that shitheap thread with >400 replies just archived. we're not doing this shit again.recucklican faggots can have their AI slop, it's the only thing that gives them joy.
>>129273556I may not care for Bruce Springsteen's politics, but that AI slop song is insulting to me.The tune is maudlin, overly dramatic, poorly written and kitsch. AI voice notwithstanding (overlooking this takes work), the first chorus hits high notes best left for the last chorus when the tune is arranged to build towards a crescendo after an emotional bridge, not overwhelm the listener out of the gate.The lyrics are also divorced entirely from the right's relationship with Charlie Kirk. The right responded strongly because he was entirely milquetoast and ultimately trying to keep young men voting Republican rather than agitating for change against liberal progressive political power. His assassination sent a strong signal to e-right that, in the eyes of the deranged left-wing activists, even a man as mild as Charlie Kirk was no different than Tucker Carlson, Pat Buchanan, Mike Peinovich, Nick Fuentes or Eric Striker. The song's lyrics should've reflected that. Instead, we get this bullshit:>He stood unshaken, a voice in the storm>A man of conviction, a heart reborn>He spoke the truth when the cost was high>He lived for Jesus, unafraid to dieNo one cared Charlie Kirk was a Christian. They cared because he was a supposed conservative.
who out here eating pussyhyperpop version of streets of Minneapolis might fuck
>>129273556>we are the kike's disposable little lap dog
>>129273556Disagree on The Boss with this one, but I will always choose it over We are Charlie Kirk out of principle because it's not AI Slop. And if you choose the Left side of this image just to "own the libs" then you're an unserious and unprincipled person
They both sound like AI
>>129273556>inside you are two wolves
>>129273556We are Charlie Kirk is a great song. There is no evidence of it being AI at all. Leftists just started saying that it was and then it nysteriously appeared on wikipedia as a "fact". It is a true anthem. Then they point to thr lyrics allegedly being AI, may I point them to the poetry of Gorman, Biden's poet laureate, which is far worse than the lyrics of this song.
>>129273769It is 100 percent AI. It's published under the SP Music Project which focuses on AI generated content. You lost dude.
>>129273779Honestly I don't even care if it is AI, it is far better than any "music" any leftist has put out.
Witnessing songs like these get made makes me wonder if some of the similar social justice-related events of our history were as bad as they're made out to be. Obviously, today, this place isn't an oppressive dystopia the way songs like these make it out to be, so I have to wonder if it wasn't the same back then, too.
>>129273788We're going back to the moon next month. The 2020s are the new 1960s. Make of this what you will
>>129273556I didn't even really like the Bruce song but it still has the undeniable passion and sovl of a real artist speaking his mind and earnestly reacting to something. The Charlie Kirk song was just another empty AI grift and a final punchline in the protracted joke of the poor guy's cynical, explorative, pandering mourning period.
>>129273556What kind of bullshit is this? AI isn't music.
>>129273769yes saar charlie kirk song very good song saar
>>129273769The record label specializes in AI music. I actually listened to the entire album and every song is nearly identical.
>>129273787>it's not true>but if it is, it's a good thing
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=17GCBtKYaOg&si=eHeLgOwMDMtsbgRk
>>129273788The whole 60s civil rights era was filled with lies and popaganda but since democrats and progressives won they got to rewrite history
