ThinkProgress Logo

Alyssa

Don Cheadle And Glynn Turman On Race, Racebending And Comedy In ‘House of Lies’

One of the things that works best for me about House of Lies is something that’s coming up in subsequent episodes: its intense bluntness about race and the racism that persists at the highest levels of corporate America. And it was exciting to hear Don Cheadle, who plays high-powered consultant Marty Kaan, and Glynn Turman, who plays his father Jeremiah, talk about the show’s racial politics—and to promise more explorations of those themes if they’re lucky enough to get a second season.

“I want to commend the producers, showtime, for taking on the elephant in the room. This show addresses racial situation like no other show,” Glynn Turman said at the House of Lies panel during Showtime’s presentations at the Television Critics Association press tour today. “From the very opening scene, it’s smack dab in your face. It has never been presented so up front in the history of television. This is a bold step in treating a black man like a person with dimensions…The reason you know it is he is the guy he’s playing. That’s a racial attack. That’s an attack on racism in order to bring the walls down in itself. So at every turn, this show is addressing something that is a taboo.”

And he’s right. Reverse racebending happens occasionally, but it’s hard to imagine another show that would take a book written by a white guy about skulduggery in the world of business and cast a black man in the lead role, and do it without comment.

But it’s not simply a matter of making Kaan black instead of white. This wasn’t so much an issue in the first episode, but the show is very blunt about demonstrating racism and calling it out. Among the things coming down the pike: a client mistaking every white member of Marty’s team for Marty before turning to the black man in the room, and a very honest conversation between Marty and an African-American recruit. I asked Cheadle about whether we need humor that exposes racism more than we need the gentle humor of reconciliation.

“I think the best way, sometimes to deal with things of that nature that have so much gravitas is to come at it sideways,” he told me, saying that making people laugh can open up conversations that might not be possible otherwise. “If you can find a comedic way in, it’s more difficult to do and it’s dangerous to because the subject matter is so fraught with perils and traps. But you can sometimes make even more headway than if you confront it head on.”

And in the scrum afterwards I asked him what it was like playing a role that—in his capacity as father to Roscoe, who may be questioning his gender identity and his sexual orientation— both pushes back against images of woman-headed African-American households and the idea that black communities are homophobic, one of the more unfortunate and difficult political memes of the last few years.

“It’s a real unconventional take on all of those sorts of tropes,” he told me. “Is even there another show on television with a black male lead? Anywhere? The fact that it even exists and the fact that we get to deal with things in the way we get to deal with them…is a new take, which is crazy in 2012, but it’s kind of a new take on all of that stuff…There’s a moment in one of the episodes where [Roscoe] comes to me and says ‘what do you do when you like a boy and a girl?’ And I’m like ‘I don’t know.’ Marty doesn’t know how to deal with it. He’s not sure what to do. I think if he didn’t have his father in his ear saying’ let him do what he wants to do, he’ll figure it out, he needs room to individuate,’ if he wasn’t giving him all that Jungian psychobabble, he’d be like, ‘like the girl.’…he’s just tying to understand and roll with the punches.”

No one show is going to roll back decades of reluctance to give black characters leading roles in movies and television shows. But Marty, Jeremiah, and Roscoe Kaan are all roles that feel like they’ve been delivered to us from a promising future.

Climate Progress

NY Times Public Editor Asks If Paper Should Publish Uncorrected Lies or Be a “Truth Vigilante.” Seriously.

No, this absurd piece is not (intentional) satire.  But the “headline could just as well be found at the Onion,” as one of the many exasperated New York Times readers puts it.

Obviously any paper, but most especially the New York Times, has little value to society if it knowingly prints lies — or if it fails to do the minimal investigative reporting and fact-checking needed to determine if a statement by a newsmaker or, say, a global warming denier, is false.

The public editor is “the readers’ representative,” which is to say he has no power whatsoever except the public platform to shame the paper of record.  That in theory makes him the “conscience” of the paper, but by not clearly stating the obvious here he has mostly provided cover for journalists to continue doing the lousy job they are doing.

This is not an abstract question.  We’ve seen the media described as “stenographers” by one of the country’s leading journalists in a major Harvard study — see How the press bungles its coverage of climate economics — “The media’s decision to play the stenographer role helped opponents of climate action stifle progress.” The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank has harshly slammed his fawning, stenographic colleagues in his piece, “Rotten to the press corps”:

[Fired Issa press aide Kurt] Bardella also disclosed contempt for reporters he described as “lazy as hell. There are times when I pitch a story and they do it word for word. That’s just embarrassing. They’re adjusting to a time that demands less quality and more quantity.”

