Yesterday afternoon, I got into a bit of a Twitter snit debate with a few people about whether or not Donna Brazile got access to debate questions before the Town Hall and then passed them along to the Clinton campaign, thereby helping rig the election. After a few back-and-forths, I stopped for a couple of reasons. The first is because...well, I was leaving soon to go to a friend's house to watch the beloved Chicago Cubs in their first World Series game in 71 years. That had priority over Clinton hacked emails. Oh, okay, over everything. (Side note: I wasn't anxious to go a Cubs Party for several reasons, but since he's a good friend and it felt rude not to go, I said 'yes,' but laid down a few ground rules -- which included the right to throttle a mutual friend who was gong to be there Happily, with a few admonitions, he was on semi-reasonable good behavior during the game. If only the Cubs complied as well.)
The other reason I stopped participating in the Tweet Snit is because...well, I couldn't quite see the point that the others arguing were trying to make. It began with them claiming that Main Stream Big Media was in Hillary Clinton's pocket. Never mind that when I asked what what evidence they had, things got a little pissy. Eventually it got around to basically, "Well, yeah, how about Donna Brazile's email claiming she had a question in advance from CNN and sent it to the Democratic campaign??" I wrote that I was inclined to believe her explanation since it seemed to make reasonable sense, but that honestly I had no idea if that was so, and for all I knew she was lying. (In true Twitter style, I'd keep getting back: "So, you believe whatever Donna Brazile says!!" No, I kept replying, please read what I actually said.) I was also sent techie "proof" -- involving something known as DMIK code -- that showed the hacked emails couldn't possibly have been forged. I said that, for all I knew, the proof was right, but...for all I knew it wasn't, and I preferred to see outside verification, not take the word of a blog. This set of a stream of more angry tweets. And that's when a) I had to go to the Cubs game, and b) I stopped caring, because I suddenly realized couldn't see the point they were trying to make that had started this all. Honestly, I don't know if Donna Brazile got a question in advance. I'd like to think not, and that her explanation seemed believable, but I don't know. The thing is -- for the sake of argument -- even if we accept the absolute worst, that "yes," Donna Brazile got a question in advance of the Town Hall and passed it along to the Clinton campaign, I still can't see their outraged point that this proved The Media was conspiring for Hillary Clinton. To be clear, I hope no one passed Ms. Brazile a question. And I hope she didn't pass it along. That's not the way I like to see things played out, so, for me it would be wrong. I'd like to think everything was fully above board. Yet, still, try as I might, I can't get worked up about it. And that's if The Worst really did happen. First of all, there's a timeline to all this, and CNN's explanation that they weren't involved, pointing to the inviolate timeline, is pretty tough to contradict. So, if Donna Brazile really did get her question from someone, it could not have been from CNN and only from their producing partner, a digital cable channel and satellite TV network called TV One. Hardly big time Main Stream Media. That doesn't mean TV One didn't pass anything along, just hardly evidence of a conspiracy of The Media. (It also doesn't mean they did pass anything along -- for all we know, "the question" in question may have been laying out somewhere, and Ms. Brazile saw it that way. Or not. We don't know, and there's no evidence how she got it. Even if she got it, but for now it's just something we're assuming for the sake of argument.) Furthermore, Donna Brazile is the temporary head of the Democratic National Committee. She's not part of The Media, having resigned her analyst jobs when she took on leadership of the DNC. I'd think anyone in that position -- or in the position of her counterpart at the RNC -- would be deeply interested to know the questions in advance. And if they got questions, would want to pass it along. No, it wouldn't be "playing cricket," But it would be playing politics. And I'd understand it, whichever side was involved. More to the point, as the emails show, the Clinton campaign couldn't have cared less about the question. They wrote back that the question (which was about the death penalty) was not dicey for the candidate at all and that Hillary Clinton would just go ahead with her normal answer that she always gave about the death penalty whenever it came up. So, there was no benefit from getting the question in advance. And speaking of the emails, I think it's important to always point out that they were stolen. That may not have any bearing on the content, but I think stolen material -- whatever it is -- should be looked at both with wariness and distaste. Forgetting whether it could have been forged (again, remember, we're assuming for the sake of argument that it wasn't), it was still stolen personal, private property. (Was receiving the question itself "stolen property"? If someone at TV One did give it to Donna Brazile, they gave what was theirs. It wasn't supposed to be passed along, but someone -- again, for the sake of argument -- made chose to pass what was theirs along. Unfairly, and maybe without permission. But not stolen.) In addition, if someone is arguing that this is "proof" of a big conspiracy of Main Street Media -- remembering that this is TV One we're talking about -- the reality here is that one question (one) out of a whole evening of questions was passed along. That doesn't make it good or right or disprove anything -- but perspective, noting it's still just one question, which is a pretty piss-poor conspiracy, I'd say. Getting one question in advance certainly helps. It just