Bruce Springsteen: One-Hundred Percent Republican
by Evan SayetThe “culture war” that we hear so much about is, to borrow Thomas Sowell’s phrase, a “conflict of visions.” Visions, Sowell explains, go deeper than mere policy – in fact they are the font of where we stand on the issues – and they are founded on some of the most basic and fundamental beliefs the individual holds about the nature of man and, in turn, the role and purpose of government, family, religion and all other influential forces that society has evolved. Sowell called the conflicting visions the “Constrained” and the “Unconstrained” and offered Jean Jacques Rousseau and Adam Smith as primary examples of the visions in conflict. More contemporary examples are John Lennon and Bruce Springsteen, the former holding the “unconstrained” vision (which I call here the Neo-Liberal view), the latter the “constrained,” or, in my term, Conservative take. Just to be clear, yes, I’m saying that, while Springsteen the multimillionaire, rock star with the mansion in Beverly Hills may be a Liberal, Bruce Springsteen the poet is one-hundred percent Republican.
Sowell recognizes that, at its most basic level, this conflict of visions revolves around what one believes to be man’s innate nature. Is it, as the Neo-Liberal believes, that man is born good and then corrupted by the institutions of society or, do the Conservatives have it right and man is born with a dual and conflicting nature — capable of good and evil and everything in between — requiring cultural forces to help him tamp down the darker side and cultivate the good within?
Lennon’s iconic anthem “Imagine” could not be a better representation of the Neo-Liberal vision. Since the Neo-Liberal believe that man is born good, the way to create a good society – in fact, a utopia – is to remove all forces that hinder him from doing what he wants to do, when he wants to do it. A heaven on earth is to be found merely by following the early Neo-Liberal mantra, “If it feels good, do it,” for, being innately good, ones feelings – and not moral codes or civic responsibilities, loyalties to others or such pedestrian concerns as the need to make a living – will see the Neo-Liberal do what is good.
Springsteen, on the other hand, holds the diametrically opposed – Conservative – vision of man’s nature:
“Two faces have I. One that laughs, one that cries. One says ‘hello,’ one says ‘goodbye.’ One says things I don’t understand. Makes me feel like half a man.”
Since Springsteen recognizes that his feelings are conflicted, far from seeking the destruction of the civilizing forces, these are the things he specifically turns to for guidance:
“At night I get down on my knees and pray, I want to make that other man go away…”
For this reason, where the Neo-Liberal Lennon espouses the end of all religions, few contemporary artists so fully infuse their work with faith and works. Fairly early in Springsteen’s career, in the song “Badlands,” the Conservative poet takes a moment to contemplate what will bring him happiness in life. He then runs through the usual possibilities, from losing oneself in his work to the accruing of fabulous riches, only to decide in the end that is “Faith that can save me.” Unlike the Neo-Liberal Lennon who indiscriminately rejects all religions without regard to what they practice or preach, then, Springsteen is undeniably a Catholic – his characters never happier and more fulfilled than when they are practicing the Judeo-Christian heritage and their Christian faith and never more pathetic than when they are without it. In fact, Springsteen has often been compared to a preacher and called a “liturgist,” the release of his album, Tunnel of Love described by Father Andrew Greeley, writing in America – The National Catholic Weekly, as “Perhaps a more important Catholic event in America than the visit of Pope John Paul II!”
Neither does Springsteen share with the Neo-Liberal the belief that national identity is a force for evil. Springsteen sees the constraints of the Constitution as good, right and essential:
“See that flag flying over the courthouse? It says certain things are set in stone. Who we are, what we’ll do and what we won’t.”
The combination of Catholic imagery and American iconography stand in stark contrast to the Neo-Liberal Lennon whose Utopian dreams require the dismantling of these things – of all codes and creeds beyond doing what feels good at any moment – the things Sowell calls “constraints.”
Since the Neo-Liberal believes that man is born perfect, the notion of self-improvement is seen by him as an oxymoron. After all, what can improve upon perfection? In the Neo-Liberal world, then, the individual is never wrong and society is to blame for all outcomes short of utopia. For this reason, Lennon’s song – like the policies of the Neo-Liberals in government — offers no suggestions as to how the individual might better himself and, in turn, better the outcome for himself and the world around him. Imagine offers no criticism of the individual, taking only society – from top to bottom – to task. If only the whole world would change, then, utopia will be achieved both in song and in the world.
Springsteen shares both the Conservatives recognition that we are living in the real world, and the belief that bettering ourselves is the very purpose of life. Neither Springsteen nor others who share the Conservative point-of-view, denies the vicissitudes of real life nor pretend that they are always fair and just, just that they are and, more importantly, that individual choices can make all the difference. For this reason, while Lennon’s opus requires nothing of the individual (except a flight of fancy in the “imagination”), Springsteen’s body-of-work reads like a “How to” on personal behavior. In fact, Springsteen repeatedly rails against believing in the fantastic for the lethargy and wasted time such flights of the imagination ensure. It’s not that Springsteen – and all other Conservatives — don’t have dreams. It’s that they are dreams to be acted upon in the real world:
“I was living in the world of childish dreams. Someday those childish dreams must end. To become a man and learn to dream again…”
For this reason, Springsteen implores “Mary” to “Trade in these wings on some wheels.” After all, wings may fly you quickly and safely over all of the bumps and potholes on the road…but they don’t exist! Wheels – cars – on the other hand, do exist and are the only way to achieve the dream of finding something of value somewhere further down the road.
Time and again Springsteen makes clear to his love that he’s no “Hero,” does not possess the God-like ability to bestow “redemption” and that he’s not “Prince Charming” whose single kiss will bring about a Utopian existence. It is the individual who must take action and, in doing so, better himself, his lot in life and society as a whole. In “If I Should Fall Behind,” Springsteen addresses the vicissitudes of life…
“Everyone dreams of, a love lasting and true. But you and I both know what this world can do…”
…and then offers concrete actions to be taken to overcome the obstacles of the real world and to make that dream come true:
“…So let’s make our steps clear, so the other may see. And I’ll wait for you, and if I should fall behind, wait for me.”
This concrete step is impossible to the Neo-Liberal for, as Sowell recognizes, loyalty –and all other bonds that are “intertemporal” such as patriotism, marital fidelity, constitutions, etc. – are “constraints” upon doing what one feels at any given moment. Neo-Liberalism is, to use Lee Harris’ phrase, a “Carpe diem” philosophy, the hallmark of which, Harris rightly recognizes, is “A complete lack of interest in (one’s) own historical and cultural foundation, and…relative indifference to the future.” Loyalty requires one to make a choice today based on something done in the past. Patriotism requires one to do what doesn’t feel good for the benefit of something bigger and more important. To those who share Lennon’s belief that utopia is a place where “All the people are living for today,” waiting for someone who has fallen behind is a intolerable and dying for something bigger than themselves an unfathomable choice.
Springsteen does not “live for today,” but rather shares the Conservatives’ belief that our lives have greater meaning and that goodness and happiness is to be found in the transcendent. Unlike the Neo-Liberal, he does not see himself as the be-all and the end-all of everything, his every emotion, de facto, good. Instead Springsteen recognizes himself to be part of the on-going pageant of humanity, with debts owed to and lessons to be learned from those who came before us, and promises – and the joy to be found in the keeping of those promises –made to those who come next. Again, the transcendent is a concept that is wholly unknown to the Neo-Liberal who, living for today, can value nothing more other than self and moment.
