I think Michelle Obama may have sealed it for Hillary Clinton here. That, and Bernie Sanders unequivocal and dignified endorsement. Her speech was sincere, thoughtful, articulate and delivered in a natural way. If the Obamas follow the Clintion path, there is every chance we will see her living at the White House again.
It seems to have gone down a storm in the States. But the true barometer is of course the several thousand leaders and thinkers and Richard Thompson fans, sometimes known collectively as The Massive. What is their verdict?
But we are british! We don’t praise our country, we deprecate it, which is why we struggle with all the greatest country in the world guff. Might be better if we did think that way, but we don’t.
A moving and dignified speech from a woman who has been subjected to constant vile and hateful abuse from the opposition for nearly a decade.
Come November (ok, sooner but you get it) I shall follow the advice of Lady Polly of EnglishLiberalshire who, in 2005, exhorted us to vote Tony. I held my nose and did and shall do likewise for Hillary (yep, get to vote in both countries, and do). Not my first choice in either case, but, about the only one.
She’s a star. A good woman. And her husband never got the chance to be as good for the country as he could have been. I’m hoping that the forces which reined him in will also rein in Trump, should the American public lose their senses. It happens.
At least Obama can step down knowing he’s healed the racial divide in the US.
Would love to hear your ideas on how he could have done a better job. I ask as a white American married to a black woman.
Tried harder?
“At least Obama can step down knowing he’s healed the racial divide in the US.”
That’s beyond one man’s capabilities. Beyond one government’s capabilities. But that racial divide can be made wider, quite easily.
In what way? How do you turn a bigot’s heart? He has spoken of our racial issues in a measured, dignified, thoughtful manner. He has gone about his business as a representative of his country first, his race second. I agree with some of the decisions he has made and take issue with others, but he has always conducted himself in an exemplary manner. At the same time, he and his family have taken more shit of a personal nature than any other president I can recall. His grace under pressure will be much of his legacy as our first black president, and I think many Americans (most, probably) appreciate that. It will be a few years before his impact is fully felt on the national level, I suspect.
In case there was any doubt, my response was not to Mr. Saucecraft…
He’s a lazy fuck. He’s spent more time on the golf course than even W managed. He wasn’t the Messiah after all. He’s half-white, raised by whites; not black. That hasn’t stopped him associating heavily with scumbag race-hustlers like ‘Rev’ Al Sharpton.
His foreign policy has been a disaster. His attitude to Islamic terrorism puzzling.
As for ‘taking shit’, I’d question that also. You’ve either got a short memory or, more probably, more ready to take offence in this instance.
Why you state what your marital arrangements are is baffling. So what? I’m an equal opportunity shagger. I don’t usually trumpet the fact.
I bring up my choice of spouse because, having been with her, raised two children with her, and been part of her family for several decades, I’ve gained a certain perspective on how race operates in America. Though I clearly don’t know as much as you do. As for the rest of your response, I don’t think I’ll engage. But you may want to re-read it in the morning, when your head may be a bit clearer.
Must be great being Ianess, not needing Google when you already know everything
I see Rob C refers below to James Taylor being ‘rent a bore’. Trifle harsh.
I really, really enjoy reading comments like “Obama is a lazy fuck.” Long may Ian continue to make them, especially as I don’t agree with most of them.
(Hey, Ian – is your first blog post, on “Macramé Pot Holders My Way”, nearing completion? It’s been years, and we’re beginning to think it will never happen!)
I’ve only ever done one OP and, horror of horrors, I had the gall to attack the moderators! *clutches pearls.
It was wildly popular – more than 200 comments and at least 2 or 3 of the comments weren’t frothingly antagonistic.
After that enormous success, I decided any sequels would be inevitably disappointing.
Obama has been somewhat hindered by a Republican House Of Representatives and, for a significant chunk of his tenure, a Republican Senate.
I think the issue of gun control rests heaviest on his soul.
It’s all very well saying he should have “tried harder” in that context. Like saying he should have butted the brick wall with his head harder. Let’s hope that brick wall doesn’t weaken when Darnold dances into the White House on his dainty little feet.
“I think Michelle may have sealed it for Hilary Clinton here”
I wish you were right. Michael Moore has an alternative depressing view although he has not always been right:
http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
I think Michael Moore’s message may be “if you don’t go out to vote, this may be what could happen”
I live in the US, and abhor Donald Trump. There are many who live here who equally abhor Clinton.
Moore said Mitt Romney would win.
And four years ago he said that Romney would.
Oops, sorry, didn’t see yours.
