Tag Archives: MSNBC

The Beck stops here

I’m not a fan of GleN Beck.

It’s not just because I am a tree hugging, Dixie Chicks album owning, blue state living, Barack Obama picture hanging on my fridge lefty.

It’s because he is bat shit crazy.

I have some other words I like to use to describe him. Shrill. Hack. Narcissistic. Shock Jock. Opportunist. Vainglorious.

Ok, I looked that last one up.

Those words might seem like insults, but they aren’t really.

Shrill – He screams. He really does. All the live long day. He doesn’t just scream at the people he hates. He screams at his own fans.

Hack – He does an easy job that requires little if any work and is greatly rewarded. Heck, he just stuck his name on a novel that someone else wrote. He just had to come up with an idea. Which is “socialist America.” Then he picks up an additional six-figure paycheck for saying “buy gold.” Way to go there, Hack.

Narcissistic -GleN Beck thinks God talks to him. And not in the loony-tunes, padded room, purple crayon carrying way. But as in, GleN Beck believes that he is chosen. He’s a genuflect away from Tim Tebow territory.

Shock Jock – Self-explanatory.

Opportunist – Overly self-explanatory.

Vainglorious – That’s a pretty word, huh? It means boastful or proud. And GleN sure does love himself. And his message. And his gold. And his ratings. And frankly, he earned them, so he should be proud. Now that’s vainglorious.

But keep in mind that even though I think Beck is bat shit crazy, I mean that in a qualified way. As in, crazy like a fox, and not just the super-flashy-with-the-production-elements Fox that pays him more than I’ll ever see in my life for a single afternoon of shrill, narcissistic, opportunist, vainglorious, shock jock hackery.

Enter Beck’s 8/28 rally. If you haven’t heard of it, I am terribly jealous of you. Beck is hosting a rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC tomorrow, August 28, the same place and the same date, 47 years later, of the famous “I have a dream” speech by Martin Luther King, Junior. Beck says the rally is to “Restore Honor.” Because we need to restore the honor in this country, because it’s gone, I tell you. ALL GONE.

Of course, when Michelle Obama even suggested that she had not spent her entire life proud and gushing in love with the good old USA, she was berated as being shameful. How DARE someone suggest they haven’t always been proud of a nation while our soldiers are in the midst of fighting for the freedom that we are blessed with. We should all LOVE our country. Here we are, two years later, same country, same boys overseas fighting the same war, but now the country is honorless.

Whatever.

Back to Beck.

Beck, a self-described student of history who wraps himself in the American Flag while scribbling the names of the most important and influential men in the country on his chalkboard had no idea of even a time frame for the most famous speech of the Civil Rights movement?

I’m sure Tim Russert is smiling from heaven that Beck stole his whiteboard idea and passes it off as his own on a chalkboard, by the way.

But here’s the thing. Everyone who is angry about this is furious of Beck’s alleged attempt to hijack MLK, the Civil Rights movement, and apparently, the spirit of MLK’s speech itself. Because we all know Beck is a strong black man, fighting oppression and working for peace and equality.

But me? I think they’ve got it all wrong.

It’s not about Martin Luther King, Junior. It never was. Of course Beck knew August 28 was the anniversary of the “I have a dream” speech. But he didnt’ pick that day to try to cling to the Civil Right movement. GleN looked at August 28 in Washington, DC and saw gold as sure as the overpriced nuggets he hawks on the Fox News Channel. He saw thousands of faces. Faces of color. And he wants in.

GleN Beck is going to count the people who are there to mark the “I have a dream speech” as part of his audience. Let’s say he gets his 300,000 attendees that he’s predicted will come to see him and the mom of the newest Dancing with the Stars early cast-off candidate Sarah Palin. At that very moment, there’s also a civil rights rally, not in the same place, but near by. Very near by. And naturally most of those folks will float to the Lincoln Memorial. Some to honor MLK, some just to see what’s going on, some for both reasons. And as they do, Beck will count them (and their much darker faces) as part of *his* rally. Boom, 1 million people have attended his event. Hoo-yow!

