Mic check. Mic check. I want you to know that we all should have known better when Mr. Obama said that he was for change and peace. I want you to know that we should have known better when he started to run and he went to the Black Caucus to ask for their support. When they asked him why hadn't he supported the issues of the Black Caucus, his words were he did not want to be tainted by the Civil Rights Movement. We all know that Fannie Lou Hamer only wanted to vote. This is what Mr. Obama did not want to be tainted by; therefore, when we choose not to support Mr. Obama we want him to remember all of his words where he did not want to be tainted by the Civil Rights Movement, he said stop whimpering, stop whining, stop yammering. So we want to say to Mr. Obama when we don't show up to vote, stop whining! Stop whining, Mr. Obama! We no longer believe that you will stand for anything. You never stood for the First Amendment right of free speech. You never stood for the Fifth Amendment right to have an attorney. You never stood for anything that didn't support the corporations. We are standing for all of the people not the corporations. Mr. Obama, we are going to send you back home to Chicago where you helped destroy the projects. We need someone who stands for housing. We need someone who stands for jobs. We need someone who will be true to the words they say. Goodbye Mr. Obama.
-- Ralph Poynter, husband of political prisoner and legendary attorney Lynne Stewart, speaking at the protest outside the Apollo Theater which was shut down for Barack's private fundraiser. On last week's. Black Agenda Radio, hosted by Glen Ford and Nellie Bailey, (airs each Monday at 4:00 pm EST on the Progressive Radio Network), they played the speech.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Truest statement of the week II
Of course, it's important that U.S. troops and Pentagon-paid contractors have been withdrawn. Indeed it's a huge victory for the U.S. and global anti-war movements who made it imperative for President Obama to enforce the U.S.-Iraq agreement requiring just that. But the U.S. war is not over. U.S. troops have left Iraq, but thousands are streaming into Kuwait and onto Navy ships cruising just "over the horizon." Maybe just a few hundred uniformed U.S. troops will be left in Iraq, but 15,000 or more State Department-paid mercenaries are pouring in, doing the same things--guarding the biggest-in-the-world U.S. embassy, training Iraqis to use the weapons we're still flooding the country with, "special operations"--that continue the instability. The contractors include some of the same armed men whose Pentagon-paid violence led to such outrage in the past. Americans may have forgotten, but Iraqis certainly remember.
-- Phyllis Bennis, "It's Already Too Late in Iraq" (US News & World Reports).A note to our readers
Hey --
Another Sunday.
First up, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
What did we come up with?
Ralph Poynter's speech in Harlem. (Amy Goodman 'forgot' to report on that too.)
Phyllis Bennis telling the truth about the war.
We had three more features to do when time ran out. We went with the editorial and hope to return to the two other next week. This is our Iraq feature. And, yes, we did adujst our photo of the front page of The New York Times' Sunday Review to make the paper yellow -- e.g. the paper practices "yellow journalism."
Ava and C.I. cover things that others sweep under the rug, that others spend their entire lives denying. This is another brave piece by two of the strongest feminists online. And grasp that while GLAAD and NOW get mad at two episodes of Working It, they stay silent about 30 Rock's ongoing homophobia, about their ridicule of men who dress as women (Paul), and more. Ava and C.I. also take on Democracy Now, Amy Goodman and Ralph Nader. And to repeat, this site is no longer interested in Ralph Nader. He's got a book to sell so he whores. Fine and dandy but we're not interested. As Elaine said, "Screw you, Ralph Nader."
Amy Goodman lied about the protest against Barack Obama in Harlem. She's not the only one who lied, but she is among the liars. She who ridiculed the media for under-reporting protests against wars and against Bush, whores for Barack and lies about the protest. She refuses to do a correction even after it's been pointed out to her that she's wrong. She refuses to do a correction even after Glen Ford and others take the matter public. She's a whore.
This is a short feature. We did it once to round out an edition. Then we did it a second time. E-mails and stats on those TESR Test Kitchen pieces show they're very popular. So we'll try to work in at least one a month.
Glen Ford and Chris Hedges discuss the National Defense Authorization Act and how it is a threat to Americans.
A short feature on how the Barack returned to the mother ship.
One of the great things about Ava and C.I. being on the road nearly every week (usually with Wally and Kat) is that they get exposed to so much that we would miss otherwise. We'd never heard of Undercurrents, for example. It's heard on about 100 stations around the country. (In our area, it sometimes plays on KPFA as a special. The next closest radio station to us would be in Sacremento.)
Good news for political prisoner Mumia.
A note from Ava and C.I.
An important story about how the damange from burn pits harms lives by the wife of an Iraq War veteran exposed to a burn pit in Iraq.
Senator Patty Murray wants answers on what the VA's doing for homeless women veterans.
Repost from Workers World.
Mike and the gang wrote this and we thank them for it.
We'll see you next week.
Peace.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
Another Sunday.
First up, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
What did we come up with?
Ralph Poynter's speech in Harlem. (Amy Goodman 'forgot' to report on that too.)
Phyllis Bennis telling the truth about the war.
We had three more features to do when time ran out. We went with the editorial and hope to return to the two other next week. This is our Iraq feature. And, yes, we did adujst our photo of the front page of The New York Times' Sunday Review to make the paper yellow -- e.g. the paper practices "yellow journalism."
Ava and C.I. cover things that others sweep under the rug, that others spend their entire lives denying. This is another brave piece by two of the strongest feminists online. And grasp that while GLAAD and NOW get mad at two episodes of Working It, they stay silent about 30 Rock's ongoing homophobia, about their ridicule of men who dress as women (Paul), and more. Ava and C.I. also take on Democracy Now, Amy Goodman and Ralph Nader. And to repeat, this site is no longer interested in Ralph Nader. He's got a book to sell so he whores. Fine and dandy but we're not interested. As Elaine said, "Screw you, Ralph Nader."
