Do you have proof of that, or are you just making stuff up?
I’ve read every book that’s ever been written about the band. I’ve listened to every interview. I’ve listened to every concert recording known to exist. And I can tell you that they’re about as apolitical as a rock band can get.
In fact, during the 1975 tour, Plant would often complain about the absurd level of taxation in England. Most of the big British rock acts went into tax exile during the 70′s when the top marginal rate in England was 95% or something in that ballpark. Plant would often bemoan the fact that this ludicrous tax rate drove all of England’s great artists right straight out of the country. This is hardly what I’d call a big-time liberal position.
While I’m sure none of these guys are in the Ted Nugent camp, they’ve never demonstrated themselves to be anywhere near the Bruce Springsteen camp either. Whatever their politics might be, they largely keep it to themselves and keep it out of their music, which is great in my book.
 June 22, 2016 at 9:33pm
I wish I could give more than just one thumbs-up.
 June 22, 2016 at 9:32pm
I agree with the ACLU. In other news, a pig was just spotted flying in Iowa, and the devil is launching a new business venture selling ice cubes.
The first time you suspend the constitution
for the sake of safety of the masses will
certainly not be the last time.
ACLU can see the redacted
handwriting on the wall.
I see your avatar is an ABC program. I hope you don't worship them, because they are all liberals. You shouldn't fly the liberal flag.
What's next? Shiara Law too?
As soon as "the list" is passed as a means to limit 2nd amendment rights, they hand the poison pen to the likes of Lois Learner to add the names...
.. And the RINO-s will be cowards and not even fight it.
Please think...please think....
Just about to say, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Tempted to donate to the aclu, but then they'd waste it on some offended atheist instead of important stuff like this.
The ALCU's main goal is the destruction of America's ridiculous and dangerous Liberty and the institution of a much more sane and orderly society where people's rights are properly curtailed in deference to the benevolent government.
They intend to do this by showing just how ridiculous our rights are and how dangerous they make our world. So their goal is to get under enough of our collective skin for us to support reasonable changes to our Constitution to restrict the use of rights by childish citizens who really can't be trusted with liberty.
So, if you love our rights and the freedoms God created us with, the ACLU will occasionally agree with you when it meets their tyrannical agenda.
If there were a bipartisan effort to ban white males in America from purchasing guns, we'd probably hear crickets from the ACLU.
The Collins Amendment needs to be voted down. As always, the devil is in the details and this proposal goes way beyond the word doctored talking points. See http: // www . gunowners . org / news06212016 . htm for a unemotional, detailed analysis
Don't be too quick to declare things are upside down with the ACLU. They are against the terror watch list, but not banning guns. They still want to force Americans to surrender every right they have to a Stalinistic dictatorship, they just don't want any innocent muslim terrorists, satanists, atheists, or baby killers to be inconvenienced by it.
 June 22, 2016 at 11:02am
There are still more blacks in the country than Hispanics. Especially when you consider that many so-called Hispanics are technically white, racially-speaking.
 June 22, 2016 at 10:59am
” Only a fool would say that this country is not better because of his presence in the White House…”
Oh my lord that’s the funniest thing I’ve read in, well probably my whole life.
 June 18, 2016 at 1:33pm
If the ship had been built by American union workers, this time lapse video would have been 18 hours long.
Half would be safety meetings and the other half would be break time.
 June 18, 2016 at 1:05pm
That’s how it should be, and just to be clear I wasn’t in my above rant attempting to admonish all women, but rather the liberal feminists who’ve been pushing this nonsense and demanding special treatment for decades.
Back when I worked in metal stamping the company hired several young women just out of high school to work in the shop. One of them was great, but the other three made my head explode. They were perfectly happy to sit there on their butts watching their machine spit out parts, but whenever some actual work needed to be done, anything heavy or dirty especially, they’d play the waif card and get some guy to come do it for them. Hey big strong man, can you load this steel for me? I’m just a weak helpless little woman. But then I’d hear them in the lunchroom carrying on about equal pay for equal work. I was a supervisor at the time, and at one point I just couldn’t take it anymore and flat out told them that they weren’t going to see the equal pay until I started to see the equal work. That’s the mentality I’m talking about. Here they were doing part of their jobs, while the men were doing all of their own work and part of these girls work, yet they still thought they should get paid as much as those men. And this, they call “equality”.
 June 17, 2016 at 8:19pm
Or someone should’ve stormed the stage and taken the mic a la Kanye West :)
 June 17, 2016 at 7:37pm
@WOLD – I would guess Schwarzenegger. He was a huge draw in the 80′s.
 June 17, 2016 at 7:33pm
Yeah, there’s been a whole series of this nonsense ever since women entered the workforce. First they insisted that they should be out there working and having a career just like the men. Once that happened, they realized that there’s things about having a career that suck, like having to be away from home and family working long hours. But rather than accepting that life is about choices and each choice has consequences, good and bad, they instead demanded that the workplace change to accommodate them with things like shorter hours and flex time and 9000 weeks of maternity leave and family leave, and failure to do so would make you sexist. So the workplace gave them what they demanded and allowed them to work fewer hours to spend more time at home, but that just led to now, where they complain that they’re making less than the men who work more hours than them.
The very same study from which the 70% figure came also showed that on average a woman working full-time works 30-40 hours a week whereas the average man works 40-50 hours a week. Gee, you think working less might lead to getting paid less? Again, normal people would say ok, I chose to work fewer hours and consequently I make fewer dollars. Not so with today’s feminist woman. They expect to get paid the same as a man for working fewer hours than a man, and again, saying no means you’re some sexist fiend.
Now I’m sure most women don’t think this way, but the feminist harpies that are pushing this crap sure seem to.
My Husband and I are machinists and work pretty much side-by-side. He gets paid a few dollars more an hour then I do. Here's why, he has more experience in the job and has worked there longer then I have. On the other hand, I make more per hour then a large majority of the men who work side-by-side with us. Here's why, I have more experience and have been working there longer then they have. At least in the company we all work for, they pay according to your value and time you have at the company. I have no complaints.
That's how it should be, and just to be clear I wasn't in my above rant attempting to admonish all women, but rather the liberal feminists who've been pushing this nonsense and demanding special treatment for decades.
Back when I worked in metal stamping the company hired several young women just out of high school to work in the shop. One of them was great, but the other three made my head explode. They were perfectly happy to sit there on their butts watching their machine spit out parts, but whenever some actual work needed to be done, anything heavy or dirty especially, they'd play the waif card and get some guy to come do it for them. Hey big strong man, can you load this steel for me? I'm just a weak helpless little woman. But then I'd hear them in the lunchroom carrying on about equal pay for equal work. I was a supervisor at the time, and at one point I just couldn't take it anymore and flat out told them that they weren't going to see the equal pay until I started to see the equal work. That's the mentality I'm talking about. Here they were doing part of their jobs, while the men were doing all of their own work and part of these girls work, yet they still thought they should get paid as much as those men. And this, they call "equality".
 June 17, 2016 at 7:14pm
@Rowacajr – well that’s just blatantly untrue. The US Census data as of 2014 indicates that whites are 77% of the population while Hispanic, which isn’t really a race anyhow, is 12%.
 June 17, 2016 at 7:00pm
It is weird how in the past the big actresses were often huge draws. Women like Elizabeth Taylor, Judy Garland, Katharine Hepburn, Marilyn Monroe, and others I’m sure I’m forgetting. People would flock to the theaters to see a movie because one of these megastars were in it. But honestly, I can’t think of an actress that had that kind of star power in the past few decades. Julia Roberts maybe, but even at her peak I doubt she had the kind of draw power that Taylor or Garland had back in their day. I’m honestly not sure what changed. It’s puzzling.
The whole mega star thing is not nearly as big as it used to be. John Wayne was the top grossing actor of the 40s, 50s and 60s I doubt anyone ever comes close to a thirty years run again. Burt Reynolds was top in 70s and I can't name who was in 80s. We are just a much more fragmented society now than in the past.
