To be fair, last night's Academy Awards wasn't bad. Anne Hathaway is charming and delightful. Although young, her comedic timing, stage presence, and willingness to laugh at herself proves that she's got presenting chops that will only serve to be sharpened and refined with time.
James Franco did a good job ...smirking like he was stoned.
The best part of the night also served to illustrate how incredibly boring Hollywood has become. Kirk Douglas, a stroke survivor in his 90s, had better comedic timing and classier jokes than half of the "younger, fresher" presenters that graced the stage. The funniest part of Justin Timberlake's Banksy joke was how flat it fell--I guess we know now what sound a bad joke makes when there are thousands around to hear it.
Instead of elaborate musical numbers, the show's producers cut back on production value, giving us blips of nominated songs (I'd cut my arm off if I had to listen to that Dido crap) while featuring a montage of "Man on the Street" interviews that looked as if it were shot on a flip cam. The most random of random people were selected to tell us what their favorite movie songs were; the stunt had about as much relevance as referencing Gone With the Wind before introducing Tom Hanks. It was as if the producers were trying to conjure up memories of old Hollywood in a bad attempt to remind viewers of why they used to enjoy going to the movies. Not to be left out, President Barack Obama contributed his two cents to the movie song debate; too bad for him he referenced the theme song from Casablanca, rendering most of his voting demographic asking, "Dude, that was black and white--how old is he?"
Most of the cultural references revolved around "apps" and Facebook. File those under, "Wow, they referenced the Internet; this show is so young and hip!"...and grossly cliche. Too bad for the writers that most of those references were missed by a tech-infused generation too busy testing out one-liners on Twitter to actually appreciate what was going on in the show.
And, perhaps, that is the point. Hollywood turned the Oscars into one big, fat, commercial for how great Hollywood used to be--you know, when they actually made real money off of their movies. (Back in the day when movie tickets were 50 cents, not $17 bucks a pop.) In referencing all the great films and people of the past, Hollywood illustrated how boring the younger demographic truly is. Now, instead of Gone With the Wind we have The Social Network. Instead of The Best Years of Our Lives we have The Kids Are All Right. Instead of being swept away with drama, comedy, passion, happiness, we settle for corruption, broken friendships, alcoholism, broken relationships, and middle-age misery. But technology makes it all better: Distraction? There's an app for that!
There were a few bizarre moments in the night beyond Timberlake's bad attempt to mock a hero of Hollywood's Golden Age. Anne Hathaway introduced Oprah as a woman whose air is an honor to breathe (tell that one to Al "CO2 Tax" Gore) and when the glorified talk show host came out, she was the only one taking herself seriously. (Well, that's not new.) I'd say the tension was palpable in the crowd as the audience waited to hear if Oscar was one of Oprah's Favorite Things, but actors are cheap--they don't even buy their own jewelry, so why would they spring for the taxes and fees just to take home the free statuette under their seat?
By far the strangest moment of the night came around quarter to midnight, when a bunch of ten year olds were escorted to the stage to sing a bizarrely hammy choral rendition of Somewhere Over the Rainbow. "Look, kids, Hollywood can make your dreams come true--as long as Anne Hathaway sees you on YouTube first!" I'm still stumped as to the point of that stunt and their costumes--they could've at least bedazzled their t-shirts for the occasion.
The Oscars used to be a way for Americans to luxuriate in the glitz and glam of Hollywood. That was when the telecast was done in black and white. Now if the Academy wants to attract the next generation of movie-goers, they're better off cutting the broadcast to 90 seconds and putting it on YouTube. Just think: with all that extra money, they might be able to buy James Franco a personality.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Monday, December 27, 2010
Video Gives the GOP a Virus
I just flipped through a copy of FreedomWorks’ Rules for Patriots. Rule 9 is devoted to explaining “strategies” for the average citizen to make an impact on the political process. Along with encouraging the use of Facebook, Twitter, and blogging, Matt Kibbe, the organization’s President and CEO, explains the importance of YouTube: “Video has become the most powerful medium in the online world… You can start your own YouTube account for free… Having [various clips available] can prove invaluable.” It seems that a key strategy for American patriots is using video to their advantage. FreedomWorks, by the way, has been cited as one of the major organizing force behind the TEA Party movement.
The TEA Party has its share of critics on the right. Karl Rove, for instance, has termed the grass-roots organization “unsophisticated.” The guy who was termed “The Brain Behind Bush” seems to have a yen for criticizing the uncouth among us which is odd, considering he had no problem with the casual “middle country, middle class” drawl that he directed for 8 years. Rove has also criticized one of the TEA Party’s major spokespeople, Sarah Palin, for creating her own reality show with TLC: “With all due candour, appearing on your own reality show on the Discovery Channel, I am not certain how that fits in the American calculus of 'that helps me see you in the Oval Office’.” I guess the Republican strategist was not a big fan of Bedtime for Bonzo.
The fact that Sarah Palin has her own reality TV show freaks people out. It freaks out the left because they now have indisputable ratings that prove how likeable the former Alaskan Governor really is. It freaks out the right because they can’t imagine how anyone would take a reality TV star as a serious Presidential candidate. After all, if the CEO of the WWE can’t win Connecticut, there must be no hope! Both sides can’t stop obsessing over the idea that Palin’s reality show is nothing more than a bid for the Presidency in 2012.
Oddly enough, right-wingers feel the same way about Chris Christie’s YouTube channel. Only, in the case of the bombastic Jersey Governor, this video stardom is a good thing. One former Governor interacting with average citizens where they work negates them from the Presidency, while another current Governor telling voters to quit their jobs translates into prime candidate material.
Republicans are fools.
The Liberals have a right to be scared of Sarah Palin’s TV presence. They know the last great conservative leader was nothing more than an actor—a registered Democrat, mind you—who encountered one man’s true story of Communism and “saw the light,” going from B-movie career to a political powerhouse that helped shape an entire American generation. Liberals may be socialists, but they are not stupid. If they did not see a formidable challenge in Palin, they would not be spending so much time trying to eviscerate her.
The right-wingers, the Republicans, the Conservatives on the other hand, from the establishment rovers to the average voters, are playing right into the Liberals’ hand. “Oh, Palin has to sit this one out,” I’ve heard. “That job has to be handled by a man,” is another familiar complaint. “She quit her job as Governor to be a TV star,” is another familiar one. Worst of all is the complaint voiced by many but worded exceptionally by Charles Krauthammer, that “the outside activities” the Governor is engaged in would not help her if she decides to go for a Presidential run.