It’s not about him hijacking MLK’s speech, or the Civil Rights movement, or anything like that. It has always been to make the Tea Party look more credible by scheduling it on a day and place where a few hundred thousand people were set to be anyway. It’s like setting a rally for Grant Park during the Taste of Chicago. Maybe it’s just you and a few dozen people for your cause, but you can say, LOOK AT ALL THE PEOPLE. Hell, hand out a few fliers to passers-by, and you’ve “spread the word” even.
 
People have been arguing that his ulterior motive was to hijack the anniversary of MLK’s historic speech. But in reality, it’s about hijacking people who are simply trying to remember a Civil Rights legend. It’s a scam to inflate his numbers and make the Tea Party look like they have more support — and more support from people of color — then they actually have. I feel 100 percent competent that, come Monday, Beck will be showing the overhead video of his crowd, and it will be ENORMOUS, and he will say something along the lines of “look at what has been inspired here! Honor is OURS!” And he won’t qualify that many, heck, maybe most, were there not because they feel America has no honor, but because they want to pay their respects to a man who had more honor in his little finger then GleN Beck will ever have in his entire (former) coke-sniffing race-baiting body.
 
Like I said, though. Crazy like a fox.
 
I leave you with a little nugget of Beck’s fool’s gold. Beck has been advertising that his rally will benefit the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (SOWF), a non-profit that aids the families of fallen and injured soldiers (the ones who are fighting for the country with no honor). So when you get to the rally, make sure to buy your “Restoring Honor” merchandise to benefit these families. Just don’t read the fine print on that merchandise:
The purchase of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is not a donation to SOWF, but all net proceeds from the sale of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is being donated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. All contributions made to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (SOWF) will first be applied to the costs of the Restoring Honor Rally taking place on August 28, 2010. All contributions in excess of these costs will then be retained by the SOWF.
Millionaire Beck isn’t paying for this massive rally by himself. No no no. He’s going to get those in attendance to pay for it for him. Then he’s going to play his pipe, and off the cliff they shall jump! GleN’s going to have to sell a LOT of t-shirts and bumper stickers to pay for the fees for security management and clean-up and everything else that comes with his big rally. Hope SOWF isn’t depending too much on that donation.
Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Naked politics

For the past several days, news has been non-stop over the idiotic new scandal irritatingly and ridiculously named, “bondage-gate.” I mean, for real….

Anyway, the jist of the story is, a Republican National Committee staffer spent nearly $2,000 at a naked-nudity bondage lesbian bar (what kind of business license do you think that requires?) called “Voyeur,” turned in her receipts, and got paid back for the expenditure. And OH MY GOD you would have thought she spent the money dipping babies and puppies into vats of acid.

Look, I am about as lefty-liberal as it gets. I puffy heart me some Barack Obama and would personally like to punch Sarah Palin in the face — or at least, punch her stylist in the face because for real, why does she keep wearing Michael Jackson’s clothes? But you have got to be kidding me that there is some sort of scandal involved with taking out “clients” and showing them a good time. Isn’t that all that happened here? The staffer took some potential donors out to a nudity club to show them some fun, get them a few drinks and a lap dance, and hopefully get them to bust out their own checkbooks at the end of the night. I’m not saying I necessarily approve. But it’s hardly a scandal, is it? I mean, am I missing something here? Isn’t the practice of convincing people to give you money by showing them a good time as age-old as nudity bars themselves? It’s not like she bought them hookers.

I was irritated when I heard that the staffer was fired, and get even more irritated with the incessant calls for RNC Chairman Michael Steele’s resignation. I like Steele about as much as I like Sarah Palin (though he dresses much better), and I don’t think he is nearly as smart as he thinks he is. But why should he lose his job because a staffer got people to donate money in a way that raises the collective eyebrows of America’s moral compass? And on top of it all, I have yet to hear if the outing was successful. Did the “bondage for bucks” fundraising effort work? I’ll bet it did.

