Sarah Palin: Day 26 and Almost Ready

The Sarah Palin joke must end. Palin herself might be a wonderful person, a great (hockey) mom and a terrific moose hunter. Be that as it may, the Team McCain orchestrated Palin U.N. visit was vintage Saturday Night Live satire except that it was meant to be serious.
The very idea that an hour with this world leader, ten minutes with that one, somehow amounted to substantive foreign affairs-only speaks to the desperation of a candidate at the top of the ticket. A guy who, in the middle of the worst economic crisis in generations flips between stating the economic fundamentals are solid before flopping a mere three hours later with the acknowledgement the nation is in a meltdown.

But I guess, for Sarah, when your only previous foreign relations experience is being able to gander at Russia from your lawn and a single trip abroad, experience by osmosis is not so ludicrous.

Although we can't really be sure.

Pool reporters were supposed to be allowed to take pictures -- just some sweet, little hang-'em-on-the-fridge-photos -- of Sarah's big day with the "old boys club." Only, last minute, Team McCain decides to pull the pool reporters for fear they might accidently hear Sarah speak on something -- to express an opinion that wasn't focus-group tested and talking-point ready.

From the LA Times regarding Palin's sit-down with Afghan President Hamid Karzai:

"The pool of reporters, which was to include a television crew, was supposed to be in the room for a few moments -- just to capture the opening of Palin's meetings. But when the campaign announced that even the pool television producer -- who is charged with capturing editorial content for the five networks -- would not be permitted in the room, the networks threatened to pull their cameras from Palin's events today."

Eventually, the campaign relented and allowed a CNN producer into the room for the meetings. But there were no wire service reporters or print reporters present for the first meeting, with Karzai.

According to the pool report from the CNN producer allowed into Karzai's hotel suite, Palin was seated a few feet from Karzai; seated slightly behind her were foreign policy advisors Steve Biegun and Randy Scheunemann.

Two policy advisers backing her up. She and President Karzai talked about his son.

Well, clearly we're in good hands.

On August 29, John McCain promised us a candidate who was ready on day one to be VP. It's been 26 days and counting and Palin has yet to hold a press conference. This from a presidential candidate who claims his administration will be more open and transparent than the most previous. I think about now Dick Cheney's in his undisclosed secret bunker going: "C'mon, go siddown with Michelle Malkin. She'll give you a foot massage."

But, no, we get nothing from the Alaskan Sphinx. The clock is literally ticking. The conversation about the effectiveness of being a hockey mom VP is fading into so many yesterdays. Like a reveler showing up to the party late, Sarah is just getting up to speed on world affairs and the conversation has already turned domestic.

I image she'll have that the economy down around, oh, Nov. 5 or so.

11:18 PM ET | 09-23-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

How Bad is 'Uppity'?

Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia has said he didn't know "uppity" had an offensive connotation.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

Awhile back I wrote a piece about Karl Rove referring to Barack Obama as "arrogant" and asserted that when the Roves of the world use that word around Obama, what they really mean is "uppity."

As to be expected, there were those who've never had to decode codification who took the stance that sometimes arrogant just means arrogant.

Sure.

And sometimes eggplant just means eggplant.

Be that as it may, the arrogant/uppity debate is now moot, as there seems to be a spate of folks quitting the euphemisms altogether and going straight for the pejorative. Over the few last weeks, we've had U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, a Georgia Republican, refer to the Obamas — both Barack and Michelle — as uppity, and had Rick Goddard, a GOP congressional candidate in Georgia, use the same word to describe MSNBC reporter Ron Allen. Goddard used the word in reference to a slightly testy interview Allen conducted with Newt Gingrich at the bastion of diversity that was the Republican National Convention.

The word "uppity" has a long and ugly history, and was usually part of a two-word phrase that roughly ran: "uppity n*gger."

Of course, now that the word is out there, uppity's got its defenders, too. They say that since it can be directed toward anyone of any race, it can't be offensive exclusively to people of color. Except, really, how many times do you hear the word used in conjunction with a white person? White people are supposed to have ego and ambition, so they can't possibly be uppity. It's minorities who have the temerity to want to rise above their station.

And it's journalists of color who have the nerve to ask conservatives tough questions.

Though unapologetic for the use of the word, Westmoreland says he didn't know that uppity had an offensive connotation. A difficult claim to believe coming from a 58-year-old man who grew up in the segregated South. I'm reminded of Jesse Jackson's dismay when he was informed that it's inappropriate to refer to New York City as "Hymietown." Who'd have thought?

