• A show you probably can’t remember, and neither did he

    September 8, 2023
    History, media

    Mitchell Hadley engages in a bit of fiction for fiction:

    He calls himself ‘Michael Alden,’ but says that this is not his name. He claims not to know his real name, nor who he is, nor anything that happened to him up until two months ago. Tonight we explore the mystery that is amnesia—the loss of a person’s memory, and with it, the loss of his humanity as well. I’m Walter Cronkite, and this is The 21st Century.”

    Obviously, this never happened. As classic TV fans know, “Michael Alden” is the character played by Frank Converse in the cult classic series, Coronet Blue. And, as our ersatz Walter Cronkite says, Michael Alden has amnesia. He was dragged half dead out of the water, murmuring the words “Coronet Blue.” He has no idea what this means, nor about anything else that has happened to him up until the time he is rescued. He doesn’t even know his own name; he picks the name Michael Alden because it’s a combination of his doctor’s first name and the name of the hospital where he was treated. For the remaining thirteen episodes, Alden will search for clues as to his real identity, and what “Coronet Blue” really means—while the people who tried to kill him look to finish the job.

    It’s a great idea for a television series, and had Coronet Blue existed in the real world (as is the case with many TV shows today), it’s quite likely that Alden would have been an ideal subject for a science program like The 21st Century (which aired on CBS from 1967-1970; it’s predecessor, The 20th Century, began in 1957). But just how plausible is the idea behind Coronet Blue? And how realistic is pop culture’s depiction of amnesia?

    What do we know about Michael Alden? Not much. As Coronet Blue opens, he’s onboard a ship, one piece in a moving puzzle. It’s clear that he’s part of some kind of plot; a heist, perhaps, or some kind of undercover operation—we just don’t know. Quickly, it becomes apparent that something’s gone wrong, that his confederates have discovered something about him—he had ratted them out, he wasn’t who he claimed to be, something like that—and consequently he’s been targeted for death. There’s a struggle, he goes over the rail of the ship and into the water, the bad guys take a couple of shots at him (or are they good guys? We just don’t know), and after a time he’s dragged ashore, nearly dead, mumbling the words “coronet blue.” He recovers, physically. Mentally, however, he’s a mess. He doesn’t know who he is, how he got there, why someone would want to kill him, and he has no idea what “coronet blue” means. Michael Alden has amnesia.

    In pop culture, the situation most like Alden’s is probably that of Jason Bourne, the character played by Matt Damon in the Bourne movies. Like Alden, Bourne is pulled out of the water after someone has tried to kill him; like Alden, he has no memory of his identity, although he retains his language and motor skills.

    Both Alden and Bourne suffer from a type of psychogenic dissociative amnesia called “retrograde” amnesia. As opposed to “anterograde” amnesia, which affects the ability of the mind to form new memories, retrograde amnesia means the inability to recall things that happened before a specific date, usually the date of an accident or trauma. In both of these cases, we see how retrograde amnesia “tends to negatively affect episodic, autobiographical, and declarative memory while usually keeping procedural memory intact with no difficulty for learning new knowledge.

    Now, within this fairly broad diagnosis, there are two subsets which we could be dealing with. The first, “situation-specific” amnesia, sometimes called “suppressed memory,” means that memory loss is confined to a specific traumatic event, with the victim able to remember things that happened both before and after the event. In the Twilight Zone episode “Nightmare as a Child,” for example, Janice Rule plays Helen Foley, a woman who unknowingly suffers from such a condition: Helen has no memory of her mother’s murder, nor that the young Helen was a witness to the murder, until the appearance of a little girl (Helen when she was young; an apparition? A manifestation of her subconscious? It is the Twilight Zone, after all) brings her memory back in time to apprehend the murderer, who’s returned to eliminate the only witness—Helen.*  That’s an example of “situation-specific” amnesia.

    However, Alden’s amnesia appears more likely to be a type known as “global-transient”; in other words, a major gap in the part of the memory that relates to personal identity. The most common illustration of global-transient amnesia is a “fugue state,” in which there is “a sudden retrograde loss of autobiographical memory resulting in impairment of personal identity and usually accompanied by a period of wandering.” That last is significant, because the premise of Coronet Blue is built around Alden’s attempts to find out who he is, resulting in travelling—wandering—to different parts of the country, searching for anyone or anything that can help him discover who he is. And what coronet blue means, of course.

    It’s likely that Alden’s doctors would have checked for some type of brain damage or other organic cause of his amnesia; they didn’t find anything, but even with today’s advancements in medical science, it’s unlikely that his amnesia was caused by anything as mundane as the proverbial “bump on the head.” Most of the time, psychogenic amnesia is traceable back to some type of psychological trigger; with Alden, it’s almost certainly related to the attack on him at the beginning of the first episode.

    I wonder, though: does he really want to remember? Or is it fear—fear of what he doesn’t know—that keeps his memory from returning? All the time, though, he remains focused on “coronet blue,” and it’s not just because the theme keeps playing in the background. Find out the meaning, he knows, and it’s likely he’ll be able to unlock the mystery.

    That fear of finding out what his past might be, though—that leads us to an obvious question: is Alden’s amnesia genuine? Is he a reliable narrator, or is he withholding something from the viewers?There are at least four episodes from the great legal drama Perry Mason that deal with amnesia. The first season episodes “The Case of the Crooked Candle,” and “The Case of the Desperate Daughter,” the fifth season episode “The Case of the Glamorous Ghost,” and the seventh season episode “The Case of the Nervous Neighbor” all involve Perry dealing with someone—generally a woman—claiming some form of amnesia.

    Is there a significance in this gender distinction? Possibly. While there’s no particular evidence to suggest that women are more susceptible than men to amnesia, the victim in “Glamorous Ghost,” Eleanor Corbin, claims to be suffering from amnesia “after police find her running and screaming through woods near her apartment building.” Doubtless someone would have referred to Eleanor as being “hysterical.” And that term, as understood and applied to women, dates back over 4,000 years. The National Center for Biotechnology Information calls hysteria “the first mental disorder attributable to women, accurately described in the second millennium BC, and until Freud considered an exclusively female disease.”

    Therefore, with Eleanor displaying no signs of physical injury, the suggestion is that her amnesia is a  form of retrograde amnesia known as “hysterical reaction,” one that does not appear to depend upon an actual brain disorder. Perry accepts this diagnosis, at least insofar as it provides him with the opportunity to stall for time while he tries to assemble the facts. The police, however, are suspicious: and for good reason, as Encyclopaedia Britannicanotes darkly: “Although most dramatic, such cases are extremely rare and seldom wholly convincing.”

    In fact, malingering—that is, the rational output of a neurological normal brain aiming at the surreptitious achievement of a well identified gain—is a constant threat in such cases. It’s understandable, then, that law enforcement officials have long been leery about such diagnoses, and for years they’ve pushed for some kind of standardized test for amnesia. Unlike the M’Naghten rule, which tests for criminal insanity, judging the legitimacy of amnesia claims defies application of uniform standards. As one expert remarks, amnesia cases “differ in onset, duration, and content forgotten” to the extent that it cannot be broadly defined in legal circumstances. And in a landmark case in England in 1959, a jury was called on to determine whether a defendant was faking amnesia, making him legally unfit to stand trial. The jury ruled he was faking (and convicted him, to boot). In truth, most cases of psychogenic retrograde autobiographical amnesia resolve themselves on their own accord, so if Hamilton Burger is willing to be patient, he might well be able to wait his suspect out. And, in fact, Eleanor Corbin is faking her amnesia, a deception which is soon uncovered by the police.* Could Michael Alden be doing the same thing?

    The police were, it appears, suspicious of his claim; however, that suspicion was mitigated by the fact that he wasn’t accused of having committed any crime. Indeed, the only crime apparent seems to have been perpetrated against him. But if he is faking it, it’s reasonable to assume that the reason goes back to that mysterious scene at the beginning of the series. Which means that there’s something in his past he’s trying to hide, something very dark indeed. And he knows full well what it is.

    Even a series as reliable as The Fugitive has an amnesia episode. It’s the ninth episode of the second season, “Escape into Black,” in which Dr. Richard Kimble is caught in an explosion at a diner. He awakens in a hospital, badly injured, and with no idea who he is or what has happened to him. Fortunately, there’s a social worker on the scene, one determined to look out for Kimble’s interests even though he can’t look out for them himself. Learning that Kimble had been asking about a one-armed man prior to the explosion, she renews the search herself. A good thing, too, because Kimble, having found out he’s wanted for murder and with no idea of whether or not he’s guilty, is on the verge of surrendering himself to Lt. Gerard.

    We know how it ends, of course: Kimble regains his memory in time to escape Gerard and resume his search for the one-armed man. It’s mighty convenient for us all that his problem clears up before the episode ends—but how likely is it?

    Well, it’s at least plausible. That same article from the Encyclopaedia Britannica notes that retrograde amnesia cases “usually clear up with relative rapidity, with or without psychotherapy.” Once Michael Alden’s doctors make their diagnosis (which, although it’s not mentioned by name, is almost certainly psychogenic retrograde autobiographical amnesia), then comes the treatment. Or at least it would, if Alden was willing to stand still for it. But he’s still running for his life, remember, and he realizes that he can’t afford to sit around undergoing extensive therapy to try and recover his memory. While that’s happening, the killers could catch up to him again, and this time they might not miss. (They could keep him in the hospital, of course, but then who knows if his insurance covers it, or even if he has insurance? It’s not as if they can look him up.) The treatment, however, would almost certainly have been a course of psychological therapy. Now, in the early decades of the 20th century, the therapy might have consisted of “truth serum” drugs such as barbiturates and benzodiazepines, and doubtless there are those who might wonder why his doctors didn’t try that. In fact, however, those drugs weren’t very successful in dealing with cases of amnesia—while they did make it possible for the patient to speak more easily about things, they also lowered the threshold of suggestibility, with the result that the information from the patient lacked reliability. By the 1960s, that kind of treatment would have been out.

