| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Prophet Glenn Beck - Father Guido Sarducci | ||||
| ||||
Probably one of the best pieces on the Colbert so far.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Glenn Beck's Blessing from the Vatican...Is Pure Bullsh*t
In this case, Stephen Colbert does all the talking needed.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Fake Wife, Fake Life, Real Consequences
It's June, Gay Pride month, and in honor of gay pride month, infoMania's Bryan Safi gives politicians a crisis plan in case they find themselves in a "sticky" situation (think about it...).
While hilarious, Safi evokes an important facet of America's roadblock on the way to progress: hubris.
I'm currently reading "Living in the End Times" by Slavoj Žižek (had to break out the character map for that one); the book is his treatise against Capitalism, detailing the downfall of the liberal government (read: totalitarian, detached, self-serving, not as in Democrats), and arguing that such a downfall allows us to find a new beginning through the failure. To open the discussion, he argues that admitting to one's own identity in all it's glory and tragedy is the first step to finding this new beginning.
Legislators facing such a "gay crisis" as Safi describes need take note of this. It would appear that they've gone so far down the path of hatred and discrimination that they deny what they are. It can largely be argued that they hate because they are unable to come to terms with who they are.
This hubris, this denial of what is right for the advancement of what you've constructed, affects more than just gay/bisexual/transgender legislators and legislation: this same kind of hubris has stalled health care legislation, climate change legislation, gay rights legislation, immigration reform, foreign policy, and the dreams of ordinary citizens in the process. The truth is, if legislators are to represent our wishes, they cannot do so if they are so cornered by fear as to prevent them from taking action at all.
Let this be a lesson to all of us. Be who you are and admit it to yourself, or start shipping Dawn to the Gulf.
UPDATE:
This story gives an example of the same activity in the church. It's nothing new, but it is still very important to acknowledge the toll this backwards discrimination takes, not only on the subjects of such prejudice, but on those who tout it.
While hilarious, Safi evokes an important facet of America's roadblock on the way to progress: hubris.
I'm currently reading "Living in the End Times" by Slavoj Žižek (had to break out the character map for that one); the book is his treatise against Capitalism, detailing the downfall of the liberal government (read: totalitarian, detached, self-serving, not as in Democrats), and arguing that such a downfall allows us to find a new beginning through the failure. To open the discussion, he argues that admitting to one's own identity in all it's glory and tragedy is the first step to finding this new beginning.
Legislators facing such a "gay crisis" as Safi describes need take note of this. It would appear that they've gone so far down the path of hatred and discrimination that they deny what they are. It can largely be argued that they hate because they are unable to come to terms with who they are.
This hubris, this denial of what is right for the advancement of what you've constructed, affects more than just gay/bisexual/transgender legislators and legislation: this same kind of hubris has stalled health care legislation, climate change legislation, gay rights legislation, immigration reform, foreign policy, and the dreams of ordinary citizens in the process. The truth is, if legislators are to represent our wishes, they cannot do so if they are so cornered by fear as to prevent them from taking action at all.
Let this be a lesson to all of us. Be who you are and admit it to yourself, or start shipping Dawn to the Gulf.
UPDATE:
This story gives an example of the same activity in the church. It's nothing new, but it is still very important to acknowledge the toll this backwards discrimination takes, not only on the subjects of such prejudice, but on those who tout it.
Monday, June 21, 2010
infoMania: An Oasis in a Media Desert
If being employed has taught me one thing above all others, it's that being broke sucks ass. If being unemployed has taught me another thing above all others (but below the ass sucking) it's that television sucks. I mean really sucks. The news, the sports analysis (how many times can you talk about one birdie putt?), the dramas, all of it sucks. It's indicative of a growing trend in the information age: that's that we generally do not need all this information. We deal with an onslaught of communication and entertainment in video, text, and sound and are we really any better for it?
That's where infoMania comes in. infoMania is a show parodying or highlighting the ridiculous onslaught of media and its effects on our society. It's young and hip, frequently using The Internet and you can even contribute content. If you have Current TV it's on Thursdays at 9 PM central.
