It's not Rich Little, but Little Richard who has been asked to perform at this year's White House Correspondents Dinner.
Thank you for your attention during this important update. Which is, of course, complete bullshit.
Important Update
Thank you for your attention during this important update. Which is, of course, complete bullshit.
In Which I Mourn the Silencing of Wit
What most reminds me with regularity that I'm getting old is not the white hair coming in at my temples or the wrinkles starting to stick regardless of my expression, but making complaints that I realize with regrettable clarity sound decidedly like the grievances I once dismissed as a hallmark of the impossibly ancient. Compulsively engaging in the sort of neglectable prattle that I used to mock with "Flibelty-floo! Except for the stuff that's so much better you can't possibly appreciate how easy you've got it, everything was better when I was your age!", I am aging into grumpdom at the speed of gripe.
A recent recrimination, which I will grumble (and have) to anyone who will listen, is how chat shows—increasingly bent in format for abbreviated attention spans—are killing the witty raconteur. The majority of celebrities have always been desperately boring anyhow, when obliged to be themselves, but we seem to have even fewer genuine characters populating late-night these days. I don't believe the simple answer—it's down to the quality of our celebrities, compared to days gone by—is the right answer; of course we tend to recall only the best and compare them to those whose legacies are still merely wet clay. Instead, I blame the modern chat show and its contempt for the authentic and spontaneous, when the truly charming can never be anything else.
The modern chat show chugs and churns, manufactures a product out of allegedly hilarious comedy bits and stultifying interviews administered by hosts hired for their entertainment credentials, not their conversational skills. Worse yet are the short-format shows like The Daily Show, which have no business even asking a guest to suffer through the drive-by they call an interview segment. If you're a political giant like Al Gore, or an entertainment god with fans on the staff like Tom Waits, you might be granted two segments, thusly approaching something reasonably worth your time. If you have the bad luck of being neither Gore nor Waits, you'd better talk fast and keep grinning, because you end up with about 30 seconds by the time Jon Stewart, great host but terrible interviewer, stops talking. If you've got a lovely story in you, we'll never know, because when blessed with legitimately interesting and witty guests, most hosts have no idea what do with them—namely, shut the fuck up.
Blue Girl reminded me that I've been meaning to post a little something mourning the death of raconteurs by suffocating formats and murderous hosts for the past week, after seeing, on The Daily Show and David Letterman, genuine character and bearer of the greatest unintentional gay porn name ever Peter O'Toole. BG's got the video and transcript of O'Toole on TDS, an appearance which—after the intro and movie clip—lasts in its entirety about four minutes, approximately the same amount of time it would take O'Toole to tell a great anecdote in his inimitable style.
That's a piece of information Letterman clearly knows. O'Toole tells a story about a particular exploit with Peter Finch ("Finchy") that is so funny, I was in absolute stitches for all of the nearly four minutes he takes to tell it in his incomparable way. I wanted more more more—I could listen to O'Toole talk for hours—and I got almost 11 full minutes. Letterman's one of the greatest hosts for never being afraid to let someone else be the funniest person on the stage, and it makes his show one of the only ones left where a raconteur like O'Toole can really shine, where wit is still valued over mirth, as well it should be.
And How About that Airline Food? Is it Terrible, or What?
Cowards.
Rather than penetrate the thin skin of Bubble Boy, I see that the WHCA has stepped into the Wayback machine to choose this year's comedian for the White House Correspondents Dinner:
Rich Little.
No, really.
I guess with the lack of any real humor on the Right, the only way to avoid a Presidential temper tantrum is to go with someone that couldn't possibly offend Bush's delicate self image.
Gee, why didn't they go with Ann Coulter? I hear they think she's hilarious.
(Energy dome tip to Atrios.)
Now Watch This Drive
I don't know if you were able to catch Bush's appearance on 60 minutes, or Olbermann's roundup, but if you missed them, definitely head over to C&L to take a look.
