Tim McGraw & Garth Brooks are "Obama Supporters"...

[mjr]

And some people are losing their s**t over it...

I'm a fan of both of them. I've been to concerts by both of them.

I don't want to say I was "raised" Conservative, but I definitely lean that way politically.

That said, I've felt for a long time that Mr. Brooks was a Democrat/Liberal.

Do I care? Nope. In fact, I own most of his CDs, his "signature" model Takamine (the GB-7C), and I'm planning on buying the new album. I keep seeing it in Wal-Mart, but keep forgetting to pick it up.

His political beliefs show up in some of his songs ("We Shall Be Free", for instance), but he hasn't done anything monumentally stupid, like the Dixie Chicks did.

And, the concert I went to, he put on a heck of a show.

Same with Mr. McGraw. I saw him in concert during the "Soul to Soul" tour that he did with Faith Hill.

I don't really own any of Mr. McGraw's CDs, but I do enjoy most of his music when I hear it on the radio.

And honestly, if I were able to, and they came back through my area, I'd go to their shows again.

I really don't understand why people are, as I said, "Losing their s**t" over this. I even saw something where a person made a comment using the "true Scotsman" fallacy that "no true Christian" could be Conservative/Republican.

That's a different argument, though.

But as far as Mr. McGraw & Mr. Brooks go, I still like their music, and I'll continue to do so.

I'm not surprised some country singers are Democrats (Toby Keith is one, also, I believe). I guess the primary "audience" of Country Music is "Republican". But to me, if you're putting out good music, I'll listen.

If your music is too pop for me (I'm looking at you, bands like Rascal Flatts. I'm looking at you, Taylor Swift, and so forth...), I probably won't listen.

[lordlundar]

I really don't understand why people are, as I said, "Losing their s**t" over this. I even saw something where a person made a comment using the "true Scotsman" fallacy that "no true Christian" could be Conservative/Republican.

That's a different argument, though.

Actually that probably IS the argument. American politics as of late (actually you can put in any real debate topic here) is fueled by extremists and that one trait is enough to sum up your entire character. So for these rubes (and I use the term loosely) who are getting upset, if your a country singer you MUST be a hard right conservative. To be anything else means your a traitor to the cause. Now you also have to factor in that to the right wing extremists Obama is the anti-Christ and simply saying you're an Obama supporter means you should be hung.

So yeah, the "no true Scotsman" fueled by extremism really IS the issue here.

[KabeRinnaul]

I even saw something where a person made a comment using the "true Scotsman" fallacy that "no true Christian" could be Conservative/Republican.

Despite the similar phrasing, this isn't actually used in the sense of a No True Scotsman fallacy, most of the time. Rather, it's a condemnation of modern Republican politics.

A "No True Scotsman" fallacy exists when an argument is made, an example is given that disproves the argument, and that example is dismissed as being not applicable solely because it runs counter to the argument. Wiki.

In the political arena, this is pointing out that someone who supposedly follows Christian values like peace, love, and charity should seriously reconsider their support for a party that's increasingly known for warmongering, hate-driven rhetoric and morality ploys, and cutting support programs for the needy.

[Gravekeeper]

I'm curious as to why you think the Dixie Chicks did something monumentally stupid when they ended up being right on the money. Especially given that the incident with the Dixie Chicks encapsulates what you're saying perfectly. Both in the completely insane reaction by country music fans at the time and in other artists using it as an opportunity to cash in on patriotic pandering.

[wolfie]

to the right wing extremists Obama is the anti-Christ and simply saying you're an Obama supporter means you should be hung.

Like a horse?

In the same vein as the Dixie Chicks, anyone remember the K.D. Lang controversy? She came out as both a lesbian and a vegetarian. The latter was a bigger impact on record sales - considering that a high proportion of people involved in agriculture are country music fans.

[mjr]

I'm curious as to why you think the Dixie Chicks did something monumentally stupid

My personal opinion is that it was "monumentally stupid" because it was done in a foreign country (England).

IF they had done it in, say, New York, I don't believe there would have been near the controversy that there was.

[Gravekeeper]

My personal opinion is that it was "monumentally stupid" because it was done in a foreign country (England).

IF they had done it in, say, New York, I don't believe there would have been near the controversy that there was.

Eh, the statement was directed at non-Americans anyhow. As for the controversy, there still would have been just as much controversy. Plus half the controversy was just profiteering anyway. This was at the fever pitch of all that if you aren't with us you're against us bullshit. It wouldn't have mattered where she said it. I mean cripes even Bush himself didn't have a problem with her saying it.

Plus all the controversy was largely manufactured from the usual right wing noise machine. Note how quiet said right wing noise machine is when right wing artists straight up threaten the current president.

Criticize the decision to launch the most disastrous and unnecessary war in US history? That's a lynch mobbing and hundreds of death threats.

Threaten to shoot a Democratic president? They cheer him on.

[protege]

Note how quiet said right wing noise machine is when right wing artists straight up threaten the current president.

No different than when the left got quiet when Bush was in office. They went after him from the first day he was in office. Constant criticism, including at least one movie made about his assassination. Where was the left when that was going on? It's just the way things are here now. No matter who is in office, the opposite side is never going to like what's going on. It'll change again when the other party gets elected.

As to hearing that celebrities are supporters of a candidate--who cares? I might not agree with their choice, but they're free to support anyone they want. Just as I'm free...to protest their choice by not supporting them with my wallet.

