New product rollout?! More like an embarrassing national washout!

Holy mother of God, I honestly thought I could take a pass on this if they could all get off their overpaid behinds and resolve it, but no - just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in! We are naturally talking about yet another fiasco under Barack Obama's watch - the total embarrassment often referred to (even by him) as Obamacare, his signature flagship healthcare reform program.

Talking about reform, it seems that millions of people can't even get to filling in the actual form(s), and that's what needs reforming, first. Stat. It took nary a day after the supposed shiny new  bells-and-whistles website opened for business on October 1 until issues began to surface. Quite typically of Obama's administration, blame was placed on others - in this case, the actual consumers! Are ya kidding me?! Apparently there was too large a volume of traffic on the website? Duhhhh.

Now let me see....in a country of more than 300 million people, the government railroads everyone into signing on for a new public healthcare system backed up by a new law, and, no one was expecting any serious traffic? What?! This seems to represent a new low, a new level of abject incompetency, even for an administration that has been plagued by one new low after another. 

My men on the street tell me that the most recent testing done on the site pre-launch was for about 200  "customers" on the site simultaneously. What? Which genius made the magnificent decision to beta test 200 users for a site about to become a national priority on a massive scale? It is ridiculous beyond compare. 

It didn't take very long for the volcano to erupt, and quite understandably (and most definitely predictably) both the customers and the vehement political objectors to Obamacare (read effectively all Republicans and a serious handful of Democrats as well) each raged against the machine. Here we go again, just as the country seemed to be moving forward, and with ol' B.O. into a second term with no future, he done gone and screwed it up again, with him quite literally pouring warm gasoline right onto the Republican Party's BBQ?!

You can be sure they are firing up for a huge roast, and it will be Obamacare that will be on the spit, slowly revolving over the roaring flames of Hades itself, and the Devil's own red hot sauce bubbling lava-like at the side. For hardcore Republicans, getting Obamacare onto the spit is about as good as it gets, especially as it's a metaphor with his name directly attached to it. Nirvana!

Quite what he was thinking is beyond me, beyond you, and probably beyond any of us. It is one of the most spectacularly incompetent political screw-ups in history, even if it is quite reflective of the never-ending series of woes that have been placed at his door since 2009. Solyndra, Ted Kennedy's seat loss, Fast and Furious, Guantanamo, Benghazi, the Petraeus affair, the IRS scandal, sex crimes in the military, the national debt crisis and government shutdowns, Edward Snowden and the NSA debacle (which is now causing international outrage over new evidence that leaders in various ally countries were being monitored by Big Brother USA) - need I go on? These are just off the top of my head!

At precisely the moment in his tenure when he needed a smooth transition for the country into alignment with his Affordable Care Act, he ends up on TV once again, with his by now routine (but increasingly worn) guilty-looking expression and stoicism in the face of yet another storm of his own making. He's always "angry" and he's always "gonna get to the bottom of this!" - until the storm fades away, or another fresher once blows into town, and we can use the second one to make the people forget about the first one. Until then, folks "are working overtime, 24/7, to resolve this problem!". He never seems to get the point that hearing some "folks" got their butts kicked and are no longer on the team might just keep more people on his side. 

Read my lips, people. At least one head has to roll for this debacle, and in any other business situation in life, it would be Barack Obama. A transaction-based online company rolling out a supposed shiny new product for one and all, and then the frenzied customers totally unable to use that transaction-based website, with a serious deadline approaching to do so? Trust me, for a cock-up of such a gargantuan nature, the CEO would be exited by the board. As he-she should be. 

There is no surer sign of executive disconnect than a CEO who does not take responsibility for the online presence and functionality of their online business, in today's marketplace. Can you imagine Jeff Bezos of Amazon, or Steve Jobs of Apple (during his reign supreme) or Gregg Steinhafel of Target accepting this kind of mess on their flagship websites? Before anyone thinks that these are real businesses and healthcare is not, the response is that it is - today. Healthcare dot gov is the new online shopping website for consumers to purchase their health insurance, as required by Obama's new law. It is a vendor-customer transaction and experience, pure and simple.

