THE PRICE OF STAYING AWAY

In November of 2000, Democratic Presidential nominee Al Gore “lost” the initial Florida count by 587 votes. Ralph Nader collected 97,488 votes. No doubt 587 of those Nader voters would ordinarily have voted for Al Gore, allowing for even 97,200 who just wanted to vote Green, loved Nader, hated both Democratic and Republican parties. Some could also argue, that, thanks to confusing “butterfly” ballot designing in heavily Jewish populated districts of south Florida, many of Pat Buchanan’s 17,000 votes were in error – magnifying the significance of the proactive Nader vote. Had GORE been awarded the 287 vote margin after the initial counting, and been projected the winner by all networks, perhaps then Antonin Scalia could not have been credibly concerned about any violation of George W. Bush’s “civil rights”, we would have avoided the HDDSCD#1 (Horrifying Democracy Destroying Supreme Court Decision #1 – Citizens United being HDDSCD#2) and, most important, avoided HDDP#1 – Horrifying Democracy Destroying Presidency #1, that of George W. Bush. I am being both pessimistic and realistic when I refer to Bush’s presidency as HDDP “#1” – because thanks to HDDSCD-2, I fully expect a HDDP#2.

Which is how I come to the topic of the current “Cairo in Madison” situation (at this writing, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin is seeking to gin up the national guard to clear out the protestors). Not sure if he was watching the same confrontation between hard ass non-compromising oligarch Hosni Mubarak and a few hundred thousand twittering people of Egypt the rest of us did in early February, but apparently despite the futility and failure of Hosni’s attempts to cling to power, Mr. Walker seemed to side with Mubarak’s initial approach: bring on the thugs.

Or maybe young Gov. Walker prefers to look at the bright side, and is observing how Iran and Libya use their armies to beat back and shut the fuck up protestors. Walker may even consider the use of jet fighters against teachers.

The same Fox news types who tepidly praised the outbreak of democracy in Egypt are, naturally, blind to it when it comes to American citizens (except for Tea Party mobs). Of course the huge, relentless throngs of government workers and union members Walker wants to steal from (the deficit! Lordy, the deficit!) , and disenfranchise (by way of ending collective bargaining) are, per Glenn Beck, “useful idiots” – he likes to quote from Vlad Lenin – or outside agitators* (they even used that line in “The Grapes of Wrath”, the 1940 film based on the Steinbeck novel).

*Note: Koch Brothers funded FreedomWorks, run by Dick Armey, DID bus in a dick army of faux grassroots citizens to disrupt healthcare reform town hall debates during the summer of 2009. Hypocrisy is not in the right wing dictionary, because if it was, they might read the definition and get all embarrassed by seeing their pictures in the margins.

Who is the Walker, one might ask. Well, I don’t care really – he seems to be a right wing weirdo bent on following the precepts of Ronald Reagan – destroy unions, and give money to rich people. But the bigger question is WHY Scott Walker? See, yes, I see right wing lunatics like John Kasich, Rick Scott, Mitch Daniels, Rick Snyder, Paul LePage, and I mock them like everybody else (look at Kasich, former Fox News pundit, turning DOWN federal funding for a high speed rail system – lots of jobs but not the “right kind of jobs”). The “right kind of jobs” are in China or India.

But the thing is, I mock them – but it’s not their fault they are in power, doing their crazy shit that only the Koch Brothers want done. The real fault is that voters voted for them, and in turn the right wing disinformation propaganda machine that rules the media, in turn thanks in part to Bill Clinton's media consolidation of 1996, in turn thanks to Lewis Powell's chamber of commerce memo of the 1960s describing how the right can takeover things.

The one thing well learned from the Cold War is that the scary USSR had one thing correct: Pravda. We scoffed at how that organ lied to its people. We scoffed, while others in our government learned.

But still, aren't there more of "us" than "them", more of "us" who are necessarily policy wonks but know what's good, and decent, and compassionate and American. More young people, more minorities. Why does more = less? Wisconsin – big blue state, (although yes, it did produce Joseph McCarthy in 1947). Why are they electing this guy? Ohio went blue in 2008, after Ken Blackwell and diebold's election theft of 2004. Well, in 2010, they went for Kasich. Maine's bluer than blue; even its two Republican senators are at least purple. But now they have some tea party governor.

