jon stewart "likes" rachel maddow - who cares?

If you're a fellow media junkie, it's likely you've seen the conversation between Jon Stewart and Rachel Maddow in which Stewart reiterated his "Rally for Sanity" stance that MSNBC is the liberal equivalent of Fox News and Rachel gave a lot of factual reasons why he's wrong.  I'd take Stewart down myself but I'd be hard pressed to do it better than Bill Maher, so watch his spot-on analysis here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqjh6JyxOlk

At the end of the interview Stewart announces he "likes" Maddow.  Based on his regularly interrupting her, dismissing her notion that her bosses were "courageous" in employing liberal talent, and generally refusing to acknowledge that what she does is on another level than Bill O'Reilly he doesn't appear to respect her much but apparently he'd be willing to join her for a beer.  Rachel is extremely gracious but I think I'd have had to say - "Thanks Jon, I'm glad you like me.  But I have no idea what bearing it has on our conversation here".

I like a lot of people who I wouldn't want reporting the news or running the government.  I'm sure I've enjoyed  books and movies and paintings produced by people I wouldn't have over for Sunday supper.  When I was running restaurants I would frequently shock staff by asking them to do things like bus tables, or answer the phone, or pick up the napkin they dropped on the floor.  They would be stunned at being corrected.  After protesting this great injustice (bring bread to my table - that's the busser's job - oh, the indignity) they would inevitably follow it with "It's not that I don't like you", to which I would reply "You don't need to like me, you just need to do the job". Oddly, this simple statement of fact tended to make them like me. Whatever.

It's never occurred to me that my boss might worry whether I liked them or not.  He/she was my boss.  We weren't going for lunch.  That didn't mean I didn't have an opinion about them, but I knew it would have no impact on how they expected me to do my job.  I had an odd pre-election conversation with a member of the opposing party.  This person's contention was that no one should be able to critique an electoral candidate unless they have something nice to say about them first, to encourage more civil discourse.  Okay.  Carly Fiorina has super taste in blazers.  Too bad she paid for them by costing 30,000 Californians their jobs.  I could say nice things about Carly Fiorina all day long (oh, okay, I couldn't) but it wouldn't change my oppostion to her stances on the issues or make her qualified to be a senator.  It wouldn't alter the meat of the debate.

"Liking" and  "being nice" are not what's needed to restore discourse and start getting things done. Civility.  Respect.  Listening.  Hard work.  A little humility.  Old fashioned, maybe, but I think it's a good start.

embarrassing moment in "you like me" history

Maybe at the end of it we'll end up finding out we like each other better than we thought we did. But that's an end point, not a beginning.  Because as Jon Stewart helped  remind us last week, being liked isn't the same as being heard.

from the sublime of the series to the mostly awful with glimmers of hope

Yup, I'm talking elections.  The hope, of course, provided by the stalwart residents of California who cheerfully informed two millionaires that our state is not for sale.  Bye bye Carly & Meg.  Will not be missing your smug faces on my tv machine.  Also the happy news that Sharon Angle lost, meaning we won't have to build that border wall to protect us from a state crazy enough to elect her after all.  Christine O'Donnell - done -although she doesn't seem clear on the concept having immediately followed her loss with a call to her opponent telling him what his agenda should be and then advising her followers "we've got the room all night..plenty of food..let's party".  Of course, given the fact that the way she's been supporting herself for years is by being a candidate, maybe this was just her last chance at a free meal.  Are those napkin wrapped canapes I see in your purse?  Andrew Cuomo prevailing over the porno loving, baseball bat wielding Carl Palladino - should've been inevitable, but hey, I'm calling it good news.

Now the bad news.  A lot of people voted for the party that gutted the economy and outsourced our labor market in the confusing belief that they would restore our economy and improve the labor market.  I could go deeper but that's pretty much it in a nutshell.  Why.  Truthfully, I don't think people read enough.  And even if you do read it becomes unfortunately increasingly possible to only read (or listen to) people who think just like you do.  On the right and the left.  Opinion becomes truth and opinion requires a lot less effort and self examination than research and analysis and finding fact.  Also, I wonder if there's a sort of national Stockholm Syndrome afloat - people identifying with their captors.  They look at these not too bright, venal, wealthy "leaders" and think "Hey, I'm not too bright.  I can be venal.  Sure, I'm broke right now but if they can succeed, so can I.  What if I succeed and then I don't get away with all the crap they're getting away with because I backed some crappy financial reform bill. The hell with.  I'm rolling the dice on my chances. This is American, god damn it."  Sort of like the Scientologists who haunt the Celebrity Center near my house wearing psuedo military uniforms, smoking incessantly, and doing the bidding of the house of  L. Ron in the mistaken belief that one day they will wake up and be John Travolta.

In the wake of his success I was at first a little worried about John Boehner.  How will maintain his tan and his golf par with all of his new found responsibilites?  But then I realized it's no problem.  When it comes to legislating, he can text the word "no" from any ninth hole in the country.

we win!!!!

There are a lot of things to talk about with this win - how long the fans have waited, how quirky the team is, the genius manipulations of Bruce Bochy (a man with one emotion during a game - emotionless!).  But to me the real story of this team is that in an era where so much is driven by greed and ego and profit and endorsements and a sense of entitlement, these guys play because they love baseball and each other and their fans.

Can you think of a member of  this team who doesn't - in the first minute of an interview - begin immediately singing the praises of a teammate, minimizing their own contribution, shouting out to the fans. In the best possible way watching the Giants is like watching an unbelieveably talented high school team (and not just because a couple of our stars are barely out of high school) who are on the diamond because they can't imagine being anywhere else. Watching them you forget about the exorbitant salaries,manipulative agents, and whining prima donnas that too often are the story in the sport.  The East Coast elites who've dismissed this team all season missed the real story of this club, and an incredible opportunity to watch first rate, old school baseball in the process.

They should go ahead keep dimissing us.  Laugh at the beards, keep up the mock outrage over pot smoking in the bleachers, belittle the offense.  We've got the trophy.  But even better, unlike those cynics, we had us some fun.  Torture.  Mostly fun.  Is it spring training yet?

and so it starts

Yes, there is a lot going on in the world.  Elections, wars, terrorist special deliveries and all of this is important, I know it is.  But there is only one thing on my mind today and that is the World Series and my beloved, adored, extremely odd San Francisco Giants.