Artists That SHOULD Be in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame: The 1960s

RRHallofFame

The current crop of artists and bands vying for entry into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is a very impressive lists. Cutting across all genres, including rap, pop, rock, metal and alternative music (it is arguable that folk isn’t included, but that’s a rarity instead of the norm), the potential inductees in 2020 will have many more shots at the brass ring. But who from the past may be running out of chances at getting into the Rock Hall?

There are 221 artists and/or groups in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, and many might say that the truly immortal have already been enshrined. It is tough to nitpick this fact, but in this first part of a series of essays on this subject, I was able to come up with five artists from the 1950s who have yet to be inducted for their influences on the world of rock music. In this, the second part of a multi-part essay series, the 1960s will take center stage.

It can be argued that, of all the generations that have been covered by the Rock Hall, the 1960s have been scoured thoroughly for those that should be inducted. That isn’t the case, however, including one group whose contemporaries have earned their seat in music’s version of Valhalla but haven’t gotten the call yet themselves. (As a reminder, we’re not including those that have been nominated this year. And this by no means is a comprehensive list of those who should be inducted – they are arguably the most notable oversights, however.)

Blood, Sweat & Tears

BloodSweatAndTears

There are those out there that would argue that Steppenwolf might be a better selection here, but I am holding forth Blood, Sweat & Tears as the choice. One of the most highly trained bands as far as musicianship, BST incorporated a vast repertoire of styles into their music. Jazz, blues, and country were all fused together to bring out the recognizable sounds of BST, racking up three Top Ten singles (albeit no Number One songs) and ten overall Hot 100 tracks in their career along with massive critical acclaim for their work.

A few things that hold back Steppenwolf might hold back BST, however. They were only around for a short period of time (1969-1974), much like Steppenwolf’s 68-72 tenure. Second, when you look at who can claim to have been a member of the band, there’s a LONG list of players who played under the BST banner (I joked with another person that Steppenwolf’s roster of former members was as long as an NFL roster – BST’s is just about as bad!). I choose BST over Steppenwolf because of the melding of different styles into a new part of the rock scene – while Steppenwolf made the term “heavy metal” come about, it was about motorcycles, not the music they were doing!

Lou Rawls

LouRawls

Rawls was one of those vocalists a person could hear and, once they were told who the singer was, that person would say “THAT’S Lou Rawls? I LOVE HIM!” That butter-soft baritone (to bass) voice was heard beginning in 1965, when he hit the charts with “Three O’Clock in the Mornin’.” His first #1 song on the Billboard R&B charts was 1966, when he would take “Love is a Hurtin’ Thing.” Overall, Rawls earned his way onto the Billboard Hot 100 18 times, the Billboard R&B 100 28 times and earn three Grammys for his body of work, with “You’ll Never Find (Another Love Like Mine” perhaps recognized as his masterpiece.

Rawls arguably paved the way for such deep-voiced vocalists as Barry White, 2002 Rock Hall inductee Isaac Hayes and a few others. And they would go on to bigger and better success than Rawls did. But that shouldn’t keep out the one who, along with Ray Charles and some other smooth-sounding soul legends, broke the ground for their success.

Charley Pride

CharleyPride

If you want to talk about a “Jackie Robinson” type figure, you don’t have to look any further than country music’s Charley Pride. Yes, there was a black man who was a member of the Grand Ole Opry back before World War II, but DeFord Bailey (thanks for recognizing him, Ken Burns!) would only crack the door slightly. Pride came along and kicked it off the hinges, becoming the first black singer to have substantial success on the country music circuit.

In the history of Pride’s record label, RCA Records, there was only one artist who outsold him…that artist was Elvis Presley. After a failed shot at playing professional baseball (in which he was once traded for a used bus), Pride got into his second love, music, and crafted his niche in the country music genre. He would make it onto the Billboard Hot 100 ten times, 52 Top Ten songs on the Country Hot 100 (including 30 #1 songs), won four Grammy Awards, was the Country Music Association Entertainer of the Year in 1971 (the first and only black artist to win that award) and has sold over 70 million albums in his lifetime.

There are those that say Pride might have already topped out the accolades with his induction into the Country Music Hall of Fame and membership in the Grand Ole Opry. But there’s one person who might want Pride to get full recognition – Darius Rucker, who made a long career with Hootie & The Blowfish before himself crossing over to country music and continued success. THAT’S what an inspiration does, and Pride is definitely that.

Tammy Wynette/Dolly Parton/Loretta Lynn

There is a dearth of women in the Rock Hall, especially those who have set the standard for female vocalists/songwriters with their career works. In addition to the gross overlook of Patsy Cline in the Rock Hall (discussed in the last segment of this series), there are other women who set themselves apart from the crowd that deserve their own recognition.

Photo of Tammy WYNETTE and Loretta LYNN and Dolly PARTON

Topping that list is Dolly Parton, who has spent basically the last 50 years proving everyone wrong about her talents. Originally just looked at as “eye candy” alongside Porter Waggoner, Parton quickly demonstrated that she played second fiddle to nobody, writing a string of hit country and pop songs that made her famous. Nine Grammy Awards, 25 #1 songs on the Country Hot 100, nominations for every part of the EGOT (Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony Awards) and the author of over 3000 songs, Parton will forever be known as the woman who penned “I Will Always Love You,” taken to #1 twice by herself and 2020 Rock Hall nominee Whitney Houston.