Michelle Obama is pure class – I would be more than happy if she ever ended up back in the White House one day. Her old man is one of the good guys too. Getting rid of those ridiculous sanctions against Cuba is not too bad a legacy.
davidks is right though – I have come across an awful lot of Americans although not enamoured with Trump also actively despise Hillary so her election to the White House is not a foregone conclusion. Expect the vitriol to reach pretty bad levels.
Trump will win.
After all the shite of the Republican Congress, the plagiarism, the bear baiting, the cries of ‘lock her up’ which, for many in the hall, became ‘string her up,’ Michelle Obama’s simple line of “I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves” made me gasp. It could have been written by Toby Ziegler and Sam Seaborne, it was that good.
More power to her. Literally.
Yes – “I wake up every morning…..” was the moment – and agree completely with the West Wing comment.
When she was saying “I’m here tonight…” she forgot to add “…to make a speech Republicans can steal next time around”.
Terrific stuff from a terrific woman; I pray to God (who doesn’t exist), and God (who doesn’t exist) knows there’s a lot wrong with America, that she swings things for HC. The alternative will force me to relocate to New Guinea, where I might just about be able to sit out the rise and fall of Trumpton.
Let’s face it, America has recent history of voting idiots into the White House. How much more attractive an option George Dubya suddenly looks now though.
She is such an impressive woman. I hope she has made a difference in getting people more committed to voting Clinton, who although flawed, is so much more palatable than the frankly unthinkable alternative.
One of the points that Mike Moore makes is particularly sound – the fact that Trump as President *will* put the cat among the pigeons – it *will* mess things up. It would be a protest vote against the status quo. This is why it almost doesn’t matter what he says or does.
The people that vote for Trump have been let down by the Republicans and the Democrats. The economic policies of the last 20-30 years has seen the US actively encourage businesses to increase profits by manufacturing products in Asia for the cheap labour and the more relaxed regulatory environment. This of course means that US companies can claim, with some credibility, that they are not operating from the US, so they do not pay taxes.
Anybody that has been in a competitive business environment knows that if you compete only on price or on the $ bottom line profits, you are going to have zero loyalty when the chips are down. Case in point – the Banks had a lovely time in the 90s/2000s thanks to friendly deregulation and a more relaxed stance over lending. Then it all went tits-up. Once they were bailed by the bank of You and Me, have there been any apologies, contrition, forced business behavioural change (other than in Iceland?).
If you have a wayward teenager who gets into a huge drug debt do you bail him out when he gets into trouble? Of course you do – even if it means your own financial position becomes precarious. If he told you the very next day that he’s going to continue his lifestyle and he’s not going to stop – and he wants more money – do you ruffle his hair, give him a playful punch and say “what are you like, eh?” – and give him more money?
Trump will do some crazy things – like force Apple not to outsource manufacturing to overseas companies. To many people this is not crazy, it’s overdue.
‘… like force Apple not to outsource manufacturing to overseas companies.’
And Dell, HP, Microsoft…just sayin’.
But no matter. Hugely impressive speech. She was wonderful – can’t remember hearing her speak before. Found myself thinking she’d make a good president next time round, but she’s probably had enough of the White House.
That was awesome. She really nailed that speaking other peoples’ words off an autocue impressively.
Like others have said, wouldn’t it be great if, after 8 glorious years of Hillary, we would then have 8 even more glorious years of Michelle. After all, she has lived in the White House for some time – what other qualifications are necessary?
Then, we could have Chelsea Clinton whose unimpeachable credential would be that she’s been the daughter of not just one, but two Presidents.
Then, we could have one of Obama’s sprogs who’d be equally as qualified.
Dynasties, don’t you just love them?
That’s what this vomit-inducing lovefest needed – a dash of cold water. Thank you. I think.
Trump doesn’t need an autocue or other peoples’ words. He just stands up there and says the first thing that pops into his mind. Doesn’t matter if next time it’s all different, because his people have forgotten already. In fact, they can’t remember what he’s saying as he’s saying it. It doesn’t matter what the hell he says, because they know that this billionaire narcissist is one of them – just an ordinary guy who stands up for the little guy. He can just open his mouth and make sounds and that’s enough. They don’t want speeches. You have to listen to speeches. Think about them. They want to wave stuff in the air and have a good time. They’re done thinking. They know what they know and they know Trump knows it too. The hell with policy and experts and speechifying. This is a gut thing. Right from the unthinking guts of America. They’ve had enough of whatever it was they’ve had enough of. They want … that guy up there. Their guy. The bottle-blonde who said he’d date his own daughter. Or something. Who cares what he said? Go Trump. God Bless America.
