News and Opinions - Blog Chow

It’s being reported that Anna Nicole Smith commented last year that she thought Britney Spears was “totally cool” and would like to meet and hang out with her. If you want to boil all this down to the root of the problem, that is a good example of it. Anna Nicole wanted to hang out with the “cool” Britney. Britney wanted to hang out with the “cool” Paris Hilton… When you surround yourself with the wrong people bad things happen. When people are led to believe that stupidity is glamorous, it compounds the problem. In this case Anna is dead and Britney is brain dead.

I do think that these events provide a great teaching opportunity for parents. It is a natural thing for a kid to do stupid things for attention. To believe that it pays off is a dangerous thing. People like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton can live like this and wreck their lives and when they walk out of rehab they still have millions of dollars waiting for them. In other words, they can better afford to be stupid. When they finally wake up, if don’t kill themselves, they have a great life to walk back to.

The poor girl who looks up to Britney Spears and never gets started in life doesn’t have all the options of a Britney. They are the ones who made her rich in the first place. How sad it that? Another sad thing is that kids buy into the appearance that people like Britney Spears are happy. They certainly should be, but their ignorance prevents it. They have no idea of the opportunities they’ve been given. The public pays and they spend. That’s about all they know. Maybe it’s not even their fault.

Anyone who needs constant attention and publicity can’t be happy. If these simpletons like Britney Spears aren’t the center of attention they can’t handle it. They are like spoiled children and those aren’t tears of joy. I think most people can be happy with money and fame, but there are some who can’t. Look at Elvis. I don’t think Elvis craved the constant attention that these others do. Plus he wasn’t born famous like some of them basically were. But Elvis was one who surrounded himself with the wrong people.

It won’t be long and people will grow tired of the current crop of celebrity misfits. Then it will be on to the next “hot” dumb chicks. Such is the life of a bimbo - rich or poor. These kinds of antics might be good short-term publicity stunts, but they are recipes for short careers, not long ones. Their lifestyles are recipes for short, unhappy lives as well.

Do you think wrestling is fake? These award shows have become so phony they are laughable. From gay movies nobody wants to see to home movies from Al Gore or Michael Moore, which mislead and play on our fears. Music awards have become no different. These awards are all about extreme liberal politics and sleaze. If you don’t fall into at least one of those two categories you probably don’t even have a 25% chance of winning. If you are at the other end of the spectrum you have a much smaller chance than that.

These awards are meant as publicity to those who very often least deserve it. Despite all the free publicity the Dixie Chicks have received, both from the media and these bogus awards, they couldn’t even sell out their concerts last year. Their album sales were actually down from their previous album. You would never know it from watching these award shows. The awards are meant to prop them up, not show reality. It’s easier to give an award to prop someone up than it is to fake putting asses in the seats.

The media is hyping this as a comeback and vindication for the Dixie Chicks. I can’t call it a comeback since they never really went away, and since getting an award they did not really deserve does not exactly qualify as a comeback. How can you call it vindication when they are voted on by those who were in their corner all along?

It’s not that the Dixie Chicks aren’t good musicians. I saw them myself some years back when they played on the George Strait Music Festival and they have a good sound. Unfortunately they now sound to me like someone scraping a blackboard and the sight of them makes my stomach queasy. That is the honest truth. I’m sure I’m not alone in my sentiments. They acted like skanks even back then, and I was not at all surprised when George Strait didn’t persuade them to come back a second year. They really stood out like a sore thumb. A dumb, trampy sore thumb…

When they keep their mouths shut I’m sure they gain back a few fans at a time. The trade off is that they probably also lose those who don’t care for that kind of music, but support them because they like their anti-American comments. The funny thing is, I doubt they even meant what they said that started all the controversy. They are the kind of people who have to have attention all the time and they figured a cheap shot on foreign soil would get a positive reaction from the crowd and go unnoticed here. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were advised to do it. They were too stubborn or stupid to give a real apology afterwards, especially when they got positive attention from the usual anti-American suspects. Hey, but they are the “award winning” Dixie Chicks! “Critically acclaimed.” Yawn…

