The O'Franken Factor






Air America got off to a predictably shaky start yesterday, but I have high hopes for the show, and for host Al Franken. If anybody can prove that liberal talk radio doesn't have to be grim and humorless, it's the former Saturday Night comedian who once wrote a game show sketch called "Jew - Not a Jew".


Franken has some unintended help from right wing blowhards like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter, the four Horse's Asses of the Apocolypse, who have grown to become parodies of themselves.


You can hear The O'Franken Factor and other liberal talk shows in about eight American cities right now, which makes his total audience slightly larger than mine. OK, so that's a gross overstatement, and I would like to apologize to both of my readers for it. If you don't listen to AM radio in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and some other cities where all the cool TV shows are based, then you'll have to catch AirAmericaRadio on the internet. Here's the link:
AirAmericaRadio
And while I'm on the topic of Saturday Night Live, there had better be a sketch this weekend about Bush and Cheney sitting side by side, explaining to the 9/11 commission how seriously they took the terrorist threat in the first eight months of 2000.


BUSH: We knew that bin Laden fellow was up to no good. That's why I called nine-one-one. I didn't know they'd send a committee.

CHENEY: What he means to say is that this administration actively pursued a strategy that addressed the root causes of terrorism, which involved going after states that support terrorism.

BUSH: I was expecting the police. Or maybe a firetruck.

CHENEY: He's speaking metaphorically.

BUSH: Where are the jellybeans?

REP. HAMILTON: Mr. President, I regret to inform you that we did not place jellybeans on the witness table.

BUSH: We always have jellybeans in the situation room. That's in the White House.

REP. HAMILTON: Uh huh.

BUSH: It's in the basement.

CHENEY: For my next trick, I will drink a glass of water while he "sings." Do I hear any requests?
1.4.04 15:55


Yawn Darts

I listened to Al Franken over the internet this afternoon, and I fell asleep. I'm sorry, Al, but the show is really, really, really boring. Maybe the problem was that you were interviewing Richard Clarke, who was repeating accusations and anecdotes I've already heard. Clarke is soft spoken, and I had to strain to hear his words at times.



But the biggest problem, I think, is that you're trying to hard to be fair and balanced. You're too nice. Nuance doesn't work on talk radio. When you throw a punch, such as when you attacked the GOP for it's tax cut lies, you talked about the three different types of averages, "mean, mode and median." That kind of fancy booklearning is fine for NPR, but it doesn't work on the AM band.



You're too nice, Al. And too smart.



I think liberal talk radio is a great idea, and I really want you to succeed, but you're going to have to make sacrifices. You have to dumb down.



Fortunately, you're Al Franken, not Al Gore. People love your Stuart Smalley Schtick. You can do it. Try a little comic conceipt. Do voices. Play the gullible "everyman" who buys the administration's tortured explanations for why tax cuts for the wealthy are good for the rest of us. Or that drilling for oil in Alaska will solve our energy needs. Or that Rick "man on dog" Santorum is "an inclusive fellow."



You can do it.
2.4.04 22:42


Economic news

I cringe these days when I hear John Kerry make the economy and job creation a centerpiece of his Presidental campaign. Not because I don't believe Kerry is less capable than Bush at managing the US economy, which Presidents don't really do anyway. It's because last week's optimistic employment news probably means good times are ahead. There's no doubt that that economic recovery is at the top of most voters' wish lists, but if that wish is fulfilled, which is likely, Kerry is going to look mighty foolish.


Another terrorist attack on the American homeland could change all that, sending the stock markets into a tailspin, and causing businesses to delay hiring and expansion. That would be good for Bush, since most Americans think Bush is more decisive in The War Against Terror than the Democratic senator from Massachusets.


It seems to me that Kerry is betting on an inside straight: no more terrorist attacks on the homeland, and a stagnant economy come November. Methinks neither scenario is likely.
3.4.04 16:54


A comment!

Alert reader Bill Carmichael (I think I'm up to three, now) asks:


"So if Kerry can't rely on jobs, the economy, the war or homeland security as vote winning issues what has he got left? The budget deficit?"


Many Americans are asking that question right now. It's not really clear to me that Kerry even needs "something run on," given the split in American political demographics. Unless the President goes duck hunting with bin Laden, or something equally out of character, 40 percent of Americans say they will vote for Bush in November. Another 40 percent have pledged their troth to John Kerry, for the simple reason that he is not George W. Bush. That leaves 20 percent of the electorate for Bush and Kerry to woo. They are the undecideds.



So who are the 20 percenters? It's hard to generalize. Many are independents, some Libertarians, and some are people who just aren't paying the much attention to the whole political scene.
<>BR>

One thing the majority of Americans can agree on is that the terrorist threat is real, and something needs to be done about it. Bush, for all his faults and brazen dishonesty, is doing something about it. Whether he's doing the right thing is questionable, but the question is best answered if Kerry could tell us what he would do, rather than what we wouldn't do. I consider myself more attentive to political considerations than most Americans, and I haven't a fricking clue what Kerry would have done on 9/11, or what he would do as Commander in Chief of the armed forces of the United States of America.



