Here's the latest in our series of parody songs from Randy Rainbow. The song being used won't likely be familiar to most people at first, but as I listened to the verse it sounded so familiar until I finally placed it and started laughing. When it kicks in, that's what makes this one especially fun. The production part of the video is pretty basic -- though Randy's reactions are the treat. And while the lyrics are once again very enjoyable and especially scathing, it's when he keeps getting to the (well, let's call it) "chorus" that I keep laughing.
0 Comments
Just to round things out beyond my 2010 article that I re-posted yesterday about building a wall to keep out Canadian, today we'll go back even father. This is another Golden Oldie from the Huffington Post that I wrote on May 11, 2006 -- a dozen years ago!! -- about building a wall along the U.S.- Mexican border and pondering why not keep those pesky Canadians out, too. So, again, lest anyone think this racist, xenophobic hatred is all just Trump, no, it's been bubbling among the far-right of the Republican Party for a long time. It was just left to a Trump to give it serious voice. Forget the Village, to Some It Takes a Mob A good friend of mine, David Rintels, is an Emmy-winning writer whose work includes the Broadway play, Clarence Darrow, that starred Henry Fonda, and the mini-series, Nuremberg.
He also has a most-timely screenplay, Freedom, based on the true story of a man’s astonishing pursuit of liberty for his family – so utterly heroic it has you beyond awe. But then the man’s actions start to spin out of control by going too far in that same effort. Noble virtue, carried to the extreme, becomes a horrifying vice. This all came to mind the other week when reading the latest scheme by America’s poster boys for too much spare time, the speciously-named “Minutemen”: to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican borders on private land in Arizona. No doubt club leaflets explain perverting the Minuteman name, though self-delusion shouldn’t count as a reason. The real Minutemen sacrificed their lives as the aspiring nation fought a declared war for independence. Trying to keep out Mexicans just isn’t the same thing. Make no mistake, that’s all this wall is about, despite protestations of terrorism and “criminal cartels” to the contrary. On their own website, in their very own press release, their Fearless Leader talks only about building on the U.S.-Mexico border. [Note: I originally linked to the press release, but now it only leads to an Error page.] The problem is, if this was actually about terrorism and “criminal cartels,” then you’d think they might at least mention that other, monumentally-bigger border – you know, the 3,000-mile one by Canada. If you really, truly, honestly, scout’s honor want to keep out all “criminal cartels” and terrorists, does it make sense to lock the back door but leave a welcome mat and cheese dip out front? Now, it’s possible the armed wall-builders simply forgot that there’s a 3,000-mile border to the north. After all, recent polls show a high percentage of U.S. high school students can’t even locate Canada on a map. Maybe the “Minutemen” are recent grads. Or sophomores. If you were honestly concerned about keeping illegal aliens out of the United States, you’d want to keep them all out. Right? All, not just Mexicans. Oh, sure, some people may say, “There are no ‘criminal cartels’ of Canadians trying to sneak in illegally.” Then how do you explain William Shatner? And Howie Mandel? Okay, obviously there aren’t 11 million Canadians willing to risk their lives to pick vegetables, but make no mistake there are illegal Canadians here. Moreover, Canada has hundreds of thousands of its own illegal immigrants [Note: again, the original link to an article is no longer active] – all with a beautiful, un-walled 3,000-mile border warmly beckoning them to sneak across. But far more to the point, if you were truly, honestly, swear-to-God concerned about “Protecting The Borders” from terrorists getting in, you’d insist on protecting all the borders. Right? Right???? After all, you don’t really think terrorists are too stupid to think the United States bizarrely only has one border? You don’t think terrorists would see a big wall looming along the U.S.