I think most everyone has certain things they go to when they need a mental break, when they need to get away from the humdrum crap of everyday life. For me, it's my favorite TV shows, movies, and music.
South Park was my getaway show for all of college - I grew up with its inappropriate humor and amateurish animation. Cartman's pudgy figure and insensitive remarks were the perfect combination to get me to laugh. Don't get me started on Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo. Absurd humor is a personal favorite.
Then, I rediscovered a show that I also remember growing up with: Seinfeld. TV Guide called it the best sitcom of all-time, and I wholeheartedly agree. For nine seasons, Seinfeld was nothing but quality comedy, great characters, and the best observational humor of any comedy ever.
And nonetheless, as a proud owner of all nine seasons (Amazon.com seriously is an addicting site) I find it remarkable the jokes that went right over my head. The most notorious example, of course, is a season 4 episode "The Contest" in which Jerry, George, Elaine and Kramer enter a bet of who can hold out the longest without . . . ahem . . . pleasuring themselves. I remember watching that (with my parents, no less - I'm sure their faces were red) when I was in elementary school.
But that is where the show's brilliance shines. I was maybe nine years old when I first saw that episode, and I laughed plenty of times. And yet, its tasteful, restrained treatment of rather lurid subject matter somehow averted any situation of me going to my parents and asking, "So why did they make a bet after George got caught with a Glamour magazine?"
Comedy shows are hit or miss, and I have my select few that I am absolutely in love with - Seinfeld, South Park, The Simpsons from the early days, and most recently Entourage and The Life and Times of Tim on HBO - but the pinnacle is, and always will be, Seinfeld. It had characters you could relate to, situations you probably found yourself in, and more laughs in a half-hour than any other show ever.
So as we approach the end of the semester and feedback is important in our peers' blogs, I ask you who is your favorite Seinfeld character, or your favorite Seinfeld episode / moment? Everyone has a different one, and that speaks even further to the show's brilliance.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Senioritis? Hell yes.
The majority of us in Journalism 420, I think it's safe to assume, are Juniors and Seniors. Our academic careers are at the very least half-over, and for many it is winding down to the very end. There is no doubt I'll be a little sentimental when I finally get my diploma in August (and if you're looking for extra tickets to the commencement, I'm not sure if I'm walking or not, so STOP SENDING MASS E-MAILS . . . . thanks ;-)
The College of Media has been pretty good to me. There have been a couple classes in the college that I've disliked, but the majority of them have been well taught and, even though I do not plan to go the newspaper reporter route, my skills were refined and increased enough where I feel comfortable going along the Marketing path I feel my career will take.
Nonetheless, and I preface by saying that I am NOT a pessimist - the requirements we need to graduate as a journalist are in major need of reevaluation.
To begin, I am taking six hours of Philosophy this semester. SIX. Alongside the fact that Philosophy is "the study of thinking" and is so mind-numbingly dull I want to tear what little hair I do have right out of my head, 40% of my workload this semester is in two courses that literally will have no bearing on my life once I'm done with them.
Likewise, there is a heavy emphasis, I've found, on 300-400 level classes as opposed to 200-level courses. What is the difference? It is an arbitrary number, because I know from experience some 200-level courses are in fact harder and have a heavier workload than a 300-400 level class. Nonetheless, as I started last semester to figure out how I was going to get out of her by August, I kept running into this whole conundrum where an arbitrary number would potentially dictate if I would have to take 8 or 11 hours this summer (I ended up on the short end of the stick - 11 hours this summer, ugh). Granted, that's my own fault for some weak schedules Freshman and Sophomore year.
I think I am just a little bummed at how mechanical these requirements are, and how arbitrary a lot of them are. I would love to ask someone in charge of delegating what constitutes a Quantitative Reasoning I as opposed to a II. Knowing how inept a lot of the upper-echelon administrators are at the U of I, I would expect I would get a roundabout answer, if any at all.
