Out of Focus

I promise this isn’t turning into all politics, all-the-time. It’s just today, you know? With that said, I just finished watching Bush’s acceptance speech, and while at this point it’s hard to trust anything the man says, it will be interesting to see if he eschews politics (now that he has no further campaigns) and really does try to do what’s necessary to find compromise. His very gracious speech today would indicate as such, but just like yesterday’s early exit polls, they obviously must be taken with a grain of salt.

Can we trust Dubya? His supporters would say absolutely. He said, “We have one country, one constitution, one future.” Technically, that’s true. But it’s obvious that we have two populations with different ideas and feelings who live within this one country, and among actual voters, a slim minority don’t feel like we’re a part of this “one country.

“I want to speak to every person who voted for my opponent.” OK, I’m listening. “To make this nation stronger and better, I will need your support, and I will work to earn it.” Thanks Mr. President. I hope you do. Don’t mind me, though, if I withhold judgment until I see that first Supreme Court Justice nomination to decide whether I think you’re trying to earn anything from those who disagree with you.

Side note: The most curious line in Bush’s speech? “The Vice President serves with supreme wisdom and honor, and I’m proud to serve beside him.” Can we take that as proof that Cheney really runs this government. Shouldn’t that language indicate that Bush is the number two. I understand wanting to present the concept of a partnership rather than underling, but wouldn’t it have been better to say something like, “and I’m proud to have him serve beside me.” I’m just saying. English is supposed to be his first language and all, even though to that, as well, we have ample evidence to the contrary.

Tangent: The most disturbing part of Bush’s speech came after. Watching CNN, as the commentators were chatting but a camera stayed on inside the Reagan Center, it lingered for a while on big-time Bush supporter and loquacious boxing promoter Don King. (sigh)

Hot of the AP wires (well, maybe not “hot”) is the one story definitely important enough to distract anyone from the depressing news of yesterday’s election: Simpson, Lachey Report Happy Marriage.

Whew! I feel much better now.

But in case you haven’t …

• Josh Marshall makes an important note about the youth vote. He’s right that more young people came out to vote than ever before, but it was countered by more older conservatives as well so the overall percentage of voters stayed the same. With the total vote looking to be about 115 Million, however, it seems that there’s still a good 5-10 million people, many of whom I would bet are under 30, who didn’t make it out and were probably expected to. He then goes on to note the very important point that this election potentially “portends very bad things for America’s role in the world. He notes that we have the power to change domestic policy every 2-4 years, but the image and stature of America is only partially controlled by us. “The world, though, is different. There we are just a ship — though the largest one — on waters we can never truly control. And I fear that this result will set in motion dangerous dynamics that even the relatively young among us will be wrestling with and contending with for the rest of our lives.” Unfortunately, I think he’s 100% right. Maybe Bush can right things with the rest of the world, but saying that’s doubtful would be a major understatement.

• Andrew Sullivan, via an email he received, discusse one potentially positive element of a Bush win, accountability. “Now, Bush will face the consequences of his own policies and we will be able to judge him on that.” That’s very true, and as much as this was a huge win all around for Republicans, if their policies prove to be inadequate, it could also be the party’s downfall, potentially as soon as the next mid-term elections. I’m not rooting for that by any means. I would much rather live in a safer and more prosporous Republican world than a struggling Democratic one. But now more than ever, Bush will have to live-up to his own (bizarre) criticism of Kerry: “You can run, but you can’t hide.” He has a congress more in the hold of his party than it was before, and his vision of things will be put into play. If it doesn’t work, he and his entire party will have no one to blame but themselves, although I’m sure they’ll try.

• Matthew Yglesias cautions anyone “against deluding themselves into believing that a second Bush term won’t be so bad.” Kevin Drum agrees with him, although he also says, “Like Newt Gingrich four years ago, I suspect he’s going to find out that he doesn’t quite have the mandate for radical conservatism that he thinks he does.” I think it’s somewhere in the middle, but what’s important is that the people who came out on election day and who suddenly started paying attention to politics to stay involved even when there is not a big election at hand. However, the Democrats do need to be careful, because if they’re going to oppose Republican ideas, they need to be able to give specific reasons why those ideas won’t work as well as what their alternative solutions may be. I would bet that Kerry’s not actually mentioning a way to fix Social Security hurt him even with people who are against Bush’s possible plans to privatize it. If the Republicans are able to continue to brand Democrats with the label “obstructionist,” whether there is any truth or not to the term, they will always win.

