Get Central Casting
By Mitch Berg
As a service to my audience, I provide you the following transcript.
It was surreptitiously recorded at a meeting of the Star/Tribune editorial board, sometime last week. The source’s name can not be revealed, to protect her or his identity. All names are redacted.
Transcript begins:
EDITOR A [MALE]: It’s time to run another “Roodwip” story”.
COLUMNIST B[MALE] (Sotto voce, to COLUMNIST C [FEMALE]): Psst – what’s “roodwip”?
COLUMNIST C [FEMALE] (Sotto voce): “Republican” who’s disappointed with Pawlenty”.
EDITOR A: So – who do we use? John Gunyou?
EDITOR D [FEMALE]: We use him all the time. Too much. We’re getting lots of mail from people saying he was the “Republican” budget director for a “Republican” governor that governed to the left of the previous DFL governor. I think we should broaden our base of “dissatisfied Republicans”
EDITOR A: Why? Wingnut readers are all stupid!
COLUMNIST C: Yaaaaaay! Stupid!
EDITOR E [MALE]: Be that as it may, the wingnuts aren’t the audience. It’s the “undecided voter” we need to address. They need to believe that there’s a genuine current within the GOP to oppose the likes of David Strom and Tim Pawlenty.
COLUMNIST C: Booooo! Strom! Booooooo!
EDITOR D [FEMALE]: Have a drink, L__i. No, I hear you. The question is, we keep using the same ones, over and over and over. We’ve got Gunyou…
COLUMNIST F [MALE]: …who’s kinda played out
EDITOR D: …I agree. And there’s Elmer Anderson…
COLUMNIST B: …who’s dead…
EDITOR D: …and Arne Carlson…
EDITOR A: We cant’ use him. He’s still the sitting governor!
EDITOR F: Er, no sir, that’s Tim Pawlenty. Carlson’s been out of office for nine years. But Republican have pretty well abandoned him. Who else can we get?
EDITOR D: Well, it’s not easy. Most Republicans do support the governor, and even more support the “no taxes” line, even if they don’t explicitly support the Taxpayers’ League.
COLUMNIST C: Booooooo!
COLUMNIST B: But I read that Republicans are getting upset about that type of irresponsible leadership!
EDITOR F: Er, N__k? You actually wrote that column?
COLUMNIST B: Oh. Well…
EDITOR A: We need to find another “disaffected Republican”. Maybe we need to do like the New Republic did and have someone just make stuff up?
EDITOR D: Well, that’s the contingency plan. In the meantime, though, I have one guy in mind…
EDITOR A: And he’s a Republican?
EDITOR D: Yes!
EDITOR A: Who does nothing but bitch about Republicans?
EDITOR D: Of course!
EDITOR A: And espouses policies that are not one iota different than those of the DFL…?
COLUMNIST C: Praise be unto the DFL!
EDITOR D: Duh!
EDITOR A (as trumpets sound a fanfare): As it is written, so shall it be done!
EDITOR F: Er, a simple “make it happen” would do…
EDITOR A (irate, as trumpets fall silent): As it is written, so shall it be done!
I had no idea meetings went like that…
December 6th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
This doesn’t even qualify as satire – and certainly not as humor – as you have no basis for how this actually occurs to contrast it against. Or, maybe you do (I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt) would you mind publishing what account of the Strib’s board, which meeting, you’re satarizing here (that is, if you see this as satire)? Don’t have it, gosh, not surprised. I’m betting this is just made up trash, nothing less, and nothing more. Funny only to the twisted few who think (wrongly) that this is in fact “REALLY” what they (the Strib editorial board) ‘want’ to say (and think maybe does happen behind closed doors) because those same twisted few conduct themselves in nearly this way in real life, and don’t trust anyone else could do otherwise because they can’t grasp that they themselves should. Is this the civil contribution to discourse you’re aiming for?
December 6th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
This says so much more about you, Mitch, than about your local paper.
December 6th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Great… now Peevish/PB thinks he understands humor and satire.
December 6th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
It is funny, but I’m not surprised that some cannot see it. *shrug*
December 6th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
The day I take humor advice from Peev is the day the world dies. Peev thinks an accounting seminar is comedy gold.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
This doesn’t even qualify as satire – and certainly not as humor
LT. HAUK: “In my heart, I know I’m funny!”
