Author Archives: Jerry Wilson

On Changing the Culture

There is something called BlogCon presently taking place in Dallas. It’s a mix of seminars, lectures and, should it follow the pattern of most every conservative new media conclave, drunken karaoke.

It’s a bit of an oddity that the event is co-sponsored by the Blaze, otherwise know as Glenn Beck’s media creation. Several times in the past Beck has been pilloried in CNM circles for wholesale lifting of material from conservative blogs with neither credit to, nor mention of, its originator. Apparently all is forgiven and “I am Breitbart” is forgotten, since everyone who is someone is reportedly at BlogCon. It’s pretty much needless to say I’m not, but I’ll say it anyway.

One of the overriding mantras of BlogCon, based on its itinerary, is how CNM must reach outside the echo chamber and pursue/promote changing the culture. This is an especially crucial message to deliver at this time, and what better place to proclaim this than at a gathering of echo chamber kings and queens? This guarantees much discussion and emphasis within the echo chamber of the idea that CNM must indeed reach out beyond the echo chamber, said discussion being spurred by leaders of the echo chamber who to date have done such a magnificent job of spreading their message outside the echo chamber no one outside the echo chamber knows they exist. Imagine how much worse off we would all be if they were not scoring such monumental successes unfettered by any limitations of speaking solely to the echo chamber! Why, instead of no one outside the echo chamber knowing they exist it would be absolutely no one outside the echo chamber knowing they exist! Certainly can’t have that, now can we.

Sarcasm aside, there is a deep flaw in the “change the culture” philosophy presently being espoused in CNM circles. What we are hearing from people who have made no genuine inroads themselves into the popular mentality is that we need to identify and support conservative artists, pundits and teachers to counterbalance the liberal stranglehold on entertainment, news and education. Certainly this is a noble ideal, one with much merit. However, it overlooks a key element. Part of this is how the preachers of this culture change gospel have with their own actions not moved the needle one iota even as they tell others how it ought to be done. This duly noted, the main error is their forgetting fundamental truths: without love there is nothing, and without Christ there is no genuine change in the human heart.

Breaking this down, as long as CNM individually view themselves, and collectively views itself, as the superior to mainstream media and liberals (pardon the redundancy) it will never make so much as a dent in either MSM or pop culture’s armor. The genuinely humble artist, pundit or teacher lets their work do the talking. They do not boast; they self-promote with polite confidence in the quality of what they have to present. Their mission is not “look at me,” but rather “consider this.” The problem with being someone whose primary message consists of “look at me” is that at some point in time someone will look and see the one demanding attention not as they wish to be seen, nor as they see him or herself, but rather as they actually are. Which is not always a pretty picture.

The second part of this comes straight from Jesus: “If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.” Far too often the comment is made that discussing faith and discussing politics must be separated out for fear of alienating those one is attempting to engage with the latter by talking about the former. Really? If faith calls into play the same logic and reason used to formulate political opinions; that is to say, if faith is something other than an emotional rush but engages the mind as well as heart and soul, why shy away from it? Is not the Prince of Peace more important than politics? Is a single soul not so valuable to God that Jesus came to this earth to suffer and die so that one individual soul might have eternal life with Him? Remember, that single soul is you. And me. And everyone else. If faith is interwoven throughout your life as it ought to be for a believer. even as political philosophy is interwoven throughout your thought process, it should be as much a part of your daily discourse as talking about the latest developments in Washington.

This also applies to what we promote. A personal example. On a very good and quite popular Internet radio station for which the format is 1980s pop music, I have a show on which twice every Sunday I play terrific music; the best of Christian rock and pop from the 1980s with an occasional nod to the 1970s and 1990s as well. This isn’t saccharine schmaltz. It’s real, honest music that was great then and is great now. The show’s purpose is among other things an outreach to those who once knew the joy of life in Christ back in the day when this music was on their turntables and in their cassette decks, but have since seen that joy stripped away by life’s burdens. It is a reminder that Jesus is still there, He still loves them and He is more than willing and able to rekindle their dormant joy. It is changing the culture through the most effective method available: changing people by reviving heart, mind and soul. It also opens a channel through which political discussion can be initiated by talking about the cornerstone of conservative thought, namely the active application of Scripture and Christ’s teachings in everyday life. If this is not the foundation of our politics, then our beliefs have no foundation.

