Walls a-plenty

Trump wants to build a wall in Colorado but not Kansas:

“We’re building a wall on the border of New Mexico, and we’re building a wall in Colorado. We’re building a beautiful wall, a big one that really works, that you can’t get over, you can’t get under. And we’re building a wall in Texas. And we’re not building a wall in Kansas but they get the benefit of the walls that we just mentioned.”

Got it.

I’m sure people in Colorado will appreciate the new wall keeping out all those unwanted New Mexico residents.

Some journalists, apparently trying to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, a courtesy he doesn’t really deserve at this point, have said he probably misspoke. How exactly does one misspeak about a state that is 430 miles away from the United States-Mexico border?

Trump vs. Kelly: ‘Couples therapy’

After finally getting around to watching Megyn Kelly’s interview with Donald Trump — it’s surprisingly hard to find the full video, and most copies online appear to be edited hack jobs for either supporters or haters of Trump  — I can say that, despite Kelly’s assertion that “it’s not about me” when asking Trump about his nasty retweets in which he called her a “bimbo,” that statement certainly seems like a microcosm of the entire interview: It was absolutely, 100 percent about her.

Kelly obviously has no shortage of talent. She hit the ground running at Fox News in 2004 and her celebrity has been on the rise and growing ever since, arguably reaching or eclipsing that of her long-time associates Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.

To her credit, she claims to be an independent on a conservative network that doesn’t even pretend to be “fair and balanced” anymore, and she hit Donald Trump as hard as anyone during the August 2015 debate when she questioned his character in making numerous “disparaging” comments about women:

But that Megyn Kelly — detached, steely eyed, uncowed — was far from the person who sat across from Trump earlier this week. This Megyn Kelly was soft, amicable, introspective and almost psychoanalytical in her attempts, mostly unsuccessful, to unearth the inner crust of Donald Trump. She asked him about his alcoholic and now dead brother, his perceived mistakes on the campaign trail, his regrets and his emotional wounds. Watch the interview with closed eyes and you may, for a second, forget this is a conservation between two highly privileged celebrities and imagine a psychiatry patient laying on the couch talking to his shrink.

megyn kelly donald trump

Fox

There is no psychoanalyzing Donald Trump. Donald Trump gets out of bed every morning based on the strength of three simple things: his wealth, his power and his own aura. That’s it. Yet, in this interview, Kelly, in pure Barbara Walters wannabe form and not half as probing, asked few follow-up questions and even minimized moments when Trump, seemingly unapologetic and unrepentant as ever, was at his most obnoxious.

During what was probably the most memorable part of the interview, Kelly alerted Trump to the fact that he had called her a bimbo multiple times on social media, to which Trump just donned a boyish grin, leaned in and issued an almost mocking “excuse me,” as if he had just cut her off at the checkout line. Kelly, failing to use that opportunity to reclaim some of her earlier fire and ask a tough question, just recoiled and smiled. After an awkward pause and a creepy, sustained grin from Trump, he continued, noting that he, using ethical discretion like a true gentleman, did not retweet some of the harsher comments on Twitter.

Indeed, the only time Trump revealed anything interesting about himself was when he commended Kelly for coming to him and seeking reconciliation after the imbroglio last year. “I have great respect for you that you were able to call me and say let’s get together and lets talk,” Trump said. “For me, I would not have done that. I don’t say that as a positive. I think it’s a negative for me.”

Aside from that admission, this was, as Poynter Institute’s James Warren noted, far from Frost-Nixon. Here is Warren:

Why might a cynic have wondered if Megyn Kelly’s primetime Fox network interview with Donald Trump would fall short of David Frost’s evisceration of former President Richard Nixon? Might it have been the afternoon tweet and photo from a beaming Trump himself, his arm around a grinning Kelly, her arm around his back, and the declaration, “I will be live tweeting my interview with ‪@megynkelly on the Fox Network tonight at 8! Enjoy!” (@realDonaldTrump) Or was it the night before, on the Bravo cable channel, when she conceded that she’d once not just touched his hair but “run my fingers through it” to see if he wore a wig.

So no, despite the “big fight feel” implied by advertisements leading up to the interview, this was not Kelly’s breakout moment as a long-form interviewer.