The College of Media has been pretty good to me. There have been a couple classes in the college that I've disliked, but the majority of them have been well taught and, even though I do not plan to go the newspaper reporter route, my skills were refined and increased enough where I feel comfortable going along the Marketing path I feel my career will take.
Nonetheless, and I preface by saying that I am NOT a pessimist - the requirements we need to graduate as a journalist are in major need of reevaluation.
To begin, I am taking six hours of Philosophy this semester. SIX. Alongside the fact that Philosophy is "the study of thinking" and is so mind-numbingly dull I want to tear what little hair I do have right out of my head, 40% of my workload this semester is in two courses that literally will have no bearing on my life once I'm done with them.
Likewise, there is a heavy emphasis, I've found, on 300-400 level classes as opposed to 200-level courses. What is the difference? It is an arbitrary number, because I know from experience some 200-level courses are in fact harder and have a heavier workload than a 300-400 level class. Nonetheless, as I started last semester to figure out how I was going to get out of her by August, I kept running into this whole conundrum where an arbitrary number would potentially dictate if I would have to take 8 or 11 hours this summer (I ended up on the short end of the stick - 11 hours this summer, ugh). Granted, that's my own fault for some weak schedules Freshman and Sophomore year.
I think I am just a little bummed at how mechanical these requirements are, and how arbitrary a lot of them are. I would love to ask someone in charge of delegating what constitutes a Quantitative Reasoning I as opposed to a II. Knowing how inept a lot of the upper-echelon administrators are at the U of I, I would expect I would get a roundabout answer, if any at all.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
March Madness: Welcome back, Illini
Tomorrow is one of the best days of the year. That's right - the first round of the NCAA tournament, one of the rare instances where the early rounds with some fairly mediocre teams almost always seems to top the later rounds with the higher seeds playing each other.
Even better, the dark cloud that rested atop the Illinois basketball program seems to have been lifted. Illinois is ahead of schedule, notching a very impressive 5 seed in a season where most projected another down year for the team. To be honest, I was even ready to impose a "self-exile" from Illinois basketball if there was to be, yet again, a crappy year.
However, after Illinois football did it's usual incontinence in their pants after ONE good season, I was a little less reluctant to jump on board. It started with a surprise victory at Vanderbilt, which, at the time, was a huge boost for Illinois and evidence that this team may have something. Then it continued through a one-loss non-conference schedule that included the 9th straight win against Missouri (God, I hate their fans so very much). To top off the great start, Illinois beat then #10 ranked Purdue . . . at Purdue . . . in overtime.
Sure, there were some nasty blips along the way: 33 points at home against Penn State, 38 points at Minnesota, and another loss to Penn State who, by the way, has the best record of any Big Ten team against Bruce Weber (who woulda thunk it?) But there were great wins, too - a drubbing of Purdue at home, a solid by-the-books win against a hungry Wisconsin team, two wins against our arch-enemy, the Indiana Hoosiers, and a tremendous offensive display in the second win against Ohio State - four days after the 33-point PSU debacle.
So here we are, tipping off at 9pm from Portland, Ore. tomorrow night against the Western Kentucky Hilltoppers. I remember Dee, Deron, and Augustine's freshman year, along with Brian Cook's tremendous senior campaign, that saw a first-round matchup against the same program. Things have changed, of course. One thing that separates this year, however, is the fact that nearly every "expert" predicts Western Kentucky to win. After all, they say, at least one 12-seed beats a 5, and Illinois is the weakest of the 5-seeds.
Really? Utah? Purdue (who Illinois beat twice, once quite handily)? Florida State? I don't buy it, and it's not just the orange-colored glasses. Illinois should, and WILL win tomorrow, if they bring their A-game. Given the fact that there is a wealth of bulletin board material predicting them to lose, and that WKU was average-at-best away from home this year, I'll take Vegas' word over the experts: Illinois by 4.5 points.
Not the biggest of spreads, of course. But trust in Vegas. They know their stuff, and, sorry, Seth Davis - you know little more than Coco the Monkey.
