Ryan Osentowski – Page 14 – The Conservative Blind Guy

Polish Pool

So I wanted to get this post about 2016 written. But here’s my problem. Marty has me handcuffed to the bookcase; my bed doesn’t have a headboard. We were all set to take our relationship to a new level, but then she accidentally dropped the key and Monty swallowed it. So now, we have to wait about 24 hours for him to poop out the key before I can get loose. So I’m using dictation to sum up this past year.

The fiasco with the key seems to encapsulate 2016 very well. It’s like starting out trying to get a cheap thrill, but in the end, someone has to take a crap before you can find true relief.

Actually, 2016 held a lot of high notes for me. The Broncos won Super Bowl 50 and I became a life-long fan. It didn’t really surprise me that my loyalty would be tested so early. I knew this was gonna be a transition year, but who the hell knew we wouldn’t even make the play-offs? I guess Von Miller gets the last laugh, which will carry him all the way to the bank.

My former coworker gave me a beautiful and lovable kitty that I named, Mags. She is everything a cat owner could want. She is cuddly, uses her litterbox, doesn’t eat too much and doesn’t try to play with me when I’m sleeping. I wonder if I could train Marty with those same habits?

I also started an old-time radio podcast. For those of you who have listened, thank you. For those of you who have yet to listen, give it a try. It can’t be any worse than watching Real Mafia Housewives.

In September, I was honored to attend the marriage of my longtime friend Alicia to her husband Mark. Alicia has been through some hard times, but it really warmed my heart to witness as she and Mark gave their lives to each other before God. Life wasn’t so kind to my pal Wes, who was involved in a pedestrian vs. auto accident last April. His knee was injured and he’s still dealing with some PTSD from the encounter. He’s had about as much fun dealing with the medical and legal fall-out as a man would have taking a walk through Chicago without a bulletproof vest. Chin up, Wes. At least your Chiefs are gonna make the play-offs.

I was also honored to be elected as secretary of the Denver Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Colorado. Dan Burke is a smart guy. He knew the only way to force me to pay attention at the meetings was to make me responsible for the minutes. Does this mean I have to quit mixing Bailey’s with my coffee? I hope not.

Many of you know that I began a relationship with Marty Rahn about nine months ago. Marty has a tender heart, an agile mind, a courageous spirit and the patience of a teacher. I love her.

Sadly, this year has brought challenges for Marty. In May, she stepped into a hole at work while walking Monty and broke her foot. She had to undergo surgery to get a pin to reinforce the broken bone. During her recovery, she began to experience severe numbness and tingling in her body. After a series of tests, she was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. The M.R.I. also detected three benign tumors; two on her carotid artery and one at the base of her skull.

It is a scary time for both of us right now. For the past two days, she has been experiencing intermittent dizzy spells. Getting answers from her doctors is like trying to go bowling in a herd of elephants. She has been prescribed Gilenya and it has helped, but we fear more surgeries lie ahead. All we can do now is ask for everyone’s prayers as we continue to chart these unknown waters.

In lighter news, I was accused of sexual harassment at work. There is no punchline. It really happened. My angry feminist coworker didn’t like something I said, so she ratted me out to the boss. I consider this to be a badge of honor. In this postmodern age of Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, I think we’ve learned that sexual misconduct is actually an attribute on one’s resume. You know how in the movie Ted, when the bear keeps getting promoted every time he does something naughty at work? Well, my boss gave me a raise this year. I can only conclude that he secretly approved of what I did.

I should feel guilty for writing that, but I’ll go watch the female Ghostbusters reboot and cleanse my guilt.

Speaking of Trump, I’m not going to write a lot about the election, mostly due to the fact that I’ve already written about it ad nauseam. I will only say that it’s dispiriting to me *though not surprising) to see Democrats willfully refuse to understand why they lost the election. The combination of a fatally flawed candidate, shifting demographics and bad polling lead most people *including me) down the wrong path. I did not vote for Trump, but I accept him as our president and am glad to see that the Republican agenda will have a chance to move forward.

Politics wasn’t all bad this year. In April, I had the chance to participate in the process by attending the state Republican convention. I’ve also moved away from most talk radio and have gravitated toward conservative thinkers who express themselves through the written word. For those of you who will need a strong dose of sanity throughout the next four years, read the National Review and the Weekly Standard. Conservative stalwarts like Jonah Goldberg, Bill Kristol, Amanda Carpenter and Ben Shapiro have been beacons in an otherwise gloomy populist landscape. And for those of you who think that all politicians are bad, please follow Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse on Twitter or Facebook.

2016 saw the deaths of many celebrities. The ones that peaked my interest were Glenn Frey, Harper Lee, Nancy Reagan, Merle Haggard, Kenny Baker, (aka R2D2), Gene Wilder, Holly Dunn, Florence Henderson, John Glenn, George Michael, Carrie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds.

Special note for Antonin Scalia, who’s untimely death high-lighted the polarized D.C. electorate. I’ll see you in hell, Fidel! Trying to rationalize with Castro supporters is like trying to play a game of pool against a Pollock. You confidently walk up to the table with your pool cue in hand, only to discover that the Polack is carrying a pool noodle.

Is anyone reading this a fan of the original Law & Order series? Steven Hill, who played the first (and funniest) D.A., Adam Schiff, on that series, died this year. Is anyone reading this a fan of the cop show, Homicide? Jon Polito, who played Crosetti, the first character to die on that series, also passed away. Also, a respectful nod to the memory of Curtis Hanson, who directed one of my favorite movies, L.A. Confidential.

In the personal loss column, Nehemiah Hall succumbed to cancer last Spring. He and I weren’t close, but many of my friends cared for him. I was truly shocked and saddened at the sudden passing of Ahimsa Wishneski. She and I were forming a friendship, all be it an online one. I hope someone finds that Merle’s gift card I gave her for her CCB graduation and puts it to good use.

Another friend left Denver in the person of Beth McGarr. My pal Drew and I reconnected in a heartfelt conversation at, of all places, a casino. Robin and I have also reconnected. Drew and Robin have reconnected. Special thanks to Katy for introducing me to the Joe Pickett novel series, written by C. J. Box. Art is still the best listener ever.

Many people seem to treat 2016 as if it’s a living entity. I don’t buy it. Life is what we make it. If you want 2017 to be better than 2016, go out there and make it happen. Don’t rely on external events that are out of your control to reinforce your happiness. This is a personal challenge I make to myself as well as everyone else. Happy New Year.

Monty is sniffing me and his whiskers kind of tickle. 22 hours until the key reappears.

Wait! That’s not Monty. Oh whoa ho ho whoa!!! Marty just found the feather duster. I gotta go!

One and Done

I was listening to my favorite radio talk show the other day and the host was interviewing a firebrand atheist named David Silverman. He was touting his new book, Fighting God.

Now, look…I am not the strong Christian I once was. I believe there’s a god. I’m not an atheist or even agnostic, but I’m not entirely sure humans have the first clue as to God’s true intent. We’re just too friggin’ small and he’s too vast. I can only say that it feels very much as if God has abandoned us of late.

But this guy Silverman came on like a Sherman tank, seeking to shred every religious person under his merciless treads. The basis of his message is that religion is a lie. God is a lie. Atheism is the only real truth.

Yes, I’m wavering, but he did and said nothing to persuade me toward his cause. I couldn’t help but notice how angry the guy sounded. Think about it. Here’s a guy who puts up a billboard that says, “Make Christmas great again. Skip church.”

Atheists are the ultimate purveyors of nothing. They work harder than anyone I know to promote the fact that there is nothing waiting for us on the other side. No reward. No punishment. No retrospective of life. We are truly one and done.

No wonder this guy sounded so angry. How can you pay it forward when the road ultimately leads to nowhere? But more to the point, his tone echoed that of every other atheist I’ve ever encountered. I met a guy a few months ago at a social engagement. He never asked me about my beliefs or worldview, but he couldn’t wait to start explaining to me why America was better off if we followed the policy of a strictly secular government. His tone was no different than an evangelist preaching at my door. He was going to convince me at all cost and if I didn’t believe, I was bound for the hell of ignorance.

Look, I get it. Millennials are turning away from church in record numbers. Organized religion is a manmade construct, religion breeds violence, God is a metaphor for male dominance, bla bla bla!

Therefore, what? If not God, then what? Or who? Sorry, guys, but “It’s all a big nothing,” just doesn’t work for me either.

