Subject: Is it just me?

Maybe it's just me, but whenever I see President Gump in front of a TV
camera, he still comes off like a fifth grader doing an oral report on
a book he hadn't bothered to read. Or is it just me?

Whenever I hear him talk, he's doing the same thing for the English
language that Godzilla did for Tokyo. Where are all the people
screaming, 'If you can't speak the language, don't live in this country'?

Note to self: Rent "The Candidate" again and see if I'm finding out the
answer to Robert Redford's question at the end: "What now?" One thing
for sure, I'd damned well rather have RR than what we have. At least he
can read his lines without looking like he just fouled his diaper.

How can any American watch this pantload and say he's 'presidential' or
is doing a good job? It should be obvious that Cheney has his arm way
up Bush's ass and is working his mouth like a hand puppet. Puppet is one
word that is right for describing Bush. Gerry Trudeau in Doonesbury has
to draw a hat floating in space above Bush's neck so readers know
there's supposed to be something there.

I wish most people would find out what the rest of the world is saying.
They're not in bed with the big businesses here and can say it more like it is.

Here are a couple of quotes from just the last couple of days:

Mikhail Gorbachev - I believe the United States needs to carefully
consider the problems of missile defense, NATO expansion and nuclear
nonproliferation. After all, these are issues of concern not only with
Russia and China but also between the United States and its allies. So
I ask, what is it all for? Rather than covering yourself with defense, it
would be a lot better to enter a new phase of cooperation and
partnership. If the United States goes further in the wrong direction,
I won’t  even venture to say what would happen, because it
could cause a new arms race. We have doves and hawks in both of our
countries, but the American and Russian people don’t want a new
confrontation, they don’t want an arms race, they face so many problems....

Pierre Rousselin of France's Le Figaro: “Does President Bush want to
conduct his business with no thought of the U.N.? The countries that refused
to vote for the United States wanted to teach a lesson to the new master of America.”
(I myself am waiting for him to master English-isaac).
This was in reference to the United States being voted off 2 U.N. committees last week.

We're not going to find out from our own media the shitstorm of stories
around the world calling us an arrogant, rogue nation with a clueless,
vacuous cowboy as the figurehead for a group of misanthropic, cold war
throwbacks intent on pissing off every goddamned nation on the planet.

I could go on, but won't. Anyone who wants to keep an ear to the rest
of the world can check out a British publication called the Guardian for
starters. Also check out Le Monde or Asahi Shimbun for more complete
news of our country than is generally available here.

But to continue with Bush and our own media: Let me re-ask a question raised
by my dear, dear friend and colleague, the lovely Tally Briggs-with these polls
showing approval for Bush and his policies, who the hell are the people being
asked the question? Certainly not me or anyone I know.

Even without me or my acquaintances it should be hard to find the level
of support that gets reported. In the last presidential election many more people
voted for Gore and the other guy than Bush. That means a majority who voted
wanted a more leftward direction than what we're getting.

Keeping that in mind, and the fact that the news networks are pigs
rooting deeper and deeper for ratings, why does the news continue being
so right wing? CNN has been edging more and more that way because of
the Fake News Network's ratings surge. Aren't there enough conservatives to
go around? One survey I saw a number of months claimed that only roughly
1/3 of the population claims to be Republican. So what's going on?
Doesn't common sense say that the media should be more left than
right-going where the viewers are?

When I try to watch the (unwatchable) Sunday morning gasbag shows, one
clue pops up: the huge corporations own the ad time on those shows. The
amount of money GE and ADM alone spend trying to convince us that even
though they are among the worst offenders of human rights on the planet,
they're really good guys looking out for us and our future. If you
follow the money, it's obvious those shows rake in enough ad dollars
from them and others that they don't need you or me. So I guess it's
not about ratings, but money (Horrors! I'm shocked! Appalled, I tells ya!)

I ask myself also why do so many good-hearted people seem to trust the
networks for information? One clue should be that a lot of people seem
to have Katie Couric confused with a real journalist. I don't know, I
could see her being head cheeleader in high school, but a serious journalist...?

I think part of the problem is that every year that goes by, and the
more people come of age, the more people there are who grew up with the
crappy media we have, and don't know the media used to be different.
Before too terribly much longer, no one will remember that the 'most
trusted man in America' used to be a TV journalist, Walter Cronkite.
It's scary to me that the most trusted man right now may be: Regis Philbin.

I don't think the media can keep up with the "pay no attention to the
man behind the curtain" 'journalism' we have now. I see some hopeful
signs every now and again. I watched Bush respond to questions about
Tim McVeigh's execution being delayed the other night on C-Span. I didn't
believe it: some of the questions were actually tough and some of the
reporters were trying to follow up.

My favorite question and response was about Bush's tax cut proposal.
His answer was the usual "I campaigned on that plan." He's obviously still
campaigning. (Aside to GWB: Yes you did campaign on that. It's one of
the reasons most people voted for the other guys). I don't remember
anyone following up on that one, but it was good to see Bush do his
best impression of a bug under a magnifying glass on a hot day.

Bush called a halt to the questioning before long and got the hell out before
anyone could look to see if he had  a big wet spot on the front of his pants.

I wish I could remember the name of the book so I could recommend it,
but a few months back I read a book by Clinton's head speechwriter.
Bush has good reason to come off like he's afraid the teleprompter will
break down. Apparently it does sometimes, and at exactly the wrong moments.
Sometimes it just doesn't work, sometimes the disk the words are on
isn't formatted correctly. The Big Dog wasn't scared of that; he could
just look into the camera and wing it if it came to that. The clown we
have now would probably manage a few "homina, homina's" and then have
such a massive bowel movement he'd be lucky to have any bones left..

I wonder if Yale has asked him yet to quit telling everybody he graduated from there?


Privacy Policy
. .