So, Go Illini, let's get this first win, and see what happens Saturday. Either way, a great season, and the best is yet to come.
PREDICTION:
Illinois 68, WKU 53
Even better, the dark cloud that rested atop the Illinois basketball program seems to have been lifted. Illinois is ahead of schedule, notching a very impressive 5 seed in a season where most projected another down year for the team. To be honest, I was even ready to impose a "self-exile" from Illinois basketball if there was to be, yet again, a crappy year.
However, after Illinois football did it's usual incontinence in their pants after ONE good season, I was a little less reluctant to jump on board. It started with a surprise victory at Vanderbilt, which, at the time, was a huge boost for Illinois and evidence that this team may have something. Then it continued through a one-loss non-conference schedule that included the 9th straight win against Missouri (God, I hate their fans so very much). To top off the great start, Illinois beat then #10 ranked Purdue . . . at Purdue . . . in overtime.
Sure, there were some nasty blips along the way: 33 points at home against Penn State, 38 points at Minnesota, and another loss to Penn State who, by the way, has the best record of any Big Ten team against Bruce Weber (who woulda thunk it?) But there were great wins, too - a drubbing of Purdue at home, a solid by-the-books win against a hungry Wisconsin team, two wins against our arch-enemy, the Indiana Hoosiers, and a tremendous offensive display in the second win against Ohio State - four days after the 33-point PSU debacle.
So here we are, tipping off at 9pm from Portland, Ore. tomorrow night against the Western Kentucky Hilltoppers. I remember Dee, Deron, and Augustine's freshman year, along with Brian Cook's tremendous senior campaign, that saw a first-round matchup against the same program. Things have changed, of course. One thing that separates this year, however, is the fact that nearly every "expert" predicts Western Kentucky to win. After all, they say, at least one 12-seed beats a 5, and Illinois is the weakest of the 5-seeds.
Really? Utah? Purdue (who Illinois beat twice, once quite handily)? Florida State? I don't buy it, and it's not just the orange-colored glasses. Illinois should, and WILL win tomorrow, if they bring their A-game. Given the fact that there is a wealth of bulletin board material predicting them to lose, and that WKU was average-at-best away from home this year, I'll take Vegas' word over the experts: Illinois by 4.5 points.
Not the biggest of spreads, of course. But trust in Vegas. They know their stuff, and, sorry, Seth Davis - you know little more than Coco the Monkey.
So, Go Illini, let's get this first win, and see what happens Saturday. Either way, a great season, and the best is yet to come.
PREDICTION:
Illinois 68, WKU 53
Thursday, March 5, 2009
UNOFFICIAL 2009: A lot of fun, and too much damn fuss
Well, predictably so, in the last week and a half we have seen a slew of news articles featuring our local policy makers and our university's spokespersons taking hard stances against a pseudo-holiday.
Since my freshman year and the 2006 version of Unofficial, more and more enforcement has been ushered into the campus area to police the drunken participants. Letters have been written to parents, e-mails sent to students and faculty, and here we are, 2009, and reading a forwarded letter from a member of the Interfraternity Council, get this: deans from each college will be in patrol cars.
What?!
First off, I find it hard to imagine the Dean of the College of Media, Ron Yates, would really care to spend the day in a patrol car. Second of all, what is this, high school prom where every guidance counselor shows up to see if they smell booze on anybody, while the janitor is stationed around the punch bowl to make sure no one spikes it with a little vodka?
I guess my main point is, where are the priorities? Unofficial has seen trips to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, and I'm not downplaying the fact that some people are just stupid and will do stupid things while drunk. Yes, I know one person died back in 2006, but, forgive me if I sound like George Costanza, underwhelmed after learning the Andrea Doria shipwreck had a mere 40-some casualties - one person, and the letters to parents reference it as if it is ultimate damning evidence of Unofficial?