• Kos mentions that “The (Terry) McAuliffe reign has ended in disaster, with the Democratic Party in worse position electorally than when he came in as Chair in February 2001.” I mentioned this pending leadership change, along with the departures of Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle, earlier today, and I think short of the Democrats actually winning anything, it’s the best thing that could happen for the party. This was an old and tired leadership who couldn’t speak to anybody. McAuliffe was absolutely awful as the head of the DNC, utterly failing in every responsibility belonging to his job. Most importantly to me, as a registered Democrat, I couldn’t watch or listen to the guy. He gave me a headache. Ed Gillespie, the RNC chair, was annoying with his constant smile and chuckle, but at least he was slightly entertaining. The only bad thing about McAuliffe being out of a job is he’ll probably now get one as a pundit on one of the cable networks. In the best of all worlds, McAuliffe and Donna Brazille would go off somewhere and write books nobody will read without making appearances on television where they make fools of themselves. And Carville should go back to running campaigns, where he knows what he’s doing, instead of turning off voters. Here’s hoping the Dems can get behind someone new and craft a message that will speak to everybody; not just current Democrats, not just undecideds, but everybody.

• Jonah Goldberg continues to diminish anything intelligent he ever says (even when disagreeable) with utter nonsense.

• The Rude Pundit deals with “The Five Stages of Grieving for George Bush’s Re-Election.” While he describes himself as too “disgusted” to provide any “insight today,” he does seem to be heading toward “Acceptance” by Friday. As usual, while he is most definitely “rude,” he’s also very much worth reading.

• Kevin Drum also has his own little wrap-up and mini look ahead, written before Kerry conceded but acknowledging the probably loss of Ohio, which is well worth reading. I totally agree with him that we shouldn’t lash out at Kerry, and how he was a terrible candidate. I think unlike in 2000 when Gore ran a horrible campaign and clearly lost what should have been his election, Kerry didn’t run a bad campaign; he was just plain beaten, and while all the “get out the vote” talk was related to how it would help Kerry and the Dems, the fact is that the Republicans managed to mobilize their people as much if not more.

• Tom Hall over at his indieWIRE blog Back Row Manifesto also looks at what the outcome of this election means beyond simply who won and loss. My favorite quote: “First of all, in a campaign that was run on the ‘They Hate Our Freedoms’ rhetoric of the President, it turns out no one hates our freedoms more than US.” Sadly, truer words have not been written today.

I’m sure that’s enough for now.

How much of what the general public believes is solely because of what we hear repeatedly from the media. I’m not talking about media bias at all: it doesn’t matter whether it’s a left or right-leaning subject. But simply whatever the case may be. After listening to commentary until 3 AM when I finally fell asleep, again this morning after waking-up at 7:30 AM and now on the radio, it’s obvious that the “Kerry will say anything to win” is something that has gone from spin to “fact.” Kerry will say as much to win as Bush did. Any politician is going to calculate and say the things he/she thinks is necessary to win. But to try to label Kerry as someone with no convictions is just not based on any credible fact. But you hear the Republican spin, and then you hear the pundits and reporters repeat that this is what people think, and suddenly, it’s what more people think.

I don’t know that there’s a way around this, but it is fascinating from a sociological perspective, if not utterly depressing from a real-world-view one, to see this “team” mentality ruling. Proof and evidence is unimportant. If you back one team, you want to beat the other team. Whatever little catchphrase or point, regardless of its veracity, becomes more important than issues or ideas. At least, that’s what it looks like. And with the media — and I include all television, radio, print and internet — expanding, instead of people utilizing more resources to study what’s important about both candidates, what they actually stand for and what the real arguments may be behind any issue, as opposed to the simple ideology, the plethora of choices seem to simply confuse people into looking for the simplest reports in the tidiest little bites.

