See also: the website QUESTION

I can watch the 60 Minutes story on TV, for instance, without going to the website, and feel as though I have a complete enough narrative.

When I have a subscription to Newsweek, which I get when they’re desperate enough to make me an offer I can’t refuse, one of the features I’ve enjoyed most is when they bring together a group of actors for which there is potentially Academy Awards buzz. But this year’s issue was lackluster, and I know why: some of the best stuff was excised and placed on the Daily Beast website. I’m sitting, reading my magazine, and the last thing I want to do is turn on some electronic device. Especially if I’m reading a week-old magazine and am having trouble FINDING the related piece.

Worse is PARADE magazine. On the page right after the cover, there’s a box with a quote, and we’re supposed to guess which celebrity said it. But the answer is not within the pages of the magazine. No, I have to go to Wonderwall.com. I don’t FEEL like going to Wonderwall.com; I’ve been there, and it’s cheesy and a slow-loading site to boot, which I find difficult to navigate.

Of course, lots of TV shows do the same thing. Jon Stewart on the Daily Show will have an interview run long, and he’ll throw “the complete interview up on the web.” But this bothers me less, because there is a limit to a 30-minute commercial show, and usually I’ve gotten some substance from what HAS aired, so if I don’t get a chance to go online, it usually still has value. And it’s so much easier, now that the website has a dedicated link for the extended interviews.

News networks often have more on the websites: 60 Minutes Overtime gives behind-the-scenes info for some stories. The difference, I guess, is that I can watch the 60 Minutes story on TV, for instance, without going to the website, and feel as though I have a complete enough narrative; the website merely enhances it. While the PARADE example, I either go to the website or I simply can’t answer the question; I’m FORCED to go online.

Does any of this bother you the way it bugs me?

Politics and tricks and all them things you said

The Lieberman citizenship bill; the Kerry/Lieberman energy bill; the oil spill; the Supreme Court nominee; Jon Stewart; Newsweek’s future; Lena Horne; Seals & Crofts.

Haven’t talked about politics for a bit, not because there hasn’t been anything to talk about it – that’s hardly the case – or even because I don’t want to talk about it. But I do find it a tad enervating.


As you may have heard, Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) has suggested stripping suspected terrorists of their American citizenship. As he notes, there is a precedent of stripping enemy war combatants of their citizenship, going back to World War II.

The primary, and SIGNIFICANT difference, is that the people mentioned in the WWII bill were CONVICTED. Lieberman wants to decitizenize SUSPECTED terrorists, presumably so they can be tried in military tribunals. This and the whole Miranda rights hoohah – we’re getting quite sufficient information from the NYC near-bombing suspect, thank you is disheartening. Someone suggested that Lieberman be disbarred – can one get disbarred for speech, even stupid speech?

Then there’s the oil spill, which I, almost instinctively, blame on Dick Cheney. I’ve tired of hearing the il spill is “Obama’s Katrina”, though I’ve thought for a while that the government that is supposed to be regulating the industry is too dependent on those being regulated; see also, bank bailout. Obama’s promise to become less dependent on the industry calling the shots is welcome news. It’s practically necessary after some woman in uniform (not Landau) referred to BP as the government’s “partner”.

I don’t know what to make of the John Kerry/Joe Lieberman climate and clean energy proposal. People whose opinions I trust are all over the place on it. Ditto the Supreme Court nominee Kagan, criticized from the left and the right before she was even selected.

I hear the so-called MainStream Media kvetch that we are getting too much of our news from sources such as Jon Stewart. But too often, the MSM will report a story without giving the greater context. In a piece called American, Apparently, Stewart skewers the gross overuse of a phrase too often used by politicians and news pundits. It’s dead-on correct. Jon Meacham, editor of Newsweek, whose magazine only that day, became news itself when it was announced that the Washington Post was selling it, was the guest that night. Maybe that’s why he has that new PBS gig and the book thing.

Lena at a mere 73 from LIFE magazine.

Lena Horne died last week, and the sociopolitical import of her career cannot be overstated. But I’m not equipped right now to write about that; you can read the New York Times piece Conversely, I can say that she was gorgeous, even in her seventies and eighties.

Finally, the title of this piece came from a song by, of all people, Seals & Crofts, from a song written by them called It’s Gonna Come Down on You from their 1974 Diamond Girl album. I owned it on vinyl until the breakup with my college sweetheart. It’s a schizophrenic song that starts off with guitar and mandolin but has brief surges of screaming electric guitar in the chorus, as you can hear here.

What are your opinions on anything written here today: the Lieberman citizenship bill; the Kerry/Lieberman energy bill; the oil spill; the Supreme Court nominee; Jon Stewart; Newsweek’s future; Lena Horne; Seals & Crofts.

Please note the contest on the sidebar.

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial