"...As Rodney King Might Say, 'Can't We All Just Sing Along With Bruno'?..."

Old saying.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

New saying.

Just ahead.

First, the following article, published at CNN.com, authored by Roxanne Jones and entitled "Right Voice, Right Time".

Roxanne Jones, a founding editor of ESPN Magazine and former vice president at ESPN, has worked as a producer and as a reporter at the New York Daily News and The Philadelphia Inquirer. She was named a 2010 Woman of the Year by Women in Sports and Events. Jones is a co-author of "Say It Loud: An Illustrated History of the Black Athlete" and CEO of the Push Marketing Group. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN)    Unapologetically black, that is the attitude that Beyonce -- and to a large degree Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton -- brought to Super Bowl 50. And as a lifelong NFL fan who's attended more than 15 Super Bowls, Bey and her perfectly timed, bold, Black Panther-inspired halftime tribute was a beautiful thing to behold. It was everything.

Without asking for permission, Beyonce redefined what it means for a celebrity to command the stage while the whole world is watching. Going beyond the game and the glitter, the 34-year-old pop icon used her star power to shine a light on the problem of race in America. Singing a cleaned-up version of her new single release, "Formation," Beyonce dared to use the nation's most-viewed event as a platform to shout #blacklivesmatter. 

There were nods to Michael Jackson, to Black Greek step shows, to Malcolm X and a salute to the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Black Panthers. For a minute, watching Beyonce and those strong black women sporting black berets and big afros march out onto the field, I forgot I was watching a Super Bowl performance. For the first time I felt like I wasn't just a spectator of the game but that the game had become a part of my black experience in America. With just a few lyrics, Beyonce connected with black women everywhere. Her performance became personal.

I like my baby hair, with baby hair and afros
I like my negro nose with Jackson Five nostrils
Earned all this money but they neva take the country out me
I got a hot sauce in my bag, swag

Add in the pro-LGBTQ messaging of Coldplay's performance and the soulful rendition of Lady Gaga, who has long stood with the gay community, belting out the national anthem, and you have a vision of an America that I aspire to live in one day. A nation where equality and justice aren't just reflected in the words we recite, but in our everyday interactions with one another. It is a vision of America for which men such as Malcolm X, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Huey Newton and too many of my ancestors and their advocates fought and died.

Sadly, it is a vision of America that still scares some people.

So predictably, the Beyonce bashers were out in force, calling the halftime performance politically charged, an assault on police officers, scandalous. "This is football, not Hollywood," former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani complained later, showing just how out of touch he is with sports culture. 

The truth is the star-studded, billion-dollar industry that is the NFL merged with Hollywood long ago.

The problem is that Giuliani and those critics are out of touch with a lot more than sports. They are out of touch with America. They act as if the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, which disproportionately affected poor blacks, didn't happen on American soil. As if, far too many unarmed black men and boys haven't been shot and killed by police officers on American soil. As if, systematic racism doesn't exist in America. And, as if we don't have a right to protest this brutality and demand law enforcement reforms by proclaiming #blacklivesmatter. Like it or not, Giuliani, Beyonce's message was right on time.

Her "Formation" video features scenes of a young black boy dancing in front of riot police, who signal their surrender by putting their hands up, referencing the "Hands up, don't shoot" anthem of the Black Lives Matter movement inspired by the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Tidal, the streaming service of her husband, Jay Z, reportedly plans to donate $1.5 million to Black Lives Matter.

We tend to criticize celebrities for talking about politics, for taking a stand on serious issues. We resent it when stars such as Cam Newton confront race head-on as he did before the big game, saying that many fans dislike him because he's a brash, black quarterback. But in our pop culture-crazed, message-driven world, there's no denying celebrity voices can influence the lives of many. Celebrities such as Beyonce, Lady Gaga and Bruno Mars are part of a refreshing generation of famous voices who are showing that fame can and should be used to push for social justice. 

So I say, thank you Queen Bey, for having the creative courage to join the fight for justice. You slayed.




First, as a rule, I don't have anything but admiration for anyone, up to and including celebrities, who are willing to take a stand for something in which they passionately believe.

The operative term in that last sentence, though, being "as a rule".

Second, although I'm not particularly either enamored of, nor repelled by, the contribution that Beyonce makes to the Billboard charts, I would adamantly refute anyone who attempted to accuse me of being a "BeyBasher".

