*** - After the GOP debate, it's become clear the deceptive video attack on Planned Parenthood was a manufactured ruse, likely encouraged by GOP operatives, to give Republican candidates a topic to hide behind, a topic their most fervent followers will always support. My gut feeling? This was encouraged as a way to prevent GOP candidates from having to weigh in on the Confederate Flag issue, a topic which terrified the right, but is now gone from most media coverage today.
The Planned Parenthood video tape is a lie! It's been proven to be a lie! It was highly edited to make it seem like people were saying things they just did not say. Anyone using said tape to validate their political stance is knowingly using a lie to promote their own agenda.
At the debate, every GOP candidate insisted they would be the one who defunds Planned Parenthood first. I don't think most of them would, as even they know the services Planned Parenthood provides, which is overwhelmingly medical services and exams not related to abortion, would be hard to replace in most communities. Also, if they get rid of Planned Parenthood, they get rid of one of their liberal boogymen, a villain they lean heavily on when it's election season, perfect for firing up the zealotry.
My real problem is with CNN. They're not supposed to be Fox News, who giddily promote the video as truth. They are supposed to be better than that. CNN knows this video is a lie, but they let any reference to it go unchallenged. Not only are they guilty of being crappy debate moderators and journalists, they're enablers, spoon feeding the GOP the ability to say, "since CNN never questioned the video, it must be true." Media in this country sucks right now, and Bernard Shaw and Peter Arnett would be ashamed of what has happened to their once trusted network.
*** - Anyone who says the arrest of Ahmed Mohamed was justified needs to explain the following three things. First, if the school was so concerned it was a bomb, why wasn't the bomb squad called and the school evacuated? MacArthur High School was never concerned it was an explosive device, and only regular Irving, Texas police officers responded. Second, Ahmed never said the clock was anything but a clock, replying every time he was asked with, 'it's only a clock." Since the Irving Chief of Police has stated the officers knew it was only a clock, BEFORE they arrested him (9/17 MSNBC), why did they arrest him? There was no crime, he was telling the truth, there was no danger to anyone at the school. If the school still felt disciplinary action was warranted, they could've given him detention, suspended him, or at least called his parents to come pick him up, which they didn't do until after the arrest. Third, if the school and mayor both acknowledge this was nothing but a kid and his science project, why the need to insist he was guilty of doing anything wrong? MacArthur High was quick to insist Ahmed was guilty of violating policies, making sure every parent at the school knew about the manufactured threat, even though the school clearly didn't take the threat seriously themselves (see question one). Law enforcement and the mayor insist the arrest was warranted, but outside of vague comparisons to real bombs, something the officers knew was not a concern (see question two), they offer up nothing but smug self righteousness.
Ahmed was arrested for being a 14 year old Muslim. Irving, Texas is full of idiots. End of story.
*** - This morning I got to talk with Briana Bierschbach from MinnPost about the Minnesota Sex Offender Program, or MSOP. If you had not heard, the program is violating the rights of its prisoners buy trying to create a 'do-over' in regards to the sentences handed down. Example - a prisoner is tried and found guilty of a sex crime, they're sentenced for 15 years, they serve those 15 years, and then the state insists we can't release the prisoner, attempting to hold them, in some version of a prison, for their entire life. The problem here is the lack of proper sentencing at the time of the trial, but they can't solve that problem with people already in prison. We're eventually going to lose the appeal process completely, and the state will be sued for millions of dollars for violating the prisoners rights by not releasing them after they have served their time.
If the state wants to make serious sex crimes a lifetime sentence, they could do so. They won't. Why? Not because a lifetime sentence is a harsh penalty or because of the cost of housing the prisoner. Nope, it's because if they create such a rigid standard, wealthy people won't be able to buy their way out of it.
*** - It's time to retire the term Political Correctness, and all of it's versions (PC police, etc.). It's primary purpose is to hide disgusting stereotypes and behavior in plain sight.
John Fugelsang had a sensational essay on bullying. He talked about how we need to stop referring to it as 'bullying' and refer to it for what it really was, abuse. He was right. We use the term bullying to make horrible mental and physical abuse seem like a harmless prank.
When someone brings up political correctness, or the PC police, they're almost always using it to try to divert criticism away from something horrible they have done or said. "I just gave my secretary a little swat on the caboose, but due to political correctness, my boss wrote me up." "I was just making the comment that all Muslims are terrorists, but then the PC police showed up to insist I was wrong."
The term "Political Correctness," in any version, is used to validate sexism, misogyny, racism, assault, anti-semitism, homophobia, islamophobia, and amazingly jackass-ian behavior. If you hear someone sarcastically refer to "here comes the PC police" or how "we're all slaves to political correctness," say loud and proud, "yep, you're right, it isn't politically correct to be a (racist, sexist, homophobe, etc.) so stop acting like I'm the bad guy for pointing out your horrible and unacceptable behavior, and either change or go away."
Friday, September 18, 2015
Thursday, September 17, 2015
Why People Vote
After last night's GOP debate, I decided to quickly revisit something I'd said earlier this week. It was in reference to Bernie Sanders' trip to Liberty University and how it was a solid political move. I juxtaposed that with Hillary's horrible summer on the campaign trail, using the comparison as a springboard to explain the four reasons people vote for someone:
1) They like you.
2) You inspire them.
3) You are something new and different.
4) They hate the other guy you're running against.
Pretty much every voter's vote falls into one or more of these categories. When you apply it to past elections, it shows the more of the categories a candidate falls into, the more likely they are to win the race. In 2008, President Obama was able to garner large chunks of voters in every category, but especially in 1 and 2. John McCain clearly had people voting for him in categories 1 and 4, but very few people voted for him because he was inspirational and no one voted for him as something new and different.
Going back to 2004, John Kerry had a lot of people voting for him due to reason 4, but he was having trouble getting anyone to like him outside of the core base Democrats. With W. having solid 1 and 4 numbers, he took the win. In 2012, It was Mitt Romney's turn to have that scenario play out. There was a huge turnout for him in the 4 category, but not enough to offset President Obama's once again strong numbers in all four.
So applying the formula, what can we garner about the primary races for each party? It still applies, although it may be harder to see the final outcome before it unfolds.
I had a front row seat for the 2000 Iowa Straw Poll. W. was the eventual nominee because Karl Rove realized Bush was strong in categories 1 and 4 (to a point), but very weak in categories 2 and 3. That's why Rove dramatically limited the public's exposure to W. in Iowa, keeping him out of the spotlight, making him seem new and different. He wasn't. He was his dad, version 2.0, but he still 'looked' different because he wasn't seen, like Bigfoot. When he did emerge from the shadows, it was down to him and McCain, who at that time was very strong in the 2nd category. Rove and Cheney waited until South Carolina, where they appealed to the racist element of the GOP, implying McCain had an African American child out of wedlock, a racists distortion of his adopted Bangladeshi daughter, and that he somehow, through his time as a POW, had become a sort of Manchurian Candidate. This skyrocketed W.'s category 4, and diminished McCain's category 2, and the rest is history.
2008 was fascinating for the Democrats, because you had Hillary already appealing to her supporters in categories 1, 2 and 3, but out of nowhere came Barack Obama, who also had very high numbers in the same categories. It took the entire primary season for everyone to realize Obama's numbers in category 3 were enough to override Clinton's numbers in category 1.
For this cycle, the GOP process is being controlled by whomever resonates in category 3. I really don't think category 2 applies to anyone on the right (maybe Huckabee with Kim Davis followers, to a point) and even though I think Trump has a lot of people who fall into category 4 against him, those votes are sprinkled around the numerous other candidates, so it doesn't hurt him that much. Carson, Fiorina and Trump are getting better numbers because they're 'new and different,' going beyond category 1's "who do you like" aspect of the race, so far.
The Democrats are more interesting. Bernie Sanders is getting strong numbers in 1, 2, and 3. Clinton is still the one to beat, but her numbers in 1 are taking a beating with her over managed campaign. I think Joe Biden's potential could really make the election tough for both of them, as he will garner strong numbers in 1, 2, and 3.
Then again, it's September, 2015, and the Twins are still in contention. I have other things to focus on right now.
1) They like you.
2) You inspire them.
3) You are something new and different.
4) They hate the other guy you're running against.
Pretty much every voter's vote falls into one or more of these categories. When you apply it to past elections, it shows the more of the categories a candidate falls into, the more likely they are to win the race. In 2008, President Obama was able to garner large chunks of voters in every category, but especially in 1 and 2. John McCain clearly had people voting for him in categories 1 and 4, but very few people voted for him because he was inspirational and no one voted for him as something new and different.
Going back to 2004, John Kerry had a lot of people voting for him due to reason 4, but he was having trouble getting anyone to like him outside of the core base Democrats. With W. having solid 1 and 4 numbers, he took the win. In 2012, It was Mitt Romney's turn to have that scenario play out. There was a huge turnout for him in the 4 category, but not enough to offset President Obama's once again strong numbers in all four.
So applying the formula, what can we garner about the primary races for each party? It still applies, although it may be harder to see the final outcome before it unfolds.
I had a front row seat for the 2000 Iowa Straw Poll. W. was the eventual nominee because Karl Rove realized Bush was strong in categories 1 and 4 (to a point), but very weak in categories 2 and 3. That's why Rove dramatically limited the public's exposure to W. in Iowa, keeping him out of the spotlight, making him seem new and different. He wasn't. He was his dad, version 2.0, but he still 'looked' different because he wasn't seen, like Bigfoot. When he did emerge from the shadows, it was down to him and McCain, who at that time was very strong in the 2nd category. Rove and Cheney waited until South Carolina, where they appealed to the racist element of the GOP, implying McCain had an African American child out of wedlock, a racists distortion of his adopted Bangladeshi daughter, and that he somehow, through his time as a POW, had become a sort of Manchurian Candidate. This skyrocketed W.'s category 4, and diminished McCain's category 2, and the rest is history.
2008 was fascinating for the Democrats, because you had Hillary already appealing to her supporters in categories 1, 2 and 3, but out of nowhere came Barack Obama, who also had very high numbers in the same categories. It took the entire primary season for everyone to realize Obama's numbers in category 3 were enough to override Clinton's numbers in category 1.
For this cycle, the GOP process is being controlled by whomever resonates in category 3. I really don't think category 2 applies to anyone on the right (maybe Huckabee with Kim Davis followers, to a point) and even though I think Trump has a lot of people who fall into category 4 against him, those votes are sprinkled around the numerous other candidates, so it doesn't hurt him that much. Carson, Fiorina and Trump are getting better numbers because they're 'new and different,' going beyond category 1's "who do you like" aspect of the race, so far.
The Democrats are more interesting. Bernie Sanders is getting strong numbers in 1, 2, and 3. Clinton is still the one to beat, but her numbers in 1 are taking a beating with her over managed campaign. I think Joe Biden's potential could really make the election tough for both of them, as he will garner strong numbers in 1, 2, and 3.
Then again, it's September, 2015, and the Twins are still in contention. I have other things to focus on right now.
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
Crosses to Bear
I am Catholic.
(DISCLAIMER! - You do or don't do whatever you do or don't want to do. This is not about trying to convert anyone. I only bring it up to give you perspective.)
I've been trying to get Amanda Marcotte from Raw Story on the air to talk about her sensational article which absolutely tags the conservatives behind the Kim Davis debacle correctly. Here's a link:
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/the-kim-davis-ordeal-reveals-a-frightening-truth-about-a-desperate-radicalized-christian-right/#.VfQXAYtzlUc.twitter
I don't want to break down the article too much, outside of saying her analogy about the sore loser baseball player is spot on, that these people have an agenda which may or may not include overthrowing the Federal government, and they have a violent temper.
Christianity is being ruined by people who have an agenda, wether political, monetary or personal. Let's call this what it is; Kim Davis, Mike Huckabee, and numerous other anti-gay freaks dislike the sex acts gay people commit. They don't seem to mind when heterosexual couples partake in the same sexual acts, but fine. It makes them uncomfortable. Good news for them, the vast majority of them will never have to participate in said sex acts.
