The End Of The Week As We Know It

Standup Comedy Can Help A Candidate Stand Out

Scott Blakeman — Wed, 02 May 2012 01:47:51 +0000

Comedy can be a politician's best friend. And not just at events like Saturday's White House Correspondents' Dinner.

As he has every year, President Obama outperformed the very funny comedian that had the unenviable task of following the leader of the free world. If Obama wins a second term, the organization might consider dropping the comedian slot altogether, and instead have President Obama do twice as long a set. Pragmatic and moderate as president, he is edgy and fearless as a comedian. In an election year when conventional wisdom would have him playing it safe, the president gleefully, skillfully and hilariously went after Gingrich and Santorum, who were in the audience, and even his opponent Mitt Romney.

Obama is a master at defusing negative Republican talking points about his administration with cuttingly funny responses, that are more effective than a more lengthy, serious response would be. Last year, with Donald Trump dominating the media with his inane birther rants, the president methodically and uproariously took him down with his witheringly funny put downs of the unamused Trump. And it's not simply the case that Obama scores comedically just because he has great writers. The funniest lines in the world can be rendered humorless in the wrong hands. Obama has the timing not of a pretty funny President, but of a professional comedian at the top of his game.

This is not to say that a person must be funny to be a good president. Which explains my past support for John Kerry and Michael Dukakis. But a president must at least have a self-deprecating sense of humor, that allows him to be a serious person without always taking himself too seriously. Without that, you have a president who is not humble enough to recognize his flaws and try to do better.

One could picture Newt Gingrich doing comedy with such an inflated sense of himself, that his act would go over almost as well as his failed candidacy. If a joke bombed, Gingrich would continue to insist to the audience, with a straight face, that the joke was indeed funny, that he knew better than them, and that Callista thought it was sidesplittingly funny.

There is hope for Rick Santorum as a comedian. First, there was his self deprecating response when a shirtless picture of him was posted online, Santorum quipped, "I know, I probably should lose about 15, 20 pounds, but I'm working on it. I apologize to all of us, because I'm sure it's not a pretty sight."

And on Saturday at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, Santorum flashed a thumbs up, after the president joked about Mitt Romney's two degrees from Harvard, and said "What a snob." The very word Santorum had called Obama for saying he wanted kids to go to college. Maybe the thumbs up was a way of Santorum acknowledging that his own comment had been ridiculous. Either that or he just wanted people to know he was there.

But the person who really needs comedy the most is Mitt Romney. I can picture him opening his WHCD routine, with "Here's an amusing story about several people who were laid off in the newspaper business."

I don't hold it against Romney that he is awkward and shy with strangers in intimate settings. That may be bad for a politician but it's par for the course for comedians like myself. But the greatest attribute a good comedian has is the one Romney is glaringly missing. The ability to be comfortable in your own skin and to be true to yourself on stage. When you're not, the audience can smell the fear and deception a mile away.

Again, to be an effective candidate Romney need not match Obama's extraordinary comedic skills. Nor does he have to hire the best comedy writers. What Romney needs to do, is to figure out once and for all, who he really is up there on the stage. What he really stands for and what his core convictions are. And most importantly, to be able to poke fun at his mistakes and the negative things critics say about him.

Because the same traits that help make you a good comedian can also make you a more appealing candidate and President.

And to let voters get a better sense of who the candidates are as people, I propose, in addition to the three debates, an evening of standup comedy with President Obama and Mitt Romney. Each candidate will do a 20 minute routine in a similar setting as the White House Correspondents Dinner, to an audience evenly divided between supporters of each candidate.

Unlike Last Comic Standing, the winner won't be announced that night. But what voters learn about the candidates through their material, and how easily they can laugh at themselves, could help them make a more informed decision on Election Day.

At the very least, you'll have Republicans and Democrats sitting in a room laughing together.

Which is a good start.

The Green Jacket Has A Stain

Scott Blakeman — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:41:32 +0000

It got ugly at The Masters again this year. But not because of what happened on the course.

On a beautiful Sunday in Augusta, the immaculate greens and fairways were bathed in sunshine. The tournament was decided by a two hole sudden death playoff with an emotional Bubba Watson executing a nearly impossible shot to defeat the gracious Louis Oosthuizen. And the field was richly diverse, with players from several different nationalities and ethnicities.

But the fabled green jacket presented to the winner was stained once again by the refusal of the Augusta National Golf Club to admit women as members.

