Rather Than Destroy Obama’s Signature Legislation, Fix It

While much of the world has been casting their eyes towards Orange Foolius and the latest adventures of his Confederacy of Dunces, the Congress has tried to inch forward quietly with legislation that would hammer virtually everyone in the States of America who earns less than $1 million a year. You don’t believe me? Let’s look at the ledger, shall we?

When looking at the current Administration or the GOP-led majorities in Congress, we’ve seen desperate attempts to either destroy the legacy of Orange’s predecessor, Barack Obama, or simply the cruelty of the GOP looking to enact their draconian ideas. Of most importance has been what many call the signature legislation of the Obama Administration, the Affordable Care Act (or “ObamaCare” to simpletons), which allowed for millions to have insurance they previously didn’t have before and others to have arguably better insurance. This has been one comedy of errors after another since the GOP has tried to run the ball.

First were the attempts by Speaker of the House Paul Ryan to gather his cats (fellow GOP members of the House of Representatives) and push a bill that, instead of helping people, would have cast 24 million people out of health insurance (and let’s make a BIG distinction here…we are talking health insurance, not health care…they are two different things, one paying for a product and the other the product provided, which is pretty good because of the quality doctors we have in this country). In their infinite wisdom, Ryan and his gaggle of GOP gangsters would have made sure that any money saved from the changes (approximately $337 billion over 10 years) went to those who needed it most: wealthy millionaires who didn’t need the extra money.

That attempt initially failed – and rather spectacularly – because there was a faction of the GOP, the House Freedom Caucus (about the most oxymoronic three words other than “little big man”), that felt the new legislation, known as the American Health Care Act, didn’t go far enough in eradicating the ACA. After getting over the embarrassment of not even being able to bring the legislation to the floor, Ryan twisted some arms and rejiggered some numbers a couple months later (“HEY! LOOK! We brought the uninsured down to 23 million!”) and was able to cajole enough people to pass the House version of the AHCA, to much fanfare at the White House and the public blessing of Orange Foolius.

That House bill, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, was DOA when it reached his chamber. The GOP Senators were going to “begin from nothing” and come up with their own piece of legislation, Yertle said, and it would look far different than what had been proposed by the House GOP. Even the Orange One seemed to be on board with McConnell’s efforts, remarking how the House version was “mean” and for the Senate to come up with “more money” to make it kinder. Instead, McConnell – ensconced in a secret location that even members of the GOP not working on the health insurance plan had no access to, let alone Democratic members of the Senate – looked into his cauldron and pulled out of the ooze…virtually the same plan that the House had put up, but with NEW rejiggered numbers that brought the uninsured count down to “only” 22 million people.

At this moment, the Senate health insurance plan is about as popular as a herpes-infested whorehouse. After the full CBO breakdown was revealed, GOP Senators like Dean Heller of Nevada, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky have said they cannot accept this bill (for differing reasons; Paul has said he doesn’t want “ObamaCare Light,” which is a fair argument at the minimum). This is critical because, in losing even three votes from his own GOP caucus, McConnell cannot move any legislation forward in a Senate broken down by a 52-48 margin.
While McConnell retreats into his shell to protect himself, here’s a suggestion: rather than destroy Obama’s signature legislation, how about looking for ways to fix it?

When it was enacted seven years ago (and seriously GOP…you couldn’t come up with anything over the term of the Obama Administration as a counter?), the ACA was an audacious stab at solving a complex problem that, in reality, is one that cannot fully be solved. Health insurance isn’t a requirement, like car insurance (which is also flouted by many, but I digress), and when people are initially forced into buying something – even if it helps them – there’s a great deal of reluctance. As time has passed, however, there are several areas of the ACA that have been tremendously good for people, such as the ability of those with pre-existing conditions to obtain affordable insurance and covering young people on a family’s plan up to the age of 26. Even with these good parts, however, it is obvious that there needed to be some tinkering with the ACA (such as having 80-year olds paying for pre-natal care – yes, I KNOW how insurance works…spreading the costs amongst a larger pool…but not everyone is that knowledgeable).

First off, instead of cutting funding off to the ACA and falsely saying “it’s collapsing” (as Orange Foolius is using his dinky digits to type out over Twitter), FUND THE DAMN THING. Let’s see what works and what doesn’t, what needs to be changed and what needs to be eliminated. It is only through complete funding (and, to be honest, the insurance companies need the stability to be able to set their costs) that the ACA can be fully and fairly judged.

Second, look at other options. I personally think – and have stated on many occasions – that it is time to enact “Medicaid for All.” Under this plan, the Medicaid program on the federal level would be expanded so EVERYONE has a base of insurance. Want to have a yearly checkup? You got it. How about a basic test for disease? No problem. Such a base of simple medical should NEVER be denied anyone simply because they can’t pay for it (and really – if you listen to the doctors – more serious conditions could be prevented if caught in basic medical care).

So, what about the insurance industry? Before you go weeping for them, we’ve got them covered. If people want to have “more” medical insurance – perhaps to cover Tiffany’s rhinoplasty or pay for Daddy’s Viagra so he can chase the secretary around the desk – then they can buy plans conceived by the insurance industry to cover a multitude of things. Businesses could use these expanded plans as a recruitment tool for bringing in prospective employees – people could factor those expanded insurance plans into their decisions as to where to work.

This solves many of the aspects of health insurance (remember, health care is already there and very good) that are under debate. People can take their base insurance Medicaid wherever they go, thus eliminating the issue of going across state borders and losing one’s insurance. If a person or a business wants or needs more coverage (for whatever reason), the insurance companies are there to give it. Costs? Without the crippling competition, medical costs would come down, although there would still have to be some work done on the pharmaceutical end of the spectrum (when you pay $2 for a pill in India and $800 for the same pill in the States, you’ve got a problem)…perhaps allow for LIMITED class act negotiation to get the best deals from pharmaceutical companies, either through the local Walgreens, an employer, or the government itself?

