Posted on 09/23/2023 7:57:26 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Lou Bega’s “Mambo No. 5,” a 1999 smash that topped the pop charts in most global territories, is one of the most love-it-or-hate-it songs of all time — Stephen King’s wife definitely falls in the latter camp. The author recently spoke to Rolling Stone to promote his latest novel, “Holly,” and revealed his wife once threatened to divorce him due to his love of the infamous track.
“Oh, yeah. Big time,” King said when asked if the rumors about his love for “Mambo No. 5” are true. “My wife threatened to divorce me. I played that a lot.”
“I had the dance mix,” the author continued. “I loved those extended play things and I played both sides of it. And one of them was just total instrumental. And I played that thing until my wife just said, ‘One more time, and I’m going to -leave you.'”
King must’ve stopped, as he’s been happily married to Tabitha King since 1971. The couple has three children together, including the writers Joe Hill and Owen King. The author said his wife’s ultimatum arrived while he was writing “11/22/63,” his 2011 novel about a time traveller who tries to prevent the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
“Mambo No. 5,” recorded by Bega, a German singer, was rooted in a 1949 instrumental single by Dámaso Pérez Prado that Bega sampled for his rewritten vocal rendition, which called out women’s names (“A little bit of Monica…”). It was the performer’s only significant hit, peaking at No. 3 in the U.S. while going all the way to No. 1 in the U.K., Canada, Italy, France and more than 20 other countries.
King detailed more of his daily listening in the interview. “When I write, there are things that I can listen to a lot,” he said. “And a lot of it is techno stuff or disco stuff, but techno in particular. There’s this group called LCD Soundsystem, and I love that. Fatboy Slim is somebody else. I can just listen to that stuff. If you tried to write and listen to Leonard Cohen, how the fuck would you do that? Because you’d have to listen to the words and you’d have to listen to what he’s saying. But with some of the techno stuff, or KC and the Sunshine Band, Gloria Gaynor, it’s all good.”
What is King currently listening to? “Lately, I think that I’ve been sort of stuck on Foghat and Bob Seger, people like that,” he said. “But I’ve also been listening to a fair amount of country music. So a lot of Travis Tritt and Alan Jackson, people like that.”
King’s new book, “Holly,” is now available for purchase.
I would have played it one more time. I don’t take well to ultimatums.
The anti-Commie thing went out the window with Bay of Pigs. That would never have happened with Nixon. He knew Khrushchev was all bluster. He wasn’t going to start WW3 over Cuba.
But I was talking about PRIOR to JFK becoming president through FRAUD!
A lot of people now on FR don't REALLY know Nixon's history, nor the actual FACTS of his presidency AND are, sadly, looking at the past through this century's WOKE glasses, as well as badly written, inaccurate articles, books, Wiki, and whatever else they are taking as gospel.
Curious the claims of JFK being “Conservative.” If he truly was, why did Reagan bolt from supporting the Dems ? The Dems had been taken over by the Socialists way back in 1896 when they purged the sane center-right Cleveland Bourbonites. When the party nominated center-right John W. Davis in 1924, the leftist base lost their minds and bolted to support 3rd party Progressive (leftist Socialist Republican) Bob La Follette, Sr.
The base never let anyone center-right near the Presidential nomination again. They wouldn’t even let centrist VP John Nance Garner have the nomination in 1940 to displace FDR. If JFK had been seen as that, he’d have lost the nomination in 1960 to left winger Sen. Hubert Humphrey.
Stephen King Played ‘Mambo No. 5’ So Much His Wife ‘Threatened to Divorce’ Him...”
I thought for SURE that this was going to have something to do with another woman. Or a man.
“Hey there good lookin’. Ya wanna go up to my room and play Mambo #5?”
Though I would say that a few ( VERY FEW ) Dem presidential candidates/presidents, after 1896, weren't quite full on Socialists. Grover Cleveland was the last of the "good" Dem presidents.
Al Smith wasn't all that much of a Socialist ( just a DIRTY TAMMANY HALL one), but also never president.
I agree. I liked his early books, especially “The Stand,” but I started getting tired of him not long after “Christine” and “Pet Sematary.”
I read “It” and “The Tommyknockers” and was underwhelmed. “The Dark Half” finally did it for me. I found it formulaic and dull.
I think most folks would be shocked to know what a Socialist in 1896 was vs. today. Most of the Socialist agenda was passed. Sadly, even the Republicans accepted it. Why Eisenhower never rolled back 2+ decades of a Socialist agenda by FDR/Truman. If he had followed Harding’s example, the 1950s would’ve been an unparalleled period of economic prosperity. It was really only on the surface, and the economic crash by the late ‘50s, which propelled the Demonrats to 4-decade long control of the House and 26 year control of the Senate was an example of that.
Nixon’s big flaw was that he leaned more to the failed Keynesian model on economics. Tax cuts, spending cuts and massive government rollbacks was the way to unleash prosperity. Had he championed the latter model in 1960, he’d have easily been able to overcome the JFK/LBJ Demonrat/Mafia fraud in IL, TX, and several other states.
No way. The Kennedy family was one of the worst things visited on America.
Ike was NOT a "great" president, which far too damned many, here, claim.
