The Cult Of Obama (Children Should Not Vote)

Barack Obama is our president.  We’ve had 43 others. I do think it’s significant that we finally have a non-white guy in the office.  Otherwise, color me unimpressed.  Color me unenthusiastic.  Color me however you want, but just don’t color me with the same 4-color palette of the “Obamicon.”  I’m sure some people are just doing it to be silly, but I find it, and the other ways Obama is being idolized, a bit disturbing.

Barack Obama is a man – a human being.  Sure, he’s a talented politician, and he may turn out to be a decent leader.  But he’s not “hope,” he’s not a savior, he’s not brilliant, and he’s most likely not going to make the world a better place.  It is likely that he’ll take the United States a long way down the road to European-style socialism.  It is beyond doubt that he will vastly increase the size and scope of the federal government — he has laid out his plans to do so.

Now, perhaps you like that idea.  Maybe you think a bigger, more involved, more activist government is a good thing.  OK.  I don’t agree, but OK.  But come on, do you have to act like a 12-year-old girl falling to pieces over her favorite Jonas Brother?  Seriously?  This idol worship just reinforces the perception that most of his “supporters” were simply voting for the symbol, the celebrity.  This is why a lot of republicans think of democrats as unserious.  Democrats seem to go for the “rock star” candidate.  Obama has the thinnest resume of any modern president, and so was elected mainly on blind faith.  This had a lot of us, who did not support him, scratching our heads.  And now all the idol worship just seems to confirm the suspicion that a bunch of empty-headed children swung the election in Obama’s favor.

Perhaps this actually touches on the nature of the difference between republicans and democrats.  Democrats tend to support the idea of a more paternalistic government:  pay for our health care, our education, even our food, give us a job and don’t let us fail — take care of us!  So, maybe it makes sense that so many democrats see their president as the guy who can “save us” — the way children see their parents.  But still, the icons, the slogans, the fawning press coverage, the crying when he speaks, the cheerleading — these things make Obama supporters look like followers, similar to how North Koreans look worshiping Kim Jong Il, or the Chinese idolizing Mao.  So, please, cut it out.  It’s creepy, and it’s childish.

Do People Really Find This Guy Shocking?

Here we go again.  “Funny man,” Sacha Baron Cohen’s new movie, Bruno, is on its way, and we’re already hearing about how shocking Cohen is going to be.  In fact, we’ve been hearing about it for months.  I’m sorry, but doesn’t that kind of diminish the whole shock factor?  “Hey, go see this super shocking movie.  You’re going to be super shocked!!  Did we mention how super shocking — and outrageous — it is?”  Talk about setting up expectations.  Anyway, that would be bad enough, if Cohen was actually funny or shocking.  I’m sorry to burst bubbles here, but he’s neither.  I recently watched Borat.  Well, most of it, anyway — I thought it was so pathetically stupid that I sent it back without finishing it.  So, I have to ask.  Do people really find Cohen shocking?  Do they really find him funny?  Did anyone not know that he was going to start making out with his “sister,” after introducing her as the town whore?  Was him breaking a bunch of stuff in the antique shop not ridiculously predictable?  How about his ridiculous, juvenile, phony national anthem performance?  He sure taught those overly-patriotic rednecks a lesson.  Ooo!  He’s so outrageous!  *yawn*

Is There A Doctor In The House?

What happened to House? Not too long ago, it was definitely one of the more compelling shows on TV. But now, the medicine is sloppy (good medical reviews here), there are too many characters, and the stories are all over the place. It’s a real shame, and I’m hoping they can turn it around before I decide to stop watching. I think the show is suffering from the same affliction to which many other good shows seem to succumb: let’s call it “one-up-itis.” It’s a condition that leads writers and producers to attempt to continually raise the bar on the suspense, shock value, drama, sexiness, etc, on a successful show, because they feel that’s the only way to keep people watching.

Take 24, for example. Sure the show has always been a bit over the top, but in order to push the limits, I guess to keep the show exciting, they detonated a nuclear weapon in Los Angeles, early in the last season. Did they not realize that the compelling thing about a “ticking time bomb” type story is the suspense that builds while the hero is trying to *stop* tens of thousands of people from dying? Memo to Hollywood: This is what’s meant by “jumping the shark.” Once a show gets too far out, it’s very difficult to reel it back in.

So, House folks, dial it back a bit, please. There’s no need to make each week’s medical mystery so much more baffling than the last one. Just give us a patient with a good story. You don’t have to ratchet up the conflict between the main characters to the point of unbelievability. A little workplace tension goes a long way. And grossing people out with sliced up brains and exploding intestines is not the key to securing higher ratings — teenaged boys are not your core audience. There’s room in the TV schedule for a serious, intelligent drama. Leave the nonsensical medicine to ER and Grey’s Anatomy, and the gross out garbage to reality TV.