History is written in the blood of people who at one time thought it doesn’t affect their daily lives, until finally — it does. And then, it’s too late.
I’ve watched most of this week’s “impeachment trial” in the United States Senate. The likely outcome will be as follows:
(1) ….gets away with obstruction of justice by blocking all attempts to produce documents and witnesses, and
(2) ….gets acquited.
An unprecedented abdication of responsibility will have occurred for the first time in the 200-plus year history of the United States. The legislative branch might as well CEASE TO EXIST. Since executive power now goes unchecked, and since the very last firewall of congressional and senate oversight has been trampled to death, de facto, our federal government will be transformed into an authoritarian regime guided exclusively by the wants and whims and witticisms of the premier figure atop a capricious cult of personality.
Hereafter, we will see the federal government operating almost entirely by executive order. One man’s executive order(s) will be the law of the land. Trumpian political sycophants at every federal agency will dictate policy — from cutting Medicaid and Social Security (now underway) to slashing regulations that protect clean air and water (which happened last week). Far right-wing judicial appointments will eagerly rubber-stamp any disputes in the president’s favor.
Check and balances will be GONE. OVER. FINISHED. Parts of the Constitution might as well be trimmed away with a switchblade.
Want to subpoena a witness to testify in front of Congress? Go ahead. Try that. The executive branch will simply ignore it. They just did that and got away with it. Want to obtain documents and official records to check on a government program or investigate wrongdoing? Go ahead and make the request. Ditto. The executive branch will ignore it, just as they have done by not turning over a single document, blocking witnesses from testifying, and even threatening and intimidating subordinates. It’s government by the decree of organized crime.
Since Trump will have gotten away with IGNORING all legitimate and legal requests made by law, the law no longer matters. The law is toothless. He can now cheat in elections, solicit foreign interference, and commit ANY impeachable offense in the future because it won’t matter. Congress will have played its hand, lost, and no amount of hearings or subpenas is going to put a check on executive power. We had our chance. And we blew it.
I used to believe that even with the horrors of Trump, the scare tactics and comparisons between the current regime and its players with authoritarianism-sliding-towards-fascism was a bit hyperbolic. Now, I’m not so sure.
Think about this while you try to stomach a “verdict” that was never in doubt, an “acquittal” with about as much credibility as a jury rigged by John Gotti.
Trump’s not on trial here. America is on trial. Representative democracy is on trial. The truth is on trial. All three LOST.
I never expected it to see my own country, with all its flaws, teetering on the brink of governing as a banana republic, succumbing to public division and indifference. These kinds of things happened in faraway places with names we couldn’t pronounce strongarmed by evil men in funny looking military uniforms.
The warning signs of history are abundant, should we care to heed them. History has become the present.
Footnote: I’m also attaching a clip from Bill Maher’s monologue last week. For those of you thinking the Nov. election is another firewall, don’t be so certain. Watch.
Who is most responsible for making the National Football League into the world’s richest and most successful sporting league?
George Halas, the NFL’s founder? Vince Lombardi, the great coach? Pete Rozelle, the pioneer commissioner? Joe Namath? Joe Montana? Tom Brady?
The correct answer is Karl Marx.
That’s right, Karl Marx — otherwise known as the patriarch of the global and contemporary movement known as “socialism.” [*see footnote below]
Next Sunday, more than 100 million viewers will tune in to the Super Bowl. Many of those watching will be red-meat ravishing red-staters and stalwart conservatives, their minds chained to some Dystopian philosophical mantle falsely asserting that fierce competition between businesses and among individuals combined with the prioritization of profits breeds two certain outcomes: (1) strength and (2) prosperity.
But this isn’t true. It’s certainly not true in professional sports. In fact, it’s just the opposite.
Fact: The NFL has enjoyed unparalleled national success over more than a half-century because it adopted virtually all of the principles of SOCIALISM.
Indeed, the NFL is a socialist enterprise. Socialism works. And the best example of this is American professional football.
