"USA" is where we live. In this case, it's just the name of our country mowed in some grass, that's all. If a soccer team in England painted the Union Jack in the center of the field, would that automatically be "jingoism" in support of the war? If a French team mowed "Vive La France" in a field, would that be an anti-war statement? How do you compare these things to a popular singer putting the image of our president's head on a microphone stand, in an allusion to the ancient practice putting the enemy's head on spike, and then bashing in into the ground and stomping on it?

[ April 03, 2003, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: maxallen ]

I think Pearl Jam just want some attention.Therefore, they have jumped on the anti-Bush bandwagon. It must be hard being a washed up Seattle rock group who hasn't had a megahit in years. It must be hard standing on the sidelines while rock bands such as Creed get all the attention. Pearl Jam, what a pack of losers.

[ April 03, 2003, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: davidbeck ]

davidbeck seems to be the kind of loser who can't even read above that Vedder was anti-W before he was "elected"... I'm sure Pearl Jam doesn't need a "megahit" at the cost of being a lame Christer band like Creed that stole PJ's lugubrious sound.

[quote]maxallen:
[QUOTE]If a soccer team in England painted the Union Jack in the center of the field, would that automatically be \"jingoism\" in support of the war?[/quote]At this time, yeah. If they were \"leading\" a phony \"coalition\" in a veiled power grab.

[quote] [QUOTE] How do you compare these things to a popular singer putting the image of our president's head on a microphone stand...? [/quote]Because people watching Angels games will be looking at that supremacist, defensive "USA" all season long...

See db above, Vedder's not "popular" (by #1 hit, "platinum" standards that people who don't actually like music apply). Of course, Dub was only chosen by an electorate of 9... Your president, not EV's or mine.

I also have no idea why this story is "news" to anyone but that closeted shill Drudge... I walked out of a gay country karaoke night in D.C. when someone sang that Toby Keith jingo-garbage hit, and no one wrote it up! :confused:

[ April 04, 2003, 07:05 AM: Message edited by: Bill W ]

People dont go to a PJ concert to hear their political views... People are sick of the "hollywood" elite throwing out their political views when their job is to entertain.

Why do you think Madonna wont release that video she made? Not even her would be able to fight of the flack she is going to get over that video.

I think it's quite humorous when these people from hollywood speak out of their views and people get fed up and leave... If most of hollywood is so liberal, so against war... why do they put out sooooo many violent movies? please see my new movie where i kill 10,000 bad guys, but war is bad...

1. Bill W., I don't agree much at all with your choices aesthetically, but man do I love how you use words like a scalpel. Bravissimo!

2. Count this longtime Angels fan as disgusted by the carving of USA in to the turf at The Ed. Given the Angels history with acquiring guys and keeping them because they were white and God-squadders, it barely caused a raised eyebrow on me. And I'd love to hear some right-wingers whine about their precious tax dollars being wasted on those pathetic fly-overs. PhillyFan, you up for it?

3. The right-wing corporate media is going to have to do better than the Pearl Jam story to provide feel-good stories about people supporting "our boys". From the excellent Tom Tomorrow site:
What a total non-story. And I love the line "most were audibly supporting our troops through puking and/or stumbling". Hee! Ah, rock concerts, those hotbeds of intellectualism.

And funny how the standing ovation in Okiehoma City didn't make the papers.

Re: Hollywood making violent movies while being anti-war:

I'd argue PhillyFan that the ONLY thing Hollywood cares about is $$$$. If aliens altered our brain waves and suddenly, say, f**king dogs while shooting heroin suddenly became all the rage, you'd see 10 movies about f**king dogs etc. within 6 months. It says more about our crass, debased culture that Vin Diesel actually gets paid--real money!--to make movies than anything.

[ April 04, 2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: Jim Allen ]

I will have to search the web at home to rebute your claims... and allow my allergy medice to run its course.... however... 2 words come to mind with artists who shoot their mouths off.. dixi chics.

Since you're from KC, I understand you not being informed at all about the cultural aspects of English football--it is Kansas City after all--but the short answer to that is: mostly likely, yes, that would be seen as a jingoistic display of pro-war sentiment.

First off, despite a spike in support once the shooting started (which softens the longer the war goes on), the war is unpopular in England; Blair is widely despised as "Bush's poodle" and if the Tories had any credible candidate to challenge him, he'd be gone at the next election.

England is one of the most xenophobic places you'll ever find and the use of symbols have powerful meaning there. For just one example, the English national team is not dressed in the colours of the Union Jack (which is a combination of the English Cross of St. George flag and the Scottish flag) but in the colors of the Cross of St. George, red and white. In the last 10 years or so, fans travelling for international matches have increasingly brought along the flag of the Cross of St. George (a red cross on a white background) instead of the Union Jack because of the UJ's connection with Scotland.

When you've heard 80,000 English fans chanting "Two World Wars, One World Cup" to taunt German supporters or a lusty rendtion of No Surrender

Give me St George in my heart, keep me English
Give me St George in my heart, I say
Give me St George in my heart, keep me English
Keep me English to my dying day
No surrender
No surrender
No surrender to the IRA scum

it becomes clear that that there's a ton of social/class-related baggage involved. I mean, a simple thing like what team you choose to support can pigeonhole you in a way that makes the stereotyping of Philadelphia fans seem like childs play. You support Leeds United? Obviously you're a racist thug who beats the crap out of Asians; Manchester United? You're a glory seeker who's probably never been anywhere near Manchester and so on.

And in my 23 years of watching English football, I've never once seen anything painted on to a football pitch; it isn't America where they put the team logo, the NFL logo and (during college bowl games) corporate logos on the field.

Poor choice of an example to make your point there, Maxallen.

[ April 04, 2003, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: Jim Allen ]

And just so this is clear, the "poodle" part is a French slur, since the British have long despised the French (with whom they share bloodlines), for many reasons, not least the endless series of wars that occurred between the two nations from the medieval to the Victorian eras. "Poodle" (like frog) has strong French associations. Americans, less concerned with the type of dog, would feminize it, making Tony Blair our/W.'s "b_____"...

[ April 05, 2003, 08:58 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Well.....I guess someone here knows his international soccer!! eek! eek!

A soccer game isnt good unless some fan is run over by the crowd, or someone dies...