I have been so substantive, reasonable and measured (for the most part) in these blogs that I now have a need to expose a number of the features of the political/media world that drive me batshit crazy. Allowing myself this departure from careful commentary to the hurling of brickbats (if not bricks) is like having a delicious dessert!

And, as you will discover, my peeves are nonpartisan or bipartisan.

Congressman James Daniel Jordan, the “Coach.”  Jim Jordan is a  loudmouth who appears not to own a suit as he always shows up  in shirtsleeves. Maybe he uses a loaner jacket on the House floor.

He cannot speak sotto voce and in this respect he reminds me of Ethel Merman who had the same problem. At hearings he berates witnesses. On the rare occasions when he asks a question, he does not permit an answer.

Jordan is from Ohio. He represents Elyria, not the Shakespeare one in “Twelfth Night,” the Ohio one [“What country, friends, is this? This is Illyria, lady.”].

He is in the holler school of politics, very much  like the people who speak English to foreigners in a loud voice as though this would make them understand.

The “Squad.” This was originally four Democrats, women elected ion 2018, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib. Now there are two more, Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush.

These call themselves “progressives,” but the thrust of their proposals is to tear it all apart in a demolition derby and start over. The fact that something now exists as part of society is reason enough to merit the bulldozer. They have the classic outsider stance: whatever it is, they are against it.

They are all in so-called “D+20” districts and can therefore be returned to office forever.

Responsible dialogue and compromise is not their strong suit.

AOC is a powerful star in the political firmament, appealing to millions of Americans who think “now” and not “gradual.” The squad’s problem is that they are all legislators but nothing they propose will pass nor is it designed to do so.

Feminist Condemnation of Shakespeare.  The poetry, stories and joys of Shakespeare are under attack from feminist “scholars” who argue that some of it is okay but that “The Taming of the Shrew” is the rotten apple that spoils the batch.

You might as well put your recording of “Kiss Me Kate” on E-bay.

In fact, the better interpretation is that Petruchio’s abuse of Kate is a criticism of society. That Kate gives as much as she gets is a major theme of the play. And at the end, in her final speech, Kate has the gift of elegance and freedom.

Audiences love “Shrew” because it depicts a woman who will have her way and because it is extremely funny. Why dismiss that play because the action does not conform to contemporary standards?

Grandiosity in politicians. My most-disliked examples of this behavior are Senators Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz. They are just politicians on the make but you’d have a lot of trouble convincing them of that fact.

Cruz sounds like he his talking for the history books. His views are received wisdom, according to him.

Graham gives the impression of boyish insouciance, throwing off epigrams that he thinks are both on-the-money and fabulously humorous. He is a well-rehearsed phony whose tv appearances are his life. Judging by his act, he thinks he is a combination of Justinian and Johnny Carson.

Me too. This is a good idea that has been twisted like a pretzel. These days many people are being hounded and condemned for being jerks.

A distinction must be made between a man who drugs  women to have sex or one who commits sexual assault and those big-mouths who are working out their characterological immaturity through dumb and insulting behavior.