I've been thinking about catching JOHN ADAMS on HBO this week, but hadn't gotten around to it until my good friend, the poet Robert Slater emailed me how much he had dug it, so I checked it out, and despite what I saw as some bad direction in parts of it, the way the story was told, the writing of the piece and most of the acting, made it well worthwhile.
It also made me think about the power of the word, not only among our "Founding Fathers," but ever since. How debased that has become in our own time, and how refreshing Obama's speech yesterday was, in the tradition of the great speeches throughout our history, until recently.
See for yourself what Obama had to say, and how he said it: here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Welcome back Michael,
Back to politics.
It is refreshing and revealing to see, the apostle of change and new direction, be revealed as a supporter of a purveyor of racism and anti-Americanism worthy of the, disgraced and fired Colorado professor, Ward Churchill. Obama supported Wright with money and participation in his church for twenty years. It is amazing that he is just now discovering that Wright may be an inappropriate role model and spiritual leader. Barack is either a very slow learner or a liar. Take your pick. My beloved Colorado has recently been trending Democrat. Maybe if Barak is on the ticket, in either first or second position, we Colorado Republicans can take back some seats. This election cycle is becoming less and less scary for Conservatives.
Speaking of movies, I thought you might enjoy this excerpt from the LA Times editorial page. Maybe there is hope for Hollywood yet.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-klavan19mar19,0,1967288.story
Welcome to the right, Mr. Mamet
The dramatist's conversion to conservatism is good for him and for the right.
By Andrew Klavan
March 19, 2008
David Mamet's public coming-out as a political conservative -- done in a 2,500-word essay in the Village Voice last week -- is wonderful news for the culture, far better, I fear, than many conservatives will appreciate. The left has monopolized the arts for so long that some on the right have lost the knack of them. We love to denounce Hollywood and indulge in paroxysms of rage about the latest artistic insults to patriotism and God. But when it comes actually to producing mature and complex works of art -- or supporting the people who produce them -- a good conservative can be very hard to find.
Mamet, on the other hand, is a pillar of the arts. I don't know if he's America's greatest living playwright, but I'm hard-pressed to think of a better one. Many people know him for his movie work: "The Untouchables," "The Edge," "House of Games," etc. But it's plays such as "American Buffalo," "Glengarry Glen Ross" and "Speed-the-Plow" that represent his best writing by far, each searching for remnants of heroism in the rubble of modernity through a hilarious and poetic tough-guy vernacular.
Jim, You're boring us with all these rightwing tirades and misrepresentations and thoughtless judgments and dismissals of serious concerns and factual realities.
Mamet is an egotistic self-righteous judgmental sometimes really good writer and sometimes really bad one. His opinions in that article, which I read as soon as it came out, were so misguided and based on so many incorrect generalizations that it seemed to me he was finally unmasking for everyone to see his generally weak intellect. As, I'm afriad my boy, your comments seem to do as well.
If you can't understand how Obama went to that church and supported it, along with many many many other University of Chicago professors and intellects much more well read in the facts of our history than even you and me, than you have very little knowledge of "black" American history (or American history in general for that matter) and of church going. Your beloved Bush Junior associated with and took the endorsment of and prayed with and praised and etc. (and never criticized as Obama has his minister) fundamentalist ministers who believe that the Pope is the anti-Christ, that Catholics are devil worshippers, that the Northridge, California, earthquake was God's punishment of Southern California for harboring the porn industry (though no one in the industry was hurt, just innocent people) and that 9/11 was God's retribution for America's allowing Lesbians and gays to exist, (even though God obviously created them that way) et-endlessly-cetera.
My friends wonder why I just don't erase your comments and tell you to get you own blog. This obviously isn't a happy place for people with your political misconceptions about history, past and current, and the motivations of patriots who love this country and all that it stands for and find you and your political ilk the real traitors to the ideals this country was founded on and which Obama articulated very well in his speech yesterday, as he also articulated very well the reasons why we are still working on "forming a more perfect union."
But we're old friends, and I respect diversity, even in political opinions, even when they come from a knee-jerk rightwing mindset that can never accept the truth if it doesn't fit the rightwing agenda.
