Sting, chatting up a reporter from Time magazine, decried the current state of political discourse in the country before weighing in on Obama’s track record as an environmental leader. The erstwhile Gordon Sumner took a page from the new playbook - just wait ’til his second term!

As an environmentalist, how do you think the Obama Administration is doing?

I was disappointed when he abandoned plans to tighten smog standards [in September]. But I understand the realpolitik of being President. Hopefully, with a second term, he will be able to be greener.

The unintentional howler here is calling Sting an “environmentalist.”

Sting’s wife once flew a private jet filled with friends from New York City to Washington just to attend a party. Sting himself recently led “the dirtiest band in the world,” the Police, a name given for the group’s massive carbon footprint.

That doesn’t include Sting’s rock star lifestyle:

He keeps no fewer than four homes in Britain with his wife Trudie Styler, including the 800-acre Lake House estate in Wiltshire.

The home has 14 bedrooms and eight baths.

He also has a beach house in Malibu, an estate in Tuscany, a £1million apartment in New York and a love of 4×4 cars.

Eight baths in a single house? Let’s hope those all feature low-flow toilets, otherwise Sting might just be an eco-hypocrite.

However, Di Paolo has another quality which may be even more valuable than his ability to make people laugh, and that’s his love for this country. He supports the troops, he believes in “American Exceptionalism,” and he understands the dangers that lurk behind the current administration’s attempts to Europeanize the United States of America. Thus it goes without saying that it was a thrill for me to interview Di Paolo for BigHollywood, as it presented me with an opportunity to enjoy the best of two worlds: one of stomach-cramping laughs and one of pride in America.

AWR: Compared to other people in the entertainment industry, your views are often labeled conservative or libertarian. Did something happen in your life that drove you toward a more patriotic position – a greater appreciation for this country – or have you always held such convictions?

Di Paolo: That’s a good question because I grew up in the Boston area, which makes my views even more interesting. Maybe I was just rejecting liberalism more than most because I was sick of seeing Ted Kennedy speak on the local news? (Di Paolo laughs) Actually, it wasn’t a conscience effort. I was just raised the right way and, in addition to that, the left’s views don’t make any sense to me. Evidence seems to refute everything they believe in.

Ultimately, I guess I didn’t let television or my college education get in the way of clear thinking.

AWR: Although you grew up in the Boston area, you’re in New York now. And since you’re now not only a proud American but also a New Yorker, I think readers of Big Hollywood would like to know how September 11, 2001, impacted you? 

Di Paolo: I was living on the top story of a building in Queens when that happened. I had a fog-glassed window in my bathroom that I usually kept open, but when I got up to use the bathroom around 9 or 9:30 on the morning on September 11, my girlfriend had closed the window. Anyway, I went back to bed and slept until about 11:30 in the morning, like a typical comedian.  When I finally got up, I had about 20 messages on my answering machine, all of which were directing me to turn on the television and see what had happened.

After seeing the scenes on the television, I ran into my bathroom and opened that fog-glass window, because I used to see the World Trade towers out of it. But when I opened it, all I saw were black plumes of smoke. I was in shock.

A lot of comedians in New York used to make jokes about Middle Eastern cab drivers being terrorists and stuff, which some of them were. And I remember on the night of September 12^th, just one night after the attacks, I heard Middle Eastern music coming in from outside so I looked out my window and there was a Middle Eastern guy with his cab parked in the middle of my street, with all four doors open, and he was dancing – celebrating – the destruction of the twin towers. I was so angry that my hands shook, but I knew that if I went down and confronted him I’d be the one they threw in jail.

To see him dancing and celebrating made me sick. But it helped me realize that they were here: that the enemy was among us.

—–

AWR: I’ve always recognized that a problem with liberalism is that it ties men’s hands so that they can’t be men. In a better world, one without the constraints of liberalism and the subsequent concern over giving offense, you could have gone down and confronted him for standing on American soil and celebrating the deaths of 3,000 Americans.

Di Paolo: Absolutely. And now that Obama’s been in office I’ve noticed the pressure to be politically correct, to be nice to our enemies, etc., is bigger than left and right. It’s bigger than Democrat vs. Republican. I don’t know who’s pulling the strings, but while they ask us to turn the other cheek somebody wants to turn this great country in a socialist failure like we see in other parts of the world.

And is there a country out there that likes us? I’m so sick of reading about how Putin or Hugo Chavez or the Palestinians or Europe is badmouthing us. Nobody has anything good to say about this country, and it seems like Obama is a dream come true for these people because he’s more than happy to help them execute their plans.