Amy Goodman lied about the protest against Barack Obama in Harlem. She's not the only one who lied, but she is among the liars. She who ridiculed the media for under-reporting protests against wars and against Bush, whores for Barack and lies about the protest. She refuses to do a correction even after it's been pointed out to her that she's wrong. She refuses to do a correction even after Glen Ford and others take the matter public. She's a whore.
This is a short feature. We did it once to round out an edition. Then we did it a second time. E-mails and stats on those TESR Test Kitchen pieces show they're very popular. So we'll try to work in at least one a month.
Glen Ford and Chris Hedges discuss the National Defense Authorization Act and how it is a threat to Americans.
A short feature on how the Barack returned to the mother ship.
One of the great things about Ava and C.I. being on the road nearly every week (usually with Wally and Kat) is that they get exposed to so much that we would miss otherwise. We'd never heard of Undercurrents, for example. It's heard on about 100 stations around the country. (In our area, it sometimes plays on KPFA as a special. The next closest radio station to us would be in Sacremento.)
Good news for political prisoner Mumia.
A note from Ava and C.I.
An important story about how the damange from burn pits harms lives by the wife of an Iraq War veteran exposed to a burn pit in Iraq.
Senator Patty Murray wants answers on what the VA's doing for homeless women veterans.
Repost from Workers World.
Mike and the gang wrote this and we thank them for it.
We'll see you next week.
Peace.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
Editorial: The Iraq Liars
Participating in the Debate feature at US News & World Reports last week, Phyllis Bennis and US House Rep. Dennis Kucinich both observed that the Iraq War wasn't over. But it's a point that escapes the corporate media coverage which repeatedly proclaims that all US troops have left Iraq. (We know from our e-mail that that is not the case. US troops remain in Iraq.) And sometimes they add that all have come home. (Again, we know from our e-mail that troops have been placed all around in Iraq in surrounding regions.)
It's the same media that spent last week telling you that "about 200" or "over 200" people had died in Iraq from violence since December 18th when the actual number was at least 428 by Friday. Yes, that is over 200, it's also double the number the press repeatedly insisted upon using.
Undercounting the dead, how the press has specialized in that throughout the Iraq War. They sold the Iraq War, they just didn't want to claim the deaths they were responsible for.
Anymore than they want to tell you about the political crisis and how the White House insisting Nouri al-Maliki remain prime minister despite the 2010 election results caused the crisis.
Most of all, they want to tell you that the Iraq War is over. And you should believe the press . . . because they told you that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and was connected to 9-11 and both of those claims turned out to be . . . false.
The press is lying to you all over again. They lied to start the war, they lie to continue it.
They lie and they distract. They ignore the issues that matter to waste your time and distract you with garbage about who slept with who. Newt Gingrich's many marital problems are well known and have been in the 90s and in the '00s. But what makes the cover of The New York Times' "Sunday Review" today?
Gail Collins trashy column which notes her prurient priorities in the first paragraph ("sexual misbehavior"). She and the paper have nothing better to do than dig through Newt's already well documented marital record. It doesn't tell you that you shouldn't or should vote for Gingrich because of what he might do as president. But it does distract you and turn us into a nation of gossipy little gutter snipes -- dumb ones at that, eager to laugh at and enjoy others' misery.
In typical New York Times' fashion, on page 10 of the "Sunday Review," they run an editorial entitled "Unfinished Business in Iraq." Unfinished business in Iraq is buried. Gail Collins' smutty column is front-paged.
It's the same media that spent last week telling you that "about 200" or "over 200" people had died in Iraq from violence since December 18th when the actual number was at least 428 by Friday. Yes, that is over 200, it's also double the number the press repeatedly insisted upon using.
Undercounting the dead, how the press has specialized in that throughout the Iraq War. They sold the Iraq War, they just didn't want to claim the deaths they were responsible for.
Anymore than they want to tell you about the political crisis and how the White House insisting Nouri al-Maliki remain prime minister despite the 2010 election results caused the crisis.
Most of all, they want to tell you that the Iraq War is over. And you should believe the press . . . because they told you that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and was connected to 9-11 and both of those claims turned out to be . . . false.
The press is lying to you all over again. They lied to start the war, they lie to continue it.
They lie and they distract. They ignore the issues that matter to waste your time and distract you with garbage about who slept with who. Newt Gingrich's many marital problems are well known and have been in the 90s and in the '00s. But what makes the cover of The New York Times' "Sunday Review" today?
Gail Collins trashy column which notes her prurient priorities in the first paragraph ("sexual misbehavior"). She and the paper have nothing better to do than dig through Newt's already well documented marital record. It doesn't tell you that you shouldn't or should vote for Gingrich because of what he might do as president. But it does distract you and turn us into a nation of gossipy little gutter snipes -- dumb ones at that, eager to laugh at and enjoy others' misery.
In typical New York Times' fashion, on page 10 of the "Sunday Review," they run an editorial entitled "Unfinished Business in Iraq." Unfinished business in Iraq is buried. Gail Collins' smutty column is front-paged.
TV: Covering for their own
Noting the lousy sales for Ani DiFranco's new album, yesterday Kat pointed out that many reviewers are reviewing Ani's politics and not the lousy album she produced. Which had us thinking about how politics allows bad shows to be treated as if they're wonderful. We could have grabbed one last week; however, it was a 'to be continued' and we wanted to be fair.
Let's start there, with 30 Rock which has a great many problems even before you notice that Tina Fey's unable to lose the pregnancy weight. We first checked to see if NOW had called 30 Rock out. Of course not. Even worse, GLAAD praised it.