It is truly amazing to see the delusion and arrogance in action. Every time they run one of these puffy-poo pieces, with Bush trooping around the ranch and talkin' like reg'lar folks, we get to see the mask slip. This is the real Dubya, the arrogant, blinders-sporting mule who is determined to bring "victory" in Iraq, whatever that means. His "supporters" are vanishing left and right, but goddamn it, he's the Decider, and he's sending more people to die, come hell or high water.
Oh, excuse me, he's no longer the Decider... he's now the self-dubbed "Educator in Chief." So listen up while Bush schools you, bitchez.
Obviously, the Rovian re-imaginging of Bush is chugging away, as Bush finally, finally begins to admit to "mistakes" in Iraq. Of course, the only mistakes he can mention are the ones where there is absolutely no way to wiggle away from, like Abu Ghraib, or easily dismissed stupidity like "Bring 'em on." It's infuriating to watch; not only is it insulting to our intelligence, it completely minimizes the horror of torture in our name, and diminishes the pedomorphic and inflammatory "Bring' em on" to "bad language." With Bush, it's all about how "history will look back." He can ignore the chaos now, see, because it's the responsibility of "history" to figure out this goddamned mess.
Then comes the lulu. The big one. The statement that should have every American slapping their forehead in disbelief.
Bush: I think... I'm proud of the efforts that we did. Uh, we liberated that country from a tyrant. Uh, I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude.Yep.
When Bush says the Iraqis owe the "American people" gratitude, what he is really saying is that the Iraqis owe him gratitude. If there's one thing we've learned, when Bush says "the American people think," or "the American people want," he's speaking only of his own thoughts and desires. This man, who honestly thinks he's a "flexible, open-minded person," is about to escalate troop numbers to Iraq, against the protests of nearly everyone in the country, and even the troops themselves.
This man, who can't get through a conversation about Iraq without smirking like a brat being lectured by his parents after getting caught clumsily changing the grades on his report card with a pencil, thinks that the people of Iraq should be grateful for his war of choice that has slaughtered hundreds of thousands.
Forget "Bring 'em on." Forget "Mission Accomplished." This is the phrase that defines George W. Bush.
I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude.
Terrorist Sex Offenders 4 Pres!
Obama to announce today at 11:00, supposedly.
UPDATE: Or not. He's just forming an exploratory committee, and will "announce more about his plans in his home state of Illinois on Feb. 10."
As I've probably made fairly clear, I'm not a huge Obama fan (in terms of a potential presidency, anyway), so I'm pretty wev about this. That said, I'd like to note that I don't think his lack of experience on the national stage should be held against him. Experience isn't remotely a perfect indicator of a president's capability. Case in point: Bush was terribly ill-experienced, and Cheney had experience coming out the wazoo. They've both been equally noxious, in the end, for reasons having very little to do with how long, when, or where they served previously.
And, curiously, it always seems to be the folks who have the least faith in the decency and integrity of our federal government (and the people who run it) who also argue that longevity of service is a prerequisite for the presidency—which is, ultimately, counterintuitive. If Congress is a cesspool of crookedness, then the best presidents would be the ones who rise above it earlier rather than later.
I'm also not sure why those who think he's too inexperienced for the presidency suggest he'd be better off as a veep, as if it's a guaranteed 4 to 8 years of ripening. Tell that to John Tyler, who was sworn in after William Harrison keeled 32 days into his presidency. If Obama's too inexperienced for the presidency, he's too inexperienced to be a heartbeat away from it.
All of this is neither here nor there, really. Just some observations about a silly argument made against Obama's candidacy, when there are inarguably more substantive dissensions to be made.