-Mexican border and not figure out that maybe a wall-less 3,000-miles border with Canada is another way in? Do you? Assuming the answer is, “no, of course not, do you take me for a total idiot?” – then why focus on only building a wall between the United States and Mexico? It makes zero sense. Unless the only reason behind your playacting “faux-Minuteman” activity was simply to keep Mexicans out – and had nothing to with protecting America from all “illegal aliens,” all “criminal cartels” and all “terrorists.” But the reality is, there’s something even more insidious going on here. And it goes back to that “Freedom” story, based on actual events – that a virtue carried to extremes is a danger. Remember, we celebrated tearing down the Berlin Wall. And we celebrated it for a reason. Freedom is worth fiercely protecting. But you don’t protect something by prohibiting it. Building walls is not what America is about. It’s not why basically all of our own ancestors came to the United States. (And many surely got in illegally.) They came because of the lack of walls. They came because America has a beacon that asks the world to “Give us your tired, your poor.” Illegal immigration is a serious problem. That’s why it calls for serious thought, serious discussion and serious solutions. Not fake-patriots playing dress-up Revolutionary War games. If you want to build a wall, hire Bob Villa. Or get Ty Pennington. He can line up buses to block the view and maybe make Mexicans think there’s nothing on the other side. Building a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border not only doesn’t solve the illegal immigration problem, it doesn’t even address it. Toting rifles and shovels against Mexicans doesn’t make you a Minuteman, it makes you a vigilante. In the quest for 15 minutes of fame, their minute is up. What with Trump starting a trade war with Canada, and his trade adviser Peter Navarro saying there is a "special place in hell" for Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Republicans taking up the call of anger trashing Canada on Monday, I was reminded of a prescient, sarcastic article I wrote on the Huffington Post almost eight years to the day, on May 13, 2010. So, here's the very timely Golden Oldie. An Illegal Immigration Bill We All Can LoveLast week, Minnesota Republicans announced they wanted to introduce an anti-immigration bill, similar to that passed by Arizona. "We have an illegal immigration problem here in Minnesota," the bill's sponsor Steve Drazkowski (R-Mazeppa) explained to Politics in Minnesota. "We've had it for years." Finally. Unlike with Arizona, this bill is something I can fully applaud. There are an estimated 100,000 illegal immigrants in Minnesota, at least according to crack Republican estimators. And like Arizona, Minnesota has illegal immigrants pouring into the state because it also shares borders with another country. Unlike Arizona, however, that country is Canada. Illegal Canadians have long been a cause of mine. It's an issue of national importance overlooked by the all-too easy shadow of Mexico. Back when vigilantes started patrolling the U.S.-Mexican border and demanded a giant wall be built, I wrote about the dangers of Canadians sneaking in, too, and the need for a wall on America's northern border. "If you were honestly concerned about keeping illegal aliens out of the United States," I noted in May, 2006, "you'd want to keep them all out. Right?" Of course some people dismiss this, insisting there are no 'criminal cartels' of Canadians trying to slip in illegally. But then, how do you explain William Shatner? And Howie Mandel? It turns out I was years ahead of my time. Oh, sure, it's unlikely that many illegal Canadians would be interested in picking vegetables or doing grunt menial labor, however none of those jobs are taking work that anyone else wants. But illegal Canadians - ah, those are people who can blend right in and take your job. Some cushy position as a secretary or in upper-management. Or selling double-lattes. Or one of those temp holiday jobs when department stores need to add extra staff. The next time some salesperson asks, "May I help you?" and they're just a little too polite - guess what, they're probably an illegal Canadian. If you don't think there are illegal Canadians in the United States, you're hurting America. When the government instituted a practice called "expedited removal" along our northern border back in 2006, officials claimed that up to 500 illegal Canadians would be deported each year. At that rate, it would take 200 years to get rid of them all in Minnesota. Illegal immigration from Canada is as big a problem as Mexico. Just look at a map. We share 5,000 miles of border with Canada, the longest in the world - but a paltry 1,900 miles with our neighbors to the south. Yet Mexico gets all the attention, all the armed militia, all the wall-building material. Is this fair? Is this safe??!! Some unpatriotic deniers would insist it's not the same problem as with Mexico. After all, why would Canadians want to illegally sneak across the border to live in America? Have you ever spent a winter in Manitoba? Have you ever spent a day in New Brunswick? Have you ever tried speaking two legally-mandated languages? They speak French there, you know. The problem of illegal Canadians is far more insidious than