But GLAAD is a useless group, one Anne Heche rightly attacked when their spokesperson called Ellen DeGeneres ABC sitcom "too gay for TV" on Jay Leno's show. For those whose memories don't stretch back to the late 90s, Ellen had come out of the closet on her self-titled sitcom and in real life. It was the cliff hanger for season four. Season five was what happens after you come out. And what happens after you come out is, apparently, GLAAD trashes you as "too gay." However, if your program includes homophobia, GLAAD praises you, as they did 30 Rock.
For those who have forgotten, Tracy Morgan let his homophobia and sexism run free over the summer. As we noted back in June, Tina Fey's response was to compose a comedic essay, turning the whole thing into a joke. Only we weren't laughing. We take homophobia and sexism as serious as we do racism whereas Tina's only concerned with racism.
And that's why her show has been so homophobic as we have repeatedly noted over the years. The only way to be gay on her show is to flounce in a stereotypical manner and you're never part of the group, you're either a nemesis or you're a one-episode character. And because you're gay -- or, rather, because you're gay on a homophobic show -- most of your comments will revolve around sex.
But not to worry, GLAAD has never called out 30 Rock. Ever. And, in fact, they praised them, their Herndon Graddick did, declaring of the episode we're focusing on for this piece, "I thought it was hilarious. We've been called worse than trash bag manufacturers and look forward to seeing the second part next week."
Yes, Tracy Jordan (Morgan's character) does call Glad the trash bag company to apologize when one of his homophobic rants outrages the LGBT community. Presumably Graddick saw the entire episode (he does insist he's eager to the see the second part, doesn't he)?
What's the message of the "People Are Idiots Too" (that GLAAD praises)? That homophobes are lovable. "He really is a good person," Liz (Tina Fey) insists to a group of stereotypical gay men protesting outside NBC.
It gets worse.
Confronting Tracy not on his homophobia but on the problem he's caused for the show, Liz asks him if he knows how many of his co-workers are gay? She then points out an open door at people passing by, "Him, him, her when she's drunk, I genuinely don't know."
Of the four people only "I genuinely don't know" applies to a series regular. She's referring to Lutz. The two gay men? Extras we've never seen before as is the woman.
And, excuse us, but gay "when she's drunk"? What kind of comment is that on lesbians or homosexuality? Is Tina Fey suggesting sobriety as a "cure" for being gay?
But apparently, because a man with GLAAD found it hilarious, it's okay.
Just like it was okay for GLAAD to declare Ellen "too gay for TV" when Ellen was under fire from idiots who insisted that the show be pulled because the actress and the lead character were gay. Yeah, that's GLAAD, never helping the LGBT community, never standing up for the LGBT community. During the same period, GLAAD rushed to inform America that Mel Gibson wasn't a homophobe. (We all now know better though some of us knew better in real time.) Why, GLAAD wanted you to know back then, Mel was genuinely surprised that anyone found anything in Bravehart homophobic.
Yeah, GLAAD, and D.W. Griffith was surprised people called out the racism in Birth of a Nation, so what's your damn point?
Repeatedly, GLAAD has been in the business of picking on the unpopular while excusing and ignoring homophobia from the popular and powerful.
30 Rock offers no regular gay character, re-enforces stereotypes about the LGBT community repeatedly, turns "gay" into a joke repeatedly (we covered the program's homophobia last February) and GLAAD's just happy to giggle along with the show instead of issuing demands such as the need for a regular gay character. What a pathetic organization.
On the 30 Rock episode, Matt Lauer appears at one point to read a statement from Liz where she says he's "not hateful," Tracy's just an idiot. Which leads to Tracy tossing a flat screen TV and forming a protest led by idiots. And it's time for more hilarity.
The reality is that Tracy Morgan and Tracy Jordan's statements were hateful -- Jordan's far less because he didn't threaten to kill anyone. And the reality is that they were never dealt with, they were just swept aside with, "Tracy's so stupid but he be lovable."
Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin were dismissive of the outcry over the summer. (Alec denies he was dismissive.) But there was one cast member who didn't dismiss the remarks. Does anyone remember that?
Cheyenne Jackson. Though he plays straight Danny, Cheyenne is out and openly out in real life. As it has been on TV since at least the days of The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, sitcoms are more than happy to hire gay actors to play straight (Sheila Kuehl), they're just not big on including gay characters in the mix.
Most critics are referring to the "two parter" of "People Are Idiots Two" and "Idiots Are People Three" but actually it was a three-parter. "Dances Like Nobody's Watching" kicked things off with Tracy upset that Liz wasn't paying attention to him and warning that he would do something crazy to get attention. The other episode that's aired is "The Ballad of Kenneth Parcell." What do all four episodes have in common?
No Cheyenne Jackson.
Where's Danny?
Is Danny not being used because the actor wouldn't be a dancing monkey and pretend that homophobia was okay or funny?
It's a question people should be asking.
They should be also be asking why 30 Rock demonizes gay men, portraying them as willing to marry and deceive a woman to advance, of being a backstabber incapable of having friends, of being devious and . . . Goodness, we're getting to 1950s stereotypes of gay men, aren't we. But GLAAD never says a word.
Did you know that GLAAD joined in the dog pile on Work It? That they declared the show "harmful"? Their action alert included:
Oh, "home viewers unfamiliar" might be deceived into believing these two straight men were trans? Anyone mistaking them for "trans" would actually be mistaking them for gay because their working knowledge would be so small, a reality GLAAD ignores.
Seeing a man on TV dress as a woman and be mocked for that, be made fun of, called a "shh-man" and worse? Seeing him hire someone to sit on him for sexual pleasure? Seeing him put a woman on a leash and walk her through a dog park while he is dressed as a woman?
