Another day, another needless controversy.
Never mind Trump is naming his staff and deserves closer attention and scrutiny.
Nope.
Let's focus on actors playing their parts in The Great Unhinged in accosting a vice-president in attendance.
Years ago I sat down with my wife in an Italian restaurant in Montreal. As we sat enjoying a nice summer evening the bus boy decided he was going to lecture my wife. See, she was wearing a Ralph Lauren top with an American flag emblazoned on it (she has roots in Rhode Island on her maternal side). See, again, she made the mistake of wearing such a sweater in public because George W. Bush was President. Suddenly, people with their own selfish and inflated sense of intellectual worth felt they were in the right - indeed obligated - to make right what they perceive to be unconscionable acts of intellectual and moral crimes!
He said, 'You think it's appropriate to wear that top given who is the leader in the United States?'
OH NO HE DIDNT!
Oh, but he did.
We were left in total shock. I politely told him to suck my dick but didn't want to engage the twit. When he left I asked my wife, 'did that just happen? Did that jackass actually pull that?'
After we regrouped we complained to the waiter and warned him that could cost him tips lest that twirp continued with this behaviour with out customers.
Where am I going with this?
Keep with me. I'm getting there.
A few years ago, my friend and I went to see Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. I've been to many concerts in my day and believe you me when I say there's not much out there that measures up to a Springsteen concert. It was right before, incidentally, Clarence died.
Now, we know Springsteen is a Democrat with progressive leanings. No one is perfect. But we know enough of his upbringing to understand where he's coming from and respect that even if we disagree from a philosophical standpoint.
We even have come to expect and tolerate his left-wing comments during a show.
However, this time I was left with a bitter taste in my mouth. I don't recall exactly what was said but even my buddy (who is a Sprinsgteen head having gone to over 25 of his concerts across North America) wondered if it was necessary.
This was all before all this polarization craze we're seeing now. Nonetheless, I came to the conclusion if Springsteen isn't going to respect the fact that some people in the audience doesn't share his world view, then it was time for me to let The Boss go. I'm not going to fork over $100 and shlep downtown fighting traffic to make a millionaire socialist wealthier still.
It's just the way I felt and still feel today. In fact, I don't bother going to concerts because I just don't know if they're going to lecture me - which I don't need. What I want is to be entertained; be taken away from life and all the politicization.
This is how I view what happened with Hamilton.
Yes. I get they have that right but knowing what we know of the left, I can't but help but feel like this was an exercise in more post-traumatic Trump syndrome and less about real, hard core principles. Moreover, it makes me wonder if this stunt was done on, say, Vice-President Joe Biden, would they extend the courtesy to those speaking their minds? My guess is no knowing what we've seen from progressives these last eight years.
Framed this way, it really isn't about free speech - as it's clear, to me anyway, this is fair game and should be defended - but more about whether it was in good taste.
To his credit, Pence took the high road and let it peter out as it ought to.
You know, there's something to be said of common courtesy (something the left preaches except when they feel it's appropriate to amend this basic sense of decency) in the public sphere. If we condone this at a play, why not at the movies or a mechanics shop, or as Starbucks attempted at their coffee shops or at the local soccer or Little League game or at the bank? Or what about during a national anthem a singer decides to have the singular arrogant audacity to change the lyrics as we've seen already? Where's the line?
How about everyone just shut the hell up where it's not expected to discuss politics? How about that? We consider it to be déclassé to talk politics at the dinner table so why should it be any different here?
I think, to me, this was all bush league. They knew damn well Pence, in a position that's largely symbolic, wouldn't or even couldn't respond. This is what makes their actions all the more dubious. There's nothing courageous in singling out a member of the audience and attacking them.
Sure, he's a big boy and can handle the criticism but using the stage to lecture someone is rude and, really, without intellectual merit since he's not in a position to rebut which is the foundation of true and healthy debate (although I'm not sure how is supposed to respond to the idea that blacks and minorities will suddenly not be protected in Trump's America. As if he can singularly end American law by edict as if he's Commodus. It's all so profoundly ignorant and irrational). Alas, to the left, there's only one-way debating when they see fit.
Anyway. It's always best to consider the source. Brandon Victor Dixon is the one who spoke on stage. This guy.
