Does [Norman] Solomon even understand what it means to "put up a fight"? And what's with the notion that progressives will "apply pressure" once Obama wins? They have no cash and he's already going to receive most of their votes. What are they going to do to pressure him, poke him in his ribs? Cause a stink by farting through the halls of Congress? Obama may actually listen to us if he thought progressives were considering to vote for a guy like Ralph Nader, which is the point Nader seems to be making by campaigning in swing states this week. Nader knows how to put up a real fight, one not mired in hypotheticals and fear-mongering, so he's pressuring Obama where it matters most.
Of course, such a direct confrontation to Obama's backward policies ruffles the slacks of many devout liberals. But that is the point. Progressives are not flush with cash and as we all should know, flashing the almighty buck is usually the best way to grab a politician's attention. But the only thing we have at our immediate disposal now is votes. These crooks need us to get elected. Obama already has the majority of left-wing support shored up despite his resistance to embrace our concerns. Imagine if he had to earn our votes instead of receiving our support without having to do a thing for it?
So let's prepare for what's ahead. Obama may win next Tuesday, but what will happen to the movements that have been sidelined in order to help get the Democrats elected? What will become of the environmental movement after January 20? Will it step up to oppose Obama's quest for nuclear power and clean coal? Will the antiwar movement work to force Obama to take a softer approach toward Iran? Will they stop the troop increase in Afghanistan?
These are but a few of the questions I'd like progressive supporters of Obama to answer. I've yet to hear exactly how they will pressure an Obama administration. In fact, I don't think they will. George W. Bush will be gone and that will be enough for most.
-- Joshua Frank, "Note to Progressives for Obama: What Happens After Election Day?" (Dissident Voice).
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Truest statement of the week II
The problem with that explanation, of course, is the slanted coverage in favor of Obama has happened since the day he announced close to two years ago. It was slanted in favor of him and Hillary Clinton, while far more electable candidates such as Edwards (before the successful blackmailing him out of political life--how convenient) were shoved aside in favor of the identity politics narrative. And THEN, when it became a two-person contest in the primaries, it was open season on both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Not a word of protest by the mainstream media for the 24/7 shitting upon them because they were not run out of the Beltway in the 1990s for refusing to kiss the Beltway Slut's ass. Hell, no, they were right in there with the Obama campaign with the "racist" filth, the RFK filth, the NAFTA filth, the caucus filth and so forth, but never, ever seriously vetting Obama despite his numerous problems. Criticisms were brushed aside or tagged as racist, and believe me, the race card is about all Obama had to get as far as he did. Nobody DARED to criticize him then, and nobody dares to do it now for fear of being tagged racist.
-- Susan Nunes "Media Bias" (Random Notes).
-- Susan Nunes "Media Bias" (Random Notes).
Truest statement of the week III
After defending Sarah Palin, I heard from a member of the angry left who wrote: "Your (sic) from a Third World country, or your family is, stop trying to be white." I also heard from baby boomer activists who regret -- as they see it -- yanking me off that landscaping crew and sending me to the Ivy League. Or as one put it: "Unbelievable that you can sit there and defend Sarah Palin. I broke down doors for you to have a foot into the society you now participate in."
When I praised McCain, a liberal asked: "What are you, the Uncle Tom of Latinos?" She advised, "Make your people proud because you are shaming them."
When trying to assert control over freethinking Latinos and African-Americans, the liberal catchword is "disappointed." Lately, I've received dozens of e-mails from readers who use that word to describe how they feel about me. In the liberal tradition, most of the missives are condescending. Like this: "At one time, your articles were interesting to read but ... it seems you have lost your way." Or this: "You are feeding the ignorant and twisting truths so badly they become lies ...One day my words will resonate, sorry you lost your way in the meantime."
To read their complaints, it seems the last time I had my bearings was -- coincidentally -- the last time I wrote something with which they agreed. It's part of how broken our political discourse has become. We're not allowed to say that we think either Obama or McCain would make a fine president. We can't agree to disagree; we have to destroy the other side. We're trapped in an all-or-nothing paradigm where partisans demand complete agreement and undying allegiance.
-- Ruben Navarrette Jr., "One-way political discourse" (San Diego Union-Tribune).
When I praised McCain, a liberal asked: "What are you, the Uncle Tom of Latinos?" She advised, "Make your people proud because you are shaming them."
When trying to assert control over freethinking Latinos and African-Americans, the liberal catchword is "disappointed." Lately, I've received dozens of e-mails from readers who use that word to describe how they feel about me. In the liberal tradition, most of the missives are condescending. Like this: "At one time, your articles were interesting to read but ... it seems you have lost your way." Or this: "You are feeding the ignorant and twisting truths so badly they become lies ...One day my words will resonate, sorry you lost your way in the meantime."
To read their complaints, it seems the last time I had my bearings was -- coincidentally -- the last time I wrote something with which they agreed. It's part of how broken our political discourse has become. We're not allowed to say that we think either Obama or McCain would make a fine president. We can't agree to disagree; we have to destroy the other side. We're trapped in an all-or-nothing paradigm where partisans demand complete agreement and undying allegiance.
-- Ruben Navarrette Jr., "One-way political discourse" (San Diego Union-Tribune).
A note to our readers
Hey --
Another Sunday. What have we got? Let's start with who helped. The list includes Dallas and:
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),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
and Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ.
And Isaiah. We thank them all.
Truest statement of the week I -- Joshua Frank. He deserves it and we wanted to do more with it but there wasn't time.
Truest statement of the week II -- Susan who is also deserving, Susan Nunes.
Truest statement of the week III -- RN Jr (I'll mispell if I try to spell it right, so initials will do) was part of a documentary Ava and C.I. wanted to note weeks ago but I begged and pleaded with them to cover something else. So he's earned a truest and more.
Editorial: Silence -- Syria was attacked last week and not many seemed to care. Syria was attacked by the US and no one forced the White House to answer as to why. For those who wonder what happens after the election, these are the sort of topics we've covered before and will return to covering.
TV: The Uglies -- I (Jim) begged and pleaded for Ava and C.I. to grab some stuff this week. What they wanted to do was cover SNL (as requested by SNL friends) and Tavis Smiley's PBS show -- the appearance by Labelle. They may grab it next week. I like the way this turned out but Ava and C.I. do not.
Robin Morgan: Troll (Ava and C.I.) -- Jess broke a tooth during the writing edition. How? He was eating but nothing with a bone. (Vegetables, he's a vegetarian.) He was in pain and the writing edition was placed on hold early this morning as we got him an emergency dentist visit. When we came back to the edition, Jess was doped up and we knew we didn't have time to argue about anything. So we quickly divided up. Ava and C.I. grabbed this topic and felt they had damn little to say (read it and disagree) but knew Isaiah was blocked for a cartoon idea so they called him with a few suggestions and he provided this one which will run at TCI and also appears here. Thank you to Isaiah.
Heroes and villains -- Kat and C.I. came up with the Beach Boys opening. Dona pieced together scraps from four features that were killed online. If it works for you, great. If it doesn't, it wasn't written as one piece.
Only Once (Ty, Betty, Cedric and Marcia) -- Ty, Betty, Cedric and Marcia wanted to cover this topic and when we resumed the writing edition, they knew there was no time for a roundtable so they decided to write about this topic themselves.
Film quotes -- Mike, Wally, Dona, Rebecca, Elaine, Ruth and I worked on this (with help from Ava and C.I.). We did this before and it was very popular so when we were pressed for time, Mike suggested we grab this for another feature.
Uh, WMC, something's hanging out -- Short item that Dona and Rebecca led and largely did. WMC, cover it up, your bias is showing!