    It’s far more likely that a course of psychoanalysis would be suggested, and I think it’s intriguing that one of the possible diagnoses to come from such treatment would have been along Freudian lines, by suggesting that his amnesia was a form of self-punishment, “with the obliteration of personal identity as an alternative to suicide.” I wonder if that will come up in the course of the series? Is it possible that Alden’s apparent dual identity at the start of the series has to do with something so secretive, so horrifying, that his subconscious simply can’t deal with it anymore, with the result that he tries to sweep it all clean? In an early episode, someone shrewdly observes that he has an opportunity few people ever get: to make a brand-new start to life, with no baggage, nothing linking him to the past. Is that what he’s subconsciously trying to do, to divorce himself from something he doesn’t want to be reminded of? In such conversations, Alden invariably states that all he’s interested in is the truth of who he is, and if it turns out that there’s something bad in his past (in one episode, he thinks he might be a killer), well, so be it—that’s the risk he’s willing to take

    And this, Walter Cronkite would probably discover, is where the story ends. In cases involving brain damage, doctors may be able to find a cause, and perhaps a cure. But Michael Alden’s case remains a mystery. It is likely, but not certain, that his amnesia will eventually clear up. It may happen relatively quickly, or it may take a protracted period of psychoanalysis. But as to how or why it happens, and how or why it resolves itself? And what the amnesiac goes through, a man without a past, whose continued survival depends on reclaiming that past? It is, surely, part of the mysterious world of the amnesiac. One thing is for certain, however: the trauma that Michael Alden faces is one that most of us will never have to deal with. …

    Don’t wait; that should be the moral of the story. Do your living now, while you can, while you can still live in the present. That’s what Michael Alden does, in Coronet Blue. He does it because he has no choice. And really, neither do we. Life is not meant for inertia, but for movement. Forward movement. However you can, wherever you can, whenever you can. Even if you’re not like Michael Alden.

    But we have a couple of advantages over Mike: for one thing, he doesn’t know who’s shooting at him, but we know who’s shooting at us. Life is firing the bullets, and the one thing of which we can be certain is that one of them, somewhere, has your name on it, and another one has mine. For another, most of us don’t have to worry about our series being cancelled before we find out the answers.

    There’s only one problem with this analogy, of course. We don’t know what “coronet blue” means either. 

    Come on. If you know cars you should be able to find a Dodge Coronet in blue …

    … although finding one that isn’t in a blue and rust two-tone is a bigger challenge.

    After this musical interlude …

    … the first thought is that all of us who complain about the entertainment world’s lack of originality should realize that this is not a new phenomenon.

    For those who want to know the secret of Coronet Blue, read this from IMDB.com:

    Series Creator Larry Cohen, in his autobiography “The Radical Allegories of an Independent Filmmaker”, explained the mystery behind the series’ title and catchphrase. “When the Brodkin Organization took over the series, they wanted to turn it into an anthology. So they played down the amnesia aspect until there was nothing about it at all in the show. It was just Frank Converse wandering from one story to the next with no connective format at all. Anyway, the show ended after seventeen weeks and nobody found out what ‘coronet blue’ meant. The actual secret is that Converse was not really an American at all. He was a Russian who had been trained to appear like an American and was sent to the U.S. as a spy. He belonged to a spy unit called ‘Coronet Blue’. He decided to defect, so the Russians tried to kill him before he can give away the identities of the other Soviet Agents, and nobody can really identify him because he doesn’t exist as an American. Coronet Blue was actually an outgrowth of ‘The Traitor’ episode of The Defenders (1961).” However, anyone who has seen the show knows that the amnesia aspect was in fact not played down (one episode had Alden declining a golden opportunity to learn the truth about himself, or at least a good part of it, on moral grounds concerning the way the information became available to him). Other facts are that thirteen episodes were all that were filmed, and that from first air date to last is only fourteen weeks, fifteen potential weekly air dates if you include those at both ends, but only eleven of the episodes were aired. In any case, Cohen’s “seventeen weeks”, made in a book wherein he presumably had plenty of time to check and be certain that he got such fundamental facts correct, is indefensible. All this calls the validity of the entirety of his statement into question.

    Maybe Cohen didn’t remember his own show. (Truth be told, most prolific TV producers appear to move on from one series to another. Gene Roddenberry took himself out of producing the third season of “Star Trek” and was working on other series, and probably would have forgotten about what became his most famous creation had it not survived after cancellation.)

    Since the show lasted only one half-season as a summer replacement series, as with most other series Coronet Blue ended with no resolution. That prompts this comment from the original post:

    I think I once read or heard that “Coronet Blue” had been filmed in 1965 with the intention of a January, 1966 premiere but the show was shelved and was kept “on the shelf” for a year-and-a-half.
    “Coronet Blue” supposedly had high ratings when it finally aired in the Summer of 1967, but as star Frank Converse had committed himself to star in another series in the 1967-68 TV season (“N.Y.P.D.”), there was no way production of “Coronet Blue” as a weekly series could have resumed.
    Even still, the producers of “Coronet Blue” COULD have made a two-hour TV-movie during one of “N.Y.P.D.”‘s production hiatuses, on which the loose ends could have been tied-up.

    Since Coronet Blue was set in New York City, as obviously was “N.Y.P.D.” …

    … the obvious solution would have been for Converse the detective to investigate the case of Converse the mysterious amnesiac.

    And before you ask, if you put “Coronet Blue” and “N.Y.P.D.” together, you do not get …

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on A show you probably can’t remember, and neither did he
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 8

    September 8, 2023
    Music

    Today in 1956, Harry Belafonte’s “Calypso” went to number one for the next 31 weeks:

    Today in 1965, Daily Variety included this ad:

    Madness! Running parts for four Insane Boys age 17-21.

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Sept. 8
  • The next g-g-g-generation

    September 7, 2023
    US politics

    Stephen Daisley:

    American politics has become a tug-of-war between two generations. Boomers (and those older) dominate positions of power even as their capacity diminishes. Eighty-year-old Joe Biden has repeatedly displayed signs of frailty and confusion but, as far as we know, he’ll be running for re-election in 2024.

    Over on Capitol Hill, eighty-one-year-old Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell continues to freeze during public remarks and ninety-year-old Dianne Feinstein faces calls to retire from within her own party. While mental impairment is no impediment to serving in the United States Senate — if anything, it’s probably an advantage — the upper house is older than it has ever been. The average age in the Senate today is sixty-five. There are eight serving senators who were born during Franklin Roosevelt’s administration.

    Millennials frustrated by this gerontocracy want the boomers to shove off so their generation can take power and dramatically lower the median age in DC. New blood would be no bad thing but would going from rule by boomers to rule by millennials really be an improvement?

    On the left, it would see leadership of the Democratic Party pass from the generation of acid, amnesty and abortion to the generation of privilege, pronouns and police abolition. On the right, the Republican torch would go from tax-cuts-for-Jesus Reaganbrains to Viktor Orbán fans who think they’re terribly edgy.

    In the round, it would mean replacing the most coddled, entitled, insufferably certain generation in American history with the generation that comes a close second. Which brings me to my proposal for solving, if not all, then quite a lot of America’s problems: put Generation X in charge.

    Gen X — those born between 1965 and 1980 — have the perfect political hinterland, forged in the fiery crucible of absolutely nothing. They had no war to protest, no draft to dodge. No counter-culture, no “Helter Skelter.” By the time they came of age, politics had escaped from the dread clutches of relevance and returned to its rightful place as the preserve of nerds, sociopaths, egomaniacs and other descriptions of Hillary Clinton.

    Instinctively post-racial, mostly unfussed about private preferences, casually skeptical of authority, if Gen X has a political philosophy it is the great cause of not giving a fuck. Some might call them slackers but I consider them the chillest generation. The last to make a proper go of smoking, the last to do any drinking worth the name and the last to actually enjoy sex, which given the backdrop of AIDS is impressive. Besides, how can you not love a generation whose twin enthusiasms were cocaine and exercise?

    Gen-Xers made careers for John Hughes and Cameron Crowe and Robert Zemeckis. They couldn’t get enough of watching their likenesses sliced up by summer-camp stalking psychos. They made hits of lowbrow sex comedies like Porky’s and Spring Break — and if you want to know why that’s super problematic, some joyless hall monitor called Melissa at VICE or the New Republic will explain in 1,000 breathless words.

    They read Bret Easton Ellis and Salman Rushdie and Martin Amis — and Alice Walker, because someone had to. They Vogued and Walked Like An Egyptian and pretended to understand what Michael Stipe was on about. They found their sound in The Smiths and Tracy Chapman and Prince, and we’ll just gloss over the whole U2 thing. They started grunge bands in their parents’ garages and some of them ended up playing their music on MTV back when MTV played music.

    Fine, Gen X is less buttoned up than the generation that came before and after. It has eclectic and easygoing tastes in popular culture. But are these really qualifications for running the world’s most powerful country? In a word, yes. In a Gen X word, duh.

    Take the economy. There’s no better generation to lead on this than the one that falls smack-bang between boomers and millennials. The former entered a less competitive labor market, with fewer qualifications and those who did attend college paid a lot less for it.

    They benefited from more job security, cheaper housing and a more active government, born into the economic stability fostered by the New Deal and coming into adulthood in time for the Great Society. Their grandchildren’s generation, in part because of boomers’ voting patterns in the Eighties and Nineties, came of age amid recession, precarity and pared back government.

    Gen X understands both experiences, having shared in some of the boomer-era benefits while taking some of the hits that landed on millennials. They are well-placed to strike a balance between economic growth, competition and innovation, on the one hand, and economic security, social protection and an enabling state, on the other.

    Ditto on another defining challenge, climate change. Gen Xers grew up appreciating the value of fossil fuels but also seeing their escalating impact on the planet. They are the ideal cohort to find a middle ground between carbon-clingers resistant to change and doom-mongering idealists who would shutter entire industries overnight. As for the culture wars, Gen X is the generation most likely to practice a laidback liberalism that says do what you want, think what you want, and say what you want, but you don’t get to decide what anyone else does, thinks or says.

