(Nice job, Gladys. Thanks)
I’m not saying “Good Morning!” until I can do it without coughing.
1. Is this hypocritical…or maybe just greed? Cardi B—if you don’t know who the singer is, then you are just hopelessly out of step— Cardi B refused to perform at the Super Bowl halftime show out of support for former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick. Then she showed up on the broadcast in a Pepsi ad.
Of course, the half-time gig doesn’t pay, and Pepsi does, but if you are boycotting the Super Bowl, how can you justify appearing in a Super Bowl ad? Well, performers tend not to be deep thinkers…
2. The Washington Post Super Bowl commercial…
Yes, the Post spent an estimated ten million dollars for pro-news media propaganda. Desperate and self-indicting, in my view. The best way for the Post and other mainstream news media to convince the public that they are trustworthy is for them to do their jobs ethically, and they obviously do not. This self-glorifying ad comes one week after the Post led the media attack on a 16-year old Catholic school student without checking the veracity of a deceptively edited videotape or talking with the student involved. The Post was indulging its anti-Trump bias by casting a kid wearing a MAGA hat as a racist. How did this disgusting and unethical performance embody the platitudes Tom Hanks mouthed in the ad—“There’s someone to gather the facts. To bring you the story. No matter the cost. Because knowing empowers us. Knowing helps us decide. Knowing keeps us free”? How about the Post actually doing those things, rather than spending millions to convince people that they are, when the evidence says otherwise?
Just as the ad was running yesterday, we learned of a 2004 sexual assault allegation against Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax that the Post decided at the time wasn’t credible enough to report on. Why? Well, theories abound. Maybe it wasn’t credible, but then, I thought the idea was to believe all women. How could it have been less credible than some of the accusations against Brett Kavanagh that the Post reported when it was trying to sink his nomination? Does the fact that Fairfax is a Democrat have anything to do with the Post’s “objective news judgment”? Might not Virginia voters have wanted to make up their own minds about the allegations, when Fairfax was running for Lt. Governor?
Tell us again about how “democracy dies in darkness,” Tom.
Meanwhile, one of the Post’s union’s leaders, Fredrick Kunkle, wondered about that 10 million dollar expenditure:
“While I too am extremely proud of the Post and its legacy,” Kunkle said. “[T]his seems like an especially infuriating expense for a company that has: a) tried to take health care insurance from part-time employees b) moved everyone toward riskier forms of health insurance.” He added: “c) made it easier to lay people off d) cut their severance e) frozen their pensions and resisted the smallest enhancements to remaining retirement benefits until Sen. Bernie Sanders shamed it into doing so.”
3. Gotcha! Jennifer Rubin, whom the Post absurdly touts as a “conservative blogger” despite her having morphed into one of the most virulent Trump-hating pundits alive, called for Democrats to “move [Virginia Governor] Northam out” so he could be replaced by Fairfax, whom she described as a “dynamic, eloquent African American.” Now she’s under attack, like Northam, for revealing nascent racism. See, calling Fairfax, a black man “eloquent” is the equivalent of saying he is articulate, as if it’s a surprise that any African American can speak well.
I’ve never heard Fairfax speak. Is he eloquent? I thought Obama was over-rated as a speaker, but he was certainly skilled, and could be eloquent when at his best. Can’t someone call an eloquent black speaker eloquent, and an articulate black speaker articulate? If only white speakers can be called eloquent or articulate, isn’t that unfair to eloquent and articulate blacks? Is it racist to describe Martin Luther King as eloquent? Or is the rule that blacks can call black speakers eloquent or articulate, but whites can only call white speakers eloquent and articulate. Blacks can still call white speakers eloquent and articulate, however. I assume they also can call white speakers like President Trump or Governor Northam inarticulate, jibbering clods, but whites must never use such terms to describe even the most incomprehensible black speakers, since that’s just racist stigmatizing speakers of “African-American English.”
Do I have it right? Look, I just want to understand the rules.