But for some reason, that's not good enough. They want to kick open the doors of gay people's houses and stop them from doing the gay sex in private, or, if they legally can't do that, they want to be able to treat them differently in society. They are obsessed with stopping gay people and in turn, gay people sex. I know they'll say, "it's not about the sex Matt." Let me respond: Yes it is! I'll let everyone ponder that.
In a desperate attempt at legitimacy, they wrap themselves in the handful of passages the Bible has on the issue, freely and gleefully distorting them a will. Mind you, Jesus never preached against homosexuals (just because he praised heterosexual marriage doesn't mean he condemned gay marriage), so the anti-gay folks need to find other places in the Bible to validate their hatred. They focus on two parts of the Bible they insist proves all Christians need to hate gay people. First, Paul's letters to the Romans. That was Paul, not Jesus or God, but Paul.
Second is an Old Testament goodie, Leviticus! If you really are insisting Leviticus is God's word on this earth, verbiage which can't be challenged and distorted, you really need to go read Leviticus, and the rest of the Old Testament, before you open your mouth. There are plenty of things we no longer follow or believe from the Bible (but Matt, God would want us to eat shellfish now!), but because gay sex acts done within the privacy of a gay person's residence so offends some people, they'll distort and manipulate scripture any way they can to prove their hatred is righteous.
Jesus didn't hate gays or lesbians. He loved us all. If you say the Bible needs to be followed to the letter, but you're not practicing the Bible as written (does your church have a roof? Oops!) then it is YOU, as an individual human being, who is choosing to hate, and YOU are ruining the good teachings of Jesus by picking and choosing the Biblical passages that fit YOUR ulterior motives, stoking YOUR anger, while ignoring all the biblical passages which YOU find inconvenient or contradict YOUR outrage.
Christianity can be a good thing. As these opportunists make the church an unappetizing litany of hatred and condemnation, they overshadow the positive messages the church has, messages we all can rally around.
My church is a progressive Catholic church in Eden Prairie. I love it. The priests we've had/have are exceptional, and have helped guide me and my family through the sex abuse scandal, and around the diocese leadership, whose misguided, anti-gay campaign emptied out the pews of many Twin Cities churches.
My priest had a sermon a few months back, which included a slide show. "Where do we find God's love and happiness?" The slides started with a picture of a young adorable baby, a kind looking grandmother, a puppy. He stated, "It's easy to see God's love in those faces isn't it?" Then came a picture of someone sick, followed by one of a homeless person. "Same God. Same love, but a different perception, isn't it" Then came the picture of President Obama. "What's the matter? Wasn't he a cute baby at one point too? Doesn't God show his love through him as much as anyone else? Just because you don't agree with him, does that make him less of a symbol of God's love and happiness?" It was a strong message.
On Sunday, he pointed out something many people ignore; the cross itself is a symbol of a horrible death, a tortuous method of punishment at the time of Christ. I asked myself, how many people would be Christian today if instead of a cross it was a noose, a electric chair or a lethal injection hanging around their neck? The cross is not just a gold "t", and we shouldn't become ambivalent to the violence it represents from back them, OR the violence of today. As Kim Davis' supporters talk about throat punching anyone who disagrees with them, or wants to follow her around, armed, in the 'hope' there is an opportunity of a shoot out with government officials, how many of them would eagerly grab the wood and nails if it meant crucifying gay people?
We are often told in my church to welcome all, and our priests hammer that home. Not just in a casual greeting on Sundays, but we are encouraged to welcome everyone, like the family who is escaping violence in their homeland, the migrant worker just trying to find any job, the hungry children whom we walk past everyday, the homeless person who might be dirty and smells, or any person who is different from ourselves. Do you welcome them? You should. It's very likely your ancestors probably fell into one of those categories.
On Sunday, at the beginning of his sermon, the priest brought up a story about being Christian in our modern world. He told of a college student, majoring in business, who went onto a great job, fast tracked for upper management. A senior executive decided to take him under his wing and show him some of the benefits of senior management. At a conference, they walked into a room, were offered drinks, and he was told the women there were purchased for the evening, a perk for the senior executives, so he should indulge himself. The young man didn't.
When they had returned from the conference, he was called into the senior executives office and sternly asked what his problem was. He said, "I'm Christian and I wasn't comfortable with that." The senior executive told him they would 'excuse' his behavior, this time, but he needed to get on board with the program. He was gone from the company a few weeks later.
A lack of humanity, spirituality and morality is a plague in our corporate world. Many in that world worship money, wealth and power over all. The family of the kid who died after eating tainted food gets sued out of court. The refusal of the insurance company to cover the claim they promised they would. The tricks and legal acrobatics designed to take advantage of people. For profit colleges which don't offer a good education or any future, eagerly taking thousands of dollars from the students they've lied to. The corporation who knowingly poisons the land, water and air in the name of profits. The under the table negotiations which end up costing hard working people more, because of cronyism. The outright stealing of people's money, but because it was done in a suit and tie in an office building, it's somehow considered less of a crime. The mistreatment and abuse of the workers, with long hours, low wages, no benefits and no retirement, just so executives can have their conferences.
This is why I laugh at these modern Christian movies which vilify gay rights activists, college professors, scientists, journalists, the medical profession and anyone who thinks screaming prayers in someone's face, even as they are dying at an accident scene, is not a good idea. They have their agenda too.
We have too many people ignoring the truly needy in our world, who instead choose to focus their attention, purposely or blindly, on a minor issue, a molehill issue they want to turn into a mountain, an issue which they insist is the primary purpose of the Christian faith, but an issue God and Jesus would never endorse, all the while turning our attention away from the real problems plaguing us as a society.
But enough of me preaching. Stop hating gay people due to your over fascination with the sex acts they perform. That's on you, not them. And stop taking a good religion and destroying it by trying to fulfill your personal agenda. Please. Individual crosses are hard enough to bear with out you guys weighing them down.
(DISCLAIMER! - You do or don't do whatever you do or don't want to do. This is not about trying to convert anyone. I only bring it up to give you perspective.)
I've been trying to get Amanda Marcotte from Raw Story on the air to talk about her sensational article which absolutely tags the conservatives behind the Kim Davis debacle correctly. Here's a link:
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/the-kim-davis-ordeal-reveals-a-frightening-truth-about-a-desperate-radicalized-christian-right/#.VfQXAYtzlUc.twitter
I don't want to break down the article too much, outside of saying her analogy about the sore loser baseball player is spot on, that these people have an agenda which may or may not include overthrowing the Federal government, and they have a violent temper.
Christianity is being ruined by people who have an agenda, wether political, monetary or personal. Let's call this what it is; Kim Davis, Mike Huckabee, and numerous other anti-gay freaks dislike the sex acts gay people commit. They don't seem to mind when heterosexual couples partake in the same sexual acts, but fine. It makes them uncomfortable. Good news for them, the vast majority of them will never have to participate in said sex acts.
But for some reason, that's not good enough. They want to kick open the doors of gay people's houses and stop them from doing the gay sex in private, or, if they legally can't do that, they want to be able to treat them differently in society. They are obsessed with stopping gay people and in turn, gay people sex. I know they'll say, "it's not about the sex Matt." Let me respond: Yes it is! I'll let everyone ponder that.
In a desperate attempt at legitimacy, they wrap themselves in the handful of passages the Bible has on the issue, freely and gleefully distorting them a will. Mind you, Jesus never preached against homosexuals (just because he praised heterosexual marriage doesn't mean he condemned gay marriage), so the anti-gay folks need to find other places in the Bible to validate their hatred. They focus on two parts of the Bible they insist proves all Christians need to hate gay people. First, Paul's letters to the Romans. That was Paul, not Jesus or God, but Paul.
Second is an Old Testament goodie, Leviticus! If you really are insisting Leviticus is God's word on this earth, verbiage which can't be challenged and distorted, you really need to go read Leviticus, and the rest of the Old Testament, before you open your mouth. There are plenty of things we no longer follow or believe from the Bible (but Matt, God would want us to eat shellfish now!), but because gay sex acts done within the privacy of a gay person's residence so offends some people, they'll distort and manipulate scripture any way they can to prove their hatred is righteous.
Jesus didn't hate gays or lesbians. He loved us all. If you say the Bible needs to be followed to the letter, but you're not practicing the Bible as written (does your church have a roof? Oops!) then it is YOU, as an individual human being, who is choosing to hate, and YOU are ruining the good teachings of Jesus by picking and choosing the Biblical passages that fit YOUR ulterior motives, stoking YOUR anger, while ignoring all the biblical passages which YOU find inconvenient or contradict YOUR outrage.
Christianity can be a good thing. As these opportunists make the church an unappetizing litany of hatred and condemnation, they overshadow the positive messages the church has, messages we all can rally around.
My church is a progressive Catholic church in Eden Prairie. I love it. The priests we've had/have are exceptional, and have helped guide me and my family through the sex abuse scandal, and around the diocese leadership, whose misguided, anti-gay campaign emptied out the pews of many Twin Cities churches.
My priest had a sermon a few months back, which included a slide show. "Where do we find God's love and happiness?" The slides started with a picture of a young adorable baby, a kind looking grandmother, a puppy. He stated, "It's easy to see God's love in those faces isn't it?" Then came a picture of someone sick, followed by one of a homeless person. "Same God. Same love, but a different perception, isn't it" Then came the picture of President Obama. "What's the matter? Wasn't he a cute baby at one point too? Doesn't God show his love through him as much as anyone else? Just because you don't agree with him, does that make him less of a symbol of God's love and happiness?" It was a strong message.
On Sunday, he pointed out something many people ignore; the cross itself is a symbol of a horrible death, a tortuous method of punishment at the time of Christ. I asked myself, how many people would be Christian today if instead of a cross it was a noose, a electric chair or a lethal injection hanging around their neck? The cross is not just a gold "t", and we shouldn't become ambivalent to the violence it represents from back them, OR the violence of today. As Kim Davis' supporters talk about throat punching anyone who disagrees with them, or wants to follow her around, armed, in the 'hope' there is an opportunity of a shoot out with government officials, how many of them would eagerly grab the wood and nails if it meant crucifying gay people?
We are often told in my church to welcome all, and our priests hammer that home. Not just in a casual greeting on Sundays, but we are encouraged to welcome everyone, like the family who is escaping violence in their homeland, the migrant worker just trying to find any job, the hungry children whom we walk past everyday, the homeless person who might be dirty and smells, or any person who is different from ourselves. Do you welcome them? You should. It's very likely your ancestors probably fell into one of those categories.
On Sunday, at the beginning of his sermon, the priest brought up a story about being Christian in our modern world. He told of a college student, majoring in business, who went onto a great job, fast tracked for upper management. A senior executive decided to take him under his wing and show him some of the benefits of senior management. At a conference, they walked into a room, were offered drinks, and he was told the women there were purchased for the evening, a perk for the senior executives, so he should indulge himself. The young man didn't.
When they had returned from the conference, he was called into the senior executives office and sternly asked what his problem was. He said, "I'm Christian and I wasn't comfortable with that." The senior executive told him they would 'excuse' his behavior, this time, but he needed to get on board with the program. He was gone from the company a few weeks later.
A lack of humanity, spirituality and morality is a plague in our corporate world. Many in that world worship money, wealth and power over all. The family of the kid who died after eating tainted food gets sued out of court. The refusal of the insurance company to cover the claim they promised they would. The tricks and legal acrobatics designed to take advantage of people. For profit colleges which don't offer a good education or any future, eagerly taking thousands of dollars from the students they've lied to. The corporation who knowingly poisons the land, water and air in the name of profits. The under the table negotiations which end up costing hard working people more, because of cronyism. The outright stealing of people's money, but because it was done in a suit and tie in an office building, it's somehow considered less of a crime. The mistreatment and abuse of the workers, with long hours, low wages, no benefits and no retirement, just so executives can have their conferences.