In one sense, I see how atheism can be comforting. If you belong to the church of no, you’re taking far less of a risk than saying yes to something. The church of no is indeed seductive. No God. No rules. No consequences. No hope.

No thanks.

E Is For Elope

The following is a guest post, submitted by Lenore from Sioux Falls. Here she is, writing from room 209 of the Castle Hotel.

I will not add any preamble or post script, except to say that I am not, nor have I ever been married. If others with more knowledge or experience would like to speak to this issue, your comments are most welcome.

Here is Lenore:

Years ago on an old blog, Ryan posted an entry titled “The top 10 lies people tell themselves.” Inspired by that entry, and my own marriage, I am now writing “The top 5 lies told to the bride and groom about their wedding day.”

Before I begin, I feel the need to make two disclaimers. The first is, I acknowledge that I am speaking in generalizations. The statements I’m about to make do not apply to all people or all weddings. The second is that I realize the tone of what I’m about to write may sound as if I don’t favor marriage. Given that I am married, nothing could be further from the truth. I do indeed favor the institution of marriage. I would be remiss, on the blog of the conservative blind guy, if I didn’t also state for the record that I’m talking about traditional marriage, between one man and one woman. I stand in awed wonder that I’ve found someone I love enough to make those vows to, and that loves me enough to make them to me. Even as I type with my wedding ring on my left hand, I have trouble rapping my mind around this. In short, this is not an anti-marriage entry. It is, however, a commentary on the darker side of wedding planning, and weddings in general. So, with all that said, here are the top five lies told to the bride and groom about their wedding day.

5. “I’ll help you with anything you need.”
While many people do want to help, most want to help with the things that are considered fun, convenient for them, or that land them in the middle of the glitz and glamour of the wedding day itself. For example, people are quite eager to go dress shopping, stand up with a couple, or take pictures. However, when the couple starts asking people to help with running needed errands before the wedding, or to assist in the bureaucratic process of changing one’s name after the wedding, most family and friends will suddenly find reasons why they are too busy and don’t have time to help after all. The reality is that these things are not fun, not convenient, and there’s no glory for the person helping. They are the inconvenient and unglamorous necessities that come with a wedding and a marriage, but which the bride and groom may need assistance with all the same.

4. “I don’t’ want anything in return for my help.”
Again, most people are well-meaning. However, most also do, consciously or not, want something in return for the support they give a couple. This is not usually related to money. Perhaps it would be easier to deal with if it were, and if thanks could be shown in the form of some cash or a gift card. Unfortunately, in return for their assistance, people usually want one of two things: public recognition, or a say in the decisions that are made surrounding the wedding. When the couple doesn’t give these things, or doesn’t give them to a person’s satisfaction, drama is likely to occur.

3. “It’s your wedding, you shouldn’t have to do all the work.”
No matter how much work a couple is able to delegate to other trusted individuals, weddings are exhausting. The exhaustion seems to start about a month before the ceremony actually happens, and is at its worst during the days before and after. Even when other people are supposed to be the ones playing host/hostess, in the end it’s the bride and groom who are still responsible for ensuring that everyone else around them remains happy, appeased, and has what they need and want.

2. “It’s your day, do things how you want them done.”
I can’t tell you how many times my now-husband and I heard this line, told someone what we wanted, and then were immediately told why that was wrong and we shouldn’t do it that way. Even when the bride and groom give their reasons why they may want something done in a specific way, there is always some well-intended person who find something to criticize about what the couple wants, and thinks they have a better suggestion. This leaves the couple with one of two choices. They can stand firm and have their day as they wish, but risk the anger or hurt feelings of family and friends when their advice is not taken. Alternatively, a couple may cave in to pressure in an effort to keep the peace and avoid the drama, but give up having “their day” as they wanted it. In the end, it’s an exercise in strategy and tactics, and picking battles on a near daily basis.

1. “It’s your day, it’s all about you.”
The wedding day is, in fact, not about the couple getting married at all. Even the bride and groom initially try to convince themselves of this one, because if recognized for the lie that it is, not nearly as many people would put themselves through the stress of planning and carrying off a wedding. Certainly society tries to convince themselves of this, in part because it’s the lie that drives America’s multi-billion dollar wedding industry. The truth is that the wedding day is about the family, friends, and acquaintances of the couple. It is done to give those people something to attend, to remember, and to talk about. (Particularly remember, as the bride and groom will likely not remember 95 percent of that day, even when they look at their pictures later.) For the couple, it is about the end result, that they are married in the eyes of God and society. A big, (or even medium-sized) ceremony/reception is not needed to achieve this result. It is, however, seemingly needed for the rest of society to view a couple as having legitimately gotten married.

As stated earlier, I am not anti-marriage. Bottom line though: Eloping is a wonderful thing that I now dearly wish I had done, and would advise any couple who wishes to avoid stress and drama to do as well!

Valse Triste

After nine years of patience, I finally saw No Country for Old Men last night.

This movie should’ve had everything for me; a crime thriller headlined by Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin, a west Texas backdrop, a murderous psychopath, an old-fashioned sheriff, a briefcase full of money and a drug deal gone bad. A recipe for happiness for a guy like me.

Sadly, I was underwhelmed. I don’t get it. The critics love it. Fans love it. Rotten Tomatoes loves it. What’s wrong with me?

It wasn’t a bad movie. I just wasn’t blown away. I didn’t feel that emotional gut punch that I get from really great movies.

When I watched The Godfather, I understood the hype immediately, and that was long before we got to the climactic bloody baptism montage scene. Same goes for The Departed. How can you hate a movie in which the final line isn’t a line at all, but rather, the spit of a silenced gun blowing a guy’s face off while a rat crawls around? I was a bit cooler toward Goodfellas, but understand why it’s considered a great movie.

But No Country for Old Men was just meh for me. I understand the themes of destiny versus chance as symbolized by the fateful coin toss that serves as the killer’s trademark. But I found Chigurh to be underwhelming. Maybe it’s because I’ve been spoiled by other fictional villains such as Walter White, Tony Soprano and Lorne Malvo.

Malvo makes me think of Fargo, which is also haled as another crime classic by the Coen brothers. I didn’t care for that one either, though I love the TV series knock-off, which is a wonderful example of the student surpassing the teacher.

Maybe the Coen brothers are the problem, or rather, my problem is with the Coen brothers. Sometimes, the best director or writer in the world just can’t make that emotional connection. Steven Spielberg is that way. Whether it’s Indiana Jones or Jaws or even Saving Private Ryan, I just don’t feel that emotional hook that is required of good storytelling. Private Ryan is wonderful at simulating wartime combat, but as a story, it’s kind of thin.

Anyway, I’m done now. Except to say that I also saw Sicario this weekend. Now there’s a film that does indeed live up to the hype. The first 2/3 of it is a standard story about a naive FBI agent plunged into the dark world of the drug culture along our southern border, but the climax elevates everything that came before it.

I guess one out of two ain’t bad. I wonder if Chigurh would agree.

Alligator Dilemma

The official definition of the word, paradox, from dictionary.com:

Paradox: “A statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory.”

If that definition has your head spinning, let me illustrate it through example; said example being this past election.

Let’s start with a bunch of angry people in 2008 who feel betrayed by George W. Bush, who operates under the Republican banner. He calls himself a conservative, but he initiates a massive government bail-out of the private sector through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, thereby rejecting free market principles.

Then, Obama is elected in 2009 and pushes through a massive new reform of healthcare. This leads to the rise of a loosely-formed grass roots movement of conservative/libertarian opposition known as, The Tea Party.

The Tea Party proves to be influential in the mid-term elections of 2010 and 2014. This gives them a sense of power, even when they fail to help secure the presidency in 2012 with a so-called, “Establishment candidate,” in the person of Mitt Romney.

However, the movement does give rise to reliably solid conservatives in the form of Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Deb Fischer; all of whom prove that conservatism and minorities can go together.

Yet, when a few of these Tea Party favorites try for their shot at the White House in 2015, they are blocked by a man who is demonstrably not conservative.

Donald Trump has been all over the political map. He’s been registered as a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent and as the head of the Reform Party. The Tea Party, founded on rock solid constitutional principles, invests in a man who has none. He has given large sums of money to both Republicans and Democrats. When asked about it he says, “I’m a businessman. I make deals. It’s what I do.”

