Best Rush Limbaugh Quote, Ever (& Added Bonus)

I stumbled upon this quote the other day, and it's stayed with me, so it's time to share.

(from THIS site)

In a related...and more serious...note, I highly recommend THIS column by Michael Smerconish:  Are The Voters Really Mad As Hell?  A thoughtful look at how we got in this horrid political place in 2016.  My favorite quote from the article?

"Business motives drive the titans of talk. They aim to maximize revenue from advertising, which requires the attraction of computer clicks, ears, and eyeballs. That goal, in turn, necessitates producing an authentic, stimulating product. The more passion provoked by hosts, the better their shot of capturing and maintaining an audience.

Bold, assertive, controversial content achieves this goal far better than thorough, nuanced, paragraph-long explanations. This incentive explains why the content on talk radio and cable television news has long been a precursor to the provocative language of the stump speeches of Donald Trump and one of his final GOP challengers, Ted Cruz."

Talk radio...as in Limbaugh, Savage and others on the hard right...has NEVER been about informing, educating, or even thoughtful advocacy; no, it's all about business, as in earning revenue through a constant stream of bitter sound bite mental candy to people so that they will buy stuff from advertisers.  It becomes a kind of bizarre mental arms race into the gutter, feeding conspiracy and fostering an attitude of "it's the fault of _________ you are not getting ahead", where the blank could be filled by everything from ACORN to Obama to Black Lives Matter to fluoride in drinking water, all in the name of increasing advertising revenues.  Who needs a thought provoking discussion when you can simply point fingers and call names?

For the record, having listened to Limbaugh over the years (from time to time) and having read some of his work, I'm reasonably convinced that even he doesn't believe half the stuff he says, but he does know how to generate ad revenue.  Hillbilly heroin abuse may have destroyed his hearing, but it's done nothing to dull his keen business sense.

  

Johnny Carson

After reading a review of the book Johnny Carson by Henry Bushkin by a fellow blogger, I eventually got around to getting the book myself.  I have mixed feelings about the whole experience.

On the positive side?  It's a pretty compelling read.  Most of us who spent time watching Johnny Carson really never knew all that much about the man, other than the fact that we had heard he had been married a few times.  Four to be exact.  The book, written by his one-time lawyer, Henry Buskin, is at times very insightful...at least as far as most of Carson's career at the Tonight Show is concerned.  It's also a fairly complex story about a man who was clearly both very talented and easily driven to rage.  It was a relatively fast read for me, being something I picked up while buying some Christmas presents at a local bookstore.

On the negative side?  Henry Bushskin is, well, a rat.  Over and over again Bushkin talks about how much Carson valued his privacy, and how he trusted so few people in his inner circle.  Some of that trust has clearly been betrayed, for sake of money, by Bushkin.  The author also paints a fairly vanilla picture of himself, and while some bad behavior is alluded to, by and large Bushkin wants to be seen as a "good guy".  I felt slightly soiled for having purchased the book and rewarding Bushkin's rat-esque behavior.

I'll also note that you really don't learn all that much about Johnny Carson's life from the book.  Yes, it's pretty clear he had a tough upbringing, but there are no details to speak of.  You also don't learn anything of substance about Carson's final years, as he and Bushkin had a falling out years before he died.

Would I buy it again?  I'd have to say no, at least not new in a hardcover.  However if you are fan of Carson, you may want to pick up a used copy on-line.  It's worth that price.

10 Reasons Why I Have No Interest In Ever Running for Public Office in Scranton

Liz Randol's candidacy for Mayor of Scranton has already reminded me of why I have no interest in running for office.  Here's my list, in no particular order...