December 6th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
This says so much more about you,
It being my blog, that’s not a big worry.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Funny only to the twisted few who think (wrongly) that this is in fact “REALLY” what they (the Strib editorial board) ‘want’ to say (and think maybe does happen behind closed doors) because those same twisted few conduct themselves in nearly this way in real life, and don’t trust anyone else could do otherwise because they can’t grasp that they themselves should.
Er…huh?
Is this the civil contribution to discourse you’re aiming for?
No, this is the barbed, tart, acidic satire I’m aiming for.
The Strib Ed Board are big boys and girls. I think they can hack it.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Flash, I apologize for ever calling you humorless. The Peever takes that prize.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
I may not understand humor and satire, but I know what I like, and this is funny.
And peevish, in Mitch’s comment, since it’s very subtle, I’ll be helpful and point out that using the word “hack” in a comment about the Strib’s editorial practices is also funny.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
“…as you have no basis for how this actually occurs to contrast it against.”
I’d slap Pee fish with AssClown’s floppy shoe if I thought for a minute he could read or had ever actually had seen a copy of the Star & Sickle before it was removed from someone’s bird cage.
I’d also slap the subject of Mitch’s satirical scorn with L__i’s stinking Birkenstock, or perhaps with N__k’s flapping chicken skin, if he ever showed up at a GOP caucus touting himself as “a life long Republican”.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
No, this is the barbed, tart, acidic satire I’m aiming for.
Aimed for: barbed, tart, acidic
Hit: clumsy, obvious, poorly-written
Shot in the Dark: the
Eddie Deezen of the right.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Tim in StP
Aimed for: caustic pop-culture put-down MIRVed with taut irony.
Hit: Labored, groaning reach that includes a pop-culture slam that any former journeyman voice-over guy would take as a back-handed compliment.
Tim in StP: The arrogance of the late Doug, the accidental humor of Ken Avidor.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Tim in StP; the Dwight Schrute of moonbat commentators.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
BTW..hows that new tax rate going for ya in StP, Dwight? Still Happy to pay?
December 6th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
The arrogance of the late Doug
Alive, well and self-righteously caustic as ever. http://www.haloscan.com/comments/tracyeberly/7502131774553696605/?src=hsr#190108 You want him back?
December 6th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
You want him back?
Nope!
December 6th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
MoN: Not so fast, I’ve read it three times and get nothing but a stream of incoherency, certainly not humor. What I am seeing here is only the SitD cheerleaders find it funny.
Swiftee: “”Hows that new tax rate going for ya in StP”” As a St. Paulite, I am very happy to finally be back down the road of fiscal responsibility after years of fiscal ignorance by prior administration who borrowed and spent our way into this mess
December 7th, 2007 at 8:53 am
What the hell are you talking about Flash? Norm Coleman and Randy Kelly both presided over balanced budgets for the last twelve years!
The current financial problems started AFTER Nick Jr. took office; that’s a fact. And I’d bet my next paycheck that either of the former mayors would be presenting the city with another balanced budget this year without a 15% tax hike heaped upon last years 8% hike.
In any case, I give you joy of *finally* being able to send in more money to the city…as if anyone was forbidding you to do so voluntarily before hand.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:59 am
“MoN: Not so fast, ”
OK then, I retract my apology.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:20 am
What I am seeing here is only the SitD cheerleaders find it funny.
Actually, it’s only the SiTD detractors that don’t.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Half full, half empty . . nice play *rolling eyes*
Even Trojan man admits its subtly is easy to escape, so I’ll go with Cheerleaders still
December 7th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
“”What the hell are you talking about Flash? Norm Coleman and Randy Kelly both presided over balanced budgets for the last twelve years!”
Careful, Tom, your ignorance is showing. Actually, I think you know exactly what is going on, but choose to mask it from the reality you and I both no exists.
“”The current financial problems started AFTER Nick Jr. took office; that’s a fact.””
Does that mean I can blame Bush form the dot com bust. I mean, everything was peachy under Clinton. the ‘current financial problems’ didn’t start till AFTER Bush Jr took office.