Thus, in “Walk Like A Man,” a song about the death of his father, Springsteen does what he can on behalf of his father – he takes up the mantle of the adult and takes his place as an adult. In “Living Proof,” a song about the birth of his own son, Springsteen had previously seen the world – as so many Neo-Liberals do – as a place that’s “So dark and dirty, so fouled and confused” and finds proof of God’s mercy in the gift that Barack Obama had only recently called a “punishment” – the birth of a baby.
One last constraint the Neo-Liberal finds intolerable must not go unmentioned and that is the concept of merit. In the Neo-Liberal world, merit must be fully divorced from reward as becoming expert – or merely proficient – requires hours, days, months or even years of practicing for a pay-off that cannot possibly come soon enough for those who are “Living for today.” As Sowell recognizes, costs – including effort – are constraints upon the ability to act as one feels. The purpose of Neo-Liberal policy, then, isn’t to encourage as many people as possible to become expert, but to deny the expert addition rewards for their efforts. In the world of politics this is known as the “Nanny State,” while in Lennon’s utopia the hardworking and the slothful, the expert and the incompetent, the chaste and the promiscuous simple “share all the world” equally.
Springsteen whole-heartedly believes in the concept of merit — and is more than willing to “pay the price” for the things he wants. In “Thunder Road” he makes clear that he not only “Got this guitar,” but that he put in the years needed to nothing less than “Learn how to make it talk.” In “Local Hero,” Springsteen may acknowledge the luck involved in attaining success:
“…And if you turn the right cards up, they’ll make you ‘Boss,’ the devil pays off…”
But also makes clear that his luck is the residue not only of design but of effort:
“I learned my job, I learned it well. Fit myself with religion and a story to tell.”
It is hard to believe that Springsteen believes that Bill Horton, who worked so hard to make himself a better man, and who built his wife a home with his own hands, should be forced to share that home with vagrants and bums and the hippy-dippy weatherman. Springsteen is – like most Conservatives (and unlike most Liberals) extremely charitable. He wishes to take others with him on his road to success, but, as he says to Mary in “Thunder Road,” “the door’s open but the ride it ain’t free.”
In the end, Neo-Liberalism is about permanently infantilizing the populace. The “thinking” is that, since children are born good, then the way to have a society of good adults is to keep the population eternally infantile.
Springsteen, however, does not dream of – to borrow a phrase from another iconic musical group of the Neo-Liberal Era, The Beach Boys – Endless Summer of non-stop play. Nor does he seek, in John Cougar Mellencamp’s words, to “Hold on to sixteen as long as you can.” Instead Springsteen relishes the life of the adult with all its rules and constraints, duties and obligations – for they are both the challenges and the significance of life. In fact, Springsteen repeatedly rails against those who seek “The carnival life forever.” In “Fourth of July, Asbury Park (Sandy),” Springsteen enumerates the instant pleasures that are so appealing to the permanent children of the boardwalk from pinball machines to a parade of casual sex partners and declares:
“And me? Well I just got tired of hanging in them dusty arcades, banging them pleasure machines.”
Soon Springsteen takes off down the “Thunder Road,” of life not with the child’s wings, but with the man’s wheels, not seeking the instant pleasure of sex, but looking for love – a love that comes with the condition that he merit it – his dreams to be worked for and ultimately realized, not merely imagined. Yes, Bruce Springsteen the multimillionaire, rock star, ensconced in his palatial mansion high in the hills of Beverly may now consider himself a Neo-Liberal (“A life of leisure and a pirates treasure” can do that to a man) but Bruce Springsteen the poet — the philosopher – is the epitome of the Conservative vision.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
107 Comments
Even though I have the highest respect for Mr. Sayet, I won’t be watching comrade Springsteen when he defiles the Super Bowl.
Any bets on the style of Kuffiyah he will be sporting?
I know as a Springsteen fan you must wane for him to be conservative, but it won’t work. Even if you somehow (?) manage to work in Thomas Sowell’s name you cannot make Mr. Springsteen a conservative anything, much less a poet. You derive your explanation from a simple fact; that he acknowledges things greater than himself,i.e. God and country, which while exceptional among liberals is not a sole arbitor.
He is doing concerts to promote a socialist. He has his, get yours is the outlook from most celebs. I do not see the conservative vision and you are blinded by a college wonderment of the BOSS, that has since dimenished for most of us.
Part of being a conservative is attempting to live what you believe, though all of us fall short, he makes no attempt.
Springsteen is a quintessential liberal; narcissistic and so self-important.
Awesome! Evan, I’m so glad to see that you’ll be blogging here!
One of the arguments I have with Conservatives is that Liberals want the same things. We are all basically the same even though some of our principle beliefs are different as how to achieve what we want. Unwittingly, you have proven my point. Springsteen is a Liberal through and through. And defending his ideals [or the ideals of his lyrics] as being ‘Conservative’ just proves to me that we are all basically the same. Yes, a liberal believes in your principles too.
That said I think you need to study more lyrics by John Lennon. You only mention his one song ‘Imagine’ while you cite numerous Springsteen songs; But only the ones that prove your point. ‘Imagine’ is a song that wants us to imagine what could be – not what is and not what will ever be. John had a good grasp on reality. Listen to his John Lennon / Plastic Ono band album from 1970. He tells it straight defying all gods human or otherwise. He did not believe man was born great. But he wanted us to imagine we could be.
Who cares about Republicans? We’ve been burned too many times by RINO’s and Republican quid pro quo Pols.
What I’m on the look-out for are Conservatives; a much more refined and loyal breed of American.
The “Boss”, “Ain’t no Conservative”, and past performance proves he’s hardly a republican-
Nicely written. But also emblematic of the problems involved in trying to turn everything into a pep rally for your chose ideology. It sorta takes the life out of the thing you examine, the magic too. Yes, you can distort the music in order to better own it. But to what end? It shouldn’t matter one way or the other if Springsteen is a Liberal or a Conservative, and yet you have, and will have, commenters here who would sacrifice their ability to enjoy the music at the altar of the political beliefs. It’s yet another subset, many of which are on display here, of the larger notion that animates far too much of this site. That political disagreements are not just that, but the basis for a kind of holy war.
That’s the jihadi way. And one I reject.
Mr. Sayet makes a solid argument, but really it just highlights the hypocrisy of Bruce Springsteen. His poetry may wax the conservative light, but merit is judged by action and his actions are hardly in line with his flights of conservative fancy.
So this means he’s still confused about who he is. Sounds like a personality disorder. He does belong in BH.
Delete my comments, but we all know Obama ”Wasnt Born in the USA”.
The Moderators are cowards, racists, hypocrites and supressors!
Huh?
I really like and respect Evan Sayet. But his knowledge of Catholicism is lacking. Thomas Sowell, in “The Vision of the Anointed” describes conservatives as holding a “tragic vision”, of mankind in which our flawed natures are recognized.. Thousands of years of human experience have produced laws, which liberals want to discard.
If Bruce Springsteen is a Republican, I am a Polar Bear.
Maybe Bruce is like David Mamet, just not out of the liberal closet yet.
“[Left-leaning Hollywood personalities] are uninteresting, they’re vicious, they’re vitriolic, they’re really, really not good people. I’m willing to say that on the record. You could probe them scientifically and anthropologically and prove that they’re not good people….[The Hollywood left] is a stale group of people who are recycling the same old bad ideas that don’t work. Why else would those people go to the stinky side?”
