I literally cannot think of anything to write about today, not because there isn't any news out there worthy of comment but because I just don't see an angle to any of it that isn't already covered by the experts.
I know I've been accused of regurgitating Conservative talking points or, as Bruiser says, "towing the party line". I'm sure he means "toeing" but I'm not going to stoop to correcting spelling. God knows I have my own issues with that. My point is I try very very hard not to comment on issues and news that already has been commented on by pundits.
OK that doesn't sound right.
What I am saying is I usually make my comments on things I hear in the news before I listen to the Conservative talk shows, so I can truthfully say they are my own revelations. I do that on purpose. Often times I have heard a talk show host say the same things I have already said on the same day and sometimes a day or two after.
Case in point: Glenn Beck. I had a run of about 3 days straight recently when I commented on something and then Glenn Beck made the exact same observations exactly one day later. Also, in my area, I don't get Glenn Beck at his usual time, in the morning. I get a delayed broadcast in the afternoon. I post my blog in the mornings. Anyway it's gratifying to know that he and I think alike. Or scary.
Great minds think alike. Or not. Actually, I don't consider myself a great mind, nor do I consider Glenn Beck a great mind.
Well, ok, actually I do consider myself a great mind. Who am I kidding? But I don't consider him a great mind.
Recently, I was also accused of having an "amen chorus" at my place. What the writer meant by that was that the people that comment on my blog always agree with me. Well, I'm sure he didn't mean "always", that was my interpretation.
I'm also equally sure he didn't mean that, after all, anyone that reads my blog and the comments know that I probably have more opposing commentators than those in agreement.
I believe that's because I always allow comments no matter how inane and insane. I talk about issues involving freedom of speech, guaranteed to us by the Constitution, and I think if I censor or delete anyone's comments, than I would be a hypocrite.
Another commentator e-mailed me once telling me that I should delete some particuarly abrasive comments just because they were so mean spirited and didn't really add anything worthy to the discussion. But I see those kinds of comments as proving my point that Liberals are generally mean spirited, hateful, and have no valid points so they engage in name calling.
But an interesting phenomena has occurred of late. Two of my most vicious attackers have made valid, well thought out and lucid arguments. Only one time each, but, hey! It's a start.
Well, that's all I am going to say at this time. I started out with nothing to say and it has evolved into an entire rambling post. Ha!
Wait! I just turned on the TV. There is a movie on starring Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn. I bet the coffee breaks on that set had some interesting conversation. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when they were making that film.
Oh well, I'm rambling now. Good day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Rambling, yes. First thing you posted in days, though, that doesn't make me want to stick an icepick in my eye. ;-)
--ER
Come on, ER. Mark called us "generally mean spirited, hateful, and have no valid points so they engage in name calling." That should make you want to wield an icepick. Generally. :-)
BTW, Mark, I think a much more interesting film set would be one with both Susan Sarandon and Ron Silver. THAT is a place where I'd like to be a fly on the wall. (BTW, there's an interesting column here from last year about the Republican double standard about celebrity activism.)
As for the point of your piece, Mark, for what it's worth, I don't think you're like Glen Beck. And having commenters who disagree with you is a high compliment. If every blog was an amen corner or Free Republic clone cyberspace would be a very boring place. That's why I generally don't drop comments on liberal blogs. Variety is the spice of life.
Well, you did call me 'delusional' over on ER's space recently, when 'mistaken' would have worked just as well. I could call it mean spirited, but I really just call it hysterical.
But yes-please let any of us, who are able to make it past the drunk catcher, comment. It equals more laughs for all.
Where IS the amen chorus? No blind adherence to ideology or dogma here today. Nothing here to "amen," apparently.
Just us hedonists and (from the host's perspective) heretics, weighing in.
No! I know! The utter implosion of anything "righteous" about the country's current political leadership (read: GOP) -- could it have silenced them?
Naaaah. Thayt's what blind faith is: Blind. Must be watchin' baseball.
--ER
Sorry, Rich. Perhaps you're right. Mistaken is a better word.
Jay, I don't mind your comments. They are always respectful. I wasn't referring to you, personally. I was referring to the commentators who aren't respectful. That's why I said "generally" and not "always"
ER, take some valium. It isn't as painful as an ice pick, and you need to relax.