Wynette and Lynn might not be as accomplished as Parton, but both or either would be worthy elections to the Rock Hall. Lynn might be the one to get the nod, however, because of her virulently feminist stance in an era when the “little lady” was supposed to be seen and not heard. Lynn wrote songs protesting the Vietnam War (“Dear Uncle Sam”), the way that divorced women were treated (“Rated X”) and birth control (“The Pill”) at a time when such discussion was quite controversial. Wynette would also have her moments in the sun during this era, but Lynn actually was the one rocking the boat…if that ain’t “rock and roll,” just what is?

The 5th Dimension

FifthDimension

This was one that, to be honest, I wasn’t aware of. I thought The 5th Dimension was already IN the Rock Hall. I looked it up and there were The Temptations and The Four Tops, but surprisingly the 5th Dimension wasn’t enshrined. This is arguably a gross oversight.

The 5th Dimension spanned the gap between the R&B world and the psychedelic world by delivering the anthem for a generation. “Aquarius/Let the Sun Shine” became the anthem of the Woodstock generation and 1969 was called “The Age of Aquarius” with this tune as its theme song. The group wasn’t just a one-hit wonder, however, hitting the Top Ten six times, the Top 100 30 times and the R&B charts 17 times.

Perhaps the best legacy of The 5th Dimension is that, when they did break up, the artists went on to further success. Founders Billy Davis, Jr., and Marilyn McCoo not only made great music as a duet, they were married and continued to have a happy life. Nick Ashford and Valerie Simpson, who were songwriters for The 5th Dimension, would also have their own success as a duet in the 1970s and 80s, but it all started with The 5th Dimension, something that should be honored.

The next part of this series will arguably be the toughest one of the lot. The 1970s gave us a great deal of legendary music and fantastic artists that created it for us. Like the 1960s, you might think that the 70s have been thoroughly covered, but that is far from the truth. There are some out there in the hinterlands that are waiting for their call from the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame to take their place in music’s Pantheon of immortals. But will that call ever come? As we will probably end every part of this series, the longer that we as fans – and the voters for the Hall – are removed from their heydays, the less likely it is that these artists and groups will earn their induction.

Artists That SHOULD Be in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame: The 1950s and Before

RRHallofFame

The current crop of artists and bands vying for entry into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is a very impressive list. Cutting across all genres, including rap, pop, rock, metal and alternative music (it is arguable that folk isn’t included, but that’s a rarity instead of the norm), the potential inductees in 2020 will have many more shots at the brass ring. But who from the past may be running out of chances at getting into the Rock Hall?

There are 221 artists and/or groups in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, and many might say that the truly immortal from the 1950s and before have already been enshrined. It is tough to nitpick this fact, but in this first part of a series of essays on this subject, I was able to come up with five artists who have yet to be inducted for their influences on the world of rock music. In one case, the artist has earned a nod for their “early influence,” but they really should be inducted as well for the priceless value of their performances.

“Big Mama” Thornton

BigMamaThornton

One of the groundbreaking blues singers, Willie Mae “Big Mama” Thornton, called that because…well, there’s no way to be kind about this…she tipped the scales at around 450 pounds, was a vocalist who owned the R&B charts in the early 1950s. For those that only remember Elvis Presley’s 1955 version of “Hound Dog,” it was Thornton who originally brought the song to the masses in 1952 with her powerful version of the song written by Leiber and Stoller. She was one of the groundbreakers for women in the industry as well, like another person that will appear on this list.

The possible downsides for Thornton getting in is that she didn’t have the longevity that many would like in their performers. By the early 1960s, Thornton’s star had faded and many had forgotten about the blues pioneer. Also, beyond “Hound Dog,” Thornton did not have a lengthy list of hits, although another song she wrote and performed, “Ball ‘n’ Chain,” was never released by her record company; it would eventually become a monster hit in the hands of Janis Joplin, who viewed Thornton as an influence.

Dick Dale

DickDale

While the Beach Boys get the credit for the creation of “surf music,” that credit should really go to the master of the surf guitar, Dick Dale. Dale was at the forefront of innovation with the electric guitar in the 1950s, creating the “surf music” sound by combining Middle Eastern influences, reverb and pure speed in bringing out his unique sound. Dale’s career wasn’t a lengthy one but, to the Beach Boys, Jan & Dean and a host of other musicians and bands, Dale was a god.

Dale also is one of those artists that the Rock Hall misses out on honoring before they are no longer with us. Dale played right up to the last days of his life, passing away earlier this year from heart failure. It is very much like the nominations of Thin Lizzy and Motörhead this year, nominations that should have come long ago before the members of the group had passed away and not received the recognition they deserve.

Neil Sedaka

NeilSedaka

This was one that I initially didn’t agree with before I started my research. I always thought that Sedaka was just another nauseating “candy coated” pop music thief of black artists’ music. It was only after I really started looking at his career that I gradually began to shift my opinion.