And although the CEO of IBM is traditionally offered membership, Virginia Rometty discovered the grass ceiling at Augusta National is harder to crack than the glass ceiling of corporate America.

Yet by refusing to challenge the gender discrimination at the club, IBM and Ms. Rometty sent a discouraging signal to the other women employees at the company and elsewhere, that in 2012, Augusta National can still set the clock back to the dark ages.

Since its inception, Augusta National has been a restricted club, banning Jews and African-Americans until recent years. And today, club officials desperately and defiantly hold on to that last shred of discrimination, by not allowing women to become members.

Yes, private clubs can get away with this, but why should the PGA put up with it? Why can't they institute a policy that bans tournaments from being held at clubs that practice discrimination? And why don't sponsors like IBM pressure the club to do the right thing?

The final day of The Masters was fittingly held on Easter Sunday, because this is a club and a tournament that is inexplicably revered with an almost religious devotion, as if the fairways, greens and bunkers are sacred ground.

But despite its natural beauty, and the inspiring spectacle of superb athletes often performing heroically, the Augusta National Club is an ugly place because of its immoral and sexist policies. No miraculous shot can change that. The attitudes of the closed minded club officials must change immediately. If not, the PGA, the tournament sponsors and even the players themselves must take the issue of equality into their own hands.

I Hate What Limbaugh Said and Support His Right To Say It

Scott Blakeman — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:18:08 +0000

It's been a few weeks since Rush Limbaugh verbally assaulted an American citizen who merely exercised her democratic right to testify before Congress. His words were disgusting, vile, mean spirited, misogynistic, inane, and despite Limbaugh's dubious claims, not remotely funny in any conceivable way.

Yet I am opposed to the organized efforts of several organizations to urge advertisers to boycott Limbaugh's show, and to demand that his show be cancelled.

I stand with the ACLU on this. And with Bill Maher, whom I stood up for back in September 2001, when advertisers were urged to boycott his Politically Incorrect show after he made some controversial comments. My thoughts were published in a letter to the New York Times:

"The television stations that drop ''Politically Incorrect,'' and the advertisers that boycott the show, are the ones guilty of a lack of patriotism, not its host, Bill Maher. It would be chilling if one of the first casualties of our war for freedom was our right to debate all opinions vigorously, no matter how unpopular, here at home. Whatever the nature of Mr. Maher's misinterpreted remarks, his rights and those of his guests to exercise freedom of speech should not be silenced."

I don't equate Limbaugh's words with anything Maher or any other comedian has said. Including David Letterman, whose Sarah Palin jokes in June 2009 had conservative groups calling for an advertiser boycott. At that time, I wrote this in The Huffington Post:

"Letterman's Palin jokes were like all jokes. Some people thought they were funny. Some people didn't think they were funny. And some people were offended. The same three reactions all comedians, including myself, can expect. In the past, if you didn't think someone on television was funny, you had a surefire option. Turn the channel. Lately, some Americans seem to be ignoring their remote in favor of an advertiser boycott."

The true test of defending freedom of speech is whether you defend speech that is hateful and totally without any redeeming value whatsoever, like what Rush Limbaugh said. Because once you start making exceptions to free speech, you are on a path to losing the right to speak freely altogether.

After Maher's remarks in 2001, then White House press secretary Ari Fleischer uttered these chilling words, "All Americans need to watch what they say, watch what they do."

If liberals and conservatives continue to silence words and views they find offensive, through advertiser boycotts and firings, we will become a fearful, less democratic and far less free nation than we are now.

Instead of focusing our ire on Limbaugh's comments, we should have focused much more closely on the shockingly weak and inadequate responses to those comments by Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich. These three men have no problem using venomous language to mischaracterize the president, and gleefully demean each other with harsh personal attacks. Yet all three brushed off Limbaugh's reprehensible words, with Romney saying "I wouldn't have used those words," implying he agreed with the sentiments but might have replaced "slut" with "whore." And Santorum and Gingrich, who piously invoke morality and religion, however insincerely, at every turn, couldn't summon the moral fiber to at least echo John McCain who called Limbaugh's words "unacceptable."

What Rush Limbaugh said told us more about Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich, than it did anything new about himself. There was a time earlier in his career that one could see the broadcasting chops and skill Limbaugh had, despite his often disturbing and offensive words. But as the bar has been lowered for political discourse in this country, Limbaugh's rants have become increasingly desperate, vile and devoid of even the slightest hint of humor or absurdity that could sometimes be heard in his early days.