you think. I've spent time in Minnesota, and can tell you that it's really hard to distinguish a Canadian from the locals. They blend in really easily. Especially in Minnesota. For starters, Canadians look just like you and me. (Unless you're black or Hispanic, but you get my point.) They speak perfect English. And they wear nice shoes. So, it's about time that we have an anti-immigration bill in Minnesota to deal with illegal Canadians. But once we have the bill, our problems don't stop there. How does it get enforced? What is it about an illegal Canadian that would make them "reasonably suspicious" to be stopped und show zer papers? It's so much more difficult than with illegal Mexicans. For one thing, they're not Mexican. You can't just stop and question someone simply because they look…well, very white. True, there's their tell-tale dialect. But a person can just avoid saying things like, "I'm going ootside." And of course legal Canadians say "oot," so that's not suspicious, just silly. Moreover, Minnesotans have their own strange dialect, so everyone blends together. See how difficult it is? There are two ways to detect an illegal Canadian: One is excessive politeness. Normal politeness, of course, is not suspicious, because they could be a perfectly legal Canadian. But someone illegal will try at all costs to avoid confrontation. If that happens - if someone is so polite your teeth ached, bam, you've got reasonable cause. The other way is if the person is using phrases to avoid words that would otherwise have an "oot" in them. Like "I'm leaving the house and going through the front door so that I'll be away from the inside and in open air." That, my friend, is the language of an illegal Canadian. Difficult as this problem is, though, don't despair. Because there's one thing about illegal Canadians that, once you've established "reasonable suspicion," makes proof and deportation drop-dead easy. Indeed, it's the greatest gift ever to law enforcement: if you ask an illegal Canadian if they are illegal - they will tell you the truth. So, hat's off to Minnesota. It's about time someone shined a light on the illegal immigration problem with our neighbors to the north. Now, if only we could start building that 3,000 mile wall, we'll finally be on our way. On Friday, I read a headline on the Raw Story news site that I found absolutely hilarious. It read, "Arizona Republican running for US Senate seat wants to build a wall to keep Californians out." Okay, yes, I know you probably think that either I'm lying for a joke or that I mis-read the source and it's actually from The Onion. After all, no "serious" and self-respecting politician -- not even an overtly-pandering Republican trying in soul-crushing desperation to appeal to the most highly idiot-racist portion of the base -- would do something so eye-rollingly and uproariously stupid. So, here's the screen shots to prove it. So, there you are. See! I was telling the truth. Yes, a real-life pandering Republican who is actually and honestly running for the United States Senate (!!!) is suggesting that Arizona build its very own wall in order to keep out its fellow-citizens -- U.S. residents from a state with the fifth largest economy in the world, bigger than even Great Britain. Hey, if it works for Trump and Mexico, why not Arizona and California? (Okay, okay,, it hasn't worked for Trump and Mexico, but now that's just quibbling) Never mind the pure idiocy of trying block the Interstate Highway system. And never mind the pure idiocy of not recognizing that one would be able to...well, simply drive around the border and just come in from Nevada. (Which would be REALLY EASY, taking you about 10-20 miles out of your way.) Or come in from Utah. Or from Colorado. Or from New Mexico. Or for that matter, come in from real Mexico where there isn't a wall. Unless, of course, Martha McSally plans to have Arizona build a wall around all its borders and keep everyone out. That doesn't appear to be her crackerjack plan, though. It's just to build a wall at the Arizona border with California. And never mind the concept of merely getting an airplane ticket and just plopping in that way -- or take the train -- since after all you don't need a passport to go from one state to another. And by the way, lest you think that Martha McSally is your garden variety right wing nut job, someone running for the U.S. Senate on one of those loopy 3rd party "Americans Against Sanity" ticket. Oh, no, she is actually an already-elected United States Congresswoman "representing" Tucson in the 2nd District. No, really. To be clear, her intent is not to keep out all Californians with her really cool Arizona Wall. It's that she doesn't like all them illegals in California and is afeared they'll come into Arizona. Because, apparently, you see, Arizona