STUFF OF THE DAY: MAY 15, 2006 (NEW AND IMPROVED WITH A BUNCH OF TYPOS FIXED!)

DICK MOVE OF THE DAY:

The New York Times got a hold of some evidence that Special Prosecutor Fitzpatrick is planning to use in his prosecution of Scooter Libby. The document: A copy of the January 2003 op-ed piece by then special ambassador Joseph Wilson criticizing the case for war in Iraq. The cut-out op-ed piece has what are alleged to be Dick Cheney’s notes scribbled neatly in the margins. It is clearly an attempt to fashion an attack on Wilson. The last, intriguing note reads, “Did his wife send him there on a junket?” Alas. Cheney’s notes on Plame. The smoking gun. Or the Plaming pile of poop. Motive. Knowledge. Opportunity. While only Libby has been indicted, it suggests the intriguing possibility that the chain of accountability went up as high as Cheney…and the even more intriguing possibility that there might be a legal basis for going after him. No, my breath is not held. I’m not pulling a David Blaine on this one. But, whether he’s implicated or indicted or neither, I’ll say this about Cheney: His doodles and marginal scribblings are surprisingly legible for such a self fashioned arrogant/macho prick. I’d always assumed there was an inverse relationship between one's level of macho arrogance and one’s quality of penmanship (see doctors' famous disregard for legibility and diffident schoolgirls’ famous prioritization of it.) Is this just a gratuitous observation from the margins of political history, or perhaps evidence of a kinder gentler, more effeminate side to the Imperial Dick—a more Brokeback side to the quail hunting cowboy?

“LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT” MOMENT OF THE DAY

I know what I am about to say is nothing new. Indeed, it may be tired to the point of cliché. But then again, the fact that we are all going to die or that the earth is forever spinning or that Adam Sandler is considered a great talent is nothing new either. But we still look upon these things with newfound amazement from time to time. So, all this by way of preface. What I want to say—unoriginal though incomprehensible as it might be –is: So, let me get this straight. Our last president lied about a blow job and was impeached. But this administration has lied to start a war in which over a hundred thousand people have been killed, ordered illegal wiretappings of countless citizens and, as the immaculately scrivened Cheney op-ed notes suggest, jeopardized the life of an undercover American CIA agent by revealing her identity in an act of political revenge on her husband---and no is even talking about impeachment in a serious manner? Add to this, illegal fundraising initiatives incompetence and deception of epic proportions in matters of the environment, taxation and campaigning, etc etc. etc. and…OK, just wanted to make sure. Fine. No problem. Just checking.

That said: I’m a big fan of the Democrats looking forward rather than backward; coming up with a clear, relevant alternative platform rather than dissipating their energies on the vengeful wish to punish the administration for their crimes…But still. C’mon. Dang.

2008 THOUGHT OF THE DAY: GORE ON SNL

Talking about looking forward and looking back: The man who won the popular vote for the presidency in 2000 made a surprise appearance on SNL this weekend—offering us a superficially amusing but deeply painful glimpse of how things might be different now if the popular will of the country had been respected at that time. His appearance convinced me that he is seriously testing the waters for a run in 2008—a development I’d personally applaud. In the public imagination, he was last seen right before the epoch-defining, politically-manipulated attacks of 9/11. And while one might think this would cast him irrevocably into the fog of historical irrelevance, I think that, to the contrary, it gives him a unique and powerful position from which to speak. Indeed, I believe having been offstage during these compromised and compromising 6 years, he can benefit from the myriad failures and embarrassments of this administration and can ride the “road not taken” sentiment much farther than any of the other Democrat candidates. Indeed, his absence over the last two terms is arguably his strongest virtue—as no one has come out of these rotten times unscathed. His gravitas and emotional authority are unassailable and so long as he abandons his carefully focus-grouped, wooden candidacy of 2000 (an embarrassment one suspects he rues every waking moment and will never ever repeat), I think he can actually win the damn thing. With respect to moderate voters who’ve become alienated by Bush-Cheney but still harbor irrational hatred of Clinton, Gore will not be tinged by associations with the former president—as he clearly separated himself from him during the campaign of 2000. And I think after 8 years of an imperial Chimp, moderate America might be more interested in a candidate’s “Presidentiality” and breadth of actionable knowledge than in his “would I like to have a beer with him?” factor. Kerry is shot. He’ll still be trying to clarify his position on the war until at least 5 mintues after his death. And Obama is not ready (not to mention not white enough). The big challenge of course will be Hillary--a candidate the Democratic party power structure is pledged to support—despite lingering doubts about her electability. Let’s be clear. I actually sort of like Hillary (her transparently calculated positions shifts and barely veneered ambition notwithstanding). But there is no way on earth that she can win the election. People in the party must know this and must be hoping that someone (like Gore) comes along with enough independent momentum to allow them to save face in switching horses. (Defending their move on the grounds of electability and “Party unity.”)