—Meet Andrew Breitbart, self-proclaimed rebel-king of L.A.’s underground conservative movement (interview), 2008[1]
But Mr. Breitbart and his contributors are not biased, prejudiced, or in any way prone to prejudgement, are they? Nawwww ….
I would agree that a lot of Springsteen kinda-sorta puts forth an instinctively conservative viewpoint. But that is a lot different from Republican or Democratic. But if you’re just talking about lowercase-c conservatism, I think Springsteen reflects American society’s modest lean towards conservatism.
One of the arguments I have with Conservatives is that Liberals want the same things. We are all basically the same even though some of our principle beliefs are different as how to achieve what we want.
_____________________________________________-
You know Moddm I hear you say that and the bile in my stomach along with my dinner starts racing to be thrown back up. Why you ask?
First off you don’t want what I want. You want Universal Health care, I don’t. I have proof as having seen from the inside as a patient the US Health Care system at its best that we do not need nor have we ever needed universal health care.
Second: We want to finish the job in Iraq. There were goals set and they are being met. These goals have been hindered by people like you time and time again. Lies told about our President, downright disgusting libels and slanders against our military and our own country by the left in this country. You don’t want the same things. You don’t care about our military, or even if the US has been safe for 7 years because we went on the offensive. You want us to be in a defensive croutch perpetually. Ask any military man who has studied and been to war what he thinks of that brilliant strategy. I can tell you what they would say, the best defense is a good offense. You don’t think 9-11 was a declaration of war on our civilization. Well we know it was. We are going to win it. Whether you like it or not.
Thirdly: You believe in that sillieness called Global Climate change. Where to begin. We do not. Never have, never will. Why? Algore’s Academy Award winning power point presentation in no way reflects actual science. Its a heck of a propaganda film but its not science. We do know its a political issue to beat people over the heads with and usher in the democrats dream of socialism.
Now just in those three issues you know we don’t have anything in common. In my world the sky is blue. I don’t know what color the sky is with yours but its not the same as in mine and that is a fact. So stop the patronizing.
Evan great piece. I read it and after reading the bits of poetry and lyrics coming out I find it fascinating that the same man who follows Obama around could have written those words. One wonders if Springsteen understands himself completely. I also sense a lot of hypocrisy in his words.
Mr. Springsteen has no respect for the nation from whose teat he suckles. His song “Born in the USA” expressed his trials and hard times after returning from Vietnam. This from a man who has never served his country for a “nano-second”. I can also add, from personal experience, that I have never known him to perform at a USO show, or any other venue for military personnel. This type of unappreciative conduct coming from a man who undoubtedly cherishes his rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution just pisses me off to no end! In other word, as far as I’m concerned, he’s just another elitist free loading bum! He is one of those who believe they are “owed” protection by this country because they were simply born here. An attitude that, in the near future, will undoubtedly prove to be a terrible mistake.
Piss on him and everyone like him!
Hoipolloi’s got it right. Springsteen holds the basic American values closely, and it’s reflected in his music. The lie is in the suggestion that only one half of the political spectrum holds or honors those same values. That’s the disconnect, isn’t it? How long can one side of the aisle — either, I don’t care which — pretend they and they alone understand what it means to be an American?
Evan persuaded me to take another look at Springsteen’s poetry, if not the artist. Celebrities who use their celebrityhood to tell the rest of us how to think (and vote) have earned our contempt. If there is a conservative poet trapped in the Boss’s bod, then let’s out him here and now.
Wow, that was deep. Your right on!. But! Until he starts living his life according to his lyrics, he’s nothing but just another Bush bashing anti-conservative freak liberal. Though I LOVE his music. And he makes it really hard sometimes to continue to listen. I’m just so conflicted. Every time he opens his mouth, I lose yet another string on the rope that keeps me hanging on. Who knows, someday he may have an epiphany and come home to the true ideal. There is always “Hope and Change”, haaaaaahaaaaa! Just kidding.
So someone has the nerve to suggest that we all want the same things. The things, given this post, that Springsteen often sings about. And Stephanie’s reaction is ‘the bile in my stomach along with my dinner starts racing to be thrown back up.’
God, what a psychopath. At what point in one’s life does hatred become the animating principle?
You got it right – sorta. Let’s take the album “Born in the USA” as an example.
If a Liberal listens to “Born in the USA,” he or she will hear all about the factory shutting down, the jobs leaving, the unjust Vietnam War, racism in small town USA (My Hometown), the unfairness of growing old without achieving his goals of athletic stardom, etc. The message is “Life is SO unfair.”
A Conservative listening to the same album is going to hear about a guy who served his country, faced tough times when he got home, yet never lost his love for his country or family (Born in the USA). He will hear about overcoming obstacles and overcoming hard economic times (several songs) and the bond between a father and a son (My Hometown). He will hear lyrics about reminiscing about the good times with old friends (Glory Days).
Springsteen may be a socialist-leaning liberal, but he writes songs about the human experience and he does it so well that Liberals and Conservatives can take it different ways… Just like they interpret the human experience differently. Just look at how the Reagan campaign interpreted the song “Born in the USA.”
Personally, I can’t listen to that album and feel anything but uplifted. The album exudes conservative values, whether Bruce realizes it or not.
I wrote something similar – when I was in high school. I guess it is perfect for the intellect of many of your readers judging from the absolute perversion of grammar in many responses.
I am glad I stopped by so I know to never return. Complete waste of time.
Compelling and provocative look at Springsteen. Indeed his Catholic roots often emerge in his lyrics. Yet, like many Christians a dichotomy seems to exist between his conservative religious core and his sociopolitical beliefs. Lennon grew up a few years subsequent to his writing “Imagine.” In his later years he wrote a moving balled entitled “God Bless Our Love” in which he calls on God to help his marriage endure. He also called Oral Roberts and Pat Robertson seeking prayer help and made a personal commitment to Christ.
Word is that Yoko discouraged any enduring faithfulness to that commitment.
After all is said and done I like Springsteen and find his lyrics appealing. But, I wish he would not use his concerts to draft voters.
You aren’t fooling me with this “Judeo-Christian” nonsense phrase. Judeo-Muslims have very little to do with Christians and Jews hate Christians. Look what your tax dollars support in Israel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQV9z_kt8vY
You so called conservatives sound like a bunch of rabid america haters bent on dividing the nation yet again based on your “mightier than thou” self righteous hypocricy. let it go you losers! this is one country one people. you are not the ones for God and the others the devils… you are not the bearers of religion and the others heathens. You are morons to think this way that is all!
Springspleen injects his shallow ‘faith-can-somtimes be the-answer’ lines in his songwriting soul to make his inner soul appear the conflicted, deep, the soulful thinking-man’s artist.
In reality, he is scared witless to admit that the very Judeo-Christian ethic espoused by the conservative military Republican wing of America is the ONLY thing that brings civility to this dangerous world.
But Springspleen knows if he were to go “Republican”, as this article says, the tye-dyed t-shirt anarchists who inhabit the CD-buying world would instantly write him off as a has-been geezer.
There are those of us who are conservative but still enjoy Springsteen’s
poetry/songs/talent to put into words how we feel about life or give us other ways to look at it. Politics doesn’t have to be in every single thing. We can sometimes just enjoy things for what they are. I have very strong political views- but, they are MY views- I don’t force them on anyone and I can’t be influenced by someone else’s beliefs. I am not a sheep. I simply enjoy the music and would appreciate if entertainers while making their millions would just entertain NOT try to influence.
