Year: 2006

Issue #3 of what is essentially a four-issue introductory arc. Whad’ja think?

PAD

People in showbiz (and other bizzes, I imagine) refer to the Flyby (or Flyover) States…that is, states that don’t register on their personal radar other than that they fly by them while jetting from Los Angeles to New York and back. Well, fly by states have viewers with ratings boxes as much as NY and CA do, and I have a strong feeling that they’ll be watching something else this year for the Oscars.

(Broad brush warning: The following is speaking in generalities, not individuals. If you feel you’re an exception, then you probably are. I’m speaking of general viewing habits, not specific viewers.)

None of this year’s Oscar nominated films are remotely what one would call populist fare. My purely unscientific guess is that the vast majority of film goers have not seen the vast majority of this year’s films or its nominees. Not only that, but two of the films focus on homosexual protagonists (“Capote,” “Brokeback Mountain”), but one of the nominees (Felicity Huffman) plays a transsexual. So not only do you have no films that are general viewer turn-ons (such as “Titanic” was), but considering the number of states that went out of their way to introduce the legislative bigotry that is the gay marriage ban (there, I fixed it, happy? You knew what I meant), I have to think you’ve got some active turn-offs in there. This may well be the first Oscar cast that’s picketed by the religious right.

And who’s the MC? Jon Stewart, whose work I adore and you probably do as well. But compared to the heartland appeal of Johnny Carson, or the vaudeville schticky “eager to please you” Billy Crystal, Stewart may well be perceived as that smart ášš smug New York Jew (plus anyone who doesn’t have cable may well not know who the hëll he is.)

When you consider all that, I have a sneaking suspicion that this year’s Oscar cast may well have ratings that make the Tonys look like a ratings bonanza.

Me, I’ll be watching. What can I say? I’m a glutton for glitzy out-of-control sluggish behemoths of awards shows. Plus it’s Jon Stewart, and we smart ášš smug New York Jews must show solidarity. But I’m doubting I’ll have a ton of company, especially in the Fly Bys.

PAD

What the HÊLL is with this guy’s left eyebrow? He’s like Spock on crack.

PAD

And here we go. We’re watching on NBC. Here is…Brian Williams.

9:01: Here come members of the Supreme Court. I think it’d be cooler if they all entered in one shoulder to shoulder line in slo-mo, like in “The Right Stuff.” Or “Monsters Inc.”

9:02: NBC commentators are talking about everything that’s wrong. I wonder if Fox is talking about everything that’s right.

9:03: Wow. Even Fox is talking about divisiveness. That can’t be good.

9:05: NBC speculates that Bush has changed the face of the SC for at least the next twenty years. Entirely possible, and too depressing to contemplate.

9:06: Bush is said to be in a small holding room. Makes him sound like a rodeo bull. I wonder if his testicles will be tied tightly to get a better show.

9:07: And now, in advance, the Democratic response: “Pbbbbbthhhh!”

9:08: The Sergeant at arms is “Bill Livingood.” Gotta love that name.

9:09: Caroline has offered her commentary in advance: The moment Bush was introduced, she farted and dropped a load in her diaper.

9:11: Four minutes of applause and counting.

9:11: And they applaud AGAIN? Just for being introduced? Bet the SC high-fived each other.

9:12: Okay, who had twenty-five words into the speech before he invoked King?

9:13: “Differences can’t harden into anger.” Sorry. That ship sailed in the year 2000.

9:15: Who had three minutes into the speech for 9/11?

9:16: Yes, Democracy has replaced terrorism with hope. In Israel, the hope is that the Democratically elected terrorists won’t destroy them.

9:17: Oh. Bin Laden is serious about mass murder. Funny. A few years ago, he said he wasn’t thinking about bin Laden much.

9:18: Terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror

9:19: Terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror terror

9:20 Yes. We liberated death camps…so we can open our own torture camps. It’s like Walmart liberating neighborhoods of mom and pop stores.

9:21: If he believes in freedom, in democracy, and in Iraq…why is he against the concept of Iraqis holding an election to determine whether we should leave or not?

