Elisberg Industries
Decent Quality Since 1847
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Products
    • Books
    • Movies
  • About Elisberg Industries
    • Our Corporate Board
    • Information Overstock
    • Elisberg Industries Entertainment Information
    • Elisberg Statistical Center of American Research
    • Consultancy Service
  • Contact
    • How to Find Us
  • Kudos
  • Good Things to Know
    • The BOB Page
    • Sites You Might Actually Like

Quote of the Day

12/23/2020

0 Comments

 
“I’m counting the hours until he’s gone…I plan to pull him out by his hair, his little hands and his feet.”
-- Speaker Nancy Pelosi, on Trump

It wasn't the bluntness of Speaker Pelosi's comment towards a lame duck president that stood out to me yesterday -- and her counting the hours, not the days which requires a calendar rather than a ticking watch -- it was her use of "little hands."  As is well-known by now, Trump is deeply sensitive whenever the small size of his hands is ever referenced, seeing it as a reflection on what that purportedly means about the size of another of his important male body parts.

By the way, the origin of that sensitivity goes back to January, 1998, when Graydon Carter, co-founder of the bitingly satirical Spy magazine out of New York, wrote an article that described Trump as a “short-fingered vulgarian.” It upset Trump so much that for many years he would send photos of himself, generally torn out of magazines, to Carter with his hands circled in gold Sharpie and a personally-written comment to the side, "See, not so short!"  In a 2015 article in Vanity Fair (where he was then the editor), Carter said that the most recent mailing had come earlier that year and added, "I sent the picture back by return mail with a note attached, saying, 'Actually, quite short.' Which I can only assume gave him fits."

The knowledge of that sensitivity -- and the reality that he still would respond to it, even in public -- it a high point in the GOP presidential primaries that same 2015 when Marco Rubio made a reference to it, saying, "I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5-foot-2,  And you know what they say about men with small hands? You can't trust them." That, of course, is not what they say about men with small hands, unless they are trying to clean it up for public consumption, and Trump knew that well.  And so, with all the insecurity that the country has come to know, he responded in defense of his hands a week later during an actual presidential debate.  "Look at those hands, are they small hands?” he said, holding them up for the world to see, despite being the front-runner as Republican nominee for president of the United States. “And, he referred to my hands – ‘if they’re small, something else must be small.' I guarantee you there’s no problem. I guarantee."  Never mind that Rubio didn't say that, Trump knew what was meant, and so he brought the presidential conversation down into the scatological gutter.  For all I know, it's where the origin of his "Little Marco" insult came from.

And Nancy Pelosi most-certainly knew all this.  So, not only did she bluntly tell Trump off, she knowingly insulted his manhood.  And of course, it wasn't an insult of his manhood from just anyone, but from a woman.  And not just any woman, but an 80-year-old woman who was insulting his manhood.  And not just any 80-year-old woman, but the most powerful woman in the United States. 

And on top of insulting his manhood, saying she planned to throw him out.

Oh, and the "by his hair" wasn't too shabby as far as insults go, either, especially when dealing with a man famous for his elaborate comb-over.

But what perhaps leaped out the most was the response from Republicans in Congress. And that response was -- silence. No outrage, no cries of how unbecoming it was for the Speaker of the House -- and not just any Speaker, but the hated Nancy Pelosi, who Republicans have been fundraising off of for years, indeed decades.  Just... silence.  Forget the sly insults, just simply saying she planned to throw him out would normally be enough to send Republicans into apoplexy.  And not even because it's Nancy Pelosi or a generic Speaker of the House, but have we ever heard any politician be so blunt about getting rid of an outgoing president??  And as far as I can tell, there wasn't a word of complaint from any Republican.

I don't think that's necessarily because they didn't want to defend Trump -- they clearly have no trouble with that, even now, as many continue Trump's assault on democracy.  The best I can figure is that even they are just weary by it all and heard Speaker Pelosi's response as the natural reaction to Trump Mania.