And for those of you too lazy to check the thing for yourself, here's an episode. Enjoy!
That's where infoMania comes in. infoMania is a show parodying or highlighting the ridiculous onslaught of media and its effects on our society. It's young and hip, frequently using The Internet and you can even contribute content. If you have Current TV it's on Thursdays at 9 PM central.
And for those of you too lazy to check the thing for yourself, here's an episode. Enjoy!
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
"Gather Your Armies"
Daily I wake up and watch the news and daily I am by the depths to which "politicians" will stoop. On my facebook page I posted this video.
It was simply incredible to me that anyone could express this level of hubris, confusion, and anger simultaneously. The ideas that 1. Rick Barber would lead the founding fathers, 2. the American Revolution was simply over a tax on tea, and 3. that the IRS should be violently overthrown are simply incredible. With recent results showing the Tea Party in a sticky spot, however, I don't expect we'll have to worry about Barber's "armies" staging a military coup any time soon.
But the implications of the Tea Party's message and impending failure are far deeper. Let's examine the Tea Party message.
The idea behind the Tea Party is that the Constitution, and Bill of Rights especially, should be held as sacred. No law should violate the boundaries that these documents set on government and special care should be taken to keep government out of the economy, allowing free market principles to have their say. In this way, they attempt to protect the little guy, the grass-roots citizen, from tyranny.
Rick Barber's message exposes Tea Party confusion on two levels. The first is that he speaks with the founding fathers, painting them as the protectors of individual liberty. This completely ignores the classic American hypocrisy: the Founders installed Democracy while completely ignoring blacks, Native Americans, women, renters, farmers, and craftspeople. The qualification of property for voting and the economic gains the Founders stood to make from the installation of the new government should immediately call into question the intentions of their actions.
The second is the interpretation sanctification of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was added to quell citizens fears of tyranny in order to achieve ratification. This is clear since, after passage, the government continued to violate these "laws" over and over again; the Espionage Act of WWI and the detention of Japanese Americans during WWII are just a couple of examples. Furthermore, the people holding the strings during the drafting and amending of the Constitution were all wealthy land-owners, not Joe the Plumbers. It is clear through history that the Constitution was not entirely created to protect people, but instead (at least partially) to set formal boundaries that would satiate the public while the powerful largely did as they pleased.
So it's clear now that the grass-roots organization most prominent in politics is favoring the powerful. Not by design, but by rhetorical steering from the likes of Glenn Beck, Fox News, and all business interests that fill their coffers. This lies in stark contrast to the labor revolutions of the late 19th century, where true grass-roots organizations rose up against labor tyranny in order to shackle industry from harming the real "little guy. Frankly, the implication here is that grass-roots, or at least grass-roots prominent and well funded enough to make it in the news are completely betraying the historical definition.
Despite this, however, the largest consequence arise from the Tea Party's failure. Not only are grass-roots now, effectively, "corporate grass-roots", but their failure is observed as if the Tea Party really is a people's movement. The danger is that when they fail, the community of politicians, corporate firms, and active-but-uninformed voters could write off the power of a people's movement altogether. I don't imagine this set back would be permanent, but it would certainly be damning in the short-term.
I have faith that, as is historically true, the true power of people will fight back even if they don't win. Simply consider, however, that when the bell tolls on the Tea Party, it tolls for us as well.
It was simply incredible to me that anyone could express this level of hubris, confusion, and anger simultaneously. The ideas that 1. Rick Barber would lead the founding fathers, 2. the American Revolution was simply over a tax on tea, and 3. that the IRS should be violently overthrown are simply incredible. With recent results showing the Tea Party in a sticky spot, however, I don't expect we'll have to worry about Barber's "armies" staging a military coup any time soon.
But the implications of the Tea Party's message and impending failure are far deeper. Let's examine the Tea Party message.