doesn't help all that much... especially when you don't even care about the question and are sticking with your standard answer. One would think that a Big Conspiracy of The Media would be able to come up with more than just one freaking question, out of an evening of questions . Most especially when this is your centerpiece of "proof" that The Media is in your pocket. One question is a pretty teensy pocket. And that leads to a final point. As I said, I'm not shocked that the head of the DNC would want to pass along "one" question that she got in advance (assuming she did). Since -- as I also said -- I'd think the head of the RNC would, as well. And so, this is the thing: while there's all this outrage over the one question that Donna Brazile may possibly have gotten...and as I said, I have no idea if she's telling the truth or lying about that...what I also have no idea about is if the RNC and Trump committee got any questions in advance, as well. They may not have, and we have no proof that they did. But -- a) I'm absolutely sure they were trying as hard as the DNC was to find out, and b) the only reason we don't know is that their emails aren't being hacked and stolen. The bottomline here is that -- assuming the worst -- I don't like that anything was known in advance when it shouldn't have been and got passed along. But (as its worst) it's not an issue that even remotely demonstrates that Main Stream Media is in Hillary Clinton's pocket and conspiring for her. At worst, it shows that someone at a small TV organization passed along one question that they shouldn't have, and that the question got ignored by the recipients. In no way am I dismissing this as perfectly fine. The general idea of getting questions in advance is not how I like the game played. It may be politics as usual, and may also be something both sides were doing -- or not. And it may not have even happened -- or did. But assuming The Absolute Worst here, it is not even in the most infinitesimal incarnation Big Outrage Proof of a Mass Conspiracy by Main Street Media that some are trying to make it. At its worst, it's that a hacked and unforged email shows someone outside the Clinton campaign acted very inappropriately and unfairly. And in the end, seems to have had zero impact on anything. If in fact it happened, it would be a problem worth knowing and there should be ramifications for whoever did wrong. It would also be, in this campaign, one of the more superficial transgressions in a near-daily avalanche of revelations, some of which fall in the land of not just criminal but actual felony. So, in the end, after enough give-and-take, it's become difficult for me to care one whit about anyone trying to prove that Donna Brazile's actual or fake, stolen email demonstrates there is an ongoing conspiracy with The Media to rig the election. And that's what I was trying to write in 140-characters or less on Twitter...
0 Comments
As I've posted in the past, Jimmy Kimmel occasionally brings celebrities in to read "Mean Tweets" that people online have written about them. A while back, I posted a segment which was slightly different because it featured only one person, President Obama. Here's the follow-up they just did with the President. It's cute, not overly funny (I think, like the last time, they're careful to not be as grossly rude to the President of the United States as they are to entertainment celebrities), but it's all worth it for the last tweet and Mr. Obama's response. I have a feeling that, unlike all the earlier tweets in the piece, which I sense he was seeing for the first time -- which is how the segment is always done - he might have been given a written reply for this last one. Perhaps not, but that's my guess. Still, it's worth it. In honor of the the start of the World Series tonight, in which -- shockingly -- the Cubs are playing, the Art Institute of Chicago did their part with the two famous bronze lions that are stationed in front of the museum. And note their homage to the iconic big blue "W" flag that the team flies at Wrigley Field after every game that the Cubs win. As I mentioned here a couple of days ago, the egregiously far right former baseball pitcher and white supremacist supporter Curt Schilling -- who was fired from ESPN and has posted a litany of hate-filled, racist and misogynistic comments and memes (okay, I'm trying to be low-key and objective here) -- recently announced he was seriously considering running for the United States Senate. Hey, if a Donald Trump can get nominated for president by the Republican Party, who not? On Monday, he held a rally for Trump in Boston. Where he played for a good part of his career, and was a wildly-popular star, helping the Boston Red Sox win its first Wold Series in 86 years. As was described in the media, the rally attracted literally "tens of people." This is not a joke. This is real. Again, keep in mind that Curt Schilling is not an unknown in Boston. He's a local sports hero. A major one. If it was announced that he was appearing at a sporting goods store to sign autographs -- and that you had to buy something from the store first -- they'd probably have lines around the block. But yesterday, stumping for Trump in Boston, he attracted what was reported as about 15 people. And for all we know, some weren't there to hear him talk politics, but just heard that Curt Schilling would be there. Or maybe they saw a tent and wondered what was going on, maybe thought it was a snake oil salesman or something. (At least those people got their money's worth. But then it was free.) It was also just announced that Schilling signed with Breitbart to host an online radio show. No word yet if Breitbart is reconsidering the deal. But the best part of this story is not the picture above -- which you'd think would be pretty hard to top -- but rather the reaction the same day by Elizabeth Warren at her own (much better-attended rally) when she was asked by a reporter to comment