Matt of All Trades blog, like the title suggests, is by a Vermont author and offers offbeat musings on pop culture, media, journalism, humor, weirdness, stupid people, smart people, my life as a journalist, landscaper, photographer, married gay man, dog lover and weather geek and more. It's run by me, Matt Sutkoski, a native Vermonter living in St. Albans, Vt.
In these gloomy impeachment times, Randy Rainbow just dropped another gem
YouTube star, satirist and singer Randy Rainbow hasn't made as many hit funny videos lately as he did earlier last year.
He's been touring and supporting his wonderful schtick on the road. That doesn't mean he's stopped making videos, oh, no.
Rainbowdropped another gem yesterday. He starts by introducing the president of the United States, ("at least at the time this video was recorded)."
Then, Rainbow offers Trump help with his marketing, his self-branding if you will, with a song that's a takeoff of "Gaston" from "Beauty And The Beast."
Without further delay, here's "That Don" by Randy Rainbow:
Joan Jett and Debbie Harry deliver an apocalyptic newcast
in a dark and funny video for the new Blondie tune "Doom or Destiny"
Blondie, with Debbie Harry of course, and Joan Jetthave teamed up in a startling, but darkly funny video for Blondie's song "Doom or Destiny" and it's totally worth the watch. Especially since Harry and Jett have lost none of their considerable mojo over the decades.
In the video, Harry and Jett are off-kilter news anchors. The pair, asRolling Stone puts it, "tease a series of foreboding headlines, referencing global warming, Russian election meddling, nuclear war and President Trump's 'grab 'em by the pussy comment from the leaked Access Hollywood tape."
Rolling Stone continues:"Harry said she wanted the video to comment on 'the bizarre state of media and news in the current 'idocracy' by addressing issues like 'environmental collapse, fossil fuels, bee population decline, global warming, sexism, patriarchy, Trump and Russia, feminishm, consumerism, the marketing of war and more.'"
Yes, that's a dark vision. And the video has that dark vision. It's not for bright and cheery Pollyannas. But those Pollyannas would be missing out if they didn't watch the "Doom or Destiny" video.
Harry, age 72, and Jett, 59, are still the no-holds-barred women they've alway been, thank goodness. In the video, they are disgusted, world weary and fuming as these two "news co-anchors" deal with dinasour men rejoicing amid money, a Trumpesque orange sock puppet screaming "Fake News!" vapid fragrance commercials, a weather segment that forecasts, among other things, seven plagues and thermonuclear winter, and a report by Harry regarding global warming, "Hot as fxxxing hell"
You have to watch the video several times to catch all the very quick jokes and dark humor throughout the piece.
The song "Doom or Destiny" itself is at once catchy, dark, cynical, driving and some of the best work I've heard from Blondie, Harry and Jett I've heard in years.
Here's the video, which is not really NSFW, if you dare. It's so worth it.
You know what they are: Those googly-eyed cartoon characters that resemble yellow pills and get in all sorts of trouble.
Now I have to re-think my fandom, thanks to John Oliver.
Stephen Miller, the odious, self-absorbed evil Trump aide, really, really looks like a minion, John Oliver points out.
He's right.
Check out this clip of Oliver, which ends inexplicably with footage of an enthusiastic Seattle gardener, I guess to sweeten the bad taste in your mouth left my Minion Miller.
Yes, they all have a point of view, but satirists cut through the bullshit, instead of adding to it.
When the news gets confusing, satirists like John Oliver are there for the rescue.
I just encountered a video that backs up my point of view exactly. The point of thevideo, from Vox, is that comedians have learned to cover the Trump administration much more effectively than any news network.
Here's why:
Big news networks will accurately report that something Trump said is a lie, or totally fabricated, or has no evidence to back it up.
So far, so good.
Then the TV channels spend hours and hours and hours parsing the latest lie or stupid remark. Plus, they bring on Trump sycophants to defend the lie, to spin the lie, to make it all seem better.
All this has the effect of confusing the viewer. Including people like me, who are pretty sophisticated news consumers.
Frankly, I trust Stephen Colbert more than I trust much of what passes for cable news.
