Calling Peggy Noonan -- that tedious, tiresome, sententious conservative "pundit" (she was Ronald Reagan's principal speech writer, you know, and her craft consisted in drafting language that made vaporous "ideas" sound like something not outright laughable) -- a 'liberal intellectual' is one thing. But to reduce Amanda Gorman to a mascot? Well: I guess some people do have quite the taste for the jugular.
The January 6th Committee is smartly fighting fire with fire: Having tried the route of evidence and discourse (Muller and the impeachments), they have had to turn to TV, but this time they are doing it right. Not the TV that gives “equal time” to immoral liars and nihilists (and much, much more), such as Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz, political pirates who delight in ridiculing coherence and truth (the way George W. Bush ridiculed John Kerry for pointing to investigative stories from the New York Times and The Washington Post), and who revel in their ability to be outrageous because they can, but TV as a medium to bring about clarity through spectacle. Which is precisely what The Watergate Hearings did through seven sessions in seven months, from May 1973 to November 1973. Watergate as it was becoming Watergate, was not only a gripping grand spectacle, but a culture-wide phenomenon. There was really no Watergate before those hearings, and then, by the end of 73, it was all Watergate all the time. (Go to Youtube and watch it all -- it's all there. And make sure you type Dick Cavett (for the left) and William F. Buckley (for the right) in your search bar to get a whiff of what wafted through the air back then.)
The irony with this piece here is that the only cynical thing that it reveals is the stand that it is taking, if one can call whatever its anonymous author is trying to say 'a stand.' Truth -- especially Big Truth -- sometimes needs spectacles. Art must be summoned when simple language fails. Ask Plato, who detested playwrights precisely because he understood that only they could undermine his push for complete domination. That is also why, not embarrassed in the least by his own open hypocrisy, he wrote exquisite plays, which he branded as "Dialogues."
As for those calls to cast a pox on both houses and to avert our eyes and look elsewhere (like the Supreme Court with Roe, we are being remanded to the States, it looks like), I say, thanks but no thanks. I will watch and I will cheer on the side of truth-unearthing against the side of obfuscation, sand-in-the-eyes throwing, naked lying, indecency, and criminality, and I will let those who can’t tell the difference between a Noonan and a Nossel do their mish-mash dance to their heart’s content (because they can).
Point of fact: these were not failed impeachments. Trump was not removed from office, but he was impeached. Twice. Successfully.
Calling Peggy Noonan -- that tedious, tiresome, sententious conservative "pundit" (she was Ronald Reagan's principal speech writer, you know, and her craft consisted in drafting language that made vaporous "ideas" sound like something not outright laughable) -- a 'liberal intellectual' is one thing. But to reduce Amanda Gorman to a mascot? Well: I guess some people do have quite the taste for the jugular.
The January 6th Committee is smartly fighting fire with fire: Having tried the route of evidence and discourse (Muller and the impeachments), they have had to turn to TV, but this time they are doing it right. Not the TV that gives “equal time” to immoral liars and nihilists (and much, much more), such as Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz, political pirates who delight in ridiculing coherence and truth (the way George W. Bush ridiculed John Kerry for pointing to investigative stories from the New York Times and The Washington Post), and who revel in their ability to be outrageous because they can, but TV as a medium to bring about clarity through spectacle. Which is precisely what The Watergate Hearings did through seven sessions in seven months, from May 1973 to November 1973. Watergate as it was becoming Watergate, was not only a gripping grand spectacle, but a culture-wide phenomenon. There was really no Watergate before those hearings, and then, by the end of 73, it was all Watergate all the time. (Go to Youtube and watch it all -- it's all there. And make sure you type Dick Cavett (for the left) and William F. Buckley (for the right) in your search bar to get a whiff of what wafted through the air back then.)
The irony with this piece here is that the only cynical thing that it reveals is the stand that it is taking, if one can call whatever its anonymous author is trying to say 'a stand.' Truth -- especially Big Truth -- sometimes needs spectacles. Art must be summoned when simple language fails. Ask Plato, who detested playwrights precisely because he understood that only they could undermine his push for complete domination. That is also why, not embarrassed in the least by his own open hypocrisy, he wrote exquisite plays, which he branded as "Dialogues."
As for those calls to cast a pox on both houses and to avert our eyes and look elsewhere (like the Supreme Court with Roe, we are being remanded to the States, it looks like), I say, thanks but no thanks. I will watch and I will cheer on the side of truth-unearthing against the side of obfuscation, sand-in-the-eyes throwing, naked lying, indecency, and criminality, and I will let those who can’t tell the difference between a Noonan and a Nossel do their mish-mash dance to their heart’s content (because they can).