Sedaka started out in 1957 and, since that point, has written over 500 songs that either he or other popular artists have recorded and charted. His own performance library includes the classics “Oh! Carol,” “Calendar Girl,” “Next Door to an Angel” and “Breaking Up is Hard to Do.” After a lull when the British Invasion hit the U. S., Sedaka would come back in the 1970s with songs like “Bad Blood” and “Laughter in the Rain.”

Sedaka would also pen songs for such artists as The Captain and Tennille, ABBA, Connie Francis and Jimmy Clanton. Although I still am not a huge fan of him as an artist, I’ve got to give him credit for his longevity, success and critical acclaim that he’s garnered for more than 60 years.

Patsy Cline

PatsyCline

Anyone who watched Ken Burns’ documentary Country Music cannot disavow what Patsy Cline did for the music industry, country or otherwise. She was performing while still in her teens and her first big song, “Walkin’ After Midnight,” came when she was a mere 21 years old. That song, which topped not only the country charts but also the pop charts, catapulted her into the realm of the immortals.

Her contemporaries Brenda Lee and Wanda Jackson are already in the Rock Hall (Lee as a performer in 2002, Jackson as an “early influence” in 2009), so it is highly illogical to keep Cline out because she’s “not rock enough.” If it weren’t for Cline, it’s arguable that there’s no Dolly, no Loretta, no Reba, no Shania and no Miranda. And, taking the other path of the evolution tree, possibly no Janis, no Suzi, no Joan, no Anne and Nancy…you get my point. Patsy Cline deserves a slot in the Rock Hall.

Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys

WillsTexasPlayboys

This is another artist that got a great deal of attention from the Burns documentary and it was well deserved. Their musical legacy is undoubtable, but what set Wills and his backing group apart was their non-stop touring, one of the things that is ENTIRELY rock and roll! The group would sometimes play three or four towns IN A SINGLE DAY and six of seven days per week (Wills did, as a good church man would, saved Sunday for worship).

Wills and His Texas Playboys technically are already in the Rock Hall as an “early influence” (1999), but they really deserve to be inducted as a performer outright. Without them, do we even hear of Hank Williams and his progeny, Johnny Cash, the “Texas Outlaws” (Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings and Company) or a host of others who came out during the 1960s and 70s? Maybe we do, but Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys paved the way.

Speaking of the 1960s, there are some from that era who haven’t been inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame as of yet! In the next part of this series of essays, we’ll examine those that have been the biggest oversights and, as of yet, have not been inducted into the Rock Hall. Will these oversights be corrected? The longer that we as fans – and the voters for the Hall – are removed from their heydays, the less likely it is that they will earn induction.

The Aftermath of 9/11 – Has it Been Worth It?

911

Today marks 18 years since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center changed the world forever, and not for just the States of America. 19 terrorist hijackers primarily from Saudi Arabia – 15 of them held Saudi citizenship, two were from United Arab Emirates, one from Lebanon and one from Egypt – seized control of four aircraft flying cross-country routes from Boston, Newark, NJ and Washington, D. C., to California (Los Angeles and San Francisco). Loaded with jet fuel, the terrorists utilized the planes as weapons, employing training that they had received at flight schools in the U. S. to pilot one plane each into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon in Washington and, after an uprising of the passengers on the flight, a forced crash landing in a field in Pennsylvania instead of its intended destination of the White House or Capitol Hill, home of the U. S. Congress.

The results of the 19 terrorists’ actions were immediate and numbing. 2977 people – and not all of them ever had any physical evidence of their existence ever recovered from the wreckage – were killed in the four instances, the worst terrorist attack on U. S. soil in the country’s history (the 1941 attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor technically did not occur on U. S. soil as Hawaii was a territory of the U. S. at the time, not a state). And, much like when Pearl Harbor was attacked, the response from the country was swift and powerful. But the question has to be asked – 18 years later in the aftermath of the 9/11 attack, has it been worth it?

In the days following 9/11, first responders sifted through the rubble of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and that field in Pennsylvania, trying to find any survivors and, when it became apparent that there were no survivors, recover the bodies of those who were killed in the attacks. Meanwhile, the presidency of George W. Bush aggressively moved to act against an unknown opponent. In an address to Congress mere days after the attacks, Bush announced that a “war on terrorism” needed to be conducted and, with the blessing of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, received virtually everything that was asked, including wide-sweeping mass surveillance of citizens of the U. S. (the Patriot Act of 2001) and broad ability to conduct military actions anywhere in the world.

MarineHelo

That thoroughly expected military action is still ongoing. As a part of the actions given to the Bush administration, on September 14, 2001 a broad Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) was granted by Congress. This allowed the Bush administration to immediately attack – without the consent of Congress, who is the body that has the right to declare war against another country – anyone viewed as “responsible for the attacks of September 11” and any “associated forces.” The AUMF has since been used by subsequent administrations.

