The brilliant Charles Krauthammer is a must read, one of the few grand exceptions to prove the "Clueless Newsie" rule.  Two columns he's recently hammered out of the park:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/15/AR2007111502032.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/22/AR2007112201089.html

Why isn't the GOP shouting this stuff off the rooftops?

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Des_Moines_Register,_Hill/2007/12/15/57268.html?s=al&promo_code=4170-1

 

I’m seriously considering an apology to everyone for calling Hillary a mediocrity.  Really now, do you think that a female, liberal mediocrity with decades of at least closely observing one of the great politicians of our time would be able to effectively charm an endorsement out of a group of female, liberal newspaper people?  I should certainly think so, and without having to resort to calling a variety of Democrat heavyweights to overcome a failed attempt so “pretty intense” that her staff had to apologize.

 

Hillary’s not a mediocrity, she’s incompetent; and all the fawning press coverage (from people she’s working overtime to alienate) and starry eyed wishful thinking (ditto) isn’t going to change any of it.  Her house of cards - the spin, fabrications and outright lies that make up her public persona – is crumbling fast.  Try as she might to hide in the rubble, the bottom line is that this is a person we knew all too well even before it came painfully obvious even to liberal Kool-Aid guzzlers that she hasn’t learned much from all her “experience” at her husband’s side … or that perhaps she just isn’t smart enough to really benefit from it.

 

For the increasingly unlikely event that Hillary gets the nomination, and then by some satanic miracle wins the election, I have a further nightmare scenario:

 

BILL CLINTON: (At his first moment alone with his wife after her inauguration)  Congratulations, baby!  (Going in for a big hug)  We did it!

 

PRESIDENT CLINTON:  (Pushing him away)  I did it you mean.  I’m driving the bus now, and don’t you forget it!  From here on out you sit down, shut up, and do as you’re told.  Remember all those years I let you humiliate me?  (slowly developing a wide, demonic smile) Well I now have what I was waiting for … and it’s payback time, you *expletive deleted*!

 

On one level this is funny, and certainly the sort of low soap opera we’ve come to expect of the Clintons.   But soon, say about five minutes from there, something comes up that Hillary can’t handle and she starts running the ship of state into the rocks.  Badly enough  that nobody can spin it away.  Then she’s going to need him.  Fast.  Especially as she tends to choose her underlings more by loyalty than capabilities.  Especially as she’s not much of a listener anyway.  So Bill, perhaps the only person in American politics as narcissistic and stupidly self centered as she is, laughs and gives her enough rope to hang herself (and us) while he waits for a begging knees apology that she’s too proud to give.   Meanwhile the Iranians, and the North Koreans, and the economy, and … well, you get the idea.

http://www.nme.com/news/led-zeppelin/33079

 

This hasn’t been at the top of my mind, but I was getting into a car with my girlfriend today, realized what day and time it was, and exclaimed “My God, Led Zeppelin is on stage right now!  The first full show since the eighties is going on as we speak!”

 

Led Zeppelin is not only the most maligned superband, but also perhaps the best.  Only the Beatles have sold more albums in the U.S., and you’d be hard pressed to name any other group with anywhere near the same influence on music in general.   Not just on the wailing hair bands mind you.  Everyone from Nashville crooners to Hip – Hop sampler mavens praise their enduring genius.  Zep is one of the few artists/bands – you could probably count them on your fingers – that without in some way quoting is nearly impossible to play or even market modern popular music.  Before Zeppelin, record companies and concert promoters made far more money than the artists themselves.  Zeppelin and their manager, Peter Grant, changed all that. 

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10962851/zep_eternal_why_is_led_zeppelin_still_popular

 

So here they are again, and I’m rooting for them.  If this, as the official version reads, is merely a one off show to honor the memory of an old friend that incidentally was a major player in all that history, then good for them.  If there’s a concert recording that comes out of this, as one may reasonably assume since they reportedly came into this loaded for bear and played substantially longer than requested, all the better.  I’ll be among the first to buy one and wish them well for whatever lives they choose from here on out.  But as nice as another live DVD would be, Led Zeppelin owes history, or its’ fans for that matter, nothing more at this point.