They never adjust for inflation so really difficult to compare directly to actors of past to those now.
But if Gone with the Wind was judge by percentage of population that went to see a movie it is by far the most watched, no other movie has even come close.
The only women paid less than men for one of the best books and movie deals ever were Vivian Leigh, Hattie McDaniel, and Olivia de Haviland.
@WOLD - I would guess Schwarzenegger. He was a huge draw in the 80's.
Porn usurped the demand for hot starlets on the silver screen. Now all you get is frumpy wives, feminists and the occasional badass chick
 June 17, 2016 at 6:47pm
@Marnin – yeah I know, and I’m not saying the owners shouldn’t take a handsome profit if their team is hauling in the dough. But I guess, it’s just ironic because so often the people who complain about athletes being overpaid are the same people who complain about corporate CEOs making millions while their employees make minimum wage. So if you turn it around on them and point out that if the athletes weren’t making the big bucks, all that money would go into the pocket of the rich owner, they kinda start to look like one of Asimov’s robots that was just ordered to violate one of 3 laws of robotics.
 June 17, 2016 at 6:22pm
Not really, there’s only so much an agent can do when the movie producer can just go hire Ms. Some Other Hot Chick for less. If there’s anyone deserving of blame, it would be the writers, who can’t seem to write a compelling female lead to save their lives. Or perhaps the producers themselves, who don’t seem to care which pretty face gets cast as long as it’s a pretty face. Whatever the case, the big male actors like Brad Pitt or Robert Downey Jr. have massive draw power whereas, with a few exceptions, the female actors tend to be just an interchangeable array of pretty faces.
 June 17, 2016 at 6:10pm
Absolutely right. The same goes for professional athletes too. While it may seem absurd to get paid millions to toss a ball around, fans are paying those millions to see the athletes. Nobody is paying to see the ball. So if fans are paying millions to see the athletes, then who should get that money? The athletes, or some rich team owner?
Any film producer could go out and hire no-name actors who’ll work for peanuts, but odds are they’d end up with a movie that nobody would want to pay to see.
 June 17, 2016 at 5:58pm
Exactly, which I’m sure is why Elizabeth Taylor was making ten times more than Caine.
Whatever, but I'd still prefer a romantic dinner with Michael Caine than with Liz.
Actresses are starting to demand that mediocrity be rewarded in the form of equal pay even though they aren’t contributing equally to the revenue being generated.
This is akin to the “stars” of the WNBA demanding the same salary as Lebron James.
It’s ridiculous…. The actors and actresses who put butts in the movie theater seats should absolutely get paid more. Same goes for sports…..the players who draw the crowds into the stadiums and arenas get the big bucks….the others have absolutely no claim to nearly as much.
If these actresses think the offer they are getting for a role in a movie is unfair….turn the part down, or negotiate your salary up to something you believe to be fair.
If the powers that be don’t think you are worth that much….you may simply have an overinflated opinion of your skills,
Regardless of Taylor acting ability or not. She was much more well know than Caine at the time, and in the business longer who had the household name that he didn't. People went to see the movie more because of her involvement, not his.
 June 14, 2016 at 11:50am
Yeah if you want to see an “unhealthy body shape” just take a gander at Rosie O’Donnell.
“extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end.”
Good freaking grief, so because your precious little snowflakes cant’ look at a picture of a shapely attractive woman without feeling bad about themselves, we should ban pictures of shapely attractive women.
What happens when these delicate flowers see a shapely, attractive woman in the flesh? Will they be banned too? Will the government mandate that thin women eat more?
If you have a body that you’re unhappy about you have exactly two choices: change it, or deal with it. If these precious little snowflakes can’t see a picture of a thin woman without feeling demeaned or self-conscious, then they’re really not prepared for the world in which they live.
 June 13, 2016 at 4:46pm
No kidding, the guy uses ellipses like Bill Clinton uses women.