Westmoreland's final fallback position is the same as most who refuse to either man up and apologize or just get honest and admit they're bigoted: Webster's. Westmoreland says that because there is a dictionary definition for "uppity," people's sensitivity to the word is overdone.

I would point out there are also dictionary definitions for "coon" and "tar baby" and "macaca."

And there is also a dictionary definition for "cracker." So I'm sure neither Westmoreland nor Goddard would take offense if I refer to them as one.

5:00 PM ET | 09-16-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

One More Thing: Please, Apple, No More Special Events

Except for World War II-era soldiers lost on desert islands and people who think Zunes are the height of cool, I don't have to tell anyone what special events Apple Special Media Events have turned into.

Tech writers are herded like sheep into a Bay Area venue, where they wait for Apple CEO Steve Jobs to bestow upon them some Clarke-ian magiclike scientific device. These events often end with a final tease from Jobs of "One more thing..." before he wows with a last, fantastic toy. Among the gifts handed down from the Infinite Loop Olympus: the amazing iPod and the revolutionary iPhone.

But as fabled as these Special Events have been, they are starting to become decidedly routine. A prime example is Tuesday's Apple "Let's Rock" Special Event that yielded ... not much of anything special: some new iPod Nanos that were most spectacular in that they did a 180-degree from last year's shortened form factor. A slightly updated iTunes music store that debuted an in-house version of the freakishly cool Pandora. And NBC Universal returning to the Apple fold after making a big show of pulling its content from iTunes in favor of the Hulu Web site that it co-owns with News Corp. and that you never heard of before.

And while all that is nifty if you happen to dig Apple products — just to let you know where I stand, I'm writing this on my MacBook Air — none of that is really stop-the-presses material. To the point, before the event Apple was doing some arm twisting with the tech media, trying to get them to "please" come with promises of something truly special to be revealed. I'm guessing more than a few tech writers are feeling a bit played.

The problems with Apple and its Special Events are multiple. Foremost is that Apple is a victim of its own success. Tiny digital media players with full-color screens and accelerometers might be light-years beyond the competition, but for MacAddicts such refreshes have become commonplace. If Apple isn't presenting something on beyond the iPhone, all else seems Dullsville. And Apple's fan base is so, well, fanatic, there are a bunch of Web sites more dedicated to vetting Apple rumors than John McCain was to vetting Sarah Palin. Pictures of the new iPod and specs for Version 8 of iTunes were on the Web days before the event. All of that kinda takes the surprise out of the surprise party.

But more than anything, I for one am becoming Special Event fatigued. After all, if every Apple event is special, how can any of them be unique? When Apple finally comes out with a tablet computer, by all means Special Event away. But in the meantime, I think an old-fashioned press release'll do fine.

One more thing... Considering the recent roll-out issues that Apple's had — the MobileMe fiasco and the iPhone that drops calls more often than [insert pop culture reference here] — I'll take an ordinary event with a product that works over another rushed Special Event any day.

Unless it's an ultraportable tablet. Then just give it to me buggy, and firmware me later.

4:18 PM ET | 09-10-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

Your Pocket Guide To Speaking Palinguage (Vol. 1)

Up in the Twin Cities, folks are speaking a new language. Or, should I say Palinguage. It sounds sorta familiar because it's Latin based. But different from the plain English we're used to speaking, in Palinguage recognizable words take on new meanings.

Won't you take a moment to learn some Palinguage? Here are some of my helpful tips, a version of which appeared here earlier today.

REPEAT THE FOLLOWING:

If you're a minority and you're selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a "token hire."

If you're a conservative and you're selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a "game changer."

If you live in an urban area and you get a girl pregnant you're a "baby daddy."

If you're the same in Alaska you're a "teen father." (Actually, according to your own MySpace page you're an F'n redneck that don't want any kids, but that's too long a phrase for the evil liberal media to take out of context and flog morning, noon and night.)

Black teen pregnancies? A "crisis" in black America.

White teen pregnancies? A "blessed event."

If you grow up in Hawaii you're "exotic."

Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, you're the quintessential "American story."

Similarly, if you name your kid Barack, you're "unpatriotic."

Name your kid Track, you're "colorful."

If you're a Democrat and you make a VP pick without fully vetting the individual, you're "reckless."

A Republican who doesn't fully vet is a "maverick."

If you say that for the "first time in my adult lifetime I'm really proud of my country," it makes you "unfit" to be first lady.

If you are a registered member of a fringe political group that advocates secession, that makes you the governor's "first dude."

A DUI from 20 years ago is "old news."

A speech given without proper citation from 20 years ago is "relevant information."

