http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Sun, 19 Mar 2006 01:52:10 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/19/015210.php ChaunceyBillupsJackie Greene's fourth album, released March 14th, 2006, did not disappoint. In fact, it was shockingly good, despite the fact that he'd been touring the songs for nearly a year. Songs that were amazing live are taken to seemingly unreachable heights. It's a new style for Greene, who in the past, recorded solo and simplistically. American Myth strikes a chord as a collective group effort, complete with overdubs and stereo sound. With this it becomes one of those definitive "headphone records" in which the sensation grows the closer you can get to injecting it straight into your bloodstream. Note: I bought it on iTunes, so I can't review the artwork. For $9.99 though, Apple is selling the CD with an extra live song.Without further ado, here's the play-by-play:"Intro": I'm a sucker for neat production tricks. The way the intro -- which I can only describe as some sort of drunken blues lullaby -- transitions into the first song got me giddy for the album to start. It's an excellent precursor to an album in which the little things really seem to make a difference."Hollywood": It's not a bad track, though I'm not sure if I would have picked it to open the album. If you entered this album fearing he may have ditched the blues, you're immediately struck by your own stupidity. My only problem lays in the lyrics: "doing 90 on the 10?" What time was this at? Why must you mock me, Jackie? If I recall correctly, it took me 2 hours to travel 4 miles on the 10, when I went to the show on the Strip. "So Hard to Find My Way": Most upbeat Jackie song to date? I think so. I've been singing this one in my head since I first heard it. To me, it seems like the perfect single with the cheery horns, the foot-tap inducing banjo and subtle key work. It's got a big chorus, something that in the past, was missing from his other albums. The fact that he can pull off the energy--which seems to explode coming out of each verse--is a testament to the improvement of his voice. "Just As Well": Someone on Amazon.com called this a "Jack Johnson-esque bore of a song" and I'm not sure if it's humanly possible to be any more wrong. Aside from the fact that "Jack Johnson" and "bore" are incredibly redundant, it's just a huge misread on the track. The artistic vision required to say "hey, this acoustic track needs some accordion" and then the ability necessary to pull it off is astounding. In terms of recording and quality, this song is just superb. When you can actually feel the smokiness of a singer's voice, you've captured something special."Cold Black Devil/14 Miles": As if it were even necessary, this song stands as another example that the major label didn't drain him of the blues. The breakdown at the end has got some of the finest guitar work on the entire CD. With the Wah pedal he brings the guitars to a screaming pitch all while maintaining the bouncing feel that powers the track. The vocals are distorted on purpose, allowing the listener to focus on the collective impact of the music, not the words. "Never Satisfied (Revisited)": I've found myself repeating this song over and over again as I stare off into space; an obsessive musical experience that comes along only so often. The last song I did it to was "Devils and Dust." It's not so much that he "revisited" the track as it is pouring three years of maturity and wisdom into a song that was already profound. The twangy guitar tone and the layering give it an aural depth perceivably unreachable by "just" an acoustic guitar. When they say that "less is more", people ignore powerful contrarian examples like this, a song in which a few production adjustments increase the power exponentially."Love Song, 2:00 AM": I could go into some analysis here, but I figure the lyrics themselves do a better job than I ever could:"well the moon is in the mountains and the night is taking pictures of the sky and i've got nothing for you, nothing but this simple lullabye"The song then revels in this theme of simplistic beauty and whispered vocals that flow like a river to the beat. That an artist would place such a reflective low song here, instead of filler or a throw away track is refreshing and appreciated."When You're Walking Away": This song starts out slow and dreamy but builds to one of the best on the album. It's got that big chorus feel that, again, while uncharacteristic, is brilliant. If ever there was a song more primed for a bigger solo, this is it. It's not to say that the one that's there isn't enjoyable, but every time I listen I trick myself into anticipating a different one."I'm So Gone": The guitar effects make the song. They take a pretty standard rock song and give it a modern groove without losing "his" sound. It has, without a doubt, the coolest lyric in Greene history along with some of the sharpest guitar tone. I won't pretend to know what it means, but I sure do like it."Did you hear about Vegas, she's got mouths to feed and only one hole keeps them fed? It's starting to plague us, and it won't be long 'fore one of us is dead""Closer to You": One of the most chill tracks on the record. Lyrically, it's probably the closest to a biopic since Sweet Somewhere Bound's "Write a Letter Home." "you can listen to the money you can listen to your friends but if you listen to your heartbeat you might never go home again"I hope it's not necessary that I analyze that. In reality though, it doesn't even matter, because the lyrics aren't what make the song great. The warm guitar tone, the rhythmic drums, and the backup vocals truly power it. "I'll Let You In": In the vein of the other acoustic songs, it takes a slow ballad, and through subtle additions, reaches a seemingly unattainable level with them. All it takes is just a few notes here and a slide there to make this piece really come alive. With headphones, it leaps into your ears, and you can absorb each iota that combine for an experience like no other. It's soft and sweet, evoking a stare out the window, and the evaporation of the daily worries. Like the title alludes, Greene extends the listener an invitation to that idyllic world that seems to inspire his music."Farewell, So Long, Good-Bye": The horns come out again on this song, bringing the energy with them. Instead of a poppy chorus like "So Hard", it's got a blues grit and a rocky tone; a style reminiscent of Rusty Nail, his first album. "Supersede": Clocking it at nearly 10 minutes, this is surely one of his longer songs. I think the length alone, however, testifies to his unique reign of artistic freedom, and a lack of an oppressive label. Too often, songs like these are shortened to 3 or 4 minutes, so as to make them more accessible or realize them as singles. In its entirety, the song is catchy and never drags, but if it were cut short, it wouldn't be much more than filler. If an artist has material, why not let them see where they can take it? "Supersede" has that Dylan ramble and good natured vocal; at times you can almost hear him laugh as he sings. "Marigold": I've had a solo acoustic copy of this song for quite some time. To be honest though, I wasn't sure if the album would be able to improve on it. I could not have been more wrong, especially with the power of the chorus amplified drastically in this version. If you were afraid that this album didn't have the loneliness that fuels most great artists, this track proves you wrong as well. It's a slow, meandering piece that swells to a chorus but twice in 5 minutes. Instead of hurting the song though, this helps it, making the two stand apart with beauty and authoritarian clout.I, for one, was impressed, with an artist who told stuck and growth-less fans to "go to hell." Surely, the idea of artistic development is one that needs to be defended, but that's not why I liked it. If you can't appreciate this album, realize the difference between change and evolution, lose yourself in the beauty of hybrid mix of a no-frills simplicity and arranged mastery, then you're an idiot. This album is fantastic, one of those destined to stay in the player long after you've heard it through a hundred times. I'm not saying this album is flawless. But if the biggest critique of an album is that the artist could have ripped a few more solos, you better count your blessings. The attitude -- a lack of any sort of ego -- that accounts for smaller percentage of blues rockers is what powers some of the greatest tracks on the CD. The idea that band is more important than the leader is what makes "So Hard to Find My Way" such an energetic masterpiece. These songs don't diminish the power