Whether if it's just guest-starring in an issue, or influencing the tone of a whole event, the president (and politics) of a certain era has some impact on its comic books (and pop-culture).
George W. Bush's presidency spanned such events as 9/11, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, and the current financial disaster. On top of that has been the highlighting of a divisiveness in this country over lines of ideology and even religion that threaten to tear it apart. You can call it an Identity Crisis, a Civil War, Our Worlds At War, a Secret Invasion, a Countdown. Captain America is dead. The people clamor for a Brand New Day. Long live the new Captain America.
The GWB years were the fuel that fed storylines in The Authority, Superman, The Ultimates. Who can forget President Luthor? The Thunderbolts in a barely-disguised Gitmo facility? And the "Sub-Diego" storyline in Aquaman -- was that before or after Katrina? Ditto for Our Worlds At War and 9/11 and the subsequent battles. Sometimes the comics do better than merely reflect current events -- sometimes they predict them.
Anyway, George W. has had his Final Crisis. What next? How will comic book stories be influenced by an Obama presidency? And how will the industry be influenced?
Wow. So many voting problems where I was, they just about ran out of write-in vote affidavits. Our voting worker apparently had a "problem with the alphabet" -- this was what I was warned when I first got on the line. Apparently he couldn't tell a "G" from an "M". We had an unusual amount of people on our district's line because of "irregularities" -- our district's line was four times longer than all the rest. Among the problems: missing names and switched districts. People who lived in the same apartment had different districts. Piles and piles of write-in votes due to missing names, with some agitated people even wanting to talk to the police. It was so bad that the supervisor would just stand at the door apologizing to people as they left. I've never seen anything like this in all my years of voting. Chaos.
What a mess. I think both sides might have mucked around with the process. I'm not saying that the candidates approve the mucking of the votes. But you have to understand, when you get down to really local branches, there's very little control. I think the past voting clusterfucks like Florida don't happen because of some official dictate from on high. It's the result of highly zealous people on a more local level who justify what they do by their loyalty to their party. I was asked to tear down the opponent's posters when I volunteered at my local Democratic club in the early 1990s. I'm sure the Republicans do this too. "Politics" -- and power -- can make some people stupid and unethical. This is why I'm cynical, and can't throw myself into complete and total support for any one side.
Still, I urge people to vote, even if it's a big pain in the ass to do so.
Here's hoping next year my district hires election workers who know the alphabet. That might really help.
Obama's grandmother dies, some hard-line conservatives on message boards suggest it's part of a conspiracy to get sympathy votes.
I CAN'T TAKE THE STUPID ANYMORE!!!!!!
Look, I'm an Obama supporter, but I don't demonize McCain. McCain had and still has some good ideas -- but ran an *awful* campaign, complete with dirty trick robocalls and TV ads. And he didn't properly vet Palin, who he knew was a heartbeat away from the presidency. But I'm keeping a balanced view of it. Obama is not a magic fix for this country, he is not a "messiah" or some infallible mystical being. I just think he's the best of two options right now, and seems like an honestly good guy with some fresh ideas. I think McCain is honestly a good guy too, but got too caught up in wanting to win this thing and made some really bad decisions.
But if you are so ultra-conservative and anti-Obama that you honestly believe he had his grandmother killed in order to win the election through pity-- you are insane. Seriously. I mean -- I can see you saying something like that because you're just bitter and you hate him but you don't really believe it. But if you honestly think in your heart that Obama had the "drip" turned off on his grandmother so it would be timed for the election, you are Crazy.
But to be fair, some of these conservative sites are trying to moderate these comments and aren't tolerating the nastiness. And there are many conservative posters there who are telling the conspiracy theorists to knock it off, because they are making them all look Crazy.
This election has brought out so much Crazy -- from both sides -- I SO cannot wait for it to end. I'm exhausted watching it. Knowing that the end of this election is not the end of the Crazy, but only the beginning of four more years of New Crazy, no matter who wins.
That said, Obama/Biden 08. (voting tomorrow, then trying to block it all out until Wednesday morning)
John McCain calls Barack Obama by his full name in the latest debate:
That's right: "That One."
That's just how politicians should talk to each other. Don't make eye contact, don't shake hands, just point over your shoulder and call him "that one."
Let's see how many blogs have covered this by 11:30 tonight, several hours after the debates ended: wow, at least 20 Google search results pages full.
I was waiting for that Kennedy/Nixon debate moment...that point where people saw the sweat glisten off Nixon's burgeoning five o'clock shadow and it was clear who was going to lead the country into the future...