Trump’s remedy for a porous border, a sluggish economy and the terror threat is simple; “I alone can fix it.” This suggests that the powers of the presidency are akin to those of a king. Obama’s opponents resented his abuse of the executive pen, but now, they squeal with delight at the prospect of the former star of The Apprentice, who seems to have no knowledge of how Washington D.C. works, but who is determined to fix it with a snap of his fingers.

“We’re sick of politicians! We want an outsider!” cry the masses of the disaffected.

And why do people dislike politicians? Very simple. Because they promise the moon, then go to D.C. and they don’t deliver. So, Trump, the grand outsider, plays the politician’s game on steroids by making a series of promises without having any inkling of how he will deliver them.

“We’re gonna make America great again!”

This suggests that America isn’t already great. Up to this point, liberals are usually the ones who claim that America is inherently flawed and that we are not, nor have we ever been a great nation. Conservatives are more likely to champion America as an exceptional experiment in freedom.

Yet, somehow, the two philosophies have flip-flopped. Conservatives claim that Obama has made America not so great, even though we only had two years of total Democrat domination in D.C. Liberals counter Trump’s signature slogan with sudden passion; “America is already great!”

“I’m gonna build a wall and Mexico will pay for it!”

When asked how, Trump bobs and weaves, muttering about tariffs and the confiscation of financial transactions, none of which are rooted in conservative philosophy.

“I’m gonna bring jobs back to this country!”

When pressed on the specifics, he meanders on and on about non sequiturs like China, NAFTA and the evils of free trade in general. Free trade has always been a marketplace principle championed by conservatives.

“I am the law & order candidate.”

All we’re missing is the “duh-duh!” sound from the TV show. He is blatantly pandering to the cops and military who insure our national security, and who comprise a substantial portion of the Republican voting bloc. Another political ploy from the fellow who is not a politician.

Yet, he proposes solutions to threats that would never hold up in a court of law, such as the banning of those who practice Islam from our country. He suggests mass deportations, not only of illegal immigrants, but of their natural born citizen families as well, which is blatantly unconstitutional.

When planted protesters make trouble at his rallies, he eggs on his followers. “Knock the crap out of them. I’ll pay your legal fees, I promise.”

All the while, he sings the praises of Vladimir Putin, leader of an oppressive regime who once fought against the U.S. in the Cold War; a war won by a Republican president.

Despite his obvious shortcomings, his primary supporters remain undeterred.

“He’s a businessman who will get things done.”

Yet, he refuses to release his tax returns that would show us his financial successes and failures. When asked about them he says, “I’m under audit. I will release them when the audit is complete.” An audit does not prevent him from disclosing his tax records, but no one cares.

“Trump will pick the best people!”

Oh, really? His first campaign manager, Cory Lewandowski, is arrested for assaulting a female journalist at a Trump rally. They lie about it and smear her, even though the assault is irrefutably caught on video. Trump claims he will stand by Lewandowski on grounds of loyalty, but quietly fires him later.

His second manager, Paul Manafort, steps down when his suspicious business ties to Russia threaten to become an embarrassment to the campaign.

His third manager, Steve Bannon, is the executive editor of the website, Breitbart.com; a site that was once a bastion of mainstream conservatism, but which has drifted toward the extreme Alt-Right in the wake of the death of its founder, Andrew Breitbart.

“The Donald is a fighter. We need a fighter in Washington.”

And oh, the fights he wages.

He calls Jeb Bush, “Low energy.” He makes fun of Marco Rubio’s penis size. He ridicules Carly Fiorina’s facial appearance. He questions Ted Cruz’s citizenship and accuses his father of having a hand in the Kennedy assassination. He calls Hillary Clinton, “Crooked Hillary,” and hints that he’d like to see her assassinated by the pro-2nd Amendment crowd.

Trump’s propensity for personal attacks over policy differences leads us to another grand paradox. For decades, Republicans have fended off spurious charges of racism, sexism, homophobia and nativism from the Democrats and the mainstream media. Genuinely decent candidates such as George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney have been unfairly tarred and feathered by the liberal establishment. So the GOP counters it by nominating a man who embodies the very worst Republican stereotypes in grandiose fashion.

Trump launches his campaign by painting all illegal immigrants with a broad brush by calling them drug dealers and rapists. He maligns a female journalist after she asks him a question in a debate that he doesn’t like by targeting her menstrual cycle. He mocks a disabled reporter at a rally. He picks a fight with a Gold Star family of Arabic descent. He questions the objectivity of the judge in the lawsuit against Trump University by targeting his Mexican heritage. He puts out a campaign video with anti-Semitic overtones just days before the general election. And worst of all, a hot mic video surfaces in which he openly brags about grabbing and kissing women without their express consent and getting away with it because of his celebrity status.

There’s only one claim Trump makes during the course of his campaign that seems to hold water.

“We’re gonna win! We’re gonna win big! We’re gonna win so much, you’ll be sick of winning.”

This is certainly true in my case. I was sick of Trump before he won a single primary. And yet, he keeps winning state after state, knocking down his opponents like bowling pins. He goes on to win the Republican nomination in Cleveland with the help of the GOP machine, who intimidates the Free the Delegates movement. He wins the endorsements of most of his enemies, including former hold-out Ted Cruz, after attacking Cruz’s family on social media. And on November 8, he wins the general election, vanquishing Hillary Clinton for a second time.

Why did he win? Despite claims to the contrary, it is not because he was overwhelmingly popular. In fact, it appears that Hillary won the popular vote, while Trump won the Electoral College. After all, Trump has the highest disapproval numbers in presidential memory.

Trump won because Hillary herself was a paradoxical candidate.

It was long assumed in leftist circles that Hillary was entitled to the presidency after Obama vacated the office. Liberals championed her on feminist grounds; the glass ceiling and all that. The fact that she almost certainly enabled her husband, a known sexual predator, was of no consequence. Like the very Trump supporters they disparaged, high-minded liberals bought into the classic political trope; the ends justify the means.

Her years of public service experience would pave the rest of the way. Sure, she had plenty of baggage. Benghazi was troublesome. She wasn’t particularly warm or likeable. Despite an occasional coughing fit, she’s in perfect health.

Never mind that pesky private Email server. Comey cleared her. We love him! No, wait. The investigation’s on again. That bastard Comey is trying to influence the election! Wait…Comey cleared her again. We love him!

No matter. Trump was so boorish that she could easily take him out.

But Hillary did not engender passion among her followers, particularly the millennial crowd. They preferred Bernie Sanders, a 74-year-old socialist who looked like he would be more at home at a Starbucks on a Wednesday afternoon than on a debate stage.

Hillary couldn’t deny the impact that Sanders was having on the campaign, so in true Clintonian fashion, she colluded with the DNC (who is supposed to be neutral) to take down Sanders. She didn’t count on WikiLeaks, who exposed the collusion before the Democratic National Convention.

Yet, Hillary seemed predestined for the White House, gaining the nomination and, more significantly, the endorsement of her former rival. But she did not gain an enthusiastic following, as did The Donald. In the end, she couldn’t do what her predecessor had done by turning out the youth vote.

Post election data seems to confirm that voter turn-out was at a 20-year low in the general contest. Did millennials punish Hillary by staying home? If so, they ultimately punished themselves in yet another paradox.

Many pollsters predicted that Democrats would not only win the White House, but they would take back the Senate as well. This strategy of protest by abstinence backfired. By choosing apathy over action, the Bernie crowd insured that the Supreme Court will see at least one more judge in the Scalia mold. Even if President Trump waffles on his list of conservative judges, the Republican-controlled Senate will not confirm a nominee who is overtly leftist, or even moderate.

This is why we have a system with checks and balances; the same system that prevented Republicans from repealing Obamacare and Obama from replacing Scalia with a liberal judge. This is the same system that angered the low information voters that Rush doesn’t talk about, those who thought that shutting down the government was the best way of achieving leverage.

Mention of Rush makes me think of the media, who played no small paradoxical role in this election.

On one hand, you have traditional print medium such as the New York Times, major TV networks such as NBC and CNN, and weighty internet sites such as The Huffington Post and Politico.

All of these media outlets lean leftward, though they make a pretense at objectivity. All of them covered the GOP primaries with feigned shock and outrage at Trump’s bad behavior, but they did it with a glint in their eye. It’s the same type of glint an avid storm-chaser might have as he watches a tornado glide right over his house and demolish his neighbor’s. He seems horrified, but he’s got his cell phone in his clenched fist, capturing the catastrophe on video, which will appear on his Facebook page tomorrow.

