This just in from God -
"I see that Bill O'Reilly is upset at me. Imagine My pain. I created the world in six days. Look what he did with everything I gave him. And by the way, he had 68 years. And millions of dollars. And his own TV show. I had nothingness. "I look at people say that Man is created in God's image, and then I wonder what on earth they must think about Me when they see Bill O'Reilly. Hold on, Nellie, let's be clear about something. Yes, I did create the image. But it's you people yourselves who fill in all the empty spaces, which is what makes up one's humanity. And believe me, Bill-O has a lot of empty spaces. "I don't always work in ways that are really SO mysterious. I gave free will, and when I saw what Bill O'Reilly did, I got him canned. Anything less would be irresponsible. "Besides, I was getting pretty bothered by that whole 'War on Christmas' thing. So, I killed two birds with one stone. Christmas is going just fine. In fact, I've got to get back to my TV. Hallmark is running another of its 'Christmas in October' movie marathons. God love 'em. Literally."
0 Comments
This is not the best-acted video you will see. And it's fairly repetitious. But -- the repetition is part of the point, AND (most importantly) it has a twist near the end that takes the story in an unexpected and quite wonderful direction making it all worth it. In fact, it has another sort-of twist at the very end, as well. And hey, it's only three minutes long, so I think you all can handle it... For people who like the British musical, Half a Sixpence, this will be a bit of a surprise. A new song for the show. The musical began life on the West End in the early 1960s and had a couple of oddities about it. First, the show brought its star to eventual international fame. Tommy Steele had been a very popular rock star, though pretty much known only in England. He'd made some movies, but going on stage in Half a Sixpence was a big leap for him, and then he transferred with the show to Broadway, where it again was a big hit, and later starred in the movie version. The other oddity is that the musical comedy is based on a novel by, of all people, H.G. Wells, titled Kipps. The show got revived last year at the Chichester Festival and then moved to London where it had a scheduled 10-month run, set to close last month. They didn't just re-stage the musical, though but brought in Julian Fellowes (of Downton Abbey) to rework the show's book, and had two songwriters -- George Stiles for the music, with lyrics by Anthony Drewe -- to expand the score and fit Fellowes' new material. That's always a bit of a risk, blending musical styles, especially since the original score by David Heneker is extremely good. This is one of the new songs, "Pick Out a Simple Tune," lead by the show's star, Charlie Stemp. It seems like perhaps it might replace the song "Money to Burn," in the original, where the lower-class Kipps is asked what he'll do with the big inheritance he's going to be receiving, taking him into high society -- and the best he can come up with, for some reason, is that he'd buy a banjo. (The reason for this seems to have only been to give Tommy Steele the opportunity to play the instrument on stage.) So, if this does replace that song, it's not unreasonable. In fairness, it's not all that substantive a song itself, but it has a light charm, and turns into a very enjoyable production number. From what I've read, it's possible that a DVD of this production will be released, so fans of Half a Sixpence may have a chance to check out the new version. By chance, I happened to turn on MSNBC yesterday morning. Steve Kornacki was a guest in the studio and making a good point when the host interrupted to say they be leaving to go another breaking story. I was annoyed because I wanted to hear Kornacki finish -- but what they cut to was a stunning, admirable speech on the Senate floor by Republican senator Jeff Flake slamming complicity "by all" towards Trump, as Flake said he wouldn't seek re-election because he didn't fit in with today's Republican Party. Rather than repeat the highlights -- since much of the speech was highlights -- here's the full 17-minutes, if you haven't seen it. What I thought particularly intriguing, although they didn’t comment on it back in the studio afterwards, is that as soon as Flake was finished, scathing as he was, Mitch McConnell praised him. Now, that by itself didn't stand out. Senators praise Their Distinguished Selves on the Senate floor like birds flap their wings when flying, especially when senators say they are leaving. But it was something else he added, that it was good to hear the things Flake was saying. I don't know how much of that was just senatorial courtesy, as well, but if so that exceeded the norms of gentility because this was the Senate Majority Leader commenting on someone who had just trashed the leader of McConnell’s party, and the party itself. A common thought I've heard and read from many liberals is that they wish such strong criticisms of Trump by Republican senators, like Jeff Flake and Bob Corker, were made by those who were not retiring. I understand the point fully. And I wish it, too. But in today's political environment that's probably too much too expect. Even John McCain, who's been more critical lately has done so from the near-certainty that at 81-years-old the senator will not be running for reelection. But in the end, you take what you can, and every dam needs a first break before the flow comes rushing through. As a response on the far right, we've seen a lot of joy, suggesting that Flake leaving the Senate is a big win for Trump. The thing is, I've had no doubt that the far right white supremacist base would say something like that. Of course they're happy that someone critical of Trump is leaving. But in leaping for joy they're missing a massive part of the immediate reality, rather than something they're looking forward to down the line. The reality is that -- with Sen. Corker also firmly opposed to Trump -- this makes it all the more difficult for the GOP to pass anything important now, most especially the upcoming tax cuts. Republicans can longer count on either man, and that means they can only afford to lose one more vote to pass such big things. And with McCain becoming more vocal a critic, and senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski more in the middle, the GOP is in serious trouble for the next year. Even Rand Paul is a likely "no" on tax cuts, since by all reports the cuts would vastly increase the budget deficit. The thing is, if Flake and Corker (and McCain, as well, as he has been suggesting) ever became willing to put actions firmly to their words and legislate on the foundation that -- as