This is why I laugh at these modern Christian movies which vilify gay rights activists, college professors, scientists, journalists, the medical profession and anyone who thinks screaming prayers in someone's face, even as they are dying at an accident scene, is not a good idea. They have their agenda too.
We have too many people ignoring the truly needy in our world, who instead choose to focus their attention, purposely or blindly, on a minor issue, a molehill issue they want to turn into a mountain, an issue which they insist is the primary purpose of the Christian faith, but an issue God and Jesus would never endorse, all the while turning our attention away from the real problems plaguing us as a society.
But enough of me preaching. Stop hating gay people due to your over fascination with the sex acts they perform. That's on you, not them. And stop taking a good religion and destroying it by trying to fulfill your personal agenda. Please. Individual crosses are hard enough to bear with out you guys weighing them down.
Friday, September 11, 2015
The Friday Link for 9/11/15
The Food Network: once a gleaming pillar of gastronomic excellence, now a pathetic network geared to over-eating, mediocre family restaurants and zero-value cooking competitions. As a food guy, a person who watches cooking shows to learn how to cook, I don't watch it anymore. The best chefs have all left, or been fired, and in their place are glorified line cooks whose culinary ability seems to have been burned away, like the tastebuds in one's mouth after eating a lava hot piece of pizza.
Ina Garten is the last hold out of quality cooks from their once juggernaut lineup. Even Alton Brown, the brilliant host of Good Eats, is nothing more than a tragically misused version of Wink Martindale anymore. I remember when Giada de Laurentiis was the weakest chef on the network, looking like a doe eyed intern compared to the rest of the line up. Today, she's one of their top talents, but more likely to host a talent show then wow me with a recipe.
Ten years ago, the Food Network went with style rather than substance, and have become a hollow shell of what they initially represented, but they're not the only ones. Bravo used to air operas, Discover Channel used to have science and societal based programming, and the History Channel used to air historical programming. Heck even the Weather Channel rarely has weather on anymore. It's cheaper and easier to put on reality crap or a cheap competition show than it is to do real programming.
But nothing on the Food Network makes me sadder than watching Sandra Lee. I know she is struggling with cancer. This post is not about that, and I hope she recovers soon.
This post is about what Sandra Lee represents to cooking; a sad, pathetic attempt at making the term 'chef' apply to any idiot who pours a can of hormel chili on a bag of Fritos. Her use of 70% pre-packaged food in her "recipes" is such a joke. Her entire career is some sort of attempt a validating lack luster and incompetence. "I made a Duncan Hines cake!" Well that's great, but that doesn't make you a chef. It means you followed the instructions and baked a box cake, so don't act like you just made beef wellington.
I also don't like how she validates daytime drinking. I don't care how flashy your drink looks, it's not healthy to encourage drinking like that. I'm no prude, but how many people watch her and start having a drink at 11 AM? She's got the blender going early!
Anthony Bourdain, an amazing chef, author and traveler, knew it was time to leave The Food Network when she came up to him at a network event, put her arm around him and implied they were equals in the kitchen. His criticism of her and the Food Network for hiring her, are spot on. Some of her segments have not only been hard to watch, but culturally obtuse and insulting (Search: Sandra Lee Kwanzaa Cake).
For a laugh, here is a montage of her crazy style from her show. I do laugh when I see this, but I also cry a little for the Food Network that is long gone.
Ina Garten is the last hold out of quality cooks from their once juggernaut lineup. Even Alton Brown, the brilliant host of Good Eats, is nothing more than a tragically misused version of Wink Martindale anymore. I remember when Giada de Laurentiis was the weakest chef on the network, looking like a doe eyed intern compared to the rest of the line up. Today, she's one of their top talents, but more likely to host a talent show then wow me with a recipe.
Ten years ago, the Food Network went with style rather than substance, and have become a hollow shell of what they initially represented, but they're not the only ones. Bravo used to air operas, Discover Channel used to have science and societal based programming, and the History Channel used to air historical programming. Heck even the Weather Channel rarely has weather on anymore. It's cheaper and easier to put on reality crap or a cheap competition show than it is to do real programming.
But nothing on the Food Network makes me sadder than watching Sandra Lee. I know she is struggling with cancer. This post is not about that, and I hope she recovers soon.
This post is about what Sandra Lee represents to cooking; a sad, pathetic attempt at making the term 'chef' apply to any idiot who pours a can of hormel chili on a bag of Fritos. Her use of 70% pre-packaged food in her "recipes" is such a joke. Her entire career is some sort of attempt a validating lack luster and incompetence. "I made a Duncan Hines cake!" Well that's great, but that doesn't make you a chef. It means you followed the instructions and baked a box cake, so don't act like you just made beef wellington.
I also don't like how she validates daytime drinking. I don't care how flashy your drink looks, it's not healthy to encourage drinking like that. I'm no prude, but how many people watch her and start having a drink at 11 AM? She's got the blender going early!
Anthony Bourdain, an amazing chef, author and traveler, knew it was time to leave The Food Network when she came up to him at a network event, put her arm around him and implied they were equals in the kitchen. His criticism of her and the Food Network for hiring her, are spot on. Some of her segments have not only been hard to watch, but culturally obtuse and insulting (Search: Sandra Lee Kwanzaa Cake).
For a laugh, here is a montage of her crazy style from her show. I do laugh when I see this, but I also cry a little for the Food Network that is long gone.
The Broken Media, Part 2
I love it when I post something and the validation for my thoughts come at me the very next day.
This morning, the Star Tribune ran front page, above the fold, the story of an indictment being handed down to Bill Davis and his son Jordan for misusing $250K in taxpayer money, while the senior Davis was the director of Community Action of Minneapolis. It would've been the main story on the front page if not for the tragic murder/suicide in Greenwood. The Davis' are African American, and I believe they're Democrats.
Is it a legit story? Sure it is, although I don't think it's front page above the fold material. For some reason, the Star Tribune did, but when a far worse story of abuse of taxpayer dollars happened, done by a white Republican, I don't recall the Star Tribune putting that story above the fold, or even on the front page.
State Senator Sean Nienow, a Republican from Cambridge, was the subject of a civil complaint earlier this year, filed in US District Court, where he stopped making payments on a Small Business Administration loan he and his wife had received. He stopped making payments 18 months after he received the loan, and owed in the realm of $750K, three times the amount abused by Davis. Not only that, but the story of Nienow's loan approval opens up even more questions, some real head scratchers. He somehow secured a 600K+ base loan with the title of a house worth less than 150K, for a business idea ( a summer camp location service for upscale clients) which was weak at best. Okay...
If I remember correctly, the Star Tribune placed that story on the front page of the B section, below the fold. I'll check the next time I'm at the library and I'll post an update here when I confirm.
Now for the record I think both of these stories should be covered. The one involving a Democrat - 250K, front page above the fold. The one involving the Republican, a sitting Senator - 750K, buried in the back of the paper.
Not only did they down play a FAR larger abuse of taxpayer dollars by the Republican, and not only did this story not immediately warrant their news department following up with a story on how he even qualified for the loan, the Star Tribune's story actually downplayed the amount Nienow and his wife owed, referring to the original loan amount of $613K in the headline, implying it was less of a crime, even though he clearly owed 750K.
I also did get two people brining up a comparison between Jim Newberger, the Republican Representative from Becker who made the racist "joke" about north Minneapolis, and Rep. Ron Erhardt, the Democrat from Edina who made less than civil comment about the bird flu crisis in the Minnesota farming community. They were insisting Newberger was ignored by local media, while Erhardt was ripped apart. I remember both incidents getting covered, and Erhardt deserved grief for his tone deaf remarks, but Newberger was covered FAR less in the Twin Cities media. Also, the media drove the chants of shame towards Erhardt, but after Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt said he wouldn't make Newberger apologize on the House floor, the same place he made the insensitive comment, the Twin Cities media made the story vanish.
This morning, the Star Tribune ran front page, above the fold, the story of an indictment being handed down to Bill Davis and his son Jordan for misusing $250K in taxpayer money, while the senior Davis was the director of Community Action of Minneapolis. It would've been the main story on the front page if not for the tragic murder/suicide in Greenwood. The Davis' are African American, and I believe they're Democrats.
Is it a legit story? Sure it is, although I don't think it's front page above the fold material. For some reason, the Star Tribune did, but when a far worse story of abuse of taxpayer dollars happened, done by a white Republican, I don't recall the Star Tribune putting that story above the fold, or even on the front page.
State Senator Sean Nienow, a Republican from Cambridge, was the subject of a civil complaint earlier this year, filed in US District Court, where he stopped making payments on a Small Business Administration loan he and his wife had received. He stopped making payments 18 months after he received the loan, and owed in the realm of $750K, three times the amount abused by Davis. Not only that, but the story of Nienow's loan approval opens up even more questions, some real head scratchers. He somehow secured a 600K+ base loan with the title of a house worth less than 150K, for a business idea ( a summer camp location service for upscale clients) which was weak at best. Okay...
If I remember correctly, the Star Tribune placed that story on the front page of the B section, below the fold. I'll check the next time I'm at the library and I'll post an update here when I confirm.
Now for the record I think both of these stories should be covered. The one involving a Democrat - 250K, front page above the fold. The one involving the Republican, a sitting Senator - 750K, buried in the back of the paper.
Not only did they down play a FAR larger abuse of taxpayer dollars by the Republican, and not only did this story not immediately warrant their news department following up with a story on how he even qualified for the loan, the Star Tribune's story actually downplayed the amount Nienow and his wife owed, referring to the original loan amount of $613K in the headline, implying it was less of a crime, even though he clearly owed 750K.
I also did get two people brining up a comparison between Jim Newberger, the Republican Representative from Becker who made the racist "joke" about north Minneapolis, and Rep. Ron Erhardt, the Democrat from Edina who made less than civil comment about the bird flu crisis in the Minnesota farming community. They were insisting Newberger was ignored by local media, while Erhardt was ripped apart. I remember both incidents getting covered, and Erhardt deserved grief for his tone deaf remarks, but Newberger was covered FAR less in the Twin Cities media. Also, the media drove the chants of shame towards Erhardt, but after Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt said he wouldn't make Newberger apologize on the House floor, the same place he made the insensitive comment, the Twin Cities media made the story vanish.
Thursday, September 10, 2015
Twin Cities News Has Broken
A few weeks back, Minnesota Republican House Representatives Tara Mack and Tim Kelly were ticketed for nuisance when a Dakota County Sheriff's Deputy spotted their vehicle in a regional park parking lot, approached it and, as he reported, caught the lawmakers "making out," with Rep. Mack's pants being listed as "unzipped" and "pulled down." Both Mack and Kelly are married, but not to each other, and both are Representatives of the political party which insists it's the party of high moral fiber, Christian standards, and a wholesome way of life. Both Mack and Kelly insisted the Sheriff Deputy was making up the story, with Kelly even going as far as suggesting it was the beginning of a smear campaign against him for the 2016 election. Mack and Kelly insisted they were only in Lebanon Hills Regional Park for a "document exchange," but their story had some serious holes developing, such as why they couldn't exchange documents in the St. Paul office building they both share, why they decided to meet in a park no where near either of their districts, and in the day and age of electronic communication, why wasn't this document available in some sort of electronic form? Quietly, on the Friday night before Labor Day weekend, both lawmakers paid their nuisance fine, insisted they were innocent of any wrong doing, and refused to comment further.
Mack and Kelly are grown adults. People fall in and out of love all of the time, and the notion that two co-workers might have felt a spark for each other is nothing new. I would've hoped they were adults about it, talking about any problems with their perspective families before going through with any potential affair, but my criticism is not about their implied affair. That's their business.
I do raise an eyebrow in regards to the 'insisting they're innocent, but paying the fine' aspect of it. If I was accused of something of that nature, and I knew I'd done nothing wrong, I'd be screaming bloody murder to clear my name, not paying the fine. That aside, my biggest problem with this whole fiasco is how the newspapers, and most of the media in the Twin Cities, showed their pro conservative hand in their lack of coverage of the story.
Briana Bierschbach, the exceptional writer for MinnPost, said it best, political journalists HATE stories like the Mack/Kelly one. Legitimate journalists don't want to cover it, but they have to due to the nature of the individuals involved in the infraction. But what is becoming undeniable is how the media, on stories of this nature, ask one question first; what party are they from? If it's a Republican, the story is written from a "nothing to see here" perspective, but if it's a Democrat, it's written from the "For Gods sake, the sky is on fire and we are all going to die!" perspective. Neither is right.
The idea of media having a 'liberal agenda' is a made up lie to force US's mainstream media to the far right; a scarlet letter 'L' to terrify news rooms and editors. The Republican's war wasn't with outfits like Democracy Now, a clearly pro-Progressive/Liberal news outlet (which for the record still reports their news stories fairly), but rather the NBC's, ABC's, CNN's and CBS's of the world. The right wanted to make sure the narrative of any news story was pro-conservative from the get go. This meant all responsible journalism had to go, and, frankly, they've far exceeded expectations. In the last 25 years, conservatives have bought, threatened, paid off, tricked, bribed, acquired, fired and black listed reporters and editors labeled bad because they maintained a standard of neutral reporting and journalistic integrity. This war on the media was never about facts; it was about driving an agenda.
This conservative bias has permeated down to the local media, with examples everywhere. The owners of broadcasting companies openly support Minnesota Republican candidates for office, even hosting fundraising events for them. The media companies controlled by these people then seem to incorporate a double standard for political ad buys. The company refuses left leaning ad buys against their candidate, insisting factual errors, whether they exist or not, negate them from running the ad against the Republican, but anything goes when it's an attack ad against the Democrat, even allowing bold face lies. How about the Ebola scare, where the media in this town also drove the national narrative "ebola is everywhere(!), and it's the Democrats fault?" Then, the day after the election, it just stopped, vanished as if Emily Litella said, "Never mind!" And we should point a finger at 'pointer-gate,' the made up story by KSTP 5 which was nothing more than a political hit piece on Democratic Mayor of Minneapolis, Betsy Hodges; a story so outrageously stupid, it was mocked internationally in it's blatant attempt to smear her.
The Mack/Kelly story got very little coverage in this town. The Pioneer Press was the first to have it, and they HAD to run it. What they did was bury the story on page 3, nearly apologizing for having to report it, and writing it from a very pro-Mack and Kelly angle. Over the next few days, a few media outlets mentioned it in passing, but usually as an "in other news..." story, or only as an online feature. Even when Kelly and Mack paid their fines, seeming to contradict their assertions of innocence, pseudo-acknowledging culpability, media in this town shrugged it's shoulders and turned away.
Imagine if this was two Democrats caught in the same exact situation. Both major newspapers in this town would run the story front page, above the fold. They would report on hypothetical sexual acts, deeming each politician a pervert, calling for their immediate resignations. The news departments of television and radio would follow suit, with exposes on the families, talking about the web of lies each politician was weaving. The media would cover GOP press conferences live, amplifying the right's call for full investigations, demanding apologies from anyone who ever voted DFL, insisting all party leadership resign, and forcing everyone to only think of Democratic deviant sex come election day. Bookend this with political ad buys, partially funded by the media owners themselves, mudslinging and smearing like a full contact, finger painting class in a swamp.
Then, the day after the election, when it all just stops, the GOP and the media's political 'experts,' will insist the sex scandal had nothing to with the election results. "No one EVER mentioned the sex scandal. This was a rejection of DFL ideals!"
Think I'm exaggerating? How about the manufactured outrage when the Dems were accused of boozing it up in the Capitol, or the way the Wellstone Memorial was turned into a weapon against the Dems, with GOP'ers insisting THEY were on only ones showing any REAL respect for Senator Paul Wellstone. This is their game plan, and they've played this game and won, over and over and over again.
Mack/Kelly should be covered, and not in an apologetic or bias manner. It should have been featured in most major news casts, not left for tertiary news outlets and fringe reporting formats. It shouldn't have led the news, but it should have been there. I don't think it should've been covered like a meteor crashing into the planet, but it should've been covered, whether the journalists like to or not.
The news days of my great uncle Cedric Adams are long gone, wiped away, as was predicted by the great movie 'Network,' 40 years ago. The best bet for us is a new cultivation of competent news outlets, ones not driven by the accounting departments, ones like MinnPost. Until then, here's the link for the Japanese animation version of the Mack/Kelly story. For some reason, while the Twin Cities news media yawned, they thought it was worth covering, and funny, they rightly call out the distance to the parking lot Mack and Kelly used, and how it was nowhere near St. Paul. I shouldn't have to go to the other side of the planet for actual fair and balanced Minneapolis/St. Paul news coverage.
Mack and Kelly are grown adults. People fall in and out of love all of the time, and the notion that two co-workers might have felt a spark for each other is nothing new. I would've hoped they were adults about it, talking about any problems with their perspective families before going through with any potential affair, but my criticism is not about their implied affair. That's their business.
I do raise an eyebrow in regards to the 'insisting they're innocent, but paying the fine' aspect of it. If I was accused of something of that nature, and I knew I'd done nothing wrong, I'd be screaming bloody murder to clear my name, not paying the fine. That aside, my biggest problem with this whole fiasco is how the newspapers, and most of the media in the Twin Cities, showed their pro conservative hand in their lack of coverage of the story.
Briana Bierschbach, the exceptional writer for MinnPost, said it best, political journalists HATE stories like the Mack/Kelly one. Legitimate journalists don't want to cover it, but they have to due to the nature of the individuals involved in the infraction. But what is becoming undeniable is how the media, on stories of this nature, ask one question first; what party are they from? If it's a Republican, the story is written from a "nothing to see here" perspective, but if it's a Democrat, it's written from the "For Gods sake, the sky is on fire and we are all going to die!" perspective. Neither is right.
The idea of media having a 'liberal agenda' is a made up lie to force US's mainstream media to the far right; a scarlet letter 'L' to terrify news rooms and editors. The Republican's war wasn't with outfits like Democracy Now, a clearly pro-Progressive/Liberal news outlet (which for the record still reports their news stories fairly), but rather the NBC's, ABC's, CNN's and CBS's of the world. The right wanted to make sure the narrative of any news story was pro-conservative from the get go. This meant all responsible journalism had to go, and, frankly, they've far exceeded expectations. In the last 25 years, conservatives have bought, threatened, paid off, tricked, bribed, acquired, fired and black listed reporters and editors labeled bad because they maintained a standard of neutral reporting and journalistic integrity. This war on the media was never about facts; it was about driving an agenda.
This conservative bias has permeated down to the local media, with examples everywhere. The owners of broadcasting companies openly support Minnesota Republican candidates for office, even hosting fundraising events for them. The media companies controlled by these people then seem to incorporate a double standard for political ad buys. The company refuses left leaning ad buys against their candidate, insisting factual errors, whether they exist or not, negate them from running the ad against the Republican, but anything goes when it's an attack ad against the Democrat, even allowing bold face lies. How about the Ebola scare, where the media in this town also drove the national narrative "ebola is everywhere(!), and it's the Democrats fault?" Then, the day after the election, it just stopped, vanished as if Emily Litella said, "Never mind!" And we should point a finger at 'pointer-gate,' the made up story by KSTP 5 which was nothing more than a political hit piece on Democratic Mayor of Minneapolis, Betsy Hodges; a story so outrageously stupid, it was mocked internationally in it's blatant attempt to smear her.
The Mack/Kelly story got very little coverage in this town. The Pioneer Press was the first to have it, and they HAD to run it. What they did was bury the story on page 3, nearly apologizing for having to report it, and writing it from a very pro-Mack and Kelly angle. Over the next few days, a few media outlets mentioned it in passing, but usually as an "in other news..." story, or only as an online feature. Even when Kelly and Mack paid their fines, seeming to contradict their assertions of innocence, pseudo-acknowledging culpability, media in this town shrugged it's shoulders and turned away.
Imagine if this was two Democrats caught in the same exact situation. Both major newspapers in this town would run the story front page, above the fold. They would report on hypothetical sexual acts, deeming each politician a pervert, calling for their immediate resignations. The news departments of television and radio would follow suit, with exposes on the families, talking about the web of lies each politician was weaving. The media would cover GOP press conferences live, amplifying the right's call for full investigations, demanding apologies from anyone who ever voted DFL, insisting all party leadership resign, and forcing everyone to only think of Democratic deviant sex come election day. Bookend this with political ad buys, partially funded by the media owners themselves, mudslinging and smearing like a full contact, finger painting class in a swamp.
Then, the day after the election, when it all just stops, the GOP and the media's political 'experts,' will insist the sex scandal had nothing to with the election results. "No one EVER mentioned the sex scandal. This was a rejection of DFL ideals!"
Think I'm exaggerating? How about the manufactured outrage when the Dems were accused of boozing it up in the Capitol, or the way the Wellstone Memorial was turned into a weapon against the Dems, with GOP'ers insisting THEY were on only ones showing any REAL respect for Senator Paul Wellstone. This is their game plan, and they've played this game and won, over and over and over again.
Mack/Kelly should be covered, and not in an apologetic or bias manner. It should have been featured in most major news casts, not left for tertiary news outlets and fringe reporting formats. It shouldn't have led the news, but it should have been there. I don't think it should've been covered like a meteor crashing into the planet, but it should've been covered, whether the journalists like to or not.
The news days of my great uncle Cedric Adams are long gone, wiped away, as was predicted by the great movie 'Network,' 40 years ago. The best bet for us is a new cultivation of competent news outlets, ones not driven by the accounting departments, ones like MinnPost. Until then, here's the link for the Japanese animation version of the Mack/Kelly story. For some reason, while the Twin Cities news media yawned, they thought it was worth covering, and funny, they rightly call out the distance to the parking lot Mack and Kelly used, and how it was nowhere near St. Paul. I shouldn't have to go to the other side of the planet for actual fair and balanced Minneapolis/St. Paul news coverage.
Monday, September 7, 2015
Quick Hits for Labor Day, 9/7/15
* - It's Labor Day, time for us to reflect on what our lives would be like if not for the work of the Labor Movement and unions. We'd all be working today, starting at the break of dawn and working until the boss said you were done. You'd be lucky if you didn't work seven days a week, as true ultra capitalists didn't care about religious doctrine in the age before worker's rights. You got paid barely enough to get by, usually in credits at the company store. You didn't get sick days, breaks, or overtime. You didn't get a 40-hour work week, minimal pay, or vacation days. There was no healthcare, pensions or retirement accounts. There was no safety regulations, and no one mourned if you were seriously wounded or died while performing your tasks. There was no retirement, or minimum working age either. Eleven year olds were working next to 70 year olds. You were a line item on an accounting form, next to paper, pencils and staples. It was an employment system much more akin to a fiefdom, where one person exuded complete control over all aspects of the people beneath them, but, in America, it wasn't some ancient title which granted you such power, but money, buying off law enforcement, judges and politicians, ensuring your way of life was the only way of life. And if you dared complain or get out of line, they took you out back and shot you, evicting your family from their house and the community after the funeral.
The 1950's were great (although we weren't dealing with minority rights and women's rights, something we still need to address today). They were great because it was the Golden Age of workers rights. Even the conservatives back then understood an equal tide raised all boats. Since the 1960's, Republicans have been doing everything in their power to undo the workers rights we've earned in this country. Looking east into Wisconsin, and seeing the nightmare worker's world created by Scott Walker, it shows how close we are to returning to a fiefdom system on the 1890's. I believe in Democracy, I believe in fair and responsible Capitalism, I believe in fair wages and a fair tax rate imposed on all citizens, in all income brackets, and I believe in workers rights. The only question I have for people who make less than a million dollars a year, and who continue to vote Republican, is why don't you? The GOP's official platform is to take away your rights. They use the frustration created by their own employment policies to whip up an anger campaign against 'perceived enemies,' all while eroding worker rights further and further, to the cheers from the GOP voters. Happy Labor Day, and remember, if you keep voting Republican, it will eventually be renamed 'Hard Labor Day.'