 

If the desire is there however, and they can set aside all the water that inevitably goes under the bridge, and the old magic returns, something very rare and special could happen.  Sure, seeing as I was still on the sunny side of eleven when they last played live in the U.S., I’d love to see a tour.  I’d happily pay a sum with a comma in it for really good seats.  But the thousand pound gorilla in the room, and possibly what Robert Plant was referring to in this month’s issue of Rolling Stone when he said that he doesn’t want the Zep reunion to turn into a “big deal” is this: the certain hopes and expectations associated with any new album.  We’d expect it to be good; maybe very good indeed.  There’s pressure enough for the band in that.  But Zeppelin may be alone amongst the “grandpa bands” in the potential to produce a document worthy of a group of living legends.  Something that could stop all the young whippersnappers in their tracks to say, “Wow … someday I hope to come up with something like that.”

 

Rock and Roll has always been an instrument by and for youth.  It does not, by it’s very nature, have “old masters” in quite the same sense as any other art form.  The heroes of Rock die young, as did Hendrix, fail to evolve like AC/DC, or go soft and mushy like Rod Stewart.  Clapton is pretty much a bluesman these days, and the Eagles seem content to play it safe.  At worst they become parodies of past greatness, such as the Stones.  But we don’t see any rock Michaelangelos designing domes and painting frescoes of any lasting value at an advanced age.  You don’t see them dancing around - and past – sixty years old talking about how they’re determined to make this coming one-off benefit show an example of their best work.  Win, lose or draw, Zep never got soft, let the moss grow, or just played it safe at any point.  If they have any of those inclinations now the smart play would be just to sail away into already well earned immortality without any needless new album boat rocking.

 

Personally though, I’d like to see them take the high road of risk for no other reason than as a shining example of how even in the most youth obsessed segment of our youth obsessed culture you don’t have to become a dinosaur.  Show us some smart, finesse-full music that really rocks!  Let’s hear some new music of real value in a day when the kids are tuning in to “Classic Rock” because there’s so little else on the radio worth listening to.  I’d like to see the comeback of a band that the fans never really allowed to fade away, see them be the Biggest Band In The World once again.  Let me chuckle to see the kids bleaching their hair white to be like Jimmy Page, and realizing that “old” and “cool” are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

 

As a forty-something guitar slinger myself, I’d like that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/fashion/02oprah.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

Oprah’s going to give dissatisfied Hillary voters another reason to switch sides in the primaries, but come the general election she can’t make him substantial … he’s still going to be Bland Obama prattling on in generalities.  Actually, I don't know which saddens me more, the vast array of empty suits the Democrats are running, or the vast array of moderate fence straddlers we're getting from the Republicans that will be perhaps too milqtoast uninspiring to defeat them.

My kingdom for a truly conservative nominee!!!  Go Fred Thompson!!!

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/11/14/hillary/index.html

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=6e01fdce-ad97-4dab-a07d-bf98dc52f681

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/29/AR2007112902165_pf.html

 

It’s often been noticed, on both sides of the political fence, that Bill and Hillary Clinton are beyond all else a political partnership.  It’s also been well discussed that ’08 is Hillary’s turn to carry the standard forward for the next round of the Co-Presidency.  She’s certainly running the standard Clinton Playbook.  Yet despite her extensively borrowed “experience”, a largely sycophantic media (who else could have talked CNN into using questions from obvious plants such as Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr), and mammoth celebrity, her “inevitable” turn at President seems ever more questionable as the campaign heats up.  Why? 
 

I call it the Charisma Gap.

