Hate Speech

[heather borean]

This Canadian Filker is astounded. Conventions have begun saying hey people there are things you can't say or sing at our conventions, and the reaction of some filkers is to list a number of songs and say "This means I can't sing these songs" or "Under the First Amendment . . . . " Some of these same filkers are choosing to vote with their pocket books. And of course that is their right. Money is what makes the world go round.

What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flowers are crying about is dangerous. You know as well as I do that words have power. Words shape us, they shape how we think they shape society. POC are dying at the hands of cops, every day, on both sides of the border. But if we try and make language less racist, people get upset. I can say what I want. Free speech. At least that's what I'm hearing from the south, you still haven't learned have you, The Tolerance Paradox. The Country that tolerates everything, will tolerate anything. And I am very much afraid that is where the States is. A country that will allow anything in the name of freedom.

I want to go to OVFF in October. I think I will be safe. There is a Worldcon in December in somewhere near Washington DC. I doubt I will be able to afford to go. But if I could? I wouldn't, your country simply isn't safe.

We come together to sing, to share JOY in the music, politics are not joyful, I work hard these days to be uninformed. Can't we just sing? Can't we just share the joy of music?

[Scott Dorsey]

heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flow=
>ers are crying about is dangerous. You know as well as I do that words hav=
>e power. Words shape us, they shape how we think they shape society. POC =
>are dying at the hands of cops, every day, on both sides of the border. B=
>ut if we try and make language less racist, people get upset. I can say wha=
>t I want. Free speech. At least that's what I'm hearing from the south, y=
>ou still haven't learned have you, The Tolerance Paradox. The Country tha=
>t tolerates everything, will tolerate anything. And I am very much afraid =
>that is where the States is. A country that will allow anything in the nam=
>e of freedom. =20

Well, that's sort of the thing. Voltaire said "I disgree with what you say
but I will defend your right to say it." Free speech is a dangerous and
touchy thing and it's a sword that cuts both ways. But for the most part,
I think it's better than the alternatives.

>I want to go to OVFF in October. I think I will be safe. There is a Worldc=
>on in December in somewhere near Washington DC. I doubt I will be able to =

>afford to go. But if I could? I wouldn't, your country simply isn't safe.

On the whole, our country is pretty safe. If you look at actual statistics,
you'll see violent crime is far, far less prevalent than it was back in the
seventies. If you talk to the people on the right, they'll tell you that
it's an unsafe place and we need more guns to protect ourselves from all
the dangers. If you talk to the people on the left, they'll tell you that
it's an unsafe place and we need to eliminate guns because they are the
primary danger in themselves. In reality both the left and the right are
benefitting from the perception of insecurity and often promoting it.

Our problem isn't free speech, our problem is a shortage of logic and reason.
On both sides of the aisle, I am sorry to report.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[heather borean]

Leaving aside safety, and all of that, Karl Popper, who came up with the idea of the intolerance paradox was quite right.
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

Look him up. Read his other words on this topic. Understand that when you allow any one to say or do anything with out consequence then when what you get is the States. If it were not so, then you would still be fighting endless battles on Abortion.
Christians would not be whining and crying that their "rights" were being trampled every other day. Living in Canada is like living in a second story walk up and the first story is a bunch of I have no polite words. Your country might have passed the mark where of no return, I don't know. All I do know is this. Karl Popper knew what he was talking about. This is SO far of topic I am sorry mods.
This is why I would love to have a filk with just filk songs.

[Gary McGath]

On 5/31/21 9:49 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flow=
>> ers are crying about is dangerous. You know as well as I do that words hav=
>> e power. Words shape us, they shape how we think they shape society. POC =
>> are dying at the hands of cops, every day, on both sides of the border. B=
>> ut if we try and make language less racist, people get upset. I can say wha=
>> t I want. Free speech. At least that's what I'm hearing from the south, y=
>> ou still haven't learned have you, The Tolerance Paradox. The Country tha=
>> t tolerates everything, will tolerate anything. And I am very much afraid =
>> that is where the States is. A country that will allow anything in the nam=
>> e of freedom. =20
>

I missed the original of this, probably because I have my settings to
block Gmail posts by default. It's very depressing to see something like
this expressed by a member of the filk community. I'll try not to make
assumptions, such as whom she is addressing.