I've been asked many times this past week what I think of Republican VP pick Sarah Palin. Before I address this, let me back up.
I find myself making many snap judgments on these candidates based on the broad strokes and bells and whistles the media -- mostly online, but some MSNBC and Comedy Central -- feed me. I am supposedly a smart cookie; that's what it says on my college diploma. "Smart Cookie." Yet I buy what the media tells me, especially if they are of (allegedly) the same ideological stripe as myself.
I like Barack Obama and I want him to win the election. The biggest reason I want him to win, quite frankly, is because I feel this nation has been beaten down over these eight years and that psychologically him becoming president will be a boost in morale. It's the Kennedy thing all over again -- young charismatic man, A New Hope, Luke Skywalker, the whole nine. It is, to my mind, a positive forward step for our country.
But, in my vigor for him to win, I block out anything that might contradict that. I do that. I consciously do that. Now, I'm not referring to the paranoid racist bullshit that's been spewed about him. To me, that's rather obviously wrong and undeserving of discussion.
But take something like his level of experience. It's an issue. But it's an issue I consciously chose to ignore. Part of the reason I chose to ignore it is because I feel the last eight years under Bush rule have been so outrageously bad -- and McCain giving me no assurance that he is so very different -- that we must do everything possible to prevent a sequel.
Is the messiah/celebrity/icon thing that has been referred to regarding Obama accurate? Of course it is. He is extremely charismatic. He's the only politician I've ever felt compelled to hang a portrait of in my house.
Sarah Palin is also charismatic. I partially agree with the point-of-view that McCain picked her as a gimmick to attract frustrated female Clintonites. But also, it seems to me, she was picked by him as a knowing "fuck you" to Obama -- choosing someone with a similar level of inexperience (and easy on the eyes) who can rally a lot of people and be media candy.
And Palin and Obama are media candy. So was Clinton, so was Reagan. GWB was as well, but in a negative sense, as someone you love to hate -- the National Buffoon.
Through all the media candy, I try to look for something fucking real.
But -- real doesn't sell.
Middle-of-the-road doesn't sell either. Neither does critical thinking. We need a *cause* -- someone to hate, someone to worship.
Sarah Palin? I'm not happy with her. That's a gut feeling. The fact that she shares with McCain the belief that we must stay in Iraq "until we win it" tells me a lot, that I absolutely don't want her to be my Vice-President. But I could step in the murky water of actually looking at her good qualities. I could do that, but strategically I can't. Strategically -- we have to destroy her. Just like we did Hillary.
And did you hear -- she's banning books! She wants to ban Harry Potter! It's true -- I read it on BoingBoing! Only...the oft-cited list of books she wants to ban -- or is that burn -- is not true. It's actually taken from here. But that hasn't stopped people from blogging about it everywhere.
But it doesn't matter what is right -- or left. We need fuel for our sides, both sides, to keep the extremism going.
This two-party system doesn't work for me. The danger with only having two major political parties is that everything gets extreme, becomes "Us" vs. "Them." And yet -- how very different are they? I have yet to see any real, fundamental change. Yeah, GWB had a lot of fuckups and skeletons -- but so did Bill Clinton. There's still tons of poor people, we still go into countries and bomb the shit out of them, and women are still exploited whether by written policy or on their knees in the Oval Office.
I'm tired of it. I will definitely vote for Obama. But after that, I'm going to seek a candidate out of this loop.
For the record, even back when I supported John Edwards and pushed for him to be at least VP, I thought he reminded me of the notorious "Smiler" president from Transmetropolitan.
The fact that he decided to risk the Democratic election by covering up the affair he had while his wife was in cancer remission only makes it moreso.
I don't condemn him for the affair, but I think had he made it to the presidential nomination and this stuff came out now -- it would have cost everything. It was irresponsible. But -- as he himself said in his speech a few days ago -- he was on an "ego trip."
This was brought up on Fark, and, in light of the whole Obama "New Yorker" controversy, I'm interested in your opinion.
Is this cartoon (illustration) that appeared in a recent Rolling Stone offensive?
Just to backtrack a bit, I found The New Yorker cover with Obama & his wife offensive...or more specifically, in bad taste and not effective as satire. I understand arguments to the contrary and respect them. I just didn't like that cover. So sue me. I'm not asking for a boycott of The New Yorker. I'm just saying "meh," and I'm not buying the issue. Okay, not like I buy it anymore anyway, but just read what they post online. But there is a point in there, somewhere.
