^ I didn't name the Big3, as simply put...it goes without saying. :thumb:

It can have good effects, but be devastating to a band also. I'm neutral for this on the most part, but a band should only write about politics when it is a subject that will not fade away. Something that 10 years down the line, the world will still be experiencing, just nothing about a current problem.
i.e. presidents, etc. Plus it probably would get more people intrested in politics, so it can have a good effect.

It all depends on how much they know about the situation, yet some peopel will follow a bands politics to act like a sort of groupie, having no thoughts on their own. If The band is going to be political they should have all their facys straight, look into the historical events leading up to whats happening, and/or see both sides of the argument. The last thing we need is mislead people blabbering on about something they learned from a band. Basically liek Crowquill said, the punk rockers who go around saying ****ee bush have obviousley not been able to make a logical descision for they have not looked into both sides of the argument. Anyways Say we Take the song Ohio by the band CSNY we are presented with a song about the Kent state murders, this song is good because it told the story about how the students were protesting, and were shot down by soldiers. It's accurate and got the story out to millions of Americans who bought the single. Also sometimes, take the instance of john Lennon's song Imagine, It's political, but I just can't grasp how someone who lives in a mansion can sing about having no possesions... it's misleadinf, not that I don'y like his music, I just don't like how he is saying thsi stuff, but yet he has millions of dollars worth of stuff.

Well put. I think Lennon meant imagine what it would be like not having it. Yet people complain everyday about something, when they could be far worse off.