document.write(' | ');document.write("Ian");document.write("
NY
9/23/2005 | ");document.write(' | ');document.write("Dorothy Rabinowitz's commentary on Garrison Keillor during last week's 'Tacky and Toney' segment was as wrongheaded as it was misinformed. Rabinowitz's characterization of Keillor as a 'liberal icon' and a 'bitterly partisan political writer' clearly shows that she has never once heard his program. First of all, to call Keillor a 'liberal icon' is like calling Drew Carey, Bo Derek, or Britney Spears a 'Conservative icon'. People watch the 'Drew Carey Show' to laugh and be entertained just as folks tune-in to 'Prairie Home Companion' for old-timey music and goofy radio plays about Lake Wobegon. From listening to Rabinowitz’s critique of Keillor one would draw the conclusion that his show consists solely of anti-Bush rants and leftwing rhetoric. This couldn’t be further from the truth. His 'bitterly partisan political humor and parody', which can only be described as featherweight, only very occasionally takes light and careful jabs at America’s political elite. The truth is that the last thing fans of 'Prairie Home Companion' want to hear are political opinions and it is certainly not the reason they tune in. If one ventures into the blog-o-sphere, one will find that Keillor has come under equal criticism (which he duly deserves) for his frivolous lawsuit from both left and right e-pundits. Obviously, I am no fan of Keillor and would rather off myself than listen to an afternoon of his maudlin and sentimental musings but what really sticks in my craw is the conservative noise machine’s obsession with 'liberal' actors, musicians, television personalities, and the other members of the creative community. When I listen to c-span and hear callers on the 'Support President Bush' line spout off about folks like Katie Couric (why?) and actors like Susan Sarandon, I have to scratch my head. Do they really shape public opinion? What threat do they pose to the American way of life and our national security? What real power do these people have? The truth is almost none. They have no real influence. They certainly don’t send troops to war or decide to raise or lower taxes. They are simply citizens in our free society with opinions which they have every right to express. The right’s malicious attacks are reminiscent of those launched against writers and composers by the former leaders of the Soviet 'evil empire'. Shortly after Dimitri Shostakovich’s “Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk” premiered in 1936 a scathing review of the work appeared in Pravda. Many people speculate that this review may have been written by the big mustache himself, Joseph Stalin. This review decimated Shostakovich. At the time, he was the rising star of the Soviet musical scene and the darling of the politburo. Knowing the fate of many of his fellow artists, such as Isaac Babel, Shostakovich forever after kept a packed suitcase by his door. After the review he was never quite sure whether he might one day be composing a great symphony and the next, toiling in a work camp. Luckily reactionary tracts in today’s rightwing press cannot lead to the execution or imprisonment of America’s artists. But the weapon of character assassination is never far from the hand of today’s Republican culture warriors. ");document.write(' |
|
');document.write(' | ');document.write("Jim");document.write("
MN
9/19/2005 | ");document.write(' | ');document.write("So, some viewers are not fond of the Tony and Tacky segment and others only want the narrow minded voices of the Left on taxpayer subsidized TV. Well, it would be nice if intercourse in America were such that personal attacks never happen. But, when they do, is it only the Left who can call an attacker to account? And, is it only the Left who are entitled to decide what is on public TV or public radio? After years of taxpayer subsidized productions and broadcasts assorted public broadcasting executives, especially here in Minnesota, have made a fortune leveraging this tax payer investment into the sale of all sorts of monographs, tapes, books and other merchandise. Literally, tens of millions of dollars through separately incorporated ventures have found their way to the bank accounts of some of these 'double-dippers.' And, these most vocal proponents of government intervention to insure equal outcomes are indignant at any suggestion their special deals might be unseemly or self-serving. All the while these taxpayer supported elitists flood the public airways with their invectives about evil entrepreneurs, crooked corporate executives, and, of course, Republicans. ");document.write(' |
|
');document.write(' | ');document.write("Marc");document.write("
MI
9/18/2005 | ");document.write(' | ');document.write("The choice of Roberts by the Bush Administration (if it was G W Bush himself that chose him, that sure shows that he is a far more brilliant political-national scale decision maker than most of the whining liberals that post in this forum will ever be capable of understanding). Even the most partisan Dems in the Judiciary Ctee, such as Chuck Shumer, the Senior Senator from NY, publicly said, repeatedly, that Roberts was the most intelligent, brilliant person ever to come before that committee. That should say a lot to any rational person that has no partisan blinders on (such persons are few in this forum, unfortunately, as the posts prefer to bring up paranoid conspiracy theories about what Chief Justice Roberts would do to harm.. consumers (SIC!) and the like.)");document.write(' |
|
');document.write(' | ');document.write("Tom");document.write("
IN
9/18/2005 | ");document.write(' | ');document.write("Narrow-minded, partisan views have no place on PBS. The commercial media provide far too much already to have PBS join in this despicable twisting of facts and ideas. Let the Journal editors serve their masters and selfish ideologies in their own pages, and not on PBS.");document.write(' |
|
');document.write(' | ');document.write("Robert");document.write("
FL
9/18/2005 | ");document.write(' | ');document.write("The US presence in Iraq and Central Asia is primarily about oil. For WSJ to only present the Administration's propaganda and deride people who support that belief is no more than 'Swift boating'. I think your program should present a balanced debate on the subject. One among many good books relating to US involvement is 'The New Great Game Blood and Oil in Central Asia'. Your guests should at least read the history of this region back to 1900. ");document.write(' |
|
');document.write(' |
|  |
');