For real — if you are shocked that ANY political fundraiser would try to raise those funds by taking young-to-middle-aged men to a club where the ladies are spanking each other, then you are pathetically naive. And you know who REALLY knows that? Democrats. Dudes, we practically INVENTED the idea of tricking people into giving us money by showing them a little skin. So let’s try to reign in the false shock and indignation a little, shall we? It just seems like we have a lot bigger things to worry about, and being incensed that people like to look at the boobies is pretty stupid.

I mean really, if there is a lesson here, it is more about the importance of saving your receipts. I mean, that’s just good practice.

2 Comments

Filed under 1

Why Rush doesn’t matter

I have been hesitant to write this week about the tragedy of the earthquake in Haiti, only because I am so frustrated with the responses of certain individuals with over-sized personal pulpits that reach coast to coast who seem to not really care, and was afraid that the point of the matter would be lost in my venting. But I’ve calmed down to the point that I think I can articulate it without, you know, freaking out.

I can’t believe that in the wake of such a tragedy, GleN Beck would air an hour-long interview with Sarah Palin rather than scrap that show for a day or two and talk about the rescue efforts. Honestly GleN, 37 seconds? That’s how much time he devoted on his show to the crisis in Haiti before getting on with the interview, which I assume was pre-recorded. I mean, Sarah Palin WORKS for Fox now. They couldn’t wait a day or so for that one?

Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity were about the same, carrying on their shows as usual while other networks devoted most of the same news hours usually reserved for commentary to live reports and updates from Haiti.

Pat Robertson. I mean honestly. What the hell? The worst part about his statement about how Haiti pretty much asked for it because of their “pact to the devil” is that he was historically inaccurate. The Haitians who revolted against the French to pull themselves out of slavery didn’t make a pact to the devil. They made an animal sacrifice as part of a Vodou (voodoo) ritual. And despite what Hollywood and even the fabulous city of New Orleans has done to promote voodoo as some sort of extension of devil worship, it’s not. It’s actually a blend of African tribal rituals and Christianity. Apparently to Mr. Robertson, praying to anyone other than HIS Christian God is akin to devil worship. These few sentences are really more mention than he deserves.

But the most notable of the on-air comments devoid of decency and common sense, in my opinion, were those of Rush Limbaugh. When Rush first spoke about the tragedy in terms of Obama gaining favor with both “light-skinned and dark-skinned” blacks, he was making a statement about the recently disclosed comments of Harry Reid about Obama being a good presidential candidate in part because he was a “light-skinned” black man. To this comment, I could have said to Rush, point taken. He was right, the left was far more forgiving when Harry Reid used the exact language, and Rush efficiently exposed a glaring double standard. You’ve got us, Rush.

But the man just wouldn’t shut up.

He continued on about how anyone who goes to the White House website to donate money for Haiti relief was risking having their money stolen by Obama himself. He said that the U.S. already gives to Haiti in the form of the United States income tax (a remark that frankly, I don’t get). When a caller asked him why he would tell people not to donate to the Haiti relief effort, he told her she had “tampons in her ears” and said he never discouraged donating, just said it should go to private organizations. So (taking the tampons from my ears), I hear Rush saying that the United States government has no business leading the way or even supporting the relief effort at ALL in Haiti. Just churches and civic organizations and anyone who can raise funds. Let them do it. The government needs to stay away.

But here are 2 reasons why Rush doesn’t matter:

1 – I know lots and lots of people who are conservative, republican or both. Not a single one of them seems to feel this way. I know that Rush, GleN, O’Reilly, Hannity, Pat Robertson and their entire ilk have millions of followers. But I don’t know a single one of them. What I do know is that people by the thousands have texted “HAITI” to 90999, an instant way to donate $10 to the Red Cross. In the past few days, that simple act has raised, at last count, more than $8 million, all one $10 donation at a time. Yes, I know that people who listen to Rush and Pat Robertson are likely among those contributing as well. But I have yet to hear anyone agree with the vocal vomit that either of those men spew.