they themselves say -- Trump is an actual danger to democracy, they could do far more good than just making blunt speeches and statements. They could decide to vote against (and therefore block) anything that comes out of the Trump White House and contain the danger that they themselves say exists. I don't think that's likely at all, they remain conservatives representing their states, but I do think that on major issues their votes will be willing to stop what they truly see as wrong and dangerous, rather than vote lock-step with their party leader. There's one other real-world problem for Republicans that comes from Jeff Flake pulling out of the Arizona race for re-election. Much as that overjoys the far right Bannon Wing of the party, it also opens the door wider for Democrats to take the Arizona Senate seat in 2018. That's no certainty, but a very serious possibility. Arizona, after all, while a red state, is one of those that has the very strong potential of being in play (somewhat like Nevada) since it has a higher Hispanic population that other red states. And all the more so without an incumbent senator running. (Even an unpopular incumbent as Jeff Flake was.) At the moment, the Republican front-runner is Kelli Ward, a Bannon-backed candidate who is not just far-right but a nut job, so much so that she's actually considered beatable. (She's one who recently said, basically, that because McCain is so sick he should resign and let her be appointed.) She's the only candidate who has announced so far, though several others are expected, most especially with Flake dropping out. Some are far-more respectable than Ms. Ward, who I'm sure the GOP prefers, though she's run before -- most recently losing to McCain -- and remains the favorite. And if she's the Republican candidate, the Arizona senate seat is up for grabs. For Democrats wishing Flake would have stayed in the race, the reality is that he was likely to lose the GOP primary. He's been highly critical of the Republican leader, and is therefore unpopular within his own state. To win, he'd have to take positions he thinks are not just wrong but dangerous, and he said clearly on Monday he's not willing to do that. (And Democrats should keep in mind that, though he's very much a reasonable man with a thick streak of decency, and no Bannonite-loon, he's still a solid conservative who near-exclusively votes that way.) So, in the end, another Republican was likely to be on the ticket next year. But 2018 is one thing. And while I'd dearly love Democrats to take the seat, and think it's a very real possibility, it remains just "possible" and has never been my assumption. Mainly, my concern is what is, and that's being able to block Trump measures for the next year -- and Jeff Flake now offers that likelihood, at least on the worst bills and most-especially the awful tax bill since it's presumed to increase the debt by $1.5 trillion. After 2018...who knows what the landscape will be then?? Maybe Democrats will turn three other states and not need Arizona to have a Senate majority. Maybe Trump won't even be president. We'll see. But that's down the line. For right now, Jeff Flake's actions are anything but a "big win" for Trump. Being the first to to make a speech against Trump, even more emphatic that Bob Corker's statements, he opens the door wide for other Republicans to feel a sense of protection and find their voice, if only to criticze. He also takes away a certain vote over the next year -- a vote Republicans can ill-afford to lose. And he makes the race to replace him far more wide-open for Democrats to take. But mainly, it was a great and important speech. This is another of those "hidden treasure" Broadway treats. A while back, I had several pieces about a 1959 musical I like a lot, but that's little known, Take Me Along. It starred Jackie Gleason (who won Best Actor that year) and Walter Pidgeon -- and got eight Tony nominations, including Best Musical, running for a year, 448 performances. It also brought a young Robert Morse to attention. It has a wonderful score by Bob Merrill, who also wrote the great show Carnival (as well as the lyrics for Funny Girl -- and lyrics for the beloved-around-these-parts animated TV special, Mr. Magoo's Christmas Carol.) What's also odd-ish about the Take Me Along is that it's a musical comedy based on a play by, of all people, Eugene O'Neil, his play Ah, Wilderness! I wrote about it extensively here, and included the audio of the wonderful title song. The audio only, alas, because it's pretty near impossible to find video from the show, 58 years old. One of my fond hopes is to find the title song video somewhere, but it's pretty unlikely. Indeed, it was always pretty unlikely to find any video of the show. But -- I did! It's not a live performance on stage, but rather a TV re-creation of one of the big numbers with Jackie Gleason in full costume, full set and full chorus. And being for performed television -- in this case, a special, The Fabulous Fifities -- the quality is very good. This is the song, Sid Ol' Kid, which is the introduction of Jackie Gleason's character to the show. He's a bit of a rascal with a wanderlust spirit who left town several years back, but has just come back home. It isn't going well for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA). It's not that he's referred to as "Putin's favorite congressman." That's bad enough, of course. And it's not even that the Republican-lead House has actually put limits on his travel, from concerns of his ties to Russia, refusing to pay for his last trip there, which is even worse. But rather that this damning statement -- “His committee travel and hearing requests were curtailed following news accounts of his outside-the-box interest in Russia -- isn't from one of his opponents in next year's House race, but...from HIS OWN spokesperson!!
Seriously, that's the best they could come with, "He has an unusually uncommon and highly concerning tie to Russia, even by his own party." I certainly admire candor all the time, so hats off to the spokespeople. Though as someone who muddled through PR for far too long, I also understand the craft that goes into getting your message across to the public. And "My boss's party believes he may have been compromised by the Russians" doesn't appear to be campaign slogan they're going for. Rohrabacher represents the CA-48 district in very conservative Orange County, though despite that the race is seen as a toss-up. And not only has he have 10 opponents who have announced for the race, several of those are even Republicans, despite him having been elected to the office 16 times. You can read the full story here on Raw Story. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|