Here's another priority: it's the economy, stupid. Our economy sucks, the government keeps spending cash, and we'll see it here tomorrow. Hundreds, and I do mean HUNDREDS of officers from all the different agencies - University, cities of Champaign and Urbana, and even agents from the Illinois Liquor Control Commission - are going to swarm around campus. At least the navy uniforms contrast nicely with green.
Our state will have spent tens-of-thousands of dollars enforcing this event, while the city of Champaign will gleefully cash in on the underage tickets (which, mind you, are up to $365 for March 6) and go on to waste the money on their crap school district or God-knows-what.
I will happily participate tomorrow, my last and final Unofficial, and I'll dig out whatever green clothing I have, and bask in the surreal glory of campus being overtaken by drunken college students. It always hits, every year, around mid-afternoon, when you look up and down Green Street and observe the controlled fervor. From my perspective, Unofficial is not some huge menace to society.
Here are some imparting words of advice:
Chancellor Herman - I used to like you, man, but after you folded like a schoolgirl during the Chief decision and continue ignore ACTUAL problems instead of spending University cash on mailing nearly 40,000 letters about a pseudo-holiday, I think you should go back to teaching math.
Police officers - man, you were all pumped to have the weekend off, and you get a call to come in and look for underage kids with beers in their hands. I can only imagine the temptation you must have to take off that uniform, slip into some jeans and a green shirt, and join in on the festivities.
Mayor Schweighart - I met you once, and you were a pretty cool dude. With a pack of Pall Mall's in your shirt pocket and a blue collar aura about you, I get the feeling you, deep down inside, don't mind this Unofficial thing too much. Better yet, you think the drinking age should be lowered to 19. Bravo! Oh, and enjoy the loot the city will pull tomorrow. I wouldn't blame you if you go corrupt on us and keep some dough for yourself.
And to Scott Cochrane, hardly a mastermind but more just a cocaine-induced entreprenuer - major props, my friend. I'm sure tomorrow, in between lines of powder and liasons with 19 and 20 year old employees, you'll have enough time to reflect on how one little idea back in 1995 has become such a big deal.
Since my freshman year and the 2006 version of Unofficial, more and more enforcement has been ushered into the campus area to police the drunken participants. Letters have been written to parents, e-mails sent to students and faculty, and here we are, 2009, and reading a forwarded letter from a member of the Interfraternity Council, get this: deans from each college will be in patrol cars.
What?!
First off, I find it hard to imagine the Dean of the College of Media, Ron Yates, would really care to spend the day in a patrol car. Second of all, what is this, high school prom where every guidance counselor shows up to see if they smell booze on anybody, while the janitor is stationed around the punch bowl to make sure no one spikes it with a little vodka?
I guess my main point is, where are the priorities? Unofficial has seen trips to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, and I'm not downplaying the fact that some people are just stupid and will do stupid things while drunk. Yes, I know one person died back in 2006, but, forgive me if I sound like George Costanza, underwhelmed after learning the Andrea Doria shipwreck had a mere 40-some casualties - one person, and the letters to parents reference it as if it is ultimate damning evidence of Unofficial?
Here's another priority: it's the economy, stupid. Our economy sucks, the government keeps spending cash, and we'll see it here tomorrow. Hundreds, and I do mean HUNDREDS of officers from all the different agencies - University, cities of Champaign and Urbana, and even agents from the Illinois Liquor Control Commission - are going to swarm around campus. At least the navy uniforms contrast nicely with green.
Our state will have spent tens-of-thousands of dollars enforcing this event, while the city of Champaign will gleefully cash in on the underage tickets (which, mind you, are up to $365 for March 6) and go on to waste the money on their crap school district or God-knows-what.
I will happily participate tomorrow, my last and final Unofficial, and I'll dig out whatever green clothing I have, and bask in the surreal glory of campus being overtaken by drunken college students. It always hits, every year, around mid-afternoon, when you look up and down Green Street and observe the controlled fervor. From my perspective, Unofficial is not some huge menace to society.
Here are some imparting words of advice:
Chancellor Herman - I used to like you, man, but after you folded like a schoolgirl during the Chief decision and continue ignore ACTUAL problems instead of spending University cash on mailing nearly 40,000 letters about a pseudo-holiday, I think you should go back to teaching math.