There has rarely, in the history of the U. S., been two documents that affected the future as much as the Patriot Act and the AUMF. With the Patriot Act, it became possible for the government itself to spy on its own people, something that would have been abhorrent to the founders of the country or, even more recent, those that fought against oppressive governments in Germany, Japan and Italy in World War II. With the AUMF, it basically allowed the government to wage war virtually anywhere in the world in the name of the “war on terrorism;” it has been used to justify military actions by not only the Bush administration but those of President Barack Obama and the current occupant of the White House in countries as diverse as Afghanistan, Yemen, Georgia, Syria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Iraq and Somalia, among others.

But other, uglier actions arose from 9/11. Now called “hate crimes,” attacks against Muslims, Middle Eastern “looking” people, people of Asian descent (Sikhs in particular, who wear turbans that are erroneously confused with being associated with the Islamic faith) and others precipitously rose, blaming them for the actions of the 19 terrorists. This included taunting people in public and burning mosques all the way to killing people, when white supremacists took lives of those that “looked like terrorists” or were “towel heads” in a murderous rampage. It is arguable that these actions go on to this day.

Citizens themselves are not absolved of any responsibilities or blame for the devolvement of society since 9/11, either. If Watergate damaged the image of the country in peoples’ minds, the 2000 election controversy between Bush and former Vice President Al Gore and the actions of 9/11 totally destroyed any belief in a “just” government. These shattered thoughts and beliefs have tumbled over the past two decades into a massive snowball that ravages the psyche of the country in an avalanche of unsubstantiated thoughts and “alternative facts,” weaponized by extremists and employed by those to justify their philosophies.

Beliefs that the U. S. were a part of a “New World Order” (a phrase, ironically, uttered by Bush’s father, George H. W. Bush) brought about the idiotic conspiracy theories that 9/11 was an act by the Central Intelligence Agency and other nefarious operators, both domestic and international, to take freedoms from the citizens of the U. S. The use of fraudulent intelligence by the Bush administration that led to the Second Gulf War and the overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein further ripped the fabric of the country. And the virulent rhetoric from both sides of the political aisle – that if you didn’t fully support “American” action, then you weren’t a “true American patriot” – contributes even today to the massive schism that exists in our political process.

The costs of the “war on terror” brought by the 9/11 attacks also have to be questioned. The human toll is striking and depressing simultaneously – the U. S. military has seen roughly 7000 deaths and tens if not hundreds of thousands of injuries from operations contributable to the “war or terror.” The civilian cost is estimated to be conservatively 1.3 million deaths, although some estimates set the total closer to four million. And the costs to cultural, religious and historic areas – ISIS has destroyed many sites of antiquity in their version of the “war on terror” – are too numerous to mention.

SYRIA-CONFLICT-HERITAGE-PALMYRA

The human costs are arguably the most important thing, but the financial costs of continuing the “war on terrorism” are approaching astronomical figures. Since 2001, it is estimated that the three U. S. presidential administrations that have conducted the “war on terrorism” have spent $7.6 TRILLION pursuing terrorist targets around the world and added $2.4 TRILLION to the U. S. budget deficit. This isn’t counting what other nations, including our NATO allies, have spent in their support of the actions following 9/11.

What has all of this brought to the U. S. and the world? “Terrorism” is something that can never truly be snuffed out. It is an action that dates back to biblical times (a Jewish group called the Sicarii would use concealed daggers to execute their targets in large crowds before slipping away and the Hashhashin, an Islamic sect, were a terrorist group in the 11th century that employed terrorist killings – the group’s name is where the word “assassin” comes from) but, in recent history, has moved from a “nation-state” action to a tool used by an individual political, religious or social group that has no traditional physical base of activity. It is one of the reasons that al-Qaeda (the terrorist organization responsible for 9/11), despite the protestations of the current administration, continues to thrive around the world.

And what has been the collateral damage from the aftermath of 9/11? In the U. S., we have raised a generation of children that know nothing but “war” and a misguided view of “patriotism” that is foisted by some who use that “war” as a political tool. In the world, there are people who have seen their families affected by the bombs of some far-flung U. S. drone attack, the bullets from a U. S.-made weapon or the ravages of imprisonment for “being (insert your religion or nationality here)” that has permanently implanted anti-U. S. sentiments in their minds. And the money that has been spent on the pursuit of “war” hasn’t been spent on areas to improve life for EVERYONE, significantly impacting all facets of life around the world.

On this 18th anniversary of 9/11 and in the future, as the costs both human and financial continue to rack up, we all must ask ourselves – “Was (Is) it worth it?” The nationalism that is becoming prevalent in the world nowadays can be directly traced back to 9/11 and it is something that has to be combated because it will only acerbate terrorism throughout the world. When it comes to the aftermath of 9/11, everyone has to have the ability to examine this question and plenty of other ones truthfully and come up with their own answers because this current situation cannot be continued in perpetuity. The current situation also cannot be allowed to flourish, lest it destroy civil society and plunge the world into an anarchistic state or theocratic or fascist rule. There is no such thing as “total security” and these thoughts present not only the people and leaders of the U. S. with a complex challenge but the world as well.