Well, let’s look at the voting public. Who’s voting with glee? But also, who is not voting. Is Boehner’s crap REALLY “what the American people want”? Or just 20% of them, the ones that vote, and, the Koch Brothers. So after the relief of getting some non-Bush into office in 2008, and achieving victory for the amazing Barack Obama, wha happen? Well, many things. Perhaps Obama couldn't or wouldn't act as fast and as progressively as he could, given the disastrous (and well calculated) inheritance from Mr, Bush. Obama was confronted with a right wing megaphone on steroids.

But perhaps more sinister, he was also confronted with a rather demanding liberal class demanding a quick cure of Bushitis. They had expended time, money and enthusiasm on electing this "hope we can believe in". "We are what we have been waiting for" was absolutely correct. Then there was the healthcare "debate", where Obama faced the unique problem of being opposed with feudal error by those on the payroll of the health insurance companies and those who expected Canadian healthcare for all. He coughed up as much as he could to the first, and naturally still got spanked - they never are deterred by facts.

But the coughing up, despite the "first step" gains of "Obamacare", devastated liberals. Liberals, experts at the circular firing squad approach to such political defeats, decided the best approach in November 2010 would be to punish Obama by not voting. The right wing echo chamber naturally encouraged this discouragement with fervor, Polls were flouted that showed Obama's favorability numbers flagging, and relentlessly predicting Republican victories all over the country.

The Enthusiasm Gap grew, as the young folks, feeling betrayed and discouraged with fallen expectations returned to their Wiis. And with the immigrant demonization programs, most ardently displayed in Arizona, many brow people, concerned with confrontations at the polls - promised by Republican thugs - were skittish. And the extraordinarily strident "tea party" people, actually fueled by the Koch Brothers, Dick Armey and other anti-Demcoratic icons, were feverishly getting out the vote especially in local districts where they had been able to beat up Democrats and disloyal Republicans alike in those "town hall meetings" in 2009.

The irony of 2010 is that true progressives in fact did well. It was those scaredy cat Dems running as Republicans, such as Blanche Lincoln, were trounced by ACTUAL Republicans. Harry Reid survived, but, back to Wisconsin, the great Russ Feingold did not. Sure enough, Democratic voters stayed away, and quickly and eagerly filling the vacuum was a class of Republicans never before seen.

And so, Wisconsin has Governor Walker. And so, Wisconsin. But of course we know there's no real "Tea Party" ethos, as espoused in bumper stickers - stuff about smaller government, protecting our borders, and managing the deficit. That's the sizzle they are selling, with not a little undertow of racism (the frightened John Boehner can never completely dismiss the birthers, less he turn off a legion of haters who vote). No, we (the informed) knew what Scott Walker was up to, and it had nothing to do with responsible spending, and budget balancing; rather he is the initial cannon shot of a broad Republican corporate strategy - the war on the middle class, the war on the New Deal, the war on unions initiated by Walker's hero Reagan. Bust the unions, and then they aren't organized to support Democratic nominees. Strangle public services, such as heath and education, by withholding money, and people are too busy scrambling for survival or sufficiently dumbed down to worry about informing themselves on how to vote.

And then, as they always do, Walker busted himself. Punked by a journalist pretending to be his benefactor David Koch, Walker admitted to his real ploy, toady that he is. They implode, they always do. Is Frank Luntz working over time to save his ass, so that Kasich can do the same stuff in Ohio, and LePage in Maine, and Snyder in Michigan, and Daniels in Indiana?

But this battle raging now is the price of staying away. There is even talk among some of my progressive friends of "voting green" in 2012, as if the complete the deal.

Imagine how Citizens United beneficiaries are to take the White House in 2012, if for no other reason than to pack the Supreme Court with even more Scalias and Alitos. And there's not just money for TV ads, there's all manner of vote suppression in the works. Hosni Mubarak could have learned something from the take no prisoners approach. We mock him and Gaddaffi who will stop at nothing to maintain their power. Well, they have nothing on Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers. This is the price to pay for staying away.

History of sorts was made in 2010 - but about as opposite as possible to what happened in Egypt, which we admired and supported so much. They were clambering for democracy… while we are doing our best to discard it.

OF BULLETS, SAHL AND OLBERMANN

"Liberals feel unworthy of their possessions. Conservatives feel they deserve everything they've stolen." – Mort Sahl
Mort Sahl, the great social satirist once famously said during the height of the red scare / blacklist era of the 1950’s: “For every American the Russians throw in jail, HUAC throws in one to get even”. His night club joke was based in cold reality. Any dissension on the part of journalists, politicians or commentators (or even actors and screenwriters) during those times the Cold Warriors routinely referred as anti-American, a traitor. Or Communist.
Sahl himself somehow got away with his puncturing of the powers that be, because other powers that be were getting tired of the brazen totalitarianism of the anti-Communism crusade, especially its obvious corrupt politicization. Sahl’s comment, and others, was a stinging underscore of the hypocrisy – getting people to shut up is not a proper exercise of the “freedom of speech”.
It also hurts our international lecturing. How credible is it to decry Russia of its taking political prisoners while in effect doing the same. No more credible than lecturing Russia on the honesty of its elections when we suffered through Bush v. Gore and Diebold machines. Even President Putin made this precise point to a sanctimonious Mr. Bush. And now we shocked, shocked to find that Iraq, our new democratic child, is torturing prisoners. After Abu Ghraib, might be a little tough to launch a huge protest.
Mort Sahl, to finish the thought, eventually had a radio talk show on KLAC in Los Angeles in the mid 60’s. It was extremely popular, lambasting the purveyors of the Vietnam War and resistors to the burgeoning civil rights movement. And latterly he along with guests Mark Lane and Jim Garrison, district attorney of New Orleans, suggested that John F. Kennedy may not have been murdered by a lone gunman. Perhaps, there was a bigger conspiracy, given dying witnesses, contradicting evidence, and, of course, Arlen Specter’s “magic bullet”.
Sahl, along with compelling information from Lane and Garrison, had us questioning, in a very plausible manner, the nature of The Warren Report. The implications were startling to me. The United States government could not be trusted? Had dark forces within the government – rogue elements in the CIA or FBI perhaps - killed John F. Kennedy? And certainly, given the backdrop of the specious rationale for continuing the deadly adventure in Vietnam, were dark forces in the government conspiring to lie to us about that, too? And why not, while young people were being drafted and killed in the ever obviously pointless war, obviously corporations were getting rich. Corporations who gave a great deal of money to political campaigns.
What else were we blissfully unaware of? Was the “Communist conspiracy” bullshit, too, just a tool to keep us in fear, and suspicious of “dissenters” so that we’d be content with our barbecues, tract homes and Pontiacs? Of course the danger for the corporations went beyond that. Did Brylcreem really help me get chicks? Were my history books telling the whole story? Mort had me questioning everything.
Not long after he mounted this on air contemplation of the murder of JFK, Mort Sahl no longer had a radio show, to our great disappointment, chagrin. And loss. No doubt the analog to the network CEO in the film Network must have said to Mr. Sahl, “You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and for that, you will atone!” As Sahl himself once said, "If you maintain a consistent political position long enough, you will eventually be accused of treason."
Was, in the end, Sahl just an obsessed conspiracy nut? Many thousands of us, his loyal listeners, were convinced otherwise, but we had no great power except in perhaps numbers, or votes. Still, in the end, Kennedy was dead, LBJ ensured that the war raged on bigger than ever, and this particular a voice of dissent was silenced from the airwaves.
They could do that then. And they are doing that now. And, oh my, have they gotten so much better at it.
The bullets over Safeway in Tucson on January 8, 2011 should have been a surprise to no one. After all, how many times has this happened in just the last 15 years or so, starting with Timothy McVeigh’s attempt to start a holy war by blowing up some ATF agents, and a day care center, at the Murray Federal Building in Oklahoma City? McVeigh was perhaps tinged by undiagnosed schizophrenia or PTSD after having experienced the first Gulf War. But additionally, he was most definitely besotted with relentless anti-government diatribe in books and media, which made sense to him. Ostensibly put over the edge by the Waco showdown, he decided to take matters into his own hands. He was put to death unrepentant, perhaps not a little puzzled his revolution didn’t start.
But of course, it did.
On Fox, right wing curmudgeon Bill O’Reilly relentlessly demagogued about “(George) Tiller the baby killer, murdering thousands of babies – for free!” – referring to the only OBGYN in Kansas (or even the greater Midwest) who would perform the medically necessary, and legal, “late term abortions”. Media Matters documented dozens of times O’Reilly invoked his catchy “Tiller the baby killer” on his program. And one day, in his church, Tiller was gunned down by an anti-abortion soldier who went to prison, likewise unrepentant, self-satisfied that he saved the lives of countless babies – and punished Tiller for the murder of others.
Glenn Beck, full of right wing piss and vinegar, after having helped run the community activist group, Acorn, out of existence, set his sights on something called The Tides Foundation – a similar nonprofit group, whose chief M.O. was basically to do good. Something they did rubbed Beck the wrong way, and from his bully pulpit, Beck harangued about them. And lo, a man with a gun embarked on a mission from his personal god to take them out. The California Highway Patrol interrupted said mission, mainly due to the man’s erratic driving. A shootout followed, then a court hearing. The man blathered on, using many of Beck’s words, about the evils of George Soros, the ACLU, The Tides Foundation and wanting to start a revolution.
As of election season, 2010, Sarah Palin, selected by one time sane U. S. Senator John McCain of Arizona to be his running mate in the ’08 election remained in the political firmament. Stung by the ’08 landslide, and then, of course, by such things as "Obamacare", Palin was there to help urge the conservatives and more specifically, the “tea party” to not be shy. “We don’t retreat, we re-load”. She even helpfully put out a map of targeted congressional districts – folks who had voted for healthcare and other bad things. They could easily be spotted on the map with gun sight markings. A cluster could be found indicating Arizona districts. One of them belonged to Gabrielle Giffords, a “blue dog” Democrat in district 8.
The anti-government zealotry, the gun metaphors, gun talk and indeed guns themselves were becoming more and more visible, particularly, it seems, since Obama’s election. In 2009, one guy even showed up to an Obama town hall speech in Arizona, with a huge weapon strapped to his leg. This was the summer of the healthcare “town halls” – beleaguered congresspeople lambasted, their meetings made chaotic, mainly by perfomers bussed in by Dick Armey’s “FreedomWorks” organization. Funded by the Koch Brothers, FW didn’t want this healthcare reform to pass. And so they advanced the myth, via willing TV cameras, that there was an angry, frustrated “grassroots” movement of “regular folks” against it. No doubt some real people got sucked into this bogus reality show. But really the biggest screamers were basically Jerry Springer Show attendees whose next gig was to disrupt otherwise civil discussions of the healthcare reform.
Violence is a useful tool, not just actual guns but the fierce anger and threats – it scares people. And congressmen and Senators are people, too. So they also get scared. And the media puts it all over the top. The overwhelmingly right wing voices sympathize with the yellers as if they are truly representative of the American public, and the remaining press seldom reported the Dick Armey busses.
And so, 50 years after Mort Sahl was fired, after a lot of work and wisdom, and the purchasing power of Rupert Murdoch, the corporate media was making sure the people got the story they wanted them to get.
Not long after the bullets flew at Tucson, piercing the brain of Representative Giffords and killing six others, including 9 year old Christina Taylor Green, speculation emerged – speculation based on prior events – as to what happened. Sarah Palin had provided the gun sight map to district 8, Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly and others had provided the frightening, generic rhetoric about the enemies on the left: “they are out to kill us!” Even Nevadan candidate Sharron Angle suggested there are “second amendment remedies” if the election didn’t come out as needed.
All it took was a guy crazy enough to actually take matters into his own hand.
And not long after Palin’s bull’s-eye map went viral – as did Gabrielle Giffords’ own words warning against such murderous rhetoric – the right wing media went viral, “correcting the record.” Palin herself became the victim, whimpering about being blamed for what a crazy man had done. Batshit crazy old bat, Rep. Virginia Foxx of South Carolina, said based on the readings of the guy, he was a “leftist”. Palin said the same, while trying to be, you know, civil and put this above the political fray. Others said “he was a just crazy guy. Period.” Except crazy guy didn’t shoot his family, the cab driver who drove him to the shopping center, or bagboys at Safeway. Crazy guy left a small paper trail, albeit suggesting he was indeed unglued – and, via YouTube, as a sign of the times, a video trail – which in part clearly indicated Giffords was his target. Was he a Palin fan? Who knows other than two + two = you know the rest.
But the overpowering volume of the right wing noise machine does its works and it is how it now does its work. By overpowering. There will be no discussion of aiding victims of mental disorders, which may have helped the Tucson shooter (and the Columbine shooters, maybe McVeigh and maybe others), no discussion of banning 30-bullet clips for hand guns, or even perhaps raising the price of bullets (Chris Rock suggests “$5,000 per bullet. Believe me, if a bullet cost $5,000, there would be no such thing as innocent bystanders.”). There has been, however, some discussion of Giffords resigning her post despite the rapid and miraculously recovery she was making!
Who can say whether enticing crazy people with guns is really in the back of their minds – I guess only the most awfully cynical among us - but once that crazy person uses that gun, or that explosive device, they cannot quibble with the results - no more than Bush and Cheney could quibble with the benefits reaped from 9/11.
And then there was Keith Olbermann. For me, the modern day equivalent of Mort Sahl and so many other voices not merely of “the left” but of “the Truth”. Again, in an act of “civility” called for in the wake of the Tucson tragedy, Olbermann took down his best segment “Worst Persons in the World” on his very next broadcast. Was Olbermann himself making the pointless point of attempting to make an example of liberal kindness, as if there will be some in return? Bill Maher essentially said, “Why is he pandering to people who don’t get the joke. Fuck them!” Olbermann was a small voice, given the loud din, in the wilderness, but a righteous one. Like Sahl, he opened up the worm cans on stories heard nowhere else. He had the saber-like wit to go with it, adding to his charm and power. He had been reprimanded and “suspended” –for two days – in November for having contributed personally to political campaigns – one of them the ill-fated Giffords; this while an entire NETWORK – Fox – admitted to being basically a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party!
That may have been fair warning that Olbermann’s days were numbered. Indeed, with dramatic suddenness, Olbermann said Friday (January 21st) was his last show. A symbolic gesture of civility? Or way too coincidental to the merger of NBC and Comcast? Way too coincidental to happen just in time for the State of the Union address – which no doubt Olbermann would cover alongside blabbermouth Chris Mathews. Way too coincidental to happen just in time for the new right wing congress’ takeover. The voice is silenced, and that in itself, warrants a Special Comment.
Whatever, they’ve done it again, as they did to Mort. A favored voice is out of the picture, way too coincidental to believe it has nothing to do with these dramatic and tragic times. They could just not afford that voice to be heard.
The bullet through the congresswoman’s brain was tragic, but it worked. It ravaged, it silenced, it frightened, it warned.
I leave with one last musing from Mr. Sahl: "There were four million people in the American Colonies and we had Jefferson and Franklin. Now we have over 300 million and now we have Palin and Boehner. What can you draw from this? Darwin was wrong!"