* - Speaking of Republican history, think about World War II and how we look at FDR today, Pearl Harbor, D-Day, the war in the Pacific. Even though we rightly continue to debate the use of nuclear bombs to end the war, the conflict itself is viewed as this noble cause, stopping the Axis powers on their quest for world domination. In 60 years, how will we look back at the Bush administration? We can point out 9/11 failures, Hurricane Katrina, obscene cronyism and the economic collapse, but to do an apples to apples comparison, lets focus only on the Iraq War. The W. Bush administration started an unjustified war in Iraq, cultivating public support off the country's raw emotions from 9/11, costing thousand of American lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, trillions of dollars, completely mismanaged Iraq afterwards, due to administration arrogance and short sightedness, and destabilizing the entire Middle East, just so Dick Cheney's corporate buddies could have the greatest government funded payday in US history. No one will fondly remember the Iraq War or the W. Bush administration's actions, but then again, maybe this is the reason conservatives are trying so hard to rewrite high school text books; to change the facts into something more GOP friendly, a propaganda technique the far right learned from Communist Russia.
* - I keep hearing from angry leftie guy about how Democrats are no better than Republicans, and how I'm part of the great misinformation machine because I endorse the Dems. Please. I've pointed out the differences between the Democrats and the Republicans numerous times. To say they're the same is fool hearted, and a simpleton's mindset. There are problems which have permeated both parties, namely the influence of Wall Street, but I'm sure if John McCain would've been in office the last 6 1/2 years, this country would be in a VERY different place. That aside, I'm not against a third party, but I'll fall back to what I've said before about them. Give me an option that's real, not something which might exist in four election cycles. Give me something to talk about, a party that can compete nationally, not just for one city council seat, in one major urban city. When you show me something, I'll pay attention. And for the record, Bernie Sanders is running as a Democrat. You do realize that don't you? To imply the Democrats are a lost party, but then praise Bernie is purposely omitting his party affiliation in an misguided attempt at achieving hipster political uniqueness.
* - And finally, the Minnesota State Fair. I was at the Fair for a long time yesterday. I'll post some photos later today on the blog. I love the Fair, an over the top celebration of all things Minnesotan, without getting too weird. Sure you can get non-Minnesota elements, like deep fried gator and frozen Key Lime pie on a stick, but at the heart of it all is a true Minnesota experience. There was a girl standing outside of the Grandstand yesterday. She was the ubiquitous State Fair girl, doe-eyed elegance, looking both lost and found at the same time, a ghost of State Fair visitors from my youth. I recognized her, but not because of retro fashion. Quite the opposite, her outfit was all modern, but it was what she represented that was timeless. I turned back and she was gone into the mass of Minnesotans, a phantom to be spotted again next year. I love the Fair. Try the mint chocolate milk shake at the dairy barn (you have to ask for it), and gyros, walleye sandwich, deep fried pickles, fries, pronto pups and even a Sweet Martha cookie or two as well.
Have a great Labor Day everyone!
The 1950's were great (although we weren't dealing with minority rights and women's rights, something we still need to address today). They were great because it was the Golden Age of workers rights. Even the conservatives back then understood an equal tide raised all boats. Since the 1960's, Republicans have been doing everything in their power to undo the workers rights we've earned in this country. Looking east into Wisconsin, and seeing the nightmare worker's world created by Scott Walker, it shows how close we are to returning to a fiefdom system on the 1890's. I believe in Democracy, I believe in fair and responsible Capitalism, I believe in fair wages and a fair tax rate imposed on all citizens, in all income brackets, and I believe in workers rights. The only question I have for people who make less than a million dollars a year, and who continue to vote Republican, is why don't you? The GOP's official platform is to take away your rights. They use the frustration created by their own employment policies to whip up an anger campaign against 'perceived enemies,' all while eroding worker rights further and further, to the cheers from the GOP voters. Happy Labor Day, and remember, if you keep voting Republican, it will eventually be renamed 'Hard Labor Day.'
* - Speaking of Republican history, think about World War II and how we look at FDR today, Pearl Harbor, D-Day, the war in the Pacific. Even though we rightly continue to debate the use of nuclear bombs to end the war, the conflict itself is viewed as this noble cause, stopping the Axis powers on their quest for world domination. In 60 years, how will we look back at the Bush administration? We can point out 9/11 failures, Hurricane Katrina, obscene cronyism and the economic collapse, but to do an apples to apples comparison, lets focus only on the Iraq War. The W. Bush administration started an unjustified war in Iraq, cultivating public support off the country's raw emotions from 9/11, costing thousand of American lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, trillions of dollars, completely mismanaged Iraq afterwards, due to administration arrogance and short sightedness, and destabilizing the entire Middle East, just so Dick Cheney's corporate buddies could have the greatest government funded payday in US history. No one will fondly remember the Iraq War or the W. Bush administration's actions, but then again, maybe this is the reason conservatives are trying so hard to rewrite high school text books; to change the facts into something more GOP friendly, a propaganda technique the far right learned from Communist Russia.
* - I keep hearing from angry leftie guy about how Democrats are no better than Republicans, and how I'm part of the great misinformation machine because I endorse the Dems. Please. I've pointed out the differences between the Democrats and the Republicans numerous times. To say they're the same is fool hearted, and a simpleton's mindset. There are problems which have permeated both parties, namely the influence of Wall Street, but I'm sure if John McCain would've been in office the last 6 1/2 years, this country would be in a VERY different place. That aside, I'm not against a third party, but I'll fall back to what I've said before about them. Give me an option that's real, not something which might exist in four election cycles. Give me something to talk about, a party that can compete nationally, not just for one city council seat, in one major urban city. When you show me something, I'll pay attention. And for the record, Bernie Sanders is running as a Democrat. You do realize that don't you? To imply the Democrats are a lost party, but then praise Bernie is purposely omitting his party affiliation in an misguided attempt at achieving hipster political uniqueness.
* - And finally, the Minnesota State Fair. I was at the Fair for a long time yesterday. I'll post some photos later today on the blog. I love the Fair, an over the top celebration of all things Minnesotan, without getting too weird. Sure you can get non-Minnesota elements, like deep fried gator and frozen Key Lime pie on a stick, but at the heart of it all is a true Minnesota experience. There was a girl standing outside of the Grandstand yesterday. She was the ubiquitous State Fair girl, doe-eyed elegance, looking both lost and found at the same time, a ghost of State Fair visitors from my youth. I recognized her, but not because of retro fashion. Quite the opposite, her outfit was all modern, but it was what she represented that was timeless. I turned back and she was gone into the mass of Minnesotans, a phantom to be spotted again next year. I love the Fair. Try the mint chocolate milk shake at the dairy barn (you have to ask for it), and gyros, walleye sandwich, deep fried pickles, fries, pronto pups and even a Sweet Martha cookie or two as well.
Have a great Labor Day everyone!
Friday, September 4, 2015
The Friday Link for 9/4/15
If you listen to the show or read the station's social media feeds, you know I love art, and I love the modern mediums being explored with artistic expression. The MIA and the Walker Art Museum have a few video art pieces which are exceptional (Chiho Aoshima, Jennifer Steinkamp, Doug Aitken, Bruce Nauman, Paul Chan, and others).
What I find fun is when you get someone who can take something deeply artistic and make appeal to the masses, slyly, through popular culture. I don't think anyone does that better than the band OK Go.
OK Go have taken their music videos to the next level with numerous visual tricks and innovations. They're probably most known for their music video for 'Here it Goes Again,' where they dance on running treadmills, but they've done so many different types of artistic expression in their music videos, it's astounding; all accompanied by their trademark catchy songs.
I say the band OK Go did these, but it's the directors, the artist teams and the band who design and create the videos. Combined, they're the main artists. OK Go, for the record, are the ones taking the risks, green lighting the projects.
If you browse their selections, do be careful for the occasional bad word.
Here's my favorite, the giant Rube Goldberg Machine for their song 'This Too Shall Pass'. It's directed by James Frost, the band, and the folks at Syyn Labs. Enjoy, and watch over and over and over again to catch it all.
What I find fun is when you get someone who can take something deeply artistic and make appeal to the masses, slyly, through popular culture. I don't think anyone does that better than the band OK Go.
OK Go have taken their music videos to the next level with numerous visual tricks and innovations. They're probably most known for their music video for 'Here it Goes Again,' where they dance on running treadmills, but they've done so many different types of artistic expression in their music videos, it's astounding; all accompanied by their trademark catchy songs.
I say the band OK Go did these, but it's the directors, the artist teams and the band who design and create the videos. Combined, they're the main artists. OK Go, for the record, are the ones taking the risks, green lighting the projects.
If you browse their selections, do be careful for the occasional bad word.
Here's my favorite, the giant Rube Goldberg Machine for their song 'This Too Shall Pass'. It's directed by James Frost, the band, and the folks at Syyn Labs. Enjoy, and watch over and over and over again to catch it all.
Tuesday, September 1, 2015
Slack Jawed, Stone Faced Silence
Republicans are funny, but in a scary way. After 20 years of right wing opinion validation as their only news input, they've lost the ability to debate, interact, defend and counterpoint. They're so used to having their point of view repeated back to them, they don't know how to process truths which call into question their believed reality.
Some examples:
I have conservative friends who insist the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal is the worst thing ever done by a politician (their words, not mine). The fact she actually used private e-mail to interact and receive information as Secretary of State is tantamount to treason in their minds, but when you bring up the W. Bush administration's 'lost' 20 million plus e-mails, e-mails from the entire length of his presidency, official e-mails which used private and campaign accounts illegally, e-mails dealing with such topics as 9/11, the Iraq War and it's justifications, his re-election campaign, government contracts, Hurricane Katrina response and the banking crisis, e-mails which should have been archived by law, e-mails which could only have become 'lost' by purposely erasing the e-mails from multiple locations on multiple computers and on multiple servers, e-mails which were 'supposedly' 'found' in 2010, after lawsuits were filed, but with no independent review to validate them, and, conveniently for the Bush administration, the 'found' e-mails can't be seen by the public for decades; when you mention THAT e-mail scandal, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
I hear cheers from conservatives who applaud the actions of a few religious zealot county clerks in Kentucky, who refuse to issue marriage certificates to gay couples. They're imposing their religious point of view on the people they're supposed to represent, hand picking what parts of their distorted Bible they follow, trying to hide in plain sight while they practice hatred, bigotry and homophobia on this country's citizens. At the same time, conservative critics rip apart the Supreme Court calling them activist judges who should be dismissed for legalizing same sex marriage, but when you bring up to the same conservative critics how much they loved the same Supreme Court only a year earlier during the Hobby Lobby case, and when you point out there is absolutely no difference between what these county clerks are trying to do in Kentucky and what the far right in this country is terrified of, mandatory religious law being forced on the populace by individuals with an agenda, only they refer to it as Sharia Law; when you mention THAT counterpoint to their convictions, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
There's a GOP meme going around about President Obama never mentioning any police officer killed in the line of duty, in the last two years. They juxtapose his alleged silence with further allegations of him praising the lives of African Americans victims of police violence, lives which the right wing media paint as 'criminals getting what they deserved,' but when you point out this is a made up story, showing them videos of Obama indeed praising police officers lost in the line of duty, and when pointing out he never praised a criminal, unlike the right's praising of Cliven Bundy, a man who IS a criminal, who refused to pay his grazing fees, fines and taxes, who thinks he can make up the rules as he goes, a man who encouraged militias to target Bureau of Land Management officials, government agents akin to law enforcement, with loaded weapons with intent to kill, while they hid behind women and children, when you mention THAT right wing criminal worshipping, with not one condemnation, even after his horrible pro slavery rant, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
The right lives in a bubble of their own making. It's gotten worse since the end of the W. administration, when even they couldn't deny the massive failure of his presidency. They have turned off any dissenting view point which contradicts their side being anything but the wholesome American Christian values side, or paints their opposition as anything other than anti-wealth, anti-famliy, anti-God Anti-Americans.