What are you talking about?
Bruce Springsteen endorsed Obama.
Springsteen isn’t a conservative. He’s just not as liberal as Lennon was. A conservative is never “confused”.
Have you ever read a Springsteen interview? You probably should have done so before writing this laughable article. Springsteen is proudly progressive, and articulate about it. Your lack of understanding is hilarious.
Stephanie – January 9th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
First: You want Universal Health care, I don’t.
Yeah, but you want your family to be healthy and you don’t want to be stuck with having to pay thousands of dollars. Therefore we want the same thing. We just have different ways to achieve it.
Second: We want to finish the job in Iraq.
So do we. And I am pretty sure everyone can find common ground to finish the job. I don’t think anyone really wants to be there for another 10 years and I agree we should not pull out without a plan. Also we do support the military. We want them back from that particular war. But we do not hate the military. I don’t anyway. I have friends and relatives who are part of the military. Why would I hate it?
Thirdly: You believe in that sillieness called Global Climate change
I think we all care about the environment we live in. The air we breath, the water we drink, etc. Even some of the more conservative among you realizes there is something going on – even if it is cyclical and not related to man.
I find it fascinating that the same man who follows Obama around could have written those words.
Read Obama’s words and read Springsteen’s words. Both are good Americans. You just happen to disagree with some of their views. [But not all].
The bottom line is we do want what is best for your children, our family, our neighborhood and our country. If you call that patronizing then so be it. But I think we are Americans first no matter what party we belong to or political beliefs we have.
Take care.
Big Willie-judging from your post, it most likely isn’t (and that goes for your intellect too).
I do remember wondering why Springsteen didn’t play “41 shots” at the benefit show for the fire and police that were killed on 9/11.
Mr. Sayet’s analysis confines itself to Mr. Springsteen’s published lyrics, and makes no attempt to justify or vilify Bruce’s activities outside of songwriting. I think he makes some valid points. He treats John Lennon the same way- although only one song is mentioned. Surely the most irritating moonbat anthem of them all.
Bruce may be a liberal, but he got where he is today by working his ass off.
But I am very pleased to see Evan Sayet on this blog, especially since he updates his own blog not nearly often enough.
However I suspect that Alice Cooper has it right in his contention that Rock and Roll should be a place to escape from politics- and that musicians are morons anyway and not to be looked to for any practical wisdom at all.
Moddem-you sound very nice but woefully naive. A nanny state is not what is best for our children, our families, our neighborhoods, or our country. What people want and how to get it are two entirely different things.
Stephanie the intellect. Great discussion!!
And ModDem you imply you and your kind don’t hate the military but in you objections insure the politicians influence the military leaders to adopt Rules of Engagement ROE that get us killed and I am convinced that to get more of killed is the intent of some on the left. Our deaths only facilitate the publicity that HAMAS enjoys from locating its munitions and offensive sites in civilian areas. If you help kill us don’t be surprised you do not get our respect back except to defend to our death you right to say so… Your position is entirely self adulation, elevation(vagus nerve), or premature cognitive commitment because it does not support our mission. Sorry for ya…
>>I can also add, from personal experience, that I have never known him to perform at a USO show, or any other venue for military personnel.>>
As disgusted by pretty much every BDS-riddled political nonsense that emerges from his mouth, I will always give John Mellencamp credit for playing a show for the guys and gals at Walter Reed Hospital. Springsteen? Please just shut up and sing the rock and roll, brudda.
Evan, glad you’ve found a home here, my friend! Nicely done.
Wow, talk about misguided. Bruce Springsteen is yet another noxious, self-absorbed, and totally vicious left wing blow hard. Anyone that things he represents the Republican party, either in deed or spirit, is totally confused.
This essay is part of what is wrong with many Republican media types these days. They think that the best way to win people over is by showing how “with it” or multicultural they are, or by adopting the left-liberal world view.
Most Republicans I know however really want a party that actually cares about conservative values, not one that essentially adopts the left-liberal dogma that the rank and file are insufficiently enlightend.
-Ken
http://www.LaserGuidedLoogie.com
I have land that border’s mr springsteens in Colts neck NJ…And I have a chance to chat alot with Bruce and Patty…very nice people…nice famely….we never talked a hole lot about ploitics but I know for a fact he was heart broken when Sen. John Kerry failed…told me that him self….as for Obama…I think they are as happy as a pig in sh!t….and you know what…so am I
I was working as a second engineer for a recording studio in Hollywood when I recieved a phone call telling me that the studio was beng taken over by Bruce Sprinstien. On my last day, as I was leaving the studio, Bruce was just arriving. He was geting ready to record Born in the USA and he and his engineer and producer, Toby Scott and Chuck Plotkin, who were my early mentors, and I had a nice chat as we gave him a tour of the studio. He had a ton of charisma and raw intellect… I was impressed.
Later in my career in the music business I was very much involved in strategy sessions developing technology to exploit the burgeoning distribution powers of the internet. One of the jobs I had was to raise money from the BIG 5 for a series of television commercials about the moral sins of internet freeloading. I made requests from these companies to allow me to use Rock Stars as spokespersons. They said absolutely not. Their reasoning was if the Rock Star got involved an advocacy then they would alienate half of their fan base and loss record sales.
In hindsight I wish they stayed true to that principle… I think Sean Penn is a great actor but I would never go see him in a movie or try to get his autograph. He is a border line traitor in my eyes. The last good movie I saw him in was “The Game” with Michael Douglas. But what they lose in domestic sales they pick up in European sales.
I was a Democrat then and now a Conservative and still in the entertainment industry. I know a lot of musicians in Hollywood that think like a Republican and act like a screaming liberal. Then they grow up and if they become famous it is harder for them to admit their mistake for fear of losing half of their fans.
The duality of fame – inner conflict never resolved….
I would hate to be a Rock Star.
Happiness is the absence of conflict.
Good article Evan… looking forward to your book.
Ted Nugent would kick Bpruce Springsteen’s ass all over God’s green earth!
As for Bruce…just another celeb who is living off his “Glory Days” when they really should be in infomercials selling some sort of work-out program or geriatric medicincal device. No harm in that. At least its dignified. But I guess its hard for Bruce to come to grips with the fact that his booming career was made possible by the extraordinary time period of the Presidency of Ronald Reagan. Ouch.
Ya know the old saying, “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, most likely it’s a duck”. Bruce Springstein is a duck, in liberal form mind you!
I think a lot of you are missing Evan’s point entirely here.
Yes, Bruce Springsteen is a liberal. Yet when he is writing music and the poetry it contains, he taps something a little deeper, revealing that his liberalism is a mask, something that he has adopted as a kind of drug for himself. There are true liberals out there- people who deeply believe that ideology. But there are also people who are “deceived in their minds,” to reference the Bible. Evan is making a case that Springsteen is simply confused- he thinks he is something, yet his deepest thoughts, inscribed in song, reveal something else.
Very thought provoking Evan. Superb post.
Very thought provoking.
I’ve always thought that alot of “liberalized” characters, especially those of popular fame, really do have shared Conservative principles. If only they knew it.
I really hope that one day these folks learn the errors of their ways. I would be more than willing to welcome them back into the fold.