Those disclaimers divulged, here's my considered, and respectfully offered, reaction to what Ms. Jones has to say in her op/ed.

Puh-leeze.

Fifty plus years ago, Ted Dealey, the then owner and publisher of the Dallas Morning News was one of several prominent newspaper executives invited to visit with the President for coffee and conversation.

Dealey took it upon himself to throw caution, and good manners, to the wind and, in front of the entire group, berate the President for what he believed to be an unsatisfactory performance in office by the Chief Executive.

In what he apparently considered to be an oration of powerful patriotism, Dealey informed the President that what America needed was "a leader on horseback" and what Dealey, and his readership, were getting for their money was a President "riding his daughter's tricycle."

The daughter Dealey referred to by name was Caroline.

And the President who was rudely taken to task was, of course, Caroline's daddy.

John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy responded with some tough language of his own, putting Dealey in his place and not bothering to waste time or breath trying to make the newspaper tycoon understand that what was objectionable wasn't the criticism, but the allusion to his six year old little girl.

A tasteless, classless and completely inappropriate show of discourtesy.

Oh, and not for nothing, but, yes, Ted Dealey was of the same Dealey family that had been prominent in Dallas politics for generations.

So prominent, in fact, that a large chunk of downtown Dallas was named in honor of them.

Perhaps you've read of it through the years.

Dealey Plaza.

Roxanne Jones seems to be fervently faithful to the belief that Beyonce's performance at the Super Bowl was nothing short of a Rosa Parks moment, an expression of moral outrage and courage, focusing a global spotlight on injustice and inequality.

Again...puh-leeze.

Rosa Parks civilly disobeyed a city ordinance, was taken off the bus and went to jail.

That simple brave gesture was a ripple that eventually generated a wave of activism, conflict and, in no small measure, change.

Beyonce exploited the availability of a global spotlight to promote a new single release and disguised the exploitation in a cloak of protest and racial resentment. At the conclusion of the "entertainment", she was assisted to her limo and, escorted by a full contingent of the same kind of police officers she had denigrated in the "act", was driven to her luxury weekend accommodations, acquired through AirBnB to the tune of ten grand for the weekend. One can only assume that a splendid smorgasbord of edible and drinkable delights was ready and waiting her arrival.

Not exactly three hots and a cot, there, Rosa.

And while Super Bowl performers are not, by NFL policy, "paid" for their appearance, all expenses incurred resulting from that appearance are paid.

Reasonable estimates put the figure in the neighborhood of $600,000.

Not a bad neighborhood, by any stretch.

And let's not forget the aforementioned promotion of her new single, seen, and heard, on the telecast to the tune of 112 million people, give or take, in the U.S. alone.

Not a bad tune, either.

No reasonable person would fault Beyonce, or any other citizen, for that matter, for expressing a point of view.

Hijacking the half time show of the Super Bowl was, at the very least, bad business judgement.

Because for every one watcher/listener throwing their blanketed pig to the coffee table in solidarity and screaming "testify, sistah!", there were, rest assured, a couple of dozen watcher/listeners throwing their blanketed pig to their coffee tables in annoyance and/or disgust and screaming "what the fuck?....like having to listen to Coldplay isn't enough?"

And hijacking the half time show of the Super Bowl was, at worst,...

...a tasteless, classless and completely inappropriate show of discourtesy.

Roxanne Jones wrote a little over 700 words praising, and proselytizing on behalf of, "Queen Bey" and her courageous, controversial choreography.

Due respect, I've got a rebuttal that consists of just two words.

Pish.

Tosh.

And the title of Jones' article?

"Right Voice, Right Time"?

Brings us to that new saying I promised at the outset.

Two rights can be oh, so wrong.

"...Given What Lennon Eventually Said About Jesus, Seems Like Sunday Night Was The Perfect Place to Start It All...."

It was fifty two years ago today / Ed Sullivan booked a band to play

And still guaranteed to raise a smile / they've never yet gone out of style

Ed introduced to me and you / the act you've known for all these years.

Four kids from Liverpool who were once told by a major record label executive that "groups with guitars are on the way out."

That turned out to be one of history's less insightful predictions.

Today, February 9, is the fifty second anniversary of the first appearance of The Beatles on the Sunday night variety program that, in those days, was that time's equivalent of "must see TV", The Ed Sullivan Show.

Fifty two years accounts for a whole lot of words having been said, shared, printed and/or posted about that time, that night, those guys and that music.