JOHN BOEHNER’S BABY MAMAS

“Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” – Jesse Unruh

In 1995, John Boehner, in the spirit of helping the campaign treasuries of his fellow Republicans, unashamedly handed out tobacco lobbyist checks to his on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. The House of Representatives, the peoples’ house, where Henry Clay served as speaker. Those were the great brazen days of Newt Gringrich, “The Hammer” Tom DeLay, and the Contract for America.

And so it began.

The young representative from Ohio subsequently apologized for such a distasteful act – possibly without tears in his absolution. Boehner was then a sophomore member of Congress.

And as for most sophomores in high school or college, the best was yet to come.

In recent months than has been great curiosity about those tears – which were even displayed on 60 Minutes for - excuse the expression - crying out loud. He seems to turn on the faucets on cue better than Ricky Schroder ever did.

In the hard hitting (not really) 60 Minutes interview, he was weeping about his grand hope that young Americans today might also be afforded the same opportunities he had when he was a growing up – in education and job opportunities - while seeing to it, through the legislation he supports, that they will never have those opportunities. Does he cry like a baby because he knows this hypocrisy as well as we do?

But then, in researching his history, one realizes there’s indeed a baby analogy when it comes to Boehner; not the tears, but his eager “suckling on the teat” – a phrase recently made famous by Wyoming’s dour and disagreeable ex-Senator Alan Simpson.

