I've never totally understood the argument that America was founded on Christianity, or Judeo-Christian values. I've never understood the obsession with the religious beliefs of the men who declared America an independent nation and wrote its Constitution.
What do people mean when they talk about the "Founding Fathers," anyway? Fifty-six people signed the Declaration of Independence. There were 55 delegates to the 1787 convention where the U.S. Constitution was drafted, and then that Constitution had to be ratified by each state. So, if we're talking about the people who are directly responsible for creating America, that's a pretty large group, and I seriously doubt they all had the same exact views on faith.
Let's talk about Thomas Jefferson, for instance. The man who authored Virginia's Statute on Religious Freedom wanted that and the fact that he'd founded UVa on his tombstone, but not the fact that he'd been the third president. He's also the man who wrote in 1803, "I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others."
But really, what difference does any of this make in 2010? We're arguing about the church habits of men who a) put freedom of religion in the very first slot in the Bill of Rights, b) risked execution for treason to get away from a country with an official state religion, and c) have all been dead for nearly 200 years.
What, we're supposed to live life just like the Founding Fathers? They were all rich white men, many of whom owned slaves and none of whom drove cars, flew in space or had iPhones. No more brain surgery - it's trepanning from now on!
I don't know what Jefferson's relationship with God was like. It's interesting trivia... Except when history is used by people with an agenda to try and convince you that things were always one way until the evil feminists/civil rights activists/etc. came along and ruined everything, or try to tell you that in an America as a historically Christian nation, people who aren't Christian don't belong.
Here's what I know. The Founders were pretty smart guys. They had a chance to create a government from scratch, and if they'd wanted to designate an official religion, language or anything else, they would've done it. What they DID do was write a Constitution that could grow and change with America, and it's done so successfully for 223 years.
Another thing I know: Jesus Christ preached that, above all other commandments, Christians should love others and treat others as they would want to be treated.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Turn Back to God
Bible:
“My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don’t show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, 'Here’s a good seat for you,' but say to the poor man, ‘You stand there’ or ‘Sit on the floor by my feet,’ have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?
Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing right. But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.” —James 2:1-9 (NIV)
Glenn Beck:
GLENN: Your church is there and that's why I said I don't care what church you go to. I don't care. As long as that church is telling you and helping you be a better person, be more honorable, be more honest, be more giving. But once that church starts to preach social and economic justice, especially through the structure of a giant government, well, now that's something totally different. Now, now you are talking about a church that is getting involved in government itself. We don't do that. We don't do that.
The unspoken truth is that this bill is simply a first step towards universal healthcare. It starts with the poor children, then moves to middle-class children, then to the elderly, and then, before you know it—poof!—everyone is covered. And guess who gets the privilege of paying for all that? You do! So remember, despite what the SCHIP cheerleaders say, you don’t have to choose between helping poor children or being an “evil” conservative—you can actually do both.
“Abolish Medicare”
And this:
Has anybody seen John Edwards speak? That guy gave that same damn speech last week. He gave another speech last night from New Hampshire. It was the same speech: "Let me tell you about little Johnny Muckenfutch. Little Johnny Muckenfutch who doesn't have a face. If it wasn't for this healthcare system, Johnny Muckenfutch would have a face, but it's just Sally Muckenfutch, oh, boy. She was without legs or arms. She had only a finger for an eye, and I brought it up. I started talking about Sally Muckenfutch with the little 8-year-old girl with a finger for an eye and those insurance companies, they wouldn't do anything. Oh, they didn't care that Sally Muckenfutch would have to pick her nose but she couldn't because she couldn't reach down the nostril because her little eye finger wouldn't go all that way because she didn't have a hand. She just had a finger for an eye. I mean, shut up, John Edwards.”
He also made fun of people who’d lost everything they owned and had been starving for days after Hurricane Katrina and said he “hates” 9/11 victims. Maybe that was before he found Jesus.
“My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don’t show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, 'Here’s a good seat for you,' but say to the poor man, ‘You stand there’ or ‘Sit on the floor by my feet,’ have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?
Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing right. But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.” —James 2:1-9 (NIV)
Glenn Beck:
GLENN: Your church is there and that's why I said I don't care what church you go to. I don't care. As long as that church is telling you and helping you be a better person, be more honorable, be more honest, be more giving. But once that church starts to preach social and economic justice, especially through the structure of a giant government, well, now that's something totally different. Now, now you are talking about a church that is getting involved in government itself. We don't do that. We don't do that.
The unspoken truth is that this bill is simply a first step towards universal healthcare. It starts with the poor children, then moves to middle-class children, then to the elderly, and then, before you know it—poof!—everyone is covered. And guess who gets the privilege of paying for all that? You do! So remember, despite what the SCHIP cheerleaders say, you don’t have to choose between helping poor children or being an “evil” conservative—you can actually do both.
“Abolish Medicare”
And this:
Has anybody seen John Edwards speak? That guy gave that same damn speech last week. He gave another speech last night from New Hampshire. It was the same speech: "Let me tell you about little Johnny Muckenfutch. Little Johnny Muckenfutch who doesn't have a face. If it wasn't for this healthcare system, Johnny Muckenfutch would have a face, but it's just Sally Muckenfutch, oh, boy. She was without legs or arms. She had only a finger for an eye, and I brought it up. I started talking about Sally Muckenfutch with the little 8-year-old girl with a finger for an eye and those insurance companies, they wouldn't do anything. Oh, they didn't care that Sally Muckenfutch would have to pick her nose but she couldn't because she couldn't reach down the nostril because her little eye finger wouldn't go all that way because she didn't have a hand. She just had a finger for an eye. I mean, shut up, John Edwards.”
He also made fun of people who’d lost everything they owned and had been starving for days after Hurricane Katrina and said he “hates” 9/11 victims. Maybe that was before he found Jesus.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
A humble plea
So, this is happening.
That's right - the people who brought us "Jersey Shore" are currently working on a spinoff with 12 of "the hottest and proudest Southerners," to be called "Party Down South." Casting has already been completed... dammit.
So, since I can't sneak on this show myself, I have a humble request for the producers of "Party Down South." Please just don't make us look stupid. Of, course, I know the lucky 12 WILL look stupid, because that's part of the entertainment value (and I say that as someone utterly addicted to "Jersey Shore"). But, you see, we here in the South have fought pretty hard against some insidious regional stereotypes. Namely, that we're all closet KKK members with three teeth. Pick colorful cast members who may not be the most well-adjusted, by all means. But I would just love it if you didn't chalk up their cluelessness to the fact of their Southernness.