    There is an alternative to government of, by and for the nursing home and the dismal competing visions of those who would supplant the current order, with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s wokeocracy on the left and Vivek Ramaswamy’s neo-Trumpism on the right. Between boomers’ self-enrichment and millennials’ identity-obsessed illiberalism there is a generation that can lead America with cool heads. A generation that can fix some of the mistakes made by boomers and head off some that millennials are itching to make. Everybody wants to rule the world, according to a seminal band of the era, but only Gen Xers should be allowed to.

    This is not a new concept. In 2017 Peter Weber wrote:

    What would a Gen X president have to offer? You may still think of Generation X as the slackers from such ’90s classics as Singles, Reality Bites, and, well, Slackers. But that was then. Now, they’re the tough, no-nonsense former latchkey children. “Gen-X did not inherit the military structure of the Greatest Generation, the class structure of the Silent Generation, nor the automatic economic growth given to the baby boomers,” GOP consultant Brad Todd wrote in The Atlantic last year. “Instead, they inherited the latchkey kid autonomy that came from a skyrocketing divorce rate, and the adult career uncertainty ushered in by post-industrial economic transition.”

    As a generation, Pew tells us, Gen X is politically about halfway between the more conservative boomers and the more liberal millennials — whether that’s a shifting-right-with-age phenomenon or something deeper is presumably to be determined. But it seems more complicated than simply occupying the political center. “It was Gen Xers who popularized the phrase ‘socially liberal, economically conservative,’” generational researcher David Rosen wrote at Politico in January 2016, “an ideological orientation reflecting their underlying distaste for authority.”

    If that’s true — tax cuts and gay marriage? — it isn’t true for Gen X’s political footprint. The most powerful Xer, Paul Ryan, is socially conservative and economically very conservative. Ditto Ted Cruz, the Gen Xer who came closest to the presidency. If the Greatest Generation lived in the penumbra of FDR and the boomers in the brief-hot glow of JFK, Gen X grew up with Jimmy Carter — a proximate doppelgänger of Mister Rogers — and especially Ronald Reagan.

    The Republican Gen Xers venerate Reagan, but they’re offering a purified version of Reaganism, sort of like the Gipper was a band and they’re going to play only his best albums, original vinyl, on their political turntables. They probably genuinely love trickle-down economics, but as a practical matter, this Reaganphilia makes political sense, too, because the Republican Party, and especially the part of it that votes in primaries, is older and more more conservative than the general public (and Gen X). …

    The important difference between Gen X and its demographic older and younger siblings is in tone, though, not policy. It isn’t that Gen X doesn’t have its own aspirations, it’s just that, collectively, it has seen the limits of ideological windmill-tilting and moral preening and recognizes the value of pragmatism. “If generations could be said to have mottos,” Rosen argues at Politico, “Gen X’s would almost certainly be Nike’s omnipresent corporate slogan: Just Do It.”

    Boomers had a dream; Gen X has its own dreams but what it really wants is a plan. It has mortgages and car payments and kids to put through college.

    … the two main political parties being what they are, the best shot for achieving a Gen X America lies in compromise, finding common ground between a vibrant Gen X right and Gen X left. Real compromise used to happen in Washington — say, when Reagan worked with the Democratic-controlled Congress to pass major immigration and tax reform. It has been rarer since the boomers took over Washington in 1995, but it could happen again, if we can move past their decades-old ideological blood feuds. …

    So, when the boomers finally retire (with their Social Security checks financed by Gen X and millennials), there’s a chance for a new politics in Washington. But for that to happen, Gen X needs good politicians. Trump’s last-gasp-boomer presidency is drawing candidates willing to take a leap of faith toward Congress in 2018, and so maybe that is when Gen X will gain a House majority. But the midterms are a year away, and Gen X is still Gen X.

    “Though much derided, members of my generation turn out to be something like Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca — we’ve seen everything and grown tired of history and all the fighting and so have opened our own little joint at the edge of the desert, the last outpost in a world gone mad, the last light in the last saloon on the darkest night of the year,” Rich Cohen writes in Vanity Fair. “There never were enough of us to demand the undivided attention of advertisers and hitmakers, we have been happy in our little joint, serving from can till can’t astride the Sahara. We have been witnesses, watching and recalling.

    Being on the oldest end of Generation X and as someone suggested more than once to run for … something …

    … I find this amusing on the eve of my high school’s 40th class reunion, as well as this 2022 piece from Ben Jacobs:

    It’s a drowsy rainy Thursday at the Iowa State Capitol, and Iowa State Representative Cherielynn Westrich is speaking to a school group about how a bill becomes a law. The state Legislature is out of session, and only a handful of members are lazing about the chamber catching up on correspondence. Westrich, a petite cheery blonde, is just finishing up explaining how a lawmaker can summon a legislative page to their desk if they have a specific request to add to a bill. Her audience is a group of about two dozen middle school-aged kids seated on the floor in the back corner of the room.

    Just then, another legislator, Steve Holt, interrupts with a smirk. It’s a school group from his district but he had left Westrich babysitting them for a few minutes. “You all know a fun fact about Rep. Westrich?” he asks. “She was in a famous rock band when she was young; you can find the videos on YouTube.”

    Westrich then tries to explain her past to the school group of children too young to remember Kanye West at the VMAs, let alone the mid-90s alternative rock scene. “Well so, you guys know who Madonna is? Madonna signed my band to her record label, and we toured all around the world and got to play all the big coliseums like Madison Square Garden, and then we had videos — you guys know about MTV? — we had two of them, and you can still find them online from a long time ago back in the 1900s.”

    The children laugh politely, and then it is time for them to go back to their school bus. Both their tour of the Iowa State Capitol and brief excursion into ‘90s nostalgia were over.

    But, for Westrich, neither was. The first term Iowa Republican was a Zelig-like figure in ‘90s pop culture. She worked for Flea, played with Spike Jonze in her first band and turned down the opportunity to appear on “Jackass.” But she’s perhaps best known for playing keyboard with the Rentals, a ‘90s band that scored a single hit with the song “Friends of P.” while touring the world with performers like Blur and Alanis Morissette.

    Now, 20 years later, after getting inspired to enter politics by former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, Westrich is a solidly conservative state representative from blue-collar southeast Iowa who is pro-gun and anti-vaccine mandate. It may be an unusual trajectory for someone who played moog synthesizer in a popular alternative rock band, but, given the politics of people in her generation, it actually might not be unusual at all.

    Gen Xers, which can be roughly defined as those born between 1965 and 1980, came of age under President Ronald Reagan amid the end of the Cold War. The popular image of Generation X has never quite fit in within any easy political framing. It’s the generation that produced grunge rock and gangsta rap but also reached cultural consciousness at the height of the “greed is good” 1980s memorialized in Oliver Stone’s Wall Street. In fact, if there was any popular image of this generation’s politics, it was that they were apolitical. The slackers depicted in Richard Linklater movies or the grunge rockers in flannel were almost devoid of political inclination save a generalized cynicism and MTV’s “Choose or Lose” campaign, which was designed to simply convince young voters that politics matters at all. After their first election in 1984, they bounced back and forth in presidential elections — although exit poll data doesn’t always provide a clear generation breakdown — but were never at all particularly progressive and veered to the right of the nation as a whole.

    And there were always hints of a more right-wing inclination culturally even if they may have been camouflaged by the less politically charged atmosphere at the time. The first major political depiction of this cohort was on the sitcom Family Ties, where Reagan-loving teenager Alex P. Keaton clashed with his liberal boomer parents. As Republican pollster Patrick Ruffini put it to Politico, “the MTV generation has always been a little bit more conservative.”

    Now, though, there is no confusion: Generation X is safely Republican. One model from 2014 measuring only white voters through the 2012 election shows those born in the mid-to-late 1960s being the most Republican-leaning of all, more so than the older Boomers and Silent generation. In a poll released in late April by Marist/NPR that separated voters by generation, Generation X had the highest level of disapproval for Biden and were the generation most likely to say they would vote for a Republican candidate in the midterms if they were held that day.

    While voters have historically tended to be more conservative as they age, that has accelerated with Generation X. In fact, Tom Bonier, the CEO of TargetSmart, a Democratic data firm, told me that Generation X has now become the most conservative generation, surpassing the Boomers in their rightward tilt.

    Some of this has to do with broader historical forces that were out of anyone’s control. The political atmosphere in which voters first cast ballots and became politically aware leaves a lasting impact through their lives. As Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson told me, “If you first became aware of politics during Reagan/[George H.W.] Bush/Clinton era, you’re more likely to lean a bit more to the right.” This was a time when even Bill Clinton was proclaiming “the era of big government is over

    Westrich, born in 1966, fits in with the oldest and, according to some studies, most conservative tranche of this generation. The first presidential election she would have been eligible to vote in was Reagan’s 1984 landslide, and she would have come of age at time in which there were few strong personalities defining the Democratic Party. Exit polls from that year show Reagan improving by 15 percentage points over 1980 among voters under 30, which was the biggest change in any individual demographic that year.

    For Westrich, the ‘90s were not particularly political times either. There was no discussion of Newt Gingrich or Hillarycare on the tour bus. Instead, it was a nerdy nomadic experience going from city to city and country to country. In lieu of political talk, Westrich and fellow keyboardist Maya Rudolph (who would later become famous on Saturday Night Live) would make humorous videos on their Super 8 camera.

    For her, even joining the band was the result of a series of accidents. It was a side project of Matt Sharp, the bassist from Weezer. In the year leading up to the release of Weezer’s hit debut, the Blue Album, Sharp had some downtime. He used it to record a demo with some friends. A small punk rock label got a hold of it and became interested. Sharp roped in two friends, one of whom was Westrich, to pretend to be the band behind the demo.

    It worked, and the two, along with Weezer’s drummer, Patrick Wilson, and the guitarist from Westrich’s band at the time, Rod Cervera, started recording an album before ever playing any live shows together.

    The result was repeated rehearsal sessions at a studio broken up by games of hacky sack while Ronnie James Dio, the former lead singer of Black Sabbath who was recording in the same building, sat in and watched.

