Another reason I hate to watch the news ( re-discovered by me, this evening, while trying to watch Anderson Cooper's show on CNN- he was interviewing Angelina Jolie about World Refugee Day, which I have some minor interest in- which seemed like a safer bet than most news shows): punditry. I mean, how LOOOOOOONG can these people discuss the same issue over and over and over and over and over with different alleged "experts" and politicians and whom-ever-the-stupid-fuck they can get to sit still long enough to slap a mic on? I care just as much about when the hell we're getting out of Iraq as they do; trust me, I do. I'm opinionated about damned near anything ( except sports , raking leaves , and yet another possible R.E.M album except to say, unilaterally: I don't care. Period.). Sometimes my friends even joke with me and say, "No, Jessica! Tell us how you REALLY feel!" because I'm so vocal. But even I have to pause aand ask: why is there this compulsive need to hash and re-hash something untill it's, well, hash? Democrats are saying we need to have a "phased deployment". Republicans are saying we need to "finish what we came to do." Okay, sounds clear to me. Depending on whose side you're on, I think you know where you stand.
But NOOOOOOO, we've got to ask every schmo in Washington, including the guy who sells hot dogs outside the White House fence what they think, feel, intuit , suspect, or downright don't know about the situation. And we have to give every one of them airtime, even if it's clear that all they're doing is pushing their own agenda ( cough cough Carl Rove cough cough)/current book (cough Ann Coulter cough) / film ( cough Al Gore coughcougcough)l /bid for party support in the next election (Gore again, coughcoughchoughchough). Occasionally you get someone interesting on there like Al Franken or Rush Limbaugh to just say the most outrageous things possible, but let's face it: after awhile it's like listening to Charlie Brown's teacher: mwah mwah mwah, mwahmwah, mwah, mwah mwah. And that's not because they lose me somewhere in betweeen when they open their mouths and when they take a breath for air, either. I can follow along, jargon and all. It's just after awhile, it's all the same bullshit; it all sounds the same no matter WHO'S saying it. Or it just serves NO purpose whatsoever to actually illuminate the topic, like sports commentary, another thing I can't stand ( along WITH the sports, but who knows how much more tolerable it might be without those assholes? All that endless yammering in the backgrouund of a simple game saying crap like, "Well, Mike, it looks like he might be going to throw to Player X downfield. " "I do agree, Jim. You know if the Team wins this one, they'll be well-set to go to the Big Game." "True, but only if Joe Coach keeps them sharp...." AAAARGH! Makes me want to hurt somebody!)
Even the ever-sharp dressed and sharp-minded Anderson getting in there and throwing down with his emo-journalist self does not keep it going for me. And if I can't get a man that good-looking to make the news tolerable for me, then that's one sorry fuckin' state of affairs, I'd say.
10 minutes. That's all I could take today of yet another discussion going nowhere, talking about a deeply important issue that everyone cares about, as though they were dispassionately ordering lunch at Burger King, and with about that much veracity in any of their statements. At least when you order lunch, and things are a little more REAL. You actually get food. You know, substance? Not speculation? Ain't nothin' speculative about a Whopper, my friend. Nothing! It's there or it's not, just like those troops are there or they are not, and we have a plan to get them out with a solid timeline or NOT.
With my PoMo street cred to protect, I'm sure some folks ( like Leo, like some other scientists I know, like a few fundamentalists I've run into over the years) would have a piss-their-pants laughing fest at me right now, sitting around saying that something is there or it's not and being so ( gasp) hardcore John Locke about politics. But I never SAID that ideas just exist in a vacuum, although that's what most people against Postmodernism would argue. I say, first of all, you haven't done your research ( because while they're just kinda skatey on what you might call "The World", they ARE quick to call you on your cultural biases, in the interests of making sure everyone gets a voice). Secondly, while I never really argue for the teleological view on things ( ditched that Grand Narrative awhile back, thank you, Karl), I do think that in a Marxist sorta way, ideas DO affect how people respond to things, and therefore, they're important ( even if they seem a little indulgent and appear to exist in the Ivory Tower of Academe). If it's not applicable, it's interesting, sure. But what are you going to DO with it? And I've held THAT idea from the start. Remember I got my start in Religion, where we like to sit around and talk about ethics. Ethics are nothing if not applicable. They exist to be applied, n'est pas ( just had to get a little French there, nodding to those damned Gauls for starting this in the first place)? Okay?