Matt Gonzalez asks the big question -- This is a reprint from the Nader campaign and the only thing (and only campaign) we're specifically noting going into this week's election. Those of us who declared (all but Ava and C.I.) endorsed Nader. So we wanted to offer a strong reminder of why the Nader - Gonzalez campaign is one you should be thinking about as you vote and we couldn't have written anything any better than what Gonzalez produced for the campaign.
Highlights -- Kat, Mike, Wally, Elaine, Rebecca, Betty, Marcia, Cedric and Ruth wrote this and picked all highlights unless otherwise noted.
So that's what we've got and we'll see you next week.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
Another Sunday. What have we got? Let's start with who helped. The list includes Dallas and:
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),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
and Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ.
And Isaiah. We thank them all.
Truest statement of the week I -- Joshua Frank. He deserves it and we wanted to do more with it but there wasn't time.
Truest statement of the week II -- Susan who is also deserving, Susan Nunes.
Truest statement of the week III -- RN Jr (I'll mispell if I try to spell it right, so initials will do) was part of a documentary Ava and C.I. wanted to note weeks ago but I begged and pleaded with them to cover something else. So he's earned a truest and more.
Editorial: Silence -- Syria was attacked last week and not many seemed to care. Syria was attacked by the US and no one forced the White House to answer as to why. For those who wonder what happens after the election, these are the sort of topics we've covered before and will return to covering.
TV: The Uglies -- I (Jim) begged and pleaded for Ava and C.I. to grab some stuff this week. What they wanted to do was cover SNL (as requested by SNL friends) and Tavis Smiley's PBS show -- the appearance by Labelle. They may grab it next week. I like the way this turned out but Ava and C.I. do not.
Robin Morgan: Troll (Ava and C.I.) -- Jess broke a tooth during the writing edition. How? He was eating but nothing with a bone. (Vegetables, he's a vegetarian.) He was in pain and the writing edition was placed on hold early this morning as we got him an emergency dentist visit. When we came back to the edition, Jess was doped up and we knew we didn't have time to argue about anything. So we quickly divided up. Ava and C.I. grabbed this topic and felt they had damn little to say (read it and disagree) but knew Isaiah was blocked for a cartoon idea so they called him with a few suggestions and he provided this one which will run at TCI and also appears here. Thank you to Isaiah.
Heroes and villains -- Kat and C.I. came up with the Beach Boys opening. Dona pieced together scraps from four features that were killed online. If it works for you, great. If it doesn't, it wasn't written as one piece.
Only Once (Ty, Betty, Cedric and Marcia) -- Ty, Betty, Cedric and Marcia wanted to cover this topic and when we resumed the writing edition, they knew there was no time for a roundtable so they decided to write about this topic themselves.
Film quotes -- Mike, Wally, Dona, Rebecca, Elaine, Ruth and I worked on this (with help from Ava and C.I.). We did this before and it was very popular so when we were pressed for time, Mike suggested we grab this for another feature.
Uh, WMC, something's hanging out -- Short item that Dona and Rebecca led and largely did. WMC, cover it up, your bias is showing!
Matt Gonzalez asks the big question -- This is a reprint from the Nader campaign and the only thing (and only campaign) we're specifically noting going into this week's election. Those of us who declared (all but Ava and C.I.) endorsed Nader. So we wanted to offer a strong reminder of why the Nader - Gonzalez campaign is one you should be thinking about as you vote and we couldn't have written anything any better than what Gonzalez produced for the campaign.
Highlights -- Kat, Mike, Wally, Elaine, Rebecca, Betty, Marcia, Cedric and Ruth wrote this and picked all highlights unless otherwise noted.
So that's what we've got and we'll see you next week.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
Editorial: Silence
Last Sunday, the US attacked Syria. The US crossed the border into Syria and killed eight Syrians. The Telegraph of London described as follows: "In an echo of the Israeli air strikes which last year targeted a suspected Syrian nuclear facility, US military helicopters were reported to have crossed into Syria to drop troops who then executed the mission.The state news agency Sana reported that eight civilians had been killed in the raid. 'Four American helicopters violated Syrian airspace around 16:45 local time (1345 GMT) on Sunday,' it said. 'American soldiers' who had emerged from helicopters 'attacked a civilian building under construction and fired at workmen inside, causing eight deaths. The helicopters then left Syrian territory towards Iraqi territory,' Sana said."
And the was pretty much all anyone ever got.
The US attacked Syria -- the way so many fear Iran will be attacked -- and there was no huge protest, there wasn't even a desire to make it an issue to discuss. Neither the Republican presidential candidate John McCain or the Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama felt the need to call out the attack.
And with no one calling it out, there was no pressure on the head of an alleged democracy to explain to the American people what happened. Instead of hearing from the administration, the public was served up whispers and gossip, unsourced.
It was treated as though it were no problem, this despite realities and the fall out. Realities?
Martin Sieff (UPI) reminds, "Cross-border attacks in any conflict carry the risk of widening it uncontrollably. That is especially the case here, since Syria is the main Middle East ally of Iran, and tensions between the United States and Iran remain high over Tehran's drive to acquire long-range ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. And the risks of escalation are far greater when ground troops are involved in the incident, not just airstrikes." Fall out? The treaty masquerading as a SOFA that the US wants so badly with Iraq became even more iffy as the puppet government in Baghdad had to call out the attack, publicly pledge to their neighbors that Iraq would not be allowed to be used as a staging ground for US attacks and as they had to announce that they were launching an investigation (and that they would share the results with Syria). And that's just noting the fall out for Iraq.
Monday morning, White House spokesperson Dana Perino refused to comment on the attack.
*"The United States government has not commented on reports about that and I'm not able to here either."
*"I can't comment on it at all, no."
*"I'm not going to comment in any way on this; I'm not able to comment on that."
*"I'm not going to comment on the reports about this, no, I'm not. Anybody else?"
*"I'm not going to comment on it at all. This could be a really short briefing."
*"I don't know. I don't know."
*"Jim, all I can tell you is that I am not able to comment on reports about this reported incident and I'm not going to do so. You can come up here and try to beat it out of me, but I will not be commenting on this in any way, shape or form today."
*"I don't believe anybody is commenting on this at all."
*"To give you an answer to that would be commenting in some way on it and I'm not going to it."
*"Nothing."
"*I understand the reports are serious but it's not something I'm going to comment on in any way."
The White House wasn't saying a word but Syria was very clear, via their Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem, that they saw the attack as "criminal and terrorist aggression." That judgment was not limited to Syria. Borzou Daragahi and Ramin Mostaghim (Babylon & Beyond, Los Angeles Times) reported, "The pro-U.S. faction within the Lebanese government condemned the U.S. move. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora accused the U.S., which funds his military, of an 'unacceptable' violation of Syrian sovereignty. 'Any military attack against an Arab country or on a small country by a larger country is an act we reject,' said a statement issued by his office." And Monday also brought the news that fall out included calling off an announced press conference featuring the Syrian and UK foreign ministers. Tuesday, Hurriyet explained, "The weekend U.S. raid into Syrian territory will hamper Turkey's efforts to create a more stable Middle East through mediating between rival Israel and Syria, according to experts." Hurriyet maintains Turkey had no advance knowledge of the attack on Syria and notes, "Turkey has so far hosted four rounds of indirect talks between Israel and Syria with the aim of bringing the bitter enemies together for direct talks. The fifth round, originally scheduled for Septemeber, was postponed after former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert resigned amid corruption claims. . . . Washington has remained silent on the Olmert-led Israeli government's initiative to engage in indirect talks with Syria under Turkish auspices."
Tuesday at the US State Dept, there was no comment on the attack but Robert A. Wood wanted the press to know that he had nothing in writing about Syria closing a an American school and cultural center in Syria: "I've seen, actually heard about the reports but we have not been officially notified by the Syrian government. So until we do, I don't have much further to say on it."
The next day, Sean McCormack would use the US State Dept press briefing to nah-nah-nah the fact that the US school and cultural center remained open but he would clam up when asked if the US Embassy in Syria was shutting down or if there were protests scheduled outside of it. He had no answers -- this despite Dana Perino steering reporters to the State Dept for answers to those exact questions.
The questions were answered by the US Embassy in Syria and, to date, the Embassy is the only US governmental outlet that has made any sort of official statement regarding last week's developments in Syria and that was one sentence.
And not only was it closed Thursday, it was also closed Friday although Robert Wood would state that the Friday closing was due to "a holiday."
While voices in the US remained largely silent, some voices did speak out. Farrah Hassen (Asia Times) reminded that 8 Syrians died ("including a farmer, three children, and a fisherman") and that while "numerous questions" continue, no answers are provided. Hassen notes, "By violating Syrian airspace and apparently not consulting the Syrians about its supposed intelligence on Abu Ghadiya ahead of the attack, the Bush adminsitration has confirmed, yet again, its disdain for international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter." Mohammad Akef Jamal (Gulf News) observed that an agreement allowing cross borders raids is one thing but, "Breaking into the borders of any country without a similar agreement is considered a hostile act and a violation of this country's sovereignty, besides being a breach of international laws. This attack raised many questions about its targets and content. First, the US never carried such attacks when the Syrian-Iraqi borders were almost open and Syria was accused of allowing hundreds of militants to infiltrate into Iraq to carry out vandalism operations. However, the situation has changed lately as these accusations decreased and Syria was no longer the country that allows militants into Iraq. Syria has also taken steps to mend its relations with Lebanon and France, which should bring it closer to the US, not the opposite."
Those issues were avoided and the administration was allowed to go through a full week without answering to the people. Want to keep pretending we have an opposition party?
Want to keep pretending we have a healthy and viabrant democracy? Or even a functioning one?
And the was pretty much all anyone ever got.
The US attacked Syria -- the way so many fear Iran will be attacked -- and there was no huge protest, there wasn't even a desire to make it an issue to discuss. Neither the Republican presidential candidate John McCain or the Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama felt the need to call out the attack.
And with no one calling it out, there was no pressure on the head of an alleged democracy to explain to the American people what happened. Instead of hearing from the administration, the public was served up whispers and gossip, unsourced.
It was treated as though it were no problem, this despite realities and the fall out. Realities?
Martin Sieff (UPI) reminds, "Cross-border attacks in any conflict carry the risk of widening it uncontrollably. That is especially the case here, since Syria is the main Middle East ally of Iran, and tensions between the United States and Iran remain high over Tehran's drive to acquire long-range ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. And the risks of escalation are far greater when ground troops are involved in the incident, not just airstrikes." Fall out? The treaty masquerading as a SOFA that the US wants so badly with Iraq became even more iffy as the puppet government in Baghdad had to call out the attack, publicly pledge to their neighbors that Iraq would not be allowed to be used as a staging ground for US attacks and as they had to announce that they were launching an investigation (and that they would share the results with Syria). And that's just noting the fall out for Iraq.
Monday morning, White House spokesperson Dana Perino refused to comment on the attack.
*"The United States government has not commented on reports about that and I'm not able to here either."
*"I can't comment on it at all, no."
*"I'm not going to comment in any way on this; I'm not able to comment on that."
*"I'm not going to comment on the reports about this, no, I'm not. Anybody else?"
*"I'm not going to comment on it at all. This could be a really short briefing."
*"I don't know. I don't know."
*"Jim, all I can tell you is that I am not able to comment on reports about this reported incident and I'm not going to do so. You can come up here and try to beat it out of me, but I will not be commenting on this in any way, shape or form today."
*"I don't believe anybody is commenting on this at all."
*"To give you an answer to that would be commenting in some way on it and I'm not going to it."
*"Nothing."
"*I understand the reports are serious but it's not something I'm going to comment on in any way."
The White House wasn't saying a word but Syria was very clear, via their Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem, that they saw the attack as "criminal and terrorist aggression." That judgment was not limited to Syria. Borzou Daragahi and Ramin Mostaghim (Babylon & Beyond, Los Angeles Times) reported, "The pro-U.S. faction within the Lebanese government condemned the U.S. move. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora accused the U.S., which funds his military, of an 'unacceptable' violation of Syrian sovereignty. 'Any military attack against an Arab country or on a small country by a larger country is an act we reject,' said a statement issued by his office." And Monday also brought the news that fall out included calling off an announced press conference featuring the Syrian and UK foreign ministers. Tuesday, Hurriyet explained, "The weekend U.S. raid into Syrian territory will hamper Turkey's efforts to create a more stable Middle East through mediating between rival Israel and Syria, according to experts." Hurriyet maintains Turkey had no advance knowledge of the attack on Syria and notes, "Turkey has so far hosted four rounds of indirect talks between Israel and Syria with the aim of bringing the bitter enemies together for direct talks. The fifth round, originally scheduled for Septemeber, was postponed after former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert resigned amid corruption claims. . . . Washington has remained silent on the Olmert-led Israeli government's initiative to engage in indirect talks with Syria under Turkish auspices."
Tuesday at the US State Dept, there was no comment on the attack but Robert A. Wood wanted the press to know that he had nothing in writing about Syria closing a an American school and cultural center in Syria: "I've seen, actually heard about the reports but we have not been officially notified by the Syrian government. So until we do, I don't have much further to say on it."
The next day, Sean McCormack would use the US State Dept press briefing to nah-nah-nah the fact that the US school and cultural center remained open but he would clam up when asked if the US Embassy in Syria was shutting down or if there were protests scheduled outside of it. He had no answers -- this despite Dana Perino steering reporters to the State Dept for answers to those exact questions.
The questions were answered by the US Embassy in Syria and, to date, the Embassy is the only US governmental outlet that has made any sort of official statement regarding last week's developments in Syria and that was one sentence.
And not only was it closed Thursday, it was also closed Friday although Robert Wood would state that the Friday closing was due to "a holiday."
While voices in the US remained largely silent, some voices did speak out. Farrah Hassen (Asia Times) reminded that 8 Syrians died ("including a farmer, three children, and a fisherman") and that while "numerous questions" continue, no answers are provided. Hassen notes, "By violating Syrian airspace and apparently not consulting the Syrians about its supposed intelligence on Abu Ghadiya ahead of the attack, the Bush adminsitration has confirmed, yet again, its disdain for international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter." Mohammad Akef Jamal (Gulf News) observed that an agreement allowing cross borders raids is one thing but, "Breaking into the borders of any country without a similar agreement is considered a hostile act and a violation of this country's sovereignty, besides being a breach of international laws. This attack raised many questions about its targets and content. First, the US never carried such attacks when the Syrian-Iraqi borders were almost open and Syria was accused of allowing hundreds of militants to infiltrate into Iraq to carry out vandalism operations. However, the situation has changed lately as these accusations decreased and Syria was no longer the country that allows militants into Iraq. Syria has also taken steps to mend its relations with Lebanon and France, which should bring it closer to the US, not the opposite."
Those issues were avoided and the administration was allowed to go through a full week without answering to the people. Want to keep pretending we have an opposition party?
Want to keep pretending we have a healthy and viabrant democracy? Or even a functioning one?
TV: The Uglies
Last week, TV aired a whole lot of ugly. And even in a week of stiff competition, Chuck Schumer managed to land ugly of all uglies.
"I would say," he heavy-panted to Charlie Rose Friday on PBS, "with Senator Obama, nuclear energy is on the table."
As if the words weren't ugly enough, the cow eyes the Charlies made back and forth at one another (like something out of Zoolander) really sent it over the top. So much so, in fact, that he managed to beat Tiny Teethed Davy Brooks who also appeared on Rose's yawn-fest Friday (we'll come back to it).
