Rant #77: "Larger" Obituaries Should Not Take So Much Precedence Over "Smaller" Ones

When you have a public figure like Sen. Ted Kennedy die, it almost seems as if the world stops. Nothing else matters as we grieve for this fallen icon. Even if we weren't truly enamored by him, the Kennedy saga plays out like our own royalty.

Add into this the continued Michael Jackson nonsense, and you get two obituaries, and their continued coverage, that overshadows all other deaths that have taken place during about the same period of time.

One death that you may have missed was of a person who you probably knew better from her songs than from her name.

Ellie Greenwich, who died on August 26, was one of the most prolific songwriters of her generation. Often working with collaborators like Jeff Barry, she churned out a bushelful of hits in the 1960s, including "Do Wah Diddy Diddy" "River Deep, Mountain High," and "Leader of the Pack." That is just naming three of the dozens of hits she had as a writer, and just three of the hundreds of songs that were put out that had her name as a writer.

She personified the famous "Brill Building Sound" as both a writer and a producer. She was one of the first female rock and roll producers, and helped Neil Diamond attain fame as a solo artist during a period when he was primarily known as a songwriter.

She was also the focus of a long-running Broadway show, "Leader of the Pack," which was loosely based on her life.

Another one you might have missed was Drake Levin, the guitarist for Paul Revere and the Raiders, who died almost fittingly on July 4.

Although he has become a mere footnote in the history of rock and roll, he was the guitarist of the band when they were first being noticed nationally after being sensations in the Pacific Northwest for a number of years. He played on many of their early hits including "Kicks," the first anti-drug rock song.

He left the Raiders in 1966 when they were achieving mass popularity to go into the military. He later pursued his craft as a session guitarist for a number of popular acts including Emitt Rhodes.

I know Greenwich and Levin were not up to the levels of Kennedy and Jackson, but their deaths--and lives--should be recognized, and not overshadowed by bigger and more world-shaking passings.

Rant #76: Woodstock Hollywooded To Cash In With Peace

Is anyone else but me bothered by the recent Hollywoodization of Woodstock by those in the entertainment industry?

No, I was not there (I was 12, and my friend's sister invited me to go along, but I knew my mother would kill me if I went), but I think that Hollywood is taking this one-time experience and molding it into its own vision.

There is a movie out right now, "Taking Woodstock," which is the prime example of this Hollywood vision. It purports to tell the story of Elliot Tiber, an aspiring Greenwich Village interior designer whose parents owned a small motel in upstate New York, near the site of the festival. He held the only music festival permit for the town of Bethel, and offered it and accommodations at the Catskills motel to the organizers of the Woodstock festival.

However, whatever its "noble" intentions may be, it has gotten the story all wrong--at least based on one of the commercials I have seen about the film and some reviews I have seen of the movie.

I have not seen the film, probably won't see it in the theaters, but on the surface, I see some problems, having to do with Hollywood tampering with the product.

The song "Hush" is used as the music in one of the commercials used to promote the film. Well, "Hush" is a great song, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the festival.

As you probably know, it was a big hit for the earliest incarnation of Deep Purple, a band that with all its glory, had nothing to do with Woodstock--meaning that they weren't there, did not perform, probably weren't invited, and probably had little or no idea what "Woodstock" was.

Why is their music being used in this commercial? Who knows.

Another commercial for the film uses Joe Cocker's version of "Feelin' Alright," which is more in keeping with the film's theme. I mean, at least he was there.

I wish Hollywood would get its facts straight, and not appropriate a bit of this and a bit of that to make things more palpable for the viewing public.

I think everyone would agree that Woodstock was what it was, and it wasn't Deep Purple, and it wasn't Hollywood per se, either.

Our local newspaper gave the movie a poor rating, but that doesn't really mean that much. as the reviewer complained that not much screen time was given to the main character's homosexuality, only passing mentions.

Tiber was gay, which I think excited the moviemakers, because for better or worse, gayness is "in" in Hollywood now. It wasn't during the time of Woodstock, so I guess the filmmakers thought they could use this as a subplot, exploring how it was being gay 40 years ago in a country going through a civil rights revolution that did not include gay rights.

Homosexuality in a Woodstock movie? I mean, who really cares about this? Do a movie on Stonewall about the beginnings of the gay rights movement during this time, but why throw in this subplot? What does it have to do with the festival? Why is it being used as a plot device? For that matter, why would heterosexuality be used as a plot device here?