of acoustic tracks, instead, they increase them by way of contrast. The sorrow in a song like "Never Satisfied" grows as it sits in a valley sandwiched between two peaks like "Walking Away" and "Cold Black Devil." It's a wonderful collective effort, where the sum is clearly greater than the parts. This new direction is promising and inspiring, with the artist fully utilizing his own talents as well as those of his peers. I can testify that they translate well into the live show, a fact that becomes increasingly relevant for this touring fiend. I'm not sure if the single is going to chart or if it was the best pick. What I do know, however, is that this album deserves a listen and this artist, respect. Music45186@blogcritics.org Sun, 19 Mar 2006 01:52:10 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/08/142708.php ChaunceyBillupsMichael Kalin of The Boston Globe, and Harvard alumn, published what can only be described as the embodiment of liberal ignorance last week when he attacked Jon Stewart. The piece, entitled "Why Jon Stewart isn't Funny" proposes and, without common sense, concludes that political parody hurts democracy. Mockery of our politicians -- Stewart focuses on the Bush administration -- supposedly prevents the recruitment of a new generation from heading to Washington. The article follows a fictional college student and Daily Show fan who, influenced by negative portrayals of politicians, refrains from becoming one himself out of a sense of superiority. The conclusion is that Stewart's humor hurts America because it makes politicians look bad.Stewart's daily dose of political parody characterized by asinine alliteration leads to a ''holier than art thou" attitude toward our national leaders. People who possess the wit, intelligence, and self-awareness of viewers of ''The Daily Show" would never choose to enter the political fray full of ''buffoons and idiots." Content to remain perched atop their Olympian ivory towers, these bright leaders head straight for the private sector.Only an Ivy League grad would consider the removal of pretension from politics to be a "bad thing." You don't get respect just because you're a politician; in fact, you better be busting your ass to earn it -- every single second you are getting paid.I realize that Democrats need someone to blame, but I think Kalin is going after the wrong guy. If anything, Stewart lobs softballs at liberals and crucifies Republicans. So what though? I'm not going to sit here and act like we don't deserve it. Bush gets nailed every night because he makes himself an easy target. We have ourselves a President who likes to pretend he's infallible; if that's not an invitation for mockery then I'm not sure I know what is.The idea that our politicians are somehow sacred or are off limits from criticism is what has gotten us into this mess. That Nixon thought he could define legality or that FDR could simply pack the Supreme Court is directly tied to public mistrust. Rightfully so, when you start to act untouchable, people start to resent it.As biased as the media is--and I do think that--they give politicians a pass when it comes to shameful self-righteousness. Why? They share the same affliction. The motivation that led Dan Rather to use obviously false documents in his story is the same that led Bush to rush into Iraq. Our politicians, our media, and our CEO's are so certain of their superiority that they alter reality to prove it. It's a bad case of finding facts that support your opinion instead of finding an opinion that matches the facts. The connection between Rather, Bush, and Lay (Enron) is rather simple. So assured of their own abilities and so ingrained was their sense of entitlement that they had no qualms about bending the rules or letting ethics lapse.This is exactly where the new media, specifically Stewart, comes in. They are the People's equalizer. They knock our leaders down a notch, remind them who's really in charge, and keep them on their toes. The premise that this hurts America is so absurd it hurts. Since when has holding office meant you got a free pass when it comes to bullshitting?When Stewart mocks John Ashcroft for singing "Let the Eagles Soar," he's doing everyone a favor. Someone needs to get in their face and scream, "Who the fuck do you think you are?" "Is your ego so large that you thought you could pull this off?" "Are you so isolated that not a single staff person said you looked like a fool?" "What of your dignity?"Claiming that Stewart shouldn't make our politicians look like "buffoons and idiots" is like saying an umpire shouldn't call a strike a strike. Delusion, unlike honesty, is not a virtue. Just because you don't like seeing a train wreck doesn't mean it didn't happen. Washington, like Hollywood, is out of touch with reality and it's about time someone made that clear.Although Stewart's comedic shticks may thus earn him some laughs Sunday at the Oscars, his routine will certainly not match the impact of his greatest irony: Jon Stewart undermines any remaining earnestness that liberals in America might still possess.Undermines the earnestness of liberals? That is the perfect example of the self-righteous crap that pervades the American left. The fact of the matter is that you can't get mocked if you haven't done anything stupid. You can throw stones at a brick wall but they'll bounce off; a house of cards on the other hand... If the earnestness was there, we wouldn't be having this talk. Jon Stewart wouldn't have a show if his humor wasn't striking a nerve. Great humor comes from great pain, and there is no pain deeper than in the heart of any thinking American. The realization that our leaders throw us crap and hope it will stick, that they look at their constituents as a burden, and that they think the truth is secondary is heartbreaking, but necessary. The Daily Show makes light of what can only be described as a crushing despair: our government is out of control.The only thing worse is Kalin's article. Here we have a journalist, a supposed member of the 4th estate -- a final check against tyranny -- and he's telling us to lay off. Political satire is important to this country for the same reason the 2nd Amendment is important; if leaders do not fear the voters, they will do them wrong. They will continue to act like idiots, embarrass our nation, and makes fools of themselves if not made aware that we will be laughing at them. It forces them to be genuine and dignified, something it's fairly clear they'd do less often if they weren't held accountable.To say that parody and humor discourages earnest politicians is just incorrect. It does exactly the opposite, weeding out the two-faces, the incompetent and the weak hearted. We ought not get in the business of deciding what political criticism helps or hurts this country because in the end it's a relative. In terms of what is allowed and what is not, Stewart's style is clearly legal and well intentioned. If a politician can't withstand the observations of a late-night host, he's not qualified to lead. If the "liberal earnestness" can't survive a few jokes, then it's not worth having.So yes, in a sense Kalin is right, Jon Stewart isn't funny -- in that his importance is deadly serious. Anyone who holds our leaders accountable keeps their egos in check and gets the public interested in politics does this nation a great service. Ideology aside, the Daily Show stands as a deterrent from the self-righteousness and condescension that so regularly comes with power. To think that we should bite our tongues and hold back from poking fun at our politicians is to contradict every thing that is great about America. Politics44649@blogcritics.org Wed, 8 Mar 2006 14:27:08 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/02/144226.php ChaunceyBillupsThe Bush Administration might as well be over. I can't even recall the last time I heard something positive about the White House, and it's not an issue of a biased media. We have a president whose political skills are obsolete in this modern landscape. Five years of mistakes, missteps and malaise have taken their toll, to the point where we might as well pronounce this horse officially dead.If there is a better example of troubles facing a modern politician than the Cheney shooting incident I don't want to know about it. If there is a worse example of a way to respond to it, I pray to God I won't ever know about it. Nobody can blame a guy for accidentally shooting his friend, but you can fault somebody for handling it so poorly. I didn't even think it was possible to get crucified for something such as this, but I guess that's what happens when you not only neglect to inform the media of a near vice-presidential