The senator's words are only schocking if you haven't been paying attention. Barack's bought and paid for by the nuclear industry and assorted other enemies of the environment. But a number of people were shocked when we repeated the words -- shocked that they came from Schumer. "There really isn't a Democratic Party anymore, is there?" asked one who early voted for Barack and would now take back that vote. In answer to the question, no, there really isn't a Democratic Party.
There is a cult around an egomaniac and it took a lot of ego for Barack to do his infomercial Wednesday night. For those who can't remember, H. Ross Perot bought TV time in 1992. That's where the similarities end -- though none of your Water Cooler Set could set you straight.
The billionaire Perot bought the spots with his own money and he didn't use them to air Whitman's "Song Of Myself." He used the his infomercial to address the economy -- which, for the record, was in a lot better shape in 1992 than it is currently.
But there was Barack, for a half hour (on all the networks except for ABC) hawking photos of his parents, showing clips of his speeches -- just underscoring how pathetic and unaccomplished he truly is. Think about it, a half-hour of network time with no (other) commercials? Frank Sinatra got an hour of time -- with commercials -- from CBS on November 16, 1965. Unlike Barack, Frank had plenty of accomplishments to point to.
Election 2008, when the presidential election became one of those faux-reality shows and, if Barack didn't have the appeal of Evan Marriott, he was a dead ringer for Rick Rockwell.
Dead was 30 Rock Thursday night. The big return that petered out.
The claim is: It's a hit!
That's the lie they're pimping. While 30 Rock did indeed get its best ratings ever, the reality is that it has never had good ratings. In what was the 'big' return, the failed and failing and flailing sitcom came in third. Translation, it beat Supernatural on the CW but not much else. In other words, it's a bomb.
That's very hard for the Water Cooler Set to state. Maybe they fear losing out on an NBC tote bag or free GE light bulbs? Whatever the fear is, the truth is the truth.
Truth is the debut episode was third for the night in its timeslot. Another sad truth is that the show got a little bit higher of rating (.4) than did the pilot episode two years ago. Three years later and that's all the show can brag about?
If you're singing "Right Back Where We Started From," you may have actually watched. The season three opener was a lot like season's one "The Baby Show." In that one, Liz (Fey) was consumed with baby fever and ended up abducting a small child. Thursday, Liz was consumed with baby fever yet again -- and still 'tragically' single. It was all so retro and offensive that, had a man written it and it starred Blair Brown, people would be up in arms. Instead, expect Tina to get a pass for her backlash claptrap.
We have to note the hair (we'll be kind and avoid the waistline). If Madonna was sporting Bette Davis' Poodle a year back (see Live Earth), Tina's sporting The Shetland. It's the overly long, overly curly thing. The comedy she's attempting to do is supposed to be sleek and brisk. Supposed to be.
But you can't be sleek and brisk and bet the farm on Oprah. The suits are pissed at the ratings. But one told us that they still have hopes for this week. We tried not to laugh as they explained Oprah means big ratings. On daytime TV, maybe once upon a time.
30 Rock once provided Jerry Seinfeld's return to sitcom form but now hopes to become the big Thursday happening by offering the increasingly unpopular Oprah playing a MAD TV version of herself. Tired and tiring.
TV and Tina's hair were so ugly last week that another network took pity on viewers. CBS put an X on The Ex-List. And thank goodness for that. The meandering show played like a combo of all the wrong parts from Sandy Dennis' Sweet November and Tuesday Weld's A Safe Place. This really bad one hour show was supposed to be both comedy and drama but never supplied either.
The show revolved around Bella Bloom -- yes, you can get a tooth ache from that name. Bella's problem wasn't that she'd never experienced love, it was that she'd misplaced it like a set of keys. So each week, she would team up with an ex to discover whether or not he was Mr. Right. It was as dull as it sounds and so was Bella who, as a friend pointed out to her, owns her own business next to the beach and won't even make time to hit the beach. When you're that much of a drip, maybe you didn't misplace your true love, maybe he ran like hell from you?
A lot of uglies showed up during the show's four episodes. Brian Van Holt was the ex two Fridays ago when the show aired for the last time. He was actually an improvement in that he could act and was attractive. But it was like sitting through another Peter Griffith "chick film" (Steel Vaginas II?) as nothing ever happened. One of the subplots involved Daphne Bloom getting married. Not in episode four, not in episode one, two or three. In fact, it was one of those sub-'plots' that's as ill thought out as the main plot where nothing ever happens there either. Each week, Bella meets an ex and he's nice and she's nice and, gosh darn it, it's all just so wholesome it's as though Pax never ceased to be a network.
CBS did viewers a solid by not making them suffer through the show on Friday, NBC did viewers a solid by bringing back Ben Affleck as host on last night's SNL.
Ben's best moments in the past involve the Who Wants To Be Groped By An Eleven-Thousandaire? skit, the skit where he attempts to impersonate Matt Damon in order to land Mango and the Fantatic spoof. Our big concern with Ben hosting wasn't fear of having to say something bad about someone we know and like because Ben actually is funny.
Among his best moments was a skit where he played Keith Olbermann in all his blustering. He did a funny pitch-meeting sketch, amused in the Target sketch as Sir Cumfrence, and he was funny in The View spoof (so was Casey Wilson as Jennifer Aniston -- the rest of that skit was disgusting including using men to play women) but it's the latter that brings up our fear.
So let's say it. The best SNL host of the 90s was? Alec Baldwin. (Baldwin still makes a good host and Baldwin was who Ben played in The View sketch.) But along the way, Baldwin's best moments became small screen ones. His rise at SNL goes hand-in-hand with the demise of his leading man career on the big screen. If you grasp that Ben's Gigli is Alec's The Getaway, you can see how the comparison could get scary.
Scary was Seth yet again trying to do Weekend Update solo. We were asked why we didn't comment on Seth's facial hair and our honest reply was, we just assumed his tastes, like his jokes, were very old. That would explain his Miami Vice look. However, we were informed that Seth's fronting the shadow because he's trying to 'butch up' and is worried about how he comes across on camera? Seth, anyone thinking your gay is actually crediting you with much more depth than you possess. Silly viewers, whores don't have depth, they just run up the meter.
Seth had time to tell Palin 'jokes' on Weekend Update, he had time for "Joe The Plumber" 'jokes,' but, strangely, he didn't have time to note that Barack's aunt is living in Boston in public housing and against government's orders which demanded her deportation back in 2004. In the good old days, if Lorne had ever caught anyone trying to carry the water like that for any candidate, they would have been gone. Back then, he saw himself as the last protector of comedy. These days, he goes along -- making so many who remember his sneering and scorning of The Carol Burnette Show (a better show in any season than SNL in any season) point out just how badly he needs to be retired.
As always Seth got in his insults at John McCain. This time, to his face. McCain guested playing himself in the opening and on Weekend Update. The one-time host of SNL proved to be far more relaxed on SNL than he was in any debate. In the opening skit, he had to endure Tina Fey's increasingly tired spoof of Palin. Tina's never had the voice down but she's no longer even consistent. (She uses her own voice when she starts whispering about 2012.) She had nothing to offer but her usual bitchy moments. McCain played good sport and Cindy McCain played a spokesmodel (displaying McCain "Fine Gold") in the opening as well. The McCains were very good sports and only drove home (yet again) how there are no jokes about Barack on SNL. He must be treated with kid gloves and sealed in a vacuum.
The McCains stuck around for the entire show and were on stage for the goodbyes. We were asked (by SNL writer friend) if we noticed the beeline Tina made for Cindy? Yes, we did. But then Tina hasn't been ridiculing Cindy McCain, has she? Sarah Palin's whom she avoided and whom she's been ridiculing.