doesn't have any illegal Mexicans in their state, despite sharing a border with Mexico that is 2-1/2 times longer than the California-Mexico border. And despite the fact that if the Mexicans who came into California actually wanted to really come into Arizona in the first place, they could have...well, come into Arizona in the first place, rather than take the roundabout route of initially going into California and then take a right-turn and "Go East, Young Man," reverse Horace Greeley and travel into Arizona. But here's the thing -- The reason I find this story so hilarious is not why you think. It's not for all those reasons I've noted that the dear Rep. McSally (R-AZ) has come up with for her truly idiotic, racist idea. If for another reason entirely -- which says a lot given how truly idiotic her racist idea is. No, the reason I find the story so hilarious is because -- I wrote it as a joke 12 YEARS AGO!! In fact, almost to the day! This real news story about Ms. McSally was published on May 18, 2018. I wrote my joke story in the Huffington Post on May 16, 2006. And by the way, after I published it -- and I swear to you this is true -- there were several user comments who thought it was real. I couldn't believe that I had to explain to them it was a joke. Now, yes, I know that we now have evidence from Martha McSally that an idiot Republican Congresswoman made almost the exact same suggestion and meant it. But not only do we now live in a post-Trump world where such idiocies are possible...but, more to the point, when you read my article you'll see how even more intentionally over-the-top it is as a way to satirize such racism as highly and blatantly as possible. And yes, I am proud, gobsmacked and just a little bit nauseated to say that I presaged Trump. Here was that article. May 16, 2006 Illinois Citizen Group to Build Wall on Indiana Border A private citizens group in Illinois today announced plans to build a wall along the Indiana border to keep out those they say are streaming across the unprotected state line. The problem, they say, has been growing for the past 30 years. “Ever since the oil refineries in Gary began closing in the mid-1970s, people there have had to find other income,” states the leader of the group, T. Herbert Duffy. “They’ve been streaming into Chicago ever since.” Duffy’s organization was founded four months ago in mid-January. “We didn’t actually care about immigration,” he acknowledges. “We just got together because it was so butt-numbing cold that all anyone could do was sit in the basement shivering. So we came up with the idea of this club.” At first, the only agenda item was to complain about shoveling snow. It was only after the Spring thaw came that the illegal Indianan idea popped up. “Our wives kicked us out of the basement, and we needed another problem or they’d make us come home. That’s when Phil started complaining about having lost his job, and blamed the Illegals from Indiana.” Although the man had worked in a Galesburg tractor factory that had closed in order to manufacture cheaper overseas, the Minutepeople still knew they had their issue. “It just pissed us off, all those illegal Indianans sneaking into Illinois to steal our jobs and womenfolk. A couple of six-packs will do that.” The mission grew from there. Starting from only five disgruntled men, they began recruiting, and found that there were enough people who wanted to get out of their house or meet singles that the club grew to its present total of 57 Minutepeople. “That wasn’t our original name,” Duffy acknowledges. “We wanted to call ourselves Minutemen. We even had a lot of t-shirts made up. But someone thought there was another group with the name. Back in the Civil War or something. [Editor’s note: it was the Revolutionary War.] We figured it was better not to get sued, so we changed it.” A similar situation impacted the women in the club. “We had intended to call them Minutemaids, but we got a ‘Cease and Desist Order” from the orange juice company. So, we’re all Minutepeople.” The name has its own sense of history, Duffy relates. “My wife would ask me to take out the garbage, mow the lawn, and I’d all always say, ‘In a minute, honey. In a minute.’ The name just stuck.” As attention to the wall-building grows, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has announced that he is ordering members of the State National Guard to the Illinois-Indiana border. “We will be sending four National Guardsman,” a spokesman for the Governor’s office reports. “There are going to be a lot of drunk guys with loaded firearms in the hot sun, and we don’t want another Dick Cheney incident.” At present, the wall along the Illinois-Indiana border stretches 12 feet. The Minutepeople hope to have it completed by the end of August, though Duffy figures late-Autumn. Many experts figure that it will take at least several hundred years. Some suggest longer. “With soil erosion and the natural corroding of cheap materials they bought,” states Lawrence Eberhardt of Eberhardt Fencing, “within 30 years they’ll likely have to start repairing their earlier work.. Then, each year the later-construction will begin falling apart. This could stretch until eternity.” Duffy and the Minutepeople remain undaunted. They insist they will finish the wall. It’s a mission now to the club. “I know some people have said this is all racist, but that’s not true. If Indians want to live in Indiana, that’s fine. We have some right here. But wherever you live, you don’t enter somebody else’s land uninvited. That’s been true in America ever since the Pilgrims landed in America.” Duffy is clear to insist, that it’s not just Indians the Minutepeople want to protect Illinois from, but all Illegals. The problem, he says, is that there aren’t enough border guards in Illinois. “Or actually, any.” That’s when they knew they had to build the wall. “To keep all illegal immigrants out. All.” When asked if that includes illegals from Kentucky, Duffy hedged a little. “That’s the really squiggly part of the state border,” he noted, “and it’s pretty hard to build a wall on something that shape. We can bend our metal piping a little, but not that much.” However, the Minutepeople are concerned about illegal immigrants from Missouri. “In some ways, they’re worse than Indiana,” the Exalted High Poobah noted. “Who wants all those St. Louis Cardinals fans here?! The Cardinals suck..” But the Minutepeople don’t have any plans to build a fence along the Illinois-Missouri border. “No, that’s why God created the Mississippi River,” states Duffy. “If anyone from Missouri tried to swim across, their fat butts would sink.” The river, however, is only the first line of defense against both the Missouri and Iowa borders. “If any Illegal tries to drive into Illinois over bridges, you can see them coming. And since it’s mostly single file, that makes them easy to pick off. Also, we’re buying landmines to plant along the shore.” That only leaves the Wisconsin border to the north. Duffy admitted that initially the Minutepeople had forgotten about the northern border. But after a good laugh and a couple of beers, he said they all realized, “We really got nothing against Wisconsin. Cheese, beer, how can you not like them? Hate the Green Bay Packers, but the Bears rule, so what? The only thing about Wisconsiners is that when they come here they drive tractors really slow down the middle of the road. Forget ‘em. They’re like us, they’re okay.” It’s a difficult mission, but one that makes Duffy’s wife Helen extremely proud. “I know the Tribune did a big state poll which said 98% of people in Illinois thought the Minutepeople were idiots, but I don’t believe polls. I’m sure it’s less than that. We do get about 75 phone calls every night yelling at us for being un-American, but I don’t believe phone calls either. I’m sure they’re just wrong numbers. And every morning our house is covered with eggs, but I don’t believe the egg-throwing. I’m sure they’re just trying to give us food for our important work.” In the end, T. Herbert Duffy is proud of all that he and his Minutepeople have accomplished in so short a time. “Some may call us vigilantes,” he says, appreciating his 12-feet of fence, “and while that is true, it’s not necessarily a bad thing. After all, it got us on TV.” As is my wont, I was browsing the YouTube thing and came across a video that reminded me of an article I had written seven years ago for the Huffington Post. May 25th, for those of you keeping notes. It was somewhat of an offbeat piece. The background is that on a recent episode of Aaron Sorkin's show, Studio 60 on the Sunset Trip (about the people who put on a weekly live TV variety show, somewhat like Saturday Night Live), he brought in Allison Janney to guest star -- as the fake show's guest host that week. What made this noteworthy is that a regular on the this series was Timothy Busfield, who played the show's director. And for fans of The West Wing, this meant a re-teaming of Sorkin, Janney and Busfield -- the latter two who had just a joyously fun rapport in their dance-around-the-edges, would-be-but-never-quite romance. And the treat of the episode is that their wonderful rapport was still intact, and Sorkin played it for all it was worth. Even putting in a The West Wing reference -- which wasn't a stretch, since Allison Janney played a character named...Allison Janney. I wish I could embed the full episode. It was a total treat, more of a comedy than usual, since it was about everything going wrong. But the good news is that I did find a 10-minute video that cut together much of Allison Janney's scenes -- which means