But what people don’t understand is that this country, with capitalism and all, was never meant to be like the rest of the world. We’ve got all these socialists pushing equality but they’ve failed to grasp the fact that in our country, a country with true liberty, some people are going to soar higher than others. Things weren’t meant to be equal.

Yet people don’t seem to understand that. Instead they want us all to live in mediocrity.

AWR: Moving away from strictly political questions, let me tee one up for you by asking who, in Hollywood, is really getting under your skin right now?

Di Paolo: It’s so funny. I’m in the business a little bit, but I’m not as big a player in Hollywood as I’d like to be. So I’m just sick of the same people that everyone else is sick of.  People like Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins, who really aren’t in the news that much anymore, or Sting and Sir Paul McCartney.  (Di Paolo laughs) I call him “Miss” Paul McCartney. Every time I hear McCartney blabbing I think to myself: “Why is that stupid old lady talking? He’s not even from here.”

Of course there’s Rosie O’Donnell, who I actually met while doing “Tough Crowd with Colin Quinn” and I wanted to like her. But then I heard her come out and say that one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter and that was that.

And there’s Alec Baldwin, but he’s different for me. His politics make me sick but I think I’d like him if I met him. Remember, I’m a guy who tells jokes for a living and I’ve got to admit that Baldwin is hilarious. He’s funny in movies and when he’s on shows like David Letterman. And this goes to the point that I’m not like people on the left. I find that people on the left, if they don’t agree with your politics, they’ll hate you personally. I can separate the two. But I find they seem to have trouble separating them.

—–

AWR: I’m thinking about the fact that you don’t hide your atypical Hollywood convictions, and I wonder if there’s a certain one of those convictions that, when you bring it up in your performances, draws a warmer applause than expected?  For instance, are their people who wouldn’t laugh at Obama two years ago who are now busting out laughing every time you bring him up?

Di Paolo: It’s definitely become easier over the last year or so to make fun of Obama, all because he’s done such a horrendous job.  And what I’ve learned more than anything is that when I do jokes that push the envelope a little bit, either racially or in the arena of political correctness, the people who get quiet are the white people in the audience. It’s funny, when I talk about black people or illegal immigrants or whatever, those people are laughing, but the white people are silent because 30 years of politically correct television has brainwashed them.

What the white people who sit silently at my shows don’t understand is that I don’t hate Obama personally.  I just hate what he stands for politically, because I believe in “American Exceptionalism.” But there seems to be a concerted effort against this country from within, and there are even some Republicans in on it.

AWR: I was doing some research on Keith Olbermann this morning. Particularly looking at the way he lambasted George W. Bush for playing golf while we were at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet he has fallen silent when it comes to criticizing Obama for playing golf while we are still at war in both those places, with illegal immigrants pouring into Arizona and oil washing up on the shores of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. What do you say to people like Olbermann (and other entertainers) who were so eager to go after Bush but are giving Obama a pass for the same things they criticized in Bush?

Di Paolo: These people have no moral compass. Zero. They are so arrogant. And it’s hard for me to judge Olbermann in particular because I saw him twice and I almost threw up. He’s such an arrogant dork that I haven’t watched him anymore.

See, I’ve criticized people on the left because they haven’t listened to Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin but I can see their point sometimes, if they feel as strongly about Limbaugh and Levin as I do about Olbermann. However, the kind of hypocrisy seen in Olbermann is not something I see that much on right. It’s something that usually characterizes the left. I’m not saying someone can’t find a few cases of such arrogance on the right, but such cases aren’t the norm. People on the left are just so arrogant. They think they’re so much more enlightened because they went to an Ivy League school or whatever.

And Olbermann is such a blowhard. Like others on the left, he is so closed-minded. When you meet someone on the right that’s close-minded that’s one thing, but it’s the people on the left who claim we ought to be so open minded and liberal, and then they turn out to be so close-minded and intolerant of other ideas.

—–

AWR: If I’ve learned anything about the left it’s that they’re tolerant of everything except the things they won’t tolerate.

Di Paolo: Exactly.

AWR: Last question. What do you think about actors and actresses in Hollywood who were so outspoken against the War on Terror under Bush yet, in a throw back to the Vietnam War, continued to cover their own liberal butts by giving lip service to the idea that they somehow still supported the troops?

Di Paolo: I laugh at the notion that you can be for the troops but against the war. How can you be for the troops but against the war? That’s like saying I like tomato sauce but I’m not for tomatoes. It makes no sense. It’s just another way for them to talk out of both sides of their mouths.

I watch those Sunday morning news shows and I don’t know if it’s just my imagination or what, but it seems to be very difficult to get a straight answer out of liberals. When asked something, they immediately evade the question or begin rationalizing, as when they say, “I support the troops but oppose the war” or whatever.

