefs at any given time. If artist like Vedder and Springsteen have the urge to take sometime away from their performance to talk to the audience about current events and politics so be. If that bothers you, not you in particular, then don't go to their shows anymore. I'm pretty sure if artists like Vedder and Springsteen, or even actors like Sean Penn, had political beliefs closely resembling O'Reilly's he would not have a problem with them speaking out.

I would like to use this as an example of what I believe is terminally wrong with this country. We are so concerned with how other nations or people act, making sure that they act in a certain manner and follow certain rules, that we fail to see that our own behavior is damaging and that we ourselves are not acting in the accepted manner or following the same prescribed rules and laws. We should concern ourselves a bit more with the problems within our own home before we go pointing fingers at others.

lazymoon13

I like o'reilly, he brings up some great points sometimes but he is way off on this.

know1

I have views that do not correspond with Eddie's, but I do not mind him making political statements at the concerts...as long as the whole show isn't a political rally. I went to one of the VFC shows and didn't mind the comments...and there really weren't very many.

spiral out

catefrances wrote:

well imo if you got something to say then you should say it. just cause youre a musician or god forbid, an actor/actress doesn't mean you should just shut your mouth and play.

I agree with you 100%, they have an opinion and a right to express it.

writersu

I do not think they should shut up; Bill O'Reily makes a living out of broadcasting his opinion so everyone is entitled to. I do think though, that people should speak their truth quietly (as in Desiderata), and not be rude.

But I have been thinking lately,as my mind opens up and I begin to attempt to to wrap my mind around others views on the war, etc. that I truly would love to hear those who have such strong feelings tell me what they think should have occurred in the wake of 9/11 and from this point on. I am not being funny here either; I really really would like to learn this so I can possibly grow past my current thinking.

mammasan

writersu wrote:

I do not think they should shut up; Bill O'Reily makes a living out of broadcasting his opinion so everyone is entitled to. I do think though, that people should speak their truth quietly (as in Desiderata), and not be rude.

But I have been thinking lately,as my mind opens up and I begin to attempt to to wrap my mind around others views on the war, etc. that I truly would love to hear those who have such strong feelings tell me what they think should have occurred in the wake of 9/11 and from this point on. I am not being funny here either; I really really would like to learn this so I can possibly grow past my current thinking.

Well I am one who firmly believes that our foreign policy played a large role in the events of 9/11. The first step that should have been taken was to see where our foreign policy works and doesn't work. Obviously we made a lot of mistakes in the past that are now coming home to haunt us. We can ill afford to repeat those some mistakes. That's not to say that we are solely responsible for what happened on 9/11. The terrorists are the responsible culprits but instead of just painting the situation as black and white, good vs evil, we need to really examine the situation and the history behind it. It is obvious that our government did not even bother to do this and decided to just repeat history.

writersu

yeah, I was shocked when as an adult,( after a whole life of hearing how great we are in the USA, ), I found out that the other countries do not think we are as great as we would sometimes believe........

mammasan

writersu wrote:

yeah, I was shocked when as an adult,( after a whole life of hearing how great we are in the USA, ), I found out that the other countries do not think we are as great as we would sometimes believe........

I don't think it's that the US isn't great. I think it's that for as long as I can remember we where always told that the US is the greatest. That there is no other country like us in the world. This is all non-sense because there are other great countries in the world and there are other countries with the same opportunities and freedoms as there is here. We believed what we where being told and became complacent. We believed that we where the greatest and just sat lazily on our imagined peddle stool.

Kel Varnsen

writersu wrote:

I do not think they should shut up; Bill O'Reily makes a living out of broadcasting his opinion so everyone is entitled to. I do think though, that people should speak their truth quietly (as in Desiderata), and not be rude.

That's what I was wondering. What makes Bill O'reilly any more qualified or deserving to spout off his opinions than anyone else?

searchlightsoul

He's got his own cable show. Like he's in a position to call out these guys for expressing their more educated opinions.

LikeAnOcean

As long as people keep buying tickets for the show, I think the artist can use their constitutional right in any way they want.

Keep in mind, O'Reilly wouldn't mind if these artists were preaching stuff he agreed with,.. just another reminder O'Reilly is a tool.

writersu

mammasan wrote:

I don't think it's that the US isn't great. I think it's that for as long as I can remember we where always told that the US is the greatest. That there is no other country like us in the world. This is all non-sense because there are other great countries in the world and there are other countries with the same opportunities and freedoms as there is here. We believed what we where being told and became complacent. We believed that we where the greatest and just sat lazily on our imagined peddle stool.