    At the time, Westrich stood out for her hobby of repairing vintage cars rather than any political inclinations. As Sharp recalled, “there weren’t too many Moog-playing … mechanically inclined synthesizer players in the alternative landscape of 1995.”

    In fact, Sharp couldn’t really recall much political engagement at all at that time. “We were quite young and had our minds on other things and don’t think any of us were too engaged in that stuff.”

    Westrich didn’t recall any political conversation either. She said at the time she “felt like politics was for rich people.” “Everyone in politics had money,” she said, “and I just felt that was never going to be for me because I grew up … without a lot of money.” She couldn’t even recall any candidate who had ever really inspired her before Trump and described her past votes as just “picking between the lesser of two evils” and often just voting against incumbents of either party.

    In the decades since leaving music, Westrich reached an entirely different niche of quasi-celebrity as a mechanic on Overhaulin’, a reality television show where a team of auto mechanics surprises someone by rebuilding their car into a custom hotrod. Westrich took great pleasure in noting to me that while there were other women on the show, she was the only fully-fledged mechanic who actually worked on the cars.

    Westrich’s introduction to politics didn’t come until 2016. Having recently moved to Ottumwa, Iowa, to be with her long-term boyfriend, she was coaxed into volunteering for Trump’s general election campaign by a friend with whom she worked out. In Westrich’s telling “she kept talking about making phone calls and knocking doors for Trump and asking me to go and I kept saying ‘no thanks.’”

    Eventually, though, she relented and went to Trump’s campaign office.

    She found that she enjoyed the process of engaging with voters. “It was fun talking to people,” she said, and she enjoyed able to give them good information. “They really weren’t doing their homework,” she said of the voters she talked talk to. “They felt informed because watching evening news, but really weren’t able to go beyond that.”

    It was an unlikely path to a political career, and in keeping with her roots, she often sounds less like a savvy political insider and more like an average voter who is still figuring out which party is right for her. Her thoughts on her own political journey also shows how Gen X voters square their conservative views with the independent streak one also finds in the alternative culture they gave a name to.

    Although she was attracted to politics by Trump and voted for him twice, she has not embraced the personality cult around him and struck discordant notes about the 45th president at times. She certainly didn’t like his temperament, but she made clear that she was still a fan of his policies, pointing to achievements like “supporting our veterans” and “getting innocent people out of prison.” She also praised him as “the first candidate who was anti-establishment enough that I took a second look at him.” “I thought he may be someone that was actually different from the Clintons and Bushes,” she said.

    In her recollection, her interest in Trump was prompted by his positions on trade. However, looking back six years later she confessed, “I’m going to forget all the facts.” She tried to recall: “I did my research back then into what was happening with Paris Trade Accord [a reference to the climate agreement that the Obama administration had entered into] and things … I didn’t like it, and Trump was against it. I said, ‘Ok, great.’”

    This is roughly consistent with Bonier’s analysis of Gen X voters, which has found that they are very concerned about the economy, somewhat concerned about retirement (although nowhere near as much as Baby Boomers) and not terribly concerned about issues like the environment or guns. These general trends were echoed by John Della Volpe, the director of polling at Harvard University’s Kennedy School who found that on economic issues, Generation Xers leaned far more to the right than any other generation.

    Her journey to supporting Trump was also a typical one for Gen Xers, As Anderson explained Trump in particular had an effect polarizing politics along generational lines. Younger voters broke heavily towards Democrats while older voters broke heavily towards the GOP.

    From there, Westrich was recruited to run for office by local activists in what was a traditional Democratic area in and around Ottumwa against an eight-term incumbent. Although she lost on the first try in 2018, Westrich won in 2020.

    In her first term, she’s sponsored legislation to ban vaccine mandates, to prohibit libraries from making obscene materials available to minors and to nullify federal enforcement of gun control laws in the state. Now, in 2022, she is expected to easily win an open state senate seat created as a result of Iowa’s non-partisan redistricting process.

    Yet, despite being a Republican elected official, she still maintains a certain insistent independence. In fact, she insisted that she had kept her independent registration until two weeks before her first election until she was told that Iowa election law did not offer her much of a choice. She still insisted that she votes for “the person,” not “the party.” “That may disappoint some Republicans,” she said, but “you have to elect the people who will do the right job.”

    In the past, that meant she would deliberately switch back and forth to vote against incumbents “just to get them out of power.” Now, in reality, as an incumbent herself, that meant she was still just supporting Republicans.

    Westrich’s journey may be unusual in its details, but it still captures the political arc of her generation. Increasingly, the demographic base of the American right will be those too young to remember Watergate but too old to have spent much if any of their childhood on the Internet. It’s not just their life experiences that differ from other generations. At a time when American politics is increasingly polarized around education and racial views, Generation X maintains higher rates of racial resentment than succeeding generations while still having lower rates of educational attainment..

    In 2012, Paul Ryan, who is perhaps the most politically successful Gen Xer so far, was the subject of bewildered stories when it was reported that his favorite band was Rage Against The Machine, the anti-capitalist rap metal that had multiple triple platinum albums in the 1990s. In response, the band’s guitarist, Tom Morello, called Ryan everything “we’ve been raging against.”

    That may have been true, but it was also a hint of the politics to come. Gen X is full of contradictions, but not surprises — at least not when it comes to politics. In 2024, and probably for many years afterward, the fate of the GOP will rest safely in the hands of Gen Xers such as Westrich. First they were latchkey kids and then they were slackers — but now, they’re Republicans.

    Paul Ryan for president? The GOP could do worse, except in the opinion of Trumpers who, it must be said regardless of the polls, are backing a candidate who lost in 2020, whose backed candidates mostly lost in 2022, and who will lose in 2024 if he’s the GOP nominee. Of course, Florida Sen. Maco Rubio, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Utah whatever-he-was Evan McMullen all ran in 2016, and all obviously lost to Trump.

    The GOP presidential field now includes from my g-g-g-generation South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, 57; former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, 51; Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, 44; and former Texas Rep. Will Hurd, 44. There are also former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, 57; Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, 56; South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, 51; and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, 46, who might run or might change his mind, in Sununu’s case, against running.

    Whatever you think of those on the preceding two paragraphs, each seems unlikely to drop dead tomorrow due to age, or make you question their faculties or mental state. They and we of Gen X have gone through three cataclysms in our adult lives — 9/11, the Great Recession, and COVID — in which national leadership left a great deal to be desired. Some of us may have learned from them.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on The next g-g-g-generation
  • Conservatism vs. populism

    September 7, 2023
    US politics

    National Review:

    Former vice president Mike Pence took aim at former president Donald Trump and his “populist followers and imitators” during a speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday titled, “Populism vs. Conservatism: Republicans’ Time for Choosing.”

    Pence told a crowd at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College that Republican voters “face a choice” between conservative principles and the rising populist movement. He said populists are replacing limited government and traditional values with “an agenda stitched together by little else than personal grievances and performative outrage.”

    Pence warned that leaning into populism could lead to a future where “our party’s relevancy will be confined to history books.”

    “It may live on in some populist fashion, but then it will truly be, in a cruel twist, Republican in name only,” he said.NR Logo

    “Will we choose to go down the path of populism and decline? I believe we stand at a crossroads,” Pence said. “I have faith that Republican voters will once again choose the good way.”

    Pence took direct aim at his former running mate. “The Republican Party did not begin on a golden escalator in 2015,” Pence said, referring to Trump’s presidential announcement at Trump Tower in New York.

    “Donald Trump, along with his populist followers and imitators — some of whom are also seeking the Republican presidential nomination — often sound like an echo of the progressive they would replace in the White House,” Pence said.

    He also suggested Trump’s position on entitlement reform is “identical” to President Biden’s.

    Trump called on Republican lawmakers not to “cut a single penny from Medicare or Social Security” when they began negotiations with President Biden and Democrats over a measure to raise the debt ceiling in January. “Cut waste, fraud, and abuse everywhere that we can find it, and there is plenty of it. . . . But do not cut the benefits our seniors worked for and paid for their entire lives. Save Social Security. Don’t destroy it,” Trump said at the time.

    Pence went on to criticize Florida governor Ron DeSantis for having “used the power of the state to punish corporations for taking a political stand he disagreed with.” The comment seemingly referred to DeSantis’s ongoing feud with Disney, which filed a lawsuit against the governor and other state leaders in April accusing them of participating in a “targeted campaign of government retaliation” against the company that began last year when it spoke out against Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law.

    Pence, meanwhile, also called political newcomer Vivek Ramaswamy “one of former president’s populist protégés” and knocked his support for raising the inheritance tax.

    But the former vice president’s advisers told reporters ahead of the speech on Tuesday that the former vice president’s remarks are not directed specifically toward Trump or Ramaswamy. It would be “much too small an interpretation” of his speech to focus on any one political figure, the advisers said.

    They also accused former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott of claiming to be classical conservatives while adopting some populist views. “Which might be even more dangerous, because it seems like it’s pandering,” an adviser said.

    Pence warned that the move toward populism over conservatism could strip America from it’s role as a global leader and erode constitutional norms.

    While some may question how Pence can distance himself from the populist movement after having served with Trump, the former vice president said: “When Donald Trump ran for president in 2016, he promised to govern as a conservative. And together, we did just that. But he and his imitators make no such promise today.”

    Pence’s speech, which is a callback to Ronald Reagan’s 1964 “A Time for Choosing” speech in support of Barry Goldwater’s presidential bid, comes weeks before the second presidential debate is set to take place at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Conservatism vs. populism
  • Donald J. Biden

    September 7, 2023
    US politics

    Barton Swaim:

    From the moment Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016, his critics on the left have bewailed the overwhelming support he receives from evangelical Christians. How could those who claim to esteem traditional moral values—monogamy chief among them—support a profane libertine like Mr. Trump? The implicit charge was that socially conservative Christians cared more about political ends than about moral values. But the charge was specious. Their political ends were perfectly consistent with the values they purported to hold, even if the agent through whom they sought to promote those values (Mr. Trump) didn’t exhibit them. And anyway I’m not sure what choice socially conservative religious voters had on Election Day in 2016. Were they supposed to vote for Hillary Clinton?

