Alice Cooper on Musicians and Politics

From BLABBERMOUTH.NET:

ALICE COOPER: Anti-BUSH Rockers Are Guilty Of Treason

ALICE COOPER has told the Canadian Press that all the rock stars campaigning for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry are guilty of one thing: treason. The shock-rock legend, a staunch Republican who attends NBA games in Phoenix with Arizona Senator John McCain, was disgusted when he learned of plans by Bruce Springsteen, John Mellencamp, R.E.M. and other bands to hold a series of concerts aimed at unseating U.S. President George W. Bush.

“To me, that’s treason. I call it treason against rock ‘n’ roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics,” says the 56-year-old Cooper, who begins a 15-city Canadian tour on Aug. 20 in Thunder Bay, Ont.

“When I was a kid and my parents started talking about politics, I’d run to my room and put on the ROLLING STONES as loud as I could. So when I see all these rock stars up there talking politics, it makes me sick.

“If you’re listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you’re a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we’re morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.”

Despite his strong insistence that rock has no place in politics, Cooper is one of just a handful of high-profile musicians who’ve proclaimed support for Bush.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Alice Cooper on Musicians and Politics

  1. Anonymous says:

    So, what… Just because they’re rock stars, you can’t have an opinion on politics? Are they supposed to just hide in the basement while the elections are going on? I have no problem with rock stars being politically active – especially if their intent is to make a positive change. If they are a part of this nation, they have every right to voice their own opinions. It’s not fair to make them choose to either a) be a rock star or b) be a bum on the side of the road holding up a tattered cardboard sign saying “Re-elect Bush.” I really don’t think that’s in the constitution.

  2. Frog says:

    Ok, Mr or Mrs. Anonymous… it’s nice to have opinions while cloaked in anonymity… Let’s take a look at your so-called argument.

    1. I have a problem with celebrities that use their influence brought about by the fact that they can pluck a guitar strink to change the course of national elections. Most of the time, they spread falsehoods and lies and are woefully ignorant on the issues and offer no solutions. The “anti-Bush” people are just that… people that support a candidate that’s “not Bush”. They also align themselves with groups like MoveOn.org, which spreads the worst kind of vitriol. It’s these same people who would cheer about campaign finance reform but think it’s ok for these groups to have bottomless funding for Democratic causes.

    2. You assume that these musicians are after some kind of positive change. How can you possibly know what their intent is?

    3. This part makes no sense: “It’s not fair to make them choose to either a) be a rock star or b) be a bum on the side of the road holding up a tattered cardboard sign saying ‘Re-elect Bush.’ I really don’t think that’s in the constitution.” No one told them to choose one side over another… especially one as rediculous as holding a tattered sign. You should consider reading what you write before you post it. I do agree with you that your insane proposition is not in the Constitution, thank goodness.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Answering your #1:
    Do you really have that little faith in the American public that they are to be so easily swayed by “woe-fully ignorant” celebrities? Most of the time, these musicians end up making themselves look like jack-asses. Why feel the need to get your feathers ruffled by supposed morons?

    #2:
    I never assumed that any and all musicians were after some positive change. If you re-read my previous statement, you’ll see that it says,”I have no problem with rock stars being politically active – especially if their intent is to make a positive change.” Especially is the key word here, folks. I know not everyone has the best of intentions. I know that musicians are not more or less moral simply because they can “pluck a guitar string.” What I do believe is that they have every right to use their earned cash in whatever way they choose. I’m not supporting ill-intentioned propoganda, I’m supporting the right to spend earned money however is seen fit by the owner.

    #3:
    Obviously, our host’s sarcasm detector has eluded him on this sad day.
    Of course I don’t think that they have to literally be bums holding up tattered signs.
    Perhaps I should go through this one step-by-step.
    Ready?
    OK!
    What I meant was that from the reaction of your initial blog you seem to be against rock stars voicing their political views. Agree? Okay, moving right along…
    As you know, I disagree with this notion, because, once again, I believe they are as real as any of us and also are as deserving to use whatever means they have to gain political sway in any direction. Isn’t that what we all do when we put bumper stickers on our cars? It is unfair to deny the rights of these celebrities simply because of their status. Doing so makes them more useless than any of us, and therefore… hope you catch it this time… “bum-like.”
    Taa-daa!

  4. Frog says:

    Yes, you’re absolutely right! Putting a bumper sticker on a car is exactly the same as using your celebrity to push your agenda on television. You know… when I put one on my car, all I got to influence were those people who saw the sticker. I didn’t get interviewed on Entertainment Tonight.

    These entertainers – who incidentally make their living on the fact that they need people to pay attention to them – are now so self important that they think that they know what’s best for the country. If these same entertainers ever decided to get together and focus on a non-partisan cause, I would have more respect for them.

    Here’s your quote: “It is unfair to deny the rights of these celebrities simply because of their status. Doing so makes them more useless than any of us, and therefore… hope you catch it this time… “bum-like.”
    Taa-daa!” Clearly, you’re retarded. No one has denied their rights. No one has even suggested that they be denied the opportunity to speak their mind. That would be impossible under the Constitution. I don’t like the imbalanced influence they are trying to have on this election. It’s called “expressing an opinion”. Apparantly, you have a problem with Alice Cooper and me doint that. Taa-daa! Got it? OK!

    As for you, Anonymous, I’ve decided that you don’t get to post anymore on my site unless you register who you are. No more hiding, Little Miss Opinionated!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *