The Rip-Off feat. Nazareth and The Beatles

While it has been said the the Fab Four have spawned more musical acts than most, that they had more original riffs and ideals than most, one thing is certain - their greatest tracks are ones that Ringo and McCartney had little creative input on.

After several weeks of "The Rip-Off" being silent around here, we're back with a whole new musical moment for you to ponder.

First up, it's quite possible the only other song that Nazareth is known for: Hair Of The Dog




And the song that it was likely born from - Day Tripper by The Beatles

The Rip-Off feat. Led Zeppelin and Chicago

It's been a couple of weeks since the last installment of this, so I had to make sure I picked a good one.

Being a rabidly faithful Zeppelin fan for as long as I can remember, I tend to notice the occasional riff from other artists that sound like Zep tracks. From Tori Amos to Pearl Jam and even obscure "college music" bands like Dig and The Bogmen, Zeppelin's presence is still around.

So let's get into it.

The track has been covered by everyone from Great White and even Pink as well as remixed by electronic-music mastermind John Graham. Prominently featured on Zep's 1968 debut LP, "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" is a classic among classics.



Chicago's 1970 LP of the same name contained the classic 25 or 6 to 4, a track with a rather peculiar history about it. Musical historians have speculated about an alleged numerological mysticism and some fans claim it has to do with cocaine, but all seem to be missing striking similarities to the Zeppelin track above.

The Rip-Off feat. The Judybats and Led Zeppelin

While many bands have used Zeppelin as a jumping off point, a band of inspiration, The Judybats track "Being Simple" is a little too close to Zeppelin's classic "The Rain Song" to just be coincidental.

Check out the Judybat's guitar riff in Being Simple

And now, in it's original for from Zeppelin:

The Rip-Off feat Ricky Nelson and Deep Purple

A pretty straight-forward theft of a riff, even if Deep Purple are known as one of the greatest bands in the world.

But first, Ricky Nelson and Summertime



And now, Deep Purple's Black Night

The Rip-Off: Featuring The Cure and Wilco

This particlar edition of "The Rip-Off" features two of my favorite bands of all time - The Cure and Wilco.

And while I will defend both Jeff Tweedy and Robert Smith to my dying breath, there is more than just a minor simularity between these two tracks.

First up, The Cure with "In Between Days"

** you'll notice that there is not a YouTube video posted here as the embed function has been disable. So, would someone please explain why anyone would put something up on YouTube and not allow an embed? It rather defeats the purpose of the site, doesn't it.**

And now, Wilco with Pot Kettle Black

The Rip-Off: Pt III feat. Nirvana and Killing Joke

I will freely admit that when Nirvana release "Nevermind", I was immediately impressed. To me, they were a band that crystalized a muscial genre that dominated the early 90s. But then I discovered Soundgarden's "Screaming Life" EP, Mother Love Bone, and The Meat Puppets and realized that there were far better bands creating this music long before Kobain and Co. sprang onto the highly commercialized MTV scene. The only thing that Nirvana had going for them was their willingness to be overly marketable. But this post really isn't about that.

For our third installment of "The Rip-Off", we take a look at a classic, punk/metal/dance band that most people haven't heard of and how one of their greatest tracks were stolen by Nirvana.

First up, off the Nevermind LP: Come As You Are



And now, Killng Joke's track: Eighties

The View From Her Book Is Pretty Much The Same

Hasselbeck is being accused of plagarism and the person representing the author of the book she ripped from, Susan Hassett, warned her it was coming:

....in which Susan claims she sent Elisabeth a book called "Living with Celiac Disease" back in April of '08. Thirteen months later, Susan says Hasselbeck published the same book with a new title: "The G Free Diet-A Gluten Free Survival Guide." Yes, the title sucks.

Susan compares chapters and lines. Here are some highlights.

Susan's Book Chapter 1: What is Celiac Disease?
Hasselbeck Chapter 2: What is Celiac Disease?

Susan's tips: "Shop in the outer isles of the supermarket."
Hasselbeck's tips: "Food in the outer isles of the supermarket."

And the comparisons go on and on.

Sean Hannity's surely going to come running to his favorite girl's defense. And I'm certain that all the members of the right-wing peanut gallery are going to chime in about how this is a "manufactured controversy" and that Hasselbeck is being "target" because she's a woman, a conservative, blah blah blah blah.

In her defense, everyone in her party says and writes and does the same thing ad infinitum. It's as if they are one personality, a collective, like the Borg.