Certainly it is bothersome when I mention the show to CNM people as a possibility for promotion only to be either ignored altogether or told, be it directly or indirectly, there is no interest as it is not a political broadcast; yet these same people are presently gathered at BlogCon shouting to the skies how we must change the culture. Here is a golden opportunity to do so, and it is being dismissed out of hand. However, railing against this either collectively or individually will effect no change in the situation. Waste time, energy and unnecessarily incur hard feelings, yes. Accomplish anything worth accomplishing, not in the least. Therefore, not going there.

What I will say is this. People in CNM say within the echo chamber of their own creation they want to change the culture by reaching outside of the echo chamber. Fine, well and good. However, as long as CNM remains a self-satiated movement unwilling to move past all politics all the time, and as long as it actively excludes those whose cultural outreach is not strictly political in nature, all of its fine words about culture change are so much shouting into the wind heard by no one save those doing the shouting.

In Defense of Justin Bieber

So I wake up on this sunny Sunday, nursing a slight sunburn from the birthday party for my one year old great-grandniece her grandmother held in her backyard yesterday, to see the Twitter world is all atwitter over something Justin Bieber said. Seems the young Canadian lad and pop music teen idol visited the Anne Frank House yesterday, spending an hour or so there, then wrote in the guestbook how inspirational she was and that he hoped she would have been a “belieber.” For the uninitiated, “belieber” is the nickname Bieber’s great in number and even greater in fervor fan base of tween and teenage girls proudly wear.

From the right, the reaction has been a torrent of how abhorrent Bieber’s note was, or at least should be, to one and all. How dare he trivialize Anne Frank in this manner; what a maroon if not in fact dumber and more ego drenched than the lead singer of Maroon 5, etc etc etc and all the usual things you see on Twitchy when people grow outraged over the latest outrageous outrage.

Actually, the only people behaving outrageously are those professing outrage and/or leveling their snark attacks at Bieber over his comment. Shall we review?

Has it occurred to anyone that Bieber might have been expressing a wish that in a better world the toughest situation Anne Frank would have felt compelled to write about in her diary was choosing between the Justin Bieber and One Dimension of her day? That perhaps he meant no disrespect, nor was tripping over his own ego, by expressing a wish that Frank could have had a normal teenage life, not to mention life period, and that instead of his writing a note in the guestbook she’d be writing a check at the local record store to buy one of her granddaughters a Justin Bieber CD? That the face of the Holocaust could have instead been presently making a face at the silly antics of teenage girls going nuts over whoever’s picture is on this month’s Tiger Beat?

Some more facts, if you please. Bieber has 32.5 million Twitter followers. Thirty-two and a half million. Given the well-chronicled disaster that is public education, what are the odds that more than a handful of these kids have so much as heard of Anne Frank? If this non-incident gets copies of The Diary of Anne Frank in their hands, if this sparks interest in who she is and why their dreamboat visited her house, how can this be a bad thing?

Are we so accustomed to slamming celebrities every which way for everything and every slight that we are no longer capable of discerning when the issue is reasl or imagined? C’mon, people. Pick your battles.

No wonder we keep losing the cultural as well as the political war.

The Fine Art Of Criticism As Demonstrated By How(e) Not To Do It

Leave a reply

Back in the dawn of antiquity, when I was an active journalist covering Christian music, I regularly attended the industry’s yearly convention in Nashville. This was at a time when the debate over whether rock and roll was a acceptable medium for Christian music was still a hot button issue. One of the major Christian labels had just put out its first hard rock record, and was fiercely promoting the band. I ran into one of the band members, at a non-industry supervised moment, and he asked me what I honestly thought of their debut. I told him. In my opinion, the music was far too produced and processed to be a legitimate counterpoint to its secular namesake. At that particular time, Guns ‘n Roses was riding high before its appetite for self-destruction took full hold. I mentioned them not as someone to necessarily emulate musically, but rather pointing out the raw energy in their music. In the Christian band’s case, any energy the music might have had had been squeezed out in production, making it too smooth to be what it was trying to be. He politely said thank you. I was told later by other journalists that he commented how much he appreciated I had been the only person to directly speak to him about the band’s music, rather than hiding behind a review or talking about the band behind their back. As a side note, the band’s second record, which if I remember correctly was more commercially successful than the first, was far more raw and energetic.