[Gravekeeper]

Sorry, but the "both sides are bad" argument hasn't functioned for quite some time in US politics. As for people being on Bush from the first day he was in office.....do you not remember what a complete shit storm the 2000 election was?

[protege]

Yep, the 2000 election was a fiasco. But still, I remember when that movie came out, and how the left was silent. In fact, many of them cheered over it. Why is it OK for one side...but not the other? That's the point I was trying to make. Unfortunately, we get so many people that are so wrapped up in the party...that they don't vote on the issues, but whether or not there's a D or an R next to a candidate. I try to vote for candidates based on the issues, and yes, I do go either way. Except in city/county elections. Those, I pull the R lever, simply because I don't agree with 80-plus years of Donkey Power.

[TheHuckster]

Sorry, but the "both sides are bad" argument hasn't functioned for quite some time in US politics.

No. Just... no.

Both Republicans and Democrats have been pandering to special interest groups and lobbyists in lieu of the public's best interests. Democrats have responded just as much to the 1%'s contributions to keep the status quo of keeping big corporations in an abusive and destructive power. They simply have a far, far better PR machine than the republicans have.

We have a very dysfunctional system of "let's only listen to the people with the most money" which is destructive to society no matter which side is in power. All the debate about the ACA, gay marriage, environmentalism, etc. are important, for sure, but the way I see it, keeping either side in power is still going to lead us down the spiral toward oligopoly rule and an eroding democracy and capitalist society, which is a fundamental issue and is just as important as the others.

Saying we should support the democrats simply because the republicans are worse is like saying we should support the wright brothers airplane to take us over the ocean because we think the only other option is to fly one of the prior failed prototypes.

[protege]

Both Republicans and Democrats have been pandering to special interest groups and lobbyists in lieu of the public's best interests. Democrats have responded just as much to the 1%'s contributions to keep the status quo of keeping big corporations in an abusive and destructive power. They simply have a far, far better PR machine than the republicans have.

They're all crazy...but they're not stupid. Neither side is dumb enough to bite the hand that feeds them. They both take contributions from the 1%, but one side manages to obscure or deflect criticism of that very well.

All the debate about the ACA, gay marriage, environmentalism, etc. are important, for sure, but the way I see it, keeping either side in power is still going to lead us down the spiral toward oligopoly rule and an eroding democracy and capitalist society, which is a fundamental issue and is just as important as the others.

I've already seen what a single-party system can do. The city I live near--Pittsburgh--has been under control of the Democrats since the 1930s. They came to power after alleged Republican corruption during the Depression. Some of their descendants are on their 2nd and 3rd generations in politics. 84 years of this.

[wolfie]

As for people being on Bush from the first day he was in office.....do you not remember what a complete shit storm the 2000 election was?

It's interesting that the "birthers" (for those of you living under a rock for the past 7 years or so, they're the people who said Obama wasn't qualified to be President because he was from Kenya) didn't make one peep about Bush Jr. being the President from Chad.

[Gravekeeper]

No. Just... no.

Yes, just yes. There's a reason "Both Sides Are Bad ( So Vote Republican )" is an Internet meme.

This is not an binary position. Saying one side is worse doesn't mean the other side are saints that smell of roses. Nor does saying one side did bad things when the other side is doing worse things mean that both sides are equally bad.

Yes, US politics in general are rife with corruption. However, one side is so far down its own rabbit hole that its basically like a cartoon villain at this point. There's a difference between some corrupt dick wad lining his own pockets with special interest money and someone who legitimately believes his own bullshit and is actively doing things that directly and indirectly ruin lives and hurt people. Often in the face of overwhelming evidence that what they are doing does not and will never work. Because they think Jeebus wants them too.

There's a huge difference between greedy self interest and wanting to force your believes on others even if its to the complete detriment of the entire society you swore to serve.


Edit:

Saying we should support the democrats simply because the republicans are worse

I never said that. I would prefer you vote for whomever is least like a bag of dicks in your area. But on a national level, the Republican party is objectively worse and doing more damage to the country at large. It also unfortunately tends to eat its own when someone doesn't tug the party line and not act like a bag of dicks.

But hey, 2 party system. =/

[TheHuckster]

There's a huge difference between greedy self interest and wanting to force your believes on others even if its to the complete detriment of the entire society you swore to serve.

Both lead to the same dismal conclusion where people's votes are not heard and economic disparity continues to grow.

If politicians are not fighting hard for better income equality, then it makes no difference if the reason for that is because one side is only getting kickbacks from lobbyists while the other is doing the same but also has some religious or ideological justification for doing so: The earners are still fucked.

"Both sides are bad (so vote Democrat)" is not much better. I don't want to live in a society where, while on one hand social issues like LGBT rights, feminist issues, and discrimination is improved upon, but the middle class ceases to exist as we continue to be ruled by a government backed by a bunch of colluded corporations who don't give a fuck about real democracy and economic freedom.

But hey, 2 party system. =/

As protege says, as the Republicans continue to self destruct (which despite the last midterm elections, I believe they are still dying a slow death), we are going to be entering an era of a single-party system that greatly concerns me. Our viable choices as voters will shrink more, as a self-replicating machine of double-faced asshats continue to mutually benefit the economically powerful, at which point, we are effectively a despot. Checkmate.