Ok, that's the only Star Trek reference you'll likely find here. I promise it won't happen again.

But what of the other books that are written about Celiac Disease? Don't they all essentially say the same thing? What about medical websites - are they at risk of being called out for their use of someone else's text and thoughts? That's ultimately for a jury to decide should someone attempt to file suit.

And since Susan Hassett has, the odds are in her favor. It's not a crime to write a book on simular subject matter by any means. However, when your chapters and passages are practically mirror images, then you're just not exercising any sort of original thought.

Do you think she'll cry in court to try to get the judge to have pity on her?

Of Plagarism, Quotation, And Pleas For Acceptance

A recent speech in Anchorage by conservative Republican "cover-girl" Sarah Palin contained some interesting lines written by Newt Gingrich and Craig Shirley.

Geoffrey Dunn writes:

Sarah Palin's speech delivered in Anchorage on Wednesday -- the one in which she declared "screw political correctness" and wondered why "we have to pussyfoot around our troublesome foes" -- repeatedly lifted from an article written four years ago by Newt Gingrich and Craig Shirley without attribution.

While Palin twice mentioned Gingrich in the speech (she never acknowledged Shirley), she frequently mixed her own remarks about Reagan with passages that appear to be pulled directly from the Gingrich-Shirley article.

Although one can argue that Palin didn't blatantly rip off Gingrich's writings - as she at least mentioned him twice in her speech but can't tell the difference between "recently" and 4 years ago ,it is interesting to note that she didn't mention Craig Shirley at any point during her seemingly endless preamble. The reason for that would most likely reside in the fact that Palin likely thinks that she will be seen in a more "respectible" light now that she has "quoted" Newt.

If this was Palin's plan, it's standard fair with conservatives. The rationale is the more you mention or pander to anyone within your base, the more likely they are to see you as favorable and a "team player". Gingrich refused to name Palin as an "emerging leader" in an interview with Christianity Today. But now that Palin has done so, the chances of her being reconsidered by Gingrich increases. That is, unless he has aspirations of his own to run in 2012.

Perhaps the only other thing Palin could do in order to get Newt's attention is to out some "pagan" group in Alaska that is calling on their "god" to help bring in a better haul of crab in the coming season. Now that would make for a great episode of "The Deadliest Catch".

-------------------------------------------

Back to the "plagarism/quotation" issue, this was something that came up in reference to Barack Obama when he used lines in a speech origianlly used by Governor Deval Patrick:

The allegation came as it emerged that Karl Rove, the former chief strategist for President Bush, has been involved in putting together an attack plan to counter Mr Obama, amid a growing Republican belief that he will win the Democratic nomination.

Howard Wolfson, the communications director for Mrs Clinton, referred reporters to a passage in Mr Obama’s speech in Milwaukee, comparing it to one delivered by his friend Deval Patrick, the Massacussetts Governor, in 2006. Referring to Martin Luther King, the Declaration of Independence and Franklin D. Roosevelt, Mr Obama said: “Don’t tell me words don’t matter. ‘I have a dream.’ Just words? ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’ Just words! ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’ Just words — just speeches!”

This became a very hot talking-point on the campaign trail, as Hillary Clinton came off with the zinger of "that's change you can xerox".

Whereas Obama was on the "other team", this was great ammunition for conservative Republicans. But since this is Sarah Palin we are talking about, no one is to mention her name aloud without being accused of "sexism" or simply being "afraid" of her.

More than just aobut any conservative politician out there, Palin is ready to act at a moments notice. You never see her in any form of "normal" light that you are likely to see other politicians in. She's quite possibly the greatest publicitiy-hound within the Republican party - ready to pander to Limbaugh, Fox"News", and do and say anything and everything that will keep her in the spotlight for just one moment more.

The broader question is, will Palin's "quotation" of Gingrich bring her into his favor? This seems to be her angle these days.

With the continuing talk of the GOP somehow gaining ground in 2010 and 2012, Palin seems to be continually placing herself within proximity of those that are considered more of a power-player than herself. What Palin has to bring to the table is that folksy wisdom and a psuedo-sexual vibe that you won't find in virtually any member of the GOP. She's the "pretty set-dressing" that Republicans need. After all, they have always been style-over-substance in not only their rhetoric, but their implementation of policy and the practice thereof.

So, will Gingrich respond to Palin's posturing and supplication?

Only time will tell.