The Affordable Care Act does have its issues. But those issues need to be worked on, not discarded like a candy wrapper. Putting a new name on it doesn’t serve any purpose except to grandstand that “you repealed it” (hear that, GOP?). Fund the operation and see what needs to be fixed, don’t starve it and then claim it didn’t work. It’s time for some people to be adults about the issue and, since the toddler in the White House is unable to get about without messing his nappy, it’s high time Congress took the reins.

Advertisements

A Fine Line Between Disliking and Dismembering: Kathy Griffin Was Wrong

Recently it has become nearly impossible to pool the regurgitation that has emerged from The Resident’s efforts in Washington D. C. The constant cesspool of filth that is spewed by him and his Confederacy of Dunces leaves many breathless in trying to keep up. Just as soon as one fuckup seems to be reaching its apex – let alone its conclusion – they seem to fire off another shit storm just to make sure that their idiocy stays in the public eye.

What can be even more of an embarrassment is the actions of those that support The Resident. The recent murder of two Good Samaritans in Portland by a white supremacist who seemed to be reciting The Resident’s campaign platform while being arraigned for the murders is simply the latest in what is a vitriolic campaign of hate from the GOP. The Planned Parenthood shooting in Colorado in 2015…a figure looking like President Barack Obama hanging from an interstate overpass in 2014…multiple instances of Obama being burned in effigy…calling former First Lady Michelle Obama an “ape” or that she is transgender…these are but a few of the examples of the vile lengths that the GOP has gone in depicting the 44th President of the States of America and his family.

ObamaEffigy

For the most part, progressives have stayed away from some of these statements…that was until yesterday and “comedian” (my emphasis…I’ve personally never liked her work) Kathy Griffin’s desire to make her voice heard.

Griffin, who has been able to parlay her supposed “D-List” status into a moneymaking endeavor (she even had a show on cable television called My Life on the D-List that followed her every move), tries to come off as an “edgy” comic that is “pushing the boundaries,” something that is difficult to do when you host New Year’s Eve with Anderson Cooper on CNN (about the most “unedgy” thing you can do). Now, when I think of this type of comedy, I am more in the lines of the work of the late George Carlin or even Sam Kinison, two men who rode the edge in search of the joke (and always hit the mark with their efforts). So what Griffin did yesterday is not only “not funny,” it puts her in the same closet as those vermin who dip to the depths that some on the right do.

We won’t justify Griffin’s actions with a photo here, but I will attempt to explain it. In an unflinching shot, Griffin – with absolutely no inkling of “making a joke,” smiling or otherwise trying to show a comedic aspect of her action – holds up a mask that is intended to be the head of The Resident. The mask is smeared in red “blood” as Griffin holds the head by the hair in her hand, as if she has decapitated The Resident herself and is presenting the prize to the people.

Kathy Griffin arrives at the 56th annual Grammy Awards in Los Angeles

In some circles, this would be promoted as a “performance art” or a “artistic statement,” but if Griffin meant it in this manner, she grotesquely missed the mark. Outrage from not only conservatives but also from those that Griffin thought she was representing – those left of center – came from all corners of the globe, sending a scurrying Griffin to Twitter to apologize for her actions. In a video Griffin stated, “I sincerely apologize. I am just now seeing the reaction of these images. I’m a comic. I crossed the line. I move the line, then I cross it. I went way too far. The image is too disturbing. I understand how it offends people. It wasn’t funny. I get it.”

First – some people have made this argument and couldn’t be further from the truth – this in NO WAY represents the thoughts of many who disagree with The Resident. While you can have philosophical, political, and methodical differences with a person or politician, it should NEVER approach the realm of even advocating for the death of another person. I can dislike you with the intensity of 1000 suns, but that doesn’t give me the right to suggest that your death solves the situation.

Second, this reinforces in the minds of the right that they are being “persecuted,” something that energizes their stance. Griffin’s supposed “comedic statement” gives those on the right a hook to hang their “martyrdom” on, that they are the ones being disrespected or threatened with various methods of execution from an angry horde of progressives (besides the fact it is often the conservatives screaming to “bring the torches”). It fuels their fires of hatred…by having that same fuel used against them, a twisted bit of psychology if ever there were one.

ChristianPersecution

It is certainly a fine line between comedy and tragedy, such as the old woman who slips on a banana peel and falls. Many might find that funny, but wouldn’t find it as hilarious if that same old woman broke her neck and died after slipping on the same banana peel. You can attempt to do edgy, even controversial, comedy, but there’s a line between pointing out the absurdities of life and/or politics and moving into the arena of advocating for the physical intimidation or, even worse, death of someone you don’t agree with.

Many on the right often overstep this boundary. The left used to be able to keep their heads above the water on this instance and refuse the temptation of such absurdities, but the current administration seems to have brought the disease created by conservatives to the progressive side. It is something that cannot be allowed to continue.

You can disagree – loudly and vehemently. You can advocate for their imprisonment – including a special island where they can rot. You can question their humanity – because many of their works are from an evil demon rather than any person with a shred of concern for their fellow man. You CANNOT, however, incite physical violence or advocate for your opponent’s death. There are some lines we must maintain as an intelligent species, otherwise we are but animals who simply have advanced linguistics and tools.

MonkeyStick

Griffin’s apology is hopefully heartfelt. She’s not going to escape the ramifications of what she’s done – say goodbye to that cushy New Year’s Eve spot on CNN with Cooper and probably a slew of stand-up gigs for the near future, not to mention sponsorship deals – and that is the way it should be. Free speech is a beautiful thing, but there are also consequences when that “beautiful thing” is exercised in a manner not acceptable to the common man.

