Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
One of the Right Wing News crew asked a question just now, that really should not have been asked. She wants to know why anyone is defending Sarah Palin. Why have the Palin defenders — she invents a paradigm, which I’m challenged to take seriously in light of recent events, that the Palin fans are somehow militant, incurious, uncompromising and just-plain-nuts — not scrutinized her dismal performances? It’s a wonderfully elegant exercise in grokking. That means to observe something while having an effect on what’s being observed, so that it becomes an open question of who is changing the mindset of who. Ms. Cavere offers an illusion of asking a question and being open to whatever information drifts her way as an honest response, but the diligent observer can’t help but think she’s already got her mind made up about things…and is far more concerned with shaping an outcome than learning what she says she wants to learn.
This strikes us as a particularly awkward time to be advancing the notion that a slick and polished performance on the teevee, has something to do with what’s generally accepted as good leadership. Our country appears to be finding out the painful way that that isn’t true. We thought there was a parallel; “we” voted for it; now it’s emerged that we gambled and lost. This “Right Wing” person wants to advance that assertion yet again? See, we here look at the elections that took place last year and we see three failures. Exactly three, no more and no less; two committed by the nice folks who voted for Obama, and one committed by the RINOs who thought John McCain would make the best candidate on the other side.
“If we vote for ‘hope,’ we’ll get it.”
“He’ll be a wonderful President because He gives such amazing speeches (There’s just something about Him! I can’t explain it!).”
“The only votes Republicans have a shot at getting, they’ll get by being moderate, friendly, classy, and they’ll lose the votes if they ever go on the attack (or mention Jeremiah Wright).”
All three of those were put to the test. And all three failed the test. But it’s a funny thing about the hoi polloi when they discuss things that fail tests, isn’t it? All they wanna talk about is Sarah Palin’s “performance” when she was interviewed by Katie Couric and Charles Gibson. News flash: “Katie Couric” appears nowhere in the Constitution. Neither does Charles Gibson.
Left this comment:
The “hostile” interviews with Charles Gibson and Katie Couric are mentioned, but why has Mrs. Palin’s performance in “friendly” interviews not undergone scrutiny among conservatives?
Because conservatives tend to be more worried about what she would do if & when she got elected, rather than how she “comes off.” This is a sharp contrast against Obama fans who, by and large, completely neglected the questions associated with what their Man-God would do in office, opting instead to genuflect before His “wonderful speeches”…which, it turns out, seem to be about all He has to offer. online.wsj.com
True conservatives, it turns out, are a pretty strange bunch — even stranger than people say. They tend to value what’s presented to them for the substance in it, rather than for the appearances. Comes from working for a living.
Mrs. Palin has adamant supporters who will defend her at any cost, but their reasons for this devotion have not adequately been explained. Why is there such vigor in defending her, instead of defending conservative principles?
This statement-disguised-as-a-question presumes a conflict where none exists. It would be far more legitimate to ask why some people seem so much more dead-set on electing someone with the letter ‘R’ after his name, instead of defending conservative principles.
The real question we need to be asking here has nothing to do with television performances. That isn’t even a question. What we need to be asking has to do with time…future and past. We saw last fall the permeating theme that we were voting for a New Tomorrow, for “change.” Here in the following summer, that is looking like a more and more ridiculous mindset with each passing week. You could say we just forfeited the country’s future — mortgaged a future that, as of a year ago, we still had. It’s in hock now. That’s what we get for voting for the future. Ironic, no?
Where is your Hope-n-Change now?
No, as a Palin backer I’d say we are the ones embracing the future — because in 2012, a “back to basics” approach is going to look pretty damn refreshing. Regrettably so. And call me naive if you want, but I have to doubt a flashy presence on the boob tube is going to count for very much.
Like I said. We tend to be rather selective about what’s been run through the “acid test” and is ready to be evaluated for its less than impressive performance, for a possible ranking as an abject failure never to be tried again. We’re choosy about that…because we can afford to be. But that’s changing. We’re losing some luxuries we’ve been enjoying, and that’s going to be one of them. Not that I’m rooting for this — I’m not some “never let a crisis go to waste” type o’ guy — but once people have had their standard of living eroded to the point where continuing survival is exposed to the ultimate exigency of question, their tendency is to become a bit more even-handed in applying tests and evaluating results. That’s what we as a country are facing right now…we’re learning some lessons that we have been needing to learn. Deep down, I believe every thinking voter knows that to be true. Just think back to November…and January 20. Imagine a space alien visiting our planet and watching that stuff, a space alien skilled in logic, reason, somewhat acquainted with different forms of government and how they work — but altogether foreign to our customs, the oddities in our culture, the factions within, and our recent history. Just imagine the questions he’d have for us about this Obamamania!
We, collectively, engaged in a poor exercise of decision-making, placing great weight on things that didn’t matter, and neglecting things that did. We are suffering the consequences, and in three years we’ll have an opportunity to do better. That’s really all there is to it. Couric & Gibson aren’t part of it.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great post Morgan and for the record I don’t think your beating a dead horse but rather making some very good points that need to be made over and over again.
BTW – “It’s a wonderfully elegant exercise in grokking. ” –
http://tryingtogrok.new.mu.nu/
- tim | 07/17/2009 @ 05:58Like a Vulcan…? Wonder what Spock would say.
- KG | 07/17/2009 @ 17:56It’s an ancient trope. I think “My Favorite Martian” started it…then “I Dream of Jeannie” which counts…you know Mork from Ork counts.
That’s exactly what made all those shows funny: Us. This poor thawed-out caveman or rejuvenated mummy would be struggling to figure us out, and when you think on any specific subject for any length of time you realize we don’t make as much sense as we like to think we do.
That principle has never been more true, I daresay, than it is right now.
- mkfreeberg | 07/17/2009 @ 18:10BTW, I’ve always related to those guys. Sometimes I think I really should have called this blog “The Latest Mork,” with myself being the title character.
- mkfreeberg | 07/17/2009 @ 18:12