If we could forget about the politics and see it purely as theatre, then Sarah Palin’s problem becomes obvious.
She forgets her lines.
She needs more rehearsal.
It seems obvious that she memorizes answers to certain questions and then freezes up and gets lost. But it’s live, so she has no choice but to blast through to the end.
I’m sure she does much better in rehearsal.
I can almost picture it. Bristol holds the script. Our Tea Party hero starts. She gets off to a good start. Slides in a zinger. And then… she forgets. You can’t hold it against her. She’s had very little time with the script.
When the camera finally rolls, with no book in hand (unless it’s on her hand), she starts out fine. She looks great. And then forgets a line. She panics, cobbles together a few random keywords from the script, and then, after a moment, detours into some familiar territory. Anything. Pulling it together for a strong, coherent finish (on a completely different subject).
I wanted to know why Collins thought Borg never won the U.S. Open, and if he thought the problem was the cold reception he got from American spectators in New York.
Collins told me that my interpretation was off the mark. They liked Borg fine in New York, he said. But they adoredJohn McEnroe and Jimmy Connors.
Looking back, the answer to my question is obvious. Why didn’t Borg ever win the U.S. Open? Because he got beat.
Another time, I called Larry’s radio show and asked Scott Meredith, the literary agent, a question about publishing. This was a long time ago and I can’t remember the silly question I probably asked.
Both times, when Larry said “Salisbury, North Carolina, hello!” I hesitated for a split second and got reprimanded for it.
“Go ahead!” he said impatiently. “What’s your question!”
I remember one time somebody asked Larry King (on radio), who in all of history he would most like to interview.
“Jesus Christ,” he said.
“What would you ask?” the person said (I don’t remember who this person was; it’s been many years).
King said that he did not prepare a list of questions. He just started with one and then went from there.
“The obvious question to start with would be ‘Are you the son of God?'” he said.
I wasn’t an addict who watched the show every night — by no means. Like many of us, I spend more time on the computer these days than watching TV. It’s more productive.
But I was a fan, for sure. I spent many evenings watching Larry King Live. When both of my parents were alive and well and in their home (three blocks from mine), I often checked in on them and visited around that time. We watched together.
When my father’s health was in decline, with my mother working many nights, I often showed up at 9pm. The last night of my father’s life, I was at Port City Java, right at closing time. He called and told me that Jon Stewart was to be the guest on Larry King. He knew I was a Jon Stewart fan. I drove right over and we watched the show. Then we switched to basketball. Then my mom arrived from work and we all visited for awhile.
I’ve been a little disappointed with Larry King’s replacement. I don’t dislike Piers Morgan. (I don’t dislike anybody on TV; I don’t know them). But I watched the show for a few minutes and did not find his interviewing style to be…highly captivating.
If CNN could do a redo, would Keith Olbermann be the perfect replacement for Larry King?
Olbermann and King are almost opposite in style.
King is neutral. He his there to learn, not judge.
Olbermann is not neutral. He’s there to judge.
King never inserts his own views. Olbermann always inserts his own views.
King asks a lot of questions. Olbermann doesn’t ask many. He basically reports the liberal perspective.
But I was a big fan of Keith Olbermann and will miss the opportunity to check in, on occasion, and see what he’s ranting about.
While the solution to 9pm on CNN is obvious to me, there’s no chance that will happen. Olbermann will probably end up on Oprah’s network, or somewhere else on cable.
If a book or story or movie or speech moves me to tears, I stop and ask myself:Â is it that good, or could I be depressed?
Last night, the memorial service in Tucson moved me to tears. Twice. And I’m not depressed.
The first time was during the opening prayer, when Dr. Carlos Gonzalez asked God to let us bless many people and things, including:
“the families of those that have lost their loved ones… the family of those that are healing…those people that are here today… those that are outside in greater Tucson, in Arizona and in our country… our fellow creatures. Those that stand. Those that blow in the wind. Those that are tall and stately. Those that crawl on the earth. Those that slither on the earth. Those that live under the earth…”
But it was this line, dropped in among the many, that, for some reason, hit me hard with emotion:
“Oh, Creator — if I may, my son is in Afghanistan. A little blessing to him, too.”
This really got me, the personal prayer, so meaningful to him — and so out of place among the other collective, communal blessings.
Many bloggers and talkers have questioned his rambling, non-Judeo-Christian prayer. Brit Hume on Fox said it was “most peculiar.”
I found it quite moving and refreshing.
I was moved by Obama’s entire speech because he was so much The President. Barack Obama inspired many millions of us to work quite hard to help him get elected, only to watch his opponents (many of whom did not lift a finger to canvass their neighborhoods for McCain-Palin in 2008) relentlessly whine about the election’s result and try to disqualify him for the office he rightfully holds.
Last night, Obama made things quite clear. The entire speech was a much needed symphony of healing.
But with all the lyrical, powerful passages, including the plea to make America as good as 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green imagined it to be, it was this simple line that got me:
“And we are grateful for the doctors and nurses and first responders who worked wonders to heal those who’d been hurt. We are grateful to them.”
Why, with so much poetry, did this simple statement punch my buttons?
