Showing posts with label W. C. Fields. Show all posts
Showing posts with label W. C. Fields. Show all posts

Sunday, May 3, 2020

Cut The Deck


President Trump said Thursday that he had seen evidence to prove that the coronavirus pandemic had spread from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, but he declined to detail what that evidence was.
“I’m not allowed to tell you that,” he said . . . .*

Let’s consider this for a bit. Trump says he’s “not allowed to tell” us. Well, why is he not allowed to tell? Who is stopping him? Way back early in his administration he declassified secret information; as president, he had the right to do so. Just a year ago last May, for example, he gave the Attorney General broad power to declassify documents.** He had no one above him to say no, to disallow the release of such information. 

Trump’s refusal to divulge his (apparent) evidence immediately reminded me of this scene in the W. C. Fields/Mae West film “My Little Chickadee.”





Clearly, Trump (no gentleman) was pulling a fake “Gentleman’s Game” ploy before our eyes. To quote Gertrude Stein, as far as Trump’s privileged information went, there was “no there there.” 

Trump has been pulling the fake card trick for years now. His most used fakery phrase is “many people.” A recent variant was "very good experts”—who supposedly predicted that the coronavirus outbreak "would never affect the United States.”*** 

When next he tries to pull that stunt, I am waiting for someone to pop up and demand: “Name one!”


***




***  https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-very-good-experts-said-coronavirus-would-never-affect-us-2020-4

Friday, December 22, 2017

The flowers that bloom in the spring, tra la, have nothing to do with the case

Seven years ago, in a post entitled “Deforestation,”* I offered my answer to the question: “What is the crappiest famous poem?” I was moved to write that post after hearing a rendition of the famous musical setting of that nausea-inducing work "Trees." 

I have recently determined what is the runner-up to the musical version of “Trees” as “crappiest famous”: “I Believe.” In case you have had the good fortune of having forgotten how it goes, let me do the dirty and remind you:

I believe for every drop of rain that falls,
A flower grows,
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night,
A candle glows.
I believe for everyone who goes astray,
Someone will come to show the way.
I believe,
I believe.

I believe above the storm the smallest prayer,
Will still be heard.
I believe that someone in the great somewhere,
Hears every word.
Every time I hear a new born baby cry,
Or touch a leaf or see the sky.
Then I know why,
I believe.

Every time I hear a new born baby cry,
Or touch a leaf or see the sky.
Then I know why,
I believe.

*

Conducting independent research during the most recent precipitation event in New Jersey, I must admit that I did not get a bouquet of horticultural delight; what I did get was wet. 

I was lucky to escape with merely a minor cold.

*
Unfortunately, people’s beliefs (in opposition to soaking epistemological evidence) can (and do) have deleterious outcomes for others. Consider:
For weeks now, White House officials, Treasury Department officials, and G.O.P. leaders on Capitol Hill have been blithely asserting that their big tax plan—which features huge giveaways for corporations and wealthy investors in private partnerships—would pay for itself. The argument is that the plan, by sparking a wave of business investment and hiring, would generate enough extra tax revenues over time to offset the initial fall. Gary Cohn, Donald Trump’s top economic adviser, said it (“We believe we’re going to get more than enough growth to pay for this”). Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, did, too (“We believe . . . that we’re right there in the sweet spot, with economic growth that gives us more revenue with where we need to be”). And Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, agreed (“We believe this is a responsible budget and a responsible tax reform”).**
It is most likely that those of us who are not a corporation or a multi-millionaire will end up being soaked by the recently-enacted Republican tax fiasco, er, bill. Despite the weedy beliefs of Cohn, Ryan, McConnell, and their fellow delusionists, trickle-down economics has never proven to be workable, and the calculations of showery mathematics (as practiced by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, for example***) predict a flood of future misfortune for middle- and low-income families. 

But don’t knock the believers: we may all end up with flowers—or, more likely, hay fever.