This was simply theater masquerading as a hard-hitting interview. I don’t know if Trump and Kelly went over some of the questions she was going to ask beforehand, but did anyone really think that she was going to walk into Trump Tower, recreate a working relationship with the real estate mogul just to pepper him with a relent barrage of questions a la the August 2015 debate? They both realized that to make the interview seem genuine, Kelly was going to have to ask an uncomfortable question or two, but this was never going to be a whole-cloth take-down of Trump.

It was not even about policy or Trump’s character. It was almost exclusively about Trump and Kelly, and as Trevor Noah brilliantly summarized recently, amounted to little more than high-profile “couples therapy” after a breakup. Frankly, if people Connie Chung, Katie Couric and Barbara Walters are the benchmarks, Kelly’s interview looked rather pedestrian by comparison.

Kennedy: ‘Everyone looked like a terrorist to me’

I long-since came to the conclusion that I simply can’t watch much Fox News because if I did, just because of the sheer volume of stupidity, I would spend my time writing about little else than Fox’s limitless potential for vomiting up heavy doses of sophistry, distortions and half-truths, served up drip-feed style to its loyal and dumb-downed viewed base.

Some media outlets latched on to the fact that Fox analyst Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and contributor Stacey Dash had some unflattering things to say about Obama — what a shock — as Peters called Obama a “total pussy,” and Dash said the president doesn’t “give a shit” about terrorism.

But I didn’t even think the latter barb from Dash was the most obnoxious part of the video below:

https://youtu.be/8MvFkc5Xdyk

I thought Kennedy’s — yes, that Kennedy — comments were actually the most repellent. She had this to say after contemplating Obama’s recent speech on the San Bernardino, Calif., shooting:

What I was watching for is I want to feel better. I want to feel better about my friends and neighbors, and this morning as I rode the subway to work, I was looking around — and you know, I feel kind of bad saying this — but everyone looked like a terrorist to me. And I don’t want to feel that way in my city and in my country, and I want the president — no matter what my party is — I want the president to make me feel better when something so horrific has just happened. I don’t think he gave it the proper context. I don’t he gave proper domestic strategy, and he certainly didn’t give me the peace of mind.

A privileged white female who gets to rant on television for a living just wants to “feel better” about herself and the people for whom she cares. Seriously? What about the families of the victims? What about peaceful believers of Islam whose lives get more difficult and complicated every time a fresh batch of terrorists cause chaos in the States or harm their fellow believers in Europe and the Middle East? What about the plight of closeted gays or nonbelievers living in the shadows in places like Saudi Arabia and Syria? What about oppressed women?

Even worse, Kennedy’s line, “everyone looked like a terrorist to me,” in true Fox fashion, needlessly stirs up anxiety among the network’s already panicky viewers, and Fox and its cronies then use that fear to prop up their shallow political message that stigmatizes nearly every outgroup except, of course, the privileged and affluent. Indeed, people like Donald Trump and Ben Carson are byproducts of this sinister strategy. You get what you pay for, but you also eventually wind up paying for what you get, and the American public is complicit in allowing this echo chamber of distortions and hysteria to fester and metastasize these last 20 years.

One has to wonder, then, what exactly could Obama have said to protect Kennedy’s precious feelings about the real or imagined threat of terrorism along her path to work on the subway? Since his name is Obama, after all, and since Fox analysts would find something for which to castigate him even if the government’s budget was perfectly balanced, health care and immigration were finally resolved, the world was a peaceful place and the sky rained down Skittles and unfiltered joy, I’m guessing the answer is nothing.

[Graphic credit: https://hipiseverything.wordpress.com]

Charlie Sheen is HIV positive. And?

As I noted on Twitter when the story broke, the World Health Organization estimates that 35 million people were living with HIV in 2013, yet, when a privileged and historically promiscuous male in Hollywood contracts the virus, it’s supposed to be surprising or breaking news? Hell, given his licentious track record with substance abuse and women, I could have almost predicted it. It’s always sad when someone — anyone — gets a diagnosis like that, but in Sheen’s case, is it really that much of a shocker?

Screenshot

Screenshot

What is slightly surprising, although not terribly so, is the fact that, by his own admission, he extorted people for up to $10 million to keep quiet about his illness in order to end “this onslaught, this barrage of attacks and of subtruths and very harmful and mercurial stories that are about me.”

According to the a New York Times article, the admission may have come from a place of “desperation”:

Andrew D. Gilman, chief executive of CommCore Consulting, a crisis communications group, said that Mr. Sheen’s disclosure appeared to come from financial desperation and did little to repair his reputation as an erratic and irresponsible narcissist. “He was getting caught in a vise and needed to take the pressure off,” he said.