If any post ever needed an up button, this is it.
Up up up up
I know. They’re almost Bush-like.
Kennedy?
Did Kennedy write his speeches. Here is Australia Whitlam was famous but it was Freudenberg who wrote them.
Surely they are always a collaboration and, presumably, the person delivering the speech has input into content.
She delivered it well and seems like a really impressive woman.
I’ve always had a simmering dislike of Hillary Clinton, the machine person. the dynasty thing but I have to acknowledge that even though a lot of her drive is about power , and being centre stage, most of the causes she has championed have been worthy.
Here in Australia
Edith fnuction!!!!
Put what about the pant suits?
I don’t think Kennedy wore pant suits, Johnny. Maybe you’re thinking of Edgar Hoover?
‘Most of the causes she has championed have been worthy’
The sole ’cause’ the Clintons have championed is their gross enrichment under the guise of ‘public service’.
There isn’t a principle that they will not shred, a policy that they will not drop, a viewpoint that they will not flip-flop on, a national interest that they will not subvert, a colleague who they will not stab, a rape victim that they will not slander, a mental defective that they will not execute in their lust for power, influence and, most importantly, the money that will flow into their bulging coffers.
Gosh.
I’m often complimented on my gsoh.
And another thing. I think Hils looks fine in a pant suit. Certainly better than Bernie Saunders. He’d have made a brilliant POTUS except for the fact that he never had a chance.
Before the blog went down the shitter, this is the point where a picture of Hillary in an ill-fitting powder blue pant suit (or “trouser suit” in English) would appear as if by magic,
I’m afraid you’re just going to have to imagine it from now on. Or turn on the TV.
You always give me a laugh,H.P.
Well, I want it back.
Michelle Obama. Part of a political dynasty. Come again?
/\ UP /\
(sigh ) this UP is for Ian’s ‘That was awesome…’ UP /\ there.
(sigh) H P Saucecraft, Vince Packet, Sitheref2409, Junior Wells, Johnny Concheroo, M C Escher, mikethep, as you were.
(snore)
We’re looking forward to your holiday snaps of Mystical Tibet, Rob!
We got wi-fi in Tibet. Do keep up dude.
Hello Dalai!
Hi Honeydew Melon Cheeks ! X
As Davidks pithifully póints out, both candidates have many who abhor them. A lot of voters it seems will be voting against someone they dislike rather than for someone they like.
In this very close-run race, it will be interesting to see what the turn out is on the big day.
Hillary only looks good because Trump is so bad.
Otherwise the multi-millionaire Clinton is under investigation for a Watergate style email leak and her campaign has been part funded by Saudi Arabia, a country where women have few legal rights. Saudi Arabia is also the country thought to be funding ISIS and other terrorism around the world.
is the Saudi funding fact ? If so what is the source.I’d have thought they could have got sufficient funding from their own politico industrial elite network.
A bloke down the pub swears it’s true. That’s good enough for me.
I doubt it.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/hillary-clinton-links-saudi-arabia-to-terrorism-and-the-world-suddenly-changes-20160614-gpikum.html
As Obama said, it’s complicated. It’s actually illegal for foreigners to contribute to US election campaigns. Not that that would necessarily stop them, of course.
Saudi Arabia has donated between $10m to $25m to The Clinton Foundation (slush fund) since its inception. (WSJ) Tip of iceberg. Let’s not go into the stunning amounts she and Bill have racked up in speaking fees from interested parties.
“Donors on the list include the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as the governments of Norway, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Italy and Jamaica. Other donors included Bill Gates, Elton John and security firm Blackwater.” BASTARDS!
I’m well aware of the Clintons’ iffy history, and the unanswered questions surrounding the Foundation. In any other year I’d be seriously depressed at the prospect of the White House back in their hands. I was simply expressing my doubt at the “fact” of Saudi Arabia contributing to her election campaign. Happy to be proved wrong, obviously.
Would love to attend the donors’ party where Elton and husband meet with the ISIS-backing rulers of the most illiberal regimes on Earth.
And Norway.
Astonishing how insouciant you are when the list above includes Saudi, Qatar, Brunei and Kuwait which I wouldn’t have thought would rank highly in your favourite nations list.
Also, Blackwater are genuine bastards. But hey, Hillary is on the side of the angels, so no problem.
Yet again you put on your hobnail boots to tell me what I already know. One man’s insouciance is another man’s, oh, I don’t know, puckishness, maybe?
Ian wears slingback hobnails.
Puck off, HP.