9:22: We have a coalition? I thought we had our troops and three guys named Nigel.

9:23: Oh, NOW he’s going to listen to military commanders? The same ones who said that invading Iraq was a bad idea?

9:24: And here, before I could say that he was curtailing opinions he’d respond to to “Responsible opinion,” he goes and basically admits that anyone who doesn’t fit that–namely, those he doesn’t like–are being ignored.

9:25: “Second guessing isn’t a strategy.” Considering the lack of strategy going into Iraq in the first place…

9:27: All right. Who had eighteen minutes until he singled out one soldier and his family to hold up as a symbol of his wonderful war. The wife, trapped on camera, looked like an incredibly pìššëd øff deer in the headlights.

9:28: Welcome to the state of the terror address.

9:29: Accountable institutions? The head of a government that tries to block any bid at accountability is talking about being held accountable?

9:30: Oh…my God…he’s talking about attacking Iran.

9:31: No one is talking about isolationism. People are talking about freaking invading other countries.

9:32: By all means, let’s not shortchange the efforts of a compassionate America. We should…oops. More terrorism talk.

9:33: Does he understand it’s possible to support the military, law enforcement…and not the President?

9:34: AND NOW WE’VE GOT A GAME. Half of them sit while the other half stands in supporting the patriot act. “We didn’t know about their plans until it was too late.” This is the point where Jon Stewart would cut to a clip of Condi Rice saying, “I believe the title was ‘Bin laden intends to attack US”

9:35: Hillary is shaking her head thinking “You áššhølë.”

9:35: The Master of Accountability insists that he must have an eavesdropping program that doesn’t require accountability.

9:37: He has the gall to invoke FDR and JFK?

9:38: Whenever Bush speaks of “Natural disasters” I keep thinking I’m looking at the biggest one to hit the US in years.

9:39; No one is saying immigrants are bad for the economy. They’re saying illegal immigrants are bad for the economy.

9:39: He’s gonna try for more tax cuts.

9:40: There it is.

9:41: Symbolic, really. The Democrats are expressing distaste by sitting on their áššëš. When are they gonna realize they have to GET OFF THEIR ÃSSÊS TO MAKE THINGS BETTER?

9:42: Right, right. Line item veto. Notice the hypocrisy of the GOP applauding when they screamed over Clinton trying the same thing.

9:43: YES! YES! YES! THEY GOT OFF THEIR ÃSSÊS!

9:44: I have NEVER seen a president look THAT PÍSSÊÐ ØFF during the SOTU!

9:45: No one can outproduce the American worker. Except, y’know, maybe Japan.

9:45: And China. And Korea. And…

9:46: No you’re not meeting the responsibility of health care for the poor and elderly. You cut it.

9:47: Okay, that’s a good point. The medical liability thing is, if nothing else, driving OBGYNs out of the baby delivery business.

9:48: “Clean safe nuclear energy.” There’s a contradiction in terms.

9:49: I’m all for making dependence on ME oil a thing of the past. Certainly invading them to try and take it by force isn’t working.

9:51: A firm grounding in math and science? Here’s a fast way to start: Make it illegal for kids to have pocket calculators with them during math tests. What the hëll is up with that?

9:52: We don’t need more advanced math courses. We need more remedial courses. We’ve got a population that can’t do the most basic functions.

9:53: Yes, we’ve become a more hopeful nation: And yet, no matter how much we hope, Bush is still there.

9:54: BUSH is talking about personal responsbility? That’s like Hannibal Lecter talking about becoming a vegetarian.

9:55: The pessimists predicted Bush would be elected and re-elected. They were right about that.

9:58: I’m sorry. I don’t see where a guy who endorses torture, spying on citizens, capital punishment, and cutting off medical research that could cure Altzheimers gets to talk about being compassionate.

10:01: By all means, let’s do whatever we can to eliminate AIDS. So how’s that condom in schools program working out?

10:02: And now he obliquely compares himself to Lincoln and MLK. How does he find trousers that hang right with balls that big?