It says something troubling about our country that Rush Limbaugh makes $30 million a year and has millions of loyal listeners. It would say something even more troubling about our country, if we use the free market to silence voices we hate.

Already the backlash has begun. Greta Van Susteren called the very funny and smart comedian Louis CK a "pig" and urged a boycott of the Radio Television Correspondents Dinner, which Louis CK was scheduled to host. Yesterday, he announced he would be withdrawing from the event.

For all of our bluster about the lack of freedom of speech in other countries, we're not doing a very good job here at home either.

The Misconception Debate

Scott Blakeman — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:59:39 +0000

The most telling moment of last night's Republican debate was virtually ignored by most pundits. When John King asked Mitt Romney to name the biggest misconception about himself, he chose to ignore the question and robotically repeated his stump pitch for why he should be President.

When pressed by King to answer the misconception question, Romney repeated a line he has used in previous debates, "You get to ask the question you want and I get to give the answer I want."

At the core of the ambivalence towards his candidacy is the fact that Americans really don't know who Romney is. From his "I'm a moderate, a progressive" days in Massachusetts to his to the right of Attila The Hun positions today, he comes off as desperately inauthentic in every way. Romney needs to look in the mirror and channel the words of the late Admiral James Stockdale, Ross Perot's running mate, who famously said in a debate, "Who am I, and why am I here?"

Answering the question of what is the biggest misconception about himself, would have been a golden opportunity to give voters at least a glimpse into who Mitt Romney really is. Yet Romney ignored the question, because he apparently has no ability to be introspective at all.

And if he thinks it's acceptable to refuse to answer simple questions about who he is, how will he respond to the far more pressing questions that will arise if he was President? If an instant decision had to be made to protect the country, would Romney simply refuse to make that decision and sing "America The Beautiful" instead?

Romney's arrogant demand to "give the answer I want", is a troubling character trait that is totally unacceptable for a candidate for President of the United States.

Why We All Need A Vacation from GOP Debates

Scott Blakeman — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:39:42 +0000

For those of us going through GOP debate withdrawal between now and Feb. 22, here are some ways to make the most of that time.

First, for the candidates themselves: Don't say anythingbetween now and the next debate. When was the last time a candidate said something outside of a debate that actually made him look good?

If Romney had followed this advice, he wouldn't have said that he doesn't worry about the very poor. He could have been lounging by the pool at his mansion in La Jolla.

And Newt Gingrich wouldn't repeat his false claim that the Palestinians are "an invented people." Just watching the tired, grumpy Newt ramble on in his non-concession concession speeches shows why his decision last June to go on a cruise with Calista was actually the best idea he's had so far in his campaign.

And maybe Ron Paul might use the time off from the campaign trail to remember that he really did know the contents of a newsletter named after him.

And Rick Santorum might just realize, with some rest and reflection, that saying he opposes abortion even in cases of rape because it's "a gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you" is so morally offensive that even he would reconsider those words.

And since the candidates wouldn't be saying anything, neither should the pundits. The last original observation was uttered about six weeks ago, so why keep talking? Let the talking heads give their mundane thoughts about issues other than the Republican presidential candidates. And promise, under no circumstances, to ever mention Donald Trump's name.

And for the rest of us, we should use this GOP reality show hiatus to focus on the real world -- which is a much smarter, more compassionate world than the one the debates live in.

GOP Debate Sets Clock Back in South Carolina

Scott Blakeman — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 01:50:04 +0000

At Monday's ugly Republican debate, there were the five remaining candidates and an empty lectern representing the former candidacy of Jon Huntsman.

The empty lectern won the debate.

And Huntsman's parting words "the current toxic form of our political discourse does not help our cause," was never more in evidence than in South Carolina that night. The hooting, drooling, rabidly anti anything not white or American crowd made a Jerry Springer audience look civilized.

And the candidate who best played into the hands of this angry mob was Newt Gingrich, who thinks taking the high road means not criticizing him, while he can say anything he wants, true or not, about his rivals. But the petty back and forth between the candidates, who, with the exception of Ron Paul, basically agree on every issue, pales in comparison to the ignorant, race-baiting remarks Gingrich delighted in making to the crowd.

