Bruce Springsteen - The Streets of Minneapolis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

What AI? I'm the poster who shared the WSJ piece and I stand by it. You know we're allowed to agree with other people and share their opinions... right? You people constantly do, with your imbecilic Bluesky reposts from people no one's ever heard of.

I don't care if Bruce decided to write what is clearly a mediocre (and that's being generous) song in a hurry. But you're crazy if you think no one should be allowed to comment on it unless they're swooning and fawning. The song itself is awful and embarrassing, and I have no issue saying so. You disagree. Who cares?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

What AI? I'm the poster who shared the WSJ piece and I stand by it. You know we're allowed to agree with other people and share their opinions... right? You people constantly do, with your imbecilic Bluesky reposts from people no one's ever heard of.

I don't care if Bruce decided to write what is clearly a mediocre (and that's being generous) song in a hurry. But you're crazy if you think no one should be allowed to comment on it unless they're swooning and fawning. The song itself is awful and embarrassing, and I have no issue saying so. You disagree. Who cares?

I take no position on the song. It’s the whole “let’s feel bad for the murderers” take that gets in my craw. I grew up working class, and I know plenty of boys that joined forces to serve no one but themselves. Violent a-holes that beat their wives and would have relished the chance to crack some skulls. I’m sure Bruce knew them too, even though he’s 30+ years older than me. And they are going to escape accountability yet again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

What AI? I'm the poster who shared the WSJ piece and I stand by it. You know we're allowed to agree with other people and share their opinions... right? You people constantly do, with your imbecilic Bluesky reposts from people no one's ever heard of.

I don't care if Bruce decided to write what is clearly a mediocre (and that's being generous) song in a hurry. But you're crazy if you think no one should be allowed to comment on it unless they're swooning and fawning. The song itself is awful and embarrassing, and I have no issue saying so. You disagree. Who cares?

The WSJ opinion piece is pure trash IMO. I guess we each have our own opinions. "Embarrassing" come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

What AI? I'm the poster who shared the WSJ piece and I stand by it. You know we're allowed to agree with other people and share their opinions... right? You people constantly do, with your imbecilic Bluesky reposts from people no one's ever heard of.

I don't care if Bruce decided to write what is clearly a mediocre (and that's being generous) song in a hurry. But you're crazy if you think no one should be allowed to comment on it unless they're swooning and fawning. The song itself is awful and embarrassing, and I have no issue saying so. You disagree. Who cares?

I guess be prepared to hear such an "embarrassing song" because it's being praised far and wide. Guess you'll have to avoid it for a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind the guy lives on a 400 acre ranch. And at 76 he's probably not doing the dirty work himself.

He's out there making sure he will always have a steady supply of under-the-table labor.

You better come with receipts if you’re going to make a claim like that. He came from nothing, unlike your boys Santa Monica Miller and Silver Spoon Trump.

He’s a zillionaire who wants everybody to think he’s still a working man. He’s a fraud.

Unlike Trump, whose altar you worship at

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind the guy lives on a 400 acre ranch. And at 76 he's probably not doing the dirty work himself.

He's out there making sure he will always have a steady supply of under-the-table labor.

You better come with receipts if you’re going to make a claim like that. He came from nothing, unlike your boys Santa Monica Miller and Silver Spoon Trump.

He’s a zillionaire who wants everybody to think he’s still a working man. He’s a fraud.

Unlike Trump, whose altar you worship at

Yeah, an incredibly lazy argument - and so many MAGAs just adore Springsteen. It's why this is important to mess with their very feeble brains. The cognitive dissonance is off the charts.

[Anonymous]

Trump has already trashed the song per my newsfeed. Job done!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump has already trashed the song per my newsfeed. Job done!

It's perfect because there are PLENTY of Springsteen Trump voters. Keep alienating everyone ::clapping::

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a long-time Springsteen fan, like the message of the song but I gotta say... I don't really care for it.

Creatively, it seems like a rehash of Streets of Philadelphia.

Yes, I think that's intentional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a long-time Springsteen fan, like the message of the song but I gotta say... I don't really care for it.

Creatively, it seems like a rehash of Streets of Philadelphia.

Yes, I think that's intentional.

Too bad it's actually nothing like the powerful and heartbreaking song, Streets of Philadelphia. This sounds like a spoof.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump has already trashed the song per my newsfeed. Job done!

Meanwhile…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born to Run His Mouth

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/born-to-run-his-mouth-d0da2a4a?st=xrPebu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Paywall. What’s the hot take? That entertainers should simply entertain and shut up?

That should be a gift link.

Requires signup. TLR?

The best thing Bruce Springsteen ever did was admit he was a phoney.
It was a late-career reveal that endeared him to me—a fan grown weary of his aggressive partisanship.

