The baldest of lies

We have a dishonest government. The most dishonest portions of government are those dealing with security, military and police functions. Here is the sine qua non and ne plus ultra: the war department (renamed--department of defense) calls citizen protest, low level terrorism; conversely they call torture, enhanced interrogation. And for dishonest media--Fox television: to-day, Mark Sanford, the Republican governor of South Carolina admitted to a sexual scandal, and Fox labels him -- Mark Sanford (D). Again and again they identify embarrassed Republicans as (D). Just as another side note: with the Ensign affair, and now this, the Republican nominee is boiling down to Romney or Palin.

The apt question

Some friendly teachers, that I have had, make the statement, “There are no stupid questions”, a very broad statement, that may be true in spirit, but untrue in fact. Some questions are asinine, and that insults that beast, when they have no relation to the matter, or even worse, when they are provocatively dishonest. Yet, other questions are precisely perfect. Those go beyond clarification, they frame a resolution appropriately, or especially when they completely destroy the argument before it. Now, those questions that are provocatively dishonest, wish to be that which they are not.

Recently, a public television programme on episodes of indian history was shown. The particular episode was on cherokee resettlement. North Georgia was going to be ethnically cleansed of the red man. A discussion amongst the indians, themselves, was re-enacted. They were to be resettled on similar lands to the west of the Mississippi. One indian asked if those lands are as good as ours, why are they empty? He asked the vital question. There was no rationale, no evidence and no true argument to answer it. The question was devastatingly true.

This sort of question answered and ended the entire line of thought. I remember, hearing more than once, the argument that tries to defuse Jesus, when Jesus says:

Et íterum dico vobis : Facílius est cámelum per forámen acus transíre, quam dívitem intráre in regnum cælórum.
And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. — Matthew xix. 24.

Facílius est cámelum per forámen acus transíre, quam dívitem intráre in regnum Dei.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. — Mark x. 25.

facílius est enim cámelum per forámen acus transíre quam dívitem intráre in regnum Dei.
For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. — Luke xviii. 25.

They tell of a gate in the wall called the camel’s eye, or the needle, or something. Yes, the existence of such a thing would change the OBVIOUS meaning of the word of Jesus. BUT, it would have to have existed at the time of Jesus’ speaking, and certainly it did not, nor did anyone mention such a ‘convenient’ gate for centuries (perhaps until the twentieth). Shakespeare makes an allusion in Richard II, but not in the way of a gospel revisionist of the american prosperity school of capital mammon. I have not found which writer, or speaker, invented this tale of the crawling camel, but in different versions the gate is in Damascus, or another syrian city, or Jerusalem, or Joffa. Sometimes an ancient, but only mediæval ancient, entrance is alluded to. Sometimes there is a statement that points to a late mediæval or early modern writer, but not that the writer is speaking to that interpretation. But, all in all, no real gate has ever existed that gives credence to the supposition, and the crawling camel is still more dubious.

Now, such a supposition would be devastating, but challenging that supposition by devastating fact, totally negates it. Now, there is another view, which states, in aramaic the word for rope was similar to camel, and even that does not change the meaning. There are other semitic sources (talmud, koran, proverbs) that have a camel, or elephant, travel the needle that are similar to the example given by Christ. Perhaps, Jesus meant what he said.

So, when such a false story is given, there is not often, allowed or allotted, the response so as to suggest the statement stands. So a teacher, or presenter, can be opened to be steered to the truth, or resistant, so as to continue course. There are good questions, there are stupid questions and there are bad questions.

Ensign, Hoekstra, Palin: A study of the Republican

Now, I contend that nearly, every committed, partisan Republican is demented. This is a severe judgment, the only other judgment, that, the evidence suggests is that they’re hypocritical, duplicitous, miscreants. I wanted to rest these arguments, but this week three ugly heads arose Cerberus like, to remind us all of the unending tonnage of crazy there exists in their store of barrels.

Sarah Palin does not want to be out of the headlines. She began a campaign to blacklist David Letterman. She is an opportunist, a thin skinned hypocrite, and a true bitch. Letterman told an unpleasant joke. Palin has one unmarried daughter, with a bastard child of an athlete, Letterman was referring to her. Palin mounted a campaign, that Letterman, referred to another, younger daughter.