The media loved watching Trump take a wrecking ball to the GOP establishment. They all assumed that Hillary would coast to victory in November. Bernie Sanders was a happy distraction for them, but only a distraction.

After the Cleveland convention, they brought out the big guns.

DONALD TRUMP IS A SEXUAL PREDATOR!!!

DONALD TRUMP DIDN’T PAY HIS TAXES IN THE ‘90’S!!!

VLAD PUTIN LOVES THE DONALD TOO MUCH!!!

OH…SHIT!!!

DONALD TRUMP JUST WON THE PRESIDENCY!!!

This blog proves that I am lousy at predictions, but what the hell. I’ll make another one. The media’s next big push will be:

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE MUST GO!!! EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT!!!

Yet another paradox. If the Electoral College is abolished, people in New York and San Francisco will be happy, but those in Harlan, Kentucky and Fremont, Nebraska will no longer be represented. You think America is divided now? If the Electoral College falls and America becomes a pure Democracy, this year will look like a garden tea by comparison.

On the other side of the equation, you have conservative media.

Fox News is the big E at the top of the chart. Early on in the primaries, Trump went after Megyn Kelly with guns blazing. Roger Ailes defended her and many other staffers came to her defense, but after a while, all of them (sans Megyn and Bret Baier) became Trump defenders, long before the primaries end.

Trump’s biggest cheerleader by far was Sean Hannity, who hosted interviews with The Donald almost nightly. This is unsurprising, since Hannity has always been the dimmest bulb on an otherwise bright tree.

Bill O’Reilly, who proudly hales from his self-proclaimed, “No-spin Zone,” soft-peddles Trump’s own brand of spin whenever he appears on The Factor. O’Reilly’s lowest moment comes when he suggests that Judge Curiel should recuse himself from the Trump University lawsuit, after Trump questions his impartiality due to his Mexican heritage.

Chris Wallace, who questioned Trump sharply in early debates, soon glad-hands The Donald on Fox News Sunday, punctuating interviews with such assurances as, “You’re gonna like this last question, Mr. Trump. I promise.” In fairness, Wallace was far and away the most even-handed of the moderators between Trump and Clinton during the general election debates.

After the dawn of the primaries, FNC and the other networks were quickly flooded by scores of Trump interpreters. These were people who felt compelled to visit the various news/talk programs and explain what Trump (who always tells it like it is) really meant to say. Such apologists included Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Ben Carson. The most striking interpreter was former Secretary of Education, Bill Bennett, who once wrote a tome called, The Book of Virtues.

Sidebar: It won’t be surprising to find many of these interpreters in future cabinet positions.

Then, there was talk radio.

It gives me no pleasure to write this next part, because I was a dittohead up until October of last year when it became clear that Rush Limbaugh was no longer the, “Doctor of Democracy,” or, “America’s Truth Detector.

I appreciate the fact that Rush has never endorsed a Republican candidate. I appreciate the fact that he did not want to alienate a loyal segment of his audience by attacking Trump. I appreciate the fact that he has been honest when he says that his first objective is to part his listeners from their money, which is a clever way of saying that he’s in radio to sell advertising.

I also used to appreciate the fact that Rush was the most vocal national advocate of conservatism for almost three decades. For me (and many other listeners), conservatism and Trump just don’t mix. I believe that Rush would have been perfectly in character if he’d gone after Trump the same way he went after Ross Perot in 1992.

In fairness, I think Rush was a stealth backer of Ted Cruz for a while, but he saw the writing on the wall. Unfortunately, by contorting himself in an attempt not to alienate one segment of his audience, he alienated purists like me.

For me, the death blow came to my inner dittohead when Rush told an angry caller, “I never took him seriously on this!” He was referring to Trump’s stated plan to deport illegal immigrants along with their American-born families.

Thanks for 25 years of informative entertainment, Rush. See ya.

Rush’s imitators such as Laura Ingraham, Mike Gallagher and Eric Mataxis leapt aboard the Trump Train without a backward glance. Others such as Hugh Hewitt, Dennis Prager and Mark Levin were more reluctant, but ultimately climbed aboard as well.

The only two hold-outs were Glenn Beck and Michael Medved, though both have understandably pledged their support to President Elect Trump in the last 24 hours.

All of these talkers once stood together with conservative thinkers such as Bill Kristol, Jonah Goldberg and Andrew McCarthy, forming a last ditch between conservatism and the ever-encroaching movement of liberal populism embodied by President Obama. But the post Trump era saw a fracture that widened until it de-evolved into a budding civil war, the full bloom of which was stayed only by the electoral result.

I don’t even want to address the giant paradox of the pro-Trump Christian movement. It makes my head ache and my heart cry. Sufficed to say, folks like Jerry Falwell Jr., Franklin Graham and James Dobson will have a lot of explaining to do to the big man when they get upstairs. But then…won’t we all?

In spite of, or because of, all of these various paradoxes, Trump won. In two months, he will be the 45th president of the United States. Then, all of America will witness the ultimate paradox. The man who promised to, “Drain the swamp,” will become its biggest alligator. Will he be effective, or will he be impeached? We’ll see.

Another irony…the slogan, “Drain the swamp,” was pirated from the Democrats. They used it back in 2006 when they recaptured Congress during George W. Bush’s second term.

As for me, I am now living my own paradox. I was part of the Never Trump movement and I stayed true to my conscience. I voted third-party two days ago. But now, I will support President Trump and the Republican coalition. It is yet another irony that the Republican and Democrat establishment, long derided by Trump supporters, may be what saves our country if Trump proves to be as volatile in the Oval Office as he has been on the campaign trail.

In the meantime, I believe that our country is going to be okay. Right now, reality looks a bit like a Rod Serling morality play, and I’m waiting for the twist ending. Until the eerie music kicks in, all we can do is live and laugh at our imperious leftist coworkers who are still crying two days later.

Sidebar: According to my friend Amy, that comment about imperious coworkers was a jab. Yeah…it kind of was. But there’s more to it.

Over a year ago, two of them sat in the kitchen at my workplace and prayed that Trump would be the Republican nominee. “We want Trump to win so we can keep the White House,” one of them laughed.

How’s that working out for ya, ladies? They wanted Trump to win, but now, he won.

Paradox.

One of them has been out sick all this week. Is she really sick, or is she spending her nights disrupting traffic on I-25? We may never know.

And yet, I can’t enjoy the full irony as much as I should, because I think we’ve all lost something along the way.

Still, when the big picture looks crappy, all we have in life are small pleasures. So, I’ll be out back with a cigar in one hand and a vial of Lisinopril in the other, waiting for America to become great again.

Ho! Lee! Cow!

“I don’t want to be a killjoy, but it’s been my experience that it’s always safer to bet against the Cubs.”

That is what I tweeted a week ago last Monday. Now, I have to eat my words, and I couldn’t be happier!

I’ve always been a casual baseball fan. As a kid, my family supported the Mets because our uncle was a scout for them. Our local radio station carried the Royals.

As an adult, I lived in Lincoln for 14 years and I knew a lot of Cubs fans, but I didn’t care. I moved to Denver nine years ago and have been to more than a few Rockies games, but I’m not passionate about them.

Having said that, I admire the dedicated loyalty of Cubs fans everywhere. To paraphrase Eddie Vedder, Cubs supporters are not fair weather fans, but foul weather fans.

They’re people like my pal Amy B, who always wore a Cubs T-shirt when the weather got nice. I watched a lot of the competition between Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire in 1998 on her living room floor. Or her Uncle Ray, a school teacher who took a day off every year for the first Cubs game of the season

Or my buddy Wes, who was more interested in the Cubs match-up against the Marlins that night at Applebee’s in 2003. I was more interested in guzzling Long Island ice teas and flirting with some girl or other.

Wes was perfectly in character when he dragged Amy M and I to a Cubs game when we visited Chicago over Labor Day weekend of 2007. The Cubs won that day and I affectionately chuckled at the fans who stayed around and sang, “Go Cubs, Go!”

Then, there’s my folks. I’d like to think that they would have been Cubs fans if not for family loyalty. Whatever the case, their association with Jim Hendry brought them around in the early 2000’s. I texted Mom the other night that I didn’t think the Cubs would win. Her response was classic Mom: “Shame on you!”

As an aside, I would’ve tried much harder to kiss Mr. Hendry’s ass that night he came to dinner at our house if I’d known he was gonna turn into a baseball big shot.