I know whay you mean, Mark, they think we are stupid to be conservatives.I know I bust my tail for a living at a small business and the demwits sure don't represent me or my clients.They want to tax and regulate us,BAAAAAAAAA
Oh and I left a final comment on last nights post,the ID one.
Amen, bruthas!!! Testify!!!!
Jay,
That is an interesting article, but I think it's stretching the arguments in trying to point out a double standard. The most vocal, righteous, indignant, bloviating celebrities are from the Left. The conservatives in Hollywood don't stand on soapboxes making their political bent as widely known as the Hollywood liberals do. That's where the "shut up and sing" applies.
And the article kept bringing up Schwarzenegger. The difference between him and Whoopi, is that when he chose to run for governor, even though of course he can't escape his celebrity star power, he was now a politician, not a Hollywood actor. It's now his job to comment on politics. And if you followed the Los Angeles Times during his campaign, the rag kept referring to him as "the actor", rather than as a serious political candidate.
I live in Los Angeles. From my own personal experience, Hollywood bends overwhelmingly and vocally to the left. I interact with a number of people in the industry, in large part due to my job, and I only know 2 conservatives. I know there are more out there, but they don't use every opportunity before a camera or on a stage or before a mic to pontificate and bloviate their political ignorance all over the airwaves. And that's the difference.
I think most people can't name many Hollywood conservatives, but can name you many liberal ones. There's a reason for that, and it's not from conservative bias. Hollywood's love affair with liberalism is a reality.
Wordsmith.
I don't thnk the point of the article is to state that Hollywood personalities don't tilt toward the liberal side. It was saying that the Republican Party rails against celebrity intervention in politics and "cultural elitism" out of one side of its mouth, but then showcases consevative celebrities at every opportunity - as if these "bloviators" being Republicans or conservative makes them more politically qualified than liberal bloviators. It's kind of like a terrorist vs. freedom fighter argument. If it's good for the goose...
I got that point as well from the article; but, no, conservative celebrities are not hawked and showcased "at every opportunity" like the left does. Who got a hero's welcome at the DNC last year, then took his seat in the President's box next to Jimmy Carter?
If conservative celebrities want to stand up for their party in open support, of course the Party would welcome their endorsement. But the article misses the point of the argument is what I am saying.
Republicans don't "rail against celebrity intervention on politics". They can say what they want. My problem is in their arrogance in pushing their beliefs down my throat at every turn. Is Oscar Night the proper forum to push politics? Get off the high horse and have some class!
Richard Dreyfuss is the epitomy of "I know better than you do" cultural elitism". And that permeates many of these ill-informed Hollywood blow-hards. Ron Silver is not over-the-top in the way in which Barbra Streisand, Janeanne Garafalo, Michael Moore, Danny Glover, Martin Sheen, Tim Robbins, Bill Maher are. To me, they are the embodiment of moonbattiness. And they are not alone.
What i got from that article is that the liberals celebrities are bigger stars than the conservatives celebrities. And I say who cares? They can say whatever they want. If I am stupid enough to give them credibility just because they are rich and famous for their abitlity to pretend, then shame on me, not them.
Republicans don't "rail against celebrity intervention on politics". They can say what they want. My problem is in their arrogance in pushing their beliefs down my throat at every turn. Is Oscar Night the proper forum to push politics? Get off the high horse and have some class!
Guess what. I agree with you on that! There is a proper time and place for eveything. I have no more problem with Democratic celebrities appearing or speaking at their political convention than Republicans doing so, because that is a POLITICAL arena. Schwarzenegger was appearing at political events long before he fluked into a recall election situation. (I say fluked because there's no way he would have won his party's nomination through the normal primary process.)
But what if I take your above statement and present it this way:
My problem is in their arrogance in pushing their beliefs down my throat at every turn. Is the Super Bowl the proper forum to push religion? Get off the high horse and have some class!
I should also add that Garofalo and Maher are talk show hosts, so their opinions should be just as valued as Limbaugh's or Savage's or O'Reilly's.
To be honest, I don't get influenced one way or another by what celebrity endorses what, be it politics or cars or fast food. But I remember a discussion with my dad (who is conservative) last year in which he said all the celebrities campaigning for Kerry would be a turn off. I mentioned to him all the athletes and country music stars campaigning for Bush, and he sad, "That'll probaby help him." THAT is the double standard I'm talking about.