LaVar Ball’s Mouth Writing Checks His Sons’ Bodies Can’t Cash

LeBronSteph

The National Basketball Association Playoffs are currently ongoing and, to be honest, to say that they have been a bit dull would be the understatement of the year. The two best teams in each conference – the defending champion Cleveland Cavaliers with “next evolution in human existence” LeBron James and the 2015 champion Golden State Warriors with smooth-as-silk shooter Steph Curry (among others) – have literally steamrolled past their opposition, with both sides only losing one game so far (did anyone see that decimation the Cavaliers laid on the Boston Celtics in Game 2? On their home floor? That the Celts came back for a squeaker win on Sunday in Cleveland was shocking). Sometime next week, these two teams will meet for the third year in a row (never done previously) to determine the NBA Finals championship.

But the collision course these teams are on hasn’t been the big story in the Association…not by a long shot.

The NBA Draft, like its cousin with the National Football League, has become almost as big a deal as its pro football brethren. Players from around the world and the best “one-and-doners (players who went to college to meet the NBA requirement that they be one year removed from high school)” vie for one of the 60 slots (the draft is two rounds, with the first-round picks guaranteed to be on an NBA roster) in the draft. With these stakes, players are trying to make their best impressions…except for one.

Lonzo Ball is, giving the player his due, one of the better prospects in this year’s NBA draft. If it weren’t for the idiotic “one year” rule that the NBA has implemented to prevent kids from going straight from high school, it is thought that Ball would have been one of the success stories to come straight from the high school ranks. After winning several high school Player of the Year awards across the country, Ball enrolled at UCLA, looking to improve his resume with the one year he plainly told everyone he would be there for.

In his one season with the Bruins, Ball’s statistics were nice but not mind blowing. He averaged 14.6 points per game, shot 55% from the field (and 41% from three-point territory), averaged six rebounds a game and almost eight assists as a guard/forward with UCLA. The 6’ 6” Ball was duly awarded many post-season honors, including the Wayman Tisdale Award for best college freshman and was first-team All-American (the team made the Sweet Sixteen in the NCAA Tournament), as he held to his promise to only stick for one year on the campus of Westwood by declaring for the draft almost as soon as his Bruins team heard the final buzzer and was defeated in the NCAA Tournament.

LonzoLaVarBall

With such accolades and achievements, you would figure that Ball would be the talk of the draft. Unfortunately (for him), he has been overshadowed by his father, LaVar, who will tell anyone that will listen that his son(s) (that’s right, there’s two more following Lonzo) are going to change the basketball world. What the senior doesn’t realize is that he is writing checks that none of the Ball brothers will be able to cash.

Who is LaVar Ball? A quick look at his college life shows that he was a basketball player of no renown (averaged 2.2 points per game at Washington State over two seasons in the late 1980s) and found even less success when attempts were made to turn him into a football player. Ball would play in the World League of American Football (appropriate acronym of WLAF) as a tight end. In one season, he played with the London Monarchs and found time on the practice squads of both the New York Jets and the Carolina Panthers. Other than this, there was absolutely nothing that would mark him as a “game changing” athlete, although even having the proverbial cup of coffee with a professional sports franchise is quite an achievement.

Apparently, this is about the time when Ball had his epiphany, even to the point of picking his wife for the express breeding purposes of creating basketball players. Don’t believe me? Ball himself said, “I see this tall girl, very attractive, walking down a hallway and I go, ‘I don’t know what we’re going to do, but we’re gonna be doing something!’ Once that was in her head, I had her. I picked a big girl who was beautiful. A big stallion.”

When’s the last time you called your significant other a “big stallion” – and you were SERIOUS about it?

This wasn’t the end of it for Ball. He’s has said that Lonzo is better than Curry, who was only the Most Valuable Player in the NBA for the past two seasons. Ball has trashed Cavaliers’ point guard Kyrie Irving for coming from a single parent home, ignoring the fact that Irving’s mother passed away when he was four. Ball has said that, in his heyday, he could beat Michael Jordan one-on-one. Ball criticized Lonzo’s UCLA teammates, saying they were “too white” to win the championship (and, forgetting the fact that his wife is white, there’s a mixed heritage to Lonzo). He’s also created the family company “Big Baller Brand” and is currently marketing Lonzo’s signature shoe to the tune of $459 (you want them autographed by Lonzo? Make it $759…) – only after the three major shoe brands Nike, Under Armour, and Adidas, turned down his BILLION dollar demands for shoe deals with all three of his sons.

Having overbearing parents in sports is nothing new. You can see it pretty much every weekend when you go to a Little League baseball game or watch Friday Night Tykes (about PeeWee football) on television. It’s when those overbearing parents actually think they are doing their child(ren) a favor by pushing them hard does it usually blow up in their faces. One only should look at the career of former quarterback Todd Marinovich – basically engineered by his father to be an NFL quarterback, to the point that the senior Marinovich said that Todd had never eaten at a McDonald’s – or the up-and-down career of tennis player Jennifer Capriati (pushed by her mother) to see the down side of these types of actions.

Britain Wimbledon Tennis

There has been at least one success story. The Williams sisters, Serena and Venus, were driven by their father Richard to excel at tennis, while at the same time inciting similar vitriol from the public for comments that he made regarding taking his girls from South Central Los Angeles to the pinnacle of tennis greatness. It is arguable, however, that the Williams sisters didn’t really reach their peak form until after they removed themselves from Richard’s tutelage and began to think and act for themselves.

The elder Ball may think that he’s helping his children achieve their goals and wants to take the family along for the ride. And that is something that all mothers and fathers want to ensure for their kids. At a certain point, however, that assistance becomes an overbearing, maniacal obsession and needs to be ended. That is where the elder Ball finds himself right now.

While Lonzo may be a high draft pick in this year’s NBA draft (the Celtics have the first pick and the Los Angeles Lakers – whom LaVar Ball has said he wants all three of his kids to play for – have the second), there is still a very close-knit professional community of athletes that will not take kindly to LaVar’s statements. Lonzo, through no fault of his own, is going to be targeted by these professionals for retribution. You don’t think that LeBron James won’t light him up for some of the things that LaVar has said about him? You don’t think that Curry or his teammates, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, and Kevin Durant, won’t smoke Lonzo at every opportunity? The utter failure of Lonzo Ball – and the “Big Baller Brand” – is a very realistic possibility and it would be a warning to others coming down the road that they aren’t bigger than the game, something that LaVar seems to think his family is.