“I told Alaskans I was going to do all that I could to promote Alaska,” Palin responded to Krauthammer’s criticism in a recent interview with Bill O’Reilly. The show, it seems, has little to do with promoting Palin and much to do with promoting our “domestic resources that can be tapped into” that would allow America to be “healthier, more secure, and more prosperous.” In other words, it is as if Sarah Palin is using video to illustrate the value of American Exceptionalism not only as an ideology, but as a strategy to improve the economy and national security.
Well, Chris Christie has used the power of video to tell a lot of teachers they could just find new jobs. I think that sounds a lot more Presidential, don’t you? It must be because he’s a man. I mean, if a female politician told the media they were “thin skinned” and followed that with,“you should really see me when I’m pissed,” she’d probably be accused of “not being ladylike.”
Oddly enough, Karl Rove was reportedly the one who put a bug in Chris Christie’s ear regarding a possible gubernatorial bid. I wonder if Rove was also the architect behind the Governor’s oh so sophisticated in-your-face strategy.
Christie has outright denied that he will put a bid in for 2012, leaving many right wing supporters out in the cold. Palin has only commented that if she felt she were the right person, she would put her hat in the ring. Already, the alarm bells are sounding. Sarah’s list of right-wing critics is a mile long. In the meantime, Christie’s supporters are inviting him into Congressional strategy sessions. This fall, while bill S1872, the Governor’s “stepping stone to school vouchers,” sat dying in committee, Christie was out campaigning for Republican candidates across the country (perhaps expecting his new Democrat teacher-turned-Clinton lawyer-turned Education Chief to take up the cause?); Palin resigns as Governor to avoid the encroachment of her personal life onto her public office, and she's deemed simply unfit for the job.
Video is a powerful tool in today’s political dialogue, but change is still a matter of personal choice. As long as right wingers choose style over substance the only kind of sophistication they’re looking to put in the White House equates to Tony Soprano in a RINO suit.
The TEA Party has its share of critics on the right. Karl Rove, for instance, has termed the grass-roots organization “unsophisticated.” The guy who was termed “The Brain Behind Bush” seems to have a yen for criticizing the uncouth among us which is odd, considering he had no problem with the casual “middle country, middle class” drawl that he directed for 8 years. Rove has also criticized one of the TEA Party’s major spokespeople, Sarah Palin, for creating her own reality show with TLC: “With all due candour, appearing on your own reality show on the Discovery Channel, I am not certain how that fits in the American calculus of 'that helps me see you in the Oval Office’.” I guess the Republican strategist was not a big fan of Bedtime for Bonzo.
The fact that Sarah Palin has her own reality TV show freaks people out. It freaks out the left because they now have indisputable ratings that prove how likeable the former Alaskan Governor really is. It freaks out the right because they can’t imagine how anyone would take a reality TV star as a serious Presidential candidate. After all, if the CEO of the WWE can’t win Connecticut, there must be no hope! Both sides can’t stop obsessing over the idea that Palin’s reality show is nothing more than a bid for the Presidency in 2012.
Oddly enough, right-wingers feel the same way about Chris Christie’s YouTube channel. Only, in the case of the bombastic Jersey Governor, this video stardom is a good thing. One former Governor interacting with average citizens where they work negates them from the Presidency, while another current Governor telling voters to quit their jobs translates into prime candidate material.
Republicans are fools.
The Liberals have a right to be scared of Sarah Palin’s TV presence. They know the last great conservative leader was nothing more than an actor—a registered Democrat, mind you—who encountered one man’s true story of Communism and “saw the light,” going from B-movie career to a political powerhouse that helped shape an entire American generation. Liberals may be socialists, but they are not stupid. If they did not see a formidable challenge in Palin, they would not be spending so much time trying to eviscerate her.
The right-wingers, the Republicans, the Conservatives on the other hand, from the establishment rovers to the average voters, are playing right into the Liberals’ hand. “Oh, Palin has to sit this one out,” I’ve heard. “That job has to be handled by a man,” is another familiar complaint. “She quit her job as Governor to be a TV star,” is another familiar one. Worst of all is the complaint voiced by many but worded exceptionally by Charles Krauthammer, that “the outside activities” the Governor is engaged in would not help her if she decides to go for a Presidential run.
“I told Alaskans I was going to do all that I could to promote Alaska,” Palin responded to Krauthammer’s criticism in a recent interview with Bill O’Reilly. The show, it seems, has little to do with promoting Palin and much to do with promoting our “domestic resources that can be tapped into” that would allow America to be “healthier, more secure, and more prosperous.” In other words, it is as if Sarah Palin is using video to illustrate the value of American Exceptionalism not only as an ideology, but as a strategy to improve the economy and national security.
Well, Chris Christie has used the power of video to tell a lot of teachers they could just find new jobs. I think that sounds a lot more Presidential, don’t you? It must be because he’s a man. I mean, if a female politician told the media they were “thin skinned” and followed that with,“you should really see me when I’m pissed,” she’d probably be accused of “not being ladylike.”
Oddly enough, Karl Rove was reportedly the one who put a bug in Chris Christie’s ear regarding a possible gubernatorial bid. I wonder if Rove was also the architect behind the Governor’s oh so sophisticated in-your-face strategy.
Christie has outright denied that he will put a bid in for 2012, leaving many right wing supporters out in the cold. Palin has only commented that if she felt she were the right person, she would put her hat in the ring. Already, the alarm bells are sounding. Sarah’s list of right-wing critics is a mile long. In the meantime, Christie’s supporters are inviting him into Congressional strategy sessions. This fall, while bill S1872, the Governor’s “stepping stone to school vouchers,” sat dying in committee, Christie was out campaigning for Republican candidates across the country (perhaps expecting his new Democrat teacher-turned-Clinton lawyer-turned Education Chief to take up the cause?); Palin resigns as Governor to avoid the encroachment of her personal life onto her public office, and she's deemed simply unfit for the job.