Quote of the Day
"This movie was a life-changing experience. I saw some amazing, beautiful, invigorating parts of America but I saw some dark parts of America, an ugly side of America, a side of America that rarely sees the light of day. I refer of course to the anus and testicles of my co-star Ken Davitian. Ken, when I was in that scene and I stared down and saw your two wrinkled golden globes on my chin, I thought to myself, 'I'd better win a bloody award for this.' And then, when my 300 pound co-star decided to sit on my face and squeeze the oxygen from my lungs, I was faced with a choice—death or to breathe in the air that had been trapped in a small pocket between his buttocks for 30 years. Kenneth, if it was not for that rancid bubble, I would not be here today." — Sacha Baron Cohen, in his acceptance speech last night after winning the Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Comedy.
Obama Can't Catch a Break
First, Senator Barack Obama's name was accidentally (ahem) used in a graphic meant to reference Osama bin Laden. Then yesterday, his face mysteriously appeared during a story about a sex offender.
This comes from Minneapolis/St. Paul Fox affiliate KMSP. They claim it was some sort of "error" or "mistake," but we think it's pretty apparent that people who support Obama in 2008 are objectively pro-sex offenders. Happy Martin Luther King Day!Yeesh.
Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime
I never watched this show, but it seemed like every
person I knew while it was on was addicted to it.
Question of the Day
The other day, I was brushing my teeth, and while I was doing so, I was distracted away from the sink. When I returned, I realized I had left the water running, and I felt really bad about it.
See, when I was in elementary school, we saw this educational film (probably on a rainy day when we couldn't go out for recess, and they were trying to keep us occupied) on water conservation. I think our teacher may have given us a little talk afterwards as well. Well, apparently, it made quite the impression on me, because even now I'm rather obsessive about conserving water. (Does anyone even talk about water conservation anymore?) Who would think that such a seemingly insignificant event from my childhood would still be with me now?
So, Shakers... what's a carryover from your very young days that still affects your behavior as an adult?
Clinton's Jab at Edwards
In what's now being reported as a tiff between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, this is what was actually said:
Edwards: "Silence is betrayal, and I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war in Iraq," Edwards told a crowd at Manhattan's Riverside Church, where Martin Luther King had declared his opposition to the Vietnam War. "If you're in Congress and you know that this war is going in the wrong direction...it is no longer OK to study your options and keep your own private counsel," he said. "Silence is betrayal. Speak out and stop this escalation now."
Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson: "In 2004, John Edwards used to constantly brag about running a positive campaign. Today, he has unfortunately chosen to open his campaign with political attacks on Democrats who are fighting the Bush administration's Iraq policy."
He has? I don't see where he says anything about Democrats at all, no less Hillary Clinton specifically. And, quite frankly, when I first read his comments, I was thinking more about the Republicans about whom we keep hearing who "privately" express reservations about the war and the president's management of it, but publicly say fuck-all. It wasn't until Wolfson opened his yapper that I considered Edwards' statement applied to Clinton at all.
I've got to second PSoTD who notes: "Wolfson's statement is just so craven. And yet, so feeble and pathetic. It just adds to my doubts about her candidacy."
And I'll add that Edwards' statement adds to my support of his.
You know what the worst thing about rape victims is?
Their annoying bullshit turns your totally-not-a-rapist boyfriend into a giant bore!
For nearly three years I dated a guy who had been dismissed from Harvard over accusations of raping another student. … Throughout, I strove to create a relationship of hopeful normalcy despite his electronic ankle bracelet, public ridicule and compromised future. Until finally, sadly, our affair ended, though not for reasons you might guess.Oh. Mah. Gawd. It was like a fucking nightmare when my irreverent boyfriend who used to tell the most awesome offensive jokes started respecting other people. And not even just women, either. He totally stopped laughing at my wicked cool homo and nigger jokes!
…[His required rehabilitation] sessions, of which he spoke very little, clearly were intended to positively influence how he treated others. But the reality was somewhat more complicated.
Already he felt the shame of the charge and conviction. With the sexual evaluations, he was forced to question the normalcy of his impulses. Now the rehabilitation extinguished the remaining spark he had left, the irreverence I’d originally fallen in love with, replacing it with a generic "respect" for others that in reality was a kind of bland and suffocating politeness.