2 – We are Americans. This is what we do.

As simple as that sounds, it’s true. When people say “send in the calvary,” they’re talking about us. We go to places where hope seems lost. We send soldiers in to keep peace and deliver goods and clear dead bodies from the road and hand Beanie Babies to small children. We send in the Navy on a floating hospital. We send in the Coast Guard to evacuate people and deliver aid. We send in volunteers and doctors and nurses. When a Belgian medical team leaves a field hospital for security reasons, it is an American doctor, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, there as a journalist, who puts down his microphone and forgoes his reports to CNN so he can treat victims. When others step back, Americans step forward. We promote this quality about ourselves as the one thing that makes us better. Then for some reason, Rush asks us to stop. What makes him think we would do such a thing?

I remember reading an online article after September 11, the author of which I cannot remember for any reason, but I am pretty sure it was a British guy. He basically talked about how the United States often gets the short end of the stick. Other nations will curse America and what it stands for as they burn our flags and effigies of our leaders in protest. Americans are snobby and priggish and unworthy. Americans are fat and lazy and cruel and barbaric. Worldwide, disdain and disrespect for the United States and its people is widespread. But when a crisis hits, the first thing those same people want to know is, “Where are the Americans?”

And you know what? That’s fine. Because it’s our job. As Americans, we didn’t be asked to be born to this nation that is so heavily relied upon worldwide. But neither did the people of Haiti ask to be born to such extreme poverty. It’s just how it is. When it comes to Rush and his nonsense about how the U.S. shouldn’t take the helm, the fact of the matter is, most of us are better than that. Of course we’ll take the helm. It’s what we do. Why in the world would we wait for someone else to do it, when we can. When people beam with pride about how awesome it is to be an American, THIS is what they are talking about — our unwavering determination to do the right thing when the right thing needs to be done. Someone needs to help these people, so here we come. When it is the other way around, and it is the U.S. who needs the help, we know some others will of course come to our aid. But the bulk of the work will have to be done on our own. And we’re ok with that. This is who we are.

I suppose it is that attitude that makes others think that maybe Americans are a little bit full of themselves. But of all the names that those who dislike Americans can call us, I don’t mind being thought of as a snob. If the way the U.S. aids the needy of the world makes us snobby, then it’s a title we should proudly wear.

Rush doesn’t need to shut up. I mean, how great to live in a country where even the most primitive among us are allowed their own platform to say whatever they want, no matter how stupid or silly or ridiculous. But not send government aid to Haiti? What a foolish notion. That’s not us. We’re incapable of NOT helping where help is needed. We’re incapable of that, and we’re damn proud of it too.

We are the calvary. Haiti is where we belong right now.

3 Comments

Filed under 1

Who wears short shorts?

I’m fairly intrigued by the latest “controversy” regarding one Mrs. Sarah Palin and that nasty, mean, lefty media. I mean, I don’t know if this new “scandal” has been dubbed with a name followed by the word “gate,” but let’s give it a try. Covergate? Picturegate? Short-short-gate. Yes, I like that one.

The unfair, sexist, demeaning SHORT-SHORT-GATE, which started with this snapshot:

We’ve all seen this by now, right? Sarah Palin posed for this photo for a story about running in Runner’s World. Then, Newsweek took this photo and pasted it on their cover, with the phrase, “How do you solve a problem like Sarah Palin?” written next to it.

Now, before I go on, I want to explain a little something. I have a bit of respect for Sarah Palin. More so, in my opinion, than a lot of people who actually support her political cause (whatever that may actually be). Go hopping around from site to site, and you’ll find a lot of people talking about the former Alaska Governor, about what a nice person she is and how she has such great values and morals and how she stands for conservatism. Those same people will note that she is attractive and young! She was a beauty queen! Heck, just this morning, I saw a few women on MSNBC talk about how they like her because she “speaks her mind.” Ladies. I speak my mind. Do you want to buy my book?

Those types of comments are about as far as they ever go. No one ever takes note of her actual accomplishments. And while I don’t think her political accomplishments come anywhere near close to giving her international credibility that she seems to hold (or at least crave), I do know that being the mayor for a town of 6,000 people is a really hard job. I sit in city council meetings every other week for the city of Braidwood, Illinois, and you know what? That mayor and those commissioners don’t have it easy.

After running Wasilla, Sarah Palin managed to become the first female governor of Alaska by beating the incumbent governor in the primary. People, that’s nothing to shake a stick at. That’s good stuff. And yes, she did accomplish a few things in office, for the little time she spent there. And in case you forgot, she was the first female VP nominee for the GOP. And while she couldn’t seem to answer simple questions from Katie Couric, she did hold her own with Joe Biden. So good for her.

Of course, she’s also a big whiny quitter. But let’s go back to the photo.

Of the thousands of photos of Sarah Palin to choose from, Newsweek chose one of her in shorts that probably accent her cheeks when she turns the other way. Mrs. Palin has responded by crying foul, or, more accurately, crying sexism! And I gotta admit, I think she has a point.

Joan Walsh at Salon noted that hell has frozen over  regarding this one — she agrees with Palin. Walsh argues that Sarah Palin is, in fact, very professional, and what she would wear to a Newsweek shoot and a Runner’s World shoot are quite the opposite. I agree. Walsh also notes that while Palin is obviously attractive, that is something her supporters and critics play up, not something she ever introduced. She certainly never campaigned in short-shorts. Walsh also notes the headline, “How do you solve a problem like Sarah Palin.” It is a take from the song “How do you solve a problem like Maria” from The Sound of Music, where Maria is just too flighty to control. I think it is actually pretty fair to say that if Newsweek were portraying a male GOP representative who is causing the party problems, like say, GleN Beck, they certainly wouldn’t find a saucy photo of him (though Time did find an extremely unflattering one).

But, all that said, there is ONE thing about this photo that makes me ok with its use on the cover of Newsweek. I do think it is sexist. I really do. But you know what the problem is? Here, look again:

Take a look at Sarah’s left arm there. It’s perched on an American Flag, draped over a chair in what appears to be Sarah Palin’s home office.

If Sarah Palin took this photo for Runner’s World, and meant it for and only for the issue of promoting running and health and fitness… then why the hell is she using the American Flag as a prop? Am I to believe that THIS is where she keeps her flag regularly, and she just happened to say, hey, let’s take the photo here, in my natural environment. While I don’t think that the picture was necessarily appropriate for Newsweek, I don’t think it was necessarily appropriate for Runner’s World either.

Sarah Palin wraps herself in her patriotism to the point that she literally uses it as a political crutch. Look at her. She’s not standing there, saying, LOOK AT ME, I’M A RUNNER. She’s standing there saying, LOOK AT ME, I’M A PATRIOT WHO RUNS TOO! When Sarah Palin took this photo, she exploited the American Flag to sell her position. Promoting a healthy lifestyle isn’t just non-partisan, it’s not a patriotic issue either. With this photo, Sarah Palin proved that she’ll use the flag to promote herself and any cause she believes in, even a cause not specific to the left or the right or the United States entirely. But when someone else uses the photo, which shows that she’ll use the flag to promote herself, she claims it’s unfair. And THAT is the point of the story. Sarah Palin, with her mixed messages and her contradictory behavior, is a problem for the GOP.

Sarah Palin is smart. She knows that sooner or later, someone would cry foul for HER posing for a picture in Runner’s World using the flag as a prop. So she struck first, crying SEXISM. Now everyone is so wrapped up in the controversy about her in her Daisy Dukes, people managed to turn a blind eye to her pimping out the American Flag.

Governor Palin, if you don’t want people to “misuse” photos of you, then stop posing for pictures expressing your patriotism when they are supposed to be pictures expressing your good health. I mean, I would kill for those legs — but you brought this on yourself.

4 Comments

Filed under 1

Did I mention that GleN Beck sucks?

My father told me that when it comes to GleN Beck, maybe, maybe, I need to simmer down a little while I rant about him. I say SCREW YOU OLD MAN! No wait, that’s not right.

Ok, so I was thoughtful about today’s rant.

On Oct. 30, GleN was talking about how it would be a super bad thing to introduce another stimulus package. He decided to use the wonderful story telling tool of allegory, where he would tell a story about something non-related that has a much, much deeper meaning that can then be used to illustrate his first thought. Genius.

So, since he cannot just make up a story himself (not drunk enough to be that creative), he borrowed the lesson of the cinematic masterpiece, “Mission: Impossible III.”

You see, much like the adrenaline shot that Tom Cruise shot in the heart of Keri Russell in “Mission: Impossible III,” as is another stimulus. Rolling the video, we see said adrenaline shot, then cut to a scene a few minutes later when (SPOILER ALERT) Keri Russell drops dead.

“Those adrenaline shots will (takes deep breath while making sweeping arm movement) shock the system and it will come back in a little while,” GleN tells “America.” “But in the end, it doesn’t work. We all know what happens when the government tries to (punches self in heart) shoot an injection into the heart. It fails.”

 Wow. Great story GleN.

Of course, he never pointed out that the reason Keri Russell’s character died was not because of the adrenaline shot, but rather, because the evil genius Philip Seymour Hoffman planted a chip in her head that blew up.

I don’t mean to be overly knit-picky, but shouldn’t GleN draw proper parallels when using a movie to illustrate his point? Not to mention, medically speaking, a shot of adrenaline does not ultimately result in death. It doesn’t revive a person for a moment, but then kill them. Adrenaline shots, quite the opposite, save lives. In fact, a shot of adrenaline can help normalize blood pressure and make breathing easier in the event of anaphylactic shock. Further, a shot of adrenaline, if it were, say, administered incorrectly or unnecessarily, STILL is not dangerous. According to Dr. Edward J. Read, Jr., MD, assistant clinical professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine:

“The consequence for the person receiving the unintentional injection is not usually too severe. The bigger risk may well be the ‘lost dose,’ the fact that the epinephrine is no longer available to administer properly to the person urgently needing it.”

It’s actually more dangerous to NOT have your adrenaline than to use it, even improperly!

This is just another in a long line of GleN’s irresponsible on-air dribble. It’s this kind of fear mongering that leaves people not just fearful, but grossly misinformed. I mean, if he must use a movie, why not a horror flick. You know, the screaming Jamie Lee Curtis (the stimulus) has defeated the evil Michael Myers (the sinking economy) but BAM! He’s not on the lawn anymore, he’s ALIVE (the economy is still sinking!). See how I did that off the top of my head? And I don’t even have a team of producers or a nasty cocaine habit to help me think.

GleN. It is completely on target to question government spending. I mean seriously, we’re bleeding money. Why you refuse to do this in either a responsible or a rational or an honest manner is beyond me.

2 Comments

Filed under 1

The sky is falling…

I certainly am not the only person irritated with the media these days. I think it is only fair to note that I am clearly driven stark raving mad by pretty much every talking head on FOX who opens up his or her mouth, and I am otherwise ok with MSNBC. But across the board, it seems pretty obvious that everyone has lost perspective.

The impossibly squinty-eyed Sean Hannity begins his radio show every day with the following voiceover:

AMERICA UNDER SEIGE!

CONSERVATISM IN EXILE!

On FOX this afternoon, a promo for an upcoming show with Bret Baier, who has the absolute hardest helmet head hair this side of Dan Rather circa 1970: “We will explain the latest White House ATTACK on FOX news,” Baier announced.

And of course, my favorite ex-junkie, GleN Beck:

Regarding healthcare:

“Should we still continue to put up with the same old politicians who care about their seats and their power and their titles that they’ll sell you and your children into slavery in order to do special favors for their cronies.”

