stupidmop wrote:
Cool, I get all that I guess, but I think personally if the band ran things got to a point where I thought they were sickening I'd have to step back from the band a little.
See, I don't understand how someone who agrees with Ed on most political issues, couldn't find it sickening. That's the irony. I don't really agree with him (most often). So, when he or the band do things that come across as hypocritical (on greed or whatnot), it kinda just shows his original POV was off. I would think that the band "selling-out" per se, would affect those against corporate greed, etc. more than someone who's a capitalist. Think about it.
stupidmop wrote:
I definitely believe the band should get a little shit for some of their recent decisions. Though, I say band because I know ed has the Mic and we get to hear what he has to say more than the other guys, he's not single handedly making the decisions, I have a niggling suspicion that at least some of the discrepancies between what ed says and the band does is down to him conceding to the band on things.
[/quote]
I understand your point. But, just using that interview, for example. Ed's the guy who did that. He said that. He's offered no apology. He's also the guy who did the axe throwing and so on. You can say, well axe toss competition stuff isn't as bad as guns. I get all that. The point is, the guy isn't really even considering it. I mean, if you're going to go into an interview and spout off on an issue like that. AND. You're going to have ads for your new album with you wielding deadly weapons... perhaps, you could at least apologize? Say it came out wrong. Or something. To me, I feel like it really did not come out wrong. Which I hope you'd agree, is fucked up "IF" that's the case.
On the band - I think Ed has pretty much all the control. If he says no, do that and we're through.... I think they listen.
stupidmop wrote:
Wasn't he best friends with johnny ramone who was a republican? I assume they had more than a few differing opinions. (I might be thinking about someone else here).
I could have predicted this on
His one 'different' friend. Yes, I believe they were friends. That doesn't make Ed open-minded. To have one republican friend who was also a rock star doesn't take away what I was saying before. I don't think he's open-minded.
stupidmop wrote:I guess to me I put down most of the discrepancies( though I don't usually think about this shit unless it comes up here) in what he says due to the fact that we're only getting snapshots or soundbites of him talking. Like everyone has already mentioned he's not the best or most comfortable public speaker, we don't know what its like to have an actual conversation with him, for all we know he could be an amazing conversationalist when there's not a camera in his face, or a reporter writing things down or thousands of people standing in front of him.
I honestly think it's possible to defend anyone of anything they've done or said with this sort of logic. In fact, I think Ed fans do that frequently. I think it's probably true that he's not a great public speaker. But, truth be told, I don't think he seems like he's having a tough time with interviews and I'm not so sure this really is "public speaking". I think he gets rambling and states what he feels. I actually think that's what he thinks.
I won't give him the pass on having a camera there or it being a "tough" interview because it's one of his friends in his band's practice studio. Seems kinda scapegoating to pretend it's the interview situation, to me. I truly believe this is who Ed is.
stupidmop wrote:And you could say maybe he shouldnt be talking about things in public at all then, but I think he'd rather feel like he's raising awareness or getting people talking, which he is, if this thread is anything to go by. Plus its not like we've seen him shut down someone trying to have a debate with him, someone asked him a question and he answered.
[/quote]
I think he rambles. And I think he thinks about these things often. I don't believe he thinks about them critically, however. So, when he gets rambling, he thinks of one of these topics, and baam.... out comes a line that the press will talk about.
Do I think he could control this? Yes. I do. I think he doesn't want to. Once again, I bet he does think about these things. Critically - no. But, he does probably read what Zinn had to say or something of that nature. Which ironically, circles him back to passion, which circles him back to making these mistakes. Yet, they aren't mistakes... because we hear no apology.
He has never debated anyone - ever publically (other than an large portion of a crowd with the BUsh thing) to my knowlege. So, the part on a debate, not sure where that's coming from. In fact, that's kinda my point. He only allows himself to speak either when he has the mic or in interview situations where he won't be challenged. In a sense, he likes to live in a bubble.
stupidmop wrote:I still think its easier to kill some one with a gun than an axe. Do you think if there were axe sprees at schools and in malls and on the streets on the regular, and people wanted to ban axes, he'd start ranting about his right to own an axe and chop his own wood?
I think it's easier to hurt someone accidentally with a axe tossing game situated in one's house, then it is to have a small fire arm (used for target practice) locked up upstairs. Let's just say they are equal. My point is - how does he get off telling "everyone" who has a gun (even those who are good with it) that he wishes them ill? I think that's kinda sick. I honestly can't see how anyone would defend it.