Liberals can say they support the troops all they want, but they’re probably not going to go up to a soldier in an airport and thank them. I just really don’t believe that’s something they would do.

AWR: You are so right on. Thanks again for taking time out of your schedule to talk to me for BigHollywood.

Di Paolo: It was my pleasure.

Readers of BigHollywood who was to learn more about Nick Di Paolo and his upcoming appearances can do so by going to his website, www.nickdip.com.

—–

While most telethons are about helping people this one seemed more concerned about the oil soaked animals. In fact two thirds of the proceeds went to environmental activist groups, The Nature Conservancy and the National Wildlife Federation. The United Way was there for the human victims, although very few of the stars seemed concerned about that aspect of the tragedy. Robert Redford made a response so comical; that it looked like it was a SNL skit (I’m saving that for the end).

The best example of the Telethon’s focus was voiced by Chelsea Handler:

“Everybody now is thinking about the animals, and and it’s really scary, especially for anybody, you know, espec… for-for a mill…  a bevy of reasons I mean we have to think about the animals out there. Everybody needs to be thinking about animals.”

Perhaps victims of the Nashville flood could have activated Hollywood behind their disaster had they shown pictures of drowning possums.

Chelsea was seated next to the very animated and annoying Jenny McCarthy at the beginning of the show, and moved over two seats after Jenny volunteered $5000 of Chelsea’s money. Every time the camera came on Jenny was mugging and gesticulating and Chelsea had moved another seat farther away from her. I’m guessing her remark might have been mocking Jenny.

But Jenny brought up a very good point. Why weren’t these celebrities donating more of their own money? The entire telethon raised about $1.3 million, which is a pittance to most of the stars appearing.  There was a time when Ted Danson was making that much in a week of Cheers residuals. Sting could have raised nearly that much by playing a few songs at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding.

Philippe Cousteau Jr. was on board as the oceanic expert, and if he ever attended college, I couldn’t find it in any of his biographies posted around the Internet. I’m fairly certain that being the grandson of Jacques Cousteau gives him ample credibility, but he made a remark that I believe is scientifically wrong. He claimed:

“Oil is toxic, deadly toxic, at one part per billion in the water column.”

One part per billion is a half teaspoon of crude into an Olympic-size pool. Drinking a glass will gross you out, long before it kills you.

Ian Somerhalder chimed in with his own take on the toxicity:

“I made the mistake of getting it on my fingers and then I went to rub my eye and I didn’t pay attention that I was touching my eye and the whole thing swelled up and got red stinging …it’s-it’s really toxic, I can’t imagine having it on my entire body.”

(Although many fans of the Vampire Diaries probably do.) I mean come on, Ian, a little misplaced eyeliner would do the same thing, and THAT isn’t stopping you.

Philippe Jr. also claimed that the spill is a…

“Symptom of a bigger problem our dependence on fossil fuel we just refuse to get off. All of us have a part to play.”

Somewhat hypocritical, considering Philippe is an heir to an empire built on fossil fuel consumption. Grandpa Jacques didn’t sail out to film his documentaries. I would bet the Calypso burned more oil filming one episode of the Undersea World than most of us will use in our entire lifetime.

Cameron Diaz voiced what the whole event was really about: making sure that private planes, limousines, and imported raw organic vegan deli trays are only available to movie stars.  She claimed that we all need to:

“…start making a change in the way you live: What you buy, what you drive, what you eat. You can make the difference; you can help prevent a terrible tragedy like this from ever happening again.”

Victoria Principal not only repeated the debunked Al Gore hurricane chestnut, but indicated she hasn’t been looking at weather reports for the past four years:

”The reason we’re having more hurricanes is because we weren’t thinking in advance about how we treat this planet, so it’s really a wake up call on every level.”

CNN reporters Kyra Phillips and Soledad O’Brien both did nice human interest angles on the tragedy, talking to fisherman whose lives have been interrupted, although neither talked to any oil workers unemployed by the moratorium. The only time the oil workers were mentioned was when Larry asked Robert Redford about them and you won’t believe how he responded. (It’s coming).

There was a lot of blame put on BP, a little blame put on Congress, and absolutely no mention made of the President, beyond the plug Kerry Kennedy squeezed in:

“One of the things that we’re doing is trying to get people to petition President Obama to sign, um, a legislative order that will make 100,000 green jobs in the uh, in the gulf coast.”

Shouldn’t a Kennedy be aware that Congress does all the legislation?

As I mentioned before there was no sympathy for the oil economy. Ted Danson doesn’t see a problem with it:

“No more offshore oil drilling, pump the wells we got, but no more new because the risks as we see are way too high, and the benefits are not that big.”

