H/t: Pink Progressives
Daily Archives: January 23, 2013
What would have been worse? If Bey had screwed up the song in front of TENS of millions of viewers and a million people LIVE?
My guess is that some of the old stodgy types didn’t like her “soulful” rendition and “outed” her for it.
Lip syncing is not unusual in big venue events…
It’s not just Beyoncé, folks. From Ashlee Simpson to Luciano Pavarotti—and yes, even Whitney Houston at the 1991 Super Bowl—see other famous performances that weren’t quite live.
Whitney Houston at the 1991 Super Bowl
“It might well be the best Super Bowl performance of all time,” said Billboardmagazine editor Danyel Smith. The only problem? Whitney Houston’s 1991 rendition of the “Star Spangled Banner” was lip-synced. “The music was pre-recorded, and so was the vocal,” confirmed Houston’s former musical director Rickey Minor to ABC News last year. With all the crowd noise, a jet flyover, and the unpredictability of a live event, Minor said “that’s the best way to do it.” Houston’s performance came just as the U.S. entered the first Gulf War; a recording of the song, released by popular demand, reached the top 20 on the Billboard charts.
Ashlee Simpson on ‘SNL’
When Ashlee Simpson got ready to perform her song “Autobiography” onSaturday Night Live in 2004, she had no idea she was about to experience a moment that would come to define her musical life for years to come. You remember: the wrong song started to play—ironically, given the career-shattering implications, it was called “Pieces of Me.” Simpson slumped around for a bit, and then, in an awkward coup de grace, proceeded to dance what she later called a “hoe-down.”
Elton John Insults Madonna at 2004 ‘Q Awards’
Hey Madonna, can you feel the love tonight? Probably not. Because back in 2004, Sir Elton John famously bashed your nomination in the “live act” category at the Q Awards, hosted by the magazine Q. “Since when has lip-syncing been live?” Sir John said. “Anyone who lip-syncs in public on stage when you pay 75 pounds to see them should be shot. Thank you very much.” He added some good expletives for emphasis.
Pavarotti at the 2006 Turin Olympics
Read this as an opera singer: Nooooooooooo! Turns out esteemed tenor Luciano Pavarotti lip-synced his virtuosic performance at Turin’s 2006 Winter Olympics. Conductor Leone Magiera reportedly wrote in a memoir that Pavarotti’s declining health, added to the brisk cold at the Games, made it “too dangerous for him … to risk a live performance before a global audience.”
Jennifer Hudson at the 2009 Super Bowl
Rickey Minor was at it again at the 2009 Super Bowl, when he insisted that Jennifer Hudson and Faith Hill lip-synch the national anthem and “America the Beautiful,” respectively. “I would never recommend any artist go live because the slightest glitch would devastate the performance,” he said. And not singing doesn’t?!
50 Cent at the BET Awards
When the lyrics dropped out of his backing track at the 2007 BET Awards, 50 Cent decided to let the awkwardness hang in the air. Gunshot sound effects punctuated the auditorium as Fiddy waded into the audience to give out handshakes, before the music to “Amusement Park” returned in full, and the rapper continued lip syncing.
(Unable to imbed video)
Milli Vanilli at…Always
“Girl You Know It’s True”…that Milli Vanilli didn’t sing any of their songs. Ever! When the pop group had its Grammy revoked in 1990, it was the culmination of the greatest lip-syncing scam of all time. We’re still not sure if their hair was real.
Britney on her ‘Circus’ Tour
Oops… After Britney Spears’s comeback tour sparked controversy over accusations of lip syncing, John Mayer tweeted, “If you’re shocked that Britney was lip-syncing at her concert and want your money back, life may continue to be hard for you.” Enough said.
- Not-so-live performances (cnn.com)
- Beyoncé Lip-Synced at the Inauguration and the World Is Betrayed (jezebel.com)
- PEOPLE’s Music Critic: Why We’re Upset About Beyoncé’s Lip-Synching Drama (people.com)
- Watch: Ashlee Simpson Releases A Music Video For ‘Bat For A Heart’ (pinkisthenewblog.com)
- Ashlee Simpson in Hudson Juliette Jeans in Coated Bordeaux (denimblog.com)
- So Emotional – Whitney Houston (classicollector.wordpress.com)
Wayne LaPierre, chief executive of the National Rifle Association, on Tuesday delivered a strange and strident rebuttal to President Barack Obama’s inaugural address, accusing the president of reducing the U.S. Constitution to “a blank slate for anyone’s graffitti” and lavishly praising a Supreme Court justice who famously ruled to limit gun rights.