about a possible challenge by Donald Trump. Again, this is real. This is also a reason why so many Democrats love Elizabeth Warren. Over on his website, Mark Evanier has a terrific piece here about what an important standup comedian Robert Klein was -- and how wonderful he still is in his mid-70s when Mark went to see him perform. Be sure to check it out. I can bookend the fellow with Mark. He saw Klein the other night at age 75. I remember seeing him before his standup career even began, when he was part of the Second City troupe in Chicago. It was their road company which at the Ravinia Music Festival. It was probably around 1964. So, Klein was about 24. I was a pretty young kidling, so don’t remember much of what he did – but obviously he was memorable enough that I actually remember him. The only specific thing about him that night which I recall was something that wasn’t comedy, and was him stepping out of character. There had been a very funny, very odd and very short sketch. Klein walked out on stage right after it, as the somewhat-stunned audience was still reacting and laughing. Rather than launch immediately into the next bit, though, he said, “I always liked that one, too.” I do remember the sketch, though. There were people in an office deciding to throw a surprise party for “Pops,” the very elderly janitor. They hide, he shuffles in with his broom, they leap out and shout, “Surprise!!!” – and after a beat, he grabs his heart and collapses to the ground. Blackout. Trust me, it got huge, somewhat-stunned laughs. Now that I think of it, it’s possible that Klein played “Pops,” or maybe the guy who sets up the surprise. I can’t recall exactly, but I do remember his line that followed it. Here he is in 1983 from of his many appearances on the Tonight Show. Yesterday, I went to a play in its world premiere run written by my friend Ken Levine, called Going Going Gone. The comedy takes place in the press box during a baseball game, and Ken is probably the best-equipped writer in the world to take on that story. And I think "probably" is being polite. He's an Emmy-winning writer who's worked on such shows as Cheers, M*A*S*H, Frasier and Wings -- as well as creating three series, and co-writing such films as Volunteers (with Tom Hanks and John Candy), and has directed, produced and most likely swept-up many theaters. But beyond all that, he -- and this is the bizarre part -- is also actually a professional baseball announcer, who has been the analyst for the Baltimore Orioles, San Diego Padres and Seattle Mariners (for which he wrote about his experiences in the extremely funny book, It's Gone!...No, Wait a Minute -- named after one of his mistaken home run calls). The point here is that when you have a play that takes place in a baseball press box, Ken Levine knows from whence he writes. The show is extremely funny, but also takes a turn and becomes thoughtful and dramatic, as the four main characters get into discussions about their lives, which have the underlying theme of legacy and how you'll be remembered and what you leave behind, as opposed to the value of enjoying what you're doing right now. Though it takes place at a ballpark, and there's some commentary about what is going on during the game down on the field, the show isn't about baseball at all, and you barely even need a smattering of knowledge about how to play the game. The more you do know, the more you'll get some of the jokes and references, but this is a play about these four people. In that regard, the title of the show doesn't do it justice -- it fits perfectly once you eventually figure out what the play is about (thoughts about how you'll be remembered after you're gone...) -- but since the reference is to a home run call, some potential audience might think this is "just a baseball play." It's not even remotely. It's about the development of these characters' lives, which as the play develops shows them each at various crossroads -- some small, but several large and conflicting. There are several very good confrontations, but mainly it's very funny...as you'd expect from someone with Ken's pedigree -- and skill. The cast all does an extremely solid job, several of them wonderful, which is a particularly good trick given the confines of the set -- a press box. They are David Babich, Dennis Pearson, Troy Mebcalf and Annie Abrams. (If you saw the recent production of Neil Simon's The Sunshine Boys with Judd Hirsch and Danny DeVito at the Ahmanson Theatre in L.A., as I did, she was in that -- I assume as the nurse in the "doctor's sketch.") If you live in the Los Angeles area, Going Going Gone is well-worth seeing. It's playing at the Hudson Theatre in Hollywood, for which you get ticket information here. The show is one act of 90 minutes, and performances are on Friday through Sunday, with matinees, and it runs through November 20. (It's an extremely small theater, and the performance I went to was nearly sold out.) Since this is a world premiere production, I suspect their hope is that it will play elsewhere around the country -- I don't know their ultimate goal, but it would be a wonderful show for local community theaters since it only requires a small cast and small set. If you saw the play Bleacher Bums, which takes place in the outfield stands of Wrigley Field during a nine-inning baseball game, there's a certain similar in setting, but beyond that the two shows have absolutely nothing in common -- other than both being funny, thoughtful and very good. And that, in the end, is what Going Going Gone is -- a very enjoyable play. It's always a dicey thing going to a play or movie that a friend wrote, wondering what you'll say if you don't like it much. I relaxed early on during Going Going Gone, knowing that I was safe ground when it was over, and could go up to Ken to tell him in full openness how good it was. |
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
Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|