In terms of both customer experience/satisfaction (a critical aspect of any online vendor's website) and the inevitable political maneuvering, the new product is a total, undiluted washout. A complete professional embarrassment, for everyone involved. The one head that I feel will roll is Kathleen Sebelius, HHS secretary, who is facing a lonely walk up to Capitol Hill this week to face an angry House Committee who want answers. Congress is fuming, just like those who have tried to use the website she is responsible for - the latest estimate with the new troubleshooter is that it will be fixed only by end of November. LOL. 

I don't know which enterprise was brought in to set up this website (I think it might have been CGI) but both they and Sebelius have created a farce of massive proportions which has once again seriously undermined Barack Obama, Obamacare, and the entire administration. Although I might just feel a smidgen of sympathy for the guy who is embroiled in yet another crisis over healthcare reform, it evaporates extremely quickly when I see the amount estimated to have been spent on getting this product/website to where it is today.

$394,000,000. 

I think those numbers speak for themselves most eloquently, and I needn't say one word more. - Kevin Mc

Is there any fake in Drake, or should Canadian rap be given a break?

As part of our new and occasional "Commentary on Canadian artists" of note, it felt appropriate to begin with a certain Torontonian who was granted the honour of a very rare full hour segment recorded in the CBC's Studio Q with Jian Ghomeshi. We are of course referring to local rap phenomenon, Drake.

Now as usual, I will lay my cards on the table from the get-go, and say that I don't really understand the "phenomenon" part of the Drake phenomenon, at all. In terms of lineage, image and a truckload of the content - it's all been done before, and better, in my opinion. Having said that, I will admit to not having spent agonising hours examining the artistic merit of the guy and his music, but that says a lot in and of itself.

How much artistic merit or intellectual insight is one expected to glean from lyrics which not only are truly reminiscent of black American rappers from the 'hood, but often seem like total clones of everything that's been said before? To wit:

"I want the money, money and the cars, cars and the clothes, the hoes.....I suppose, I just wanna be successful" - ["Successful" by Drake]

Yes, yes, I know, a thousand master's and a few hundred doctoral theses have been written on the significance and rise of black rap (and even white rap), and what such lyrics tell us (told us, today) about the struggle of growing up black in America - I get it. For those who lived that struggle in earlier times of our history, I understood both the need to break out of the 'hood, and actually turn their 'hood experience into cold, hard cash, and then to even brag about it.

Such feelings are not unique to black America (or Canada), nor are they restricted to underprivileged kids of colour. Look at the punk movement in the UK (for that is where real punk was born and nurtured), which was a similar rebellion about being underprivileged white kids with no future. God save the Queen, indeed. A three chord rebellion that came in at a little over two minutes in many classic cases, with a more clever way of stitching together the beautiful irony that railing against the establishment can often result in one joining it!

"Huh, you think it's funny? Turnin' rebellion into money...." - ["White Man in Hammersmith Palais" by The Clash]

Maybe it's a cultural thing, but I just find something truly more inspirational and intellectually interesting about the latter lyric (one example among many), and feel a total artistic emptiness in the former. The UK rebellion was equally anti-establishment (be that musical or governmental), but that didn't somehow translate into the procurement of "hoes" as a motive behind artistic success and the money that came with it. The goal was expression, and getting the underground truly out and onto the overground, and if one made some serious cash doing it, well, keep quiet about it and let the art speak for itself. I can remember the furor over Joe Strummer's "white mansion" in London, because he had a basement apartment in someone else's big white house, and even that was considered annoyingly ostentatious! RIP Mr. Strummer, you made (and still make) a huge dent in the musical memory of so many.

