In the WSJ today there was a review of "Politics is a Joke," a book about political humor and the relatively recent phenomenon, where serious candidates must appear on late night talk shows to assure the public that they have a sense of humor.
It was interesting to note that Bill Clinton was the first pol to appear on Johnny Carson's Tonight how. But going back in time, I recall that Presidential candidate Nixon did a "Sock it to me" cameo on the "Laugh-in" program back in 1968 (which he credited as one of the reasons he got elected.)
It is gratifying to consider that the US electorate prefers a leader who has a sense of humor. I have always thought a sense of humor requires a having a sense of perspective. The fundamental element of humor is the delight in the unexpected. Humorless people hate surprises and unintended outcomes.
It was not surprising that Republican politicians are more likely to be the butt of the jokes than Democrats. Claims that comedy shows and comedians tend to be liberal are true. It follows that most of the mainstream media lean toward a "progressive" agenda. It is a hallmark of the intellectually curious mind to dare to question the dogma of the past, to chuckle at irony, hypocrisy and paradox.
This is not to say that Conservatives lack a sense of humor. They are big on fart jokes, puns, banana slips, ethnic jokes, and 3 stooges sight gags. What they lack is the ability to laugh at themselves, to be silly, or to question their own fundamental beliefs. Comedy is a world of color. The Conservative sees things as chiaroscuro.
(Look that up in your Funk and Wagnalls).
Showing posts with label progressive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label progressive. Show all posts
8/20/2014
10/19/2013
Heads versus Hearts
This seems as true today as it was when I posted it in January 2010
As we roll into a new decade, Americans are basically divided into two groups. The first group sees the world changing for the better. We call these people Progressives. They tend to be naive and hopeful. They view the ever-changing cultural norms with equanimity. They see possibilities, they regard 'having fun' as a worthwhile goal. Fundamentally, they believe that things will work out if we just try to get-along and treat each other decently. They feel superior to the other group because they are driven by compassion to share the wealth (especially the wealth of the rich fat cats) with less-fortunate souls. They regard human laziness and stupidity as an unfortunate result of a bad dice roll. By contrast, if one is lucky enough to be born good looking , healthy and smart enough to take advantage of opportunity, you must always keep in mind that you were not entitled to it; you were given a break and you must pay it forward.
The second group - the ones we call Conservatives - are a grumpy bunch of stick-in-the-muds. They spend their workdays trying to get ahead. Then they stay awake at night afraid of slippery slopes and camels' noses in tents. Cons clearly see the negative aspect of anything that smacks of change. They love traditions and old authoritative books and parchments. They think everything worth knowing was already known by the Founding Fathers; new fads and ideas are regarded with suspicion and skepticism. They don't see the point in having fun, because people hate us and we need to stay on guard. They think they are superior to the other group because they are driven by their heads instead of their hearts. They see most taxation as stealing money from hard working people and giving it to ignorant slackers. They feel they are entitled to what they have, and hard cheese if you were born into the servant class, but that's the way it goes.
Normally, I think of myself as a fence-sitter between the two groups, usually falling on the side of the progressives due to a tendency to feel empathy and to acknowledge the relativity of moral truths. Conservatives are driven by their heads, thus they see human existence as a zero-sum equation where someone has to lose for you to win. For them everything is black or white, right or wrong. They regard fence-sitting-seers-of-grey with contempt.
Throughout the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration we were treated to the monotone nattering drumbeat from ultra progressive partisans, ranting negatively about everything that "W" said or did. It was tiring but often laughable for the extremes that the Libs would go to find fault with the President.
Now the cons, apparently feeling that turnabout is fair play, are filling the blogosphere and airwaves with silly criticisms of everything Barack Obama has done since his inauguration. Examples abound:
He is blamed for the ineffectiveness of the economic stimulus package (which was started during Bush's term), he is blamed for not bringing the troops home, for supporting a surge in Afghanistan, and the record unemployment is clearly his fault - all accomplished in just 9 months in office!
Lately, the criticisms are even nastier. You would never know that the Christmas day Northwest underwear bomber failed to complete his mission if you listen to some Conservative commentators. They are falling all over themselves accusing Obama of crimes and misdemeanors, sins of omission, commission and admission.
It's laughable. They used to say of Bush "He kept us safe" because there were no successful repeats of the 911 terrorist attacks in the USA. But Obama has been criticised as weak because of recent reports of foiled plots. (Hello, Cheney himself testified that there were several foiled plots after 911.)