Letterman is employed by CBS. The Bushes had Dan Rather’s scalp in continuous site, and eventually got that scalp from CBS. Palin would enjoy that sort of coup, and so would her rabid admirers. Now, here is part of the hypocrisy: both Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien, each, made more than twice as many jokes about Palin’s daughter’s randiness, and there was no outrage. Saturday Night Live made a comment suggesting incest and Palin performed on that show. Palin has a history of vendettas, and a penchant to be filmed.

John Ensign is a senator from Nevada. He has admitted to an extra-marital, sexual affair. When Bill Clinton committed an infidelity, Ensign demanded Clinton’s scalp. These three facts, and actions, he shares in common with Larry Craig, and David Vitter. Craig retired after his term ended. Not one of the three resigned. Is this sort of hypocrisy a requirement to be a Republican senator?

Cornelius Peter Hoekstra is a Republican congressman from Michigan. On June 17th, he sent out an electronique mass communique:

Iranian twitter activity similar to what we did in House last year when Republicans were shut down in the House.

A website, http://petehisameme.wordpress.com/, formerly HoekstraIsAMeme.com., has collected new examples of his rhetorical device, perhaps the best are:

• I burned my finger this morning on a hot plate, now I know how Joan of Arc felt.
• My softball game was rained out today. Now I know what Hurricane Katrina felt like.

This rhetorical device, they define thusly:

To Hoekstra is to whine using grandiose exaggerations and comparisons.

Pete has said other stupid things. He, also, promised to serve no more than twelve years as a congressman; he passed that mark over four years ago. He had replaced the bloviating Guy Vander Jagt who spent twenty-six years. Hoekstra, three years ago, discovered five hundred, imaginary, chemical weapons in Iraq. Two years ago, Pete found imaginary, nuclear weapons in Iran.

Bling and Ferguson

‘Bling bling’ [or ‘bling’ for short] was a term used in a ‘rap’ number by the Cash Money Millionaires (Christopher Dorsey, aka, BG), in 1999, and perhaps, previously by the Silvertones, from Jamaica . It quickly joined the national lexicon, and international lexicon (OED in 2003). At first it was familiar to a certain youth culture, but since it so aptly described an actuality it spread, to the snarky disdain of the clued-in hip.

Bling refers to the shine and clink of ostentatious, extravagant and garish jewelry and ornamentation of the ‘gangsta’ culture and its imitators. Once seen, easily remembered. Perhaps, it is the most well known, and understandingly used, and transferred term of that subculture. Bling is ugly, loud and expensive; well serving its raison d’être.

Its perfection in portrayal of absurd reality strikingly came to me in response to two pieces of filming: in the film, Brother Sun, Sister Moon, about Saint Francis, there is a scene, in church, where the rich citizens wear expensive, colorful, and for the most part, beautiful costumes, but about there necks hang huge, bejewelled squares, and away from them―the poor in rags. This bling is the sign of station, without any practical use BUT identification; the other one: Craig Ferguson and crew in lip synchronisation to Fatboy Slim’s, It’s a wonderful night, had a chorus of animal hand puppets wearing bling about their necks. Bling is an advertisement of ugly and unnecessary wealth. This is easily seen by saints and jesters, but not by the ambitious, or those desirous of society’s acceptance.

To diverge on a tangent: Ferguson is in a public niche of his own. He can barely, at times, conceal his knowledge behind buffoonery. In his comedic monologue he once, self-consciously, mentioned reformation history. On one show he mentioned, knowingly, Aristotle and, then later, Picasso. In interview he brought up Aquinas, and in another, Augustine, for questions. I do not know what his past schooling and reading has been, but at least some of it was academically significant. On american, commercial, network broadcasting such references might be unique. These are topics, occasionally, mentioned on public radio and television, and are, therefore, anathema to many.

He needs to fill airtime. He has been employing puppets for humor, and they are funny. Ed Sullivan had Topo Gigo act in a similar rôle, and Señor Wences.

Ferguson reuses several set lines and pieces for familar comic effect: he will remind you, that, “your cat will eat you when you die”; that all dogs speak like Scooby Doo and George Jetson’s Astro; on maps Narnia always borders the place in question; that the glorious land of Scotland is on the northern part of an island, that has the insignificant England beneath her; that all non-anglo, teutonic peoples speak vit dah zame accent, und haf a schared fetisch; Craig portrays himself as sexually ambiguous; and it’s a great day for America, everybody (as he hits the camera).

