Joel Osteen: Faster Horses

I admit, I am fascinated with Joel Osteen.

Primarily, the whole gospel-of-plenty thing, really blows my mind. Catholics will do a sneaky novena asking for greenbacks here and there, but nothing like Joel counsels us to do. He says you have to think BIG, like God does. He sounds like Cecil B DeMille.

As I've said before, this whole line of thinking was stolen wholesale from the late Reverend Ike, appropriately dressed up and taken to the white suburbs. Joel constantly tells us we deserve big things, better jobs, giant houses (don't settle for smaller!) and prosperity prosperity prosperity!

Listening to him, I have more than once recalled the chorus of the old Tom T. Hall song, Faster Horses:

Faster Horses
Younger Women
Older Whiskey
And More Money

I halfway-expect Joel to belt that out, at some point.

While I am admitting my fascination with America's foremost preacher of the Prosperity Gospel (note the link does not include Reverend Ike, whom they all stole from), let me catalog my points of fascination:

1) His smile and his teeth. The literary term, "he beamed at us" hardly suffices for what Joel can do... his smile is bloody incandescent.

Ronald Reagan Jr once said no man was a match for his father, when his father decided to "turn on the high-beams"--and I daresay, I have found the match.

Could anyone argue with this smile? I certainly couldn't. If he was in sales, he would be as rich as the Sun King... oh wait, he is and he is, I forgot.

2) His wife, Victoria. As a feminist, I don't usually call women Barbie dolls, since that would be mean, she winked at her readers. And besides, that would only be describing her appearance, not her famous diva-tantrums. Joel never talks about her tantrums, but I wonder how he feels about her periodic um, moods?

I'd love to be the proverbial fly-on-the-wall during one of their squabbles.

3) His hair. Nobody would listen to a promise of prosperity from a 49-year-old who was losing his hair. It's a psychological thing: since he has an enviable, profuse, heavy head of hair, he probably has LOTS OF EVERYTHING. Samson and Delilah, etc. His prayers keep his hair from falling out, don't they? Obviously, his prayers work pretty good!

4) The way he points upward (to God and heaven, presumably) at key points during his sermons. I once attended a retail-sales workshop in which I was taught that I should touch the item I intended to sell. Pick it up and make it "intimate"; you will notice on shopping networks such as QVC and HSN, there is virtual non-stop pawing of the merchandise. You have to make it real for people, and putting something REAL in their hands, is the way. And it does increase sales.

What do you if it's God you are selling?

Some preachers pound that Bible, or pound that lectern, or emote-in-extremis whilst explaining things (Jimmy Swaggart was famously very good at this). Joel points upward. Lots. It's like he's been there already, and has come back to tell you all about it.

Well, if having millions of dollars is the way to heaven, or is the equivalent of heaven on earth, or something... I guess he HAS been there, hasn't he?

My question is: In these harsh economic times, why isn't everyone jealous of him, instead of giving him even MORE money?

I think this is due to--

5) The amazingly-wholesome vibe he puts out. This is what keeps me glued to the screen. He is so POSITIVE, so, so, so... POSITIVE. There just isn't any other word for it. OPTIMISTIC maybe. And the people I've met who like Osteen, are just this optimistic and positive also. Although they tend to believe fundamentalist ideas (or at least give lip service to them), they are reluctant to judge others, and concentrate mostly on their own lives and spreading good feelings and love (while praying for prosperity).

You might say Osteen has learned to combine the peace-and-love of the hippie era of his childhood, with the Reagan-era go-getter capitalist concepts of his adulthood... just add Jesus and stir. Works for Joel.

Joel is way better than the Mike Huckabees of the world, and yet, there are Chrsitians who are driven bonkers by his warping of the scriptures, dragging in that tired old Prayer of Jabez and ignoring the words of Christ Himself.

Christ was no fan of the rich, and that is the Gospel. And yet, it seems this unabashed embrace of capitalist values insures they won't meddle too much in social issues. After all, unbridled capitalism IS a social issue, too, and I think Joel knows that. I watched an old sermon last night, dated 2009, and it was interesting in the way he says "Don't worry that you can't afford a new house, because God will provide!"--wait, I thought, did this idea contribute to the housing market crash?

Hanna Rosin has been there already, and is way ahead of me:

On the cover of his 4 million-copy best seller from 2004, Your Best Life Now, Joel Osteen looks like a recent college grad who just got hired by Goldman Sachs and can’t believe his good luck. His hair is full, his teeth are bright, his suit is polished but not flashy; he looks like a guy who would more likely shake your hand than cast out your demons. Osteen took over his father’s church in 1999. He had little preaching experience, although he’d managed the television ministry for years. The church grew quickly, as Osteen packaged himself to appeal to the broadest audience possible. In his books and sermons, Osteen quotes very little scripture, opting instead to tell uplifting personal anecdotes. He avoids controversy, and rarely appears on Christian TV. In a popular YouTube clip, he declines to confirm Larry King’s suggestion that only those who believe in Jesus will go to heaven.

...