Speaking at the annual Weatherby International Hunting and Conservation Awards in Reno, Nev., LaPierre zeroed in on a line in Obama’s inaugural address, delivered Monday, in which the president said “we cannot afford to mistake absolutism for principle.” The line was a subtle reference to the gun control debate, and the tendency of gun rights activists to interpret the Second Amendment as giving carte blanche rights to buy and carry any type of firearm anywhere.
“Absolutes do exist, it’s the basis of all civilization,” said LaPierre. “Without those absolutes, Democracy decays into nothing more than two wolves and one lamb voting on who to eat for lunch.”
Surprisingly, LaPierre renewed a widely criticized argument the NRA put forth last week in an attack ad featuring the president’s two daughters. “We believe that we deserve and have every right to the same level of freedom that government leaders reserve for themselves — to defend ourselves and our families with semi-automatic firearms technology,” LaPierre said. “We believe that if neither criminals nor the political class — with their bodyguards and security people — are limited by magazine capacity, we shouldn’t be limited in our capacity, either.”
Using terms better suited to a talk radio host than to the leader of the nation’s largest gun lobby, LaPierre said Obama’s address “makes a mockery” of the Declaration of Independence and the notion of “unalienable rights.” LaPierre repeatedly addressed Obama in the speech, delivered to a black-tie crowd at the hunting awards benefit dinner. “Words have meanings, Mr. President, and those meanings are absolute,” LaPierre said. “And when absolutes are abandoned for principles, the U.S. Constitution becomes a blank slate for anyone’s graffitti.”
LaPierre told the crowd the president “doesn’t understand you. He doesn’t agree with the freedoms you cherish. If the only way he can force you to give ‘em up is through scorn and ridicule, he’s more than willing to do it — even as he claims the moral high ground.”
LaPierre quoted former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, a one-time Democratic congressman who served on the high court in the 1930s. “Justice Black understood the danger of self-appointed arbiters of what freedom really means, like President Obama,” LaPierre said.
But Black is a problematic hero for LaPierre. In 1939, Black and fellow Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously in a landmark gun control case, United States v. Miller, that the Second Amendment does not protect blanket access for citizens to any type of firearm.
The NRA and other gun rights groups groups are gearing up for a legislative battle in Congress during the coming weeks over a proposed ban on military style weapons, and limits on the size of gun magazines.
- A Month After His Bizarre Press Conference, NRA’s Wayne LaPierre Goes On A Huge Rant On Obama’s Gun Plans (businessinsider.com)
- NRA’s Wayne LaPierre delivers ‘major response’ to Obama’s inaugural address (twitchy.com)
- N.R.A. Leader Denounces Obamas Call for Gun Control (democraticunderground.com)
- Hypocrisy Perfected – NRA Gets Death Threats, Blames Obama (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
- NRA responds to inaugural address by condemning Obama’s ‘absolutism’ attack … – Daily Mail (dailymail.co.uk)
- NRA’s Wayne LaPierre says Obama trying to take away basic rights (washingtonpost.com)
- Has the NRA lost it entirely? (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
- NRA criticizes Obama’s reference to ‘absolutism’ – Watertown Public Opinion (thepublicopinion.com)
Colin spoke truth to power on Monday…
Yikes. I wonder what’s going through GOP minds as they continue to be slammed by the overall well respected former Secretary of State Colin Powell? Last week, Powell, who served in high-profile roles during the Reagan administration and both Bush administrations, told Meet the Press:
“There is also a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party….They look down on minorities…When I see a former governor say that the president is shucking and jiving. That is a racial era slave term. When I see another former governor – says that the president was lazy. It may not mean anything to most Americans. But to those of us who are African-Americans, the second word is shiftless and then there is a third word that goes along with it.” (Source)
He then proceeded to defend Hillary Clinton against right-wing smears:
“Well, you can’t keep everything from happening. Benghazi was a very, very difficult one and a difficult situation and maybe they shouldn’t have been there in the first place. And I think that we have had a good review of that by Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen and I don’t know whether the Congress in their examination of Mrs. Clinton will find something that they find distasteful. But I don’t think it’s a blot on her record.” (Source)
Powell even went as far as to imply that Clinton would make a good president:
”I think she’d be good at whatever she does, whether she is interested in it or not, I will let her opine on that.”