I mention this in light of the brewing brouhaha between Ben Howe and John Nolte over Howe’s review of a film and music video produced by a tea party group. Howe lambasted the film and video (which as it turns out was a two-minute clip with no plans for being extended into a feature), to which Nolte responded by lambasting Howe over destructive rather than constructive criticism plus writing his review for a left-leaning website. This has had the usual repercussions on social media, namely everybody choose your partner and let’s go square dancing at today’s Battle of Butthurt Hoedown with complimentary refreshments provided by the fine folk at Candyass Cafe.

Being familiar with the entertainment critic realm, given that I used to be in it as both participant and one who rubbed shoulders with others in the same club, a few thoughts born from experience come to mind. The first is that with very few exceptions, critics are frustrated artists. Some accept this fact gracefully, treating fellow albeit more successful artists with affectionate familiarity and encouraging words. Others are steeped in bitterness over their lot in life, brooding over the fundamental unfairness of it all. I should be the one on that record, or stage, or in front of or behind that camera. For these folk, being a critic is not about providing objective analysis of artistic work. It’s a chance for revenge against the guilty by association.

Tied into the latter is the odd phenomenon of critics seeking to co-opt artist’s fame by becoming famous themselves for their invariably caustic criticism. Being noticed by being notorious is a path many have taken over the years, although given how social media has diluted the power traditional media critics once held this is no longer as effective as in days past when a critic could make or break an artist, movie or play.

Taking this from general to specific, while a critic’s obligation is to review with fairness and honesty, letting the chips fall where they may, when dealing within a realm not viewed favorably by the world in general it becomes ever more important for a critic to not only measure their words carefully but also be a direct advocate for raising the performance standard by approaching artists privately to offer thoughts and suggestions on how improvement can be achieved. Two prime examples are Christian music and conservative politics. No one involved in either of these fields need be told they are not in the running for any worldwide popularity prizes. They know the world hates them and is looking for any excuse to tear their work, and them, apart. In this light, it should be even clearer how imperative it is for the knowledgeable critic to respond when something less than stellar comes their way not with snark or smug condescension but rather by going to the artist with a simple message: look, this is not good enough, here is how you can improve. Both the artist, and the cause, will benefit. Provided the artist isn’t so in love with his or herself that all advice is immediately dismissed out of hand, of course. But that is hardly the critic’s fault.

To summarize, there was an opportunity here to work together in the pursuit of excellence. Instead, what we have is what we all too often have: ego, butthurt and nothing positive gained from any of the going-ons. Once again we have someone playing Wile E. Coyote to the hilt as they run around proclaiming themselves, by looking down on others, as a super genius, never noticing they are equally as effective as their idol.

Ali Akbar – Man Of CONVICTION!!!

Leave a reply

And we’re not even referring to his past felonies. From US News & World Report:

Akbar then linked to a story about Donehue, which noted that before he began working for Sanford, Donehue had publicly called the former South Carolina governor a “piece of human [sh#t].”

The back-and-forth didn’t go much further before a moderator stepped in and told the two to take their name calling elsewhere.

Really, Ali? You, linking to a story about someone working for a campaign who previously derided the candidate in question?

How quickly we forget…

Here are the quick ramblings and tatlings of a Newt endorser and the leading NotMittRomney voice: me.

And of course, Ali, your notmittromney.com site which started with such sound and fury in November 2011 — complete with a page on which to make donations — mysteriously transformed itself into a redirect to Romney’s campaign site sometime in-between May 12th and May 27th of last year. Right, Ali!

A man of conviction you are, Akbar.

More Methodical Elements Assembly

Leave a reply

The methodical elements assembly continues with the redesigned Cephas Hour website. Previously it was a single page; now it has far more content with much more to come: artist bios, past show playlists and whatever else I can come up with.

Reaction thus far has been mixed; the design appeals to some and overpowers/turns off others. Ah well.

The work continues.

Methodical Elements Assembly

Leave a reply

The multi-pronged promotion of Cephas Hour, and far more importantly the artists whose music I play on said show, continues. From Examiner.com:

East Bay alternative rock legends Veil of Ashes, whose new record Eternal Teenage Angst was released earlier this week, will be the feature artist during an upcoming episode of Cephas Hour on BlackLight Radio. The show will air Sunday March 24th at 11 AM and 11 PM Eastern time.

