Courtesy of Bruce comes a link to this blog post on CMT with John Mellencamp in which he describes his disdain for the current freedom of speech we enjoy. Go give Bruce's post a read as he captures the fecal gem that falls from Mellencamp's mouth.
I felt the need to reply on the original posting and I'm posting it here as well. Here it is my thought on the matter...
John Mellencamp doesn't "think people fought and gave their lives so that some guy can sit in his bedroom and be mean.". Furthermore, he describes freedom of speech as "Freedom of speech is really about assembly for us to collectively have an idea. We want to get our point of view out so we can assemble and I can appoint you to be the spokesman. That’s freedom of speech to be able to collectively speak for a sector of people. But somehow it’s turned into ‘I can be an asshole whenever I feel like, say whatever I like, be disrespectful to people and not be courteous.’ It’s not good for our society. Not being courteous is not really freedom of speech.".
You don't think people gave their lives to protect the freedom to say mean things, eh?
That's going to come as quite a shock to the Founding Fathers. You see, it seems they did the whole collective thing too. They had a collective idea. But it required them to say some really mean, and I do emphasize "mean", things about King George III. They accused him of all kinds of terrible things like levying horrible taxes, not listening to their numerous and collective attempts at sending spokesmen to discuss their grievances as a sector of people, about how they were unhappy with the idea of soldiers living in their houses and so on.
Finally, they had had enough of this, sat down and wrote a very long document called the "Declaration of Independence" that described in lengthy and very mean detail all the things that King George III had done and that they just weren't going to accept any more.
In this document, they wrote down their collective ideas while sitting in a small bedroom and, in eloquent 18th Century terms, did call King George III an "asshole" many times over. It was very disrespectful of the King. You don't say and talk about a King in that way. It was not gentlemanly or polite at all.
And when they were done, they signed it as a collective group and contrary to your belief, did fight and gave their lives to sit in that room and be mean by ending their discourteous rant against the King by stating "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.".
So what do you think? Was it appropriate or wasn't the Founders sacrifice enough for you?
By the way, the freedom of assembly is only ONE of the five items specifically covered by the 1st Amendment. Assembly is useless without the freedom to speak at the same time. There are many countries that will punish the mere attempt to assemble very seriously before one mean word ever leaves the mouths of the people attempting it.
So have a little respect for the asshole in the bedroom because you just might need him someday.
I felt the need to reply on the original posting and I'm posting it here as well. Here it is my thought on the matter...
John Mellencamp doesn't "think people fought and gave their lives so that some guy can sit in his bedroom and be mean.". Furthermore, he describes freedom of speech as "Freedom of speech is really about assembly for us to collectively have an idea. We want to get our point of view out so we can assemble and I can appoint you to be the spokesman. That’s freedom of speech to be able to collectively speak for a sector of people. But somehow it’s turned into ‘I can be an asshole whenever I feel like, say whatever I like, be disrespectful to people and not be courteous.’ It’s not good for our society. Not being courteous is not really freedom of speech.".
You don't think people gave their lives to protect the freedom to say mean things, eh?
That's going to come as quite a shock to the Founding Fathers. You see, it seems they did the whole collective thing too. They had a collective idea. But it required them to say some really mean, and I do emphasize "mean", things about King George III. They accused him of all kinds of terrible things like levying horrible taxes, not listening to their numerous and collective attempts at sending spokesmen to discuss their grievances as a sector of people, about how they were unhappy with the idea of soldiers living in their houses and so on.
Finally, they had had enough of this, sat down and wrote a very long document called the "Declaration of Independence" that described in lengthy and very mean detail all the things that King George III had done and that they just weren't going to accept any more.
In this document, they wrote down their collective ideas while sitting in a small bedroom and, in eloquent 18th Century terms, did call King George III an "asshole" many times over. It was very disrespectful of the King. You don't say and talk about a King in that way. It was not gentlemanly or polite at all.
And when they were done, they signed it as a collective group and contrary to your belief, did fight and gave their lives to sit in that room and be mean by ending their discourteous rant against the King by stating "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.".
So what do you think? Was it appropriate or wasn't the Founders sacrifice enough for you?
By the way, the freedom of assembly is only ONE of the five items specifically covered by the 1st Amendment. Assembly is useless without the freedom to speak at the same time. There are many countries that will punish the mere attempt to assemble very seriously before one mean word ever leaves the mouths of the people attempting it.
So have a little respect for the asshole in the bedroom because you just might need him someday.
3 comments:
Well, his first few albums were his best. He went downhill after dropping the 'Cougar' from his name. I can see his point about the online community in general, but his reaction to it is idiotic.
Yep, I agree, and I don't think people fought and died so people who used to have "Cougar" as a last name and then a middle name could go shooting their mouths off wherever and whenever they pleased, saying stupid things. Too many people died for him to be allowed to say stupid things, alls I'm saying.
JCM STFU!
Who gave THAT guy permission to state his opinion that free speech is a collective right? Someone should muzzle that celebrity, keep him from spouting off and being a bedroom-azzhole.
Post a Comment