I Blame Jon Stewart

Today it was announced that Conan O'Brien will have his
very own show on TBS. Yes, really, basic cable. He's going
from having a show on network television to basic cable.
Why didn't Fox jump to snap him up? I have no idea.
Alas, my dreams of a Fox late night lineup that includes
Conan followed by Red Eye is shattered.

The landscape of late night of television has completely
changed and I blame Jon Stewart. Now it seems like
every basic channel wants their own late night show.
There's Chelsea Lately, The Daily Show, and Lopez
Tonight. You don't have to be on network television
to have your own late night comedy show. The Daily
Show really proved to basic cable that they can have
a successful late night comedy show.

Another late night feature I attribute to Jon Stewart is
the partisanship in late night comedy. Johnny Carson
would skewer both Republicans and Democrats and Jay
Leno for the most part attempts to keep this mode (which
explains his success with older demographics). Jon Stewart
is a liberal all the way and lets it be known. Yes, sometimes
he pokes fun of Democrats. However, it is nothing like
the way he skewers Republicans. His hate for Bush
was visible in his face and jokes. Now it seems like just
about every late night comedian (with the exception to
some extent of Jay Leno) is obsessively partisan.
Chelsea Handler, George Lopez and David Letterman
make no bones about being liberals.

Here is an interview with Stephen Colbert where he
explains that Jon Stewart asked him to have a political
opinion (It's starts about seven minutes in):



The late night television landscape has changed.
Technology plays a big part in the dramatic change but I
think Jon Stewart is partly responsible. Whether the
transformations in late night comedy are good or bad ,
I'll let you decide.

The Goode Family

Check out the preview to the new show by Mike Judge, creator of
"Beavis and Butthead" and "King of the Hill." I looks like the shows' intent
to stereotype environmental liberals. I know as a Christian, television
programs often push forth narratives about the "hypocritical religious
nut." I don't really enjoy that. I do enjoy watching "King of the Hill," so
I'm going to give the show a chance. I haven't seen this particular show
(it's not out yet) but if the whole intent is to box a group of people into
some type of nutty mold, it probably won't be my cup of tea or shall
I say "green tea." We will see.

Via Breeze Debris

'Sex and the City' Didn't Revolutionize A Darn Thing

In a couple of weeks the movie version of "Sex and the City" will be released in
theaters nationwide. Here's the trailer:



I've repeatedly heard this show described as "revolutionary" and "empowering" by
commentators on culture and television. Take, for example, this quote from a
Newsweek article :

Yet for all the hype and adoration, was "Sex and the City" really
all that revolutionary? The show definitely, and loudly, explored
uncharted TV territory. It was naughty and bawdy and was one of
the rare shows— along with "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" and
"Murphy Brown"—to ask the provocative question: is it OK for a
woman to be alone? The fact that the four characters—the thoughtful
writer Carrie, the razor-witted lawyer Miranda, the defiantly romantic
Charlotte and the sexually voracious Samantha—demanded sexual
satisfaction was refreshing, even empowering.

Or take this statement from a sex therapist who appearing on "Good Morning
America":

Sex therapist Laura Berman said the show helps women feel
more comfortable when talking about sex and relationships.

"I think the greatest thing about Sex and The City is it's really
bringing sex out of the closet, so to speak," Laura said on
ABC New's Good Morning America. "Women are feeling more
empowered. The message it gives is that women should take
control of their sexuality.

Give me a break! "Sex and City" didn't revolutionize or empower a single thing
and for the news media to continually portray it as so shows their stance on loose
sexual standards. All the show did was glorify women having rendezvous after
rendezvous with men (and sometimes other women).

Some feminists will celebrate such sexually "free" depictions of single women. I,
however, will not. We now live in a country where 1 in 4 teenage girls have an STD.
So, I will not celebrate. We live in a country where 28.4 percent of households
headed by single women are poor, according to this source. If these two statistics
show empowerment for females, then perhaps we need a little less of it.

There are plenty of women out there doing wonderful things and fighting real
oppression. However, I see not such example in the characters of Carrie, Miranda,
Charlotte, and Samantha. Earlier this week I read this horrific story out of Iraq.
These are they type of women who need a revolution and empowerment.

John Adams

Have you been watching the HBO miniseries John Adams? I've been
watching it since the beginning and have found myself fascinated with it.
It really makes me proud of the ideals this country was founded on.

I found some clips on Youtube.

We are in the very mist of a revolution:



Washington's inauguration:



Liberty will reign:

The Anti-Grey's Anatomy?