Video is a powerful tool in today’s political dialogue, but change is still a matter of personal choice. As long as right wingers choose style over substance the only kind of sophistication they’re looking to put in the White House equates to Tony Soprano in a RINO suit.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Have Yourself a Merry Jewish Christmas
Originally published @ OurLastStand.com
I am sitting here watching Glenn Beck’s “American Christmas” broadcast from Wilmington, Ohio, and I hear him say, “Everyone should have a Rabbi.”
He then expresses his desire to study the entire Tanak (Old Testament) in Hebrew with his friend, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, even if it means suffering through the blandness of eating kosher meals. (For the record, there is nothing bland about a good brisket.)
Why the growing interest in Jewishness?
Because, the gentile Mormon Glenn Beck is increasingly using Hebrew to explain the solutions to the moral problems we face as a nation. For instance, he proceeded to explain to his middle-American Christmas audience that the root of the Hebrew word for “love” (ahavah) is “to give” (ehav). Giving, Beck explains, is the root expression of love and, moreover, when giving occurs miracles happen.
As if to prove God’s linguistic point (because, as Beck said, Hebrew is the language of God) a miracle occurred: a Jew found a Christmas special that didn’t make them feel completely left out in the cold during the holiday season.
Hanukkah came early this year. Ask any American Jew and they will tell you they hate it when Hanukkah comes early, because it is even more of an excuse for the country to forget about us, the poor measly Jews, as they trample us underfoot on their way to see Santa, cut trees, and hang lights. These are the cultural traditions that make us as Jewish Americans fully aware that we are the outsiders during the one time of year when everyone is supposed to get along.
The funny thing is, without us Jews you folks would never have Christmas as you know it. Whether Garrison Keillor likes it or not, without Irving Berlin you’d have no White Christmas, without Johnny Marks you’d have no Rudolph, and without Jule Styne and Sammy Cahn you’d never be able to say ‘let it snow’. The only reason you know you “need a little Christmas” is because the Jewish Jerry Herman told you so.
At this point you’re probably asking, “Why would so many Jews invest their time and talent in writing songs about a holiday they don’t even celebrate?” Take a look at the lyrics. “White Christmas” expresses longing for missed loved ones and bucolic youth; “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” is about the picked-on outsider who earns a place in history for rescuing the Chief and saving everyone’s favorite holiday; “We Need a Little Christmas” because we need “a little snappy Happy Ever After”. Were these Jewish American songwriters channeling the cultural imprint of loneliness and longing to fit in with the crowd? Perhaps. But, one thing is for certain; these Jewish songwriters are a major reason why this is the season of “goodwill towards men.”
Practically every popular Christmas song was composed by a Jewish American, and I’m not just talking the secular ones, either. Little Drummer Boy was co-written by Harry Moses Simeone and performed by his own Chorale & Orchestra. Lest you think we secularized your holiday, Little Drummer Boy is a song about a boy with no gold, frankincense, or myrrh to bring to his Messiah. Instead, the little boy presents the gift of his own talents to his king. Yes, even at Christmas we Jews are reminding you of the true spirit of your holiday season.
While we’re talking about Jewish contributions to Christmas, if it weren’t for that little Jewish boy from Bethlehem, your “Christmas” might still be called “Saturnalia” among other pagan titles. You’d be hanging evergreens to ward away witches and evil spirits, or encourage your sun god not to die in the freezing cold. Your mistletoe would be hung to entreat Nature Sprites to join you in your festivities, and your 12 day celebration would focus around a burning Yule Log meant to symbolize and welcome pagan gods and goddesses.
Face it: You don’t need a billboard telling you to, “Remember the Reason for the Season,” you just need a Jew. As Glenn Beck said, “Everyone should have a Rabbi.” And when it comes to Christmas, everyone should thank the Jews, not that we’d take the credit. We know better, but we’re still happy to pass on the praise.
After all, we speak the language.
I am sitting here watching Glenn Beck’s “American Christmas” broadcast from Wilmington, Ohio, and I hear him say, “Everyone should have a Rabbi.”
He then expresses his desire to study the entire Tanak (Old Testament) in Hebrew with his friend, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, even if it means suffering through the blandness of eating kosher meals. (For the record, there is nothing bland about a good brisket.)
Why the growing interest in Jewishness?
Because, the gentile Mormon Glenn Beck is increasingly using Hebrew to explain the solutions to the moral problems we face as a nation. For instance, he proceeded to explain to his middle-American Christmas audience that the root of the Hebrew word for “love” (ahavah) is “to give” (ehav). Giving, Beck explains, is the root expression of love and, moreover, when giving occurs miracles happen.
As if to prove God’s linguistic point (because, as Beck said, Hebrew is the language of God) a miracle occurred: a Jew found a Christmas special that didn’t make them feel completely left out in the cold during the holiday season.
Hanukkah came early this year. Ask any American Jew and they will tell you they hate it when Hanukkah comes early, because it is even more of an excuse for the country to forget about us, the poor measly Jews, as they trample us underfoot on their way to see Santa, cut trees, and hang lights. These are the cultural traditions that make us as Jewish Americans fully aware that we are the outsiders during the one time of year when everyone is supposed to get along.
The funny thing is, without us Jews you folks would never have Christmas as you know it. Whether Garrison Keillor likes it or not, without Irving Berlin you’d have no White Christmas, without Johnny Marks you’d have no Rudolph, and without Jule Styne and Sammy Cahn you’d never be able to say ‘let it snow’. The only reason you know you “need a little Christmas” is because the Jewish Jerry Herman told you so.
At this point you’re probably asking, “Why would so many Jews invest their time and talent in writing songs about a holiday they don’t even celebrate?” Take a look at the lyrics. “White Christmas” expresses longing for missed loved ones and bucolic youth; “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” is about the picked-on outsider who earns a place in history for rescuing the Chief and saving everyone’s favorite holiday; “We Need a Little Christmas” because we need “a little snappy Happy Ever After”. Were these Jewish American songwriters channeling the cultural imprint of loneliness and longing to fit in with the crowd? Perhaps. But, one thing is for certain; these Jewish songwriters are a major reason why this is the season of “goodwill towards men.”
Practically every popular Christmas song was composed by a Jewish American, and I’m not just talking the secular ones, either. Little Drummer Boy was co-written by Harry Moses Simeone and performed by his own Chorale & Orchestra. Lest you think we secularized your holiday, Little Drummer Boy is a song about a boy with no gold, frankincense, or myrrh to bring to his Messiah. Instead, the little boy presents the gift of his own talents to his king. Yes, even at Christmas we Jews are reminding you of the true spirit of your holiday season.
