[ricgough]

I too am a lifelong fan, I believe personal politics has no bearing on ability as a performer and will judge based on the artistic output and basic humanity of a person or group rather than political affiliation. However, many fans, and I am one of them do not agree with Romney's (or more widely the current incarnation of Republican political ideology) - and in some (not necessarily all) areas find specific aspects of that abhorrent. (For the record I would cast myself as a centrist libertarian with no particular natural affiliation - for example I would look to history and proven, academically based economic theory for a solution for deficit reduction and economic growth (see John Keynes, IMF) before a right-wing, gaffe prone politician with overriding ideological, partisan and lobbyist agenda's anyday!). Where is the modern-day F.D. Rooseveldt when you need him!

When a culturally relevant recording artist puts his head above the parapet publicly then there is always going to agreement or disagreement on this amongst fans, the press and general populous. That should surely be part of the risk assesment for any business or cultural entity (and Meat, you are one of those too!) before any endorsement takes place. As an economic liberal who believes in a free market then the onus is upon that particular organisation, rather than the paying customer to provide an appropriate service and not alienate it's market base. You are in a cultural industry and that makes such political considerations relevant to your public standing, overall popularity and ultimately economic success or failure. We are discussing this in critical terms because I think we all wish you success. I certainly do. Unless you had strong market research suggesting a strong republican leaning, or had built a career based on conducive political artistic content (e.g. Dylan, Springsteen etc...) then there was always going to be a political risk to this endorsement.

I have close friends who vote very differently from me (in some cases diametrically so!) and frankly, I see the strength of a relationship in that we can row over it and agree to disagree,with personal bonds being unshaken as a result of the debate. This is where many on here have got it wrong over the last few days in my opinion.

I also may have my own opinions on artistic output which may of not be comfortable reading, but before I can hate or dislike something I have to either love or at least like it first and foremost. I don't have feelings for things I have no emotional connection to. This is often take as read by members posting due to the fact they actually spend their time in honour of a man and his music. This is not always tangible in specific posts. There is tacit approval of you and your career, your artistic output and personal likeability in the fact they are here in the first place and care enough to have an opinion first and foremost.

I feel there is mitigation on behalf of most posters here, but also Meat who obviously cares deeply about his fans and works incredibly hard to satisfy their demands.

I just wish all would simply read what they propose to say, re-read it and if they are still willing to post after consideration of others then so be it. That said, I think if that were always the case, most of the inflammatory stuff found on the web would not be posted, and the world would be a better place. That is down to personal responsibility on all sides.

I have loved Meat down the years and always will, but equally have enjoyed some performances more than others and feel some albums have greater longevity than others. On balance I love more than I hate and I believe that must be the the case for 97% of those here, even if I and others can sometimes be critical over specific points at times.

I hope I am regarded as a friend rather than an enemy, but will speak my mind if I feel the need to do so. That is all of me.

Take it or leave it as is your right.