Regarding OnStar, after they created a system in which they can turn off a car after being informed by the police that the car has been stolen:

“Fantastic technology, if you trust the people whose hands are controlling that technology. OnStar is a private industry, but their client is General Motors… Not technology to be feared, not a company at this point to be feared. But we don’t seem to be going in the right direction with our government. Our government is starting to consume and control everything. Do you really want the United States government to be able to… know where you are in your car all the time, also be able to have a microphone in your car? Do you believe this government has your children’s best interest at heart?… Do you think that history will repeat itself and we will go the way of the former Soviet Union?… We’re going to have to declare martial law, but it’s for the good of the country, because the country is falling apart, do you think that’s a possibility?… Why do we trust them with listening and tracking devices and a device that will turn your car off?

Regarding Obama:

“President Obama wants to banish everybody’s opinion into the wilderness.”

 These are just quotes from TODAY. I didn’t have to search around and do research or anything. I just had to listen and watch.

 Under seige. Exile. Attack. Sell your children into slavery. Consume and control everything. Martial law. Tracking devices in your car. Banishing your opinion into the wilderness.

Look, I am a writer. I know that if your words are boring, people won’t bother to listen. Peppering your language, coloring your words, telling a story as vividly as possible, using strong and direct language, painting a picture… these are all goals of the writer, and the best way to get people to tune in and hear you. And I won’t pretend that my buddies at MSNBC don’t engage in this. Olbermann is so theatrical, all he’s missing is a white half-mask and a woman to covet. Ed Schultz practically spits all over the camera lens, he gets so worked up. But we’re talking about FOX here, and their incendiary language that rains all over every broadcast that their commentators host.

Think about people who actually are “under seige.” I think about it in local terms, the children at Fenger High School in Chicago. Children who have lost their neighborhoods to gangs, children who cannot play in their own yards without the risk of being shot, children who get beaten to death in the street just walking home. Their neighborhoods are under seige.

Think about exile. Actually being rejected from your own country. Actually having your voice silenced. Does anyone else sense the irony (or dare I say, idiocy) of exercising your very profitable freedom of speech to announce that you are in “exile?”

Attack. War. I cannot believe that FOX, self-proclaimed patriots who claim to have cornered the market on the right way to look out for our soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, would have such an extreme lack of decency as to draw a parallel between actual war and the fact that the President of the United States has decided not to talk to FOX news. Thousands of US Soldiers and Iraqi citizens — dead. THAT is a war. There is no war being waged here. Just the president not wanting to talk to a single network. The use of the term “war” is offensive and vile.

I think you get my picture here. FOX uses the most charged up language they can to describe situations that do not merit it. It is a legitimate question to ask how the government plans to pay for health care. But it then smacks down that legitimacy when you suggest that the government will only pay for health care by selling your children into slavery. They’re following you. They’re tracking your movements. Martial law is coming as the President banishes your opinions to the wilderness. It is, plain and simple, fear mongering. And FOX is up to their elbows in it.

I wish that the next time GleN Beck mentioned the ATTACKS that the White House has launched on FOX, that someone could point out a real attack to him. This week, the body of 7-year-old Somer Thompson was found in Georgia. She was abducted, killed and tossed into a garbage truck, where her body was transported across state lines and dropped into a landfill like everyday trash. Somer was attacked. FOX isn’t even being picked on.

While I am done with that part of the post, I feel like I cannot talk about GleN Beck without mentioning how incredibly irresponsible he is with his bizarre amount of power over those who need him to tell them what to think. On Oct. 22, Beck threw his support behind a candidate for a special election taking place in New York. Beck endorsed David Hoffman, running to fill a House seat in New York District 23 vacated when Republican Representative John McHugh was named Secretary of the Army by President Obama. Beck compared candidates Hoffman, Dede Scozzafava and Bill Owens by comparing three types of modern skyscrapers. The exercise was futile at best, moronic and infantile at worst, and amounted to Beck pointing at a photo of Hoffman and declaring that he was the best candidate. Why? Because, according to Beck, the best candidate for this particular office was the man who was not “sleek and manufactured.”

