What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Unknown User
Joined: 12/31/69
#0What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/20/04 at 7:42pm
From the current issue of The Advocate:
http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/925/925_kushner.asp
#1re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/20/04 at 8:08pm
I was at Coliseum Books in the end of September when he read us his rought draft of this column.
It was 20 minutes, spoken.
He is a genius.
-d.b.j-
#2re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/20/04 at 8:12pmI hope the Republicans on this board read Tony's words and understand what this election means to their lesbian and gay friends.
#3re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/20/04 at 9:34pmThat was a great article. Tony Kushner puts into words what I have been trying to express for months.
Plum
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
#4re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/20/04 at 9:46pmWow, Mr. Kushner. Tell us how you really feel.
#5re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/21/04 at 1:36am
I agree with Kushner 100%. I had been thinking for a while now a version of the following:
"So why is one half, more or less, of the electorate voting for Bush? Fear and greed and theocracy seem to be the toxic ingredients in the answer."
I honestly believe that all Bush voters fall into one or more of those categories: religious right, the rich, and those living in abject fear. There is no other explanation for how smart people (that I DO respect in my life and on this board) can vote for a man that as Kushner beautifully puts it is "an embarrassingly inept, ignorant, incurious, and unfeeling figurehead for the worst conventicle of religious nuts, plutocrats, and petrochemical bagmen ever to lay hold of our federal government".
Unknown User
Joined: 12/31/69
#6re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/21/04 at 9:22amjrb - those are very broad strokes that you're painting the Republican electorate with. There are some who are truly fiscal conservatives and also interested in the approach this administration is taking in foreign affairs - believe it or not, some actually find it thoughtful and hopeful (which I do not, but none-the-less.)
Auggie27
Broadway Legend Joined: 10/13/03
#7re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/21/04 at 9:29amJust when we thought we'd read the last word -- I've got me some bad antiBush burnout -- along comes a blistering, fresh, eye-opening indictment. I was jolted awake as I read on. I've sent this to everyone. Thank you, DGrant. I was particularly moved by Kusher's impassioned defense of his own brand of patriotism, placing his dissent, fervor, and investment in a better future in the context of the activism of our founding fathers. Bravo. Everyone, spread this one around.
#8re: What Tony Kushner has to say about the election
Posted: 10/21/04 at 9:32amFiscal conservatives have turning away from Bush in large numbers because of his profligacy.
#9re: toni basil should just keep singing mickey
Posted: 10/21/04 at 9:54ami think saint tony has provided the best argument yet against voting for john kerry, "you shouldn’t elect someone you know is a schmuck."
...global warming can manifest itself as heat, cool, precipitation, storms, drought, wind, or any other phenomenon, much like a shapeshifter. -- jim geraghty
pray to st. jude
i'm a sonic reducer
he was the gimmicky sort
fenchurch=mejusthavingfun=magwildwood=mmousefan=bkcollector=bradmajors=somethingtotalkabout: the fenchurch mpd collective
#10Andrew Sullivan on Bush
Posted: 10/21/04 at 9:59am
Andrew Sullivan (with whom I don't often agree) sums up why conservatives have been turning away from Bush:
"...libertarian hawks - "eagles" - like me. If our policy mix is one of fiscal conservatism, cultural liberalism and foreign policy hawkishness, then Bush presents an awful problem. He hasn't only been a reckless spender and borrower, he has moved the GOP into the permanent position of the spend-and-borrow party. On domestic issues, he has simply failed to live up to his promise to be a moderate or a uniter. (When I read my endorsement from 2000, it reads like another candidate altogether.) His social policy is indistinguishable from James Dobson's. On foreign policy, he grasps the enemy we face; and he has some important achievements. But he's also clearly screwed up badly. What he will do to the Supreme Court is anyone's guess. But, on the basis of his first four years, my bet is whomever the religious right wants. "
THE LIBERAL HAWK DILEMMA
Gothampc
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/20/03
#11Kushner
Posted: 10/21/04 at 10:03amI honestly tried to read this article, but I can't get past Kushner's bile and hatred. He's going the Larry Kramer way of communicating: just spew out venom and then wondering why nobody likes him or listens.
#12Kushner
Posted: 10/21/04 at 10:16am
Goth--maybe if you read it, you might understand why your lesbian and gay friends are so angry at George Bush--and angry at you for supporting him.
Straight people like you and PapaLovesMambo don't understand that this election is life-or-death for us.
Gothampc
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/20/03
#13Kushner
Posted: 10/21/04 at 10:39amPal, why should I finish an article that calls me names and mocks my belief system? If a person is trying to convince another person, he shouldn't be spewing venom all over the person he's trying to convince. Would you read an article that says "I don't understand why gays are stupid"?
Corine2
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/14/03
#14Kushner
Posted: 10/21/04 at 10:50am
I went to that event at the book store.
Kushner is a very funny man. I was there to hear him read from Caroline and was sad he talked about politics.