Even those Chicagoans who are not Cubs fans can’t help but be impacted. My coworker Matt, for instance. He’s a White Sox fan. I asked him if he was stoked about a possible Cubs victory yesterday and, in his trademark flat Chicago tone, he stated, “I’m indifferent.”

And yet, we’re having lunch today from a place called, Mustard’s Last Stand, which serves Chicago-style hot dogs.

I was pleased to see the Cubs win last night. I love the fact that we have back-to-back Midwestern championships. But this victory isn’t for me. I’m just the guy who occasionally had a game on in the background.

This is for Wes, Amy B, Uncle Ray, Mom and Dad, Jim Hendry and all the thousands of long-suffering fans who took the jokes and the affectionate contempt in the name of something bigger than themselves. They stuck with their Cubbies year after disappointing year, but they kept coming back. If that isn’t love, you tell me what is.

So, congratulations to the Chicago Cubs, 2016 World Series champions. And congratulations to their fans. 108 years is a long time.

“IT MIGHT BE…IT COULD BE…IT IS!!!”

By the way, did Steve Bartman ever come out of hiding?

Everybody Lies

One of my favorite entries from the old blog was titled, “The top 10 Lies People Tell.” There was no official study taken for this compilation; only my life experience served for the parameters.

Here, as best as I can remember, are the 10 lies with very abridged explanations.

By the way, lest you think I make these proclamations from an elevated position, I’m as guilty as the rest of you for propagating many of these lies, especially numbers 10 and three.

10. “I will pay you back.”: Everyone uses it and no one ever means it. It’s why we have a crushing national debt, why credit card companies make a killing and why your best friend secretly resents you after five years of waiting.

9. “I do.” If people really stopped and reflected on the meaning of these two simple words and the vows that go with them, the divorce rate would not be at 50 percent and professional florists and photographers would have to take up panhandling to supplement their income.

8. “I don’t want to date you because I don’t want to ruin our friendship.”: A lie commonly told to men by women when they are just not attracted to him enough to take the next step.

7. “It’s what the people want.”: This lie rests at the foundation of every honey-coated untruth that drips from the forked tongue of politicians, activists, false prophets and social architects. What they really mean is, “It’s what will give me more power.”

6. “It’s not you…it’s me.”: A lie commonly told to women by men in the course of a break-up. What they are really thinking is, It’s not me…it’s you.

5. “I don’t have a favorite child.”: A lie commonly told to children by their parents. It is usually followed by the compounding lie, “Parents just love each child differently.”

4. “Violence never solves anything.”: Think about this lie the next time you see President Barack Obama on television, and realize that he might very well be picking your cotton for you if it weren’t for violence. Or maybe we’d all be eating chicken teriyaki with chopsticks. Or English tea would be a hell of a lot more expensive. Get the picture?

3. “I’m sorry.”: Usually said when someone who committed a wrong merely wants to smooth over the hurt feelings of the injured party without really feeling regret for what they did.

2. “I don’t judge.”: This lie is my biggest pet peeve. Everyone judges. We can’t help it. As human beings, we make dozens of judgments every day. We’re wired that way. It’s what we do with those judgments after they are made that really counts. I don’t give a damn how non-judgmental you are. If you come home after a hard day of work and find your wife shagging the grocery delivery boy on the kitchen table…you’re gonna judge her.

1. “I love you.”: The three most over-used, misused words in the English language. People use it as a mask for lust, envy, control, manipulation, fear, violence and even hate. Parents, children, spouses, friends and even leaders use it without truly understanding it’s deeper meaning.
I posted this abridged entry to Facebook a year ago. The longer entry, which is now gone, was written sometime in 2011. If I’d known then what I know now, we could’ve added two more lies to the top 10 for the sheer number of times we’ve heard them over the past year:

“I’m gonna build a wall and Mexico is gonna pay for it!”

And…

“I thought C stood for Clinton.”

I’m paraphrasing that second one, but you get my point.

I’m done now. Thanks for reading this. Love you guys.

When I Figure Out the Ballot, Will I be Too Old to Care?

Last Saturday, we were honored to have a guest speaker at our NFB Denver chapter meeting. She was a rep from the League of Women Voters. She seemed like a kindly, gentle soul who was very genuine. She reminded me a lot of my friend Deb, sans the squash soup.

She was there to outline the many different proposed amendments, propositions and other items that will appear in our local ballot in three weeks. This is a tradition that has occurred for many years between the local NFB and the League of Women Voters.

She began her speech by saying, “I was here once before and I made a boo-boo. I used the word, see.”

Immediately, a dozen members tried to console her, But our assurances did not seem to assuage her fears. Several times throughout her presentation, she tripped over the word, “see,” pausing self-consciously to say, “Oops! I did it again.”

I figured that someone with more gravitas would buttonhole her after the meeting and have a friendly, enlightening chat with her.

As it happened, I was leaving and she held the door for me. I thanked her for sacrificing her Saturday, told her I enjoyed her presentation very much and then I asked her, “Has anyone talked to you about the word, see, yet?”

“No,” she said, sounding genuinely confused.

Batter up!

I proceeded to explain to her that most blind people don’t have a problem with words like, “See,” “Look,” or “Sight.” I told her that the word, “See,” doesn’t merely mean to view something with one’s eyes. It also connotes a general perception or understanding of a concept or point. “I see what you’re saying,” or “Look at the facts.”

I further explained that most blind people would notice her awkward attempts to steer around the terms more than they would take note of her use of them as part of a smooth presentation.
I told her that none of us were offended in the least by her use of such words and I wanted to make sure she did not leave thinking she had ruffled any feathers. She seemed to see my point.

Then she said, “Look at the sky. It’s so blue today. Oh gosh! I’m sorry! I did it again!”

*sigh*

Oh well. She has decades of misconceptions to overcome.

So for all of our sighted friends, please don’t police your speech around blind people. Most of us don’t give a damn and the ones who do are the ones who have the real problem.

Stick to the important issues, like banning Halloween costumes from college campuses because they signify cultural appropriation. Next year, I’m gonna go as a sighted person and see if anyone gets offended.

It’s Not Funny

I promised not to comment on the election in this blog until November 9. That still goes. But let me put one toe over the line.

I heard the infamous Trump tape. I will let all of you make your own judgements about The Donald. I will only say that, if any of you were surprised by this latest revelation, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m sure there’s more to come.

What I really want to talk about is sexual assault.

I’ve known many women in my life. Many of these women have been victims of sexual assault; that is, the unwanted sexual advances or contact from either men or women.

I’ve known women who were abused by their friends, boyfriends, husbands, authority figures such as bosses or coaches, strangers, or worst of all, by their relatives. The impact of this trauma is nothing less than heartbreaking. It never strikes women in the same way.

Some of them lose their basic sense of self-worth and believe that the only way they can relate to men is to have sex with them. Other women suppress their sex drive entirely. Some learn to hate all men.

Some women battle depression or other mood disorders for years afterward. Some go into deep denial and pretend it never happened. Some women want to talk about it. Some don’t. Some talk about it too much. And some women choose to go on a long, painful journey that leads to healing and recovery.

Some women have chosen to come forward, either privately to trusted friends or family, or publicly by exposing their abusers. The women who come forward are sometimes believed, sometimes not. Often, their revelations lead to fractures within families and friendships that never heal. This is why most women who are molested choose to stay silent. It’s just easier.

Don’t get me wrong…I’m far from a feminist who thinks that every woman has the right to be believed. I am firmly in favor of due process and the constitutional guarantee of innocent until proven guilty.

Whatever the case, sexual assault is not a joking matter. It’s not funny. Any man who would find humor in it doesn’t have a mother, a daughter, a sister, a friend or a coworker who has survived sexual assault.

One defense I’ve heard over the past 72 hours is, “It’s no big deal. All men talk like this from time to time.”

That is flatly, patently false! I’ve said and done many things in my life of which I’m not proud, but rape jokes are not part of that. Moreover, most of the men I’ve known over my life would not joke about such a subject. I am hard pressed to imagine my father joking or laughing about rape or sexual advances of any sort.

This election really has brought out the worst in our country, not the least of which is abject hypocrisy on both sides.

For those of you supporting Hillary, I suggest you study the term, “Enabling.” Those who enable sexual predators are little better than the predators themselves. If you want to call yourself a feminist and brag about the first female president, think long and hard about Bill Clinton’s victims. I’m looking at you, Ms. Albright and Ms. Pelosi.

As for you Trump supporters, many of you were around during Bill Clinton’s era. Why is it that character no longer matters? What makes Trump so much better than Slick Willie? I’m looking at you, Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Limbaugh.

