Some folks are born silver spoon in hand :: Final Fantasy XI

#35 Nov 13 2014 at 2:22 PM Rating: Decent

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

gbaji wrote:

Just in case it wasn't clear.

You not knowing the song was clear from the start. Case in point:

gbaji wrote:

The song assumes that serving in the military is something that one must try to avoid.

Not in English it doesn't.

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#36 Nov 13 2014 at 2:29 PM Rating: Good

Jophiel

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

gbaji wrote:

The song assumes that serving in the military is something that one must try to avoid.

Not really. It's speaking about the inequity of some people avoiding it and putting the burden on others. Likewise, the song isn't an attack against the notion of taxation but rather the idea that the wealthy would shirk paying their taxes.

Or maybe you think it's a conservative anthem against taxation, I dunno. You're kind of weird that way.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#37 Nov 13 2014 at 2:30 PM Rating: Good

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

Jophiel wrote:

Or maybe you think it's a conservative anthem against taxation, I dunno. You're kind of weird that way.

"I like when they say a movie is inspired by a true story, because that's weird; It means the movie is not a true story, it was just inspired by a true story. Like, hey Mitch, did you hear the story about that lady who drove her children into the river and they all drowned? Yes I did, and it inspired me to write a movie about a gorilla!"

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#38 Nov 13 2014 at 2:31 PM Rating: Good

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

lolgaxe wrote:

gbaji wrote:

Just in case it wasn't clear.

You not knowing the song was clear from the start. Case in point:

gbaji wrote:

The song assumes that serving in the military is something that one must try to avoid.

Not in English it doesn't.

Yes, it does. WTF? It's amazing to me how easily people fall in line when their talking heads tell them to take a position. it's become a political "thing" to attack people who took offense, so suddenly a song that has been well understood to be anti-war and anti-military service is declared to not be those things, and anyone who claims otherwise can't read lyrics? Really? I usually roll my eyes when conservative's use the term sheeple, but holy hell you guys are meeting that description.

It's an anti-war song. It has always been an anti-war song. Only in the last few days has it suddenly become necessary to defend Springsteen, so now it's not? That's freaking insane.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

#39 Nov 13 2014 at 2:32 PM Rating: Decent

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

gbaji wrote:

It's amazing to me how easily people fall in line when their talking heads tell them to take a position.

Oh the ironing.

So does accusing people of what you're doing work at distracting them from your own behavior work anywhere, or are you just not any good at it?

Edited, Nov 13th 2014 3:34pm by lolgaxe

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#40 Nov 13 2014 at 2:37 PM Rating: Decent

Debalic

Prodigal Son

20,643 posts

gbaji wrote:

Friar Bijou wrote:

gbaji wrote:

you don't sing songs at a Veterans day concert highlighting the past faults of the military and government.

cynyck wrote:

Any 10 year old who sat down and read the words would be able to tell us the song is about people with money and power avoiding something the average joe has to endure.

Any 10 year old, yes. gbaji, no.

The point being that the military is something negative that must be endured. Which kinda doesn't tend to go over well with people who have chosen to serve in the military. Get it? Please tell me that people get this. Saying that it's not an anti-war/anti-military song is the height of situational denial.

No, the point being that the military is something *necessary* that must be endured. When your number is called you should serve, not get daddy to shift you off to some reservist resort.

They're only offended because they don't have enough conscience to feel guilty.

____________________________

publiusvarus wrote:

we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

#41 Nov 13 2014 at 2:40 PM Rating: Good

Elinda

Skelly Poker Since 2008

16,781 posts

gbaji wrote:

Yes, it does. WTF? It's amazing to me how easily people fall in line when their talking heads tell them to take a position.

Who's the talking head?

____________________________

Alma wrote:

I lost my post

#42 Nov 13 2014 at 2:42 PM Rating: Decent

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

Muslims are bad! God says gays can't have cake! Guns for all! There's a war on Christmas!

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#43 Nov 13 2014 at 2:43 PM Rating: Decent

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Jophiel wrote:

gbaji wrote:

The song assumes that serving in the military is something that one must try to avoid.

Not really. It's speaking about the inequity of some people avoiding it and putting the burden on others.

Yes. Burden. And a burden he specifically says he does not want. That's what the line "I ain't no military son" means. He does not believe in serving his country (admittedly in the context of the Vietnam war), and he does not like that he's being told he must by people who themselves have the power and connections to avoid responsibility.

If it were not for that third stanza, you'd have a point. If he wrote a line saying something about how he'll willingly do his part ("I *am* a military son"?), despite others shirking their duty, it would be about true service and patriotism in contrast to phony patriotism. But that's not the song he wrote. Pretending otherwise after the fact by ignoring lyrics, and more importantly ignoring decades of the songs meaning to those who heard it, is ridiculous.

Quote:

Likewise, the song isn't an attack against the notion of taxation but rather the idea that the wealthy would shirk paying their taxes.

Yes. But you'll note he didn't write a line about "I'm not a taxpayer's son". Had he done so, we would interpret the song to be anti-tax. But he didn't. He wrote about not being a military son. Hence, why the song is universally (until the last couple days) understood to be anti-military service.

Edited, Nov 13th 2014 12:44pm by gbaji

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

#44 Nov 13 2014 at 2:43 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

The "anti-military" aspect of it wasn't "The army is evil!" but rather "WTF is with these rich guys sending us out into this jungle while they and their kids stay home"?

With the lack of a draft these days that's not quite the same message.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#45 Nov 13 2014 at 2:44 PM Rating: Good

Jophiel

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

gbaji wrote:

Hence, why the song is universally (until the last couple days) understood to be anti-military service.

Ok, sure.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#46 Nov 13 2014 at 2:46 PM Rating: Decent

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

gbaji wrote:

Hence, why the song is ~~universally~~ suddenly (until the last couple days) understood to be anti-military service.

Fixed that for you, little sheepy.

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#47 Nov 13 2014 at 2:47 PM Rating: Good

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Elinda wrote:

gbaji wrote:

Yes, it does. WTF? It's amazing to me how easily people fall in line when their talking heads tell them to take a position.

Who's the talking head?

All the liberal media types who leaped to Springsteen's defense and basically invented the idea that the song wasn't anti-war and anti-military over the course of like one day. What's bizarre is how many people just bought it and now believe it's always been that way. Not just believe it, but actually are positive that anyone who thinks otherwise can't understand the lyrics of the song. Which is strange because the song has been used as an anti-war anti-military song for decades.

It's kinda scary how easily people are being manipulated by this.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

#48 Nov 13 2014 at 2:48 PM Rating: Good

Jophiel

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

gbaji wrote:

It's kinda scary how easily people are being manipulated by this.

It's also scary how easily people can be manipulated into using ham-fisted phrases like this to try and shame people into thinking their way Smiley: laugh

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#49 Nov 13 2014 at 2:49 PM Rating: Good

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

gbaji wrote:

It's kinda scary how easily people are being manipulated by this.

Not really, you were manipulated by a coke commercial.

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#50 Nov 13 2014 at 2:51 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

And a car commercial!

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#51 Nov 13 2014 at 2:52 PM Rating: Good

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

The song has been used at anti-war rallies for decades people WTF?

Whether you believe it's against the people who serve, or those who send them to serve, it's still incredibly inappropriate to sing at a veterans day celebration. How about instead of re-writing history in order to defend Springsteen, we just acknowledge that his song selection was in bad taste and move on? Is that really so hard to do? People in his audience were offended. Instead of ridiculing them for this and insisting that they are wrong to be offended, maybe we should just respect that they were, in fact, offended. What arrogance to do otherwise.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please