Police officers - man, you were all pumped to have the weekend off, and you get a call to come in and look for underage kids with beers in their hands. I can only imagine the temptation you must have to take off that uniform, slip into some jeans and a green shirt, and join in on the festivities.
Mayor Schweighart - I met you once, and you were a pretty cool dude. With a pack of Pall Mall's in your shirt pocket and a blue collar aura about you, I get the feeling you, deep down inside, don't mind this Unofficial thing too much. Better yet, you think the drinking age should be lowered to 19. Bravo! Oh, and enjoy the loot the city will pull tomorrow. I wouldn't blame you if you go corrupt on us and keep some dough for yourself.
And to Scott Cochrane, hardly a mastermind but more just a cocaine-induced entreprenuer - major props, my friend. I'm sure tomorrow, in between lines of powder and liasons with 19 and 20 year old employees, you'll have enough time to reflect on how one little idea back in 1995 has become such a big deal.
Monday, February 23, 2009
To Print or Not to Print: Controversial Pictures
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
No Dud On The Horizon: U2's latest album ranks with the best
I will be forthright - I am a huge U2 fan. My earliest musical memory was listening to "Where the Streets Have No Name" from The Joshua Tree on an old vinyl LP with my dad when I was not even 3 years old. Twenty-two years later, U2 is - sorry, Coldplay - still the biggest band in the world. Album releases (unfortunately every 4 years or so anymore) are events by themselves, followed by the anticipation of tour dates.
I've seen them live twice - once in 2001, again in 2005 - and there isn't a U2 album I don't own. So, understandably, waiting as long as U2 fans have for their latest, No Line On The Horizon, in this digital age, I found myself all too often checking bit torrent sites hoping that finally this damn thing would leak.
Last night, around 11:30 p.m., it happened - Universal Australia, U2's label for down-under distribution, put it on their site 10 days before its intended release. Whoops. Of course, leave it to the huge online community of U2 fans to comb the net and stumble upon an Australian music site.
An album's greatness isn't determined upon first listen. It takes repeated listens, and for the real classics, years before we can legitimately give an album such a weighty label. U2 has had two so far - The Joshua Tree and, my personal favorite, 1991's Achtung Baby.
No Line On The Horizon is the third.
That won't be the first time you hear such a bold statement - in fact, I stole it from a few rock critics who've already wrote early reviews for it. But this album is an encapsulation of the entire U2 sonic arsenal. It is both beautiful and rugged, acoustic and electronic, soaring yet subdued, immediate yet layered . . . I could go on listing adjectives, but in a word, this is one dense album that will take its rightful place as the third masterpiece for the band.
The most obvious classic on the album is "Magnificent", the second track where the name sums it up perfectly. It is quintessential U2, with chiming guitar licks from the Edge, a soaring Bono vocal, and the same pulsing rhythm section found on old classics like "New Year's Day" and "With or Without You". "Only love can leave such a mark, and only love can heal such a scar," Bono sings.
"Moment of Surrender" is the longest studio track ever by U2, clocking in at over 7 minutes. It is a bold song in its subtlety - the band sounds so comfortable in a smoky, jazz-lounge groove, that is truly unlike anything they've recorded before.
"Unknown Caller" features some achingly beautiful guitar work by The Edge. I find that most rock critic types, no matter their thoughts of Bono, admire what Edge has done for the instrument of guitar.
Ah hell, I'm basically listing every song. They're all great, all very unique from the one before it. Yet, at the end of the album, it feels that all 11 tracks have a cohesive quality about them. The one-two knockout blow to finish the album, the rollicking rocker "Breathe" and the meditative, gravelly-vocalized "Cedars of Lebanon", are the best proof of how disparate styles and genres were melted together to make pure bliss.
