Jon Stewart - No Place To Go But Up

Not long ago a reader made a point to me after hearing commentary contrary to my own.  She heard it on the Daily Show and suggested I probably didn't watch it anyway.

I almost answered, but decided against it.  Now I will.  It's an age thing.  Or maybe maturity.  Or maybe decency.  Or maybe all of the above.

In answer to my readers query, I used to watch Stewart regularly.  His satire is top notch.  After awhile, though, I got really tired of the sophmoric humor.  He is so good he doesn't need to stoop to vulgarity to make his points.  If that's what his audience wants, then I question whether they're really interested in his take on the news or if they wait with baited breath to see if he can sink to a new low.

It seems Delta Airlines thinks he had hit bottom by pulling their ads. Kelloggs is probably going to be next.  Why? They too have been targeted for whatever reason.  Supposedly all top management was slated to get the photograph you can see by following the link.  A picture depicting a nude woman, legs spread and a nativity scene ornament between her legs.  It's being referred to as a "vagina manger."

I have no idea what the joke behind this display is but I'd not have found it funny.  It's an 'I'm old, I know' moment for me.  I've been old for a really long time because I've never seen the humor in vulgarity.

Jon Stewart is a very intelligent man.  We agree on very little politically but I still enjoyed listening to him slice and dice government idiocy.  It's disturbing to me, personally, that this is where the majority of his demographic get their news.  It is definitly skewed content.

That he is not uncomfortable about it makes me wonder what kind of a man he really is.  That he  probably earns more money doing this type of humor than if he were strictly a pundit says something about his listeners and his advertisers priorities.  Until he goes a joke too far.

And that, dear reader, is why I no longer watch Jon Stewart.

Elizabeth Warren - High Cheekbones Do Not An Indian Make

Elizabeth Warren is the perfect example of why 'book learnin' should be trumped by common sense.  Of course I'm referring to her claim of being 1/32 Cherokee because her grandfather had high cheekbones.

Does she have any idea how many other nationalities also have high cheekbones?  Most notably Orientals along with Eastern Europeans and Egyptians.  Okay, she grew up in Oklahoma where the Cherokee flourished.  This makes me wonder where the emphasis was in a relative's comment regarding her grandfather.  "He had high cheekbones like all the Indians do," or "He had high cheekbones like all the Indians do."  There are two completely different meanings.

All the nonsense aside, the question as to whether or not she should be teaching at Harvard does make me wonder.  Women have been defending her all day for what a brillient scholar and lawyer she is and that she absolutely earned her place.  If so why did she use her 1/32 degree of minority ethnicity as a tool?  Could she not have achieved the same without it? Was she so insecure with her own being she felt the need to put this forward?  According to her, not at all.  Me?  I think she just keeps digging a deeper hole.

Her reason that she used it in order to meet people like herself, with similar tribal roots, is laughable.  I don't imagine she found too many Cherokees, or native Americans for that matter, in Boston by doing so.

Actually, I've met quite a few native Americans and have gotten to know many quite well. I don't have a drop of Indian blood in my veins.  It's because Hub and I are interested in their culture, have made a study of it and collect their art.  Everything developed quite naturally.  They are not a mystery people lurking in the shadows waiting to be discovered and recognized.

I will suppose Harvard hired her for her abilities.  I will also suppose it would be a good thing if the quest for 'diversity' be retired and academic excellence be rewarded, no matter what sex,  sexual preference, religion, or ethnicity one may be.

The more a person uses dubious crutches to achieve, the more I question their achievements.

TSA To END?

Finally!  As I had hoped for what seems forever, if the TSA harassed the right member of Congress something would be done about these thugs. Finally, it may actually be happening.

Not so long ago Senator Ran Paul was detained by the TSA.  Why?  He refused to be patted down after already having passed through a scanner.  It grew contentious enough that the Senator missed his flight.

The adverse publicity from that incident did not keep the TSA from continuing its invasive and humiliating pat downs, especially egregious when it came to young children, the elderly and the handicapped.

To my knowledge not one single potential terrorist has been stopped by this methodology.  I could be wrong.  The TSA doesn't release such information.

They picked the wrong Senator with Rand Paul, however. He has launched a campaign to end the TSA .   I love his quote, "It's time to end the TSA and get the government's hands back to only stealing our wallets instead of groping toddlers and grandmothers."

Every time something outrageous occurs Janet Napolitano comes out and defends her "highly trained" agents who are just following procedure.  I can't help but wonder who established procedures that included the removal of a prosthetic breast or a mother to open formula bottles thus contaminating the only food available for her baby on the upcoming flight.  We've all heard more and worse.  What kind of people supervise this kind of behavior?  What kind of people consent to engage in it?  I see nothing worth redeeming in the entire agency.