He was not using his microphone properly and I said
"Sing Out Louise!"
Tony will be at the 92nd street Y saluting Larry Kramer this Sunday. That should be very entertaining. I bought my ticket today!
Hope his microphone works!
Updated On: 10/21/04 at 10:50 AM
#16kushner
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:06am
see, pal, i see it as being life and death for more than just glbt folk. don't put words in my mouth. i completely understand your perspective and while i can respect it when voiced rationally (and even irrationally, thank you robbiej) by others, you squealing about in full chicken little mode is like nails on a chalkboard. people of good conscience used to be able to disagree about matters political without painting each other as bigots, racists and fascists, but no more.
i don't understand? of course i understand the basis out of which that sentiment grows. i don't argue very often when people scream that republicans are bigots. it's a very emotional issue and i realize how deeply felt the sentiments are and how personal. i don't argue because there is a great deal about my party with which i don't agree. but while i don't agree with some of the fringe elements of my party and have even spoken out against them here and elsewhere, i refuse to be lectured like a child and told what i do and don't understand.
john kerry as far as i can tell has been a good friend to glbt causes in his years in the senate. it seems to be one of the few things that he felt strong enough about to buck public sentiment and support even when it might cost him in the long run in national elections. that's brave and i commend him for it. however, i do not trust him to have that same stregth of character when it comes to foreign policies about which he's been ambivalent, at best. i don't trust john kerry to act in the best interests of the united states of america. i don't trust john kerry to uphold the sovereignty of the united states of america. i don't trust john kerry to be able to do the hard thing when it comes to fighting a war. it's a deep and visceral distrust fed by his statements about american foreign policy since returning from vietnam to the present day.
i'm voting for george bush because despite his flaws, which are legion, i trust him to make the hard choice. just as i believe that the middle east will be transformed by a free and democratic iraq. i trust him to maintain the sovereignty of the untied states of america. i trust him to protect america. just as i trust the american people and the constitution of the united states to protect america from george w. bush's worse qualities.
call me scared? yer godamn right i am. but, don't ever again presume to speak for me.
...global warming can manifest itself as heat, cool, precipitation, storms, drought, wind, or any other phenomenon, much like a shapeshifter. -- jim geraghty
pray to st. jude
i'm a sonic reducer
he was the gimmicky sort
fenchurch=mejusthavingfun=magwildwood=mmousefan=bkcollector=bradmajors=somethingtotalkabout: the fenchurch mpd collective
#17Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:37am
It's not just GLBT issues, Papa. It's so much more than that.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to foreign policy.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to the best interests of the United States.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to protecting the sovereignty of the United States of America.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to fighting a war. John Kerry fought in a war--valiantly. George Bush took massive amounts of cocaine and failed to show up.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to the economy.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to civil liberties.
You are making the wrong choice when it comes to trust. If you are trusting George Bush, you are trusting an unrecovered addict, and anyone with 12-step experience or an addict in the family knows that an addict will lie to you, an addict will charm you, an addict is unable to see the ramifications of his actions, and an addict will forget how he has harmed you moments after he has harmed you.
If you vote for George W. Bush, it will be the end of the United States as a force for peace and justice in the world, the end of the United States as a world power.
And I will hold you responsible for that vote.
Gothampc
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/20/03
#18Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:45am
Pal says: "If you are trusting George Bush, you are trusting an unrecovered addict, and anyone with 12-step experience or an addict in the family knows that an addict will lie to you, an addict will charm you, an addict is unable to see the ramifications of his actions, and an addict will forget how he has harmed you moments after he has harmed you."
There's no forgiveness or second chances in your world, is there?
#19responsibility?
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:48amok, pal, just as i'll hold you responsible for your vote and uh, yeah, you're wrong on everything too. oh, and the sky is green and grass is plaid. whatever...
...global warming can manifest itself as heat, cool, precipitation, storms, drought, wind, or any other phenomenon, much like a shapeshifter. -- jim geraghty
pray to st. jude
i'm a sonic reducer
he was the gimmicky sort
fenchurch=mejusthavingfun=magwildwood=mmousefan=bkcollector=bradmajors=somethingtotalkabout: the fenchurch mpd collective
#20Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:50am
There would be if he had recovered. But his behavior demonstrates that he is a dry drunk, at the very least, and a continuing user, most likely.
If you've been through any 12-step work, you know that a reformed drunk can be difficult (so can we all!), but a DISHONEST drunk is not to be trusted. One bit.
#22Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:57am
Papa, did you say scared? I found this an interesting column speculating on why people are voting for Bush:
Appealing To Our Lizard Brains: Why Bush Is Still Standing
By Arianna Huffington
Since the president's meltdown in the first debate — followed in quick succession by Paul Bremer's confession, the CIA's no-al-Qaida/Saddam link report, the Duelfer no-WMD-since-'91 report, and the woeful September job numbers — I have been racking my brain trying to figure out why George W. Bush is still standing.
The answer arrived via my friend Ed Solomon, the brilliant writer and filmmaker, who explained that the conundrum could be solved by looking at the very organ I'd been racking.
Ed introduced me to the work of Dr. Daniel Siegel, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and author of the forthcoming book "Mindsight," which explores the physiological workings of the brain.
Turns out, when it comes to Campaign 2004, it's the neuroscience, stupid!
Or, as Dr. Siegel told me: "Voters are shrouded in a 'fog of fear' that is impacting the way our brains respond to the two candidates."
Thanks to the Bush campaign's unremitting fear-mongering, millions of voters are reacting not with their linear and logical left brain but with their lizard brain and their more emotional right brain.
What's more, people in a fog of fear are more likely to respond to someone whose primary means of communication is in the nonverbal realm, neither logical nor language-based. (Sound like any presidential candidate you know?)
And that's why Bush is still standing. It's not about left wing vs. right wing; it's about left brain vs. right brain.
Deep in the brain lies the amygdala, an almond-sized region that generates fear. When this fear state is activated, the amygdala springs into action. Before you are even consciously aware that you are afraid, your lizard brain responds by clicking into survival mode. No time to assess the situation, no time to look at the facts, just: fight, flight or freeze.
And, boy, have the Bushies been giving our collective amygdala a workout. Especially Dick Cheney, who has proven himself an unmatched master of the dark art of fear-mongering. For an object lesson in how to get those lizard brains leaping, look no further than the vice-presidential debate.
"The biggest threat we face today," said Cheney in his very first answer "is the possibility of terrorists smuggling a nuclear weapon or a biological agent into one of our own cities and threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans."
Just in case we didn't get the point, he repeated the ominous assertion, practically word for word, two more times — throwing in the fact that he was "absolutely convinced" that the threat "is very real." It was "be afraid, be very afraid" to the third power.
And when we are afraid, we are biologically programmed to pay less attention to left-brain signals — indeed, our logical mind actually shuts itself down. Fear paralyzes our reasoning and literally makes it impossible to think straight. Instead, we search for emotional, nonverbal cues from others that will make us feel safe and secure.
When our right brain is at Threat Level Red, we don't want to hear about a four-point plan to win the peace, or a list of damning statistics, or even a compelling, well-reasoned argument that the policies of Bush and Cheney are actually making us less safe. We want to get the feeling that everything is going to be all right.
In this state, our brains care more about tone of voice than what the voice is saying. This is why Bush can verbally stumble and sputter and make little or no sense and still leave voters feeling that he is the candidate best able to protect them. Our brains are primed to receive the kinds of communication he has to offer and discard the kinds John Kerry has to offer, even if Kerry makes more "logical sense." Which, of course, he does.
The strutting, winking, pointing and near-shouting that marked Bush's town hall debate performance all sent the same subconscious message to our fear-fogged brains: "I'm your daddy . . . I've got your back. So just go to sleep and stop thinking. About anything."
"At the deepest level," Dr. Siegel told me, "we react to fear as adults in much the same way we did as infants. It's primal. Human babies have the most dependent infancy of any species. Our survival depends on the caregiver. We instinctively look to authority figures to comfort us and keep us safe."
As needy infants, this natural drive to be soothed and reassured is what we looked for in our parents; as anxious adults in these exceptionally unsettling times, it's what we are looking for in our leaders.
Over the remaining three weeks of the campaign, as the anxiety level reaches a fevered pitch — and you can be certain the Bush campaign will do everything in its power to make sure that happens — the test facing voters is no longer, "Which candidate would you rather have a beer with?" It's "Which candidate would you rather give you your blankie and a bottle and keep the boogeyman away?"
I know it sounds ludicrous that the most important election of our lifetime is coming down to who can best pacify the electorate's inner baby, but I can think of no better explanation as to why Bush is not currently hovering at around 5 percent in the polls — a voting block made up of those hardcore fanatics who are as utterly blind to reality as he is.
As long as we're operating from our lizard brains — and reason takes a back seat to more primal needs — George Bush will continue to survive the logic-based attacks on his ever-escalating failures.
The only question that remains is: Can Bush, Cheney and Rove keep us shrouded in the fog of fear long enough to brain John Kerry and win in November?
Gothampc
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/20/03
#23Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 11:58amThere are many gay men currently using crystal meth and engaging in dangerous behavior. By your logic, I shouldn't allow them to marry because they are dangerous and not to be trusted.
#24Trust
Posted: 10/21/04 at 12:07pm
Crystal meth use is a major, serious problem in the gay community. I have already lost one good friend to "tina" and kjnow many others whose lives have been destroyed.
I would be very wary of getting involved with someone who uses tina. There are some people who can use it casually, but it is much more addictive and addicting than any other recreational drug. The friend I lost had been a "casual" cocaine user and he thought he could "handle" tina. He couldn't. Neither could many others.
I often have thought they Bush in his more manic episodes (like the 2nd debate), acts like he's "tweaking." I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were giving him some sort of amphetamine.
Videos