Over the years, Mr. Sheen has acknowledged extensive drug use and the hiring of prostitutes. Mr. Sheen was once the highest-paid television actor, but his personal life became the focus of global media attention in 2011 after he had a drug-fueled public meltdown, and CBS was forced to temporarily shut down production of his hit sitcom, “Two and a Half Men.”

Mr. Sheen was fired from the series, but he quickly returned with the FX comedy “Anger Management,” since canceled. Hollywood databases indicate that Mr. Sheen has no current television or movie projects.

In any case, he’s millions in the red thanks to his apparent need to protect his precious reputation, although given his actual documented reputation, even suggesting such a thing sounds a bit silly. What reputation did he have to protect? He hasn’t exactly been a Boy Scout these last 30 years. Hell, if he was determined to piss away million of dollars after his diagnosis, he could have actually repaired his reputation by throwing his efforts into philanthropy, instead of claiming after the fact that’s he’s now going to clean up his act. Going forward, the proof will be in the pudding.

All that dough he spent on an elaborate extortion scheme sure could have gone a long way in feeding hungry people — or I don’t know — funding cancer research or giving a bunch of dying kids the best day of their lives through the Make-A-Wish Foundation. Yet, he chose a self-absorbed coverup. And he wonders why his reputation is in the shitter?

Just released: the Pandora’s box of stupidity

Racists Urge Boycott of ‘Star Wars: Episode VII’ Over Black Lead

Apparently, some bigots are all up in arms about a black man having a lead role in Star Wars and the fact that “Episode VII” has black storm troopers.

One would think that racists would approve of the fact that some storm troopers are now black since storm troopers are part of the Galactic Empire, but even in their faulty logic they can’t seem to manage a single rational thought.

These people do realize that Samuel L. Jackson was a Jedi master serving on the High Council, and Billy Dee Williams played the unforgettable Lando Calrissian in “The Empire Strikes Back,” right?

Their heads might explode when they consider the rather obvious point that James Earl Jones did the voiceover for Darth Vader, arguably the most famous villain in all of cinema.

In any case, these folks are apparently arguing, in futility, that the new movie puts forth a “very sinister multicultural agenda.” In what galaxy, in this one or one that’s far, far away, is multiculturalism a bad thing? Indeed, in the Star Wars universe, multiculturalism is the rule, not the exception.

One only need to look at the makeup of the High Council in the more recent films:

jedihighcouncil

Since I’ve already said more than this ridiculousness warrants, here’s Trevor Noah:

On guns and faith

Having apparently never read or fully comprehended the book on which Christianity is based, Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, the second highest ranking official in the state, has called for fellow believers “who are serious about their faith” to consider getting a gun.

In response to the tragedy in Oregon, he wrote in a post on Facebook that Christians have been the target of recent mass shootings:

The recent spike in mass shootings across the nation is truly troubling. Whether the perpetrators are motivated by aggressive secularism, jihadist extremism or racial supremacy, their targets remain the same: Christians and defenders of the West.

While this is not the time for widespread panic, it is a time to prepare. I would encourage my fellow Christians who are serious about their faith to think about getting a handgun carry permit. I have always believed that it is better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.

Our enemies are armed. We must do likewise.

CHRISTIANS-GUNS

Credit: liberalbias.com

I’m not exactly sure what being serious about the faith has to do with self-protection, but is it really better for believers, who may or may not be trained well enough to effectively use them, to have concealed weapons and then, if the situation arises and while others are doing the same, pull out their guns and proceed to take matters into their own hands?

Also, doesn’t Jesus say a thing or two about nonviolence and loving your enemies? I’m pretty sure retaliation and in-kind violence didn’t make it into the Beatitudes. Does “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God” ring a bell? Guess not.

