Perhaps it is a sign of the August news lull, but the normally innocuous “Explainer” caught thousands of angry posts for its discussionof Charlton Heston’s right to bear arms. (There were warning signs: Earlier, history guy had accusedSlate of using Explainer to snipe at a troubled competitor.) There were some defenses of Slate’s article, but they were lackluster.
Nor could anyone muster up much anguish over the president’s economic forum in Waco. Liberals and conservatives actually agreed that they expected nothing from it and got what they expected. Only RonK, already in his back-to-school mode, seems geared up for the midterm elections.
And speaking of erections, no one was all that worked up about HBO’s Real Sex or the “Ad Report Card” on natural male enhancers. There was a warm-hearted defense of John Waters and some strident anti-ness for Toby Keith, but this only confirmed Rob Walker’s point: Sex sells best when it isn’t selling sex.
Subject: At Long Last, Have You No Sense of Decency?
Re: “Explainer: Will Charlton Heston Have To Give Up His Guns?”
From: Eric Friedemann
Date: Aug. 12, 2002 8:29 a.m.
Are the concepts of cruelty and bad taste completely lost on those who “edit” Slate? The Charlton Heston “Explainer” piece is breathtaking.
Charlton Heston has made a courageous public statement under horrific circumstances, publicly admitting that he probably has Alzheimer’s disease. That a public figure like Heston or Ronald Reagan would have the guts to discuss such an awful illness openly deserves praise, not a snide, back-handed attack in the guise of examining California’s draconian firearms laws.
Also, Charlton Heston has, for years, been an honest, courteous advocate for the rights guaranteed to gun owners under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. If Norman Lear or Alec Baldwin were diagnosed with a brain-wasting disease, would Slate be running ironic commentary about them? Has Slate poked fun at former editor Michael Kinsley’s sad affliction, Parkinson’s disease? Of course not; that would be inhuman.
[Find this post here.]
Subject: If a President Holds a Forum, and No One Cares …
Re: “Ballot Box: Fake Forum”
From: Zathras
Date: Aug. 13, 2002 6:43 p.m.
Assume everything William Saletan says about the Waco forum is true. What, then, was the point of having it?
If it really was a political event, aimed at spreading a message of support for the Bush administration’s agenda, how many people did it reach? A few thousand watching on C-Span, perhaps, most of whom probably support the administration anyway. However many did watch, or followed print or Internet accounts of the forum, many more received brief reports from the major broadcast networks or read newspaper stories that generally echoed Saletan’s skeptical tone.
Blame the media if you want to, but a political event that doesn’t reach anyone is just a reason to take up some space on the president’s schedule. I hope Saletan is wrong about the policy value of this forum, because its political value looks to be about zero.
[Find this post here.]
Subject: Who Are You Taking to Sadie Hawkins?
Re: “Ballot Box: Fake Forum”
From: RonK
Date: Aug. 13, 2002 8:26 p.m.
Bush is a cheerleader. This was a pep rally. I can hardly wait for the big bonfire the night before our road game with Iraq.
GO BIG DOW!
YOU KNOW HOW!
SSS-SSS-CISCO
SSS BOOM POW!
[Find this post here.]
Subject: She Doth Protest Too Much
Re: “Television: Faster, Harder, Stupider”
From: Dilan Esper
Date: Aug. 8, 2002 1:37 p.m.
How is HBO supposed to [create] a television documentary show about sex without exhibitionism? … This is the television version of the observer’s paradox, or Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle—there’s no way to document sex without somehow affecting the nature of the sex you are going to see.
[Find this post here.]
Subject: The Bush May Change, but the Song Remains the Same
Re: “Number 1: Toby Keith”
From: REDNEX
Date: Aug. 12, 2002 9:33 a.m.
As for Keith’s song, it reminds me of a great old Saturday Night Live fake ad featuring Dennis Quaid as the eponymous singer of “The Specialty Songs of Cal McLane, Jr.” This was at the height of pre-Gulf War fervor, and Cal’s newest song ended much like Keith’s: “Saddam Hussein—we’re gonna kick you where the sun don’t shine!” Then we hear Cal’s earlier songs—about Manuel Noriega, Ho Chi Minh, North Korea—and they all end with some variation of “you can shove it where the sun don’t shine” or “we’re gonna kick you in the heine!”
[Find this post here.]
Subject: Of Course It’s Number 1
Re: “Number 1: Toby Keith”
From: history guy
Date: Aug. 12, 2002 12:26 p.m.
This song has what all red-blooded patriotic American males want. A catchy tune, a popular political position, and a celebration of (implicitly) male-on-male anal penetration.
[Find this post here.]
Fray Notes:
Magnum opus: Thrasymachus’ analysis of the Rev. John McCloskey “Assessment” put the phrase “bowling for converts” in perspective.
Frayvergnügen My favorite Fray tangent of the week began with &kathleen’s post in “Ballot Box” and went, well, you have to see.
Phallogocentrism: Deej slyly slipped this well-crafted poem into the Ad Report Card Fray even though it would be better suited to the Bangkok Hilton; Burris offered a lush play-by-play of an infomercial for the more downmarket enhancer, ExtenZe.
Birth of Fray Nation: Much of the Best of the Fray is sui generis. Two long threads told labor stories this week: some literal, some figurative.
