Annoying Moby
I'm fairly ambivalent about Moby's music. It makes good bumper music on the radio and on televised sporting events, I suppose. I'm not as ambivalent about Moby becoming a mouthpiece for the Democrats. I thought Moby was a Marxist? I guess this is another case of pragmatism.
Take Moby's latest journal entry:
ralph nader...
you all know ralph naders dirty hidden secret(s), no?
that the majority of his funding comes from supporters of president bush and that the majority of people signing petitions to get him on the ballot for the next election are republicans.
why?
it's pretty clear, having nader on the ballot is the only chance that bush has of winning in november because nader will take a few percent of the votes away from john kerry.
john kerry wins in every poll wherein the choice is between bush and kerry.
but when it's between bush, kerry, and nader, kerry loses by 1 or 2 percentage points.
so if you have friends supporting nader ask them if they know that naders money comes from bush supporters and that the people trying to get nader on the ballot in november are republicans.
moby
Moby can support any politics or politicians he wishes, but when he begins using his celebrity status and his weblog to spread false propaganda to impressionable, ignorant fans (not that all of his fans are ignorant and impressionable, but obviously some are, as is the case with any celebrity), someone needs to say something.
For example, Moby says about Ralph Nader, "the majority of his funding comes from supporters of president bush and that the majority of people signing petitions to get him on the ballot for the next election are republicans." This statement is untrue. According to MSNBC on July 19, of the $1 million Nader had raised for his campaign at that point, $50,000 was from donors that also contributed to the Bush campaign. That is a significant amount, but hardly "the majority of his funding."
Moby saying "naders money comes from bush supporters" could also be said about Kerry, since it is a known fact that some contributors donate to both the Democratic and Republican candidates. Moby makes it sound like all of Nader's funds are being supplied by Republicans.
I will agree it is newsworthy that Bush supporters are donating money to Nader and working to get him added to the ballot in some states, but the idea that most of Nader's supporters are Republicans is absurd.
What bothers me about this even more is the fact that Moby is one of those celebrities running around crowing about how his fans have a responsibility to get out and vote as part of the democratic process and properly performing their civic duty, but it appears he actually cares nothing at all about democracy. He just wants to get his candidate elected (or, more appropriately, make sure Bush is not reelected). Anyone that truly cares about the democratic process should be wailing over the current state of affairs that offers only two candidates that are virtually indistinguishable in stated positions.
Take Moby's latest journal entry:
ralph nader...
you all know ralph naders dirty hidden secret(s), no?
that the majority of his funding comes from supporters of president bush and that the majority of people signing petitions to get him on the ballot for the next election are republicans.
why?
it's pretty clear, having nader on the ballot is the only chance that bush has of winning in november because nader will take a few percent of the votes away from john kerry.
john kerry wins in every poll wherein the choice is between bush and kerry.
but when it's between bush, kerry, and nader, kerry loses by 1 or 2 percentage points.
so if you have friends supporting nader ask them if they know that naders money comes from bush supporters and that the people trying to get nader on the ballot in november are republicans.
moby
Moby can support any politics or politicians he wishes, but when he begins using his celebrity status and his weblog to spread false propaganda to impressionable, ignorant fans (not that all of his fans are ignorant and impressionable, but obviously some are, as is the case with any celebrity), someone needs to say something.
For example, Moby says about Ralph Nader, "the majority of his funding comes from supporters of president bush and that the majority of people signing petitions to get him on the ballot for the next election are republicans." This statement is untrue. According to MSNBC on July 19, of the $1 million Nader had raised for his campaign at that point, $50,000 was from donors that also contributed to the Bush campaign. That is a significant amount, but hardly "the majority of his funding."
Moby saying "naders money comes from bush supporters" could also be said about Kerry, since it is a known fact that some contributors donate to both the Democratic and Republican candidates. Moby makes it sound like all of Nader's funds are being supplied by Republicans.
I will agree it is newsworthy that Bush supporters are donating money to Nader and working to get him added to the ballot in some states, but the idea that most of Nader's supporters are Republicans is absurd.
What bothers me about this even more is the fact that Moby is one of those celebrities running around crowing about how his fans have a responsibility to get out and vote as part of the democratic process and properly performing their civic duty, but it appears he actually cares nothing at all about democracy. He just wants to get his candidate elected (or, more appropriately, make sure Bush is not reelected). Anyone that truly cares about the democratic process should be wailing over the current state of affairs that offers only two candidates that are virtually indistinguishable in stated positions.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home