She's been as bitchy about Sarah Palin as Tiny Teethed Davy Brooks and what a proud moment this must be for both of them. Friday, Davy Brooks was justifying his disdain for Palin and for what she represents (populism, he explained). If you could get past those Island of Dr. Moreau teeth, you could enjoy him whining that he wasn't elitist! He wasn't! It wasn't fair to call him an elitist!
Charlie Rose tried to flip it into a good thing and started yammering on about who wouldn't want to be the best? But Davy was having none of it. Read his lips, he's not an elitist.
So what if he writes for The New York Times, so what if he coins terms like "bobo"s (which sound a little too art school for the masses and why the term never caught on with Republicans), so what if he wears pink shirts on camera, so what if he purses his lips a great deal, so what if
Ta-Nehisi Coates (The Atlantic) described him in September as "Latte-sipping, Chardonnay-swilling sissy David Brooks"? He's as much a two-fisted He-Man as Woody Allen, Jerry Lewis and Paul Lynde. Say it to his face and he'll likely strike you across your own with a white glove.
In a week that saw the alleged comedy 30 Rock tank and saw another (The Ex-List) pulled from the air, Davy Brooks proved laughs can still be had on TV provided the characters are larger than life and the performers are not afraid to make a fool out of themselves.
"I would say," he heavy-panted to Charlie Rose Friday on PBS, "with Senator Obama, nuclear energy is on the table."
As if the words weren't ugly enough, the cow eyes the Charlies made back and forth at one another (like something out of Zoolander) really sent it over the top. So much so, in fact, that he managed to beat Tiny Teethed Davy Brooks who also appeared on Rose's yawn-fest Friday (we'll come back to it).
The senator's words are only schocking if you haven't been paying attention. Barack's bought and paid for by the nuclear industry and assorted other enemies of the environment. But a number of people were shocked when we repeated the words -- shocked that they came from Schumer. "There really isn't a Democratic Party anymore, is there?" asked one who early voted for Barack and would now take back that vote. In answer to the question, no, there really isn't a Democratic Party.
There is a cult around an egomaniac and it took a lot of ego for Barack to do his infomercial Wednesday night. For those who can't remember, H. Ross Perot bought TV time in 1992. That's where the similarities end -- though none of your Water Cooler Set could set you straight.
The billionaire Perot bought the spots with his own money and he didn't use them to air Whitman's "Song Of Myself." He used the his infomercial to address the economy -- which, for the record, was in a lot better shape in 1992 than it is currently.
But there was Barack, for a half hour (on all the networks except for ABC) hawking photos of his parents, showing clips of his speeches -- just underscoring how pathetic and unaccomplished he truly is. Think about it, a half-hour of network time with no (other) commercials? Frank Sinatra got an hour of time -- with commercials -- from CBS on November 16, 1965. Unlike Barack, Frank had plenty of accomplishments to point to.
Election 2008, when the presidential election became one of those faux-reality shows and, if Barack didn't have the appeal of Evan Marriott, he was a dead ringer for Rick Rockwell.
Dead was 30 Rock Thursday night. The big return that petered out.
The claim is: It's a hit!
That's the lie they're pimping. While 30 Rock did indeed get its best ratings ever, the reality is that it has never had good ratings. In what was the 'big' return, the failed and failing and flailing sitcom came in third. Translation, it beat Supernatural on the CW but not much else. In other words, it's a bomb.
That's very hard for the Water Cooler Set to state. Maybe they fear losing out on an NBC tote bag or free GE light bulbs? Whatever the fear is, the truth is the truth.
Truth is the debut episode was third for the night in its timeslot. Another sad truth is that the show got a little bit higher of rating (.4) than did the pilot episode two years ago. Three years later and that's all the show can brag about?
If you're singing "Right Back Where We Started From," you may have actually watched. The season three opener was a lot like season's one "The Baby Show." In that one, Liz (Fey) was consumed with baby fever and ended up abducting a small child. Thursday, Liz was consumed with baby fever yet again -- and still 'tragically' single. It was all so retro and offensive that, had a man written it and it starred Blair Brown, people would be up in arms. Instead, expect Tina to get a pass for her backlash claptrap.
We have to note the hair (we'll be kind and avoid the waistline). If Madonna was sporting Bette Davis' Poodle a year back (see Live Earth), Tina's sporting The Shetland. It's the overly long, overly curly thing. The comedy she's attempting to do is supposed to be sleek and brisk. Supposed to be.
But you can't be sleek and brisk and bet the farm on Oprah. The suits are pissed at the ratings. But one told us that they still have hopes for this week. We tried not to laugh as they explained Oprah means big ratings. On daytime TV, maybe once upon a time.
30 Rock once provided Jerry Seinfeld's return to sitcom form but now hopes to become the big Thursday happening by offering the increasingly unpopular Oprah playing a MAD TV version of herself. Tired and tiring.
TV and Tina's hair were so ugly last week that another network took pity on viewers. CBS put an X on The Ex-List. And thank goodness for that. The meandering show played like a combo of all the wrong parts from Sandy Dennis' Sweet November and Tuesday Weld's A Safe Place. This really bad one hour show was supposed to be both comedy and drama but never supplied either.
The show revolved around Bella Bloom -- yes, you can get a tooth ache from that name. Bella's problem wasn't that she'd never experienced love, it was that she'd misplaced it like a set of keys. So each week, she would team up with an ex to discover whether or not he was Mr. Right. It was as dull as it sounds and so was Bella who, as a friend pointed out to her, owns her own business next to the beach and won't even make time to hit the beach. When you're that much of a drip, maybe you didn't misplace your true love, maybe he ran like hell from you?
A lot of uglies showed up during the show's four episodes. Brian Van Holt was the ex two Fridays ago when the show aired for the last time. He was actually an improvement in that he could act and was attractive. But it was like sitting through another Peter Griffith "chick film" (Steel Vaginas II?) as nothing ever happened. One of the subplots involved Daphne Bloom getting married. Not in episode four, not in episode one, two or three. In fact, it was one of those sub-'plots' that's as ill thought out as the main plot where nothing ever happens there either. Each week, Bella meets an ex and he's nice and she's nice and, gosh darn it, it's all just so wholesome it's as though Pax never ceased to be a network.
CBS did viewers a solid by not making them suffer through the show on Friday, NBC did viewers a solid by bringing back Ben Affleck as host on last night's SNL.
Ben's best moments in the past involve the Who Wants To Be Groped By An Eleven-Thousandaire? skit, the skit where he attempts to impersonate Matt Damon in order to land Mango and the Fantatic spoof. Our big concern with Ben hosting wasn't fear of having to say something bad about someone we know and like because Ben actually is funny.
Among his best moments was a skit where he played Keith Olbermann in all his blustering. He did a funny pitch-meeting sketch, amused in the Target sketch as Sir Cumfrence, and he was funny in The View spoof (so was Casey Wilson as Jennifer Aniston -- the rest of that skit was disgusting including using men to play women) but it's the latter that brings up our fear.
So let's say it. The best SNL host of the 90s was? Alec Baldwin. (Baldwin still makes a good host and Baldwin was who Ben played in The View sketch.) But along the way, Baldwin's best moments became small screen ones. His rise at SNL goes hand-in-hand with the demise of his leading man career on the big screen. If you grasp that Ben's Gigli is Alec's The Getaway, you can see how the comparison could get scary.
Scary was Seth yet again trying to do Weekend Update solo. We were asked why we didn't comment on Seth's facial hair and our honest reply was, we just assumed his tastes, like his jokes, were very old. That would explain his Miami Vice look. However, we were informed that Seth's fronting the shadow because he's trying to 'butch up' and is worried about how he comes across on camera? Seth, anyone thinking your gay is actually crediting you with much more depth than you possess. Silly viewers, whores don't have depth, they just run up the meter.