manslaughter, but the commander-in-chief as well.Republicans like to think they bring business logic to the government, but the fact that White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan still has a job proves they're full of it. The days of a press secretary being able to spin a story or shift the blame are long gone. The legions of fact checkers have expanded from the press corps to literally anyone with a computer. The RatherGate incident reflects the reality that faces politicians on a daily basis; the no-spin zone has expanded from O'Reilly's TV show to the entire Internet; everyone's a Jon Stewart as they laugh at the excuses.For all intents, the old media - CBS, ABC, NBC - are as elitist and corrupt as our politicians. They are established and stuck in their ways, completely oblivious to the changing winds. The new media - talk radio, Internet and cable news - are different, and they more closely resemble the makeup of the population. It could be the fact that they actually involve the public via phone calls, emails and letters, or it could be the fact that they seem to put in some effort. Do not misunderstand this phenomenon or label it an obsession of the middle class. The people's involvement in the media has drastically changed the equation, and made it impossible for politicians to ignore.Remember as a child when your parents told you that "if you ignore it, it will go away?" You might as well forget that if you plan on playing the politics game in the future. In this era of instant gratification, everything is about satisfaction. When people express worry they want to be calmed, when they expose a problem they want it fixed, and when they feel they've been wronged they want an apology.The Internet's ability to give the people literally everything they want has spoiled us when it comes to politics. If a computer capitulates to every demand, why doesn't our government? We fund them with our tax dollars, we support them with our votes, and we dignify them with our ceremony, so they sure as hell better give us the time of day. The democratization of content happened because of the inherent hatred of elitism. People don't like distant leaders just as they dislike media distribution that defies common sense.The old Hollywood is failing because of a failure to respond to the people, and so too will the old model of Washington. The woes of the movie industry parallel those of our politicians, who feel that because things have always worked, they will continue to work.The key to success in this new era lies in proactiveness. Remember pre-emption? It may not have worked too well in Iraq, but it does in everyday politics. Politicians cannot wait for a storm to blow over because of the permanence of the Internet. It doesn't matter if the MSM picks up your story, because millions of bloggers will. You can't get away with the Friday news dump anymore, and you aren't going to be able to pull a fast one on an angry public. The bias of the media is irrelevant when you take into consideration the combined force of talk radio and the Internet.There is only one way to deal with problems in this new era. Head them off. Politicians will be forced into openness, honesty, and a quick response, lest they wish to raise the ire of the blogsphere. The only way things die down is when everyone has taken their shot; refusing to comment just extends the problem and keeps it in the public eye.I don't think it's a stretch to attribute Bush's low poll numbers to a failure in every single one of the above categories. It's not surprising; the business world hasn't even caught up to this trend, so we shouldn't exactly expect it from our politicians...yet.The importance of this issue, however, is that the first party to master it can ensure itself victory. Democrats or Republicans, the first ones to modernize, to utilize technology, to win the web, will forever retain that label. As Republicans allied themselves with big business a hundred and twenty five years ago, they ought to now become the party of the information generation. Become the party that responds quickly to the public's needs, hears their demands and does something about it. Regain the youth and energy that comes from being on the cutting edge and you will feel a boost in the polls.Hollywood and Wall Street are making the transition to the Internet; when will Washington? It's really not that difficult, a few token moves will make a massive impression.Here they are:Make It a Policy to Support Internet/Computer Voting Why don't teenagers vote? Because they are too busy spending time with video games, and the computer. Bring politics to them. Everyone realizes there are some security issues that need to be dealt with, but go ahead and deal with them instead of complaining. When you remove the barriers that keep people from the polls, then your message begins to matter. Prove that you are willing to step into the future and you will be taken seriously.Start Blogging People want to know what their politicians are doing, so give them what they want. They already comment on your decisions, your votes, your donors and your sound-bites, don't you think it's time your explanation is thrown into the mix? Give a write-up on weekly or even monthly Congressional happenings. Explain how you voted in Congress and why. Announce television appearances. Post speeches in advance and ask for comments. People want to be involved; they want to see their money at work. It will prove that you understand modern media, and will allow you to seem accessible. It can reaffirm to them why they support you in the first place, and then help your campaign by re-posting a tangible track record. Stand Up For Free Speech If the Internet has relit any political flame, it has been for the 1st Amendment. People for the first time are able to fully express themselves, and in doing so realize the importance of such a right. Every time a blog gets shut down, or a writer gets sued, the fallout is huge. The Internet has flourished because of a lack of restriction, and the public is smart enough to realize it needs to stay that way. Become the party, or at the least the politician with a reputation for standing up for free expression. Oppose legislation that limits Internet speech or attempts to impose legal standards on bloggers. The passionate energy that explodes when a blogger is fired could be used to for a re-election campaign instead of a petition against you. If you stand up for the Internet, it will stand up for you, so vote and act accordingly. Become Involved Grant interviews, give quotes, leak information to bloggers just as you would the mainstream media. DailyKos has thousands of daily readers who eagerly seek out political information to write about. Give them fodder, and make them feel important. Hell, read their blogs. If they're important enough, drop an email or a comment. Let the Internet know that they influence your thinking, that you've got a finger on the pulse. When you talk to reporters, drop names of the blogs/sites you read. If someone writes a good article, syndicate it. Post it on your official page just as you would a positive write-up from any other media outlet. They will thank you for the traffic, trust me.The Bush administration is literally the opposite of what a modern political organization ought to embody. A politician - a man of the people - has no justification whatsoever being less than completely forthcoming. Bush is supposedly this straight shooter, a get-right-to-the-point kind of guy, and he avoids nearly every public speaking opportunity. So many of the issues that have ravaged his administration could have been cut short or dealt with outright. When he addresses the Union, the confidence is re-instilled and his initiatives supported; when he wholly ignores informing the public of his moves, he fails miserably.Arnold proved the legitimacy of a 'directly to the people' strategy. When he said, "screw the legislature," skipped the middle man and spoke straight to the voters he was successful. When he took his name off the initiatives, essentially giving in to the media, he lost...miserably. Naturally the checks and balance system limit Bush's options, but the media strategy still applies. You can't reach the people when you hide inside the White House. You can't revolutionize Social Security when you let your opponents define your opinions in the eyes of the public. Your argument for the War on Terror has to be something other than, "Well they aren't showing you the good we are doing!" You have to prove it, then take the initiative and show that supposedly missing side of the story. This elitism, this refusal to dignify the other side with a response