Jump to content

Elton John


Shady

Recommended Posts

.....For me, the shock isn't that Elton would play some conservative commentator's wedding, the shock is that Rush would want a flamboyantly gay man to play at his wedding, but maybe, sometimes, people are a little more complex than politics supposedly allows. Besides, I think Rush and Elton have something in common, they're both entertainers.

Besides the obvious status display, I can see exactly why Rush would want to co-opt a presumed icon of progressive interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should be, as the propaganda value of these "entertainers" has diminished greatly in recent years. As the Dixie Chicks found out....just shut up and sing.

I don't know about that. Surely entertainers are allowed their opinions, too. I certainly don't accept anyone's opinion just because they won an Oscar or sold a million albums, but the Dixie Chicks has as much right to protest Bush as the radio stations that cut them out had a right to not play their songs. The whole thing was a big feeding frenzy of self-righteousness by the worst elements of both camps. I didn't find the supporters of the Bush administration any more compelling than the detractors, and the Administration came into disrepute largely on its own, with little help from Hollywood, and certainly wasn't helped by absurdist comedians like Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck posing as legitimate Conservative commentators.

Artists at certain times have had an enormous impact. I keep thinking of Goya's horrifying sketches of the evils of the Napoleonic invasion of Spain, showing the atrocities of war. So I think artists, if working within their medium and with some understanding, can be the most powerful advocates of any particular view (think Uncle Tom's cabin for an example a little closer to your home). What I thought was ludicrous about the Dixie Chicks was that none of it had anything in particular to do with what they were known for. I can understand John Lennon, who, at least had the balls to admit the fundamental hypocrisy of being a multi-millionaire singing about working class heroes, but these people were just so serious. Bono's the worst in my mind, arrogant beyond all measure, to the point where I gather even his bandmates think he's a nut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've got the cash to be self-righteous, so be it. Otherwise, well, you get it where you can. Elton John isn't any different from any other guy in his 60s, realizing his earning potential has only way to go, and that's down. So he plays for guys like Rush Limbaugh. I don't fault him for it. If I had as much money waved at me as Elton obviously had waved at him, hell, I'd play Rush's wedding. People are acting like he played for Mussolini or something.

If he can play for Limbaugh, he would have been willing to do the same for his WWII equivalent -- Joseph Goebbels back then. It's his decision who he takes money from, but if he can take a million from someone who disparages all of his social causes, it tells me that they may be not much more than vanity projects.

There are some entertainers who have been willing to walk the talk, and those are the ones I have any respect for. Take Sean Penn for example, in spite of the fact that he generally acts like an asshole, he has been toiling away with his group down in Haiti, trying to get rubble and debris cleared away, and new homes and permanent shelters built before a hurricane blows through the Island. For his troubles, he has been pretty much ignored by the MSM, except that they noticed recently that he was still working there on the six month anniversary of the Earthquake! Needless to say that he is not able to make movies or do other stuff to make money while he is down there. Most celebs just want to show up for charity photo-ops and concerts, and once the cameras are gone, so are they.

For me, the shock isn't that Elton would play some conservative commentator's wedding, the shock is that Rush would want a flamboyantly gay man to play at his wedding, but maybe, sometimes, people are a little more complex than politics supposedly allows. Besides, I think Rush and Elton have something in common, they're both entertainers.

Could be that Rush's new bride wanted Elton, so he felt obliged to spend a week's salary on the entertainment at the wedding. It also could be that Rush is a fan...and it could also be true that this is just another sham wedding, and that those rumours of Rush being among the pantheon of secretly gay conservatives is true! He has never commented about the public indecency charge he got many years ago when he was still an unknown DJ, or the reasons for his little jaunts to the Dominican Republic with a supply of viagra pills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he can play for Limbaugh, he would have been willing to do the same for his WWII equivalent -- Joseph Goebbels back then. It's his decision who he takes money from, but if he can take a million from someone who disparages all of his social causes, it tells me that they may be not much more than vanity projects.

Comparing Limbaugh to Goebbels is obscene. I think Rush spouts crap, but he knows his audience, and probably is about as sincere as Coulter or Beck, but come one. I mean, this is so over the top as to be idiotic. It's as moronic as some right wing blowhard claiming Obama is a Commie.

Get a grip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about that. Surely entertainers are allowed their opinions, too.

Well, you know what they say about opinions.....

Artists at certain times have had an enormous impact. I keep thinking of Goya's horrifying sketches of the evils of the Napoleonic invasion of Spain, showing the atrocities of war. So I think artists, if working within their medium and with some understanding, can be the most powerful advocates of any particular view (think Uncle Tom's cabin for an example a little closer to your home).

Too little too late....artists lag events and movements with subjective history and interpretation. I prefer photographs over paintings.

What I thought was ludicrous about the Dixie Chicks was that none of it had anything in particular to do with what they were known for. I can understand John Lennon, who, at least had the balls to admit the fundamental hypocrisy of being a multi-millionaire singing about working class heroes, but these people were just so serious. Bono's the worst in my mind, arrogant beyond all measure, to the point where I gather even his bandmates think he's a nut.

That's right....John and Yoko were preaching their commie crap from the back seat of a Rolls Royce Phanton V. Only sheeple afford such artists prominence in their perception of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you know what they say about opinions.....

And you know what they say about those who don't want to hear anyone else's.

Too little too late....artists lag events and movements with subjective history and interpretation. I prefer photographs over paintings.

I call BS on that one. Uncle Tom's Cabin was enormously influential, and Goya's prints, while about the Peninsular War, have come to represent one of the most profound and disturbing sets of images of the horrors of war ever created.

I wonder, are you even familiar with them?

That's right....John and Yoko were preaching their commie crap from the back seat of a Rolls Royce Phanton V. Only sheeple afford such artists prominence in their perception of the world.

Perhaps it could be that John Lennon was actually a rather talented guy. You might not like his politics, but his music, particularly when he wasn't dragging it down with awful political sentiment (which was really only a brief period), was pretty damned good. His political beliefs were goofy, but then again this was an era when National Guardsmen were opening fire on unarmed protesters. Both sides were absurd, but one side had bullets and the other didn't. For some reason, down to this very day, some folks want to continue to demonize the peace movement and forgive guys like Nixon.

It's always nice to see just how much Lennon pisses guys like you off, though.

Edited by ToadBrother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you know what they say about those who don't want to hear anyone else's.

Sounds fair to me.

I wonder, are you even familiar with them?

No suh...I jus' be a stoopid Negro ain't never hurd of no Goya or Uncle Tom.

Perhaps it could be that John Lennon was actually a rather talented guy. You might not like his politics, but his music, particularly when he wasn't dragging it down with awful political sentiment (which was really only a brief period), was pretty damned good. His political beliefs were goofy, but then again this was an era when National Guardsmen were opening fire on unarmed protesters. Both sides were absurd, but one side had bullets and the other didn't.

He was an angry misogynist, with work moderated by McCartney early on. The man had drugs and demons.

It's always nice to see just how much Lennon pisses guys like you off, though.

Cool...Mark Chapman made him a martyr for you...not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,767
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    rosebella
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...