I know I'm not going to change your mind Jim, and you must realize you're not going to change mine. So relax, enlighten up, and let me share my perspective, and if you want to quibble with some of my facts or ideas fine, but no need to bring in links and entire articles that can be refuted in a second by my own links and articles and just pile up distracting verbiage on both sides that won't convince either of us. You think after a lifetime of study, of college teaching, of twenty-seven published books and lectures around the world and personal experience a bit broader than most folks I ecnounter and etc. etc. that I don't know what I'm talking about? Or that my mind can be changed by silly rightwing propganda or "the big lie" technique of the Nazis and Russian Communists that the Republicans mastered so well they continue to exploit its use, or just by listing links and/or articles etc.?
But then I remember when we used to actually fight a lot as kids, the way kids don't seem to as much anymore, thank God. And realize it never kept us from being friends. That's the best thing about this country as well, and I don't like it when the dialogue between different political and social and religious perspectives is debased by name calling (a bit of which I've been doin in this comment I must admit) and distortions of what really went down (as in, my link was for people to listen to Barack's entire speech and see for themsevles what he had to say, which you obviously somehow either didn't do or heard it with such a biased perspective that you totally misunderstood it and certainly misrepresented it in your comment).
Michael,
If you want me to cease and desist, just let me know. You don’t have to do it publicly, you can email me at j.mckenna42@yahoo.com. You have a following, which I assume is very liberal. I don’t have a following, so any blog, I were to have, would be very undervisted. Worse than that, what little traffic there was, would most likely attract conservatives. What fun is it to have political discussions with people that agree with you.. You have said that you have had complaints from people who visit your site, who do not like having your or their views challenged. I understand that. No harm no foul It is your blog,and your call.
Isn't it odd! In reading the above, it suddenly dawned on me that Jim is easily equated with Rev. Wright for the blind, yet sincere fury of his screed. Lally is equated to Obama, who despite his total and undeniable rejection of the screed refuses to throw a friend under the bus.
alamedatom,
I can not resist a parting shot. It used to be said in jest, that a politician would sell his grandmother in order to get elected. Until Obama's speech, I have never seen it actually done. Poor grandmom Obama, that racist pig for her slurs and street crossings.
I don't mind the questioning or arguing with my perspective on things Jim. It just seems you often miss the point or ignore the point of what I post in order to make some rightwing propaganda point. Like your last one. The greatness of Obama's speech, which you obviously just can't seem to comprehend, maybe his English is too clear or too humble for you to even hear, but the point he was making is that his grandmother had faults common to other "whites" just as his preacher has faults common to many "black Americans" etc.
And Obama's point, the point of his speech and his candidacy and campiagn is to finally get beyond those faults, to accept that not everyone's perfect and that these differing perspectives can be addressed with honesty and the goal of moving beyond them. As John Stewart said in THE DAILY SHOW last night, Obama actually talked about "race" as if he were speaking to adults.
My guess is that Minister Wright is descended from slaves, which means his family has been in this country, been "Americans" far longer than most of the white population, even centuries longer, and yet for centuries, and sometimes even to this day, he and his family were and still sometimes are treated as if they aren't good enough "Americans" by people who have suffered little, if at all, to claim their "American" identity as if it's the only one. And the idea of "race" was imposed on his ancestors by slave traders and then by of all people the Founding Fathers, because like Europeans, Africans identified ethnically, by tribe, like the Irish and the English and the Scots etc. until they were taken as slaves, the Africans, and all put into one categrory and then a theory to support that categorization was developed about a seperate "race", less than human etc. So Wright has a family and "racial" memory of not only his own personal oppression and repression by the government of this country as it supported and legalized the seperation of the "races" and kept his ancestors and himself from full equality and all the opportunities etc. etc. Why should I have to explain the simple facts of our history to you Jim when obviously you can't hear them? Because that's what Obama was talking about, not your dismissive distortions of what I perceieve as a good man trying to move this country forward to "a more perfect union" than we started out with and obviously have now. Sure Obama is human and has faults and ambitions and the other traits we all share, but I truly believe the evidence so far, and especially yesterday's speech, show that he is trying to get beyond the divisiveness that in the eyes of many patriots, myself included, has been draggin our country backward, and downward, into the morass of petty "gotcha" politics instead of forward into a discussion of how we can move beyond the mistakes of the past and into a future in which we address the serious problems we all face and not just the demans of a handful of giant corporations and their shills in the Republican and unfortunately some as well in the Democratic Party. And by the way, that's the way Americans have identified the Democratic Party since its inception, so anyone who says Democrat Party is obviously not a true American, if we're gonna keep questioning our opponents patriotism.
