Kathleen Parker is at it again!! (she Loves Zombies)
Hey Folks,
There are always two sides to every story, and Kathleen Parker will give you both of them. It just depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Invariably if someone to the left is in question, she trots out the authoritarian, hard-line, fire-and-brimstone, accountability, crime and punishment rhetoric. If the focus is on a Righty – as with the George Allen’s “macaca” incident – she breaks out the violins and plays the give-him-a-break, oh-come-on, that’s-not-what-he-said/meant, it’s-no-big-deal, do-you-want-to-hurt-America medley.
Having perceived – after much study – that Allen had a long history as a Righty (as well as a racist), she rosined up her bow.
Her discord is reproduced below – with my comments in red.
- Uke Man
Society makes great sacrifices in this age of unending, often raw information (Yeah, we have to think for ourselves, what a pain!! What a "sacrifice"!!!)
Monday, August 28, 2006
KATHLEEN PARKER
The age of YouTube, iPod, blogs, Technorati and Digg — combined with 24-7 insta-everything — has created both a wondrous and horrifying (she's not talking about interminable Mentos & Diet Pop videos) world.
Wondrous belongs to the spectators, who are free to google, oogle and giggle (passive oogling giggling SPECTATORS - entertainment - is "wonderous" [check John Lennon's line in "Working Class Hero"] ) . Horrifying is the realm of actors (not "passive-ors"- not SPECTATORS like us). Not actors of the Tom Cruise variety, though Maverick’s meltdown surely is as much a function of the relentless Eye as of his odd behavior.
I’m talking more about real people (people not like us who "google, oogle, and giggle" - "real" people) who mount life’s stage in good faith to do things that matter (unlike googling, oogling, and giggling - which IS "wonderful" and quite suitable for regular folks - just not "real people" ). To shape events, to mold policy, to advance civilization (on what basis? according to whom? certainly not according to us; we just need to keep busy googling, oogling, and giggling while REAL people act). Not everyone is qualified for the job, clearly, but neither is every critic a worthy adversary (especially not those severely affected by the "actors").
What passes for acceptable criticism today was unimaginable a generation ago (she must be unaware of Nixon's campaign tactics in his 1950 Senate campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas). So, too, are the mechanisms for capturing and distributing our every public — or private — moment.
Where once you made a gaffe in front of 100 people, today you do it in front of millions. Not once, but forevermore. YouTube, the Web site where anyone can post a video, has become a favorite hitching post for riders of the blogosphere. And what about tapping any citizens' phones "whenever" and without oversight and without notice? No tears there?
Count me in. I love it. I watch TV segments I missed. Today, I watched a wrenching homage to the Lebanese people. Yesterday it was the amazing wardrobe-changing act from an episode of America’s Got Talent. Not long ago, I watched a tape of Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead singing the national anthem in 1993 at San Francisco’s Candlestick Park. Spectacular.
And then there was Sen. George Allen, R-Va. Will he ever survive the macaca tape (should he?)? Probably not, because no one will ever forget (should they?). It’s there, captured for all time, rewound and replayed a thousand times, archived in the ethers of the World Wide Web, forever and beyond.
Likewise, if you give a speech to, say, 500 people in Ohio, you’re talking to them, those people, those faces, those eyes. You direct your remarks, your jokes, your expressions, to them (and if they are racists or homophobes or sexists - damn it! - real people who want to shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization ought to be able to play to their prejudices without worrying about some macaca with a video cam putting it up for happy, oogling-giggling Americans to get upset over).
But then you’re on the Web, podcasted, excerpted, spliced, inserted, critiqued by strangers (googlers and gigglers) and reviled by . . . whom? Anonymous. They — the googlers, ooglers and gigglers — are Everyone and No One In Particular. Which is it, Kathleen? Is everyone reviling Allen or is it no one?
I’ve been on the receiving end of Anonymous enough times to glimpse what higher-profile actors (oh, she considers herself someone who shapes events, molds policy, and advances civilization - an actor, although at a lower level than Allen) get to enjoy (she deserves it - that's why it hurts so much). Imagine being president of the United States. No thanks.
It’s not about having thick-enough skin to withstand the pressure and constant scrutiny. You can grow it over time. It’s whether you want to. Is anything worth that kind of self-sacrifice? Who will run for public office in such an environment? (this old bullshit!! Who runs for office now? Who always has? Only hacks that follow the party line which is determined by the big boys who as John Jay used to say "own this country") Only the exhibitionist? Only the hardest-nosed, thickest-skinned among us? What kind of people will they be? What kind of nation will we become? Not to worry - Bush & Co. will have it already totally fucked by 2008. And there's always Katherine Harris and Coach Dave to step into the void.