Elijah Stewart,Lonzo Ball

Where Lonzo Ball goes in the draft – publicly NBA general managers and scouts are saying that Ball’s father isn’t going to affect his draft status – is still up in the air, but even he recognizes that his father rubs people the wrong way. “My dad’s a funny guy,” Lonzo said to Bleacher Report in an interview. “People were coming up to me and saying, ‘Are you embarrassed? Your dad said you’re going to win the championship.’ No, I’m not embarrassed. I know how he’s going to act. I just go out there and play. Let him be him.” There will come a point, however, where the junior Ball – and, if not him, one of his two brothers (who haven’t done jack shit yet) – will have to tell the senior Ball when enough is enough and cut ties with him if they are to reach their true success in professional basketball, just like Serena and Venus did in their pursuit of greatness.

Who is The Greatest Hard Rock/Metal Band of All Time – AC/DC vs. Metallica, Part Two: Who’s the Winner?

ACDCMetallicaHardRockMetal

We have reached the penultimate battle of our tournament to determine who is the greatest hard rock/metal band of all time. Through the previous 62 contests, we’ve whittled down the competitors to the two veterans that we see here, Australia’s AC/DC versus the States of America’s Metallica. As they used to say on the series Highlander, however, there can be only one. Let’s get to it on that decision!

Just to remind you, there are criteria that we can take into consideration after breaking down the various parts of the band. First, the band/singer would have to have some sort of longevity to their career – you don’t see many bands or singers that are considered “legendary” if they were only around for a couple of albums (Amy Winehouse is a rare exception, but that’s a discussion for another time). Second, the band/singer would have to have an impact on the genre – did they do something particularly noteworthy or notorious that put them into the annals of the genre’s history, a song or “behavior” – that was historic. Third, just how popular were they when they were in existence – a band or singer that was wildly popular with the fans might get some leeway over a critical darling OR vice versa (depending on tastes). Fourth, what accolades did they receive – awards, gold records, and recognition by the industry (Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, hello?) are all under consideration here. Finally, was the band/singer influential on future generations of music – have they helped shape the genre since they have left the sphere?

Without further ado, let’s see who is going to take the crown!

ACDCMetallica

Band Breakdown

There are four basic parts here – the vocalist, the guitar section, the rhythm section and miscellaneous. With the first, we look at AC/DC’s front men – the late Bon Scott and Brian Johnson (we will not include Guns ‘N Roses singer W. Axl Rose as he has not officially been added to the band) – and contrast them with Metallica’s face James Hetfield.

It is arguable that there are not two bands with more identifiable or iconic leaders as these three men. Could you imagine an AC/DC song without the readily recognizable sounds of Scott or Johnson drawing you in? Likewise, Hetfield – and, as a result, Metallica – are also known quantities immediately upon hearing Hetfield’s growl. To be honest, none of them are what you’d call great singers but, for the bands they front, they are the perfect fit. Therefore, we’ll have to call this part of the competition a tie.

With the guitarists, Hetfield returns to the equation as rhythm guitarist. Along with first lead guitarist Dave Mustaine and then Kirk Hammett, the power behind Metallica’s sound is undeniable with these two men. AC/DC isn’t lacking for strength themselves with the brother combo of Angus (lead) and Malcolm Young, but they come up just short in this match. The “three bars and a cloud of dust” attack of the Young brothers doesn’t quite measure up to the complexity of the chord progressions of Mustaine and Hammett, nor do they have the ability to play at a virtuoso level (as Hammett does) and include the speed. Thus, we’ve got to give this segment to Metallica.

Finally, there’s the rhythm section, the bass and drums. Cliff Williams (bass) and Phil Rudd (drums) were the longtime base for AC/DC and they did their jobs masterfully but unspectacularly. In basically creating Metallica – and still being the vocal (as in speaking) member of the band – Lars Ulrich (drums) has done something that hasn’t been previously seen, the drummer as a band leader. Along with the late Cliff Burton, Jason Newstead and now Robert Trujillo, Ulrich has been the backbone of the band and created his own distinct style of drumming. This segment goes to Metallica also, giving them the overall win in the segment.

Winner: Metallica

Metallica2017

Longevity

This is one category that will split down the middle with no victor declared.

Since 1973, AC/DC has been pounding out their brand of music, with arguably the apex of their career coming in the late 1970 through the early 1990s. They still are playing today (and drawing arena sized crowds for their tours), although Malcolm Young, Johnson, Rudd, and Williams are no longer a part of the proceedings. Metallica has a slightly shorter career, having “only” been founded in 1981, but it isn’t sacrilege to say they may still be at the best of their game. Sure, the mid 1980s through the late 1990s may have been considered their heyday, but Metallica continues to pump out excellent music (Hardwired…to Self-Destruct is arguably their best album since their …And Justice for All/Metallica days) and they are currently on a stadium tour that is selling out across the States of America. With such performance as this, there’s no way that one is pulling out over the other.

Winner: Push

Influence on The Genre

This is one area where AC/DC could have the edge. Quite honestly, any hard rock/metal band that doesn’t say they were inspired by bands from the late 1960s/70s is being disingenuous. Such bands as Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, and others were the ones who laid the foundation for those who came later like Metallica. There is one issue where Metallica might outpip AC/DC is their location on the “Mount Rushmore” of thrash metal alongside Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax. Still, we’ve got to give credit where credit is due: without AC/DC, there’s no Metallica.

Winner: AC/DC

ACDC2017

Popularity

Another borderline call between two of the most loved bands in the world. You don’t stick around for three or four decades without having a devoted following that will literally follow you to the gates of Hell for a concert. Both bands have monster record sales – AC/DC has sold over 200 million albums worldwide (and 71 million in the States of America, more than Madonna and Mariah Carey) and Metallica has 100 million worldwide – and both bands have been lauded by the critics. Metallica has a bit of an edge on the critical acclaim, which only serves to offset the lead in record sales for the boys from Australia. I certainly hate doing this, but we’re going to have to call this one equal.