I just finished watching a brilliant scene from the show E.R. (hat tip ThinkChristian).
I don't watch the show but from this clip I think it might be the anti-Grey's
Anatomy:



I think we live in a world that wants real answers and authenticity and
moral relativity isn't cutting anymore.

I have some issues with Oprah

So as you've probably heard by now Oprah Winfrey will be campaigning
for Barack Obama this weekend. This will certainly bring large crowds
to the campaign trail. Since she is making headlines I wanted to take the
time and discuss some issues I have with her.

Oprah has been on television for decades so the public has really gotten to know
her. I believe Oprah is a good hearted, generous, and a well-intentioned person.
However, she prescribes to a wishy-washy New Age philosophy that she uses
her nationally syndicated show to promote.

I've talked about her New Age belief that all roads lead to Heaven. She
heavily promoted to the book "The Secret," another new age thought book.
She's also been in the fore front of the self-help movement, which largely tells
people to put themselves first. I can see how this philosophy has garnered so
many viewers over the years. It tells people they can form their own religion
and image of God to what makes them happy.

She also lets celebrities go on her show and spread their misguided philosophies
about life and love on her show. Here's what Halle Berry said on her show and
Oprah agreed with:

"What Gabriel and I have decided is we will just redefine marriage for
ourselves. You know, that paper isn't worth anything to me anymore. …
I don't want to do that again, so we have spent a lot of time talking about
how can we redefine this. There's all kinds of ways to commit to one
another that doesn't have to involve the government," Halle says. "I feel
more married in a way than I ever have in two marriages before."

No way am I going to let someone who believes marriage is just a piece of paper
and doesn't mean anything tell me to vote for someone especially when building strong
families is such a crucial issue and even Barack Obama concedes that in his campaign
Web site. The depressing part is more people have come to agree with her on this topic
because there's now more single women than married.

I think we are living in difficult times where hard choices and some sacrifices
have to be made. Oprah appeals to the "do whatever feels good in your own soul"
part of us that deters us from making those hard choices and that honestly
"improve" ourselves, communities, and the world. There's no tough love on
"The Oprah Show."

Oprah knows how to communicate to her large audience. She's proven that over
and over again with her stellar ratings. I know this weekend not too many in the
mainstream media will discussing the issues they have with Oprah because she's
likable and has a huge fan base. However, lets take the time to evaluate exactly
what she's been yapping about on her talk show all these years to largely a women
audience and has it indeed helped them?

Update: CNN has a segment of Oprah's speech. Also, Barack Obamas' campaign
Flickr account has pictures of the event.

Hugh Laurie: Just doin' a job that an American wouldn't do

I finally got to reading last Sunday's issue of Parade this morning
and I found the most absurd question and they actually gave a
response to it! Here it is:

Q. People complain about immigrants taking jobs away
from us but don’t utter a peep about all the Brits playing
Americans on TV, like Hugh Laurie on House. Why do
producers hire them?
—Elizabeth Testerman, Grand Prairie, Tex.

A. Brits work for less than American stars, who demand up to
$1 million an episode. And, when casting, producers are impressed
by a British accent, equating it with good acting, which of course it
isn’t.

Are we now so afraid of immigration we want to know why Hugh Laurie,
who I would even argue is the best television actor we got today, has a job
in America?

Maybe Hollywood should just hire American talent. Gwenyth Paltrow
is a good American actress. Oops, sorry, she now thinks she's British and
doesn't want to raise her child in America. Oh I know, they should put
Johnny Depp in more movies because he's from the United States. What's
that? He now lives in France and also thinks "America is dumb." Bad idea,
I guess.

I want to see Hugh Laurie's legal documents, stat!

Strike of fake news writers is good for real news!

Everything has an upside! So now that the writers of the "Daily Show,"
"The Tonight Show," and the like are on strike a real news show
sees their ratings rise. Now if we only get the people who write
Entertainment Tonight and other Hollywood "news" programs maybe
we will have better informed citizens! Just kidding. Where else am I going
to find out how celebrities are going to vote next year so I can blindly
follow?

It's all just a bunch of Grey!

Many believe that the most dangerous thing about television and movies
is the abundance of sexual and violent content. I agree that those type of
images can be harmful. However, I don't agree that is the most detrimental
effect of television. The ideology that is preached in these programs is what
we should pay attention to. And most of the time it's the benign scenes, the
one's without violence or sexual overtones, that reflect their true hearts.