It's very easy for Pence to dismiss this outright for what it is. An irrational hissy fit masking as a plea for civil discourse. I know I would.
Hopefully, this immature act of faux-self righteous protesting (well, it's the theatre what did you expect?) will run its course and subside. People, it turns out, don't like to be lectured when they're not expected to be. It has nothing to do with living in ignorance or because they're racist or whatever negative pejorative the left hurls on people they disagree with. It's just that most sensible and fair minded people just know how to leave, you know, the politics at home. Never mind that some in the audience may be of greater intellect and perhaps spiritualism and wisdom than the people doing the lecturing.
Talk about ignoring and insulting other people's experiences. That they pay good money to see you perform doesn't extend they're willing to hear your thoughts about anything. And if you do, do it in a manner that won't alienate people - if that's possible. Annoying the peasants is never a good idea.
Just do your job.
I don't know much about this Hamilton (other than it strikes me as one gigantic exercise in cultural appropriation and extreme revisionism) thing but I do know they love to play up they're a 'diverse cast' (i.e. not white. Whites need not apply if you prefer) but it's richly ironic (and this is where we see racial inclusion stops with their arbitrary cultural lines) they do this when all we heard for eight years that if you criticized Obama it was because you were racist full stop. It wasn't hinted, it was overtly and explicitly repeated in words and verbally repeated to the point of actually having a negative impact. Now, they've suddenly reverse course. If you support a white President (well, this one anyway; or at least the one the left can't handle), you're still racist. The 34 million who voted for but Trump this time? That's right. In four years, you've become a racist. Wha happened?
What's really interesting is that Alexander Hamilton was the most ardent proponent of centralized power (a statist) who probably wouldn't have been to keen on this sort of free speech. What's equally interesting and just as ironic, I believe it was the "dictatorial" Hamilton who played his part in creating the imperfect Electoral College.
I guess one can say, the whole thing - from the 1A to the EC - is working as it ought to. It's not the system the problem. It's how it's (arbitrarily) intellectually interpreted and applied the problem.
Nonetheless, the best I can sum this up is 'it's their right but it doesn't make it right.'
Never mind Trump is naming his staff and deserves closer attention and scrutiny.
Nope.
Let's focus on actors playing their parts in The Great Unhinged in accosting a vice-president in attendance.
Years ago I sat down with my wife in an Italian restaurant in Montreal. As we sat enjoying a nice summer evening the bus boy decided he was going to lecture my wife. See, she was wearing a Ralph Lauren top with an American flag emblazoned on it (she has roots in Rhode Island on her maternal side). See, again, she made the mistake of wearing such a sweater in public because George W. Bush was President. Suddenly, people with their own selfish and inflated sense of intellectual worth felt they were in the right - indeed obligated - to make right what they perceive to be unconscionable acts of intellectual and moral crimes!
He said, 'You think it's appropriate to wear that top given who is the leader in the United States?'
OH NO HE DIDNT!
Oh, but he did.
We were left in total shock. I politely told him to suck my dick but didn't want to engage the twit. When he left I asked my wife, 'did that just happen? Did that jackass actually pull that?'
After we regrouped we complained to the waiter and warned him that could cost him tips lest that twirp continued with this behaviour with out customers.
Where am I going with this?
Keep with me. I'm getting there.
A few years ago, my friend and I went to see Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. I've been to many concerts in my day and believe you me when I say there's not much out there that measures up to a Springsteen concert. It was right before, incidentally, Clarence died.
Now, we know Springsteen is a Democrat with progressive leanings. No one is perfect. But we know enough of his upbringing to understand where he's coming from and respect that even if we disagree from a philosophical standpoint.
We even have come to expect and tolerate his left-wing comments during a show.
However, this time I was left with a bitter taste in my mouth. I don't recall exactly what was said but even my buddy (who is a Sprinsgteen head having gone to over 25 of his concerts across North America) wondered if it was necessary.
This was all before all this polarization craze we're seeing now. Nonetheless, I came to the conclusion if Springsteen isn't going to respect the fact that some people in the audience doesn't share his world view, then it was time for me to let The Boss go. I'm not going to fork over $100 and shlep downtown fighting traffic to make a millionaire socialist wealthier still.