Winner: Push

Accolades

AC/DC has been nominated for seven Grammys and won once, while Metallica thrashes them in this category. Metallica has been nominated 21 times for Grammys, walking away with nine. Where AC/DC holds the edge is in platinum albums; 20 of their albums has gone platinum (one million sales) and the legendary Back in Black is a double diamond holder (10 million sales, twice). Metallica can vouch for their own double diamond record (Metallica), but they’ve only had 10 platinum albums because that’s all they’ve released.

They are both in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, but under highly different circumstances. Metallica was a first ballot entry when they were inducted in 2009 (an artist or band becomes eligible for induction into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame on the 25th anniversary of their first official album release) with everyone but Mustaine named on the induction plaque (Metallica wanted Mustaine to perform with them during the induction ceremonies, but Mustaine was touring in Europe with Megadeth at the time). AC/DC took a bit longer to get into the Hall, with their induction in 2003 coming almost 30 years after their debut. It’s a close battle, but the edge here must go:

Winner: Metallica

So, Who Is the Champion?

By the slimmest of margins, Metallica captures the metal ring from AC/DC, earning the accolades of the greatest hard rock/metal band of all time. Individual tastes may vary on this decision, but overall there is a great deal of musicianship, innovation, and musical and lyrical substance to Metallica’s body of work. That isn’t saying that AC/DC’s brand of metal is something to deride; they have blazed their own trail in a very difficult industry and, as an international act from Australia, probably had some more issues to overcome in their early days. For this competition, however, it is the boys from San Francisco – Metallica – ruling supreme in the history of the genre.

metallica-at-mercedes-benz-arena-by-ross-halfin

Who is The Greatest Hard Rock/Metal Band of All Time – The Final Battle: AC/DC vs. Metallica, Part One

HardRockMetal

Rather than delve into the delusion that currently is supposed to oversee this country (and trust me, there’s plenty to call the Tangerine Ignoramus out on simply from this last week alone, such as his rewriting of the history of the Civil War, not only in interviews but on his own fucking golf course), I’ve decided to do something that will be much more fun. Since college basketball completed the NCAA Basketball Championship in April, I thought it would be fun to do the same but in a different arena – the genre of hard rock/metal music.

What are the criteria for consideration? First, the band/singer would have to have some sort of longevity to their career – you don’t see many bands or singers that are considered “legendary” if they were only around for a couple of albums (Amy Winehouse is a rare exception, but that’s a discussion for another time). Second, the band/singer would have to have an impact on the genre – did they do something particularly noteworthy or notorious that put them into the annals of the genre’s history, a song or “behavior” that was historic. Third, just how popular were they when they were in existence – a band or singer that was wildly popular with the fans might get some leeway over a critical darling OR vice versa (depending on tastes). Fourth, what accolades did they receive – awards, gold records, and recognition by the industry (Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, hello?) are all under consideration here. Finally, was the band/singer influential on future generations of music – have they helped shape the genre since they have left the sphere?

Here we are – we’ve finally made it to the Final Battle for the right to wear the crown of the greatest hard rock/metal band of all-time. Both bands have slogged through their respective regions – including knocking off the #1 seed in both regions – to meet on this hallowed battleground. Without further ado, here are your two heavyweights vying for the championship, with a brief history of each combatant. In Part Two, we will see how they match up with the criterion we’ve set for determining the victor and crown the champion.

AC/DC vs. Metallica

AC/DC – The True “Thunder” Came From “Down Under”

ACDC

AC/DC was founded in the wilds of Sydney, Australia, by the Young brothers, lead guitarist Angus and rhythm guitarist Malcolm, in 1973. In their early years, they tried to perfect the “three chords and thunder” sound that would become their trademark, but they also needed the right personnel to bring that sound to the people. Their first break came in finding their rhythm section in Phil Rudd (drums) and Cliff Williams (bass), but it was the vocals of Bon Scott that started the group on its way to glory and success.

AC/DC received some accolades for their early work, particularly High Voltage in 1975, but it was their 1979 album Highway to Hell that broke them as an international superstar act. With such songs as the title track, “Girls Got Rhythm,” “If You Want Blood (You Got It)” and “Touch Too Much,” AC/DC would eventually sell eight million copies of the record. It would also mark a moment that shook the band to its core.

BonScott

As they were in the studio creating their next album, Scott would die of accidental alcohol poisoning. The band briefly considered breaking up but, encouraged by Scott’s father, decided to soldier on with the band. With new lead singer Brian Johnson at the front of the stage, the band released what would arguably be their masterpiece, Back in Black. The record featured no noticeable change in the style of the band and the title track, “Hells Bells,” “Shoot to Thrill“ and the legendary “You Shook Me All Night Long,” became staples of classic rock stations. The success of the album has been seen in its longevity – it is second only to Michael Jackson’s Thriller in worldwide album sales and been certified double diamond (20 million sales) in the States of America. It is also arguable that AC/DC is now known more for Johnson’s voice than for Scott’s.

CONCIERTO DE ACDC

Over the next 30-plus years, AC/DC continued to pound out classic hard rock for its legion of fans around the world. This would eventually lead to their induction into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2003, but they haven’t even come close to slowing down since then. Lately they’ve gone through some issues – in 2014, Rudd was replaced after being charged with a litany of offenses, including “attempting to procure a murder;” also in 2014, Malcolm Young cited his health in departing the band; in 2016, Johnson was replaced (by Guns ‘N Roses singer W. Axl Rose) after doctors said his hearing could be permanently lost if he continued touring; following the final show of their 2016 “Rock or Bust” World Tour, Williams announced his resignation, citing that the loss of Johnson and Rudd made AC/DC “a changed animal.” But the constant of the band has been the sight of Angus Young, in his schoolboy outfit, still doing his modified Chuck Berry “duck walk” to the delight of crowds worldwide.

