Esther Press

As has been apparent to most anyone watching the political news, there has been a severe slant in positive coverage toward Barack Obama. SNL's recent satirization of CNN's grotesque Obama fawning was admirable and just. Likewise MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and the serial sexist Chris Matthews continued on with the Clinton slights and Obama love tonight after the debate. (Matthews awhile back said Obama made his thighs tingly, and this wasn't a joke. This is a network newsperson! Reminding one of Brit Hume and his days covering the White House while, on the side, playing tennis with the president). Anyway, almost immediately, Olbermann felt it necessary to frame the summary of the debate as no one scoring any "touchdowns" but "fieldgoals," and certainly Obama had more "hits" (no explanation necessary, it seemed)--he then threw it to the grinning and thoroughly annoying Chris Matthews on his assessment. Well, why even bother to ask? He could have mailed it in. Matthews decides to focus on some negative Clinton remarks, which is the typical drill. Then enter Andrea Mitchell, in a surprisingly even-handed take on Hillary-as-fighter. The first five minutes or so was spent on "negative" aspects of Clinton, or Tim Russert gloating about his supposedly probing question that got Clinton to mention she would like her Iraq vote back. Matthews and Russert then decided to spend some time behaving like frat brothers, giggling like idiots. There was the typical importance placed on "soundbites" and "great lines", as if this is all that we can, as a people, muster anymore. Or, perhaps, that's all that the commentators can understand: sports metaphors and soundbites. At that point, I could take no more and had to turn it off. I will say that in the debate Russert showed slightly more aggressiveness toward Hillary in his questioning, but overall I think he was balanced for a change. Brian Williams's questions were softballs--personal and mostly pathetic. I felt Williams' went much easier on Obama than Clinton. And how does the AP talk about the debate, what do they talk about--well, of course, Clinton's negatives (forget any meat); Reuters decided to just blow up a minor event to fill up an empty article with more emptiness. Is this a new service or a blog?

There will soon be medication available for Obamabots near you. Please have them check in with their doctors. In the meantime, some textual curatives:


The Messiah

The Rapture

The Republicans Doing What They Can To Help

On the news that Fidel Castro is stepping down in Cuba:


Bush, traveling in Rwanda, pledged to "help the people of Cuba realize the blessings of liberty."

"The international community should work with the Cuban people to begin to build institutions that are necessary for democracy," he said. "Eventually, this transition ought to lead to free and fair elections — and I mean free, and I mean fair — not these kind of staged elections that the Castro brothers try to foist off as true democracy."

*

American Liberty is code for control by proxy of a country's economy.

Free and Fair elections? Like in the Florida presidential election in 2000, and the Ohio presidential election in 2004.

Never mind that there are more literate people in Cuba and that they already have a more humane system of healthcare than the US.

Also never mind that the US has done everything in its power to cripple the economy of Cuba--with fairly significant results--since Castro took over, by the strategic inhumane blockade. Any infrastructure problems, any lack of economic diversity, can be lain directly at the feet of the US government and its barbaric cronies.

As one can see from my early prediction about a Hillary-Romney run-off, I have no business making predictions. I just couldn't imagine people voting for McCain, but they have.

Mina Agossi

Due soon: Michael Burkard's Envelope of Night: Selected and Uncollected Poems 1966-1990. An enormous collection--382 pages. But this, really, is just scratching the surface.

Reading the final poems in the manuscript: "Sunset Junk," "Lynow," "Necros," "Amber," and "The Misters."

Gabcast! Esther Press #12

WHAT IS AMERICAN POLITICS?


The media decides when and where the debates will happen. The media decides who will be eligible to be in the debates. The media decides which one of its own will ask the questions. The media decides on the questions to be asked. The media asks the questions. Even the questions seemingly coming from "real people" are censored first by the media. Will the media approve? The media's other wing, another medium, are the polling agencies, like Reuters, Zogby, etc. Why do we actually need polls? What is their real function? The poll will be used by the media to instruct the citizenry on who's winning. No one likes to vote for a loser, or for one who people think is looking like a loser, so is this not also one function of the polling agencies mission: to dismiss by inference? The polling agency helps the media additionally position the candidates the media wants to see win. The media decides to present the American public with the choices it decides makes the best sense for them.