The idea behind the Tea Party is that the Constitution, and Bill of Rights especially, should be held as sacred. No law should violate the boundaries that these documents set on government and special care should be taken to keep government out of the economy, allowing free market principles to have their say. In this way, they attempt to protect the little guy, the grass-roots citizen, from tyranny.
Rick Barber's message exposes Tea Party confusion on two levels. The first is that he speaks with the founding fathers, painting them as the protectors of individual liberty. This completely ignores the classic American hypocrisy: the Founders installed Democracy while completely ignoring blacks, Native Americans, women, renters, farmers, and craftspeople. The qualification of property for voting and the economic gains the Founders stood to make from the installation of the new government should immediately call into question the intentions of their actions.
The second is the interpretation sanctification of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was added to quell citizens fears of tyranny in order to achieve ratification. This is clear since, after passage, the government continued to violate these "laws" over and over again; the Espionage Act of WWI and the detention of Japanese Americans during WWII are just a couple of examples. Furthermore, the people holding the strings during the drafting and amending of the Constitution were all wealthy land-owners, not Joe the Plumbers. It is clear through history that the Constitution was not entirely created to protect people, but instead (at least partially) to set formal boundaries that would satiate the public while the powerful largely did as they pleased.
So it's clear now that the grass-roots organization most prominent in politics is favoring the powerful. Not by design, but by rhetorical steering from the likes of Glenn Beck, Fox News, and all business interests that fill their coffers. This lies in stark contrast to the labor revolutions of the late 19th century, where true grass-roots organizations rose up against labor tyranny in order to shackle industry from harming the real "little guy. Frankly, the implication here is that grass-roots, or at least grass-roots prominent and well funded enough to make it in the news are completely betraying the historical definition.
Despite this, however, the largest consequence arise from the Tea Party's failure. Not only are grass-roots now, effectively, "corporate grass-roots", but their failure is observed as if the Tea Party really is a people's movement. The danger is that when they fail, the community of politicians, corporate firms, and active-but-uninformed voters could write off the power of a people's movement altogether. I don't imagine this set back would be permanent, but it would certainly be damning in the short-term.
I have faith that, as is historically true, the true power of people will fight back even if they don't win. Simply consider, however, that when the bell tolls on the Tea Party, it tolls for us as well.
New Design!
Hello everybody!
As you can see, I've made a few cosmetic changes to the design of the website. I thought that the original design was a little too copy-paste Washington stereotypical. I feel like the new design reflects the casual nature of our conversation and the grass-roots (an overused word, I'm aware) nature of our thoughts.
Please, enjoy the new design and comment on upcoming stories. We'll have a lot to talk about here real soon.
As you can see, I've made a few cosmetic changes to the design of the website. I thought that the original design was a little too copy-paste Washington stereotypical. I feel like the new design reflects the casual nature of our conversation and the grass-roots (an overused word, I'm aware) nature of our thoughts.
Please, enjoy the new design and comment on upcoming stories. We'll have a lot to talk about here real soon.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
The Importance of Spin
And after a move to Pennsylvania, hello again!
Now to get down to business. The dance of politics involves several parties: representatives, constituents, courts, and, now-a-days more than ever, media. In a world of myriad complex issues with sometimes complicated subject matter, the general public has little ability (without great effort) to discern for themselves what is fact, what is fiction, and what to vote for.
So obviously, in this climate, integrity in reporting is important.
Furthermore, because of modern advertising know-how, politicians understand that band-wagon support is as vital as vast sums of money when it comes to gathering political capital. Whether or not one lies on the "right" side of an issue is largely tracked by the "public"'s majority acceptance of a particular position.
So how do you lie and tilt things in your favor at the same time? By featuring a biased statistics firm of course!
John B dropped me this link with a brief Daily Kos discussion of just such a house. A group called Rasmussen features statistics that consistently lay in the Republican favor. In such a sensitive time, where public opinion can so easily sway the midterms at a crucial period in the Obama administration's legislative agenda, lying about statistics of all things becomes one of the most egregious acts of dishonesty possible.