He grew so cowed that I almost began to hope for a politically incorrect slur or diatribe to spring from his lips, unburdened by the worry of offense.See?!
Regardless of how much I reassured him that everything was fine, he grew increasingly afraid of touching me in an authoritative way.I was, like, so pissed! That bitch who had accused him of raping her before he and I ever met had totally ruined our sex life!
In my mind, he was not seeking to humiliate and subjugate a woman on that night many years ago. I believe he was a boy who endeavored for hours in the dark to express his drunken, fumbling desire in a way that, fair or not, ended up unraveling his life. I wish he had found me first.Because let me tell you—I would have just submitted with gusto to his authoritative touching. None of this would have happened if it weren’t for that dumb woman who accused my boy of raping her, instead of just recognizing it for the drunken, fumbling endeavoring it probably was. Or something...
It was quite generous of the New York Times to give Ashley Cross this stunning opportunity, particularly considering her palpable difficulty facing the most basic truth about these events, a willful blindness which becomes evident within paragraphs as her troubled beau goes from having "been dismissed from Harvard over accusations of raping another student" to having "left school immediately after the incident" because "the university was investigating the allegations and … he might face dismissal." I imagine a rather intractable self-deception is a prerequisite for penning an apologia for all the poor "boys" who endeavor in the dark to express their drunken, fumbling desires for women who aren't fucking interested, but, nevertheless, it doesn't bode well for the veracity of the author's "version of truth." The stank of horseshit really began to waft from the Times' general vicinity as I realized that not only are we meant to feel sorry for Cross, and for her ex-boyfriend, but angry at his victim, because "Rather than allow the college administration to handle the situation, his accuser filed criminal charges"—and the worst part of this unmitigated temerity was not that she was presumed to be lying, but that her nonsense has totally turned Cross' boyfriend into a pussy!
Yet what alarmed me was not some sinister side of him I never saw but a passivity and retreat that I saw far too much of. In the end, I found it harder to love an emasculated boyfriend than one accused of rape.Amazing generosity on the Times' part, I feel, to provide free space for the promulgation of the hideous, anti-feminist assertion that women are fine with a few rapes here and there as long as we don't have to deal with emasculated girly-men. And truly spectacular generosity to let Cross transmit this swill couched in the context of real-life events, without so much as a link to any article about the facts of the case in question—a decision which would no doubt be defended with vague references to privacy, in spite of how easy it was for Adam B to identify the case from the details provided in Cross' piece. Realistically, the facts of the case were best kept hidden because they undermine the article's vile objective of further muddying the already murky waters of date rape for its victims, but that certainly had nothing to do with the omission of such information.
From Cross' piece: "As I peppered him with questions, he talked me through the fateful night of only a few months before, when he and the girl, who’d been a friend, had mingled at a party and drifted off drunk together before winding up back in her room, where, several hours later, they had sex. She became hysterical, claiming he forced himself on her. He left, bewildered and distraught. That night he wrote her a letter apologizing for upsetting her and left it at her door. He told me the letter was an attempt to salvage the friendship."
From a Harvard Crimson story about the case, located by Adam B:
In the court records, the prosecutor reads an account of the incident, after which [D. Drew] Douglas is recorded as saying, "I admit to committing the crime."There's no question this was rape. The rapist admitted to the crime, first in his letter to his victim and then to the court. Why Cross decided to convince herself otherwise is not for me to suppose, and I don't particularly care, but I am singularly disgusted (if unsurprised) at the Times' choice to both aid her delusion and exploit it to reinforce anti-feminist garbage that all of us could easily do without.
According to the account, both students had been friends for a year. On April 3, the night of the incident, the woman saw Douglas while on a date with another man.
The victim told The Crimson yesterday that she was "feeling the effects of alcohol" that night.