Osteen is often derided as Christianity Lite, but he is more like Positivity Extreme. “Cast down anything negative, any thought that brings fear, worry, doubt, or unbelief,” he urges. “Your attitude should be: ‘I refuse to go backward. I am going forward with God. I am going to be the person he wants me to be. I’m going to fulfill my destiny.’” Telling yourself you are poor, or broke, or stuck in a dead-end job is a form of sin and “invites more negativity into your life,” he writes. Instead, you have to “program your mind for success,” wake up every morning and tell yourself, “God is guiding and directing my steps.” The advice is exactly like the message of The Secret, or any number of American self-help blockbusters that edge toward magical thinking, except that the religious context adds another dimension.

...

Demographically, the growth of the prosperity gospel tracks fairly closely to the pattern of foreclosure hot spots. Both spread in two particular kinds of communities—the exurban middle class and the urban poor. Many newer prosperity churches popped up around fringe suburban developments built in the 1990s and 2000s, says Walton. These are precisely the kinds of neighborhoods that have been decimated by foreclosures, according to Eric Halperin, of the Center for Responsible Lending

...

[Most] new prosperity-gospel churches were built along the Sun Belt, particularly in California, Florida, and Arizona—all areas that were hard-hit by the mortgage crisis. Bowler, who, like Walton, was researching a book, spent a lot of time attending the “financial empowerment” seminars that are common at prosperity churches. Advisers would pay lip service to “sound financial practices,” she recalls, but overall they would send the opposite message: posters advertising the seminars featured big houses in the background, and the parking spots closest to the church were reserved for luxury cars.

Nationally, the prosperity gospel has spread exponentially among African American and Latino congregations. This is also the other distinct pattern of foreclosures. “Hyper-segregated” urban communities were the worst off, says Halperin.

...

It is not all that surprising that the prosperity gospel persists despite its obvious failure to pay off. Much of popular religion these days is characterized by a vast gap between aspirations and reality. Few of Sarah Palin’s religious compatriots were shocked by her messy family life, because they’ve grown used to the paradoxes; some of the most socially conservative evangelical churches also have extremely high rates of teenage pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and divorce.

In short, it's Joel Osteen's hour. He won't put you down for being divorced, etc.

He will point upward, and for some unfathomable reason, you just want to follow him up there.

Haley Watch: Transcript of Haley on ABC's THIS WEEK

Last Sunday, our very popular governor took time off from posing for magazine covers to talk to Christiane Amanpour on ABC's THIS WEEK. A mostly predictable interview, Governor Haley nattered on about what is appropriate and sounded like a veritable Mother Superior, whilst assuring us that she is NOT running for Vice President, like that other Lady-Tea Party-governor who didn't finish her term.

I figure I'll just give it to you straight; here is the transcript.

~*~

AMANPOUR: Governor, thank you for being with us.

GOV. NIKKI HALEY (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: It's great to be with you.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you first a big burning policy issue which is consuming a lot of time here in Washington and that is the raising of the debt ceiling. Do you think that this should happen or are you on the side of those who say hell no?

HALEY: Absolutely not. You know, we are seeing total chaos in D.C. right now. The very first thing they need to do is -- is make sure that they stop raising the debt. They need to make sure that they balance their budget like every other state in the country, and we've got to get control of our spending. It is chaos in D.C. and they need to stop.

AMANPOUR: So you say absolutely don't raise the debt ceiling. But what about the Fed? What about the treasury sector? What about Wall Street who's really worried that if this even goes down to the wire, it's going to really damage America's credibility and its ability to pay for doing its business.

HALEY: You know, government is notorious for saying the sky is falling. What I will tell you is every governor in the country has balanced their budget through very tough times. We have all had to make strong decisions. We have all had to go back to the basics and say what is the role of government? What do we have to have and work our way up?

AMANPOUR: So let's now then turn to the presidential race and the GOP candidates. Is Newt Gingrich an exciting candidate for you? You have said recently that there was a place and a time for him. Do you think he's the right candidate for the Republican party right now? Will he win the nomination?

HALEY: You know, I think the press always tries to paint a dark picture on everything. I think every candidate has their challenges. And I think that what we have seen with Newt Gingrich is he's had great ideas in the past, and what we are already starting to see is he's coming out and showing how his ideas today match the feelings of what we're dealing with today, whether it's the Medicaid mandates, whether it's food stamps, whether it's the unions. And he's come out and talked about the unions. That's what we want to hear about is the issues of the day. And I think that's what every candidate's going to have to do, and I was pleased to see him start to do that this week.

AMANPOUR: Well, but how do you square that saying that he did have a time and a place? Does he speak to the future to you?

HALEY: You know, I think that will remain to be seen. I think that's what he's got to tell. I think that the people of South Carolina and across this country are really going to push these candidates in a way that we've never pushed them before. And I think that Newt Gingrich has dealt with a lot of issues in the past, and I think now he's going to have to show that he's got those ideas to deal with the future.

AMANPOUR: So talking about policy debate, Mitt Romney gave a big speech this week about health care, about other issues, but primarily about health care. And he seemed to try to, again, put a square peg in a round hole saying that his health care for his state was great, but he would never do it for -- for federal health care.

The "Wall Street Journal" has called him compromised and not credible on this issue. Do you think that he's compromised and not credible? Could he be a nominee?