 

While Hillary has shown evident success improving her questionable warmth, it isn’t enough if she’s going to play the family game of changing her story from speech to speech.  She needs, like her husband did, to charm people into wanting to believe despite her tattered credibility; most specifically people that aren’t voting for her just because of who she is.  She’s still brittle, easily flustered, and doesn’t think well on her feet.   Not the kind of thing most people look for in a President.  She must try to stay in staged, scripted situations as often as possible.  On the rare occasion Bill got a tough question, he was usually able to spin it off in a warm and convincing fashion, even if he was playing fast and loose with the facts.  Hillary smiles, but usually comes off like Lady Macbeth greeting King Duncan.  If the news media makes the smart play to redeem itself from recent scandals by hitting Democrats with anything near the kind of questions that Republicans take for granted, Hillary will be in deep trouble.

 

But even if reporters refuse to put her feet to the fire, the GOP will.  Having a lock on the traditional mainstream media isn’t the gilt edged protection that it used to be.  If she couldn’t politically handle Bill’s “bimbo eruptions” gracefully, how well do you think she’s going to deal with sudden, uncomfortable questions regarding the Rose Law Firm, her investments, or numerous other personal scandals?  Think of the debates.  Imagine her reaction when Rudy Giuliani, a Brooklyn native, starts roasting her about New York bonafides, and her husband’s incredibly weak performance leading up to 9/11.  Imagine Fred Thompson, calm and jovial, tying her into knots as she glares and spits out her ineffective evasions to even moderately tough questions.  The only thing she’s been good at on her own is as a Democratic fundraiser, and even then just staying a short step ahead of the Grand Jury on several scandals down the years.  Imagine her having to answer about that.  Her nearly total lack of solid, verifiable accomplishments require her to run on her husband’s record which even the former President, with his immense political skills, has difficulty defending without throwing a fit when the tough questions arise.  In short, Hillary can only survive politically when the fix is in, and even the Clintons can’t guarantee gentle handling enough to win on when around half the electorate refuses to vote for her under any circumstances.

 

Hillary is the latest in a long line of “spin over substance” Democrat Presidential contenders and nominees … but if she’s going to run the Clinton Playbook, she needs the Clinton charisma.  Otherwise, she’s just the latest mediocrity with no record worth running on trying to play President.

 

Incidentally, if she can’t handle Chris Matthews, how is she going to deal with Bin Laden, nuclear Iran and a resurgent China?  Just curious …

Here in Red State / flyover country we have a pretty clear idea about how political thought and the general worldview runs among the entertainment elites.  While most of us agree those views run from silly to suicidal, for the most part we’ve learned to overlook them.  We’re generally happy to allow you a genteel chuckle as you try to whiz your leftist brainwashing past us in the entertainment you produce … we’re not like other folks who want to destroy anyone that disagrees with them.

 

We would like you to understand something though. While most of us are fairly tolerant of your views, there is a point where enough is quite enough.

 

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11252007/gossip/pagesix/de_palma_iraq_flick_bombs_582058.htm

 

 http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

 

Please consider how many movie theatres, TV sets, CD players, etc. there are in all those Red counties, and how the attitudes of the people there effect your bottom line.  We like good old reluctant hero Sgt. Murtaugh, doing the right thing when the bad guys threaten innocent people, but once we associate Mr. Glover’s face with Castro, Chavez and other dangerous leftist nonsense, we can live quite happily without him.  Ask Martin Sheen about that, too.  When our most precious values are attacked, our collective memory can grow very long indeed .

 

Bottom line, we look at your moveon.org brand of politics in about the same light as we view your fad diets, fad religions, and $10,000 handbags: the foibles of people with too many resources and not enough sense.  A little is fine, a bit of eccentricity is expected in artists, and few of us look to you for anything approaching heavy thought anyway.  But do bear in mind that your First Amendment right to express yourselves doesn’t guarantee the right to be taken seriously, or indeed even listened to.  It certainly doesn’t cover loss of income when people - your customers - walk away because you’ve insulted their intelligence a few too many times.