Finally, to any man or woman who has been sexually assaulted, I won’t presume to tell you how to feel. I won’t presume to tell you what you should do. The only thing I will do is beg you to please share your burden with someone you can trust. Don’t go through it alone.

D’oh!

I was recently on a long car trip with some friends when I was suddenly alerted to an aspect of my personality that I never knew existed. One of them told me that I’m a nerd.

I balked at this characterization at first. I’ve never thought of myself as a nerd. Then, a few days later, I learned of the existence of a new book by TV critics Alan Sepinwall and Matt Zoller Seitz. It is called, TV (The Book.) It is a listing of the top 100 American TV shows of all time.

Once my paycheck permitted it, I ran right out and bought an unabridged audio copy.

So now, in my glorious TV nerdiness, here is the complete listing of the top 100 TV shows, according to these two critics.

Preliminaries:

The shows they selected are only scripted dramas and comedies. No variety shows like Saturday Night Live, news shows such as 60 Minutes, talk shows such as Oprah, etc.

With only a couple of exceptions, no shows currently on the air were included, such as The Big Bang Theory and Game of Thrones. They figure that series like South Park have been around long enough so that the true measure of the show can be accurately judged.

Sorry, Jim Henson. They chose to avoid children’s programming, promising that a separate book will follow at some point. The animated programs chosen are intended for both kids and adults, or in one case, adults only.

The shows are judged and ranked on the basis of six categories, with a point score of 10 maximum per category, per author. The six categories are: innovation, influence, consistency, performance, storytelling and peak.

Shows that last one season or less were considered, though they were penalized with lesser point values.

And now…the list as ranked from greatest to least:

1. The Simpsons (1989-present)
2. The Sopranos (1999-2007)
3. The Wire (2003-2009)
4. Cheers (1983-1993)
5. Breaking Bad (2008-2013)
6. Mad Men (2007-2015)
7. Seinfeld (1989-1998)
8. I Love Lucy (1951-1957)
9. Deadwood (2004-2006)
10. All in the Family (1971-1979)
11. M*A*S*H (1972-1983)
12. Hill Street Blues (1981-1987)
13. The Shield (2001-2008)
14. The Twilight Zone (1959-1964)
15. Arrested Development (2003-2006, 2013)
16. The Larry Sanders Show (1992-1998)
17. The Honeymooners (1955-1956)
18. Louie (2010-2015)
19. The Mary Tyler Moore Show (1970-1977)
20. The X-Files (1993-2002)
21. Curb Your Enthusiasm (2000-2011)
22. SpongeBob SquarePants (1999-present)
23. Twin Peaks (1990-1991)
24. Lost (2004-2010)
25. Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997-2003)
26. Freaks and Geeks (1999-2000)
27. My So-Called Life (1994-1995)
28. Oz (1997-2003)
29. The Dick Van Dyke Show (1961-1966)
30. Friday Night Lights (2006-2011)
31. NYPD Blue (1993-2005)
32. Frasier (1993-2004)
33. Homicide: Life on the Street (1993-1999)
34. Battlestar Galactica (2003-2009)
35. In Treatment (2008-2010)
36. South Park (1997-present)
37. The West Wing (1999-2006)
38. Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman (1976-1977)
39. The Andy Griffith Show (1960-1968)
40. The Cosby Show (1984-1992)
41. Moonlighting (1985-1989)
42. Taxi (1978-1983)
43. East Side/West Side (1963-1964)
44. Hannibal (2013-2015)
45. ER (1994-2009)
46. Parks and Recreation (2009-2015)
47. Roseanne (1988-1997)
48. 30 Rock (2006-2013)
49. The Bob Newhart Show (1971-1978)
50. Malcolm in the Middle (2000-2006)
51. Miami Vice (1984-1989)
52. The Office (2005-2013)
53. St. Elsewhere (1982-1988)
54. Community (2009-2015)
55. The Golden Girls (1985-1992)
56. Police Squad! (1982)
57. 24 (2001-2010, 2014)
58. The Defenders (1961-1965)
59. Gunsmoke (1955-1975)
60. Sex and the City (1998-2004)
61. Star Trek (1966-1969)
62. Firefly (2002)
63. Law & Order (1990-2010)
64. Maude (1972-1978)
65. The Rockford Files (1974-1980)
66. China Beach (1988-1991)
67. Enlightened (2011-2013)
68. Everybody Loves Raymond (1996-2005)
69. The Wonder Years (1988-1993)
70. Barney Miller (1975-1982)
71. Frank’s Place (1987-1988)
72. It’s Garry Shandling’s Show (1986-1990)
73. The Jack Benny Program (1950-1965)
74. Justified (2010-2015)
75. The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show (1959-1964)
76. Thirtysomething (1987-1991)
77. Columbo (1971-1978, 1989-2003)
78. Friends (1994-2004)
79. Futurama (1999-2003, 2008-2015)
80. The Outer Limits (1963-1965)
81. Northern Exposure (1990-1995)
82. Batman (1966-1968)
83. King of the Hill (1997-2009)
84. Veronica Mars (2004-2007)
85. Cagney & Lacey (1981-1988)
86. EZ Streets (1996-1997)
87. Gilmore Girls (2000-2007)
88. Six Feet Under (2001-2005)
89. Sports Night (1998-2000)
90. Wiseguy (1987-1990)
91. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993-1999)
92. Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1995)
93. Boardwalk Empire (2010-2014)
94. NewsRadio (1995-1999)
95. Picket Fences (1992-1996)
96. Scrubs (2001-2010)
97. WKRP in Cincinnati (1978-1982)
98. How I Met Your Mother (2005-2014)
99. Soap (1977-1981)
100. Terriers (2010)

Reactions:

I have always leaned toward television dramas over comedy. Many of my comments on individual programs will focus on dramatic fare. This is why I don’t have much to say about Andy Griffith, Seinfeld or The Office. M*A*S*H is an exception and you can find more detailed thoughts on it in an earlier entry.

The only animated stuff I occasionally watch is cartoons from my childhood; The Flintstones, Scooby-Doo, The Transformers, etc.

Sepinwall and Zoller Seitz were smart enough to acknowledge the absurdity of ranking art from the start. In terms of objectivity or long-lasting substance, the contents of this volume amounts to little more than bathroom reading.

They also acknowledge that some of the shows made the list merely because they have a soft spot for them. Thus, they know their rankings and opinions will make a lot of people mad. So, since they already put the shoes on their own feet, allow me to lace them up.

As you browse the list, you’ll notice that modern shows score higher. I would define “modern” as 1990 to the present. The essays that accompany each entry tend to be lengthier and evoke more passion from the authors when the show is more recent. This is not a coincidence. Both Sepinwall and Zoller Seitz have been critiquing these shows for decades. They are human beings with a certain worldview. Therefore, they tend to gravitate toward shows that espouse a more post modern worldview, thereby validating their biases.

In Sepinwall’s case, his apparent impartiality may be coming from a more crystallized place. Four years ago, he wrote a book called, “The Revolution Was Televised,” in which he chronicled the rise of 12 TV programs that changed the modern television landscape. Unsurprisingly, 11 of 12 shows made the top 50 in this list. To that end, he interviewed 11 of the 12 showrunners, including David Chase (The Sopranos), David Simon (The Wire), Matthew Weiner (Mad Men) and David Milch (Deadwood). In fact, after the controversial finale of The Sopranos, David Chase granted only one interview. Guess who won the prize.

Can you really be objective about a show’s placement in a historical context when you’ve had coffee and chatted it up with a showrunner? The reader will have to be the judge.

The Simpsons as the best show of all time?! Really!? I was never a fan so I can’t comment on the particulars, but I do know that The Simpsons offers critical commentary on much of modern American life. Such criticisms are tame compared to South Park and Family Guy, but they are there nonetheless.

I am, however, thoroughly familiar with The Sopranos and The Wire. Aside from featuring excellent storytelling, both series offer a mostly bleak outlook on the American experience.

At its heart, The Sopranos offers a not-so-subtle indictment of excess; a failing that David Chase seems to view as uniquely American. Never mind that the story is told from the point of view of members of the mafia; a subculture that is undeniably criminal in our society. In Chase’s jaded view, the harsh truth about American hypocrisy and materialism still holds. The series finale is called, “Made in America,” a title that is not accidental. Nothing David Chase does is accidental, including the infamous black screen that still causes consternation amongst Sopranos fans to this day.