has been the Achilles heel of the Bush administration. If you're not going to explain yourself, believe me, millions of people are willing to do it for you -- not positively I might add.George W. Bush had the opportunity to secure a place as a powerful and respected president, but his hubris prevented him from taking it. A policy of condemning innovation and a refusal to explain himself created one of the most bogged down administrations in history. Much like a modern military must be fast and responsive, so too must a modern politician. No longer can our leaders sit back and ignore the demands of the people, for the individual's influence has grown too great. In an era where an unpaid writer can reach thousands of readers, a politician cannot afford to blow off public opinion.Though the environment facing office holders may seem hostile, it is not hopeless. The Internet is still a rough and untamed land; in other words, it is the perfect cause for a party to align itself with. The first party to fully utilize technology and the Internet will find itself a voting base strong enough to sustain a run to the top. It is not a difficult task; the only requirements are humility and honesty. Our media has been democratized, so it's only fitting that our democracy should be as well. The Internet is more than a bunch of computers, it's a vehicle for the people to finally overthrow the elites against whom resentment builds nearly everyday. The days of politicians simply ignoring a story until it goes away are over, with media spin and finger-pointing lagging not too far behind. The best way to overcome a competitive trend has always been to embrace it, so though the Bush administration fatally shot itself in the foot, it's not too late for the rest of the party. Ryan Clark Holiday is a published journalist. Politics44384@blogcritics.org Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:42:26 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/02/18/213724.php ChaunceyBillupsHere's the review of last night's Jackie Greene show on the Sunset Strip in Hollywood:I'm not going to sit here and pretend like getting to the show was cake. With a near 3 hour drive through horrendous traffic, ticket fees that amounted to a measly 40 percent of the total cost, $15 bucks for parking and a lack of seats, it could have been easier. Nonetheless, I can't recall a time that I had been more content with my purchase. You didn't walk away angry or ripped off, as every one of those feelings had dissipated by the end of the first song.This was my first show since July, a time in which some rather drastic change has occurred. With an entirely new band--though it was good to see Nick working backstage--Jackie Greene has come back with a vengeance. The energy and passion has returned tenfold, combining nicely with what can only be described as brilliant song writing. (The new stuff is up on Jackie's Myspace) I lost count of how many times I've seen him, but that doesn't stop this show from ranking right at the top. Though nothing can beat a solo acoustic show, this new lineup, attitude and music comes about satisfyingly close.The new guitarist was fantastic. Don't get me wrong, he's not the best I've ever seen, but I'm not sure you can ask for anything more. He did absolutely everything a rhythm guitarist ought to. Better yet, you couldn't sense the slightest ego even with everything he adds to the sound. There weren't any attempts to steal the show, "express his musical self" or dance around like an idiot (you know who I'm talking about). The "So Hard to Find My Way" was flawless and I can't even begin to describe how much his slide-work improves the set. The beauty of his addition is not that realization that he fills a void that plagued the shows in the past, but rather his ability to take the Jackie Greene experience to a level you didn't even know was possible.It was the little things that made the show better than the others. The drumming--something I can honestly say was irrelevant in past performances--added volumes to the impact. That a group could be this tight with less than 6 months of shows leaves me salivating for the future. Surprisingly, I was pleased with the bassist as well. Like the drummer, his play was slick and spot-on. Together their fills worked to create a flow that simply wasn't there previously. The rhythm hits accented the songs and built the climaxes with amazing energy--one's that were exceedingly greeted with solid solos and riffs.With a 40 minute set, you couldn't have asked for a better catalog. It grabbed from all the right styles with enough variety to keep it interesting. For the first time I don't remember the piano section dragging on--in fact, it actually lifted the show to a new level. The same quickness and showmanship that he'd always held with the guitar has finally been fully applied to the keys. Too, the ability to combine the harmonica, keys and guitar simultaneously allowed the live show to capture the power that had previously been limited to his albums.I was talking to a friend about Jackie the other day, and he expressed concern about the direction of his career. That it was strange for an artist to open for B.B King and then two years later take the stage before someone like Big Head Todd. It's a completely legit observation, but I think it's misguided and lacking some context.I get the transition, completely and entirely. A young kid on stage, blowing people's minds with his maturity and talent only gets you so far. It induces a few "holy shits" and gets you noticed, but what then? Getting noticed is how you sign to major--something he's done--but after that, you've got to continue improving.After that, you better fucking be amazing. If you're not jaw-dropping then you don't deserve your spot. Once you've got a record deal, the excuses are over, you can't rely on novelty or nostalgia, and you sure as hell better be innovative. That--growth as an artist--is exactly what this new lineup is about. He's not 20 anymore and he no longer meets the "small town kid" qualifications. It took some balls and self-awareness to realize that.The live act finally reflects this. The dynamic has changed dramatically, and for the better no doubt. It's not just one talented musician; it's a collective and coherent group broadcasting the same message. We still know who's in charge, who's writing the songs and who's putting everything out on the table--the band just amplifies it all.I suppose I ought to address Big Head Todd, though I'm not sure what else should be said other than "coulda used a little less of them." Not to say I wasn't pleasantly surprised or that Todd wasn't an absolute badass, it's just everything blended together. There were a few stand-outs and no shortage of ripping solos, but it dragged for sure. If the acts had split the time more evenly, they could avoid the massive disparity and create a more entertaining packaged. It would have allowed Jackie to build on the energy of his set, play an encore and perhaps jammed a bit, all while preventing a lack of distinction and loss of impact from BHT. With a set north of 90 minutes, I completely forgot the titles and styles of the songs I liked, and lost track of where one track ended and the other began.In the end though, I couldn't have designed a much better show. Anyone who debated attending and decided against it made a mistake that they ought to regret. My experience with Jackie Greene has been revolutionized and I left impressed and awe-struck, something I couldn't have predicted for all the world. For this to be such a great show, after all I've seen, is a testament to obvious effort put forth by Jackie and the band. The evolution of this young man's career is so clearly heading in the appropriate direction. No longer does he wish to impress as a old soul in a young body, but as artists on an equal playing field. It won't be him that recruits new fans, rather the performance put forth by his group of fantastic musicians. They'll continue to win an audience, for sure, but finally with showmanship thrown into the equation. And no matter how difficult the circumstances are in the future, I know now how imperative and how worthwhile it will be to attend every single Los Angeles show.If you want to see the rest of the tour dates, they are posted hereIf you want more info on Jackie Greene, try this article: 3 Reasons to Listen to Jackie Greene For more from Ryan Clark Holiday try Ryan Clark Holiday.com Edited: [GH] Music43811@blogcritics.org Sat, 18 Feb 2006 21:37:24 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/02/14/001032.php ChaunceyBillupsThe pioneer of blogging has an excellent post today on Brokeback Mountain -- mainly the undeserved hype that it gets. Mickey Kaus, a writer for Slate.com, analyzes the box office receipts of the movie and the misinformation that's used for political gain.Essentially, Hollywood would like you to believe that it's a breakout hit, transcending political and social boundaries and finding a massive audience across demographics. In reality it's an art flick with the media behind it, a fact that really doesn't change its appeal. Like most of these films, it's not changing minds or revolutionizing opinion, but simply preaching to the choir.Keep in mind that "The Passion of the Christ" was roughly six times larger in gross receipts but it didn't get near this kind of positive coverage.Kaus manages to do a superb job of taking the facts -- the isolated data -- and applying it to the larger picture. 