HALEY: You know, I think he absolutely could be a nominee. The interesting thing was he was one of the only governors that showed courage when it came to dealing with health care. I will tell you we do not want a Massachusetts health care plan in South Carolina. I think that he will have to continue to deal with that issue. I think he's going to have to talk about how that was not good for the country. That wouldn't be a good thing that we'd want to mandate on all of our states. And I think he'll have to respond to what his thought process was. But I think that we are looking for a leader that's willing to, one, make courageous stands, take strong policy decisions, but two, also admit when a mistake was made.

AMANPOUR: So do you think he adequately addressed that in his speech on Thursday? Has he laid that issue to rest?

HALEY: I think that issue's going to continue to be part of the debate. I think that every, like I said every candidate's going to have their challenge, I certainly think that's going to be his challenge.

AMANPOUR: So when it comes to social issues South Carolina is a pretty conservative state. What about Mitch Daniels who may or may not get in? Some are saying that he probably will. He has called for a truce on social issues and to be able to push the economy and other such issues forward. Do you agree with that?

HALEY: We're very conservative on maintaining family values, keeping our families strong. But also understanding the value of a dollar and that government is overspending in a time where we need to be cutting back.

AMANPOUR: Let's just take what you talked about family values and sort of make it about family. Mitch Daniels -- obviously there's been a lot of talk also about his wife, how sort of reluctant she is as a political spouse. Do you think there is enough, too much, not enough focus on the families, the wives of the candidates? How do you assess all of that?

HALEY: I think it's ridiculous. I think it's a terrible distraction to a campaign. I think what you need to be looking at and what I'm certainly looking at is what type of governor he was. He was an amazing reformer in his state. He brought great issues. He showed great courage at times that he needed to. Those are the issues we need to talk about. He needs to give his stance on where he stands with family values and what he'll do to make sure those stay strong in this country. But I think to go into a candidate's personal life and to try and attack them and distract the country, people are smarter than that.

AMANPOUR: You, of course, suffered your own attacks on that regard. Do you think that it's finished, that kind of smearing or do you think that that's going to be part of the race in 2012?

HALEY: We won't allow it in South Carolina. You know, the one thing about the people of South Carolina -- they showed it in my election, they will show it in the presidential -- is we will ask the hard questions, but we will show every candidate respect. And the second a political consultant tries to play dirty tricks, it will backfire and it will hurt that candidate. And so my warning to every candidate coming into South Carolina is come in, talk about the issues, that's what we want to hear about, but the distractions are not welcome in South Carolina.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you about Donald Trump. What would you say to him, given that he has revealed himself, at least in one speech with women's group, to have a bit of a, I suppose what one might call a potty mouth, would you tell him that that was appropriate? What would you say about that? It offended a lot of women.

HALEY: That is not appropriate in South Carolina. We will give all of our candidates respect, and we certainly expect our candidates to come in and give the people of South Carolina respect.

AMANPOUR: You also said that it's time for Republicans to stop just attacking President Obama and look forward, look towards leadership, look towards their own positive ideas for government. Do you think for instance a politician such as Sarah Palin, who's a big supporter of yours, would her style, would her tone be the kind that you look for in a 2012 election since she really does spend a lot of time attacking President Obama's policies?

HALEY: You know, what we're saying is -- we're not saying don't attack his policies, that is what's gotten us into this policy debate that we're in today. What we are saying is we want to hear the solutions.

AMANPOUR: Do you think Sarah Palin would get in?

HALEY: I think she is amazing at getting people to know the power of their voice. I think that she woke up a lot of people in our country that just really thought that government was a waste of time and she got them to care again. And for that, I think that there will always be a place for her. But now it's time to talk about policy. And I think that if she chooses to get in, she'll understand that the policy issues of today are relevant and important right now too.

AMANPOUR: There have been a lot of suggestions that would make a great vice-presidential nominee, that you'd be great on any ticket. It's been discussed publicly. Where do you stand on that? Would you want to do that if you were asked?

HALEY: No. What I will tell you is it is -- I find it silly that it's being talked about, but I will tell you this. The people of South Carolina took a chance on electing me. It is my job and my family's job to prove to them that they made a good decision. I plan on committing to the people of this state my full four years in office, and I look forward to watching the 2012 and making sure those policy discussions are there, but I also plan on making the people of South Carolina very proud. I represent the best state in the country. There's no better job than that.

AMANPOUR: I heard a very strong commitment there. No waffle room. No wiggle room.

HALEY: No wiggle room at all. We are staying in South Carolina, and we're going to continue to lead it in a way that makes everyone proud.

AMANPOUR: Governor Haley, thank you very much for joining us from South Carolina.

HALEY: Thank you.

~*~

EDITED TO ADD: Nikki Haley muscles up for 2012 (Politico)

Charlie Sheen: Hero of the hour?

As you have undoubtedly heard, Charlie Sheen's live shows didn't go over so well over the weekend. Practicing alcoholics are never as funny as they think they are, in the long haul. With editing, yes. For a whole show, no. From ABC:

After all but getting booed off stage at the Detroit, Mich. debut of his live show, "My Violent Torpedo of Truth/Defeat Is Not an Option," it's unclear if or how Sheen's month-long tour will proceed.