While we’re talking about Jewish contributions to Christmas, if it weren’t for that little Jewish boy from Bethlehem, your “Christmas” might still be called “Saturnalia” among other pagan titles. You’d be hanging evergreens to ward away witches and evil spirits, or encourage your sun god not to die in the freezing cold. Your mistletoe would be hung to entreat Nature Sprites to join you in your festivities, and your 12 day celebration would focus around a burning Yule Log meant to symbolize and welcome pagan gods and goddesses.
Face it: You don’t need a billboard telling you to, “Remember the Reason for the Season,” you just need a Jew. As Glenn Beck said, “Everyone should have a Rabbi.” And when it comes to Christmas, everyone should thank the Jews, not that we’d take the credit. We know better, but we’re still happy to pass on the praise.
After all, we speak the language.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Eight Crazy Clicks
In honor of Hanukkah I give you, dear readers, my 8 greatest clicks of the week (and it is only Wednesday!):
J Street Israel-office vs. Zionism/Oppression – Rosner’s Domain @ the JPost
Rosner does a glorified re-post of Omri Ceren’s entry @ Mere Rhetoric on a discovery circling the blogosphere—the head of the Israeli J Street office, Drew Cohen, is the same “Drew C.” who published a series of anti-Israel, anti-Zionist blog entries at jewschool.com under the name “Last Trumpet”.
This is yet more damning evidence against the claim that J-Street, co-founded by Daniel “there is no such thing as progressive Zionism because the re-establishment of Israel was ‘wrong’” Levy, is a “pro-Israel” organization—wording already removed from their on-campus promotions “to avoid alienating students”.
What’s the Hebrew word for “sticking your foot in your mouth”? Repeat after me: J Street.
Deadly Fictions – Lee Smith @ Tablet Magazine
The usually leftist Tablet printed the most thoughtful analysis of the infamous WikiLeaks scandal of the week. Smith compared the dissemination of State Department docs to the infamous Pentagon Papers leak of the 70s, noting, “The difference is that while the Pentagon Papers substantially vindicated the American left, the WikiLeaks cable dump vindicates the right.” The conclusion: What the media is printing isn’t always the truth and America has a blind electorate as the result.
Every single conservative pundit was quick to admit that the WikiLeaks story simply echoed what the right wing has been talking about for years; the Red Crescent is nothing more than a tool to transport terrorists; China has been working to supply Iran with nukes; the Arab world wants America to do their dirty work. The big deal? Finally, at least one leftist source is acknowledging that the MSM isn’t as “main stream” as it wants you to believe and that maybe, just maybe, conservatives are right: America and Israel do have some serious enemies in the world and we’re not going to sing them away with endless choruses of Kum-Bay-Ya.
Fair press for peace – Jerusalem Post
Distrust of the MSM continues with this scathing look at what the press isn’t talking about when it comes to Israel’s Palestinian peace partners. The Fifth Fatah Revolutionary Council honored Amin al-Hindi, one of the masterminds behind the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre of 11 Israeli athletes. Nothing says “we want peace” more than honoring a guy who planned and executed the murder of your fellow citizens. During the course of its meetings, the Council rejected the definition of Israel as a “Jewish state,” rejected the concept of “land for peace,” and rejected the idea of any compromise with the Zionist entity.
To be fair, Fatah did approve of a few measures including the Palestinian “right of return” for the purpose of wiping out Israel’s Jewish majority, and the ridding of large Jewish settlement blocs that take up 5% of the West Bank, because while they don’t believe in land for peace and they do want to move back into Israel proper, they still want all of Judea and Samaria for…a really big golf course to be named in honor of the late Yassir Arafat: A-Hole in One.
All of this along with a recent survey by the Israel Project that revealed growing militancy among the Palestinian population (56% in the West Bank & Gaza believe they will have to “resort to armed struggle again”) has gone unreported in the MSM. The results of this gross lack of reporting? A skewed press means a skewed public view, in this case one that is skewed against Israel.
Jewish Americans for Sarah Palin
Former Jewish Exponent Editor Benyamin Korn has been busy since his tenure expired at the Philadelphia weekly last year. With more press coverage than you can shake a stick at, Korn has promoted this union of “academic, religious and political leaders, dedicated to promoting consideration of Gov. Sarah Palin’s political positions in the wider American Jewish community.” Perhaps the message behind Palin’s ever-present Israeli & American flags lapel pin is making its way through the Jewish community, one mystified viewer at a time.
The best part: Korn refers to his page (and his radio show on Philly’s WNTP) as “Independent”. Kudos to Korn for standing on conservative principals without playing into party politics.
Chelm-On-The-Med – Daniella Ashkenazy
For some brain candy, check out these translations of human interest and even some fluff from the pages of the Israeli press. The goal of translator Daniella Ashkenazy: To show the lighter side of Israeli life to Diaspora readers overwhelmed with endless stories of terror attacks and… not much else.
I found the link through Ashkenazy’s recent article in ZEEK that asks, What’s Wrong With Israel Education in the Diaspora? She remarks, “American Jewry needs to be weaned away from its addiction to Israeli victimology.” And she’s right. Israel needs a return to the victory ideology of ’67 as badly as America needs to revisit the patriotism of ’76. Our best bet in both cases: On the ground education from people who’ve lived and know the difference. And websites like Ashkenazy’s do their part to bring that much-needed perspective to the table.
Latma TV
According to its Wikipedia entry, “Latma is an Israeli group that produces political satire in Hebrew and occasionally in English for Internet broadcast. Latma was created to mock what the members view as Israel's leftist media. Caroline Glick, who is one of the web site's editors, told the Jerusalem Post that the group was founded with the intention of using comedy to critique the ‘egregious leftist slant of news coverage in this country.’ According to the New York Times, Latma ‘is an initiative of the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank’.”
Although it is funded by American sources, Latma’s satire is 99% Hebrew (subtitled in English) so my recommendation to American audiences is to check out their clips via the excellent Caroline Glick’s personal web site. While you’re there, avail yourself of her commentary on the latest in Israeli politics and Israeli-American relations, also published in The Jerusalem Post.