The news network reporters all know the latest Trump lie du jour is bullcrap, but they take it seriously, and make an effort to "report all sides of the issue."
But when something is bull, just call it that, for crissakes!
Which is what satirists do. You don't necessarily have to agree with the satirsts' point of view, but at least you know you're getting to the heart of the matter.
In a humorous way. Humor often makes things so much easier to understand.
A few journalists are starting to get the message.Jake Tapper on CNN, for instance, is starting to make sarcastic remarks when a Trump surrogate says something over the top. He's calling the bullcrap.
On MSNBC,Rachel Maddow isn't really a satirist, but she's sure doing a good job of digging through the mountains of dirt in Washington to give us some insight into what's really going on. I like how she enthusiastically explains things in ways any bozo (like me!) can understand.
So all that is a start.
Yes, journalists ought to try to over all sides and be fair. But when someone is calling the Earth flat, time to go for the jugular.
It's no wonder satirists through history have had they heydeys when the leaders are failing particularly badly. If you're a good satirist, enjoy your current success. We need people like you.
In the video at the bottom of this post, you'll hear Sophia McClennen, a co-author of "Is Satire Saving Our Nation?" give this money quote that is spot on: "Political satire is about showing you the system is faking you out...It fires up the mind to say, 'Hmmm, this doesn't seem right.'"
Yes, I think satire can inspire needed political activism.
The video below is about seven minutes long, but you should really watch it. It's a great guide to how to report on, and how the public ought to try and understand bullcrap. The video is NSFW, because of some language, but worth it.
Meryl Streep's Golden Globe criticism of Donald Trump wasn't the most important thing that happened this week, but mocking Trump IS an effective tool against him.
More than a few pundits in the Twittersphere raised a good point yesterday: They questioned why we were all so focused onDonald Trump's feud with Meryl Streepwhen there's so many more important questions about the Donald.
You know: Russian hacking, his love affair with Vladimir Putin, the shadowy, corrupt business dealings, the lack of a good temperament, his tacit acceptance of bigotry, violence and the like.
I could go on and on.
On one hand, the Twittersphere is right, Meryl Streep vs. Donald Trump seems pretty low down the list of things to worry about.
However, I still think the Trumpster's Twitter feuds are the best ways to keep him off balance. True, his ultra-thin skindoesn't give anyone a lot of confidence he can competently captain the Ship of State.
But we all know Donald is going down anyway. Maybe keeping him off balance is the best way to get him off the world stage once and for all. The sooner the better.
These celebrity feuds make it all the more easy to mock him. To Trump, the worst thing that can happen to him is getting mocked.
It happens a lot to him. Why not keep making it worse?
Especially when the cause of the mocking is something like Trump's inevitable Twitter reaction of Streep's speech at the Golden Globes on Sunday.
As if this Streep was the most important thing facing him Trump, Tweeted:
So we get funny headlines like this fromsatirist Andy Borowitz in the New Yorkerwho had an article with this headline: "Trump Urges Spy Agencies To Lay Off Russia and Focus On Threat Posed By Actresses."
Plus, incidents like the Great Streep/Trump crisis of 2017 give us reminders of more the more important issues I referenced above, like this tweet from ABC political analyist Matthew Dowd:
"Let me make it more clear: Trump fans oppose actress exercising free speech while supporting Russian despot who prevents free speech. Hmmm."
And this from Brian Klaas:"Every day around 6:30 a.m. in New York, an angry billionaire awakens in a gilded penthouse to tweet furiously about how he is a victim."
One more, from David Sirata"It's odd to hear criticism of a Hollywood star for making comments...in a nation that elected a reality TV star to the White House."
Naturally, like it or not, people would rather watch or read about celebrity news than the intricacies of military intelligence regarding Russia. I'm just as guilty as the next person in this regard.
Celebrity news can have real beneficial effects, if played right. Streep was Exhibit A Sunday night in this regard at the Golden Globes, which is run by the Hollywood Foreign Press.