So there.
Suffice it to say, I think I've had enough with CNN for now. Unless Anderson decides to change his tie ( swear he's been wearing the same tie for a week, but who can tell? They all look the same!) and then I'm sure I'll be all a-twitter about that. Love ya, babe. Not watching your show. Sorry.
Which is why I decided to watch "America's Next Top Model" reruns instead. So shoot me. I suppose it makes me a bad American. But I'll bet I'm one of the few "ANTM" watchers who can tell you what an IED is. At least I can say that. Can you?
But NOOOOOOO, we've got to ask every schmo in Washington, including the guy who sells hot dogs outside the White House fence what they think, feel, intuit , suspect, or downright don't know about the situation. And we have to give every one of them airtime, even if it's clear that all they're doing is pushing their own agenda ( cough cough Carl Rove cough cough)/current book (cough Ann Coulter cough) / film ( cough Al Gore coughcougcough)l /bid for party support in the next election (Gore again, coughcoughchoughchough). Occasionally you get someone interesting on there like Al Franken or Rush Limbaugh to just say the most outrageous things possible, but let's face it: after awhile it's like listening to Charlie Brown's teacher: mwah mwah mwah, mwahmwah, mwah, mwah mwah. And that's not because they lose me somewhere in betweeen when they open their mouths and when they take a breath for air, either. I can follow along, jargon and all. It's just after awhile, it's all the same bullshit; it all sounds the same no matter WHO'S saying it. Or it just serves NO purpose whatsoever to actually illuminate the topic, like sports commentary, another thing I can't stand ( along WITH the sports, but who knows how much more tolerable it might be without those assholes? All that endless yammering in the backgrouund of a simple game saying crap like, "Well, Mike, it looks like he might be going to throw to Player X downfield. " "I do agree, Jim. You know if the Team wins this one, they'll be well-set to go to the Big Game." "True, but only if Joe Coach keeps them sharp...." AAAARGH! Makes me want to hurt somebody!)
Even the ever-sharp dressed and sharp-minded Anderson getting in there and throwing down with his emo-journalist self does not keep it going for me. And if I can't get a man that good-looking to make the news tolerable for me, then that's one sorry fuckin' state of affairs, I'd say.
10 minutes. That's all I could take today of yet another discussion going nowhere, talking about a deeply important issue that everyone cares about, as though they were dispassionately ordering lunch at Burger King, and with about that much veracity in any of their statements. At least when you order lunch, and things are a little more REAL. You actually get food. You know, substance? Not speculation? Ain't nothin' speculative about a Whopper, my friend. Nothing! It's there or it's not, just like those troops are there or they are not, and we have a plan to get them out with a solid timeline or NOT.
With my PoMo street cred to protect, I'm sure some folks ( like Leo, like some other scientists I know, like a few fundamentalists I've run into over the years) would have a piss-their-pants laughing fest at me right now, sitting around saying that something is there or it's not and being so ( gasp) hardcore John Locke about politics. But I never SAID that ideas just exist in a vacuum, although that's what most people against Postmodernism would argue. I say, first of all, you haven't done your research ( because while they're just kinda skatey on what you might call "The World", they ARE quick to call you on your cultural biases, in the interests of making sure everyone gets a voice). Secondly, while I never really argue for the teleological view on things ( ditched that Grand Narrative awhile back, thank you, Karl), I do think that in a Marxist sorta way, ideas DO affect how people respond to things, and therefore, they're important ( even if they seem a little indulgent and appear to exist in the Ivory Tower of Academe). If it's not applicable, it's interesting, sure. But what are you going to DO with it? And I've held THAT idea from the start. Remember I got my start in Religion, where we like to sit around and talk about ethics. Ethics are nothing if not applicable. They exist to be applied, n'est pas ( just had to get a little French there, nodding to those damned Gauls for starting this in the first place)? Okay?
So there.
Suffice it to say, I think I've had enough with CNN for now. Unless Anderson decides to change his tie ( swear he's been wearing the same tie for a week, but who can tell? They all look the same!) and then I'm sure I'll be all a-twitter about that. Love ya, babe. Not watching your show. Sorry.
Which is why I decided to watch "America's Next Top Model" reruns instead. So shoot me. I suppose it makes me a bad American. But I'll bet I'm one of the few "ANTM" watchers who can tell you what an IED is. At least I can say that. Can you?
posted by Jessica @ 12:43 AM
<< Home