I was sorta hoping the interview on Q would help change my mind, not least as Drake is a Canadian, and a proud Torontonian, but maybe the only thing that kept me watching was that Jian Ghomeshi was not as sycophantic as I expected him to be, so that made it all more bearable somehow. Jian doesn't use his platform much to discover new talent, more and more he interviews exclusively those who have already made the big time, and the ensuing love affair in live interviews can occasionally be too sickly sweet for the discerning viewer.

There wasn't much insight gained that opened up a deeper or more intellectual side to Drake, and there was enough reinforcement of what we do know already to kinda seal the deal, as it were. On the one hand, he expressed deep appreciation of getting a Grammy award, as it had been a "lifelong" ambition ( can you say that at 25?!), then he said he was "not doing this to get awards", in reference to when he hosted the Canadian Junos, was nominated for six of them, and walked off the stage empty-handed. Do the American awards matter more then?

Rather surprisingly, Jian called him on it and asked him which it is, you want the awards or don't care about the awards? You only have to read some of the guy's lyrics to feel what it is about the awards that matters - it's the being there with a big posse amongst competitors and dissers, and winning, per se - that's what counts - not so much the silverware. That "whole rap thing that's been going on for thousands of weeks!" - anyone spot the Godfather reference, a la Diane Keaton and Al Pacino?!

He got a bit sensitive when questioned about criticism over his own OVO Festival held in T-O each year, and made it clear that it's not "some ego-driven thing" as in the end he doesn't make a penny from it. But coming from a mega-rich guy in his mid-20s, who seems to care about attention, media accolades and recognition, that statement could come across as rather disingenuous. Especially when it's backed up by a statement in almost the same sentence that reads:

"I put a lot of people in positions to do great things...." - very selfless, in a self-aggrandizing sort of way, but I am sure all those people are eternally grateful.

The entire package to me just reeks of legacy/image ambition over content, and a lot of the content and branding comes from established rap and hip-hop artists from the south (i.e. the country south). Yeah, he's Canadian, so much is made (by him) of a hiatus spent in Memphis - either learning his trade or assimilating some cred while being Americanized,  depending on who's telling the story. But it all somehow comes across as very clever branding and marketing, using tried and trusted trademarks originally and less calculatedly utilized by (American) others:

