« Corn pone | Main | Kurt Vonnegut, RIP »

Poll-driven, or pal-driven?

By Michael J. Smith on Wednesday April 11, 2007 09:45 PM

Mike Flugennock passed along a characteristic item from The Onion:
WASHINGTON, DC—Democrats in both houses of Congress demanded a thorough inquiry Monday into whether or not the American people think they are doing a good enough job, and what, if anything, they should do differently.

"We cannot afford to make a wrong move as we face this crucial crossroads in our nation's history, which is why we need to know for sure what decision you'll support the most before we make it," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a Democratic National Committee fundraiser Monday, scrutinizing the assembled crowd for signs of approval. "The question facing us today is simple: Do you like us? If not, why? We demand an answer."

Added Pelosi: "The time for second-guessing our every move is now."

If only it were so. The reality is that they don't give a hoot what we think: they know perfectly well they have a majority in Congress because the public is sick of the Iraq war, but they're quite determined to keep it going. The same could be said for any number of other "issues" -- single-payer health care, for example.

It's interesting that The Onion can't or won't see this. I've always had the feeling that there's something quite reactionary, quite devoted to obfuscatory cliche and conventional wisdom, about the humorist's profession.

They're like journalists that way.

Comments (2)

royal paine:

"there's something quite reactionary, quite devoted to obfuscatory cliche and conventional wisdom, about the humorist's profession"
not contesting its general accuracy
but on behalf of all my brothers
i 'd like the record to show...

father smiff
we take that slap quite up close and personal

Jym:

=v= There certainly is a penchant for the reactionary in the humor profession, making the vast majority of it unfunny. The possibility is there, though, to riff off the conventional wisdom in ways that are subversive rather than obfuscatory. This can be powerful stuff, and the mainstream does all it can to squelch it. Look how they pulled out the big guns against the very tepid satire of Bill Maher.

While this particular story is no gem, the Onion is often more satisfactory and more subversive. Indeed, when I look back at the humor publications that have flourished and then (effectively) perished in my lifetime, I can't think of one that has kept it up as long as they have.

Post a comment

Note also that comments with three or more links may be held for "moderation" -- a strange term to apply to the ghost in this blog's machine. Seems to be a hard-coded limitation of the blog software, unfortunately.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on Wednesday April 11, 2007 09:45 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Corn pone.

The next post in this blog is Kurt Vonnegut, RIP.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License

This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31