Yes, that is the point though. We are great in regard to our opportunities and what we stand for. However, I think we are looked at as spoiled brats sometimes because we don't take advantage of all of our opportunities.

writersu

Kel Varnsen wrote:

That's what I was wondering. What makes Bill O'reilly any more qualified or deserving to spout off his opinions than anyone else?

because he gets to vent everyday for an hour and get watched by many many people???????idk.......

jubilairesjl

Eddie and Bruce have a right to express themselves. If you don't like it when they say something about their beliefs then don't go to the concert. Plain and simple, it is the essence of a free market.

muppet

I think some of you have missed my point. I don't have a problem with artists saying their political beliefs - when it comes to Vedder and Springsteen, I believe what they say and I support them. But then I'm sure that so does everyone else in the concert. Isn't that just preaching to the choir?

I think O Reillys point - and you can shit on him as much as you want, and I'd probably agree with you - is that if artists such as Springsteen and Vedder are going to state their political beliefs and intentions (and bearing in mind that they command a huge audience), then they have a responsibilty to talk to people who may not neccesairly agree with what they think. Debate is healthy, and probably much more productive than having a rant against Bush at a concert where nobody can really challenge you.

As I said, I'd probably class myself as liberal, and although I don't claim to know a tremendous amount about the ins and outs of US politics, I do generally agree with people such as Vedder and Springsteen (although I made that decision by myself). But, to use a cliche, if they want to talk the talk then they should walk the walk. Get out of their comfort zone, that's what I say.

O Reilly is a cunt of the highest order, but it would certianly be interesting to see Vedder take him on like Michael Moore did (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=trOdCU6aZOg).

writersu

muppet wrote:

I don't think I've got a problem with artists saying their political beliefs - when it comes to Vedder and Springsteen, I believe what they say and support them. But then I'm sure so does everyone else in the concert. Isn't that just preaching to the choir?

I think O Reillys point - and you can shit on him as much as you want, and I'd probably agree with you - is that if artists such as Springsteen and Vedder are going to state their political beliefs and intentions (and bearing in mind that they command a huge audience), then they have a responsibilty to talk to people who may not neccesairly agree with what they think. Debate is healthy, and probably much more productive than having a rant against Bush at a concert where nobody can really challenge you.

As I said, I'd probably class myself as liberal, and although I don't claim to know a tremendous amount about the ins and outs of US politics, I do generally agree with people such as Vedder and Springsteen (although I made that decision by myself). But, to use a cliche, if they want to talk the talk then they should walk the walk. Get out of their comfort zone, that's what I say.

O Reilly is a cunt of the highest order, but it would certianly be interesting to see Vedder take him on like Michael Moore did (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=trOdCU6aZOg).

well, if you are going to be a c--t, you might as well be of the highest order.

muppet

writersu wrote:

well, if you are going to be a c--t, you might as well be of the highest order.

You know what? I'm not even sure what that expression actually means. It's come to the point where I'm just trying to find the most inventive way of insultiung the man.

writersu

muppet wrote:

You know what? I'm not even sure what that expression actually means. It's come to the point where I'm just trying to find the most inventive way of insultiung the man.

I am just teasing you........I really do not have any loyalty to the man at all and could not care less....

I was just playing on your words........

muppet

writersu wrote:

I am just teasing you........I really do not have any loyalty to the man at all and could not care less....

I was just playing on your words........

Sorry, my comment wasn't meant to appear rude.

cornnifer

mammasan wrote:

I'm pretty sure if artists like Vedder and Springsteen, or even actors like Sean Penn, had political beliefs closely resembling O'Reilly's he would not have a problem with them speaking out.

.

Exactly. This is the crux of the matter right here. If these and other celebrity types agreed with O'Reilly, he'd call them heroes and beg to suck their cocks live on the Factor. They don't, however, so they should shut up. What a douche.

blackredyellow

Kel Varnsen wrote:

That's what I was wondering. What makes Bill O'reilly any more qualified or deserving to spout off his opinions than anyone else?

He was on Inside Edition... duh...

Flannel Shirt

muppet wrote:

I think some of you have missed my point. I don't have a problem with artists saying their political beliefs - when it comes to Vedder and Springsteen, I believe what they say and I support them. But then I'm sure that so does everyone else in the concert. Isn't that just preaching to the choir?