Take for example the hit show "Grey's Anatomy." I watched the program a
couple of weeks ago and I was taken back by this scene:



Let me explain why. Bailey is telling George, who recently confessed to
his wife that he had an affair with his best friend, things are not black
or white. That right there is a philosophy. I believe it's dangerous to think
that there's no right or wrong. In George's situation there is no ambivalence.
Having an affair is wrong. There's no "gray" area! Bailey's situation, I
admit, is a bit more complicated. However, if you notice in the scene she
qualifies her actions as "a good thing." She herself defines the issue as
wrong and right. Her husband is WRONG for not understanding. She is
RIGHT is helping a little boy.

The sad thing is this is not the only show on air that teaches the philosophy of
moral relativity. In graduate school I did a paper where my group members
and I spotted many cases of this in the program "Law and Order." So my
friends it is not just the "love" scenes or acts of violence that we need to
beware of, it's the moments where they want to indoctrinate you with their
philosophy.

Look at me! I can do more than one thing at once!

I like it when research tells us the obvious, like this. I think
we all know that people use the internet while watching television.
I use to do it all the time when I had a laptop. Not anymore. Now
I have to settle for writing my blog posts while downloaded songs
on iTunes, watching a Youtube video and simultaneously reading
my favorite blog on a minimized window. It would be nice if I had
cable in my room so I can add watching the tube while blogging.
I'm really good at.....

Um, where was I at? I have a really hard time focusing sometimes
and I have no clue why. Oh yeah! I remembered what I was about
to say. I was about to say, "I'm really good at multitasking."

One issue voting

Yesterday James Dobson had a piece in The New Yorks Times
basically saying that if the major parties don't nominate a pro-life
candidate he is going to take his vote elsewhere. Also, yesterday Log
Cabin Republicans, a group more moderate in social issues, put out this
yesterday:



It perplexes me how abortion keeps on being such an important
issue in elections. I will quickly disclose my personal views on
abortion. I use to be a strong pro-lifer but not so much anymore. I still
believe abortion is immoral but I don't think it should be illegal. I don't want
us to go back to when abortions were done in unsafe conditions. Ironically,
I don't think the conservative judges in the Supreme Court want that to
happen either.

Many evangelicals, like Dobson, will absolutely not vote for a pro-choice
candidate. Understandably, they feel passionate about the issue. It seems
like you can't have a dispassionate view on abortion these days. However,
I maintain that it is not wise to be a single issue voter especially on a issue
that is not likely to change any time soon.

I want a president who is strong on terrorism and stands for fiscal responsibility.
These are dangerous times and I want a president who can deal with national
security issues most importantly. There are other social issues Christians should
also be concerned about besides abortion. Poverty and injustice are dealt with in
the Bible too. Where's the moral outrage on those issues? We can't be selective.

Going somewhat off topic for a while. Sarah Silverman believes abortion is
funny (hat tip: Hotair). Look at this:



I'll repeat what I sarcastically wrote on Hotair: I’ve noticed lately
women comics are making more abortion jokes. You know like Carlos
Mencia talks about race. Well, now women comics have to add an abortion
joke to their repertoire so when VH1 does a special on them they can say,
“I not only did jokes but I did social commentary.” I makes the silliness they
are doing seem more important. Thanks, Sarah Silverman, for your
enlightening social commentary. Here is another unfunny abortion
joke example from network television:

Amy Schumer Last Comic Standing

Add to My Profile | More Videos

Ok, wow, I made it through my first complete 'abortion' post. Hope no one
is offended.

Cold-hearted

I will be taking a show off my list of regularly watched
programs this fall. Cold Case absolutely appalled me
when I watched it this Sunday. The show revolved around
a group of teenagers in an abstinence program and one of them
gets stoned to death. Here is a good synopsis of it. And, yes, I did
watch it although I had to change the channel a couple of times
because I knew where it was headed and it wasn't good. So I'm not
complaining without even watching a second.

The whole show was absolutely ridiculous! Is this really what the
writers in Hollywood think Christians do in the real world? They
are more clueless than I thought. I must have missed a headline
about group of abstinent teenagers STONING someone. I was in
a youth group when I was teenager and took an abstinence pledge
and guess what? No one got stoned. Big shocker, huh.

These crime drama shows like to make fictitious stories to
show Christians as the ultimate hypocrites. I say 'crime drama
shows' because I've seen Law and Order and other programs
do this but not to the extent that Cold Case did. But really that's
all they (as in anti-Christian Hollywood writers) really got on their
side. Instead of showing what justice in America looks like they go for
emotional, baseless attacks on groups of people. That is the childish
arguments they are reduced. Instead of making a thoughtful argument
against abstinence programs all they come up with is 'You guys are
hypocrites so there.' It is easy to be labeled a hypocrite when you
actually believe in something.