Smithsonian to Remove Ant-Covered Jesus on Cross Video From Exhibit – Fox News
A 4-minute video depicting a bloody Jesus on a crucifix covered with ants, A Fire in my Belly is a part of the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery’s exhibit titled, Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture -- or, at least it was until yesterday. The exhibit, intended to showcase gay and lesbian art, was so offensive that the museum actually-shock-took it down. Perhaps that’s because Republican lawmakers in Congress have now decided to look into the Smithsonian’s funding. After all, money talks.
So, why include this report in a Hanukkah post? Simply put, I wouldn’t appreciate a Torah scroll, Star of David, or Hanukkiah being immersed in ants, fecal matter, or any other substance in the name of art. Moreover, a Danish cartoonist does one sketch of Mohammed and the Muslim world explodes (all puns intended) – it is about time Christians learn to stand up for themselves and their beliefs. Finally we have a Congress who, in some regard, is willing to hit back at the system where it hurts—their pockets. Hopefully they’ll continue that trend over the next two years. In the meantime, the many religions and cultures of this nation need to stop hiding behind perversions of “Freedom of Speech” and start standing firm on the principle of mutual respect. Where better to start than through taxpayer funded art?
The Great Princeton Hummus Debate will decide the Future of Israel, More or Less (Probably Less) - Jeff Edelstein @ The Trentonian
The Global BDS (Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions) Movement strikes again, this time on the campus of Princeton University. The Princeton Committee for Palestine, led by Jewish Israel-hater Yoel Bitran, has demanded a University-wide referendum on the inclusion of alternative brands of hummus, claiming that The Strauss Group, the company that produces Sabra hummus, supports the IDF’s elite Golani brigade and, therefore, human rights violations against the Palestinians.
One could easily argue against buying any products produced by the Arab world, citing the human rights violations against women and non-Muslims in general, but that wouldn’t help to further the PCP’s true objective to “… start a conversation on Israeli human rights violations.”
Here’s a thought: Every supporter of Israel, from political conservatives to the members of CUFI, should friend Sabra on Facebook and be sure to include some Sabra hummus on their table this holiday season. The chickpea-tahini combo goes great as part of any hors-d’oeurves spread and by buying Sabra, you’d be doing your part to support the hardworking men and women of the Israeli military who were drafted by law to protect the last bastion of true democracy in the middle east and America’s only hope of a true ally in the region.
J Street Israel-office vs. Zionism/Oppression – Rosner’s Domain @ the JPost
Rosner does a glorified re-post of Omri Ceren’s entry @ Mere Rhetoric on a discovery circling the blogosphere—the head of the Israeli J Street office, Drew Cohen, is the same “Drew C.” who published a series of anti-Israel, anti-Zionist blog entries at jewschool.com under the name “Last Trumpet”.
This is yet more damning evidence against the claim that J-Street, co-founded by Daniel “there is no such thing as progressive Zionism because the re-establishment of Israel was ‘wrong’” Levy, is a “pro-Israel” organization—wording already removed from their on-campus promotions “to avoid alienating students”.
What’s the Hebrew word for “sticking your foot in your mouth”? Repeat after me: J Street.
Deadly Fictions – Lee Smith @ Tablet Magazine
The usually leftist Tablet printed the most thoughtful analysis of the infamous WikiLeaks scandal of the week. Smith compared the dissemination of State Department docs to the infamous Pentagon Papers leak of the 70s, noting, “The difference is that while the Pentagon Papers substantially vindicated the American left, the WikiLeaks cable dump vindicates the right.” The conclusion: What the media is printing isn’t always the truth and America has a blind electorate as the result.
Every single conservative pundit was quick to admit that the WikiLeaks story simply echoed what the right wing has been talking about for years; the Red Crescent is nothing more than a tool to transport terrorists; China has been working to supply Iran with nukes; the Arab world wants America to do their dirty work. The big deal? Finally, at least one leftist source is acknowledging that the MSM isn’t as “main stream” as it wants you to believe and that maybe, just maybe, conservatives are right: America and Israel do have some serious enemies in the world and we’re not going to sing them away with endless choruses of Kum-Bay-Ya.
Fair press for peace – Jerusalem Post
Distrust of the MSM continues with this scathing look at what the press isn’t talking about when it comes to Israel’s Palestinian peace partners. The Fifth Fatah Revolutionary Council honored Amin al-Hindi, one of the masterminds behind the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre of 11 Israeli athletes. Nothing says “we want peace” more than honoring a guy who planned and executed the murder of your fellow citizens. During the course of its meetings, the Council rejected the definition of Israel as a “Jewish state,” rejected the concept of “land for peace,” and rejected the idea of any compromise with the Zionist entity.
To be fair, Fatah did approve of a few measures including the Palestinian “right of return” for the purpose of wiping out Israel’s Jewish majority, and the ridding of large Jewish settlement blocs that take up 5% of the West Bank, because while they don’t believe in land for peace and they do want to move back into Israel proper, they still want all of Judea and Samaria for…a really big golf course to be named in honor of the late Yassir Arafat: A-Hole in One.
All of this along with a recent survey by the Israel Project that revealed growing militancy among the Palestinian population (56% in the West Bank & Gaza believe they will have to “resort to armed struggle again”) has gone unreported in the MSM. The results of this gross lack of reporting? A skewed press means a skewed public view, in this case one that is skewed against Israel.
Jewish Americans for Sarah Palin
Former Jewish Exponent Editor Benyamin Korn has been busy since his tenure expired at the Philadelphia weekly last year. With more press coverage than you can shake a stick at, Korn has promoted this union of “academic, religious and political leaders, dedicated to promoting consideration of Gov. Sarah Palin’s political positions in the wider American Jewish community.” Perhaps the message behind Palin’s ever-present Israeli & American flags lapel pin is making its way through the Jewish community, one mystified viewer at a time.
The best part: Korn refers to his page (and his radio show on Philly’s WNTP) as “Independent”. Kudos to Korn for standing on conservative principals without playing into party politics.
Chelm-On-The-Med – Daniella Ashkenazy
For some brain candy, check out these translations of human interest and even some fluff from the pages of the Israeli press. The goal of translator Daniella Ashkenazy: To show the lighter side of Israeli life to Diaspora readers overwhelmed with endless stories of terror attacks and… not much else.
