Taylor Swift wants to bring people together with her music.

Also, it's smart not to talk about any political issue. Once you're in the game, people will hound you and you'll be called out any time you're silent on an issue

Maybe shes one of the few entertainers that realizes half the country disagrees with her political views, whatever side she falls on, and intelligently and progitably keeps her trap shut.

In a country where a black rapper has become a billionare, or close enough to. I think making claims of racism in the music industry should get you shot.

Without racism, *all* black rappers would be billionaires.

See also and also.

It seems that a celebrity can't win for losing. When they do weigh in on political matters, they are criticized because they are not authorities on politics and their platform doesn't come from their politics.

On the other hand, if they wish to keep their mouths shut on all things political, they are criticized for doing that.

Taylor Swift does not owe anyone her political views. What she owes is to make music, since that's how she gained her celebrity. Or perhaps do other things in the entertainment industry, such as acting.

Hmm.
"Niki Minaj -- in the words of Guardian writer Nosheen Iqbal, talked about "unspoken bias and sometimes out-and-out racism of an industry that has profited from the talent of black artists without giving them their dues.""

Sigh. Entitlement, again. Blacks simply cannot do anything on their own. Right?

This is the face of the actual demographic: the leading buyer of black rap is the 17-year-old white male. Just who is wearing their hats backwards? Is that Justin Bieber gesturing in what he thinks is a gang sign? Everything in America must be arranged to suit blacks, right?

I had no idea sampling somebody else's work and selling the cover art was worth so much.

Meanwhile, you can't do anything the same as a hundred other people and get, "dues". The serious will walk right by Beyoncé to speak to Aretha.
By the time my daughter graduated years ago, her entire school had discovered that there was nothing a "rapper" could say that hadn't been covered by Jim Morrison already. She was shocked to find that a Tupac song she admired was almost identical to an Ozzy tune put out a couple of years prior.

When all you do is dance, make gestures and pretend to have sex on stage, the audience gets bored. Country is having trouble right now because ten songs making money getting air all have, "pickup truck, tight jeans, dirt road" in them and traditional instruments are gone.

There are artists out there with serious talent but hundreds of imitators. That's the reason it was The Mothers of Invention, not "The Mothers of Sampling".

Ask the Dixie Chicks how going openly political went.

There is nothing nuts about that editorial not understood by knowing this is what is being taught.

Well, she's pretty, she sings-ish, and unlike the rest of the pop stars, prefers to remain apolitical. Of course they hate her for that.

To quote a NBA legend, Michael Jordan, who in his prime got the world super-moist for him, and yet he chose to remain apolitical: Republicans buy shoes too.

Just don't share any of her songs online or the feds will go after you.

Somewhat interestingly, anyone could tell, pretty much, where George Carlin stood most of the time, but if he wanted to support any politician or organization, he only did so privately, IIRC.

Minor correction: Swiftboating originally meant that Kerry's fibs got busted by the guys who served with him.
This annoyed the MSM no end, so they continually insisted that the whole thing had been debunked, so much so that people started to actually believe it.

Everything the Guardian writes is biased to the point where Poe's Law kicks in.

And as for black artists not being successful and blaming racism -- the same points you raised in "Living Out Lout" apply here too. Everyone is responsible for his/her own economic success or lack of it. And an artist whose speech and behavior drive away a large part of his potential market has to live with the result. TANSTAAFL. #everythingisnotaboutrace

I swear that I've encountered almost the exact same article on 4 other sites. It's like there is a coordinated effort to frame Swift as a white supremacist.

Something like this happened to her several years ago because she wouldn't identify as a Feminist.

She made some innocuous statements about equality, but wouldn't endorse ideological Feminism. So the SJWs went wild and defamed her until she made a public statement endorsing Feminism.

The funny thing is that she claimed it was because Lena Dunham explained to her what Feminism 'really' is and that changed her mind. Then Dunham went on to prove that she's a human dumpster fire of depravity.

I bet she learned her lesson then and realizes that it's not worth trying to appease SJW's.

Richard Aubrey at November 25, 2017 9:19 AM

✔︎

The Left really wants you to believe that Kerry was unfairly portrayed in that election. But he made his service a central part of his campaign, even "reporting for duty" at the convention. Therefore, his war record was fair game. And it was a full of contradictions.

He was awarded three Purple Hearts, but spent not one day in the hospital. He wrote the citations for his awards himself, later substituting one written by someone who was not there (as allowed by military rules).