that it includes much of the scenes with her and Timothy Busfield together. And that's the whole point here. The video doesn't do the episode justice -- or even do their scenes together justice, since you lose a bit of context. But you get a pretty good idea -- and with my original article below, you should have a better idea still. Just know this: in the episode, the prop department has gone on strike, and the question that Janney is concerned about during final dress rehearsal is whether the people with cue cards are part of the prop department. Busfield has kept assuring her before airtime that the cue cards are fine -- all to keep her calm. But the reality is...well, here's the article and then the video -- Hollywood’s New ‘It’ Couple in a Perfect World May 25, 2011 Admittedly, this is a bit different. With the inauguration of the Huffington Post’s new design, however, it seems appropriate. A mere piffle to be sure, but some things far under the radar are too good to be allowed to pass without notice. Last Thursday, NBC brought back Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, no doubt for its last hurrah. But whatever the reason, it was worthwhile because it gave the audience a chance to see one more re-teaming of what’s becoming a remarkable TV couple — Allison Janney and Timothy Busfield. The two, of course, first overlapped on The West Wing as press secretary C.J. Cregg, and reporter Danny Concannon who was madly in love with her, but was perpetually rebuffed. Their rapport was always such a gem that it was allowed to flourish, to the point where the hapless Danny was allowed to win his heart’s desire at the end. Janney isn’t a part of Studio 60, though Busfield is a regular, playing the director of the show-within-the-show. But Aaron Sorkin, who created both series, had the good sense to bring the actress in for a guest appearance, and made sure her character interacted with Busfield’s as much and as wonderfully as possible. Whatever anybody thought of Studio 60, this one episode — titled “The Disaster Show” — made the whole series worth it. Okay, NBC might disagree, but they were footing the bill. (For my taste, I thought Studio 60 started out weakly, which killed it, but three or four weeks in, it found its voice and got absolutely terrific. But by then, it had lost its audience and was too late.) But opinions of the full series aside, it was this single teaming of Janney and Busfield on Thursday that leaped out. On the episode, Allison Janney portrayed a character named ... well, ‘Allison Janney.’ She played herself hosting the sketch show — on a night when the people who handle the cue cards go on strike moments before the live show is scheduled to begin. The joy of the episode is that Busfield, as director, spends most of the show lying to Janney to keep her from panicking, and then charmingly apologizing the moment the problem comes to light. Such as when she steps on stage to do her opening monologue on live TV, only to discover to her horror that she has to ad-lib it. Busfield has given her an earpiece so that he can help guide her through the nightmare — but it’s her nightmare, because he appears to be having the time of her life. “Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention,” he coos warmly, with a twinkle, “there are no cue cards.” Throughout the show, the two communicate intimately over the monitor, which is no easy feat for actors, as the studio audience is blissfully unaware of her private hell and thinking she’s talking to them alone. The funniest moment comes at the end, when she’s saying her live “goodnights” after the total disaster ... and then one more disaster occurs. As she desperately struggles on, even stumbling over her own credits, Busfield whispers into her earpiece, “‘The West Wing,’” and she finally screams out exasperated, uncaring that it’s live TV, “I know the name of the show I was on!!!!” The whole episode was a hoot, but the joy was watching two consummate professionals having the time of their lives acting together, even when they usually weren’t in the same room together. As good as they were on “The West Wing,” they were even better here, like a pair of comfortable shoes that just feel perfect. Like a jigsaw puzzle where the pieces fit exactly, and the result is a beautiful picture. A friend referred to them as the new ‘Nick and Nora,’ alluding to the characters William Powell and Myrna Loy played impeccably ages ago in the classic Thin Man movies. The performances that Janney and Busfield give are completely different, but the sensibility is apt: smart, funny, loving and outspoken. What we get are two actors so gorgeously paired that they become something different entirely, something special. Their timing, their glances, their body language all took the clever dialogue of the episode to