Sorkin must agree with Romney that the only thing wrong with US Isreal policy has been Sec Blinken “losing control of the narrative”, once the news of realities became known.
They are furious their official versions have been exposed by journalists & aid workers who were targeted and killed or jailed.
Even in the face of brutal truths that Israel had already imposed apartheid regime for decades & the brutality of occupying IDF leading up to Oct 2023 and is actively engaged in a war of attrition & genocide against the Palestinian people, Romney and others think more spin is the correct thing to do.
Thank you again. Sorry to preach a bit, but I’m so sick of this failure to face the modern age and enduring the damages caused by the ruling class fighting like cornered rats desperately fighting to retain their unearned privileges at our expense.
Sorkin, like every single successful hollywood denizen, is completely out of touch and beneath our notice. Further proof that NYT is a sad pathetic joke
Sorkin, like the majority of the opinion havers in major newspapers, is confident to the point of obliviousness that he will not suffer under Trump. He knows on the surface that there is a risk to democracy from Trump, and I expect he can even stretch to imagining how badly treated and abused "immigrants"- whether real or merely suspected- will be under Trump, but he himself is basically going to be fine, meaning he can live happily and thrillingly in a world where he's a hero battling dictatorship in the name of those downtrodden masses without ever actually being threatened like they are. Yes, he may have a visit from Trump's NKVD and they may rifle his papers, maybe even hit him, but they won't do any worse, and he'll have a scar or a bruise- a mark of honour because he fought the good fight- and it will make his nerve more steely so he can write more scathing pieces about him and when it's all over be recognised as something like a dissident, albeit without a stint in the actual gulag.
I think this is how a lot of them see it. It's basically a real world haunted house for them- there's a simulation of danger, there's images of horror, but they enjoy it more if they get into the spirit of it than if they don't. The thrill is in role playing, in pretending to take it seriously and not breaking character, but it's not REAL and at any time it gets too uncomfortable they can just leave.
"any time it gets too uncomfortable they can just leave" - right, they've got a half million (at least) in the bank and a house in Portugal, so it's all good. Germany/Austria 1937 all over again
Rewatching the Newsroom soon. I remember being quite impressed by Will McAvoy. I might see him in a different light now.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts on Kamela Harris's viewpoints- I think she is a great pick. And she was raised part Hindu. She is an avid reader and the kite runner is in her top 5. She is the first politician running for president that gives me sincere vibes (in a loooong time. Or maybe this is a first!)
I think there’s an idealism in Sorkin’s stuff that is fine. Will McAvoy is probably still fine. (Or maybe I’ll see that show differently too)
But holy shit—I can’t believe he brought that as a serious idea to the NYT. No one who has paid attention to politics since at least Obama should know better.
I've never seen The West Wing, and after reading Sorkin's piece -- which was literally the most idiotic thing I've read this year -- I'm glad I never bothered. Just mind-numbingly stupid.
[I’m still aware that this is real life not a TV show or even a blockbuster movie.]
That's why you're better than the pundits in the newspapers.
They're insulated from reality. It's all just a fucking game to them. Who's up? Who's down? Who's in? Who's out? Who was seen snuggling with whom? Intrigues, gossip. Bullshit.
Never enters into their mind that this election is literally life and death for some people. Will a family experiencing a pregnancy complication be able to get health care to save the mom? That's an abstract to them. Doesn't affect them.
Will a child be able to get health care to help them with gender dysphoria? Or will they end up as a statistic about trans-youth suicides? Doesn't fucking matter to them. They don't see those people when they write about politics. It's all a glorious entertaining game to these dickheads.
Sorkin hasn't (won't) fully grasped that real life 'never-Trump' Republicans like Mittens (who became sure, why not Trump lol') are not the flawed but redeemable Republican characters in his TeeVee scripts.
Sorkin writes that Romney wouldn’t go along with many things that Dems hold dear. So why the hell should Romney be the pick? Unity? Hahahaha. Let me know when that fever dream becomes a reality.
Sorkin's whole pitch here is a masterclass in Murc's Law. Note that it's always Democrats that have to show 'unity,' and to do such by picking a Republican (or taking a Republican position). And this is baked into so much political commentary; only Democrats have agency.
Republicans do something shitty - "Why didn't Democrats stop it?!"
Democrats win a race - "They should make nice with the Republicans and be gracious." (and yet also they do not get a mandate because of the people Democrats represent)
Democrats try to do legislation - "Democrats need to make it bipartisan."
There's never serious calls or browbeating on Republicans to compromise or do the right thing. And IF the Republicans were asked to include a Democrat it'd be someone in the vein of Maserati Manchin, who is no longer a Democrat anyway!
As a woman, it's similar to being told to fuck/date/marry a MAGA guy - for the good of our population growth and Social Security checks. Accept them as the assholes they are because it's "nature" and "biology".
i mean i've seen the bloated sense of entitlement in red-pilkers who venture away from their echo chambers
... but what's the SocSec argument? that on average he'll die first and you'll get survivorship benefits? what's the actual trade-off for putting up with hus bad choices ans bad faith in the first place?
What a F*CKING Maroon. Mitt Romney did the minimum to convince me he still has a soul but other that that F*CK him and his magic underwear.
Thanks for posting this.
Sorkin must agree with Romney that the only thing wrong with US Isreal policy has been Sec Blinken “losing control of the narrative”, once the news of realities became known.
They are furious their official versions have been exposed by journalists & aid workers who were targeted and killed or jailed.