But the funniest and most telling moment of the evening came when Larry asked a befuddled Robert Redford about what will happen to the oil workers if offshore drilling ceases. (Incidentally, I’m fairly certain that Standard Oil is now BP, but Bob doesn’t seem to be aware of that.)

The show was closed out with a performance by Herbie Hancock and India Arie, playing John Lennon’s Socialist classic Imagine, which doesn’t have anything to do with the topic at hand. Religion, Possessions and Country weren’t really responsible for the explosion. At least Sting played Fragile, which seemed somewhat appropriate.

And just imagine where we would be…without our stars.

—–

The tsunami hit in the wake of my recent column on Sting, Soros and their pro-drug partnership, which both cast doubt on the sacred truths of the very vocal drug legalization fans and defied George Soros.  Accordingly, I had to be stopped.  What happened next tells us much about the tactics, techniques and procedures we will come up against fighting for our culture – and how we can fight back.

The counter-attack came first came in the form of over 400 angry comments from drug legalizers (oh, sorry – “decrimminalizers”) and bong-fueled Twitter tweets from hemp-focused lay-abouts.  Next came columns by Huffington Post nonentities and other dope-o-centric fellow travelers.  Topping it off came at least one semi-veiled threat. 

The main effort, and a clever one – is part of a continuing efforst to use the drug issue as a wedge within the conservative movement.  You can see that in the comments, many of the commenters excoriating me describe themselves as “true conservatives” or “libertarians.”  Far from being the kind of mellow, Lebowski-like stoners one might expect, most of them were quite angrily convinced that my skepticism about Sting’s support for turning our society into a cornucopia of pharmaceuticals was simply proof positive of my dedication to tyranny, fascism and general meanness. 

As the creepy Soros/Sting video implies, apparently the only possible reason anyone could ever think that selling angel dust over the counter at every corner liquor store is a bad idea is some sort of amorphous delight in human misery.

The Left sees that there is a serious debate within the Right on the best way to address the drug question.  It is the conservatives and libertarians in publications like National Review and Reason (as I mentioned in the article but the commenters overlooked) who make the most interesting and trenchant critiques of current drug policy – most liberal drug policy critiques just whine about racism or go on and on about how groovy hemp is because Patrick Henry grew it in his back yard. 

For that reason, fomenting discord within the Right about drug policy is a profitable enterprise to people who would much rather see us beating ourselves up over whether government has a right to keep smack addicts from shooting up on the subways instead of uniting on real issues like stopping the Administration from nationalizing pretty much everything while spending every dime we don’t have.

Tony Papa

Actually, I sympathize to some extent with the conservative critiques of drug policy but, because I dared to point out the dubious assumptions often underlying those arguments – like that criminals will just stop being criminals if drugs are legalized – I became the enemy.  Since it really wasn’t a piece on how I felt about drug legalization but about how celebrities lecture us peasants then retreat back into their castles while we deal with the consequences, I broke my standard rule of letting my columns speak for themselves and added a long multi-part, comment of my own.  Pointing out the legalizers’ total failure to address legitimate concerns about drugs’ effects on society only got them madder.

Their second axis of attack was through critiques on other web sites – most of them focusing on how horribly out-of-step with progressive social values people like us are.  Many of these come from such junkie-friendly precincts of the internet as “drugwarrant.com” and “stopthedrugwar.org.”  However, one came from a blogger I have a great deal of respect for, libertarian Radley Balko, who does great work exposing government abuses.  Unfortunately, his reference to the column falls in the legalization echo chamber trap:

Yes, there are still people who think like this though their ranks are dwindling, even in conservative circles. 

I should point out that if anti-legalization is the hip new position among the cool kids, none of the politicians seem to think so since no major candidate will run on the syringes-in-every-supermarket agenda of the most ardent legalizers.

Naturally, the Huffington Post, as part of its we-know-where-our-bread-is-buttered program, weighed in with a piece blasting my critique of the Drug Policy Alliance written by – surprise – some guy from the Drug Policy Alliance.  I guess Sting’s daily tantric hoe-down was too important to interrupt for him to have one of his minions write a column for him.  In any case, the thrust of it seemed to be that I didn’t criticize Rush Limbaugh, which I guess is supposed to be is significant . . . somehow. 

And since none of that worked – I was unrepentantly responding both in the comments and on Twitter - then why not try some intimidation, since that seems to be the hot new tactic for frustrated leftists?