Your cynicism is only outmaneuvered by your thoughtfulness,Ian.
Career politician, blue-stocking, Ivy League, rather icy and arrogant and as establishment as they come: I can understand why Hilary has her haters.
She doesn’t come across as having the common touch.
She may not be perfect but she’d certainly get my vote this year.
She had the first go at Obamacare. I think it was a stuff up, or obstructed out of viability but at least she was driving for it.
There was a very good chance of a similar system being passed under Clinton. She totally cocked it up.
What a country. The poor cant afford to get sick and any nut job can get hold of a gun.
Obama was treated like an extreme Marxist for suggesting the poor might need a little help with their medical bills.
None of this will change much under Hillary mind you.
Not just the poor – bills over there are absolutely crippling.
With travel insurance you’d think places like Africa would be most expensive due to the danger but it is the US medical charges that freak em right out.
Baz The Naz, Trumpton, Shrilary, Teresa Klebb, Corbweasel… etc & etc.
MINIONS OF SET. Don’t be fooled.
WAKE UP SHEEPLE!
Sheep are perfectly adjusted intelligent sentient beings, unlike a large swathe of humanity, it would appear!
_/\_ X
Sorry, Rob. I’ve got to disagree with you there. Black-faced Suffolks have a death wish from an early age, Jacobs and Soays are evil b*stards (never turn your back on them) and Texels are barely sentient at all.
Well… erm… ahh…. obviously Black Faced Suffolkers are great big thanatoids, Jacobs and Soays are narcissistic psycho nut jobs, and as for the ones from Texas.. hide the chainsaw and don’t share a minibus with them if they’re hitching.
The others are totally cool, though. Wise mystics.
( pst! GCUgeydude – I’m following you, right ? *taps side of nose* )
I know! Ditto!
They ain’t from Texas, theys from the Netherlands, and I think they may have overindulged in grassy substances. . .
Ainsley Harriots’s Cup-a-Psychedelic Reindeer Piss abuse has a similar effect. Apparently. I wouldn’t know.
I loathe and detest Trump and everything he stands for, and though I think the runes are pointing to a Brexit-style donkey-vote “up the establishment” Trump win, I hope that somehow this gets turned around over the next 3 months, and that he finally gets beaten down in November…
… except for the thought of waking up on November 9th with that awful, privileged, entitled harridan, screeching and cawing about her “destiny”, and “making history”… I know I’m not alone in finding her a hateful personality that represents everything people resent about the political establishment.
Don’t get me wrong, I still hope Hillary wins, but by God it’s really come to something when she’s the best option…
These days all politics is like choosing between slightly alternating levels of vile. It astounds me how many people still champion the so-called ‘good’ ones eg. slightly less obviously corporate agenda monkey vile than the others who make no effort to conceal their effluvial stench under a PR Halo.
I don’t understand your (or anyone else’s for that matter) vile towards Hillary other than that the relentless bile poured upon her by her political opponents has managed to affect your critical ability in distinguishing fact from reality.
There’s no need to understand it. It’s not personal either. I don’t waste chakric energy getting heated up her or any of them. They are all (by far mostly eg the big kahuna shagnasties) on the same circumference of greedhead gimpery. This says it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce-v2EyG52Y
Kail Yuga Shanka
OK, fair point. I’m absolutely prepared to concede that some of this is “my problem” – her persona in general makes my teeth itch, a perceived air (by me) of absolute entitlement and elitism, cronyism and “the establishment”, compounded by the dynastic aspects of her ascent to power (another no-no for me), and apparent determination to become the first woman president, not for any higher reasons, but simply to have her name engraved in the history books forever more (hell, her memoirs when just wife-of-Bill were called “Living History”…)
At a more concrete level, I’m “uncomfortable” at best with the email thing, the Foundation thing, the Whitewater thing, the paid speeches thing, the voting-for-war-in-Iraq thing and so on, but fine, maybe I’ve been brainwashed by her opponents and the media.
I’m happy to say she has been an absolutely competent SoS, and friends of mine in the US I respect are utterly committed to her, so maybe mine is a purely visceral reaction, but as I say, I’m not the only one to have it.
I struggle to think of any other US election in living memory where both candidates were so utterly dislikeable.
The closest I can get to was the Veep contest between Cheney and Palin.
And which election was that? When were there 2 Republican candidates for VP?
No such election obviously. Brain scrambled trying to think of vilest candidates in memory.
Well, I like Hils. There – I said it, and I’m glad. I’ve always thought she was a smart cookie. I “wouldn’t”, mind you. I’m like her husband in that respect (and that respect alone, I should add). Michelle, now … hmm … gosh … ooooooofffffff … brb
yep glad you said it first – Michelle is one hot first lady
Call the Jesuits to exorcise your scrote.