Gather your jaws off the floor, and open your minds, my fellow football fanatics.
The NFL is a monster.
It’s the richest and most successful sporting institution in the history of the world. It’s America’s true national pastime. Forget Major League Baseball — which slipped off the pedestal as the nation’s premier spectator sport 60 years ago because of its rejection of socialism and embrace of me-first/fuck-everybody-else capitalism.
Football initially surpassed and eventually supplanted baseball as the national pastime in the early 1960s, when television became the new barometer of popularity. Now, both college and professional football demolishes baseball in ratings to the point where Major League Baseball avoids scheduling post-season games against the NFL regular season. Want proof? Consider that nine of the top ten most-watched television programs of all time are Super Bowls. Not baseball. Football. By contrast, the World Series of Baseball’s highest-rated game ever in history (played in 1986) drew about a third of what an average Super Bowl attracts.
How did this remarkable transformation come about? Two words — revenue sharing. In other words, the governing body redistributing wealth.
Earlier, I alluded to Pete Rozelle, who really is the most important figure in the history of professional football. If the game has a Karl Marx figure, it’s most certainly Rozelle, who ran the NFL for nearly 30 years and was the architect of the NFL-AFL- merger in 1970. I suppose it’s Friederik Engels would then be Dallas’ Lamar Hunt, who held the same power over in the American Football League (AFL). When the two pro football leagues signed huge national television contracts, Rozelle and Hunt had the tremendous foresight to divide profits and share the millions in revenue equally between all teams. That meant money from CBS, ABC, NBC (and later FOX and ESPN) would be divided into equal shares between New York, Chicago, Los Angeles — and much smaller cities like Green Bay. Despite the big market teams enjoying significantly greater numbers of fans and viewers, Rozelle and Hunt (along with team owners) understood that the overall game — the COLLECTIVE (remember our Marxism, classmates) — would be much better off if all teams were given an equal chance to compete, win, and prosper. In 1970, the two leagues merged and adopted this same policy for all teams.
Wow, talk about a chapter straight out of Das Capital.
Today, all NFL teams receive an equal share of the profits generated from the league’s coffers. For this reason, Green Bay (population 70,000) can compete with New York (population 8,000,000). Both teams can also be just as profitable.
By contrast, baseball maintains an economic system reminiscent of the robber baron days, an area of “haves” and “have nots.” In baseball, big market teams reap and keep the lion’s share of their television money and horde their profits from merchandising. Accordingly, big and powerful teams like the Yankees, Mets, Cubs, Angels, and Dodgers can buy up all the talent every year when players around the league become free agents. Smaller cities like Kansas City and Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay — with far less money to spend on good players — can not compete. The competitive imbalance causes fans in some cities to lose interest. The entire league suffers. That’s one reason why baseball’s TV ratings are in the shitter.
Indeed, while professional football is based on the principles of socialism, baseball remains very much wielded to the principles of capitalism. And based on any tangible metric, the evidence is abundantly clear as to which system is more successful.
Socialism’s intent is sharing resources and encouraging cooperation.
Let’s examine how the NFL operates as a business model. Consider the following:
REVENUE SHARING — All 32 NFL teams share television money in equal shares. “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.” Sound familiar?
MERCHANDISING PROFIT — Until 2010, NFL teams shared most of the royalties earned from merchandise sales. However, courts ruled that this policy violated anti-trust laws. Now, the 32 teams will be able to make their own deals, which ruins a system that has worked well for the past fifty years. So, Jerry Jones becomes the owner of the NFL’s most valuable franchise, despite not winning a championship in a quarter-century (admit it — you knew the attack on Jones was coming).
THE NFL DRAFT — Every year, the weakest teams are given an advantage. Sorta’ like the poor. Losing teams are given the opportunity to make the first picks when drafting new players. This gives bad teams a greater opportunity to improve and perhaps become better. By contrast, the best teams must pick last in the draft. This is the way taxation should work, according to the principles of socialism. Tax the wealthy — they’ll still do fine. At least the poor teams have the chance to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
SCHEDULING — The teams at the top get penalized. They are required to play tougher schedules the following year. The worst teams play a weaker schedule. Whatever you think about this system, it works. Chalk up another win for NFL socialism.