I wonder how Ramsey and people who support the unholy union of guns and faith might rectify themselves with passages like Matthew 6:25-27:

Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?

and Luke 6:27-36:

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

In any case, doesn’t it show a supreme lack of faith that believers don’t trust their god enough, or at all, to protect them from would-be shooters in the unlikely event of a crisis? If their faith was really strong, a) why would they be worried about the possibility of their god allowing them into a situation where their lives could be in danger and b) why would they be fearful of losing their lives in the first place if the ultimate prize was heaven? The answer to both of these is that the lion’s share of believers don’t actually have true faith that compelled people like the Sept. 11 attackers and other terrorists to hurl themselves into buildings and strap bombs to their chests on the promise of reward in the ever-after. In fact, Christians know, somewhere deep down, that they actually aren’t protected, just like the nine people in Oregon weren’t protected, just like the devout believers’ children in Newtown, Conn., weren’t protected, just like students killed at Columbine weren’t protected, just like Christians who lost their lives in 9/11 — to fanatical supporters of a competing religion, no less — weren’t protected by the god of the Bible, just like …

They know, at bottom, that there is no spiritual savior from tragedy in this carnal life, that wonderworking soul-force is impotent and that physical force for protection is the only force that matters. So, they advocate for more guns and dishonestly wrap it up in a banner of faith. Whatever that might say about them, it says very little about the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

The Bush shrug o’ doom — ‘Stuff happens’

When asked about the recent shooting tragedy in Oregon today, in which nine people were killed and seven others wounded, former Florida governor and GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush seemed dismissive of tighter gun regulations, approaching a level of philosophical erudition superseded only by Nietszche himself when he mused, “stuff happens.”

We’re in a difficult time in our country and I don’t think more government is necessarily the answer to this. I think we need to reconnect ourselves with everyone else. It’s very sad to see.

But I resist the notion—and I had this challenge as governor—because we had—look, stuff happens, there’s always a crisis. And the impulse is always to do something and it’s not necessarily the right thing to do.

A fatalistic view indeed. So, to summarize: “stuff happens” and in response to stuff happening we should resist the urge to “do something” and instead, do nothing. What a great president this guy would make. Fortunately for us, he seems to be barely hanging on and is a distant third or worse in most polls.

Here is what the current president had to say:

As I said last night, this will not change until the politics changes and the behavior of elected officials changes. The main thing I’m going to do is I’m going to talk about this. I’m going to politicize it. Inaction is a political decision we are making. Normally politicians are responsive to the views of the electorate. The majority of the American people think it’s the right thing to do.

[Photo credit: © Brian Snyder / Reuters]

In the immortal words of Dave Matthews: ‘Don’t drink the water’

These are the kind of people we have running our country: A U.S. representative who believes that the glass of water Pope Francis, aka Jorge Bergoglio, drank from during his recent speech before Congress was actually consecrated holy water.

With beliefs such as that, rational behavior rarely follows, and subsequent action of Rep. Bob Brady, D-Pa., was no exception. After the speech, Brady took the used glass of water, which Stephen Colbert called “old man’s backwash,” and proceeded to drink from the glass himself:

According to The Washington Post:

He carefully carried the glass, still half full, back to his office where he sipped the water and then passed it around to his wife and two staffers. Later, he invited Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) to his office, who, along with his wife and mother, dipped his fingers in the water. Casey’s office confirmed this was true.

Brady later emptied the remaining water in a bottle with plans to bless his grandchildren with it. The Post picks up again:

Now, as we understand it, and please correct us if we’re wrong, unless the pope actually blessed the liquid it’s not technically holy water.

“Please correct us if we’re wrong …” Happily. Even after the Pope or any other priests “blesses” water, it’s still nothing more than two hydrogen and one oxygen molecules and has no extraordinary abilities other than, of course, the power of quenching thirsts.

Brady told the press that he could “care less” what anyone thought about the water. He still believes it’s holy water:

“Anything the pope touches becomes blessed,” he said. “I think so and no one is going to change my mind.”

So, Francis is like a Catholic version of Midas with the golden touch? In any case, Brady was undeterred in his belief about the holy water and commits the same mistake as many fellow believers who think the world contains a supernatural component despite a lack of evidence in all of recorded human history, except for some deeply flawed ancient texts.

In any case, a company called Wayne Enterprises is attempting to cash into this belief. The company was or still is selling drinking water it is marketing as holy water. The company claims the water has been blessed “by hands of God.” According to the company’s website:

By hands of God, we mean a priest, churchman, clergyman, cleric, curate, divine, ecclesiastic, elder, father, friar, holy man, lama, monk, padre, pontiff, preacher, rabbi, rector, sky pilot, or vicar.

Our future goal is to have a clergy from every faith bless each bottle of Holy Drinking Water.

“Every faith?” So, representatives from all 4,200 religions in the world are going to bless each individual bottle of water before the product is shipped out? Sounds like a logistical nightmare.