Here's what I recommend. DOWNLOAD NOW . . . . and buy later :-) In all seriousness, go to a site like thepiratebay.org, search for No Line On The Horizon, download and enjoy. March 3, go to Best Buy and get a hard copy. It will be awhile before U2 lights up the stadiums in America, but word is the band will have a couple nights at Soldier Field, their first outdoor gigs in Chicago since 1997's PopMart Tour.
I've seen them live twice - once in 2001, again in 2005 - and there isn't a U2 album I don't own. So, understandably, waiting as long as U2 fans have for their latest, No Line On The Horizon, in this digital age, I found myself all too often checking bit torrent sites hoping that finally this damn thing would leak.
Last night, around 11:30 p.m., it happened - Universal Australia, U2's label for down-under distribution, put it on their site 10 days before its intended release. Whoops. Of course, leave it to the huge online community of U2 fans to comb the net and stumble upon an Australian music site.
An album's greatness isn't determined upon first listen. It takes repeated listens, and for the real classics, years before we can legitimately give an album such a weighty label. U2 has had two so far - The Joshua Tree and, my personal favorite, 1991's Achtung Baby.
No Line On The Horizon is the third.
That won't be the first time you hear such a bold statement - in fact, I stole it from a few rock critics who've already wrote early reviews for it. But this album is an encapsulation of the entire U2 sonic arsenal. It is both beautiful and rugged, acoustic and electronic, soaring yet subdued, immediate yet layered . . . I could go on listing adjectives, but in a word, this is one dense album that will take its rightful place as the third masterpiece for the band.
The most obvious classic on the album is "Magnificent", the second track where the name sums it up perfectly. It is quintessential U2, with chiming guitar licks from the Edge, a soaring Bono vocal, and the same pulsing rhythm section found on old classics like "New Year's Day" and "With or Without You". "Only love can leave such a mark, and only love can heal such a scar," Bono sings.
"Moment of Surrender" is the longest studio track ever by U2, clocking in at over 7 minutes. It is a bold song in its subtlety - the band sounds so comfortable in a smoky, jazz-lounge groove, that is truly unlike anything they've recorded before.
"Unknown Caller" features some achingly beautiful guitar work by The Edge. I find that most rock critic types, no matter their thoughts of Bono, admire what Edge has done for the instrument of guitar.
"I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight" is perhaps the best pop song U2 has ever recorded, seamlessly integrating some shamelessly joyful lyrics with a rollicking groove that is at once instantly recognizable, yet afforded a unique touch from Larry Mullen's stimulant-infused drums and Adam Clayton's all-the-way-up-in-the-mix, but-damn-if-it-doesn't-sound-good bass guitar.
"Get On Your Boots", the single, sounds even better in the context of the album, followed by "Stand Up Comedy", the smirking hard rock track of the album that infuses a Zeppelin riff with some serious Sly Stone funk credentials in the verses..Ah hell, I'm basically listing every song. They're all great, all very unique from the one before it. Yet, at the end of the album, it feels that all 11 tracks have a cohesive quality about them. The one-two knockout blow to finish the album, the rollicking rocker "Breathe" and the meditative, gravelly-vocalized "Cedars of Lebanon", are the best proof of how disparate styles and genres were melted together to make pure bliss.
Here's what I recommend. DOWNLOAD NOW . . . . and buy later :-) In all seriousness, go to a site like thepiratebay.org, search for No Line On The Horizon, download and enjoy. March 3, go to Best Buy and get a hard copy. It will be awhile before U2 lights up the stadiums in America, but word is the band will have a couple nights at Soldier Field, their first outdoor gigs in Chicago since 1997's PopMart Tour.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
The Decline of the Republican Party: Unfortunately, they brought it upon themselves
People wondered upon the inauguration of Barack Obama just how long his honeymoon would last. Somewhat surprising to me, in a good way, was just how short the honeymoon was, and how our tame-by-most-standards mainstream media stopped the incessant romanticism fairly quickly and got back to business as usual.