Ventura body slams mouthfoamers

Jesse Ventura became known to America as a television wrestler and loudmouth. He became a political figure, first as a mayor and then as a successful, third party candidate for Minnesota governor. He defeated the loser Coleman, and Hubert Humphrey’s son. He made the national media notice by some controversial statements.

Well, recently he has been promoting a book. I have seen three segments of television, where he is not promoting the book, but fighting for the honor of the nation. He has, in succession, verbally defeated three, rabid mouthfoamers. Their logic is wretched, their enthusiasm is dogged. Mr. Ventura makes the honest and rational argument, that, torture is illegal, immoral and ineffective. Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Brian Kilmeade and Sean Hannity advocated for the devil, and could not speak calmly, honestly or rationally. Kilmeade, an individual I was blissfully unaware of, was extremely repugnant toward Ventura, and eventualy fled his own show in a fit of pique, and defeat.

Mr. Ventura was a navy veteran, with highly specialised training. He was a SEAL. Kilmeade, in effect, called him a coward and a traitor. Ventura has repeatedly identified Cheney's motive and lies. ‘Enhanced interrogation’ is an obfuscation, an insidious, invented synonym for torture. The bully, Hannity (practically admitted he was a bully that could not intimidate Ventura), tried to get his false last words in again, and again. Mr. Ventura did not relinquish the ground to this villain.

Jesse Ventura has been painted, and has acted the entertaining fool, but he is telling the necessary truth. Those, who are trying to stifle him, all speak from the same, diabolic script. They do not interview, they interrogate.

It is four, it is always four!

Sometimes one thing reminds one of another, and sometimes there is chain of provenance of memories and works. Last night I had a couple of discussions, and in between them I remembered a scene from a television show. The scene had the actor, Patrick Stewart being subjected; the scene is a retelling of Orwell. The character O’Brien, was portrayed by Richard Burton, in an extremely grey Nineteen Eighty-Four [which I do not remember well] at the picture show, but the motivation of the interrogator (read torturer) was shown better in Star Trek as, the unnamed, Gul [captain] Madred. The two and two formula of truth, I have remembered maintaining many times as truth and freedom, and have been appalled by the other conversant not agreeing. I remember Dostojevskij, and other russians, and Aristotle, and Aquinas, and the epitome of the self evident.

In a two part episode, Chain of Command, of the second Star Trek, which came out very late in 1992, Captain Picard is captured by the next series main villains, Cardassians. They want military information and plans. The interrogating officer finds out Picard knew nothing of any military plans, yet the torture continues. He shows four lights. The answer he wants to hear from Picard is that there are five.

The torturer received news of the agreement which is to have Picard released immediately, he [the torturer] quickly attempts to fool and pressure Picard to verbally break, and to state the evident falsity as actuality. Guards come to escort Picard’s release, and are displeased that the officer does not have Picard ready. Picard stands defiant, “There are four lights!”

Elsewhere, Captain Picard remarked,“Torture has never been a reliable means of extracting information. It is ultimately self-defeating as a means of control. One wonders why it is still practiced.” The torturer says to his daughter: “But human mothers and fathers don’t love their children as we do.” At times, the episode is chilling, it is even more chilling, that such scenes happen every day, and by fellow citizens. I have since read, that, the scriptwriter, Frank Abatemarco, was in contact with Amnesty International.
____________________
From, George Orwell, 1984, part 3, chapter 2:

'Do you remember,' he went on, 'writing in your diary, "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four"?'
'Yes,' said Winston.
O'Brien held up his left hand, its back towards Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.
'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'
'Four.'
'And if the party says that it is not four but five -- then how many?'
'Four.'
The word ended in a gasp of pain. The needle of the dial had shot up to fifty-five. The sweat had sprung out all over Winston's body. The air tore into his lungs and issued again in deep groans which even by clenching his teeth he could not stop. O'Brien watched him, the four fingers still extended. He drew back the lever. This time the pain was only slightly eased.
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four.'
The needle went up to sixty.
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four! Four! What else can I say? Four!'
The needle must have risen again, but he did not look at it. The heavy, stern face and the four fingers filled his vision. The fingers stood up before his eyes like pillars, enormous, blurry, and seeming to vibrate, but unmistakably four.
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four! Stop it, stop it! How can you go on? Four! Four!'
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Five! Five! Five!'
'No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?'
'Four! five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!'
Abruptly he was sitting up with O'Brien's arm round his shoulders. He had perhaps lost consciousness for a few seconds. The bonds that had held his body down were loosened. He felt very cold, he was shaking uncontrollably, his teeth were chattering, the tears were rolling down his cheeks. For a moment he clung to O'Brien like a baby, curiously comforted by the heavy arm round his shoulders. He had the feeling that O'Brien was his protector, that the pain was something that came from outside, from some other source, and that it was O'Brien who would save him from it.
'You are a slow learner, Winston,' said O'Brien gently.
'How can I help it?' he blubbered. 'How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.'
'Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.'
He laid Winston down on the bed. The grip of his limbs tightened again, but the pain had ebbed away and the trembling had stopped, leaving him merely weak and cold. O'Brien motioned with his head to the man in the white coat, who had stood immobile throughout the proceedings. The man in the white coat bent down and looked closely into Winston's eyes, felt his pulse, laid an ear against his chest, tapped here and there, then he nodded to O'Brien.
'Again,' said O'Brien.
The pain flowed into Winston's body. The needle must be at seventy, seventy-five. He had shut his eyes this time. He knew that the fingers were still there, and still four. All that mattered was somehow to stay alive until the spasm was over. He had ceased to notice whether he was crying out or not. The pain lessened again. He opened his eyes. O'Brien had drawn back the lever.
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four. I suppose there are four. I would see five if I could. I am trying to see five.'
'Which do you wish: to persuade me that you see five, or really to see them?'
'Really to see them.'
'Again,' said O'Brien.
Perhaps the needle was eighty -- ninety. Winston could not intermittently remember why the pain was happening. Behind his screwed-up eyelids a forest of fingers seemed to be moving in a sort of dance, weaving in and out, disappearing behind one another and reappearing again. He was trying to count them, he could not remember why. He knew only that it was impossible to count them, and that this was somehow due to the mysterious identity between five and four. The pain died down again. When he opened his eyes it was to find that he was still seeing the same thing. Innumerable fingers, like moving trees, were still streaming past in either direction, crossing and recrossing. He shut his eyes again.
'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'
'I don't know. I don't know. You will kill me if you do that again. Four, five, six -- in all honesty I don't know.'
'Better,' said O'Brien.

WOIO 19/43

Many people have lamented how lame local news is, its lack of quality, and its shallowness. In northeastern Ohio, there is currently a CBS affiliate, and its secondary station, that have a “news” department. It is not quite accurate to say it appeals to the lowest common denominator. It does appeal to the audience that finds extremist, irrational, irresponsible, mouthfoamer radio authoritative. Every on air reporter or reader seems free to ad lib (snide) comments. It does seem, all those comments come from the same range. This must be policy. Sure, they may select personnel of a certain, political persuasion, but primarily, they must be coached, coaxed, or thusly directed in sensationalist idiocy. They also select for attractive women. Their most famous stunt: was to have one appear in a mass nude photo session, it got her (Sharon Reed) a guest shot on Letterman. She has tried to get a job in a bigger market, and has not. Most of the nonsense come from males, including one, loud, obnoxious to the point of disgusting, local, radio mouthfoamer (Trivisonno).

Cleveland television news, years ago, had news directors, and station vice-presidents, give occasional editorials. I remember Virgil Dominic, Gary Ritchie, and Ken Bagwell, speak evenly, moderately, and even blandly. In recent years, the only station executive to speak is Bill Applegate. He is the VP/General Manager, and must set the tone, style and example.

The comments (they use the words honest, fair and everywhere) on WOIO would fit well on FOX cable, or a satirical comedy. Applegate* spoke on, oil drilling in Alaska, as the panacea cure-all to US energy demands. He used math, that might have been, learned from Sarah Palin. He has shown great contempt for Congressman Dennis Kucinich. His views have not been conservative, they have been from a bizarre cloud cuckoo land. His on-air staff have often sensationalised material. They have cribbed false stories from odd sources. One instance, in 2004, a false story, on a non-existing series of trysts between John Kerry and a young woman, was carried with brio and brouha. Later it was discovered, the transmitter of the story was the fake journalist, the pseudonymous Jeff Gannon. Of course false, or wild stories, are brought up, but are not rectified, when reality intervenes. Practically, any rubbish story that embarrasses certain individuals (usually Democrats) is used. Sometimes creatively, absurd questions are posed. Accuracy is irrelevant, it is an opponent to be defeated when obstructive. This is often described as tabloid style journalism, it is extreme rubbish with a political agenda.
___________________
*On the often amusing The Simpsons, there is My Two Cents, on channel 6, with Kent Brockman.

your television signal

For many years in the US and Canada, there was not television twenty-four hours a day. The programming would begin with a sign on, and end with a sign off. NBC had a Today, and a Tonight show; this, often, bracketed an affiliate station’s day. Beyond that, there was often a performance of the national anthem, and the very first, and last thing--the picture of supra, or similar. Sometimes, this would persist for a few seconds, and sometimes, through the early morning hours, sometimes with the sound of static, or a high pitched squeal. It was simple, coherent and ritualistic. What else could have been done? A fellow to tell you to shut the television off, or to unplug it?

It is the public’s airwaves. There is commercial licensing. In Britain people pay a television and radio tax. In the US, the appliance is bought with just local sales taxes; but the government grants licenses to private companies to broadcast, broadcast in the public’s interest. The Federal Communications Commission, since 1934, has regulated the radio signal. The radio signal includes television, and mobile phone signals. And because of the latter, being a new, and profitable, and ever, more, ubiquitous presence. It was decided to take away the free analog signals, and sell or give them to the new industry, in disregard of the public’s ownership.

A chief actor in this was, the recent chairman, who did not want to relinquish his post under the new administration, Kevin Martin. He had been chairman, since 2005, and a commissioner since 2001. He received these benefices after being the Deputy General Counsel to Bush-Cheney 2000, and member of the Florida vote scandal team.

He was investigated for his manner of conducting business by Congress:

“Chairman Martin’s heavy-handed, opaque, and non-collegial management style has created distrust, suspicion, and turmoil among the five current commissioners.” -- Congressional Report 9 Dec. 2008

It was readily found, that he withheld, and manipulated, evidence from his fellow commissioners, the Congress, and the public. His goal was to deregulate everything. This, in practice means, to serve the greatest monetary interests, and damn the law, and the public. He was a very, successful, Republican lawyer; very arrogant, and dismissive, and without scruples.

In this light, and in the lessons of history, it is easy to see, that it is not the public that will benefit, in the switch from analogue to the new, high, definition signal. In the short term: it has been the appliance industry. They have sold more televisions, sooner than replacement opportunities would have opened up, and the new gadgets to retrofit, some of, the older sets. In other countries, e.g. Japan, the switch was made without obsolescence. In the long term: private companies which will be given the old signal frequencies.

Some people, meaning the impoverished, shan’t have the new equipment. Democrats in Congress, and the president, have suggested a delay to June. It seems some 680 stations of the country’s nearly 1800 stations will drop the analog signal to-day. This delay was objected to by the out-going Martin.

This Martin has collected many paychecks. He has also worked for Wiley Rein LLP. A major client of Wiley Rein is Verizon. Martin’s wife has worked for: John Cornyn, Donald L. Evans and Dick Cheney. What a nexus of dollars and interests!

Governors and senators in flagrante

Rod Blagojevich was on Letterman last night. He became nationally known for a single act of corruption: he was about to peddle a US senatorship to the highest bidder. He found no takers. He was impeached 114 - 1, and found guilty 59 - 0. Previously, Elliot Spitzer resigned his governorship for renting women. How easy, and quickly, does scandal remove Democrats from office. How many Republicans would, even, allow the thought of impeaching any bushevik, to be expressed? The media, certainly, did not, as it seemingly promotes all Republican arguments.

Diaper Dave Vitter, a frequent brothel customer in Louisiana, and about DC, is still senator. Diaper Dave Vitter, is a man who, voted to impeach Bill Clinton. Diaper Dave, is a man who, campaigns on family values. Diaper Dave pegs the pole as a Republican conservative, but falls about mid-range as a Republican hypocrite. Mark him as another, outrageous Republican. Stevens, financial ethically challenged, was defeated at the polls, very narrowly. Craig, a deviant adulterer, finished his term. It is extremely difficult to find a Republican who shows shame, or applies a single standard.

