I’m a Bleeding Heart Liberal…Because Esquire Magazine Says So

Bleeding heart 2This feels so…not right…I think.

I have always thought of myself as a centrist in personal and political disposition.  I don’t care for extremism on the left or the right and I think “compromise” is a good word and a good way to get things done when it comes to governing.  I like notion that our leaders fight over questions of political philosophy and practical governance by day and then play softball on the Mall and share a beer afterwards.

But, according to Esquire Magazine’s survey of the “New American Center” I’m a classic “bleeding heart liberal.”  There’s apparently nothing to the left of me.

Continue reading

It’s the “Hysterical Delusional Affirmation” Syndrome

NEW SLAUGHTERThis was pretty good from Charlie Cook’s National Journal column today …

“Driving in to work Tuesday morning while listening to WTOP, Washington’s excellent all-news radio station, I heard my friend, the extremely able congressional reporter Dave McConnell, relate a conversation he had with a Republican House member. This member told McConnell that allowing the debt ceiling to be breached might “get the leadership’s attention.” That sounded like a kid saying if he threw his mother’s priceless vase against the wall, she might start letting him do what he wants. Political judgment this bad, coming from members of Congress, is a dangerous thing for a party. When it comes to dealing with something with enormous consequences, such as intentionally creating a situation that could lead to default on our national debt, we are no longer quibbling about minor differences of opinion.

Continue reading

A Rowdy Crowd Pop Quiz

NEW SLAUGHTERWhat father of what politician preached this … ?

“There are some of you, as a matter of fact I will dare to say the majority of you, that your anointing is not an anointing as priest. It’s an anointing as king. And God has given you an anointing to go to the battlefield. And what’s the battlefield ? The battlefield is the marketplace. To go to the marketplace and occupy the land. To go to the marketplace and take dominion. If you remember the last time I was in this pulpit, I talked to you about Genesis chapter 1, verse 28, where God says unto Adam and Eve, “Go forth, multiply, TAKE DOMINION over all creation.” And if you recall, we talked about the fact that dominion is not just in the church. That dominion is over every area – society, education, government, economics…

Continue reading

Not Just “Unconditional”, A Faceplant Surrender

NEW SLAUGHTERSo, it has come to this. A complete, unconditional, unequivocal faceplant surrender by John Boehner. I should feel more Schadenfreude and vindication than I do.

A few thoughts on the truly ridiculous debacle we’ve just lived through (and may have to live through again in January).

1:  Can a major political party get any closer to the life-or-death decision of whether to self-amputate a body part than the Republicans are today? I keep thinking about Utah hiker Aaron Ralston, sawing off his own arm from under an immovable boulder in order to live to hike another day. The Tea Party has made the Republican party an object of ridicule and contempt with truly perilous consequences for even “moderate”-but-enabling characters like John Kline and Eric Paulsen here in Minnesota.

Continue reading

CJR asks: What is journalism for?

Ira Glass CMU 2006

The Columbia Journalism Review published an article that compiled an incredible array of responses to the question “What is journalism for?” The answers came from people like Peggy Noonan, Arianna Huffington, Ben Smith of BuzzFeed, Matt Welch of Reason Magazine, Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic, Craig Newmark of Craigslist and so many more.

My favorite is Ira Glass, who said:

Journalism is to document and explain what’s going on in the world. The kind of journalism we do at our show also takes as its mission to entertain. On a weekly schedule, we don’t think you have to sacrifice the idealistic, mission-driven parts of the job in order to entertain.

Anyone who’s trying to get at the truth of a situation can be a journalist. It’s not fucking rocket science. Talk to people, write down or record what they say, use good judgment in picking quotes and evaluating the overall truth of what’s happening. Try to summarize it interestingly for others. A kid can do it.

Read the rest here. Then take your swing at answering the question below. Remember the specific wording: Not “what is journalism?” What is journalism for?

My answer, off the top of my head: Journalism is for making people smarter. Which means you assholes writing about Miley Cyrus have some god damned explaining to do.

End of Days for the Bubble-Saurii.

NEW SLAUGHTERAlong with the strategies, tactics and rhetoric, this whole shutdown/default crisis is a fascinating moral drama, at least for President Obama.

His level of exasperation with Republican malfeasance and ineptitude was pretty evident in his press conference yesterday, and mirrors what the public is saying in polls. You saw today’s? Where Congressional approval has hit … 5%? Scrape away a bit and you’ll find that number is an overwhelming condemnation of the Tea Party factor.

Obama certainly knows — and said — that we can’t go on like this, with the same bunch of “neo-confederates” (TM former Republican staffer Mike Lofgren) ginning up a national crisis every three months. I suspect he is factoring that into his thinking talk of a “deal” that kicks this can a month down the road. Why do that? What does that really serve? At some point enough has to be enough, and the public at large is clearly on board with that line of thought.

Continue reading

No problem? Sez who?

A few weeks ago, on one of my favorite TV programs, CBS’s “Sunday Morning,” the commentator Bill Flanagan deliciously lamented and skewered the younger generation’s annoying habit of answering reasonable requests with the expression, “No problem.”

He said that in almost every instance, there is no problem to begin with, so that an answer of “no problem” is inappropriate. What’s called for, he said, is an answer such as, “I’ll be happy to do that for you,” or, “Certainly.”

Well, I do have a problem, and it also has to do with choice in language.

I can best illustrate it by pointing to a Minnesota Public Radio program in its series of Q&A sessions with noted broadcast journalists. The featured guest was the NPR reporter Kelly McEvers, who has been covering the civil war in Syria.

I have no reason to doubt the courage or skill she has brought to that assignment. But I do recoil at the way she speaks: almost every sentence contains the word “like’,” as in the popular misusage regularly heard among high schoolers: “I was, like, surprised,” or, “I’m, like, what are you talking about?”

Further, she larded her sentences with “you know” –a crutch phrase that equates with “um.” And she used the qualifiers “sort of” and “kind of” as hedges, when no hedges were needed. If something is a fact, it’s not “kind of” a fact. Just state the fact.

For these lapses I blame not her, but rather her supervisors, who are failing to hold her (and, I presume, other on-air staffers) to a standard worthy of the pre-eminent American radio news operation. Her editors would never allow her written stories to contain these blemishes, nor can I imagine her ever writing THE stories in that way. But when it comes to speaking without a script, she suddenly morphs from professional journalist to Valley Girl.

People who speak in that way are creatures of a culture that has produced language slackers. Of course some people in every generation do master fundamentals and niceties.

I wrote to the NPR ombudsman, who replied that his office considers only concerns about ethics, but would forward my message to the NPR training officer. I thanked him for that, but urged him to send it first to the editors and producers who directly control the output of their first-line reporters.

If NPR’s news managers do not enforce strict standards for speech, they will undermine the network’s substance and image.

To my mind there’s no difference between hearing language slackers on NPR and seeing Jeff Daniels (lead actor in “The Newsroom”) accept his Emmy Award while chomping on chewing gum on camera.

It’s a problem — not “no problem.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,893 other followers