Quite an audit on the state of things in this country when you need to ask where the numbers are coming from.
How do you fight something like this and what can we do to help?
Now to get down to business. The dance of politics involves several parties: representatives, constituents, courts, and, now-a-days more than ever, media. In a world of myriad complex issues with sometimes complicated subject matter, the general public has little ability (without great effort) to discern for themselves what is fact, what is fiction, and what to vote for.
So obviously, in this climate, integrity in reporting is important.
Furthermore, because of modern advertising know-how, politicians understand that band-wagon support is as vital as vast sums of money when it comes to gathering political capital. Whether or not one lies on the "right" side of an issue is largely tracked by the "public"'s majority acceptance of a particular position.
So how do you lie and tilt things in your favor at the same time? By featuring a biased statistics firm of course!
John B dropped me this link with a brief Daily Kos discussion of just such a house. A group called Rasmussen features statistics that consistently lay in the Republican favor. In such a sensitive time, where public opinion can so easily sway the midterms at a crucial period in the Obama administration's legislative agenda, lying about statistics of all things becomes one of the most egregious acts of dishonesty possible.
Quite an audit on the state of things in this country when you need to ask where the numbers are coming from.
How do you fight something like this and what can we do to help?
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
A Hiatus Poorly Timed and Political Correctness Run Amok
Progressives passed Health Insurance Reform and I missed the celebration. Obama ran a victory lap with quips rivaling Mark Twain and I missed the laughter. The Tea Party's rhetoric became more vitriolic than ever during the debate and I missed the window for discussion.
However, I'm back. I apologize for the delay (though no delay was present if you've followed my Iowa State Daily works) and I promise to bring you more content as my scholarly duties melt into the ether. Thank God for the cap and gown.
The content of this post comes exclusively from John B. Thanks again for digging me out of the blogging hole.
Today, Slate mirrors a recent piece of mine decrying the misuse of terms like "tyranny" by the Tea Party. The underlying idea is identical to the motivation I used when I began writing for the Iowa State Daily: you cannot simply laugh off hateful ignorance. Even if it's in everyday conversation, allowing people to convince others that Obama is a "socialist-communist-fascist" or bring "facts" against social programs that help the needy is a step backwards for our country. The more people that get away with stuff like this, facts unchecked, the harder it is to move forward in a progressive manner.
John B astutely asks then when someone will finally ask these people, "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" this being the famous question that brought down McCarthyism in the '50s. Honestly, how much longer can people continue to share such a blindingly hateful and errant doctrine before someone finally says enough? Tolerance of this, my friends, is political correctness run amok.
Disagree, but don't hate. Respect and debate for the good of all mankind. Do not "save" humanity by losing your humanity.
It's good to be back.
However, I'm back. I apologize for the delay (though no delay was present if you've followed my Iowa State Daily works) and I promise to bring you more content as my scholarly duties melt into the ether. Thank God for the cap and gown.
The content of this post comes exclusively from John B. Thanks again for digging me out of the blogging hole.
Today, Slate mirrors a recent piece of mine decrying the misuse of terms like "tyranny" by the Tea Party. The underlying idea is identical to the motivation I used when I began writing for the Iowa State Daily: you cannot simply laugh off hateful ignorance. Even if it's in everyday conversation, allowing people to convince others that Obama is a "socialist-communist-fascist" or bring "facts" against social programs that help the needy is a step backwards for our country. The more people that get away with stuff like this, facts unchecked, the harder it is to move forward in a progressive manner.
John B astutely asks then when someone will finally ask these people, "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" this being the famous question that brought down McCarthyism in the '50s. Honestly, how much longer can people continue to share such a blindingly hateful and errant doctrine before someone finally says enough? Tolerance of this, my friends, is political correctness run amok.
Disagree, but don't hate. Respect and debate for the good of all mankind. Do not "save" humanity by losing your humanity.
It's good to be back.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Health Insurance Reform: The Final Push Day 1
Good evening everybody!