I found the link through Ashkenazy’s recent article in ZEEK that asks, What’s Wrong With Israel Education in the Diaspora? She remarks, “American Jewry needs to be weaned away from its addiction to Israeli victimology.” And she’s right. Israel needs a return to the victory ideology of ’67 as badly as America needs to revisit the patriotism of ’76. Our best bet in both cases: On the ground education from people who’ve lived and know the difference. And websites like Ashkenazy’s do their part to bring that much-needed perspective to the table.
Latma TV
According to its Wikipedia entry, “Latma is an Israeli group that produces political satire in Hebrew and occasionally in English for Internet broadcast. Latma was created to mock what the members view as Israel's leftist media. Caroline Glick, who is one of the web site's editors, told the Jerusalem Post that the group was founded with the intention of using comedy to critique the ‘egregious leftist slant of news coverage in this country.’ According to the New York Times, Latma ‘is an initiative of the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank’.”
Although it is funded by American sources, Latma’s satire is 99% Hebrew (subtitled in English) so my recommendation to American audiences is to check out their clips via the excellent Caroline Glick’s personal web site. While you’re there, avail yourself of her commentary on the latest in Israeli politics and Israeli-American relations, also published in The Jerusalem Post.
Smithsonian to Remove Ant-Covered Jesus on Cross Video From Exhibit – Fox News
A 4-minute video depicting a bloody Jesus on a crucifix covered with ants, A Fire in my Belly is a part of the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery’s exhibit titled, Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture -- or, at least it was until yesterday. The exhibit, intended to showcase gay and lesbian art, was so offensive that the museum actually-shock-took it down. Perhaps that’s because Republican lawmakers in Congress have now decided to look into the Smithsonian’s funding. After all, money talks.
So, why include this report in a Hanukkah post? Simply put, I wouldn’t appreciate a Torah scroll, Star of David, or Hanukkiah being immersed in ants, fecal matter, or any other substance in the name of art. Moreover, a Danish cartoonist does one sketch of Mohammed and the Muslim world explodes (all puns intended) – it is about time Christians learn to stand up for themselves and their beliefs. Finally we have a Congress who, in some regard, is willing to hit back at the system where it hurts—their pockets. Hopefully they’ll continue that trend over the next two years. In the meantime, the many religions and cultures of this nation need to stop hiding behind perversions of “Freedom of Speech” and start standing firm on the principle of mutual respect. Where better to start than through taxpayer funded art?
The Great Princeton Hummus Debate will decide the Future of Israel, More or Less (Probably Less) - Jeff Edelstein @ The Trentonian
The Global BDS (Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions) Movement strikes again, this time on the campus of Princeton University. The Princeton Committee for Palestine, led by Jewish Israel-hater Yoel Bitran, has demanded a University-wide referendum on the inclusion of alternative brands of hummus, claiming that The Strauss Group, the company that produces Sabra hummus, supports the IDF’s elite Golani brigade and, therefore, human rights violations against the Palestinians.
One could easily argue against buying any products produced by the Arab world, citing the human rights violations against women and non-Muslims in general, but that wouldn’t help to further the PCP’s true objective to “… start a conversation on Israeli human rights violations.”
Here’s a thought: Every supporter of Israel, from political conservatives to the members of CUFI, should friend Sabra on Facebook and be sure to include some Sabra hummus on their table this holiday season. The chickpea-tahini combo goes great as part of any hors-d’oeurves spread and by buying Sabra, you’d be doing your part to support the hardworking men and women of the Israeli military who were drafted by law to protect the last bastion of true democracy in the middle east and America’s only hope of a true ally in the region.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Keep the Lights On @ NJN
Editor's Note: I originally submitted this as a Letter to the Editor to every NJ newspaper I could think of. As a result, I took a slew of 'confirmation calls' last week and, today, received a call from my in-laws that the first submission finally made it to print in The Trenton Times. Afterwards I learned that the letter also appeared in the Star Ledger on Thanksgiving Day.
The one question I kept being asked by every editor that called was, "Do you have any personal connection to NJN." I chose to answer honestly: "Every taxpaying citizen of New Jersey has a personal connection to NJN that stretches from their wallet to the State House." It is a fact that without NJN, New Jersey voters will have no connection to their own representatives. As I argue below, in the spirit of honest and open government (let alone good financial practice) the Governor has the responsibility to ensure that the station's transition to private ownership is a smooth one that does not allow the spotlight on his office to go out.
This New Year could usher in a new era in the relationship between New Jersey voters and their state representatives, one that would be darker and more distant than ever.
If the State moves forward with the Governor’s plan to cut all funding to NJN as of January 1, we will no longer see the happenings of the State House on television. Debates will be held, laws and budgets will be passed behind doors closed to the cameras that were once the lifeline between voters and elected representatives. In the information age, our most vital lifeline to real time information—New Jersey Network—will be cut off.
How can this possibly be in the best interests of New Jersey?
With barely a month to go before 147 workers are added to the already overburdened unemployment rolls of the state, a number of options are being thrown around. It is reported that the Governor favors holding onto the valuable FCC licenses in order to ensure that the state’s 40 year, multi-million dollar investment in NJN be used to produce Jersey-centric programming by a new entity.
Who this entity is, we have yet to find out.
The Governor seems to favor the idea of a possible takeover by WNET, a public television station that receives annual funding from New York State. Follow the money and you have to ask, how Jersey-centric could that relationship possibly be? WNET’s merger with Long Island PBS station WLIW was filled with empty promises of maintaining Long Island-centric programming. If WNET couldn’t even stay faithful to their fellow New Yorkers, what chance would Jersey stand in such a merge?
It is New Jersey money that purchased the licenses, towers, facilities, and equipment, and that helped to produce 40 years of Emmy Award winning programming. Whether by tax dollars or donations, since its inception NJN has been a station of the people, by the people of New Jersey. The Governor isn’t telling us it was a bad investment; we just don’t have the money to continue.
Now, the Governor is right; our state is in tough financial times. But when money is tight, shouldn’t cutting the lines of communication between government and her citizens be at the bottom of the list?
Assembly Speaker Oliver has said that she “will not sleep unless NJN stays on the air as of January,” and neither should her fellow representatives. Allowing NJN to go dark means putting their credibility at stake. Decisions must be made that ensure the survival of NJN as a Jersey-centric media outlet. One that, in the interest of keeping our residents in-jobs and in-state, continues to employ the talented staff that has faithfully brought this state to life over the airwaves.