• The fierce pride for a city and an area code. While this is understandable, it originated from hardcore rap and hip-hop artists who escaped from the 'hood while either trying to not forget their roots, or making sure others remembered them. But there is a huge difference between Cypress Hill or Watts or Queen's, and Forest Hill. Still, the message is to identify with a city and use it to marketing advantage.
• To that end, Drake even extended it to the classic rap/hip-hop mantra of tattooing his area code on his skin - that area code being 416. More or less the equivalent of say, 212, for New Yorkers, where the poor people don't live, often. It's not exactly a tattoo across one's navel saying "Thug Life", but then again 2Pac was the real deal. Drake even states rather incredulously that he puts lines into some songs specifically about T-O, and seems to want thanks for doing so, or at least some form of selfless/artistic credit. 
• A very vocal claim that "I do everything I can for the city, and I don't expect anything in return". Very admirable indeed, even if big old bad old T-O is not quite crying out for the help, and many have moaned that it's got way more to do with Drake's own masterplan and individual agenda than it has T-O's.
• The whole thug thing in general - you gotta have been a drug dealer or a gang banger, and if like another real deal, Fiddy Cent, well, if you been shot a whole bunch of times that's just credibility currency the like of which no one has - and certainly not Drake. But he does talk about his father having been in jail, and repeats the urban myth that it was a jail cell buddy of his dad who turned Drake onto rap. Ironically, while giving credit to that guy, Drake can't remember his name apparently because he never knew it. A seemingly convenient yet evidently unverifiable little tidbit of street cred, I guess, for a former privileged Degrassi  actor from Forest Hill.
• In many ways, this Drake "thing" needed American acceptance and approval before Canada warmed up to the guy, and even he admits that. There's a whole slew of 30-somethings from Toronna spouting off on Twitter about how great he is, today, yet when you go to their record collection it's all Springsteen and classic rock (maybe a KOL album as dressing). Huh? Howdya go from dat to groovin' wid yo bros and hoes?! But when big brother USA buys in, it's usually only a matter of time, especially for something as esoteric in mainstream Canada as rap/hip-hop. Now we have our very own bad boy rappa, only a decade or more later! Rejoice!
• The association with the big local basketball team, the Raptors. He even identifies himself as an ambassador for them, and wants to even be involved in the building's management and presentation. Hmm, can anyone remember any famous rap or hip-hop dude who has a passion for basketball and is often pictured in the expensive seats right on the sidelines? Does JayBey ring any bells, for example?!
• It's pretty clear that this young man has seen the wealth and the lifestyle of Jay-Z, Kanye et al. and decided he wants some of dat! But to hear such naked thirst for money in both his earlier desire to have $25M by the time he was 25 (been there-done that) and his new, current ambition to have $250M by the time he is 29 - well, that reeks of a rather unashamed greed way more to me than any form of artistic integrity or ambition. Had he said he wanted to be Bill Gates, and give it all away, that just might have come across better, but no. I don't think it's that healthy to be driven by the desire to have a quarter of a billion dollars by 29, when you are 25, but hey, that's just me.
• "I wanna invent something, I wanna start a company, you know".....again, this is just more copycatting and has been TM'ed to death already by all of the famous individuals he is channeling: Diddy, Jay-Z, Fiddy, Dre etc. Already a superstar with maybe hundreds of millions before 30, yet not content, and wanting to be something else that one has zero training or education for, but for which one can simply pay others to do for you and stick your name on it.
• The biggest indictment is that this supposedly mild-mannered kid from Forest Hill has begun to be involved (or indulge in?) the almost prerequisite spats in clubs with other hip-hop types, causing a stir and creating some unpleasant but rarely undesired media attention. I just laughed when I heard this Canadian boy's posse were involved in altercations with that other bad boy, Chris Brown and his crew. One person commenting on it on MTV suggested that Drake needed that, to up his rep a little, with the big boys. Fortunately though, it's hardly the war between East and West coasts that involved real bullets and killed famous people - it's just one kid who was charged with slapping around his girlfriend fighting with another kid, over that same (ex-)girlfriend, apparently. Far from classy and even farther from typically "Canadian".
• The single most disappointing thing overall is the lack of any apparent musical excitement or artistic ambition - he more or less expressed answers in that regard in terms of how he wants to win, wants to be #1 and wants to be mega-rich. This is almost artistic bankruptcy, from where I stand. I cannot find anything remotely intellectual or endearing in it.

I could go on, but why bother. As long as the people see worth in him and enjoy his music then good luck to the guy. And I suppose I should give him a break for only being 26 today, an age at which what one spouts is often meant to have little significance whatsoever. But when I hear a very rich kid in his mid-20s stating:

"I sacrificed so much, dedicated so much of my time, given up a lot of years for this" - well, how much sympathy or empathy is one supposed to have? I think anyone who made $25M by 25 and who fully intends to make $250M by 29 should zip it. Ya don't wanna come across as moaning about how much life you missed, makin' that quarter billion in yo twenties, do ya?! Or the other way of seeing it, and it might be the most telling thing I gleaned from listening to Drake during the entire interview, is that all that money doesn't seem to make him happy and there's still a huge hole inside.  He should think about that some if it's indeed the case.

That might be the take home lesson for y'all, kids - having $25M in your bank account by 25 could just have the capacity to suck the very need to get out of bed each morning right out of you, suck the very life out of you, take away your purpose......and then what?