I hope if Senator Paul succeeds and gets the government out of the airport security business, the airlines review the entire process before establishing new guidelines. As with everything,  the private sector will do it better.

Think about the pluses.  While the lines won't disappear, they should be shorter.  You might be able to take more than a day's supply of shampoo with you and carry on a bottle of water.  You won't have a knot in your stomach from the time you plan your trip until you're home again because of the stress of waiting for what you know is coming.  You just don't know how bad it will be.

So here's to Rand Paul.  Go for it Senator.  I signed your petition .  I hope many of my readers will follow the link and join with me!

Me Me Me! It's All About Me!

If there is anyone more into themselves than the President strutting his stuff on the anniversary of bin Laden's demise it has to be the last three Republican primary candidates after it became clear Mitt Romney would become the nominee.

Graciousness, if nothing else, would have the President heaping praise on the officers who planned the mission and most certainly the Seals who carried it out.  But no.  It's all about him.

The same seems to hold true with Santorum, Gingrich and Paul. Each wants his pound of flesh. Hello?  They lost.  Paul continues to say he won't drop out due to his differences with Romney; that he may not even endorse him.  I've often wondered what value there is in a begrudged endorsement in the first place.  The endorsements that count are those that come from the ballot box and those are the ones that went to Romney.

Mr. Santorum agrees that Romney will be the nominee.  He is withholding his official endorsement until Romney promises to accede to conservative demands. I don't know Rick.  Enough of them left you high and dry that Romney has the nod rather than you.  A bit cheeky, aren't you?

Of course there is Newt too.  Not only does he want help in rehabilitating his reputation, such as it is, he wants help in forgiving his campaign debt.  I know it is not uncommon for the winners to help the losers for the sake of common cause, but really.  For someone who came across as a loose cannon more than a man of bold vision, who was continually condescending to the voters and even worse to the other candidates, you're asking a lot.

The "me generation" has put a different face on politics it would seem.  Now the losers are making demands of the winners in exchange for rather dubious support.

I don't know if Romney can beat Obama or not.  It's really too soon to tell.  One thing that might be indicitive is how well the "me's" did in the primaries versus a more "we" oriented Romney.  There is no bigger "me" out there than the President.  Just listen to him.

It's The Pits

I've gone and done it.  I've totally lost my sense of humor.  I define more and more of what I hear as tasteless.  Jokes included.  Take for instance Obama's crack at the White House Correspondents Dinner regarding Sarah Palin. Was it about Sarah? Or something else?

"What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?  A pit bull  is delicious."

I guess there are some things of which I find hard to let go.  One is the horror story of football's Michael Vick and his dog fighting ring of pit bulls. I'm still reading progress reports on those rescued by Best Friend's Animal Society.  I've crossed paths with a lot of pit bulls during my years and have yet to meet one that deserves the reputation they have as a breed.  Oh sure.  They can turn and do but it's not a trait exclusive to them.  Even my beloved Saints can be nasty and believe me a nasty Saint is no Saint!  I guess that's why the President's joke left me cold.

I usually weigh how men treat their wives in public when forming an opinion.  Maybe I should pay more attention as to how they joke, or even just talk, about their dogs!  Neither Mitt Romney nor Obama rate very high on the Arf Scale!

Sure, Obama was referring to his previous comment about having eaten dog as a youth.  I know it's considered a perfectly legitimate food in some societies.  But not ours.  It's the connotation in the form of a joke.  Animal lovers in this country fight so hard to give our voiceless companions the best lives possible.  They fight the idea that an animal is no more then a possession and can be treated anyway you please.  They aren't inanimate objects.  They are living, breathing, feeling creatures. Does how you treat your possessions carry over to how you treat your animals?  Does it carry over to family too?  Some would say yes.  I'm not sure.  I've never experienced the circumstance.  Our dogs have always been treated  like the most revered of people.

It just hit my hot button.  I've been saturated with mean spirited and truth challenged commentary over the months since political season began in earnest.  It's going to get worse before it gets better, I know.  Go ahead,  tear one another apart.  Lie about one another.  Leave it to the bewildered brain power of the voters to sort it out.  But leave our dogs out of it.  Don't joke about eating them while legalizing the trapping of wolves.  Keep your attacks aimed at those on equal footing who are equipped to fight back - other politicians.

As words and phrases are being banned on what seems nearly a daily basis, maybe we should do away with "It's a dog eat dog world."  More appropriately it should be " It's a politician eats politician world." After all they are the ones cannibalizing our way of life.