It's strange that GLAAD never objected to any of that -- either for what it implied or for what impression it might leave with viewers. All of those things? They didn't happen on Work It. They happened on 30 Rock. That's Paul, Jenna's sometimes boyfriend. Who on top of everything else is a sexist who is fond of saying "as the man in this relationship" -- while in full drag.
It's not funny. And, again, it goes to how the Republican Tina Fey (Republican until the last decade, of Republican parents, and only a nerdy Republican would have been in college worshiping Amy Grant) portrays gays and trans-genders and cross-dressers and more. But GLAAD will look the other way every damn time. 30 Rock will get away with one insulting stereotype after another and GLAAD will never object.
Before we move beyond the issue of homophobia, we need to note our agreement with Marcia (see her "The joke that is Sundance") that there is no justification for Robert Redford's film festival hosting an event in which Morgan was given the Spotlight Initiaive Award. It hasn't even been a year since Morgan's homophobic and sexist remarks surfaced and all he did after that was p.r. to save his own ass. None of which warrants an award.
But then 30 Rock's racked up a ton of awards and it really hasn't deserved them either. Used to be, the show's tired jokes were recycled from season to season. So you'd get, in season five, Matt Damon's character saying that as a pilot he got a discount at Sunglass Hut and this seasons you get Criss (James Marsden) telling Liz, "I called Sunglass Hut and got my credit limit raised 80 bucks!" But now the rip-offs come much more quickly and within the same season. For example, on the first episode of this season, Jack (Alec Baldwin) riffs on Liz secretly wanting to see Gary Marshall's New Year's Eve -- riffs at length. Then, three episodes later, 30 Rock opens with a trailer for MLK Day.
They really don't have anything left and are just spitting out their own fumes these days.
And that more or less describes Amy Goodman and Democracy Now!
The last months have not been good for the program. There was, for instance, Amy again chatting up her good friend and frequent guest Juan Cole on live TV and radio when Cole lets slip that he's a CIA contractor and Amy fidgits nervously to avoid exploring on air what she already knew. There's been criticism from CounterPunch's Alexander Cockburn, "On Amy Goodman's Democracy Now one was far more likely to hear CIA-consultant Juan Cole issuing fervent support for the entire intervention than rather any vigorous interviewing of informed sources about what was actually happening on the ground in Libya."
Last week, Glen Ford joined the growing chorus calling out Democracy Now! when the show wrongly reported of a protest against Barack Obama, "A crowd of around 100 protesters with Occupy Wall Street and other groups demonstrated outside of the Apollo" ("Headlines, January 20, 2012). At Black Agenda Report, Ford explained the crowd was about 400 and called out "the left flank of Obama's apologists and protectors" including Amy Goodman's show, "But Democracy Now!, whose politics has undergone a palpable turn to the right during Obama's time in office, told its audience that only about 100 people protested, when in reality, the MoveOn section of the demonstration alone approached that number. In this sense, Democracy Now! is worse than the police at reporting demonstrations it doesn't support."
Interestingly enough, Amy Goodman wasted three pages (147-149) of her Exception To The Rulers (copy and pasted with help from brother David Goodman) denouncing NPR and The New York Times for undercounting the crowd at an October 26, 2002 protest. NPR would go on to correct their error on air. A week after her error aired, Amy Goodman has offered no correction. But then she's always been too busy pretending to be Last Journalist Standing to ever issue needed corrections.
Last week came the most telling and embarrassing Democracy Now! moment of all. The morning after the State of the Union Address was delivered by US President Barack Obama, Amy invited Ralph Nader on her program to join her in whoring for Barack.
Whoring?
Ralph rattled off about "lawless militarism" in the speech, that Barack's unable to use the word "poverty," that Barack "says one thing and does another," etc. Goody Whore then asks him what to tell people who ask, "What is the alternative here? Mitt Romney? Newt Gingrich?" Like a cheap whore, Ralph Nader replies the answer is to put pressure on Barack and whimpers about the pressure from the corporations on Barack.
The whole thing was an embarrassment and this publication will never again encourage anyone to ever listen to Ralph Nader again. Nader wants the microphone, so he'll whore now.
We're not in the mood.
The entire segment was a testimonial. The Obama campaign used testimonials in 2008. They were often successful at them. They put lipstick on a bunch of cheap hookers in the summer of 2008 who would lie that they were for Hillary but were for Barack now (we called out one whore who delivered that performance on Democracy Now!, where all the frauds eventually go). This testimonial relies on the premise that you will relate at the beginning and therefore buy into the conclusion: So it starts with the expression of outrage and then ends with a sigh of 'oh, well, what can we do?'.
The testimonial exists to strip you of your anger and your power and turn you into a meek little lamb shuffling off to slaughter.
That it would come from the mouth of Ralph Nader is beyond disappointing.
Let's deal with the what-can-you-do aspect first. What can you do? You can vote a protest vote which does include voting for whomever is on the GOP ticket. You should not, however, try to protest vote by writing in the name of another Democrat. As we reported in 2008, writing in the name of a Democrat (such as Hillary Clinton) in many states will result in your vote being counted for Barack.
In addition, you can protest vote by not voting. That's the option that we're currently entertaining. (We're not advising anyone else to follow our lead, we're merely disclosing.)
You can also vote for a third party or independent candidate.
Have you ever heard of those?
See, we thought every adult knew about that option but it's one Ralph Nader failed to mention on Democracy Now! despite the fact that he ran for president in 2000, 2004 and 2008. Yet now all he can offer is "put pressure" on Barack?
He never thought that was good enough or an answer when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House. But suddenly it's the answer?
Despite being repeatedly attacked for it, Ralph Nader didn't cost Al Gore the 2000 election; however, none of those attacks on him could have done more damage to Ralph than what he did on TV and radio last week as he refused to suggest that voters even consider a third party or independent candidate. Elaine shared her outrage on Friday. She voted for Ralph in 2008. She'll never do so again. She feels betrayed and, judging from the response to her post, she's far from alone.