I had really hoped that when his son was born, Bruce would become a Scoutmaster presiding over pancake fundraisers rather than another Barbra Streisandish liberal grandee. I think that Hector’s comment was close to the mark. Bruce’s liberalism is “precious”, and what I mean by that is Springsteen’s conception of inspiration may lead him to identify as liberal. Artists must have a serious work ethic, but there is the also mysterious aspect of the muse. Although he is in the music industry, he identifies more with being a craftsman or artist, than as a businessman. Real artists like the Boss don’t work for THE MAN, as it were. He is someone who, like Odysseus, has struck out on his own, and had a fantastic journey. Perhaps, like in the Catcher in the Rye, he doesn’t want to be a “phony”. Even though the content of his moral scruples are conservative, he simply can’t identify with “making it”, if “making it” doesn’t involve the intensely personal quasi-religious aspect of Creation. I think if he read the Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand he would find in it an inspired artist who also happens to be conservative. But for whatever reason the Boss can’t mentally equate the “precious and self-absorbed” aspect of his muse-creation with the “cool and detatched” managerial aspect of industry. They are possibly one and the same; excepting that Bruce is mining his own private gold of inspiration, and the other is making money.
There are frauds everywhere, in art and otherwise, but the numinous aspect of artistic creation causes the artist to look at others in high places who don’t respect “Soul”, as it were, and cry, “Sell-out!”.
One final aspect is the “folk” antecedents of rock-n-roll. Blues and Rock were created by poor black people–the real opposites of worldly success and yet and yet they had SOUL riches. Rock-n-Roll artists like the Boss feel they owe a debt of gratitude to the folk, and so there the social aspects of their politics tend to be more liberal.
John Lennon was about as liberal as Reagan. He duped the masses with his pose of “utopian pot addled peace and love” and they bought it hook line and sinker. The man was literally a multimillionaire and dressed down, wrote populist songs and played the part of “common man/hippy rebel” at the same time. As much as Ozzy is a blood sucking devil worshiping demon, Springsteen is a working man’s liberal.
It sells records to people who like to ignore the obvious, and it’s a pose. Popular music is a capitalistic venture, and anyone that thinks otherwise is simply naive.
Springsteen pretty much had to grab the political bandwagon to keep selling records. His core audience is getting too old and his albums come out unnoticed these days, so the political thing was pretty much all he had left in my opinion. The election just helped him pay a few more bills and keep his dull albums in the limelight for a few more minutes.
Great piece. The author never says Springsteen is a conservative, only that his lyrics (especially early days) advocate conservative principles. Only is his later, wealthier (earned by that conservative work ethic) years has he jumped onto the Hollywood liberal bandwagon, bashing Bush and campaigning for Barack Hussein — reasons I’ll (sadly) never again buy his music or attend his concerts. The Boss may simply be using liberalism to cloak his closet conservatism.
Couple things. I find the assessment of Lennon and his believes on the mark. While I like his music, I did lose respect for the man’s morality when I learned he would’ve slept with his mother. This should make one question Neo libs morality (which is clearly questionable).
Springsteen is either ignorant or a hippocrate. He has either bought into the Kool Aid served up so well in those areas, that he can’t see which party strives towards the words he writes about, or he knows what people what to hear and gives em what they want to hear, despite what he really believes in.
Either way, I’m happy to imagine Springsteen getting upset at someone inferring he is a conservative.
The OP misuses the term “neo-liberal”. Properly, it refers to the reemergence of Classical Liberalism and laissez-faire economics. It has nothing to do with culture wars.
Springspleen occasionally plays the “faith” card because it is hip to appear conflicted ..
He plays the part of the soulful thinking-man’s artist very well.
In reality, his liberal political hero’s reject EVERYTHING that faith stands for.
I am deeply concerned about the music the GOP used in its campaign and its liberal, atheist, satanic and sometimes gay agenda. Music acts in the subconcious, and when you start listening to music, you are easily influenced by its suggestions.
You may be saying Bruce is a Repblican in reality, but his messages will corrupt our young. I think it is better our children are not exposed to liberal music. It will make the rebels when they grow up, and rebels become Democrats
Growing up, my Sunday School teacher taught us about AC/DC. This is a group with many Satanic associations. Yet the GOP made repeated use of their music during the campaign. I can’t help but thing that the liberals were behind this and this should be investigated carefully. How can we ban this from ever happening again.
Here is one example I found of this, and it pains me to see real americans fooled into dancing to this music:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cN1TCdoB238
The infestation even gets to our most revered leaders like Sarah Palin. She even named one of her kids in reference to Van Halen, another hard rock group that mocks our values.
If we don’t put a stop to this, our course will be perverted (in a non-sexual way)
Hmm, it said I posted this too fast & then didn’t show up. Just in case.
__________
I am deeply concerned about the music the GOP used in its campaign and its liberal, atheist, satanic and sometimes gay agenda. Music acts in the subconcious, and when you start listening to music, you are easily influenced by its suggestions.
You may be saying Bruce is a Repblican in reality, but his messages will corrupt our young. I think it is better our children are not exposed to liberal music. It will make the rebels when they grow up, and rebels become Democrats
Growing up, my Sunday School teacher taught us about AC/DC. This is a group with many Satanic associations. Yet the GOP made repeated use of their music during the campaign. I can’t help but thing that the liberals were behind this and this should be investigated carefully. How can we ban this from ever happening again.
Here is one example I found of this, and it pains me to see real americans fooled into dancing to this music:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cN1TCdoB238
The infestation even gets to our most revered leaders like Sarah Palin. She even named one of her kids in reference to Van Halen, another hard rock group that mocks our values.
If we don’t put a stop to this, our course will be perverted (in a non-sexual way)
OK, last attempt at posting this. Maybe this is really a liberal parody blog censoring me?
________________
I am deeply concerned about the music the GOP used in its campaign and its liberal, atheist, satanic and sometimes gay agenda. Music acts in the subconcious, and when you start listening to music, you are easily influenced by its suggestions.
You may be saying Bruce is a Repblican in reality, but his messages will corrupt our young. I think it is better our children are not exposed to liberal music. It will make the rebels when they grow up, and rebels become Democrats
Growing up, my Sunday School teacher taught us about AC/DC. This is a group with many Satanic associations. Yet the GOP made repeated use of their music during the campaign. I can’t help but thing that the liberals were behind this and this should be investigated carefully. How can we ban this from ever happening again.
Here is one example I found of this, and it pains me to see real americans fooled into dancing to this music:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cN1TCdoB238
The infestation even gets to our most revered leaders like Sarah Palin. She even named one of her kids in reference to Van Halen, another hard rock group that mocks our values.
If we don’t put a stop to this, our course will be perverted (in a non-sexual way)
“But I think we are Americans first no matter what party we belong to or political beliefs we have.”
Except for the fact that everything (news, music, movies, literature, education) in today’s pop culture revolves around hating Bush, Republicans, Conservatives, Christians, Capitalists or rather, anything which is perceived as The Other who does not fall in line with Collectivist’s political beliefs.
Yes we are all Americans, so why do the multitude of artists such as Springsteen work to enforce Collectivist enslavement upon us all?
Does not the fact that Big Hollywood had be created because Hollywood in general is such a monolithic tyranny of One Thought?
AMERICA IS A REPUBLIC FOR WHICH WE STAND, NOT AN OLIGARCHY IN WHICH ONLY A SELECTED FEW ARE ALLOWED TO STAND!!!
Hitler=Democrat
Stalin=Liberal
Springsteen=Republican
Dixie Chicks=Communists
Yea, makes perfect sense in bizzaro world.
Interesting and quite thought provoking. Thank you.