Streep noted the dangers to press freedom under Trump as she accepted the Cecil B. DeMille Award for lifetime achievement, she said in part:
"That's why our founders enshrined the press and its freedom in the Constitution. So i only ask teh famously well-heeled Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the Committee to Protect Journalists, because we're going to need them going forward, and they'll need us to safeguard the truth."
I bet few television viewers had even heard of the Committee to Protect Journalists before Streep mentioned them at the Golden Globes.
But her words had an immediate effect. According to Money Magazine, the Committee to Protect Journalists typically gets a sleepy five online donations on a Sunday evening. Because of Streep, the number of people contributing Sunday night was more than 700.
They're still counting that nice influx of money they got. (The non-profit CPJ raised about $1 milllion in 2016.)
The Guardian had a good point regarding Streep's remarks at the Golden Globes. The Guardian quoted Streep and had this analysis:
"'There was one performance this year that stunned me,' (Streep) said. 'It sank its hooks in my heart. Not because it was good; there was nothing good about it. But it was effective and it did its job.' She souned like the most withering theatre critic ever. If that was a review and you had to work a quote out of it for a poster, the best you could do would be 'Effective - Meryl Streep."
"Streep, thougn, had identified one of Trump's key weaknesses. You can critisize him all you like for being a racist, a sexist, a sexual predator, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a conspiracy theorist, a bully or a bad advert for male grooming, but it's all water off a duck's back - you could even say that duck is sitting on Trump's head pretending to be a toupee. - it doesn't matter. But to disrespect Trump's performance - that's gotta hurt."
Which is the point of this post. Life is performance art for Trump. Give bad reviews to the performance, and he goes off the deep end.
Especially if you highlight how lame his performances are, and how reluctant other performers are to participate with him. Or come up with ways to make him "pay" for those performances.
It seems the Trump team is still desperately trying to book acts for the inauguration, even though easy Google searches of the people their seeking would show they're no fans of Trump.
Still, unlike many performers, Moby said he would agree to perform at Trump's inauguration, but I bet his price is too steep for even the (alleged) billionaire Trump.
Moby said he wouldn't need money as compensation from the Trump team. I'll let Moby explain it in his own words,as quoted in the Independent:
"Hahahahaha, wait, Hahahaha, really? I guess I'd DJ at an inaugural ball if as payment Trump released his tax returns....So Trump what do you think? I DJ for you and you release your tax returns?"
Again, Perfect. Moby slams Trump where it hurts - his fascination with celebrity - and at the same time calls attention - with humor - to more important issues: Trump's um, complicated finances.
Moby went so far as to come up with a proposed playlist for Trump's inauguration, which includes Rage Against The Machine's "Killing In The Name,' Radiohead's "Idioteque" and Billie Holiday's "Strange Fruit."
Ouch!
So let's all keep, um, showering Trump with mockery. It will do a body - and a nation - good.
"Vladimir Putin" and "Donald Trump" on Saturday Night Livv last night.
In case you haven't seen it, you have to check out last night's Saturday Night Live cold opening, which features, well, the usual suspects.
These include Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and a few other familiar characters.
The real Donald Trump is going to HATE this, and I'm sure we'll hear about it via his Twitter account.
The other day, Trump blasted on Twitter a Vanity Fair magazine for an unfavorable restaurant review on one of his hotels. The result was that new Vanity Fair subscriptions skyrocketed.
I think SNL keeps getting Alec Baldwin to poke fun at Trump to ensure it stays on the air forever, with the help of Trump's Twitter feed.
This is definitely worth the watch, though. I laughed out loud:
This petition on Change.org to allow open carry guns at this summer's GOP convention in Cleveland was fake, but it raised some provocative questions.
A number of Republicans favor open carry laws, in which you can carry your gun around no matter where you are.
So why not allow open carry at the GOP convention this summer in Cleveland.
What could go wrong?
A petition calling for just that garnered more than 51,000 signatures before the Secret Service shut the idea down.
I guess a convention center that promises to be full on angry, argumentive people fighting over Donald Trump isn't considered a great place to bring guns.
The petition turned out to be fake, anyway. I suspected as much when I read its flowery language.