Anticipation ran high for the event. Ticket holders milled about the Fox Theater in downtown Detroit before the 8 p.m. start time, sometimes yelling Sheen catchphrases like "tiger blood" and "winning" to rev up fellow attendees. As of Saturday afternoon, all 4,700 seats at the theater had been sold.

...

Sheen managed to up the crowd's enthusiasm for the start of his act. Before his official debut, he played a montage of video clips including scenes from "Apocalypse Now," the film starring Sheen's father that Sheen claims to be obsessed with. He then strutted on stage with his "goddesses," Bree Olsen and Natalie Kenly, who proceeded to engage in a passionate kiss, much to the delight of the crowd.

They then went backstage to burn a bowling shirt similar to the one Sheen wore on "Two and a Half Men." While footage of the shirt on fire in a garbage can played on the big screen behind him, Sheen urged the crowd to hold up their lighters, asking, "Doesn't anyone smoke cigarettes anymore?"

The spectacle mirrored the ranting and raving Sheen's done online and in interviews over the past few weeks. But after that, things took a turn for the weird.

Sheen stood at a podium in front of a pseudo-presidential looking seal saying "Warlock States of Sheen" and launched into a nonsensical speech seemingly directed at his critics.

He started, "Tonight I am delivered by cyber cloud, with the stomp and glisten of heaven's produce section." He then talked about burning something "down from the mount of olive" and "gasoline rainbows." He frequently damned "trolls" -- presumably, "Two and a Half Men" creator Chuck Lorre and his former bosses at CBS and Warner Brothers. He called Sarah Palin a "whore" for no apparent reason.

No apparent reason? Of course there is an apparent reason, that you media-swine refuse to take seriously: He's a misogynist pig.

The fact that so many people find his woman-hating amusing and worth celebrating, lets us know exactly how far we have to go.

Anna Holmes' piece in the New York Times, linked above, details all the woman-pounding Charlie has humorously engaged in over the years. And as a rich, privileged white man, he gets by with all of it (paging Chris Brown! Chris Brown, call your office)... and of course, since so many of the women getting pounded are mere actresses, models and sex workers, they 'deserve' it:

A woman’s active embrace of the fame monster or participation in the sex industry, we seem to say, means that she compromises her right not to be assaulted, let alone humiliated, insulted or degraded; it’s part of the deal. The promise of a modern Cinderella ending — attention, fame, the love and savings account of a rich man — is always the assumed goal.

Objectification and abuse, it follows, is not only an accepted occupational hazard for certain women, but something that men like Mr. Sheen have earned the right to indulge in. (Mr. Sheen reportedly once said that he didn’t pay prostitutes for the sex; he paid them “to leave.”)

Haha, ain't that funny? Is he serious or joking?--go the predictable onlooker-comments... ohhh, he's just being funny. Actually, I think he means everything he says, and he has repeatedly proven that he is willing to back it up with a nice right to the jaw, if any nearby female should argue.

Indeed, it’s difficult for many to discern any difference between Mr. Sheen’s real-life, round-the-clock, recorded outbursts and the sexist narratives devised by reality television producers, in which women are routinely portrayed as backstabbing floozies, and dreadful behavior by males is explained away as a side effect of unbridled passion or too much pilsner.

And so, a pricey live show-tour by a woman-hater, or should I say ANOTHER woman-hater (there are oodles of rock stars and hip-hop stars and country-and-western stars who have gotten plenty rich off of women-hating... paging Eminem! paging Ted Nugent! etc) ... and then I see Phyllis Schlafly (barfs for emphasis) on C-Span over the weekend, telling us that feminism is over with and no longer necessary, and what are these harridans and harpies still so pissed off about?

One wonders if she has flipped her channels lately, over to ABC (live video of Charlie at above link) or to the millions of other outlets that have advertised Charlie's zealously-sexist antics over recent months. Hello? What planet is Schlafly on?

They deserve each other, most assuredly.

Haley the Comet

Nikki Haley photo is from the NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE. (Too bad she won't talk to any press in the state where she is actually the GOVERNOR, huh?)

~*~

The New York Times magazine has just named our governor Nikki Haley, "The Comet"--now is that cute or what?

The State newspaper in Columbia writes:

Haley, South Carolina’s Republican governor of one month and a GOP rising star, is the interview subject in today’s New York Times Magazine. (Last week, ABC’s “This Week.” This week, the NYT. Who knows, maybe after she runs out of national mainstream media, which she loves to rip, the governor might speak to the S.C. press that serves her constituents.)

I guess me and Michael Ulmer aren't the only people who have noticed that.

Since everyone is so bedazzled by her on a national scale, maybe she will do a Palin... serve a scant couple of years and GO AWAY. Certainly, I wouldn't argue.

Here is the NYT-mag softball-interview. My favorite quotes:

NYT: You’re said to be incredibly competitive. Outside politics, how does this manifest itself?

Haley: Ask my kids. When we have basketball tournaments, I am the basketball queen. When we play the Wii, I am the bowling queen. And I will forever say that I am the Putt-Putt queen.