Along with tracks from the new record Eternal Teenage Angst, the show will feature songs from Veil of Ashes’ other releases along with quotes from band members and reminisces by the show’s host, who covered the band as a music journalist during its active days playing clubs throughout the San Francisco Bay Area in the time period of the late 1980s through early to mid-1990s. While the band made no effort to disguise its members beliefs, its observational lyrics format analyzing social and relationship issues along with its edgy, hard-driving music won it a wide following as it shared the stage with artists and bands such as Chris Isaak, the Call, Psychedelic Furs, Social Distortion and 4 Non-Blondes.

BlackLight Radio, on which Cephas Hour exclusively airs, is an Internet station presently celebrating its eighth year online. Since 2010 it has featured an all-80s music format. About the format station owner Gene Savage notes, “It’s the music I grew up with, a format I know well, and it’s also an excellent advertising demo (35-44 year olds).”

Savage, whose reasons for starting the station include “hopefully showing the mega-corporations who currently control radio how it’s done,” waxes enthusiastic about Cephas Hour in general and the upcoming special in particular. He comments, “It’s a fantastic addition to our programming which really helps complete the story of the music of the 80s and helps us fulfill our commitment to play ‘all of the 80s, all of the time.’ Not only does it introduce ‘new’ 80s music to many listeners, it also provides religious programming on Sunday mornings – a common practice for many top 40 stations in the 80s. Additionally, Cephas Hour is completely unique programming, unduplicated on any other station. It is a programming element that sets us apart from the other 80s stations.”

Savage adds the show has personal meaning for him as well as professional ties. “It is a great feeling for me personally. My roots are in Christian rock, and I’ve been disappointed to leave behind the music that was there for me when my faith was new. (Show host) Jerry (Wilson)’s programming is a great mix of forgotten favorites along with new-to-me songs that challenge my faith and move me forward spiritually. It’s rare to find a program that makes me tap my feet and make me think, but Jerry’s does!”

NOTE: The author of this article is the host of Cephas Hour.

Also, while a complete overhaul of the show’s website is in the works I’ve made a few modifications to the present one. A couple of banners, one for the new Veil of Ashes record and one for Frontline Records have been added, and I’ve tidied up the archive listing so it’s more compact.

The elements creation and methodical assembly continue.

And Now, What I’d Rather Write About

Leave a reply

It ain’t Ali Akbar, folks. From my Examiner column yesterday:

Legendary East Bay alternative rock band Veil of Ashes, which shared the stage with musical luminaries such as Chris Isaak, the Call, Psychedelic Furs, Social Distortion a 4 Non-Blondes during its active years of the late 1980s through mid-1990s, has released its first new album in twenty years. Eternal Teenage Angst, available through the band’s Bandcamp page, includes one new song in addition to a collection of demos and live tracks spanning much of the band’s career.

The new track, “Reach,” is a cover version of the Brian Healy/Dead Artist Syndrome tune from his 1990 debut alum Prints of Darkness. Veil of Ashes often backed Healy in concert during his San Francisco Bay Area appearances. The song was recorded by the band’s best-known lineup of lead vocal and guitar Sean Doty, bassist Brian Kirsch, drummer Phil Meads and guitarist/keyboardist Lance Harris.

New to the listener will be three songs recorded during what turned out to be Veil of Ashes’ last studio session before disbanding in the mid-1990s: “Angel Falls,” “Demon Box” and “Seraphim Twist,” the latter featuring a rare lead vocal by Kirsch who used the stage name Sterling during his tenure with the band. The album continues with demos of known tracks recorded at different times with different lineups, with arrangements ranging from somewhat to noticeably different than the eventual studio release. The overall tenor, as befitting demo session dynamics, is more raw than the studio versions. A few live tracks close out the record.

What is most noticeable about Eternal Teenage Angst is how it showcases Veil of Ashes as both a powerhouse rock‘n’roll ensemble and how well its music has aged. The demos are in several cases superior to the studio version, better capturing the band’s driving style without forsaking melody, while the energy and style mesh well with today’s alternative rock flavorings. Far from being a nostalgia trip, the album has several tracks that would fit into most any alternative rock radio station’s playlist without the listeners suspecting they were hearing twenty to twenty-five year old music.

It has often been noted that fans of today’s Christian alternative rock artists such as Switchfoot have no idea from whence the genre came. Although not as well known as a Steve Taylor or the Choir, Veil of Ashes were a vital part of Christian alternative rock’s formation in that they not only produced quality music on a level equal to secular acts, they routinely played secular venues on their own merits. Eternal Teenage Angst is not a comprehensive career-spanning Veil of Ashes anthology. But for those who want to know how artistically accomplished classic Christian alternative rock was, it is a superb introduction.