But what if I take your above statement and present it this way:
My problem is in their arrogance in pushing their beliefs down my throat at every turn. Is the Super Bowl the proper forum to push religion? Get off the high horse and have some class!
Not sure what you are referring to...is it the Janet Jackson nip slip?
I should also add that Garofalo and Maher are talk show hosts, so their opinions should be just as valued as Limbaugh's or Savage's or O'Reilly's.
You're right. They've made the transition from celebrities commenting outside of their normal sphere, to professional political pundits; so that's fair.
I remember watching Fahrenheit 9/11 with the Brittany Spears clip where she states her support of President Bush.
That just made me want to say, "Shut up...and don't sing either, for that matter!"
The Super Bowl/religion thing I mentioned was not about Janet Jackson. It was more referring to athletes who use the post-game interview as a religious forum (as if God cares about who won the game.). It doesn't really bother me, personally, but it isn't far off as an analogy for using Oscar night for politics.
As for Britney, you're right. She should just shut up and not bother singing. I say the same thing about Celine Dion. You can keep her down there. But I noticed you listed Bruce Springsteen among your favorite music. I realize that you have a "shut up and sing" next to him, but I have a question: Do you think that what he talks about politically is any different than the messages he puts across in his music that you enjoy so much?
BTW, you have good musical taste. I'm impressed that you included my compatriot Loreena McKennitt. She stayed at home, so don't ask us to swap her for Celine. :-)
Jay, I believe that Celine Dion is reason enough for the U.S to invade Canada and enslave all of it's residents.
But you guys gave us Rush ( not Limbaugh...Geddy, Alex and Neil), and Our Lady Peace, so I guess we will let you live.
Mark, have you considered the possibility that Glenn Beck may be reading your blog?
I am sure that Rush Limbaugh reads mine... :)
Tug,
We aren't so proud of some of the folks we've sent your way over the years, like Celine or Pam Anderson or Jenny Jones or Keanu Reeves. But we also gave you Shania and Rachel McAdams and Dorothy Stratten, so I hope they will distract you enough from invading us. "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
referring to athletes who use the post-game interview as a religious forum (as if God cares about who won the game.). It doesn't really bother me, personally, but it isn't far off as an analogy for using Oscar night for politics.
Well, I think it is. I think athletes saying, "I'd like to thank God for giving me the ability..." is more akin to thanking your friends and family who supported you through all these years to get that Oscar. Now, if that athlete starts proselytizing how we should all accept Jesus into our hearts, then I'd say "Shut up and play ball!".
I say the same thing about Celine Dion. You can keep her down there.
No, really. You can have her. Although I admit to liking that Titanic song (never seen the movie btw).
But I noticed you listed Bruce Springsteen among your favorite music. I realize that you have a "shut up and sing" next to him, but I have a question: Do you think that what he talks about politically is any different than the messages he puts across in his music that you enjoy so much?
Except for his last album, yes I do. Many of his songs are not overtly political, with something like BIUSA being an exception. Stories about people struggling, doing what's right and still breaking their backs to make ends meet and failing....are songs anyone can relate to. It's not the same as saying in your lyrics "Bush hates black people and tax cuts are for the rich"
It's only election year last year that he annoyed me. I used to wear concert t-shirts, but haven't since he came out in such open support of Kerry and such harsh criticism of the Administration. He can say what he wants, but I don't want to be mistakenly identified with as an endorser of his political opining. One day, I'll feel comfortable to wear my concert t-shirt again.
And it's not like I don't think he does great things for the community, with his charitable givings and concern for the homeless and vets and the disenfranchised. I respect his thoughtfulness and interest in the quality of life for everyone and wanting to make things better; I just don't agree with certain aspects of how he thinks to bring about a better economy for everyone; and his opinion on Iraq and the Bush Administration.
I wish I had discovered Loreena McKennitt in college. It would have been cool to bring in one of her songs, written by a classic poet, to show off to my English professors. What better lyricist than an actual poet, the likes of Tennyson, Yeats, Keats, or Shakespeare? Glad to know someone else familiar with her work. My biggest complaint would be that she doesn't turn out music quick enough for me.
Post a Comment