And, I have another quibble. People in other parts of the country go muddin' and eat fried chicken. Take it from a proud redneck - we're everywhere. There are many, many other things particular to the South that they don't do in, say, Ohio. So if you want to be the redneck reality show, cool. But if you want to be the Southern reality show, please understand that this might be a very different thing.
For the record, North Carolina is home to both the nation's first women's college and first public university. Also, we went for Obama in '08. Just wanted to get that out there.
That's right - the people who brought us "Jersey Shore" are currently working on a spinoff with 12 of "the hottest and proudest Southerners," to be called "Party Down South." Casting has already been completed... dammit.
So, since I can't sneak on this show myself, I have a humble request for the producers of "Party Down South." Please just don't make us look stupid. Of, course, I know the lucky 12 WILL look stupid, because that's part of the entertainment value (and I say that as someone utterly addicted to "Jersey Shore"). But, you see, we here in the South have fought pretty hard against some insidious regional stereotypes. Namely, that we're all closet KKK members with three teeth. Pick colorful cast members who may not be the most well-adjusted, by all means. But I would just love it if you didn't chalk up their cluelessness to the fact of their Southernness.
And, I have another quibble. People in other parts of the country go muddin' and eat fried chicken. Take it from a proud redneck - we're everywhere. There are many, many other things particular to the South that they don't do in, say, Ohio. So if you want to be the redneck reality show, cool. But if you want to be the Southern reality show, please understand that this might be a very different thing.
For the record, North Carolina is home to both the nation's first women's college and first public university. Also, we went for Obama in '08. Just wanted to get that out there.
Katrina, five years later
I can’t be the only one who had nightmares.
Five years ago this weekend, Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast, devastating cities and towns in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. The natural disaster was bad enough. But what haunted me and other Americans was the man-made disaster, particularly in New Orleans.
And I’m not just talking about the federal response and the scapegoated “heckuva job, Brownie” FEMA head Mike Brown. New Orleans is and long has been a deeply dysfunctional place, socially and with respect to its government. It’s a city where doctors and nurses in places like Charity Hospital tended patients with no electricity and 100+ degree heat. It’s a city where Charity Hospital, not to mention the public housing, still hasn’t reopened five years later.
I visited New Orleans in March. I bought a newspaper one day, and four out of five front-page stories had something to do with Katrina – five years later. We were building a house for a family outside the city who’s still living in a FEMA trailer – five years later. When you drive past the Lower Ninth Ward at night, the lights from rebuilt houses are few and far between – five years later.
Yes, it’s beautiful, and yes, it’s like no other place in America. It’s home to an astonishing, fragile culture that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world, much of it lovingly tended by the black population. But I found it to be pretty depressing, frankly. If another Katrina hit this time next week, I have a feeling people would still be drowning in their attics.
New Orleans is a contradiction. A city so laissez-faire that you can walk around in public with an open container of liquor in the middle of the day, but where the government seems to get in the way more than it helps. A city that sells itself on its jazz culture, which is largely sustained by the same poor blacks that New Orleans now seems hell-bent on keeping out.
More than anything, Katrina was a symbol of government ineptitude. We put a man on the moon back when computers still took up a room, we developed the atomic bomb in a year, but in 2005 we couldn’t get water to the Superdome. Our country’s current frustration with and skepticism of government may have tipped because of the financial crisis, but I think it might have started with Katrina.
For people who care to look beyond the “Bush doesn’t care about black people” rhetoric, the implications are even worse. New Orleans was the victim of bad public policy – local, state and federal – for years before Katrina. For most of the 20th century, the city constructed canals to keep the Port of New Orleans viable, including the 76-mile-long MR-GO that channeled Katrina’s storm surge right into the middle of the city (it was closed last year).
What this says to me is that the people in the government aren’t always right. It’s our responsibility as citizens to question their motivations and their judgment, taking a long view that isn’t concerned with the next election cycle. You can’t blithely ignore the public arena until it’s time for the government to help you out.
New Orleans elected a new mayor this year – Mitch Landrieu – who says his top priority is restoring public faith in the police department. The Justice Department is finally getting around to investigating some of the NOPD’s alleged abuses, including post-Katrina murders. The cops involved in the Danziger Bridge shootings are facing trial. Five years later.
It’s axiomatic that life moves slower in the Big Easy. But maybe it’s time for the tempo to pick up a bit.
Five years ago this weekend, Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast, devastating cities and towns in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. The natural disaster was bad enough. But what haunted me and other Americans was the man-made disaster, particularly in New Orleans.
And I’m not just talking about the federal response and the scapegoated “heckuva job, Brownie” FEMA head Mike Brown. New Orleans is and long has been a deeply dysfunctional place, socially and with respect to its government. It’s a city where doctors and nurses in places like Charity Hospital tended patients with no electricity and 100+ degree heat. It’s a city where Charity Hospital, not to mention the public housing, still hasn’t reopened five years later.
I visited New Orleans in March. I bought a newspaper one day, and four out of five front-page stories had something to do with Katrina – five years later. We were building a house for a family outside the city who’s still living in a FEMA trailer – five years later. When you drive past the Lower Ninth Ward at night, the lights from rebuilt houses are few and far between – five years later.
Yes, it’s beautiful, and yes, it’s like no other place in America. It’s home to an astonishing, fragile culture that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world, much of it lovingly tended by the black population. But I found it to be pretty depressing, frankly. If another Katrina hit this time next week, I have a feeling people would still be drowning in their attics.
New Orleans is a contradiction. A city so laissez-faire that you can walk around in public with an open container of liquor in the middle of the day, but where the government seems to get in the way more than it helps. A city that sells itself on its jazz culture, which is largely sustained by the same poor blacks that New Orleans now seems hell-bent on keeping out.
More than anything, Katrina was a symbol of government ineptitude. We put a man on the moon back when computers still took up a room, we developed the atomic bomb in a year, but in 2005 we couldn’t get water to the Superdome. Our country’s current frustration with and skepticism of government may have tipped because of the financial crisis, but I think it might have started with Katrina.