So, in the spirit of commemoration, while trying to prevent a predictable lack of concentration, let's just hit a few, quick anecdotal reminiscences.

Ringo Starr on their concern about the quality of the sound the American TV audience would hear...

"The main thing I was aware of when we did the first Ed Sullivan Show was that we rehearsed all afternoon. Y'know, TV was such bad sound, so we would have 'em, like, tape our rehearsals, and we'd go up and we'd mess with the dials, y'know, that they had in the control booth. So we'd sort of got it all set with the engineer there, and we went off for a break, and -- the story has it, 'cause we didn't see it -- but the cleaner came in (laughs) while we were out, and she came to clean the room and the console, and thought, 'What are all these chalk marks?', and wiped them all off. So then we had a real hasty time trying to get some sound." 

George Harrison on one socially beneficial phenomenon of the Fab Four appearance that night...

"Later, they said that there was the least reported, or there was no reported crime. Even the criminals had a rest for, like, 10 minutes, while we were on."
 
And then future superstar Bruce Springsteen on the impact that Sunday night had on the culture...

"This was different. 'Shifted the lay of the land; four guys, playing and singing, writing their own material. There was no longer going to be a music producer apart from the singer, a singer who didn't write, a writer that didn't sing. It changed the way things were done. The Beatles were cool, they were classical, they were formal and created the idea of an independent unit where everything could come out of your garage."

It really was something very special.

And unique, in the sense that the culture and the country, for that matter, the world, has never really seen anything like it since.

Time and its passage, though, take a little bit of a toll.

The music, along with a little of the magic, have survived half a century, even, some might argue, continued to flourish.

The excitement, the real, palpable feeling in the pit of the stomach and center of the heart that something extraordinary was happening right before our eyes and ears....

well, that part of it, in fairness, falls into the category of "you really had to be there."

But, trust me, it really was something to see.

And hear.

Paradoxically, the music, and its impact, has continued to charm and connect to this very day.

While the band itself was, for all intents and purposes, done and done just seventy two short months after that Sullivan Sunday night.

But their contribution to the culture was undeniable.

And our affection for them both powerful and, well, affecting.

So powerful and affecting, in fact, that just eight years later, to the day, that the Fabs sang their songs on Sullivan, Paul McCartney debuted his first post-Beatles effort, Wings, in small university settings.

And...wow...were we excited about what was next in the Beatles history?

Damn right we were.

And did we eagerly hang on every note and chord that came our way?

Damn right we did.

And did we lovingly indulge a lot of what was, honestly, pure crap from that period?

Damn right we did.

(Find your worn, frayed copy of the LP Wings Wildlife and cringe while you re-visit),

Because, you see, it didn't matter.

Love is, and was, blind.

And we loved those guys.

For all the reasons that those aforementioned sayings, sharings, printings and postings have offered and continue to offer to this day.

And for all the reasons that every new generation that discovers the music offer when asked why they've come to love it, as well.

Magic, by its nature, is both elusive and illusory.

Making it difficult, if not impossible, to specifically define.

Let alone trace back to an exact moment of first appearance.

This particular magic, though, is, like the artists who created it, easily traced back to an exact moment of first appearance.

8:12 PM, Eastern.

February 9, 1964.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

"...Pick A Card, Any Card...Or A Target, Any Target..."

Talk radio is a lot like magic.

Sometimes, in fact, very often, the key to being successful with it is being able to direct the listening audience where you want it to go.

Or misdirect,  as the case may be, if the need be.

Those skills come in especially handy on slow news days.

Obviously, when something major is happening, conversation, debate, argument, discussion, dissent and/or simple chit chat about that said something between show host and show listeners pretty much happens by itself.

No poking, prodding or provocation required.

That's one reason why, regardless of our personal, political persuasions and/or positions, all of us who do any talk radio hosting at any time are likely, at least once per show, to say a prayer of thanks to the good Lord above for providing this life with the bountiful harvest of chat chaff that is Donald Trump.

Sarah Palin.

Ted Cruz.

Lacey Lafferty (hometown favorite, do the Google).

You get the idea.

When nothing out of the ordinary is going on, though, it gets a little more challenging on the "hey, we want to hear what YOU have to say about it" side of the microphone.

That's why most experienced talk show-sters have a folder (mentally or literally) of fallback topics.

Subjects pretty much sure to set the phone lines afire.