I know people in television revel in 'shock and awe' programming.
Well, you just 'shocked and awe' me to change the channel from
CBS on Sunday nights at 9 p.m. Eastern/8 p.m. Central. So thanks
you just freed up my time to do other things :)

Fall is near! And I'm about to become pale again

Ok, so the fall television season is upon us and it's time to take
out the summer trash. In the next couple of weeks we should
be seeing the season premieres of some of our favorite shows
along with some brand spanking new programs. I'm particularly
awaiting for the shows House and Curb Your Enthusiasm to make
a return. There is also a new show, Back to You, which
looks like it might be interesting. Here is a clip:



Exit questions: So which television shows are you programming your
DVR to record? Which new shows will you be checking out?

Profane

From the Episode: House vs. God

Here is an excellent read by Ross Douthat titled 'Lost and Saved
on Television' (found via Think Christian). Douthat suggests that
'envelope pushing' television might not be necessarily a bad thing.
If Christian conservatives keep demanding PG-rated content perhaps
that material that delves deep into the issues of sin and morality
will be lost. Here is a quote from the article:

Yet religious believers have also profited in certain ways from the
crack-up of the old middlebrow, PG-rated common culture, even
if it’s sometimes hard to see the gains through the gore and exhibitionism.
This is the great paradox of twenty-first-century popular culture in
America: For all its profanity and blasphemy, the new culture arguably
takes religious issues and debates more seriously than it used to in a
more decent, less decadent era.

I see more and more shows debate the issues of religion and morality.
For example, shows like 'House' and 'Law and Order' often deal with
issues of faith and morality. Dr. House is an atheist who sees everything
in only scientific and medical terms. His professional life is great but his
personal life is a mess because of a drug problem and arrogance. He is not
happy and theists can conclude it because he rejects God. Douthat
specifically talks about the programs 'Lost,''Galactica,' and 'Sopranos.'
He writes:

Whether The Sopranos’ creator, David Chase, believes in a literal hell
I have no idea—but his show believes in it. Just as Lost and Galactica
tease out their metaphysics through hallucinations and dream sequences,
The Sopranos deals frequently in private visions—mainly Tony’s richly
detailed dreams, which are more psychological than metaphysical,
but also a pair of theologically fraught near-death experiences.

I know a lot of the television content is distasteful without any
redeemable value. But what if taking away the smut also takes
away the thought provoking television?

What is Wrong With the World?

I heard buzz about the HBO's new show Flight of the Concords
online and checked it out on HBO on Demand. It is absolutely
hilarious.

Golden Era of Television

I watched this interview with Conan O'Brien on
Charlie Rose a while back. I thought he made some
interesting points on television. O'Brien and Rose
agreed that we are living in an Golden Era of
television, we just don't know it. He said that
the quality of writing and acting has made this the
Golden Era. He points to shows like 'Lost,' 'House,"
and '24.'

I agree with him. You now see quality actors from
movies doing T.V. For example, Gary Sinise,
Keira Sedgwick, and James Woods are on
television. And it use to be if you wanted an action
based, special affect entertainment you had to go to
the movies. But now you can tune in to something like
'24,' and 'Lost,' on your HDTV for some action packed
programming. They also talked about niche programming.

I know I am biased as a television fanatic and O'Brien
is on the tele, so he has to say that. I really don't go to
the movie theater too often because I can spend those
two hours watching my favorite shows on my DVR.

With the touch of the hand

In this episode of House, the creepy
doctor gets touched by the fetus he
is about to operate on. Earlier in the
episode he refused to call the unborn
child a baby and insisted it was only
a fetus.

Rehab

This song is dedicated to Linsay Lo,
Britney Spears, Isaiah Washington,
and Mel Gibson. I think I know a place
where I can meet famous people.

American Stinkfest!

I watched American Idol last night and
80 percent of the contestants were horrible.
There were people forgetting words and some
horrible enunciating and I'm not talking about
Paula's judging. I kept on thinking the show
supposedly traveled all around the country
and auditioned thousands of people and this
is the talent they found. Really?!? Halfway
through the show I thought maybe I should
audition next near because I think I could
possibly sing better than a couple of those
"singers." And that's because I've been told I
sound like a dog howling (thanks mom).
It just fustrates me to think there is so much
talent out there who would cherish an
opportunity such as this and instead it is
given to mediocre performers.

Bill Maher says the darnest things

Earlier this week Bill Maher was on Larry
King talking about politics and talking
about his new documentary, which he
is contemplating titling "Religion is Dumb."
I have a love/hate relationship with
Bill Maher. I absolutely disagree with
everything he says and stands for.
I think he shows such disrespect for
for religious people and generally
anyone who has an opposing view than his.
But for some odd reason I still watch him
on HBO.