He was a military guy who after WW II was the president of Columbia University ( shades of Woodrow Wilson ! ), and had many black marks against him as president, not the least of which was never supporting Nixon...threw him to the radical lefty/STINKING COMMIE wolves over and over again!
Today we'd properly call him part of the GOPe!
Ike was really a Demonrat. Because of Truman’s massive unpopularity (akin to Wilson in 1920) he didn’t want to run as one because that would’ve stood a good chance of him losing in 1952 (it should’ve been Robert Taft & Gen. Douglas MacArthur as the GOP ticket). Ike’s father was a Socialist.
And, yes, he did nothing at all to help Nixon in 1960. Had he dropped dead from one of his heart episodes before 1961, that would’ve elevated Nixon and he would’ve, again, handily won that year (somewhat similar to 1964).
The lefties/Pinkos/stinking COMMIES/Fellow travelers had been after Nixon, too and claw, unceasingly, since he beat Helen Gahagan Douglas, for the Senate Seat. And Ike did less than NOTHING WHATEVER, re that whole thing and the crap thrown at him, resulting in THE CHECKERS SPEECH!
Yet through it all, Nixon never bad mouthed Ike, when it happened, or afterwards.
Ike's help, in '60, might have helped; however, what with the Mafia and Dem rigging, who knows?
Bttt
Bttt
Combo Number 5 is better.
The left was after Nixon before that. He took out a beloved leftist New Dealer Democrat Congressman, Jerry Voorhis, in 1946, leading to the GOP winning back Congress for the first time since Hoover. The incident exposing Alger Hiss was one more thing, and defeating fellow leftist Rep. Helen Gahagan Douglas in 1950 was the cherry on top (nevermind that a lot of non-leftist Dem politicians supported Nixon, and also including Joe Kennedy, Sr. sent $$ to Nixon).
Nixon’s ability to defend himself, the Checkers speech, was pretty good. Ike actually wanted to dump Nixon in 1956 for the Democrat Texan Navy Secretary, Robert Anderson (reading his Wikipedia entry is curious, Ike seemed to have an unusually strong affinity for him, apparently even wanting to draft Anderson against Nixon in ‘60, and then after Anderson refused, trying to strong-arm Nixon into making him his VP running mate). Ike was going to put Nixon at Defense (presumably then he’d dump him altogether).
Nixon was classy for not badmouthing Ike, despite his deserving a good criticism. As for Anderson, who had quite the post-1961 career (he ended up at Defense in lieu of Nixon’s refusal to job swap before then). He was later prosecuted in the 1980s for criminal activity. None other than Rudy Giuliani did the prosecution as U.S. Attorney. Curious how these folks all tie together.
The Hiss thing not really all THAT much, since that didn't cool the hearts of the damned lefties towards JFK, the "SPARE, BRAINLESS PRINCE" of the Kennedy clan.
Though yes, I agree, the first whiff of lefty/COMMIE anger was beating Voorhis, which predates my earliest, rather rabid interest in politics.
I do know that Ike hated Nixon and wanted to replace him. Thankfully that morbidly STUPID idea failed to come to fruition.
Re Nixon and something you said earlier....
Yes, Nixon had the guts to stand up to Khrushchev, had his number from the get go, and so there would NEVER have been the Cuban Missile, and as an added bonus, there would NOT have been the Vietnam War either, had Nixon been president instead of that drugged out of his mind, fornicating with any female who crossed his path, easily influenced JFK.
Up to the bitter end in August 1974, Demonrats saw Nixon being forced out of the Presidency as payback for the Hiss thing. It was REALLY personal. 29 years after his death and they’re still kicking him around, but the hatred for Trump eclipsed anything directed at Nixon. Despite Nixon’s faults and being wrong-headed on many policies, I think he’d be 100% behind Trump today, remembering what he went through with an evil media and a profoundly corrupt elitist Establishment/Derp State.
RE: Vietnam
The question on that (with a ‘61-’69 Pres. Nixon) is what explicit policies would he have pursued ? He wouldn’t have had the imbecilic JFK/LBJ Cabinet (certainly no Robert McNamara as the “Republican” Defense Secretary). Some speculated he might’ve been more isolationist, or let the South Vietnamese take the lead. The other end suggests he might’ve allowed more hawkish interests to have used limited nuclear attacks (that would’ve likely upset too many Americans). I don’t think he would’ve let media criticisms (idiots like the Commie Cronkite) influence him too much, since he knew they hated him anyway (Voorhis/Hiss/Douglas/JFK). If he had ended up with a permanent split, a la Korea, that would’ve been a win.
With a lot of the war stuff settled before 1969, you may never have seen the total social breakdown as a result, from which we’ve never recovered (which was my biggest issue with the JFK/LBJ regime). As it was, so much had been effed up, Nixon couldn’t clean up the mess post-1969. It would’ve required more dramatic changes. Reagan would’ve been better as President from 1969-77, might’ve ended the showdown with the Soviets earlier, although they were still firmly in control. Might’ve been back to ineffectual RINOs from 1977-onwards and then a similar decay as we’ve reached today, just with different events.
I didn’t know the song so I played it on YouTube.
Now I like Stephen King even less.
What kind of monster becomes obsessed with such a terrible, worthless song?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.