Seth had time to tell Palin 'jokes' on Weekend Update, he had time for "Joe The Plumber" 'jokes,' but, strangely, he didn't have time to note that Barack's aunt is living in Boston in public housing and against government's orders which demanded her deportation back in 2004. In the good old days, if Lorne had ever caught anyone trying to carry the water like that for any candidate, they would have been gone. Back then, he saw himself as the last protector of comedy. These days, he goes along -- making so many who remember his sneering and scorning of The Carol Burnette Show (a better show in any season than SNL in any season) point out just how badly he needs to be retired.
As always Seth got in his insults at John McCain. This time, to his face. McCain guested playing himself in the opening and on Weekend Update. The one-time host of SNL proved to be far more relaxed on SNL than he was in any debate. In the opening skit, he had to endure Tina Fey's increasingly tired spoof of Palin. Tina's never had the voice down but she's no longer even consistent. (She uses her own voice when she starts whispering about 2012.) She had nothing to offer but her usual bitchy moments. McCain played good sport and Cindy McCain played a spokesmodel (displaying McCain "Fine Gold") in the opening as well. The McCains were very good sports and only drove home (yet again) how there are no jokes about Barack on SNL. He must be treated with kid gloves and sealed in a vacuum.
The McCains stuck around for the entire show and were on stage for the goodbyes. We were asked (by SNL writer friend) if we noticed the beeline Tina made for Cindy? Yes, we did. But then Tina hasn't been ridiculing Cindy McCain, has she? Sarah Palin's whom she avoided and whom she's been ridiculing.
She's been as bitchy about Sarah Palin as Tiny Teethed Davy Brooks and what a proud moment this must be for both of them. Friday, Davy Brooks was justifying his disdain for Palin and for what she represents (populism, he explained). If you could get past those Island of Dr. Moreau teeth, you could enjoy him whining that he wasn't elitist! He wasn't! It wasn't fair to call him an elitist!
Charlie Rose tried to flip it into a good thing and started yammering on about who wouldn't want to be the best? But Davy was having none of it. Read his lips, he's not an elitist.
So what if he writes for The New York Times, so what if he coins terms like "bobo"s (which sound a little too art school for the masses and why the term never caught on with Republicans), so what if he wears pink shirts on camera, so what if he purses his lips a great deal, so what if
Ta-Nehisi Coates (The Atlantic) described him in September as "Latte-sipping, Chardonnay-swilling sissy David Brooks"? He's as much a two-fisted He-Man as Woody Allen, Jerry Lewis and Paul Lynde. Say it to his face and he'll likely strike you across your own with a white glove.
In a week that saw the alleged comedy 30 Rock tank and saw another (The Ex-List) pulled from the air, Davy Brooks proved laughs can still be had on TV provided the characters are larger than life and the performers are not afraid to make a fool out of themselves.
Robin Morgan: Troll (Ava and C.I.)
Bill Flanagan: You wrote a pretty funny letter to Musician about Rickie Lee Jones.
Joni Mitchell: Oh... I can just see me when I'm an old woman writing nasty letters-to-the-editor all over the country.
Bill Flanagan: She made a crack in Musician about Linda Ronstadt trying to sing jazz, and you wrote that jazz wasn't a private sidewalk; anybody who wants to can walk there.
Joni Mitchell: She said that Peter Asher had appeared at a concert of hers, and she knew for sure that night that he would go and tell Linda to do a jazz album because jazz was now hip. What she didn't know was that Linda had this idea to do those albums with Nelson Riddle all on her own, had no support. Peter was chewing his arm up to the elbow thinking, "Oh God, this is terrible,this could kill her!" Just like Mingus. It was very risky.
Bill Flanagan: Losing another one to jazz.
Joni Mitchell: Yeah. This did not look like a good move. She did it purely on her own impulse. It was something she wanted to do. It was completely her own idea and her own artistic motivation. So at first I tried to write the letter from that tack and then I thought of Geraldine Campbell when I was a kid. She used to chase me with a hatchet if I crossed in front of her house. If I'd go up the back alley she'd be there saying "This is my property. You can't cross over it!" And I thought, man, it was like Rickie was possessing jazz. It was there before her, it'll be there after her. I was dabbling in jazz and being persecuted for it by the time she had some public success with it. And I'm not the innovator of it, I didn't invent it. It's all a totem pole.
The above exchange is from Bill Flanagan's "Joni Mitchell Has The Last Laugh" (Musician, December 1985). We thought of that last week as Robin Morgan resurfaced at (Democratic Only) Women's Media Center to yet again attack Governor Sarah Palin.
Journalistically, it was an embarrassment for many reasons including the fact that she made no apologies for her still uncorrected lies from her last swipe at Palin. But what it really said was, "Robin Morgan thinks she owns feminism!"
You sort of picture Robin with a hatchet, screaming at everyone and having no idea how, not only is she coming off like a crazed psycho, she's doing so -- in the eyes of many -- in the name of feminism. Or maybe, like Isaiah,' you see Robin as "Ms. Troll"?
A functioning movement would have told Robin to cool her jets some time ago. They would have told her that 'movement troll' was no road to liberation.
We always say we write "a" feminist take and not "the" because feminism is a diverse movement. Robin fails to grasp that and seems to think because she coined some phrases at the end of the sixties (and stole some without crediting -- not exactly sisterhood behavior), she owns feminism.
Feminism was there before Robin Morgan was born, it'll be there after she's gone.
After you've gone and left me crying
After you've gone there's no denying
You'll feel hurt you'll feel sad
You're gonna miss the best friend you ever had
It's like Judy Garland was singing the song just to Robin!
One of 2008's big failures is the lack of leadership from 'leadership.'
Women like Robin Morgan have had nothing to contribute for the bulk of the year because they've seen their role as 'leaders' as 'big ass boss.' They're not anyone's boss.
"Leadership" in the feminist movement is not anything to hoard over anyone. It is a role that comes with responsibilities and Robin (and Kim Gandy and many, many more) have acted as though responsibilities don't exist and that the grassroots are nothing but idiotic minions waiting to be ordered around.
Sarah Palin isn't just a woman, she's one who self-identifies as a feminist, does so publicly and has done so publicly for many, many years.
Robin's panties are in a twist and damp because Palin's not pro-choice.
Too damn bad, get the f**k over it.
We've advocated here that feminism was not elastic and that certain guidelines need to be created (and Rebecca's long done that at her site). 'Leadership' ignored it because it wouldn't allow them to claim assorted questionable women in Ms. yearly (and embarrassing) wrap up charting all the YOU GO FAMOUS GIRL! moments that have damn little to do with the feminist movement. They wouldn't have been able to run so many questionable celebrity covers (we're not speaking of this decade) if they'd narrow the term down.
Having refused to take up that argument, Robin Morgan cannot show up and suddenly attempt to change the rules because she personally loathes Sarah Palin.
Palin's a feminist. By the rules and standards in place in 2008, Palin's a feminist.
Tough s**t, Robin, grow the hell up.
Instead of doing that, Robin decides to launch one cat fight after another. In fact, she's become The Ultimate Cat Fighter (though, if it would hurry her scampering off from public life, we'd gladly step in the cage with her and take her on). A bitchy, negative, nagging shrew attacking a younger woman. The younger woman is a vice presidential nominee. And Robin? To put it kindly, she's a "faded rose from days gone by."
As a 'leader,' she's supposed to be aware of perceptions and she's damn well supposed to be aware that when she acts out every negative stereotype of feminism with her public stage caterwauling, she embarrasses the movement.