And what the conversations lack in, say, sophistication and/or insight, they more than make up for in "filler fodder"

Which, just between you and me, is an inside the biz slang term for "I got twelve minutes to kill here and absolutely nothing is going on worth talking about..."

 Here's just a few of the live grenades I keep stashed in my news/talk knapsack, just in case.

• Same sex marriage
• Uni-sex rest room access
• Same sex workplace equality
• Okay, actually anything that starts out with "same sex"
• Donald Trump (yeah, I know, already mentioned, but, still, almost always sure to start a new back and forth in one way or another.
• Obama (the shelf life on this one is ticking, given Jan 2017 is so close, but, for now, the hatred of this guy in my neck of the broadcast woods is still good for damn near a whole show)

and...

two words that, when put together, brings a flood of phone calls into the studio line that makes a Tsunami look like the splash Uncle Fred causes when he eases down into the bathtub.

Gun.

Control.

See?

I just got three incoming calls this second.

And I don't even have a phone in this room.

Monday morning show prep is on today's "get started to research a little" list and, lo and behold, thank you, Jesus for never failing to bring it, there's a brand spanking new development in the world of high caliber conversation.




The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit has ruled that Americans have a “fundamental right” to so-called assault weapons, a major victory for gun rights.

A three judge panel ruled that Maryland’s Firearm Safety Act of 2013, ban against what the court called “the vast majority of semi-automatic rifles commonly kept by several million American citizens”, is a blunt violation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

“In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment — the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,” Chief Judge William Traxler wrote in the divided ruling.

In his ruling, Judge Traxler sent the case back to the District Court for review, demanding they apply “strict scrutiny” – a stringent constitutional test that almost no gun control legislation can survive.

“This case was a major victory for the NRA and gun rights advocates,” said Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA who specializes in Second Amendment law. “This opinion is an important one because it subjects important gun control laws to the most strict form of judicial scrutiny.”
 
While the Supreme Court has not yet weighed in on these cases, Justice Clarence Thomas has complained that the Second Amendment was being relegated to “a second-class right.”

“If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing,” he wrote, and added that those earlier decisions enshrining the right to gun ownership shouldn’t be expected to “clarify the entire field.”



Obviously, the general subject matter isn't even remotely close to new.

And while this latest juicy judicial tidbit is fresh, the primary pinpoint of pondering is also solidly grounded on well trod territory.

Still and all, not a whole lot of the ordinary going on at the moment (Donald and Sarah on the down low for now, but, hope springs eternal) and while there is always a good chance something sensational and salacious will pop between now and 05:30 Monday, I'm ready to lock and load on this latest smack-down attempt on the Second Amendment.

"So, join me Monday as we talk about the 4th Circuit Court giving those who feel the need to own an AR-15 the full and legal right to do so.....and, of course, the latest in weather and traffic information..."

Always looking for a different way to talk about the same old things kind of guy that I am, though, I already know how I want to come at this.

First, though, in the spirit of "fair and well balanced" discussion (yeah, I know, Fox News really has made that too much of a punchline to take seriously, right), here's a key fact I just grabbed on line that I think is germane to our conversation.

A fact that addresses the legitimate argument gun enthusiasts offer that the whole "assault rifle" controversy is bogus.

The AR-15 can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. This rate of fire is comparable to other semi-automatic firearms, but pales in comparison to fully automatic assault rifles, some of which can fire more than 1,000 rounds per minute.

Okay.

Quite an obvious difference between the ability to fire one thousand rounds per minute, which by my Louisiana sixth grade math skills comes out at sixteen bullets per second.....and a mere 60 rounds per minute, which calculates out at a calm, easy going one bullet...per second.

So, here's how I'm most likely going to put the on air question of the hour.

And, as a little extra Monday morning show entertainment bonus, throw in a little magic.

"hey, I want to hear what YOU have to say about this latest ruling by the 4th District Court of Appeals..so give me a call...and here's the question....taking into account any reasonable justification, from protecting your family and property to shooting animals from a well camo'ed hiding place and everything in between, why do you feel the need to own a weapon that can fire one bullet per second? OTHER than the only reason so many people seem able to offer up.

"Because you can."

This ain't my first morning talk show rodeo, so I can assure you that two things will happen when that question goes out on air.

The phones will light up because, hey, although I didn't actually say the two words, even the hint of the words "gun" and "control" perhaps being insinuated will bring out the faithful by the 600 round clip.