Is this the right room for the Top Gear auditions?
Yes! You look right for the job, too. Nice Budgie jacket!
Takes all sorts I suppose.
Cue happy song!!
I would vote for Hillary in a heartbeat. She’s tough as nails, a pragmatist and reminds me of the sort of flinty, formidable, get-shit-done middle aged American women I often deal with at work.
All of that said, I find the endless trumpeting of the virtues of electing a female President problematic, and I felt the same way about Obama the first time around. Elections should focus on identifying the best person for the job, male or female, black white or in between, not giving voters a warm glow because they’ve “made history”. Electing a goldfish would “make history” if that’s all you’re trying to do. We’ll know we’re making progress when this stuff doesn’t merit a mention, let alone these endless video montages and such like.
I also fear that “when they go low, we go high”, while a laudible sentiment, is a huge political miscalculation in terms of the election campaign that’s just about to occur.
Name one concrete achievement of ‘get-shit-done’ Hillary.
As for the smug, virtue-signalling, warm righteous glow of ‘we go high’ – such a shame the DNC emails were leaked where suggestions were made as to how to screw Bernie for possibly being an atheist, as well as a Jew. Some moral high ground.
Well, technically I said the women she reminds me of “get shit done”, but nonetheless: the creation of the CHIP, her work re: health benefits for 9/11 responders, helping negotiate a temporary ceasefire in Israel, and semi regularly singing backing vocals for Status Quo.
I agree that there is, and will be, no moral high ground in this campaign. No sense pretending otherwise. I take it you’re feeling the Bern, Ian?
I liked Bernie. I’d never imagined a candidate like him would attract such a following in America.
Fairly drab list of ‘achievements’, with the exception of Staus Quo.
Just saw Bill , he now looks like a thunderbird puppet – too much work.
I just can’t help feeling it’s just all the same old delusional, naïve people still wiping their eyes over Brexit who are now wetting their pants over Hillary, and saint Obama. Can I remind them that the world, at least this part of it ie Europe, is a much more unstable, more dangerous place than it was when Obama last came into office and decided to fuck up Libya and then support the anti-Assad Islamic front.
Guys, guys. Trump will win.
Recent CNN poll shows that 68% of Americans view Hillary as dishonest; 54% believe she is running for personal gain (47% believe this of Trump) and 55% view her unfavourably (52% for Trump)
Not great reading for the candidates for position of most powerful person in world.
Would someone summarise Hilary’s email scandal for me please.
Thanks.
She uses Comic Sans, adds several .png’s to her signature which also appear as attachments, and she always starts messages with the phrase “I’m reaching out to you…”
LOCK
HER
UP!
I think the emails also confirm that the Democrats organising the nomination process were totally tilted towards Clinton and undermined Bernie Sanders’ campaign. They’re meant to be neutral, but they were not.
Whether that’s a hang-em-high crime or not, that’s for others to say.
Isnt it as as simple as that she was sending confidential work stuff to her personal account and storing stuff on there.
Presumably found it quicker and easier but I guess a tad less secure.
The assumption by the mal-pensants is that she could decide which official emails got archived on the government system and which official emails could be deleted before they got there. The server is in Brooklyn, apparently.
Yup, she’s a vile piece of work. And I hear she stole Tippex from the stationery cupboard. You know – boxes of the stuff, not just one or two. Used to sell them from a tray on the street. Is this the kind of president you want? A bag lady street seller of stolen office supplies? You make me sick.
The private server was in her home. It meant she could transact Government business and any other business on her (unsecured) private server, without it ever being subject to FOI requests, congressional demands etc.its Hillary, so, doubtless, nothing to see here.
Not to worry, Trump’s on the case.
Cue Roy Ayers
Due to failing eyesight I first read the stuff about a private server as a private sewer and thought that Hillary had become incredibly paranoid.
After watching that speech I wish it was Michelle rather than Hilary on the ballot.
But … how anyone with a few brain cells could go for Trump over Clinton is beyond me.
Well … they don’t.
Fucking amoeba have the sense to vote for neither. Everyone should take election day off and not go to work either. Flip The Man the bird big style. Get high. Get naked.
And end up with Trump. Well, that would certainly show *him*! Ha!
Carole King just appeared doing You’ve Got A Friend. If points were awarded for gushing insincerity Carole would be World President for life. As she gets older the Tapestry hit maker has become more and more embarrassing, like your granny at a wedding.