Milorad Blagojevich is now an ex-governor of Illinois. For whatever reason, he has shown an appreciation of victorian, british poets. He has publicly quoted Tennyson* and Kipling†, in apparent reference to his circumstances. As a serb, from a people whom have heralded defeats in song and poetry for centuries, it is not, particularly surprising to relish lyrics in defeat; nor from an american politician, hubris in failure. But, as he repeatedly said, he was not convicted, nor was he defended. Letterman posited, that, he will have time in the future for due process.

Don Siegelman, former governor of Alabama, was sent to prison, as a political prisoner, so as to be removed from the stage, by Rove and the Republican party. He has been since released, and Rove, and his gang have not been forthcoming. This swift removal of Blagojevich was not pro forma, and Blagojevich wants the stage.
________________________
*Ulysses, not reflecting the homeric Illiad, but the infernal Dante
†If, celebrating failed, imperial freebooting

MacGyver and the anti-MacGyver

Action adventure is a television genre. They are part of culture of the time. In the 1960s there were many horse opera westerns. There was a good deal of social commentary in many of them. Watch episodes of Gunsmoke, Bonanza, Maverick or Big Valley. See how many moral issues are addressed. How many of those issues, were really pointing to the then current America. And how many advanced progressive views and answers. Espionage shows, such as: I Spy, and The Man from U.N.C.L.E, also pointed this way, and so did the space opera, Star Trek.

Now, in the years preceding the Clinton presidency, there was the action, adventure series, MacGyver. In 1984 Reagan trounced Mondale (and Dukakis did little better in ’88). Most of the country seemed more attuned to the political views of Mondale, but still more voted for Reagan. Reagan’s initial bellicosity (before perestroika, and the Iran-contra and Beirut disasters), and carte blanche to the moneyed interests, was much challenged. Reagan’s Hollywood did not applaud and propagandise for him. MacGyver was a socially conscious [some read preachy], intelligent, action hero, who was remarkable in his calmness, and especially, his resourceful ingenuity, but he realised, that, sometimes he needed at least a ‘Plan B ’.

An identifying, and memorable feature, was his inventiveness. With barely more than a swiss army knife, and nearby flotsam and jetsam [junk at hand and occasionally duct tape], MacGyver rigs a workable, mechanical solution. ‘MacGyver’ has become a verb. A couple of times, at work, people have used the term. Sometimes, merely humorously, others admiringly: “You’ve macgyvered that! ”, “What now MacGyver? ”, “You watch MacGyver, dontcha?”.

Overall, MacGyver was a peaceable, and anti-violent hero. He strongly avoided guns. This plot device has been rarely used in the US. Now, there was the wonderful Andy Taylor of the idyllic Mayberry, the sheriff without a gun. Well occasionally he did get one out, but he did not walk around armed. He permitted, his deputy to carry a gun, but the lone bullet would be in Barney’s pocket. But those were comic devices, MacGyver was earnest.

In contrast, to the ending, of the current mini-epoch, of this country’s usurpation, we have the show ‘24’. A hideous modus operandi of a programme (including the preposterous ‘real time’ one day gimmick), that flourished under georgebushjr’s US, and, probably, could never have been written (and, almost, certainly not aired) outside the atmosphere of such a regime. A fictive, secretive, security agency*, that, has no qualms in using evil means to achieve their ends. All is permitted to fight ‘terrorism’, in order to ‘defend’ the country. Human and civil rights are thoroughly ignored. Torture is legitimate and necessary. Invented dilemmas, where there must be victims sacrificed. This show will not last long under a return to democracy.
________________
*MacGyver had the Phoenix Foundation, 24 has the Counter Terrorist Unit, Get Smart had CONTROL and KAOS and so on.
postscriptum: There is a humor in the choice of the character name ‘MacGyver’. Obviously scottish, the scots have had a stereotype of being very canny, and frugal, about managing resources and being mechanically clever. There is the old joke, about the scotsman at the guillotine, where Scotty turns to look at the falling blade and says, “Aye, laddie! I ken yourr prroblem.” [further digression: the chief engineer on Star Trek was “Scotty”] Finally, in a late programme, it is revealed that his name was the archetypal ‘Angus’. But, this also is the socially aware, near bleeding heart hero. MacGyver is an alternative spelling of MacGiver, both of which can be read mac--giver, pronounced with a short vowel.