For people who care to look beyond the “Bush doesn’t care about black people” rhetoric, the implications are even worse. New Orleans was the victim of bad public policy – local, state and federal – for years before Katrina. For most of the 20th century, the city constructed canals to keep the Port of New Orleans viable, including the 76-mile-long MR-GO that channeled Katrina’s storm surge right into the middle of the city (it was closed last year).
What this says to me is that the people in the government aren’t always right. It’s our responsibility as citizens to question their motivations and their judgment, taking a long view that isn’t concerned with the next election cycle. You can’t blithely ignore the public arena until it’s time for the government to help you out.
New Orleans elected a new mayor this year – Mitch Landrieu – who says his top priority is restoring public faith in the police department. The Justice Department is finally getting around to investigating some of the NOPD’s alleged abuses, including post-Katrina murders. The cops involved in the Danziger Bridge shootings are facing trial. Five years later.
It’s axiomatic that life moves slower in the Big Easy. But maybe it’s time for the tempo to pick up a bit.
Monday, August 23, 2010
120,000
Must read: Paul Krugman's excellent breakdown of the Bush tax cuts and the debate over making them permanent. He touches on the history of the tax cuts (pushed through Congress in 2001), remarks on what he sees as the hypocrisy of conservatives who bicker over $26 billion recovery packages but think that yanking $680 billion in federal revenue is totally fine, and, most importantly, shreds the mythology surrounding who will actually benefit from the tax cuts:
And where would this $680 billion go? Nearly all of it would go to the richest 1 percent of Americans, people with incomes of more than $500,000 a year. But that’s the least of it: the policy center’s estimates say that the majority of the tax cuts would go to the richest one-tenth of 1 percent. Take a group of 1,000 randomly selected Americans, and pick the one with the highest income; he’s going to get the majority of that group’s tax break. And the average tax break for those lucky few — the poorest members of the group have annual incomes of more than $2 million, and the average member makes more than $7 million a year — would be $3 million over the course of the next decade.
Or, as he writes earlier in the piece - this cut will only impact the 120,000 wealthiest Americans. 120,000. That's smaller than the population of the city where I live.
So please, remember in the next few months, as various TV screaming heads and politicians desperately trying to get elected try to frighten you into thinking that your taxes are going to skyrocket: 120,000. None of whom are you.
And where would this $680 billion go? Nearly all of it would go to the richest 1 percent of Americans, people with incomes of more than $500,000 a year. But that’s the least of it: the policy center’s estimates say that the majority of the tax cuts would go to the richest one-tenth of 1 percent. Take a group of 1,000 randomly selected Americans, and pick the one with the highest income; he’s going to get the majority of that group’s tax break. And the average tax break for those lucky few — the poorest members of the group have annual incomes of more than $2 million, and the average member makes more than $7 million a year — would be $3 million over the course of the next decade.
Or, as he writes earlier in the piece - this cut will only impact the 120,000 wealthiest Americans. 120,000. That's smaller than the population of the city where I live.
So please, remember in the next few months, as various TV screaming heads and politicians desperately trying to get elected try to frighten you into thinking that your taxes are going to skyrocket: 120,000. None of whom are you.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Quickie: Are you frakking kidding me???
- I'm not sure it's possible for Sarah Palin to be more out of touch with mainstream America.
- "Dr." Laura didn't come under fire for using the n-word. She came under fire for telling a black woman calling her for advice on dealing with her racist in-laws not to be so darn touchy, because, hey, hip-hop artists say it, too! Tone. Frakking. Deaf. If you look up "privilege blind" in the dictionary, there's a picture of "Dr." Laura.
- Back to Palin, and anyone else who thinks "Dr." Laura's First Amendment right to free speech has been violated: go back to high school civics class, now. The First Amendment does not guarantee your right to say whatever the hell you want without consequence. It protects your right to assemble and communicate without having to worry that the government will throw you in jail for insulting the president or something. It does not protect you from being boycotted by listeners who think you're clueless. That's just the free market talking, "Dr."
Of course, we all know that Palin struggles with the concept of popular choice... like elections.
- "Dr." Laura didn't come under fire for using the n-word. She came under fire for telling a black woman calling her for advice on dealing with her racist in-laws not to be so darn touchy, because, hey, hip-hop artists say it, too! Tone. Frakking. Deaf. If you look up "privilege blind" in the dictionary, there's a picture of "Dr." Laura.
- Back to Palin, and anyone else who thinks "Dr." Laura's First Amendment right to free speech has been violated: go back to high school civics class, now. The First Amendment does not guarantee your right to say whatever the hell you want without consequence. It protects your right to assemble and communicate without having to worry that the government will throw you in jail for insulting the president or something. It does not protect you from being boycotted by listeners who think you're clueless. That's just the free market talking, "Dr."
Of course, we all know that Palin struggles with the concept of popular choice... like elections.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Worst. President. Ever.
Ben Quayle has never heard of Warren G. Harding. Or James Buchanan. Or, bless his unlikeable, impeached little heart, Andrew Johnson (the only North Carolinian president that other states don't fight us for).
Or he has, and he's just assuming that the voters in Arizona's 3rd Congressional District have never had a social studies class.
Quayle released an ad last week calling President Obama the "worst president in history." Whether you agree with Quayle or not, you have to admit that it's pretty asinine to give a president an all-time ranking based on his first 18 months in office. And, whether you like Obama's policies or not - worse than any of the string of presidents that let the country degenerate into civil war? Really?
Best/worst president polls are interesting. They're entirely subjective, first of all. Are you measuring likeability? Effectiveness? How do you define "effective," anyway? A small-government type and a the-Executive-Branch-should-lead-the-way type are going to have very different definitions of "effective." Which I suppose is why the 1982 survey (at the link) found that conservative and liberal historians agreed on the top 10 best and worst with the exceptions of LBJ and Eisenhower (best) and Coolidge and Carter (worst).
The color-coded chart on that same Wikipedia page is also revealing... were the "best" presidents (on average) really skewed toward America's founding period, and its "worst" in the years prior to the Civil War? Did they lead historical events, or did those events lead them?
If nothing else, it's a fun exercise. Lincoln wasn't exactly popular during his first term, but now he's universally voted our best president. Truman barely won re-election, and now he's top-10 best. The public ranks JFK higher than historians, but even the experts have him in the top quadrant - and as much as I adore all things Kennedy, I don't think I'd put him that high. Andrew Jackson, LBJ and Woodrow Wilson were strong leaders, but damn, they each did some crappy things. And, sorry, I have to defend Nixon. Yes, his abuses of power were heinous and he deserved every bit of what he got... but the man did do some pretty progressive stuff. He proposed the Environmental Protection Agency and signed the law creating OSHA, for pete's sake.