911Memorial

If You’re Going to “Show Support” for the Military, Show it FOR ALL

USMilitaryEmblems

When it comes to my service in the military, I am proud of it, but I don’t make a big deal out of it. My Honorable Discharge hangs proudly on my wall (thanks to my Mom, may she rest in peace, for keeping it all these years) and I have several photos that show me at different stages during my four years of service. I do fly the United States Marine Corps flag on military and some national holidays but, as previously stated, I usually don’t make a big deal of my veteran status. A situation recently has made me rethink this situation, however, because it seems that veterans still get short shrift in most arenas.

Recently I was flying back from a fantastic family trip to the Outer Banks of North Carolina (something that I would encourage people to do at least once – it is a historic, beautiful, exciting and fun area to visit) and doing what is the worst part about flying – waiting for the call to board the plane. If you’re one of the few people on Planet Earth that haven’t flown, let me set the stage for you: imagine a herd of cattle in a pen waiting for the train to open up and then, in an orderly procession, slowly meander onto the transport. That’s what loading a plane is like, only in a human form.

CattleLoading

Anyway, back to the point. The gate attendant (the airline was unimportant, but they recently bought the naming rights to the Las Vegas Raiders new stadium) was doing a fine job, actually moving the cattle forward with some rapidity, when I heard her make this call. “At this time, we’d like to allow all active duty, reserve and retired military to board the aircraft first and thank you for your service.”

I’ve heard this on many an occasion but, for the first time, this set me off.

Airlines aren’t the only ones who have fallen victim to this mindset. Many restaurants and other businesses, when looking to “Salute the Troops,” will often use those three designations – active duty, reserve service and retired – often negating those who aren’t actively in service and didn’t retire from the Armed Forces but did actually served for a substantial amount of time in some cases. According to estimates from the National Conference of State Legislators, there are 18.8 million veterans in the United States. Of that total, there are roughly 2.1 million retired military persons and 2.3 currently active or reserve members of the Armed Forces. That means there are over 14 MILLION people in the States of America whose service to the country is being disrespected.

I am sure there are plenty of instances of this, but I don’t have to go any further than my family for examples. My service in the USMC was honorable but, after four years of active duty (and two more in the Reserves), I decided that the military lifestyle wasn’t for me and walked away. Service in the military isn’t for everyone and, although I credit the military lifestyle for being an important building block in the creation of me, I recognized that it wasn’t something that I wanted to make a career of philosophically, politically or otherwise. In short, I was proud of my service, but I wasn’t looking to do it permanently.

MarinesAttack

For an example on the longer end my brother, from the time he entered the USMC, wanted to make a career of it. The little idiot actually signed up to JOIN THE INFANTRY, for fuck’s sake. And he served admirably in the first Gulf War, where he was injured by a shattered windshield on his troop carrier (the glass from the windshield nearly took one of his eyes out) as his unit rumbled into Kuwait City, but he refused the Purple Heart.

As the years went on, however, the wear and tear of the military and, in particular, the infantry requirements began to debilitate him. Four years short of making his lifetime goal – to serve for 20 years in the military – the USMC had to medically discharge him because his body was so broken down he couldn’t go on (a prime example of “the mind wanting to but the body unable”). So, for statistical purposes, my brother – who gave his body in service to the country – is NOT a “retired” veteran…just a “veteran” but not worthy of recognition. Nowadays he makes do, but without the retired military veteran’s pension that he had worked so long for.

This type of story can go further, even to today’s veterans. How many of the young men and women have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan, after four or eight years of service (or shorter, in some cases) with debilitating or life-altering injuries, and face this same type of thought? That you are “not worth honoring” because you aren’t currently serving or retired? And what about those 14 million plus veterans who did their jobs – and did them honorably, from Berlin to Okinawa, from Vietnam to Korea, from Grenada to Beirut, from Baghdad to Kabul, in “peacetime” (an oxymoronic statement about the States of America) and in times of war – but yet are neglected when it comes to recognition or treatment?

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 85

Recognition of veterans has always been a bit shitty in the States of America, to be honest. We talk a good game about “supporting the troops” but, when it comes down to actually taking care of that Afghanistan veteran, now a quadriplegic, who is trying to get by on a Social Security check or getting the right mental health care for that Vietnam veteran who saw a village on the Mekong wiped out by napalm and still wakes up at night screaming, this country hasn’t come up for them. We have an amazing capability to create veterans, we also have a tremendous ability to tell them to fuck off when they need help the most.

In the grand scheme of things, whether ALL veterans are honored with special treatment isn’t that big a deal. But instead of segmenting some for “special recognition,” it perhaps would make more sense to either recognize ALL of those who served – regardless of whether they are active, retired or “just a veteran” – or just don’t bother with the platitudes. If you want to show “support for the troops,” how about taking care of them once their service is complete rather than a couple of bucks off a meal at Golden Corral?

“Conservatives,” It’s Time to Get Off Your Ass and Reclaim The GOP

TrumpUnstable

Even though we’re in the infancy of the 2020 Presidential Campaign, we’ve already been hearing plenty about the candidate that the Democratic Party should choose. Some on the left have advocated for extreme left wing, progressive philosophies that harken to a socialist democrat state in Scandinavia. Then there’s those in the moderate/center left branch – and even some moderate “Republicans” – that are advocating for a more mainstream, middle of the road candidate. Instead of doing these things – because with 24 candidates to choose from, there’s going to be a process until it is decided who are the serious contenders – how about “conservatives” actually get off their ass and reclaim the “GOP” from the POT?

Currently the most divisive president in the history of this country is sitting in the WH, and don’t even open your yaps about “but Obama…” Obama was NOT a racist son of a bitch. He was NOT a xenophobic asshole. He was NOT a misogynistic, narcissistic bastard. He didn’t constantly feed red meat to other racist motherfuckers with his verbiage, his actions or his policies. This IS ON THE “CONSERVATIVES,” on them – if they believe that they have a future – to reclaim the party they sacrificed in 2016 when they nominated this asshole to the Republican Party.

So, you say he’s not a racist? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT sued and won a case regarding his discrimination against blacks in housing. He tells FOUR AMERICAN CITIZENS – three of whom are BORN IN THIS COUNTRY – to “return to the country they came from,” a racist dog whistle that blows loud from every racist motherfucker knuckle-dragging their way to the redneck bar. He says white supremacists are “fine people.” He sidles up and has warm, wet kisses with fascists, despots and dictators. You NEED MORE to demonstrate his racism? Try this…and this…and this. You don’t get the NAACP Man of the Year award if you’ve got this many issues. In fact, he’s NEVER won an “award” from the NAACP. (And before anyone pipes up about the Ellis Island Award, he got that the old fashioned way, the same way he got his star of the Hollywood Walk of Fame – he bought the fucker.)

Anyway, back to the gist. For all the “conservatives” trying to advise the Democrats on who they should nominate, they should perhaps look in the mirror and into their own souls. You continually say that this isn’t “indicative of the party” or “indicative of what we believe.” Yet you continually support the policies promoted by this fascist bastard and DON’T STOP HIM AT ALL.

But the stock market’s doing SO GOOD!

But my 401k looks GREAT!

The unemployment rate is down!

All bullshit statements.

TrumpWinner

If you are willing to sell your souls for a few extra dollars in a retirement account that will sit there until you too goddamn old to be able to use it for anything fun, then what would it take for you to actually throw the switch on a gas chamber and kill some “illegal” immigrants? Two percentage points growth in the GDP? A few more hundred points on the stock market? If this is your rationale for accepting the idiocy that you see, then that says a great deal about your character and your soul.

If you are REALLY against what Orange Foolius is doing, then actually DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. 2020 is around the corner. VOTE AGAINST HIM and get him out of the office. If you are as concerned as you say you are about “the United States of America,” then this embarrassment in the history books must be corrected. And you CAN vote against him, you don’t have to support every iota of inanity that he does. Because when you do, you become COMPLICIT in what he is doing. Do not ever let me hear a “Republican” or a “conservative” EVER talk about morality, upholding the law or “religious freedom” ever again, because you have sacrificed any position or moral stance with your support for your “Dear Leader.”

It is up to you, “conservatives.” If you say this person isn’t representative of you, that the racist fucks that exist in this country aren’t reflective of your “base,” it is time to goddamn prove it. Vote against him – and yes, I know you love stealing Supreme Court seats and gerrymandering voting districts, but this isn’t a coffee klatch we’re talking about…this is the future of this country. Sometimes you must admit you were wrong, “conservatives,” and this was a big one. You want to reclaim the GOP and have a future…exorcise this past. Otherwise you will wander the deserts as the POT (the “Party of T***p) dies a cruel death.

The Clown Car Loads for a Second Run

DemocratClownCar

2016 was the year that a megaton of TNT was tossed into the political process. Not only were there the rumors of the “rigging” of the process in the Democratic Party (unfounded since one candidate racked up FOUR MILLION VOTES more than the runner-up) but there was the shitshow that was the GOP primary. At one point during the primaries, 17 people were running from the Republican Party for the nomination. Only a scant two years later, it seems that we’ve learned nothing from the past as the clown car loads up for a second run, this time on the Democratic side.

The 2020 race began literally on Inauguration Day 2017. In arguably one of the earliest ever announcements of intent to run, Orange Foolius opened his 2020 reelection campaign THE DAY HE SAT DOWN IN THE WHITE HOUSE. No previous president had EVER taken this unfathomable step, simply because it is a ludicrous idea from the start (what is did was allow Orange Foolius and his sycophants in the “conservative” GOP the ability to worship their god – money and donations from billionaires). The Democrats haven’t done much better, however, they just simply waited until after the 2018 midterms – and the drubbing the Democrats handed to the “conservatives” of the GOP – before they put the makeup, clown shoes and squeaky horns into practice.

2020DemPresCandidates

More than 18 months prior to Election Day 2020, the Democratic Clown Car is loading up with buffoons, pretenders and a few contenders. As of today, 20 potential contenders from the Democratic Party have said they are tossing their hat in the ring, with Massachusetts Representative Seth Moulton becoming the latest candidate. This isn’t counting former Vice President Joe Biden, who is supposed to announce some time this week his intentions, or the ghastly specter of Hillary Clinton that keeps hovering in the background waiting for attention. By Memorial Day, it is possible that there could be maybe 25 candidates that have announced for the Democrats.