When you are facing a wall

Yesterday, Laura Dern, was a delightful guest on David Letterman’s show, after a ten year absence. Some people should visit more often, but people often only come to promote something; and, conversely, a few should never appear. The very tall Dern is to portray, the very painted, and petite, Katharine Harris, in a cable movie, “Recount”, which tells part of the story of theft of the 2000 election. To paraphrase her, in telling an anecdote to Dave: My son came home from kindergarten, and said to me, “Mom, they have told me, that you are playing a Republican.”

It reminded me of the cartoon character, Sylvester Junior. There was an element of shame and hurt betrayal, spoken with a tinge of melodrama. The dear, revered parent, did not confide, beforehand, of their disgraceful behavior.

To-day, there came the news of John Edwards announcing his support of Barack Obama. Mrs. Clinton has not relented. Her doggedness is remarkable. If Gore and the Democrats had shown such tenacity, Florida would have been counted more accurately, and the world would have been saved this horrendous disaster of an usurpation.

Hillary Rodham had been a Republican, and it shows, al-be-it a Nelson Rockefeller Republican. She was president of some college Republican organisation. Oh, [insert emoticon, with hand on face, head tilted downward, nodding no]. I saw these people at university. Their oblivious smugness, condescending nastiness, and their inability to listen to reason and logic, when those faculties, contradicted their assumptions. I, think I, must confess a class revulsion.

In eadem hora apparuerunt digiti, quasi manus hominis scribentis contra candelabrum in superficie parietis aulæ regiæ: et rex aspiciebat articulos manus scribentis.
In the same hour there appeared fingers, as it were of the hand of a man, writing over against the candlestick upon the surface of the wall of the king's palace: and the king beheld the joints of the hand that wrote. — Daniel v. 5.

Hæc est autem scriptura, quæ digesta est: MANE, THECEL, PHARES.
And this is the writing that is written: MANE, THECEL, PHARES. — Daniel v. 25.

Earl and Samantha versus bad television

Most television is unwatchable. Daytime programs are wretched and have little or no interest to men: Baba Wawa's kaffeklatsch -- a torturing device, game shows, soap operas, relationship chat shows; all this assorted dreck. What passes for local "news": fires, car wrecks, murders are all sad, but are all the same,* and the lifestyle segments -- what can the housewife do to interest herself and the like have less gravitas than dandelion fluff.

The popular reality genre is often despicable: Survivor, let us put people outside of civilisation and manipulate them into social darwinism experiments, then there is the show where people compete in eating roadkill viscera while a "host" cheer leads and berates them. But the worst was The Mole, where within the group there is a Judas/spion/provocateur. I only saw the advertisements and am, thusly, spared any recalling of events.

Fox programming is aggressively going for the least common denominator and fascist inculcation. The national newsy programs give little news and also are pursuing news light, when not giving further display and credence to the corporate, moneyed, movements "conservative"† party line non-reality version of things. God rest the soul of Edward R. Murrow.

Two programs that may shine from this dung heap are My Name is Earl and Samantha Who? The premises are wonderful. Earl confesses and takes responsibility for his former bad actions and attempts to make amends for all of them, and as a corollary benefit: those around him become better too. I have seen only one episode of Samantha, whom awakes from a coma without knowing whom she is and finds out that she does not like that person. It seems her instincts are to be a better person than she was.

These two speak of resurrection and redemption of the human soul. They ask what is a man truly? what is his nature? Both Earl and Samantha are trying to be the persons they should be, their genuine selves, their selves before the fall. There may be more philosophy and ethics in these two comedies than anything on television since Bishop Fulton Sheen was on Dumont.
___________________________________________________

* I am sure that I never read any memorable news in a newspaper. If we read of one man robbed, or murdered, or killed by accident, or one house burned, or one vessel wrecked, or ... we never need read of another. One is enough. If you are acquainted with the principle, what do you care for a myriad instances and applications? -- Henry David Thoreau in Walden

† a more apropos term would be anti-democratic.