I don’t know. Experience creates memories that become mysteries of our experience; it’s not always possible to explain.
Obama’s gratitude reminded me of one of my favorite passages in literature, from Anne Tyler’s The Accidental Tourist. She asks what a martian might think if he came to Earth and happened to land at the entrance to the emergency room, seeing all the people rushing to help someone in need.
“‘Why,’ he’d say, ‘what a helpful planet, what kind and helpful creatures.’ He’d never guess we’re not always that way; that we had to, oh, put aside our natural selves to do it. ‘What a helpful race of beings,’ a Martian would say. Don’t you think so?'”
I well remember listening to Reagan’s Oval Office address in 1986, after explosion of the The Challenger. Christa McAuliffe, a teacher, was aboard. I was a teacher then, at West Rowan Middle School, where I watched The Challenger and crew and teacher burst into flames along with roomful of children.
That night I watched Reagan’s address with my father. Dad was a good, liberal Democrat who, without an ounce of animus, completely disagreed with Reagan’s conservative stand. As was the custom back then, he respected the person and the office.
It seems to me that politics was not so much a competitive sport in those days, but a way of looking at the world. An education in civics. History in the making. When Nixon resigned, before the days of VCRs, I remember my father and I setting up a reel-to-reel tape recorder and putting it in front of the TV so we could tape the audio.
My father tried to see humor in almost everything.
After Reagan’s Challenger speech, Dad said “You know, he would have been great during World War II.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt was his reference point for what a President could do and be.
These days, Obama gets criticized for “just giving speeches” with a “bunch of rhetoric.”
For my father, who quit Columbia University the day after Pearl Harbor in order to join the United States Air Force, that was a primary part of a President’s job: giving speeches. Displaying a mastery of rhetoric. Using words to lead a nation.
I remember being in the car with my father one night in March of 1968 when he told me to stop talking and be quiet so we could listen to the President. Lyndon Johnson was announcing that he would not seek reelection. My mother was a journalist who reminded us that today’s news is tomorrow’s history. These were moments which required our attention.
And yet, this morning, I saw friends on Facebook express their gratitude for the President’s speech, only to be answered by those who said he was chastising his liberal base. One person wrote that it was just a crazy person in a grocery store — something that happens every day — and because a member of Congress was involved, Obama…
Such bull.
Obama could thank God for the sunshine and Fox News would say that he’s not a Christian because he’s worshipping the planets (I know, the sun is a star, not a planet; it doesn’t matter).
Arizona has been through a tough time with the politics of racial profiling. Many of us in North Carolina lived with Jessee Helms for many years; we know how it feels.
And now this.
If ever a place hungered for a speech, it was Tucson last night.
And they got one.
This is just to say that Obama may have won reelection last night. Not because he played a political move, but because it’s hard to beat an incumbent — and last night it was clear to both sides that he fully embodies the office he holds.
I’m disappointed in our U.S. Senator from North Carolina — Kay Hagan.
Senator Kay Hagan
She voted with Republicans to keep the DREAM Act from getting a vote in the Senate, which kills the bill for now.
Even though 55 Senators wanted a vote and would have passed it, a majority is not enough these days. The filibuster is the norm rather than the exception.
Senator Orin Hatch
Even Utah Senator Orin Hatch, who introduced the bill, voted against letting it come to the floor for a vote.
Of course, we all know that expecting integrity from a U.S. Senator, these days, is like looking for a healthy vegetable in a fast food burger.
I don’t have a lot of integrity on this issue myself. I never emailed my Senator before the vote — and I had every opportunity to do so. And here I am, blogging about it afterward, when it’s really too late.
It might be a few years until it gets another chance. The argument against it is that it should be part of comprehensive immigration reform.
Between now and the day it passes, sometime in the future, many good students will be denied the scholarships and fellowships they need to become educated, productive members of society. They will be denied the opportunity to serve in the military. And they will be denied the chance to work toward citizenship.
They probably won’t start many businesses, hire people, and buy houses. That’s the flip side. The downside.
Since 9/11, the country has become suspicious of immigrants.
The global economy — with much of our manufacturing base gone to overseas lands — has also created resentment of those not born in the U.S.A.
This suspicion and resentment has not done our economy any favors.
Who are the hardest workers? Immigrants.
Who most wants to live the American Dream, start a business, hire people? An immigrant.
What causes the housing market to grow? Population growth.
What does our country need now? New business, hiring, a rebound in the housing sector.
This is not a well-informed blog. I never took a course in economics — and I don’t pretend to know the facts and figures to back up my argument.
But I’m pretty sure that immigration is part of the solution to our countries economic problems, not the cause.
Senator Hagan, I think I understand you’re vote. You’re afraid that the anti-immigrant sentiment will hurt you in the next election. I can’t think of any other reason why you would block the DREAM Act.
Both of them are great entertainers. Personally, I would have to give Michael the nod, since he did such groundbreaking work with Monty Python, has had such a long, distinguished career, and produced an enormous body of funny work.