After we got past the fact that failed actress Robin wants to go out playing the role of the vengeful harpy, the thing that bothered us the most was this BITCHY moment from Robin:
But if any actual feminists are concerned about the effect on Women’s Movement institutions and energy of this clutch of "formers" (a former chapter official of a national feminist organization, a former editor of a feminist publication, former Democratic funders, former Hillary supporters, and so forth), let me reassure you. The "trust date" had already long expired on these women, who'd been voted off feminist leadership posts, or fired, or quietly asked to resign. Some are confessed consultants to the campaign whose candidates they now--surprise!--endorse. I never imagined I'd see a "feminist" mercenary. But then I never heard of rats climbing onto a sinking ship, either.
Rats? Oh, that's so very, very amusing because it reminds of so many stories of Robin's days at Rat and, let's be really damn clear here, if Robin wants dirty linen aired, we'll air all of it. Be prepared because the ground will shake.
There'll come a time
And you'll regret it
There'll come a time
You won't forget it
Robin's acting like a real bitch and that's the only word for it. She thinks she can determine not only whether Sarah Palin deserves feminist status but whether other women do as well.
She calls out feminists who support Sarah Plain and snarls, "Some are confessed consultants to the campaign whose candidates they now--surprise!--endorse." You mean like Robin tried to be a consultant to Barack's campaign? (They didn't want her. It's a homophobic campaign and there were concerns and confusions over whether Robin was "one of those lesbian feminists" as a Barack aide explained it to us.)
Robin's mind has decayed. There's nothing wrong with being a consultant to a campaign. There's something wrong with being one and hiding it. The women Robin's getting all catty about aren't hiding a damn thing. But Robin's tossing every piece of shit she can squeeze out at the wall and hoping something leaves a smear.
The only thing she's done is created a stink and an embarrassment.
It's no longer enough that she attack Sarah Palin, she now wants to smear other feminists. Let's repeat, if this is the new stage of feminism, Robin, please note, we'll partake and St. Robin of the Assembly Line Feminism will be the first burned at the stake; however, fairness will not allow us to stop with you. We'll burn 'em all -- friend and foe alike.
We'll talk about the money that disappeared from Ms. that no one was ever supposed to know about because it could 'embarrass the movement.' We'll talk about the 'gal' who was there for another after a marital break up and how, all these years later, the woman from the broken marriage has no idea that her 'friend' was the mistress. We'll make it as ugly and painful for all, we'll spread it around because we're not Robin Morgan, we play fair. If this is the new wave of feminism that Robin's 'leading,' then let's have at it. And we'll certainly discuss past smear campaigns by Robin and other 'leaders'.
When Robin went after Sarah Palin, she should have been loudly called out. It should have been obvious to her that feminism is not doing the bidding of the patriarchy by attacking a woman to advance a man.
Someone should have explained to Robin long ago that she doesn't own feminism and she doesn't control anyone but herself. (And she can't even control her mouth -- her mouth has a cracked mind of its own.) They should have made it very clear to her that feminism is not a private sidewalk but a public space and anyone can participate.
Joni Mitchell: Oh... I can just see me when I'm an old woman writing nasty letters-to-the-editor all over the country.
Bill Flanagan: She made a crack in Musician about Linda Ronstadt trying to sing jazz, and you wrote that jazz wasn't a private sidewalk; anybody who wants to can walk there.
Joni Mitchell: She said that Peter Asher had appeared at a concert of hers, and she knew for sure that night that he would go and tell Linda to do a jazz album because jazz was now hip. What she didn't know was that Linda had this idea to do those albums with Nelson Riddle all on her own, had no support. Peter was chewing his arm up to the elbow thinking, "Oh God, this is terrible,this could kill her!" Just like Mingus. It was very risky.
Bill Flanagan: Losing another one to jazz.
Joni Mitchell: Yeah. This did not look like a good move. She did it purely on her own impulse. It was something she wanted to do. It was completely her own idea and her own artistic motivation. So at first I tried to write the letter from that tack and then I thought of Geraldine Campbell when I was a kid. She used to chase me with a hatchet if I crossed in front of her house. If I'd go up the back alley she'd be there saying "This is my property. You can't cross over it!" And I thought, man, it was like Rickie was possessing jazz. It was there before her, it'll be there after her. I was dabbling in jazz and being persecuted for it by the time she had some public success with it. And I'm not the innovator of it, I didn't invent it. It's all a totem pole.
The above exchange is from Bill Flanagan's "Joni Mitchell Has The Last Laugh" (Musician, December 1985). We thought of that last week as Robin Morgan resurfaced at (Democratic Only) Women's Media Center to yet again attack Governor Sarah Palin.
Journalistically, it was an embarrassment for many reasons including the fact that she made no apologies for her still uncorrected lies from her last swipe at Palin. But what it really said was, "Robin Morgan thinks she owns feminism!"
You sort of picture Robin with a hatchet, screaming at everyone and having no idea how, not only is she coming off like a crazed psycho, she's doing so -- in the eyes of many -- in the name of feminism. Or maybe, like Isaiah,' you see Robin as "Ms. Troll"?
A functioning movement would have told Robin to cool her jets some time ago. They would have told her that 'movement troll' was no road to liberation.
We always say we write "a" feminist take and not "the" because feminism is a diverse movement. Robin fails to grasp that and seems to think because she coined some phrases at the end of the sixties (and stole some without crediting -- not exactly sisterhood behavior), she owns feminism.
Feminism was there before Robin Morgan was born, it'll be there after she's gone.
After you've gone and left me crying
After you've gone there's no denying
You'll feel hurt you'll feel sad
You're gonna miss the best friend you ever had
It's like Judy Garland was singing the song just to Robin!
One of 2008's big failures is the lack of leadership from 'leadership.'
Women like Robin Morgan have had nothing to contribute for the bulk of the year because they've seen their role as 'leaders' as 'big ass boss.' They're not anyone's boss.
"Leadership" in the feminist movement is not anything to hoard over anyone. It is a role that comes with responsibilities and Robin (and Kim Gandy and many, many more) have acted as though responsibilities don't exist and that the grassroots are nothing but idiotic minions waiting to be ordered around.
Sarah Palin isn't just a woman, she's one who self-identifies as a feminist, does so publicly and has done so publicly for many, many years.
Robin's panties are in a twist and damp because Palin's not pro-choice.
Too damn bad, get the f**k over it.
We've advocated here that feminism was not elastic and that certain guidelines need to be created (and Rebecca's long done that at her site). 'Leadership' ignored it because it wouldn't allow them to claim assorted questionable women in Ms. yearly (and embarrassing) wrap up charting all the YOU GO FAMOUS GIRL! moments that have damn little to do with the feminist movement. They wouldn't have been able to run so many questionable celebrity covers (we're not speaking of this decade) if they'd narrow the term down.
Having refused to take up that argument, Robin Morgan cannot show up and suddenly attempt to change the rules because she personally loathes Sarah Palin.
Palin's a feminist. By the rules and standards in place in 2008, Palin's a feminist.
Tough s**t, Robin, grow the hell up.
Instead of doing that, Robin decides to launch one cat fight after another. In fact, she's become The Ultimate Cat Fighter (though, if it would hurry her scampering off from public life, we'd gladly step in the cage with her and take her on). A bitchy, negative, nagging shrew attacking a younger woman. The younger woman is a vice presidential nominee. And Robin? To put it kindly, she's a "faded rose from days gone by."
As a 'leader,' she's supposed to be aware of perceptions and she's damn well supposed to be aware that when she acts out every negative stereotype of feminism with her public stage caterwauling, she embarrasses the movement.