    The idea that lust for power explains evangelical support for Mr. Trump is one form of a larger accusation leveled by liberals and progressives against Republicans in the Trump era. Every time a Republican praised the 45th president, it was an indication of the party’s “fealty” or “near-total fealty” or “total fealty” to the president. And every time a Republican candidate took Mr. Trump’s view on a subject, it was an instance of the president’s “grip” or “iron grip” or “death grip” on the GOP.

    I gladly concede that many Republican candidates and officeholders aligned themselves in unseemly ways with Mr. Trump. Some sang his praises as president despite having scorned him as a candidate. Others took up his crotchets as their own—voter fraud, trade deficits—having never complained about those things before. And many—though far from all—remained silent about his erratic, frequently childish and vulgar personal behavior. Still, some form of “fealty” by Republicans to a sitting Republican president is unavoidable, and it was hardly surprising that the head of his party had a “grip” on it.

    Whatever may be said about the GOP’s solicitous attitude to Mr. Trump during the years of his presidency, it compares favorably with the left’s omertà in the face of President Biden’s obvious mental infirmity, incompetence and what appears to be a history of self-enrichment.

    Mr. Trump’s election occasioned some unlovely shifting of principles on the right, but it also precipitated fierce debate. Some Republicans refused to find fault with the new president for anything. Others made their peace with his election but remained critical when his conduct and decisions merited it. A few made it their mission to destroy him. Right-oriented policy organizations and conservative publications endured rancorous public schisms. Conservative religious leaders, including evangelical Christians, fell out with each other.

    That is more than one can say for the Democratic Party and the mainstream left of the 2020s. The deficiencies of Mr. Trump are different from those of Mr. Biden, but the latter’s personal culpabilities and political liabilities are what any normal, uninvested person would call grave. Mr. Biden’s cringe-making decline is on display nearly every time he appears in public; examples are too many, and too painful, to describe. His diminished state might be funny in a novel or a movie, but in the real world it’s a continuing invitation to bad actors to engage in devilry and expect no consequence.

    And yet with a tiny number of unremarkable exceptions, Democratic politicos say nothing.

    The stupendously incompetent pullout from Afghanistan occurred early in Mr. Biden’s term, and the horrors it produced would have destroyed any other presidency—a bomb killing 13 Marines; a retaliatory drone strike killing zero terrorists and 10 civilians, including seven children; a White House affecting unconcern for hundreds of Americans trapped inside the country; Afghan citizens pitifully clinging to a departing U.S. military plane, some of them falling to their deaths; former Afghan allies left at the mercies of the Taliban; billions of dollars worth of military equipment abandoned in the field; women and girls forced to drop out of school. Forgive the indecorousness, but it is undeniable that this calamity was a consequence of some combination of senility and incompetence. Yet the number of high-level Democrats who expressed more than vague “worry” and “concern” is somewhere between small and nonexistent.

    You might have expected a credible Democrat, maybe a retired military officer, to challenge Mr. Biden in a primary. But no; the party rearranged its traditional primary schedule to begin with South Carolina and so make any primary challenge nearly impossible. I await the stream of articles in the New York Times and Washington Post about Mr. Biden’s “iron grip” on his party.

    The Hunter Biden revelations would have generated calls for resignation in a time of more sanity and less rancor. Text messages indicating the young Mr. Biden was selling access to his father, a maze of shell companies seemingly meant to hide transactions, strong evidence that the Justice Department monkey-wrenched an investigation into that activity—none of it provokes curiosity on the left. That one of the associates Hunter badgered for payment works for a company with ties to the Chinese government is also, for Democrats and the left’s pundit class, a matter of no interest.

    This newspaper’s editorial page managed to provoke Mr. Trump into many all-caps condemnations. Has any center-left outlet provoked Mr. Biden into one of those fits of rage for which he is famous?

    The leftist journalist Franklin Foer’s book “The Last Politician,” to be published Tuesday, relates some episodes that reflect poorly on President Biden. The passages I’ve been able to glean, however, look mild—mainly a lot of unflattering things said about Mr. Biden, anonymously, by allies and aides. That these rather gentle slights have attracted so much attention isn’t a measure of their severity. They remind us, rather, that for 2½ years no one on Mr. Biden’s side has dared to say anything disparaging of him.

    Now that’s what I call fealty.

    Michael Smith:

    Yesterday while my wife and I were sort of working to get ahead of the week, I stopped long enough to call an old friend to wish him a happy birthday. …

    He was a full on Democrat-Farmer-Labor Walter Mondale lib, I was a Reagan Republican but as strange as it was, we became friends. …

    Needless to say, he hates Trump with the heat of a thousand suns.

    He knows my political bent so he started rattling off all the things Trump had done.

    As usual, nether Trump, Ron DeSantis, nor anyone in the GOP had done any of that. Honestly, his litany sounded like the worst BlueAnon graphic novel ever conceived in the fever dreams of a leftist. It was true Bad Orange Man stuff.

    So, I let him go understanding that it was pointless, so when he ran out of breath, I said:

    “You know, for the first time in my life I might not vote for someone who uses their family to enrich themselves, who colludes with our enemies, is protected by elected officials in Congress who lie for him and then uses the media to hide his treason.”

    I went on to list all the things that Biden has done – or had people do for him – acting as if I was talking about Trump.

    My friend literally was not cognizant I was talking about Biden. He is totally locked into “See no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil” mode where Biden is concerned.

    Imagine his surprise when I told him I was talking about Joe Biden.

    He then began to argue that none of what I said happened even though I offered to send him links to favorable leftist media where even they admitted it did.

    He simply said he didn’t need any cites because he knew Biden was a good man who would never do things like that.

    I figured out what the issue was and I told him that he was using everything he imagined Trump did, but didn’t, as a wall to block the real issues with Biden.

    We ended the call somewhat less cordially than it began, but I think we are still friends, at least for the next year. …

    It completely sums up the Democrat Party’s willful blindness to the cringing awfulness of Joe Biden and that the real damage Biden and his minions are doing that is even greater than anything their jaundiced brains could imagine Donald J. Trump ever did.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Donald J. Biden
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 7

    September 7, 2023
    Music

    Today in 1963, ABC-TV’s “American Bandstand” moved from every weekday afternoon in Philadelphia …

    … to Saturdays in California:

    The number one album today in 1968 was the Doors’ “Waiting for the Sun,” their only number one album:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Sept. 7
  • 1948, 2012 and 2020 again?

    September 6, 2023
    US politics

    Noah Rothman:

    Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson has documented a strange mix of catastrophism and overconfidence that dominates the thinking among Republican voters. “Republicans both deeply fear a 2024 loss and can’t fathom its actually happening,” she wrote. And the focus groups she conducts for the New York Times bear this conclusion out. Though their political views and values differed, precisely none of the eleven Republican participants in her last sample could envision a scenario in which Joe Biden won reelection in 2024. That doesn’t just also apply to Donald Trump if he emerges as the Republican Party’s presidential nominee. They think it is especially true of the former president, who Republican primary voters appear to believe is Biden’s strongest hypothetical opponent.

    The theories that political observers posit to explain the Right’s certitude are unsatisfying, partly because they are predicated on a variety of uncharitable assumptions about Republican voters. For example, the notion that Republicans refuse to entertain the prospect of loss because Trump has coached them into believing that he didn’t actually lose the 2020 election is one unsatisfactory theory.

    Self-identified Republicans are inclined to echo the former president’s claims about the 2020 race when speaking with pollsters, just as they are inclined to view most Trump-related phenomena as proximate tests of their support for Trump himself. But Republicans have mixed views of the actions Mike Pence took on January 6, and the relatively warm reception the former vice president received from his opponents and the Republicans in the audience during a portion of the first primary debate in which his conduct was relitigated do not suggest Trump’s electoral record is a live wire. Moreover, there is no transitive property to Trump’s stolen-election narrative, though his mimics in the GOP did their best to incept the idea that the midterm elections were similarly marred by fraud and malfeasance. Republican voters know their candidates lost in 2022.

    The GOP’s voters may be presumptuous, but they are not delusional. Rather, Republicans are responding rationally to the general lay of the political landscape.

    GOP voters think the economy is terrible, believe that most people agree with them, and assume voters would take Trump’s economic record over Joe Biden’s in a heartbeat — and they may not be wrong. Voters are deeply dissatisfied with the economy over which Biden has presided, blame Democrats for their circumstances, and consistently give Trump’s handling of economic issues high marks.

    Republican voters think Trump is a victim of an overzealous government, which has been weaponized with the aim of neutralizing the former president as a political force and stealing from them the opportunity to vote for him again. Once again, they think most Americans agree with this point of view, and, to some extent, they do. When asked about the many criminal allegations against Trump, pluralities regularly tell Ipsos pollsters that they believe the charges are politically motivated.

    The Republican primary electorate thinks Joe Biden is irredeemably corrupt and, once again, they have reason to believe theirs is not a minority point of view. Sixty-four percent of respondents to a recent YouGov survey, including 47 percent of Democrats and two-thirds of independents, believe Hunter Biden “definitely or probably” did something illegal. Forty-four percent of that poll’s respondents said “yes” when asked if “Joe Biden did anything illegal regarding Hunter Biden.” Republicans believe the stink of corruption about the president is contributing to the erosion of support for Biden’s reelection, and who is to say they’re wrong?

    Republicans believe all this while catastrophizing the prospect of Joe Biden’s reelection, often earnestly and in ways that are reinforced by prominent Republican officeholders. If you believed that Biden’s conduct is “treasonous,” that “America is finished” if he gets to spend another four years in the Oval Office, and you’re receiving signals from your environment that suggest most Americans agree to the extent they are willing to put their objections to Trump aside, why wouldn’t you conclude that your side can’t lose?

    The problem with this analysis is not that it is a rationalization to justify nominating Trump to the presidency for a third time. The problem is that the analysis is incomplete.