another level. I don’t know what Aaron Sorkin is going to do next, but it should be sure to have the two of them in it. Actually, some network should be smart enough to team them up in a series. Maybe they work best as a supporting couple, I don’t know — but man, do they ever work great together. One of the most disappointing votes for the Trump tax bill was Susan Collins, Republican senator of Maine. She never came up with a good explanation why this bill, which had so many issues that would seem problematic to her existing voting record. And when she got challenged by the press and public for suggesting that she was naive in believing GOP leadership promises that would smooth over her biggest concern, she slammed her critics for being sexist in suggesting a woman would be so befuddled. Of course, it wasn't that at all, it was that she was being self-serving and profoundly naive in trusting the promises. And now that the bill has passed, it turns out that she was indeed "scammed" by Republican leadership, and the "fix" she was promised isn't happening this year. If ever. Gee, go figure. The reaction to her voter has been harshly critical. She's always been popular in Maine, and for all I know she'll weather this storm. Or not. Because she sits in a party whose leadership is a man with a 32% approval. And this wasn't just any old vote, it was one that affects every American deeply and has been called one of the most outrageous in U.S. history, with a 24% approval. So, I don't know if her seat in the Senate is safe -- or in trouble. What I do know, is that I wrote the following article on the Huffington Post 11 years ago, back in 2006. "Paradise Found! An Actual, Good Person in Government" It speaks for itself. Though to give it a deserving bonus, there's an addendum afterwards. As I write in the article, I have no idea what plans there may be today, what with all the changes in the political landscape. I'm just saying. But in any case, whatever does or doesn't happen next, this is just a story I always like telling. June 15, 2006 People have been cynical about politicians since the Roman Empire. (“O, that Marcus Aurelius. He too hath a lean and hungry look.”) It’s just that these days – between Bill Frist diagnosing brain-dead strangers via television, the Vice-President shooting someone without investigation, and the White House outing a covert agent for spite – Republicans have turned cynicism into an art form. However, it’s important to remind oneself that there actually are incredibly good people in government service. I don’t mean “people I agree with.” I mean, simply, good people. Kind, decent, thoughtful. While banging my head against the wall, weary of yet one more outrage (I think it was conservatives comparing Al Gore to Hitler), I was saved a concussion when I thought of Chellie Pingree. It’s good to always recognize that the Chellie Pingree’s of the world exist. It brings comfort. I was covering the 2000 Democratic Convention in Los Angeles. In fairness, “covering” is too grandiose. I was covering it like one snowflake covers the Alps. I was dong a single article for the Writers Guild of America magazine. A delegate from Maine named Chellie Pingree saw my press badge. Mentioning that I’d worked briefly in Maine and loved it, that’s what we talked about. Politics didn’t enter into the conversation. This was the National Democratic Convention. If two mimes met, politics would have entered into the conversation. But we talked about Moody’s Diner, Campobello Island and wild blueberries. She just wanted to chat. But after 15 minutes, I didn’t even know what this Pingree person did. She was about to floor me. “Oh, I’m a delegate from my local area,” she said, and left it at that. So, I had to drag out more. How’d you get to be a delegate? “Oh, I’m in politics.” Well, okay, what do you do in politics? (By this point, I figured she’s a poll watcher in Waldoboro.) “I’m the State Senate Majority Leader.” Okay, here’s the thing: that’s not what amazed me. It’s that I still had to do yet more questioning to find that she was running for the United States Senate in 2002. Again, remember, this was the Democratic Convention. Candidates will trample little children to reach someone with a press badge – but it had to be dragged out of her that she was running for the U.S. Senate There was enough politics there; she just wanted to chat. But even that isn’t what impressed me most about Chellie Pingree. It was a small matter later – small, as in, “bizarrely insignificant.” But its very insignificance is what speaks volumes. Over the next year, we exchanged periodic emails. That she took the time during her exhaustive Senate campaign was notable enough. We discussed politics, and chatted frivolities. Once, I even mentioned buying a University of Maine baseball cap while