That faithful, by the way, will offer nothing even remotely close to anything in response to the question beyond a literal or easy to spot variation of the one answer I said was out of play.

Because they can.

And, as for the magic?

Well, those who are waiting for the screener to pick up the phone, letting it ring and making the lights on her console blink furiously but then actually heard me say "OTHER than because you can" will cause those lights on the console to vanish.

As they hang up.

Because they haven't got any other answer to offer.

Presto.



 

"...And Tequila Sunrise Was A Popular Drink, But That Doesn't Matter, Either...."

Old saying in the song business.

Pop music fans are loyal to the music.

Country music fans are loyal to the singer.

The packaged for quick consumption interpretation of those two observations goes like this.

Fans of pop music tend to remember the songs, the lyrics, the melodies, the groove, the beat, the feel, the overall presentation and/or any and all of those parts that make up the whole. And, if along the way, they happen to remember who it was who wrote/recorded/played on and/or sang on that particular song, then it's considered informational gravy.

Fans of country music, meanwhile, attach their affections and their allegiances to the performer. And they remain fans of that performer long after the material that said performer is cranking out has faded in quality to a point that is hardly deserving of notice, let alone praise.

It's been said, for example, that, in his heyday, Garth Brooks could have recorded and released a recitation of two pages of the local phone book set to music and it would have gone multi platinum.

That's actually stretching the truth.

But not stretching it much.

Meanwhile, a host of pop hits through the years remain popular, even legendary, although, if asked, those who still hold those songs in high regard and close to heart couldn't tell you who the singer and/or singers were if you held an IPhone playing a Keeping Up With The Kardashians marathon to their heads.

Pop quiz (no pun intended).....and play fair, no Googling allowed.

Who did these pop hits?

You Were On My Mind.

I Can Help.

Keep Your Hands To Yourself.

Crush.

The list, like the hits, just keeps on comin.

And it really doesn't matter that, for example, those songs were recorded, released and became big hits between the 60's and 90's by,. respectively, We Five, Billy Swan, The Georgia Satellites and Jennifer Paige.

What mattered, and ultimately matters, is the music itself.

Because that's what music is supposed to do.

Matter.

I was reminded of that life/art truth today as I experience the media tsunami of words and music flooding social media and the airwaves with the words and music of Glenn Frey.

No question about the props the guy deserves for his work.

And no surprise that the unexpected passing of someone relatively young stirs emotions and inspires reminiscence and reflection.

Oh and while the millennials' youthful brows probably furrowed perceptibly at the idea that 67 is "relatively young", let me offer to them the old bromide that "I was your age once, yes, I thought any age ahead of me by more than, say twenty five years or more was, in fact, old and I discovered as I approach 65 what you, too,will discover when you approach 65.

67 is relatively young.

But Glenn Frey died. Relatively young. And his work was, and remains, such a part of the soundtrack of life that it's only natural that his sudden passing stirs emotions and inspires reminiscence and reflection.

Not to mention credit where credit is due.

And, inevitably, even where, maybe it's not so due.

In his twilight performing years, Frank Sinatra made an effort to stay relevant and contemporary in his concerts by offering up his takes on a sprinkling of, then, contemporary works by, then, contemporary songwriters.

One song, in particular, he went to gracious and great effort to introduce each time as "one of the greatest love songs ever written and his personal favorites of all the songs written by John Lennon and Paul McCartney."

He then proceeded to pay tribute to those esteemed colleagues with his heartfelt performance of the classic Beatles love song, "Something".

Words and music by George Harrison.

Apparently, in the spirit of a long ago emperor and his not so apparent apparel, no one felt sufficently confident to correct Ol' Blue Eyes as to who wrote what when.

And, ultimately, it didn't really matter to the legions of Sinatra fans.

Because what really mattered was the music.

Because that's what music is supposed to do.

Matter.

This morning I heard a local radio personality throwing out the garden variety request for folks to call and share their personal favorite Glenn Frey songs.

He, personally, mentioned two of which he was particularly fond.

Desperado.

Hotel California.

And just as it is with favorite fruits, favorite desserts, favorite cars, favorite hair styles and, of course, favorite captains of the starship Enterprise, the whole notion of favorite anythings is subjective and, especially when it comes to something as personal as music, personal.

So, there's that.

George Harrison died in 2001, but I have an impish feeling that he would be amused by the credit being doled out to Frey in the wake of his passing.

Because he knows how that kind of thing goes.