'Brokeback Mountain doesn't deserve all the hype' is a theme conservatives have been hammering at since its release. What they forgot to address, however, was the larger politically relevant issue.But this B.S. falls into a special category: the sort of gratifying myth that in the past has helped lull liberals (and gay rights activists who may or may not be liberals) into wild overconfidence. Remember when Democrats actually believed that Fahrenheit would help push Bush out of office? It didn't work out that way. Moore's film didn't change many minds in part because, as York puts it, it "never reached audiences that had the power to defeat the president at the polls."A movie that was shoved down the public's throat at every awards show, newspaper, and magazine isn't going to change minds. It's going to appeal to the people it was aimed at and alienate everyone else. Instead of realizing this, or being grateful for the initial acceptance the movie garnered, liberals are out proclaiming the century's greatest achievement. Two gay cowboys in a moderately successful movie aren't going to unravel 150 years of collective idealization and legend. Gay's are going to progress rapidly forward because the Sundance film festival had a critical orgasm at their expense.In fact, this works to the conservative advantage. Just like Newsome's dictatorial move to radically alter marriage ended up hurting the cause, an over hyped movie is just going to turn people off. No one likes to be told what the greatest movie ever is; they want to find it for themselves. With liberals out there attempting to tarnish the sacred image of the American west, people are going to fondly remember the old days. For all the talk of progress and change, in reality, the opposite is going to occur. Enthusiasm is fine, but saturation is annoying.Much of Democratic politics seems to now consist of embracing and fanning similarly comforting, but ultimately deceptive, liberal memes. Enron has fatally damaged Bush, Abu Ghraib has fatally damaged Bush, Katrina has fatally damaged Bush, Abramoff has fatally damaged Bush, the Plame investigation will fatally damage Bush -- you can catch the latest allegedly devastating issue every day on Huffington Post or Daily Kos (and frequently in the NYT). If you believe the hype you'll believe that Democrats don't need to change to win. They just need to push all these hot memes forcefully.Again, reality is not always comforting; it's just as disheartening for conservatives as it is for liberals. Public opinion polls are relevant for this reason, they show that a significant portion of society accepts abortion rights and gun control and that people value morals and the institution of marriage--issues that are discouraging to Republicans and Democrats respectively. In the end, you cannot simply ignore these facts to fuel your idealism. You cannot twist the data from a movie's returns to justify the furthering of homosexual agenda, lest you wish to fail.The author is exactly right; liberals are delusional if they buy into the hype that they created. If you want to exaggerate the successes of Brokeback Mountain, so be it, but you're an idiot to use it to justify political endeavors. Control of the media is powerful, no doubt, but it's not the end all be all. Just because the networks covered Abu-Ghraib endlessly and exploited the hurricane doesn't mean everyone agreed with it. Anderson Cooper's outrage doesn't always translate into national outrage, and the blame game falls on many deaf ears.Democratic failures often come from this: an overestimation of their own prowess. Too regularly they just assume they've got everyone on board, and proceed accordingly. This is a weakness that conservatives can take advantage of. As they push forward confidently, but wholly oblivious to true public opinion, elitists alienate the masses. They piss people off with their obsession with audience-less films and ignorance to overwhelmingly popular ones. When legislation is passed over the heads of the voters in contradiction to their demands, Democrats shoot themselves in the foot. That is the essence of the Brokeback debacle -- crowds aren't flocking to fill theatres or relating to its message but the media acts like it's revolutionizing the consensus on homosexuality. Reality is starkly different, the movie isn't changing minds; it's masturbation to the left's own moral superiority and self-righteousness.Just as the left's recent initiatives have failed due to their own delusional confidence and ignorance, this will too. The same political gravity that took down Bush -- the lack of public support and political capital -- will shock the optimism that this movie spurned. It's not striking the nerve that the critics think it is, mainly because the target audience is far different than the average American. The resentment builds and conservatives thrive on it. For all Bush's mistakes, the Republican Party will flourish due to Democratic arrogance. There is no need to fear our culture's corruption because it's a sham. This movie isn't a smashing success; it's a niche flick. So keep it up liberals, it will be your demise.For more from Ryan Clark Holiday: Ryan Clark Holiday.com Ryan Clark Holiday.com/Blog Politics43591@blogcritics.org Tue, 14 Feb 2006 00:10:32 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/23/081830.php ChaunceyBillupsThis story is the perfect example of why the major television networks and movie studios are failing: ABC Defends Cancellation of Emily's Reasons Why Not.One minute, Heather Graham was the face of ABC. The next minute, she was gone. Her comedy series Emily's Reasons Why Not was promoted relentlessly by the network as the linchpin of its post-football Monday night schedule, but was only given one airing before being yanked earlier this month. ABC committed to the big promotional campaign before even seeing a script for the show, said ABC entertainment president Stephen McPherson on Saturday. The series turned out to be a dog creatively, he indicated.They signed up for an ad campaign before they even saw show? Nice priorities. Apparently content quality isn't even a concern anymore. This is when you know it's time to jump ship -- when a company doesn't even bother to look at their product. When they've become so self-assured that they think success is a guarantee, or at least a likely possibility. What if GM started advertising for their new SUV before it was finished? Before it'd passed its safety tests? How angry would you be that a company can't respect you enough to subject themselves to their own product before they tossed it your way? The entertainment industry shouldn't be any different, and it's starting to show.People are sick and tired of crap being shoved down their throats. You begin to resent an industry that is so cocky that they pitch you shows like Bones or Emily Reasons Why Not. It's fairly obvious that it has become common practice to advertise incessantly for shows the networks know suck. The majority of new shows fail, how can an industry not take that as a hint? Try pitching something new and you might get different results. Law and Order is a great show, but anything north of 3 spin-offs is a bit extreme. With all the capital available, why is innovation not the name of the game? Because no one in charge gives a damn ... about the product or making money apparently.Since it's not happening on the silver screen or the television, the Internet has taken over. People who actually care about their craft are devoting the necessary effort required for greatness. You don't see indie artists advertising at all, let alone for things they've yet to even preview. It's the future for sure, but currently, it's not without its misconceptions.The problem here, with the Internet revolution, is that people think the old model is going to play a big part. The genius of the web is its content, not the