Back to this Rolling Stone cartoon.
I find this cartoon effective in that I clearly understand the "joke" -- the Democratic candidates are bedeviling McCain. Okay.
I find this cartoon in bad taste for two reasons.
First, the way the mock "Viet Cong" are drawn bothers me. Of course it's exaggeration -- an illustration of a theoretical McCain "flashback" using stereotypically drawn antagonists a la WW II propaganda -- and is not meant to be in any way a statement by Rolling Stone on Asians. It's satire. And yet, the appropriation of that racist imagery still has the power to disturb. I'm not saying Rolling Stone shouldn't have used that imagery, I'm just describing a gut feeling I have when I look at that cartoon. Please do not lecture me with "What Is Funny 101" and tell me my sense of humor is dead. That sort of patronizing tactic was used to death by certain critics in relation to the Obama New Yorker cover, and I'm pretty much sick to death of it.
Second, I think making fun of McCain's experience as a prisoner of war for 5+ years is in incredibly bad taste. That really bothers me. If McCain wants to once in a while make a little joke about it, that's fine. He has earned the right to refer to his painful experience any damn way he wants to. But the reference falls flat in this cartoon, and makes me cringe at the sight of it. It makes me wonder why this is not an an issue in the way the New Yorker cover was.
That all said -- I'm a Obama supporter and plan to vote for him in the election. But I respect the time McCain put in military service, and I think he suffered terribly and that's not something that should be used in satire. From Wikipedia:
"In August of 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain.He was subjected to rope bindings and repeated beatings every two hours, at the same time as he was suffering from dysentery.] Further injuries led to the beginning of a suicide attempt, which was stopped by guards...His injuries left him permanently incapable of raising his arms above his head.He subsequently received two to three beatings per week because of his continued refusal to sign additional statements."
Again, not advocating censorship, just giving my two cents.
And one thing that has become increasingly clear to me: I am both in awe and in horror of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Hillary: The Agony The horror is obvious. After two Republican terms that nearly gutted this country, the fact that she would rather risk another by eating into the Democrats' campaigning time and splitting the vote is unforgivable. Related to this is that she has done more (purposely or not) to highlight race and polarize the voters accordingly than anything that the Republicans would dare to do.
Another horror, at least to me, is that this is our most viable female candidate for President to date. Great. And she's trying to make this about "women's suffrage" (when she isn't trying to make it about those "hardworking people, white people").
Hillary: The Ecstasy But honestly, I'm totally in awe of her as well. Not even in a sarcastic way.
She is so over-the-top in focus, so seemingly bulletproof to the massive amounts of criticism thrown her way, so singlemindedly determined to become president...that it is, all the damage to the rest of the country aside, kind of impressive. It's like Terminator.
I mean, she is going after her dream -- NO MATTER WHAT!
It seems hopeless for her -- but she's moving forward to the bitter end, unwilling to accept defeat.
"Never say die, honey." Isn't she simply doing what those self-help books and common parental wisdom everywhere have extolled for just about forever?
"Don't quit." "Don't give up on your dreams." "Just do the best you can and don't give up." "If you can dream it, you can be it." "It's always darkest before the dawn." "Nothing's impossible." "Little train that could; choochoochoochoo..."
Hillary: Escape From The Death Star But, wouldn't we want a president that fights so passionately and without yield? If we were in a war, would we want the president that considers both sides of the argument and concedes that we might lose, or the one that megalomaniacally pursues our nation's victory at all costs and by any and all means at our disposal?
Or would she, in the heat of battle, jet like Darth Vader at the end of Episode Four, pull out from the Death Star as the credits rolled?
Great Women (and Men) In Popular Culture Whatever the case, I would not count Hillary out until not only the official Democratic candidate has been selected, but she has ceased her legal appeals as well. It's like Michael Myers at the end of those "Halloween" movies, how you think he's dead but then he comes back, jumps out, reappears, revives.
And yeah, in spite of everything, I still think if Hillary was a man she wouldn't be as hated. I mean, pop-culture seems to think people like Donald Trump are adorable. Who are our female Donald Trumps? Martha Stewart? We know what happened to her.
Oprah? If Oprah didn't have her warm-and-fuzzy approach (and a helpful monthly magazine chock full of tips on how I can love myself more), would she be as hated as Hillary? And she still has been attacked in the media as of late, amid speculation that her "empire is over."
That is why I would like to opt-out of the gender thing and be hated solely based on my own merit.