It is being used to satisfy 00's needs in a movie about the 1960s. How lame a reason is that? It is like using hair care as a subplot of a movie on the Civil War.

Heck, it has gotten to the point that I'd much rather watch the really loooooong three-hour documentary about the festival ... at least that was real ... well, sort of real, at least.

Rant #75: Argentina Hanky Panky Puts Governor In Hot Seat

Two months after admitting to an affair with a woman from Argentina, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford said "folks who were never fans" won't remove him from his elected office early--and this includes jabs from his lieutenant governor, Andre Bauer, who said the state cannot solve critical problems with Sanford at the helm.

Bauer called for Sanford to step down, while the impeachment process was being discussed by South Carolina lawmakers.

I guess the lessons learned by Ted Kennedy were not learned by Mark Sanford.

But then again, I am not so sure that Kennedy learned them either.

OK, we know that many marriages end in divorce. My first marriage did, and I rebounded, got married again, and all is well in my house.

Well, all is not well in the Sanford house. His marriage was breaking up, and he decided to have an affair with some hot tamale in Argentina, of all places. Couldn't he find a similar "shoulder to cry on" in his own state? That wouldn't have made it any better, but at least he wouldn't have to use government funds to get to his lover's place of destination like he supposedly did in traveling abroad.

No, Sanford can't perform his functions as state governor under these circumstance, and no, Kennedy could not perform his functions as a senator when he left the scene of his accident in Chappaquiddick decades ago. Kennedy got away with it, but that was 40 years ago, when the Kennedy name was akin to god (see my earlier rant, and yes, the lower case "g" was intended).

No, the Sanford name means nothing to anybody outside of his state, and in these times, when every move made by public people is micro-reported by the media, he can't--and rightfully won't--get away with this. He will have to step down, or he will be removed.

Times have changed a lot in the past 50 years. Do you think Ted's older brothers, John and Robert, would have been able to get away with all of the things that they reportedly did while serving our country if they did it today? I doubt it, and I doubt that Ted would walk away from his indiscretions virtually scott-free today, either.

Sanford is another one of these politicians who believe they are way above the law. In the past, they were. However, in today's open society, where news flows on the Internet in milliseconds, this just isn't so anymore. No, the days of the Strom Thurmonds of the political arena are over, and for that, we can be thankful.

Sanford is a goner, and everyone in his state, and around the country, should rejoice.

He is an idiot, and he got caught literally with his pants down.

He should put his pants back on, pack his bags with his other clothes, and get the heck out of the governor's living quarters, and do it fast, lest the media find out more about this dummy and his dalliances.

Rant #74: Ted Kennedy, R.I.P.

I was never a fan of Ted Kennedy. I thought of the three brothers that entered politics (less the older brother, who was a war casualty), in my mind, he was the lamest, and perhaps the most deceitful of the bunch. His liberal politics played havoc with his more-than-immense lifestyle of a playboy tripping Washington during the 1960s and early 1970s.

But you have to hand it to him. He carried the torch of "America's First Family" for decades after the assassinations of his brothers, and even after his own personal tragedies, some of which were brought on by himself.

I guess you have to go back to the touchpoint of his life, one that he would truly wish hadn't happened. His dalliance with Mary Jo Kopechne--and her subsequent death--put a major blemish on Kennedy's life. I truly believe he would have been our President in the 1970s if this incident hadn't happened, but it did, with the 40th anniversary last month. I believe it dogged him the rest of his life.

He had lots of anguish to bear beyond that unfortunate incident. His own transgressions, his wife's alcoholism, his son's cancer, his nephew's rape trial ... it really never stopped for him, although in his later years, he was looked upon by some as something of an elder statesman.

His life was cut short by a terrible disease, but he fought on, with bandages on his head and vigor inside of him.

I will give him that. He was a true fighter. His kind is pretty much gone now.

I know the media will play up his death, going overboard to salute him as a humanitarian. I mean, it's politically correct to do this--look at how you can't say a bad thing about Michael Jackson now, for fear of people dumping on you--but it's really not necessary. He was an enormous talent who had many, many failings that often overshadowed who he was and what he did.