And, personally, I think there should be a buffer between a presidency and any attempts to assess it long term. you have to be dead 10 years to be considered for a frakking postage stamp, for crying out loud. Is it too much to ask that historians wait until George W. Bush is out of office a full term before declaring him one of history's worst? (For that matter, naming Obama 15th best is just as silly as Quayle calling him the worst.)
And, for what it's worth... Ben Quayle, what if you win? It's January, 2011, and you're the junior-most representative in a Congress that's still probably controlled by Democrats (the House, at least), and if you do somehow manage to get something through committee, you're still the guy who called the president the worst in history. So, you're trying to get the Democrats who control your committee to bring your bill to a floor vote and then vote for it - the same Democrats who are going to be asking the "worst president" to campaign for them a year later. And then, if you're very lucky, you get to ask the "worst president in history" to sign your bill into law.
Get ready for a few years with zero federal appropriations, 3rd Congressional District.
Or he has, and he's just assuming that the voters in Arizona's 3rd Congressional District have never had a social studies class.
Quayle released an ad last week calling President Obama the "worst president in history." Whether you agree with Quayle or not, you have to admit that it's pretty asinine to give a president an all-time ranking based on his first 18 months in office. And, whether you like Obama's policies or not - worse than any of the string of presidents that let the country degenerate into civil war? Really?
Best/worst president polls are interesting. They're entirely subjective, first of all. Are you measuring likeability? Effectiveness? How do you define "effective," anyway? A small-government type and a the-Executive-Branch-should-lead-the-way type are going to have very different definitions of "effective." Which I suppose is why the 1982 survey (at the link) found that conservative and liberal historians agreed on the top 10 best and worst with the exceptions of LBJ and Eisenhower (best) and Coolidge and Carter (worst).
The color-coded chart on that same Wikipedia page is also revealing... were the "best" presidents (on average) really skewed toward America's founding period, and its "worst" in the years prior to the Civil War? Did they lead historical events, or did those events lead them?
If nothing else, it's a fun exercise. Lincoln wasn't exactly popular during his first term, but now he's universally voted our best president. Truman barely won re-election, and now he's top-10 best. The public ranks JFK higher than historians, but even the experts have him in the top quadrant - and as much as I adore all things Kennedy, I don't think I'd put him that high. Andrew Jackson, LBJ and Woodrow Wilson were strong leaders, but damn, they each did some crappy things. And, sorry, I have to defend Nixon. Yes, his abuses of power were heinous and he deserved every bit of what he got... but the man did do some pretty progressive stuff. He proposed the Environmental Protection Agency and signed the law creating OSHA, for pete's sake.
And, personally, I think there should be a buffer between a presidency and any attempts to assess it long term. you have to be dead 10 years to be considered for a frakking postage stamp, for crying out loud. Is it too much to ask that historians wait until George W. Bush is out of office a full term before declaring him one of history's worst? (For that matter, naming Obama 15th best is just as silly as Quayle calling him the worst.)
And, for what it's worth... Ben Quayle, what if you win? It's January, 2011, and you're the junior-most representative in a Congress that's still probably controlled by Democrats (the House, at least), and if you do somehow manage to get something through committee, you're still the guy who called the president the worst in history. So, you're trying to get the Democrats who control your committee to bring your bill to a floor vote and then vote for it - the same Democrats who are going to be asking the "worst president" to campaign for them a year later. And then, if you're very lucky, you get to ask the "worst president in history" to sign your bill into law.
Get ready for a few years with zero federal appropriations, 3rd Congressional District.
More mosque thoughts...
There's a sequence in "Bowling for Columbine" where Michael Moore gets reactions from several people to the NRA's decision to stick with their planned convention in Denver just weeks after the infamous school shooting. Being the master propagandist that he is, Moore juxtaposes footage of crying students with then-NRA president Charlton Heston intoning "From my cold, dead hands!" while he weilds a rifle at the convention podium. We get to see clips of the protest outside the convention, complete with speeches by parents of children killed at Columbine. Thanks to the way this part of the film is put together, a viewer can't help but conclude that the NRA, Heston in particular, is indifferent to the suffering of victims of gun violence.
Later, in an interview with "South Park" creator Matt Stone, Moore asks him about the NRA convention. Stone says something like, Yeah, sure, the NRA had the "right" to have their convention wherever and whenever, but c'mon.
That's kind of how I feel about the so-called "ground zero mosque" (which is neither a mosque or located at Ground Zero). Yes, there's been a mosque at the Pentagon for years and nobody's cared. Yes, this is a total sham of an issue designed to stir up a culture war in advance of the mid-term elections. And, yes, its founders have the right to build their center anywhere they want.
But... if it were me, I'd build it somewhere else.
Later, in an interview with "South Park" creator Matt Stone, Moore asks him about the NRA convention. Stone says something like, Yeah, sure, the NRA had the "right" to have their convention wherever and whenever, but c'mon.
That's kind of how I feel about the so-called "ground zero mosque" (which is neither a mosque or located at Ground Zero). Yes, there's been a mosque at the Pentagon for years and nobody's cared. Yes, this is a total sham of an issue designed to stir up a culture war in advance of the mid-term elections. And, yes, its founders have the right to build their center anywhere they want.
But... if it were me, I'd build it somewhere else.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Do it, Bill!
I really liked Bill Simmons' column this week about hold-outs. I usually fall in the "screw these whiny millionaires" camp (which I chalk up to Kevin Greene-related PTSD), but Simmons is right that a) the team owners are even whinier and wealthier than any player holding out on a contract, and b) Tom Brady really is getting screwed.
But Deadspin has an interesting twist: is not Simmons the Tom Brady of ESPN.com? They pay Rick frakking Reilly more than they pay Simmons. None of us can say whether Simmons was projecting his own issues here, but this is definitely true:
For years he's been easily the biggest draw among the non-on-air talent, and he's continually brought something new to the table. 30 for 30. The Book of Basketball. His podcasts, which he seems to devote more time to than his columns. And the thing is, ESPN indisputably needs him more than he needs them. He could easily start his own site, with him as the main draw (he flirted with the idea in an interview last fall). Think his readership would suffer? You can't blame the guy for wanting to get paid, especially since he's not even the highest-paid writer at his own company.