MUSIC COMMENT OF THE DAY: PAUL SIMON ON SNL

Another 55 year old plus liberal made an appearance on SNL with Gore, albeit one about a foot and a half shorter. It was Paul Simon. He sang two lovely, catchy songs from his most recent album “Surprise”—the second of which repeated the lyrics: “Who’s gonna love you when your looks are gone? Who’s gonna love you when your looks are gone? Who’s gonna love you when your looks are gone? Who’s gonna love you when your looks are gone?” It was a nice song and an important question, but it’d be more impressive for someone like Jacob Dylan or Julien Casablancas (of The Strokes) to be singing it. Someone whose looks weren’t already gone…at birth. Now that’d be a striking statement in this age of vanity and youth worship. But, hey, from Paul, it was pretty nice too.

A propos of this question, I couldn’t help by thinking—as I watched the frumpy little rhymer-- how the fact that Edie Brickell is in love with him is an eloquent testimony to the superior spiritual depth of women over men. You didn’t see Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger, Jim Morrison or Jimi Hendrix falling in love with Janis Joplin because she was so beautiful on the inside, did you? (Sorry for shifting eras, but I just couldn’t think of any soulful but unlovely female singer from today. Perhaps that’s because the MTV-ization of music has made it next to impossible for a less than moderately attractive woman to get a record contract? Or maybe it’s just that I couldn’t think of one and so—lazily—went old school where the picking was easy. Thank you Janis.)

MEMORY OF THE DAY:

Speaking of Gore: I remember when I was still embittered by Gore’s self-defeatingly wooden run for the roses in 2000 and I saw him endorse Dean in 2003. He was passionate, uncompromising, charismatic—in short, everything he had failed to be against Bush. I remember thinking: That Gore. He can’t run. But MAN can that guy endorse!!!

WISH FOR THE DAY:

May there come a day when there will be something more than our ring tones to differentiate or unite us.

TV COMMENT OF THE DAY:

It was brought to my attention that one of the comelier female contestants on Survivor had lost a lot of weight over the course of the show and was looking really great. I suspect that even if Survivor fails to survive as a Reality TV show, it will continue to thrive as a weight loss program—no longer competing against “Lost” or “Alias” or “24” but instead competing against Trimspa.

OBSERVATION OF THE DAY:

As we all know, people are seldom polite in the subways any more. Men never even offer a pregnant woman a seat unless she’s really hot. So why does it seem that the only time people are unfailingly polite in the subway is when you’ve dropped the Sunday circular crap out of the interior of your newspaper and they pick it up and offer it back to you?? Let’s face it: the spilling of the filler was a fortuitous act of kibble reduction—unintended though not undesired. But now you have to act grateful for the gesture of help--lest you appear like an unappreciative litterbug. Is this helpfulness or a perverse passive aggressiveness on their part? Are your fellow passengers coming to your aid or trying to thwart and reproach you with an apparent act of assistance?

CURIOSITY OF THE DAY:

Ted Kennedy’s plane was hit by lightning. On the one hand, you can say "My Goodness, Proof that the Kennedy Clan is cursed!" But the fact that he didn't die can also be interpreted as meaning he lacks the gravitas and moral authority to be a true Kennedy. If he were a true Kennedy, you know that plane would have caught fire and crashed. It's like fate is snubbing him--depriving him the familiar familial immortalization of a tragic end. He's probably condemned to being the first Kennedy to die the undignified death of an old drunk. Or, as my friend suggests,he may finally have so much residual alcohol fumes coming out of his pores that he may walk by a fireplace one day and spontaneously combust. But still, hardly a Kennedy-esque ending.

COLBERT QUOTE OF THE DAY:

"I admire this man. He doesn't just stand for things, he stands ON things. Things like rubble and aircraft carriers and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message: that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound -- with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world."

CHERRYHILL SCAMMER UPDATE OF THE DAY:

Still no word from the nice British Jewish man I loaned money to in Grand Central Station. But I just read about a letter that was delivered after 54 years, so I'm not giving up hope! Like Anne Frank, I still believe that mankind is basically good. But unlike Anne Frank, I'm sort of kidding.

MEDIA META-COMMENTARY OF THE DAY:

ESPN's getting into bed with Barry Bonds (by broadcasting a “reality TV show” that functions as a propoganda vehicle for the embattled superstar) is like the rest of the media getting into bed with the administration at the outset of the war. Ah, the compromised fourth estate. Ah, ABC/Disney! Ah, humanity!

HERO OF THE DAY:

QWEST. For refusing to turn over phone records to the NSA over concerns about its legality.

QUESTION OF THE DAY:

How will we know when the “War on Terror” is over? (Hmm. Isn’t THAT convenient.)

UNOFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE REMINDER OF THE DAY:

Remember: Gravity is just a theory.

IMAGE FROM THE WEEKEND:

Awakening at dusk in a train as you pass the stop that was your childhood.

QUOTE OF THE DAY:

Overheard being said plaintively with a surprisingly high voice into his cell phone by a large African-American guy on the street:

“But why should we have gone to fisticuffs? Why?”

Tags:   None

© All rights reserved.

Posted on 5/15/2006 ( Permanent Link )
Read 457 Times
 Send to Friend