Is there an answer? I don’t know, but I’m sure there are plenty of media “experts” who will tell you what all this means and why their jobs are important (you know, cause otherwise they’ll lose them). Chances are, they’ll just be spouting a bunch of shiite too.

I don’t know how much I’ll be blogging today, although obviously, I doubt I’ll get to much other than this subject simply because there’s not much else on the brain. Kerry has apparently called Bush to concede; the former will give a concession speech at 1 PM, and the latter a victory one at 3 PM. Today is depressing, but before I get accused of being a kneejerk liberal (which I’m actually not), I’m not upset because of “losing,” although I’m sure plenty of people are. I’m upset because more so than any other time in my 33 years, I am genuinely scared and nervous about the future of our country and society. Much more than I was in 2000 when Bush didn’t have a presidential track record so very, very bad.

Just a quick little thing: since I was just listening to The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC, and heard conservative columnist Ruben Navarette Jr. going off about how he’s sick of “liberal elitists” calling people who are against gay marriage anti-gay or “haters” when they just support “traditional marriage.” It’s this kind of flawed thinking that is infuriating. What reason other than not liking, even hating but at the very least disapproving, the lifestyle of gay people is there for not approving of gay marriage. You’re talking about not allowing two people to live their own lives because you dislike or disagree with it. You’re talking about infringing on someone else’s rights. And “traditional marriage”? If we’re going with “traditional marriage,” then I expect every man to be able to get a dowry from his wife’s family. I expect every woman to have no ambition other than creating a home for her husband and children. I expect every man to be the sire of his household. In fact, I expect women to have no choice as to whom they must marry because their fathers will be able to make that decision. I also expect those women to be handed off to older gentlemen as early as 14, 15 or 16 years old. And yes, the traditions of marriage dating back to the bible actually are probably more in line with what some mormons seem to consider OK: one man, any number of women. There are your historical “traditions” of marriage. The one man, one woman, choose who you love thing that people are talking about now? That’s maybe a couple hundred years old. You know why? Because traditions change. And marriage is one of them.

No, I’m not trying to be dramatic. As I mentioned a few days ago, I’ve been suffering campaign fatigue. I am happy that this thing is effectively over. I’d love to be optimistic and think that there was a realistic chance in Ohio, but I have a feeling that before the end of the day we’ll hear that even Kerry’s campaign will realize that the hill they need to climb is just too steep.

We learned a lot from last night, though. We learned that much of this country is filled with simple-minded people who can’t deal with complexities, and therefore they like a president who panders to those uncomplicated natures. I’m not calling Bush stupid (even if I do think he’s incompetent), nor am I calling the population of this country idiotic. But it’s clear that most people don’t like to think through the grey areas of issues, and they want to be told that something is this way or that way, and they succumb easily to scare tactics.

The most terrifying result to me, that also supports this notion, is that politics has simply become football. I’m a diehard 49ers fan, and there’s nothing you could tell me that would make me suddenly decide to root for another team over mine. It seems that Democrats and Republicans have fallen along the same lines with a very small and limited number of exceptions. People will celebrate in similar fashion (maybe minus the parade, but then again, just wait until inauguration day) to Boston’s recent World Series win. One team won, the other lost. Unfortunately, when it’s played that way, we actually all lose.

Continue reading “YES, I’M UPSET, SAD AND DEPRESSED; THROW IN SOME SHOCKED … AND EVEN A LITTLE SCARED”

Day zero!

In the closest thing you could ever find to a Daily Show endorsement for Kerry, after telling people to make sure they participate in our democracy and vote today, although he didn’t name names, Jon Stewart gave as good a reason as any for voting our current president out of office:

On a personal note, I’m a comedian who makes fun of what I believe to be the absurdities of our government. Make my life difficult. Make this next four years really (shitty) for me, so that every morning all we can do is come in and go, “Eh, Madonna’s doing some kabbalah thing. Wanna do that?” I’d like that. I’m tired.

That’s right: make our comedians work for their living.