Snakes (And How Smitty Isn’t One)

Leave a reply

Smitty, who blogs at The Other McCain, was kind enough to share his thoughts here about one of my recent posts. Much appreciated. A few observations in regard to his comments:

It’s worth noting that I’m not about evangelization. It’s not my calling. I’m about edification and exhorting people to return to the faith.

I’ve done loss leader activities before when it was something needing to be done. I will never, as in never, come even halfway close to recouping the money I spent putting together my book. I didn’t mind in the least. How could I? I was repaying a debt to these artists I could never repay. Namely, bringing me back to God. The very least I could do was what I could do to encourage others to also return home.

That said, I didn’t spend what I didn’t have, and I’m not about to start now. I’m neither prepared nor willing to solicit donations for such an endeavor as staging a concert during CPAC 2014. Maybe I’ll change my mind between now and then; I don’t know.

Also, let’s face it. If someone has the choice between writing a check to bring the Lost Dogs or Phil Keaggy to town, or writing the same check to facilitate shmoozing between a bunch of bloggers (never mind their effective reach beyond the echo chamber is negligible at best) and politicos, it’s not cynicism to suggest that going for the immediate effect of perceived political action will trump effecting the cultural change so many bleat they want yet never seem to actually do anything to put into place. Every time.

Back in the day, I attended several Gospel Music Association conventions in Nashville. To a one they were filled with fresh-faced artists, radio people, concert promoters, bookstore owners and so on. These people were to a one in love with the Lord and on fire to serve Him through the music in whatever area they worked. They were ready and willing to do whatever it took to change the world.

They never did.

Why?

It wasn’t their fault. Sure, there were errors of enthusiasm: overestimating abilities, failure to learn business dynamics. However, these people were not even close to being the primary reason for not achieving their goals. They were thwarted by industry leadership unwilling to support the ministries they claimed to have at heart as instead it lavished attention and resources on what was safe, and what paid the most within the Christian cultural castle echo chamber. They were equally held back from reaching their goals by an industry with significant corruption at the highest levels, be it financial, moral or both.

Sound familiar? It should. Substitute CPAC for GMA and you have the exact same scenario. The only difference is that now people claim to follow Ronald Reagan rather than Jesus Christ.

I noticed Smitty didn’t address my comments about NBC. Any possible gain it might offer by facilitating contact between bloggers and politicians is ancillary to its main objective: making Ali Akbar a Beltway player. Never mind that NBC has abandoned its original objective; never mind its lack of financial transparency or its primary fundraising technique consisting of poking the hornets nest and then crying because its residents emerged in an ill humor. Never mind how Akbar has left behind a trail of underhanded dealings, broken promises and questions that regardless of who asks what are immediately labeled a nefarious plot, or unwitting participation in one, by his enablers *coughstacymccaincough*. Does enabling Joe or Jane Blogger to get a photo op with Ted Cruz make all of this all right?

We saw this year with the thin-skinned act by the ACU of excluding GOProud, then Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, from the CPAC program because of criticism, its corruption. We know Akbar’s corruption. This isn’t about them. It is about any organization. A corrupt head weakens, renders ineffective and ultimately lays to waste the entire body no matter how many of its other parts are doing the right thing for the right reason.

You can’t dance with the devil in order to sing for the savior. Stay away from snakes.

PS: Video’s not so hot, but the song is great:

Do Something? Okay

3 Replies

I noted Smitty’s rebuke on The Other McCain today to my none too gentle post here yesterday labeling CPAC in general and BlogBash in particular as lamentable money wasting, serving no purpose save that of egostroking. Smitty is a good man and a good blogger, but I fear in this case he is somewhat off target. To wit:

Noting Jerry Wilson’s disdain for BlogBash, “An event such as BlogBash could prove valuable if it led to greater networking, encouragement and support for all bloggers, not solely those in attendance,” I don’t think Jerry is fully briefed on the goals of The National Blogger’s Club, which really aren’t bad at all.

Actually, I am fully briefed on the NBC’s goals. To quote: “The National Bloggers Club will work to give educate, provide access, and further equip citizen-journalists without robbing them of their independence for those who advocate for economic and individual freedom.” The club’s original goal was to provide independent bloggers with accreditation that could be used to be accepted as legitimate media when covering news events. A very good idea.

