Monday, February 14, 2005
 a famous poet once wrote, "patience is a virtue/but thrill is what we're here to do".
and i can understand why you'd think it necessarry to drag up a slutty dressed girl and her american hero boyfriend especially when the chickie won a grammy ten years ago and the hero dumped his wife girlfriend who was there while he sufferred through his cancer
ok, i cant understand it, cuz really what was the point of all that?
i also cant understand how you can give Led Zeppelin a lifetime acheivement award, which everyone knows is an apology award, a makeup award, an award that says shit we really must suck if led fucking zeppelin can churn out record after record and we were too lame to ever award them a regular grammy
and then not let them on stage during your three and a half hour tv show.
led zeppelin.
the hammer of the gods.
a band who rips farts bigger than maroon 5, and yet they get to go on stage and collect their bullshit
and we wont even talk about john mayer.
yes in a perfect world i would be in charge of the grammys television show and the dude from sugar ray would not be up on stage pointing down to jimi page and john paul jones
the killer, jerry lee jewis, would be on stage receiving his award, and the killers would not be nominated for their trivial pursuits at medicoraty.
U2 would not be allowed to sing their brand new single, a ballad that neither shows the peaks or valleys of the greatest band from ireland, and if they insisted they would be asked to stand down as my chemical romance or the arcade fire would be introduced to the world
or jack white and loretta lynn would get to sing.
i love bono and the boys but do i really need to hear another one of their mumbley also-rans that will not bring down the house, that will be forgotten before its even over, that is nothing more than a backroom deal maker that will guarantee the bands appearance - even though theres no way that u2 wouldnt show up to get their grammy so why bendover backwards to have them sing their commercial.
 something tells me the grammys can find someone else to fill that slot.
i liked j.lo i liked green day i liked the mashup intro.
the star of the show, though, was kanye west whose beautifully produced performance was only eclipsed by his heartfelt and defiant acceptance speech.
the lynyrd skynyrd mess was a mess
and almost as embarrassing as what would have happened if they had let ray charles's manager on stage and not speak.
no more makeup awards. we all loved ray but you dont give a guy all those awards just cuz hollywood made a movie about him and he died.
you give the best records the best awards and when you realize 25 years later, as in the case of zeppelin, that you goofed and never recognized your boys, you pull em on stage and let em rage.
and as much as i love guns n roses, they are not my first choice for the backup band for a fundraising mini we are the world.
bono was wrong. this was not the best grammys. last years was better. even if usher danced his tail off.
any time john mayer wins song of the year over kayne west and/or alecia keys you have a serious problem.
especially when hoobastank is also a nominee.
who even their mommas know dont belong there.
the grammys is one place where you should be able to say, oh yeah that dude really belongs there, and him and him and her and her and them and him and her.
fuckers.
raymi + science blog explains love + via doc searls
# | |
Previously on busblog...
|
