Prince’s Estate Has Had Enough Of Trump Playing His Music At His Hate Rallies

[Guest Indiana]

 

While Prince was not necessarily a political artist, he often talked about race, poverty and faith in his music. He was not associated with a particular political party, and he was also open about never voting.

“Well, I don’t vote,” Prince famously told Tavis Smiley while discussing  Barack Obama in 2009. “I’ve don’t have nothing to do with it. I’ve got no dog in that race.”

Prince cited his faith for not participating in any elections.

“The reason why is that I’m one of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and we’ve never voted,” he continued. “That’s not to say I don’t think … President Obama is a very smart individual and he seems like he means well. Prophecy is what we all have to go by now.”

https://newsone.com/3889647/prince-estate-trump-rally-music/

[TrueTomHarley]

The fact that you call them “hate rallies” suggests a shedding of neutrality.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

That was my very first thought when I read the headline of this topic..

I have listened to four of his rallies it their entirety, and see no hate whatsoever.

Trump does call a pig a pig, and points out that lipstick on a pig does not make it acceptable as a date, but pigs are pigs ... and it is not necessarily "hate" to correctly label pigs as pigs ....... etc.

[TrueTomHarley]

I know it sounds as though shedding neutrality myself, but in the Pres vs Media war, it is not that I am pro-former. But I am anti-latter, I freely admit.

If there is some new family-undermining meme or some new morality sure to turn society upside down, media instantly embraces it—they are all over it—so anything that gets them apoplectic cannot be all that bad. 

It’s the same with warring against business-as-usual government. (He wars with everyone!) To call him a bull in a china shop, one must accept the premise that the latter is a china shop. Junkyard dog in a junkyard works better. The focus should be, not on the subject (bull vs junkyard dog—there will be little disagreement there), but on the object of the preposition (china shop vs junkyard)—here there is disagreement.

It took me awhile to notice it, but those who hang their hats and hearts on the BITE model (of Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional “control”) that they see everywhere and apply to Jehovah’s Witnesses in a heartbeat are almost always leftists. They are almost always people who think that government as usual IS a china shop, albeit a deeply flawed one. On the issue of sovereignty, they almost always are ones who advocate “government by Man,”  and not “government by God.”

It is very hard to shed all appearance of partisanship. For that reason, many of Jehovah’s Witnesses go further than they need to, in my opinion, and object if you even mention politics for fear of not staying neutral. Even Geoffrey Jackson, when he is lecturing on the importance of maintaining neutrality, acknowledges how hard it is to not think, “I hope that idiot does not come into power,” and it is impossible for me not to think what idiot he has in mind.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

It's easier when you actually see lipstick on a pig.

NOW ... here is the question of the day ......

When you read the above line ... how many people instantly visualized Nancy Pelosi?

[TrueTomHarley]

2 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

When you read the above line ... how many people instantly visualized Nancy Pelosi?

Not me

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

What, then, DID you visualize?

 

[TrueTomHarley]

3 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

What, then, DID you visualize?

Nor have I ever seen one of Trump’s rallies, due to my usual objection about video. 

Of course, I have seen clips of them as presented on media, where they are carefully culled to make them appear hate-laden, yet even there, sometimes they reveal the wishes of the media more than that of the Pres—the media being primarily left of center, by over 90%.