GAME DAY — All NFL teams play games on the same day at the same time (in rotation). They are equals. No team gets special treatment. It’s not like baseball in which teams can play pretty much whenever they want. No NFL team is permitted to schedule its games apart from the rest of the league. The league strictly dictates pro football’s regular-season schedule and game times are known and expected by fans. No outlier competition. Total cooperation. More socialism.
And so, virtually everything the NFL does is patterned on the principles of sharing and cooperation. Profits are divided equally. Teams needing help are given competitive advantages. And teams that consistently perform well are asked to sacrifice more.
Conclusion: The NFL is the best illustration of the success of socialism.
Footnote: Okay, so this isn’t totally true. But “Karl Marx” rolls off the tongue easier than Auguste Comte or Saul Alinsky.
We read and hear this canard all the time. Today, I’ve seen versions of the falsehood splattered all over social media. The saying goes — the Israelis and Palestinians have been fighting ever since biblical times.
Fact: No they haven’t.
The region was relatively peaceful until the creation of Israel in 1948 (actually the British mandate period after WW1 would be more technically accurate). Whatever one’s opinion of Israel and its “right to exist,” the territory today commonly known as Israel/Palestine was devoid of conflict from circa 1500 when the Ottomans ruled the land and peoples over four centuries until the 20th Century. While most of the world was engulfed in various land invasions and massacres, Palestinian and Jews lived and worked together side by side.
Pan-nationalist movements and religious extremism began to boil in the late 19th Century, coming to a neo-colonial “solution” with the Isreali state’s creation following WW2.
Sadly, the region has been a powder keg for nearly 70 years. I think most people, regardless of religion or politics or nationality would like to see peace. But let’s start the discussion with some facts and an understanding of actual history.
Next time you read some idiotic comment that goes: “They’ve been fighting over there for centuries” ……
…..perhaps you should mention they must be referring to EUROPE, which has been fighting for centuries, resulting in the deaths of tens of millions ever since the Crusades.
Yeah, I’m getting a little sick here of morally-superior acting Americans with absolutely zero knowledge of world history playing the “fighting for centuries” card when: (1) that is factually incorrect, and (2) most of our own origins have wallowed in bloodshed since the days of the Romans.
“They’ve been fighting over there for centuries” = bullshit.
One Final Thought: I’m not a cartoonist, but I have a great idea for a cartoon that brings home this point. Have a Jew talking to a Palestinian in 1945 at the end of World War 2 and pointing at a map of the world and seeing Europe and much of Asian in ruins, and then one says to the other: “There’s no chance for peace. They’ve been fighting over there for centuries.”
Who was that hookworm who wiggled himself into the mighty chamber of United States Senate today, arguing in defense of the dark, venal, and incurable metastasis that is the Trump criminal presidency?
Who was that anti-constitutional parasite who once spent three years and blew $70 million in tax dollars investigating a shady old Arkansas real estate deal from more than a decade earlier — and then thousands of witnesses, truckloads of documents, and tens of thousands of billable legal hours later — ended up with the high crime and misdemeanor of ONE blow job?
Who was that scandal-plagued ex-college prez who resigned in disgrace only a few years earlier who now has the audacity to claim:
“The Senate is being called to sit as the high court of impeachment all too frequently…Indeed, we are living in what I think can aptly be described as the age of impeachment.”
It’s Ken Starr!
Wow. What a past from the blast.
Twenty years ago, Ken Starr tried to argue an inappropriate sexual affair was grounds of impeachment and a guilty verdict in the U.S. Senate.
Today, the same Ken Starr slinked his way to the defense table, telling America with a straight face there’s been too much impeachment lately. Yes, the very same Ken Starr intent to bury Bill Clinton is now utterly dismissive of dirty deeds by THIS criminal president.