Something about our new anonymous world (as to that, who IS "Foxxx News"? everyone and no one?) has brought out the worst in all of us. We neither impose nor honor limits (e.g. Dubya, the Commander in Chief, contends he is not limited by either law or the Constitution - [you won't hear Kathleen complaining about that] ). The raunchy fare of late-night TV is now commonplace at prime time. The scatological has become pathological.
Wednesday night, I caught Keith Olbermann on MSNBC talking about President Bush’s reported fondness for bathroom jokes. I’m no prude when it comes to jokes (I bet she'd love the "Aristocrats"!!), but I’m way past potty humor. Olbermann apologized to viewers who might be offended (can you spell: I-R-O-N-Y ??), saying that he was merely repeating what already had been reported by U.S. News & World Report. (Ok, Kathleen, you want to beat up on Olbermann for reporting farts; where's your censure of the Farter in Chief? or is that flatulence of a different odor?)
Two thoughts: He didn’t have to relay it; he didn’t have to then expand the report to show Bush wearing expressions in photographs that could be suggestive of a potty joke’s punch line. Olbermann and a comedic sidekick provided captions and commentary. Oh, I see. It was a schtick of choice, a preemptive strike. He didn't have to do it, but our safety came first.
It’s hard to describe how bad it was. There’s a time and place for irreverent humor, but coming up with clever new ways to describe flatulence and relating it to the president (the president is the one who related fart jokes and even farted in front of new hires for "comic" effect, and YOU're going after the reporter?) isn’t, as my mother used to say, cute or funny.
It’s dumb. "Dumb" and "Dubya" - isn't that the title of an old fart-joke movie?
I don’t mean that fools shouldn’t be exposed, or that corrupt politicians or racists or what have you should be protected (just HER fools, corrupt politicians, racists, and what-have-you's). The vast array of media options also allows citizens greater access to useful information (to paraphrase Dylan: you can look up anything you want as long as it doesn't change anything). That goes in the "wondrous" column. But somewhere in this increasingly unprivate world, we (she means the Little People) have to develop a personal ethics that respects the privacy of others and, above all, their humanity. She means the privacy and humanity of the "real" people like her and Allen and the Pres - the ones who shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization - not us googlers, ooglers, and gigglers.
If not, our choices for future leaders will be either Mr. Narcissist or Ms. Perfect. One knows only what he wants; the other knows nothing at all. Well, we already have both, don't we? And all in one swaggering package. Our beloved President, No. 43, certainly knows what he wants, and - as he's left no doubt - he knows nothing at all.
Wee didn't need to Google to see that! And we're not giggling!
Kathleen Parker writes for The Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel.
kparker@kparker.com
There are always two sides to every story, and Kathleen Parker will give you both of them. It just depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Invariably if someone to the left is in question, she trots out the authoritarian, hard-line, fire-and-brimstone, accountability, crime and punishment rhetoric. If the focus is on a Righty – as with the George Allen’s “macaca” incident – she breaks out the violins and plays the give-him-a-break, oh-come-on, that’s-not-what-he-said/meant, it’s-no-big-deal, do-you-want-to-hurt-America medley.
Having perceived – after much study – that Allen had a long history as a Righty (as well as a racist), she rosined up her bow.
Her discord is reproduced below – with my comments in red.
- Uke Man
Society makes great sacrifices in this age of unending, often raw information (Yeah, we have to think for ourselves, what a pain!! What a "sacrifice"!!!)
Monday, August 28, 2006
KATHLEEN PARKER
The age of YouTube, iPod, blogs, Technorati and Digg — combined with 24-7 insta-everything — has created both a wondrous and horrifying (she's not talking about interminable Mentos & Diet Pop videos) world.
Wondrous belongs to the spectators, who are free to google, oogle and giggle (passive oogling giggling SPECTATORS - entertainment - is "wonderous" [check John Lennon's line in "Working Class Hero"] ) . Horrifying is the realm of actors (not "passive-ors"- not SPECTATORS like us). Not actors of the Tom Cruise variety, though Maverick’s meltdown surely is as much a function of the relentless Eye as of his odd behavior.
I’m talking more about real people (people not like us who "google, oogle, and giggle" - "real" people) who mount life’s stage in good faith to do things that matter (unlike googling, oogling, and giggling - which IS "wonderful" and quite suitable for regular folks - just not "real people" ). To shape events, to mold policy, to advance civilization (on what basis? according to whom? certainly not according to us; we just need to keep busy googling, oogling, and giggling while REAL people act). Not everyone is qualified for the job, clearly, but neither is every critic a worthy adversary (especially not those severely affected by the "actors").
What passes for acceptable criticism today was unimaginable a generation ago (she must be unaware of Nixon's campaign tactics in his 1950 Senate campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas). So, too, are the mechanisms for capturing and distributing our every public — or private — moment.
Where once you made a gaffe in front of 100 people, today you do it in front of millions. Not once, but forevermore. YouTube, the Web site where anyone can post a video, has become a favorite hitching post for riders of the blogosphere. And what about tapping any citizens' phones "whenever" and without oversight and without notice? No tears there?
Count me in. I love it. I watch TV segments I missed. Today, I watched a wrenching homage to the Lebanese people. Yesterday it was the amazing wardrobe-changing act from an episode of America’s Got Talent. Not long ago, I watched a tape of Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead singing the national anthem in 1993 at San Francisco’s Candlestick Park. Spectacular.
And then there was Sen. George Allen, R-Va. Will he ever survive the macaca tape (should he?)? Probably not, because no one will ever forget (should they?). It’s there, captured for all time, rewound and replayed a thousand times, archived in the ethers of the World Wide Web, forever and beyond.
Likewise, if you give a speech to, say, 500 people in Ohio, you’re talking to them, those people, those faces, those eyes. You direct your remarks, your jokes, your expressions, to them (and if they are racists or homophobes or sexists - damn it! - real people who want to shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization ought to be able to play to their prejudices without worrying about some macaca with a video cam putting it up for happy, oogling-giggling Americans to get upset over).
But then you’re on the Web, podcasted, excerpted, spliced, inserted, critiqued by strangers (googlers and gigglers) and reviled by . . . whom? Anonymous. They — the googlers, ooglers and gigglers — are Everyone and No One In Particular. Which is it, Kathleen? Is everyone reviling Allen or is it no one?
I’ve been on the receiving end of Anonymous enough times to glimpse what higher-profile actors (oh, she considers herself someone who shapes events, molds policy, and advances civilization - an actor, although at a lower level than Allen) get to enjoy (she deserves it - that's why it hurts so much). Imagine being president of the United States. No thanks.
It’s not about having thick-enough skin to withstand the pressure and constant scrutiny. You can grow it over time. It’s whether you want to. Is anything worth that kind of self-sacrifice? Who will run for public office in such an environment? (this old bullshit!! Who runs for office now? Who always has? Only hacks that follow the party line which is determined by the big boys who as John Jay used to say "own this country") Only the exhibitionist? Only the hardest-nosed, thickest-skinned among us? What kind of people will they be? What kind of nation will we become? Not to worry - Bush & Co. will have it already totally fucked by 2008. And there's always Katherine Harris and Coach Dave to step into the void.
Something about our new anonymous world (as to that, who IS "Foxxx News"? everyone and no one?) has brought out the worst in all of us. We neither impose nor honor limits (e.g. Dubya, the Commander in Chief, contends he is not limited by either law or the Constitution - [you won't hear Kathleen complaining about that] ). The raunchy fare of late-night TV is now commonplace at prime time. The scatological has become pathological.
Wednesday night, I caught Keith Olbermann on MSNBC talking about President Bush’s reported fondness for bathroom jokes. I’m no prude when it comes to jokes (I bet she'd love the "Aristocrats"!!), but I’m way past potty humor. Olbermann apologized to viewers who might be offended (can you spell: I-R-O-N-Y ??), saying that he was merely repeating what already had been reported by U.S. News & World Report. (Ok, Kathleen, you want to beat up on Olbermann for reporting farts; where's your censure of the Farter in Chief? or is that flatulence of a different odor?)
Two thoughts: He didn’t have to relay it; he didn’t have to then expand the report to show Bush wearing expressions in photographs that could be suggestive of a potty joke’s punch line. Olbermann and a comedic sidekick provided captions and commentary. Oh, I see. It was a schtick of choice, a preemptive strike. He didn't have to do it, but our safety came first.
It’s hard to describe how bad it was. There’s a time and place for irreverent humor, but coming up with clever new ways to describe flatulence and relating it to the president (the president is the one who related fart jokes and even farted in front of new hires for "comic" effect, and YOU're going after the reporter?) isn’t, as my mother used to say, cute or funny.
It’s dumb. "Dumb" and "Dubya" - isn't that the title of an old fart-joke movie?
I don’t mean that fools shouldn’t be exposed, or that corrupt politicians or racists or what have you should be protected (just HER fools, corrupt politicians, racists, and what-have-you's). The vast array of media options also allows citizens greater access to useful information (to paraphrase Dylan: you can look up anything you want as long as it doesn't change anything). That goes in the "wondrous" column. But somewhere in this increasingly unprivate world, we (she means the Little People) have to develop a personal ethics that respects the privacy of others and, above all, their humanity. She means the privacy and humanity of the "real" people like her and Allen and the Pres - the ones who shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization - not us googlers, ooglers, and gigglers.
If not, our choices for future leaders will be either Mr. Narcissist or Ms. Perfect. One knows only what he wants; the other knows nothing at all. Well, we already have both, don't we? And all in one swaggering package. Our beloved President, No. 43, certainly knows what he wants, and - as he's left no doubt - he knows nothing at all.
Wee didn't need to Google to see that! And we're not giggling!
Kathleen Parker writes for The Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel.
kparker@kparker.com
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home