Here's where it gets scary. Have you seen the GOP field for President? There are only two candidates I'd even label as somewhat mentally capable of holding down the office of President (Kasich and Graham [not, in any way, an endorsement of either]), and neither of them have a chance on the Republican side. The right wing's self validation bubble prevents them from looking at a Cruz, Trump or Carson and saying, "dear Lord, what are we doing?" Nope, because their perception filters have made them blind, they look at the wart ridden, patchy haired, oozing flesh mass which has pulled itself out of the cesspool of humanity, and see the belle of the ball.
This is how you get vastly unqualified people elected into positions they can't manage. Look at this Republican mess and realize their voters will ALL show up to vote for which ever Broom Hilda survives the GOP beauty pageant. The left can laugh and shake their head, but at no point should they take what is going on in the Republican Party lightly. If the GOP wins in 2016, it will be the Democrats who will be stunned, with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
Some examples:
I have conservative friends who insist the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal is the worst thing ever done by a politician (their words, not mine). The fact she actually used private e-mail to interact and receive information as Secretary of State is tantamount to treason in their minds, but when you bring up the W. Bush administration's 'lost' 20 million plus e-mails, e-mails from the entire length of his presidency, official e-mails which used private and campaign accounts illegally, e-mails dealing with such topics as 9/11, the Iraq War and it's justifications, his re-election campaign, government contracts, Hurricane Katrina response and the banking crisis, e-mails which should have been archived by law, e-mails which could only have become 'lost' by purposely erasing the e-mails from multiple locations on multiple computers and on multiple servers, e-mails which were 'supposedly' 'found' in 2010, after lawsuits were filed, but with no independent review to validate them, and, conveniently for the Bush administration, the 'found' e-mails can't be seen by the public for decades; when you mention THAT e-mail scandal, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
I hear cheers from conservatives who applaud the actions of a few religious zealot county clerks in Kentucky, who refuse to issue marriage certificates to gay couples. They're imposing their religious point of view on the people they're supposed to represent, hand picking what parts of their distorted Bible they follow, trying to hide in plain sight while they practice hatred, bigotry and homophobia on this country's citizens. At the same time, conservative critics rip apart the Supreme Court calling them activist judges who should be dismissed for legalizing same sex marriage, but when you bring up to the same conservative critics how much they loved the same Supreme Court only a year earlier during the Hobby Lobby case, and when you point out there is absolutely no difference between what these county clerks are trying to do in Kentucky and what the far right in this country is terrified of, mandatory religious law being forced on the populace by individuals with an agenda, only they refer to it as Sharia Law; when you mention THAT counterpoint to their convictions, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
There's a GOP meme going around about President Obama never mentioning any police officer killed in the line of duty, in the last two years. They juxtapose his alleged silence with further allegations of him praising the lives of African Americans victims of police violence, lives which the right wing media paint as 'criminals getting what they deserved,' but when you point out this is a made up story, showing them videos of Obama indeed praising police officers lost in the line of duty, and when pointing out he never praised a criminal, unlike the right's praising of Cliven Bundy, a man who IS a criminal, who refused to pay his grazing fees, fines and taxes, who thinks he can make up the rules as he goes, a man who encouraged militias to target Bureau of Land Management officials, government agents akin to law enforcement, with loaded weapons with intent to kill, while they hid behind women and children, when you mention THAT right wing criminal worshipping, with not one condemnation, even after his horrible pro slavery rant, you're met with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
The right lives in a bubble of their own making. It's gotten worse since the end of the W. administration, when even they couldn't deny the massive failure of his presidency. They have turned off any dissenting view point which contradicts their side being anything but the wholesome American Christian values side, or paints their opposition as anything other than anti-wealth, anti-famliy, anti-God Anti-Americans.
Here's where it gets scary. Have you seen the GOP field for President? There are only two candidates I'd even label as somewhat mentally capable of holding down the office of President (Kasich and Graham [not, in any way, an endorsement of either]), and neither of them have a chance on the Republican side. The right wing's self validation bubble prevents them from looking at a Cruz, Trump or Carson and saying, "dear Lord, what are we doing?" Nope, because their perception filters have made them blind, they look at the wart ridden, patchy haired, oozing flesh mass which has pulled itself out of the cesspool of humanity, and see the belle of the ball.
This is how you get vastly unqualified people elected into positions they can't manage. Look at this Republican mess and realize their voters will ALL show up to vote for which ever Broom Hilda survives the GOP beauty pageant. The left can laugh and shake their head, but at no point should they take what is going on in the Republican Party lightly. If the GOP wins in 2016, it will be the Democrats who will be stunned, with slack jawed, stone faced silence.
Monday, August 31, 2015
Black Lives Matter verses All Lives Matter
I know this will sound nuts, but there are times when someone says "all lives matter" I get very angry. It's because the phrase is being said not as a true statement of conviction, but rather as a cheap way to try to shut up the group Black Lives Matter.
For the record, I believe all lives do indeed matter, and I believe the African American community has been kept at a lower and different standard than the white community; a discrimination I cannot understand fully, but I still know is wrong. I have no problem with Black Lives Matter. The real crime is how we allowed their lives to be so neglected for so long.
Most people I know who say "all lives matter" are only doing so as a way to dismiss Black Lives Matter. What they don't want to hear, or do hear and just want to silence the outrage, is the undeniable history of racism and bigotry that has lead the African American community to finally say enough. The black community has been screaming for decades about unfair treatment at the hands of law enforcement, prosecutors and the courts, and white America went about their business, ignoring them.
It's the prolific abundance of cell phone cameras which is showing the real story. The African American community was telling the truth; they are being treated differently, many times with fatal consequences. The horror is obvious to everyone, even the most racist of fools.
I was getting ready to start screaming and typing less than flattering things to the "all lives matter" trumpeters, but Bill Corbett, from RiffTrax and MST3K fame, sent me a link to a piece on the Reddit "Explain Like I'm Five" board from GeekAesthete which addresses this in a calm and rational manner, with incredible simplicity. It's so good:
For the record, I believe all lives do indeed matter, and I believe the African American community has been kept at a lower and different standard than the white community; a discrimination I cannot understand fully, but I still know is wrong. I have no problem with Black Lives Matter. The real crime is how we allowed their lives to be so neglected for so long.
Most people I know who say "all lives matter" are only doing so as a way to dismiss Black Lives Matter. What they don't want to hear, or do hear and just want to silence the outrage, is the undeniable history of racism and bigotry that has lead the African American community to finally say enough. The black community has been screaming for decades about unfair treatment at the hands of law enforcement, prosecutors and the courts, and white America went about their business, ignoring them.
It's the prolific abundance of cell phone cameras which is showing the real story. The African American community was telling the truth; they are being treated differently, many times with fatal consequences. The horror is obvious to everyone, even the most racist of fools.
I was getting ready to start screaming and typing less than flattering things to the "all lives matter" trumpeters, but Bill Corbett, from RiffTrax and MST3K fame, sent me a link to a piece on the Reddit "Explain Like I'm Five" board from GeekAesthete which addresses this in a calm and rational manner, with incredible simplicity. It's so good:
Imagine that you're sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share." And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, "everyone should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful sentiment -- indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad's smart-ass comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you still haven't gotten any!
The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end: "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else." But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "only I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.
That's the situation of the "black lives matter" movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.
The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn't work the way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn't want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That's not made up out of whole cloth -- there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it's generally not considered "news", while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate -- young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don't treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don't pay as much attention to certain people's deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don't treat all lives as though they matter equally.
Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase "black lives matter" also has an implicit "too" at the end: it's saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying "all lives matter" is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It's a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means "only black lives matter," when that is obviously not the case. And so saying "all lives matter" as a direct response to "black lives matter" is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.
Well said indeed. Now if we can only stop the anti-Black Lives Matter folks, and their incompetent media, from using every death of a white person at the hands of a black person as an equalizer, a way to dismiss 10 or more dead African Americans by implying the one dead white guy makes it even; a macabre quid pro quo to delegitimize from a different angle. Yes, please stop that too.
If only it was that easy.
If only it was that easy.
Friday, August 28, 2015
The Friday Link for 8/28/15
After 10 or so years of watching the Daily Show and Colbert in the mornings, it's been pretty quiet lately. Ever since Jon Stewart finished up, it's been really silent, not as much fun.
Being Trevor Noah will stink. There is an old adage in media - You don't want to be the guy who replaces the legend. You want to be the guy who replaced the guy who replaced the living legend. It holds true in all of entertainment (sorry Moose Miller). Much like Larry Willmore, who took over for Colbert, there is going to be a loss of wind in the sails, but Willmore was much better positioned to take over a timeslot of that magnitude. I have some real big concerns about Noah.
Willmore was the "black correspondent" from the Daily Show, with years of top notch bits. His take down of the folks who think the Civil War wasn't about slavery was epic. When he transferred to 10:30 PM, he understood the show had to be his and his alone. His take on the daily news from the African American perspective isn't as witty or polished at Colbert, but it is hilarious when he calls out the racial hypocrisy with his own brand of hosting. He's ramped it up very quickly, becoming a pretty good watch in only a few months.
Trevor Noah has some funny jokes from his stand up days, and the few bits he did do on the Daily Show were somewhat funny, but I was very surprised he got the gig. Considering I felt he was the fourth or fifth choice, he either must have really impressed in the interviews or he was the only one who would take the job. Here's to hoping he got the gig due to his hosting ability.
Then again, it'll all be moot soon. It was going to be tough enough with Fallon, Kimmel and O'Brien to compete with, but with Colbert soon to rule the roost at CBS late night, they'd better have their A game ready.
To give them, and you, a taste of what they are in store for, here's just Colbert cracking up. The last time a late night host gave me giggles by just losing it with he rest of us, it was a guy named Carson. Enjoy.
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/w9dj97/the-colbert-report-5-x-five---colbert-moments--stephen-cracks-up
Being Trevor Noah will stink. There is an old adage in media - You don't want to be the guy who replaces the legend. You want to be the guy who replaced the guy who replaced the living legend. It holds true in all of entertainment (sorry Moose Miller). Much like Larry Willmore, who took over for Colbert, there is going to be a loss of wind in the sails, but Willmore was much better positioned to take over a timeslot of that magnitude. I have some real big concerns about Noah.
Willmore was the "black correspondent" from the Daily Show, with years of top notch bits. His take down of the folks who think the Civil War wasn't about slavery was epic. When he transferred to 10:30 PM, he understood the show had to be his and his alone. His take on the daily news from the African American perspective isn't as witty or polished at Colbert, but it is hilarious when he calls out the racial hypocrisy with his own brand of hosting. He's ramped it up very quickly, becoming a pretty good watch in only a few months.
Trevor Noah has some funny jokes from his stand up days, and the few bits he did do on the Daily Show were somewhat funny, but I was very surprised he got the gig. Considering I felt he was the fourth or fifth choice, he either must have really impressed in the interviews or he was the only one who would take the job. Here's to hoping he got the gig due to his hosting ability.
Then again, it'll all be moot soon. It was going to be tough enough with Fallon, Kimmel and O'Brien to compete with, but with Colbert soon to rule the roost at CBS late night, they'd better have their A game ready.
To give them, and you, a taste of what they are in store for, here's just Colbert cracking up. The last time a late night host gave me giggles by just losing it with he rest of us, it was a guy named Carson. Enjoy.
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/w9dj97/the-colbert-report-5-x-five---colbert-moments--stephen-cracks-up
Thursday, August 27, 2015
I'm Back, and Feisty!