After reading your analysis Evan, I’m having the same feeling come over me when my dad told me there’s no Santa Claus. Well done
I still love many of his songs, but there’s simpy no way. A man who takes his yacht from his Rumson mansion to Shea Stadium to serenade the common folk(or Manhattan swells slumminmg really) with songs knocking hard-working cops like “41 Shots” is not conservative. You can try to dress it up any way you like, but the man’s work betrays him. “Darkness…”, “The River”, “Nebraska”, “Tom Joad”, “The Rising”-all speak of an American dream destroyed or as a false promise entirely.
Sayet nails it. Springsteen’s long time fans (pre-1984) know it.
I was given tickets to a Springsteen concert in Denver in about 2005 and was very excited. I was a fan. When he stopped playing his music and started his liberal-speech-a-fying, I was profoundly disappointed and left. I guess I expected better. I have not contributed one-cent to his bottom line since and refuse to listen to his music on the radio. I prefer my personal boycott of the radio stations to contributing to Mr. Springsteen.
I also apply the same to other entertainers that feel they need to tell me the liberal way is the only way. They are entertainers that may not have even finished high school. Where do they obtain the intelligence to preach to me? Inside there small Hollywood boxes?
Hollywood needs to wakes up!
springsteen is rich, ignorant, and vocal…..liberal to the core
This is a thought-provoking article. As a pretty much lifelong conservative I have found myself disagreeing with many musicians politics while still trying to enjoy their music. And Bruce definitely explores themes in his past work that conservatives can identify with.
In general I don’t mind if an artist uses political passion as the fuel for a song even if I don’t agree. But there is fine line between the passion motivating the art and starting to preach politics. That applies to songs and public statements. As Bruce and other artists have obviously crossed that line I do lose interest quickly. It doesn’t negate everything they have done, but it does taint it, which is sad.
I don’t run around preaching politics in my job, because that’s not what I get paid to do. I wish entertainers would realize this more often themselves.
Music used to be so much fun!!!!
Springsteen is one of the greatest American artists of his time, period. He has tapped into the American experience on a lot of levels. In the end it doesn’t matter whether his lyrics are liberal, conservative, or neo-whatever (although Sayet’s analysis is interesting intellectually, is stirkes me as meaningless in the face of the overall experience of his music). I don’t agree with his politics, but his artistry cannot be dismissed or ignored by anyone that can appreciate music. The rest of this blog and most responses (including mine) are mere self indulgence.
Sarge229:
BORN IN THE USA was written from Springsteen’s experience in Vietnam?
Huh?
— it was written ABOUT a returning veteran, a person you would call a patriot, who fought for and loved his country, and found himself despised and shut out by the society he defended. It’s an angry song.
But Ronald Reagan’s people didn’t listen past the hook before they grabbed it for their campaign theme song. For a decade after that, in concert, Springsteen took that song back, and it was something to witness.
As for never serving his country, no, he wasn’t in the military. But he quietly supports a LOT of charities from his mansion on the hill. Does that count as service, or can you ONLY serve your country in uniform?
yeah, but rock isn’t conservative and no shoebox or pigeonhole is going to make it get there. rock music’s “vision,” to borrow the term, is inherently unconstrained, utopian, and liberatory. that simple fact sinks the whole argument that Springsteen can be read as a conservative.
and you seem to throw around the neo-liberal term without much understanding of what it denotes in contemporary political discourse. neo-liberal means generally someone who supports global free-markets without regulation (yes, at the expense of the sovereignty of the nation-state) and a strict and ostensibly non-ideological meritocracy in administration and policy-making. Lennon as a neo-liberal makes very little sense.
“Collectivist enslavement”? Geesh, Syn. Where exactly do you live?
From the hankey hanging from his jean’s pocket to his self important banal lyrics,Springsteen is a phony.I love how people get all teenie bopper excited over this guy.Why would he be taken so seriously?I guess the same reason that Al Franken may be a US senator.It’s the dumbing down of this country.I also will not be watching him at halftime just as I make sure I don’t watch 30 Rock.Will it matter?No.The pendelum has swung left but give it awhile after people stop having tingly feelings going up their leg and sanity may return.I just pray that it won’t take another tragedy for people to return to reality.
Mr. Sayet, thank you for a very enlightening piece, very nicely written and engages the brain. Have actually never been a Springsteen fan, but have picked up a line or two of his lyrics from time to time and felt they were overall pretty positive. As you mention in the last paragraph of your article, Mr. Springstein probably does consider himself a neo-liberal, but the out-takes of the lyrics in your article above most certainly are of a conservative bent. The side-by-side comparison of Mr. Springsteen and Mr. Lennon is amazing. Thanks again,
Dennis Miller couldn’t even do a rant on this site.What a crock.I will be spreading the word on the politically correct moderators.This is a liberal site when all is said and done.Quit portraying yourself as something you’re not.
Nominated for most boring blog.
I’d rather listen to RATT.
Thank you for writing perhaps the stupidest bit of dreck ever written in the English language. Somebody had to do it.
>>But Ronald Reagan’s people didn’t listen past the hook before they grabbed it for their campaign theme song. For a decade after that, in concert, Springsteen took that song back, and it was something to witness.>>
Wonder when he’ll be taking it back from Melissa Etheridge after she performed it at a Democrat event last fall. Just curious.
Great work, Evan. Loved your YouTube video on the mind of a liberal.
Yes, the only confusion of your article was from describing Springsteen as a Republican.
He’s about as Republican as Howard Dean.
Oh, DJA, glad to assist: http://www.threedonia.com/archives/2142
Harley: What makes you think you are a liberal? If you believe the same thing as conservatives do, you are a conservative, not a liberal. Come on, develop some cajones and admit your true self. At heart you must be a conservative according to your own admissions.
The problem with Springsteen (and a lot of other celebrities) is that they have become so sheltered in the celebrity, away from the common man’s toils and troubles. Like, when has Springsteen last taken a bus? Seriously, they are up in that rarefied air and have no clue what it’s like to be a fellow human anymore.
If you think that Springsteen has an ounce of Republican anywhere in his marrow you need help.
Patscholar, you’re confusing political positions with basic human values. Your position on global warming isn’t a basic human value. Caring about the health of the planet is. Your position on the war in Iraq isn’t a basic human value. Demanding that our country be kept safe is.
See the difference? When Springsteen writes about the big dream and the sacrifices it takes to chase after it, when he sings about Mary dancing across the porch while the radio plays, he’s addressing basic human desires, things we all share. The need for love. The promise to protect our families at any cost. I can’t imagine why anyone would think these feelings or desires are limited to a specific political ideology.
Not everything is about politics.
Moddem:
I wish you would pass along the idea that liberals and conservatives want the same things to you liberal friends. As a conservative, the problem I have with most liberals is not so much their point of view, to which they are fully entitled. It’s that they simply do not understand conservative beliefs.
I could give you countless examples, but consider how so many liberals react to conservative dislike of affirmative action. The knee-jerk reaction is to believe it’s due to racism. From your post, I assume you do not see it that way, which is refreshing. But I can tell you from personal experience that to disagree with a liberal on something like affirmative action is to invite an accusation of bigotry or racism.
Another example is the disagreement over environtmental issues. To hear the Al Gore’s of the world tell it, you would think that conservatives actually want to foul the air and water, as if our bodily systems function differently. We simply disagree on issues such as man-made global warming. Once the left can grasp that concept, and honest debate can begin.