Even in the face of brutal truths that Israel had already imposed apartheid regime for decades & the brutality of occupying IDF leading up to Oct 2023 and is actively engaged in a war of attrition & genocide against the Palestinian people, Romney and others think more spin is the correct thing to do.
Thank you again. Sorry to preach a bit, but I’m so sick of this failure to face the modern age and enduring the damages caused by the ruling class fighting like cornered rats desperately fighting to retain their unearned privileges at our expense.
Sorkin, like every single successful hollywood denizen, is completely out of touch and beneath our notice. Further proof that NYT is a sad pathetic joke
Sorkin, like the majority of the opinion havers in major newspapers, is confident to the point of obliviousness that he will not suffer under Trump. He knows on the surface that there is a risk to democracy from Trump, and I expect he can even stretch to imagining how badly treated and abused "immigrants"- whether real or merely suspected- will be under Trump, but he himself is basically going to be fine, meaning he can live happily and thrillingly in a world where he's a hero battling dictatorship in the name of those downtrodden masses without ever actually being threatened like they are. Yes, he may have a visit from Trump's NKVD and they may rifle his papers, maybe even hit him, but they won't do any worse, and he'll have a scar or a bruise- a mark of honour because he fought the good fight- and it will make his nerve more steely so he can write more scathing pieces about him and when it's all over be recognised as something like a dissident, albeit without a stint in the actual gulag.
I think this is how a lot of them see it. It's basically a real world haunted house for them- there's a simulation of danger, there's images of horror, but they enjoy it more if they get into the spirit of it than if they don't. The thrill is in role playing, in pretending to take it seriously and not breaking character, but it's not REAL and at any time it gets too uncomfortable they can just leave.
"any time it gets too uncomfortable they can just leave" - right, they've got a half million (at least) in the bank and a house in Portugal, so it's all good. Germany/Austria 1937 all over again
why doesn't Sorkin just stay in his lane?
Does he know he doesn't get to write the outcome of real life elections?
I heard Sorkin interviewed about his production of To Kill A Mockingbird.
His sniggering, his smugness so disgusted me, I haven't been able watch West Wing since.
Rewatching the Newsroom soon. I remember being quite impressed by Will McAvoy. I might see him in a different light now.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts on Kamela Harris's viewpoints- I think she is a great pick. And she was raised part Hindu. She is an avid reader and the kite runner is in her top 5. She is the first politician running for president that gives me sincere vibes (in a loooong time. Or maybe this is a first!)
I think there’s an idealism in Sorkin’s stuff that is fine. Will McAvoy is probably still fine. (Or maybe I’ll see that show differently too)
But holy shit—I can’t believe he brought that as a serious idea to the NYT. No one who has paid attention to politics since at least Obama should know better.
*anyone
I've never seen The West Wing, and after reading Sorkin's piece -- which was literally the most idiotic thing I've read this year -- I'm glad I never bothered. Just mind-numbingly stupid.
[I’m still aware that this is real life not a TV show or even a blockbuster movie.]
That's why you're better than the pundits in the newspapers.
They're insulated from reality. It's all just a fucking game to them. Who's up? Who's down? Who's in? Who's out? Who was seen snuggling with whom? Intrigues, gossip. Bullshit.
Never enters into their mind that this election is literally life and death for some people. Will a family experiencing a pregnancy complication be able to get health care to save the mom? That's an abstract to them. Doesn't affect them.
Will a child be able to get health care to help them with gender dysphoria? Or will they end up as a statistic about trans-youth suicides? Doesn't fucking matter to them. They don't see those people when they write about politics. It's all a glorious entertaining game to these dickheads.
I could not have come up with a better encapsulation of what I hated about The West Wing than that essay, so I have to give him that.
Sorkin hasn't (won't) fully grasped that real life 'never-Trump' Republicans like Mittens (who became sure, why not Trump lol') are not the flawed but redeemable Republican characters in his TeeVee scripts.
Let's not forget that while many find Sorkin's shows entertaining (I've never been one of them), Sorkin himself is not that smart.
Sorkin writes that Romney wouldn’t go along with many things that Dems hold dear. So why the hell should Romney be the pick? Unity? Hahahaha. Let me know when that fever dream becomes a reality.
Sorkin's whole pitch here is a masterclass in Murc's Law. Note that it's always Democrats that have to show 'unity,' and to do such by picking a Republican (or taking a Republican position). And this is baked into so much political commentary; only Democrats have agency.
Republicans do something shitty - "Why didn't Democrats stop it?!"
Democrats win a race - "They should make nice with the Republicans and be gracious." (and yet also they do not get a mandate because of the people Democrats represent)
Democrats try to do legislation - "Democrats need to make it bipartisan."
There's never serious calls or browbeating on Republicans to compromise or do the right thing. And IF the Republicans were asked to include a Democrat it'd be someone in the vein of Maserati Manchin, who is no longer a Democrat anyway!
As a woman, it's similar to being told to fuck/date/marry a MAGA guy - for the good of our population growth and Social Security checks. Accept them as the assholes they are because it's "nature" and "biology".
Gah!
...
i really can't even ...
i mean i've seen the bloated sense of entitlement in red-pilkers who venture away from their echo chambers
... but what's the SocSec argument? that on average he'll die first and you'll get survivorship benefits? what's the actual trade-off for putting up with hus bad choices ans bad faith in the first place?
Sorkin writes fantasy not real life. As do most Hollywood writers. Never listen to any of them on political issues.
We can only hope that the next time Sorkin takes a deep huff of his own farts, he'll keep it to himself instead of running to the NYT's opinion pages.