*
By chance, today my fortune cookie, courtesy of Hunan Wok, read: “He who believes is strong; he who doubts is weak.”

True enough, if you’re W. C. Fields: “Everybody's got to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer.”

However, what of the fate of A. B. Spottsworth?
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn’t.**** P. G. Wodehouse, “Ring for Jeeves” (1953)
The moral, I guess, is: “Have another libation and stay away from big cats.”

That is a conclusion, one might declare, Right as rain.”

***






**** As happens many times, the verbs “to think” and “to believe” are interchangeable.  For example, “I think it’s going to rain”=“I believe it’s going to rain.”

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Open the Door for Mr. Muckle!

For us South Africans, and for many across the globe, it is impossible to watch Oscar Pistorius run without a stir of emotion, without wanting to break down and cry and shout with joy. Pistorius is no ordinary hero: he is that rare thing, a man with an almost-impossible narrative. (Justice Malala, The Guardian
 *
Google “Pistorius hero” and you’ll find what you would expect to find: words like “fallen” and “flawed.” In many newspaper and magazine articles Pistorius’ downfall is linked with those of other former sports legends—especially now, because of its chronological propinquity, with that of Lance Armstrong, recently stripped of his seven Tour de France titles for doping. All the time that the public celebrated the accomplishments of these athletes, asks Jeff MacGregor of ESPN.com, “How much did we really know?”
(Answer: "little.") How many questions went unasked? (Answer: "most.") How much of the "truth" do sportswriters and sports fans really want? (Answer: "Next question, please.")
But, strictly speaking, MacGregor isn’t quite right. The tarnish on the supposed golden crowns was there to be seen. As Malala himself reports,  
There have always been niggling, worrying features to Pistorius. At the London Olympics last year, when he behaved in an unsportsmanlike manner towards another athlete and shocked many, we were reminded of his flaws. . . .There was the drinking and the short temper.
And with Armstrong ("I wrote four books about the guy. All the evidence was out there since 2004 and people will still say there is no evidence”-- 
David Walsh, sportswriter on the Sunday Times), there was, above all, the intimidation and bribery, using his clout within the sport to keep the lid on his doping practices. According to the New York Daily News,
Armstrong was probably the most litigious athlete in the history of sports.
He set a precedent for other athletes who would go on to use guerilla tactics to attempt to intimidate the media or silence accusers.
(Before I go further, it should be noted that while Armstrong has limply admitted to some degree of drug cheating, Pistorius’ killing of his girlfriend has not yet been tried and so we must await his day in a South African court to learn if it was indeed a criminal act.)

But while the Pistorius and Armstrong stories emerged very closely together and became natural fodder for the continuation of the athlete-as-fallen-hero narrative, I prefer to focus on the aspect of their stories that made their athletic success even more striking and their status as celebrities even more elevated. That is, their battles against their misfortunes (Pistorius' disability--being without legs and Armstrong's illness--testicular cancer). I believe that those afflictions led the public to perceive in the two men something even greater than the heroism their athletic feats granted them, and thus made them more immune to critical assessment of their characters by most fans and journalists. The halo effect wasn’t just a product of heroism, but of heroism-cum-sentimentality. Like cute little children, the disabled and the ill are often viewed by us as being innocent of those endearing human qualities the rest of us have—avarice, malice, spite, viciousness, pride, and so on for the next ten pages. 
*
As a reminder of what sweet little children can do, here is Baby LeRoy dunking W. C. Fields’ pocket watch in a tub of molasses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YvHn4_8n78. Fields rightly pays him back with a furtive boot on the backside.

Here from Fawlty Towers is a desentimentalizing view of the disabled--the self-centered deaf lady: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIVDx-8kWZo

And here is what is probably the best demolishing of reflexive sentimentalizing of the disabled—the destructive Mr. Muckle from Fields’ It’s a Gifthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y189-69cQPs.