So what is he up to this week? He’s chastising the GOP for not speaking out about the lunatics in their party and he’s advising them to loudly denounce the “birther nonsense” and “other things that demonize the president.” In an ABC News interview with Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos, the four star general said:
“Republicans have to stop buying into things that demonize the president. I mean, why aren’t Republican leaders shouting out about all this birther nonsense and all these other things? They should speak out. This is the kind of intolerance that I’ve been talking about where these idiot presentations continue to be made and you don’t see the senior leadership of the party say, ‘No, that’s wrong.’ In fact, sometimes by not speaking out, they’re encouraging it. And the base keeps buying the stuff.
And it’s killing the base of the party. I mean, 26 percent favorability rating for the party right now. It ought to be telling them something. So, instead of attacking me or whoever speaks like I do, look in the mirror and realize, ‘How are we going to win the next election?”
Oh and one more thing. He accused them of voter suppression. Yes, he did.
“The Republican Party ought to be out there not restricting voting by voter ID, but saying we want everybody to vote,” he said. “It’s a party that has to stop saying, ‘We are going to appeal to you with new messages.’ You need policies — the country is becoming more minority.”
And he said the same thing on MSNBC’s Morning Joe show:
“Should we really have gone after reducing the turnout of voters in those places where we thought it would make a difference?” he asked. “The Republican Party should be a party that says, ‘We want everybody to vote,’ and make it easier for people to vote and give them a reason to vote for the party, and not to find ways to keep them from voting at all.” (Source)
Many conservatives are calling Powell a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only), but he maintains that he’s still a Republican. Why?
“I grew up under Ronald Reagan and Cap Weinberger and George Schultz and George Herbert Walker Bush — that’s the Republican party I know — the Howard Bakers of the world, and I think we’ve drifted from that. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with trying to drift a little bit back. Not because it’s just good to be moderate, but because that’s where the American people are. They lost an election — two.”
Will someone please tell the GOP that this man is trying to send them a message? He’s doing everything but parachuting into their little retreats and pulling them up by their shirt collars and saying “LISTEN”.
No, he’s not a RINO. He has no reason whatsoever to lie about being a Republican.
No, he didn’t endorse President Obama because he’s Black. He endorsed President Obama because the GOP keeps tossing up idiots as candidates. I’d bet a paycheck that if Hillary Clinton runs in 2016, he’ll be endorsing her as well.
He’s offering the GOP, free of charge, his opinion that if they don’t get their act together and move with the rest of the country, they’re definitely going to be DINOs (dinosaurs).
“The country is moving more toward the center. There are social changes taking place in this country that are irreversible and there is demographic change … you can’t just say, ‘Well, we’ll fix our message,’” he said. “It’s not the message. You have to appeal with policies and programs to these people who are going to be the leaders of our country in a generation.” (Source)
I suppose General Powell is attempting to soldier on in his attempts to penetrate the thick skulls of the Republican party leaders. I don’t have a military-like acumen, but I’ll say this: You, sir, are wasting your time. It ain’t gonna happen.
- Colin Powell Calls Out The GOP’s Racism Problem: There Is ‘A Dark Vein Of Intolerance’ (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
- Colin Powell slams GOP’s ‘dark vein of intolerance’; says some in party ‘look down on minorities’ (thegrio.com)
- Colin Powell: ‘Birther Nonsense’ Is ‘Killing The Base’ Of The GOP (dailyqueernews.wordpress.com)
- Joe Scarborough: GOP Cheating To Win Implies Party In Decline (VIDEO) (addictinginfo.org)
- Colin Powell slams GOP for ‘idiot presentations,’ ‘demonizing’ the president’ [VIDEO] (upi.com)
- Colin Powell slams GOP, says it has developed ‘dark vein of intolerance’ (kdvr.com)
- Colin Powell to GOP – Stop This ‘Birther Nonsense’ And Voter Suppression (VIDEO) (addictinginfo.org)
Dolphins are my favorite sea creatures. When I ran across this video, I simply had to share why they are my favorite. The humans in this video are the coolest, ever. Enjoy…
This video of a dolphin in need is really something on so many levels.
