Monthly Archives: February 2006

Some of the Broadway shows that have opened in Las Vegas haven't done well but more are heading to Nevada. Meanwhile, The Producers is a big hit in Israel.

Note to self: Remind your blog readers that the first lady of animation voicing, June Foray, is on The Ellen DeGeneres Show on Wednesday, February 8.

Message before last, I said that George W. Bush has — and I quote myself — "…this tendency to announce things and then forget about them." This brought two incensed, outraged e-mails from Bush supporters informing me that Bush is a man of convictions, that his word is like gold, that he has the integrity to do what he says, yadda yadda yadda. To these folks, I offer this news item that appeared on the wires less than 24 hours after the State of the Union address. Here's the first paragraph…

WASHINGTON – One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn't mean it literally.

That's one of the problems I have with Bush: He rarely means anything literally. When he said during the 2000 elections that he was against "nation-building," he didn't mean it literally. When he pledged money to rebuild Manhattan after 9/11 or New Orleans after Katrina, he didn't mean it literally. Not long ago, when he said that wiretaps require a warrant, he didn't mean it literally and when he signed a bill that outlawed torture, he immediately issued a "signing statement" that asserted his right not to follow the bill he'd just signed. He even hides behind the tactic. At one point, he and his administration very much wanted us all to believe, as they apparently did, that there was a provable link between Saddam Hussein and the guys who hit us on 9/11. When this turned not to be provable, the administration fallback was that they really didn't mean it.

I sometimes debate about this man with friends who say they like him because he takes bold action and he's a man of conviction. Personally, I think "bold action" is a negative unless it's coupled with some qualifier…like, say, the right "bold action" or the smart "bold action." And as for being a man of conviction, I'm sorry. I just don't see it. I see a guy who was told our country was under attack and sat and read My Pet Goat for seven minutes. I see a guy who announces Big Plans, like building a space station on Mars…and then he lets them wither away and anonymous aides have to go around and say, "He didn't mean that literally."

I don't hate the man. Dismissing someone as a "Bush-hater" is a too common way of trying to not deal with legitimate criticisms of a guy we elected to do an important job. I don't wish him ill or failure or anything negative because, as far as I'm concerned, he's driving the bus we're on and if he drives off the road, we all crash and burn. He just keeps failing to convince me that he knows where he's going or how to get there.

Nevertheless, he is our president and he has my support. Of course, I don't mean that literally.

Fred Kaplan on the State of the Union address.

Mark is very busy for the next day or three so don't expect a lot of wonderment on this page. If you're starved for something media-related to read, I have some new posts up over at my Old TV Tickets site. Read all about Saturday Night Live With Howard Cosell, The Newlywed Game and other classics.

I caught some of the State of the Union address and agree with those who say these things are always boring and that there's a strong level of phoniness regarding what the assemblage does and does not clap for. With George W. Bush, there's an extra layer of artifice because he has this tendency to announce things and then forget about them. How's that hydrogen car program going?

You get the feeling that Bush's poll numbers are pretty much frozen at about a 39%-41% approval rating? That nothing short of dragging Bin Laden in with his bare hands is going to help him much? No one seems to want to say that because the right-wing media doesn't want to believe it and the non-right-wing media is trying too hard to prove they're not the left-wing media. And hey, what's with Chris Matthews and a few other reporters, who seem to flip a coin before each on-camera appearance and decide if Bush is in trouble or making a spectacular comeback? Make up your mind, people, and cite some real evidence to support whichever position you take. A lot of this seems to me like trying to pretend there's important political news when there isn't any.

Back to deadlines…