It came in the form of comments by Tony Papa, the ex-jailbird and designated drug war victim idolized by – and apparently employed by – the Drug Policy Alliance.  He is unhappy with me, possibly because I expressed little sympathy for the fact that he went to jail because he, well, committed a crime.  Writing as “tonypapa123,” he commented:

Kurt Schlichter you are a two bit shister (sic) laywer (sic) wannabe writer who confuses your mouth for your A-hole – attacking myself and others with rude remarks that have no substance other than making you look like the f—— A-hole that you are. I would like to meet you one day so I can really tell you how I feel about the piece you wrote in person scumbag – put that in ur (sic) comedy routine

Putting aside the creative spelling and disturbing anal fixation (he also called me an “asshole” twice in a two-line comment he added to the HuffPo piece), this seemed to me pretty clearly to be a veiled threat (You can make up your own mind).  Unable to let what I saw as a clumsy attempt at intimidation stand, I again broke my “no comment” rule to reply:

I may be a “two bit shyster lawyer wannabe writer” but I’m not a convicted felon.  So, convict, save your threats – you don’t wanna get in trouble with your parole officer.

At that point, it probably occurred to Mr. Papa that perhaps being a convicted felon transmitting via interstate electronic means what could be perceived as a threat in writing and in public was the same kind of criminal mastermind move that got him locked up for a dozen years over a $500 blow deal.  So the tap-dancing began:

shyster – its (sic) not a threat – I am just pointing out your good qualities as a human being – Read my book – “15 to Life” which is becoming a feature film – maybe I will give you the part as the shyster piece of crap lawyer that defended me and sold me out

His editor must have had his work cut out for him.  In any case, I enjoyed the segue from how he wanted to tell me “how I feel about the piece you wrote in person scumbag” to whining that his stint in stir for the crime he committed was all his lawyer’s fault.  I replied:

I’m glad you clarified it wasn’t a threat.  The Feds don’t like threats made across state lines.  I think you ought to read my 4-part comments and thoughts on the issue of legalization in the comments – my column focused on something else.   And I don’t do criminal law – I don’t like criminals.  But if I did, and if I defended you, and you did nothing wrong, I bet I would have won.  But if you participated in a conspiracy to distribute narcotics, well, you knew the price of admission to that show going in.  And if you did what the jury (or judge) thought you did, or what you pleaded guilty to, no one was going to be able to help you.

So, what does this episode teach us about our struggle?  The first thing is that the other side is clever enough to use wedge issues to try and divide natural allies.  Sure, it might seem like traditional conservatives have little in common with bong-hitting hemp fanciers and hardcore libertarians who think that coke ought to be on the Safeway shelf next to Coke because Ayn Rand would have thought so.  While we may have some dramatic disagreements on this point – though, if they would be a little less dogmatic and more rational in their approach to dealing with the very real costs of drug abuse they might get a more favorable hearing – they still have much more in common with us than with the nanny-state neo-socialists of the authoritarian Left. 

If the legalizers think the people trying to tell us how much salt and trans-fat we can scarf up will just sit back and let them Cheech and Chong themselves in peace, they are already high.

The second point is that there is a media network on the Left that attempts to leverage a sense of inevitability about their agenda into momentum for it. They do it about everything – here, it’s about legalizing drugs.  That false sense of inevitability about irresponsible mutations to our society needs to be punctured at every turn – a specialty of Big Hollywood and its brethren Big Journalism and Big Government.

The lesson:  Never – ever – allow them to seize the initiative.  Never – ever – allow yourself to believe you are beaten, no matter how uncool, unhip and unfashionable they try to make your traditional beliefs appear.  Finally, when they get desperate and make threats – and they will – you call them on it.  You can comment.  You can Twitter.  You can blog.  Regardless, engage in the battle, because, in the end, we only lose when we give up the fight.

Apparently not content to subsidize the whining of the nonentities at Media Matters, Soros is taking a break from his adventures in currency manipulation and general scuzziness to enlist entertainment celebrities like Sting in his newest quest.  The Drug Policy Alliance is the result, a group whose members, as its founder puts it, “come from across the drug use spectrum.”  Yes, the junkies, stoners, hopheads, dope fiends, pill-poppers, and Lindsay Lohan are unanimous:  Drug laws are bad, and it’s probably BusHitler’s fault.

The threshold problem with comments by Sting such as, “The war on drugs represents an extraordinary violation of human rights,” is that Sting presumably not only believes this piffle, but further believes that he can put down his bass and offer meaningful input into the discussion.  This assumption of competence is a common delusion among celebrities, and here it has more potential for damage than most mindless celebribabble.

Now, Sting is not alone – no one in that clip says anything worthwhile.  One woman, who is bald for no apparent reason, states that “The War on Drugs is a war on people of color,” as if Americans decided they would outlaw crack because they fear that black people might enjoy themselves.  Montel Williams shows up to explain that drug laws prevent him from making choices about his own body, but the awful tie and ridiculous earring he chose to wear make a powerful argument against allowing him to make any kind of choices at all.