1. Anonymous Dirt-bags.  In Scranton all manner of anonymous morons will assassinate your character, your significant other's character and blame you for anything and everything, no matter how little sense the charges make.  Just ask Chris Doherty:  among other things, he was accused of causing a suicide, the death of children in a fire, of stealing public money and countless other ridiculous charges that have proven to be not just wrong, but ridiculously wrong.  To the best of my knowledge, the man hasn't gotten so much as a parking ticket over the years.  Whether Chris Doherty was an effective Mayor is very much open to debate, but how he was treated by a bunch of Internet weasels isn't.
2. Pay-Cut.  Despite what most Scranton residents think, you actually can make more money working in the private sector than you can in the public sector.  As for me, I have no desire to take the pay cut.  Now would I ever work in the public sector?  Maybe, but that would be to specifically trade compensation for something else of value, such as security, a pension or work experience.
3. Daughters.  I have three daughters.  See point #1.  I have no desire to have them dragged into the gutter by a bunch of anonymous Internet weasels who shame the First Amendment at every opportunity.
4. Religion.  I was raised Roman Catholic, but I don't consider myself to be a member of the Church any more.  That's a pretty big strike in these here parts.  Heresy anyone?  Even worse?  I don't especially care what religion other people are...or...bite my tongue...if others have no religious beliefs at all.  Hell, the vast majority of the Atheists I've met over the years are far more moral than some of the religious I've known.
5. Privacy.  As in I am fond of my own.  More like fond of selective disclosure...here...under my own terms.  Having my life open to such scrutiny just isn't something I desire.
6. Honesty.  I have something of a fondness for it.  I claim no higher moral standard than anyone else, but I also don't claim to be able to keep my mouth shut all the time either.  That's no good in the political arena.
7. Partisan.  I'm not a political partisan, and as a result I find many Democrats to be as equally slimy as many Republicans.  I'd neither want nor ever get a political party endorsement, and sadly that actually matters in NEPA.
8. Unions.  While I am a registered Democrat, I will not suck up to labor unions and their leaders.  Mind you I don't really care of a bunch of people want to join a union...just don't demand that I do so, as I can speak for my own performance, thank you very much.  In many instances, labor unions seem to be create as many problems as they solve.  This would make me none-too-popular in the closed reality ecosystem that is Scranton.
9. Media.  While I respect the role that the media plays in our society, I don't think that they should be beyond criticism.  In Scranton, there really isn't an effective alternative to the Scranton Times, which means that they are basically above scrutiny in their dealings.  While their endorsement doesn't mean much in terms of election success or failure, they can do a decent job of bolstering the incompetent or roasting the incompetent...their (obvious) choice.  Yet another playing field that is far from level in Scranton and yet another reason why seeking public office is a losing proposition.
10. Money. As a general rule, I don't like to contribute to political campaigns, so raising money for my own would be somewhat problematic.  The only exception I have ever made is when someone I know is running for office, which I view as more "helping a friend" than "supporting a candidate".

Who knows?  Maybe when I am older, retired and wiser I'll change my mind.  By then Scranton will be long bankrupt and probably purchased via a lease-back by the Chinese.

(Bonus points to anyone who can translate)

Gore Vidal

As has been reported widely, writer Gore Vidal passed away recently.  Link HERE.  I'll confess that I've never read any of Mr Vidal's books, and while I know him by reputation (and by virtue of the fact that William F. Buckley once called him "queer"), I can't say that I was drawn to his work.  I do, however, respect the fact that many have been touched by his writing.  You can link to an example of what I mean HERE.

The passing of Mr Vidal does remind me just how much we can be impacted by the written word.  As Gort mentioned in his posting (the link, above), I too, at about the same age, had some neurons reconfigured via reading a great book.  In my case it was The Great Shark Hunt by Hunter S. Thompson.  As I've noted here before, it was the first book I think I've ever read cover to cover that intellectually grabbed me and made me think about "things".  The specific lessons about politics...and the absurdity of politics...aside, the book also was the first time when I actually felt okay to be, well, somewhat strange.  It was as if there was a subtext to the book that said "it's okay to be a weirdo".  Later in life I would learn that we are ALL a little strange, in our own beautiful ways.  To this very day I still treasure the time when I first read The Great Shark Hunt.

As a side note, I was not really broken to pieces when Thompson committed suicide.  In fact I was more relieved than anything else, as I had read where the last year or so of his life was lived in quite a bit of physical pain.  While I'm not advocating for suicide here (as someone who has had member of his family make such attempts I know all too well how painful that can be), there is something graceful in a person who consciously makes the ultimate decision to take charge of their life.

The moral of this all?  I think that there is tremendous power in the written word.  We need to cultivate great thinking via great written works so that others have the same opportunity to learn and grow that we have enjoyed in our lives.  To the extent we have a culture it is reflected in the works of people like Gore Vidal and Hunter S. Thompson.  What a great legacy.

Advertorial

I was reading the golackawanna website today, trying to catch up on some local news, when I spied a review of the Suzuki Kizashi.  Now being mildly interested in cars, I thought to myself that this might make for an interesting diversion.  I like reading car reviews, and while I'm not in the market for a car at the moment, who knows, I may find some useful tidbit and/or factoid.

Then I saw the word: Advertorial.

My initial reaction was a simple and straight forward "what the hell is an advertorial?".  Then, as I am often fond of doing, I thought about it some more.  Sure, I got the definition...Advertisement + Editorial.  In other words, this was a paid opinion piece.  Someone greased the golackwanna folks so that they would publish this mock review of the Suzuki Kizashi.  Forget for a moment that this looked like a straight-off review, although the constant references to "J.D. Power award" came up time and time again.  That was a dead give-away.

Side note:  I think just about every piece of crap that Detroit has ever produced has won a J.D. Power award.  I wouldn't be shocked if, going back to the 80's, JD. Powers marveled at the cutting edge engineering of the Chevrolet Citation.

So now I am left wondering just what place, if any, the "Advertorial" has on a real news site.  Call me old fashioned but if an advertiser pays for space...be that space on paper or virtual...that is an advertisement.  Calling it something else is, in my opinion, walking the edge of propriety.

Maybe this is a common practice in print journalism.  Maybe I'm making too much out of this whole thing. Maybe I'm just tired.  Who knows?  Well I do know one thing:  I am disappointed in the golackawanna folks.