Metallica – Bay Area Thrashers Fueled by Inner Demons

Metallica2

Metallica was founded in Los Angeles, CA, in 1981, but for the entirety of its career has called the San Francisco area its home turf. The band’s drummer, Lars Ulrich, put an ad in a local newspaper looking for a singer/guitarist for the band he wanted to found. That band would take on a new form of hard rock/metal, the skate-community inspired “thrash metal” and the pieces of the band had to fit perfectly together. When guitarist James Hetfield– and fellow original members in lead guitarist Dave Mustaine and bassist Cliff Burton – all came on board, the band Metallica was born and exploded on the music scene.

“Exploded” is a rather tame term for the power and aggression that Metallica attacked the then-Euro-driven synth pop and “hair metal” of that era. From their first album, Kill ’em All, in 1983, the band’s in-your-face approach was evident:  hard core guitars crashing around machine gun drumming and the angry growl of Hetfield crushing anything in its path. The aural assault also brought something else that hadn’t been a part of the hard rock/metal scene:  lyrics delving into issues such as isolation, religious issues, anger, militaristic thought, drug usage and the damage of such usage, not exactly the thing that the “hair metal” acts were singing about on the Sunset Strip.

HetfieldAndMustaine

With these demons, however, came changes to the band. Mustaine was ejected from the group allegedly because of his drug usage and would be replaced by Kirk Hammett. As their star was on its ascendance, tragedy would strike the band in the death of Burton while the band was touring in Sweden in 1986. After receiving the blessing of Burton’s family, the remaining members of Metallica decided to keep the band going, replacing Burton with Jason Newstead, at which point they would enter arguably their most creative and successful era of their career.

In 1988, Metallica released …And Justice for All, arguably their most creative work, and the music world responded. The album, driven by such songs as “One“ (it’s video, splicing scenes from the film Johnny Got His Gun in with band performance, is considered one of the Top 100 videos of all-time), “The Frayed Ends of Sanity,” “Harvester of Sorrow“ and the title track, rocketed the band into notoriety. It was also one of the first competitors in the Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance Vocal or Instrumental category at the 1989 Grammy Awards, but was comically bested by Jethro Tull‘s Crest of a Knave for the inaugural honor (something that is recognized as one of the greatest gaffes in the history of the Grammys; it was corrected somewhat the following year when Metallica won the Grammy in the category).

Metallica3

Not content to sit on that success, Metallica would next release arguably their masterpiece. The entirely black cover – hence many fans and others calling it “The Black Album” but officially an eponymous album – sparked even bigger things for the band. Through such songs as “Enter Sandman,” “Wherever I May Roam,” “The Unforgiven,” “Sad But True,” and others, Metallica solidified its place in the pantheon of “thrash metal” gods (alongside Mustaine’s Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax). It also etched its place in music history; Metallica would be the band’s first #1 album, has sold 16 million in the States of America, and started their consecutive streak of studio albums that have debuted at #1 (six, including their latest Hardwired…to Self-Destruct).

To this day, Metallica continues to pound out their brand of metal to an appreciative audience, even though Newstead left the band in 2001 and was replaced by Robert Trujillo. They have also brought attention to many social issues, including mental illness, often depicting their own struggles with those subjects (mental problems and drug and alcohol abuse) in documentary fashion. They were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2009 (first ballot), but Metallica shows absolutely no signs of slowing down as we get deeper into 2017 (and the “Hardwired” tour rolls along with two bands they’ve influenced, Avenged Sevenfold and Volbeat). In fact, if the Hardwired record is any indication, it is possible they still can get better – hard to believe, but potentially true.

Now it is up to you, the voters. We will break the competitors down by the criteria in our final essay and make the decision – who is the greatest hard rock/metal band of all-time? Vote, argue, fight about it (just keep the chains, brass knuckles and knives out of the battle, thank you!)…just let us know who the ultimate champion is going to be!

Who is The Greatest Hard Rock/Metal Band of All Time – The Final Four

HardRockMetal

Rather than delve into the delusion that currently is supposed to oversee this country (and trust me, there’s plenty to call the Tangerine Ignoramus out on simply from this last week alone, such as his stream of consciousness interview with the Associated Press that featured more errors than a five-year old T-ball game), I’ve decided to start something that will be much more fun. Since college basketball just recently completed the NCAA Basketball Championship, I thought it would be fun to do the same but in a different arena – the genre of hard rock/metal music.

What are the criteria for consideration? First, the band/singer would have to have some sort of longevity to their career – you don’t see many bands or singers that are considered “legendary” if they were only around for a couple of albums (Amy Winehouse is a rare exception, but that’s a discussion for another time). Second, the band/singer would have to have an impact on the genre – did they do something particularly noteworthy or notorious that put them into the annals of the genre’s history, a song or “behavior” that was historic. Third, just how popular were they when they were in existence – a band or singer that was wildly popular with the fans might get some leeway over a critical darling OR vice versa (depending on tastes). Fourth, what accolades did they receive – awards, gold records, and recognition by the industry (Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, hello?) are all under consideration here. Finally, was the band/singer influential on future generations of music – have they helped shape the genre since they have left the sphere?

It’s been a long journey, but we’ve finally reached the pinnacle, the mountain – the Final Four. The four combatants have worked their way through their “regions” – the 1960/70s, the 1980s, the 1990s and the 2000s/10s – and are all champions. There can be only one, however, and they will now square off against each other to see who is the final band standing. In our first battle, the 1960s/70s will square off against the 2000s/10s:

ACDC

AC/DC (2) vs. Disturbed (1)

It was an incredibly tough vote, but longevity seemed to be the deciding factor in the battle between AC/DC and Led Zeppelin, despite the factor that the individual members of Led Zeppelin have had outstanding careers since the band dissolved. Over in the 2000s/10s division, Disturbed was finally able to end the run of Slipknot, sending the six-seed home and moving on to take on arguably one of the most loved bands in the history of hard rock/metal.