Tina Fey and Amy Goodman are two of the most overly praised and petted on the left. Both had some early work that demonstrated some promise; however, that promise long ago flickered out and, even more disappointing, they've become guilty of the very things their supporters supposedly oppose. How sad that what they'll protest from others, they'll accept and applaud from Fey and Goodman.
Let's start there, with 30 Rock which has a great many problems even before you notice that Tina Fey's unable to lose the pregnancy weight. We first checked to see if NOW had called 30 Rock out. Of course not. Even worse, GLAAD praised it.
But GLAAD is a useless group, one Anne Heche rightly attacked when their spokesperson called Ellen DeGeneres ABC sitcom "too gay for TV" on Jay Leno's show. For those whose memories don't stretch back to the late 90s, Ellen had come out of the closet on her self-titled sitcom and in real life. It was the cliff hanger for season four. Season five was what happens after you come out. And what happens after you come out is, apparently, GLAAD trashes you as "too gay." However, if your program includes homophobia, GLAAD praises you, as they did 30 Rock.
For those who have forgotten, Tracy Morgan let his homophobia and sexism run free over the summer. As we noted back in June, Tina Fey's response was to compose a comedic essay, turning the whole thing into a joke. Only we weren't laughing. We take homophobia and sexism as serious as we do racism whereas Tina's only concerned with racism.
And that's why her show has been so homophobic as we have repeatedly noted over the years. The only way to be gay on her show is to flounce in a stereotypical manner and you're never part of the group, you're either a nemesis or you're a one-episode character. And because you're gay -- or, rather, because you're gay on a homophobic show -- most of your comments will revolve around sex.
But not to worry, GLAAD has never called out 30 Rock. Ever. And, in fact, they praised them, their Herndon Graddick did, declaring of the episode we're focusing on for this piece, "I thought it was hilarious. We've been called worse than trash bag manufacturers and look forward to seeing the second part next week."
Yes, Tracy Jordan (Morgan's character) does call Glad the trash bag company to apologize when one of his homophobic rants outrages the LGBT community. Presumably Graddick saw the entire episode (he does insist he's eager to the see the second part, doesn't he)?
What's the message of the "People Are Idiots Too" (that GLAAD praises)? That homophobes are lovable. "He really is a good person," Liz (Tina Fey) insists to a group of stereotypical gay men protesting outside NBC.
It gets worse.
Confronting Tracy not on his homophobia but on the problem he's caused for the show, Liz asks him if he knows how many of his co-workers are gay? She then points out an open door at people passing by, "Him, him, her when she's drunk, I genuinely don't know."
Of the four people only "I genuinely don't know" applies to a series regular. She's referring to Lutz. The two gay men? Extras we've never seen before as is the woman.
And, excuse us, but gay "when she's drunk"? What kind of comment is that on lesbians or homosexuality? Is Tina Fey suggesting sobriety as a "cure" for being gay?
But apparently, because a man with GLAAD found it hilarious, it's okay.
Just like it was okay for GLAAD to declare Ellen "too gay for TV" when Ellen was under fire from idiots who insisted that the show be pulled because the actress and the lead character were gay. Yeah, that's GLAAD, never helping the LGBT community, never standing up for the LGBT community. During the same period, GLAAD rushed to inform America that Mel Gibson wasn't a homophobe. (We all now know better though some of us knew better in real time.) Why, GLAAD wanted you to know back then, Mel was genuinely surprised that anyone found anything in Bravehart homophobic.
Yeah, GLAAD, and D.W. Griffith was surprised people called out the racism in Birth of a Nation, so what's your damn point?
Repeatedly, GLAAD has been in the business of picking on the unpopular while excusing and ignoring homophobia from the popular and powerful.
30 Rock offers no regular gay character, re-enforces stereotypes about the LGBT community repeatedly, turns "gay" into a joke repeatedly (we covered the program's homophobia last February) and GLAAD's just happy to giggle along with the show instead of issuing demands such as the need for a regular gay character. What a pathetic organization.
On the 30 Rock episode, Matt Lauer appears at one point to read a statement from Liz where she says he's "not hateful," Tracy's just an idiot. Which leads to Tracy tossing a flat screen TV and forming a protest led by idiots. And it's time for more hilarity.
The reality is that Tracy Morgan and Tracy Jordan's statements were hateful -- Jordan's far less because he didn't threaten to kill anyone. And the reality is that they were never dealt with, they were just swept aside with, "Tracy's so stupid but he be lovable."
Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin were dismissive of the outcry over the summer. (Alec denies he was dismissive.) But there was one cast member who didn't dismiss the remarks. Does anyone remember that?
Cheyenne Jackson. Though he plays straight Danny, Cheyenne is out and openly out in real life. As it has been on TV since at least the days of The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, sitcoms are more than happy to hire gay actors to play straight (Sheila Kuehl), they're just not big on including gay characters in the mix.
Most critics are referring to the "two parter" of "People Are Idiots Two" and "Idiots Are People Three" but actually it was a three-parter. "Dances Like Nobody's Watching" kicked things off with Tracy upset that Liz wasn't paying attention to him and warning that he would do something crazy to get attention. The other episode that's aired is "The Ballad of Kenneth Parcell." What do all four episodes have in common?
No Cheyenne Jackson.
Where's Danny?
Is Danny not being used because the actor wouldn't be a dancing monkey and pretend that homophobia was okay or funny?
It's a question people should be asking.
They should be also be asking why 30 Rock demonizes gay men, portraying them as willing to marry and deceive a woman to advance, of being a backstabber incapable of having friends, of being devious and . . . Goodness, we're getting to 1950s stereotypes of gay men, aren't we. But GLAAD never says a word.