We will close it out with some lyrics from his big number "Started at the Bottom", full of swagger and clinging to familiar cliches of a formely down-and-out rapper, now proudly wearing their chains and swag even when at home; that relative "bottom" being Forest Hill or his having been a charmed young actor on Degrassi, notwithstanding. - Kevin Mc

"I'ma worry bout me give a f**k about you

Nigga, just a reminder to myself

I wear every single chain even when I'm in the house

Cause we

Started from the bottom now we here

Started from the bottom now my whole team f**kin here

Started from the bottom now we here

Started from the bottom now the whole team here nigga"

From the sublime to the totally ridiculous!

    

Hey EU peeps, here we go again! Another interesting week to say the least; quite a few things took my eye (and ears), and I have selected a few of note for this weekend's blog. First up, the announcements of the Nobel Prize winners for 2013 which certainly warmed a few hearts I am sure.

After a life and career as a short story writer (who recently retired), the Nobel Prize for literature went to a Canadian woman for the first time in history, none other than Alice Munro. Now in her eighties, Ms. Munro could not be reached and Peter England of the Swedish Academy had to leave a message on her answering machine to tell her the news! She was typically (Canadian) humble in her reaction to winning, even after such a magnificent cherry-on-the-cake of her career. Many congratulations to her. 

The prize in physics rightfully went to those who first conceptualised the "God particle" more scientifically referred to as Higg's boson - that would be Peter Higgs of the UK and Francois Englert of Belgium. Even though the particle was only truly discovered/proven in July 2012 at the Large Hadron Collider of CERN, the prize was appropriately awarded to the pair who came up with the hypothesis almost a half century ago. Quite remarkable!

Onward to the Nobel Peace Prize, for which my money was on none other than Malala Yousafzai, who has been the subject of a few other blogs on this site in the past. Most recently, we commented on our enormous disappointment that Time magazine sold out and gave their prestigious "Person of the Year" award in 2012 to Barack Obama, for merely getting re-elected against almost non-existent competition. As opposed to a girl who got shot for her belief that girls everywhere deserve the same education and opportunities as boys. 

But let's not forget that the Time award was previously known as the "Man of the Year" award until as recently as the millennium, and old habits die hard. Choosing Obama over Malala was a woefully conservative and wholly underwhelming choice, almost as incomprehensible as the Nobel Peace Prize he got simply for being elected in the first place. In both cases, I feel the choice represented an inverse bias and had a lot more to do with new world old school politicking, than any quantifiable merit. In fact, the Academy acknowledged they had given Obama the award more for what he would (read, might) do, rather than had done for world peace, which in my opinion cheapened the award. What he did do was spend a first term way more focused on getting a second term, rather than fussing over world peace. 

It's ironic that Obama beat out Malala for the Time award, just because he scraped his way into a second term (and for being a black president, which also got him a Nobel Peace Prize) as once again, in 2013, the Pakistani girl lost out for her own shot at the Nobel Peace Prize to an organisation (OPCW) responsible for eradicating chemical weapons on a global scale. This is the outfit who will be responsible for decommissioning all of Syria's chemical weapons systems, which while being an admirable pursuit, does not in my opinion in any way equate with the notoriety and individual heroism displayed by Malala Yousafzai. 

One is an organisation paid to carry out its mandate, and the other is a schoolgirl who risked her life everyday by speaking out for girl's rights everywhere and who got shot for doing so - which did nothing to silence her - in fact, she has become more vocal than ever and is truly an inspiration to girls (and their parents) all over the globe. I cannot help but feel that losing out to Obama for the Time award and to the OPCW for the Nobel Peace Prize just underlines that we still have a way to go when it comes to real equality between males and females. 

Go and look at who has won the former "Man of the Year" award since it became "Person" in 1999 to see how cosmetic the supposed political correctness is, versus it being any actual reflection of the fact that women are as dominant as men in today's zeitgeist. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, indeed. There's a lot more recognition given to a black male politician for staying home in Washington for four more years than some Pakistani schoolgirl who took a bullet from the Taliban enemy that this president is also at war against - I know who is by far the real (only) hero of the two!

