Casting Call!

                                                           

Title:
Hurricane Relief Infomercial
Category:
    Performer
Description:   
Fire fighter -  supporting roll.   American male, any ethnicity.   Athletic build, attractive face;                          Mid-30's to  Mid-40's;  strong and silent;  down to earth,  not married to the whole  saving-people side of the job.   Character is willing to be part of a large team with a strong lead who's more talk than walk.    *Performer must be discreet:  Absolutely NO press during or after run of show.    *Performer must provide own costume.  T-shirt, hair and make-up services provided.
Job Start Date:
    9/4/2005
Job End Date:      
10/4/2005
Union Information:   
Non Union, non-negotiable
Salary:
N/A
Contact:
          Federal Emergency Management Agency - Region IX
1111 Broadway, Suite 1200
Oakland, CA 94607

Photo credit

cross-posted at the American Street

Comments

[Chris Clarke]

Belly laugh at that book jacket image. Thanks.

[Thomas Nephew]

thanks, I needed that

[DavidByron]

Well as act 1 draws to a close, with the only thing slower than FEMA's response being the Democrat's political response, apparently most Americans don't think anything bad happened and the media spine lasted about two days.

We should have a sweepstake to guess how long it will be before Keith Olbermann and Anderson Cooper are parroting GOP filth along with everyone else. I give it a week.

Act two is now how the Thugs will get away with holding thousands of "ungrateful" black people in concentration camps round the country and call the jailers "heroes".

Over at dKos some bright bulb has come up with a new strategy: attacking the GOP. Wow. Apparently that's a new idea. Seems like "progressives" never have the slightest trouble attacking *me*. How's this for a stretegy "progressives": imagine the GOP were the far left and just lay into them.

[Chris Clarke]

How's this for a stretegy "progressives": imagine the GOP were the far left and just lay into them.

David, that is such a great line.

[Pepper]

Non-union. Now THAT is the icing on the cake!

Yeah, let's lay into the GOP. And, while we're at it, all the Dems complicit with them. There's much housecleaning to be done after this, and not just in Nawlins.

[eRobin]

David and Pepper: I'm with you. I can't understand the antipathy that some big bloggers have for the "far left." Recently Aravois slammed the march coming up on the 24th. He was on about ANSWER but he said that Haiti was a stupid cause. It mystified me. I'm only now getting calm enough to write a response.

[DavidByron]

It's mystifying ok. And do you know what that means? (This is important as a concept)

If you are mystified about a certain political action it means that your current understanding of the situation from that groups point of view is faulty. It means your big picture view of their perspective is wrong. They simply aren't who you think they are.

And you need to get past "mystified" to figure out where they are and why. This is essential. "Mystified" means "still trying to figure out what they stand for".

So how's that going?

As far as I can see these top bloggers tend to get increasingly concerned about how they are viewed by the right and by the corporate media. The usual word to characterise this position is "serious". Being "serious" means acting in a way that is acceptable to the corporate media. Either by compromising your beliefs or by changing them to be more rightwing. (corporate rightwing that is - not those silly religious bunch)

An example is useful: war. The principled point of view is laid oput in law and in treaties such as the UN charter and that's the position the "far" left takes. So Iraq was criminal and so was Haiti and Afghanistan. The "serious" corporate media, often owned by the arms manufacturers, obviously takes a different view that America has the right to kill people in other countries for any reason. As a result no war can be said to be criminal (if you want to be taken "seriously") but only argued as "the wrong war at the wrong time" or otherwise said to be inefficient rather than wrong.

Being "serious" also means helping the corporate media to give the impression that the views of corporate America are the only acceptable views. That means attacking the "far" left (which is really now seen to be simply "the left") as much as the "far right" (who also oppose the war oddly enough). In fact Democrats have to attack the "far left" more vigorously because they start off further away from the corporate point of view ("serious") to begin with.

Now this process of compromising their views to gain acceptance by the corporate (not religious) right can be either conscious or unconscious. We're often told that ANSWER or going on about Haiti isn't so much wrong as just "impractical" because being "serious" is the way to gain corporate media attention and hence move forward with the limit number of issues that corporate America finds acceptable -- such as gay rights.

I beleive that argument doesn't hold up. I beleive the way to press for changes is to press for them -- not attack those who do. I beleive those who argue consciously for being "serious" often have a different agenda, possibly subconsciously -- they want recognition from the corporate media as a sign of their importance.

But that's just my view of it.

However what I said about "mystified" is true. You need to get to a position where it doesn't mystify you any more.