Did you know that GLAAD joined in the dog pile on Work It? That they declared the show "harmful"? Their action alert included:
While the show’s pilot does not explicitly address transgender people, many home viewers unfamiliar with the realities of being transgender will still make the connection. As the ad states, by encouraging the audience to laugh at the characters’ attempts at womanhood, the show gives license to similar treatment of transgender women.
“This show could contribute to the high levels of job discrimination that transgender Americans face and will give license for people to mock and ridicule those whose gender expression might not fit with what society considers the norm,” said GLAAD’s Acting President Mike Thompson. “The media should use this as an opportunity to address the huge number of inaccurate or offensive images of transgender people in news and entertainment today.”
Oh, "home viewers unfamiliar" might be deceived into believing these two straight men were trans? Anyone mistaking them for "trans" would actually be mistaking them for gay because their working knowledge would be so small, a reality GLAAD ignores.
Seeing a man on TV dress as a woman and be mocked for that, be made fun of, called a "shh-man" and worse? Seeing him hire someone to sit on him for sexual pleasure? Seeing him put a woman on a leash and walk her through a dog park while he is dressed as a woman?
It's strange that GLAAD never objected to any of that -- either for what it implied or for what impression it might leave with viewers. All of those things? They didn't happen on Work It. They happened on 30 Rock. That's Paul, Jenna's sometimes boyfriend. Who on top of everything else is a sexist who is fond of saying "as the man in this relationship" -- while in full drag.
It's not funny. And, again, it goes to how the Republican Tina Fey (Republican until the last decade, of Republican parents, and only a nerdy Republican would have been in college worshiping Amy Grant) portrays gays and trans-genders and cross-dressers and more. But GLAAD will look the other way every damn time. 30 Rock will get away with one insulting stereotype after another and GLAAD will never object.
Before we move beyond the issue of homophobia, we need to note our agreement with Marcia (see her "The joke that is Sundance") that there is no justification for Robert Redford's film festival hosting an event in which Morgan was given the Spotlight Initiaive Award. It hasn't even been a year since Morgan's homophobic and sexist remarks surfaced and all he did after that was p.r. to save his own ass. None of which warrants an award.
But then 30 Rock's racked up a ton of awards and it really hasn't deserved them either. Used to be, the show's tired jokes were recycled from season to season. So you'd get, in season five, Matt Damon's character saying that as a pilot he got a discount at Sunglass Hut and this seasons you get Criss (James Marsden) telling Liz, "I called Sunglass Hut and got my credit limit raised 80 bucks!" But now the rip-offs come much more quickly and within the same season. For example, on the first episode of this season, Jack (Alec Baldwin) riffs on Liz secretly wanting to see Gary Marshall's New Year's Eve -- riffs at length. Then, three episodes later, 30 Rock opens with a trailer for MLK Day.
They really don't have anything left and are just spitting out their own fumes these days.
And that more or less describes Amy Goodman and Democracy Now!
The last months have not been good for the program. There was, for instance, Amy again chatting up her good friend and frequent guest Juan Cole on live TV and radio when Cole lets slip that he's a CIA contractor and Amy fidgits nervously to avoid exploring on air what she already knew. There's been criticism from CounterPunch's Alexander Cockburn, "On Amy Goodman's Democracy Now one was far more likely to hear CIA-consultant Juan Cole issuing fervent support for the entire intervention than rather any vigorous interviewing of informed sources about what was actually happening on the ground in Libya."
Last week, Glen Ford joined the growing chorus calling out Democracy Now! when the show wrongly reported of a protest against Barack Obama, "A crowd of around 100 protesters with Occupy Wall Street and other groups demonstrated outside of the Apollo" ("Headlines, January 20, 2012). At Black Agenda Report, Ford explained the crowd was about 400 and called out "the left flank of Obama's apologists and protectors" including Amy Goodman's show, "But Democracy Now!, whose politics has undergone a palpable turn to the right during Obama's time in office, told its audience that only about 100 people protested, when in reality, the MoveOn section of the demonstration alone approached that number. In this sense, Democracy Now! is worse than the police at reporting demonstrations it doesn't support."
Interestingly enough, Amy Goodman wasted three pages (147-149) of her Exception To The Rulers (copy and pasted with help from brother David Goodman) denouncing NPR and The New York Times for undercounting the crowd at an October 26, 2002 protest. NPR would go on to correct their error on air. A week after her error aired, Amy Goodman has offered no correction. But then she's always been too busy pretending to be Last Journalist Standing to ever issue needed corrections.
Last week came the most telling and embarrassing Democracy Now! moment of all. The morning after the State of the Union Address was delivered by US President Barack Obama, Amy invited Ralph Nader on her program to join her in whoring for Barack.
Whoring?
Ralph rattled off about "lawless militarism" in the speech, that Barack's unable to use the word "poverty," that Barack "says one thing and does another," etc. Goody Whore then asks him what to tell people who ask, "What is the alternative here? Mitt Romney? Newt Gingrich?" Like a cheap whore, Ralph Nader replies the answer is to put pressure on Barack and whimpers about the pressure from the corporations on Barack.
The whole thing was an embarrassment and this publication will never again encourage anyone to ever listen to Ralph Nader again. Nader wants the microphone, so he'll whore now.
We're not in the mood.
The entire segment was a testimonial. The Obama campaign used testimonials in 2008. They were often successful at them. They put lipstick on a bunch of cheap hookers in the summer of 2008 who would lie that they were for Hillary but were for Barack now (we called out one whore who delivered that performance on Democracy Now!, where all the frauds eventually go). This testimonial relies on the premise that you will relate at the beginning and therefore buy into the conclusion: So it starts with the expression of outrage and then ends with a sigh of 'oh, well, what can we do?'.