But she is calling at least some of the people who stand up for freedom
"dainty little wallflowers" and some opposition to censorship "crying."
This kind of rhetoric usually comes from people on the right trying to
prove how tough they are, but it serves for anyone trying to stomp on
other people's freedom.

Yes, cops kill people. The solution to this is not to give cops the
power to arrest the people who expose and denounce their actions. Free
speech is what brings their actions out into the open.

But, Ms. Borean, you'd only outlaw statements which you don't like? It
doesn't work that way. Give the rulers the power to outlaw speech, and
they'll outlaw speech which annoys them or threatens their hold on
power. Look at what's been happening in Hong Kong for just one example.

Look at a little of the United States' history, which you say we haven't
learned. Look at the abolitionist movement. People who spoke out against
slavery were threatened, beaten, arrested, and sometimes killed. There
was no excess of tolerance there.

The "tolerance paradox" is a case of sloppy thinking that started from a
misreading of a hastily written footnote in Popper's _The Open Society
and Its Enemies_. Now the people who proclaim it don't even seem to know
that much.

The key to the obfuscation is to omit some necessary words. The freedom
to do anything that does not violate the rights of others (and, by the
way, there is no right not to have one's feelings hurt) becomes "the
freedom to do anything." We can't have that, say the advocates of
censorship, so we need to outlaw speech which we don't approve of.

For instance, Canada has criminalized "alarming" the queen, and people
can be thrown in jail for years for doing it. I don't think that law has
been enforced for a long time, but such laws are always useful for
locking someone inconvenient away.

Anyone who thinks the Bill of Rights has turned America into a dystopia
of tolerance hasn't read much news in a long time. Try a Web search for
"US Capitol, January 6, 2021" for starters.

Those who think freedom is the great danger in America should think
carefully about what they wish for.


--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

[John Davis]

On Monday, May 31, 2021 at 9:14:26 AM UTC-4, heather...@gmail.com wrote:

> We come together to sing, to share JOY in the music, politics are not joyful, I work hard these days to be uninformed. Can't we just sing? Can't we just share the joy of music?

Though I agree with you that Politics are not all that Joyful
Some of the best music I've heard in 2020/2021 was Political in nature.
And no. I'm not going to post any links or lyrics.

I will say this. The songsmith often tells the truth. Tells it like it is. and for many.. that's very painful very painful indeed for the Truth BURNS.

[heather borean]

On Tuesday, June 1, 2021 at 5:39:20 AM UTC-4, Gary McGath wrote:
> On 5/31/21 9:49 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flow=
> >> ers are crying about is dangerous. You know as well as I do that words hav=
> >> e power. Words shape us, they shape how we think they shape society. POC =
> >> are dying at the hands of cops, every day, on both sides of the border. B=
> >> ut if we try and make language less racist, people get upset. I can say wha=
> >> t I want. Free speech. At least that's what I'm hearing from the south, y=
> >> ou still haven't learned have you, The Tolerance Paradox. The Country tha=
> >> t tolerates everything, will tolerate anything. And I am very much afraid =
> >> that is where the States is. A country that will allow anything in the nam=
> >> e of freedom. =20
> >
> I missed the original of this, probably because I have my settings to
> block Gmail posts by default. It's very depressing to see something like
> this expressed by a member of the filk community. I'll try not to make
> assumptions, such as whom she is addressing.
>
> But she is calling at least some of the people who stand up for freedom
> "dainty little wallflowers" and some opposition to censorship "crying."
>

That was the original. I was calling you a dainty little wall flower. I am tired, of the rhetoric that surrounds this idea that freedom of speech some how trumps everything else.

Or at least that’s how it seems to me. The great and glorious United States of America. The inventor of so many things. Lowest in industrialized nations in anything you care to name to anyone who has a soul.

