Laugh. Because the alternative is rage.

[elfs]

America has a tradition of political mockery. H. L. Menken was surely one of its greatest practitioners, and Mark Twain competes with him for the title. Although written mockery was commonplace, even more commonplace was the caricature or editorial cartoon, with Thomas Nast as its traditional progenitor and people like David Horsey and Peter Bagge the modern carriers of the tradition.

That that tradition would do well in other media, such as, oh, say, television. And such a tradition does well on a continuum: at one end of the spectrum we have The Onion, with its War for the White House, which uses fake newsclips and sketch comedy well-informed by real-world politics, and at the other end of the spectrum we have Rachel Maddow, who with a wit far more biting and accurate than anything the right wing currently has, presents herself as a legitimate pundit using the real news and talking points of the day on which to base her commentary and interviews. In the middle we have Stephanie Miller, John Stewart and Steven Colbert, who use video and audio clips of politicians and pundits saying ridiculous things, and then mock them with sketch comedy of their own.

Right now, there ain't a whole lot of this coming out of the Republican side of the media. It might be because there's not a whole lot funny about an unending and yet unendurable war, our children's future in hock to the current generation of fat-cats, our image loathed around the world, a broken military, or a failing economy.

But while outrage and bile are the order of the day on talkshout-show show television, wit and laughter are apparently beyond the pale, and I've now heard or read several pundits dismiss Maddow for refusing to identify herself as "a comedian" the way Dennis Miller does.

Nast and Menken found the long enough lever with which to move worlds. So have Stewart and Colbert, and even the Onion makes its own nasty points with like "John McCain Accidentally Left In Campaign Bus Overnight" and "Obama Promises To Stop America's Shitty Jobs From Going Overseas." If anything, these people have managed to significantly raise the level of discourse by making the news much more palatable. John Stewart is by far the best interviewer on the air, surpassing Letterman and Leno, and Maddow's indignant "really?" whenever a pol says the indefensible serves a public purpose far better than either O'Reilly or Olbermann's posturing at the camera.

In the meantime, the correct response is not to label Maddow dismissively, or to argue that she shouldn't label herself; it's to to better, to make your points more clearly and with style. At this point, though, the circular firing squad of drunk Republican attack monkeys clearly has its paws full, and finding the next generation of spokespeople for conservatism. And that's going to be hard when the litmus test for whether or not you deserve the support of the Republican party is going to be, "Do you support Sarah Palin?"

You know that old joke about how a guy goes to jail, and the jokes are so old that prisoners just shout out "number 21!" "number 57!" and the rest of the prisoners laugh? And so the newcomer tries, "Number 90!" and nobody laughs, and his cellmate says, "Well, some people just don't know how to tell a joke."

If you're old enough, you might remember this one, too:

A vast wasteland, filled with ice and snow.

It'll remind her of home.

Comments

[cthulu-for-pm.livejournal.com]

EXPN for the last one?

All my Google-fu brings up are descriptions of parts of WoW... probably not what you meant.

[kengr]

I believe that was what some senator said about the purchase of Alaska.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

aaaaah, soooo. Without which Ms. Palin would be *living* in Russia. Which might not be such a bad thing. :)

[doodlesthegreat.livejournal.com]

A useful gag against those who call for a return to the non-existent "good old days" by taking away the progress made to a certain point. In essence:

"[The candidate]is a fine person, and will return our country to what it was before!"

"A vast wasteland, full of ice and snow..."

[elfs.livejournal.com]

During the Carter/Reagan election cycle, Reagan talked both about the good old days and about confronting the evils of communism. Nostalgia and warmongering combined led left-wing pundits to mock him, "Ronald Reagan will make this country what it once was, so long ago: a vast wasteland, filled with ice and snow."

[cthulu-for-pm.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the explanation; I am now enlightened.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Mus' not be old enough. Pray elucidate, Mister Hayes?

[kengr]

See previous reply.

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Back during the Carter/Reagan election fight, Reagan said, "I want to take this country back to what it was," to which many left-wing pundits, razzing his bellicose rhetoric with respect to the Soviet Union, said, "Yeah, a vast wasteland filled with ice and snow."

[blaisepascal]

The real test of political mockery, in my opinion, is the ability/willingness to skewer whomever is in power. I have little doubt that The Onion will succeed in that, as they have typically been willing to skewer anything. Similarly with The Daily Show, as it has existed longer than the current administration -- their Peabody Award is for coverage of the 2000 election, after all.

I'm a bit concerned about The Colbert Report. It was, initially at least, a parody/mockery of right-wing pundits. It may still be, I haven't watched it in a long time. It seems hard to transition that to something which skewers the probable Obama administration while maintaining the sense of parody -- unless his "politics" changes and he becomes as much a caricature of extreme left-wing punditry as he is a caricature of extreme right-wing punditry now. He's going to have a lot of difficulty once his main target is taken away.

I don't know enough about Rachael Maddow to seriously comment. How do you think her comedy/political mockery will survive a change in administration?

[elfs.livejournal.com]

That's a good question. Maddow is willing to go after anyone stupid. So is Olbermann, actually, it's just that the right is providing such a target-rich environment at the moment. I suspect they'll do fine.

I share your concern about Colbert, though. He succeeds because there's a right-wing punditocracy to riff off. If it shrinks, and it probably will, he'll have to struggle for more material.

[damiana-swan.livejournal.com]

*chuckles* Oh, you mean like it shrank while Clinton was in office? And you think that having a black man in office will calm the frothing 'wingers down?

Right now the Republican party is going through a schism. It's only superficially a schism between the rational and the irrational, though--that's going to last about another week. The real schism is between the corporate conservatives and the theocrats, and having Obama in office is going to cause both sides to continue frothing. The main difference between the two is that the theocrats are furious because they think they have G*d and faith on their side and can't understand why us damned liberals don't agree with them, and the corporate conservatives think they have logic and sweet reason on their side and can't understand why we damned liberals don't agree with them. Both are a recipe for plenty of sound and fury, and both will be presenting Colbert with plenty of fodder.

[gromm.livejournal.com]

the theocrats are furious because they think they have G*d and faith on their side and can't understand why us damned liberals don't agree with them

All the frothing theocrats I've ever met have been more interested in exterminating us damned liberals, than on trying to understand why... well, why anything.