We both know that Norm, and more so Randy, rode a Housing bubble that was appreciating home values at a rate so great there was no need to raise the levy percent. My taxes went up plenty, and significantly under Kelly. But I suspect you know that. Now we are faced with a butchered budget and decreasing revenues as home values drop, lowering the tax base. Classic Republican set-up. Kick the shit out of the economy, claim no new taxes and when all hell breaks loose give it back tot he dems to fix while bitching about how they raise taxes. Classic GOP gambit!
“”And I’d bet my next paycheck that either of the former mayors would be presenting the city with another balanced budget this year without a 15% tax hike heaped upon last years 8% hike.””
I won’t argue that, but I would argue whether or not that move was n the best interest of the city and its citizens.
“”In any case, I give you joy of *finally* being able to send in more money to the city…as if anyone was forbidding you to do so voluntarily before hand. “”
My joy comes in knowing there won;t be a boondoggle numbers game being played. What I see is what I get. No republican smoke and mirrors.
Flash
December 7th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Mitch:
You mean…you gave Dougie the boot? Banned?
I mean, what will we DO without Dougie’s wit? And lies (I still laugh about the ‘election observer’ lie I caught him in).
December 7th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
“Does that mean I can blame Bush form the dot com bust. I mean, everything was peachy under Clinton. the ‘current financial problems’ didn’t start till AFTER Bush Jr took office.”
Now who is showing ignorance? You are comparing market driven activity to government spending.
It is well known that there is a limited influence that governments can assert directly on the market place. Politicians that claim they are responsible for economic upturns are just as fallacious as those that claim their predecessors were responsible for downturns.
However, politicians CAN be held, and in fact ARE responsible for the financial health of the public domains over which they have control.
Spin it any way you want Flash, but the fact is that St. Paul enjoyed 12 years of balanced budgets under fiscally responsible administrations that used whip and chair to hold back the drooling moonbats on the council…now that you have elected a moonbat mayor, he opened the cage and you have 23% combined tax increases in two years.
If 23% tax increases fit your definition of “the best interest” of the citizens of St. Paul, I’d suggest that your centerist credentials have gone up in flames and that Gigi has a nice cake waiting for you.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
“You are comparing market driven activity to government spending.”
No, I’m comparing market driven activity (dot Com) With Market Driven activity (Housing). The same housing market boom with appreciation that provided built in tax increases without having to change the levy percentage is the same housing market crash and depreciation that has caused a bump in the levy.
It is really simple to understand, if you chose to. I am comparing apple to apples. You are just making up anti lefty rhetoric in the face of what is turning out to be the most sensible fiscal policy St. Paul has seen in awhile.
A home that has risen almost 90,000 in taxable appreciation over the last 4 or five years, now is faced with a taxable depreciation of about 40,000 in just one year. The funds need to be made up somewhere.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Now flash, I did not say “its subtly is easy to escape”, I said “I’m not surprised that some cannot see it”.
The former has a MUCH more narrow meaning than the latter. 🙂
December 7th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
“A home that has risen almost 90,000 in taxable appreciation over the last 4 or five years, now is faced with a taxable depreciation of about 40,000 in just one year.”
90K appreciation in five years, and 40K depreciation in one???
You mean for people who added six rooms and a two car garage to a fishing shack and then had a fire, right?
I don’t know who your “realtor” is Flash, but I think that Mark Ritchie could use his or her services right about now *laughing*.
December 8th, 2007 at 6:33 am
“”You mean for people who added six rooms and a two car garage to a fishing shack and then had a fire, right?””
No, I was actually using numbers for Mitch’s house off the top of my head. I double checked them: 93,000 appreciation during 4 years (03-06) and a $30,000 drop in one(07). This is rather typical in St. Paul but since I knew you would fire back with more rhetoric I wanted to use a home you were familiar with.
And one doesn’t need a Realtor, these are publicly available numbers on the Ramsey County website.
December 9th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Housing prices have wildly fluctuated in the recent past here, and crazy peaks and valleys are not uncommon. That said, taxable appreciation and depreciation of homes that haven’t actually sold have as much to do with market forces as the city or county (whomever is making up the estimates) desires. They can (and should) be taken to task if they are too aggressive with it. At least that is how I understand it. *shrug*