Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Can't stand to hear one more word about tensions over the debt-ceiling crisis? Well, how 'bout that Tweeting Pope?

>

Middle-Man and the Debt Ceiling Debacle
[Don't forget to click to enlarge.]

by Ken

Well, Tom, that's pretty much where I am on the Events of the Day. Sick to death, tired of it all, and . . . and . . .

Does anyone else think back in stray moments to Inauguration Day 2009, and remember what it felt like, after the grueling and terrifying years of the Bush regime, to feel hope? And then feel some combination of cheated, stupid, and desperate over the pass we've come to?

Hope? Is it possible to have any hope now except that What Happens Next may not be as hideous as it shows every sign of being? With the only thing standing between us and the ghastliest imaginable outcome being Middle-Man, who we now know is much more a part of the problem than any conceivable part of any solution.

Intending no disrespect to the truly inspiring work of the "It Gets Better" campaign aimed at communicating to besieged younger LGBT folk that their lives can yet take meaningful, satisfying shape, despite the evidence to the contrary in their daily lives, I find myself in daily "It Gets Worse" mode when it comes to the news of the day. A moment ago I took a peek at the NYT afternoon update and found these as the top items:
Cost-Cutters, Except When the Spending Is Back Home
By RON NIXON
House Republicans who rode a wave of voter discontent into office last year may be pushing for spending cuts, but they're also quietly funneling millions of federal dollars back home.

Bipartisan Plan for Budget Deal Buoys President
By JACKIE CALMES and JENNIFER STEINHAUER
A group of senators made a new push to win backing for an ambitious deficit-reduction proposal that includes new revenues and deep spending cuts.
THE CAUCUS: How the Gang of Six Revived the Grand Deal
I hope I don't have to tell you that I didn't read either story. I've read them, in one form or another, way too often. (And I certainly wasn't going to waste precious NYT "clicks" on them.)

So let me instead offer you two bits of actual reading, one apt to make you still angrier (yes though, it doesn't seem possible, let alone fair, it really is possible to feel angrier), the other likely to make you feel just a bit giddy.


APART FROM THIS PHONE-HACKING OUTRAGE,
EVERYTHING AT NEWS CORP IS A-OK, RIGHT?


I know we've covered this ground before, what with my misguided sense that while of course criminal behavior by a major "news" organization is important, that's kind of the least of what's wrong with News Corp, or maybe it's most important as an inevitable outgrowth of the company's deeply corrupt and corrupting propaganda mission ("Postscript on the problem with "news" coverage Murdoch-style: Joyce Purnick recalls the New York Post takeover").

AlterNet's Sarah Seltzer reports on an AP report by Raphael G. Satter, "With Brooks arrested, tabloid insiders open up":
Misogyny, Made-Up Facts and More: Working in a News Corp Newsroom

The AP has an explosive little story based on interviews with disgruntled former News Corp employees of British tabloids who are opening up to the press now that their former boss, Rebekah Brooks, has resigned and faces a criminal probe for the phone hacking scandals that have horrified and enthralled the world.

The scandal itself has certainly made the daily life of a News Corp employee at the News of the World and The Sun an object of curiosity. The ruthlessness and top-down authority of the newsrooms--as described by these former staffers--is remarkable, including the strange story of a reporter forced to wear a Harry Potter costume who was chastised for forgoing said mandatory outfit -- even on September 11th.

Misogyny and fact-fudging were also part of the routine, these former employees claim. . . .
Read it and weep. Or --


BUT THEN, ON THE LIGHTER SIDE, PAUL RUDNICK
GOES KIND OF NUTS OVER THE TWEETING POPE


In a "Shouts and Murmurs" piece in the July 25 New Yorker, "The Pope's Tweets," Paul gets crazy over an AP report of the 84-year-old Pope Cardinal Ratguts' giddy entry into the world of Twitter. My first thought for a post was just to copy all 21 of his imaginary tweets, but I decided that no, that would be wrong. So I decided to limit myself arbitrarily to the first five. When the dust settled, I found I'd reached a bipartisan compromise: nine.
Sometimes, when I'm all alone, I like to put on my cassock and spin around really fast and pretend I'm a tepee.

During a papal audience, I put folks at ease by asking, "Are you gay?" Then I say, "Kidding!" Then I go, "No, seriously, are you gay?"

It's hard to tell all the cardinals apart, so sometimes I put different dinosaur stickers on their backs.

This is so embarrassing, but whenever I see Orthodox Jews I always think they're waiters.

If people ask, "Why does God allow war and evil?," I ask, "Why do the high-school students on 'Glee' look forty?"

When I stand on my balcony and wave to the faithful and millions more via satellite, I think, Kate Middleton must hate me!

If someone questions papal infallibility, I reply, "I know one thing for sure: you shouldn't be wearing horizontal stripes."

When I ponder why I was elected Pope over so many others, I wonder if it's just a popularity contest. Then I think, Gosh, I hope so.

Proof of God's existence: St. Patrick's is right next to Saks.
Now are you going to tell me you don't want to read the rest?
#

Labels: , , ,

2 Comments:

At 8:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ken, If you use the incognito window in Google Chrome it doesn't count your clicks.

 
At 10:25 AM, Blogger KenInNY said...

Ooh, interesting, Anon! I'm not sure I know what the incognito window in Google Chrome is, but I did download Google Chrome on my home computer and use it sometimes, so maybe I'll root around.

I'll also have to think about the ethics of it. If they say, "Twenty clicks is what you can have for free, and if you want more you gotta pay," then it seems to me my choice when it comes to click 21 is to pay or fuhgeddaboutit.

On the other hand, I do keep an eye out for "third-party" NYT links -- like to Krugman -- which I know are not counted. Still, that's part of the site's stated policy, so that doesn't quite count as circumventing its ground rules.

Still, I might find myself nosing around Google Chrome tonight during the Yanks-Rays game. (C. C. Sabathia pitching!) Thanks for the tip.

Cheers,
Ken

 

Post a Comment

<< Home