I'm still pissed at ESPN over the whole "let's not report on a Super Bowl-winning QB getting sued for rape, because we don't report on civil cases (except when we do)" BS. The only reason I ever begrudgingly visit ESPN.com is to read Bill Simmons.
So I would do a happy dance every day if Simmons ditched the Worldwide Leader for his own site. I can't wait to see what he would be able to write about without his corporate overlords nixing criticism of their various programming. Also: profanity, please.
I completely understand his loyalty to the people who gave him the platform he has now. As we say around here, you dance with the one what brung you. But we've all been in jobs where we've had to decide whether to stay with the company that took a chance on you, working to improve it from within, or leaving for something better.
BillSimmons.com (or whatever) would be must-read material for me every day - probably multiple times per day. And I can't be the only one.
But Deadspin has an interesting twist: is not Simmons the Tom Brady of ESPN.com? They pay Rick frakking Reilly more than they pay Simmons. None of us can say whether Simmons was projecting his own issues here, but this is definitely true:
For years he's been easily the biggest draw among the non-on-air talent, and he's continually brought something new to the table. 30 for 30. The Book of Basketball. His podcasts, which he seems to devote more time to than his columns. And the thing is, ESPN indisputably needs him more than he needs them. He could easily start his own site, with him as the main draw (he flirted with the idea in an interview last fall). Think his readership would suffer? You can't blame the guy for wanting to get paid, especially since he's not even the highest-paid writer at his own company.
I'm still pissed at ESPN over the whole "let's not report on a Super Bowl-winning QB getting sued for rape, because we don't report on civil cases (except when we do)" BS. The only reason I ever begrudgingly visit ESPN.com is to read Bill Simmons.
So I would do a happy dance every day if Simmons ditched the Worldwide Leader for his own site. I can't wait to see what he would be able to write about without his corporate overlords nixing criticism of their various programming. Also: profanity, please.
I completely understand his loyalty to the people who gave him the platform he has now. As we say around here, you dance with the one what brung you. But we've all been in jobs where we've had to decide whether to stay with the company that took a chance on you, working to improve it from within, or leaving for something better.
BillSimmons.com (or whatever) would be must-read material for me every day - probably multiple times per day. And I can't be the only one.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
I don't live in Sarah Palin's America, and I'm proud of it
I made a promise to myself that I wouldn't write anything else about Sarah Palin or her family unless one of them did something politically relevant. I don't care about their never-ending family drama, and it's none of my business. But this kind of is.
Because, the last time I checked, I'm an American. I was born here (and in case Lindsey Graham is keeping track, so were the previous 10 or so generations on both sides of my family), I pay taxes here. And, apologies to Bristol, but your mom doesn't represent me.
She doesn't "represent the United States," either, and the reason for that is that, when Americans had the opportunity to vote for her, nation-wide, they voted for the other ticket. Palin's welcome to try again in 2012, but given her current popularity among both Republicans and the general population, that doesn't look good.
Palin shouldn't bash the media. She should buy them flowers. They're the only reason she's still relevant.
And am I the only one getting REALLY tired of this "real America" crap? It's not just BS, it's dangerous. It's just an attempt to marginalize people who don't agree with you by questioning their legitimacy to even be involved in making decisions. Personally, I feel like showing up for the decision automatically gives you the right to help make the decision. So, people who make the effort to get involved and vote (like the ones who didn't vote for Palin in 2008) ARE legitimate. The ones who are so new to civic engagement that they don't even know that Medicare is a federal program... they have a ways to go with me.
And am I the only one getting REALLY tired of this "real America" crap? It's not just BS, it's dangerous. It's just an attempt to marginalize people who don't agree with you by questioning their legitimacy to even be involved in making decisions. Personally, I feel like showing up for the decision automatically gives you the right to help make the decision. So, people who make the effort to get involved and vote (like the ones who didn't vote for Palin in 2008) ARE legitimate. The ones who are so new to civic engagement that they don't even know that Medicare is a federal program... they have a ways to go with me.
Two more things: a) Please stop saying "lamestream" in reference to the media or anyone else. "Lame" used to mean "bad" is offensive to disabled people (like, for instance, Palin's youngest son).
And b) You rolled your eyes at the teacher, lady. You did. Own it - call her a communist or something - but don't tell me not to trust my lying eyes. You were on frakking camera, and you knew it. It continues to amaze me that a woman with both a college degree and a professional career in journalism is so royally bad at understanding it.
Former Senator Ted Stevens Killed in Plane Crash
A few years ago, I interviewed a professor about a book she'd just published. In the course of our conversation, she mentioned that she'd taught for several years in rural Alaska. I got very excited and started pumping her for information, because I still harbor a fantasy of moving there (too many re-runs of "Northern Exposure," I guess).
She really seemed to miss it, so I asked her, why did she leave Alaska? "Too many of my friends died in plane crashes," she said. It would probably happen to her sooner or later.
I remembered that conversation earlier today when I first saw the news that former U.S. Senator Ted Stevens was believed to be on a plane that crashed in a remote area of southwest Alaska yesterday. Initial reports suggested that some of the passengers had survived, but, given that Stevens is 86 years old, I had a hard time believing he could be one of them.
Sadly, he wasn't. Former NASA head Sean O'Keefe was also on board, as were either six or seven others.
I admit I don't know a lot about Stevens other than that he was the longest-serving Republican in the Senate and that he narrowly lost in 2008 after a conviction on corruption charges (which Attorney Journal Eric Holder overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct). His first wife also died in a plane crash in 1978. For that matter, Rep. Nick Begich, the father of current Sen. Mark Begich (the guy who defeated Stevens in 2008) is also believed to have died in a plane crash in Alaska. ("Believed" because they never found the plane. That's when you know your state is giant and rugged.)
What I do know about Stevens is that he used the clout he accumulated in the Senate put his stamp on his adopted state through billions in appropriations, much like fellow senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd did. Stevens was so powerful that, after he lost his chairmanship of the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2006, Alaska's per capita federal "pork" dropped by more than half, from $985 to $489 - still leading the nation, though. After Stevens left the Senate, Alaska slipped to No. 4. (Byrd's West Virginia was in the top five that same year.)