But Malala did get the Children's Peace Prize in Holland this past week, so we are glad she continues to draw attention to her crusade for equal rights for children everywhere, and still being a tender 16-years-old, well, time is on her side to one day go to the White House as a new Nobel Peace Prize winner. It will be quite fitting that it sure can't be Barack Obama who will be there as her host, and in all likelihood, it will be Hilary Clinton, potentially the first female President in American history. Very appropriate!

Our second subject (befitting the sublime to ridiculous title) actually arises out of a campaign championed by that other Obama, the first lady, and her "Let's Move" initiative. It's part of her approach to tackle childhood obesity that is at epidemic levels in the US, via promoting both a more active lifestyle as well as better nutrition for the nation's youth. 

It's a worthy cause, not least because the future healthcare costs for a nation of already clinically sick children is going to be massive when they become adults with lifelong obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and atherosclerosis (among others) ahead of them. For the first time in history, children are developing age-related diseases ahead of their parents, which is a staggering indictment both of the impact of fast food on society, as well as the outcome of endless hours spent in front of TV and computer screens. 

As part of the effort to support this campaign, the US Postal Service released a special "Just Move" stamp series (example shown above) to commemorate the concept and get it into the public eye everywhere. But whaddya know? There's always someone who wants to spoil the party, and due to criticism from various groups, the stamp has been withdrawn and will have to be redesigned for later release.

What's the huge problem? Apparently we had a skateboarder with no kneepads, a kid doing a cannonball into the pool ((whoa, dangerous!) and another doing a headstand with no helmet. Are you kidding me?! I mean, come onnnnn! This is totally ridiculous and a real example of what is wrong in society today - total (often hypocritical) political correctness at all times in public, yet simultaneously doing nothing to change things or even happily clinging to old ways in private. 

You know what I find the most ridiculous thing in all of this? As kids, we didn't have kneepads, we crashed into the water with total abandon and got ourselves into all sorts of shapes and situations, and yet we are the healthy ones? If these naysayers worried less about kneepads or helmets and always finding something negative in a positive, and actually got their kids off their backsides and out doing these activities like we did, they might actually become healthier! 

I think it's a real shame that the stamps were pulled and the artist involved saw his work being removed from the shelves. All due to some little concerns over a cut knee or a bump on the elbow or a bruised leg - as a kid, I know which I would happily race outside to get, rather than being diagnosed with adult-onset diabetes or metabolic syndrome, due to the way kids get to live today. 

Shame on those responsible for creating a furore over this stamp and for giving kids yet another excuse to claim that activity and exercise can be dangerous, so just let us sit idle at our gaming screens while we stuff our face with crap, as we can't get injured doing that at least. Out of the mouths of babes. 

Ironically, finding any excuse to not let kids get into any of the activities shown on the stamp above is going to injure them in a way that makes a sore knee seem like something to celebrate and show off by comparison. We used to be proud of our battle scars, and maybe there was more reason to be proud of them than even we realised at the time - we were active and we were healthy! ;) - Kevin Mc

The Twit in Twitter is meant to be silent!

       

It was an interesting week, what with Washington bullets and the chaos surrounding the ridiculous shutting down of government services in the US, but you know, I have said more than enough about Obama and his difficulty in actually leading, in the past. As each month passes, he gets closer and closer to the "dead duck" status of a President hitting mid-life (crisis?!) of a second term, where all the focus and attention shifts to someone else.

That someone else being Hilary Clinton, natch, who he fought with aggressively to get to the White House in the first place. It's already time for a change; a sentiment with which most of America agrees, I am sure, given the current excuse for a "government". I said back in 2009 that there would be no JFK+Jackie O legacy left behind by the Obamas, not least because in their case there were no brilliant politics nor even any serious risk-taking behind their hype and celebrity. Trying to please all the people all the time does not a President make, and when one spends almost an entire first term focused on a second term? Well, that story is already written, and current events are an accurate summary of it. 