An excerpt:
"Without the right to protect themselves, those at the Quicken Loans Arena will be sitting ducks, utterly helpless against evil-doers, criminals or others who wish to threaten the American way of life."
Yep. Bring a gun to a political convention and America is saved!!
The petition was the brainchild of some guy named Jim, who goes by the handle Hyperrationalist on Twitter, according to The Hill.
"Jim said he published the petition to call attention to what he sees as a discrepency in Republicans' position on gun rights. He said if GOP candidates were actually against gun-free zones like they claimed, they would support the allowing of open carry at the convention. If the rest of us get to have law-abiding citizens protecting us with guns at restaurants and schools, Jim added, then why shouldn't Republicans have it at their convention?"
Of course, with Donald Trump raising the idea of "riots" if he is denied the GOP nomination, guns at the convention could get pretty interesting.
Now that the Secret Service had decreed no guns at the convention, will Republicans rebel against their tyranny?
I doubt it, but it's an interesting question nonetheless.
Look, I'm not anti-gun. Are you a law-abiding sane person who likes to hunt, target shoot or think a gun offers you protection? Then enjoy your guns! It's your right.
It's also probably unfair to compare open carry at say, some restaurant to open carry at the volatile GOP convention.
But this whole things raises some good questions. When and where is open carry a good idea? A bad idea? Should there be any regulation on it? Or, to you Second Amendment absolutists: Should guns be anywhere and everywhere?
Including at an important but controversial major political event where passions flare?
As a middle aged guy, I never watch those because I figure it's too late for a beautiful new me.
However, I had to stop at the satire/comedy YouTube makeup tutorial you'll see at the bottom of this post.
Don't you admire Donald Trump's looks? That handsome devil!
Well, you can look like him if you just follow the tips in this great new makeup tutorial. Your friends will love you. Or maybe want to build a wall around you, I don't know.
I also never knewCheetos were a critical tool in one's makeup kit, but there you go.
It's worth the watch, just for some laughs. (h/t JoeMyGod)
Donald Trump wants to weaken First Amendment
protections for the media. It's a dangerous idea.
Say what you want about Donald Trump, but his relationship with the media is......complicated.
I agree with the pundits who say he would have never gotten this far in his inprobable, successful and many say scary success in his bid for the Republican nomination for U.S. President.
After all, he's gotten so, so much free media. People love a train wreck, a controversy, so he's been great for media outlets as people tune in to watch, read or hear the latest outrageous Trump remark.
I'm not sure the media is to blame for Trump's rise or not, but it's something to consider. And Trump should be grateful for all the free 'advertising' he's gotten because he's constantly on the news.
The media attention on him isn't always fawning of course. There's lots of journalists, pundits, comedians, social media wizards and the like who can't stand Trump, who point out all his hypocrisies, bad ideas, racist comments, xenophobia, greed, and ego.
Trump, needless to say, is not a fan of people who even question him. Just ask Megan Kelley, the Fox News anchor who had the gall to ask him vaguely pointed questions months ago in a Republican debate, and Trump still hasn't gotten over jabbing at Kelly on Twitter.
Which leads me to one of Trump's dangerous ideas. At least I think it's dangerous and so do a lot of other people.
He would weaken libel laws to make it much easier to sue media outlets, and win.
"The changes envisioned by the celebrity businessman turned Republica front-runner would mean that 'when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,' he said at a rally in Fort Worth, Texas. Trump added that, should he win the election, news organizations that have criticized him will 'have problems.' He specifically cited the New York Times and The Washington Post."
First of all, if a journalist knowingly broadcasts something that is false and said with malice and can harm a person's reputation, that person can sue for libel and likely win.
You can't sue and win if what is reported is true, or is opinion, you're covered. In other words, you'd open yourself up to a legitimate lawsuit if you accuse Trump of being a child molester, because he is most certainly not. He has not definitely not committed any kind of crime like that.
However, if you broadcast an opinion that his idea to build a wall on the Mexican border is stupid, you're covered. The First Amendment guarantees you can criticize a public figure's positions on any topic he or she discusses.