In one year, we've lost three of the longest-serving members o the Senate in history, two of whom (Kennedy and Byrd) were still in office. All three weren't shy about using the Senate's earmarking rules to benefit their constituents at the expense of tax-payers in other states. I'm still not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
My prayers go out to Stevens's family, and the families of the plane's other passengers. It can't hurt to remember the rescuers now making their way over terrain so rough that it took 12 hours to reach the crash site.
She really seemed to miss it, so I asked her, why did she leave Alaska? "Too many of my friends died in plane crashes," she said. It would probably happen to her sooner or later.
I remembered that conversation earlier today when I first saw the news that former U.S. Senator Ted Stevens was believed to be on a plane that crashed in a remote area of southwest Alaska yesterday. Initial reports suggested that some of the passengers had survived, but, given that Stevens is 86 years old, I had a hard time believing he could be one of them.
Sadly, he wasn't. Former NASA head Sean O'Keefe was also on board, as were either six or seven others.
I admit I don't know a lot about Stevens other than that he was the longest-serving Republican in the Senate and that he narrowly lost in 2008 after a conviction on corruption charges (which Attorney Journal Eric Holder overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct). His first wife also died in a plane crash in 1978. For that matter, Rep. Nick Begich, the father of current Sen. Mark Begich (the guy who defeated Stevens in 2008) is also believed to have died in a plane crash in Alaska. ("Believed" because they never found the plane. That's when you know your state is giant and rugged.)
What I do know about Stevens is that he used the clout he accumulated in the Senate put his stamp on his adopted state through billions in appropriations, much like fellow senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd did. Stevens was so powerful that, after he lost his chairmanship of the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2006, Alaska's per capita federal "pork" dropped by more than half, from $985 to $489 - still leading the nation, though. After Stevens left the Senate, Alaska slipped to No. 4. (Byrd's West Virginia was in the top five that same year.)
In one year, we've lost three of the longest-serving members o the Senate in history, two of whom (Kennedy and Byrd) were still in office. All three weren't shy about using the Senate's earmarking rules to benefit their constituents at the expense of tax-payers in other states. I'm still not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
My prayers go out to Stevens's family, and the families of the plane's other passengers. It can't hurt to remember the rescuers now making their way over terrain so rough that it took 12 hours to reach the crash site.
Monday, August 9, 2010
You know who we need right now? George W. Bush.
Let's give former President George W. Bush his due. As Matt Bai writes in the New York Times this week, Bush genuinely tried to build a multi-ethnic coalition of conservatives, in addition to his 2006 attempt at immigration reform. Bush successfully convinced huge numbers of Latino voters that their socially conservative values fit in with the Republican Party, and, personally, I think he showed tremendous leadership in the days after 9/11 when it would've been very easy to demonize all Muslims.
...which is kind of what's happening now. Suddenly the building of houses of worship is a political issue, particularly in the party that likes to think of itself as the defenders of the Constitution (which includes the right to freely practice religion). I think the reason we haven't heard President Obama address the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" is that he and his advisers understand that it would be pretty fruitless for someone whom over 40 percent of Republicans think is really Kenyan to defend Muslims. But for Bush to step in and tell his former base to lay off might actually have an impact. It wouldn't convince everyone. But it would probably make a lot of the people on the moderate border stop and think.
This could be a real Nixon-goes-to-China moment for Bush. His initial response to the 9/11 attacks, I believe, is one of the things that history will judge his administration got right. And I believe that his response was genuine, not some political calculation. Obviously I've never met him, but I've always gotten the vibe from Bush that he's someone with an innate sense of fair play when it came to individuals that he met or things he experienced personally. It's both his biggest strength and biggest weakness. He's the Republican Jimmy Carter.
Hear me out. There are people - you probably know some yourself - who pride themselves on their intuition and ability to read other people. They're right most of the time. But the downside is that a) they have problems empathizing with people in the abstract (that is, situations they haven't experienced personally), and b) they can be deceived by people who aren't as trustworthy as they themselves are. My dad's one of these people. He doesn't lie, so it would never occur to him that other people do.
Carter has had a successful career as a diplomat since leaving the presidency. Maybe Bush can, too.
Because it isn't just the Republicans that could use a reminder of their very recent past as the big tent for conservatives of any color. It's our entire country. Only 10 years ago, Democrats like me were looking at the very real possibility of losing Latinos to the GOP for a generation. Only four years ago, people like Sen. Lindsey Graham were pushing for a third way in immigration reform and changing the guest worker program. Now Graham is openly wondering if we should ditch the 14th Amendment. And Graham is a moderate Republican.
To his credit, Bush has kept a low profile since leaving office, which can't have been easy at times. But America needs Bush's voice right now. It certainly couldn't hurt.
...which is kind of what's happening now. Suddenly the building of houses of worship is a political issue, particularly in the party that likes to think of itself as the defenders of the Constitution (which includes the right to freely practice religion). I think the reason we haven't heard President Obama address the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" is that he and his advisers understand that it would be pretty fruitless for someone whom over 40 percent of Republicans think is really Kenyan to defend Muslims. But for Bush to step in and tell his former base to lay off might actually have an impact. It wouldn't convince everyone. But it would probably make a lot of the people on the moderate border stop and think.
This could be a real Nixon-goes-to-China moment for Bush. His initial response to the 9/11 attacks, I believe, is one of the things that history will judge his administration got right. And I believe that his response was genuine, not some political calculation. Obviously I've never met him, but I've always gotten the vibe from Bush that he's someone with an innate sense of fair play when it came to individuals that he met or things he experienced personally. It's both his biggest strength and biggest weakness. He's the Republican Jimmy Carter.
Hear me out. There are people - you probably know some yourself - who pride themselves on their intuition and ability to read other people. They're right most of the time. But the downside is that a) they have problems empathizing with people in the abstract (that is, situations they haven't experienced personally), and b) they can be deceived by people who aren't as trustworthy as they themselves are. My dad's one of these people. He doesn't lie, so it would never occur to him that other people do.
Carter has had a successful career as a diplomat since leaving the presidency. Maybe Bush can, too.
Because it isn't just the Republicans that could use a reminder of their very recent past as the big tent for conservatives of any color. It's our entire country. Only 10 years ago, Democrats like me were looking at the very real possibility of losing Latinos to the GOP for a generation. Only four years ago, people like Sen. Lindsey Graham were pushing for a third way in immigration reform and changing the guest worker program. Now Graham is openly wondering if we should ditch the 14th Amendment. And Graham is a moderate Republican.