Cue someone saying “I thought she was quite good actually”
You’ve done it now. You’ve given me a thread idea.
I’m looking forward to it BC.
As Hillary just said, with a tsunami of empty rhetoric, during her closing speech, “We will make a better future for our children, heal the racial divide and take the guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists”.
Good luck with that one.
One day a presidential candidate will say, ‘We will fuck our children up good, kill more blacks and give AR-15s away with Cheerios.’
I wouldn’t count on it though.
Apeing that vomit inducing scene in the sappy arsed utopian bullshit West Wing when rent a bore James Taylor popped up, strumming his turgid bore drone ?
And how about those millionaire rock stars who get all precious and outraged about their music being played at Republican events. It often reaches the point where they feel moved to stand up and demand that the evil doers on the right cease and desist immediately, on pain of a strongly-worded letter from Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Runne.
It’s almost as if Springsteen really believes that, if we hear Born In The USA during the Repbublican campaign, we’d really think he was a dyed in the wool Trump supporter.
And it’s not just Bruce. Queen, the band who played in South Africa during the height of Apartheid lest we forget, don’t want We Are the Champions played either.
Jackson Browne sued over the use of his song Running on Empty and both Talking Heads (Road to Nowhere) and Tom Petty (American Girl) issued a big “niet” followed by a strongly worded lawyer’s letter.
Other right-on refuseniks include Neil Young, Eminem, Sting, Don Henley, Journey, John Mellencamp, Heart, Bobby McFerrin, Isaac Hayes, Boston, the Foo Fighters, Van Halen, Bon Jovi and Abba, all of which have denied permission for their music to be used by the Republicans at some time or other.
Recently on Twitter I saw Howard Kaylan out of the Turtles blow a gasket when someone pointed out that Trump had been playing his big song Happy Together at some event or other.
I guess it’s fair enough for rock stars to act this way. Remember when Morrissey and Johnny Marr got all upset when Cameron quoted from a Smiths’ song in Parliament? Marr actually said something like “I forbid him (Cameron) from liking the Smiths”. Good luck with that one Johnny.
Remember how we hated all Gary Numan and Kenny Everett for coming out in support of Thatcher in the 80s? I think I refused to have a Tubeway Army LP in the house for decade after that. Gee, those Student Grant years seem so long ago now and looking back, all that angst was frankly pointless, wasn’t it?
But it’s always the precious SJW on the left hating the evil fascist right. I can’t think of a single instance of Ted Nugent suing Jeremy Corbyn over the use of Wang Dang Sweet Poontang for example, but hey, it could happen.
Actors, rock stars, luvvy liberals wankballoons polishing their ego right on cred for puckering the other arse cheek of Evil.
Cut those rock stars some slack, Johnny C! How would you feel if Hilary quoted one of your AW threads about Donovan in one of her electoral speeches?
I suspect that at this very moment the Donald is browsing through old AW OPs in the hope of some nugget of wisdom or witticism that he can recycle for his own ends.
I’d be thrilled at the prospect KFD and I certainly wouldn’t be offended or, heaven forbid, ask for money. Who knows, I may even get some work out of it.
My point was, those records already exist and are out there in the world. To try and limit their use on a political basis is just too precious.
With all due respect I think you’re painting yourself into a corner here JC.
True, records, once they’re out there, ‘belong’ to all of us, become the soundtrack to our lives if you will. Clearly if Sting discovered somehow that you loved his records he’d have no grounds for complaint.
At the same time, all this music is made by real-life people who have thoughts, feelings, political views even, not necessarily views which you share. If I were Howard Kaylan, and I discovered that my sunny summer-of-love ditty was being used to prop up the rancid demagoguery of Trump in such a way that it was thought I was endorsing him, I’d complain too.
If I’d written a novel in which an unpleasant character, a psychopathic serial killer say, expressed certain views which were then taken out of context in a way that made people think I shared those views, I’d have grounds for complaint, surely?
You can lump all those people together with the handy off-the-shelf soubriquet SJW (see also: right on; PC; lefty; PC), but I think that’s far too easy. When was the last time Foo Fighters, Isaac Hayes and Abba all appeared in the same basket? You could label any politician, ever, as PJW if you were so inclined.
Maybe politicians don’t reach for right-wing music because it’s just not uplifting enough?
I meant SJW. Where’s Edith F ‘Extreme’ Unction when you need her?
You’re right of course. But Trump is at one end of the right wing scale and everyone else, including Cameron, is at the other. I thought it was pathetic for Marr and Morrissey to get their knickers in a twist over what was, let’s face it, quite a clever remark, especially for a politician. It was something we never thought we’d hear in the Houses Of Parliament.