We Irish had problems with the Brits and their land confiscation, lack of action during the potato famine years and second class citizenship that was Ireland's lot for centuries. We also had problems with the WASPS and their "Irish need not apply" policy in the 19th and 20th century. But this is America. In 1847, the leaders of Protestant NYC raised $68,000 for the relief of the starving Irish. That was a considerable sum back then. The Irish anger against British or American Protestants would not justify the violence done against civilians in the 1970's and 80's. Every American Irishman who gave to the IRA, shares in the guilt of the bombers.
We American Irish who sang "By the Rising of the Moon" and other Irish anti British songs at the Shore, but did not contribute to the "Cause" share some complicity. We helped to keep the hate alive that led to men, women and children being blown apart in Britain and Ireland. Blacks in America have suffered unspeakable horrors for close to 400 years. My ancesters may or may not have been complicit, but I have not. The Rev. Wright has spewed his religion of hate and victomhood to the detriment of his congregation and to the Democrat candidate who has supported him for 20 years.
PS. Mike, You are quite competent in defending your views, but others may be less confortable doing so. Would it be better if I only respond to you directly. I must admit I have been rather direct with others on your site.
i'm not sure, but i think the point of 'the alley' is to visit some of the experience and insight that the author brings back from his trips around the block ...
i look forward to his filtering and the like-minded insights of others who visit and provide variations on the theme ...
it becomes a safe-haven and forum for creative and constructive ideas [non-aggressive]- something i've seen far too little of over the past seven years [coincidence ?] ...
on occaision, its even insightful to get thoughtful alternative views until they begin to sound like the all too familiar rhetoric i'm trying to avoid ...
that ain't why i hang here with my morning coffee ...
the good thing about talk radio spewing diatribe [limbaugh,etc], is that you can turn off the heckler - besides, it doesn't play well in this alley ...
got some jazz?
Hey, it's been an emotional time for me lately, so I responded a little more than usual to some of your comments Jim. I don't mind the alternative view now and then, but as Harryn says above, when it starts sounding like the right's line of the day and not an individual's thoughts, it's just tiresome, and when your comments are an article someone else predictably on the right or not has written, it's just like i said extra verbiage to wade through that I've probably already read anyway, so you can just refer to it or where it can be found. And once again, you miss the point, I believe, of what Obama did and what my post was about, which is what we think about his speech, a speech even many of his opponenets and critics admit was one of the most significant of the campaign, and maybe even in our history. Yes rev. Wright said things that Obama and many of the rest of us would disagree with, and victimhood gets tiresome too. But let's see who has complained the most about being victims in the past few decades: Christians, rightwing Republicans ("victims" of the "liberal" media, which is another of their big lies, I wish we had a liberal media) and Republicans in general complaining about being victims of "Washington" and the federal government when they have controlled Washington and the federal government one way or another for many many years, etc. So, it's Wright's justified anger at centuries of oppression versus rightwingers unjustified false posturing as victims of some "liberal" media and government that don't exist except in the propaganda of the right. (it is true that probably most reporters lean more toward liberal than conservative, but I suspect if you really got the statistics down it would come out almost even, but if you move that to editors, managers, and owners of the media, the tilt is so far to the right everyone would slide off the scale, and the same goes for supposed "liberal" Hollywood, as I have written many times, my experience after 20 years there is that most sutido heads, producers, and directors and even writers, are more Republican than Democratic. Anyway, that's my last word on this comment thread.
PS: (I say last comment and then can't resist a PS!) Meant to say above Jim that your point about the Irish is well taken, but just FYI, native American tribes and African-American groups and individuals (especially Frederick Douglas) also contributed to the Irish during the famine (though the corn and grain they sent was kept offshore to rot in ships by the Brits rather than distributed among the starving) and even more than the Irish Protestants you mention did.
Interesting, I never heard that about about Douglas and American Indians. What a country!
Post a Comment