The testimonial exists to strip you of your anger and your power and turn you into a meek little lamb shuffling off to slaughter.
That it would come from the mouth of Ralph Nader is beyond disappointing.
Let's deal with the what-can-you-do aspect first. What can you do? You can vote a protest vote which does include voting for whomever is on the GOP ticket. You should not, however, try to protest vote by writing in the name of another Democrat. As we reported in 2008, writing in the name of a Democrat (such as Hillary Clinton) in many states will result in your vote being counted for Barack.
In addition, you can protest vote by not voting. That's the option that we're currently entertaining. (We're not advising anyone else to follow our lead, we're merely disclosing.)
You can also vote for a third party or independent candidate.
Have you ever heard of those?
See, we thought every adult knew about that option but it's one Ralph Nader failed to mention on Democracy Now! despite the fact that he ran for president in 2000, 2004 and 2008. Yet now all he can offer is "put pressure" on Barack?
He never thought that was good enough or an answer when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House. But suddenly it's the answer?
Despite being repeatedly attacked for it, Ralph Nader didn't cost Al Gore the 2000 election; however, none of those attacks on him could have done more damage to Ralph than what he did on TV and radio last week as he refused to suggest that voters even consider a third party or independent candidate. Elaine shared her outrage on Friday. She voted for Ralph in 2008. She'll never do so again. She feels betrayed and, judging from the response to her post, she's far from alone.
Tina Fey and Amy Goodman are two of the most overly praised and petted on the left. Both had some early work that demonstrated some promise; however, that promise long ago flickered out and, even more disappointing, they've become guilty of the very things their supporters supposedly oppose. How sad that what they'll protest from others, they'll accept and applaud from Fey and Goodman.
Amy Goodman's Exception For The Ruler
Just in time for the 2012 political season, Amy Goodman and brother David Goodman have updated their self-stroking volume which they've now dubbed The Exception For The Ruler 2012.
Barack Obama may be in the White House but some things haven't changed. For instance, the authors still bash Bush because otherwise they'd have no one to hiss at. Barack?
He's their object of affection.
So they've updated their tome. Page 147, for example, now reads:
Protesters? What Protesters?
ON OCTOBER 26, 2002, the Democracy Now! crew headed to Washington, D.C., to cover a major protest against an attack on Iraq. Although the police in Washington, D.C., no longer issue official estimates of crowd size, they told us unofficially that there were between 150,00 and 200,000 people. The next day, The New York Times reported that "fewer people had attended than organizers had hoped for . . . even though the sun came out." NPR reported "fewer than 10,000" showed up.
In 2003, this really mattered to me; however, in 2012, I came to understand that really good reporting means getting the totals wrong. Good reporting means whoring for the White House and working overtime to ensure that they are not embarrassed. That's why, on a recent program, I reduced a protest of at least 400 people in Harlem to 100 people.
As I work hard to whore for Barack Obama and to suck up to power, I am learning that journalists are entertainers. We are not reporters. We go to places that are popular. We broadcast voices that are status quo. We are here to win popularity contests.
So let me make a confession. In the original edition of this book, I went on and on about how we broadcast political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jabar's commentaries on my show. I explained how NPR had hired him first but, due to protests, had dropped him. And I went on and on about how we broadcast him on our show. Of course, by the time the book made it into print, I had dropped Mumia's commentaries from the show. They were now broadcast by Free Speech Radio News.
I used to live in fear that a reviewer or interviewer would call me out on that. But no one ever did. Yes, I dropped Mumia. Not because of the same reasons NPR did. NPR dropped him because they got complaints from listeners. I dropped him because I got complaints from new outlets that had just begun to carry my show. So for those who read this 2012 edition and think, "Way to whore Amy!," well let me just tell you, I have been whoring for years. And years.
Those of you are 18 and older should join me in the next chapter, "Seduced by Samantha Power" where I discuss what it's like to embed with a War Hawk.
From the TESR Test Kitchen
Michaelina's offers frozen foods for about a buck and the slogan "LET MAMA FEED YOU!" Praising the line in 2008, The Orlando Sentinel's Moms At Work declared, "I'm here now to tell you: Don't be scared!" We're here to tell you, they don't hire 'em to smart at The Sentinel.
See Moms At Work was tackling Michaelina's Lean Gourmet line, the line that boasts, "When you're looking to cut the calories, without cutting the taste, Mama has you covered."
No, Strange Woman, you don't.
And shoppers would do well to check before purchasing.
For example, Beef & Peppers. There's the regular gourmet line and there's the lean gourmet version. If you eat one, you will be consuming ten fewer calories.
But which one?
If you guessed the Lean Beef & Peppers, you guessed wrong. Though that is the 'diet' version of the product, at 280 calories, that's ten more calories than you'll be getting if you consume the non-diet version.
See Moms At Work was tackling Michaelina's Lean Gourmet line, the line that boasts, "When you're looking to cut the calories, without cutting the taste, Mama has you covered."
No, Strange Woman, you don't.
And shoppers would do well to check before purchasing.
For example, Beef & Peppers. There's the regular gourmet line and there's the lean gourmet version. If you eat one, you will be consuming ten fewer calories.
But which one?
If you guessed the Lean Beef & Peppers, you guessed wrong. Though that is the 'diet' version of the product, at 280 calories, that's ten more calories than you'll be getting if you consume the non-diet version.
Radio highlight of the week
Last week's strongest radio moment would be a discussion of the new National Defense Authorization Act. The discussion took place on Black Agenda Radio, hosted by Glen Ford (above) and Nellie Bailey (airs each Monday at 4:00 pm EST on the Progressive Radio Network) and was presented as a conversation between Ford and journalist Chris Hedges.