Those who say South Carolina isn't what it used to be may be right, but the audience that night would have eagerly snapped up "Segregation Now, Segregation Forever" buttons if they were on sale in the lobby. These are the people who are the demographic for Gingrich's moronic commercials that attack Romney, because, like John Kerry, he speaks French. When a commercial is so idiotic that it would succeed brilliantly as satire, actually resonates on a serious level with some people, it tells you the kind of lowest common denominator Gingrich is aiming for.

When Gingrich repeatedly calls Obama "The food stamp president", and talks about instilling a work ethic in minority kids by having them work as janitors, you would think you were back in the South of the 50s and 60s. Gingrich not so subtly implies that minorities are lazy, and prefer food stamps to paychecks. As all the Republican candidates so often do, Gingrich ignores actual facts in making his ignorant case. Most Americans on food stamps are white, and a majority of them work while on food stamps. And no one in their right mind, except Gingrich, believes tossing out child labor laws will revive the economy. Yet these inherently racist comments not only received thunderous cheering and applause, but they brought the crowd to its feet.

If Huntsman was in the debate, I think he might have called out Gingrich for spewing his venom, and criticized his pandering to the worst elements in the audience. And if he did, the crowd would have brutally booed Huntsman, with a look on their faces reminiscent of those who yelled at African-American students walking to class in Mississippi in the 60s.

The very Republicans who wrongly claim that President Obama is waging class warfare because he wants millionaires to pay their fair share, are themselves stoking racial tensions by bringing back the vile language most of the people of the South have long since discarded. And Gingrich, Perry and Santorum regularly preach religious warfare when they refer to the fabricated "war on Christianity".

The Republican debates have produced a long list of stupid, completely wrong, eye-rolling comments, that have rightly diminished those candidates who said them.

The mean-spirited, racially divisive comments Newt Gingrich made Monday night, disqualify him from any serious consideration as a candidate for president of the United States.

Jon Huntsman left the race with his dignity and integrity intact.

Newt Gingrich should leave the race the way he did when he left Congress.

In disgrace.

But there's an organization in South Carolina that might welcome him with open arms.

My Debatable Weekend

Scott Blakeman — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:29:39 +0000

From Saturday night until Sunday morning, we were given a taste of what life would be like if there was a 24 hour Republican presidential debate channel.

Saturday's debate followed the adventure game showWipeout where contestants tried to navigate a moving obstacle course suspended over water. Even though theWipeout contestants often emerged soaked and battered, they emerged from the chilly waters with more dignity than most of the GOP candidates.

A year from now, one of the candidates in the debates this weekend will be doing reverse mortgage commercials.

Jon Huntsman kept his dignity intact and won both debates. Not just for what he said, but for the fact he finally got to say anything at all. Like many people, when I first heard Huntsman speak Saturday night, I thought "Oh, so that's what he sounds like."

With the elocution, looks and demeanor of someone who would have played the part of the president in a 1950's film, Huntsman proved that by speaking with intelligence and wisdom, and at times, in Mandarin, you completely alienate the Republican base. Even though Huntsman is an authentic dyed-in-the-wool conservative who hasn't done a Romney flip-flop, he is looked upon by Republicans as an alien from another political party. Even though he would be the GOP's strongest candidate if they were willing to take him seriously.

The real question is how Republicans can take any of the other candidates seriously. When Newt Gingrich passionately defended marriage as a "sacrament", which is at the very foundation of our society, you might rightly wonder how this twice divorced philanderer qualifies as an expert on that institution.

After some early comments, Rick Perry disappeared from the first debate (I think he flew to South Carolina ), until the final question, when he was asked "If you weren't here, what would you be doing tonight?" Perry said he would be at a shooting range, which was one of the most believable comments anyone said all night. But just when I thought Perry might be finally getting his muddled thoughts together, he gramatically incorrectly said in Sunday's debate, "I make a very proud statement and a fact that we have a president that's a socialist." Perry also gave his vote for sending our troops back to Iraq. Next, he'll be calling for a restart of the Vietnam War.

Romney is an oddly ill at ease, uncomfortable front runner. He's like a comedian who's always desperately trying to win over the crowd. By using someone else's material.

If I left Ron Paul out of this article, his supporters would claim it was a conspiracy. So I didn't.

And Rick Santorum says he doesn't discriminate against gays, but just doesn't want them to actually have equal rights.

After watching the first debate Saturday night, I went to sleep and had a few nightmares. Then I woke up this morning and turned on the second debate.

Those nightmares turned out to be real.