Hi all! Thanks for understanding my blog quietness after the passing of my father in law. Sometimes you just have to walk away.
What got me back was something that happened this morning. There's a listener who interacts with the show on Twitter, John Appleseed, @WhizkeyDreamer. He's been interacting with the show for awhile, and whereas some of the staff think the guy is just a troll, I disagree. Although he and I didn't see eye to eye on everything, and he hated when I'd do a character voice, we got along fine. That all started to change when I was talking about the shooting of the 16 year old armed robber in St. Paul. I'm not going to revisit my stance, but let's just say JAWD intensely disagreed with me.
This morning, for some reason, he took offense at my asking questions about what happened in regards to the tragic death of a worker at the new stadium being built for the Minnesota Vikings. Two workers were on top of the building, and as I said this morning, either they weren't using safety equipment, the safety equipment failed, or (as I realized a little later) there could've been a structural failure of some sort which cause the accident. Really, those are the only three options on the table. I also insisted that we, as taxpayers who are funding this boondoggle, have a right to know what exactly happened. I'll not mix words; I want to know it the roofing subcontractor was skipping safety regulations for some reason.
This triggered JAWD to come after me. He initially insisted I sounded like an idiot and I shouldn't be talking about the accident. Both Bryan and I were scratching our heads, wondering what he'd heard to set him off. We asked what was bothering him, and he just got more and more belligerent and more and more insulting.
I warned him, saying I wanted nothing more to do with the discussion, but that didn't stop him. He just kept pushing and pushing and pushing. Finally he said a pretty nasty insult, and that's when I blocked him.
I'm married, have three kids, a house, a dog. I work hard on the radio show, love to be active with the kids, help them out with school and sports, garden, cook, love music and partake in the great Twin Cities art scene whenever I can. I love Rush, Doctor Who and baseball. Most days, I have a hard time fitting it all in.
My point is this. I have no time for angry fools or derogatory and disrespectful jerks. I have discovered there is a way to block people I don't like on social media, and I have no problem in doing so. This isn't saying a person can't disagree with me. Not at all. Everyday I have numerous people tell me I'm wrong, defending their position with varying degrees of facts and determination. If you think I'm wrong, challenge me, but don't become furious, indignant, foul-motuthed or hostile. I don't mind ornery, but if I see you ramping it up more and more, and if my telling you you're getting too extreme, to tone it down, or to walk away, goes ignored, C'est la Vie.
I love interacting with you, but I don't have time to be the wall a person just wants to yell at.
What got me back was something that happened this morning. There's a listener who interacts with the show on Twitter, John Appleseed, @WhizkeyDreamer. He's been interacting with the show for awhile, and whereas some of the staff think the guy is just a troll, I disagree. Although he and I didn't see eye to eye on everything, and he hated when I'd do a character voice, we got along fine. That all started to change when I was talking about the shooting of the 16 year old armed robber in St. Paul. I'm not going to revisit my stance, but let's just say JAWD intensely disagreed with me.
This morning, for some reason, he took offense at my asking questions about what happened in regards to the tragic death of a worker at the new stadium being built for the Minnesota Vikings. Two workers were on top of the building, and as I said this morning, either they weren't using safety equipment, the safety equipment failed, or (as I realized a little later) there could've been a structural failure of some sort which cause the accident. Really, those are the only three options on the table. I also insisted that we, as taxpayers who are funding this boondoggle, have a right to know what exactly happened. I'll not mix words; I want to know it the roofing subcontractor was skipping safety regulations for some reason.
This triggered JAWD to come after me. He initially insisted I sounded like an idiot and I shouldn't be talking about the accident. Both Bryan and I were scratching our heads, wondering what he'd heard to set him off. We asked what was bothering him, and he just got more and more belligerent and more and more insulting.
I warned him, saying I wanted nothing more to do with the discussion, but that didn't stop him. He just kept pushing and pushing and pushing. Finally he said a pretty nasty insult, and that's when I blocked him.
I'm married, have three kids, a house, a dog. I work hard on the radio show, love to be active with the kids, help them out with school and sports, garden, cook, love music and partake in the great Twin Cities art scene whenever I can. I love Rush, Doctor Who and baseball. Most days, I have a hard time fitting it all in.
My point is this. I have no time for angry fools or derogatory and disrespectful jerks. I have discovered there is a way to block people I don't like on social media, and I have no problem in doing so. This isn't saying a person can't disagree with me. Not at all. Everyday I have numerous people tell me I'm wrong, defending their position with varying degrees of facts and determination. If you think I'm wrong, challenge me, but don't become furious, indignant, foul-motuthed or hostile. I don't mind ornery, but if I see you ramping it up more and more, and if my telling you you're getting too extreme, to tone it down, or to walk away, goes ignored, C'est la Vie.
I love interacting with you, but I don't have time to be the wall a person just wants to yell at.
Friday, August 21, 2015
The Friday Link for 8/21/15
Here's a little gem I have wanted to share. Jerry Seinfeld is a genius.
It's not like I have to tell anyone this. He's been the high water mark of comedy in this country for 20 years, and his "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee' is one of the purest interview shows ever, where you get a true glimpse into the person he interviews, a lot of laughs, and a masters course on comedy. His episode with Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner is perfect.
His complete understanding of how the entertainment industry works is highlighted in this quick four minute bit with Seth Meyers. He breaks down the entire falsehood of late night talk shows, and all interview shows for that matter, and subtly makes a tremendous point about talk show hosts; you shouldn't have to be spoon fed your interviews. As a talk show host, you should be able to go out there and wing it, and still be able to put on a good show, especially when an entertainment titan is sitting across from you. It's why Carson and Letterman were so good. It also explains why Seinfeld's CICGC is so good.
It's also fun to hear him fall into classic Seinfeld cadence. Enjoy!
It's not like I have to tell anyone this. He's been the high water mark of comedy in this country for 20 years, and his "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee' is one of the purest interview shows ever, where you get a true glimpse into the person he interviews, a lot of laughs, and a masters course on comedy. His episode with Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner is perfect.
His complete understanding of how the entertainment industry works is highlighted in this quick four minute bit with Seth Meyers. He breaks down the entire falsehood of late night talk shows, and all interview shows for that matter, and subtly makes a tremendous point about talk show hosts; you shouldn't have to be spoon fed your interviews. As a talk show host, you should be able to go out there and wing it, and still be able to put on a good show, especially when an entertainment titan is sitting across from you. It's why Carson and Letterman were so good. It also explains why Seinfeld's CICGC is so good.
It's also fun to hear him fall into classic Seinfeld cadence. Enjoy!
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Not Feeling it
Forgive me...please.
For the last few weeks, I've not been feeling it, with the 'it' referencing me sitting down and writing. I have a ton of posts I'd like to write, but the motivation to actually type them out isn't there.
The funeral was very nice. St. Mary's in White Bear Lake was lovely. The cemetery plot is shaded by a big oak. The luncheon afterwards featured some amazing Italian food from Donatelli's. Exceptional tortellini. The family in town was delightful. A lot of support from family and friends. Thanks.
My mother sent me a line from Pericles - "What you leave behind is not what is engraved on stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others." So true.
I will try to write more serious posts soon. Until then, the Friday link will be here and I'll try to get a fun post or two up this weekend.
Thanks for understanding. Thanks for reading this blog. Thanks for being you.
I leave you with really cool art.
For the last few weeks, I've not been feeling it, with the 'it' referencing me sitting down and writing. I have a ton of posts I'd like to write, but the motivation to actually type them out isn't there.
The funeral was very nice. St. Mary's in White Bear Lake was lovely. The cemetery plot is shaded by a big oak. The luncheon afterwards featured some amazing Italian food from Donatelli's. Exceptional tortellini. The family in town was delightful. A lot of support from family and friends. Thanks.
My mother sent me a line from Pericles - "What you leave behind is not what is engraved on stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others." So true.
I will try to write more serious posts soon. Until then, the Friday link will be here and I'll try to get a fun post or two up this weekend.
Thanks for understanding. Thanks for reading this blog. Thanks for being you.
I leave you with really cool art.
Friday, August 14, 2015
The Friday Link for 8/14/15
It's been a sad week. Having to go through the motions of burying a loved one is sad, draining, and exhausting. Tomorrow, I'm at a funeral. Tomorrow I mourn.
I need a smile, with intelligence. I'll miss Jon Stewart...
Thanks Jon. I needed that.
I need a smile, with intelligence. I'll miss Jon Stewart...
Thanks Jon. I needed that.
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Donald Trump IS the Republican Party
Many Republicans have a look of horror on their faces, jaws hanging, staring in stunned silence at what's happening to their party. The 2016 election cycle is underway and Donald Trump, a racist, misogynist, wealth worshipping, blowhard, who's short tempered and always looking for a new grudge, is the face of the GOP. Not only is he leading the GOP field, he seems near impervious to what some might describe as attempts to sabotage his own campaign. He's leading despite himself. As Republicans try to define why Trump resonates, they need to realize he's not a freak show, he's a Republican mirror.
Reality: the Republican party of yore has disappeared. Beloved Presidents who proudly wore 'R's next to their names wouldn't even recognize what their party has become, and many current Republican's wouldn't endorse many of their signature policy decisions. If this GOP existed back in the time of Lincoln, you really think they would've gotten rid of slavery? Of course not! Many modern GOP'ers insist African Americans had it better under slavery. If this GOP existed back in the time of Teddy Roosevelt, you think large swaths of the American West would've been set aside for public park land? Of course not! They would've handed the American West to the wealthiest industrialists and just asked for campaign donations in return. If this GOP existed back in the time of Eisenhower, do you think the Interstate Road System would've been built? Of course not, at least not the way he built it. It would've been done for wealthy communities only, at an astronomically higher cost, with kickbacks to the industries that got them elected.
It wasn't one thing that changed the Republican party, rather people and events changed it over time. If the pre-1960's Republican party was a thick forest, the embracing of the Dixie-crats was the beginning of them cutting down the trees. Reagan was the next step, building a dirt road on the cleared land. Gingrich and Dole upgraded the dirt road to a country highway, and Karl Rove and Dick Cheney finished the job by paving over the whole thing. The funny part is, as the modern Republican voter cruises across this asphalt wasteland, they insist the best part of the drive, and the main reason they continue to vote Republican, is the lovely shade of the long gone trees.
The Republican party morphed over time to fit the Trump mold. It explains why he wasn't fully embraced when he broke onto the scene in the 80's and 90's. He was ahead of his time, needing the Republican Party to catch up, which they did after the last Presidential election cycle. After the 2012 debacle, the Republican's did their own 'autopsy' to try to figure out what went wrong with the Romney campaign. They correctly pinpointed the problem. They'd alienated African-Americans, Latinos, women, the GLBT community and anyone who supported those groups, which in turn is the majority of American voters. But then, the Republicans ignored their autopsy results, and doubled down on the bigotry, misogyny, homophobia and hatred. Much like Anikan Skywalker killing off Mace Windu, completing his turn to the dark side, after 2012, the GOP arrived at their current destination, welcoming in the Age of Trump.
Trump embodies every element of the GOP, much to their chagrin.
Trump mimics the wealthy financiers who create these presidential candidates, but he does the Koch brothers and their ilk one better. Their model involves getting some brainless low level Republican stooge, who can be sold as a pillar of political integrity, lifting them out of their obscure community or state position, giving them tons of money and some advisors, and propelling them onto a much larger stage. If they can maintain the mirage of competence, and if they pay back the wealthy donors through massive quid pro quo, they then get groomed for the big stage, a Presidential race (see Walker, Bush...well most of the GOP field).
Trump turns their model on it's ear. He doesn't need to find a brainless Republican stooge; he is one! He doesn't need the money people to back him up; he has that too. He's their worst nightmare, a candidate who's blown up the modern GOP grooming system, simply by eliminating the middle man!