NYT: How do you react when you lose?

Haley: I don’t lose, so I don’t have to worry about that.



Them big-city slickers can hardly contain themselves, people. ((rolls eyes)))

Sarah Palin: Even more of a mess than we thought

I know we are supposed to be observing "no Sarah Palin week" or perhaps (for the particularly ambitious liberal!) "no Sarah Palin month" (a whole month!?!) --but speaking personally? You gotta be kidding.

Her ex-aide's manuscript (not even published yet!) was obtained by POLITICO. Translation: All "no Sarah" promises will simply have to go by the wayside for now.

The aide, Frank Bailey, tells us everything we know already, but with emails!:

A new memoir from an embittered former aide to Sarah Palin includes a trove of emails that vividly illustrate her intense focus on image and depiction in the media.

The emails, apparently from the former Alaska governor, portray Palin as nearly obsessed with her political adversaries and consumed with every slight, real or perceived.

This makes me wonder... I've gotten numerous hits from Alaska on my various Sarah Palin posts, which I assumed were from disgruntled Alaskans, personally subjected to Palin and looking for sarcasm aplenty (and we're SO happy to do our part here at DEAD AIR), as well as garden-variety sleaze (ditto!) ... and now I am wondering if these hits (particularly from Wasilla) were from Palin herself. Does she troll the blogs looking for herself? (I know the "Real Housewives" frequently do, but at least they admit it.)

More from the pissed-off employee:

A Palin ally, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that Bailey and Palin corresponded and that the former aide had access to Palin’s passwords and her email account. But the Palin ally said that the content should be viewed through the lens of Bailey being “the quintessential disgruntled employee” who had been denied senior jobs he sought, cut out of Palin’s vice presidential campaign, and been caught up in the “Troopergate” scandal — details Bailey confirms in the proposed book, which is titled “In Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin: A Memoir of our Tumultuous Years.”

As every working class person knows: disgruntled employees know where all the bodies are buried. If you want truth, go to them; they are not beholden to anyone and do not act in obscenely craven ways in order to keep their jobs. (Brief quasi-socialist note: Why an ex-employee should be regarded as less truthful than someone still on the payroll is one of those evil capitalist lies, which you should never, ever believe.) Frank has been cut loose, and now, he is here to tell us all about his nasty boss. LISTEN UP, good Republicans. Behold your queen. She doesn't have too much between the ears:

“Todd just told me you had spoken with him awhile back and reported that some law enforcement friends of yours claimed some dumbass lie about Track not being Todd’s son? This really, really disgusts me and ticks me off,” Palin, according to Bailey, emailed aide Scott Heyworth in January of 2006. “I want to know right now who said it, who would ever lie about such a thing… this is the type of bullsh** lie about family that WILL keep me from running for Governor.”

Palin later repeated the obscure rumor in an email to supporters, prompting Bailey to wonder about her “penchant for inflaming issues that, left on their own, might disappear” – a recurring pattern in her public life.

By the spring of 2009, just months after she and John McCain had lost the presidential race, Palin is depicted as tired of being criticized and focused more on her own national image than Alaska issues.

“I hate this damn job,” she wrote in an April 28 email to Bailey and another confidante.

A month later, she delves deeply into the case of Carrie Prejean, the Miss California beauty pageant contestant who voiced her support for traditional marriage.

“I got slammed on Fox News today for “not defending” (Carrie Prejean), speaking out for someone unfairly and mercilessly attacked by hypocritical media,” Palin wrote.

“I think it would be good to have that statement out there that of course I support this young, strong woman who voiced her honest opinion on stage - then got punished and crucified for doing so. What kind of statement can go out to solidify my already-spoken support for her? I know if I were in her shoes (and I have been) it does mean a lot to have someone with the balls to publicly speak up in support. I’ve asked for [Donald] Trump’s contact info so I can thank him, too.”

Palin, Bailey writes, thought about contacting the media to explain her support for Prejean – but then reconsidered.

“If I call those reporters then I‘m on the hook to answer all their other questions they want,” she wrote.

Concludes Bailey after the episode: “The question we failed to ask was: What does this possibly have to do with being governor of Alaska? While it had nothing to do with Alaska, it had plenty to do with publicity. Fox News made this an ongoing story, giving it wall-to-wall coverage. Sean Hannity in particular latched on with both hands. With Sarah suddenly an outspoken supporter, he had gorgeous Prejean on one arm and sparkling Governor Palin on the other. He appeared a happy man.”

Palin wasn’t entirely divorced from local issues at the time, but her fixation on appearances veered into the absurd, Bailey writes.

When an Anchorage TV news station, KTUU, ran an online poll in May asking Alaskans if they agreed with her decision to reject federal stimulus dollars for energy, Bailey writes that Palin’s small inner-circle “invested time, energy, and emotion into linking our computers and utilizing our software into generating votes in favor.”

Refreshing the results to run up the votes, they emailed one another.

When an aide said Palin was initially leading in the unscientific survey, the governor responded: “Oh thank God!”

This makes me wonder even more... Did Palin teach her protégé (and brand new Tea-Party Governor) Nikki Haley, these kinds of high-tech hi-jinks? It makes sense; how Nikki vaulted to the head of the pack so quickly.