The issue of reporters simply repeating what they have heard with little or no fact checking is one of many flaws that go to the heart of the demise of modern journalism, of which climate coverage is but the most important subset.  There is a related flaw of getting that quote from a global warming denier to provide balance in a story when the reporter or their editor should know that the denier is a widely debunked purveyor of falsehoods, something that still happens at the Times (see below).

And the issue comes up with respect to columnists — see “The Washington Post, abandoning any journalistic standards, lets George Will publish a third time global warming lies debunked on its own pages.”

Now that would be an interesting topic for Brisbane — should the NY Times fact-check its opinion pieces?  Right now, like most other newspapers, it publishes the most absurd, error riddled nonsense that would hardly withstand even a few minutes of fact-checking online — see, for instance, “Small IS Beautiful”! Robert Bryce Pushes Nuclear Power by Quoting Famous Author Who Called It “an Ethical, Spiritual, and Metaphysical Monstrosity”

Brisbane tries to explain his original column as poor word choice in his weak follow-up, “Update to my Previous Post on Truth Vigilantes“:

Read more

Economy

Dumb Budget Cuts: How Slashing Funds For The IRS Winds Up Costing The U.S. Money

When does a cut to the federal budget actually result in an increase in the deficit? When, as the New York Times profiled today, it cuts the Internal Revenue Service, leaving the IRS understaffed and unable to collect all the taxes owed to the federal government:

An expanding workload and cuts in funds have left the Internal Revenue Service unable to adequately perform either of its primary duties — collecting taxes and providing the public with reasonable service, according to a report released Wednesday by the I.R.S.’s internal monitor.

The agency’s staff reductions and backlog have limited its ability to collect the hundreds of billions of dollars a year that the government is owed but not paid, Nina E. Olson, the national taxpayer advocate, said in her annual report to Congress.

In the report, Olson noted that, due to budget cuts, the IRS “is unable to maximize revenue collection, contributing to the federal budget deficit.” “It will never be possible to eliminate the tax gap entirely, of course, but even modest improvements would help to reduce the federal budget deficit. Moreover, even apart from the fiscal implications, the size of the tax gap raises important equity concerns,” the report added.

The latest data shows that there is a $385 billion gap between the taxes owed to the U.S. and those collected, meaning close to 15 percent of federal taxes went unpaid. There would have to be a $3,400 “noncompliance surtax” paid by every tax compliant household, in order “to enable the federal government to raise the same revenue it would have collected if all taxpayers had reported their income and paid their taxes in full.” The IRS, meanwhile, estimates that every dollar spent on enforcement brings in $4-$5 dollars of additional revenue.

Justice

Survey: Illegal Corporate Campaign Contributions Up 400%

In 2009, just 1 percent of respondents to National Business Ethics Survey — a large industry study funded by major corporations like Walmart — said they had witnessed illegal corporate political donations. This year, that number quadrupled to 4 percent. Management-level employees at large, publicly traded companies were most likely to see the illegal activity, with seven percent of senior managers saying they had witnessed it.

While it’s unclear exactly what caused the spike, Roll Call reports it may have to do with increasingly lax campaign finance laws in the wake of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision:

“If these numbers are quadrupling, it is eye-popping,” said Kenneth Gross, a lawyer with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom’s political law practice who advises corporate clients on government affairs compliance. “Possibly the relaxed laws on giving have pervaded … the workplace, giving people the impression that things aren’t as strict as they were.”

Although it is not clear what led to the spike, there is no question that the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which opened the door to unlimited political spending by unions and corporations, has dramatically changed the landscape of political giving in the business world, heightening pressure on fundraisers to rake in big sums from new sources.

Meanwhile, employees reported a similar increase in observing bribes and improper payments to public officials that violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

NEWS FLASH

Canadian Government Won’t Revisit Decision To Invalidate Foreign Same-Sex Marriages | Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is telling reporters that his government will not reconsider a controversial decision that could potentially invalidate the marriages of 5,000 foreign same-sex couples who wed in the country following the enactment of marriage equality in 2004. “When we first came to office we had a vote on this issue. We have no intention of further reopening or opening this issue,” Harper said. The new policy was revealed just recently when the government argued in a Toronto court case “that non-Canadians gays and lesbians who have been married here since 2004 are only considered married under this country’s laws if gay marriage is also recognized in their home country or state.”

Economy

Santorum Favored Expanding Affordable Housing Before He Blamed It For Causing The Financial Crisis

During the final Iowa debate, GOP candidates came out hard against former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his ties to government backed mortgage behemoth Freddie Mac. But there was one man whose voice rang out particularly discordant amid his attempt to take a swipe at Gingrich’s moral character. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (R) has recently rebranded himself as an outspoken critic of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, despite his previous support for the GSE’s affordable housing programs.

Intentionally overlooking his 1998 vote in favor of a motion to increase the Federal Housing Administration’s loan maximum from $170,000 to $197,000 — a maneuver that is strongly at odds with the hardline Republican stance he’s adopted in recent months — Santorum, in a May 2010 op-ed penned for the Philadelphia Inquirer, asserted that Fannie and Freddie were to blame for the financial crisis as they sought “to accomplish Democrats’ affordable-housing goals“:

Congress created Fannie and Freddie in 1938 to provide the affordable housing that Democrats thought the market was incapable of providing. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration pushed the mortgage giants to take on more subprime debt — and therefore risk — to accomplish Democrats’ affordable-housing goals.

As Fannie and Freddie grew in size and risk profile, I and some of my Republican colleagues attempted to restrict their growth and reform them. Democrats opposed us, and they prevailed until it was too late. In 2008, Fannie, Freddie, and the real estate bubble burst.

This particular brand of rhetoric isn’t unusual during the GOP primaries, where candidates have generally “embraced a theory that blames government policies aimed at expanding access to homeowner[s]hip for the 2008 financial crisis.” Neither is this widely accepted claim foreign to Santorum, though in suggesting that he agrees with the misguided theory that federal policies aimed at expanding access to affordable housing amongst low-income families were a preeminent factor in the 2008 financial meltdown, Santorum is, in effect, refusing to acknowledge the role he had in the matter.

In fact, in 2005 Santorum told his fellow Republicans that he was “very concerned about making sure that we do things in working with this legislation [on Fannie and Freddie] to improve the access to affordable housing,” adding that he wanted to orient Fannie and Freddie “toward taking a more active role in creating housing opportunities for low and moderate income families.”

In 2000, Santorum authored an academic article titled “A Compassionate Conservative Agenda: Addressing Poverty for the Next Millennium,” which stated that “access to safe and affordable housing is … a significant concern for low-income Americans seeking to pull themselves out of poverty,” he wrote. Now though, he’s more than happy to blame those same policies for causing the financial meltdown.

Fatima Najiy

Health

GOP Presidential Candidates Would Have A Hard Time Finding Coverage Under Their Health Reform Plans

The National Journal’s Margot Sanger-Katz and Meghan McCarthy have an interesting piece examining how the GOP presidential candidates obtain health insurance coverage, given their support for repealing the Affordable Care Act and pushing individuals and families into the individual market:

– MITT ROMNEY: The Romney campaign refused to say where he gets his health care coverage. But because of the health care reform law he signed as governor of Massachusetts, he is lucky to live in one of the few states with good insurance options for a 64-year-old unemployed man with a wife who has a preexisting health condition: multiple sclerosis.

– RICK SANTORUM: The 53-year-old former senator from Pennsylvania is enrolled in insurance that “is totally private, and not related to his time in Congress,” his spokesman, John Brabender, said in a phone interview. And if Republicans succeed in their stated goal of repealing “Obamacare,” Santorum likely won’t be firing his insurer any time soon, since his daughter suffers from a pre-existing condition.

– NEWT GINGRICH: Gingrich, 68, is enrolled in Medicare and buys his own supplemental insurance from Blue Cross Blue Shield, according to his campaign.

– RON PAUL: Paul, 76, as a member of Congress, gets his insurance coverage from the federal-employee benefit program, his campaign says.

– RICK PERRY: Perry, 61, gets his insurance from the state of Texas, a benefit he can continue to receive for the rest of his life. (According to the Texas Tribune, Perry is already collecting a state pension, even while he earns his salary as governor.)

These men are insured in large-group policies that don’t discriminate against pre-existing conditions and spread the risks and costs of insurance among a pool of healthy and sick applicants who can use the advantages of their size to negotiate better rates with medical providers. (It’s unclear if Santorum actually has an individual policy or a group plan through his campaign or think tank affiliation.)

Their campaign proposals, however, would encourage individual Americans to face down health insurance companies on their own and seek out affordable rates in an unregulated national market where companies can sell policies that don’t comply with state consumer protections and offer little reliability. Insurers have an incentive to enroll the healthiest beneficiaries and avoid or price out older applicants, so that the GOP candidates and many millions of Americans who suffer from pre-existing conditions, would have a hard time finding affordable insurance if they don’t have an alternative offer of employer coverage. In that case, they could (under the Republican proposals) end up uninsured or in a state-based high-risk insurance pool, where the enrollees’ older and sicker risk profile leads to higher premiums and out-of-pocket spending. Those are costs that this particular set of wealthy candidates could surely afford, but many other Americans will struggle with.