Boehner may seem like a big orange baby, weeping on behalf of the American public, and how much he hurts for them (so he says). But he is really a cooing – and suckling – baby of those who supposedly the “tea party” (and just about everybody else) are most furious about: lobbyist pals and tone deaf “Washington insiders”. Mr. Boehner’s picture would be in the dictionary under both entries.

Boehner’s 17 years in congress has thus far been a feast of such suckling. Of course there is Big Tobacco that apparently made him their honorary paymaster. He’s also apparently one of their best customers.

But that’s just the beginning of the spoiling rotten of Boehner Baby.

There is Sallie Mae, the big student loan lender and notorious “middle man” in that industry, coughing up hundreds of thousands of dollars to Boehner’s coffers to ensure they remain middle men (but now that role has been undermined by the new “direct lending” programs; but we’ll see how long that lasts). Then there is his most notorious baby mama, lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now in prison (and perhaps making room on the next cot with Boehner’s mentor Tom DeLay). Abramoff funneled thousands of dollars to Boehner’s PAC on behalf of Native American tribal gaming; Boehner’s humbly named Freedom Project PAC received over $32,000 – more than any politician in that scandal. Another scrumptious teat was bared by “for-profit” schools (like the University of Phoenix) have taken advantage of Boehner’s cooperative position on education committees in the house, coughing up over $100,000 in 2004.

Boehner has been a very good baby in exchange for all his pampering, pushing legislation in aid of his pamperers. The spoiling with results also includes over $83,000 just in golfing related gifts. Maybe that IS a real tan!

And yet, despite all the legal bribing (called campaign donations elsewhere), and quid pro quos, despite all the turmoil of the Tea Party, beginning in 2011, this guy - whose suit wouldn’t have enough room for all the paid-for NASCAR-style patches - will become Speaker of the House of Representatives with a huge majority behind him. Talk about a loaded nursery, with a constant flow of toy deliveries and mothers’ milk.

So one can assume that while there is enough milk filled breasts flying around Washington, DC, Boehner Baby will keep right on crying.

Or perhaps Boehner will stop the tears now, unless all along they have been tears of guilt. Boy, in that case, watch the floodgates open now.

And legions of Americans will join in the crying.

Glenn Beck: It's a Blunderful Life

As we cruise into the holiday season – KOST 103.5 is already playing Christmas music 24/7 and I haven’t bought my turkey yet – it’s just about time for the annual airing of “It’s a Wonderful Life”, the great film starring James Stewart as the selfless small town banker George Bailey in Bedford Falls, NY who goes up against evil town miser, Lionel Barrymore’s Henry Potter. The crux of the film is a parable about Stewart giving up hope of success beyond his hometown and making the mistake of wishing to an angel that “he’d never been born”. The angel (the irrepressible Clarence) grants this wish, to show Stewart that his little life has grand value.

And so for the third act we get to see what life would be like if George hadn’t been around to touch other lives, and what destruction would have occurred in the void (Potter takes over the town and renames it Pottersville). The film, which didn’t do well when it was first released in 1946, slowly, thanks to television, became an institution – a simple, sweet if not cornball story about how the human spirit, caring for one another, and selflessness can win over evil.

Well, in the spirit of the evil Potter, guess what right wing boob is trying to appropriate this bit of beloved Americana as a some sort of bizarre Beckspin about how the Communist/Nazi/Progressive government is out to get us? Yes, him.
Glenn has selected the small town of Wilmington, Ohio, from where he will do one of his live broadcasts, as a poster town for a latter day Bedford Falls which has resisted “becoming Pottersville” by being “self-reliant” against the government “takeover”.
Needless to say, none of this has anything to do with either the story of “It’s a Wonderful Life” film or reality. But that’s not a surprise. Beck is a fascinating dichotomy: is he merely a stupid liar, or an incredibly brilliant liar?

Accurately describing reality is of little concern to Beck or apparently his bosses at Fox “News”, or his loyal minions of the underinformed, misinformed and disinformed.
First off, Beck’s claim about the town being self reliant (i.e., without some federal government support) is, of course, wrong. It has received $6 million in stimulus money – a matter of public record. Does he not know this? Does he ignore it? Does he hope nobody will look it up? Of course he relies on this last part because clearly few Fox viewers care to “look stuff up” or they wouldn’t be viewers.

