I liked their nude magazine cover. Which mag was it again? Time? Newsweek? Can't remember now. I guess they think it's bad enough that the musicians have to speak when they RECEIVE their awards. We can't let them speak to PRESENT them, too. Much too risky, right? Oops in message below I meant several movie stars presenting GRAMMYS.
--- In [email protected], "algriner1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yep, that's the committee. The whole censorship/music labelling > agenda that was pushed by the PMRC back in the 80's. So, I guess I'm > seriously showing my age here, eh? > > Maybe the Grammys are terrified about what real musicians might say > on network TV, and that's why they're having anyone else read > teleprompters, mouth cheezy jokes, and hand out awards. Real > musicians are pretty notorious for not following scripts and saying > exactly what they think (multiple-grammy-winner Dixie Chicks, > anyone?). > > Speaking of which, our local country music station spent the whole > morning ripping on the Chicks, despite the fact that they're the > first country act in YEARS to sweep the major Grammy awards. Pretty > sorry, when their industry won't support them because one member of > the trio spoke her mind pretty bluntly (of course, I agree with Ms. > Manes). I mean, it happened in 2003. Who cares anymore? Besides, I > think the majority of the country agrees with her. > > > --- In [email protected], "Ellen" > <ellengoodman6@> wrote: > > > > I'm sorry, what committee are you referring to? The senate music > > censorship committee? I just truly don't understand what Gore has > to > > do with the Grammys anyway. I know he was nominated for a > > documentary Oscar and there were several movie stars presenting > > Oscars including Samuel L. Jackson (?), but what were Gore and the > > Grammy people hoping to accomplish by having him present a Grammy? > > And for best rock album no less? > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "algriner1" > > <algriner1@> wrote: > > > > > > Man...I didn't watch the Grammys, but this really is almost > > > hypocritical of Gore. I will never forget, when in college, the > > late, > > > great Frank Zappa came to my town to speak on the issue of music > > and > > > censorship. When he opened the floor to questions, I was > fortunate > > to > > > be able to ask him why Mr. Gore sat on the committee when his > wife > > was > > > the director of the PMRC. I felt it was a significant conflict > of > > > interest, and that it was questionable at best that Gore was > > > involved. Mr. Zappa could only answer that he had been asking > the > > > same question of the Senate Committee the entirety of the > meetings, > > > and never was able to receive a satisfactory answer. > > > > > > This very thing is what I remembered when Gore was running for > > > president. I could't stand Bush, and would rather shoot > novacaine > > > into my own eyeball than vote for him. But, I also couldn't get > > the > > > hypocracy of Gore out of my head, and I kept wondering how I > could > > be > > > assured he wouldn't act in such a manner again. > > > > > > I finally sucked it up, and voted Nader... > > > > > > Amy Organic Gal > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Ellen" > <ellengoodman6@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Former Vice President Al Gore and Queen Latifah presented the > best > > > > rock album at the Grammys just now. The winner was Red Hot > Chili > > > > Peppers. Mr. Gore seemed very excited and enthusiastic. I kept > > > > thinking that Tipper founded the Parents Music Resource Center > to > > put > > > > warning labels on record albums. The whole thing just seemed > > > surreal. > > > > Just throwing that out there. Kind of the same effect as > > Governor > > > > Schwarzenegger giving best picture Oscar, except he used to > > actually > > > > be in movies. I kept expecting someone to reassure Mr. Gore > that > > > they > > > > voted for him or something. > > > > > > > > > >