But as a writer/composer of modest accomplishment and an admitted music minutiae geek, I had to resist every temptation to jump online and post that...

...Desperado did, in fact, benefit extraordinarily from Glenn Frey's classically trained piano sensibilities and, those who actually know attest, his minor contributions to the lyric, but he himself would probably warmly acknowledge that the lion's share of the song, including, of course, the weary, yet poignant, vocal was the work of Frey's partner in  crime, Don Henley......

...and Hotel California was actually the primary brain child of temporary Eagle Don Felder with, once again, Henley's raspy and right for the mood vocal with meaningful, if not substantial, contributions from Frey.

None of that matters.

Because today people who love the songs of The Eagles are hearing, over and over, in their heads and hearts, those songs they love most and associating them with Glenn Frey.

And that's as it should be.

Because that's really getting "down to the heart of the matter".

Words and music by Mike Campbell, JD Souther.....and Don Henley.

Not that it matters.

So, the epitaphs will continue, the testimonials will flow and the music will live on.

When it comes to tribute, though, nobody has yet offered anything more essential or poignant than Frey's other half during their musical lives, the aforementioned Mr. Henley who had this to say at the end of his public statement....

"...you did what you set out to do....and then some....".

A true fact about Glenn Frey.

Words by Don Henley.

Not that it matters. 





  

"...Kanye's Meglomania Notwithstanding, It's Not Everyboy Who Has Their Very Own Beatle...."

Dear Sir Paul.....

I gave it my best shot.

Two or three, actually.

But I came up with the same feeling every time.

Having grown up with your music, my instinct, and ambition, was to applaud this performance as a wonderful bridging of the generations.

And I assume that's the spirit with which you entered into it.

But no matter how many times I watch the performance, I'm left with the same impression.

Maybe it's because the quality of your work and presentation through the decades so surpasses as lot of the contemporary banality.

Maybe it's because it's because the line between cool and creepy is so hair fine.

(Like when your very hip granny shows style by coming with you to the concert but makes you think twice as she bounces around bra-less in her Adam Lambert T shirt...)

Maybe it's because while I can appreciate what Rhianna brings to the culture, I can't get past hearing, and/or seeing, Kanye as anything other than a pretentious douche.

Or maybe it's nothing more complicated than the microphone mix that all but eliminated the sound of your voice from this "collaboration".

Resulting in what I saw and heard.

Not a collaboration at all.

But the musical equivalent of LBJ attending a Kennedy family picnic.

Sarah Palin speaking at a Hillary Clinton rally.

A cute poodle peeking out of Rihanna's purse.

Another lame attempt by Kanye to validate his faux cultural omnipotence.

With faux, token and Auto Tuned props to your musical stature.

Making you, if not his bitch, then certainly his musical trophy wife,

Yeah, I'm gonna go with the pretentious douche theory.

And look forward to the next "event" really being just that.

While, due respect, offering that, having grown up with your music, I'm pretty sure that John would have never let you live this one down.

" Kinda Surprised Greenpeace Hasn't Come Down On Herman Melville...."

"Freedom is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear...."

                         ---George Orwell

NEW YORK (AP) — First lady Michelle Obama urged Hollywood to give a more accurate portrayal of veterans and defended the Oscar-nominated "American Sniper," which has received criticism for its depiction of war.

Bradley Cooper, who is nominated for best actor for his portrayal of the late Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle, joined Obama and media heavyweights in Washington, D.C., on Friday to launch "6 Certified" with representatives from Warner Bros., National Geographic Channels and the Producers Guild of America.

The initiative will allow TV shows and films to display an onscreen badge that tells viewers the show they're watching has been certified by the group Got Your 6, which derives its name from military slang for "I've got your back." To be approved, the film or show must cast a veteran, tell a veteran story, have a story written by a veteran or use veterans as resources.

"We hope our country will welcome back our veterans — not by setting them apart but by fully integrating them into the fabric of our communities," Mrs. Obama said.

Mrs. Obama also came to the defense of "American Sniper" — about Kyle, considered the most lethal sniper in U.S. military history. It has become a box-office sensation and has strong supporters but has also weathered a growing storm of criticism that the film glorifies murder and serves as war propaganda.

"While I know there have been critics, I felt that, more often than not, this film touches on many of the emotions and experiences that I've heard firsthand from military families over these past few years," she said.

