411-movie news

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, 5 December 2009

On the use of Presidential Privilege to destroy Christmas

Posted on 06:34 by anderson
For the record, no, President Obama did not deliberately pre-empt "A Charlie Brown Christmas" as part of a concerted effort to further eliminate religious references from the public media.

But it WAS a spectacularly boneheaded play.

He had an important message to give, he requested the time from the networks, and his media team either didn't realize what he'd be talking over, or they figured it wouldn't be a big deal.

*sigh*

It's exactly the kind of thing that that people LOVE to grab on to and blow up into importance. It's pointless, stupid, distracting, and serves only to elicit an emotional response - perfect for the 24-hour media cycle.

Once again, this is another play in the concerted campaign to prove that President Obama can do NOTHING right, positive or helpful to the American people. Any and everything he does or doesn't do, via action, speech or unspoken thought, is actively intended to destroy America. While I could easily go for the "Big Lie" comparison here, it's just too damn easy (and tends to veer the discussion off the rails) so I'll pull out the Brave New World quote - "62,400 repetitions equals one truth." The theory is, if ENOUGH little unbelievable accusations fly at the same target, more and more people will start to think, "Well if THIS many stories are popping up, surely SOME of them must be true". And that's all you need, the suspicion.

The President tends to ignore these stories, or has his lackies address them. His lackies do not have much patience, and it takes very little to make them sound shrill and insistent. And shrill and insistent people tend not to sound believable. Just listen to the people who call in to Talk Radio. They talk progressively louder and faster, as if trying to get in their point before they're cut off.

No, Obama should not address each of these issues personally, it does tend to give them more credence. But once in a blue moon, in inverse ratio to the importance and plausability of the charge, he ought to come out against one with such withering sarcasm that it makes anyone who tried to put the accusation forth look like a damn fool.

I'd love to see him at a press conference, answering the Charlie Brown Christmas accusation by clearing his throat and saying "Mwah-wah WAH wahwahwah waaahhh."

But again, since he's under the Everything He Does Is Wrong attack, even THAT would somehow mean he's demeaning those who love the special. Humor has become a casualty of the political process. Half the time, the opponent of a politician can not grasp that an opponent can be telling a joke, and the rest of the time it's just them trying to convince YOU that he can't be telling a joke.

ABC is doing the EXACT right move in the wake of Charlie-gate- taking shameless advantage of the mini-frenzy and re-running the special TWICE - once on December 8th, and again a week later, both at 8PM, and both on the real ABC, not pawned off on ABC Family or something. And I'll lay odds it'll get better ratings than any time it was broadcast in the last five years. It's AMAZING the reaction people have when you take away something they haven't looked at in years, but simply expect to be there. If it's not called "New Coke Syndrome", it should be.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • On the Annotated Animated All-Stars
    Children in Need is a stellar charity from Great Britain dedicated to helping disadvantaged kids in the UK. It's been going for over 20...
  • On the need to change without actually improving
    The Batman Annual, part of the pretty damn good if I say so Night of the Owls Bat-event features the New 52 origin of Mr. Freeze, who played...
  • On the possible end to a very long story.
    I was announced late on Friday (so late that few of the comics websites have addressed it yet) that DC and  Warner Brothers retains control ...
  • On what happens when you give someone the job they were born to do
    The idea of nobody dying in comics was really put in place by the Comics code - Most pre-code superheroes were quite calavier about killing ...
  • On the introduction of a very specific change to a major character
    Of all the announcements from this weekend's Kapow! Comic Convention in Britain, the one that has set the most lips flapping is the anno...
  • On the Danger of Feeding the Trolls
    As you may know, a lot of episodes of the early days of television are lost, presumably forever.  Partially as a cost-saving measure, and pa...
  • On the importance of jumping only to the right conclusions
    A bit of a change in theme today - this is a film review, in association with The Wife's "The Best Hitchcock Films Hitchcock Never...
  • On what may be the dictionary definition of the Shaggy Dog Story
    Second Grade.  The Weekly Reader flier came through, and in it was the novelization for "the major motion picture" Digby, the Bigg...
  • On not knowing when you've gone too far, save for the sound of the screaming
    Comic and "pop culture" website Newsarama, used to have informative articles, well thought out histories of characters, and, yes, ...
  • On the latest chapter in a thousand year long tale
    You ever see that cut scene from Pulp Fiction where Mia Wallace talks about "Beatles people and Elvis people"? People like Elvis, ...

Categories

  • Captain Marvel
  • Julie Newmar
  • Justice League
  • My Living Doll
  • Shazam

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2012 (21)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  May (8)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2011 (28)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2010 (31)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ▼  2009 (42)
    • ▼  December (2)
      • On the use of Presidential Privilege to destroy Ch...
      • On the Spectacular Return of the Homeless Shopping...
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (5)
    • ►  July (5)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  March (15)
  • ►  2007 (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

anderson
View my complete profile