If Whitewater + Blowjob = Impeachment in Ken Starr’s legal universe…..can someone please compute his similar math calculation as to how: Abuse of Power + Obstruction of Congress = No Impeachment?
Hey, Kenny — I got another equation for ‘ya:
John Bolton = Monica Lewinsky.
Now, let me enjoy watching you try to unroll enough legal duct tape to keep Bolton’s mouth shut.
Note 1: I was in agreement then and still agree now that Clinton should have been impeached for committing perjury.
Note 2: “Starfucker” is the title of a Rolling Stones song from the 1970s.
Photo Credit: Rod Aydelotte/Waco Tribune-Herald, via AP, File
Since the awards were first doled out in 1959, the Grammys have translated into little more than a rubbernecking exercise for millions of watchers baffled by what’s happened to popular music.
Now in its 62nd year, the annual presentation is a proverbial dumpster fire of clashing musical genres and a twisted assemblage of conflicting generational tastes.
The latest chapter of chaos combined with curiosity will be written on Sunday night, at 7 pm CST with the CBS live telecast of the Grammy Awards.
The mish-mash of generational rivalries, wandering attention spans, and awkwardly pigeon-holed acts crammed into misnamed categories have produced many inexplicable (and undeserving) winners.
What follows are my picks for the most outrageous Grammy Award winners of all time, along with my correct choice as to who should have won the award instead for that year.
Dishonorable Mention (11-20):
(20) “Moon River,” by Henry Mancini winning “Record of the Year” in 1962, instead of The Dave Brubeck Group for “Take Five.” Mancini was a wonderful composer and “Moon River” became a huge hit as the accompanying soundtrack to the movie Breakfast at Tiffany’s. But “Take Five” stood the test of time far better and it remains one of the best jazz recordings ever.
(19) “Use Somebody,” by Kings of Leon winning “Record of the Year” in 2010, instead of Lady Gaga for “Poker Face.” It’s not that “Use Somebody” isn’t a well-executed and deserving song. It’s just that Lady Gaga’s exemplary effort was far more innovative and globally infectious — both then and now.
(18) “Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” by Bobby McFerrin winning “Record of the Year in 1989, instead of Michael Jackson for “Man in the Mirror.” Somehow, an annoying bubble-gum song with a terrible message (don’t worry, be happy? really? seriously?) topped the far more serious and deserving monster hit by one of the greatest artists in pop history (before his personal scandals). The only explanation for this egregious mistake was that voters must have been suffering from Michael Jackson fatigue, as he pretty much dominated the 1980s music scene and by then some rivals were bitterly tired of him.
(17) River: The Joni Letters, by Herbie Hancock winning “Album of the Year” in 2008, instead of Amy Winehouse for Back to Black. For more than three decades, Hancock has given the world a lot of great music. But this was far from is best career effort. Winehouse was the edgier, far more interesting, crossover-pick for her throwback R&B style and extraordinary vocal interpretations on what remains a flawless album (one of my favorite compositions of the last ten years).
(16) “You Light Up My Life,” by Debby Boone winning “Song of the Year” in 1978, instead of “Evergreen” performed by Barbra Streisand and composed by Paul Williams, which was the only tie in Grammy history. Boone’s embarrassingly cheesy ballad now comes across little more than a wide-lapelled polka-dotted fashion statement and a throwback to a gutless period in popular music dominated by coked-up disco queens and the vanilla saccharine of Barry Manilow. It’s hard to believe nominees the Eagles, Carly Simon, and Glen Campbell all lost to this sappy feather-haired nobody. My two choices would have been either Stevie Wonder (“Sir Duke“) or the brilliantly-composed “Star Wars Theme,” by the great composer John Williams.