In his 2016 autobiography, Mr. Springsteen confessed that he wasn’t the working class hero he’d always pretended to be. That blue-collar persona was borrowed from his father, who, in Mr. Springsteen’s telling, was a complicated and difficult man.

My sense is that Mr. Springsteen likes complicated and difficult men. His songs are filled with them. Screw-ups who can’t get their lives on track. Men crippled by heartbreak or haunted by demons, for whom daily survival is hard work. He loves those guys.

What he doesn’t love is anyone who disagrees with him politically.

On Wednesday, Mr. Springsteen released a new song, “The Streets of Minneapolis.” As the title suggests, it was recorded in a hurry and aimed at the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. You won’t be the least bit surprised by the undercooked lyrics or the overcooked delivery.

Mr. Springsteen’s disdain for Republicans predates MAGA. He called George W. Bush and Dick Cheney monsters. He accused them of torturing the Constitution and blackening the soul of America—“a generous nation,” as he wrote in a letter endorsing Barack Obama in 2008, “with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems.”

The thing about generosity is that it isn’t really generosity if it doesn’t extend to those with whom you disagree. Same for empathy. Same for nuance.

I think most Americans accept that immigration is a complex problem. We don’t want to break up families and ruin lives. But we do need to have a border, and we do need to have laws. If there were an easy solution we’d have cracked it by now.

Of course, Mr. Springsteen thinks there is an easy solution: Let ’em in and leave ’em alone. That’s a point of view, and he’s welcome to it. He’s also welcome to acknowledge that his wealth and fame insulate him from the consequences of an open border. He never does.

In a different world, the ICE and Border Patrol agents involved in the Minneapolis shootings might make sympathetic subjects for a Springsteen song. They are working-class guys, probably. Military veterans, in some cases. They may have gone to college, though probably not to Yale.

Mr. Springsteen won’t agree, but I’d guess most of them joined ICE or Border Patrol for the right reasons—that is, out of a genuine desire to serve.

They may have been poorly trained. They may have made mistakes under impossible pressure. No way did they wake up expecting to kill someone that day. In fact, I’d bet they’re heartbroken about the deaths of Pretti and Good.

But to believe that you’d have to believe in complexity and nuance.

Mr. Springsteen prefers the comfort of his anger. He’d rather have the moral certainty of blind loyalty to partisan absolutes. Those agents aren’t real people to him. They aren’t veterans and patriots. They aren’t fathers, husbands and sons.

No, they’re “federal thugs.” They’re “King Trump’s private army.”

Strange that a guy so adept at painting colorful portraits of complex and difficult men would be content to work only with black and white. I liked him better when he knew he was a phony.

Yeah, that’s a hot take alright. Should I write an article about how this slop is exactly the sort of disingenuous crap I’d expect in the WSJ and how I preferred it when they stayed in their lane?

Stay angry, Bruce.

They're sharing crappy WSJ OPINION pieces because they can't even come up with something on their own. I'd encourage the prior poster to say what's wrong about him releasing this song in their own words. (NO AI! - )

What AI? I'm the poster who shared the WSJ piece and I stand by it. You know we're allowed to agree with other people and share their opinions... right? You people constantly do, with your imbecilic Bluesky reposts from people no one's ever heard of.

I don't care if Bruce decided to write what is clearly a mediocre (and that's being generous) song in a hurry. But you're crazy if you think no one should be allowed to comment on it unless they're swooning and fawning. The song itself is awful and embarrassing, and I have no issue saying so. You disagree. Who cares?

Wow the first amendment is still a thing.

Funny how the WSJ today printed "There was no fraud in the 2020 Election".

Awesome you get to hate the song, more of us love the song we all have our 1st Amendment rights til November 2026
Screw off you anti American Shit. Bruce is correct his lyrics are great and you are a cult member of the dumbest anti american cult ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind the guy lives on a 400 acre ranch. And at 76 he's probably not doing the dirty work himself.

He's out there making sure he will always have a steady supply of under-the-table labor.

You better come with receipts if you’re going to make a claim like that. He came from nothing, unlike your boys Santa Monica Miller and Silver Spoon Trump.

He’s a zillionaire who wants everybody to think he’s still a working man. He’s a fraud.

Unlike Trump, whose altar you worship at

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind the guy lives on a 400 acre ranch. And at 76 he's probably not doing the dirty work himself.

He's out there making sure he will always have a steady supply of under-the-table labor.

So what?

Doesn't change the facts he wants people employed Trump wants you begging for food. Springsteen is an American Trump is a two bit con from flushing NY who never once worked a day in his life and he's taking everything you ever worked for fool