Trump takes what the Republican politicians and pundits do, and has made it a way of life. Look at Trump's current war with Megyn Kelly from Fox News. Clearly she, and the rest of Fox News, wants Trump out of the GOP race, making it crystal clear at the first GOP debate in Cleveland. I don't think they were smart enough to bait him, but after taking the line of debate questions as a personal attack, Trump did what he always does, and took out his frustration, tearing into Megyn Kelly specifically, attacking her with shallow and ugly woman based insults.
Trump's insults not only opened the criticism door for GOP talkers who hate Trump, it exposed the massive level of hypocrisy within the GOP. As Republicans defend Megyn Kelly, insisting attacking her as a woman is crossing a line, they're trying desperately to avoid acknowledging they loved when Trump did the exact same thing to Rosie O'Donnell, because she's a lefty. Regardless of whether he's attacking women, Mexicans, or war records, Trump's only using the same play book the GOP themselves wrote! The Republican's love attacks on women, just not Republican women. You can't call someone a glutton for eating 50 value meals when your main problem is that they went to McDonald's, not Burger King.
It's the voters who Trump really resonates with, but why? A guy like this would've been run out of the presidential race instantly in 1992, but today, he says amazingly ignorant things and he gets higher numbers. After 25 years of wealthy donors and corporate media driving their agenda, Republican voters consistently see themselves as poor victims, with never-ending justifications for why "those people" are the "real reason" they're not more successful. The modern GOP voter has been cultivated to never try to solve their own problems, just baste in a brine of their own self pity, trying to figure out how to punish the people they think have wronged them. This is why the GOP draws in racists, misogynists, homophobes and religious zealots.
The GOP victim game started with Reagan. He sowed a seed with his followers; the reason they hadn't all become millionaires was the U.S. government, not corporate interests who started to erode the workers rights, wages and benefits in the 60's and 70's (proof of this is Reagan's 9 most terrifying words line). It worked so well, the GOP started applying it to more and more groups (Democrats, African-Americas, Latinos, all non-white minorities, gays, women). There wasn't a group they couldn't use to justify a Republican voter's personal failure. When we got to the W. Administration and their version, a hyper paranoid "them verses us" dogma, it became the Republican rallying cry.
This insularly view is constantly proven wrong. Cliven Bundy wasn't a western hero, rather a racist, tax-dodging, debtor who threatened to shoot government agents, while hiding behind women and children. Police officers aren't always the innocents, repeatedly under attack by African American 'demons,' rather some maintain a policy of racial profiling, sometimes with lethal consequences. The Confederate Flag isn't a symbol of southern pride, rather the flag is embraced and beloved by racists who feel the enemy of the United States was right in their treatment of minorities. Gay Marriage isn't an assault on traditional marriages, and it's not right to scream at gay couples because they dared asked for a crappy Indiana pizza.
Trump reverses the fight against ignorance, saying, "your delusional thought processes were correct, you're a victim, and I'm willing to double down, regardless of how insanely stupid it sounds, just to let you continue to live in your make believe world." To confirm this, let's just look at one of Trumps insanely stupid arguments he's made the last few weeks. Under Trump, Latinos aren't hard working people, desperately coming to the United States to perform menial, low paying jobs. No, "they're stealing you wages! Blame them for all of your problems! And don't feel bad about the undeniable racist element of what your thinking. They're all drug dealers and rapists, so being racist to them is OK!"
In the "poor us" Republican party, Donald Trump is a protective shield against reality encroaching in on their pity party. Of course the resonates. He validates them!
Look in the mirror Republican's, Trump is you, and you are Trump. Accepting this is the only way you can stop him. Until then, since you've made this excrement and hair piece pie, you have to eat it. Bon appetite!
Friday, August 7, 2015
The Friday Link for 8/7/15
This morning, halfway through an interview at the end of the 7 AM hour, I got word from family that my father in law had passed away. Forgive me if the remainder of the show was not the most coherent. I was having a hard time.
The Friday Link today will not be a comedy bit, but rather a John Denver song. My father in law liked John Denver. Jack Rice will be in for me on Monday.
The Friday Link today will not be a comedy bit, but rather a John Denver song. My father in law liked John Denver. Jack Rice will be in for me on Monday.
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
The Death Penalty - Minnesota Style
This has been a frustrating day. After laying down and getting a little perspective time with my dog:
I'm ready to address this mess.
This morning, I talked about the case of Lavauntai Broadbent. This young 16 year old is dead. He's dead because he attempted to rob a couple on Friday night in a St. Paul park. He drew a gun in the process of the robbery, and demanded the couple's valuables. He was then shot by one of the two people he was trying to rob, a person who was carrying a legal weapon via a Carry and Conceal permit. He died on the scene.
Some facts:
Minnesota, as a society, has approved the death penalty. It's not called the death penalty, but rather Carry and Conceal, but it's the death penalty all the same. In the case of Lavauntai Broadbent, he was instantaneously arrested, tried, convicted and executed for the crime of armed assault, without firing his weapon, by an individual who may or may not have any legal or police background. This death sentence was handed down onto a 16 year old, instantaneously, by a regular citizen.
Carry and Conceal has failed miserably in Minnesota. Not only has it not stopped or decreased crime (something that was promised it would do. Look at a February post from this year on the blog, where I address that charade), it rarely has even had a chance to operate as it was intended. What happened on Friday night in St. Paul was what Carry and Conceal legalized, instantaneous death penalty verdicts.
Most of the criticism I've taken has been expressed as such; self defense and the death penalty are two different things, and my labeling of what happened in the park being the death penalty is crossing a line.
The death penalty is not supposed to be legal in Minnesota, and is something which isn't supposed to be administered indiscriminately. The death penalty, where legal, is supposed to be weighed heavily, in a process which is applied over years, with layers of reviews by law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, juries and appellate courts. But with Carry and Conceal, we've given that power to individuals without a law enforcement, legal, judicial or appellate background, many with minimal weapons training and experience, and we allow them to enforce, in a split second, whether the person across from them lives or dies.
Self defense is a vague term. Self defense doesn't have to be a bullet, as there are numerous ways for people to defend themselves, but in this case, self defense was administering an instant death penalty. I'm saying it was self defense, but for some reason stating the punishment (the penalty for 16 year old Lavauntai's attempted robbery was death) angers some, likely because it sums up the punishment truthfully. Lavauntai committed a crime, and was sentenced to an instant death, wrapped in a blanket of self defense. That's just reality.
Depending on the circumstances, Minnesota had the harshest death penalty in the nation. There isn't a state in the union, where the death penalty is legal, and where a 16 year old would be sentenced to death for an attempted robbery with a weapon which was never fired. Not one. He would, and should, go to jail, but no court in this country would have treated this as a death penalty case. But in Minnesota, thanks to Carry and Conceal, that's exactly what it was.
And this was a 16 year old too. A dumb, stupid 16 year old, who, thanks to Carry and Conceal, will never bother anyone else ever again. The punishment, although legal, was WAY too harsh for the crime.
Carry and Conceal is a ticking time bomb. How long until someone approaches a person in a park, asking for directions, and ends up dead because the shooter thought the cell phone the guy was reaching for was a weapon? By labeling what happened to Lavauntai as self defense, it candy coats the incredibly harsh nature of what Minnesota has deemed as appropriate punishment. How do we look at the shooter in the accidental case and insist he was a bad guy for instantaneously administering the death penalty while yet defending the death of Lavauntai? Hindsight is not how these cases should be approved.
Apathy and bravado are not defenses either. We need to think about what we are allowing here. Just because you don't like calling it the death penalty, doesn't mean it's not. Maybe we should rethink this entire law before we end up having a Minnesota Trayvon Martin, complete with people insisting the shooting was self defense, just like they did when they rallied around George Zimmerman.
Lavauntai Broadbent was committing a crime, the shooter was legally administering the death penalty through Conceal and Carry, and a 16 year old is dead...pardon me if I don't celebrate.
I'm ready to address this mess.
This morning, I talked about the case of Lavauntai Broadbent. This young 16 year old is dead. He's dead because he attempted to rob a couple on Friday night in a St. Paul park. He drew a gun in the process of the robbery, and demanded the couple's valuables. He was then shot by one of the two people he was trying to rob, a person who was carrying a legal weapon via a Carry and Conceal permit. He died on the scene.
Some facts:
- I never said this young man was innocent. He was attempting armed robbery with a weapon. If he was still alive today, he should be facing charges in a court of law.
- The individual who shot Lavauntai, will not be arrested. In my opinion, he shouldn't be charged with a crime, because even I agree he didn't commit one. Under current Minnesota law, he was within his rights.
- The gun Lavauntai had was never fired, at least that's what we've been told.
- As I said numerous times this morning, you can't presume Lavauntai was going to harm or kill anyone, but you also can't presume he would have just taken the valuables and left the victims alone. Any speculation of the sort is purely hypothetical, and academic to the reality.
Minnesota, as a society, has approved the death penalty. It's not called the death penalty, but rather Carry and Conceal, but it's the death penalty all the same. In the case of Lavauntai Broadbent, he was instantaneously arrested, tried, convicted and executed for the crime of armed assault, without firing his weapon, by an individual who may or may not have any legal or police background. This death sentence was handed down onto a 16 year old, instantaneously, by a regular citizen.
Carry and Conceal has failed miserably in Minnesota. Not only has it not stopped or decreased crime (something that was promised it would do. Look at a February post from this year on the blog, where I address that charade), it rarely has even had a chance to operate as it was intended. What happened on Friday night in St. Paul was what Carry and Conceal legalized, instantaneous death penalty verdicts.
Most of the criticism I've taken has been expressed as such; self defense and the death penalty are two different things, and my labeling of what happened in the park being the death penalty is crossing a line.
The death penalty is not supposed to be legal in Minnesota, and is something which isn't supposed to be administered indiscriminately. The death penalty, where legal, is supposed to be weighed heavily, in a process which is applied over years, with layers of reviews by law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, juries and appellate courts. But with Carry and Conceal, we've given that power to individuals without a law enforcement, legal, judicial or appellate background, many with minimal weapons training and experience, and we allow them to enforce, in a split second, whether the person across from them lives or dies.
Self defense is a vague term. Self defense doesn't have to be a bullet, as there are numerous ways for people to defend themselves, but in this case, self defense was administering an instant death penalty. I'm saying it was self defense, but for some reason stating the punishment (the penalty for 16 year old Lavauntai's attempted robbery was death) angers some, likely because it sums up the punishment truthfully. Lavauntai committed a crime, and was sentenced to an instant death, wrapped in a blanket of self defense. That's just reality.
Depending on the circumstances, Minnesota had the harshest death penalty in the nation. There isn't a state in the union, where the death penalty is legal, and where a 16 year old would be sentenced to death for an attempted robbery with a weapon which was never fired. Not one. He would, and should, go to jail, but no court in this country would have treated this as a death penalty case. But in Minnesota, thanks to Carry and Conceal, that's exactly what it was.
And this was a 16 year old too. A dumb, stupid 16 year old, who, thanks to Carry and Conceal, will never bother anyone else ever again. The punishment, although legal, was WAY too harsh for the crime.
Carry and Conceal is a ticking time bomb. How long until someone approaches a person in a park, asking for directions, and ends up dead because the shooter thought the cell phone the guy was reaching for was a weapon? By labeling what happened to Lavauntai as self defense, it candy coats the incredibly harsh nature of what Minnesota has deemed as appropriate punishment. How do we look at the shooter in the accidental case and insist he was a bad guy for instantaneously administering the death penalty while yet defending the death of Lavauntai? Hindsight is not how these cases should be approved.
Apathy and bravado are not defenses either. We need to think about what we are allowing here. Just because you don't like calling it the death penalty, doesn't mean it's not. Maybe we should rethink this entire law before we end up having a Minnesota Trayvon Martin, complete with people insisting the shooting was self defense, just like they did when they rallied around George Zimmerman.
Lavauntai Broadbent was committing a crime, the shooter was legally administering the death penalty through Conceal and Carry, and a 16 year old is dead...pardon me if I don't celebrate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)