delivery system. Look at the Alexa ratings, sites with absolutely no promotion outrank major corporations like McDonalds and Pepsi. People have turned to the Internet to get away from the other media because it's not entertaining, not for lack of convenience. There's no reason for MTV to start a download service --people hate your channel. I understand the desire to sign big contracts with major networks, but keep in mind it's for publicity.Stores like Apple and Google are signing on with CBS and NBC because that is what gets them on the news and gets some initial eyeballs. The real reason though, that Google will reign supreme, is because they've realized the importance in allowing users to upload content. That is what drives the Internet. There wouldn't be an estimated 30 million blog readers if this country was wholly satisfied by the mainstream press. The television situation is the same, people are excited about the internet for its ability to allow access to new content providers, not because it can be a new vehicle for the old.I don't log onto my computer and check MTV.com for music news, I go to Blabbermouth. I don't go to a network news website for the latest stories, I go to Google. When I want comedy, I go to TuckerMax or Maddox both independent and non-traditional forms of entertainment. Why should television and movies be different? Ratings are down because people currently have other options, and choose them daily over the crap on TV. No one wants to download an episode of CSI: Ohio, we want quality. Case in point, music video downloads are through the roof on Apple and Myspace because no one on TV plays them anymore. A simple demographic study would prove that to the cable channels but they just don't care. We, I am tired of being told what to watch and it's finally time for us to change that.The beauty of the Internet revolution will come from its ability to allow ordinary people to create quality content. Success will further be based on merit, and not on corporate backing. The individual -- if their talent is great enough -- will be able to expose their work to a vast audience just as easy as a show from the majors. No longer will you need to settle with what is on, as you can actively search out whatever you desire. More importantly though, you want have to deal with things like networks pimping shows they've never even seen, or clips shows of their rare snippets of quality. Instead the torch is being passed to a new era of entertainers, who have not yet become corrupted by the spotlight. Look forward to the genius that is to come, and take solace in the stupidity whose time has finally come to pass.For more on the Internet Revolution and other articles of this kind, try Ryan Clark Holiday.com Sci/Tech42633@blogcritics.org Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:18:30 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/11/055249.php ChaunceyBillups10. Tom- LEAVE EVERYONE ALONE! You just sold MySpace for a measly half-billion dollars; I think it's time to get a life.9. Annoying Business Proprietor - Believe us, your T-shirt company has everyone impressed (I'm sure the orders for Baby Tees are just pouring in) but it would be nice if you stopped posting your ads in every single profile. Too, this applies to all you out-of-work models, pay-to-print authors, and graphic artists.8. Hater/User- Though it makes you feel better to bash MySpace in front of your friends, it's hard to reconcile that with the fact that you use it all the time. Oh yeah, no one believes that someone else made the account for you. 7. Self-Righteous Emo Kid - So wearing tight pants, eye make-up and listening to bands that have hypocritically become popular by not being "mainstream" gives you the position of judging everyone else? Regardless of your membership to the MySpace Democrats, you're not exactly anti-establishment when you frequent Rupert Murdoch's latest acquisition. 6. Young Whore- Despite the fact that precedent seems to dictate all girls must post provocative, degrading pictures of themselves, anyone under 15 years old is crossing the disgusting line. Focus on getting your learner's permit and growing out of your "awkward phase" before you commit full-time to being the next statutory rape victim.5. No Shirt Guy - We know you think that your bare chest is the ticket to the female promised land, but you're wrong for two reasons: 1) You're really not attractive 2) Girls hear the "I'm an idiot" that your picture screams so very, very loudly. 4. Explicit User Name - We understand the disappointment in realizing that your picture has failed to entice anyone to visit your profile, however, that does not justify using profane terms to get attention. The words "Sex," "Horny" or "Fuck," do little to compensate for your cripplingly boring personality and repulsive ugliness. 3.Weird Old Person - Not quite sure where you inferred there was a need for strange, fat or bald old people on a teenage-oriented personals website, but we do appreciate the respectability (by that we mean creepiness) that your presence brings. 2. Misleading Icon - While we admire the fact that you can, to some extent, acknowledge your physical shortcomings, it is nevertheless unethical to post misleading or Photoshopped pictures of yourself. Trust us, honesty is liberating, so stop zooming in to crop out your losing battle with obesity or going wide-angle to blur the acne. 1. Crappy Band - As monumental as your upcoming show at Eric's Coffee House/H.S Talent Show/ Church Parking Lot is, on behalf of America we're informing you that not only do you suck, but no one likes you. No one cares when your new EP drops, that you've posted a new live track or that New Found Glory added you to their friends list.And those are the Top 10 Worst MySpace Personalities. Please comment if you've if you feel I may have missed some. I don't have the time, nor the strength to avoid suicide that is required to browse through the site to find examples, but please post links if you find them. Also, if you'd like to post this on your MySpace profile, please feel free to do so, and hopefully some of these folks will see the error in their ways. If you post this, please link to give me credit.You can view more of my writing on my website at: Ryan Clark Holiday and other similar Top Tens.Note: This was originally composed, with Brett Loper, for the Granite Bay Gazette, though I recently updated the list. Culture42105@blogcritics.org Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:52:49 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/23/190135.php ChaunceyBillups Tucker Max can hope all he wants, but when it comes to eternal damnation he doesn't exactly have a choice. Unless of course one can think of another punishment for a man whose more tame offenses include hiding the crutches of a distracted cripple and crashing a car into a donut shop."I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell" published by Kensington Press, is 277 pages of non-stop drinking, debauchery and fornication. It's a collection of stories that track a man from law school to a life of complete indulgence. With blunt honesty the author recounts the true exploits that garnered him women, cult infamy and a six-figure income. . This anthology captivates the reader with its humor and complete absurdity.There's "The Austin Road Trip," a quaint weekend adventure that left a hotel lobby covered in faeces and the Texas carnival industry in ruins. In "The Pee Blame" Tucker wets his own bed and somehow manages to get a complete stranger to pay for it. In the "Infamous Charity Auction Debacle" his drunken belligerence leads a respected law firm to offer him a golden parachute so they can be rid of him. When "Tucker Goes to Vegas" he takes ridiculousness to new heights as he impersonates a Christian rapper and goes without sleep and sobriety for 72 hours. And in "The Midland, Texas Story," an intended vacation from his daily madness, he manages to somehow involve himself with a shovel-wielding, dog-chasing redneck and a mass grave filled with goats.The ironic part of Max's book is that he might not be the funniest one in it. His college buddies (think the Jackass crew with Ivy League brains) provide a foil for his insanity.The standouts are Slingblade, a man whose pickup lines include gems like "fellatio won't fill the hole in your soul" and "I go to the gym, you should try it sometime." Who no doubt does Ignatius Reilly (Confederacy of Dunces) proud every time he opens his mouth. And "El Bingeroso," a law school buddy who spent his elementary school days in Special Ed (his diagnosis was based on his propensity for eating paste), out-drinks Tucker at a 3:1 ratio. He livens up stories