I received an email in my inbox today from the Oranizing for America chief David Plouffe. The message talked about the final push to the health care bill and what we could do to help so, in the interest of moving (what I view to be) progressive legislation forward, I'm participating.
And you are my victims.
The following links are as they are titled, please feel free to ingest and digest. Let's help get the truth out and this bill through!
Here's to the future.
I received an email in my inbox today from the Oranizing for America chief David Plouffe. The message talked about the final push to the health care bill and what we could do to help so, in the interest of moving (what I view to be) progressive legislation forward, I'm participating.
And you are my victims.
The following links are as they are titled, please feel free to ingest and digest. Let's help get the truth out and this bill through!
The plan
The status quo
The effect
The facts
Canvasing
Here's to the future.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Authority
What is the one factor that confounds the dream of an informed citizenry more than any other? I'll give you a hint: it's news organizations with an agenda masquerading as harbingers of truth.
Think about it, if you knew no better, you could turn on Fox News, listen to their insistent tone and seemingly authoritative factual backing and, with no questions, follow them into the mouth of hell itself, offense intended. Psychologically speaking, without the blessing of foreknowledge, one is powerless to the pulls of an authoritative demeanor, which leads to a daily conflation of fact and fiction at the whims of whoever is pulling the corporate strings.
Did I jump into that too early? Well no turning back now: what is it that leads a "news" organization down the road to journalistic perdition? Sensationalism aside, news agencies have little to make off of the public by spouting biased political facts. Well, thanks to John B, we may finally have an answer:
The Media-Lobbying Complex
by Sebastian Jones
I refuse to spoil this one. It's simply too good a read.
Please, ingest and comment. How is it that this sort of thing goes so unnoticed or so un-cared-about?
Think about it, if you knew no better, you could turn on Fox News, listen to their insistent tone and seemingly authoritative factual backing and, with no questions, follow them into the mouth of hell itself, offense intended. Psychologically speaking, without the blessing of foreknowledge, one is powerless to the pulls of an authoritative demeanor, which leads to a daily conflation of fact and fiction at the whims of whoever is pulling the corporate strings.
Did I jump into that too early? Well no turning back now: what is it that leads a "news" organization down the road to journalistic perdition? Sensationalism aside, news agencies have little to make off of the public by spouting biased political facts. Well, thanks to John B, we may finally have an answer:
The Media-Lobbying Complex
by Sebastian Jones
I refuse to spoil this one. It's simply too good a read.
Please, ingest and comment. How is it that this sort of thing goes so unnoticed or so un-cared-about?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Language and Terrorism
Morning everybody!
I posted this on Facebook but I figured everybody would find this one interesting.
Terrorism: the most meaningless and manipulated word
by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com
The fact is that flying a plane into a building to advance a political agenda through violence is terrorism, just not with a capital T according to Fox News. While the cost of lives between this and 9/11 are not even comparable, what Joseph Stack did was terrorism, cut and dry.
I've been harangued by commenters at the Daily claiming that not being racist is political correctness at its worst. Tell me how not calling this man a terrorist is not political correctness run amok. Not saying that I subscribe to the college of "stop being so polite and call a spade a spade" in order to promote racism, but it shows the hypocrisy in the message if you ask me, which none of you did.
Enjoy your day, and learn something.
I posted this on Facebook but I figured everybody would find this one interesting.
Terrorism: the most meaningless and manipulated word
by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com
The fact is that flying a plane into a building to advance a political agenda through violence is terrorism, just not with a capital T according to Fox News. While the cost of lives between this and 9/11 are not even comparable, what Joseph Stack did was terrorism, cut and dry.
I've been harangued by commenters at the Daily claiming that not being racist is political correctness at its worst. Tell me how not calling this man a terrorist is not political correctness run amok. Not saying that I subscribe to the college of "stop being so polite and call a spade a spade" in order to promote racism, but it shows the hypocrisy in the message if you ask me, which none of you did.
Enjoy your day, and learn something.