Sarah's mentorship promises to reap major rewards in media time AND in learning how to cook the books.

Bailey reveals that she didn’t even support her own eventual ticket-mate in the GOP presidential primary, recalling that in a January 2008 email Palin wrote: “Huck’s a good pick for me, just fyi.”

Her distrust of Republican insiders was crystallized in a scathing e-mail she sent in June 2009.

After they couldn’t confirm her attendance at an event, the GOP congressional campaign committees rescinded their invitation for Palin to speak at their fundraising dinner that month in favor of Newt Gingrich. The Alaskan reacted by typing a scathing assessment of the former speaker and the national party to her team, in which she credited God for keeping her away from the Washington fundraiser.

“Yes, (Newt/GOP) are egotistical, narrow minded machine goons… but all the more reason God protected me from getting up on stage in front of 5000 political and media ‘elites’ to praise him, then it be shown across the nation.” Palin wrote in the e-mail.

“At some point Newt would have shown his true colors anyway and we would have been devastated having known we’d earlier prostituted ourselves up in front of the country introducing him and acting like that good ol’ rich white guy is the savior of the party,” she continued.

And with the anti-Newt remarks, we see how the Tea Party has endeared itself to the populists of the land. Her last sentence was something I might have written.

However, when she thanks God for saving her from the embarrassment of "nothing decent to wear"--well, that is NOT something I would write. But it is something I hear women say all the time here in DeMint country.

The concept that Almighty God micromanages all of our lives and has time to give a rats' ass about your clothes, well, doesn't that just sum it all up, folks? What kind of bizarre, ego-driven, TV-American narcissism is THAT?:

Palin went on to express another reason she was thankful to the almighty that she wasn’t attending the fundraising gala.

“Plus, I had nothing to wear, and God knew that too. Party machinery sucks. I can’t tell you how much I hate it - nothing ever changes - we went through it before and after the VP campaign,” she wrote. “I’ve gone through it all my career. We just don’t fit into it, and maybe we should thank God for that.”

Oh boy.

And as I wrote here, working for Palin looks like one of the shittiest jobs in the world:

“As mentioned in an earlier chapter, getting Sarah to meetings and events was like nailing Jell-O to a tree,” Bailey wrote. “On the campaign trail and as governor, Sarah went through at least ten schedulers, with few lasting more than months. Nobody wanted the job because Sarah might fail to honor, at the last minute, the smallest commitments, and making excuses for her became a painful burden. In at least one instance, a scheduler quit after breaking down in tears; another left after being accidentally copied on an email from Sarah trashing her.”

It was, Bailey claims, a scheduling issue that ultimately prompted him to lose faith in Palin.

After committing to attend an Anchorage ceremony in honor of an abortion restriction in August 2009, Palin backed out just days before the well-publicized event, Bailey claims.

And she doesn't like government interference, dammit, in anything EXCEPT a woman's womb (where she inexplicably believes the government should set up shop):

“Sarah spoke of an aversion to our no-smoking in restaurant and motorcycle helmet laws. As governor in September 2007, she wrote specifically, ‘I want to make sure DOT knows my position on helmet laws - I don’t support them.’ After alerting us to her aversion to these laws, Sarah then added, ‘Heck, I don‘t even believe in Click-it or Ticket seat belt laws, and I filmed the damn commercial for ‘em.’”

The next President? The next Vice-President? Does that scare you? It should.

Please do not underestimate her, as the Republican Establishment also underestimated Haley.

Start trashing her now.

Odds and Sods: End of 2010 Edition

Hey you crazy kidz, hope you all have a great New Years celebration planned. And resolutions, lots and lots of good-hearted resolutions, that make us feel all warm and fuzzy (at least until we break them).

This year has seen DEAD AIR's lowest number of blog posts ever, and one of my resolutions is to post more, even if the posts are short. I don't have to turn everything into a damn epistle! But alas, old habits die hard.

The important thing is the HABIT, I have discovered. If you let a few days go by without writing, well... it's easier to let a few MORE days go by... and finally, you aren't writing at all. That's how it initially happened to me some years ago, when I went long periods (like, years) without writing. I missed chronicling some very important, earth-shattering events, and I now greatly mourn the loss. (We can't remember everything we were thinking/doing ten years ago, even if we believe we do; I re-read parts of this blog from only three years ago and I am astounded at the details I have forgotten already.) I decided I wouldn't let that happen again, but this year, I nearly did.

As many of you know, my spiritual center (so to speak) was re-centered (so to speak), and I found it hard to adequately convey my thoughts and feelings around the shift in sensibility. I still find it very difficult, and I am largely unable to write sensibly about leaving the Church. It remains a jumble of emotions and I need to let it all settle, before I attempt to go there. I have about a half-dozen unfinished posts regarding sudden realizations I have had, re: Christianity and identifying as Christian. For one thing, a loss of respectability, that 1) I didn't know I had and 2) didn't know I valued. Some of this respectability is social, some political, and some is self-respect, and that last one is the one that caught me off guard.