The problem is the NBC has not only never delivered on this promise, it has abandoned its founding principle in favor of fundraising for whoever is crying victim and, well, throwing parties. Hey, parties are great fun when you’re invited — I’m not — and offering financial assistance to bloggers who have incurred the wrath of evildoers is a noble cause, never mind how doing so while naming names of the aforementioned evildoers does nothing but urge them forward. But to date there has been nothing done about making the NBC’s original purpose come to fruition. There was a promised website to register NBC membership cards. It has never happened. There is no form with which to apply for membership, no posted rules, no list of members or requirement for membership, and as others have discovered no one responsible for providing media credentials knows the NBC exists, let alone recognizes it as something worth considering when deciding who gets what access where. So yes, I do know the NBC’s goals. Apparently far better than the NBC.

I had gone to the President’s Dinner with Allen West, and then popped in to Blog Bash for about an hour with Da Tech Guy. Then it was time to get home, as  (a) really loud music and (b) heavy partying (I drank an O’Doul’s) are done for me in that time. I did catch the awards portion. It was jolly good and quick.

An even more strident criticism, of CPAC in general, is from Richard Mgrdechian:

I have one simple question for the organizers (and the profiteers) of this political farce: how does anything being done at this event help promote American values of hard work, integrity and gratitude in any way? The answer is, it doesn’t. There is no take away whatsoever.

Two points, gents:

Failure doesn’t age well. Forty years of steady growth in CPAC attendance belie the notion that it is a ‘farce.’ BlogBash/The National Bloggers Club is an order of magnitude younger, but it’s still a growing concern, as noted by the increasing harassment received.

The Democratic party has been around a couple of centuries, but that doesn’t make it any less of a farce, Smitty. Snark aside, longevity does not automatically impart legitimacy. No enterprise is judged on last year’s batting average. And harassment because people can’t stop playing the victim long enough to stop donating their own blood to recognition vampires isn’t true harassment. It’s stupidity.

People don’t scale. With growth and success come the critics. And I’ll point you to the Man in the Arena speech and suggest that, in a capitalist society, competition is the ultimate rebuttal. That is, I’m not sure any of the proffered criticisms don’t apply to many large gatherings of people, but I’d sure like to see a rounder wheel if you can spin one.

Ah, the old “if you don’t like it do it better yourself” approach. More on this later.

Ronald Reagan’s mug dominates the wall behind the main CPAC stage, not that hero-worship excites me. What does excite me is having a concentrated place for the ideas that Reagan embraced and promoted, in that one eight year pause amidst our Progressive decline, to get transmitted from the establishment fogies decried by Wilson and Mgrdechian, to the college generation.

We need CPAC for that? Really?

Is CPAC enough? Let’s call it necessary, but not sufficient. The ditch on the other side of the road is say “They should just let CPAC die because they haven’t done enough to fix. . .” which forms a non-falsifiable, moving goal line. The more criticism heads that way, the less constructive it is.

The notion that criticism is counterproductive is ludicrous. It does nothing to address the issues raised, instead attempting to sweep it all under the rug. CPAC is pay to play, to borrow a music industry term. BlogBash is a circle jerk. And this is advancing conservatism?

I like going to CPAC and trying to make the speeches a little more accessible than just a 20 minute shot of YouTube. I guess that’s my criticism of it. The bandwidth at National Harbor is also wretched, though, I guess if I was sponsoring the event I may have better joy. That many people at once is always just a drain for me.

Here’s the deal. We say we’re a family. We say we’re all together. We say everyone great and small matters and is important for the cause. So where does the inclusiveness come into play? When does it start? Did anyone do a conference call or video conference with those not in attendance? No. Unless you count an Ustream of BlogBash as inclusiveness, which would be an interesting interpretation of the word to say the least.

Did anyone at CPAC call or write anyone not there saying wish you were here? I’m sure someone did; I never heard from anyone. Did anyone at CPAC stop to actually make so much as a jab, let alone stab, at getting people not in the room involved? You say you rubbed shoulders with Allen West and Rand Paul. Great. Very good. Nice. I’m happy for you. Did you put anyone on the phone with them? Did you pass along the contact information for anyone not there at the time who has skills that they could use? Do you genuinely give a flying freak about anyone other than your immediate crew and anything other than your next photo op? Evidence, please.

