2 more clues to Tweety: 1) Larry KING started him in the biz. 2) He picks on beginner wingnuts, not
Edited on Wed Jun-30-10 08:54 PM by UTUSN
after they win.
1) He paid tribute to KING as "good company" (on the radio), revealed that his Queen Kathleen's mother is a wingnut who loved listening to KING. Would have been good if he stopped there, but added that the wingnut mother-in-law "listened with her headphones on WHILE LYING IN BED NEXT TO" the father-in-law. I still suspect that G.E.RUSSERT led him along in the transition from Democratic operative into turning into media coddler of wingnuts, but he said that it was KING who recruited him into media "after I worked for Tip O'NEIL."
Then came the BARBER himself and on first blush it was the Tweety I yearn for, the one eviscerating a wingnut, merciless, except that I instantly recalled how he did the same thing to Phil DONAHUE, performing the execution of DONAHUE on DONAHUE's own show, accusing "you Liberals" of being against America.
So he went after this 'bagger on multiple fronts: "You're calling our government a tyranny!1 It's not a tyranny!1 Don't we have representative government here, don't we?!1 Do YOU have a congressman and senator?!1 Aren't they representing you?!1 Aren't they the ones who vote on taxes?!1 So you want to replace the income tax, what do you want instead?!1 How MUCH of a sales tax, it's 31 percent, nobody is going to vote for that!1 Yes, you are, do the math!1 Have you ever been audited?!1 Why, what was wrong with your paperwork!1"
And on and on. So he made the 'bagger look like the fool he is, but WAIT A MINIT!1 It dawned on me that Tweety was performing a mock audition, not really for a job working for him, but showing him as a "pro" (who would be a FAILURE as a politician himself) how amateurish this new 'bagger is, how he is mincemeat on a plate for seasoned competitors.
Actually, he would only do this to a BEGINNER wingnut. AFTER they get elected, he fawns all over them.
It would be tempting, but wrong, to think Tweety was being a real Dem. He was just showing off. More like when he went on the Ellen show and "danced" with her, actually physically assaulting her, choking her, and throwing her around. Oh, and he tried to physically intimidate Jon STEWART, too.
1) His early career as a Dem flunky gave him the credibility he has milked ever since, that he was a street smart operative ON OUR SIDE.
2) We yearn for somebody ON OUR SIDE, with great skills.
However, I saw daily throughout the FAKE impeachment and Campaign 2000 how vicious he was toward our Dems and how he lusted after Shrub and Mc5PLANEs, and, where you first said, "I pretty much hate him all the time," I would say: I *NEVER* trust him, even or especially when he APPEARS to be on our side.
He has a core group of good Dems who apparently haven't studied him closely or who lost track of him after they were first aware of him as a "true" Dem operative, circa the publication of "Hardball," the book, 1988, and don't realize all the wingnut work he has done ever since.
So, NEVER trusting him, I have relentlessly tempered any positive comments about him here. There were some myths that who-knows-where-they-came-from, that he was anti-war because he has five draft age sons (never mind there is no draft), and other such.
In my lapsed Catholic view, I see him as part of the larger Catholic school template our public life is (cursed?) with, all the media yakkers that are Caths (HANNITY, O'LOOFAH, the BUCHANANs, many many more) and on SCOTUS, and through and through. I see the Catholic schools as having done an excellent job in instilling communications skills (rhetoric, debate), the remnants of the ancients' school model. But then there is that querulous side, the rigidity and unwillingness to compromise. Not to mention the schoolyard bullying and final reliance on "final" techniques (where persuasion doesn't work, use force).
5. "seems to respect bullies" - Yip, well, for not watching him, you sure have him pegged.
I didn't use the word "flunky" lightly. I have long characterized him as: In the hothouse of D.C., SUCCESS is what is worshipped. And flunkies gain their daily fix of status and prestige depending upon how SUCCESSFUL their bosses are. So when RAYGUN beat the pants off of Tweety's bosses, CARTER and O'NEILL, he zeroed in on worshipping RAYGUN. He's not so much ideological as a whore for success and winning.
And he's definitely a bully. A physical bully, as shown in the Ellen and Jon appearances. The schoolyard bully is defined by physical FORCE, which is what he used to exert dominance in the venues where his yakking couldn't win. Basically, like O'LOOFAH, he has the 1950s style male-dominant whassisname "woman-hating" which is also a remnant of the Church. He calls his wife "Queen Kathleen," but when she guests on his show, he snickers and mocks her. One time he and BARNICLE were like the little brats they really are, while she was trying to participate in a "serious" discussion with them.
This was his radio days, before that waste of a CNN show. In the 70s and 80s Larry was one of the best things on radio...and this is coming from someone who was working in the biz. He also was quite liberal and coined the term "right wing whacko" when some right wing whacko would call with what today would seem a mundane charge. In fact many people enjoyed Larry and he influenced a generation of talk show hosts and interviewers.
But Tweety was not and will never be a Larry King...past or present. King's game was to entertain and inform...Tweety's is to play beltway weathervane. While King emphasized using one's curiosity in asking questions, Tweety goes with the "conventional wisdom" that most times he makes up as he goes along.
In short...Tweety's like the guy who shows up at the party trying to impress everyone in the room. He'll say whatever it takes to be liked...put on the lampshade if that's what's needed. It's all about ratings and drawing attention to both himself and his show.
6. I agree about KING and have never understood all the put-downs about him.
If they accuse him of doing "soft" interviews, well, I've seen him get the guests to lower their guard and deliver information that they wouldn't have under hostile/aggressive interrogation.
I saw Geraldo's "interview" of MANSON, and it was the opposite: I hate MANSON, just about everybody hates MANSON, but what is the point of pretending to do an "interview," when what it was was for Geraldo to vent his (and our) hatred by verbally assaulting? Why not just say, "Now we are going to go confront this piece of crap and call him names"?!1 The purpose wasn't to gather new information. It was for Geraldo to be our proxy punisher.
I liked it where Bill MAHER said, "Larry, people said you didn't 'get' Lady Gaga-- BUT, WHO DOES?!1"
I can see why people ridicule the Larry King of the past decade...very much past his prime as an interviewer and out of touch with most viewers. He really wasn't a TV guy...I always thought he was uncomfortable on the medium as opposed to radio where he could really hold your attention for an hour by conversing with a guest and slowly drawing them out.
I will admit I am biased as I had the chance to spend an afternoon with Mr. King in the 80s and got some very useful pointers and insight into doing talk radio. He always was curious...which served him real well when he had hours to fill with some of the most inane guests. He also was a story teller...reminded me of my father and his friends; telling stories about the old neighborhood and creating pictures through words. This is a Larry King few people heard as it was only on display in the wee hours.
Just like you don't hear a good Top 40 hit anymore, Larry's time was in a radio and TV era that's long passed...
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.