The Wire is a show about failure; specifically, the failure of institutions as reflected in America’s futile war on drugs. It was also a thinly-veiled commentary on the Iraq War and the post 9/11 war on terror. The title of the third season finale is, “Mission Accomplished,” which was a jab at President George W. Bush’s willfully misunderstood speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003.

If I seem contrarian in my own critique of the critics, I don’t mean to be. I loved The Sopranos and still find it infinitely rewatchable. I respect The Wire more than I like it. If the former had claimed the top spot, I wouldn’t have griped at all. The latter would have elicited more skepticism from me, though no surprise.

Then, we get to Cheers. I didn’t watch it in the ‘80’s, but I remember many adults constantly discussing it. My folks, my teachers, friends of my folks, babysitters…even my grandma loved the show. I could have swallowed Cheers as the best show of all time before The Simpsons.

This brings up the issue of, “The Pantheon,” which is Sepinwall’s and Zoller Seitz’s name for the grand list. This is an appropriate name, not just for the list, but for the book itself. It is intended as an affectionate, somewhat flippant reference to the list, but there is more than a touch of unintentional pretentious snobbery in it.

In writing about The Pantheon, our two heroes show us a transcript of a debate in which they try to rank the top five shows of the list. Why shouldn’t Breaking Bad be number one? Why is The Sopranos better than The Wire? Why is The Simpsons better than Cheers? In the end, after they’re finished, you get a lot of opinion dressed up as pseudo intellectualism. It is very fitting for the entirety of the book.

Why not Cheers, indeed? Again, I’m not a fan. I have always been curious to catch up on it; for nostalgia, if nothing else. Doesn’t Cheers capture the human experience just as well as The Sopranos, or is it too optimistic? Or maybe it’s just too ‘80’s. That wouldn’t surprise me one bit.

It will surprise none of my three loyal readers to learn that Breaking Bad is the ultimate deity in my personal pantheon. No TV series is without its missteps, but the flaws of Breaking Bad are so minor in comparison with its greatness in craft that I can overlook them. In contrast to the other two dramas in the top five, Breaking Bad is the ultimate story of change. Vince Gilligan said that TV is all about keeping its characters in stasis. This is true even of The Sopranos and The Wire. The Sopranos is all about the virtual impossibility of change within people. The Wire is all about the constant failure of institutions. Each season may look a little different, but it’s themes and basic execution never change.

Breaking Bad is more narrow in its focus as it tells the story of one man’s transformation from a hen-pecked husband and over-qualified chemistry teacher into a murderous drug lord. It is a character study, rather than a societal study.

Let me put it another way. You can watch the first season of The Sopranos and quit. After the viewing, you will have felt the fullness of The Sopranos experience. Some fans (myself included) would argue that season one encapsulated the show at its best. That doesn’t mean the rest of the series isn’t worthy, but only that the show becomes repetitious after a point. The same holds true for The Wire, though our heroes would prefer it if you watched the fourth season in a bottle if you so chose.

But you can’t stop at the end of the first season of Breaking Bad, because there is clearly more story to be told. See my point?

In fairness, I must admit that Breaking Bad validates my worldview. My father always said, “Life’s about choices.” That maxim illustrates Breaking Bad in a nutshell. Society did not turn Walter White into Heisenberg. He followed his own path based on deliberate, conscious choices.

Then, there’s Deadwood. I loved Deadwood. I was sorry to see it canceled before it’s time. Part of me still longs for it to be resurrected in those wrap-up movies that we’ll probably never get. That said, it has it’s weaknesses that our two heroes tend to gloss over.

This is where RyanO, TV Nerd extraordinaire, really shows his face. When I truly dig a show, I watch all of those behind-the-scenes DVD extras.

Series creator David Milch doesn’t write his scripts. He lies on a couch and dictates them to one of his other writers, who transcribes it on a computer. It’s important to note this so that you understand me when I say that, Mr. Milch loves to hear himself talk. This is why many of his characters are so loquacious. There are times when good old swearin’ Al Swearengen is delivering a soliloquy and you wish he’d just shut the fuck up and get on with the blood-letting. This excess of verbosity becomes apparent in the show’s third season as the language gets richer, but Calamity Jane and company bloviate more and more.

Also, the character of George Hearst is a walking card board cut-out of predatory capitalism. He is a cigar-chomping villain who does not contain the depth and breadth of his fellow townspeople. Compare Hearst’s actions in the finale of season two to his actions throughout the whole of season three and see if you don’t detect a swerve in Milch’s intent for the arc of the character.

And there’s the theater troop. But never mind…I don’t want to pile on, thereby giving a false impression that I didn’t love Deadwood dearly. Sufficed to say that I don’t think the show belonged in the top 10. I would’ve taken top 20, gladly.

Ditto for The Shield. It was a solid cop drama with one of the best finales in TV history, but it owed its existence and success to Tony Soprano. I would’ve placed it somewhere in the top 50, below Homicide and Hill Street Blues; either of which are far more realistic, less hyperbolic cop shows.

We also have another character swerve on the part of Vic Mackey, the show’s main anti-hero protagonist. The Vic who killed Terry Crowley at the end of the pilot was not the more careful, calculating Vic we came to know in the course of the series. Yet, Sean Ryan needed to top the evil antics of Tony Soprano in order to push the envelope so he could sell the show to FX. Ahh well. It was a great series

I was glad to see The Twilight Zone make the top 15. 51 years after it went off the air, people still recognize the term and the iconic theme song. I’m still waiting for some kindhearted sighted person to describe, “The Invaders,” to me.

Sepinwall claims that the finale of The Shield elevates everything that came before it. I agree. Many fans believe the opposite of Lost; the finale pretty much ruined the whole series. I never got past the first season because I didn’t buy the image of a guy listening to Mama Cass inside The Hatch. Everything after that point just seemed ludicrous to me.

Do you notice how Buffy, Freaks and Geeks and My So-Called Life are all ranked together? For those unaware, all three are dramas with teenagers at their center. Hmmm.

Despite my desensitization to the brutality of modern crime shows such as The Sopranos, Breaking Bad and Deadwood, there are certain lines I have no interest in crossing. Oz represents one of those lines.

Sepinwall and I disagree about the appeal of Homicide. He says the show was at its best in its early years when it stuck to the small moments, such as the banter between Munch and Stan ‘The Big Man’ Bolander. Yes, those moments are what gave Homicide it’s special texture, but even in later seasons when the series became more conventional and adopted more cop show clichés, it was still great TV. Yes, Alan, Luther Mahoney was a bit of a trope, but Homicide still did him far better than Miami freakin’ Vice. Whatever the case, Frank Pembleton will go down in my pantheon as the best TV cop ever.

Notice that the reboot of Battlestar Galactica is ranked 34th, while the original Star Trek is way down there in 61st place? To paraphrase George Orwell, “That is so absurd that only a critic could believe it.”

Yes, by today’s standards, the original Trek was pretty clunky. Yes, the special affects and Shatner’s acting were cheesy. But how do you minimize the cultural impact that Trek had after it went off the air? Take the spin-off series, movies and novels out of the equation. Spock deserved better than a lower 50 rating.

Sidebar: People make the mistake of assuming that playing Spock was not a challenge for Leonard Nimoy due to the repressed nature of the character. Such people couldn’t be more wrong. I would place Nimoy’s acting skills on par with Patrick Stewart’s any day.

Meanwhile, I made it through three seasons of Battlestar Galactica before I threw up my hands in disgust. Starbuck as an angel?…meh.

This is what I mean when I talk about bias. Sometimes, our two heroes are clearly blurring the line between an attempt at impartial critique and fan service. Just like the three Davids (Chase, Milch and Simon), our heroes love Ronald D. Moore, creator and head writer of the BSG reboot.

Moore was also instrumental in the evolution of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Some elements of both shows are similar including overt themes of politics, religion and heavy serialization. It also may explain why DS9 made The Pantheon, while Star Trek: The Next Generation was excluded, even though Zoller Seitz admits that TNG was the best of all the series when it fired on all cylinders.

I’m not at all surprise that Deep Space Nine made the list, while TNG did not. Sepinwall and I had a Twitter debate once over which series was better. He lost. I mean…he’s got a major internet site and a few books published and decades of newspaper columns and he’s met Bryan Cranston in person and he rubs elbows with the cream of the TV crop on a regular basis. And I’ve got…this blog? But I don’t give a merry damn. He lost.