I watched the happenings on January 6th. I wept. This is the freedom you want to defend?

I say that the Monarchy is a waste of time and money, all the time. I say it in public. When Big Ears takes the throne, oh ghods. You do know that some people believe in the divine right of kings right? Like some people believe that ghod inspired the Founding Fathers to created the States? It’s all BS

That law has been on the books since Victorias time. We have a whole federal political party who don’t support the queen.

We aren’t talking about hurt feelings here. Leave the states out of it. In Canada, we’re talking about the reshaping of an entire nation. From the ground up. To leave out the racist beginnings we were built on. As far as I’m concerned this is nothing more or less than the reimagining of the way government works.

You can say and do what ever you want, that is your right, in the most screwed up nation in the world. You keep thinking about yourself and only yourself, after all, you are the most important person to look after. I only hope you will be around to see what my brain imagines. And what results from it. I hope I can make it happen. Less government isn’t that what libertarians want?

>
> --
> Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

I’m tired of politics in filking. It’s bad enough that we have the internal politics the stuff that I stumbled into before I knew it was there. Why should I have to deal with american politics as well?

[heather borean]

I appreciate you not sharing the lyrics. I’ve been trying to balance my mental health back to something resembling normal. Right now, not forever, that means I’m avoiding politics. Even domestic politics. I hate being uninformed. But really whats going to change. I figure in six months or so I’ll be ready to start reading and listening again. But I have to get on an even keel first. 🤪

[Scott Dorsey]

heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>That was the original. I was calling you a dainty little wall flower. I am=
> tired, of the rhetoric that surrounds this idea that freedom of speech som=
>e how trumps everything else.

Freedom of speech means the freedom to express any opinion. It does not
mean the freedom to express spurious information as fact, although some
misguided souls appear to think it does.

There are countries where there are specific exceptions to generalized freedom
of speech, such as Germany's anti-Nazi rules. I can see why such things are
enacted, but I also worry that such things can be used as excuses to add more
restrictions.

Freedom of speech is a dangerous thing and has to be managed well.

>I watched the happenings on January 6th. I wept. This is the freedom you w=
>ant to defend?

What does that have to do with freedom of speech? Hint: freedom of speech
does not cover or accomodate lies. You can have freedom of speech without
accepting lies.

>I say that the Monarchy is a waste of time and money, all the time. I say i=
>t in public. When Big Ears takes the throne, oh ghods. You do know that so=
>me people believe in the divine right of kings right? Like some people bel=
>ieve that ghod inspired the Founding Fathers to created the States? It=E2=
>=80=99s all BS

Monarchies always become disasters, because you don't get to decide who is
king. I have seen good kings and bad kings. Mostly, however, I have seen bad
kings because after being in power for long enough anyone is likely to become
too complacent. This is why term limits are what make democracy work.
Having lived under a couple of unlimited monarchs like Ferdinand Marcos and
Baby Doc, I am not a fan of monarchy. Freedom of speech exists to prevent
monarchies from being created.

>You can say and do what ever you want, that is your right, in the most scre=
>wed up nation in the world. You keep thinking about yourself and only your=
>self, after all, you are the most important person to look after. I only h=
>ope you will be around to see what my brain imagines. And what results fro=
>m it. I hope I can make it happen. Less government isn=E2=80=99t that wha=
>t libertarians want?

I'm very confused about what any of this has to do with freedom of speech.

[heather borean]

I am out of the habit of messaging in forums Gary brought up several points and I was responding to them. He brought up Jan 6th. It has to do with freedom.


As to the last, I can’t with words, or anything change what Gary thinks. I can’t change what happens in other places. I believe that the answer to rooting out the ills in our society lies in not merely changing how we speak, but in changing how we govern. I’m not going to try and explain my idea here, I am not a wordsmith. I can occasionally wrestle with words and write something worth listening to, but in this type of setting my word limitations are easy to see.

I will try and match better in future.

[Tim Merrigan]

On 1 Jun 2021 14:26:43 -0000, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>This is why term limits are what make democracy work.