(15) “Games People Play” by Joe South winning “Song of the Year” in 1970, instead of anything else from the rich catalog of popular music recorded and released not just within the rock genre, but the golden era of Motown, as well. Even prolific composer Burt Bachrach, who had two nominations in this category (canceling each other out, most likely) was a far more deserving choice. Has anyone ever heard of Joe South since he walked on stage that night, beating out Diana Ross, the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Jackson 5, Neil Diamond, and B.B. King (“The Thrill is Gone” was eligible that year — how did that not win?).
(14) “Roseanna,” by Toto winning “Record of the Year” in 1983, instead of Willie Nelson for “Always on My Mind.” What an awful song and a regrettable pick. A disgrace. An embarrassment. Disreputable. Utterly baffling. Insane. Voters much have been smoking some of Willie Nelson’s weed. “Every Breath You Take” by the Police, “Sweet Dreams” by The Eurythmics, and “Beat It” by Michael Jackson all came out that year. “Roseanna” won over those songs? How?
(13) Two Against Nature by Steely Dan winning “Album of the Year” in 2000, instead of anything else released that year. Give it to Radiohead, Eminem, Paul Simon, or Beck — all who were nominated and then bypassed for the best album that year. Not Steely Dan. My picks would have been Garth Brooks’ live double album or Christina Aguilera’s self-titled debut best-seller.
(12) Hootie and the Blowfish winning “Best New Artist” in 1996, instead of either Alanis Morrissette or Shania Twain. No brainer. Enough said. No excuse for this oversight. Even at the time, anyone could see Morrissette and Twain’s natural talent and staying power as potentially volcanic forces in popular music. Not Hootie. Not the Blowfish.
(11) “Kiss from a Rose,” by Seal winning “Record of the Year” in 1996 instead of TLC’s “Waterfalls.” TLC was a wonderfully gifted R&B girl group, and this was their biggest crossover hit. But that didn’t matter. Seal’s overwrought and melodramatic torture of a song “Kiss from a Rose” won, mostly because the flop from two years earlier got remixed into the Batman movie soundtrack, and then quickly shot up the charts. That wasn’t even Seal’s best song released from that epic album. “Prayer for the Dying” was. Listen to the two songs. It’s no contest.
And now, the worst, least-deserving, most outrageous ten winners of all time:
The Top/Bottom Ten
(10) Milli Vanilli — “Best New Artist,” 1990
It’s easy to see a much clearer picture now, rather than back then, when these two pop music Grammy winners from Germany faked and lip-synched their way to a scandalous victory. Fortunately, their careers ended up on the ash heap of music history, which gives us all hope that the same fate could ultimately befall all the Autotune frauds and phonies. Milli Vanilli was exposed and discredited, their Grammy award was stripped away, and their careers mercifully ended, delighting those of us whose ears still painfully echo with the horrors of stolen music. Using session musicians (and taking the credit) is problematic for any Grammy winner. But committing fraud is another. Good riddance.
Who Should Have Won — Indigo Girls
(9) “Winchester Cathedral” (The New Vaudeville Band) — Best Contemporary Song, 1966
In an astonishing year in music that produced timeless classics including — Born Free, California Dreamin’, Summer in the City, Strangers in the Night, Wild Thing, Good Vibrations, I’m So Lonesome I Could Cry, The Sound of Silence, Homeward Bound, Wipeout, Land of 1,000 Dances, If I Were a Carpenter, Zorba the Greek, and Yesterday (this is only a partial list!) — guess what song ended up winning the “Best Contemporary Song” Grammy that year? Answer — “Winchester Cathedral” by those rock legends, The New Vaudeville Band. Urgh!
Who Should Have Won — The Beach Boys (“Good Vibrations”)….or maybe not, since all the Beach Boys recordings were really done by The Wrecking Crew.
(8) Burl Ives (“Funny Way of Laughin”) — Best Country and Western Song, 1963
Burl Ives doesn’t get his historical due. He was a multi-talented songwriter, musician, and actor — one of the few to be nominated for both an Oscar and Grammy. He performed folk songs, played villains in movies, did voiceovers, and was even blacklisted during the McCarthy era. Yet, he is perhaps best known today for his iconic song and self-portrayal in the annual “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” television program shown every Christmas season. Ives won a Grammy in 1963 for a song that’s since been forgotten, which wasn’t even a country song, edging out the iconic voice and life of George Jones, someone who would prove to be a giant influence in country music for the next five decades. Jones, then a breakout artist with one of his very first hit recordings, deserved the Grammy.