Tony Papa also appears.  He went to jail for 12 years for being part of a drug deal – oh, I mean committing “a nonviolent drug offense” – and became an artist on the taxpayer’s dime.  While most of us will likely ask “Why only 12?,” naturally Papa is worshipped by trendy leftist celebrities.  Some Hollywood half-wit even scooped up the rights to his inspiring story.  So, to repeat, Tony Papa joined a drug conspiracy, got arrested, went to jail, leveraged that into becoming a hip artist and the subject of a movie, and yet he is somehow the real victim.

Of course, there’s also the perennial “America imprisons more people than anywhere else in the world!” meme.  In fact, the only drug incarceration problem in America is that too few drug dealers are incarcerated.  Sting suffers from the same delusion that afflicts many of his celebrity pals.  He seems to think that if the kind of people who deal drugs didn’t have drugs to deal, they would naturally flock to the world of hard work and responsibility.  Oh, if only drugs weren’t illegal, the drug dealing scumbags who infest our ghettos, barrios and college sociology departments would morph into clean-shaved, untatted workerbees eagerly embracing the world of 9-5 employment.  Yeah, it was outlawing meth and crack that turned the scumbags into scumbags. 

At one point, the clip promises “new solutions” to the drug problem.  Then Sting pops back up, smug and self-satisfied, to announce that drug laws violate his individual sovereignty.  Uh, typically, when you say you are going to provide new solutions you might consider, you know, providing some new solutions instead of some new cliché.

I certainly enjoy Sting and his pals’ new-found appreciation of my personal autonomy and “sovereignty over my body.”  I assume they’ll be standing by me when I reject the government’s interference in my health care decisions.  Unlikely.  If you think consistency is one of their strong points, perhaps you’ve been smoking the same stuff as them.

Now, Sting was always annoying but here he is reaching new heights of crappiness and pomposity in direct proportion to his declining relevance.  It’s always a pleasure to hear some Brit mega-millionaire who glides around his English manor practicing tantric sex sound off on American domestic policy. 

Please Sting, save us!  Unleash the full intellectual firepower you’ve amassed writing forgettable smooth jazz/rock fusion tunes for people who buy their music at Starbucks.  Just because you’ve been waited on hand and foot for three decades by a coterie of professional sycophants telling you you’re wiser than Buddha and smarter than Einstein doesn’t mean it’s true. 

There may be a case for looking at our drug laws, but these nimrods don’t make it.  The most compelling points are made by the conservatives at National Review and the libertarians at Reason.  Sure, pot smokers steal your snacks, listen to Phish and sound-off with long, disjointed monologues about the miracle of hemp, but I have a hard time getting too bent out of shape by them.  Many celebrities are among them, but Sting and Soros aren’t just talking about causal stoners.  They think we ought to go open season on meth, crack and whatever else these degenerate half-wits today are ingesting.  No thanks – I’d prefer not to live with the mess you’re rich enough to ignore.

The fact is that His Stingness knows nothing – or cares nothing – about the unspeakable devastation drugs cause, particularly within the inner cities.  Instead of standing behind the one truly effective response to urban drug terror – throwing the bastards in a cell and dropping the key down the Guatemalan sinkhole – His Majesty Sting decrees that drug dealing scumbags should run free, then retreats back behind his gates and armed guards to further hone his delayed orgasm skills.

Well, Sting, let’s discuss your really keen points about why poison ought to be legal.  But let’s expand the scope of our discussion to include some other celebrities who might be able to provide us with some valuable insights.  Let’s invite Michael Jackson, Heath Ledger, Brad Renfro, DJ AM, and Brittany Murphy to weigh in with their points of view.  Oh wait, they’re all dead.  So are just a few others.

Like a Sean Penn who can’t help but fly into some hellhole, figuratively fellate the local anti-American strongman then jet back to Santa Monica in time for dinner at Pizzeria Mozza, Sting wanders out of his fairy-tale life for a few minutes to tell the benighted peons in the real world how they need to live their lives before retiring back inside his palace behind three layers of security.  The violence, the abuse, the wasted potential brought on by drugs mean nothing to him; what is important is his own act of scolding his lessers for failing to conform to his personal vision.

That’s Sting’s high – lording over others as if he was something more than a glorified cruise ship bassist who got lucky and didn’t have to spend his career cranking out covers of Billy Joel’s “Uptown Girl” for Corona-swilling passengers during runs between San Diego and Puerto Vallarta on the S.S. Living Hell.  And like so many in the entertainment world, he’s guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of possession of stupid ideas – with intent to distribute.