In fairness to Kerry, US Navy rules for awarding Purple Hearts at the time made no distinction for severity of the wounds. However, receiving three PHs meant one could pick one's next assignment, even one outside of the combat zone.

Kerry made a big deal in the campaign that he requested Swift Boat duty because he wanted a combat assignment, like his hero, John F. Kennedy.

But in February 1968, when he requested PCF duty, Swift Boats were not combat duty. In November of that year, Admiral Zumwalt hit upon the idea to use Swift Boats to interdict NVA supply lines. That is when Swift Boats became a combat assignment.

Again, in fairness to Kerry, his secondary duty request in February was for PCRs, which were, even then, a combat assignment.

The later emphasis on requesting a combat assignment is puzzling because in his 1986 autobiography, he admitted that PCFs "had very little to do with the war" and he wanted "very little to do with the war."

He also claimed he spent Christmas in Cambodia. Yet, by his own duty logs, his boat never crossed the border.

He claimed he threw his own medals over the White House fence in a principled protest, yet it turned out he threw someone else's medals, keeping his own in case he needed them some day.

Don't get me wrong. John Kerry was in country when many of his political contemporaries were stateside. Dan Quayle was a driver for the Indiana National Guard. George W. Bush flew F-101s for the Texas Air National Guard, not exactly a safe assignment, but as John McCain can attest, getting shot down over Corpus Christi beats getting shot down over Hanoi. Phil Gramm felt the country needed him more as a graduate student in economics than as a grunt. Bill Clinton weaseled his way into multiple deferments. Al Gore, Sr. kept Al, Jr. from ever hearing a shot fired in anger. Donald Trump had "bone spurs."

So, John Kerry is to be commended for his service, no matter how contradictory his actual record. "Show me a hero, and I'll show you a bum," as Gregory Boyington is reputed to have said.

In fairness to Kerry's campaign strategy, he was stuck behind Kennedy as the "junior" member of the Massachusetts senate delegation and did not have the committee assignments and chairmanships that accrue to the "senior" member. So, he had to put the focus on something.

But making a record with so many contradictions in it the central point of his campaign proved to be foolish. Politics is about what you can insinuate, not what you can prove.

Imagine being the kind of person who thinks about Taylor Swift so deeply. Then imagine being the kind of person who is paid to do so.

I wish this article had appeared before Thanksgiving so I'd have something else for which to be thankful.

As for the "feud" between Ms. Swift and Ms. Minaj, it is my cursory understanding that such contretemps are almost required in today's recording industry. They boost profiles and give the fans something to talk about, presumably making money for both parties involved.

Such manufactured disputes weren't in play in the days of Annette Funicello and Shelley Fabares, but the "meanings" of their songs and personae were not debated in major newspapers, either. Times have changed and it's a stupider world.

Taylor Swift was interrupted and insulted by Kayne West. Why should she pay any attention to ANYONE in the music industry except her producers and her fans?
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/taylor-swift-vs-kanye-west-a-beef-history-20160216

Another celebrity tragedy rocks America.

#sad

There's one thing about the music industry: it is absolutely viper-vicious. Cutthroat. If you shake hands with someone in the industry, you'd better count your fingers afterward.

Stax Records was a small label in Memphis in the 1960s. They were integrated and ahead of their time; they had a mix of black and white house musicians, and they did a lot of stuff that mashed up elements of rock, country, soul and funk. They ran on a shoestring budget and were like a big family: their recording studio was a converted movie theater, and the artists and songwriters did a lot of the work of running the label and keeping the studio functioning. Guitarist Steve Cropper was the label's A&R man; songwriter David Phelan was the accountant, and keyboard player Booker T. Jones maintained the studio's recording equipment.

In order to grow, Stax needed a better distribution network; they didn't have the resources to put into building it themselves. Jerry Wexler of Atlantic Records, a major label, liked Stax' output and persuaded Atlantic to offer a distribution deal to Stax, which they signed in 1965. But in 1968, Atlantic was bought out by Warner Bros., which triggered a termination clause in the contract. It was at this point that Stax discovered, to their horror, that the contract had given Atlantic full ownership of Stax' entire back catalog. Stax had done the contract as a sort of handshake deal with Wexler, and never had a lawyer go over the contract.

Although Stax hung on for another seven years, it never overcame the financial blow of the lost royalties, and the label finally folded in 1975. The iconic studio was unceremoniously demolished in 1989. To this day, Warner still owns the rights to everything Stax released prior to 1968.