I think O Reillys point - and you can shit on him as much as you want, and I'd probably agree with you - is that if artists such as Springsteen and Vedder are going to state their political beliefs and intentions (and bearing in mind that they command a huge audience), then they have a responsibilty to talk to people who may not neccesairly agree with what they think. Debate is healthy, and probably much more productive than having a rant against Bush at a concert where nobody can really challenge you.

As I said, I'd probably class myself as liberal, and although I don't claim to know a tremendous amount about the ins and outs of US politics, I do generally agree with people such as Vedder and Springsteen (although I made that decision by myself). But, to use a cliche, if they want to talk the talk then they should walk the walk. Get out of their comfort zone, that's what I say.

O Reilly is a cunt of the highest order, but it would certianly be interesting to see Vedder take him on like Michael Moore did (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=trOdCU6aZOg).

Dude, you posted here. Do you read posts here? This is a Pearl Jam message pit and there are a lot of people who do not agree with the bands politics. I wouldnt agree that Ed's political statements are always preaching to the choir. There have been many threads with people that disagree with his politics and would like him to shut up. Thank God he doesnt.

What did Bruce say that he cannot back up? We have tortured people? Our govt admitted we did. That the govt wiretapped phones? They said they did. No lawyers? Gitmo ring a bell?

Besides, this is his TOP FUCKING STORY that night? Are you kidding me? What Bruce Springsteen said on 60 minutes is his top story?

But its OK for this host of Inside Edition to blanketly say that these guys are just saying things they hear from people around them? He is assuming they have not done their homework, they dont read, they havent researched the issues, they havent spoken to people directly involved? Hypocrisy of the highest order.

SoonForgotten2

O'Reilly is such a self-righteous prick. It's irresponsible not to come on his show? My, someone thinks quite highly of himself. It's been shown time and again that O'Reilly has zero journalistic credibility, which is why he brings on a cowboy named Kinky.

Oh and to the OP, I don't think O'Reilly makes any kind of interesting point at all. Simply getting indignant because others are expressing beliefs contrary to your own is not making an interesting point.

brandon10

If I ran into O'Reilly in a back alley, I would knock him out! Seriously.

writersu

muppet wrote:

Sorry, my comment wasn't meant to appear rude.

no, you weren't being rude (to me) at all. I was just kidding around with you. please don't think otherwise.......

I just like to play..........

muppet

Flannel Shirt wrote:

Dude, you posted here. Do you read posts here? This is a Pearl Jam message pit and there are a lot of people who do not agree with the bands politics. I wouldnt agree that Ed's political statements are always preaching to the choir. There have been many threads with people that disagree with his politics and would like him to shut up. Thank God he doesnt.

What did Bruce say that he cannot back up? We have tortured people? Our govt admitted we did. That the govt wiretapped phones? They said they did. No lawyers? Gitmo ring a bell?

Besides, this is his TOP FUCKING STORY that night? Are you kidding me? What Bruce Springsteen said on 60 minutes is his top story?

But its OK for this host of Inside Edition to blanketly say that these guys are just saying things they hear from people around them? He is assuming they have not done their homework, they dont read, they havent researched the issues, they havent spoken to people directly involved? Hypocrisy of the highest order.

Hey, no need to get hostile here. This was never meant to be about how much Bill O Reilly is an arsehole, becuase I think that's obvious. I'm not talking about artists such as Springsteen or Vedder going on the "O Reilly Factor" specifically - in fact, that's probably a bad idea becuase the man never lets anyone get a word in. I was talking more generally: I'm sure there are other formats that these artists could use to debate, that aren't neccesairly in their 'comfort zone.' And why not? They've obviously got a lot to say, and are intelligent enough. I'm not saying it's an obligation or anything.

And I've found that there are a lot of "shut up and sing" people support the bands politics, but they just want to keep the politics and the music seperate. Which is understandable, and I agree to some extent. I found it cringeworthy that Vedder moulded "Bettermans" meaning into something about Americas relationship with George Bush. But it's his song, so I guess he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. But for Vedder to completely to shut up completley and turn Pearl Jam into another boring, lifeless left over-band-from-the-90s act? Definately not. Thank God indeed.

jubilairesjl wrote:

Eddie and Bruce have a right to express themselves. If you don't like it when they say something about their beliefs then don't go to the concert. Plain and simple, it is the essence of a free market.

I'm not disputing that in the slightest.

LeftThePorch315

To some time to write some words about everything you folks are discussing. I posted this in "Words and Music... Communication", but I think it fits here.

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?p=5361178#post5361178

I look forward to your responses. Thank you for your time.

Oh... and Bill O'Rielly is a fascist douchebag.

ds