“Well, you can see the enthusiasm out there. And people are here to really tell big government that we want big government to make big decisions about the most important problems we face. And also to pressure our corporations to behave properly, as consumers, but we’re here to — we’re asking for big government, basically.”

First of all, who is this “we?” Don’t include me in that statement, bucko - or the readers of Big Hollywood, for that matter. And don’t include the millions of Tea Party attendees all across this still great nation of ours. Obviously someone’s too busy polishing the Grammys on his mantel to pay much attention to the news – except to watch videos of his own CNN appearances, natch.

And I have to ask the obvious question – is Mr. Sumner even an American citizen, or is he just here because the US (for now) taxes him at a lower rate than the UK? Either way, he’s a blowhard who doesn’t speak for me.

Musicians/actors/entertainers/celebrities like Gordy live in a privileged bubble surrounded by brown-nosed yes men, with the funds available to hire accountants to help them find every single little tax loophole so that less money leaves their bank accounts to fill government coffers as possible. How else could he afford five lavish homes in glamorous locales all over the world? How else could his wife afford private charter flights to the White House Correspondents’ dinner?

I find it ironic that the rock and roll culture has morphed from the “don’t trust anyone over 30″ mantra of the 1960s to the “we’re not gonna take it anymore” Twisted Sister motto of the 1980s to the “smells like teen spirit” posturing of the 1990s to the  slavering “we’re asking for big government” kowtowing of today.

But then, I suppose an independent streak doesn’t get one invited to visit the Community Organizer in Chief so that later, one can gush about The One’s being “very genuine, very present, clearly super-smart, and exactly what we need in the world.”

The whole thing puts me in mind of an old  Calvin and Hobbes strip, where Calvin says:

“The problem with rock ‘n’ roll is that the generation that created it is now the establishment. Rock pretends it’s still rebellious with its video posturing, but who believes it? The stars are 45-year-old zillionaires or they endorse soft drinks! The ‘revolution’ is a capitalist industry! Give me a break!”

I’d add that they’re not just a part of the capitalist industry they profess to despise, but they’re also now supporters of an overly-intrusive government they once wanted to overthrow, or at least gave that impression in order to sell records to become part of the capitalist industry…

Oy, the boomerang effect is giving me a headache.

Now, if Gordy really is a fan of big government, then I’d like to pass on a suggestion made by Hugh Hewitt, which was passed on to me by John Nolte: let the government run the music business. Can you imagine? Caps on prices for CDs and music downloads, because inexpensive entertainment is a right. No more expensive concert tickets either. It’s outrageous that people should have to pay so much for a couple of hours of warbling! In fact, government should regulate where these concerts are held because because it’s not fair for some patrons to get up close and personal in the front row while others are relegated to the nosebleed section.

It’s also not fair that Gordy and his band get to luxuriate before a show while enjoying chilled Evian water, full-bodied French wines, good quality vodka, champagne, fresh fruit and fruit juices, French cheeses and  six – not five or seven – but six yogurt drinks. What does all of that imported food do for our carbon footprint? Much better to have that regulated as well so that while on tour, Gordy can enjoy cheese curds in Wisconsin, ham hocks in Alabama and coffee milk in Rhode Island. You know, eat locally and all that. And NO plastic bags or containers. I’ve heard plastic is bad. They should eat off of “sustainably harvested” bark plates and drink out of their cupped hands.

Heck, while we’re at it, why not let the government force musicians and other entertainers to perform free of charge for the masses? Shouldn’t they be obligated to share their talent, rather than profit from it? Isn’t that the “big government” way? “From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs.” I needs me some free music, because heaven knows I’m not as talented as Gordon Sumner. And a free iPod. Someone get Apple on the horn.

I’d say that’s a really big problem we’re facing, to quote Gordy. Forget illegal aliens, forget Iran getting ready to blow us up as soon as possible, forget the economic collapse in Europe that’s on its way over here as we speak. Nope, free music for all is a winning campaign slogan for some enterprising politician out there.

Believe me, they need all the help they can get these days.

Seriously: I’m all for making money any  way you can (legally, of course), and I don’t begrudge Gordy his multimillion dollar bank account. He earned it. However, in exchange, I’d appreciate him keeping his big nose out of my business. If he wants to admit to being for “big government,” fine and dandy. But please, don’t presume to speak for the rest of us.

And don’t be surprised when we’re not to keen to jump on your poseur bandwagon.

Hypocrisy in the entertainment industry? Say it ain’t so!

Sting has come under fire by human rights groups for performing a private gig back in November of 2009 for the daughter of the president of Uzbekistan. (Doncha love how dictators and dictators-in-waiting use the title “president?” Oh, I’m sorry Mr. Penn; I didn’t mean to upset you. Please don’t call for my imprisonment; I have two kids and a cat to worry about.)