Chris Marvin, managing director of Got Your 6 and a former U.S. Army officer and Blackhawk helicopter pilot, said their campaign isn't hoping to show veterans in a good light but in an honest one.

"Most Americans tell us that they only see veterans portrayed as broken or as heroes who walk on water in film and television," he said by phone. "We're missing something in the middle. Veterans are everyday people.

"They're your next door neighbor who helps you bring your garbage cans back when they blow away. They're your kids' fifth-grade math teacher. It's the person running for city council," he added. "You see them every day in your own life but you don't see them on film or television."

The Got Your 6 group was launched in 2012 to enlist Hollywood in the effort to discourage stereotypes and promote more accurate representation of the 2.6 million soldiers coming home over the past 10 years. Surveys have found that many Americans presume veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, are homeless or are addicted to drugs or alcohol.

The group has taken lessons from other successful efforts to change national viewpoints, including increasing gay rights, reducing teen pregnancies, encouraging colonoscopies, improving animal rights and reducing drunken driving. It has identified Hollywood as an engine of cultural change.

"This is more of a challenge than anything else. We're challenging the entertainment industry — myself included — to live up to the responsibilities inherent in the powers we have and with the reach that we have," said Charlie Ebersol, a producer and creator of the "6 Certified" program.

Ebersol said films like 1987's "Full Metal Jacket" by Stanley Kubrick and Clint Eastwood's new "American Sniper" would likely be eligible for certification because they portray veterans accurately, even if the soldiers in those films aren't representative of the population of veterans.

Mrs. Obama cited TV shows including "Nashville" and "Doc McStuffins" as ones that share stories of "our veterans in new and meaningful ways." She said telling veterans' stories honestly makes for "tremendous TV and movies" and "are good for business as well."

Ebersol had his own list of shows with positive veteran portrayals, including the Jay Pritchett character in "Modern Family," Sam Waterston's portrayal of veteran Charlie Skinner on "The Newsroom" and Seth Rogen's guest role as a veteran on "The Mindy Project." In all them, being a veteran wasn't their defining characteristic.

"We have a real opportunity to go way beyond the platitudes of the entertainment industry. We love to say, 'I support the troops!' and 'I've got a yellow ribbon!' but there's an actual, tangible way to make a difference. That's what the challenge is here."

In bureaucratic America, nothing springs to life faster than a good cause.

And, of course, a group, panel, committee and/or advisory board to lead the charge in the pursuit of said cause.

Hidden, of course, in the "whereas's" and "therefore's" of the proclamations and/or declarations of principles that trumpet the missions of the aforementioned group, panel, committee and/or advisory board leading the charge in pursuit of said cause is a more often than not obvious, but not necessarily noticed, inevitable conclusion.

The lack of need for the aforementioned group, panel, committee and/or advisory board leading the charge in pursuit of said cause.

Primarily owing to the lack of need for said cause in the first place.

In this case, the Got Your 6.

Now, if, at this moment, you're inclined to instinctively fire off some snappy/snarky/savage comment, opinion and/or retort, usually, but not always accompanied by the ferocious waving of your flag and/or the sounds of Lee Greenwood wafting in the background, angrily taking me to task for my lack of patriotism, please allow me this suggestion.

Shut up.

I  love this country just as much as you love this country, I support the men, women and their families who give time, energy and, too often, their lives in service to this country as much as you support them and I don't need to hear your rah rah, blah blah, love it or leave it bullshit now or anytime in the future.

Because what I'm talking about here has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism.

And has everything to do with political correctness.

Pandering.

Placating.

Piffle.

I haven't seen American Sniper. Probably wont until it shows up on Netflix.

No reflection at all on the content of the film.

I just don't go out to the movies much anymore.

I don't know what I will think of the movie until I see it.

There is, though, one thing that I am rock solid, bet the farm, absolutely sure that I do know.

It's a movie.

From a book.

Neither of which required, or shall ever require, a group, panel, committee and/or advisory board to lead the charge in pursuit of the cause.

Let alone legitimize them.

Or the cause.

See, here's the thing.

It's a free country.

And free is like pregnant.

No such thing as "a little bit".

And I don't need or want to seek approval from a group, I don't need or want to hear endorsements from a panel, I don't need or want recommendations from a committee and I damn sure don't want or need to see a ribbon, medallion, logo and/or Good fucking Housekeeping Seal on a motion picture to help determine whether I want to see it or not.