And in the end, that's what you get when your party leader is a short-fingered vulgarian.
0 Comments

Today's Tweet

12/14/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
0 Comments

It's About Time

12/11/2020

0 Comments

 
I wonder if Trump's staff has told him the news about who Time Magazine selected as Person of the Year. I suspect not, hoping to avoid the tantrum. But, hey, at least he still has the fake Time covers he had made up to pretend!

In fairness, it's possible that the reason Trump didn't get named was because of the tricky part of not getting over the daunting "Person" threshold.

Picture
0 Comments

Well-worth Reading

11/8/2020

0 Comments

 
This is a very enjoyable article on election reaction from newspapers around the world.  Surprisingly and happily, some of the positive reactions were from right-leaning papers
 
A Sunday tabloid in London had a good one, simply “God Bless America.”  But my favorite this was the headline from the Ayrshire Daily News, which covers the locale where Trump's Turnberry golf course is in Scotland.
 
It said:  “South Ayrshire golf club owner loses 2020 presidential election."
 
You read all the others here.

0 Comments

Tweet of the Day

10/23/2020

1 Comment

 
I swear this is true.  You will either love this or spend the rest of the day banging your head against the wall.  I just came across this tweet a couple minutes ago, and it is serious and on the level.  I

This is from a guy who identifies himself as a “legal and political analyst for the Fox News Channel.”  Really.  His name is even familiar to me.  For those who watch "Fox News" periodically or regularly, you probably know him.

I find it odd, if not curious, that the moment I hit “send” on my column that’s highly critical of Joe Biden my Wi-Fi service disconnected. Inexplicably, it will be out all day. Never happened before. Probably just a coincidence. I drove to the local store and sent the column .

— Gregg Jarrett (@GreggJarrett) October 23, 2020

​This is how he actually thinks technology works.  That it's "probably" just a coincidence.  Probably!!!  And he’s a legal and political analyst for “Fox News”!!!!  Boy, does this explain a lot.
 
It’s one thing for idiots to have idiot conspiracy theories.  But as biased as they are at “Fox News,” you still hope that their “legal and political analysts” are just biased and not brain-dead.  Alas…
 ​
1 Comment

Tweet of the Day

10/21/2020

0 Comments

 
It's not just the tweet alone, it's the 8-minute video attached.  Unfortunately, for reasons that aren't clear, there is no embed code, so I can't embed the full things, but I can at least take a screen shot to get things started.  
Picture

​And happily, I was able to find the full video on YouTube.
0 Comments

Well-worth Reading

10/17/2020

0 Comments

 
I've been planning to write a piece for a while about Mary Schmich, who is one of my favorite columnists and writes for Chicago Tribune. (She wrote the famous "Wear sunscreen" graduation tips most people think was by Kurt Vonnegut.) She has a very good piece today about the new "Chicago 7" Netflix movie by Aaron Sorkin and a juror who is part of local history.  I'll get to the planned column later -- there's no rush on it these days, when other news pushes it back... -- but you can find her latest column here.
0 Comments

One No Trump

9/24/2020

0 Comments

 
At any other time, so many other stories would be the five-bell headline -- from the Breonna Taylor decision to charge no one in her killing, despite having settled a civil suit with the family for $12 million...to reports of former Secretary of Agriculture Rick Perry in an apparently-corrupt deal with a Ukrainian oil company to sit on its board... to the story of how the current nominee to lead the Department of Homeland Security (after having lead it illegally for months as "acting head") oversaw a $6 million contract to a firm where his wife worked.  And more.

But they pale to Trump's comments not guaranteeing a peaceful transfer of power should he lose the election, and suggesting ballots be ignored -- on  the heels of a hair-raising article in The Atlantic that described Trump plans to subvert the Electoral College by having Republican legislatures in battleground states take back the power to appoint Electors.