After we got past the fact that failed actress Robin wants to go out playing the role of the vengeful harpy, the thing that bothered us the most was this BITCHY moment from Robin:
But if any actual feminists are concerned about the effect on Women’s Movement institutions and energy of this clutch of "formers" (a former chapter official of a national feminist organization, a former editor of a feminist publication, former Democratic funders, former Hillary supporters, and so forth), let me reassure you. The "trust date" had already long expired on these women, who'd been voted off feminist leadership posts, or fired, or quietly asked to resign. Some are confessed consultants to the campaign whose candidates they now--surprise!--endorse. I never imagined I'd see a "feminist" mercenary. But then I never heard of rats climbing onto a sinking ship, either.
Rats? Oh, that's so very, very amusing because it reminds of so many stories of Robin's days at Rat and, let's be really damn clear here, if Robin wants dirty linen aired, we'll air all of it. Be prepared because the ground will shake.
There'll come a time
And you'll regret it
There'll come a time
You won't forget it
Robin's acting like a real bitch and that's the only word for it. She thinks she can determine not only whether Sarah Palin deserves feminist status but whether other women do as well.
She calls out feminists who support Sarah Plain and snarls, "Some are confessed consultants to the campaign whose candidates they now--surprise!--endorse." You mean like Robin tried to be a consultant to Barack's campaign? (They didn't want her. It's a homophobic campaign and there were concerns and confusions over whether Robin was "one of those lesbian feminists" as a Barack aide explained it to us.)
Robin's mind has decayed. There's nothing wrong with being a consultant to a campaign. There's something wrong with being one and hiding it. The women Robin's getting all catty about aren't hiding a damn thing. But Robin's tossing every piece of shit she can squeeze out at the wall and hoping something leaves a smear.
The only thing she's done is created a stink and an embarrassment.
It's no longer enough that she attack Sarah Palin, she now wants to smear other feminists. Let's repeat, if this is the new stage of feminism, Robin, please note, we'll partake and St. Robin of the Assembly Line Feminism will be the first burned at the stake; however, fairness will not allow us to stop with you. We'll burn 'em all -- friend and foe alike.
We'll talk about the money that disappeared from Ms. that no one was ever supposed to know about because it could 'embarrass the movement.' We'll talk about the 'gal' who was there for another after a marital break up and how, all these years later, the woman from the broken marriage has no idea that her 'friend' was the mistress. We'll make it as ugly and painful for all, we'll spread it around because we're not Robin Morgan, we play fair. If this is the new wave of feminism that Robin's 'leading,' then let's have at it. And we'll certainly discuss past smear campaigns by Robin and other 'leaders'.
When Robin went after Sarah Palin, she should have been loudly called out. It should have been obvious to her that feminism is not doing the bidding of the patriarchy by attacking a woman to advance a man.
Someone should have explained to Robin long ago that she doesn't own feminism and she doesn't control anyone but herself. (And she can't even control her mouth -- her mouth has a cracked mind of its own.) They should have made it very clear to her that feminism is not a private sidewalk but a public space and anyone can participate.
Heroes and villains
Once at night Catillian squared the fight
And she was right in the rain of the bullets that eventually brought her down
But she's still dancing in the night
Unafraid of what a dude'll do in a town full of heroes and villains
Heroes and villains
Just see what you've done
Heroes and villains
Just see what you've done
-- "Heroes and Villains" written by Brian Wilson and Van Dyke Parks, Beach Boys' Smiley Smile
Heroes and villains abound and one of the great things about 2008 is the self-check.
As hideous as everything that's gone down and is still going down is, there's also the fact that a lot of people were provided the chance to question the orthodoxy.
One way to do that was to leave the two-party mind set and support a third party or independent presidential candidate. This year saw a media blackout on these candidates, yes, but it also saw an awareness of the blackout. It was a real learning experience as so many 'independent' outlets copied the MSM in marginalizing candidates who actually had the gall to stand for something.
If you paid close attention, you grasped Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader's biggest problem was not the MSM, it was Panhandle Media. Had Panhandle Media treated them like the real candidates they are, there struggle for coverage might not have involved so much work.
If you were a Democrat, you had a really big self-check this year as you saw Team Barack and The Cult utilize homophobia, sexism and racism repeatedly and get away with it. You saw Panhandle media re-inforce those disgraceful tactics. You saw the party that screamed and whined as far back as 2000 be perfectly okay with stolen elections when they liked the results.
If you were a Republican, you saw some (not all) feminists prove just what sexist pigs they could be (hello, Robin Morgan!) by lying about Sarah Palin and by attacking her with bitchiness. When Hillary's under attack, Robin calls out men and women attacking her for Bill's involvement with Monica Lewinsky but Robin is happy to bring up Todd Palin's decades old DUI and try to make Sarah answerable for it. It's do as I say not as a whore feminism and women like Robin Morgan need to issue an apology or vanish from the public stage.
You could have learned all the above just by paying attention.
If you had, you would have noticed that FAIR waited until after the presidential debates to suddenly notice that Ralph, Cynthia and other presidential candidates weren't getting press attention. (In their action alert, FAIR didn't say if they were forwarding it to their own CounterSpin which spent each week promoting Barack and ignoring independent and third party presidential candidates.)
And as you saw all that information, you could do a self-check and ask, "Do I have ethics? Or am I just another gutter liar like Robin Morgan or the self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders or the idiot Norman Solomon or any of the other miserable excuses for 'independent' voices in this country?"
If you passed the self-check, great. If you didn't, it's not to late to save your soul -- provided you're not an 'independent' media whore -- they're already consigned to hell with 2008's other villains.
And she was right in the rain of the bullets that eventually brought her down
But she's still dancing in the night
Unafraid of what a dude'll do in a town full of heroes and villains
Heroes and villains
Just see what you've done
Heroes and villains
Just see what you've done
-- "Heroes and Villains" written by Brian Wilson and Van Dyke Parks, Beach Boys' Smiley Smile
Heroes and villains abound and one of the great things about 2008 is the self-check.
As hideous as everything that's gone down and is still going down is, there's also the fact that a lot of people were provided the chance to question the orthodoxy.
One way to do that was to leave the two-party mind set and support a third party or independent presidential candidate. This year saw a media blackout on these candidates, yes, but it also saw an awareness of the blackout. It was a real learning experience as so many 'independent' outlets copied the MSM in marginalizing candidates who actually had the gall to stand for something.
If you paid close attention, you grasped Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader's biggest problem was not the MSM, it was Panhandle Media. Had Panhandle Media treated them like the real candidates they are, there struggle for coverage might not have involved so much work.
If you were a Democrat, you had a really big self-check this year as you saw Team Barack and The Cult utilize homophobia, sexism and racism repeatedly and get away with it. You saw Panhandle media re-inforce those disgraceful tactics. You saw the party that screamed and whined as far back as 2000 be perfectly okay with stolen elections when they liked the results.
If you were a Republican, you saw some (not all) feminists prove just what sexist pigs they could be (hello, Robin Morgan!) by lying about Sarah Palin and by attacking her with bitchiness. When Hillary's under attack, Robin calls out men and women attacking her for Bill's involvement with Monica Lewinsky but Robin is happy to bring up Todd Palin's decades old DUI and try to make Sarah answerable for it. It's do as I say not as a whore feminism and women like Robin Morgan need to issue an apology or vanish from the public stage.
You could have learned all the above just by paying attention.
If you had, you would have noticed that FAIR waited until after the presidential debates to suddenly notice that Ralph, Cynthia and other presidential candidates weren't getting press attention. (In their action alert, FAIR didn't say if they were forwarding it to their own CounterSpin which spent each week promoting Barack and ignoring independent and third party presidential candidates.)
And as you saw all that information, you could do a self-check and ask, "Do I have ethics? Or am I just another gutter liar like Robin Morgan or the self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders or the idiot Norman Solomon or any of the other miserable excuses for 'independent' voices in this country?"
If you passed the self-check, great. If you didn't, it's not to late to save your soul -- provided you're not an 'independent' media whore -- they're already consigned to hell with 2008's other villains.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