And yes, he got away with stuff (see above) because he was a Kennedy. Let's be honest about that point. He was a Kennedy--American royalty, if you will--and he did things that would have landed others in, let's say, a bad place. But he was a Kennedy, and you can't do things to a Kennedy that you can do to others. Those that would refute this can only go back to the Kopechne incident to see how being a Kennedy helped him ride out this incident, at least legally.

I don't think the Kennedy name has the same luster now, but back 40 years ago, being a Kennedy was like being a god (lower-case "g" intended).

But again, he was a fighter, a true American original. You can't take that away from him (or his brothers, who also had their own lapses in sensibility).

No, I never liked Ted Kennedy, but I respected him. May he rest in peace.

Rant #73: The "N" Word Means "No" In My House (and Car)

Am I out of touch with what is going on or what?

My son’s 14th birthday was on Sunday, and we had some of his friends over to watch the Pay-Per-View WWE Summerslam Wrestling event. One of his best friends slept over that night.

The next day, after work, I had to take my son’s friend home. It is about 20 miles away, and being that it was rush hour, it took some time to get him back to his house.

My son got an iPod Touch for his birthday. It is a pretty nifty little device, but the niftiness of the gadget led me to think that I must be behind the times.

I don’t like my son to put certain rap music on his iPod; the vile, disgusting, curse-laden stuff really gets my dander up. But, like most kids his age, he is going to find a way to do it anyway, and I discovered this as he played a “song” (I use that term advisedly) for him and his friend to listen to.

Well, the song used one curse word after another (from what I could understand), and the tune, by a black artist, used the “N” word pretty regularly.

When I heard the “N” word, I told my son to shut the thing off. I felt bad for his friend, who happens to be black, and who was listening to this trash.

Well, you know what the kid told me? When I said I didn’t want to hear this trash and the “N” word in the car, he said to me, “It doesn’t matter.”

I replied, “Yes it does,” and I said that word was vile for not only blacks, but for people of any skin color, and it was not a word I allowed in our home or in the car.

The kids moved onto another song without even flinching.

I don’t know, am I out of the loop? And a black kid is saying this to me yet? I know the saying, “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me” might come into play here, but I don’t know, I think that word is one that should be removed from our language.

I mean, growing up in a black area, I heard the word plenty too, and I heard it plenty from blacks themselves. Back then, the word was pretty much a “touchstone” for a lot of verbal drivel, but today, I think the word has become so commonplace in some rap music that it has become part of our collective culture.

I don’t know, I think that’s not a good thing.

I know, some artists use it to show that they are immune to its connotations. But when it becomes part of our cultural verbiage, I think, as a parent, I have to draw the line.

Another word in a similar situation in today’s world is pimp. If the kids knew what the word represented, maybe they wouldn’t use it like they do. Or maybe they would.

But again, I don’t care about the media. These are words that should be expunged from our language, as are many other terms that represent such human negatives that I won’t repeat them here in any form.

And I am not talking about curses, because we all use them and they will never go away. I am talking about words and phrases that humiliate people of all races and ethnic backgrounds, and have been used against blacks, Jews, Asians and others for decades.

There is no use for these words in our language, and I wish the kids of today understood what these words meant, and stopped using them themselves—and took to task those who did use them.

Rant #72: I Almost Feel Sorry For the Mets

As a lifelong New York Yankees fan, I rarely care about what the New York Mets are doing. They have always been the second team in this town--even during their good years--and if you want a comparison, the Yankees are to the Chicago Cubs as the Mets are to the Chicago White Sox. The Mets and White Sox exist, but they will always play second fiddle to the other teams, no matter what the standings say.

The Mets will never be the top team in the New York Metropolitan area. The Yankees have been so well established that the Mets can never top them as far as popularity, press, history and success on the field.

That being said, the Mets looked to field an excellent team this year. They has a great roster to begin with, with lots of talent. They signed two top free agent relievers to bolster their bullpen, and they were moving into a long-awaited, brand new park.

I mean, they looked like a winner.

However, what looks good on paper doesn't always pan out on the field, and that is the story of the New York Mets of 2009.

Forty years removed from probably their greatest triumph--the 1969 Miracle Mets beating the Baltimore Orioles in the World Series--the Mets are a beaten bunch if you ever saw one. They have had up to a dozen players on the disabled list due to injuries, and the core of the team--Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, Carlos Beltran, David Wright, and John Maine--are all on that list.