To his credit, Bush has kept a low profile since leaving office, which can't have been easy at times. But America needs Bush's voice right now. It certainly couldn't hurt.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
That Boy’s Not Right: Songs Rand Paul should listen to, a lot
Rand Paul’s entire platform seems to be “questioning stuff reasonable people decided 50 years ago.” There was the whole Civil Rights Act thing, and now his apparent ignorance of Harlan County, Ky.’s importance is disturbing.
First of all, imagine if John Kerry, or Barack Obama, had made the mistake of placing “The Dukes of Hazzard”’s setting in Kentucky and not Georgia. We wouldn’t be able to sleep tonight for the cries of “ELITIST!!!!!!!” bellowing on the airwaves.
But I’m far more bothered by Paul’s obliviousness to Harlan’s labor history. Some of the bloodiest civil conflicts in U.S. history took place at coalfields in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado. And I’m not talking about ancient history, either. Florence Reese, who wrote “Which Side are You On” on a calendar page while the sheriff waited outside to ambush her union organizer husband, only died in 1986, and that’s in a part of the country where we still name our kids after Civil War generals. Barbara Kopple directed “Harlan County, USA,” about a miner’s strike, only four years before I was born.
I get it – Paul is a libertarian who privileges the “free market” (a euphemism if ever there was one)* over the people working in that very free market. But many of those people gave their lives in Harlan County over the years, both in the mines and agitating to improve conditions in those mines. For Paul, the guy who wants Kentuckians to send him to D.C. to represent their interests, to be all, “Oh yeah, ‘Dukes of Hazzard’” is a slap in the face.
Of course, this is also the guy who thinks that blown-up mountains would make swell sports complexes. For elk and stuff (provided they don’t need clean water or anything).
And I’m not claiming that unions have a clean history. But I’d rather live in a world where workers can organize than one where bosses-cum-plantation masters get to make all the choices. And regardless of where you stand on organized labor, you can’t just pretend that it’s something a prospective U.S. Senator shouldn’t be vaguely aware of.
So, here’s a playlist for Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, with which he might begin the process of educating himself:
- Season One of “Justified,” just because
- The aforementioned “Which Side are You On” (Pete Seeger cover)
- “You’ll Never Leave Harlan Alive” (Brad Paisley or Patty Loveless)
- “Sixteen Tons” (by Get a Frakking Clue, Rand Paul… just kidding, it’s Tennessee Ernie Ford) (Johnny Cash’s cover is awesome, of course.)
- “The L&N Don’t Stop Here Anymore” (this one’s Kathy Mattea, but June Carter Cash has a kick-ass version on one of the Oxford American Southern Samplers)
*My great-grandfather was a blacksmith in the copper mines of East Tennessee blackballed for taking part in a 1933 strike – so much for his freedom to market – finally employed steadily 10 years later by the New Deal-funded TVA. That’s right. A father of five kids was prevented from finding work by a private company for asking assurance not to die every day – not merely at that private company, but anywhere in town – until a massive federal program gave him a job building a dam in another state. So now you know a lot about me.
First of all, imagine if John Kerry, or Barack Obama, had made the mistake of placing “The Dukes of Hazzard”’s setting in Kentucky and not Georgia. We wouldn’t be able to sleep tonight for the cries of “ELITIST!!!!!!!” bellowing on the airwaves.
But I’m far more bothered by Paul’s obliviousness to Harlan’s labor history. Some of the bloodiest civil conflicts in U.S. history took place at coalfields in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado. And I’m not talking about ancient history, either. Florence Reese, who wrote “Which Side are You On” on a calendar page while the sheriff waited outside to ambush her union organizer husband, only died in 1986, and that’s in a part of the country where we still name our kids after Civil War generals. Barbara Kopple directed “Harlan County, USA,” about a miner’s strike, only four years before I was born.
I get it – Paul is a libertarian who privileges the “free market” (a euphemism if ever there was one)* over the people working in that very free market. But many of those people gave their lives in Harlan County over the years, both in the mines and agitating to improve conditions in those mines. For Paul, the guy who wants Kentuckians to send him to D.C. to represent their interests, to be all, “Oh yeah, ‘Dukes of Hazzard’” is a slap in the face.
Of course, this is also the guy who thinks that blown-up mountains would make swell sports complexes. For elk and stuff (provided they don’t need clean water or anything).
And I’m not claiming that unions have a clean history. But I’d rather live in a world where workers can organize than one where bosses-cum-plantation masters get to make all the choices. And regardless of where you stand on organized labor, you can’t just pretend that it’s something a prospective U.S. Senator shouldn’t be vaguely aware of.
So, here’s a playlist for Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, with which he might begin the process of educating himself:
- Season One of “Justified,” just because
- The aforementioned “Which Side are You On” (Pete Seeger cover)
- “You’ll Never Leave Harlan Alive” (Brad Paisley or Patty Loveless)
- “Sixteen Tons” (by Get a Frakking Clue, Rand Paul… just kidding, it’s Tennessee Ernie Ford) (Johnny Cash’s cover is awesome, of course.)
- “The L&N Don’t Stop Here Anymore” (this one’s Kathy Mattea, but June Carter Cash has a kick-ass version on one of the Oxford American Southern Samplers)
*My great-grandfather was a blacksmith in the copper mines of East Tennessee blackballed for taking part in a 1933 strike – so much for his freedom to market – finally employed steadily 10 years later by the New Deal-funded TVA. That’s right. A father of five kids was prevented from finding work by a private company for asking assurance not to die every day – not merely at that private company, but anywhere in town – until a massive federal program gave him a job building a dam in another state. So now you know a lot about me.
Monday, August 2, 2010
The Fun Girls!
Okay, having spent more time than usual back home, apparently I have my Mayberry-influenced past on the brain. Which is how I found this. Yes, the Fun Girls have their very own Wikipedia entry! I'm so proud.
You see, I am a Fun Girl veteran.
If you know me, you know that I grew up in Pilot Mountain and spent every waking moment not in school, church or at home at the Andy Griffith Playhouse in Mount Airy. At some point - I think it was my junior year in high school, but, honestly, they kind of all run together - I was drafted into the parade that took place every year at Mayberry Days (last weekend of September - mark your calendars!). Along with two of my fellow theatre-geek friends, I was to be a costumed character. I will protect their privacy, because they voluntarily went out in public dressed as a chicken and a gorilla, but I will tell you that their names rhyme with Floey Farion and Fris Foltz, respectively. I was a giant bunny. And if you're reading this wondering what a chicken, a gorilla and a bunny could possibly have to do with "The Andy Griffith Show" - just don't.
