• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

janet's boob but no bono

Sunshyne Jones

TRIBE Member
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_855534.html

so bono offered to sing at the super bowl halftime, - he had hoped to use the appearance to generate support to fight AIDS in Africa by singing a new song, An American Prayer, with Jennifer Lopez to draw attention to the disease.

the NFL didn't think the charity cause was appropriate

but hey, they totally opted for thinly veiled support of the current political actions of the day -- Willie Nelson sang about retribution and the good old days when if someone did something wrong they were held accountable for it - they were hanged for all to see. $ spent on space exploration (and dare we say the possibility of arming up 'out there') was lauded ... Kid Rock did his Cowboy song - isn't that George Bush II's anthem? etc. etc.

would it really have been SO BAD if bono had a couple of freakin minutes with this huge audience to keep a very serious issue on people's minds? It would have been a big downer if it was a big speech, but hey - the song, however heavy the subject is, has to be better than that Josh dude's cheezeball of a tune!
 

Zorro

TRIBE Member
Thats okay they also used this time to air Pro bush commericials and Army and Navy commericials but they wouldn't air an anti Bush ad showing the American people what Bush has really done in his 3 years of office.

They say they fight and stand for freedom of speech yet the still want to control that freedom. Ah good ole America home of the free land of the brave.

The only country that will show you a breast then in the same breath turn around and tell you it's wrong. No wonder the got problems.
 

kat

TRIBE Member
i really dont remember willie nelson being there at all..

i was sitting there the whole time. why dont i remember this?
 

Sunshyne Jones

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by kat
i really dont remember willie nelson being there at all..

i was sitting there the whole time. why dont i remember this?

he sang with the country singer that opened up the 'show' before the game started.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

-Mercury-

TRIBE Member
SPORTS-SUPERBOWL-81-CH-thumb.jpg
 

Dr Funk MD

TRIBE Promoter
Seriously, is anyone surprised that the whole thing was pro-America/pro-Bush? This is the Super Bowl in Texas. It's like sending a thrifty KKK member into Walmart during a linen sale. Would you expect them to NOT buy sheets?
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

Hi i'm God

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Dr Funk MD
Seriously, is anyone surprised that the whole thing was pro-America/pro-Bush? This is the Super Bowl in Texas. It's like sending a thrifty KKK member into Walmart during a linen sale. Would you expect them to NOT buy sheets?
haha
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

AdRiaN

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Zorro
They say they fight and stand for freedom of speech yet the still want to control that freedom.
Why should a television network not have the freedom to pick and choose the commercials it airs? If you want to see anti-Bush commercials, then log onto the internet during the game. This is not an issue of free speech.

The only country that will show you a breast then in the same breath turn around and tell you it's wrong. No wonder the got problems.
The Super Bowl is a live broadcast and the performers in question were not given permission by the network to show a breast on camera.
 
Originally posted by AdRiaN
Why should a television network not have the freedom to pick and choose the commercials it airs? If you want to see anti-Bush commercials, then log onto the internet during the game. This is not an issue of free speech.


I think television should not have the right to pick and choose what they air as far as political announcements and advertisements go, as it shows a patronage to a political party, when the media is supposed to remain neutral. Of course according to the FCC I believe, that rule only applies to news programs, but I feel it should also be a station wide rule as well. Political patronage with media is bullshit I think.
 

Sunshyne Jones

TRIBE Member
yeah
wasn't saying they should not be able to choose what they show and what they include in the half time show
'course they can

was just poking fun at the choices they made
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by AdRiaN
Why should a television network not have the freedom to pick and choose the commercials it airs? If you want to see anti-Bush commercials, then log onto the internet during the game. This is not an issue of free speech.


publically owned airwaves.

For a corporation to pick and choose which ads they play is a form of censorship.
 

Dr Funk MD

TRIBE Promoter
Originally posted by el presidente Highsteppa


I think television should not have the right to pick and choose what they air as far as political announcements and advertisements go, as it shows a patronage to a political party, when the media is supposed to remain neutral. Of course according to the FCC I believe, that rule only applies to news programs, but I feel it should also be a station wide rule as well. Political patronage with media is bullshit I think. [/B]

I'd say that would be a good rule but really what would happen (and probably is already happening) is they'd turn 'free' speach into 'paid' speach. The networks would just push the price up so high that only the richest people can have their say, and for the most part the rich are largely Republicans I'd guess.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
Originally posted by Dr Funk MD
I'd say that would be a good rule but really what would happen (and probably is already happening) is they'd turn 'free' speach into 'paid' speach. The networks would just push the price up so high that only the richest people can have their say, and for the most part the rich are largely Republicans I'd guess.

But that's the thing - it's already that way, with networks and television stations having to give each candidate equal air time on television, radio and other forms of media, but as we all know, media is big business, and they want their interests represented as well by the White House and candidates.

While it's understandable that candidates are going to have donations given to them by large corporations and businesses in order to run a successful campaign, what about large corporations that own media like Viacom or Fox News? Is it not a conflict of interest if some branch of this mother company offers a donation to a political candidate of some sort? How do we know that their donation won't water down over to the television or media stations that they also own?
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
oh and let's not forget the head of the FCC is the son of Colin Powell. So the bodies that would regulate media and media censorship are already on board.

:rolleyes:
 

Dr Funk MD

TRIBE Promoter
So in summary what the Super Bowl was about this year was one sided political opinion manufacturing while on the other side discussions on social and medical issues were swept aside by a tit.

God Bless America. May they all suck a lemon.
 

Sunshyne Jones

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Dr Funk MD
So in summary what the Super Bowl was about this year was one sided political opinion manufacturing while on the other side discussions on social and medical issues were swept aside by a tit.

God Bless America. May they all suck a lemon.

nice!!
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
Top