    Republicans trying to convince themselves that voters are purely economic actors and will subordinate their concerns about Trump to pocketbook issues fail to consider the fact that voters did not do that in either 2020 or 2022. Trump lost his reelection bid in 2020 despite voters’ favorable view of his management of the economy. Moreover, amid economic circumstances that were marginally worse than they are today and for which Democrats received the lion’s share of the blame, midterm-election voters turned out to vote against the GOP’s candidates — in particular, the party’s nominees who emulated Trump’s most grating habits.

    The voting public may concede the notion that the charges Trump faces at the federal and state levels are politically motivated — an outlook that is likely to evolve as voters get more intimately acquitted with the evidence against the former president, which they surely will be when proceedings against Trump consume the national discourse. But American adults hold that view while still favoring the prosecution of the former president, sometimes in the same poll. If voters are willing to entertain (for now) the notion that Trump is being persecuted, it’s persecution they’re willing to live with if it extricates the former president from public life.

    The allegations of corruption surrounding Joe Biden are breaking through despite a concerted campaign in the press to remind Americans that the GOP has produced no tangible evidence that the president benefited financially from his son’s con artistry. But they still think Trump and his family are worse. The same YouGov survey that the Right has latched onto found that a majority of respondents say that the former president and his adult children are corrupt, while just 28 percent disagree. “Since October, that gap has increased from 18 to 25 points,” observed Yahoo News reporter Andrew Romano.

    Unseating an incumbent president, even an unpopular one, is a herculean feat. But Republicans have minimized the scale of that challenge in their minds because Trump is functionally an incumbent, too. He has a record on which to run, a formidable party machine clearing the path before him, and a ubiquitous cheering section in conservative media outlets. What’s more, the circumstances in which Americans find themselves are so undesirable that Trump polls competitively against Biden before the campaign has even begun. Why should the Right give its critics the satisfaction of abandoning Trump when there seems to be more risk in putting an unknown quantity up against Biden in 2024? Republicans don’t think Republicans can lose, and they seem determined to test that proposition over and over in the most improvident ways imaginable.

    Republicans thought it was a sure thing that Thomas Dewey would beat Harry Truman in 1948. Republicans also thought it was a sure thing that Mitt Romney would beat Barack Obama in 2012. They found out otherwise on election night.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on 1948, 2012 and 2020 again?
  • The fading president

    September 6, 2023
    US politics

    William Otis:

    Three weeks ago, I wrote that, while Trump and Biden were running even in the polls, I thought Biden had the edge for next year’s general election, because I just didn’t see how Trump was making or could make gains among the undecided (assuming there are any truly undecided).

    Today, there’s evidence I might need to re-think that. I still doubt that Trump is making any converts. But what might be happening is something I underestimated: that while Trump fails to gain, Biden is slipping.

    The evidence is in a NYT article by Nate Cohn titled, “Consistent Signs of Erosion in Black and Hispanic Support for Biden.” The subhead is, “It’s a weakness that could manifest itself as low Democratic turnout even if Trump and Republicans don’t gain among those groups.”

    Why is this important? Because, as the last two presidential elections tell us, even a marginal erosion of black support for Biden in, say, Milwaukee, Atlanta, and Philadelphia could throw Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania to Trump, and with it the election.

    The Times notes:

    On average, Mr. Biden leads Mr. Trump by just 53 percent to 28 percent among registered nonwhite voters in a compilation of Times/Siena polls from 2022 and 2023, which includes over 1,500 nonwhite respondents.

    The results represent a marked deterioration in Mr. Biden’s support compared with 2020, when he won more than 70 percent of nonwhite voters. If he’s unable to revitalize this support by next November, it will continue a decade-long trend of declining Democratic strength among voters considered to be the foundation of the party.

    Given Biden’s narrow winning margins in just a few swing states last time, a slippage to that extent would make Biden’s winning them again a long shot, and probably put Trump in the White House.

    The Democratic Party’s share of support among non-white voters has slipped across every demographic category — gender, age, education and income.

    Mr. Biden’s tepid support among these voters appears to be mostly responsible for the close race in early national surveys, which show Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump all but tied among registered voters even as Mr. Biden runs as well among white voters as he did four years ago.

    Could it be that black voters have had enough of their cities being hollowed out by roving gangs of thieves, with the consequent dozens of store closures; or of their young men being murdered while prosecution standards go flaccid under progressive DA’s; or of public education dooming their kids to lousy jobs or no jobs because they never learn to read or add or speak decent English?

    I don’t know. I’m not a sociologist. But sooner or later, these things were bound to register, and black people — whom the Left has taken for years as ciphers and fools — might be in the process of showing they’re no such thing.

    …the possibility that [Biden’s] standing will remain beneath the already depressed levels of the last presidential election should not be discounted. Democrats have lost ground among nonwhite voters in almost every election over the last decade, even as racially charged fights over everything from a border wall to kneeling during the national anthem might have been expected to produce the exact opposite result.

    That passage wonderfully illustrates how much the stupid passes for the sage among those who write the NYT (and a legion of other, similarly liberal outlets). Hey Lefties, wake up! Neither working class black people (nor any other working class people who think) are going to be thrilled when illegal immigrants are taking their jobs, and doing so just as the taxes they pay are financing the services illegals absorb. And the Times’ breezy assumption that blacks support gestures of contempt for the United States is worse than merely patronizing. It’s disgusting and almost certainly false — or, as the Times would airily say, “without evidence.”

    I mean, hello! Just because the Harvard and NYU and Vassar grads who work at the Times have had their brains turned to mush doesn’t mean that black people have. People who have to live with their daily dose of wages falling behind Bidenflation, and crime and drugs and vagrancy at the streetcorner, and failing and dangerous public schools, have a grip on reality that the editing room at the Times could really use but has next to no chance of getting.

    Many of Mr. Biden’s vulnerabilities — like his age and inflation — could exacerbate the trend, as nonwhite voters tend to be younger and less affluent than white voters. Overall, the president’s approval rating stands at just 47 percent among nonwhite voters in Times/Siena polling over the last year; his favorability rating is just 54 percent.

    Support that tepid among what should be the Democrats’ strongest constituencies has to be ringing alarm bells inside the White House. If that doesn’t, these two paragraphs buried down in the article will:

    The survey finds evidence that a modest but important 5 percent of nonwhite Biden voters now support Mr. Trump, including 8 percent of Hispanic voters who say they backed Mr. Biden in 2020. Virtually no nonwhite voters who say they supported Mr. Trump — just 1 percent — say they will back Mr. Biden this time around. In comparison, white Biden and white Trump supporters from 2020 say they will return to their previous candidate in nearly identical numbers.

    Beyond voters who have flipped to Mr. Trump, a large number of disaffected voters who supported Mr. Biden in 2020 now say they’re undecided or simply won’t vote this time around. As a consequence, his weakness is concentrated among less engaged voters on the periphery of politics, who have not consistently voted in recent elections and who may decide to stay home next November.

    When, as was the case in the last two elections and is likely to be in next year’s as well, the outcome is determined by narrow margins in three or four states, each with significant black and/or Hispanic populations, the Times is spot on in noting that even a modest shift toward Trump could tell the tale.

    Still, before too much cheer about getting rid of Biden seeps in, it’s worth remembering that Trump might not be Biden’s Republican opponent, and that if he’s not, it remains to be seen whether Trump’s (relatively high, for a Republican) appeal to minority voters would also accrue to a different candidate like Ron DeSantis on Nikki Haley. But that’s yet another imponderable: What a DeSantis or Haley might lose in not having Trump’s appeal to minority voters, he or she might gain in re-establishing support in the suburbs — support that has been battered by exactly the rouge, rough-and-tumble style that Trump uses so well in building his more populist appeal.

    It’s anyone’s guess how it will work out. But one way or the other, the NYT’s account of Biden’s slipagge among his most needed constituencies counts as good news for anyone who thinks the country cannot continue on its present path.

     

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on The fading president
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 6

    September 6, 2023
    Music

    The number one single in the U.K. todayyyyyyy in 19677777777 …

    One yearrrrrr laterrrrrr, the Beatles recorded Eric Clapton’s guitar part for “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” making him the first non-Beatle on a Beatle record:

    The College of Rock and Roll Knowledge reports:

    … The Beatles’ George Harrison was heading in to London for a recording session for “While My Guitar Gently Weeps”. His neighbor, Eric Clapton needed a lift into London, so George offered to take him. George had a different idea though.
    Harrison wasn’t happy with his own guitar tracks on the song so while driving, he asked Eric to come to the session and do a track on.
    Clapton at first refused, saying that “nobody (famous) ever plays on the Beatles records!” but George insisted. Clapton came in and the invitation has its intended effect: the band members were completely professional and Eric’s solo sounded great.
    As Clapton was listening to a playback, the thought his solo wasn’t “Beatle-y enough,” so the solo is run through an ADT circuit with “varispeed”, with the session engineer manually ‘waggling’ the oscillator: Engineer Chris Thomas has recalled: “Eric said that he didn’t want it to sound like him. So I was just sitting there wobbling the thing, they wanted it really extreme, so that’s what I did.” The effect sounded like the guitar was run through the Leslie rotating speaker of the Hammond B-3 organ cabinet.

    The number one song in the U.S. today in 1975:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Sept. 6
  • Biden the jerk and liar

    September 5, 2023
    US politics

    Michael Smith on this liar:

    Twitter is full of “I’m so glad Biden is my president because he is just so empathetic” tweets these days. Idiot GenZer and DNC shill, Victor Shi, tweeted:

    “The Right can try and twist and lie about President Biden’s visit [to Maui] all they want but THIS is what the people of Maui saw — a comforting, empathetic, compassionate LEADER & decent human being. This is why we love him.”

    Well, alrighty then. Gaslighting all the way down for the young and stupid.

    The media palace guards have been pulling overtime for a while now:

    • “How Empathy Defines Joe Biden”, Forbes August 2020
    • “Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and the Return of Empathy When America Needs It Most”, Time, November 7, 2920
    • “Joe Biden: An Empathetic Leader Whose Time Has Come”, Forbes, November 7, 2020
    • “Biden’s Empathy Is What Matches Him to This Moment”, The Atlantic, November 2, 2020

    I could go on, but you get the idea. Google “Joe Biden empathetic” and you will get literally thousands of articles about what an awesome dude Joe is.