They went from serious contenders to also-rans pretty quickly with so many players hurt.

However, I wouldn't even be writing up this entry if it wasn't for yesterday's game.

The Mets were down, as usual, but were mounting an "Amazin'" comeback. They had two runners on, none out, the tying runs were on base. The runners were set in motion on a hit and run, and Jeff Francoeur hit a liner to journeyman infielder Eric Bruntlett, who did something that had not been done in generations--he ended the game with an unassisted triple play.

I mean, what more can go wrong with the Mets. Heck, with the Yankees, also in a new park, ahead in their division by 7 1/2 games--and just beating the Red Sox last night--I almost feel sorry for the Mets.

Almost. But there was one year in the Mets history where they probably were more popular than the Yankees.

I grew up in South Jamaica, Queens, just a few minutes from the Mets old home, Shea Stadium. I was never, never, ever a Mets fan, always a Yankees fan. But growing up so close to Shea, many of the people I knew were Mets fans. Sure, I knew lots of Yankees fans (most of my friends rooted for the team in the Bronx), but due to what I call "vicinity osmosis," the Mets were the team people rooted for in my old community, which was known as Rochdale Village, once the largest co-op housing development in the world.

Anyway, during that fabled 1969 season, the interest in the Mets was fever-pitched, and waned for the Yankees, although true Yankees fans stuck by their team. However, when the Mets made the World Series, all you heard was Mets, Mets, Mets.

In those days, World Series games were played during the day, with a few at night. We were allowed to bring in our transistor radios, and could listen to the games if our teacher allowed us to. At I.S. 72, some teachers did, while others did not.

The Mets lost the first game to the Orioles, and Yankees fans were happy. But the next four went to the Mets, and the team from Queens was the 1969 World Series winner.

All you heard for the next six months was Mets, Mets, Mets. I couldn't stand it.

So 40 years later--and just after an actual 1969 Mets celebration which featured appearances by many of the 1969 Mets--the team from Queens is dead.

The triple play simply put an asterisk on probably one of the worst seasons in the team's history.

Some people use Woodstock as a measuring stick for 1969. I use the Mets' World Series victory in that regard, even though, at 12 years of age, I was mad as hell at the Orioles for not taking care of these upstarts.

But today, at 52 years of age, the Yankees are the best team in baseball again, the Mets stink, and all is well in the world of baseball.

Let's hope the 2009 World Series brings my favorite New York team a championship this year.

Sorry Mets, nothing awaits for you, with the exception of a very long off season.

Rant #71: Obama-Wear Alerts Running Threadbare

Yesterday, I talked about people taking their clothes off; today, I am going to be talking about people keeping their clothes on.

The President and the First Lady have come under a lot of scrutiny about what they wear and how they wear it, and I think the time has come for us, and the media, to move on from this fascination--and criticism--about how our First Family dresses.

The President has come under a lot of criticism for his preference for leisure wear rather than formal suits, shirts and ties. And within that scrutiny has been a lot of upheaval about what type of clothes he wears when he opts for leisurewear--remember the jeans "fiasco" during Major League Baseball's All-Star Game? And how about his swimsuit pictures, remember those?

And as for the First Lady, Michelle Obama's fashion choices are going to be looked at under a microscope, anyway, because of her position as the wife of the President, but what the media has been doing has gotten to the point of being somewhat ridiculous.

They crab about the length of her skirt, her sleeveless attire, and most recently, her wearing of shorts.

I mean, c'mon, her choice of attire mirrors what most women wear when they are at leisure, I would think, and certainly is what women of her age wear.

This is not the 1920s. The First Lady--and she is a young First Lady--should be able to wear whatever she wants without being trashed by others.

Personally, although I don't agree on a lot of issues supported by the President, the one issue I do like is the fact that his and his wife's choice of dress is much like what my wife and I wear. This choice of attire shows that the Obamas are not as stuffy as many, if not most, of their predecessors. They are common people just like we are, at least looking at what they wear.

Maybe that was their plan in their choice of dress, although I doubt it. The President has said that he has had few suits in his closet in the past, and I believe him.

Personally, as I've said before on this blog, I hate ties, and thus, I really hate suits.

But I like the Obamas clothing choices, and I wish the media would get off the perch that they are on and look at more important matters.

And that's the long (sleeves) and short (pants) of it.