The End Of The Year As We Know It

Scott Blakeman — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:56:43 +0000

To those of you who think 2011 flew by more quickly than any other year, you're absolutely right.

While we were being distracted by wall to wall coverage of trials of people we had never heard of, and marriages of people we shouldn't have heard of, and debates with candidates we hopefully won't hear from again, some benevolent force was out there discreetly trimming hours from 2011. Because in a year where craziness reached new heights, the merciful thing to do was to wrap things up more quickly, and hope the new year brings some sanity.

But don't expect an easy path to a rational, reasonable year. House Republicans will try to block that. And Senate Republicans will filibuster confirming any names to implement rationality and reason. Or even the law.

Mitt Romney will come out and say he used to agree with reason while he was Governor of Massachusetts, but that being rational and reasonable doesn't work for other states or the country as a whole. Newt Gingrich will then cite his fictionalized history of the words rational and reasonable, and finally claim that those are "invented" words.

Rick Santorum will insist that being rational and reasonable begins at conception, Ron Paul will cut all aid to both traits, Michele Bachmann will make some facts up to show that being wrong about everything is the most rational and reasonable way to be.

Rick Perry will give three reasons why he's the most rational and reasonable guy out there. I can't recall what those three things are at the moment.

And finally Jon Huntsman will actually say rational and reasonable things, like believing in the validity of science. But no one will be listening to him when he says that.

And when President Obama calls for rational and reasonable things to get done, to add to the many rational and reasonable things he's already done, liberals will say it's irrational for him to be so reasonable.

But maybe, 2012 is the year craziness becomes so 2011, and intelligence becomes the new trending topic on Twitter. In 2012, maybe being hip will be replaced by being smart, and red states will be replaced by well read states.

2012 may well mark the beginning of the end of the Tea Party, or else it will be the beginning of the end of the Republican party. Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle cost the Republicans a Senate majority, and if Republicans continue to pledge allegiance to Grover Norquist instead of America, and continue to block implementation of laws and confirmation of qualified people to carry out those laws, they could well lose the House next year as well.

2011 was a crazy year.

So it's a good thing it went by so quickly.

But the brightest moments of 2011 came when people around the world rebelled against the craziness and the unfairness, and screamed out for a better life. The Arab Spring combined unspeakable bravery and dedication with a rational and reasonable desire to be free. And the Occupy movement has begun to call for other kinds of rational, reasonable fairness and equality here at home.

Hopefully in 2012 being rational and reasonable, smart and thoughtful, kind and compassionate will guide the actions of all of our elected officials and citizens here and around the world.

If that happens, I hope 2012 goes by nice and slowly.

The End Of The Year As We Know It December 29 and 30

Scott Blakeman — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 16:38:06 +0000

The end is near. In a good way. 2011 goes out on a laugh when Scott Blakeman hosts The End Of The Year As We Know It, a look back at 2011 from left to right. Or right to left for our Jewish friends.

Scott will perform his political standup, then do a one-on-one interview with a guest, and then host a panel of liberals and conservatives from the arts, media and politics.

December 29- Scott interviews Steve Rendall, senior analyst at FAIR(Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), and then hosts a panel with TJ McCormack(Fox and Friends), Rob Taub(Onion News Network), Lee Camp(The Green Room on Showtime) and more.

December 30- Scott interviews singer/songwriter/activist Jen Chapin, then hosts a panel with John Fugelsang(Up with Chris Hayes) and other guests.

7:30 pm. $10. Tickets and info at www.thetanknyc.org. The Tank@Playroom Theater. 151 W. 46th St. 8th floor.

Ohio and Wisconsin Republicans Reveal Union Busting Was Early April Fools Joke

Scott Blakeman — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:00:21 +0000

Republicans in Ohio and Wisconsin admitted today that their legislation to severely weaken the right of unions to engage in collective bargaining was merely an early April Fools joke.

Ohio State Senator Shannon Jones said, "When I sponsored this bill, I really didn't think anyone would take me seriously. I mean, what kind of an idiot would think it was a good idea to balance state and local budgets on the backs of hardworking union public employees?"

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker added, "Do you really think I would try to destroy unions in a state that has such a progressive tradition of looking after the rights of workers? Just to pay back the billionaire Koch brothers for financing my campaign?"

Governor Walker said that he was surprised no one got the joke. "Attacking the rights of public employees and unions was such an irrational, over the top thing to do. I can't believe people thought I was serious."