Rocker STING has been urged to donate concert cash he received after performing for the daughter of Uzbek dictator President Islam Karimov to charity by critics opposed to the private show.

The former The Police star, an avid human rights campaigner and environmental activist, has come under fire for playing the secret gig in Tashkent in November (09). Protesters claim Sting should have rejected the offer to sing for Gulnara Karimova, whose father rules a country with one of the world’s worst records for human rights abuses.

Karimov has been criticised repeatedly by the international community and non-governmental organisations like the United Nations and the European Commission of running a brutal dictatorship, violently suppressing political activism, free speech and religious worship with torture.

Karimov’s administration has also been embroiled in allegations of financial corruption.

According to the above report, his management team ignored pleas to cancel the performance even after being informed of Karimov’s abysmal track record.

No idea how much he earned for this little shindig, but I doubt he comes cheap if this tour rider from back in 2000 is any indication. “Cheap wines will not be accepted.” Guess he doesn’t drink Franzia.

What’s more interesting than his paycheck, however, is the fact that Sting received a prestigious human rights award from Chile back in 2001. Other humanitarian honors and efforts include:

• Taking part in the Band Aid charity song “Do They Know It’s Christmas” in 1984
• Being chosen to present the 2nd Annual Reebok Human Rights Award in 1989
• Involvement with Amnesty International, including performing during their 1988 Human Rights Now tour and sending out a recent plea on their behalf for support of people being suppressed in Iran
• Founder, along with his wife Trudie Styler, of the Rainforest Foundation in 1989, whose mission statement is “The mission of the Rainforest Foundation UK is to support indigenous peoples and traditional populations of the world’s rainforest in their efforts to protect their environment and fulfil their rights to land, life and livelihood by assisting them in:
  1. Securing and controlling the natural resources necessary for their long term well being and managing these resources in ways which do not harm their environment, violate their culture or compromise their future.
  2. Developing means to protect their individual and collective rights and obtain, shape and control basic services from the state.

Sting’s not alone in this little habit of performing for and hanging out with dictators and their families. Beyoncé, Jay-Z, Lindsay Lohan, Jon Bon Jovi, Usher, BET founder Bob Johnson, supermodels Miranda Kerr and Victoria Slivstedt and Mariah Carey have all participated in par-tays for the family of Muammar Gaddafi, that cuddly son-of-a-gun dictator in Libya.

Perhaps, though, we shouldn’t be too quick to criticize. After all, “homes in New York, Los Angeles and London, together with Lake House, a Jacobean mansion and 800-acre estate in Wiltshire, and a magnificent Tuscan villa” must cost a pretty penny. We can’t expect him to live off of piddly record royalties – why, just one song, “Every Breath You Take,” earns him a mere pittance – nearly $2,000 a day. That probably doesn’t even cover the electricity bill for one of his homes, let alone all of them. And if this report is correct, he spent nearly $12,000 for a live Christmas tree for his Wiltshire estate. Hey, money doesn’t grow on trees! (ugh, pun intended)

Lest we forget, Sting grew up in a working-class environment. It might just take a lot of money to make him forget that “I was one of these kids that thought, ‘I actually don’t belong here. Either in this family or on this street or in this town… I thought I was an orphan that had been, you know, sort of misplaced. I was kind of in the wrong environment. I just felt this wasn’t for me. and I was plotting to escape from a very early age.”

And perhaps he should also be congratulated for not just sitting back on his laurels and enjoying the good life. He’s still working hard, like his milkman father did. Attaboy!

Nope, Sting is just a working class schlub like you and me, trying to earn an honest buck in an uncertain world. So if he happens to earn it by singing for the daughter of a guy who has been accused of boiling dissidents alive, so be it.

Someone has to take one for the team.

Last year,  I went to see The Police when they came to Columbus.  I could not have been more disappointed with the show.  They looked uninterested — like three solo acts who weren’t willing to play together. On top of it, they didn’t let Sting play any of his hit songs.  When someone pays a lot of money to see a show, you expect them to put some effort into entertaining you.  I drove home, hoping that the band just had an off night.

I decided to give them another chance.  Recently I caught The Police in Argentina while watching Palladia (I know I’ve blogged about Palladia before, and I’ll do it again.  It’s an absolutely fantastic way to enjoy music.)  They still didn’t play any of Sting’s greatest hits, but the band was tight and energetic.  I suppose it’s easy to get jazzed when you’re playing in front of Argentinians, but the point is they showed they still had it. If they swing through Columbus again, I may have to line up for tickets again.

John can be reached at Recharge Ohio, Twitter, or Facebook.