Enforceable term limits, e.g. no person may hold any office for more
than two (consecutive*) terms in any office, are IMHO antithetical to
republican democracy. I approve of office holders being limited to
all, and only, the terms they can get their constincency to vote them
in for. Ideally with universal suferage.

*Alabama governorship, which is why Lurleen Wallace was governor for
at least one term.
--

Qualified immuninity = vertual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[Arthur T.]

In
Message-ID:<892de873-e640-45ac...@googlegroups.com>,

heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:

>What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flowers are crying about is dangerous.

May I be so bold as to say: "KABONG!"

Politics, as it pertains to filkcons, and even gencons, is on-topic.
Politics as a general topic is not.

If you're going to continue a political argument outside the realm of
filkdom and fandom, please do so with rhythm, rhyme, and/or scansion.

ObFilk (ttto How Much Is That Doggie In the Window?)

How much is free speech worth in this country?
How much is it worth everywhere?
Please answer this in some other newsgroup,
Or answer in rhyme if you dare.

--
Arthur T. - ar23hur "at" pobox "dot" com

[heather borean]

On Tuesday, June 1, 2021 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Arthur T. wrote:
> In
> Message-ID:<892de873-e640-45ac...@googlegroups.com>,
> heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What bothers me is this, hate speech, the thing you little dainty wall flowers are crying about is dangerous.
> May I be so bold as to say: "KABONG!"
>
> Politics, as it pertains to filkcons, and even gencons, is on-topic.
> Politics as a general topic is not.
>

Point taken.

> If you're going to continue a political argument outside the realm of
> filkdom and fandom, please do so with rhythm, rhyme, and/or scansion.
>
> ObFilk (ttto How Much Is That Doggie In the Window?)

If I could I would. It still wouldn’t make any difference.

[Leslie]

*Snort* I've been making my living on words (usually with music) most of my life, and I've had plenty of chances to see just how powerful words really are -- which is, *as powerful as the listener makes them*. I've sung songs that started fights because of differences of opinion among the listeners. Even backed up with music, or even with psychic input, *words can't compel* anyone, or anything; the best they can do is persuade. Words have "power" only when they're orders given by people with power, that is, people with armies of obedient armed men to enforce their words. Which of us has that? All we can do is counteract words/arguments we don't like with words/arguments we prefer.

And as for the Tolerance Paradox, remember that actions are very different from words; you can safely let people say whatever they want to while insisting that there are *actions* we won't tolerate. Where's the problem in understanding that? I'm honestly more worried about the kind of people who can't understand it, who claim that either words are "dangerous" or that "silence is violence", because such folk are dangerously out of touch with reality. Heaven help us when such folk get into positions of real power, when they really can summon up armies to enforce their orders. It's bad enough when they have enough economic power to rob others of their livelihoods. It's distinctly annoying when they have enough political or economic power to shut down or censor public gatherings, such as conventions.

[Leslie]

[Gary McGath]

On 6/3/21 7:15 PM, Leslie wrote:
> And as for the Tolerance Paradox, remember that actions are very different from words; you can safely let people say whatever they want to while insisting that there are *actions* we won't tolerate. Where's the problem in understanding that? I'm honestly more worried about the kind of people who can't understand it, who claim that either words are "dangerous" or that "silence is violence", because such folk are dangerously out of touch with reality. Heaven help us when such folk get into positions of real power, when they really can summon up armies to enforce their orders. It's bad enough when they have enough economic power to rob others of their livelihoods. It's distinctly annoying when they have enough political or economic power to shut down or censor public gatherings, such as conventions.

Well put. The so-called "tolerance paradox," as I think I mentioned
before, comes from an overwrought reading of a footnote in Popper's _The
Open Society and Its Enemies_. It's a pair of books very much worth
reading, but the footnote is obviously something Popper dashed off
without his usual level of careful thought. Such things happen in
everyone's work, and it's unfortunate when people pounce on them to
build dogmas.

It's worth saying a few things about tolerance. First, the word implies
that it's directed at something wrong or bad. You don't "tolerate" good
attributes, and someone who merely tolerates differences in appearance
needs to learn to do better. It implies a lesser reaction, not no reaction.