It turns out that the dolphin had fishing line and a hook stuck on one of its fins, so it approached a group of divers who were watching manta rays at night near Kona, Hawaii. Fortunately one of the professional divers was able to help remove some of the fishing line that was restricting the movement of the dolphin, though in the end they were unable to remove the hook.
There are plenty of warnings at the beginning (the divers are professional so don’t try this at home), followed by the dolphin swimming around the group, with the untangling action starting around the 3:30 mark.
You won’t believe how calm and trusting the dolphin is with the diver, who patiently cuts away the line.
- An Entangled Dolphin Approaches a Diver And Gets Help (outsideonline.com)
- VIDEO: Diver frees dolphin from line (newsnet5.com)
- WATCH: Wild Dolphin Asks Divers to Help Free Itself from Hook (ecorazzi.com)
- Diving Guide – Tropical Vaction (motortrend.com)
- Divers capture amazing dolphin-rescue on video (io9.com)
- Dolphin seeks help (boingboing.net)
- Entangled dolphin asks diver for help (wwlp.com)
- Dolphin Tangled in Fishing Line Approaches Divers for Help (Video) (misebogland.wordpress.com)
Originally written on 1-21-2013
I watched the Inauguration this morning and this afternoon. I must say, I was more impressed this time around than four years ago. Yes, back then it was an historical moment. Huge crowds, broad promises in his acceptance speech, the first Black president, “hope and change”. Make no mistake about it, it was awesome to watch the transfer of power from eight years of George W. Bush to Barack Hussein Obama, but in terms of substance and vision, the event paled in comparison to today’s events and to the POTUS’ speech.
The President seemed exceptionally confident, with a clear vision of the path forward. Where four years ago he was open to bipartisanship, he now implies he has no time for the games and partisanship that Congress presented to him in the previous term.
On Monday, President Obama used his inaugural speech to articulate a decidedly liberal vision for his second term. Drawing inspiration from the most important events in American history — from the Revolutionary War to the civil rights movement — Obama proclaimed that the Founding Fathers’ dream of equality and liberty would not be fulfilled until the country reduced income equality, ensured equal rights for gays and women, protected the most vulnerable citizens from the inequities of laissez faire capitalism, and found a better way to welcome “striving, hopeful immigrants.”
Obama also called on government to play an active role in pursuing that agenda, implicitly rejecting President Reagan’s assertion, at his own inaugural address in 1981, that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Obama argued that only collective action could heal the country’s ills, claiming that Americans “can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism.” He added, “Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people.”
As Jamelle Bouie of The American Prospect put it:
Obama is giving the speech liberals have begged him to give for four years.
Obama’s second inaugural speech contrasted starkly with his 2009 address, in which he stressed bipartisanship as a means to resolve a full-blown economic crisis, as well as to address a host of other challenges. The 2009 version of Obama said, “The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works… When the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. When the answer is no, programs will end.”
The 2013 version of Obama, on the other hand, seems far more willing to follow his own impulses — political risks be damned — and plow through ideological objections. “Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government,” he declared. “But it does require us to act.” He continued: “We must act, knowing that our work will be imperfect.”
Obama’s change in approach can be partly attributed to the fact that he faced near-unified opposition from Republicans in Congress during his first term. He’s also done with elections, meaning that if he so chooses, he can unleash an unabashedly liberal agenda without taking political considerations (beyond the 2014 midterms) into account.
However, it could be argued that his re-election represented a sea change in American politics, reflecting a new electorate that has swung left on issues ranging from gay marriage to immigration to economic equality. Many within Obama’s winning coalition are looking to government to expand opportunities and strengthen equality, and may not recognize Reagan’s assertion that government is the main obstacle to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In that respect, Obama’s speech could be seen as an attempt to place himself at the vanguard of this new political movement — and to begin building a legacy that will loom as long as Reagan’s.
- Obama Becomes A “Great” President (buzzfeed.com)
- Obama Lauds Government as Equalizer Including Gay Rights (bloomberg.com)
- ‘Seagulls’ Were Awed By Obama and other stuff you can’t make up (charlesoliverblog.wordpress.com)
- Charles Krauthammer: Obama Just Declared That The Era Of ‘Big Government Is Back’ And ‘Reaganism’ Is Dead (mediaite.com)
- Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: A historic Inaugural address (dailykos.com)
- KRAUTHAMMER: Obama Declared ‘The End Of Reaganism’ And That ‘Big Government Is Back’ (businessinsider.com)