Who Should Have Won — “She Still Thinks I Can,” By George Jones
(7) Starland Vocal Band — Best New Artist, 1977
Look up the Starland Vocal Band sometime, if you want a good laugh. The group recorded had one lame hit, the wickedly torturous “Afternoon Delight,” the epitome of a musical bologna sandwich and a fitting soundtrack for the decline of Western civilization. Even the rock group Boston, which was nominated in this category, lost to the trifling trio. This was a very bad year for popular music, arguably the worst ever as rock was phasing into disco and (later) new wave. And punk was still considered an oddity, if not outright musical anarchy. Note: This very well could be ranked #1 as the worst, most undeserved Grammy Award ever given, and if you doubt this, check out THIS VIDEO.
Who Should Have Won — The Clash
(6) “Most High” (Jimmy Page and Robert Plant) — Best Hard Rock Performance, 1999
Every rock n’ roll and blues fan reveres the music of Led Zeppelin. That said, this was one of the two frontmen’s weakest efforts, no doubt brought about by the opportunity of a potentially lucrative reunion album and tour, however brief that lasted. Meanwhile, Marilyn Manson, Metallica, Pearl Jam, and Kiss were each overlooked by voters in this category. The Grammy voters got it wrong in Led Zeppelin’s heyday from 1968-1978 by not giving them any awards, and then committed and even more atrocious act by bestowing upon them what amounts to an apology award more than two decades later, long after their musical and cultural relevance was over.
Who Should Have Won — “The Dope Show,” by Marilyn Manson
(5) Eric Clapton (“Layla”) — Song of the Year, 1992
It’s painful to include master songwriter and performer Eric Clapton on any “undeserving list.” He’s one of the greatest guitarists in popular music in history and probably deserves far more official accolades. But his 1992 Grammy win for a re-worked acoustical version of a song initially recorded in 1970 made no sense whatsoever, especially given the force the musical force that Nirvana was at the time. The song that should have won instead defined a new sound and an entire generation and continues to receive praise as one of the most innovative rock songs ever recorded. It’s on virtually every “greatest” list of songs.
Who Should Have Won — “Smells Like Teen Spirit” (Nirvana)
(4) A Taste of Honey — Best New Artist, 1978
Disco was certainly king during the late 70s, and this honor was a mirrored ball tossed to a manufactured cookie-cutter musical group that ultimately became a one-hit-wonder, with that timeless classic “Boogie Oogie Oogie.” Don’t worry, you’re not alone. I don’t know it either. A Taste of Honey disbanded soon thereafter and would be a historical footnote were it not for their mystifying victory as the music industry’s “Best New Artist” in a year with far better nominees.
Who Should Have Won — Elvis Costello
(3) Bobby Russell (“Little Green Apples”) — Song of the Year, 1969
How could voters ignore the Beatles masterpiece “Hey Jude,” which was easily the most deserving song of the year? A landmark achievement, the self-composed track was the first single ever released on Apple Records and was recorded in the summer of ’68 following the group’s return from three-months in India. That turned out to be a gargantuan year for the Fab Four, with several hits coming off the Magical Mystery Tour sessions, followed by the stellar double-disc release only months later, known as The White Album. Oh, and then there were two other popular hit singles, “Revolution” and “Lady Madonna.” Breaking with tradition, “Hey Jude” wasn’t even included on any album collection (until after the group’s final breakup in 1970). The song spent a staggering nine weeks at number one, then a record — this in the midst of an explosive era when society was rapidly changing, racial and cultural barriers were coming down, and so much extraordinary music was being recorded — from rock n’ roll to Motown. “Hey Jude” shattered conventional formulaic radio-friendly thinking at the time, clocking in at more than 7 minutes. What begins as a slow piano-laden ballad with a single voice becomes an orchestral tour-d-force, finishing off with the memorable sing-a-long, “na, na, na — na, na, na, na.” Never has anything so simple sounded so amazing, as this live appearance in the U.K. on The David Frost Show reveals:
So, what won that year, instead? Chew on this. Bobby Russell’s mostly forgettable sleepy lullaby “Little Green Apples,” performed by O.C. Smith. Remember that one? I didn’t either. So, I had to look it up. Here’s the “Song of the Year” winner for what was arguably the greatest year of popular music in history. And besides, the song was recorded by not less than three singers, also released as a single by Patti Page and O. C. Smith on separate occasions that same year. What makes the Bobby Russell version special? Answer — nothing. Russell didn’t even write the song! Outrageous.