Kerry also needs to puncture the myth of Republican competence. This might be Bush's weakest point, which is why the Bushies are having coniption fits over the 9/11 commission. For years it's been a given in GOP talking points that Clinton is to blame for 9/11, that he had his chance to take out bin Landen and blew it, that his reluctance to commit force to the fight against transnational terrorism emboldened our enemies. But Richard Clarke is telling us, convincingly methinks, that bin Laden barely registered on W's radar screen. The White House wasn't ignoring terrorism - it was merely continuing Clinton's policy, and simultaneously fishing for a long term strategy.
Clarke's critics say that what matters is how Bush addressed terrorism post 9/11. Of course that matters, but that's not all that matters. Bush made character a central part of his 2000 campaging. In fact, that's just about all he ran on. He was the un-Clinton, and he promised not to lie, and to keep his pants on in the Oval Office. Well you know what? Rewriting history and pretending to be somebody you're not is lying, and Clarke is right to call Bush on it, and the American people are justified in asking what the President knew and how long he knew it before the towers fell.



The defecit is huge, in all senses of the word. Not only does it saddle future generations with more debt, but it weakens the American dollar, which forces OPEC to raise the price of oil. And while we're on the subject of oil, Kerry can talk about our cozy relations with the Saudis, which I think most Americans don't like, or at least the ones that can find Saudi Arabia on a map.

Kerry's challenge is not a lack of issues, but rather keeping his campaign focused on the future, and coming up with concrete proposals that are palatable to the undecideds amongst us. Otherwise he falls into the trap of only criticizing Bush for the way he has conducted his Presidency, while failing to come up with clear, simple solutions of his own.


4.4.04 19:04


Past tense


Ed Cone has some thoughts on the campaign that I wish I had said:


"So far the foreign policy aspect of this campaign has been largely about the past. There is plenty to examine in the rear-view mirror -- it’s clear that Bush was itching to take on Iraq long before 9/11, which raises legitimate questions about his rush to invade; that the war on Al Quaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan languished as he pursued this adventure; and that planning for the post-war administration of the country was ideologically driven and dangerously inadequate.



"But while it matters very much how and why we invaded Iraq, nothing can change the fact that we did, and that we are bound to that decision and its consequences. Staying the course in Iraq should be a great liberal cause, no matter how liberals felt about going to war. The United States is obligated to help create a secure and stable Iraq. Doing so will improve our own security, and falling short will make the world more dangerous than it was before we invaded."

5.4.04 15:26


Annoying English

And no, I'm not talking about the only people who seem to be reading my blog. I'm referring to overused phrases and clichés used by people who really have nothing to say in order to fool others into thinking they really do have something on their minds.


Note to those people: It's not working.


The number one despised phrase is "at the end of the day", according to the cliché-free folks at the Plain English Campaign. That's "end of the day", as in "What good does it do to carp about peoples' over realiance on trite, pat phrases, because at the end of the day they're going to say anything they want to say anyway?"


The Plain English people surveyed their 5,000 supporters in more than 70 countries as part of the build-up to its 25th anniversary. Their press release says "the independent pressure group was launched on 26 July 1979." Pressure group? Does that mean they bribe politicians? Do they extort political favors with threats of blackmail? (Unless you want to see photos of your dangling participles splashed across the Globe and Mail, you'll kill every fifth adjective. We mean business.)


On the other hand, it is good to see that defenders of the mother tongue have taken up residence in 70 countries. I take a shameless imperialistic glee in hoping that some people in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia are as annoyed by "at this moment in time" and "with all due respect" as I am. And I can barely contain my Schadenfruede at the thought of a Hezballah terrorist blubbering to his Israeli captors "Like, I just want to, like, be able to go to my job at the suicide belt factory without, like, being detained for, like, five hours at one of your, like checkpoints."
8.4.04 00:35


And lo! They cast Him unto the the briar patch


A Pennsylvania Passionplay raises some disturbing questions about faith, free speech, and the sanctity of rabbits:
A church in western Pennsylvania trying to teach about the crucifixion of Jesus performed an Easter show with actors whipping the Easter bunny and breaking eggs, upsetting several parents and young children.

People who attended Saturday's performance at Glassport's memorial stadium quoted performers as saying, "There is no Easter bunny," and described the show as being a demonstration of how Jesus was crucified.

Melissa Salzmann, who brought her 4-year-old son J.T., said the program was inappropriate for young children. "He was crying and asking me why the bunny was being whipped," Salzmann said.

Patty Bickerton, the youth minister at Glassport Assembly of God, said the performance wasn't meant to be offensive.

Bickerton portrayed the Easter rabbit and said she tried to act with a tone of irreverence.

"The program was for all ages, not just the kids. We wanted to convey that Easter is not just about the Easter bunny, it is about Jesus Christ," Bickerton said.

I would like at this time to recognize Patty Bickerton for her sensitive yet irreverent portrayal of a woman in a rabbit suit being scourged. Not since Showgirls has an actresss brought so much dignity to a role involving a flagellated rodent.

And I should probably point out that the word "irreverance" is the opposite of "reverance". Did Patty Bickerton mean to say "reverance", or was she really mocking the Son of Bugs?

I like to think the reporter misquoted her, yet a part of me can't help but think that Patty Bickerson is too hare-brained to know the difference.
8.4.04 23:54


 [next page]