Example: I think the idea that you'll burn in Hell forever for not
believing in Jesus is a bad idea. I'll say so, but I won't scream at
people or beat them up for believing it.

In the political realm, tolerance of speech means not answering it by
force. The basic reason for this is that you can't arrive at truth
through superior force. Putting people in jail for their ideas doesn't
convince them that they're wrong, only that they're facing powerful enemies.

Another reason is that bad ideas can be answered by reason. A bad idea
is one which is untenable and irrational. While there are short-term
exceptions, good ideas beat bad ones in the realm of debate, and no one
has to decree in advance which ones are the good ones.

The "paradox of tolerance" people have no confidence in the power of
reason but full confidence in the power of coercion. They think that
reason will lose in a fair debate. They think that that if authorities
have the power to suppress ideas, they'll suppress the bad ones. Have
they ever read a history book?

The people who are terrified of a society with free speech are terrified
of people. They place their bet with a powerful elite that — they hope
— will uphold the ideas they like and suppress the rabble that would
destroy society if unapproved ideas aren't suppressed.

I've written a song about this mindset:

Lullaby for a Benevolent Despot
Words: Gary McGath, Copyright 2005, 2017
Music: T. J. Burnside Clapp, "Lullaby for a Weary World"

I wonder how my world can live with all her different factions.
Let me rule the world.
And I'm scared of all that people do and how they often come to blows,
And I wish the power to change it all could rest within my hands.

I've seen her people dying for such bold and bloody causes.
Let me rule the world.
For the bodies of the innocent are crushed by hist'ry's turning wheel,
And I want to bring it to a halt before it turns again.

Chorus:
Oh, give me the power to rule my weary world.
Give me a charming voice to soothe those who distrust.
Make my arms strong enough to stop those who resist.
And make me a government so pure and fine
That it will bring this weary world some peace.

I'd like to legislate away each ling'ring cause of hatred.
Let me rule the world.
And although I'd have to break some eggs, that's how you make an omelet,
For when I'd put down all resistance, peace would reign again.

Bridge:
And if her fighting will not stop, I'll send the troops to stop it,
And sing my song of peace above the noise and pain of war.
And if the violence still won't end, I might curtail some freedoms,
But you know I'll give them back. Yes, I swear I'll give them back.

And if my plan should go all wrong, I'll answer in the darkness.
Let me rule the world.
And pray a tender god will grant forgiveness for all that I've done
And grant the world I tried to rescue one more chance to live.
May God please forgive me, for I did it all for love.

Final chorus:
Oh, take back the power to rule my weary world.
Take back the charming voice that soothed those who distrust.
Take back the deadly arms to stop those who resist.
And take back the fantasy so foul and mad
That I could force this weary world to peace.

[Arthur T.]

In Message-ID:<s9e7vr$mg3$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:

>you can't arrive at truth
>through superior force. Putting people in jail for their ideas doesn't
>convince them that they're wrong, only that they're facing powerful enemies.

That's going into my growing list of quotes.

Also, people aren't jailed to try to convince them, or anyone else.
They're jailed to keep them quiet, and to scare other people into
being quiet.

>I've written a song about this mindset:

I didn't want to post to this thread without at least an obfilk, but
that reminds me that I do have a filk I can repost that's somewhat on
topic.

But before that, some selections *from* that growing list of quotes
I'm keeping:

Laws against hate speech are almost universally used by governments
to punish people they don't like, rather than to protect those who
most people normally consider the targets of hate speech.
- Mike Masnick

When people say they want to ban hate speech, what they mean is they
want to ban speech that they hate.
- Ira Glasser, ex-director of the ACLU

As I stood before the gates I realized that I never want to be
as certain about anything as were the people who built this
place.
- Rabbi Sheila Peltz Weinberg on her visit to Auschwitz

And, as my obfilk, a kind of companion piece to Gary's:

Title: If I Wore the Ring
ttto: If I Ruled the World by Leslie Bricusse & Cyril Ornadel