Court documents state that the three attended a party together. Afterwards, as her date walked her home, Douglas began walking along with the pair.
The other man left her at her dorm, but Douglas" told her he wanted to go home with her," and stayed behind, prosecutors told the court.
"She told him that wasn't going to happen and was attempting to get into her door," the prosecutor told the court. "The defendant was blocking access to the card key [reader] she needed to use."
He followed her into the dorm and up the stairs. "She repeatedly told him that he was not going to come in," the document states. "The defendant kept telling her that it's his choice; she did not have input into that decision."
Outside her room he threw her against the wall, pushed her dress and grabbed her buttocks. He also began kissing her, the prosecutor said.
"[She] told him to leave [and] was struggling to get away from him," the documents said.
She managed to open the door to her suite, but did not shut it in time to prevent Douglas from following her inside.
"Once she was inside, although annoyed that the defendant was still there, because she was a friend of the defendant, [she] wasn't particularly frightened," the prosecutor said. "She told him to leave; she was going to bed."
She lay down fully clothed on the bed and began to doze off. "She next became aware that [Douglas] had removed all of his clothing and had gotten into bed with her," the document reads.
Once in bed with her, he proceeded to sexually assault her, though the court document does not describe any penetration. Some time later, the prosecutor said, Douglas left the bed....
The prosecutor said the woman assaulted by Douglas found a handwritten note under her door the next day apologizing "for pressuring her, forcing her to engage in these activities."
H/T Atrios and Miss Pen Name.
Duh of the Day
Bush refuses to waver on Iraq troop plan:
President Bush concedes he isn't popular, and that the war in Iraq isn't either. Yes, progress is overdue and patience is all but gone. Yet none of that changes his view that more U.S. troops are needed to win in Iraq.Not to state the (used-to-be-)obvious, but listening to the will of the people isn't "trying to be popular." It's doing his fucking job. The president's job isn't to do whatever the fuck he wants to do irrespective of the will of the people, telling them he knows what's best for them, like some tyrannical daddy. The president's job is leading a democracy—and in a democracy, the voice and choice of the people matter. Substantively matter, more than just the finger-wag or back-pat of a job approval poll.
"I'm not going to try to be popular and change principles to do so," Bush said in a television interview that aired Sunday night.
Digging in for confrontation, Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney say they will not budge from sending more U.S. troops to Iraq no matter how much Congress opposes it."And the American people can stick bipartisanship straight up their asses," Bush said, "and follow that with a fuck-your-dreams-of-the-war-ending chaser."
"I fully understand they could try to stop me," Bush said of the Democrat-run Congress. "But I've made my decision, and we're going forward."
Impeachment Now. It's the only way to stop the madness.
Because…
A Tale of Two Stories
#1: President Spoke to 60 Minutes' Scott Pelley at Camp David: "On Jan. 12, 2007, two days after President George W. Bush told the country that he would send 21,000 more troops into Iraq, the president sat down with 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley for a candid conversation."
PELLEY: Did you see the video of Saddam Hussein's . . .#2: Saddam aides hanged, anger at beheading "mishap": "Two of Saddam Hussein's aides were hanged before dawn on Monday, the Iraqi government said, admitting that the head of his half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti was also ripped from his body during the execution. … Government adviser Bassam al-Husseini said the damage to the body was 'an act of God'."
BUSH: I saw some of it.
PELLEY: . . . execution?
BUSH: Yeah.
PELLEY: What did you think when you saw that?
BUSH: I thought it was discouraging. You know, obviously could have handled this thing a lot better. And I knew it'd be, you know, one of those incidents where it would call into doubt . . . it would create further skepticism. You know, it's important that-- that chapter of Iraqi history be closed. They could have handled it a lot better.
[…]
BUSH: Somebody showed me parts of it. Yeah. I didn't wanna watch the whole thing.
PELLEY: Well, you keep saying "parts of it." What do you mean you didn't wanna watch the whole thing?