I do believe that one basic disagreement between conservatives and liberals is that while we desire equality of opportunity, liberals tend to desire equality of outcome. That, I believe, is at the core of the problem. But I think we all want everyone to do well in life. Pass that along to your liberal friends and ask them to practice what they preach, openmindedness.
One last thing about Springsteen. He is truly uninformed on so many issues. He likes to read that list of complaints about the Bush administration at his shows. One of his more farcical complaints is the supposed denial of habeas corpus rights.
Exactly whose habeas corpus rights have been violated? Perhaps he is referring to certain detainees down at Guantanamo Bay who are being held as a result of their alleged terrorist actions. Certainly he cannot be referring to any American citizens because I think it’s safe to say that someone from the ACLU would have filed suit on their behalf. To date, no such suit has been filed.
Therefore, he must be referring to the aforementioned Guantanamo Bay detainees. Now, the concept of habeas corpus is about 700 years old. Until 5 law school graduates on the Supreme Court decided that they would overturn almost 700 years of collective wisdom, no individual who fits the description of the Guantanamo Bay detainees has ever reserved the right to file a writ of habeas corpus.
The idea that the Bush administration denied these people their rights is nonsense. I simply do not accept the decision, as it flies in the face of precedent (see Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)), 700 years of contradictory views on the subject and common sense.
So I wonder if “The Boss” has the foggiest clue what he’s talking about on this and so many other matters. Of course, he will never give an interview to someone who will challenge him on his views because he is, I believe, wise enough to know that he will be found out. Take what this man says with a grain of salt. He may have insight into the human condition, but he is ignorant politically.
[...] and author Evan Sayet had the courage to write a piece that will surely piss off his music idol, Bruce Springsteen. [...]
<>
Curious is good. My guess is he doesn’t need to reclaim it. She probably had something called permission.
Both republicans and democrats have increased the power of the state, when Regan and others were implementing their free market neo liberal policies, they were only doing it against ‘the poor’, those who work doing everyday jobs. The rich received more welfare in the form of tax cuts and money for Research and Development. This is not a ‘leftist’ argument…it is fact based on solid data. Bush et al are the Corporate elite they create wars to fund their military industrial complex…there is no getting away from that.
As for ‘the boss’ he is part of the elite. I am not a leftist I am more attracted to the Conservative point of view and think the individual is sovereign and all social planning leads to Centralization and the growth of the State. This has been the trend throughout American history, manifest destiny is now being implemented Internationally. As for the Judeo-Christian beliefs they were closer to the Greco-Roman antecedents in truth. The Founding Fathers were slave owners and lacked ‘Christian’ morality.
“The idea that the Bush administration denied these people their rights is nonsense.”
So taking people declaring them ‘illegal combatants’ and torturing them without trial is not denying their rights?!!
If you spew such obvious nonsense as ‘a republican’, it is no wonder that you are considered crazy by the rest of the world. Bush has implemented the same policies as Stalin. Now that is irony for you. Besides all of American politics, left and right implement the Zionist vision and none of this is lost on people who investigate the people and the advisors in the US government both parties have Israeli Firsters dominating their ranks.
Robert:
I don’t know if it’s your low watt IQ or your anti-semitism that has the greater entertainment value. But let me try to explain how it works. When terrorists who do not fight under the flag of a nation, they have no constitutional rights. They never have and never should.
As for torture, that is the most overblown issue of the past 5 years. Besides, I doubt very much that you care about torture. If you did, then tell us what you were doing during the reign of Saddam Hussein. Did you speak out about the systematic torture of his people? Did you lead or join a protest against his rape rooms? Come to think of it, did you ever say a damn thing about anyone being tortured until you heard about Abu Ghraib? It’s only when the US is involved, truthfully or not, that people such as yourself suddenly rouse themselves to action.
So tell us genius, what would you have us do. Process terrorists through our court system? Give them an ACLU attorney who would get them freed on some technicality so they can go spread havoc in our streets. Perhaps one of these cutie pies will show up at your house and blast you or one of your loved ones to pieces. How does that sound?
I also wonder if you have the brain power to even understand what I wrote. I doubt it, because the main thrust of your response was to spill your hateful bile about Israel and Jews. I wonder, were you one of those losers shouting “go back to your ovens” at that Pro-Palestinian rally the other day? Seems like your type of crowd.
Moderator:
Please disregard previous post, or delete altogether and post the following. Thanks.
Robert:
I don’t know if it’s your low watt IQ or your anti-semitism that has the greater entertainment value. But let me try to explain how it works. When someone does not fight under the flag of a nation, instead acting as a free lance terrorist, they have no constitutional rights. They never have and never should.
As for torture, that is the most overblown issue of the past 5 years. Besides, I doubt very much that you care about torture. If you did, then tell us what you were doing during the reign of Saddam Hussein. Did you speak out about the systematic torture of his people? Did you lead or join a protest against his rape rooms? Come to think of it, did you ever say a damn thing about anyone being tortured until you heard about Abu Ghraib? It’s only when the US is involved, truthfully or not, that people such as yourself suddenly rouse themselves to action.
So tell us genius, what would you have us do. Process terrorists through our court system? Give them an ACLU attorney who would get them freed on some technicality so they can go spread havoc in our streets. Perhaps one of these cutie pies will show up at your house and blast you or one of your loved ones to pieces. How does that sound?
I also wonder if you have the brain power to even understand what I wrote. I doubt it, because the main thrust of your response was to spill your hateful bile about Israel and Jews. That type of ignorance and hatred is usually associated with ignorance, which is generally the product of a weak mind. I wonder, were you one of those lovely people shouting “go back to your ovens” at that Pro-Palestinian rally the other day? Seems like your type of crowd.
Very Interesting Post;More interesting comments,however!
Loved the civil discussion.. How refreshing.
Read each one (comment) which is very unusual…
Staten Island NYorker here (hard core) and i have to say that 10-15 years ago
I saw & spent $$ on Bruce..Then he opened his mouth stuck
his boot in it with his Liberal/Socialist rants,
(his conservative better half must’ve been sleeping)
and like many above, i swore never to support such “entertainment”
I go out of my way NOT TO PAY OR SUPPORT far Left trash talkers,
in any form…
If they don’t respect my money as a Conservative, spitting in our faces every chance they get,, not respect this Country, our Troops, our Flag etc..
I Have no use for them, & i will not share my money w/them!
Laura said it best:”Shut up & Sing”
Robert:
I don’t know if it’s your low watt IQ or your anti-semitism that has the greater entertainment value. But let me try to explain how it works. When someone does not fight under the flag of a nation, instead acting as a free lance terrorist, they have no constitutional rights. They never have and never should.
As for torture, that is the most overblown issue of the past 5 years. Besides, I doubt very much that you care about torture. If you did, then tell us what you were doing during the reign of Saddam Hussein. Did you speak out about the systematic torture of his people? Did you lead or join a protest against his rape rooms? Come to think of it, did you ever say a damn thing about anyone being tortured until you heard about Abu Ghraib? It’s only when the US is involved, truthfully or not, that people such as yourself suddenly rouse themselves to action.
So tell us genius, what would you have us do. Process terrorists through our court system? Give them an ACLU attorney who would get them freed on some technicality so they can go spread havoc in our streets. Perhaps one of these cutie pies will show up at your house and blast you or one of your loved ones to pieces. How does that sound?