So on to the second part: the movie analogy. Also wrong. Again, did he see the movie or is he just ignoring, now the facts of a movie. I think you can rent it on Netflix, Glenn, for a refresher.
The federal government had no role in any aspect of “It’s a Wonderful Life”. Indeed some denizens may have gotten work or benefit via the CCC or WPA programs, and of course many of the town’s men served in World War II – notably George Bailey’s brother, Harry, who returns to Bedford Falls a hero.

A large part of “It’s a Wonderful Life” has to do with some arcane financial dealings, but basically it’s the battle between mom & pop savings and loan owner Bailey and the evil, greedy capitalist – quintessential Republican hero and modern day Scrooge Henry Potter who tries desperately either by threat or bribe to destroy the Bailey S&L. It is the one institution in town Potter doesn’t own. He has the bus lines, he has the bank, and he has a lot of real estate. He’s a one man Wal-Mart who is not regulated, and is sociopathic in his view of the town’s masses (he calls them “rabble”). All this sounds familiar – little has changed in 60 years - and I would think Beck would appreciate this Mr. Potter’s taking over hopeless liberal Bailey’s firm and indeed creating Pottersville – Republican haven! No health care, no liberal loan terms, foreclosures at the drop of a mortgage payment.

As I write this I am thinking, does Beck seriously want people to analyze “It’s a Wonderful Life”? It’s clearly a warning of what happens when the thin progressive lines against rapacious capitalists is taken down.

Bailey’s Savings and Loan is the one ray of sunshine for the folks of Bedford Falls, where they can get loans for affordable decent housing rather than one of Potter’s hovels. George is so empathetic of his customers that he even gives up his personal funds during a bank failure to keep his company afloat lest it and the people get swallowed up by Potter. He barely succeeds, thwarting Potter again.

At another point, Bailey is offered a dazzling payoff by Potter to “come work for me!” - a Faustian deal made on a daily basis in the halls of congress. It looks for a moment that Bailey is going to cave-in for the bucks – and he certainly is motivated, suffering as he does with his meager earnings and houseful of kids. But once he shakes Potter’s oily hand, he realizes Potter’s main motivation is not hiring him but scuttling the Savings and Loan. He realizes how close he has come to selling his soul. He refuses.

But eventually, events collude to defeat the do-gooder. Bailey, already in despair about not being able to leave the town and travel the world, and now facing a serious crisis thanks to his uncle’s incompetence, decides to commit suicide on Christmas Eve. (Potter in fact had stolen the money Bailey thought was missing. All’s fair in corporate takeovers!)

But the angel Clarence comes to his rescue. Trying to earn his wings, the angel comes up with a scheme to show Bailey what life would be life if he had never been born. Well of course, the immediate result is that everybody in the town, theretofore sweet and friendly, are bitter and unhappy. Indeed without Bailey’s help or guidance, the entire town has been gobbled up by Potter to become the Republican bastion of Pottersville: the non-nanny state, where one is self-reliant or dies. Instead of nice homes, people live in Potters’ dumps and the main source of income seems to be bars and strip clubs.

Bedford Falls’ fate, in Bailey’s nightmare, is truly a sweet Beckian wet dream, is it not? Pottersville, fka Bedford Falls, has simply evolved via the natural order of the free market. Far from a “government takeover”; if anything, the transformation to Pottersville is a result of little or no government intervention.

When Bailey has seen enough, he begs to be “born” again, and face his problems. But what he discovers is, of course, the magic of the movie – the grateful people he touched come together, and save him from ruin and, by extension, save their town from ruin. There is genuine affection for one another, especially in crisis. And there is a common threat – the evil of Potter’s runaway and unfeeling greed – and that has been averted. For now. Bailey’s Savings & Loan remains a slender thread.

That is the lesson, and the joy, of the film. People do not want harsh taskmasters depriving them of comforts, and punishing their misfortunes. But the Becks of the world would have us believe the “free market” is sacred, Potter doesn’t need “government regulations”, he needs a big fat tax cut.

We also realize that it’s not just Bailey’s life that touches others – each of our lives touches others, too. Perhaps ours is the only helping hand extended at any given time. If it wasn’t there, what would have happened? The angel, indeed representing what Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature”, doesn’t just show Bailey to think about what is important in life, but all of us.