The media tries to make the fact that entertainers or athletes have fans to mean they always agree with their philosophies. Mike Tyson still has fans and I doubt most of them are ear biters and rapists. The media has tried hard to do this with Muhammad Ali. They have tried to use his popularity and history to draw a relationship between him and the War in Iraq. They use his popularity as proof of redemption for whatever his political beliefs may have been. Ali didn’t gain popularity because of his stance back then. He didn’t gain redemption for his beliefs. He gained redemption as a person, in part because he was a larger than life character who did not continue to push his beliefs on the public. His sense of humor and talent made him very hard to dislike. As the years went by he seemed to have a genuineness that people like the Ditsy Chicks do not seem to posses. I’m a Muhammad Ali fan, and I do not in any way support the nonsense from way back then. Ali, who is a Muslim also spoke out against the terrorist attacks on America. There are many on the extreme left who refuse to do so without blaming America.

Hanoi Jane Fonda never got redemption for her anti-American ways and I suspect the Dixie Chicks won’t either. If they aren’t smart, just like Fonda, they’ll try to justify their actions until the very end. No matter how unpopular the War in Iraq becomes, there is a great difference for most people between being unhappy with the results and not wanting to help a large population of people who have been brutalized. These connections that some people are trying to make are simply an act of deception. Attempting to turn those who are trying to help into the villains. We live in an evil time.

These shows try to take advantage of those who are enamored by entertainers and attempt to persuade you as to who or what is most popular, even when it is far from what the public actually supports. Some of these award winners have had the biggest advertising budgets and received the biggest buzz from the media, yet they consistently do not show a profit. The only award they deserve is the money burner award.

These award shows would convince you that people love gay movies, yet as far as I know there has only been one of the likes of ‘Brokeback Mountain,’ and that was nowhere near the top of the charts for the year, despite a slew of awards. With all the free publicity it actually finished 22nd, behind such blockbusters as ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin.’ Of course there is a portion of a market out there for gay movies, but for those without a story line. It’s called porn.

Many of George Clooney’s movies have been flops by most standards, yet we are led to believe that he is the big box office man. He certainly should be with all the publicity. The facts simply show otherwise. Numerous awards, huge production and advertising budgets, but few blockbusters. I think only a small percentage even show a profit. Award shows and public opinion do not go hand in hand. The awards have some influence on popularity, but shouldn’t it be more the other way around?

When it comes to movies, we are often subjected to the same retreads over and over again. If you want to see a movie there simply aren’t always a lot of options. If you aren’t careful about who is in the movie or who is making the movie, it is easy to donate to people who are an affront to everything you believe in. More people would avoid certain entertainers if they were aware of all the anti-American comments some of them have made.

Jimmy Carter won an award for an audio book. Is this possible? A book that many even believe to be anti-Semetic. Some of his comments have had me scratching my head about that. What more proof do you need that most of these things are politics? Carter is another one who refuses to accept that his policies had America in the dumps in a time period that had a fraction of the challenges that we are faced with today.

Jimmy Carter’s policies were a failure by almost all standards. Inflation was through the roof. You had to wait in long lines just to get gas. People were convinced back then the world was running out of oil. Americans were being held hostage by terrorists before most people even knew what a terrorist was. In some ways his failure to respond could well be credited with setting the stage for things to come. Carter’s actions can also be credited with giving Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini his rise to power which subsequently left over 500,000 dead in their war with Iraq. The list of failed policies goes on and on… He still believes his policies were good, even though history repeatedly shows otherwise. Some award shows apparently still like his outdated beliefs as well. Yet he is at the bottom of the heap on any legitimate popularity poll of Presidents, somewhere near Richard Nixon, who is there because of Watergate. It’s very possible Carter has such intense guilt that he can only cope by blaming others for the things he helped bring on. He may have meant well, but it’s hard to have sympathy for people who blame the victims. It’s just not right.