As much as I was repulsed by Trump’s response at the press conference, I loved that he was asked – and that the reporter followed up.  So, perhaps we'll start to get journalists challenging him more, not in "debate," but to get his words on serious, uncommon matters like this on the record.  And in that regard, I also think that answers like he gave will repulse most voters, including some Republicans who aren’t cultists, but most-importantly undecided Independents.  I say that because I don’t think almost any American voter wants a contested election or wants a president to not commit to peaceful transfer of power.  Cultists may be okay with their beloved Trump refusing to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, but as a principle of Constitutional American life, I don’t think a president not committing to a peaceful transfer of power is something that comes across well to Americans.  And it will hurt him even more in the polls, for which yesterday there were two new ones that show him 10 points behind.
 
And ultimately, that will be the biggest protection against Trump's attempt to manipulate and challenge the results  – having, hopefully as big a landslide victory as possible.  It may not be that, it may not even be a victory at all.  But as all major polls show in the popular vote and by Electoral vote, it appears headed in that direction.  There was a major election analyst this week (I forget who, sorry), who said there is a much greater chance of Biden getting 350 Electoral votes (40%) than of Trump just winning (25%).  And I think every public action like this on Wednesday that Trump makes hurts him with those in the middle all the more.  And it's not that it changes people's minds on a wide, massive scale, but just stripping away 1% is significant.
 
And no, I don’t know.  But that’s what I think.

I also think there's a big hurdle in Trump trying to challenge the validity vote-by-mail and taking it to court.  And that hurdle is that voting-by-mail is not only legal in every state, and in operation in every state, but has been for many generations, so the precedent is very long established.

All that aside, there are two other issues related to this, in particular to the article in The Atlantic, that I believe offset some of the hair-on-fire horror that the author reported on Trump and GOP plans. 

The first is when I heard Barton Gellman, the author of The Atlantic article, state as legal fact something that supports the foundation of his article, which was a plan by Team Trump to challenge Electors being decided by popular vote, so that the Republican state legislatures can pick their own Electors, which was long-time past how things were handled before tradition changed all that.  What Mr. Gellman said was that Bush v. Gore set down the principle that states can take back the power of votes to determine Electoral votes.  The thing is...my understanding of Bush v. Gore is that it very clearly said that its ruling should not be taken as precedent, and that it solely pertained to this one specific election in Florida in 2000.
 
Now, maybe there’s another argument that supports states taking back the power.  Or maybe the Supreme Court could rule that way on its own.  But using Bush v. Gore as the precedent to substantiate your article is (as far as I can tell) without any foundation.  At the very least, I’m surprised that I didn't hear any analysts bring this up.

And there was one other thing The Atlantic article seems to ignore as a critical hurdle to its Worst Case Scenario -- a major thing.
 
Even if everything ends up happening exactly like article says Team Trump is in the early stages of tenatively maneuvering, the Electoral College doesn’t work like that.  It doesn't just meet, tabulate in their votes, and it’s all done.  Those votes actually have to be certified by the House and the Senate!  And…it’s not the current House and the Senate, but the Congress which meets in January, after the results of this election have taken place.  The new Congress.  Which means very possibly a Democratic House and a Democratic Senate.
 
I think that if Trump and Republicans actually pull off this outlandish plan, it is near impossible for me to imagine a Democratic House, let alone also a Democratic House and a Democratic Senate (if they take control) certifying such an unprecedented power-grab end run around the popular vote. 

Yes, if it all transpired this way and came down to that, it would certainly be a political mess.  But the point is that it's not the simplistic matter of just manipulating state legislatures and counting the Electoral votes.  There is another layer of protection built in.

But for all of this -- for all the hideous ghastliness of Trump's statement and The Atlantic reporting of GOP plans, the one statement that stands out just as loudly, if not more so now, that all the times before.  And the mantra can be repeated by everyone here in their sleep --

This is not about Trump, we know who he is.  This is about the elected members of the Republican Party who enable him and are complicit in it all.  This only happens if the Republican members of Congress support and allow it.  And they do support it.  And do allow it.  And at its core it is pure, book-definition fascism. Attempting to undermine trust in government institutions, and undermining what the truth and reality are, so that those in power are free to define it.

​This isn't about Trump.  It's about today's Republican Party which has gone full fascist. 


0 Comments

More What's My Line?