It has literally become comical watching the Democrats scramble to find footing in the race. What isn’t comical, however, is the pressure it puts on the voters to find a viable candidate. On CNN on Monday, FIVE of these candidates – Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, California Senator Kamala Harris and South Bend, IN, mayor Pete Buttigieg – will have hour-long “Town Hall” meetings that will “break them out of the crowd.” The reason that is in parenthesis is that the only reason they’re doing it is for 1) filling programming time on CNN, and 2) trying to get people to like them.

One of the things about politics is that there are USUALLY protocols that are set in place and for a good reason. Newcomers to any political faction – be it a political party or an elected body on a local, state or national level – usually start out in a what was derogatorily called the “back bench,” waiting their time and learning as they help to advance the party and their platform and positions. But, in the 21st century, that has been thrown out the window, first by the GOP and now by the Dems.

It is a complete waste of time to have anything beyond 10 candidates FOR ANYTHING, let alone leadership of the free world and one of the most prosperous countries on the planet. It is arguable that the GOP process in 2016, which didn’t allow people to coalesce around a candidate that was, you know, a functioning adult with an education beyond a five-year-old, contributed to who they eventually nominated. The 16-person GOP Clown Car allowed for the party to be usurped by a fascist fuck with massive personality disorders and a Twitter fix that constantly must be fed along with his bloated ego.

The same thing could very well happen to the Democrats come 2020. Without the ability to actually focus on a small group – let’s say five to six candidates – there may be either a candidate that isn’t qualified or an extremist to sneak through the cracks and earn the nomination. Then the Dems would become no better than the current “conservatives” who suckle at the teat of Orange Foolius – afraid to offend the person lest they lose their support and unable to operate because of the outlandishness of what the person wants to do.

At this point – and there is a LONG fucking way to go, people – these are the top three candidates that are the MOST VIABLE from the Democratic Party:

JoeBiden

Joe Biden – Has the gravitas of a statesman, can cooperate with the middle and some “conservatives” and regain the respect the country once had before the jackass that’s sitting in the chair now (and I’ll say this now…when he leaves, I can guaran-fucking-tee there’s not going to be the traditional letter than the preceding President leaves for his successor). Cons: his age, some of his past stances on subjects like prison reform, the Anita Hill case and corporate involvement in elections.

BernieSanders

Bernie Sanders – Although I don’t personally like him, he has been able to build a strong coalition that sometimes outthinks themselves. Really, folks…do you think you’re going to get any action on what you want with a “conservative” in the office (then VOTE BLUE, you stupid fucks!)? Cons: not very convincing in how he’s going to pay for all the progressive programs he wants to enact, his past socialist stance (only recently has he moved to “democratic socialist”), his non-Democrat status (you want to run for the leadership of the party but you discard them when they aren’t useful to you?), his age, his professorial tone…do I need to keep going?

Beto O' Rourke

Beto O’Rourke – Beto’s been losing some steam of late – that’s going to happen in a 25-person race. But he’s captured people much like Barack Obama did. That’s also part of his cons: he is inexperienced, he hasn’t provided any substance to what he stands for and it isn’t known how well he works outside of TX.

Going beyond these three and it gets a bit murky. Harris is a solid, middle of the road Democrat that could be a viable contender but would probably make a much better VP or Attorney General. Buttigieg is the “wild card” in the field, gaining ground right now but with little known about him (and seriously, his best elected office is mayor of a small Midwestern town? The biggest things South Bend is known for is being home to the University of Notre Dame, not exactly giving you foreign policy gravitas despite his ability to learn foreign languages). And, if I had to pick a sixth, I’d go with New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, who has just enough experience to be viable and to make him dangerous if he were to win.

The rest? They will be fortunate to have “former 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate” on their resumes when their obituaries are written, because that’s about the only impact they are going to have on the campaign. Klobuchar? Nobody wants Meryl Streep’s character from The Devil Wears Prada in the White House. Gabbard? Would be a Republican if she knew she’d get elected in Hawaii. Gillibrand? Three words…railroaded Al Franken. Warren? We tried Hillary Clinton in 2016…do we want Hillary 2.0? Hickenlooper? Castro? Messam? Inslee? Swalwell? WHO???

I know the purpose of the primary is to winnow the field to the best possible candidate. But the purpose of the primary is also to choose from a VIABLE field of candidates. Two-thirds of the 2020 Democratic field doesn’t have a chance in hell of earning the nomination or, better yet, defeating the embarrassment currently playing more golf than Tiger Woods. To be able to choose, you must be able to focus on who is actually worthy of the office.

There’s a long time to go in this race, however. Perhaps before the first debates begin in June, the pretenders will realize the futility of their efforts and back out of the race (but I’m not holding my breath on it). But it can be said that the Democratic Clown Car for 2020 is rapidly filling up and it doesn’t bode well for their overall program.

 

The Mueller Investigation Report – What Comes Next?

RobertMueller

After nearly two years of investigation that brought charges and/or guilty pleas against 34 individuals and three corporations (and, once any sealed indictments are released, that total should climb) and raked in nearly $50 million in fines, the Mueller Report has been issued. Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the former FBI director who was charged with finding out whether there was collusion by the Orange Foolius campaign with any segment of the Russian government and if there was obstruction of justice in other matters surrounding the campaign, has seemingly closed the book on the ACTIVE INVESTIGATION portion of his work (more on this later). Now comes the “dog and pony” show that politicians love to put up for public view.