What Should Have Won — “Hey Jude” (The Beatles)
(2) Jethro Tull — Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance, 1988
Jethro Tull….heavy metal? Indeed. British rock group Jethro Tull floored the audience and shocked the music world in 1988, winning a Grammy in a category they had no business even being nominated in. The flute-infused rock act dusted off cobwebs from the early 1970s by winning the “Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance” honor, kicking far more deserving Metallica off to the curb. This incomprehensible oversight caused a major shakeup in the way musical genres were classified from that point forward. Two years later, Metallica, which was at the height of their creative peak, did indeed win a Grammy. The metal group took to the stage and famously quipped, “First thing we’re going to do is tank Jethro Tull for not putting out an album this year!”
Who Should Have Won — Metallica
(1) Vaughn Meader (The First Family) — Album of the Year, 1963
Chances are, you’ve never heard of this artist or this mostly-forgotten album, which inexplicably won “Album of the Year” in 1963. In fact, this became one of the fastest-selling albums of all time and racked up with more than 7 million total records sold. Vaughn Meader’s entire act consisted of doing his impression of President John F. Kennedy, lampooning the famous Kennedy mystique, and mocking political events of the day. The first family reportedly hated it, which probably drove up sales even higher due mostly to curiosity. Strangely, way back then “Album of the Year” wasn’t just reserved for music. Comedy was also eligible for consideration (recall Bob Newhart’s landmark win in this category in 1961, which was probably well deserved). However, Vaughn’s off-the-wall album wasn’t even the best comedy performance of the year. That title most certainly should have gone to Lenny Bruce, then at the height of his popularity and in the news constantly at the subject of major controversy. Meanwhile, Vaughn Meader’s one-trick-pony career went into the tank after the terrible events of November 1963, since no one wanted to laugh anymore about dead President. All that’s remembered now is that this album should go down as the worst Grammy Award winner of all time. Here’s the far better choice (here’s what a real singer sounds like without Autotune):
Who Should Have Won — I Left My Heart in San Francisco by Tony Bennett
Most Bizzare Five-Time Grammy Winner of All Time — Christopher Cross
Guess who has more Grammy Awards than the Beach Boys, Chuck Berry, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Bob Marley, Diana Ross, Led Zeppelin, Queen, The Who, or Tupac Shakur — combined?
Answer — Christopher Cross.
This milquetoast music maven won a whopping five Grammys in the year 1980 for his breakthrough debut album, which produced a quick flurry of hit singles. But his syrupy one-dimensional ballads ended up as pop music’s equivalent of pet rocks and beanie babies. In fairness to Cross, he didn’t fit the ideal profile of an MTV-friendly artist, an 80s-era detour, which was entirely based on appearances and superficiality. Within a few years of a smashing debut and five fuddled acceptance speeches at that year’s Grammys, Cross had all but disappeared from the charts. His last Billboard appearance was way back in 1985.
Meanwhile, the Beach Boys, Chuck Berry, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Bob Marley, Diana Ross, Led Zeppelin, Queen, The Who, and Tupac Shakur have never won a Grammy Award.