BUSH: I wasn't sure what to anticipate beyond the yelling and stuff like that. And I didn't . . .
PELLEY: You didn't wanna see him go through the trapdoor.
BUSH: Yeah. Yes. I didn't.
I'm guessing Bush wouldn't have wanted to see Saddam's half-brother's head getting ripped off, either. I'm also guessing he feels the Iraqis could have handled that a lot better, too. In fact, they probably owe us an apology.
PELLEY: Do you think you owe the Iraqi people an apology for not doing a better job?Wow.
BUSH: That we didn’t do a better job or they didn’t do a better job?
PELLEY: Well, that the United States did not do a better job in providing security after the invasion.
BUSH: Not at all. I am proud of the efforts we did. We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude, and I believe most Iraqis express that. I mean, the people understand that we’ve endured great sacrifice to help them. That’s the problem here in America. They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that’s significant enough in Iraq.
PELLEY: Americans wonder whether . . .
BUSH: Yeah, they wonder whether or not the Iraqis are willing to do hard work necessary to get this democratic experience to survive. That’s what they want.
Somebody had to say it
It's not the most appropriate post for an MLK Day - what with the WaPo warning direly that the young'uns are forgetting basic elements of Dr. King's life and struggle - and I'll almost certainly pay in the afterlife for this, but it really must be said:
Back in the day, Coretta Scott was smokin', smokin' hot.
Okay. Packing my bags for Hell now.
(Cross-posted.)
Monday Blogwhoring
Sorry for the slow posting this morning. Mr. Shakes is off work today, and we had a few errands to run. I'll get something posted soon...
In the meantime, whatcha got, Shakers?
Our country, our truck: A modest proposal
An American revolution, indeed
In complete seriousness and in the spirit of a new beginning as embodied by the advent of our new Congress, I hereby propose that the ubiquitous John Mellencamp song in the Chevy Silverado advertisments be made our new national anthem. The tune has attracted hostility in some quarters because it's been overplayed, or perhaps because Mellencamp supposedly sold out to the Man in making this commercial ditty, or maybe because Mellencamp is a dirty hippie who opposed the war on Iraq, possibly because some NY Times crybaby whined because the imagery in the original commercial acknowledged that American history hasn't been a trip down an unalloyed yellow brick road (gasp!).
Frankly, if both the left and the right dislike the song, it may well be worth consideration as a unifying theme. It does do something that The Star Spangled Banner does not: it speaks to our ideals. It reminds us of our goals and charges us with responsibilities, while the Francis Scott Key offering more or less revels in war. Besides - simply on its merits as a song - it's a good solid anthem that's much kinder to the throat than our current national vocal obstacle course. And not least of all, it's a hell of a lot easier to remember. After all, sports fans pretty much already know it by heart.*
Imagine a stadium full of people, voices raised as one:
The dream will never leave
And some day it will come true
And it’s up to me and you
To do the best that we can do
And let the voice of freedom
Sing out through this land
This is our country
Write your congressman.
*The lyrics, for those who don't watch televised sports.I can stand beside
Things I think are right
And I can stand beside
The idea of stand and fight
And I do believe
There’s a dream for everyone
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our countryThere's room enough here
For science to live
And there's room enough here
For religion to forgive
And try to understand
The other people of this world
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country
That poverty could be
Just another ugly thing
And bigotry could be
Seen only as obscene
And the ones that run this land
Will help the poor and common man
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country
The dream will never leave
And some day it will come true
And it’s up to me and you
To do the best that we can do
And let the voice of freedom
Sing out through this land
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country
Hat tip to Down the Tyranny for the words to the song.
(This is ahhhhh cross-post...)HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MAMA SHAKES!
Because I love you so much, I baked you a cake with
your favorite man in the whole world on it:
"Happy Birthday. Go fuck yourself."
(You know, actually baking that cake probably
would have taken less time than creating it.)
I love you, Mama Shakes! Happy Birthday!