What, ideally, I do want is to be left alone to use my intelligence, common sense, core values and/or basic humanity to determine what I want to see and how I will feel about it once I see it.

And, not for nothin'.....but, ideally, that's what I want for you, too.

I don't care what the MPAA thinks about movies.

I don't care what the Parents Television Council thinks about TV shows.

And I don't care if Got Your 6 approves or disapproves of the content of a film.

I'm smart enough, old enough, wise enough and in sufficient control of my faculties to determine for myself whether a film, TV show, book, recording, et al moves me, inspires me, offends me, repulses me, angers me, delights me.....

...and whether it is a classic of its category.....or a stereotype I have no interest in endorsing.

Truth is, I can't, in fact none of us can, tell the difference between that which moves, inspires, delights and that which angers, offends or repulses unless I have free, unfettered, unbiased, unequivocal access to all.

Those who chafe at the idea of government regulation or, for that matter, regulation in general too often overlook a key element in the discussion.

Swords cut both ways.

Even the swords of freedom.

Especially the swords of freedom.

Singer/writer Steve Earle once said to me that Nashville record producers had an annoying habit of always asking to be pitched songs that were "up-tempo, positive...up-tempo, positive...".

Steve's take on it was "if you're doing that all the time, you're not painting a complete portrait because, let's face it, life ain't always up-tempo, positive...sometimes, it's down-tempo, negative..."

I'm not interested in cinema that perpetually portrays the military in a negative light.

Nor am I interested in cinema that perpetually portrays the military in a positive light.

I am interested in cinema that moves me, inspires me, offends me, repulses me, angers me, delights me.....

...and whether it is a classic of its category.....or a stereotype I have no interest in endorsing.

I am interested, it turns out, in the freedom to make up my own mind.

Freedom in the purest sense of the word.

So, thanks anyway, Got Your 6.

Don't need you.

Come to think of it, neither do the veterans.

We've got their 6.

"....Exclusion Is Not Automatically Defined As Lack of Inclusion...."

Yada yada yada.

Blah blah blah.

Or, lest we be accused of a lack of diversity.....

Black, black, black.

When the Oscar nominations were announced Thursday morning, it didn't take long for people to notice that for the first time since 1995, every single one of the 20 actors contending for the prestigious award were white. There was also not a single woman represented in the writing or directing categories. 

The hashtag #OscarsSoWhite began trending almost immediately as more and more critical thinkpieces were released discussing the lack of diversity in this year's race, and particularly the glaring snubs of Selma, the biopic about Martin Luther King, Jr.

On Friday night, the film academy president Cheryl Boone Isaacs responded to the backlash in an interview with The Associated Press, saying the all-white acting slate has only inspired her to further push for diversity in the Academy, but that she remains proud of this year's nominees.

"In the last two years, we've made greater strides than we ever have in the past toward becoming a more diverse and inclusive organization through admitting new members and more inclusive classes of members," said Boone Isaacs, the Academy's first black president. "And, personally, I would love to see and look forward to see a greater cultural diversity among all our nominees in all of our categories."

But while Boone Isaacs insists that the academy is "committed to seeking out diversity of voice and opinion," according to a survey conducted by The Los Angeles Times, the academy is nearly 94% white and 77% male with a median age of 62.

Speaking of the controversy over Selma failing to earn Ava DuVernay a directing nod or star David Oyelowo an acting nod, Boone Isaacs insisted this wasn't a reflection of a strong racial bias in the academy. "What is important not to lose sight of is that Selma, which is a fantastic motion picture, was nominated for best picture this year, and the best picture category is voted on by the entire membership of around 7,000 people," Boone Isaacs said.

She also said the academy is proud of all their acting nominees and that the five men up for best actor - Steve Carell, Bradley Cooper, Benedict Cumberbatch, Michael Keaton and Eddie Redmayne - "are all at the top of their game."

"There are quite a few actors this year at the top of their game," she said. "There are five nominees and this year; these were the five."

Sometimes, in this life, things are, by nature and necessity, complex.

This is not one of those things.

If we mean what we say when we say that we aspire to not judge by the color of skin......

Then we should not judge by the color of skin.

Whether it's the more abstract judging of one's place in society.

Or the simpler judging of one's performance in a motion picture.

Put even more simply....

Color should not prevent one from being nominated for an Oscar.

Nor should it assure one of a nomination, either.

There's really no such thing as a double standard with only one side.

It's a clear as black and white.