I also wonder if you have the brain power to even understand what I wrote. I doubt it, because the main thrust of your response was to spill your hateful bile about Israel and Jews. That type of ignorance and hatred is usually associated with ignorance, which is generally the product of a weak mind. I wonder, were you one of those lovely people shouting “go back to your ovens” at that Pro-Palestinian rally the other day? Seems like your type of crowd.
uummm…I’m pretty sure that lyric about the flag and what we will and won’t do is a bash against the sitting administration…
Ok this is Bruce Spinsteens life. His daughter is a member of the USA’s Equestrien Team. She rides horses that cost more than well many of our Student Loans. Does anyone here know how much cash it costs to fund that little HOBBY? More than my Parents made in their entire life times….and thats probably one year in riding. I mean gee…Bruce your such a member of teh working class. Hork. What a hypocrit.
How on earth does anyone know what his lyrics (poems)are? Complete gibbering garbage.
A breathtakingly original take on “what happened” to the hearts and minds — and loyalties — of our generation. I’ve blogged about it here:
The look of love.
In case you don’t do URL links to comments: http://sisu.typepad.com/sisu/2009/01/the-look-of-lov.html
A conservative? Please. I saw Springsteen perform the day after Ronald Reagan was first elected president. He opened up the concert by telling us what a dangerous, scary thing had just happened. Then he refused to let Reagan’s re-election campaign use his song “Born in the USA.” He campaigned heavily for both Kerry and Obama. Finally, he claimed that the motivation for his last album was his fury with Bush.
Springsteen’s little more than a guy with no more than a highschool education and a megaphone who made it big. It’s a shame he didn’t just shut up and sing.
Wasn’t Springsteen on the soundtrack for a Michael Moore movie? How does that equal conservative? No conservative would be tricked into that, so it had to be deliberate. Come on now.
I’m a long time fan that jumped off the bus the day Springsteen dedicated a song to Cindy Sheehan.
How can you tell Springsteen isn’t conservative? First off, because his supposed principles change radically depending on which political party is in power. In the last five years he’s repeatedly criticized Bush over rendition, which you can agree with or disagree with, but from 1992 to 2000 he had nothing*zip*nada*zero to say on the subject despite the fact that the Clinton Administration used renditions more often (70+ operations in eight years) than any previous Administration. In truth Springsteen doesn’t care one wit about rendition or the people effected by it, he just cares about taking political pot shots at Republicans, which in the end cheapens a serious issue and makes him out to be a fool. Here’s a test — is Springsteen going to criticize Obama when Gitmo stays open, interrogation techniques remain harsh when necessary, or the CIA performs renditions in the future? Hell will freeze over before Bruce has a harsh word to say about a Democratic president, and everybody knows it.
A couple of years ago Springsteen was playing a show in Ohio, and in the middle of the set he took time out to talk about a local community group that had set up an anti-death penalty table in the lobby. He asked his audience to go by the table at some point and hear what the activists had to say, and that they should keep an open mind about the issue while they listened. After the speech somebody down front yelled out “kill the killers!” and Springsteen’s immediate response was to become angry and insulting. He called the guy stupid, and said he should be the first person at the table that night. So here’s the rock star pleading for those on the other side to have an open mind concerning his opinions, but the moment Bruce hears three words he disagrees with he demonstrates beyond doubt that open minds are really for the other guy, not for famous people like him.
Then there’s the image of the billionaire who lives in a mansion surrounded by high walls and armed security guards calling for an open border with Mexico. Loved that little nightly speech on the Devils and Dust tour. It must be easy to call for policies and practices that would devastate the average American, but have so much money that it’ll never touch you or your family at all.
Or how about the 1980 show in Arizona where Springsteen said Reagan’s election the night before was “terrifying”. It’s okay for anyone to utter such hysteria, if that’s what you’re in to, but the problem is that at the time the man wasn’t even registered to vote. Hey Bruce, if it’s that important to you then fill out a form and cast your ballot. If that’s too much of a bother then do us a favor and shut the fu#k up when your side loses.
The simple fact is that Springsteen’s first loyalty is to the Democratic Party, and everything else — including any loyalty to his country or it’s people — comes afterwards. That’s not just unconservative, it’s anti-conservative.
Nice try, but Stringbean is in no way shape or form a conservative. He’s an uber-Leftie, no matter how deep you dig into his catalog. Sounds like the author is trying to rationalize his alligence to Spruce Stringbean… Sorry. You’ll just have to come to terms with it.
“Ok this is Bruce Spinsteens life.” I thought making a lot of money with your own work was a conservative virtue. I guess you also have to espouse conservative politics, too. I always get a kick out of conservatives grabbing an artist or other person they love and insisting that he must be conservative. I’ve seen “Martin Luther King was a Republican” from a Black Republican group. I’ve seen “John Lennon would be a conservative if he hadn’t been assassinated.” I’ve seen the laughable “50 great conservative rock songs.” Cripes, try to separate the art from the politics. Enjoy the songs if you like the music. Your angst over enjoying the work of a liberal makes me laugh. You don’t see me trying to say that Philip Larkin or T.S. Eliot are liberal because otherwise I can’t enjoy their poetry. You don’t see me saying that I can’t like Aerosmith because they’re conservative. LIghten up and relax.
This was a long, thoughtful and interesting article. It comes to exactly the wrong conclusion, but was still an interesting read. Your conclusion is necessary, however, on a website that boils down to “liberals are bad”. So you need to turn every liberal whose work you like into a secret conservative. Well real life is more complicated than that, and your thoughtful analysis of these songs demonstrates that you already know that. But you can’t allow yourself to acknowledge that good art is complex and comes from many different sources.
I just wanted to drop in and let you folks know that sifting through the delusion and ignorance on your little site here has been very entertaining. (And Bruno, you are especially hilarious!)
It’s amusing to hear adherents of the ideology that brought us torture and billion dollar bailouts for corporate turds thumping their chests about values and merit. Hardly anyone here knows what the hell their talking about. You folks may want to try learning a little bit about the man, instead of just spewing out whatever “Bush Phlegmball” told you to think about him on the radio.
And before you go pontificating about Springsteen not doing anything for people in the military, why don’t you check in with some members of the Vietnam Veterans of America. Ask them what he’s done for their organization as well as many others who were ignored and forgotten while Ronald Reagan was strutting around the country waving the flag and spouting platitudes about “supporting the troops”. That’s what Born in the USA is about.
The Boss is no conservative. I am guessing that Sowell doen’t thinks so either. Speaking of constrained versus unconstrained, George Will describing liberals saying they are for freedom as long as they can regulate it.
[...] self-parody—Big Hollywood. I might as well bandwagon along for a minute. There’s a choice post over there written by Evan Sayet, a stand-up comedian waging a witless campaign against a [...]
What a moron. He clearly has no idea what a neoliberal is. Hint: Ronald Reagan was one of the biggest Neoliberals of them all. But of course to know that you'd have to understand what a liberal really is, as opposed to the slur-like usage it has taken on in recent American history. Liberalism is people like John Locke, whose ideas about property rights inform most of the ideas we hold about property today, right or wrong. But Sayet probably thinks Neoliberals are like Neo-Nazis. What a maroon.
I only read a third way through these comments but its obvious most of the commenters don't understand the blogger's premise AT ALL. Perhaps you should reserve comment until you understand context (that would go for both the self-proclaimed liberals and conservatives)?
Maybe Springsteen is just Springsteen and not some caricature of the right or left? I hate two bit anti-intellectual "philosophising" like this
got anymore stormfront trash you want to post, nazi?
You must be logged in to post a comment.