Cheney, Limbaugh, and others talk about the Christmas day incident as if the bomb had exploded. They say Obama doesn't care about the safety of Americans - Which is about as block headed as it gets.
Most Americans are not as worried about crazed terrorists as they are about getting ripped off by some identity thief or taxed to death by out-of-touch elite legislators.
The main thing for which Obama should be criticized is this abomination of legislation called health care reform. As a candidate, Obama promised transparency, but has been silent while his pals in congress concocted this monstrosity of a reform bill behind closed doors. Candidate Obama pledged not to sign any legislation with earmarks, ("...we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.") Yet, nothing has changed. Deals were made in exchange for votes. Obama has has failed in his promise to us on these most important issues.
Already, two prominent Dems in the senate, seeing the tide of public opinion swelling against them, have already said that they will not run (and probably lose) in the next term.
Update: The recent shutdown and debt limit crises fan has flung shit in every direction. Hard line Conservative Republicans are generally blamed for causing the impasse (They cynically changed the rules in the House to prevent anyone but the Speaker to call for a a vote.) But the White House and Dems are not unscathed - since they cynically decided to close down government functions that would hurt innocent citizens. Professional Pols on both sides are hoping voters will forget these shameful shenanigans by the next election. I plan to vote against every incumbent.
As we roll into a new decade, Americans are basically divided into two groups. The first group sees the world changing for the better. We call these people Progressives. They tend to be naive and hopeful. They view the ever-changing cultural norms with equanimity. They see possibilities, they regard 'having fun' as a worthwhile goal. Fundamentally, they believe that things will work out if we just try to get-along and treat each other decently. They feel superior to the other group because they are driven by compassion to share the wealth (especially the wealth of the rich fat cats) with less-fortunate souls. They regard human laziness and stupidity as an unfortunate result of a bad dice roll. By contrast, if one is lucky enough to be born good looking , healthy and smart enough to take advantage of opportunity, you must always keep in mind that you were not entitled to it; you were given a break and you must pay it forward.
The second group - the ones we call Conservatives - are a grumpy bunch of stick-in-the-muds. They spend their workdays trying to get ahead. Then they stay awake at night afraid of slippery slopes and camels' noses in tents. Cons clearly see the negative aspect of anything that smacks of change. They love traditions and old authoritative books and parchments. They think everything worth knowing was already known by the Founding Fathers; new fads and ideas are regarded with suspicion and skepticism. They don't see the point in having fun, because people hate us and we need to stay on guard. They think they are superior to the other group because they are driven by their heads instead of their hearts. They see most taxation as stealing money from hard working people and giving it to ignorant slackers. They feel they are entitled to what they have, and hard cheese if you were born into the servant class, but that's the way it goes.
Normally, I think of myself as a fence-sitter between the two groups, usually falling on the side of the progressives due to a tendency to feel empathy and to acknowledge the relativity of moral truths. Conservatives are driven by their heads, thus they see human existence as a zero-sum equation where someone has to lose for you to win. For them everything is black or white, right or wrong. They regard fence-sitting-seers-of-grey with contempt.
Throughout the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration we were treated to the monotone nattering drumbeat from ultra progressive partisans, ranting negatively about everything that "W" said or did. It was tiring but often laughable for the extremes that the Libs would go to find fault with the President.
Now the cons, apparently feeling that turnabout is fair play, are filling the blogosphere and airwaves with silly criticisms of everything Barack Obama has done since his inauguration. Examples abound:
He is blamed for the ineffectiveness of the economic stimulus package (which was started during Bush's term), he is blamed for not bringing the troops home, for supporting a surge in Afghanistan, and the record unemployment is clearly his fault - all accomplished in just 9 months in office!
Lately, the criticisms are even nastier. You would never know that the Christmas day Northwest underwear bomber failed to complete his mission if you listen to some Conservative commentators. They are falling all over themselves accusing Obama of crimes and misdemeanors, sins of omission, commission and admission.
It's laughable. They used to say of Bush "He kept us safe" because there were no successful repeats of the 911 terrorist attacks in the USA. But Obama has been criticised as weak because of recent reports of foiled plots. (Hello, Cheney himself testified that there were several foiled plots after 911.)
Cheney, Limbaugh, and others talk about the Christmas day incident as if the bomb had exploded. They say Obama doesn't care about the safety of Americans - Which is about as block headed as it gets.
Most Americans are not as worried about crazed terrorists as they are about getting ripped off by some identity thief or taxed to death by out-of-touch elite legislators.