Now if by chance you’re like me and living in New York, or maybe California or any other state where Kerry will likely win by a large margin and therefore you think your vote doesn’t count, I implore you — get to the polls anyway and cast that ballot. Who knows how tight this election will really be. What I do know is that much of the negative feelings people have toward Bush started simply because he wasn’t humble enough to accept that whether he legally won election in 2000 or not, overall more people voted for Al Gore. Had he expressed some humility or not immediately started governing as if he was representing the will of all the people, but rather truly tried to unite and not divide and search for compromise, chances are he wouldn’t be quite as hated by so many as he is now. It is far from impossible, and some are even predicting it as likely, for Kerry to win the presidency but lose the popular vote to Bush. While this would be a better result than vice-versa, it would still lead to that 50% of this country who didn’t vote for Kerry feeling ripped off, just like the rest of us have for the past four years.

So saying that your vote doesn’t count is simply bullshit. From an emotional and mental standpoint, from the outlook of how the results of this election will affect the morale of the population, every single vote in every single state counts.

If you haven’t voted yet, what the hell are you waiting for. Stop reading blogs (this one included) and stop wasting time on the internet. Get to your polls. Haven’t you heard? There may be a line. And all of us out here in the worldwideinformationsuperhighwayinternetweb will still be here when you get back.

And don’t worry; Stewart’s just kidding. There’s very little chance of Kerry being a perfect president. The Daily Show and other political comedy will continue to reign supreme as long as we govern ourselves because that person at the top will always be human.

Two years ago before he was even a glimmer in an HBO audience’s eye, Sacha Baron Cohen’s Da Ali G Show starred in his own movie. Ali G Indahouse opened in England but was never able to secure distribution here in the states. Now, it will debut on DVD tomorrow, because what other film could be as enormously successful on election day. Better yet, though, if you just can’t wait to watch it from the comfort of your own home, you can head to Ft. Greene today and tomorrow because BAM is screening it as an “Election Special.”

This is more the realm of discussion for H-Bomb and Nummer on Whatevs.org, but just how bad did SNL suck this weekend? I mean, I’m a big fan of Kate Winslet. Love and lurve her. But those sketches were just painful. I don’t remember any big laughs at all, even in the opening sketch which is usually pretty dependable. And while the whole Ashlee Simpson debacle the week before was funny/upsetting/unfortunate (take your pick or choose your own), I think they went a bit overboard making fun of her. Regardless of how much a musical hack she might be, the show still booked her. Making fun of the situation is one thing, but to repeatedly make fun of her for what she did on their show? That’s just lame. And to see Horatio Sanz who never met a line he didn’t have to noticeably read of a cue card do it at all was nearly vomit-inducing. And please, Lorne Michaels; to say in your interview with 60 Minutes that you weren’t aware of anybody lip synching previously on your show was just wrong. Everyone knows your a total control freak; the 60 Minutes piece said as much. So you must know because it happens all the time. In fact, was it just me, or what track was backing Eminem during “Mosh”? There was one definite minute where he stopped rapping at the end of a line, but the vocal didn’t. I’m sure that was just his harmony. (UPDATE: Scott Stereogum has a better idea: that Eminem was also using a backing track — for that slightly echoed sound — and he deliberately stopped at one point just to fuck with us. I’ll buy it.)

Last week it was announced that producer Scott Rudin is planning a remake of The Blob for Paramount. I’m not sure why anyone thinks this is a good idea. Rudin is a prolific producer who usually makes very good movies that are often both commercially and artistically successful. But his track record with remakes proves to be exactly the opposite. Sabrina, Shaft, The Stepford Wives and The Manchurian Candidate are not four films to exactly be proud of unless you’re talking about their four original counterparts. I’m really not trying to knock Rudin who has been the man responsible for some really great films, but four tries indicates to me that you can’t just blame the independent directors. Yeah, The Blob may not be some untouchable masterpiece anyway, but there’s already been one bad remake. Come on Scott: stick to films like the ones you’ve recently released or have on your slate, and don’t mess up another “classic,” even a deliberately schlocky one. And I’m not even going to bring up the fact that you just can’t replace Steve McQueen, nor should you.