As a suggestion, guys, why not organize a Christian music concert nearby, for one of the CPAC evenings? National Harbor is crawling with dogs & cats, goldfish & clownfish from all over. CPAC has gathered a great audience for you. You could leverage that for a jolly good, edifying outing of your own. Just sayin’.

Okay, time to address the “if you don’t like how it’s done you do it” bit.

Let’s say I decided to put on a concert nearby. Let’s further say I collaborated with Mgrdechian to make it a double bill with Madison Rising and someone from my corner of the music world. Now, since this isn’t a Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland movie, the option of staging it at any given individual’s uncle’s barn is off the table. This means renting a venue for the evening, which means things like insurance, employee salaries for venue workers and security, and the like.

Next, you have to supply certain pieces of equipment to have a concert: PA, lights, possibly instruments such as drum sets and amplification if the artist can’t bring his or her own. You’ll need to rent this equipment plus pay a crew to set them up before the concert and take them down afterwards.

Now, let’s provide the artists who will play the concert. We already have Madison Rising booked for this hypothetical show, so it’s up to me to find someone of my preferred genre who is available to perform that evening. I’m now on the hook for their concert fee, plus in almost all cases transportation cost, meals, lodging and all that. And also Madison Rising’s.

Now, if you want anyone to come you can’t charge admission. The house keeps all revenues from food and beverage sales, which will be minimal since as a rule Christians don’t drink much. (And are terrible tippers to boot. But I digress.) The bands keep their merchandise sale revenue. And, since by the time you’re done counting the cost you are looking at five figures easy — like I have that kind of money, answer being nowhere near it — you’re looking at a not inconsiderable sum that cannot be recouped. All to say, “There. I did something.” Know anyone willing and able to cut a check and cover all that? Me neither.

Well, I do in fact do something. Hardly with the flash of a CPAC, but it is there every Sunday at 11 AM and 11 PM Eastern. And you don’t have to go anywhere or be part of the in crowd to participate. Plus, it’s free for everyone who wants to join in. Best I can do right now.

Which is far more than can be said for CPAC and BlogBash.

ADDENDUM: Thanks to The Pirates Cove for the link.

Ozymandias, Revisited

Leave a reply

Michael Patrick over at the Rome Free blog notes how the Obama administration’s chosen contingent to attend Pope Francis I’s inaugural mass includes Vice President Biden and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, each of whom will whip out their Catholicism whenever convenient, i.e. will score political and/or lapdog media brownie points. Curiously, they go either mysteriously mute or keep on blithering whenever it is pointed out their espoused beliefs are in direct conflict with the church’s teachings on matters such as abortion. Silly church.

Patrick nicely points out a probable reason why these folk were selected:

Yeah, you get the sense the White House is trying to pick a fight or at least testing the waters to see how much our new pope is going to let them get away with. And if you’re anything like me, you hope just a little bit that Pope Francis will tell Biden, Pelosi, and DeGioia to sit back down when they present themselves for Holy Communion — if for no other reason than for the good of their own souls.

That there may well be a scene is strongly suggested by the Pontiff’s words from 2007 when he was serving as archbishop of Buenos Aires:

The remarks came during the presentation of a document called the Aparecida Document, a joint statement of the bishops of Latin America.

The document, which the new Pope presented on behalf of his colleagues at the time and signed off on, said referring to abortion and communion, “We should commit ourselves to ‘Eucharistic coherence,’ that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortion, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. This responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors, and health professionals.”

Is the administration so clueless as to not know the Pope’s words? (Possibly.) Or is it so arrogant that it believes there is no way Biden, Pelosi et al will be refused Communion? (Most likely.) If they attempt to receive it and are turned away, how hysterical will the media reaction be to this seeming affront when the actual affront is believing one can act politically in any manner one pleases with no regard paid to the church’s teachings with which one claims affiliation? (Extremely.)

Stalin once sneeringly asked how many divisions (a military unit of between 10,000 and 30,000 soldiers) the Pope had when told of the Holy Father’s power. Given how John Paul II played no small part in bringing down the Soviet Union Stalin once led, apparently quite the number considering the USSR fell without a shot being fired by the Vatican. Obama, Biden and Pelosi would be well advised to note this lest they, too, become like Stalin; modern day Ozymandias crumbling in the desert while the faithful continue as they have for the past two thousand years: lighting the candles, saying the prayers and living out their faith, the one that chuckles at the vain efforts of vain people to turn its course in their favor.