"First Amendment advocates condemned Trump's suggestions. 'His statement shows why we need libel protections,' said Gregg Leslie, legal defense director for the Washington-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. 'Trump gets offended, he gets upset and he wants to sue to retaliate. That's not a good reason to sue someone.'"
Since freedom of speech is in the Constitution and the Supreme Court hs repeatedly endorsed the legal standard, Trump would not be able to change the law through Congress or via executive order. You'd have to amend the Constitution.
The press freedoms we have protect the nation basically from tin pot dictators. If the public learns about politicians and other public figures via an unfettered press, they can vet these candidates, learn about any red flags, and assess for themselves whether they want to vote for a particular person or not.
Also, if the press can freely report on unethical and illegal activity by any public official, that bad behavior can be stopped.
If the First Amendment protections weren't there, politicians and others could get away with anything.
I'm not saying Trump is suggesting loosening the libel laws so he can do bad things. He's not. He just doesn't like getting his ego bruised. But still, his idea is dangerous.
Of course, under the First Amendment, the media can use satire, jokes and other methods to highlight a public figure's foibles.
This was on full display this weekend, when Trump approving re-tweeted a quote that, as it turned out, was said by 20th century Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini.
Sure enough, over the weekend, Trump approvingly re-tweeted the Mussolini quote, "It's better to live on day as a lion that 100 years as a sheep."
Trump later defended using the quote on Meet The Press, essentially saying Mussolini was what he was but the quote is good.
Trump's supporters are subject to jokes, too. A video hosted by Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, has him sending wwomen posing as "Fox News Girls" to political events to ask Republican voters about Trump and others.
The questions the "Fox News Girls' ask are cringe worthy to say the least. They make up outrageous, made-up policy positions they say liberals voiced and ask Trump supporters to comment on them.
People will believe anything, apparently, as the video shows.
Like many other people, I get frustrated by road ragers out on the highway.
Road rage: Don't get mad, get even, says The Onion.
You want to exact revenge on these jerks, but the logical side of us know that just escalates the problem and makes things worse.
We can dream, though, can't we?
Leave to the satirical site, "The Onion" to give us a segment from what is supposedly a cheerful, hopelessly smarmy morning news show that instructs us on how to deal with road rage.
Remember! Don't get mad, get even! It also helps to become a really scary stalker. Watch and find out how!
I wish The Onion weren't satirical and the Weather Channel was really opening a weather casino. If you win, you get a sunny day. You lose big? A dangerous, EF5 tornado. trashes your house.
An example of the wall decor in the new Weather Channel casino?
Maybe you can put bets on which city you want destroyed in a hurricane. Does it rain or snow in the hotel rooms? Is there batting cages where you use baseball-sized hailstones to practice? Does the spa have lightning treatment to really give you a charge? Is the sauna just a one way flight to Houston in August?
Does the HVAC system in the hotel run on air from a Pheonix heat wave to warm the rooms and air from a winter Barrow, Alaska cold snap for the summer air conditioning?
Does Weather Channel meteorologist Jim Cantore get awe struck by lightning in the ballrooms as part of the casino's entertainment? Does Mike Bettes chase tornadoes down the hallways?
The best line of The Onion report comes at the end (spoiler alert!) of the Onion report when they talk about the deal with Celine Dion despite her fear of sleet.
You know, I don't usually feel a kinship to Celine Dion, but in this case I agree. I hate sleet, too.
The Onion News Network the nation's most trusted news source, or at least the most satirical, has this, um, gripping report on an Oregon couple's painful decision to euthanize their teenage daughter, who is so brain damaged she can only text, groan and roll her eyes.
Employing every cliche from every network news drama story, the Onion News Network team brings us totally up to date on this highly important issue. Especially to you parents of teens.
I particularly like the shots of the protesters who don't want the girl euthanized. You can catch demonstrators carrying signs that read "Trying on clothes is proof of life" and "Caitlin isn't brain-dead. She's just an idiot."
And you have to feel for Caitlin's mom, who urges viewers in the report to "go home and hug their kids, and be thankful they don't have such a piss poor attitude."
Also, when watching the video, stay on to the end for a glimpse of upcoming news story of utmost importance.
