OFF-TOPIC (pretty much): Bill Cosby Is A Very Cranky Fellow. WRONG!

One of the cool things about Twitter is the ability to follow a diverse group of individuals (and non-individuals).  The result is that you just never know what will catch your eye among the ever-rising flood of messages.

I added Bill Cosby last year because I was going to see him in concert (again) and I wanted to ask him a question about the show.  I rarely take a second look at his Tweets - which are generally a tame gumbo of promos and responses to fans.  Maybe today's caught my eye because I had just seen LouisC.K. on a late night talk show.

Here's the Tweet: "Thank you @louisck for enjoying my work. Nod to @andrewrgoldman & his editor(s) for the honest question about me. http://t.co/sDjgPFB"


I followed Cosby's link to see the praise, and because I wondered what "honest question" had been raised.  The NY Times article (interview) in question is about 1 1/2 weeks old now.  The relevant section is initiated by the reporter asking C.K. who is funnier (sic, NYT, sic) than he is:
 

Of all the comedians working today, who’s funnier than you?


I don’t think you can quantify it that way. It’s like boxing — there are people who are set up according to weight and how big their hands are and stuff. But the best comedian I’ve ever seen live is Bill Cosby, and this was only about a year and a half ago.

Cosby? Really. I thought he’d become a crank in his old age.

No. Go see him. Two-hour-long show, 400 ways to get a laugh. It’s like being a brawler and going to see somebody do jujitsu like a master.

I love how the Cos did not say anything more.  (Nor does his website, of course.)  The understatement made it.  Of course, the answer is that he is NOT "a crank".  (Even if he does yell at the kids to get off of his lawn, NOONE could do it with the humor that he would!) 

Now, to (try to) tie it in to the other news that Arizona's Politics has been featuring so far today, with a personal recollection: the last time I saw him in concert here in Arizona - a couple of years ago - Cosby briefly displayed a bit of political crankiness when he riffed on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.  Thomas was among the five-member majority in today's opinion overturning the matching funds provisions of Arizona's Clean Elections campaign finance system. 

P.S. My own attempt at understated-ness.





We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING AT YOU, ARIZONA: New York Times Peeks Behind Scenes At Flake's, Schweikert's Town Halls

(Occasionally, we try to highlight news coverage of Arizona from around the rest of the nation and world. The series will be titled, "Yeah, we're looking at you, Arizona.")

The New York Times ran a report today (page A9) about the behind the scenes efforts to rustle up people to attend congressional town hall meetings.  The article focuses solely on Arizona Reps. Jeff Flake (R-CD6) and David Schweikert (R-CD5).  (And actually, Flake's was a campaign event as part of his effort to take  Jon Kyl's seat in the Senate.)

Nothing much surprising in the report, and it does not put Arizona in a negative light.  In fact, the gist is that these efforts were representative of those going on around the country.




We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

Really, New York Times? Article About Arizonans Dyeing Grass Greener Makes Sunday Front Page

(cross-posted to fledgling Media In AZ blog)

I appreciate that the New York Times opened up a Phoenix bureau last year, and that excellent reporter Marc Lacey has to file some stories other than border updates and unusual Arizona elected official actions, and that this story is a semi-decent slice of life.

But, was an article about how some Phoenicians have sprayed green dye on their lawns REALLY front-page news?  Especially when there is no indication how popular it is - in fact, the article includes a statement that it might NOT be popular, and the business cited claims (on its website) that it is popular in California and the rest of the nation.  Inside, where they place human interest or gardening stories, maybe.  But, the front page?

I understand the Times' desire to place a fun or quirky story on the front page to get some attention.  But, the Gray Lady does appear to relish any story - from Lacey or otherwise - which paints Arizona and/or Arizonans in a too-unusual-to-be-taken-seriously light.

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

OFF-TOPIC: Interesting Tidbits On Fringe Of Latest Wikileaks Hubbub

I am NOT going to wade into the latest Wikileaks document dump about U.S. diplomatic cables.  However, I will note that I am very interested in many of the angles of this news event.  And, I wanted to quickly share these two items that you may not have seen yet.

1) The Wikileaks Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange has apparently been in communication with the U.S. State Department over the past several days, apparently through the U.S. Embassy in London.  Assange apparently asked what additional specific redactions the U.S. thought necessary to protect individuals.  After the U.S. said it would "not engage in a negotiation", Assange responded with this yesterday:

"You have chosen to respond in a manner which leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful and you are instead concerned to suppress evidence of human rights abuse and other criminal behaviour."

I have not (yet) seen anything that would justify the comment that the U.S. was (attempting) to suppress human rights abuses and/or criminal behavior.  Not even hints that such was on  the way.

2) Likely related, I found this appeal today to Assange from the U.S.-based human rights group Human Rights First.  HRF President/CEO Elisa Massimino believes the released documents may identify human rights activists and organizations that have received assistance from the U.S., and that that may put those persons/organizations at risk.  She appeals that such information be redacted.

Concluding thought: Wikileaks certainly sees itself as exposing and preventing human rights abuses.  It will be interesting to see what documents come out over the next several days.  Especially as the New York Times has already noted that it received the documents NOT from Wikileaks, but from the Guardian (U.K.) - and that it does not consider itself constrained by Assange/Wikileaks.  Several different, interesting scenarios could play out.  Stay tuned.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.