For my money, DS9 didn’t work because of flawed acting and mostly uninteresting characters. Avery Brooks was terrible as a leading man. I mean, I’d watch him in a scene and his stiff acting would pull me out of it. That was acceptable when Shatner was the only Federation starship captain in the universe, but after Patrick Stewart, the bar was raised and Brooks failed to clear it.

Yes, DS9 was more ambitious in its storytelling, but who cares about the Dominion War when you can’t care about Sisko, Kira and Quark? If Patrick Stewart was the only good apple in an otherwise bad barrel (a point that I don’t concede), then the same is true of René Auberjonois.

One of the most sadly moving parts of the book is when Sepinwall wrote about his decision to no longer hold viewing marathons of The Cosby Show for his kids. As a child of the ‘80’s, the unfolding saga of Bill Cosby’s downfall is a heartbreaker for me. I didn’t watch his sitcom, but I loved Fat Albert and his comedy albums. I know I shouldn’t convict him before his trial, but I think he’s already been rightly judged in the court of public opinion.

Most TV critics are liberal. Zoller Seitz is no exception and restrains himself less in his political expressions than does his writing partner. I suspect that it was very hard for him to acknowledge that 24 was the 57th best series of all time. At one point, Zoller Seitz says, “Torture rarely works in real life, but the version practiced by 24 got results.” Mkay, Matt. Tell that one to Kathryn Bigelow. To give you an idea of where Zoller Seitz comes down on the political spectrum, he just published a book celebrating the career of Oliver Stone.

Actually, I didn’t care for the torture scenes on 24 after a while because they began to smack of plot repetition and the controversy eventually overshadowed the better aspects of the series. Also, Zoller Seitz claims that seasons one, two and four are the peak of the series. He’s right about the first two, but Day Four is when the torture controversy got out of hand through its overuse as a plot device. He also ignored season five, which began with the death of David Palmer and ended with Jack being kidnapped and shipped off to China. In between, we got President and Mrs. Logan. The show didn’t get any better than that.

I was glad to see Gunsmoke on the list. I preferred the radio version to the TV, but the early scripts by John Meston were truly groundbreaking for their time. It’s also not inconsequential that Gunsmoke was one of only two TV dramas to last 20 years.

The other was Law & Order. I went through a two-year phase in college when I was obsessed with this show. Long after I got over it, I kept coming back to it because it’s TV comfort food. I’m not sure why it made this list because it’s really a cookie-cutter procedural. Maybe it was the two-part structure that made it unique? Maybe it was Jerry Orbach. I can except either explanation. That said, I did enjoy Sepinwall’s rankings of every cast combination over the course of the series from best to worst.

The Rockford Files deserved to be in the top 50, rather than at 65th place. During the first four decades of television, the private eye genre was a staple of entertainment. Rockford represented the best of that genre, just as Gunsmoke represented the cream of the TV western.

Jack Benny also deserved better than 73rd place. People wouldn’t remember it now, but he was considered the king of comedy from the ‘30’s through the ‘50’s. I guess I should be glad he made the list at all. The only reason I know this is due to my love for old-time radio.

I should also be glad Justified made it to 74th place. I loved this show, though it was very uneven at times. In their usual critic logic, our heroes seemed to value the dialogue of Elmore Leonard and themes of manhood and poverty over the show’s more basic elements. In truth, the plots were often overly-convoluted and too clever by half. Still, I’ll take it. I loved the show so much that I named my cat after Mags Bennett. “It was already in the glass, not in the jar.”

“Hey Rocky! Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!”

God bless Peter Falk! Columbo is an American treasure, though the original NBC Mystery Movies from ’71 through ‘78 were superior to the later AB C version, when the writers played up Columbo’s eccentricities until they reached farcical levels.

Whatever my criticisms of Zoller Seitz may be, he absolutely nailed it in his essay about Batman (1966). Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan took the comic book genre far too seriously. At least Adam West and company knew that they were doing campy comedy. This may offend WatchMojo.com, but they can just give me a great big “Pow!” in the jaw as payback.

P.S: God bless Frank Gorshin! Best. Riddler. Ever. And I still want to marry Julie Newmar. I don’t care if she’s 83!

Sometimes, I would smile when I came across a show, not because I was a fan, but because it reminded me of a friend. I never got into Hannibal, but Katy enjoyed it. I was glad to see Cagney & Lacey make the list because my friend Amy always loved that show.

No, Alan, Picket Fences was not David E. Kelley’s signature work. That was merely a legal drama masquerading as a quirky small town drama. Kelley’s best work came in the first five seasons of, The Practice (1997-2001), which does not appear in The Pantheon or in the honorable mentions section. Kelley was a former lawyer who knew the trade inside and out. The Practice served as an excellent counterpoint to Law & Order, which hit the height of its popularity at the same time that The Practice went on the air. The afore-mentioned quirky small town drama was done better by Northern Exposure and Twin Peaks, both of which made the list.

Two more of my favorite shows rounded out the top hundred; Boardwalk Empire and Terriers. Again, I love them both and long for the day when NetFlix announces that it will revive Terriers, but aside from personal prejudice, I don’t understand what made Terriers worthy of the list. Sepinwall even admits that every trope put forth in the show was done before. Could it be that it was a favored underdog because, like Deadwood, it was canceled before its time?

As for Boardwalk, it was more consistently solid than The Sopranos. Yet, it somehow lacked that emotional punch that would’ve made it water cooler conversation.

To my mind, there was only one obvious, glaring omission. Dragnet (1951). It received an honorable mention in the, “A Certain Regard,” section, but that’s not good enough.

It was apparent that Zoller Seitz, who gravitated more toward the historical programs, was judging Dragnet based on the 1967 revival series. This is unfair and did not represent Dragnet at its earlier peak.

Let’s take the categories one by one:

Innovation: Dragnet is the undisputed progenitor of the police procedural. Nothing like it had ever been done before. Prior to Dragnet, cops were mostly painted in crime fiction as corrupt, incompetent or mere window-dressing for the superior private eye. Jack Webb’s documentary-style approach was meant to depict a more authentic portrayal of police work.

Influence: The theme song aside, Dragnet was a cultural phenomenon in the ‘50’s. It was even parodied by Stan Freberg and later, Johnny Carson. It was a constant ratings success and even generated a feature film in 1954.

Consistency: For better or worse, Dragnet never changed its formula. Neither did Law & Order, Rockford and Columbo, all of whom made the list.

Performance: Webb wasn’t much of an actor and he insisted that all of his actors deliver an understated performance in the name of realism. For that matter, Jerry Seinfeld was a limited actor. I already beat up on Bill Shatner, so I won’t do it again.

Storytelling: The original author of most of the early Dragnet scripts was James E. Moser. He did not write Sgt. Joe Friday as the pompous, autocratic cop we would come to know in the later series of the ‘60’s. He wrote Friday as a soft-spoken, humble police officer who went about each case with the quiet intent to close it. The comical elements were lent by Ben Alexander as Frank Smith and were underplayed, unlike Harry Morgan’s over-the-top approach in the latter show. Moser also addressed many themes that were unheard of for their time, including sexual assault, pedophilia and child neglect.

Peak: I’m not fully certain what this means. There are far fewer episodes of the original Dragnet available today, whereas the entire 1967 series has been available since it was first broadcast.

Yes, based on style and substance, Dragnet seems dated today, but it’s no more fair to compare it to Hill Street Blues or The Wire than it is to compare Gunsmoke to Deadwood or I Love Lucy to Sex and the City. If we’re applying different standards to different eras, Dragnet should have been included in The Pantheon.

I’m also bummed that Perry Mason didn’t get a nod. It’s first three seasons were faithful to the spirit of Gardener’s novels. If you look at it from a sociological viewpoint, it was probably a subtle answer to McCarthyism, which represented the dark side of the 1950’s. If Joe Friday represented law and order, Perry Mason represented every American’s right to due process.

I’m glad I read this book, much as it frustrated me at times. It was a lot of fun to chew up and digest. Incidentally, there are many other bonus features outside of The Pantheon, including ‘Best Miniseries’ (remember those?), ‘Best TV Moms and Dads’, ‘Best TV Cars’, ‘Best Hair’, ‘Best Deaths’, and much more. If you want to learn about the exact rankings for each show, buy the book. It’s worth it.

Writing about it has exhausted me. Guess I’ll go watch The Flintstones and relax before I scour the internet trying to find copies of Wiseguy and The Rifleman.