And, finally, if you're a man and you decide to run for office despite your wife's recurrence of cancer, you're a "questionable spouse."

If you're a woman and you decide to run for office despite having five kids including a newborn... Well, we don't know what that is 'cause THAT'S NOT A FAIR QUESTION TO ASK.

Got some Palinguage? Let me know.

9:30 PM ET | 09- 3-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

Minorities Get Little Respect On The Big Screen

Michelle Yeoh at the Japan premiere of 'The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor' on Aug. 4.

Toru Yamanaka/AFP/Getty Images

Well, that's it. Summer's about over. Hope yours was good. How was mine? Thanks for asking. Well, I'm not given to absolutes, so I'm gonna say in terms of what Hollywood gave us, this was just the demi-most offensive summer ever at the multiplexes. Offensive, if you happen to be a person of color whom Hollywood in turn mocked, lampooned or humiliated ... that is, when we weren't just being completely ignored.

There was Jack Black supplying the voice of a Chinese bear in Kung Fu Panda. I guess the producers of the movie thought that it would be alright for an occidental to voice one of the most revered symbols of China, since they gave actual Asian actors Jackie Chan and Lucy Liu all of like five lines in supporting roles.

We had Mike Meyers entertaining himself by flogging Hindu and Indian stereotypes. And the lovely Jennifer Hudson playing a 21st century Hattie McDaniel to the Sex and the City gals. Excuse me, Jennifer's the one with the Oscar. Shouldn't they be fetching Jennifer's coffee?

Yes, there was Will Smith as a superhero. An alcoholic, abusive, foul-mouthed superhero. And, yes, there was redemption at the end of Hancock, but the path was so coarse as to be unsuitable for my kids to watch. So, the only hero of color they saw this summer was The Incredible Hulk. Which, by the way, why does a movie with nary a minority in it have to end with the Hulk destroying Harlem?

Honestly, this summer's offerings couldn't have been any more offensive if they released the director's cut of Birth of a Nation. On Blu-ray.

Out of 36 films put into wide release between May 2 and Aug. 22, only four had any minorities in leading roles.

In fact, the two performances that really stand out in big summer Hollywood films are Michelle Yeoh in The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor -- she manages to bring grace and gravitas to every performance. And Robert Downey Jr. playing a white guy playing a black guy in Tropic Thunder. Sorry, but that one passes the funny test. It was funny. What can I tell you?

Now, maybe you think this is just complaining to complain, but remember this is the summer that featured Tiger Woods gutting out one of the greatest performances in sports history on a shattered leg, China having its coming out party with the Beijing Olympics, and Barack Obama making history in Denver. Now, I know truth is stranger than fiction, but when did reality become more fantastic than fantasy?

So, to all my dear, dear friends in Hollywood -- particularly the ones who can green-light -- maybe before you finalize next summer's slate of films, it's time to put down your trade papers and pick up some real newspapers.

5:08 AM ET | 08-27-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

They're Playing Our Song?

Bruuuuce's "Born in the USA" is a classic, but the wrong anthem for these games.

Lennox McLendon/AP

Sooo ... the Redeem Team won the men's basketball gold at the Beijing games. If Russia thought it was suddenly resurgent as a superpower, it'd better think again.

But what was up with playing Springsteen's "Born in the USA" as the last second ticked off the clock?

NOTE: Maybe "Born in the USA" was ubiquitous for Team USA victories, but other than women's race walking and some kinda thing where people were paddling some kinda boat, a replay of the end of the men's basketball finals was all I saw of the Olympics, so I gotta limit my observations to that.

Anyway ...

While the song has all the trappings of great American-bred rock, as I'm sure most of you know, nary a more anti-American imperialism screed has ever been put to electric guitar: forgotten vets, jobs disappearing from the Rust Belt, Amerasian kids left "in country," and a to-the-point rendering of the Vietnam War.

Got in a little hometown jam
So they put a rifle in my hand
Sent me off to a foreign land
To go and kill the yellow man

Yellow man? Helloooo, China!

Now, I'm not picking on Springsteen. I'm just curious as to who thought this was the tune to use when celebrating U.S. dominance in hoops? Americans who dig musical hooks, but aren't up on lyrics? Chinese who have a shrewd sense of irony? Or was it Bob Costas trying to make up for erroneously telling Brian Williams that Springsteen had dedicated the song to Michael Phelps at a concert? (Yes, he already publicly corrected himself.)

So, the next time somebody brings up the trope that music is ruining society, tell 'em clearly no one listens to the lyrics.

1:55 PM ET | 08-25-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

The Elitist Tipping Point

John McCain can't remember how many houses he has. Immediately, he's hit by some with the charge of being an elitist.