While I readily admit a station like MSNBC's liberal posturing, I find the outcry of conservatives to be pathetically defensive. My God, the whole Republican party has adopted Rush Limbaugh as their man, the talking head who will lead the way - at least ideologically - as the party moves forward after such a decisive blow from voters last November.
In a Daily Illini opinion column called McRight by some chick in the College of Business, a meant-to-be humorous column about how crappy February is resorted to pathetic name calling. After establishing her view that the word "February" is synonymous with "ugly" and "terrible", she said that Michelle Obama looked, well, "February", at the inauguration.
This coming from a writer who, suffice to say voted for Bush in 2004, seems to be a bit ironic. Let's hypothetically say I decided to stoop to low-brow humor and note how Laura Bush was as vanilla looking of a First Lady we've had since Lady Bird Johnson - let's just say I hypothetically made that comparison - and you see how lame of a one-liner her put-off of our First Lady is.
I'm not someone who enjoys political correctness, but as a man looking at Michelle Obama as a woman, ugly is not what comes to mind. I guarantee a good number of readers saw that one-liner and felt racism creeping into the column. McRight - you aren't doing your fellow conservatives any McFavors with that kind of crap. Perceived racism, ignorance, or just a lame attempt at a joke? Check, check, and check.
It just shows how out of touch the Republican party is. Take, for instance, how disastrous McCain's campaign was. He is a politician to be respected, and has years of service both in the military and congress that proves the kind of man he is. He wasn't being himself the whole campaign - he instead followed the bad advice of the most incompetent campaign staff since McGovern (sorry, Hillary) and spent more time talking about Obama than himself.
For the sake of governance, I really wish the Republican party would get their act together. The basic ideals of conservatism are still important to have in political discourse, but instead of worrying about furthering their message, they waste away their energy complaining about the "Liberal media", Reverend Wright, and how bad of a deal Bush got when 85% of Americans didn't approve of his job.
Though, I think I've heard that Gallup dude was a socialist . . . so, I bet those numbers are rigged. That pesky Liberal bias.
While I readily admit a station like MSNBC's liberal posturing, I find the outcry of conservatives to be pathetically defensive. My God, the whole Republican party has adopted Rush Limbaugh as their man, the talking head who will lead the way - at least ideologically - as the party moves forward after such a decisive blow from voters last November.
In a Daily Illini opinion column called McRight by some chick in the College of Business, a meant-to-be humorous column about how crappy February is resorted to pathetic name calling. After establishing her view that the word "February" is synonymous with "ugly" and "terrible", she said that Michelle Obama looked, well, "February", at the inauguration.
This coming from a writer who, suffice to say voted for Bush in 2004, seems to be a bit ironic. Let's hypothetically say I decided to stoop to low-brow humor and note how Laura Bush was as vanilla looking of a First Lady we've had since Lady Bird Johnson - let's just say I hypothetically made that comparison - and you see how lame of a one-liner her put-off of our First Lady is.
I'm not someone who enjoys political correctness, but as a man looking at Michelle Obama as a woman, ugly is not what comes to mind. I guarantee a good number of readers saw that one-liner and felt racism creeping into the column. McRight - you aren't doing your fellow conservatives any McFavors with that kind of crap. Perceived racism, ignorance, or just a lame attempt at a joke? Check, check, and check.
It just shows how out of touch the Republican party is. Take, for instance, how disastrous McCain's campaign was. He is a politician to be respected, and has years of service both in the military and congress that proves the kind of man he is. He wasn't being himself the whole campaign - he instead followed the bad advice of the most incompetent campaign staff since McGovern (sorry, Hillary) and spent more time talking about Obama than himself.
For the sake of governance, I really wish the Republican party would get their act together. The basic ideals of conservatism are still important to have in political discourse, but instead of worrying about furthering their message, they waste away their energy complaining about the "Liberal media", Reverend Wright, and how bad of a deal Bush got when 85% of Americans didn't approve of his job.
Though, I think I've heard that Gallup dude was a socialist . . . so, I bet those numbers are rigged. That pesky Liberal bias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