by drunkenly threatening redneck policemen and kicking trucks.The characters are hilarious in and of themselves, but it's the interplay between them that puts it over the top. The tone is conversational and honest, allowing it to remind any reader of things they've done with friends. It is in this that Tucker's talent and the strong point of the book clearly lies; capturing the essence of comedic dialogue. He can carry a room, but so can plenty of others. His unique and valuable skill is the ability to recognize it in other people, and to have the balls to run with it. His narcissism permeates his entire existence, but in this case, he allows humor to prosper in any character, even when it outshines himself.There are plenty of problems in this book, don't get me wrong. And like the author himself, the book is not without its flaws. Max's cleverness is at times sacrificed for boyish immaturity, as in "she was super-hot," and talking in the third person.It is not without merit to label him misogynistic, but I think it may be misguided. He sleeps with a lot of women but he's not a player using deception to stroke his ego. Instead, he's brutally honest and straightforward with what he wants. Coincidentally, it's the bona fide womanizer himself-the one whose actions teeter on the edge of domestic violence-that ultimately tells women what they need to hear."Ladies let me give you some advice: Men will treat you the way you let them. There is no such thing as "deserving" respect; you get what you demand from people," Tucker Max said.His drinking is excessive, even amongst hard-hitters. But there is no reason for that to entirely diminish his credibility. I'm sure he's the first one to admit that he has a problem, so let him deal with it on his own time. Substance abuse hasn't stopped us from appreciating some of the greatest writers in history so why should it start now?At times too, his stories cross the line. "The Worst Tucker Story Ever" is aptly titled, as it's one of the worst stories I've ever read. Finding humor or even laughing at the absurdity of an abortion is difficult to say the least. It comes with a disclaimer but that doesn't make it any less wrong. No doubt a book like this carries the innate risk of offending people, but even the relatively open-minded will utter a gasp or two through the course of reading it.The critics can pan the immorality of this book until they are blue in the face (and believe me they will) but ultimately, his own logic clears him. In putting himself completely out there-depravity and all-he's living proof to the success of his own model. I'm sure that at this point, you've concluded Tucker Max is an asshole of epic proportions. Rightfully so, but don't let that cloud your judgment, or block you from appreciating the message of his book. Thinking that it is solely about alcohol and sex is to think that "Fight Club" is about punching people in the face.Like most great works, the message is hidden and conveyed through entertainment and flash. Beneath deviance and sexual conquest, this book has deeper meaning within it. In each story Max bombards the reader with a single question: "If I can get away with all this shit, what do you have to be afraid of?"Here we have a man who blatantly contradicts nearly every rule in the book, yet we continue to cling to our social constrictions. In caring wholly about himself, Max accomplished that which we all desire: success without sacrificing integrity and respect whilst ignoring the status-quo.You don't even have to drink to understand the beauty of this message. Nor is it a requirement to sleep with everything that walks. In fact, that's the opposite of what he advocates. You can love the antics, but you aren't supposed to emulate them."All that Adam had, all that Caesar could, you have and can do," Emerson once wrote.Greatness isn't reserved for a select few and neither is honesty. Emerson presented a message of existential equality in which anyone, with the guts for it, can do themselves proud. So too, does Tucker Max, only beneath a tapestry of drunken bitterness and a lack of shame. . The vastness of his kingdom may not venture far from a barstool and a mattress, but that doesn't mean yours has to. The success of our greatest heroes didn't come from playing the game or following in footsteps, it came from confidence and being true to themselves. Anyone can do what he does, that is strive to be best possible version yourself.When Machiavelli wrote (with but a twinge of political correctness) that "because Fortune is a woman, it is necessary, in order to keep her down, to beat her and struggle with her" he wasn't advocating an existence of timid complacency and reaction. Rather, like Max, he urged one to grab life by the throat and shake it for everything its worth.Build your own life-because you can never match theirs-but build it as you please. What you lack in notoriety or fame, make up tenfold with passion. It doesn't matter what you do, and Max stretches that maxim to its very limits, as long as you do it well.You can miss this point entirely and still enjoy the book; there is plenty of entertainment here for the never-sober frat boy looking to relive his glory days. But there is no reason to stop there. Much can be learned from a man who achieved success and fame through channels almost entirely self-created. Forget all the self-help books because there is nothing more empowering than the refusal to subdue your personality for the sake of others. And that is what this book emphatically supports, a selfish belief in your own abilities and the tenacity required to fully utilize them."I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell" is in the purest sense a guilty pleasure read and it consists of every thing a decent human being ought to avoid. Even so, a valuable lesson rests between the lines: not only should you do what makes you happy, but if you do it well enough, someone might pay you for it. Books41421@blogcritics.org Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:01:35 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/21/021003.php ChaunceyBillupsTo be honest, I wasn't too sure on my feelings about Tookie Williams... until I read this article. Now, not only am I glad that he died; I'm disappointed that the system didn't get to him faster. Fast enough to prevent his icon status and the ultimate glorification of his horrific legacy of violence.Yesterday his funeral was met with fanfare, and some 2000 supporters. Among whom hypocrisy, ignorance and stupidity were obviously qualifications.Jesse Jackson spoke:"Tookie Williams is dead. We are not safer. We are not more secure. We are not more humane." Jackson said.He's absolutely right. Too bad Williams was and continues to be a integral part in our culture of violence. Just look who attended his ceremony:Outside the church, several dozen young men wore the signature blue T-shirts and baseball caps of the Crips gang. Some wore blue bandannas over their faces to conceal their identity. Hmmm...The world may not be safer with his death, but it sure as hell would have been if he'd never been born. Hitler's troops marched on, continuing the violence after his death. The violence continues despite the capture of Saddam, and will continue after his stay on earth is through. So too will it be the case with Osama, and any other murderous leader."The state does not have the moral authority...to kill."Neither did Tookie, but that didn't stop him from taking down four people did it?The world, as Jackson correctly points out, is not a safe place. Unfortunately, the man he eulogizes had a disgusting hand in it.Of course, not only do we like to ignore the wrongdoing of the evil, we like to blame it on others. Like Al Sharpton did right after Rev. Jesse. "In the last 25 years, Arnold Schwarzenegger was promoting violence as the Terminator, while Tookie Williams was writing books of peace and harmony," Sharpton said. "We cannot have Terminators determining redemption. God determines redemption." Amen!Honestly, how dare Schwarzenegger judge the real, tangible violence of Tookie whilst his career is wrought with fake and CGI death? Are we seriously inferring that Arnold has as much blood on his hands as a murderer with multiple convictions?The irony here is that people were actually influenced by what Arnold did but nobody read Tookie's book. If they did, then someone, please explain to me why the hell are there gang members at his funeral. If his message was so wide reaching, why is gang-violence still prevalent? Why was the audience filled with Crips and Bloods?God may determine redemption, Mr. Sharpton, but the state decides on retribution. In his gory quadruple homicide, Tookie