there, but bemoaned losing it. She kindly commiserated. Many months later, she came to Los Angeles for a fund-raiser. Noticing her get off the hotel elevator, I wandered over to re-introduce myself. But before I could say a word, she greeted me with a big hello, and said, “Wait, I have something for you.” At that, she reached into her bag, and pulled out…a University of Maine baseball cap. I didn’t live in Maine, I couldn’t vote for her. I wouldn’t be writing about her. We’d met one time. And yet she listened, tracked down a cap, remembered to pack it, remembered to bring it downstairs, and the first thing she did at her fundraising event – for the United States Senate – was deliver it. This was an insignificant act, make no mistake. But the ability to notice small things and be thoughtful about them – even at the times of greatest stress – is what speaks to a person’s character. I wish the story had a perfect ending. Unfortunately, she got caught in the Republican mid-term steamroller after 9/11. She came close in her race, but lost to Susan Collins. But at least the story has a good ending. Because of Chellie Pingree’s reputation for decency and ability, she was approached to be President and CEO of Common Cause, positions which she holds today, working for the public good. I’ve avoided mentioning the issues Chellie Pingree has worked for, because issues color our perception of a person. But basic decency, that’s core. I have no idea if Chellie Pingree will run for political office again. Or be appointed to some post. Or continue with Common Cause, or elsewhere. But as I look at the mean-spirited, divisive political landscape today and cringe, I only know that whatever she does, we all are served best when people like Chellie Pingree are part of the process. And that was the article I wrote in 2006. As it happens, only nine months later, after writing those final words about having no idea if Chellie Pingree would run for political office again...she did. And that brought about a follow-up article, "Return to Paradise," which I wrote a year after that. I won't repeat the whole piece, because the first part recapped much of the article I just posted above. But after recapping, I then updated the story. We'll pick up the tale from there -- November 13, 2008 Well…nine months after that, Chellie Pingree decided to try getting back into elective politics. When Rep. Tom Allen took on the challenge of running for the U.S. Senate against incumbent Susan Collins (a race he ultimately didn’t win), it left his First District seat open. And Ms. Pingree entered the highly-contested primary. One of the great difficulties of politics, though, is to attempt a second act. Most people – wisely – don’t even try. No matter your credentials, lose once, and it’s “thanks for trying before, but…next!” But some stories have a happy ending. On Tuesday, Chellie Pingree was elected to the United States House of Representatives. She won by 15 points. Two years ago, she may not have been “officially” in government – but that story is over. She is, once again. And we’re all better for it. We understandably think of the House Representatives as being about local concerns. But the moment they sit in Washington, their voices and actions impact all of America. And having Chellie Pingree sitting in Washington, all of America has a strong and profoundly decent voice representing it, not just the First District of Maine. Ms. Pingree remains one of the earliest, most ardent voices against the Iraq War and ending America’s involvement there. She not only remains an outspoken proponent of health care reform, but helped pass Maine’s law to negotiate for lower prescription drug costs. She doesn’t just speak for renewable energy as a popular issue of the day – her college degree is in human ecology. She has long-pushed for campaign finance reform, ethics reform and far more – you don’t become the head of Common Cause without having a wide palate to work from. And perhaps just as important, you don’t become the Majority Leader of a state senate without having the ability to accomplish your goals. To be clear, it’s just one voice in a sea of voices. But it is a voice that speaks with honor, kindness and fairness as its hallmark. I don’t live in Maine. I’m not represented by Chellie Pingree. I reside 3,000 miles away on the opposite side of the continent. But I’m okay knowing that the country I live in is represented by her. We’re all of us now in two, new, good hands. There was a monumental headline on Election Day. But it’s wonderful when you turn the page and can also find that the day signaled a vibrant change on so many different and deep levels. And that among those many, an actual, good person in government beat the odds and returned to government. |
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
|