From the previously sublime to the totally ridiculous, I couldn't help but watch the online feud between controversial Irish singer Sinead O'Connor and precocious American pop starlet Miley Cyrus that exploded on all our media this week. Right from the get-go, I couldn't help but chuckle at the mere concept of a wacky 50-ish former (female) star lecturing some currently hot 20-year-old on her behaviour. Does Sinead even remember her own 20's? We do!

Now, I don't doubt that some of Sinead's comments did come from a "motherly" place, in the recent open letter to Miley that she published online. But there is one very key point to make here from the start - Miley does have a mother. And a father. It's their job to continue to try and guide their former little girl, now that she is all grown up and a young woman. 

It's not because Miley confessed to have been inspired by Sinead's very touching (and admittedly very classy) video for "Nothing Compares 2 U", that Sinead O'Connor has some special right to criticize the young woman and accuse her of being a de facto prostitute for the music industry, and being pimped out to it by either management, or even God forbid, by herself. 

Now don't get me wrong, I understand the ongoing fuss about the current female elite in pop appearing on stage and in videos wearing less and less, and being sexualized more and more. I get it. But you know, this was all done before, and caused a bigger fuss in even more conservative times. Madonna is still the one they are all trying to emulate in one way or another, and Madonna is older than even Sinead is today!

We have heard the warnings regarding all the starlets who followed Madonna, and that includes Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Lady Gaga, Rhianna and bla-bla-bla. It only takes one hot starlet to show more skin or pull some controversial attention-grabbing move, and the other girls see the response (and the increased income) and then try to do one better. It's not that different from high school, it's just on a public stage with massive amounts of money involved. 

I think it's actually naive of Sinead to assume they are being totally "pimped", and have been brainwashed into it by some svengali music biz types, who use them and abuse them, then go off to their "yachts in Antigua" on the spoils. Give me a break - the music industry has been milking talent dry for decades and squeezing every dollar out of them - there's nothing new about that. Apart from the fact that in 2013, managers and their acts have way more control of their destiny and revenue streams than ever before, and acts do not need to be "prostituted" to make music anymore.

It might even be insulting in the extreme to suggest that a rather savvy young businesswoman artist (and that is what she appears to be) is being totally controlled, and none of the decisions regarding her music, performances and image are being made by herself. I doubt that this is the case. But, she is all grown-up from being Hannah Montana, and like almost all ex-Disney child stars, she seems to be going through a semi-rebellion against all that, occasionally acting out as a way of separating herself from her past persona and stamping a new reality on her brand. Quite frankly, the skimpy tops, exposed skin and knowing innuendo are quite typical of adolescent girls in general, on your typical high street in summer, and it's not a phenotype restricted to female starlets. 

Tell me, what more do you expect of a 20-year-old who was formerly seen as all innocent and prim-and-proper, who now wants to play with the big girls of pop? She is simply announcing that she has arrived onto the bigger stage, and while I agree that it could be done more discreetly and more musically, well, in 2013, you can get more attention in a heartbeat via Twitter or an awards show than from a year of touring. Sinead  herself is acutely aware of this fact, and it may well explain what is going on here - free publicity. Little more. 

I ain't going to get into the whole furore over the MTV Music Awards performance with Robin Thicke - too much has been said already. I didn't like it, and most didn't. But she's an extremely prominent 20-year-old who (by most points of view) made a mistake or a bad judgement call - well, whoop-di-doo, let's chain her up in the town square stocks for that! People need to get over it, or over themselves - one cannot be a hypocrite just because she is famous. 

If we lambast her as if she were a prostitute (and you know, it is desperation that often leads to that career choice), then we better be prepared to do the same to a nation's teenagers, who inevitably make such errors growing up. It's not because Miley's are observed by millions that makes it so unforgivable. Burdening a 20-year-old with the demand that she always be a role model at such a tender age is just not fair, and I am sure she does not need some faded star and part-time wackjob (who is older than her mom) playing her mother. 

