See, this is what I don't get about the whole Obama "controversy". Like, don't we want someone who is intelligent, well-educated, etc., to be President? Because clearly having an undereducated, almost willfully ignorant "guy next door" for President has worked out so well...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I agree. I don't want a President I can share a beer with; I want a President who will lead our country forward.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

What's particularly frustrating is how transparent Bush's "everyman" act really is. He went to Yale! He's from American "high aristocracy"! His "ranch" is really a goddamn mansion!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

He went to Yale! He's from American "high aristocracy"!

Yale has it's share of chuckleheads (legacy admissions like W., mostly, and the children of deep-pocket donors) and if you think 'Aristocracy' precludes the presence of idiots, wait'll you get to England and get a load of the inbred mouthbreathers cluttering up the saloon bar at Claridges over there.


But you're right of course. The 'everyman' class in America has nothing in common with Bush. They're much more capable, since they actually have to earn their own living and wipe their own ass.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Yale has it's share of chuckleheads

Truly. I've heard it said many times, many ways that Dubya earned what they call a "gentleman's C"....meaning he didn't even do that well, but they gave him a pass because of his family's status.

I wish I could find it again to link it to you, but there's a wonderfully revealing interview with one of the Shrub's Yale professors. In essence, the prof expresses that a crap-ass student he was and W pretty flagrantly admited he didn't have to do shit to get his degree. I think the article appeared in Salon.com

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Bingo. I hate the fact that our "Everyman" Prez is so transparently not an everyman. Hell, Clinton came closer, at least in terms of where he started and his obvious passions (fast food, sex with women who wouldn't get a second look in the media), although for all I know that's an act too.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

And please! He's not a Texan, dammit. He's what we call a Texan via Kennebunkport. He wouldn't know a steer if it poked him in the ass - which in a way is an amusing mental image.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

And since when was "bitter" a bad word? Isn't it much more insulting to say that "Oh no, no, you silly poor people; you're not bitter! You're upbeat about having all your jobs exported and the tax burden shifted onto you and away from people making ten times what you make!"

Damn straight we're bitter, and we've got reason to be!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Denying that they are bitter is somewhere on the same spectrum of trying to make African-Americans sound like happy, watermelon eatin' darkies. And we all know what a charmingly offensive image that is.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Exactly! Imagine having to deal with the electorate as made up of real human beings with real struggles instead of monolithic demographic blocks. Imagine a politician who could. But then, that might be part of Obama's appeal; he may be vague, but he doesn't insult our capacities to think and feel at every turn of phrase.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

You're not an elitist because you despise American Idol... you're an elitist for completely different reasons!

:p

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Hey, I hate Foucault and Derrida too. That has to count for something.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

It still means you're elitist, it just means you're more aesthetically conservative than you might think.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I disagree. Given how limiting Foucault's theories are when applied to queer culture, I think rejecting him is a fairly liberal thing to do.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

...on second thought, applying concepts of "liberal" and "conservative" to intellectual topics is rather unsatisfactory. After all, what's really "conservative" about arguing that there is a homosexual identity that predates the pre-modern period or that literary analysis should take into account cultural contexts?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

What really insults me about "American Idol" is that Simon Cowell systematically takes unique and talented voices and destroys them. He intends to do this, and methodically converts their style into the sort of melismatic warbling that has no particular value but might sell a couple of interchangeable singles before they're of no more use to him.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Exactly!

I think the most succinct and accurate criticism of "American Idol" I've ever heard has been, "If a young Bob Dylan had entered, he'd be kicked off, but not before being humiliated on national television."

At least, though, I can take comfort in knowing that the careers of all the "Idol" winners have been instant flops.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Which is exactly what they want and expect of an idoru.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

To his credit Randy Jackson IS a decent bassist... and to her credit Paula Abdul is a decent choreographer. I can't defend Simon Cowell or seem to make it through an episode.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

And, to be more fair to Paula Abdul, at least she's a hilarious druggie.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Paula Abdul makes it all worthwhile. Every time she opens her mouth I start speaking in tongues, yet incredulously:

"Abupubah-bah-bupubupu-bah...?"

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)