This has been going on for decades, so it’s not just Trump. I find the whole situation intriguing. I don’t know how the Beatles felt when they heard that Charles Manson was using chunks of the White Album to justify mass murder, but I don’t recall them getting nearly as precious as Springsteen has done over a major political party using one of his songs to make a dramatic entrance at a convention.
Like I said – precious.
“Precious” is so far from being what Springsteen is, it’s laughable. He’s sincere, is all, and doesn’t want to be misrepresented.
Let’s suppose ISIS (or worse, Jeremy Corbyn) used one of your comments out of context to further their cause. Used it as a quote with “Johnny Concheroo” underneath it. Would it be “precious” of you to object? You’d just shrug it off? Or would you get all “precious” and ask them to cease and desist?
The part about Corbyn/ISIS. Not a very likely contingency to be honest
Yes, I know I’m asking for a great stretch of the imagination there, but do try your hardest. It’s important.
I don’t think it’s helpful to personalise the discussion.
That’s a bit precious of you!
Seriously though but. I was making the point that taking anyone’s work or words out of context and using them to promote a cause that the creator of that work/quote does not support is legitimate grounds for protest. I wasn’t exactly serious about ISIS or Corbyn using your words, but hope the analogy would make it clearer. I imagine you wouldn’t be happy about it.
But Bruce is in a lose-lose situation here; either he tells Trump to stop and gets sneered at for being “precious”, or he shrugs it off and is seen as supporting Trump. I think telling Trump to fuck off is the lesser of the losses.
It’s still irrelevant to personalise the discussion no matter how you word it. Thanks for attempting to make things “clearer” for me however. Appreciate it.
Okay. Let’s put it this way: I personalised it to make it relevant. I could have said “I personally would not find it legitimate to protest if someone quoted me out of context to support a cause I do not believe in.”
The reference to “ISIS (or worse, Jeremy Corbyn)” was intended to be satirically humourous. I fully agree with you that it’s unlikely either would quote you in any context.
I’m still not sure that you understand it’s a matter of principle here, and not politics.
You’ve accused me of being bile-filled and bad-tempered in the past – may I suggest here that you’re being unnecessarily touchy and perhaps a tad humourless?
Not totally humourless, I hope. But all too often these robust discussions slide effortlessly into ridicule, I find.
As I said several times above, I quite understand Bruce’s point of view. I was trying to write something of interest about the phenomenon (if I can call it that) of musicians objecting to their songs being used for political purposes. It’s a growing trend which find fascinating.
The fact that your comment has inspired a vigorous sub-thread is enough to feel good about in itself, yes/no?
Also, no ridicule outside the healthy limits of fishing-trip banter. Be deadly here if we all skirted around each other cringing at the possibility of upsetting someone. Ian does enough of that for one blog.
Born in the USA (my least fave Springsteen song btw) is a gift to any politician, wherever they are on the spectrum. If you’re going to wrap yourself in the American flag it’s possibly naive to expect otherwise. In fact I imagine whoever it was decided to use it was thinking, that’ll show the bastard.
But mostly they’re just looking to sprinkle a little feelgood fairy dust, without thinking very hard about it. Our sales director used to like to play Mama Cass’s It’s Getting Better at the start of sales conferences. The mal-pensants among us used to join in when it got to the ‘I don’t feel all turned on and starry eyed’ bit.
It’s something that I find really interesting because it’s directly related to the stuff we yak about here every day.
I can imagine several reasons why Bruce objected.
He genuinely dislikes Trump.
He’s also conspicuously signalling his virtue by trumpeting (SWIDT) his antipathy towards the right wing.
He gets acres of free publicity which always helps.
My favourite – he’s, for once in his cosseted, gazillionaire life, able to portray himself as a ‘victim’ and thus achieve the Holy Grail of ‘victimhood’ that every SJW seeks in the identity-driven politics the Left love.
Yep, and the blue collar credentials remain intact.
Poor Bruce. He just can’t win, can he?
I don’t see how expressing a political bias (one way or the other) is virtue signalling. I quite like the VS term when it’s used correctly, but it’s not applicable here (or it’s applicaple to every human point of view, which renders it meaningless.)
I also don’t see how he’s presenting himself as a victim. He’s just protesting the use of his work to further a cause he doesn’t believe in. That’s legitimate.
As to the old, old, old arguments about billionaire rock stars singing about the common man, they’re as invalid as they ever were. He can sing about what he damn well likes. His blue-collar background is well-documented and true. He doesn’t have to change his politics because he got rich and famous.