Hedges is the author of many books including the just out in paperback Death of the Liberal Class which we selected as one of the ten most important books of the last ten years and a top ten book of the year in 2010 and in 2011 in Martha and Shirley's survey of The Common Ills community. He is also suing President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta over the NDAA.
Glen Ford: Veteran journalist Chris Hedges fears that anyone can be thrown into prison without trial under the preventive detention bill signed into law by President Obama so Hedges has sued the president. We asked Hedges how he decided to take on the White House.
Chris Hedges: It actually wasn't my idea. Carl Mayer who has been involved in lawsuits to defend the assaults against civil liberties including the ACLU lawsuit against the FISA reform act -- of which I am one of the plantiffs -- came to me and said, "Look, under this legislation, someone like you could be, potentially because of the nebulous language, charged. You've had direct, personal contact with groups that the state has defined as terrorist organizations. There are no provisions in this legislation to exempt journalists. Would you be willing to be a plantiff?" And I said yes.
Glen Ford: Particularly ominous in this legislation is the use of the term "substantial support," not material support.
Chris Hedges: Right.
Glen Ford: And most people think they understand what material support is --
Chris Hedges: Right.
Glen Ford: -- giving money, passing a gun, something, but substantial support?
Chris Hedges: Right and it could be substantial support for something called associated forces so it leaves open such a broad interpretation that there is no protection for someone like me under this law or I think for ultimately any kind of dissident because there has been a clear effort on the part of the security state to try and tar the Occupy Movement as a movement that's an enemy of American democracy. When you look at the list or the criteria by which the Attorney General's office can investigate people for terrorism, tossing in a couple of obstructionist tactics by the Occupy Movement isn't much of a stretch. I mean, people who are missing fingers on one hand, people who store over seven days of food and provisions, people who have weather proof ammunition. I mean, they're going to have to round up my entire family in rural parts of Maine.
Glen Ford: That's their profile of the potential terrorist.
Chris Hedges: Yeah, as 'worthy of investigation.' We know that there are at this point probably tens of millions of Americans who, because of the FISA reform act, whose e-mails, home messages, all of which are being monitored by the government
Glen Ford: In terms of substantial support, that could be interpreted as speech, giving aid and comfort to someone that they declare is the enemy.
Chris Hedges: Yeah, the way the law is written is, when you read it really closely, really terrifying because it's the whim of the security and surveillance state whoever they want to go after they can pretty much do so under this piece of legislation and then, of course, the way they do it is to use the military to carry out extraordinary rendition on American city streets. And I think to listen to the Obama White House, you know Obama assured in his signing statement that he would not use this legislation to target American citizens? Well [US Senator] Dianne Feinstein proposed inserting into this legislation a clear statement that American citizens would be exempted from it and this was rejected by both the Democractic Party and the Obama White House. They had an opportunity to do it and they didn't. And we know from leaks out of [US Senator] Carl Levin's office that the difficulty that the Obama White House had with the bill was not over the denial of due process but the fact that the executive branch wanted to abrogate for itself the right to decide who, what American citizens would be subject to arrest and detention without access to a lawyer or courts by the military and who would be given exemptions. It was a debate about the prerogatives of the executive branch, it was never a debate about due process or the rule of law.
Glen Ford: Now if we don't have due process, do we have the rule of law?
Chris Hedges: Well if you don't have due process, you don't have the rule of law.
Glen Ford: Are you optimistic?
Chris Hedges: I don't have a lot of faith in the Supreme Court. We saw the case of Jose Padilla. They used to call him the sort-of missing hijacker. He was a US citizen held for three and a half years in a military brig without access to a lawyer or due process. It was challenged, went up to the Supreme Court and, before the Supreme Court took up the case, he was transferred to a civilian court and the Supreme Court said they wouldn't rule on it because it was moot. I mean, they sort of passed it. But given the composition of this particular Supreme Court, I wouldn't say I'm optomistic but I still say we have to try.
Glen Ford: Apologists for Obama say, 'Well this law is nothing new. President Bush claimed the right to detain anyone based on his own criteria and without charges. And that this is nothing new. But it is something new when you codify it into law with the benediction of the Congress.
Chris Hedges: They're right only in this sense: Under the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force Act, they already were doing a lot of this stuff -- including, of course, targeting American citizens for assassinations. Barack Obama serving as judge, jury and executioner for Anwar al-Awlaki, the cleric who was murdered in Yemen. But I think that most legal scholars saw that as a fairly radical interpretation of that piece of legislation. This [NDAA] essentially legalizes, overturns 200 years -- over 200 years -- of law to permit the armed forces or the military to carry out domestic policing. And I think the other important point about this legislation is that the 2001 act was tied to groups who were directly related to al Qaeda. This now permits this kind of war against a multiplicity of groups, many of which didn't even exist when 9-11 happened -- groups in Yemen, groups in Somolia. It's a way of sort of cementing into place the permanent war psychosis. And remember that these people can be picked up by the military, held without charges, without trial, without access to an attorney, in the language of the bill, until the end of hostilities. Well, you know, when is that? This is an endless war. The 2001 act was bad enough but, you know, at this point to pass a piece of legislation like this which goes into effect in March is catastrophic assault against what's left of civil liberties and our anaemic democracy.
Glen Ford: If this bill had moved through Congress when Bush was president, would you have expected a hailstorm of protest?
Chris Hedges: The Democratic Party is very good at expressing moral outrage against George Bush or Republicans but doing absolutely nothing to counter those activities. So yeah, you would have had the Democratic Party and the liberal establishment speaking out against it and expressing deep disgust and distaste for these measures yet at the same time I think what these people do and what they say is very different.
Again, Black Agenda Radio is a weekly program hosted by Glen Ford (above) and Nellie Bailey (airs each Monday at 4:00 pm EST on the Progressive Radio Network and cross-posted to Black Agenda Report -- usually on Tuesdays.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