The main thing for which Obama should be criticized is this abomination of legislation called health care reform. As a candidate, Obama promised transparency, but has been silent while his pals in congress concocted this monstrosity of a reform bill behind closed doors. Candidate Obama pledged not to sign any legislation with earmarks, ("...we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.") Yet, nothing has changed. Deals were made in exchange for votes. Obama has has failed in his promise to us on these most important issues.
Already, two prominent Dems in the senate, seeing the tide of public opinion swelling against them, have already said that they will not run (and probably lose) in the next term.
Update: The recent shutdown and debt limit crises fan has flung shit in every direction. Hard line Conservative Republicans are generally blamed for causing the impasse (They cynically changed the rules in the House to prevent anyone but the Speaker to call for a a vote.) But the White House and Dems are not unscathed - since they cynically decided to close down government functions that would hurt innocent citizens. Professional Pols on both sides are hoping voters will forget these shameful shenanigans by the next election. I plan to vote against every incumbent.
7/07/2013
The View From the Fence
Americans are basically divided into two groups. The first group sees the world changing for the better. We call these people Progressives. They tend to be naive and hopeful. They view the ever-changing cultural norms with equanimity. They see possibilities, they regard 'having fun' as a worthwhile goal. Fundamentally, they believe that things will work-out if we just try to get-along and treat each other decently. They feel superior to the other group because they are driven by compassion to share the wealth (especially the wealth of the rich fat cats) with less-fortunate souls. They regard human laziness and stupidity as an unfortunate result of a bad dice roll. By contrast, if one is lucky enough to be born good looking , healthy and smart enough to take advantage of opportunity, you must always keep in mind that you were not entitled to it; you were given a break and you must pay it forward.
The second group - the ones we call Conservatives - are a grumpy bunch of stick-in-the-muds. They spend their workdays trying to get ahead. Then they stay awake at night afraid of slippery slopes and camels' noses in tents. Conservatives always see the negative aspect of anything that smacks of change. They love traditions and old authoritative books and parchments. They think everything worth knowing was already known by the Founding Fathers; new fads and ideas are regarded with suspicion and skepticism. They don't see the point in having fun, because foreigners hate us and our way of life -- thus we need to stay on guard constantly. Fun is for the weak minded Progressive sheep. The central issue for Conservatives is the role of government. They are convinced that all Progressives want a "Nanny State" where the Feds control every aspect of citizens' lives. They see most taxation as stealing money from hard working people and giving it to ignorant slackers. They feel they are entitled to what they have, and hard cheese if you were born into the servant class, but that's the way it goes. Conservatives think they are superior to the other group because they are driven by their heads instead of their hearts.
Normally, I think of myself as a fence-sitter between the two groups, usually falling on the side of the progressives due to a tendency to feel empathy and to acknowledge the relativity of moral truths. Conservatives are driven by their heads, thus they see human existence as a zero-sum equation where someone has to lose for you to win. For them everything is black or white, right or wrong. They regard fence-sitting-seers-of-grey with contempt.
Throughout the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration we were treated to the monotone nattering drumbeat from ultra progressive partisans, ranting negatively about everything that "W" said or did. It was tiring but often laughable for the extremes that the Libs would go to find fault with the President.
Since he was elected, the cons have been filling the blogosphere and airwaves with silly criticisms of everything Barack Obama has done since his inauguration. Examples abound:
He is blamed for the ineffectiveness of the economic stimulus package (which was started during Bush's term), he is blamed for not bringing the troops home, for supporting a surge in Afghanistan, and the record unemployment is clearly his fault. The recent attack on the Benghazi embassy is another example where the opposition is bound and determined to embarrass Hillary Clinton and President Obama for snafus that they say were covered-up to help Obama get re-elected.
Many on the right wing have drifted to the fringes and embrace all sorts of conspiracy theories about the extreme path that the Obama administration is following to turn the US into a socialist state. They say he wants illegal immigrants in the country so he can have more voters. If you point out the non-citizens cannot vote, the anti-Obamite will just laugh at you and refer you to thousands of cases of alleged voter fraud, which they say is only committed by Democrats. ( In my personal experience I know of only one case where someone used a loophole to vote twice. He is a Republican.)
The main thing for which Obama should be criticized is this abomination of legislation called health care reform (AKA: Obamacare). As a candidate, Obama promised transparency, but has been silent while his pals in congress concocted this monstrosity of a reform bill behind closed doors. Candidate Obama pledged not to sign any legislation with earmarks, ("...we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.") Yet, nothing has changed. Deals were made in exchange for votes. Obama has has failed in his promise to us on these most important issues.