Glenn Beck’s and his network’s thrust is for the Potters of the world to be glorified and unfettered, not “held back”, worrying about their tax rate. And generally the thin line between us and Pottersville is not George Bailey, but the federal government, which Beck/Fox consistently demonize. One again, Beck has it backward, but, unfortunately for his lied-to fans, that is by insidious design.

Certainly we could conjecture about the reverse of the “Wonderful Life” lesson: What would the world be like if Glenn Beck had not been born?

Now that is a real Merry Christmas fantasy.

Hi, I'm a Tea-Partier

New Brown Ad Nails Whitman for Being Like Schwarzenegger - FishbowlLA

New Brown Ad Nails Whitman for Being Like Schwarzenegger - FishbowlLA

WHY IS DRAMA TAKEN MORE SERIOUSLY THAN COMEDY?

An author asked me to contemplate on that one. Here is what I sent him:
I produced many television comedies, and often we were a slave to the laughter of the audience. If they weren't laughing, something wasn't funny, so therefore the story wasn't working right somehow (or at least particular lines). And invariably the network executives, who generally had more respect for drama themselves, would feel emboldened enough to say "you call this funny". I am not sure if the reverse is true. Do they watch a rehearsal of say Gray's Anatomy and say "You call this sad?"
The question is much like "why aren't writers taken as seriously as directors"? It's all perception - as to whose job seems more difficult, more crucial, more important in human story telling. And the premise itself is a matter of definition. If the Academy Awards are a standard, then, yes, it appears dramas are given more respect, more gravitas. Who was more respected as a film maker and performer than Charlie Chaplin, for example; he is inarguably the king of film comedy, yet much of his glory comes as much from eating his shoes in the Klondike than his impeccable slapstick.
A psychologist once told me comedy can be defined as "manic denial" - we laugh at the big rich guy slipping on a banana peel as if to deny that authority, power, wealth, arrogance, whatever, and so therefore the embarrassing fall levels the playing field. And we laugh - worldwide (slapstick - pratfalls, torn pants, pies in the face - is no doubt the international comedy language). So when people say comedy generally lacks profundity, they are dead wrong and deserve a poke in the eye by Moe Howard.

Comedy by its nature seems "light" and "easy" in that it seems as if it merely has to mock convention or the human condition. Many things that have brought us to tears, and anger, in real life, are hysterical when we see them re-enacted by characters on TV, especially in comedies dealing with husband and wife relationships, dating relationships, child rearing... or dealing with ones boss or co-workers.
So the trick about this question (or the "mislead" as we say in the business) is similar to how questions on a poll are asked. Many people when asked their most memorable films or TV shows or moments therein may well be split 50-50 on comedy and drama. No one forgets the heartiest laughs - even within the most dramatic films Goodfellas, and Deliverance come to mind) because constant dread is not possible in entertainment. The "light" moments do that just that... lighten things up between murders or tears and emotional turmoil. Or tension and suspense that would otherwise be unbearable; notice how witty Bond is... and there was plenty to laugh at in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
I think again the answer to why drama is taken more seriously than comedy goes back to perception, and the fact that comic tastes are a very "niche" things. The fact is, any professional will tell you that it is far more difficult to write comedy, especially on a wide basis (since comic tastes differ far more than tastes for drama; films like Casablanca, are probably more universally liked than say a Jerry Lewis film or the brilliantly literate British dark comedy Kind Hearts and Coronets). And any actor or director will tell you that performing and directing comedy are far more difficult that straight drama any day. Indeed some of the finest actors did some of the finest comedy.
Perhaps your question, in the end, is really a faulty one, because "drama" and "comedy" could not be more different elements. People respect comedy as much or more than drama if they really thought about it, but while people can be uniform on what's a great drama - or what they are supposed to think is a great drama - comedy is highly personal, differing almost literally from person to person. Why is broccoli taken more seriously than m&ms? Well, you're supposed to, I guess. And "m&m's" is a dumb name, will make you fat and rot your teeth - however they delightfully comforting in sweet chocolatude.

But we can't live in a broccoli world, so perhaps m&ms are, in many ways, more crucial. But some people are allergic to chocolate. That's why there are thousands of candies, but pretty much one broccoli - or okay, you can mix it up with a carrot or a cauliflower.
The short answer is who the hell knows?