After all, who will be able to stand guard if the lights go out?
The one question I kept being asked by every editor that called was, "Do you have any personal connection to NJN." I chose to answer honestly: "Every taxpaying citizen of New Jersey has a personal connection to NJN that stretches from their wallet to the State House." It is a fact that without NJN, New Jersey voters will have no connection to their own representatives. As I argue below, in the spirit of honest and open government (let alone good financial practice) the Governor has the responsibility to ensure that the station's transition to private ownership is a smooth one that does not allow the spotlight on his office to go out.
This New Year could usher in a new era in the relationship between New Jersey voters and their state representatives, one that would be darker and more distant than ever.
If the State moves forward with the Governor’s plan to cut all funding to NJN as of January 1, we will no longer see the happenings of the State House on television. Debates will be held, laws and budgets will be passed behind doors closed to the cameras that were once the lifeline between voters and elected representatives. In the information age, our most vital lifeline to real time information—New Jersey Network—will be cut off.
How can this possibly be in the best interests of New Jersey?
With barely a month to go before 147 workers are added to the already overburdened unemployment rolls of the state, a number of options are being thrown around. It is reported that the Governor favors holding onto the valuable FCC licenses in order to ensure that the state’s 40 year, multi-million dollar investment in NJN be used to produce Jersey-centric programming by a new entity.
Who this entity is, we have yet to find out.
The Governor seems to favor the idea of a possible takeover by WNET, a public television station that receives annual funding from New York State. Follow the money and you have to ask, how Jersey-centric could that relationship possibly be? WNET’s merger with Long Island PBS station WLIW was filled with empty promises of maintaining Long Island-centric programming. If WNET couldn’t even stay faithful to their fellow New Yorkers, what chance would Jersey stand in such a merge?
It is New Jersey money that purchased the licenses, towers, facilities, and equipment, and that helped to produce 40 years of Emmy Award winning programming. Whether by tax dollars or donations, since its inception NJN has been a station of the people, by the people of New Jersey. The Governor isn’t telling us it was a bad investment; we just don’t have the money to continue.
Now, the Governor is right; our state is in tough financial times. But when money is tight, shouldn’t cutting the lines of communication between government and her citizens be at the bottom of the list?
Assembly Speaker Oliver has said that she “will not sleep unless NJN stays on the air as of January,” and neither should her fellow representatives. Allowing NJN to go dark means putting their credibility at stake. Decisions must be made that ensure the survival of NJN as a Jersey-centric media outlet. One that, in the interest of keeping our residents in-jobs and in-state, continues to employ the talented staff that has faithfully brought this state to life over the airwaves.
After all, who will be able to stand guard if the lights go out?
Monday, November 1, 2010
To Care or Not to Care: That is the Question
Originally published at OurLastStand.com on Friday, October 29, 2010
Is anyone but me amused by the fact that “The Rally to Restore Sanity” is being held on Halloween weekend and “The March to Keep Fear Alive” is the opening act for Mischief Night celebrations—in our political capital, no less?
The irony of timing may be the funniest aspect of this weekend’s clash of pop culture and politics, and even that falls flat after a few laughs. After all, as any politico will tell you, an election is the kind of serious business that brings out Americans’ fear, anger, and rage likened to that of the mythical Arab Street each time an Israeli dares to breathe in the wrong direction. Listening to the conversation on MSNBC’s Morning Joe one can’t help but feel that voting booths are really incense-scented offices lined with leather couches bordered by tissue-laden end tables.
Thank God, then, for the punditry of Jon Stewart and Colbert. Without their spitball satire steering the U.S.S. Apathetic, how would we ever be able to navigate the dark, stormy seas of political emotion?
To be sure, more than one news outlet has commented on the vague blur between politics and humor that has officially been deigned “a rally for the people who’ve been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs) — not so much the Silent Majority as the Busy Majority.” True to their postmodern ethic, the folks behind the rally imply their inability to draw on even their own desired demographic: Our audience would come, but they’re just too busy with real life to care. As glib as it may seem, it is more than self-effacing humor; the Rally’s permit application filed in September estimated a crowd of a mere 25,000, despite the 220,000 positive RSVP’s they received up to that point on Facebook.
So, the real question is: Why bother holding a rally if you don’t even think anyone would show up?
The entire event reminds me of a pseudo-prank a friend and I pulled in college. One afternoon we sat in the middle of the Student Center, handing out fliers, encouraging people to protest the fact that we had nothing to protest. About three people stopped to give a chuckle, while most just moved on without even taking notice. What started out as a joke quickly became my own personal reality check; it was as if I put my finger on the pulse of my generation and found myself pressing really, really hard to feel any sign of life.
The summer after that semester my friend and I joined a group of college classmates for a trip to the set of The Daily Show to see our icon, Jon Stewart. Here was a man who, in less than two years, took a fledgling parody program and quickly molded it into a serious attempt at comedic news. Ratings were soaring, especially on college campuses filled with jaded students who thought Stewart, with his sharp wit and “it’s all B.S.” attitude was the real straight-shooter in the news world. This was our chance to sit practically face-to-face with the man who held the world by the cajones. This was big.
After we filed into our seats we were told by some studio lackey that Stewart would take our questions before the show began. Anxious to impress, I formulated a question in my head regarding Arafat, Sharon, and the effects of the then-fresh new Intifada on the peace process. I had one shot to show this guy I was as informed as him, and I was going to do it right. And I did.
“I—make—the—jokes?” Stewart replied with mock-nervousness.
The audience laughed, Stewart proceeded to mock one of my friends for having a strange expression on his face, and then he took another question that was more on the level of what movies he liked to watch on Saturday night than anything related to the growing political nature of the show.
Right then is when I fell out of love with Jon Stewart. It wasn’t because he turned my serious question into an opportunity to garner laughs for himself; he’s a comedian. If people don’t laugh, he doesn’t get paid. It was because he purposely avoided answering a political question off-camera while simultaneously being as political as possible when he was on air.