I still identify as a Catholic in a social/ethnic way, and that is also very hard to quantify. I am not sure I even understand what it means, but it is simply true.

And so, forward into another year...

~*~

Two of Cravin Melon, but not sure which two! (They introduced themselves as "2/5 of Cravin Melon" at the Earth Fare benefit for Harvest Hope Food Bank, Thanksgiving Eve.)

~*~

DEAD AIR almost got through a whole year without a troll invasion, but last night, there they were, scurrying out from under all kinds of rocks. (((screams)))

I am currently waiting for the cops to arrive to arrest me for not deleting the troll's angry posts (!), as I have been assured they are on the way.

Today, I drove home at breakneck pace and the only thing I found was two florescent light bulbs outside my door, to install in the kitchen. *sigh* No cops. No subpoena. No indictment. Galdurnit! (as my late uncle liked to say) It appears I got all my hopes up for nothing.

I was planning a really JAZZY end-of-year post about Freedom of Speech and blogging, complete with trolls sending me to jail after posting their addresses on my blog (seriously, read the link)... but nah. I was also hopeful that this would be a big First Amendment case, endearing me to all of Blogdonia (and bringing me thousands of hits, of course), but it all turned out to be just another annoying pain in the ass.

~*~

Tyler Ramsey at the Bohemian Cafe in Greenville, December 4th. His musical compatriots, BAND OF HORSES, have just been nominated for a Grammy award, which he called "Some crazy news!" It certainly is!

Congrats on the nomination, Tyler, and good luck. (Apologies for the blurry photo, but it was kinda dark in there.)

~*~

I did want to link a few people who posted especially interesting, fun and/or very readable stuff that I didn't get to highlight previously:

:: How do I feel about the recent lift of the ban on openly gay soldiers (i.e. Don't ask, don't tell)? Truthfully? I hate when still another group gets turned into cannon fodder. Suzan sums up my feelings perfectly in the title of her piece: To the Gay Community: Now That You Can Join the Military, Please Don’t!

:: Renegade Evolution meets the Furries... great stuff: You’re going to Baltimore? You might need…

:: Jon shared this one with me: The Professional Left Versus The Left of Us. Money quote:

But to some the fascism warned of in all those faint allusions to totalitarian horrors already exists and the death camp trains have been running for decades with barely a peep from the professional liberals. Should we care about Obama’s failure to close Guantanamo when he never felt pressure enough to even lie about wanting to shut down the Corrections Corporation of America? Prisons and the racist legislation, hyper-policing, brutality and fraudulent judicial system that keep them filled are among the nation’s biggest businesses. Joblessness and poverty continue to worsen and even the tens of thousands dying from war abroad are more than matched by the deaths in this country resulting from public policies which deny adequate housing, food and health care to millions.

Preach it, preach it!

:: Skepchick: Eating Disorders, the Media, and Skepticism.

:: AMERICA: Y UR PEEPS B SO DUM? Ignorance and courage in the age of Lady Gaga by Joe Bageant. Required reading for every culture warrior!

Yellowdog Granny's recent funnies! It's where I found the comic on the left.



Speaking of which, I've been a loyal REAL HOUSEWIVES fan since day one, but this year, I was pretty disappointed in the newest incarnation: The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. Boring, predictable, with no authentic or amusingly-outrageous neurosis at all, just garden-variety, high-tax-bracket narcissism. Narcissism without neurosis is just... narcissism. Neurosis, however, is what makes the world go round! (We crave copious tearful, self-centered confessions about how no one understands what they go through!!!!) The Bev Hills gang doesn't have enough self-pity to suit me... or it could be that they've had SO MUCH BOTOX they are totally unable to move their faces (the husbands too!) and as a result, cry with their eyes wide open. And that just doesn't pull at my heartstrings in the same way.

If you can't even scrunch up your face and cry like the rest of us, fuck you.

:: Media Matters: 15 Whoppers [Glenn] Beck did not get fired for in 2010. (My first thought: What?! ONLY 15?)

:: Sheila instructs us in Relearning how to breathe. As a customer service rep, I would often notice that my breathing would get all raggedy and strange, after an hour or so of getting my ass chewed out non-stop. I would take a few seconds and concentrate on breathing in and out, and I was amazed at the difference in my state of mind, my countenance, my inner calm.

:: Mia Mingus shares her feelings about November 6, the anniversary of her adoption. This is her recorded birthday, but of course, not really her birthday. I had never really stopped to consider the fact that most adoptees do not know their actual birthdays:

I hate the confusion that surrounds my birthday now. People constantly getting confused, “so which birthday do you celebrate?” “When is your real birthday?” Since finding out the truth, I would rather deny my birthday all together, no celebrations, no worries about what or how birthdays are supposed to feel to someone who does not even know how to think of her own birth. It only marks another year that I have spent separated from pieces of myself that may or may not even exist; pieces of my self that made me, created me, but don’t know me now. It only marks a deep sadness at having celebrated something that was so wrong for so long, something that wasn’t real, the way sometimes entire decades of my life have felt.

Beautiful, expressive writing.

:: My always-embarrassing senator, Tea Party busybody Jim DeMint, has just revealed himself to be a starstruck fanboy, gushing to Politico that Sarah Palin has "done more for the Republican Party than anyone since Ronald Reagan," -- apparently with a straight face, too.

