Looks like a busy day here at Evanier HQ so not a lot of posting on this here blog today. Might I remind you I'll be heard on the big Tenth Anniversary webcast of Stu's Show today at 4 PM my time? Details are in the previous post.
I'm not paying a whole heap of attention to Mr. Trump this week because a lot of what's going on sounds like posturing and speculation from all sides. It is beginning to look like one big aspect of the Trump Presidency is going to be our Chief Exec's regular temper tantrums when a large part of the country refuses to recognize him as legitimate or respectable. Any day now, he may start threatening to deport anyone who insists Hillary Clinton (or anyone who ever ran for the presidency) got more votes than he did.
It also looks like Paul Ryan would let Trump start robbing liquor stores and running a white slavery ring if wealthy Americans got a good enough tax cut. I somehow don't recall the Tea Party movement was about running America to benefit the rich and letting the president ignore the Constitution when he feels like it. But hey, if that's what they wanted…
I'll be TiVoing tonight's live broadcast of Hairspray for future viewing and discussion. I like these prime-time musicals but I wish more of the attention was on the shows, as opposed to the stunt of doing them live. In the advance publicity, it sometimes feels like a reality show about "behind the scenes," as opposed to a theatrical event. I expect it'll be a good show, though Hairspray is pretty broad comedy and it's going to be hard for Martin Short and Harvey Fierstein to overact their roles. Somehow though, I'm confident they'll each find a way.
A topic for a further post here: The other day, I came across an article on a forum about comic books in which some fellow was raving about a certain series that came out years ago. On and on, he went about that a brilliant, perfect, genius, fabulous comic this was…a series that I recall finding boring and quite unreadable. I also recall a lot of other people feeling as I did, including many at the company that published it.
Now, that's fine, of course. My tastes don't match up with many others', nor should they. What struck me was how this commentator didn't seem to really think his view is darn near unanimous and inarguable. That something is good and that something is widely recognized as good are two very separate things and the latter, unlike the former, is not utterly subjective.
The article reminded me a lot of a friend I have who continues to argue that in the election just past, vastly more Americans wanted Bernie Sanders than any other candidate. Even though I voted for Bernie in the primary, I don't think the evidence supports that, even if you're only talking about Democrats, let alone those who think liberal = evil. I guess I have a problem with folks conflating the two separate views — "I feel this way" with "everybody feels this way" — and think it leads to a lot of disconnect.
You'd think that if the Internet teaches us anything, it teaches us that there are a lot of viewpoints out there that are the inverse of ours. I think this gets back to the Trump voters out there who simply refuse to believe any numbers that show that more Americans — and not by a tiny margin — wanted someone else. More on this and everything else at a later time.