|Music Artist "Common"|
Thank you @james_bkelly for motivating
me to stop, think & write.
Seriously, I did read a couple of blips citing his lyrics that I didn't care for, and re-tweeted this of course. And I got a couple of replies back, not from any of my regular followers, but from opposers to my comments about Mr. Common - one of which prompted me to write this post. In particular he implied I do not understand Mr. Common and asked me to "quik name 3 songs" by Common.
I am a Big "C" Conservative - little "l" libertarian, pretty much in that order. Most times, rather than argue with new tweepers, I try to engage. I like this. It makes me think; it keeps me from being hyper-cynical. And I am reminded always that while I am entitled to my personal beliefs just as everyone else is, we are a nation of laws, not of men (Hence, a portion of the 1st Amendment in my title).
So I decided to do some research on Mr. Common to help my ply apart just what my issue was. He uses nasty lyrics in songs about communism and assassinating police officers. You are right @james_bkelly, I don't understand. However, Linkin Park for example (one of my all-time favorite bands), might have lyrics that are misunderstood by some people as well, I suppose. It's just lyrics. (So, how come Linkin Park wasn't invited to do a poetry reading? That's rhetorical.)
Lyrics are beside the point regarding my issue with Mr. Common. There are two points I have issue with, really. The first being Mr. Common as a choice for an event that is paid for by tax payers. But, I can get past that. It's just one event. Our tax dollars go to far worse things than a controversial music artist being invited to read his stuff at the White House.
The second and more significant point I have issue with is the on-going double standard. I wonder, Mr. James Kelly, do you understand that double standard of which I speak? I mean this in all sincerity. I, as a white, conservative American, am held to a different and subjective standard than say, a black liberal American. Standard. NOT ideology. For clarification:
something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model.
1.By definition, being held to a different standard isn't negative in and of itself. But let's make no mistake, there is no objectivity among standards between liberals and conservatives. It's where overlapping similarities become both critical and hypocritical by one side against the other that makes for a frustrating set of circumstances. This is known as a "double standard."
the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides anindividual, social movement, institution, class, or large group.
1.any code or set of principles containing different provisionsfor one group of people than for another, especially anunwritten code of sexual behavior permitting men morefreedom than women.
This has become so cliche, but can you imagine if former president Bush did something similar? What reaction would he have gotten if he invited, on the taxpayers' dime mind you, Hip Hop artist Hi Calibur to poetry reading night? Imagine the dung that would be flung!! In ALL directions! Or the names called, or...whatever.
I used to be a liberal moonbat, and I can sniff out hypocrisy from miles away, believe me. The fact of the matter is, in general terms, this White House and this Administration's subjective standard does not tolerate the same objective matter at hand from conservatives. Does anyone at the White House even know what Big Dawg Music Mafia is? If so, would they be promotional and supportive toward it? How about black liberals? Objective, or subjective standard?
See, if I criticize Mr. Common, I am called a racist. Not by Mr. James Kelly, but by another tweeter (you know who you are). If Al Sharpton, for example, criticizes Linkin Park...well, that's not even news -- who cares? And although it will never compare to racial slurs endured by anyone in any race at anytime in history (my ancestors -- Irish -- were not immune), we conservatives right now are sick and tired of being called racists.
I am glad that I researched Mr. Common. In a free country, I get to choose not to listen to him. From a libertarian, 1st Amendment, Free Speech STANDARD: To each his own. If only the First Amendment could be the standard by which we measured what all sides of the aisles do, from the Highest Office in the land down to the #common (pun intended) conservative mom like me. And of course for @james_bkelly, whom I am pretty certain would agree.
|Speaking of "standard" - this website has a familiar look to it...|
but, that's another story.