First off, we probably won’t be hearing anything about the Mueller Report this weekend and anyone who says they know what is in it is full of shit. There’s just too much information for recently seated Attorney General William Barr to go through to issue any type of statement on at this point. Even with an army of foot soldiers looking it over, the earliest we probably can expect for even a bullet-pointed outline of look at the findings would, in my estimations, be Monday. And that’s fine with me…I don’t want this minion of Orange Foolius rushing to get ANYTHING out about the Mueller Report.

WilliamBarr

Secondly, and this is just personal conjecture, this is what I believe the Mueller Report will show. As to the underlings in the campaign, including Junior and Princess (I don’t think Eric could eat without a bib), they were colluding left and right with Russian agents THAT THEY WEREN’T AWARE OF. The collusion was coming as a result of trying to position themselves in the best business position possible – hell, they didn’t even conceive of winning the election, they thought they would be crushed. It has been proven in earlier cases, however, that lack of knowledge of who you’re dealing with isn’t a defense. If there are sealed indictments, expect one to at least have Junior’s name on it.

Third, Orange Foolius was unaware that these actions were going on underneath him. With his Narcissistic Personality Disorder, if it doesn’t directly affect him, he really doesn’t care. Thus, I am sure that the underlings were allowed to run free and run afoul of many a campaign law. But as far as his own PERSONAL knowledge of any collusion with Russian agents? I personally believe that Mueller will stop short of saying that Orange Foolius knew what was going on – it would take a shitload more investigation going back into the 1990s to try to demonstrate that Orange Foolius was a Manchurian candidate at the beck and whim of Vladimir Putin.

Fourth, as to the question of obstruction of justice. There are literally tens of examples of Orange Foolius obstructing justice, beginning with his statements to Russia’s Ambassador to the U. S., continuing on through his own statements to NBC news anchor Lester Holt, the obstruction through the convoluted statements regarding the Orange Foolius Tower meeting with Russian agents. Mueller knows, however, that the obstruction charge isn’t one that is going to be criminally prosecuted by anyone in the Department of Justice. And, with the current makeup of Congress, Mueller knows it isn’t going to be politically prosecuted…that’s right, that ugly word “impeachment.” Mueller’s not a fool…he’s dropping this ball in Barr’s lap and letting him decide, both legally and politically.

MichaelCohen

The campaign finance violations questions? There will probably be plenty of that too. And Mueller’s going to point this out – he’s got plenty of evidence from disgraced Orange Foolius attorney Michael Cohen, who was a “great lawyer” and Orange Foolius’ “personal attorney” before he saw his life flash in front of his eyes and copped a plea deal with the Southern District of New York and became a “liar” and a “minor player” –  but he’s also going to put it on Barr to make the decision on what approach to take.

The bottom line for many will be this question…how much of the report will we see? I believe that we’ll see quite a bit of it, to be honest. Politically, the GOP doesn’t get any benefit from having the Mueller Report squelched. In fact, the GOP knows that stonewalling the report looks suspicious and would advise Barr (who is, under normal circumstances, supposed to be an independent body with the Department of Justice) to release everything he can.

The Democrats, naturally, are going to want it all, which sets up for bullshit Benghazi-like hearings that will take us up to Election Day 2020. And this is the pitfall that the Democrats must avoid…while they can make sure that all the information is known regarding the Mueller Report – including having public hearings where they bring in the former FBI director for testimony – they must resist the temptation to begin any “impeachment” proceedings against Orange Foolius.

PelosiSchumer

There are several reasons for this. Impeachment is a political act, not a criminal one, and in the current Congress the act would be a worthless one. Although they have control of the House and could conceivably vote through articles of impeachment, the Democrats are the minority in the Senate and any articles of impeachment would be laughed out by the GOP. Furthermore, by bringing charges against St. Orange Foolius, the Democrats would run the risk of making a martyr out of him, much like the GOP did with Bill Clinton in 1998.

The Democrats would be wisely advised to pursue the Mueller Report, get as close to 100% of it in the public spectrum and SHOW the criminal activities of this Administration (which is almost unheard of in recent history – only Richard Nixon had more criminal charges brought against it). But the job isn’t done there…then the Democrats must SHOW they have something more to offer for leadership of the country than “we’re not crooks,” presenting a solid vision for the future of the country rather than the anachronistic dystopia presented by the GOP.

Present the Mueller Report evidence, present a plan, and vote the fucker out in 2020. Don’t give the GOP a firebrand for the 2020 election by allowing Orange Foolius to play the “victim” in a scenario that even Shakespeare couldn’t conceive.

The endgame of the Mueller Report will be that there’s plenty of evidence of criminal activity, financial deviance and simple malfeasance inside the Orange Foolius Mafia. This will be he albatross around this Administration’s neck. The unknown – and what might become the albatross around the neck of the “American” people – is what the body politick and the people of this country want to do about it.

StatueofLibertyWeeping