AC/DC has endured the slings and arrows of critics that labeled their three-chord grinding music as “mindless” and “simple” since their inception in the early 1970s, constantly touring and churning out new music for their legion of fans. How many records have they done? Sixteen studio albums, including the guaranteed classics Highway to Hell and Back in Black and their title tracks, with sales of over 200 million albums worldwide. Toss on 21 world tours in their history, basically touring from 1973 to 1986 without pausing, and there is no way that you can doubt the veracity of their fans nor their ability to give the people what they want.

Disturbed comes to their success during a different era of music, but they’ve garnered their own accolades through their success. As stated during the Elite Eight, Disturbed’s latest record Immortalized debuted at #1 on the Billboard charts, making their fifth consecutive studio album to do that. Only Metallica and the Dave Matthews Band can say that they have done that – not Led Zeppelin. They have also sold more than 35 million of their seven albums over their 17-year existence and they show no signs of slowing down.

If you were to break down the band by members, the edge vocally would be a tossup. The late Bon Scott and then Brian Johnson left an indelible mark on AC/DC’s sound – really, could you imagine anyone else fronting the band (it remains to be seen if Guns ‘N Roses vocalist W. Axl Rose will remain with the group)? But Disturbed is as much David Draiman as Draiman is Disturbed and his immediately recognizable smooth bass vocals drive that group.

You might say that the guitar work of Angus and Malcolm Young stand out over Disturbed’s Dan Donegan, but Donegan has been just as instrumental (no pun intended) to his group’s success as the Young brothers were to theirs. Donegan has also added in work on keyboards (something key to the experimentation that Disturbed is known for) and, along with drummer Mike Wengren, are the only two men who have been part of the group since its inception.

Disturbed

The question will come down to which do you value more – do you value the length of the career and the virtuosity shown by AC/DC, or do you value the outstanding musicianship of a career that really is still just getting going in Disturbed?

And now for the matchup between the 1980s and the 1990s:

Metallica

Metallica (2) vs. Rage Against the Machine (2)

This one seemed to be dictated from the start, but both had to overcome the #1 seed in their regions to make it to this point. Metallica had to knock down the boys from New Jersey in Bon Jovi (and I can hear the screams already – Metallica was far more influential and critically acclaimed than Bon Jovi could ever hope to be) and RATM had to best only the “godfather of grunge” in the late Kurt Cobain and Nirvana. Unfortunately, now one must go down.

So, who has the edge with creativity? Both bands have written and sung about subjects that you normally don’t find in hard rock/metal, such as religious and military leaders, rage, drug usage, anger, loss, and retribution (for Metallica) and political opinions related to not only the States of America but worldwide (Rage Against the Machine). Both bands have been the trendsetters in their genres, with Metallica considered the creators of “thrash” metal and RATM furthering the cause of “rap” metal with their work.

Even the band members are considered equals. Whether you are looking at James Hetfield (Metallica) or Zack de la Rocha (RATM) on vocals (Hetfield also wields a mean rhythm guitar), first Dave Mustaine and then Kirk Hammett versus Tom Morello on lead guitar, the triumvirate of the late Cliff Burton, Jason Newstead and now Robert Trujillo against Tim Commerford on bass and the thunderous drum work of both Lars Ulrich or Brad Wilk, they all are considered the best in the business in their respective fields. There is one thing that may swing the needle, however.

Metallica has been in this game since the early 1980s, grinding out their brand of hard rock/metal for more than 35 years solid. They’ve had a few pauses, especially after Newstead left the band in 2001, but they’ve been at the forefront of the hard rock/metal genre for decades. Although RATM was extremely powerful in their music, they also were more of a Roman candle in that they burned bright but burned out quick. Rage Against the Machine’s last studio album was in 2000 (of four; Metallica has 10 in its still-active career) and, although there have been teases in the past, there are no indications that the group is going to come back together for another run. In fact, Morello has taken the other two musicians in RATM and gone on to form Prophets of Rage along with Chuck D and DJ Lord of Public Enemy and B-Real of Cypress Hill.

RATM

The evidence has been presented and now it is up to the voters. Who will move on to the Final Conflict? Who will vie for the crown and reign supreme as the greatest band in hard rock/metal history? By this weekend, we will learn the two that will battle it out…

Who is The Greatest Hard Rock/Metal Band of All Time – The Elite Eight

HardRockMetal

Rather than delve into the delusion that currently is supposed to oversee this country (and trust me, there’s plenty to call the Tangerine Ignoramus out on simply from this last week alone, such as his inability to understand where a complete CARRIER GROUP is -you don’t say it is going to North Korea when it is just going on maneuvers with the Australians), I’ve decided to start something that will be much more fun. Since college basketball just recently completed the NCAA Basketball Championship, I thought it would be fun to do the same but in a different arena – the genre of hard rock/metal music.

What are the criteria for consideration? First, the band/singer would have to have some sort of longevity to their career – you don’t see many bands or singers that are considered “legendary’ if they were only around for a couple of albums (Amy Winehouse is a rare exception, but that’s a discussion for another time). Second, the band/singer would have to have an impact on the genre – did they do something particularly noteworthy or notorious that put them into the annals of the genre’s history, a song or “behavior” that was historic. Third, just how popular were they when they were in existence – a band or singer that was wildly popular with the fans might get some leeway over a critical darling OR vice versa (depending on tastes). Fourth, what accolades did they receive – awards, gold records, and recognition by the industry (Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, hello?) are all under consideration here. Finally, was the band/singer influential on future generations of music – have they helped shape the genre since they have left the sphere?