Also from last week, Ving Rhames is the new Kojak. And not just for one or two TV movies either. Somehow, USA Network actually convinced him to sign-on to a weekly series. Can Rhames successfully replace Telly Savalas in one of the most iconic TV detective roles of the ’70s? Or more importantly, should he? Maybe. It might be interesting to see how Kojak and Kojak might look 30 years later, and if they’re going to do it with anyone, especially while attempting to give it a darker and grittier feel, Rhames seems like potentially perfect casting.

Did anyone else watch the new Comedy Central “animated reality show” Drawn Together? Maybe it was hurt by airing immediately after a pretty strong episode of South Park, but I found it nearly unwatchable. It wasn’t funny at all. I mean, every joke was pretty obvious. The problem with spoofing reality shows is that it’s harder to make something funnier or more appalling than that which is unintentionally funny or appalling. Obviously, an animated “reality” show isn’t a real “reality” show, so all you’re going to get are exagerrated examples of all the shit you’d otherwise see on The Real World. But Drawn Together is either trying too hard or is simply a flawed concept from the beginning.

And, oh yeah … one more thing: I finally actually watched the final Tanner on Tanner that premiered on Sundance Channel last week. What a disappointment. The first three episodes were relatively weak anyway, but this payoff of a finale wasn’t either. All it did was cement that the short series was about political documentary filmmaking rather than politics or campaigning. I was actually a bit saddened by how uninteresting it proved to be and what a waste of creative talent that simply must have been too lazy to figure out a way to do only 2 hours of television, revisiting a brilliant and groundbreaking series, in a way that wasn’t interesting whatsoever. Altman and Trudeau did a disservice to not just the fans of the original series, but to the series itself. If you’re masochistic and haven’t caught them yet but want to experience this disappointment in your own right, they’ll be reshowing all four episodes tomorrow night (election night, natch) starting at 9:30 PM and on Sunday 11/7 at 8 PM. For better Tanner-watching tomorrow, preceding the Tanner on Tanner series Sundance will show the entire original Tanner ’88, starting at 3:30 PM.

A couple weeks ago I was pissed as hell at Tucker Carlson. I mentioned how I had always retained a bit of respect for Carlson, even though I disagreed with him on most issues, but had lost much of it because of his inability to even listen to John Stewart’s criticisms of the news media, especially shows like Carlson’s Crossfire. Carlson went on to demean his viewing audience by calling people who complain to him in person as drunkards at airports.

But today on The Chris Matthews Show I was reminded why Carlson is not a completely robotic conservative presence like, say, his Crossfire alter-ego Robert Novak. Carlson spoke without spin. Not only did he say he fears that Kerry is likely to pull-out a win, but he also doesn’t seem to believe the Republican spin that the Osama bin Laden tape will remind people of how protected Bush made us supposedly feel immediately after 9/11. He takes what I can only call a common-sense approach to the broadcast of the tape: if it has any affect at all (which he doubts) it will make people think, Oh, we thought he might be dead, but he’s still alive, looking a bit healthier than last time, so why hasn’t our President caught him yet?

Meanwhile on Meet the Press today, Rudy Giuliani showed up to spout more invective at John Kerry, and watching him do so was painful. Aside from the common knowledge that Giuliani disagrees with Bush on almost everything not involved with Iraq or tax cuts, his double-talk is agonizing. After making an obvious gaffe on the Today show the other morning effectively placing blame on the troops for not searching the Al Quaqa site well-enough to find the now-missing explosives, today he tried to say that he was simply trying to explain what Kerry was doing — blaming the troops. Of course, it made absolutely no sense. And Giuliani, the more he campaigns, has been afflicted by a nervous tick. It’s that thing where people chuckle while making their argument, effectively trying to show an audience, I can’t believe I’m even having to say this because look at how obvious and laughable it is! Yet that’s never the case, and maybe it’s actually a result of the speaker not believing enough in his/her own bullshit. Russert rightly challenged Giuliani on the fact that he, like Bush and Cheney, did not serve in Vietnam, so how does he feel justified calling a decorated vet “anti-military.” Again, Giuliani just turned around and said that Kerry criticizes the troops, as he did when he returned from Vietnam, which of course is a great distortion of the truth: that Kerry criticized and fought against the war itself, criticizing the policies that created an environment for certain things to happen. He criticized himself and some of his own actions, and by his side stood thousands-and-thousands of other Vietnam war vets.