It's just the way I felt and still feel today. In fact, I don't bother going to concerts because I just don't know if they're going to lecture me - which I don't need. What I want is to be entertained; be taken away from life and all the politicization.
This is how I view what happened with Hamilton.
Yes. I get they have that right but knowing what we know of the left, I can't but help but feel like this was an exercise in more post-traumatic Trump syndrome and less about real, hard core principles. Moreover, it makes me wonder if this stunt was done on, say, Vice-President Joe Biden, would they extend the courtesy to those speaking their minds? My guess is no knowing what we've seen from progressives these last eight years.
Framed this way, it really isn't about free speech - as it's clear, to me anyway, this is fair game and should be defended - but more about whether it was in good taste.
To his credit, Pence took the high road and let it peter out as it ought to.
You know, there's something to be said of common courtesy (something the left preaches except when they feel it's appropriate to amend this basic sense of decency) in the public sphere. If we condone this at a play, why not at the movies or a mechanics shop, or as Starbucks attempted at their coffee shops or at the local soccer or Little League game or at the bank? Or what about during a national anthem a singer decides to have the singular arrogant audacity to change the lyrics as we've seen already? Where's the line?
How about everyone just shut the hell up where it's not expected to discuss politics? How about that? We consider it to be déclassé to talk politics at the dinner table so why should it be any different here?
I think, to me, this was all bush league. They knew damn well Pence, in a position that's largely symbolic, wouldn't or even couldn't respond. This is what makes their actions all the more dubious. There's nothing courageous in singling out a member of the audience and attacking them.
Sure, he's a big boy and can handle the criticism but using the stage to lecture someone is rude and, really, without intellectual merit since he's not in a position to rebut which is the foundation of true and healthy debate (although I'm not sure how is supposed to respond to the idea that blacks and minorities will suddenly not be protected in Trump's America. As if he can singularly end American law by edict as if he's Commodus. It's all so profoundly ignorant and irrational). Alas, to the left, there's only one-way debating when they see fit.
Anyway. It's always best to consider the source. Brandon Victor Dixon is the one who spoke on stage. This guy.
It's very easy for Pence to dismiss this outright for what it is. An irrational hissy fit masking as a plea for civil discourse. I know I would.
Hopefully, this immature act of faux-self righteous protesting (well, it's the theatre what did you expect?) will run its course and subside. People, it turns out, don't like to be lectured when they're not expected to be. It has nothing to do with living in ignorance or because they're racist or whatever negative pejorative the left hurls on people they disagree with. It's just that most sensible and fair minded people just know how to leave, you know, the politics at home. Never mind that some in the audience may be of greater intellect and perhaps spiritualism and wisdom than the people doing the lecturing.
Talk about ignoring and insulting other people's experiences. That they pay good money to see you perform doesn't extend they're willing to hear your thoughts about anything. And if you do, do it in a manner that won't alienate people - if that's possible. Annoying the peasants is never a good idea.
Just do your job.
I don't know much about this Hamilton (other than it strikes me as one gigantic exercise in cultural appropriation and extreme revisionism) thing but I do know they love to play up they're a 'diverse cast' (i.e. not white. Whites need not apply if you prefer) but it's richly ironic (and this is where we see racial inclusion stops with their arbitrary cultural lines) they do this when all we heard for eight years that if you criticized Obama it was because you were racist full stop. It wasn't hinted, it was overtly and explicitly repeated in words and verbally repeated to the point of actually having a negative impact. Now, they've suddenly reverse course. If you support a white President (well, this one anyway; or at least the one the left can't handle), you're still racist. The 34 million who voted for but Trump this time? That's right. In four years, you've become a racist. Wha happened?
What's really interesting is that Alexander Hamilton was the most ardent proponent of centralized power (a statist) who probably wouldn't have been to keen on this sort of free speech. What's equally interesting and just as ironic, I believe it was the "dictatorial" Hamilton who played his part in creating the imperfect Electoral College.
I guess one can say, the whole thing - from the 1A to the EC - is working as it ought to. It's not the system the problem. It's how it's (arbitrarily) intellectually interpreted and applied the problem.
Nonetheless, the best I can sum this up is 'it's their right but it doesn't make it right.'
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.