Yet I recall watching an episode of Oprah once — only once — where she stated with a straight face that she was really upset because she had been about to make a meal when she realized she'd left her favorite cooking pan "in my other house." And all the nice suburban ladies trying to get by with their median household income of $48K did not bat an eye. She's Oprah. She's supposed to have many houses and favorite cooking pans.

Now, obviously, Oprah's not running for president. But she could, and she might just win. We love her for being so much more fabulous than us.

And, so, this is our public conundrum: What exactly is the elitist tipping point? Where does regular end and aristocratic begin? Is it a dollar amount? An attitude? Can one be poor and out of touch, rich and down to Earth? It's almost become an annual ritual: Fortune 500 companies revealing their executives' compensation to much public ire. But when a guy like Bill Gates — off and on the richest man on Earth — reveals that he often flies coach, he's derided as being either a skinflint or too showy with his austerity.

In every election cycle that I can recall there comes a moment — or a few — where charges of elitism and claims of commonness are wielded by presidential candidates like a sword and shield: Vote for me 'cause I'm one of you. It's the other guy who's out of touch.

Folksiness is a queer thing. You can be from a well-to-do family, attend an Ivy League school and be a "regular Joe" like George W. Bush, or you can be from a well-to-do family, attend an Ivy League school and be haut monde like John Kerry.

Or you can grow up living on food stamps in a single-parent home, attend an Ivy League school and be an "elitist" like Barack Obama for implying that people get upset and myopic when they lose their jobs.

Though it's nearly undefinable, elitism's like porn: You know it when you see it, and what somebody else likes doesn't necessarily turn you on.

And yet, we're electing the president of the U.S., still the most powerful person in the world. I don't want an underachiever working on my car's transmission. Why would I want someone regular sitting in the Oval Office? Sorry, give me somebody who has demonstrated a capacity to excel.

The cliche gotcha question of journalism is asking candidates the price of a gallon of gas at a particular locale. Can the candidate demonstrate with a single answer that he (or she) is a person of the people? Brother, I don't care if the candidate knows the local price of gas. I care if he fully understands the metrics that drive up or down a barrel of oil.

So the question isn't how many houses John McCain owns. The question is: Does he understand what's negatively affecting the equity of those houses, and what can be done about it, and how such gross fluctuations can be prevented in the future?

He'd better hope he doesn't have to check with his staff to answer that one.

9:46 AM ET | 08-22-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

Laurence Fishburne On 'CSI' Ain't No Small Thing

Laurence Fishburne will star on CSI this fall. Is CBS taking bets on November?

Mark Mainz/Getty Images for CineVegas

This week it was announced that actor Laurence Fishburne (Morpheus of the Matrix films) will be joining the cast of the long-running CBS franchise pillar CSI.

Actors rotating in and out of series aren't exactly a big deal. NBC's Law & Order(s) have made bank on that.

However, a black actor taking the titular lead of a hit drama? That is a big deal.

There was a time when blacks were making serious strides in broadcast television. Led by the uber-hit The Cosby Show and the just regular hit Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, there was a wave of black — or in the vernacular of Hollywood exec speak, "urban" — programing on the air. The Martin Show, the Jamie Foxx show, Living Single, The Wayans Brothers, Hanging with Mr. Cooper... Some of these shows were good, some were typical television, but they facilitated a lot of work for blacks in front of as well as behind the camera. A lot of us in Hollywood thought it was the beginning of a real racial breakthrough.

We were wrong.

A couple of things happened.

As a format, sitcoms after Seinfeld and Friends began to fail. That meant fewer of them made it onto the networks' schedules. And black sitcoms tended to be relegated to the Weblets — Fox, UPN and the WB. Fox moved away from urban programming; UPN and the WB merged into the CW, which — like Fox — pretty much abandoned urban programs.

As an aside, the idea that black programming had to play to an urban audience exclusively or even primarily was faulty logic to begin with.

Regardless...

When sitcoms faded, drama took over as the scripted fare the networks leaned on. Dramas have always been the restricted country clubs of broadcast TV. The last time there was a "black" drama on TV it was City of Angels, which aired briefly back in 2000. Beyond that, sure, you'll see blacks sprinkled in with a supporting cast — you might even get Dennis Haysbert (24) as president, which ain't a bad thing — but you won't regularly see blacks or other minorities as leads in straight dramas. And before you get your little blog-back fingers typing, Ugly Betty — terrific show that it is — is a dramedy, not a drama. It don't count.