I understand the VS accusation is a bit loosely affixed, but it certainly wouldn’t fit going the other way by, say, some artist complaining about Hillary using their song. Said artist would then be portrayed as a fascist or whatever by the smug, self-righteous, self-preening mob who claim ‘when they go low, we go high”.
As for your last claim, I did sneer at Jagger at the time for claiming to be a ‘street fighting man’. Springsteen’s great wealth means he’s completely insulated and detached from the problems of the people he grew up with, though, to be honest, I couldn’t care less what Bono, Geldof or any other song and dance man has to say.
You can’t win either, HP. If Ian says the Boss is virtue signalling, he’s virtue signalling. We’re all virtue signallers now.
Perhaps it would help if we all learnt semaphore.
http://i1100.photobucket.com/albums/g401/mikethep/Semaphore_Signals_A-Z_zps7o9opbll.jpg
The Fabs were right to reject that early draft of the cover.
‘Said artist would then be portrayed as a fascist or whatever by the smug, self-righteous, self-preening mob who claim ‘when they go low, we go high”.’
And would you consider that unfair? That’s all we’re doing.
Let’s wait and see what’s happens when Hillary comes on stage to the strains of ‘Okie from Muscogie’, pointing delightedly at people she doesn’t know with her maw gaping wide.
I’d like to reiterate that I don’t really have an opinion about Bruce et al objecting to the use of their songs in a political way (although some of the artists involved do make too much of a, er, song and dance about it).
My original observation was that this phenomenon has become an established “thing” to the point where it’s now expected of all musicians to be of the left and to hate the right. If any musicians choose not to follow this path (eg Ted Nugent) then watch out, because you will be dismissed by all decent people as a dangerous fruitcake not worthy of our attention, unless that attention involves receiving our undiluted scorn.
Now, just as surely as hating the Daily Mail, that’s a classic example of virtue signalling.
I don’t think anybody ‘expects’ musicians to be of the left, it’s just that a lot of them actually are of the left. Obviously we wouldn’t know this if they didn’t make it clear, or signal their virtue if you prefer. That’s their right, surely?
Apart from that nice Mr Nugent and a few flirters-with-Tories like Morrissey, Alex James, Gary Barlow etc., it’s hard to think of any major league rock stars who are of the right. Conspiracy?
As for the Daily Mail, it points up the flaw in the whole virtue signalling thing, in that it makes no distinction between people who hate something just to show off, and people who really, really hate something.
Ted Nugent, though. Seriously?
Good version of Baby Please Don’t Go with the Amboy Dukes though but. And Ted popularised the Gibson Byrdland guitar in rock. The only other time I’ve seen that was Eric Clapton’s ill fated appearance at the Concert For Bangla Desh.
‘Virtue-signalling’ is just self-righteousness wrapped up in a different package that makes it sound new and vaguely pathological.
John Lennon was quite supportive of Charles Manson, basically saying that he was just a product of society (and a reflection of it) and not as hypocritical as the politicians.
I wouldn’t quite say supportive, but he was sitting on the fence but leaning in that direction, but he was a bit of an idiot really, politically speaking. All that Red Mole crap and being suckered by all sorts of raving Marxist crackpots.
(… and yes, the Maharishi was a breadhead, but a benign one. Lennon even got suckered by Magic Alex on that score ).
*allegedly*
I got the feeling that the Beatles (and especially Lennon) just shrugged and didn’t get too worked up about Manson, knowing that people wouldn’t think they were endorsing the actions of the Family. Especially since at that time every nutcase in America was jumping on the Beatles bandwagon.
Lennon did comment along the lines that Manson was right in that the system had created him and was ultimately to blame. George, referred to them far more succinctly as ‘Californian shagnasties’.
The artist can’t stop people using their music and people can’t stop the musicians objecting if they don’t like the context.
Wonder how Bob would feel if Isis off desire got adopted by a certain militant group.
If Cameron started quoting words from my Afterwork pieces, I would be furious. Oi! No! I’m with Johnny Marr.
Well I’m no fan of the Tories, but as I get older I find the vitriol exchanged between followers of the political parties harder to understand. They’ve become like football supporters.
Can I ask a practical question at this point?
What or who is SJW?
Social Justice Warrior; (commonly abbreviated SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual promoting socially progressive views; including feminism, civil rights, multiculturalism, political correctness, and identity politics.
Yeah, that stuff.
as opposed to SKW
who is SK Warne
see Gatting M.
Or, in the rugby world JPRW