This is the final step – the Elite Eight – before we enter the REAL battleground of the Final Four and crown a champion. The competitors have already worked their way through some very strong bands to reach this point, but only the greatest will be able to claim the prize of the greatest hard rock/metal band of all time. Without further ado, let’s get things started with a look at the final duo in the 1960s/70s bracket:

Led Zeppelin (1) vs. AC/DC (2)

If there were two titans of hard rock/metal in the 1960s/70s, it would be these two bands. Led Zeppelin were somewhat the originators of the sound, with the crunching guitars of such tunes as “Rock and Roll“ and “Whole Lotta Love“ while AC/DC took three chords and has churned out rock classics like “Highway to Hell“ and “Back in Black“ (Trust me, when I present examples for these bands, there is virtually a dozen songs that could be presented as examples.)

As a vocalist, Robert Plant is recognized as one of the iconic singers of the genre, but both the late Bon Scott and Brian Johnson could hold their own with Plant and provide a bit of growl as well. There’s no way you can say that guitarists Jimmy Page and Angus Young are of equal talent, but both bring their all for their own distinctive styles. And looking deeper into the band, you cannot put AC/DC’s rhythm section of Cliff Williams and Phil Rudd over Led Zep’s duo of John Paul Jones and the late John Bonham.

The one area that the boys from “Down Under” crush the lads from London? Longevity. The era of Zeppelin only lasted a little more than a decade (1968-1980). AC/DC has been at the forefront of the hard rock/metal genre for more than 40 years. Originating in 1973, AC/DC didn’t even slow down for the death of Scott in 1980, instead cranking out what would become their masterpiece Back in Black with Johnson wailing the vocals.

This one’s going to take some thought, fans. Every vote is going to count!

Now here’s the Final Four showdown (and the matchup for the 1960s/70s bracket) in the 2000s/10s:

Disturbed (1) vs. Slipknot (6)

The problem with rating bands that are still around is that they are still growing and maturing as performers. In some cases, they haven’t possibly created their magnum opus that will define the band for history, meaning that it is an incomplete ranking. With these two bands, however, there is plenty of material and plenty of history to be able to see them make the Elite Eight.

Slipknot has been the surprise of the tournament to this point, making the Elite Eight as the lowest ranked band in that group. The intriguing thing about Slipknot is that they are CONSTANTLY experimenting and looking for ways to broaden their and their fans’ horizons. There is another huge part of Slipknot’s existence – the fans. Slipknot shows are well known for their intensity, something that applies today even though the band has been around for almost two decades.

But they are going up against a juggernaut in this bracket. Disturbed has been the benchmark that other hard rock/metal bands have been compared to since their explosion just before the start of the 21st century. From their initial release “Down with the Sickness“ through their current album Immortalized – and perhaps their masterpiece in a remake of the Simon & Garfunkel classic “The Sounds of Silence“ – Disturbed has been showing the way for hard rock/metal.

There are those that don’t think that Disturbed is “heavy” enough to be in heavy metal, but they are apparently good enough for their fans. Disturbed is one of only three bands to have five consecutive studio albums debut in the #1 slot on the Billboard album sales chart (the other two? Metallica and the Dave Matthews Band).

Without further ado, let’s jump into the 1980s:

Bon Jovi (1) vs. Metallica (2)

Just like in the 1960s/70s bracket, it seems like these two bands were destined to meet at this point. And you couldn’t find more polar opposites than these two bands – the glammy, big hair and balladry rock of Bon Jovi completely unlike the gritty, thrash metal with a mind that was put up by Metallica. Even in looking at the individuals in the two bands, the yin/yang is still apparent.

It is arguable that Jon Bon Jovi is a better singer than James Hetfield, but that is a bit superficial to look at them in just that manner. Both men are the leaders of their respective units, with Hetfield offering a blistering backing guitar to go along with his rumble of a voice. Bon Jovi, also known to pick up the guitar on occasion, has the better vocal range, but I would posit that Hetfield actually makes you feel the lyrics that thunder from his mouth. While very different, they both epitomize their bands.

In looking at the lead guitarists, they are also quite distinctive. Richie Sambora (up until departing the band this year) is one of the top guitarists in the genre, but Metallica’s duo of first Dave Mustaine and then Kirk Hammett not only provide the searing blowtorch of their solos but also pound out the very existence of Metallica. Sambora might be better than Mustaine, but I don’t think he tops Hammett.

The rhythm sections aren’t comparable. Metallica rules this department, with bassists in the late Cliff Burton, Jason Newstead and now Robert Trujillo and drummer Lars Ulrich completely outclassing Bon Jovi’s unit (quick – without Google, name the bassist and drummer for the band?). It is in fact that foundation in Metallica that gives them their unique sound, whereas Bon Jovi is just good hard rock music.

Even when you look at sales (popularity), the two are nearly equal. Bon Jovi has sold around 130 million albums worldwide, Metallica 100 million. Although they are nowhere near the same, they are worthy opponents at this point in the tournament.

And, finally, the 1990s:

Nirvana (1) vs. Rage Against the Machine (2)

This was potentially the toughest of the regions in our competition. With the birth of grunge, rap metal and other genres during the decade, you had many different sounds competing for hard rock/metal fans attention. That is seen in the final two survivors, Nirvana and RATM.

It could possibly be said that Pearl Jam should be here instead of Nirvana, but Nirvana is the band that many people point to as the “fathers of grunge.” For what it’s worth, the late Kurt Cobain was a tremendous lyricist, albeit his singing left a great deal to be desired. He did surround himself with outstanding musicians in Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl, who helped him to take Nirvana to the pinnacle of rock music – whether Cobain liked it or not.

By far Rage Against the Machine’s niche has been in their political stances. The band has long been known for their leftist (some would say anarchist) views, but they have delivered those views with a powerful brand of hard rock. With Tom Morello‘s groundbreaking guitar work and the vocals of Zack de la Rocha, the band has remained popular even though they haven’t been together since 2011 (their second stint – they were at their apex between 1991 and 2000, went on hiatus, then reformed in 2007).

With two powerful and influential bands such as these, who do you choose? The choice is now up to you. Who do you see moving on to the Final Four? And who eventually wins the crown?