Ms. O'Connor has had a colorful past of her own. Just because she claims, all holier-than-thou style, that she did not accede to the music industry and she hid her sexuality, does not a saint make. Let's remind ourselves of some of the history here:

• Sinead caused not a little controversy in her own very early career, by being present at pro-IRA rallies. These were venues for showing support for the violent struggle against the British Government in Northern Ireland, via bombs and assassinations. It was claimed much later on that she was being "misled" by her manager, one Fachtna O' Ceallaigh, who had indoctrinated her with the righteousness of the IRA's actions. So she refused to let the music industry sexualize her, while letting it use her celebrity to validate terrorist acts? Uh-huh. 
• At one point, she accused the boys of U2 of ripping off small Irish acts via their label and recording studios in Dublin, even though the boys were already filthy rich! I laughed out loud when after being asked if she had tried to make amends, she said that each time she spotted Bono at industry events and got close to him, some burly types always got in her way. I wonder why? Poor Bono was probably worried about having his throat slit!
• Sinead actually wanted to be known as Mother Bernadette Mary, after being ordained as a "priest" in the late 90's by a religious offshoot not recognized by the Catholic church. You tear up the picture of the Pope on SNL but you want to become Ireland's first female priest? Now don't get me wrong, Sinead and I would see eye-to-eye on the bulk of her opinions about that church (read "A QUIET RESIGNATION" for example), but then also having a desire to become a priest among them? Wacko.
• The aforementioned "performance" on SNL in 1992 wherein she tore up the picture of the Pope speaks for itself. No need to discuss further. I did smile though at her remembering the time she got into an elevator and Frank Sinatra, the Chairman of the Board himself, was standing there. Frank had said he would slap her, if he ever saw her again. Sinead was trembling, lol. Well, it is Frank Sinatra, not the Pope - Frank's the real deal!
• Her third marriage to Steve Cooney lasted from July 2010 to April 2011. Her fourth marriage was to a therapist called Barry Herridge, whom she had met a few months before on the internet. They married in December 2011 in Las Vegas, but 17 days later she announced on her website that their marriage had ended, after living together for only seven days. A female priest who truly seems to mock the institution of marriage? Wacko.
• Various online postings by Sinead about the state of her mental health, and her need for help, and more recently her Twitterwar with superstar Miley, simply underline the troubles that lie within. The fact she that she has since threatened legal action to that 20-year-old girl for responding more or less as any 20-year-old would (should?) to her, is by any standards just completely ridiculous! Be careful Ms. O'Connor, Miley is way richer than you are, I imagine, and she can afford to take you to the cleaners in any American courtroom. 

Need I go on? Sinead O'Connor is an Irish singer whose career never recovered from the SNL "performance" debacle, never mind any other shenanigans she got up to before or since. It must sting to see these kids of barely 20, with such huge success and maybe a lifelong career ahead of them, instead of a screwed up one. But to go public in a tone of claimed "motherliness" and lecture some girl, and then threaten to sue her, at almost 50 years old herself? All this inside the same week? Someone does indeed need to grow up - the one with no excuse for such behaviour!

Miley, you go, girl. Listen to your real parents more, and listen to all the clingers, and wannabes and self-proclaimed advisers (including wackjob "therapists") less. You're doing some growing up in public which is not always fun to watch, but you sure seem to be still way more centered than some of those willing to take a ride on your fame and success. For their own gain. 

Do y'all think it's entirely coincidence that Ms. O'Connor is heading back out on tour herself? Uh-huh. This recent public outburst (which could have been handled in private) has nothing at all to do with the fact that Sinead O'Connor audiences can fit into the upper mezzanine of the huge stadiums that Miley Cyrus can fill? Ticket sales envy is not at the bottom of it all? Yet Miley is the one accused of pimping herself to the media to increase revenues? 

Ms. O'Connor should zip it. Ms. Cyrus should rip it, but maybe just let the twerking go, and occasionally channel some Hannah and keep more clothes on. No biggie. ;) - Kevin Mc