12/30/2011
Thoughts on Christmas Letters
Consider your selves lucky. You didn't get a Christmas Letter from us this year, recalling the memorable moments experienced by our wonderful family during the last twelve months. You did not have to squint at blurry photos of us standing in front of monuments and churches on our enviable trips. You were spared the adorable pictures of our cuddly pets and cuter-than-average grandkids. If you were on our A list, you got a nice storebought card with an appropriate seasonal wish/greeting.
Everyone has access to word processing, so it has become de rigueur for the family scribe to compose these little annual histories, like newsletters, printed with festive little borders and using special gothic fonts. We got a dozen or so, ranging from the barely readable to the mildly informative to the ludicrous. When the authors sit-down to write a Christmas Letter, they presumably do so out of an urge to recap the year of pertinent news for friends whom they have not had regular contact with. But by the third sentence they start channeling Walter Cronkite, announcing each mundane event as if it were late-breaking need-to-know news.
The truth is, we are more entertained by accounts of ruined parties - where uncle Jack got drunk and fell off the chair - than we are about perfectly planned parties where the food was perfectly cooked and everyone exchanged pleasant dinner conversation. We don't want to hear you gush about your luxurious river cruise down the Seine, we want to hear about your miserable air travel hassles "And little Bernie screamed all the way from Paris to Rome! It was awful." We wallow in your misery.
Christmas Letter authors ought to be more caring and tuned-in to their audience. Instead of crowing about what a great year you have had, describe some of the hilariously crappy moments. Instead of striving to make your recipients wish they were you, give them the gift of being happy with their own lot in life - make them glad they aren't you.
Here are some ideas to get you started on a more interesting Christmas Letter next year:
** Disclaimer: Except for George, no one who reads this blog sent one of the Christmas Letters described in the piece.
Everyone has access to word processing, so it has become de rigueur for the family scribe to compose these little annual histories, like newsletters, printed with festive little borders and using special gothic fonts. We got a dozen or so, ranging from the barely readable to the mildly informative to the ludicrous. When the authors sit-down to write a Christmas Letter, they presumably do so out of an urge to recap the year of pertinent news for friends whom they have not had regular contact with. But by the third sentence they start channeling Walter Cronkite, announcing each mundane event as if it were late-breaking need-to-know news.
"Trish said her first word in February. It was "Dlurb"
"Thor, our new pucker doodle puppy, ate mom's favorite pink bunny slipper."
While I am sure these memories are precious, I wonder if they need to be shared with the World. Sometimes, they can unintentionally reveal too much information.
"Slippery fingers Jill dropped a gallon jug of K-Y Jelly on my toe and I was limping around for a month."Does anyone really like to get these smarmy, self-satisfied, impersonal missives? I don't think so. The mistake most amateur writers make is that their prime motivation is to tell you something positive about themselves. They incorrectly think that you are interested in their wonderful lives, so they selectively pick-out what they think is the most enviable moments. They believe themselves to be informative and entertaining, I guess.
The truth is, we are more entertained by accounts of ruined parties - where uncle Jack got drunk and fell off the chair - than we are about perfectly planned parties where the food was perfectly cooked and everyone exchanged pleasant dinner conversation. We don't want to hear you gush about your luxurious river cruise down the Seine, we want to hear about your miserable air travel hassles "And little Bernie screamed all the way from Paris to Rome! It was awful." We wallow in your misery.
Christmas Letter authors ought to be more caring and tuned-in to their audience. Instead of crowing about what a great year you have had, describe some of the hilariously crappy moments. Instead of striving to make your recipients wish they were you, give them the gift of being happy with their own lot in life - make them glad they aren't you.
Here are some ideas to get you started on a more interesting Christmas Letter next year:
"Melvin lost most of our nestegg investing in mink farms. What an Idiot. I should have married...."
"One of the neighbors tipped-off the cops and they confiscated my whole crop of weed...."
"Alice is pregnant again. She was featured on the Maury show to determine who the dad is....."
" Irving saved money by spreading lime on the front himself. Except that he mistakenly loaded up the spreader with rock salt..."
"Publishers Clearing house knocked on the door, but no one was home...."
You get the idea.
** Disclaimer: Except for George, no one who reads this blog sent one of the Christmas Letters described in the piece.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)