But Sarah’s ascension to the heights of politics and TV and humor is also groundbreaking. She may be catching up…
Last night, I visited my Mom in her room at Carillon. She was sleeping (which is what she does most of the time these days) so it was a chance to watch a little TV.
Television, of course, is mostly a waste of time. But, given the circumstances, it seemed like a pretty good thing to do. It was too dark in the room to read. The power supply on my laptop is on the blink (quite literally, in fact; the light is blinking, and not charging the battery). It’s not the appropriate time and place for meditation. And I wanted to sit awhile.
As long as I was watching, I decided to catch the newest reality show — Sarah’s Palin’s Alaska.
I’m sure the blogs are full of commentary by now, but this is my virgin impression — before searching the web to find out what I really think.
I might have missed the good part, because I only saw the last twenty minutes or so, but…
Why are we this fascinated? Are we this fascinated?
sarah palin climbing
In fact, we are. I check the stats on my blog, and those entries that mention Sarah Palin get more search traffic than anything else — by far.
Barack Obama, a kid “with a funny name,” raised by a single parent — and a brilliant student — paid off his college loans by publishing Dreams from my Father (a great book; I listened to the audio, read by the author/President, which won a Grammy).
Sarah Palin wrote a book too, Going Rogue — but here she was, climbing a rock, grasping for a grip, engaged in an epic struggle for sure footing, wearing a mic and talking about how hard it was.
She’s the new kind of American hero. The realty show star. All personality and celebrity. Great TV material for a campaign. But President? The fact that she has any support at all for this is phenomenal. And fascinating.
To her credit, it was an athletic accomplishment. But if it had been almost anybody else, it would have been way too boring too watch. In this case, it might be ingenious marketing. After all, whether she runs for President or not, she’s made about $20 million this year.
Putting aside the demonetization that’s so persistent from political opposition, Kennedy and Obama are real heroes who can inspire children with their remarkable lives and rhetoric and achievement.
My mom is grasping to life. The details of her life also contain elements of remarkable heroism.
In fact, when you scratch the surface, it’s apparent that many people are heroes. They’re all around us. Everywhere.
Sarah Palin is a hero also (a working woman, raising five children — like my mom). I admire the way she grasps and climbs.
But I’m not so sure, at this point, if she’s climbing the right rock.
Fifty years ago today, as the country pulled an all-nighter, waiting to see who would be the next President (Kennedy or Nixon), a young couple pulled an all nighter also, waiting to meet their new daughter (Alicia).
Alicia, my wife, was born, in California, as the votes were being counted.
It was an unbelievably close election — in the country, and in California.
Legend has it that while Cristalle labored in the delivery room, the doctor spent much of his time in the waiting room, with Richard, Alicia’s father, watching returns come in.
What a historic day. Some of us are extremely fortunate, and grateful for it.
Before the election, the Republicans talked “jobs jobs jobs.”
No word on jobs, since the election.
gridlock
Now they’re talking “health care repeal, health care repeal, health care repeal.”
I guess they want to stop it before it starts — afraid that millions of people might prefer having a doctor instead of going to the ER for every little thing.
They’re also talking about tax cuts.
And deficit reduction.
Tax cuts and deficit reduction just don’t go together. Clinton erased the deficit and created a surplus by raising taxes AND cutting the budget.
Of course they do want spending cuts (although they won’t say what spending they want to cut).
A couple more thoughts:
The economy will improve in 2011.
Why do the new members of Congress talk like they’ve got all the power? Why do they talk like they can get things done without compromise? According to Mr. Basinger, my ninth grade civics teacher, a bill cannot become a law unless it’s passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President.
Can Obama get things done without compromise? That is, can the President do things without passing legislation?
Yes — a hell of a lot. And he will.
The Republicans didn’t get the mandate they think they got. Why not?
It’s the social networking, stupid.
With online networking, messages can spread very quickly.
Candidates spent $4 billion on the mid-term elections.
What was the battle cry that won the day? “Stop spending!”
Those who said it loudest spent the most.
That is, the tea party folks talk the most about frugality, but they’re the least frugal when it comes to spending money.
Rand Paul, the champion of cutting spending, spent over $10 million on the general election — in Kentucky!
He bought so much advertising that some of the local television stations ran out of time “inventory.”
We like to spend money on eBay so much that Meg Whitman can afford to drop $160 million on her own campaign (a new record).
She’s worth $1.3 billion.
Russ Feingold, a class act liberal and bipartisan senator for 17 years, lost to Ron Johnson in Wisconsin.
Johnson, a tea party guy who, according to himself, wants to ‘stop all the spending,’ spent over $8 million — four times the amount Feingold spent.
But alas, this will continue. Our Supreme Court has decided that corporate money equals free speech. It’s doubtful those who won — the ones who benefited most from this money — will pass legislation that stops the flow to their own campaigns.
The problem with government spending is not government spending. It’s a big country and a big government. The problem is that our understanding is minimal and our priorities are distorted.
And there are groups that are willing to spend a lot of money to make sure it stays distorted.
If they would start with cutting campaign spending by creating a system with public funding of elections, it would save a lot of money, be more informative, be more positive — and make for a healthier mood in the country and a better democracy.