Later, Stewart would go on to appear on several news shows on the Big Three and cable news—he even felt political enough to openly criticize the banter on CNN’s Crossfire (maybe because the cameras were rolling). But I knew it was all an act, political or not. I’d seen behind the green curtain; the wizard was there to do nothing more than promote himself. As a result, subjects like terror in the Middle East could easily become fodder for humor before the show, but as soon as the cameras were rolling, he could be as serious as necessary about the horrors of 9-11. Jon Stewart doesn’t play to a political agenda, he plays to a crowd.
And, apparently, his managers aren’t so sure the crowd even really gives a damn. Stewart and Colbert initiated this rally to “combat” the popularity of Glenn Beck’s 8-28. Yet, no Internet hack-news agency paid for buses to take Beck and his followers to the 8-28 Rally, nor did Fox News issue a memo to all its employees to go support Beck’s event. Perhaps that’s because what Stewart is pushing isn’t about the bigger picture. This is not the rally that’s going to ask America what they can do for their country; it is the rally that’s going to ask America to take a break. The real problem is that viewers and fans have already been broken by people like Stewart who are willing to sell out principles to parody and use policy to inflate their own persona.
Perhaps that is why the managers of the Rally are anticipating that no one will care enough to show up.
Afterward our Protest to Protest the Fact that We Have Nothing to Protest, I wrote an article for the student arts & entertainment magazine called Passionate Apathy in which I begged the student body to find something—anything to care about. Even then I could see we were a cause-less generation. Today, on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Arianna Huffington was blaming the President for not doing more to organize the nation and motivate Americans to work together. I laughed.
Isn’t she one of the people spending a lot of money on a rally telling Americans not to give a damn?
Is anyone but me amused by the fact that “The Rally to Restore Sanity” is being held on Halloween weekend and “The March to Keep Fear Alive” is the opening act for Mischief Night celebrations—in our political capital, no less?
The irony of timing may be the funniest aspect of this weekend’s clash of pop culture and politics, and even that falls flat after a few laughs. After all, as any politico will tell you, an election is the kind of serious business that brings out Americans’ fear, anger, and rage likened to that of the mythical Arab Street each time an Israeli dares to breathe in the wrong direction. Listening to the conversation on MSNBC’s Morning Joe one can’t help but feel that voting booths are really incense-scented offices lined with leather couches bordered by tissue-laden end tables.
Thank God, then, for the punditry of Jon Stewart and Colbert. Without their spitball satire steering the U.S.S. Apathetic, how would we ever be able to navigate the dark, stormy seas of political emotion?
To be sure, more than one news outlet has commented on the vague blur between politics and humor that has officially been deigned “a rally for the people who’ve been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs) — not so much the Silent Majority as the Busy Majority.” True to their postmodern ethic, the folks behind the rally imply their inability to draw on even their own desired demographic: Our audience would come, but they’re just too busy with real life to care. As glib as it may seem, it is more than self-effacing humor; the Rally’s permit application filed in September estimated a crowd of a mere 25,000, despite the 220,000 positive RSVP’s they received up to that point on Facebook.
So, the real question is: Why bother holding a rally if you don’t even think anyone would show up?
The entire event reminds me of a pseudo-prank a friend and I pulled in college. One afternoon we sat in the middle of the Student Center, handing out fliers, encouraging people to protest the fact that we had nothing to protest. About three people stopped to give a chuckle, while most just moved on without even taking notice. What started out as a joke quickly became my own personal reality check; it was as if I put my finger on the pulse of my generation and found myself pressing really, really hard to feel any sign of life.
The summer after that semester my friend and I joined a group of college classmates for a trip to the set of The Daily Show to see our icon, Jon Stewart. Here was a man who, in less than two years, took a fledgling parody program and quickly molded it into a serious attempt at comedic news. Ratings were soaring, especially on college campuses filled with jaded students who thought Stewart, with his sharp wit and “it’s all B.S.” attitude was the real straight-shooter in the news world. This was our chance to sit practically face-to-face with the man who held the world by the cajones. This was big.
After we filed into our seats we were told by some studio lackey that Stewart would take our questions before the show began. Anxious to impress, I formulated a question in my head regarding Arafat, Sharon, and the effects of the then-fresh new Intifada on the peace process. I had one shot to show this guy I was as informed as him, and I was going to do it right. And I did.
“I—make—the—jokes?” Stewart replied with mock-nervousness.
The audience laughed, Stewart proceeded to mock one of my friends for having a strange expression on his face, and then he took another question that was more on the level of what movies he liked to watch on Saturday night than anything related to the growing political nature of the show.
Right then is when I fell out of love with Jon Stewart. It wasn’t because he turned my serious question into an opportunity to garner laughs for himself; he’s a comedian. If people don’t laugh, he doesn’t get paid. It was because he purposely avoided answering a political question off-camera while simultaneously being as political as possible when he was on air.
Later, Stewart would go on to appear on several news shows on the Big Three and cable news—he even felt political enough to openly criticize the banter on CNN’s Crossfire (maybe because the cameras were rolling). But I knew it was all an act, political or not. I’d seen behind the green curtain; the wizard was there to do nothing more than promote himself. As a result, subjects like terror in the Middle East could easily become fodder for humor before the show, but as soon as the cameras were rolling, he could be as serious as necessary about the horrors of 9-11. Jon Stewart doesn’t play to a political agenda, he plays to a crowd.
And, apparently, his managers aren’t so sure the crowd even really gives a damn. Stewart and Colbert initiated this rally to “combat” the popularity of Glenn Beck’s 8-28. Yet, no Internet hack-news agency paid for buses to take Beck and his followers to the 8-28 Rally, nor did Fox News issue a memo to all its employees to go support Beck’s event. Perhaps that’s because what Stewart is pushing isn’t about the bigger picture. This is not the rally that’s going to ask America what they can do for their country; it is the rally that’s going to ask America to take a break. The real problem is that viewers and fans have already been broken by people like Stewart who are willing to sell out principles to parody and use policy to inflate their own persona.
Perhaps that is why the managers of the Rally are anticipating that no one will care enough to show up.
Afterward our Protest to Protest the Fact that We Have Nothing to Protest, I wrote an article for the student arts & entertainment magazine called Passionate Apathy in which I begged the student body to find something—anything to care about. Even then I could see we were a cause-less generation. Today, on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Arianna Huffington was blaming the President for not doing more to organize the nation and motivate Americans to work together. I laughed.
Isn’t she one of the people spending a lot of money on a rally telling Americans not to give a damn?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)