I used to respect Giuliani, and his mayorship of New York did a lot of good (and some bad) for the city. Why is a man who seems to be able to stand so strongly by his convictions throughout the rest of his career feeling so comfortable blatantly spinning and even lying in support of this President? Even more so than another highly respected and honest Republican John McCain? (SNL’s “Fun with Real Audio” animated sketch showing McCain having to repeatedly leave a campaign speech to throw things and flog himself inside his trailer because he had such a hard time swallowing his words of support for Bush was hysterical.)

I think the motivations behind both Carlson and Giuliani are interesting. In Carlson’s case, I think he actually believes that his job as an analyst is more important than his job as a spinmeister. Most of the time, you see that, even on Crossfire. He will say what he thinks, even if it’s not the party-line. He got riled by Stewart not because his political arguments were being questioned but his very credibility and the legitimacy of his entire profession was being criticized. Moreover, it was being denigrated by someone who he didn’t consider worthy of doing so; a guy who is “just” a comedian. In certain ways, it was personal attack against his professional future, and when attacked in that arena, he becomes even more partisan than he ever could be political. Like any wounded person, he will defend his side ferociously without regard to the truth of the situation.

One can look at Giuliani (and McCain, actually) in the exact same way. Giuliani has always been ambitious, and whether Bush wins or lose, his future is tied Republican party support. If Bush wins, chances are the administration will try to bring him in to some sort of cabinet position, maybe even replacing Ridge at Homeland Security or Ashcroft as AG, and then in 2012, he’s a potential frontrunner for the presidential nomination. If Bush loses, Giuliani’s presidential aspirations come to the forefront four years sooner. If he doesn’t publicly and aggressively support this President, neither of those options are possible because Republicans won’t follow him. So even if it conflicts with his personal ideology, his political, and therefore personal, future are tied to his visible support of this president.

“He’ll say anything to win” has become a laughable and hypocritical argument by the Bush campaign against Kerry, as if the same wasn’t true on both sides. But it’s “obvious” that “say anything” doesn’t just need to pertain to the larger political campaigns. Ultimately, everybody does it. And on this day, my respect for Tucker Carlson has grown while Rudy Giuliani has (at least for the time being) lost any chance of ever getting my vote.

Oy, I just used that “royal we,” and I know I am nowhere near the blogger to pull that off. It must take a lot out of the ones who do it well, even brilliantly, since it seems to sometimes kill them off. Nevertheless …

I know there are at least two of you who count on content, some sort of rage or vitriol, and the past couple weeks, I’ve been lacking. Sure, Wednesday may bring a spurt of energy, but it’s that daily flow that really means so much. My excuse this time is that my good friend and I are doing another round of interviews for Gothamist. They’ll run the week of 11/8, and once again, I think we’ve got a really interesting and diverse lineup. And most importantly, I hope we (see, this time I’m actually talking about me and someone else!) haven’t scared any of our interview subjects away with our large number of questions. It’s just that we’re nosy interested, you know?

So with the work for that plus my aforementioned pre-election malaise, it’s been hard to churn out even my regular uninteresting drivel. I promise there will be more next week; maybe even this weekend. Or … next week. For example, John Wells and The West Wing? You’ve got some fucking explaining to do! After I mention that the premiere indicated a turn for the better, you give me that piece of crap episode last week? And you show such disregard and lack of respect to one of your main and most consistently interesting characters to treat him that way? Well fuck you! I wish I could wipe that entire hour from my memory. The show gets one more chance only because I know these first two episodes were really wrap-up for last season and the real storylines for this season come next week. But you’re sure making it a hell of a lot easier for me to find Wednesdays at 9 less competitive than I originally thought, even with Jack & Bobby taking up residence.

Yeah, I guess that wasn’t so hard.