Maybe Bill Taylor should have used jazz hands as he described in detail his utter dismay at the clear pattern of corruption around him. Maybe George Kent should have cried like a punk and screamed about how much he liked beer, made a scene like a day-drunk housewife.
What can our elected officials do to bring more "pizzazz" to these solemn proceedings, so that the horserace media dipshits who get paid way too much to cover these things, and the addled geriatrics that believe them, can walk away entertained by the fact that the executive branch is clearly engaged in an ongoing conspiracy of bribery and extortion?
I mean, it's certainly a service to the nation that Reuters was available to faithfully transcribe the deep musings of Fredo Number Two. The NBC guy, Jonathan Allen, is just as bad, with his avatar of two baseball players. Talk about a meaningless event that is painfully boring to sit through. I double-dog dare anyone out there to watch an entire baseball game, commercial breaks and all, without changing the channel once.
These people are disgusting, sure, but the fact that they remain gainfully employed means that there must be some role in a putatively free market for their trenchant theater critiques. So rather than be repulsed as usual with these sorts of individuals, and wondering aloud why they don't just go find a more exciting line of work if trying to save the goddamned country just isn't interesting enough, let's stipulate that there are two possibilities with these "people think these hearings are boring" analyses:
So what I really mean here is that if a sufficient number of people out there are actually interested in the proceedings, and what these witnesses -- serious career people who have decades of civil service and (in many cases) military experience, who have served under chief executives of both parties with the same degree of dedication -- have revealed so far, and will continue to do so.
The public hearings just started a day ago; the meter takes time to move. And a responsible media, focused on reporting the facts and providing a narrative context, instead of lamely trying to guess the engagement of people they don't know and haven't talked to directly, can affect that meter.
And it already has moved since the initial inquiry began, which would tend to lean more in the favor of Possibility #1. That means that the theater critics, instead of trying to provide reality-teevee snark and pigskin-prognosticator bullshit, need to either report the facts or just go find another job better suited to their skill set, bearing in mind that Eric Trump appears to have hands, so he probably doesn't need these fools to jerk him off.
Possibility #2 is much scarier, because if there really is a critical mass of people who just don't give a shit about the open malfeasance of these fuckers, then it's only going to get worse, the country really is done for, and we'll deserve it.
But we're not there yet, so it's good to see people telling the theater critics to fuck off and find honest work.
What can our elected officials do to bring more "pizzazz" to these solemn proceedings, so that the horserace media dipshits who get paid way too much to cover these things, and the addled geriatrics that believe them, can walk away entertained by the fact that the executive branch is clearly engaged in an ongoing conspiracy of bribery and extortion?
I mean, it's certainly a service to the nation that Reuters was available to faithfully transcribe the deep musings of Fredo Number Two. The NBC guy, Jonathan Allen, is just as bad, with his avatar of two baseball players. Talk about a meaningless event that is painfully boring to sit through. I double-dog dare anyone out there to watch an entire baseball game, commercial breaks and all, without changing the channel once.
These people are disgusting, sure, but the fact that they remain gainfully employed means that there must be some role in a putatively free market for their trenchant theater critiques. So rather than be repulsed as usual with these sorts of individuals, and wondering aloud why they don't just go find a more exciting line of work if trying to save the goddamned country just isn't interesting enough, let's stipulate that there are two possibilities with these "people think these hearings are boring" analyses:
- They're wrong.
- They're right.
So what I really mean here is that if a sufficient number of people out there are actually interested in the proceedings, and what these witnesses -- serious career people who have decades of civil service and (in many cases) military experience, who have served under chief executives of both parties with the same degree of dedication -- have revealed so far, and will continue to do so.
The public hearings just started a day ago; the meter takes time to move. And a responsible media, focused on reporting the facts and providing a narrative context, instead of lamely trying to guess the engagement of people they don't know and haven't talked to directly, can affect that meter.
And it already has moved since the initial inquiry began, which would tend to lean more in the favor of Possibility #1. That means that the theater critics, instead of trying to provide reality-teevee snark and pigskin-prognosticator bullshit, need to either report the facts or just go find another job better suited to their skill set, bearing in mind that Eric Trump appears to have hands, so he probably doesn't need these fools to jerk him off.
Possibility #2 is much scarier, because if there really is a critical mass of people who just don't give a shit about the open malfeasance of these fuckers, then it's only going to get worse, the country really is done for, and we'll deserve it.
But we're not there yet, so it's good to see people telling the theater critics to fuck off and find honest work.
No comments:
Post a Comment