Even award shows where people get to vote should be taken with a grain of salt. Where is the oversight? If we have dead people voting in Presidential elections, how are we to believe some of the strange results in award show voting? The answer is pretty simple. We can’t. The method of selecting nominees and winners on many of these shows is a mystery to most people. In the case of the Grammys, I believe it is like the Academy Awards where it a member/academy type voting process. It’s a who you know… or something along those lines. I think a lot of people who would be fair probably don’t want anything to do with the process.

It’s interesting that the Dixie Chicks won in Country music categories, even when they themselves admit they don’t belong there, not to mention that Country fans surely don’t embrace them. There actually is a good reason they are put in that category. There are a limited number of anti-Americans to choose from in the patriotic Country group, so it is more expedient to leave them there. Otherwise they will either take from others of similar mentality/morality, or not win at all. That would be a waste of an awards show propaganda opportunity.

“A lot of pandering started going on, and you’d see soldiers and the American flag in every video. It became a sickening display of ultra-patriotism.”
– Dixie Chicks Emily Robison

“The entire country may disagree with me, but I don’t understand the necessity for patriotism. Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don’t see why people care about patriotism.”
– Dixie Chicks Natalie Maines

I wrote this last week and then forgot to post it. So here it is… If you haven’t heard about it, Paris Hilton had some personal and private things sold off after she failed to pay the storage bill on them. Someone has been charging 40 bucks a pop to view said belongings. A temporary injunction has now halted this.

I’d say the guy who sold the lot for $2,775 must be kicking himself after the stuff was then sold for 10 million. Talk about a nice quick return on your investment! The person who paid the 10 million may yet live to regret it, though. Even if they take the stuff down or return it, it will live forever in cyberworld.

I’m not sure how upset Paris Hilton can be, since she really has already repeatedly scraped the bottom of the self respect barrel. But I really don’t think anyone should be allowed to sell or expose to the public someone’s personal, private things, especially revealing photos and phone conversations.

We live in a sad world when this kind of thing can possibly be allowed. It should be punishable by prison time if you ask me. She is suing on the basis of fear of identity theft, which I don’t think is the right way to go about. From a matter of principle I think it should be fought as a privacy issue. Maybe the identity theft angle is the best way to win, but the big thing is the invasion of privacy. It would actually be a chance for Paris to do something productive for society. Besides, I don’t really think Paris Hilton needs to worry that much about identity theft. Most people know who she is, I would assume her money is pretty secure and that she has people looking out for those kinds of things.

I wonder why Paris Hilton needs paid storage in the first place. Someone of her means doesn’t have enough space somewhere to store some private things? How can that be possible? Now that I think of it, she might have been able to store them in the space between her ears.

It can be a sick society, but then again Paris Hilton feeds off of people’s lowest tendencies. It’s a tragedy when someone sells their soul, but when someone rich sells their soul(figuratively speaking), it is pretty shameless and sad. Just what is her claim to fame anyway? I’d say it’s being a rich bitch, professional voyeur… That sounds about right to me.

This won’t get as much media attention as Al Gore’s fear mongering home movie receives, but Rush Limbaugh has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. He was nominated by the Landmark Legal Foundation.

From the nomination letter:

We are offering this nomination for Mr. Limbaugh’s nearly two decades of tireless efforts to promote liberty, equality and opportunity for all mankind, regardless of race, creed, economic stratum or national origin. We fervently believe that these are the only real cornerstones of just and lasting peace throughout the world.

Those who listen to Rush Limbaugh on any kind of regular basis know those words do apply. The out of context sound bites that appear in the media are meant to give people a far different impression. Most people who trash Rush Limbaugh have never listened to an entire radio broadcast. Regardless, I believe he has done far more for peace than Al Gore ever could. Peace through strength and equal opportunity for all is a good template. A global warming sideshow slideshow does what for peace?