    The people around Biden have carefully cultivated an image of Scranton Joey that is in direct conflict with his character, was labeled empathetic, caring, a real softie. Good old grandpa Joe, doting over the American people the way he does over his grandchildren. Throughout his political career – which essentially has been his entire adult life – Biden worked diligently to invent and nurture the persona of a kind and caring man.

    Well, he isn’t that man today and based on his performances since attaining the Oval Office, it seems the left is beginning to question the assumptions that he is, or ever was the man advertised. Here’s a little taste from the AP, contrast this headline to those above:

    • “Biden’s empathy shapes policy, but some voters don’t feel it”, AP, February 2023

    But anybody paying attention, knows the aura around Biden is a show that has run longer than Phantom of the Opera did on Broadway.

    All the way back in 1975 Biden insisted the US had “no obligation, moral or otherwise, to evacuate foreign nationals” and “the United States has no obligation to evacuate one — or 100,001 — South Vietnamese.”

    In April 1975, President Gerald Ford argued that, as the last American troops were removed from the country, the U.S. should evacuate the South Vietnamese who had helped the U.S. during the war, too but being the empathetic and kindly spirit he is, Biden objected and called for a meeting between the president and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to voice his objections to Ford’s funding request for these efforts.

    Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told the senators that “the total list of the people endangered in Vietnam is over a million” and that “the irreducible list is 174,000.” Biden said U.S. allies should not be rescued: “We should focus on getting them [the U.S. troops] out. Getting the Vietnamese out and military aid for the GVN [South Vietnam’s government] are totally different.”

    During and after the disastrous Afghanistan retreat, circumstances coalesced to reveal what he has always been, a narcissist and a sociopath, incapable of empathy of any sort.

    In the years prior to his decision to evacuate Afghanistan, Biden had repeatedly claimed that no American would be left behind and he had “plans” to evacuate Afghanis who helped American soldiers. During the 2020 campaign, Biden was asked if he believed he would bear responsibility for harm to Afghan women after a troop withdrawal and the return of the Taliban. Biden bristled as he squinted and said, “No, I don’t!” he snapped, and put his thumb and index finger together. “Zero responsibility.”

    And history has proven he was telling the truth.

    The parents of the 13 soldiers killed in the Abbey Gate bombing at Hamid Karzi International in Kabul during the Biden Afghanistan withdrawal noticed Lunch Bucket Joe checking his watch multiple times during the return of their children’s bodies at Dover (of course, the media tried to explain away Biden’s conduct).

    “It’s two fucking thirty, asshole!”

    This were the words uttered into the Congressional record by Mark Schmitz, whose son, Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Jared Schmitz, was one of thirteen killed.

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1696603882489512398

    When asked if he was going to East Palestine, Biden said he hasn’t had the time to visit a small Ohio town that was devastated by a train derailment months ago. Never mind that he just got back from a long family getaway at Tom Steyer’s $15 million “cabin” in Lake Tahoe.

    He also took multiple trips to Delaware just in the last month, on one of which he was at the beach and asked by the press what he thought about the wildfire on Maui, to which he responded, “No comment.”

    He will be the first president since 9/11 not to be present at the anniversary memorial.

    Emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop from hell displayed how, for years, he treated Hunter as an asset rather than a son and likely used him to generate a retirement nest egg.

    So, while Biden may a dirtbag and not at all empathic, at least he has his intellect, his mastery of economics, his foreign policy successes, his unparalleled negotiating skills, and soaring rhetorical skills to fall back on.

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Biden the jerk and liar
Previous Page
1 … 97 98 99 100 101 … 1,032
Next Page

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog

The thoughts of a journalist/libertarian–conservative/Christian husband, father, Eagle Scout and aficionado of obscure rock music. Thoughts herein are only the author’s and not necessarily the opinions of his family, friends, neighbors, church members or past, present or future employers.