If I wore the Ring
I'd get rid of all the evil around
All my good deeds would be seen as profound
I'd expound on the ways I'd use the powers I'd found

If I wore the Ring
Sauron's end would be so easy to cause
His defeat would surely bring much applause
And because I'd be good people'd praise my new laws

I'd rule over all Middle Earth
No evil ones could hide from my sight
They would become just objects of mirth
I'd abase all of them with my new might

If I wore the Ring
All my friends would be on top of the heap
All who tried to harm them'd I'd know as creeps
They would weep from this power I bring

Everyone would say I was grand
Disobedience would all be banned
I would rule evermore if I wore the Ring

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <892de873-e640-45ac...@googlegroups.com>,

heather borean <heather...@gmail.com> wrote:
>This Canadian Filker is astounded.

I'm astounded by this.

I've been going to cons for some 40 years. Filking for
almost that long; as soon as I found out about it.

I do not recall ever, not once, ever hearing a filk song
that expressed racist sentiments or supported any such
thing.

I've heard quite a few "All Republicans are Nazis" type
songs, with no pushback, but none attacking Communists.
This has annoyed me considerably, but I have never made
an issue of it until this posting.

I think you're getting everything you know about the United
States from the evening "News". "News" thrives on
sensationalism and Viewing With Alarm. Truth, not so much.
(All "news" programs, of whatever slant.)

--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <s9e7vr$mg3$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>Lullaby for a Benevolent Despot
>Words: Gary McGath, Copyright 2005, 2017
>Music: T. J. Burnside Clapp, "Lullaby for a Weary World"

**** Applause!!! ****

[Gary McGath]

On 6/21/21 12:30 PM, Mike Van Pelt wrote:

> I've heard quite a few "All Republicans are Nazis" type
> songs, with no pushback, but none attacking Communists.

Here's one I wrote back in 2000:

Elian
Words: Gary McGath, Copyright 2000
Music: Leslie Fish, "Ferryman"

Copyright 2000 by Gary McGath. May not be published, electronically
or in print, without the author's permission. May not be archived
except for personal use.


A storm had broken off Florida's coast
As the passengers clung to the boat.
A young boy sat watching in silence and fear
As the waves came up, drenching his coat.
He clung to his mother and stepfather there
And asked with his eyes when they'd land;
She looked for the seashore, still far out of sight,
And said as he held to her hand:

Chorus:
Elian, Elian, be strong of heart;
We must risk a stormy and dangerous sea.
Elian, Elian, we'll get across,
And we'll come to a land where we're free.

A fisherman found him on Thanksgiving day,
Adrift and still clinging to life.
The small craft had capsized and most of them drowned,
The sea claimed the man and the wife.
The boy reached the land which they'd risked all to reach,
But nothing remained of his own;
Nothing but hope and a new chance to live,
And the knowledge he was not alone.

Chorus

The aged tyrant of his native land
Demanded the boy be returned.
He said, "He is ours, and our own he'll remain;
The homeland's claim may not be spurned."
The boy's father pleaded, "With me he belongs,
Not out on the sea and the foam.
He's lived through such danger, too much for a child.
Now let him return to his home."

Chorus

The givers of blind Justice declared
The law said the boy could not stay.
His grandmothers and his cousin declared
That they never would give him away.
But with battering ram and with gun came the men
To send him to his former state;
For all that he'd been through, he had to submit
To an illegal alien's fate.

Chorus

Today the ghosts are walking again,
The shades out of many an age.
The Hebrews who fled from the Nile Delta land,
The fugitives from Caesar's rage,
The slaves who escaped by the Underground Rail,
The Jews out of old Germany;
They all are awake and remember today
The price of the ferryman's fee.

Chorus

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <saqii7$i8d$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>On 6/21/21 12:30 PM, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>
>> I've heard quite a few "All Republicans are Nazis" type
>> songs, with no pushback, but none attacking Communists.
>
>Here's one I wrote back in 2000:
>
>Elian
>Words: Gary McGath, Copyright 2000
>Music: Leslie Fish, "Ferryman"

Good one!