10:03: Interesting that of the four major political/historical figures he compared himself to, three of them were assassinated.

10:03: Fifty one minutes. Hunh. I have to think that Caroline’s commentary at the beginning was the most succinct.

I’ll be watching the State of the Union tonight and will be offering a running commentary as it goes on this site. If you’re interested in an unbiased, even-handed, completely fair series of observations on the President’s address to the country, then I suggest you stay the hëll away from here. It begins at 9 PM EST.

PAD

So my daughter, Gwen, an art student up in Boston, was taking a class that was an overview of Aztec art. The teacher was discussing the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs, and at one point she endeavored to put things into historical perspective. “What else,” she asked the class, “was going on in Spain during the 15th century?”

Gwen raised her hand and replied,”The Spanish Inquisition.”

“And what was the Spanish Inqusition?” asked the teacher.

Without hesitation, Gwen replied, “Unexpected.”

Dead silence from the class. The teacher laughed. The rest of the class just frickin’ sat there.

I think she was relieved when she told me what happened and I laughed, and then I related it to Kath and she laughed. At least *we* got the joke. Shows we raised Gwen right.

PAD

I’m sorry if this question sounds harsh, but there’s no other way to phrase it: What the hëll is wrong with the bulk of Christians in this country that if Jesus is depicted as loving and accepting, that portrayal is stoned into oblivion, but if he’s depicted as being beaten and tortured to death, THAT they come flocking to watch by the busload?

“The Book of Daniel” was an incredibly good program that was quick-fried by people who, for the most part, hadn’t seen it or refused to see it. Critics and commentators loved demonizing concepts such as that the titular minister “popped pills” without bothering to mention it wasn’t speed or uppers or downers but pain killers…an addiction he was wrestling with rather than being glorified. Or that his daughter “dealt drugs,” without bothering to mention that it was a stupid mistake she was busted for in the first five minutes of the show, and she quickly gave it up, and that she was doing it to raise money to publish her own manga comic since she was really an artist. Nor did anyone ever bring up the many scenes where the family was shown as a loving, caring group who never hesitated to display that love for one another.

But what really drew fire was the concept of Jesus as a patient sounding board for the frustrated Daniel. If they’d only bothered to actually WATCH the program, rather than allow blowhards to make up their minds for them, they’d have seen a depiction of their savior that’s probably the most heart warming and loving version of divinity since George Burns explained, “I didn’t create the universe in six days. Actually, I thought about it for five days and did it in one. I work best under pressure. But my days aren’t the same as yours, y’know. When I got up this morning, Sigmund Freud was in medical school.”

Sample the triumphant words of Donald Wildmon: “This shows the average American that he doesn’t have to simply sit back and take the trash being offered on TV, but he can get involved and fight back with his pocketbook.”

No. What it shows is that the average American is intolerant. So much so that he couldn’t JUST make the decision to try a program for himself and, if he didn’t like it, change the channel or even, God forbid, turn off the TV and read a book. No, the average American had to do everything possible to make sure that OTHER average Americans couldn’t judge for THEMselves by organizing and driving a series off the air. Of course, what most burned their biscuits was Jesus being depicted as being tolerant of sinners or even (gasp) gays. If Jesus had been shown as condemning all aspects of sin and assuring Daniel that his gay son was doomed to hëll, THAT they might well have supported.

But for Jesus to display tolerance of sinners…for Wildmon to display tolerance of other Americans rather than organize to drive quality shows off the air? Can’t have that, no, no. Because…well, because why, exactly? Aren’t Christians supposed to be charitable, tolerant, understanding? I was pretty much sure that was part of the teachings.

What is it about human beings that we constantly create codes of conduct for ourselves with lofty ideals–tolerance, love thy neighbor, judge not lest ye be judged, free expression–and then not only fail to live up to them, but TAKE PRIDE in that failure? It’s an interesting question, I think. Too bad shows such as “The Book of Daniel,” where such questions might be explored, are being canned.

PAD