It was a lot of fun, actually. There's something liberating about being in one of those mascot-like costumes, where nobody knows who you are. It's hot, and you have no peripheral vision... but it's still something I recommend everybody try at least once.
I was the bunny again the next year, though this time I got to ride in a convertible with a six-year-old beauty queen who was probably terrified of me. But this seven-foot-tall bunny was done boogy-ing up Main Street.
I think it was the year of Convertible Bunny that I met the Fun Girls. I'm standing in the parking lot of the bank/staging area in my bunny suit when I see two women that I know from the theatre, and they're in what I now think of as Joan Holloway clothes, while I am wearing - I don't know if I mentioned this - a bunny suit, and so I walk up and ask (through my bunny head) who they're supposed to be.
"We're the Fun Girls from Mt. Pilot," they say. I have to say, I felt a little robbed by that. Because, ahem, I AM a fun girl, and I am also from Mt. Pilot (or at least its real-world inspiration), and this is the first I've heard of these characters as an alternative option to a giant bunny. This is what I get for never actually watching The Show.
Flash-foward a few years, when I'm home from college. The arts council calls to ask if I'd like to volunteer for Mayberry Days again. For the very first time in my theatre-related life, I outright demand a role: If I am to participate in the parade, I WILL be a Fun Girl. No problem! My friend Angela is game, and, true to tell, she is far more prepared than me. She knows that the Fun Girls have names, for instance, which was news to me, because I never watched The Show.
One more year, and I'm back in Fun Girl mode. One issue: I'm the lone Fun Girl this year unless I can recruit a partner. I don;t know why I asked, or why she agreed, but my pre-teen sister Elizabeth agreed to do it with me. The problem is that, without Angela (who knew her Daphne from her Skippy), we're just two gals with cute outfits in a convertible, with 70-year-old-men running up on the parade route wanting pictures with us.
I'd grown up knowing that some people are really into "The Andy Griffith Show." As I learned that day, some people are really, REALLY into "The Andy Griffith Show." Like, enough to remember dialogue and traits of characters that appeared three times in nine seasons of a sitcom that had been off the air for decades. And, you know what? I can't totally blame them. If I ever go to a "Central Perk" festival 20 years from now and meet some talent who doesn't know the words to "Smelly Cat," I will be disappointed.
So, mea culpa for my lack of proper knowledge of the Fun Girls. (In my defense, we didn't have Google or Wikipedia back then.) I was the worst Fun Girl in the history of Mayberry Days, and I probably traumatized my baby sister for life, not to mention the random 70-year-old men wondering why Daphne doesn't know to say "Hello, Doll," and why both of them aren't blonde.
And somewhere, someone has pictures.
You see, I am a Fun Girl veteran.
If you know me, you know that I grew up in Pilot Mountain and spent every waking moment not in school, church or at home at the Andy Griffith Playhouse in Mount Airy. At some point - I think it was my junior year in high school, but, honestly, they kind of all run together - I was drafted into the parade that took place every year at Mayberry Days (last weekend of September - mark your calendars!). Along with two of my fellow theatre-geek friends, I was to be a costumed character. I will protect their privacy, because they voluntarily went out in public dressed as a chicken and a gorilla, but I will tell you that their names rhyme with Floey Farion and Fris Foltz, respectively. I was a giant bunny. And if you're reading this wondering what a chicken, a gorilla and a bunny could possibly have to do with "The Andy Griffith Show" - just don't.
It was a lot of fun, actually. There's something liberating about being in one of those mascot-like costumes, where nobody knows who you are. It's hot, and you have no peripheral vision... but it's still something I recommend everybody try at least once.
I was the bunny again the next year, though this time I got to ride in a convertible with a six-year-old beauty queen who was probably terrified of me. But this seven-foot-tall bunny was done boogy-ing up Main Street.
I think it was the year of Convertible Bunny that I met the Fun Girls. I'm standing in the parking lot of the bank/staging area in my bunny suit when I see two women that I know from the theatre, and they're in what I now think of as Joan Holloway clothes, while I am wearing - I don't know if I mentioned this - a bunny suit, and so I walk up and ask (through my bunny head) who they're supposed to be.
"We're the Fun Girls from Mt. Pilot," they say. I have to say, I felt a little robbed by that. Because, ahem, I AM a fun girl, and I am also from Mt. Pilot (or at least its real-world inspiration), and this is the first I've heard of these characters as an alternative option to a giant bunny. This is what I get for never actually watching The Show.
Flash-foward a few years, when I'm home from college. The arts council calls to ask if I'd like to volunteer for Mayberry Days again. For the very first time in my theatre-related life, I outright demand a role: If I am to participate in the parade, I WILL be a Fun Girl. No problem! My friend Angela is game, and, true to tell, she is far more prepared than me. She knows that the Fun Girls have names, for instance, which was news to me, because I never watched The Show.
One more year, and I'm back in Fun Girl mode. One issue: I'm the lone Fun Girl this year unless I can recruit a partner. I don;t know why I asked, or why she agreed, but my pre-teen sister Elizabeth agreed to do it with me. The problem is that, without Angela (who knew her Daphne from her Skippy), we're just two gals with cute outfits in a convertible, with 70-year-old-men running up on the parade route wanting pictures with us.
I'd grown up knowing that some people are really into "The Andy Griffith Show." As I learned that day, some people are really, REALLY into "The Andy Griffith Show." Like, enough to remember dialogue and traits of characters that appeared three times in nine seasons of a sitcom that had been off the air for decades. And, you know what? I can't totally blame them. If I ever go to a "Central Perk" festival 20 years from now and meet some talent who doesn't know the words to "Smelly Cat," I will be disappointed.
So, mea culpa for my lack of proper knowledge of the Fun Girls. (In my defense, we didn't have Google or Wikipedia back then.) I was the worst Fun Girl in the history of Mayberry Days, and I probably traumatized my baby sister for life, not to mention the random 70-year-old men wondering why Daphne doesn't know to say "Hello, Doll," and why both of them aren't blonde.
And somewhere, someone has pictures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)