But CSI is a drama, and it's got a new lead investigator in Fishburne. Better than that, it's not even a black or "urban" show. It's a show that will feature a qualified man in the lead who happens to be black.

Is CBS taking bets on November?

And is Hollywood actually setting down its collective morning mimosas and taking a look at the demographics of the rest of the country? Well, I hardly think one casting move is the beginning of more color to go with our HDTVs. But every little bit makes for great viewing pleasure.

Good luck to you, Mr. Fishburne. Good luck to all of us.

5:06 PM ET | 08-19-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

Black Is The New Black

It started about two years ago at the corner of Progress and Peril. Not an actual intersection, but instead the first in a series of in depth articles by The Washington Post on "being a black man." The series published long enough ago that Barack Obama was still merely "the American Idol of national politics," rather than the international superstar he is today.

I remember thinking at the time: Wow, are we really still that alien to the "mainstream" a series like this is needed? I mean, look, when I go to business meetings I'm still told way too often by some receptionist "the mail room is downstairs" to believe that racial perceptions don't still exist. But I figure there are always going to be knuckleheads no matter how many of their herd get stuck in the tar pits of progress. At the same time, I can't help but think that the very idea of figuring out what it means to be black is bigoted since there is no single standard of blackness.

But whether or not a series like the Post's was actually required, it was turned out to be the first in a flood of "in depth" coverage of that odd animal known as black people.

CNN recently ran its Black In America specials to gangbuster ratings. And the program wasn't without its "smack in the head" revelations: Having the fact that you're black on a job application weights similarly to having a conviction.

This weekend, the The New York Times Magazine runs a piece on generational black politics. It may well have been in the works before the Jackson/Obama tiff, but that exchange only makes the piece more potent.

Obviously much of this focus on blackness is in response to Obama's historic run for the White House. Ironic, since Obama is biracial.

Ironic, too, since blacks are no longer the largest minority in America, having been supplanted by Hispanics.

The attention is also ironic since most of these liberal institutions which are working so hard to understand people of color have been pretty God-awful when it comes to self-integrating. Maybe if they did a better job of seeking out blacks, they wouldn't be so curious as to what blackness is.

But no matter. For the minute -- in the chattering classes at least -- it's hip to be black. I guess we should just enjoy it until the fall brings some new fashions.

6:44 PM ET | 08- 8-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail

The New Invisible Man?

In the category of Things We Already Know, a new USA Today/Gallup Poll finds that most Americans believe "racism is widespread against blacks in the United States." As is to be expected, the degree that people hold this belief is dependent on their own race -- black, white or Hispanic. The survey in and of itself is worth taking a look at but, like I said, doesn't exactly stun with unexpectedness.

Except for one thing...

What was interesting to me was that a survey about how "most Americans" feel about racism and minorities didn't include responses from Asian-Americans.

They're not minorities? They don't have views on racism?

Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders make up only about 5 percent of the population, so by default maybe they lie outside the strict definition of "most Americans." But the poll was culling a variety of racial attitudes, and it managed to include views of racism against whites. You'd think if the survey had room to include views on the pervasive systemic oppression whites suffer through (now go back and read that sentence sarcastically), they'd take the time to chat up an Asian or two.

But why didn't they? And why don't we hear more about and from Asians when it comes to race in America? Are Asians the new Invisible Man -- there but not there? In some ways, yeah. Blacks and whites are always carping about the metrics of racism. And any conversation about immigration reform is immediately flipped into a referendum on Hispanics.

But Asians rarely seem to weigh in on, or have their rallying cause, with regard to race in America.

I haven't had the time to do a full scientific study, but the couple of Asian-Americans I talked with -- I know how that sounds, but, hey, that's a couple more than USA Today/Gallup bothered to talk with -- said that mostly they don't care to talk about race. Instead, they tend to have a "go along to get along" attitude.

This propensity to be cool is often misconstrued as the "Asian as the model minority" stereotype. And it is, in fact, just that -- a stereotype. That's not to imply that Asians are somehow bad folks, but that -- just as is every other minority -- they are regular folks. But we can't know that if every time opinions are sought out, they are passed over.

Clearly, not all Asians are comfortable just "being cool" about issues. And Asian-centric political action may be a more recognizable movement in coming elections.

Their opinions getting left out of one of any number of surveys on race may seem like a small thing. Maybe it is. But I think if we're really going to have an Obamaian dialogue on race in America, then we've got to have the widest dialogue possible and not just hear from the traditional "big three."

Now, that would be a poll that might fall outside of the Things We Already Know category.

5:13 PM ET | 08- 5-2008 | permalink | trackbacks (0)

comments () | | e-mail