gave up his right to life and liberty. In blatantly violating everything society holds up, he loses all the benefits that it provides--namely the ability to exist. Had it been one, or even two deaths, it could have been limited to his freedom. However, the especially horrific nature of his crimes lead to a forfeiture of every thing he has, including breath.And then, the story goes from annoyingly ignorant, to just absurd. Farrakhan compared Williams to Jesus, saying both had been betrayed by false witnesses and sent to their death after politicians failed to intervene. He called Williams, "the patron saint for all those struggling in the gang life."Struggling in the gang life? He invented the gang life! He set up an entire generation for failure, prison and early deaths. He stole the lives, wealth, and freedom from countless individuals. His life was innately and wholly selfish and yet you compare his to Jesus? The man who did nothing but give?For the record, Farrakhan, aren't you a Muslim? Why don't you leave Christ to the Christians and make the comparisons to your own savior. How would you like it if Pat Robertson got up at Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh's sentencing and likened them to Muhammad?"If I am to die tonight, then the most important message that I want the youth to remember is that I am no longer a man of war. I die a man of peace," Tookie wrote in his final statement.That's fantastic. You might be a man of peace, but your legacy is one of death, death and more death.A brief scuffle broke out between apparent members of rival gang factions after the funeral and was broken up by security personnel by the Nation of Islam.Just like Martin Luther King...right?Despite the repeated calls inside the chapel for peace, three gunshots rang out from one of the streets nearby as the crowd broke up, prompting some to duck for cover.Thank you Tookie, for all you've contributed to society. We can never repay you. Hopefully the express ticket to hell is a start though.The more I hear after his death, the happier I am that it happened. This man hadn't even begun to undo the damage he'd done. He opened the floodgates of violence and terror, and then after feeling its wrath stepped up to put his finger in the dyke. His legacy will never be undone--no book (children's or otherwise) will come close to stopping the violence his gangs have reeked on our nation. He was a terrible, terrible person.Worse yet are those who actually seek to gain from his life of destruction. "Hi, I'm Al Sharpton, I failed miserably in the last election, so I thought supporting Tookie might get myself some face time." "Hi, I'm Jesse Jackson, ever since an illegitimate child ruined my credibility, I've been searching for a cause to waste my lofty language on."Hi, both of you are a disgrace to Christianity. How dare you sit there, and allow a man to compare a convicted murderer and architect of organized crime to Jesus Christ.In the end, we all ought to be glad he's dead, but ashamed that we gave this man but a second of our sympathy and the dignity of our consideration. The world may not be safer with Tookie Williams gone, but at least its a bit more fair. It may not have solved the problem but at least it sent a message. It may not have been the most humane thing either, but it least we have purged our system of such a horrible human being. Politics41310@blogcritics.org Wed, 21 Dec 2005 02:10:03 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/02/020402.php ChaunceyBillupspublished in the UCR Highlander 11/28/05If Hunter S. Thompson had found this site, he probably wouldn't have killed himself. I say this about TuckerMax.com because there is little else that so fully embodies the Good Doctor's message of self-destruction and indulgence.The design and utility of the site, along with the subtle insertion of truly skilled artistry is impressive but in the end, totally irrelevant. His enormous traffic (some 10 million visitors a year), popular messageboard and eclectic collection of like-minded writers all pales in comparison to the stellar content.Hunter S. Thompson often wrote of man's descent into primal behavior as an escape from both internal pain and the crushing pressure of a mundane external world. Tucker Max embraces this ethic to hilarious extremes and like his gonzo predecessors, contributes to the society from which he takes so much by writing of his experiences.You can dismiss him as a joke, an internet fad or a pompous jackass, but sooner or later, you'll come around. The stories are long and they are addictive to the point of causing dangerously low productivity. One story leads to two and three leads to hours in front of the computer.Let's face it: text has never looked very kindly on humor, but this collection of youthful indiscretions and drunken angst stands as a bright exception.Try it and believe me, you'll find that the story about the time you and your buddy "got totally trashed and were pretty sure the cashier at Wendy's was on to you" or when you "got high and ate 6 bags of Cheetos" aren't as funny when you write them down.Stories about drinking, vandalism, and women have always screamed "you had to be there" but somehow Max's are different. Both the overall quality of the experience and the prose that describes it combine to ward off the juvenile nature that tales of debauchery so often fall victim to.Context and style are certainly integral to the success of his writing, but that's not to say his exploits wouldn't stand on their own. One would be hard-pressed to find anything more rife with comedic potential than a drunk fighting a hockey mascot or Duke law graduate vomiting on a dog. Nor is there a more qualified person to relay such a message than a man who, out of necessity, carries a tape-recorder to accurately recall the belligerence that flows from his toxic stupor.Humor, like his patented Tucker Max Death Mix (Red Bull, Gatorade and Everclear), flows seamlessly through the bloodstream of his work. If you can't remember the last time you actually "laughed out loud" it's probably because little on the internet actually justifies it. Max, however, earns each and every laugh with bulimia inducing fat-jokes, shameless sexual conquests and general psychosis.He doesn't just do what you wish you could do, he does what you wouldn't even begin dream of and says what you wouldn't dare think.It is from this that his message becomes so universally relatable, even if your life doesn't resemble his at all. A love of alcohol isn't required to respect a man who lives life on his own terms and is wildly successful at it. A steady girlfriend or a hatred of college-whores doesn't prevent the inevitable entertainment that stems from dangerous overindulgence and megalomania.Again, there is the tie to Thompson, who too achieved the cult-status that comes from a life of excess and intelligence."Myths and legends die hard in America. We love them for the extra dimension they provide, the illusion of near-infinite possibility to erase the narrow confines of most men's reality. Weird heroes and mold-breaking champions exist as living proof to those who need it that the tyranny of 'the rat race' is not yet final," Thompson once wrote.Max's site and success stands as inspiration to those who've grown wary of a system that rewards stagnation and embraces the unoriginal. He's a self-absorbed asshole, but at least he's himself. Unlike musicians or actors who stand apart rather than behind their work, his life and his craft are one, creating a single refreshingly genuine character.Despite its propensity for ignoring quality and promoting garbage, Hollywood has begun to take notice. With a looming book release and a screenplay under his belt along with an infamous profile on MTV, Max doesn't appear to be all talk.His site rests comfortably among the top 15,000 most visited places on the web, and is the keynote attraction in the "Festering Ass.com" network of bloggers and artists. All of which generates a self-estimated "six-figure income" from ads and merchandise sales.As an internet writer he belongs to an elite class who have shied away from imitation and in the process created an entirely new genre of media. His delivery is superb--he sits on the cusp of a revolution--but it would be nothing without content.In this rare instance, he stands apart as both a literary and business genius. Success on a massive scale isn't likely for Tucker Max it's impending, so you might as well become a fan before its cliché. ------------------------Let me know what you guys think. Check his site out too, its amazing. Ryan Clark Holiday.com Ryan Clark Holiday.com/Blog Culture40384@blogcritics.org Fri, 2 Dec 2005 02:04:02 EST