  • Steve
    • About, or, Who is this man?
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Adventures in ruralu0026nbsp;inkBack in June 2009, I was driving somewhere through a rural area. And for some reason, I had a flashback to two experiences in my career about that time of year many years ago. In 1988, eight days after graduating from the University of Wisconsin, I started work at the Grant County Herald Independent in Lancaster as a — well, the — reporter. Four years after that, on my 27th birthday, I purchased, with a business partner, the Tri-County Press in Cuba City, my first business venture. Both were experiences about which Wisconsin author Michael Perry might write. I thought about all this after reading a novel, The Deadline, written by a former newspaper editor and publisher. (Now who would write a novel about a weekly newspaper?) As a former newspaper owner, I picked at some of it — why finance a newspaper purchase through the bank if the seller is willing to finance it? Because the mean bank lender is a plot point! — and it is much more interesting than reality, but it is very well written, with a nicely twisting plot, and quite entertaining, again more so than reality. There is something about that first job out of college that makes you remember it perhaps more…
    • Adventures in radioI’ve been in the full-time work world half my life. For that same amount of time I’ve been broadcasting sports as a side interest, something I had wanted to since I started listening to games on radio and watching on TV, and then actually attending games. If you ask someone who’s worked in radio for some time about the late ’70s TV series “WKRP in Cincinnati,” most of them will tell you that, if anything, the series understated how wacky working in radio can be. Perhaps the funniest episode in the history of TV is the “WKRP” episode, based on a true story, about the fictional radio station’s Thanksgiving promotion — throwing live turkeys out of a helicopter under the mistaken belief that, in the words of WKRP owner Arthur Carlson, “As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.” [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST01bZJPuE0] I’ve never been involved in anything like that. I have announced games from the roofs of press boxes (once on a nice day, and once in 50-mph winds), from a Mississippi River bluff (more on that later), and from the front row of the second balcony of the University of Wisconsin Fieldhouse (great view, but not a place to go if…
    • “Good morning/afternoon/evening, ________ fans …”
    • My biggest storyEarlier this week, while looking for something else, I came upon some of my own work. (I’m going to write a blog someday called “Things I Found While Looking for Something Else.” This is not that blog.) The Grant County Sheriff’s Department, in the county where I used to live, has a tribute page to the two officers in county history who died in the line of duty. One is William Loud, a deputy marshal in Cassville, shot to death by two bank robbers in 1912. The other is Tom Reuter, a Grant County deputy sheriff who was shot to death at the end of his 4 p.m.-to-midnight shift March 18, 1990. Gregory Coulthard, then a 19-year-old farmhand, was convicted of first-degree intentional homicide and is serving a life sentence, with his first eligibility for parole on March 18, 2015, just 3½ years from now. I’ve written a lot over the years. I think this, from my first two years in the full-time journalism world, will go down as the story I remember the most. For journalists, big stories contain a paradox, which was pointed out in CBS-TV’s interview of Andy Rooney on his last “60 Minutes” Sunday. Morley Safer said something along the line…
  • Food and drink
    • The Roesch/Prestegard familyu0026nbsp;cookbookFrom the family cookbook(s) All the families I’m associated with love to eat, so it’s a good thing we enjoy cooking. The first out-of-my-house food memory I have is of my grandmother’s cooking for Christmas or other family occasions. According to my mother, my grandmother had a baked beans recipe that she would make for my mother. Unfortunately, the recipe seems to have  disappeared. Also unfortunately, my early days as a picky, though voluminous, eater meant I missed a lot of those recipes made from such wholesome ingredients as lard and meat fat. I particularly remember a couple of meals that involve my family. The day of Super Bowl XXXI, my parents, my brother, my aunt and uncle and a group of their friends got together to share lots of food and cheer on the Packers to their first NFL title in 29 years. (After which Jannan and I drove to Lambeau Field in the snow,  but that’s another story.) Then, on Dec. 31, 1999, my parents, my brother, my aunt and uncle and Jannan and I (along with Michael in utero) had a one-course-per-hour meal to appropriately end years beginning with the number 1. Unfortunately I can’t remember what we…
    • SkålI was the editor of Marketplace Magazine for 10 years. If I had to point to one thing that demonstrates improved quality of life since I came to Northeast Wisconsin in 1994, it would be … … the growth of breweries and  wineries in Northeast Wisconsin. The former of those two facts makes sense, given our heritage as a brewing state. The latter is less self-evident, since no one thinks of Wisconsin as having a good grape-growing climate. Some snobs claim that apple or cherry wines aren’t really wines at all. But one of the great facets of free enterprise is the opportunity to make your own choice of what food and drink to drink. (At least for now, though some wish to restrict our food and drink choices.) Wisconsin’s historically predominant ethnic group (and our family’s) is German. Our German ancestors did unfortunately bring large government and high taxes with them, but they also brought beer. Europeans brought wine with them, since they came from countries with poor-quality drinking water. Within 50 years of a wave of mid-19th-century German immigration, brewing had become the fifth largest industry in the U.S., according to Maureen Ogle, author of Ambitious Brew: The Story of American Beer. Beer and wine have…
  • Wheels
    • America’s sports carMy birthday in June dawned without a Chevrolet Corvette in front of my house. (The Corvette at the top of the page was featured at the 2007 Greater Milwaukee Auto Show. The copilot is my oldest son, Michael.) Which isn’t surprising. I have three young children, and I have a house with a one-car garage. (Then again, this would be more practical, though a blatant pluck-your-eyes-out violation of the Corvette ethos. Of course, so was this.) The reality is that I’m likely to be able to own a Corvette only if I get a visit from the Corvette Fairy, whose office is next door to the Easter Bunny. (I hope this isn’t foreshadowing: When I interviewed Dave Richter of Valley Corvette for a car enthusiast story in the late great Marketplace Magazine, he said that the most popular Corvette in most fans’ minds was a Corvette built during their days in high school. This would be a problem for me in that I graduated from high school in 1983, when no Corvette was built.) The Corvette is one of those cars whose existence may be difficult to understand within General Motors Corp. The Corvette is what is known as a “halo car,” a car that drives people into showrooms, even if…
    • Barges on fouru0026nbsp;wheelsI originally wrote this in September 2008.  At the Fox Cities Business Expo Tuesday, a Smart car was displayed at the United Way Fox Cities booth. I reported that I once owned a car into which trunk, I believe, the Smart could be placed, with the trunk lid shut. This is said car — a 1975 Chevrolet Caprice coupe (ours was dark red), whose doors are, I believe, longer than the entire Smart. The Caprice, built down Interstate 90 from us Madisonians in Janesville (a neighbor of ours who worked at the plant probably helped put it together) was the flagship of Chevy’s full-size fleet (which included the stripper Bel Air and middle-of-the-road Impala), featuring popular-for-the-time vinyl roofs, better sound insulation, an upgraded cloth interior, rear fender skirts and fancy Caprice badges. The Caprice was 18 feet 1 inch long and weighed 4,300 pounds. For comparison: The midsize Chevrolet of the ear was the Malibu, which was the same approximate size as the Caprice after its 1977 downsizing. The compact Chevrolet of the era was the Nova, which was 200 inches long — four inches longer than a current Cadillac STS. Wikipedia’s entry on the Caprice has this amusing sentence: “As fuel economy became a bigger priority among Americans…
    • Behind the wheel
    • Collecting only dust or rust
    • Coooooooooooupe!
    • Corvettes on the screen
    • The garage of misfit cars
    • 100 years (and one day) of our Chevrolets
    • They built Excitement, sort of, once in a while
    • A wagon by any otheru0026nbsp;nameFirst written in 2008. You will see more don’t-call-them-station-wagons as you drive today. Readers around my age have probably had some experience with a vehicle increasingly rare on the road — the station wagon. If you were a Boy Scout or Girl Scout, or were a member of some kind of youth athletic team, or had a large dog, or had relatives approximately your age, or had friends who needed to be transported somewhere, or had parents who occasionally had to haul (either in the back or in a trailer) more than what could be fit inside a car trunk, you (or, actually, your parents) were the target demographic for the station wagon. “Station wagons came to be like covered wagons — so much family activity happened in those cars,” said Tim Cleary, president of the American Station Wagon Owners Association, in Country Living magazine. Wagons “were used for everything from daily runs to the grocery store to long summer driving trips, and while many men and women might have wanted a fancier or sportier car, a station wagon was something they knew they needed for the family.” The “station wagon” originally was a vehicle with a covered seating area to take people between train stations…
    • Wheels on theu0026nbsp;screenBetween my former and current blogs, I wrote a lot about automobiles and TV and movies. Think of this post as killing two birds (Thunderbirds? Firebirds? Skylarks?) with one stone. Most movies and TV series view cars the same way most people view cars — as A-to-B transportation. (That’s not counting the movies or series where the car is the plot, like the haunted “Christine” or “Knight Rider” or the “Back to the Future” movies.) The philosophy here, of course, is that cars are not merely A-to-B transportation. Which disqualifies most police shows from what you’re about to read, even though I’ve watched more police video than anything else, because police cars are plain Jane vehicles. The highlight in a sense is in the beginning: The car chase in my favorite movie, “Bullitt,” featuring Steve McQueen’s 1968 Ford Mustang against the bad guys’ 1968 Dodge Charger: [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMc2RdFuOxIu0026amp;fmt=18] One year before that (but I didn’t see this until we got Telemundo on cable a couple of years ago) was a movie called “Operación 67,” featuring (I kid you not) a masked professional wrestler, his unmasked sidekick, and some sort of secret agent plot. (Since I don’t know Spanish and it’s not…
    • While riding in my Cadillac …
  • Entertainments
    • Brass rocksThose who read my former blog last year at this time, or have read this blog over the past months, know that I am a big fan of the rock group Chicago. (Back when they were a rock group and not a singer of sappy ballads, that is.) Since rock music began from elements of country music, jazz and the blues, brass rock would seem a natural subgenre of rock music. A lot of ’50s musical acts had saxophone players, and some played with full orchestras … [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CPS-WuUKUE] … but it wasn’t until the more-or-less simultaneous appearances of Chicago and Blood Sweat u0026amp; Tears on the musical scene (both groups formed in 1967, both had their first charting singles in 1969, and they had the same producer) that the usual guitar/bass/keyboard/drum grouping was augmented by one or more trumpets, a sax player and a trombone player. While Chicago is my favorite group (but you knew that already), the first brass rock song I remember hearing was BSu0026amp;T’s “Spinning Wheel” — not in its original form, but on “Sesame Street,” accompanied by, yes, a giant spinning wheel. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi9sLkyhhlE] [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxWSOuNsN20] [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9U34uPjz-g] I remember liking Chicago’s “Just You ‘n Me” when it was released as a single, and…
    • Drive and Eat au0026nbsp;RockThe first UW home football game of each season also is the opener for the University of Wisconsin Marching Band, the world’s finest college marching band. (How the UW Band has not gotten the Sudler Trophy, which is to honor the country’s premier college marching bands, is beyond my comprehension.) I know this because I am an alumnus of the UW Band. I played five years (in the last rank of the band, Rank 25, motto: “Where Men Are Tall and Run-On Is Short”), marching in 39 football games at Camp Randall Stadium, the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome in Minneapolis, Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor, Memorial Stadium at the University of Illinois (worst artificial turf I had ever seen), the University of Nevada–Las Vegas’ Sam Boyd Silver Bowl, the former Dyche Stadium at Northwestern University, five high school fields and, in my one bowl game, Legion Field in Birmingham, Ala., site of the 1984 Hall of Fame Bowl. The UW Band was, without question, the most memorable experience of my college days, and one of the most meaningful experiences of my lifetime. It was the most physical experience of my lifetime, to be sure. Fifteen minutes into my first Registration…
    • Keep on rockin’ in the freeu0026nbsp;worldOne of my first ambitions in communications was to be a radio disc jockey, and to possibly reach the level of the greats I used to listen to from WLS radio in Chicago, which used to be one of the great 50,000-watt AM rock stations of the country, back when they still existed. (Those who are aficionados of that time in music and radio history enjoyed a trip to that wayback machine when WLS a Memorial Day Big 89 Rewind, excerpts of which can be found on their Web site.) My vision was to be WLS’ afternoon DJ, playing the best in rock music between 2 and 6, which meant I wouldn’t have to get up before the crack of dawn to do the morning show, yet have my nights free to do whatever glamorous things big-city DJs did. Then I learned about the realities of radio — low pay, long hours, zero job security — and though I have dabbled in radio sports, I’ve pretty much cured myself of the idea of working in radio, even if, to quote WAPL’s Len Nelson, “You come to work every day just like everybody else does, but we’re playing rock ’n’ roll songs, we’re cuttin’ up.…
    • Monday on the flight line, not Saturday in the park
    • Music to drive by
    • The rock ofu0026nbsp;WisconsinWikipedia begins its item “Music of Wisconsin” thusly: Wisconsin was settled largely by European immigrants in the late 19th century. This immigration led to the popularization of galops, schottisches, waltzes, and, especially, polkas. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl7wCczgNUc] So when I first sought to write a blog piece about rock musicians from Wisconsin, that seemed like a forlorn venture. Turned out it wasn’t, because when I first wrote about rock musicians from Wisconsin, so many of them that I hadn’t mentioned came up in the first few days that I had to write a second blog entry fixing the omissions of the first. This list is about rock music, so it will not include, for instance, Milwaukee native and Ripon College graduate Al Jarreau, who in addition to having recorded a boatload of music for the jazz and adult contemporary/easy listening fan, also recorded the theme music for the ’80s TV series “Moonlighting.” Nor will it include Milwaukee native Eric Benet, who was for a while known more for his former wife, Halle Berry, than for his music, which includes four number one singles on the Ru0026amp;B charts, “Spend My Life with You” with Tamia, “Hurricane,” “Pretty Baby” and “You’re the Only One.” Nor will it include Wisconsin’s sizable contributions to big…
    • Steve TV: All Steve, All the Time
    • “Super Steve, Man of Action!”
    • Too much TV
    • The worst music of allu0026nbsp;timeThe rock group Jefferson Airplane titled its first greatest-hits compilation “The Worst of Jefferson Airplane.” Rolling Stone magazine was not being ironic when it polled its readers to decide the 10 worst songs of the 1990s. I’m not sure I agree with all of Rolling Stone’s list, but that shouldn’t be surprising; such lists are meant for debate, after all. To determine the “worst,” songs appropriate for the “Vinyl from Hell” segment that used to be on a Madison FM rock station, requires some criteria, which does not include mere overexposure (for instance, “Macarena,” the video of which I find amusing since it looks like two bankers are singing it). Before we go on: Blog posts like this one require multimedia, so if you find a song you hate on this blog, I apologize. These are also songs that I almost never listen to because my sound system has a zero-tolerance policy — if I’m listening to the radio or a CD and I hear a song I don’t like, it’s, to quote Bad Company, gone gone gone. My blonde wife won’t be happy to read that one of her favorite ’90s songs, 4 Non Blondes’ “What’s Up,” starts the list. (However,…
    • “You have the right to remain silent …”
  • Madison
    • Blasts from the Madison media past
    • Blasts from my Madison past
    • Blasts from our Madison past
    • What’s the matter with Madison?
    • Wisconsin – Madison = ?
  • Sports
    • Athletic aesthetics, or “cardinal” vs. “Big Red”
    • Choose your own announcer
    • La Follette state 1982 (u0022It was 30 years ago todayu0022)
    • The North Dakota–Wisconsin Hockey Fight of 1982
    • Packers vs. Brewers
  • Hall of Fame
    • The case(s) against teacher unions
    • The Class of 1983
    • A hairy subject, or face the face
    • It’s worse than you think
    • It’s worse than you think, 2010–11 edition
    • My favorite interview subject of all time
    • Oh look! Rural people!
    • Prestegard for president!
    • Unions vs. the facts, or Hiding in plain sight
    • When rhetoric goes too far
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
 

Loading Comments...
 

    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog
      • Join 198 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar
    %d