“That’s the perfect candidate to me,” Beck announced, still pointing at Hoffman. He then added quickly, “I don’t really know anything about this guy, so this is just an example.”

I don’t live in New York. I have no idea who the best candidate is. But I certainly know better than to point at one of them on national television and announce he is the best candidate, and follow it up by admitting I know nothing about him. This is representative of GleN Beck — a man who admittedly does not know what he’s talking about, but it sure isn’t going to stop him from saying it anyway.

1 Comment

Filed under 1

Mars vs. Venus

Yesterday I was watching a little of my favorite 24-hour pretty much lefty but hey, at least they don’t claim to be “fair and balanced” news outlet, MSNBC. I like this station. I like their commentators. I like that they lean my way. I loves me some Contessa Brewer. And frankly, Mika Brzezinski is starting to catch my eye these days too. She’s got really great hair.

Anyway, it was 11-ish, so it was time for Dr. Nancy.

For this part, I am going off on a tangent… stay with me.

Dr. Nancy’s name is Dr. Nancy Snyderman. She is a board certified surgeon who specializes in otolaryngology, which is a word I cannot even pronounce, but means she’s an ear, nose and throat doc. She went to medical school at the University of Nebraska, and is currently on staff at the University of Pennsylvania. Plus, she is a on-air broadcaster, which frankly, is way harder than it looks. She is, by all means, accomplished. Yet she goes by the name “Dr. Nancy.”

Why the hell do broadcast doctors, be they MDs or PhDs, do this? Dr. Oz. Dr. Phil. Dr. Laura. Do these people have some aversion to their last name? I mean, it works for Dr. Ruth — but she is an adorable tiny little four-foot-seven German native who lost her parents to the concentration camps, yet is about the happiest-go-lucky person ever who talks about sex. She broke the mold people.

The use of Dr. Firstname reminds me of Sleepless in Seattle, when young Jonah wants his father, Sam, to talk to Dr. Marcia on a radio show. “Talk to her, dad. She’s a doctor,” Jonah says. “Of what? Her first name could be Doctor,” replies Sam. That sums up how I feel about it.

We have only one Doctor in our family, my cousin Jennifer has a PhD. And I am pretty sure that if I call her Dr. Jenny, she would probably take her baby out of his stroller so she could beat me with said stroller. Last names, people. Last names.

So anyway. I was watching Dr. Snyderman, and she was discussing whether men should have a place in the delivery room. To my knowledge, my father witnessed zero of his 5 children’s births. I did not deliver my children naturally, I had to have c-sections. Amy was there the first time, Jim nearly passed out the second time because he saw a little blood hit the floor. He never actually SAW anything gross. But I was so doped up both times that I can’t even remember someone else being in the room. My friend Nancy (not to be confused with the good TV doctor) told me just about the worst horror story ever involving the birth of her daughter and her husband holding one of her legs. Kayla said her husband watched the whole thing. I remember my sister Carrie talking about wanting to punch her husband in the face because he made the mistake of eating some sort of stinky snack before getting a little to close to her to tell her to “PUSH!”

So, is there a place in the delivery room for men? Dr. Snyderman made a legitimate comment about the men who get woozy at the sight of the birth, like my husband did (good thing he wasn’t really watching and he was sitting down — he would have dropped like a sack of potatoes had it been a regular birth). She said when the doctors need to check on the passed out man on the floor, it doesn’t go over too well with Mom.

“Men never faint after they’ve had sex,” Dr. Snyderman said. “They just faint for the delivery.”

Good. Point. Doc.

So what’s the answer? Do men help or hinder the birth process? Do we, as women, really need them there? I suppose the answer is that it is different for each couple, but really, the will of the woman should definitely win out on this one. I don’t know that doctors attending to a swooning Dad has ever actually put Mom or Baby’s life in danger. But still, why risk it? I do know that if it were me, and I was having the child the regular way rather than have it taken out against its will like I did, I want Dad to be as far away as possible, possibly on the other side of a sound proof wall.

What say the women and men of the blog world?

1 Comment

Filed under 1