> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Bush’s reach even extends to being an Oscars grouch - URL: https://www.smdp.com/bushs-reach-even-extends-to-being-an-oscars-grouch/ - Published: 2006-03-07T16:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T23:33:43.000Z - Author: David Pisarra - Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import *WHAT’S THE POINT?* Awards season is over. Big surprises and stunning losses were definitely the order of this Oscars. And that was just the gowns. Selma Hayek was classic Hollywood elegance, and Charlize Theron’s dress looked like a reject from Project Runway. This year, I watched the pre-show with Isaac Mizrahi, who was on very good behavior and frankly rather dull after the kerfluffle over his first time on the red carpet. Jon Stewart was the host of the Oscars who had the unenviable task of filling the shoes of Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg and Chris Rock. After a great opening sequence in classic Oscar style, poking fun at himself, and ending up in bed with George Clooney, Stewart went on to a very lackluster hosting. As a big fan of The Daily Show, I can tell you that his performance on the Oscars was not indicative of who this comic genius is. In a year when the top movies dealt with racism, internalized homophobia, a search for self, and revealing the ugly truth, I fear that the culture of mediocrity was forced upon those whose job it is to poke the chest of America. Phrases like, “tone it down” and “keep it clean” were probably bandied about to placate the powers that be who feared that given such great fodder as gay cowboys, a transgen-dered woman, and an effete east coast writer with a passion for murderers, the jokes could and would get risqué quickly. That’s a shame because silencing, or even just muffling a little, the voices of our comics and commentators takes us one step closer to becoming the society that we fight wars to prevent. We were founded with the idea that freedom of the press is paramount to a free society. If ever there was a time when we needed a free press it is now. We need a press that is willing to inflame the religious right in this country, and expose government corruption, cover-ups and delays. We need celebrities to use their bully pulpits to speak out to the masses who are asleep in their pre Target, post Wal-Mart haze of McDonalds food comas and consumer complacency. We need people who are willing to stand up and shout from the hilltops that what is going on is wrong. The whack jobs, the crazies and the looneytune people who we cross the street to avoid are all needed to point out the inconsistencies, the illogical trends, and the just plain bad behavior of our elected leaders. There is a difference between the media which uses discretion judiciously, such as when President Roosevelt was rarely shown commanding a war from his wheel-chair, and the silence of a press that dares not criticize an administration that is evidencing incompetence, corruption and is actively shredding the U.S Constitutional rights of our citizens. The press has a remarkable history of exposing wrongs. From Upton Sinclair’s writings that changed the way in which animals are slaughtered and packed, to the Teapot Dome scandal of the Harding administration, the press has been a potent force for change in our society. In every society there is a division between the “haves” and the “have-nots.” Generally the haves run the society and the have-nots do the work. In an idealized society, the haves run things, but in the best interests of the have-nots. This is because the guy who is cleaning out the stables is probably not the guy you want negotiating treaties with foreign nations. Division of labor is what allows a society to grow and prosper, and that is a good thing. But unless the have-nots have some mechanism with which to monitor and exercise control over the haves, the society becomes unbalanced and the haves take too much. Then they stop acting in the best interests of the have-nots. We’ve seen that in our own state, where Congress Cunningham was recently sentenced to eight years federal prison for taking bribes in a scheme that was remarkably similar to the Teapot Dome scandal of the 20s. Curiously, the mistake that started both investigations was excessive spending by the corrupt officials which was brought to light by the press. That type of personal behavior becomes publicly known, only if we have a press that is willing and able to investigate, and confront, our officials. In an ideal society, the question of who guards the guards is not necessary, for they are perfect law-abiding citizens themselves. The problem with such a picture perfect world is that it’s not reality. Reality is a place of deceptions, confusions, mobile morals and deceit. In our society, reality is kept in check by a free press that doggedly pursues truth and is fearless in the face of criticism and intimidation. If it wasn’t for the Woodward and Bernstein investigation, would we have had President Ford? Not likely. Even though he pardoned President Nixon, at least we found the skunk in the woodshed and made him resign. It is a strange sense of morality and propriety that allows a war to be fought, a disaster to occur, and an environmental treaty to go unsigned, but won’t allow a comic to ply his trade. The Oscars were mundane, predictable, in a word, safe. They couldn’t offend the most far right in their content. They did, however, offend just about everyone on the left who wanted to see Jon Stewart be Jon Stewart. As family fare, they were fine. As entertainment they were bland as oatmeal, and as Hollywood’s night to spout off, they were as quiet as a preacher caught in a brothel. Maybe it was a just a bad night for political humor. It was definitely a bad night for dresses. What was Reese thinking? (David Pisarra or (310) 664-9969.) *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on March 7, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/030706.pdf?ref=smdp.com)