9/16/2020

0 Comments

 
The other day, to augment his clueless quote about Winston Churchill, Trump told the story of Churchill going outside to stand on the roof of a building during the Blitz and broadcast a speech to the British people.  I think the fake point he was trying to make was showing how the Prime Minister tried to calm the public by showing there was no reason to panic and just stay calm and carry on.  There's just one problem with his story -- and you're probably way ahead of me here -- it's not true.  Need I say, "of course"?

It was legendary CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow who would periodically go on the rooftop of the building CBS would broadcast from, and he would do his news report back to the United States (his famous "This...is London" broadcasts), as bombs could be heard exploding in the background.  And it wasn't done to calm anyone, but to keep people fully informed and and honest as possible.

Murrow is one of my few "heroes" in broadcasting, and I've read three biographies on him.  So, when I heard Trump telling the story about Winston Churchill, I could only cringe and shake my head.

Which is a long way to explain why I thought it would be a good time to have this clip of Edward R. Murrow as the 'Mystery Guest' segment of What's My Line?

Murrow had one of the most recognizable voices in radio and TV (in large part because of those London broadcasts), and so he works hard to disguise it.  This video comes from December, 1952 – that's notable because while Bennett Cerf is on panel, this is so early in the show's run that he's not yet in his traditional seat on far right. 

If you want to jump right to Murrow's appearance, it starts around the 16:30 mark.  Nice, too, is that after the game, he sticks around to make a nice, moving presentation afterwards

0 Comments

Tweet of the Day

8/28/2020

0 Comments

 
Daniel Dale was a reporter for the Toronto Sun when he began fact-checking Trump and was wonderful at it.  That's when I began following him on Twitter.  He eventually got hired by CNN and has kept it up, on a much bigger platform.

Last night, after Trump's speech at the Republican Convention, Dale delivered what up to this point might be his magnum opus.  This is a breathtaking (almost literally…) three-minute, non-stop recitation of just a partial list of Trump lies in his speech that is brilliant -- delivered seemingly without notes.  (He may have had a TelePrompter, but it seems unlikely.  But that's moot, since what the information of what he was saying is the point.)
 
Making it even fun is watching anchor Anderson Cooper's reaction through it all, fine just sitting back and watching Dale on a roll.

​Buckle up...

"This President is a serial liar."

In a lengthy acceptance speech delivered almost entirely from a teleprompter, CNN's @ddale8 says President Trump made at least 20 false or misleading claims https://t.co/qKSEhb8N6d pic.twitter.com/RfqWW2epYS

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) August 28, 2020
0 Comments
<<Previous
    Picture
    Picture
    Elisberg Industries gets a commission if you click here before shopping on Amazon.
    Picture
    Follow @relisberg

    Author

    Robert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. 

    Elisberg is a two-time recipient of the Lucille Ball Award for comedy screenwriting. He's written for film, TV, the stage, and two best-selling novels, is a regular columnist for the Writers Guild of America and was for
    the Huffington Post.  Among his other writing, he has a long-time column on technology (which he sometimes understands), and co-wrote a book on world travel.  As a lyricist, he is a member of ASCAP, and has contributed to numerous publications.



    Picture
           Feedspot Badge of Honor

    Archives

    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013

    Categories

    All
    Animals
    Audio
    Audio Land
    Books
    Business
    Chicago
    Consumer Product
    Education
    Email Interview
    Entertainment
    Environment
    Fine Art
    Food
    From The Management
    Health
    History
    Huffery
    Humor
    Internet
    Journalism
    Law
    Los Angeles
    Media
    Morning News Round Up
    Movies
    Music
    Musical
    Personal
    Photograph
    Piano Puzzler
    Politics
    Popular Culture
    Profiles
    Quote Of The Day
    Radio
    Religion
    Restaurants
    Science
    Sports
    Technology
    Tech Tip
    Theater
    The Writers Workbench
    Tidbits
    Travel
    Tv
    Twitter
    Video
    Videology
    Well Worth Reading
    Words-o-wisdom
    Writing

    RSS Feed

© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2021
Contact Us    About EI    Chicago Cubs