Alyssa

How ‘Are You There, Chelsea?’ Gets Its Asian Character Right

So, Are You There, Chelsea? is not a good television program. It’s yet another show that mistakes raunchiness for meaningful displays of individuality. It saddles Dot-Marie Jones with a deeply embarrassing side gig as a butch lesbian Chelsea (Laura Prepon) meets in prison. The wig Chelsea Handler wears to play Sloane, Chelsea’s sister (of whom Handler said earlier, “everything I’ve been accusing her of my whole life I can now reenact before her eyes”) is deeply unfortunate.

But especially after a fall of awful Asian stereotypes on 2 Broke Girls, I actually thought the one OK spot on Are You There, Chelsea? was Chelsea’s best friend and roommate, Olivia (Ali Wong), who happens to be Korean but doesn’t appear to be solely defined by her ethnic background. Sure, she makes jokes about her ethnicity, but they’re a means of allowing her to defined what role being Korean plays in her life, not of other people defining her by her Koreanness. Olivia snarks about her clothes smelling like kimchi from living at home. And when she and Chelsea talk about Olivia’s striving even though the only jobs available to her as an aspiring journalist are unpaid internships, Olivia deadpans “It’s the American dream. You people made it up.” When Chelsea explains how she and Olivia meant, her memories are of Olivia protecting her from a bully in a nice reversal of passive Asian stereotypes.

Is she perfect? Nah. I don’t really need to hear her ask their new roommate “You’re a virgin? Everywhere?” or talk about how the African-American gentleman she runs into the elevator is the source of her current ladyboner. But that’s part and parcel of the show’s trying-too-hardness, rather than big flaws in her character.

NEWS FLASH

Federal Judge Blocks Ohio’s First Scheduled Execution Of 2012 | Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Gregory Frost blocked the execution of Ohio inmate Charles Lorraine after Ohio failed to follow its own protocol list regarding lethal injection. Questions about the protocol had delayed previous executions, so Ohio officials issued a set of rules prison staff is supposed to follow step-by-step. Frost slammed Ohio officials for failing to follow their own rules: “It should not be so hard for Ohio to follow procedures that the state itself created. Today’s adverse decision … is again a curiously if not inexplicably self-inflicted wound.” He was referring to employees’ failure to “properly document the drug used and check the medical chart of inmate Reginald Brooks before he was executed on Nov. 15.” Ohio Attorney Mike DeWine (R) will appeal Frost’s decision to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Climate Progress

Connecticut Climate Denier Chris Coutu Threatens Storm Readiness

Climate zombie Chris Coutu (R-CT)

A climate denier running for Congress in Connecticut has attacked a non-partisan panel tasked to prepare Connecticut in the wake of record damage from extreme storms in 2011 for recognizing the growing threat of global warming. State Rep. Chris Coutu, who denies not only man-made global warming but even the fact of the warming itself, rejects the recommendations of the Two Storm Panel because it dared to mention the “pseudo-science” of climate change:

Chris Coutu, who is running for Congress in the 2nd District, said the Two Storm Panel strayed “far from its non-political mission and into the political minefield of global warming.” “The “Two Storm Panel” had a simple, non-political task: determining how Connecticut can better prepare for and respond to major storms. Instead of simply focusing on solutions, the panel veered into politics with its recommendations for global warming,” Coutu said in a press release issued a few hours after the panel released its report.

I don’t believe global warming’s occurring,” Coutu told the Hartford Courant. “There’s climate changes every year, there’s weather changes.”

Of course, it’s radical anti-science ideologues like Coutu who have made the scientific fact of global warming into a political issue, putting the residents of his state, our nation, and the entire planet at deadly risk. This panel is taking long-delayed action to protect Americans from the impacts of global warming caused by political inability to stop the fossil fuel pollution driving it.

“It’s global warming,” Sue Gress of New Canaan, Connecticut, told the New York Times in November. “No one wants to believe it, but things are changing. There’s much more violent weather, and we’re not prepared to deal with it.”

The Two Storm Panel’s report states that rising sea levels brought on by a warming planet “raises serious concerns about the need to protect critical infrastructure along the coast and adjacent to rivers.” Experts told the group that sea levels are expected to rise about 1.5 feet by the middle of the century and from 3 to 5 feet by the century’s end. The panel recommended new engineering standards to “better protect the built environment from the effects of extreme weather.”

“There is a reality that comes with the trend in climate change that we have to be better prepared for the future,” Gov. Dannel Malloy said. “We’re in a warming cycle,” James Skiff, the retired U.S. Air Force Major General who co-chairs the panel, told the Courant. “Sea levels are going to rise, that creates a higher storm surge.”

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up