As they say, those two need to get a room.

~*~

And now (((drum roll))) DEAD AIR VIDEO OF THE YEAR... as always, my criteria is the same: Which one did I listen to the most after I initially posted it?

Ohhh, that's an easy call. I must have listened to this five thousand times by now. (As I said back in April, all due to the wonders of modern technology!)

Cleo's Mood - Junior Walker and the All Stars



HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE! Have a fabulous 2011!

*Photos from my FLICKR page*

Why the Right wing is winning, continued

...because the left no longer tolerates dissent.

I just realized I have been banned from a good half-dozen lefty-blogs in the past few weeks. And not a single right-wing blog has banned me.

I have been as much of a pest at the conservative right-wing blogs as I have been at the liberal-lefty-radical blogs; I have in fact been far more rude and nasty to the Tea Partiers. I have (more or less) minded my manners at all of the lefty blogs, but that hasn't helped me. After all, I AGREE in principle with the lefty bloggers.

All arguments at left-leaning blogs centered on various minor points of dogma, or about the fact of confrontation itself (something the right-wing welcomes and enjoys). The Left will have none of it. It seems the good people of the Left cannot even answer ME, one of their own. How on earth could the Left realistically respond to the Right? Looking at the liberal blogs in question, I see that no outright conservatives are allowed to participate. Looking at the conservative blogs, I see a willingness to take on the liberals, even a zeal to do so.

This is how we know they are on the ascent; they are unafraid.

Meanwhile, the Left cowers and censors some old hippie grandmother who already agrees with them.

Good lord, what's wrong with this picture.

~*~

Standing around in a cozy Christmas huddle with several female customers, chatting/worrying aloud about mercury content in fish, when one of them emphatically remarked: We need to be MAMA GRIZZLIES for the environment.

What?

Oh dear.

Does she know that Sarah Palin, Mama Grizzly of the Mama Grizzly movement, just shot a reindeer, which she will likely roast out on the snow-covered Alaskan tundra, and serve for Christmas dinner? I do not trust rich caribou-killing politicians/reality-TV whores to take care of the environment. I do trust Sarah Palin to be a bloodthirsty warmonger, mindless Republican talking-head and overall narcissistic swine.

Why, I wondered, do I come to such different conclusions than my customer... a very nice lady who speaks to me every day and cares about the poor fish filled with mercury? (She really does, too.)

Is it because of our different backgrounds that we have come to different conclusions? We don't seem that different to me.

That's the scary thing.

~*~

Another reason is that certain dark corners of the Left seem to have no sense of decency these days.

For example, Todd Pettigrew just wrote a spirited defense of incest on Macleans. Not just any incest (of course!) but the gold-standard of incest: father/daughter incest, the sexy kind that gets middle-aged guys excited. All those hot-young-daughter stories on BARELY LEGAL have finally made a cultural impact, and you can almost hear the drooling. These are porn-fantasies come to life, and various men on the left can barely restrain their enthusiasm. If I were Pettigrew's daughter and I lived in his house? I'd be making plans to move. Unless I was too young to move. And then I would have nothing to worry about, needless to say, since this is all about CONSENSUAL incest; this is a defense of incest only AT THE AGE OF CONSENT. Dad only makes the moves on his daughter the DAY SHE TURNS 18. Yes, we all know that's the way it usually happens, huh? It's all very RESPECTFUL and MINDFUL OF THE AUTONOMY OF WOMEN. Sure it is.

Feminists write epistles the length of the Summa Theologica about incest and how it is an abuse of familial and patriarchal power; how it amounts to men creating and brainwashing sexual beings for their own use, and it all comes to this? Some hotshot professor (David Epstein) is busted for "having an affair" with his 20-something daughter, and well... we obviously need to rethink things. I mean, this is a COLUMBIA PROFESSOR! It MUST be okay.

After eons of redneck jokes about southerners banging their sisters and their kids, the people on Central Park West DIDN'T REALIZE that important people of the upper classes want to bang their kids too! They have just received the memo, and they are on the case. We'll have your reputation restored in no time, professor Epstein!

They are now comparing incest to homosexuality, which incidentally, is an argument I first heard from William Donahue of the Catholic League: First they'll say homos are okay and next thing you know, they will be championing incest.

Oh, don't be ridiculous, we replied.

And now, the fashionable liberals are saying just that. They are comparing same-sex peers who have attractions to each other, to someone who RAISED A CHILD to be his sex partner.

Needless to say, this is all guys excusing/defending this behavior... and this is all about David Epstein and Woody Allen and other MEN. I don't see anybody advocating moms diddling their sons (of whatever age) which I think would TERRIFY these men in a way they could not even discuss rationally. All of the examples they offer are about MEN MEN MEN... and their daughters.

Jesus H, has the Left lost all sense of morality? We have 9.8% unemployment (not nearly as sexy a story) and lefty writers are wasting valuable political net-space defending a perverted professor who can't keep it zipped around his own kid.

I figure these sicko defenses of sicko Epstein brought at least another thousand people or so over to the Tea Party side.