There’s a great piece over at the Rolling Stone blog today that talks about all the recent artists who took umbrage to Republicans using their music for their campaigns…primarily McCain/Palin.
The best part of the piece though is the commenters who are upset with Rolling Stone being “the liberal media” that wonders why Rolling Stone isn’t “attacking” the Obama campaign for using someone’s music. Duuuuurrrrrrrr!!!!!! And they’re also telling RS to “stick to music” and “stay out of politics”, which is hilarious since Rolling Stone has always written about politics since its inception during the Vietnam War, and made no bones about their leftist stance. Be sure to check out all the comments…they’re sad and hilarious all at the same time…as is life. Here’s a fun little sampling though…
Jake | 10/10/2008, 4:51 pm EST
Leave it to Rolling Stone magazine to attack the Republican party for… doing nothing wrong. It’s totally legal for these songs to be used if license fees are paid. This whole thing is absurd. It’s not as if they snuck in these artist’s houses and stole the song. They shouldn’t publish music if they don’t want people using it without permission. I guess I better call the Foo Fighters and apologize for listening to everlong with my windows down this morning because I didn’t call and ask first.
Ethan | 10/10/2008, 5:21 pm EST
I agree, Jake! These artists, most of whom i really respect, are being whiny. Just because McCain uses a song by you, doesn’t necesarily mean you support that person. It pisses me off that rock and roll thinks it loves Obama when I’m sure half of them know what the fuck Obama even plans to do in office! Politics and rock should STAY SEPERATED!!!!
Dave | 10/10/2008, 7:12 pm EST
I am waiting for Tom Scholz to serve a Cease and Desist order for playing my own Boston CD on my stereo while making hamburgers and being Republican. You got paid for the licensing. Now the party that paid the union can play it freely. That’s how it works. You want total control? Never release music publicly-which seems to be the unintentional result for your last CD.
Saulius | 10/10/2008, 7:42 pm EST
Rollingstone writing another anti-republican article? Yawn. This magazine bores me. Hey, RS, wanna do something “punk”? wanna go against the establishment? wanna do something that really takes balls? Write a pro-Bush article. When you put Obama on the cover twice within months and fail to write a pro-right article since….well, never, then you lose any ounce of journalistic credibility you ever had in the first place.
Get back to doing what you do: writing 5 star reviews for any and every Dylan album that comes down the line (seems like you lost your journalistic credibility reviewing music too).
Saulius | 10/11/2008, 12:04 am EST
Besides protecting us from another terrorist attach, Bush has given more aid to Africa than any president in history. But I’m not defending him. He’s dropped the ball big time on immigration, allowed spending to get out of control, and his reaction to Katrina was horrific. Those are just a few issues I have with him. I just find it funny how RS tries to posture itself as a political publication. I read publications that are both liberal and right-wing. I listen to Rush and watch Obermann. What bores me about this magazine is that every political article takes the exact same posture: Bush wants to eat your babies, and Obama walks on water and cures the sick. Over and over and over and over again.
As for Republicans using songs by artists that don’t support them, i say f ‘em, as long as it’s legal and they’ve paid the fees, who cares?
Greg | 10/11/2008, 9:34 am EST
This is the first and last time I visit this site. Why don’t you stick to writing about music and stay out of politics!!!!
Matt | 10/11/2008, 1:03 pm EST
It’s so hip and trendy to support Obama huh? It’s a good thing the GOP was never given a fair chance by the media. Hey, what ever happend with ACORN? False voter registrations and ties to Obama, why isn’t that news?
steven | 10/12/2008, 12:19 am EST
remind me never to listen to any of these groups.
matthew | 10/12/2008, 1:44 am EST
i find it funny how all of these songs were used by McCain what songs is Obama using and are any of those artists upset, i would like to know?
Lot of super-intelligent logic going on there, huh? If you really think about it, why would these rockers be supporting Obama when they make over $250,000/year? Perhaps because they are willing to be taxed a tiny bit more for the good of the less fortunate in their country…and for social programs that they believe in, such as health care reform. But I’m sure that’s somehow unpatriotic…or commy socialist, through a Republican’s eyes. We DO live in a society though, don’t we? And we should love our fellow human too, no?