The bitch is back, again: Move back to England or go kill yourself

Published 16 years ago -  - 16y ago 11

If it’s April it must be time for a rant about Elton John (a/k/a Lady John for you anglophiles). Just when I was beginning to think he had faded from public consciousness for good, he strolls up Capitol Hill to lecture the US on spending more money for AIDS. I don’t know about you, but I just love it when some hypocritical-leftist-millionaire-superstar lectures the rest of us about opening our wallets for his pet cause du jour. It’s both entertaining and revolting. The New York Times described the surreal scene well: “His hair was the color of a sunburst. His suit was appropriately conservative — navy blue Versace, complete with matching shoes. (The distinctive gold emblems on the heels were a dead giveaway.)”

Turn to C-Span and pass the popcorn…I’m going to be sick.

Lady John said the US had a moral obligation to spend more money on AIDS funding: “This is the government of the richest nation in history and I’m here asking you for more money to stop the worst epidemic in history.” Calling AIDS the worst epidemic in history is laughable. The fact of the matter is the US already spends more on AIDS than it does for cancer, and cancer kills 12 times as many people annually, and has been killing them for a lot longer than AIDS. Diabetes kills many more Americans (and has been doing so for a lot longer) than AIDS, but the government spends more on AIDS research than diabetes.

“No nation, corporation, foundation or individual has the money you have. No one even comes close,” John continued. This is not quite true because Elton comes close. What’s more, he matches the federal government with his amazing ability to squander tons of money on wasteful spending.

Not too many years ago, Lady John had an estimated worth of more than $250 million. Yet despite that vast financial empire he was forced to borrow 40 million dollars just to pay some of his bills, putting up homes in England, France, and the US as collateral. The Times of London reported that John’s debts included an $11 million overdraft with a bank and a $400,000-a-week credit card habit. Did you catch that? A $400,000-A-WEEK credit card habit, spent on jewels, cars, clothes, designer wigs, and who knows what else. I’m scared to imagine. John admits that during one 20-month period he spent nearly $56 million for personal items. He’s acknowledged spending more than $2 million a month on shopping sprees for clothes, classic cars, jewels and CDs, racking up $205,774 in flower bills alone. Yet Lady John wants more money from Mr. and Mrs. American Taxpayer, some of whom have AIDS and few of whom could buy the outfit he wore to meet Congress.

What gives Elton the right to lecture us about AIDS funding? He established and AIDS foundation that has funded $35 million of grass-roots treatment and prevention programs in 55 countries in the last decade. $35 million over ten years seems a bit paltry by Lady John’s standards. That’s probably less money that he spends wiping his ass with $100 bills. John, who’d never testified before a government hearing, claimed he was nervous about it but willing to “use his celebrity” to do good. That’s just peachy, Elton. How about using some of your $400,000-a-week credit card habit. Imagine all the good that could do.


As nauseatingly hypocritical as Lady John’s performance on Capitol Hill was, I ‘m more disgusted by the actions of the senators who invited him.

I quote the New York Times: “His hosts, a few of whom received him in a private meeting before he testified in the Senate, were starstruck on a bipartisan basis. ‘I’ve been an admirer for years,’ said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, the Utah Republican and occasional songwriter, whose own tunes tend toward the religious. Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, told Sir Elton he was ‘absolutely fantastic’ at a private concert during the recent World Economic Forum in New York. Mr. Leahy then produced an expensive set of Elton John compact discs for the witness to sign. ‘A boxed set!’ Sir Elton exclaimed, reaching for a pen.”

The real scandal here is the senators alarming lack of taste. To say Lady John peaked artistically in 1974 would be generous by at least a year. More than any modern songwriter/composer (other than the loathed Andrew Lloyd Weber), John’s music has been nothing but melodramatic, sentimental, repetitious garbage for 30 years. Like anyone who lived through the 70’s, there’ve been some Elton John tunes I’ve liked, but not since 1973. Since then he has been a purveyor of that musical bile known as the “Love Theme.” My apologies to all you Lion King fans, but for once I’d like to see an animated Disney film that’s not polluted by the remedial musical musings of Elton John or Phil Collins, both of whom do less musically using all the keys on the piano than Count Basie or Duke Ellington could using just three.

Who can forget John’s raunchy 1999 dance routine in which six male dancers dressed as Boy Scouts performed a striptease while the short, plump, 53-year-old bald guy wearing a Ringo Starr (circa ’65) hairpiece belted out the smash hit “It’s a Sin.” Allowing someone as old, bald, fat, and voiceless as Elton John on stage is a sin. Is there a more pathetic sight than a fleshy, aging, rug-wearing pop star schlepping with 18-year-old guys dressed as Boy Scouts? Yes, the sight of Orrin Hatch and Patrick Leahy tripping over each other like a couple of overly titillated 13-year-old girls just to kiss Elton John’s ass.

Sadly, the display of aging US senators fawning over any pop star who shows up to push his or her leftist agenda is all too commonplace these days. And Orrin Hatch always seems to be front and center, cheek to cheek, or is that face to cheek. His lavish praise of Lady John is particularly obscene, especially in light of the awful things John has said about President Bush, and I’m sure says under his breath about Orrin Hatch. John hosted an Al Gore fundraiser in 2000 and declared a return to the Dark Ages should George Bush be elected. I’m puzzled why Lady John would oppose a return to the Dark Ages. It seems to me that a return to the Dark Ages would mean a greater acceptance and use of items such as whips and chains. I’m willing to bet, due to obvious circumstances, there was a fair amount of buggery taking place in the Dark Ages. And for the new Dark Ages to be dark, religion would have to be forced underground. I fail to see why John would oppose the return of these things.

After declaring the New Dark Ages under Bush, John said he did “not want this country to have to live under George W. Bush.” Well we are living just fine under George W. Bush, and I note that you, Elton, are still here. I guess you don’t find it so unsatisfactory after all. But if you do there are at least two alternatives I can think of to ease your pain. One is to move back to England and the other is to kill yourself. Whichever you choose will be fine with me.

11 recommended
comments icon 0 comments
0 notes
bookmark icon

Write a comment...

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *