Thomas Sowell Agrees With Me

About the real Obama


Sowell writes in his article "A Post-Racial President?":

An 18th century philosopher said, "When I speak I put on a mask. When I act I am forced to take it off." Barack Obama's mask slipped for a moment last week but he quickly recovered, with the help of the media. But we should never forget what we saw.

This is what I wrote in my post "Obama's Expressions":

[H]ere's more of the true Obama coming out to the open in unexpected ways. Video footage can only conceal so much of him, thanks to gestures and expressions.

I.e. his actions.

Like Clockwork: Update On Mercer III

Idiot is as idiot writes



From the "pundit" that discreetly (without directly referring to me) called me an idiot once - and I have reason to believe she did it again - here is a truly idiotic post.

Never mind that her post is an incoherent mess of deriding Gates, reprimanding Sgt. Crowley, and talking about racism. What exactly is her point - and where is she going with all this, really?

Here is, I believe, the pertinent excerpt:

At this stage [while still in Gates's home], I think the officer ought to have walked away. Just done the gentlemanly thing and bowed out. But when Gates followed Crowley out cussing, pulling rank and threatening him, the officer cuffed the professor for disorderly conduct. At this point, the officer, who so far had done his duty, lost it and gave in to oneupmanship [sic].

a. Crowley did walk away.

b. The officer did not give in to one-upmanship. If Mercer had carefully watched the interview of Crowley after the incident, and properly read the police report that she links to on her blog, she should have realized that there was no one-upmanship on Crowley's part. Gates was simply demonstrating disorderly behavior.

c. There is no indication whatsoever that Crowley "lost it."

I understand now, after reading the comments section on her blog, that this is all to do with "The State" and "Property Rights" and other paranoid libertarian views.

So, I was right, though confused for quite a while, that I was dealing with an odd character when I got that strange email. I wish she had called me "idiot" earlier, and I would have figured out this libertarian mess that so many so-called conservative writers (or writers who use conservative venues because no-one else will publish them) call writing.

Obama's Expressions

He just can't run away from those

I did a quick, rough recording of Obama's speech
directly from the computer, and edited out most
of it except for these short 13 seconds.
Images are indeed worth a thousand words.
I've tried to analyze them. But, maybe it's
enough just to watch.

I was viewing this short video from ABC of Obama's pseudo-apology to Sgt. Crowley, and found each sentence in those short six minutes irritating enough to warrant a rebuttal, but I will leave it all to this 13-second visual segment. About four minutes into the speech, Obama says:

The fact that this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that [Obama shrugs his shoulders, nods his head sideways, mouths "you know"] race is still [does a twisting motion with his right hand with a grimace on his face] a troubling aspect of our society...

I don't know how to adequately analyze these facial expressions and body movements. My best shot is that it's as though Obama is saying: "Well, we know that we'll never really get rid of racism, as long as those evil racists are around. And I can't quite get a handle on this racism thing, but it sure would go away if the culprits wanted it to go away. I mean, don’t they get it that they’re racists?"

Anyway, here's more of the true Obama coming out to the open in unexpected ways. Video footage can only conceal so much of him, thanks to gestures and expressions.

We Know that Obama Is Not a Nice Guy

And any "nice guy" traits are questionable


I will venture to say that we know that Obama is not a nice guy.

I say this because:

- He threw is grandmother, who brought him up during his teenage years, "under the bus."

- Rather than protect his wife when pressured to produce her Princeton thesis, he allowed the media to access it. He must have known it would undergo scrutiny. Wasn't it enough that Michelle’s thesis professors put her on the spot, without the whole country (and world) doing the same decades later? Even Hillary declined to have her thesis made public.

- He sat for twenty years in Wright's church, and lied about not hearing the vicious sermons Wright preached. It is bad enough that he lied, but it is just as bad or worse the kind of bitterness and antagonism he must hold towards America, having been privy to those sermons.

- When put on a sudden spot, like in this interview, he loses all his charm and goodwill, and resorts to bad feelings based on false statistics and manufactured grudges.

- This person thinks that he has a hidden misogynistic personality. I tend to agree.

- He is a manipulator, as I posted here. He lets his wife make outrageous statements, as though by proxy for him, never denounces what she says, but lets her get all the flack. And when Malia Obama wears a politically loaded peacenik t-shirt while in Moscow, looking ungainly and unattractive, he (and his wife) let her. Again, I'm deducing that he's letting Malia play out his political views, once again showing his manipulative side.

- Probably the most revelatory is his public persona, which he camouflaged and hid from us for much of his campaign, which he then started to slowly unravel as his presidency progressed. For example, he never mentioned his middle name, but then clearly made it a part of his identity early on in his presidency. This would qualify any other politician (or person) as a liar. So, are liars nice guys?

- Finally, I do think the personal is the political. What a person does in public (and as a public person) reflects on his personality.

On the other had, we may think he is a nice guy because:

- He always talks about how much he loves his daughters.

But:

Many not-so-nice people have strong emotional attachments to people close to them.

- He appears to have a long and successful marriage with Michelle.

But:

As much as I hate getting into people’s marital affairs, we don’t know what goes on in their home. People have written about his stubborn pursuit of his political career, which had Michelle frustrated at being left behind with their children in Chicago while he was away in Washington, causing years of tension in their house.

- He appears charming and affable.

But:

He has shown an inability to hold spontaneous press conferences, getting his Speaker of the House to cover for him. Is he afraid of not appearing charming and friendly when asked difficult questions?

He may smile a lot, but then there are moments when we see his grimacing face, which suggests that all that smiling may just be a front.

- He seems to have good manners (I remember when he pulled Hillary’s chair out for her during one of their debates).

But:

Pulling the chair out for Hillary may have been what his grandma (now under the bus) taught him, and was a knee-jerk reaction.

- He takes Michelle out on dates.

But:

One particular date he had with his wife came at an extraordinary expense, and a choreography of helicopters and airplanes, all for dinner and theatre in New York. If he were a genuinely nice person, surely he would have scrapped this at a time when people were losing their jobs and a recession was looming in the horizon?

On another date, while in the Prague, he ignored or neglected protocol in a foreign land and preferred to pass the time at a restaurant with his wife instead. My theory on that was that Michelle didn't handle the trip that well (remember her fashion disasters?), and needed buttering up.

I don’t mean to be facetious, but someone once told me that Stalin was quite possibly a nice person (according to his private friends), yet look what he did to his country.

I understand people defending Obama’s personal character; it is never good to gossip since there is really so much we don’t know. But, there is a lot we do know, and perhaps we should base our decisions on that instead. That is after all what we are called to do:

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

I will stick to my long-time analysis that Obama is not as nice as he makes out. Charming, yes, although even that is losing ground with many people.

Actually, there is one theory that he is simply a narcissist. I tend to agree with that, which explains so much of his posturing and charming persona. And narcissists definitely are not nice people.

Graveyard Where Emmitt Till Is Buried Has Been Desecrated

Premonition of things to come

Emmitt Till's murder catapulted America into the civil rights movement. Now, more than fifty years later, we are seeing the fruits of that movement. The despicable incident involving the Harvard professor Henry Gates who, despite his prominent position and privileged life, found it within himself to yell "racism” when a white policeman arrested him for disorderly conduct, is testament to this "progress."

The event has been covered extensively these past few days.

I just want to point out the uncanny news of three gravediggers and the cemetery manager at Burr Oak Cemetery in Alsip Illinois, where Till is buried, that were charged with removing bodies from graves, and re-selling the emptied plots. Their charge occurred only ten days before the Gates story. Although Till's grave remained unharmed, his original casket, which was glass-covered so that, according to his mother, "the world would see what they've done to my boy," was found rotting in a nearby shed. It had been given to the cemetery to be displayed in a mausoleum.

The four that were charged with this desecration are all black. This includes the former manager, who had been entrusted with the memorial fund for the mausoleum, but who police now believe pocketed the money.

It is almost as though this incident, quiet yet devastating to the family members who had graves desecrated, was a premonition of the events to come.

The Talent of Pop Artists

Going to waste


I posted early this morning on pop star Mika's new song "We are golden." Mostly, it was a negative view of the lyrics.

[Click here to listen to Mika's "We are golden"].

I like the song a lot. There is a fullness about it. As I say in the post: "This particular song is big, orchestral, cosmic even."

There are many talents around in the arts. Pop music generates its own brand of talents, however much the highbrow elites deride them. Like I said in my last post, pop culture is an extension (or a modern version) of folk culture. We have to take it seriously, and even nurture it. This is the same with "Hollywood" films, where there are many directors who are using long-earned and learned skills and techniques in filmmaking, which if we totally dismiss, will result in a completely barren artistic world.

I think part of the problem is that people don't know how to do beautiful art anymore. And if they do it, they have to infuse it with repelling decadence. A little like the rose scene in Chéri, where Michelle Pfeiffer's character, Léa, bends down to smell a beautiful pale pink rose, only to find it disintegrating in her hands.

So, the question is: how do we get to do beautiful art once more? And not only that, meaningful art as well, which is equally important, since Mika's problem is his profound nihilism.

I would venture to say that we, older veterans (and our mentors too), owe these younger artists an explanation (which will force us to search our own intentions as well) as to why art has turned this corner and is staring into the abyss. We also need the courage of our convictions, and return to beauty once again.

Mika and his ilk are only following what they see. They are, after all, being true to themselves and their surroundings.

Notes on Pop Culture: From Paradise to Dystopia

In just forty years

Pop singer Mika looks like he could
be one of the scavenger youths from
Doris Lessings Memoirs of a survivor.

I think pop culture is a watered down version of folk culture, and that pop culture, as we know it, has a degenerative, decadent characteristic to it, whereas folk culture is more uplifting.

Still, what pop culture does, besides give us the culture of our time and hopefully our locale, is some kind of collective psychological barometer as to where our culture is going.

I recently came across this very poppy pop song titled "We are golden" composed and sung by a young man called Mika. Apparently, he is quite a pop phenomenon. He studied music at the Royal College of Music in England before writing his own songs.

Since I equate pop songs with folk songs, I take them seriously. This particular song is big, orchestral, cosmic even. But it is really uncanny too, because of the lyrics.

Now, thanks to the web, I was able to find a line of Mika’s song in Joni Mitchell’s "Woodstock" with precisely those same lines – "we are golden."

Here is part of the lyrics from Mika’s song ("we are golden" is part of the refrain):

I was a boy at an open door
Why you staring
Do you still think that you know?
Looking for treasure
In the things that you threw
Like a magpie
I live for glitter, not you

We are not what you think we are
We are golden, we are golden
(We are not what you think we are
We are golden, we are golden)

Here is part of Joni Mitchell’s "Woodstock" – again "we are golden" is part of the refrain.

I came upon a child of God
He was walking along the road
And I asked him where are you going
And this he told me
I'm going on down to Yasgur's farm 
I'm going to join in a rock 'n' roll band
I'm going to camp out on the land
I'm going to try an' get my soul free

We are stardust
We are golden
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

I knew of Mitchell’s song, but had forgotten it.

I think Mika’s song is about dystopia, the end of the world, the end of everything, whereas Mitchell’s is about leaving earth to return to paradise. Mika has given up on earth and heaven; Joni still dreams of heaven.

Mitchell’s song was written 1969; Mika’s in 2009. This is the progress our culture has made in the last forty years. Although the vestiges of this profound nihilism are to be found in Mitchell’s song, it has a ring of hope to it. In Mika’s there is an unabashed abandon. The song sounds optimistic, but it is just a wild frenzy of the moment. Let’s sing ourselves to our deaths, he seems to be saying.

What happened in these last forty years to bring forth a Mika? Why couldn’t Mitchell’s song have steered us (and her) towards another, better, path?

Mika’s characters, all those Golden Ones, remind me of course of Hitler’s golden youth. But Doris Lessing, in her 1974 dark novel Memoirs of a Survivor, writes about confident youth taking over a world that has caved in on itself. The grown-ups, the adults, who caused this destruction, are no longer in the picture. Instead, "Lord of the Flies" style, young teenagers are running the show, vandalizing and tormenting the adults as they scavenge through garbage bins for shiny things.

Lessing's prophecy is coming true, at least in Mika's songs.

Emmitt Till

Murder in the South

I'm a little ashamed to say that I hadn't heard of the Emmitt Till murder. I spent quite a bit of time going through the internet to learn about the case, and understand it.

In short, Emmitt Till was a young black teenager who was murdered in Mississippi in 1955. He was dared by his friends to flirt with a young white woman. The two men who were strongly suspected of the murder – the woman’s husband, Roy Bryant, and his half brother, J.W. Milam - were acquitted. After their acquittal, they admitted to the crime, protected by double jeopardy, during an interview in Look magazine in 1956.

Here’s is part of Milam's  interview, which certainly sounds like a confession.

Well, what else could we do? He was hopeless. I'm no bully; I never hurt a nigger in my life. I like niggers -- in their place -- I know how to work 'em. But I just decided it was time a few people got put on notice. As long as I live and can do anything about it, niggers are gonna stay in their place. Niggers ain't gonna vote where I live. If they did, they'd control the government. They ain't gonna go to school with my kids. And when a nigger gets close to mentioning sex with a white woman, he's tired o' livin'. I'm likely to kill him. Me and my folks fought for this country, and we got some rights. I stood there in that shed and listened to that nigger throw that poison at me, and I just made up my mind. 'Chicago boy,' I said, 'I'm tired of 'em sending your kind down here to stir up trouble. Goddam you, I'm going to make an example of you -- just so everybody can know how me and my folks stand.'

I apologize for not editing it, but I want the authenticity to remain.

I’m by no means condoning this horrible murder (during which the young boy’s face was disfigured), but Emmitt Till’s murder was about fundamental things.

I wonder how Milam would have reacted to the likes of Henry Louis Gates? Would he say, "me and my folks fought for this country, and we got some rights."? Or would he let Gates, Cornel, Jackson, Sharpton et al. continue with their tirades? I’m afraid the latter is most likely the case.

Roy Bryant, one of the confessed murderers
of Emmitt Till, with his wife Carolyn, who Emmitt
flirted with. Bryant is holding their two sons.

The above photo is from a collection in Life magazine. There are too many to post here, but the photos of the trial and the surrounding days are worth seeing. It really was another world then.

Here is a pretty good site with articles, photos and the various personalities and events of the case, etc.

Three Lyric Pieces For Piano By Edvard Grieg

From Camera Musica

Lyric Pieces Book 1, Op. 12
No. 1 Arietta
No. 4 Elves' Dance
No. 5 Folk Song

Sarah's Audacity

At the Republican National Convention


Here is the usual first class discussion going on at VFR, this time on Sarah Palin. I have invested a bit of time on Sarah. The American Thinker published my article on her ("Sarah Palin: Whose family values?"), edited to fit the flagrant Palin adulation at their site, which still didn't save me from over one hundred comments berating my stance on Sarah.

I also wrote a blog on her recently, equating her to a modern world's desire for a goddess, and putting her as the contender.

And previously, I have followed her daughter's ordeal of single motherhood, and the betrayal of the family by the father of that young infant.

The discussion at VFR has many interesting propositions for Sarah's immense popularity (and equally immense hate).

I like what commenter Paul V. had to say:

Never underestimate the hatred of beauty, or for many of those who love beauty, distrust of it when circumstances more properly place a premium on truth and goodness.

And I would add "never underestimate the strength of beauty." Maybe it is simply a phenomenon of charisma (based on looks, personality, and a hidden something which the followers are yearning for), something which John F. Kennedy had, something which got Obama into the White House. Perhaps in our era of televised elections, charisma is easier to disseminate. Perhaps that is the danger - the idolatry that comes from images, from television especially.

That is how I got interested in Sarah in the first place. That incredible vision of her and her extended family, because Levi was also coerced into the picture, which also included a pregnant unmarried daughter, an infant (disabled) son, and a husband who seemed happy enough to be beside his famous wife.

Sarah had the audacity to present us with this image.

Ethnic Literature Still Irreconcilable With The Mainstream

Tasleem Thawar in Diaspora Dialogues


I rarely read "diaspora" literature unless it is to glean through the material and critique it. I am by no means an expert on the history of immigrant, ethnic or non-mainstream literature, but one thing that strikes me about the current crop of immigrant writers is how they dwell incessantly on their immigrant status. It is almost as though they see no way out of their ethnicity. There is no attempt to reconcile their Canadianness (or Americanness) with their ethnic background. It is "either/or", and never "and."

This is really the big story behind current immigration. Previously, at some point, the Ukrainian, Polish, Irish or Hungarian immigrants somehow found their way into the mainstream. Some might have even changed their last names, certainly many took on mainstream first name. But despite perogies and decorated Easter eggs, these communities blended in at some point.

So what about the Indian, the Chinese, the Jamaican, now second or even third generation immigrant families? What happened there?

Writers (art) at some point cannot lie. And what the stories of these Canadian-born children of immigrants are telling us is that assimilation is still a big preoccupation. (You can read my review of an American writer of Indian origin, Jhumpa Lahiri, and her obsessive themes of immigrants, here under "Ethnic Stories, Divided Loyalties").

Tasleem Thawar, born and raised in Toronto, wrote her first short story, "Packaging Parathas", about an illegal immigrant who came to Toronto via Tanzania (and originally from India) to live with her grandmother. Thawar matter-of-factly writes about the protagonist’s illegal status, seeing it not as tarnishing her story, but as the reality that is part of her community’s existence. Throughout the story, the young girl is trying to figure out how she can enter university in Canada without causing suspicion.

The next short story Thawar writes is called "Her Hands." Helen Walsh of Gothic Toronto: Writing the City Macabre commissioned her to write it for their limited edition book, which also features Margaret Atwood and Ann-Marie MacDonald. I’m not sure what ghoulish influence Walsh saw in her first story, but Thawar certainly delivered.

This time, Thawar writes about an immigrant worker from Bombay and a ghost who reminds him of his mother. Once again, there are those themes of irreconcilability: an immigrant, a mother from the homeland, a ghost (a being) which is intangible.

On a more literary level, "Packaging Parathas" is a simple story, with a clever meandering between "Indians" in Canada and in East Africa (even those who grew up in Kenya and Tanzania consider themselves Indian). There are no “aha” moments, but it is a well enough crafted story that gives Walsh et al. sufficient ammunition to parade it at various literary events and publications as a good example of "ethnic" literature.

Sarah Palin the Goddess

Woman as savior

The "Green Goddess" is a four hundred
metre long landscape sculpture planned
for Northumberland in England.

The Judeo-Christian ethos does not see woman as savior. If a woman participates in some kind of saviorship, it is through her natural role as providing the progeny for the potential savior. Eve didn't save paradise, and Mary begat Jesus to right the wrong that Eve wrought. Three thousand years passed, before Eve's destructive action could be expiated.

Many ancient cultures gave equal, if not superior, roles to women as saviors. They called them goddesses. Yet ancient mythology is full of goddesses whose wrath and destruction is mightier than some of their male counterparts. Perhaps we are shocked to learn of goddesses killing their own children to act revenge. This is what Medea did. But then there is Cybil, the Great Mother (of gods and men). Yet her ardent following are castrated men; men who can only participate in the destruction of the world, being unable to procreate – an analogy to the impotent (and destructive) role of Cybele on her throne.

This modern world is obsessed with the goddess.“Find the goddess in you,” “Reconnect with your goddess,” “Become a goddess” are frequent lures for impressionable women, young and old. Society has given up in the power of man, the saviorship of man. Rather than follow our God, we would prefer to conjure up our goddesses.

It seems to me that such is the phenomenon of Sarah Palin. Perhaps we are nearing the apex of our goddess culture. Perhaps Sarah is that apex.

In pervious generations, women leaders were not chosen for their roles as saviors. Elizabeth I was following the strict royal lineage of her country. Catherine the Great of Russia was married to a prospective Tsar, and naturally wore the crown at her husband’s death, despite palace coups and rumors of murder (there’s that destruction in the background again). Margaret Thatcher went through rigorous election processes to qualify as Prime Minister.

The eulogy that follows Palin from the conservative court, and eventually I predict from many liberals also, is unrestrained and unruly. Men and women are letting all inhibitions drop when it comes to adulating their Sarah.

What do they want from her? The fierce nurturing of a Cybele? The possessive strength of an Artemis? The stifling wisdom of Athena? People are hungry for the return of the goddess.

Woman, goddess or not, seems more a destroyer than a savior when put in the position of unrestrained leadership. This is what her followers seem willing to give Sarah. But they should read the signs, readily available, before they make a permanent commitment to her. She brought streams of controversy with her quick entry into the political scene. This doesn’t sit well with the future of her leadership.

Modern People Can't Handle Beauty

Michelle Pfeiffer in "Chéri"
Hats for Chéri

It seems to be all things French on this blog for the past while.

Michelle Pfeiffer is radiant (and tragic, like a rose whose petals are falling off) in Colette's novel-turned-film "Chéri."

The petals scene I described is actually from the film. This is yet another decadent French story, this time of a much older woman and a younger man, who remain for six years together until reality hits them.

Colette's novel is magnificently brought to the silver (or I should say, bejewelled) screens, with Michelle's subtle and intelligent acting winning all the scenes.

I was surprised to see the film critics can this film. When I first read them, my first thought (after seeing the trailer) was that they couldn't handle how beautiful it was - like too much chocolate, said one critic.

Well, yes, it is beautiful. Yet, surprisingly, there is an attempt to ground the two characters in some kind of morality. Although Michelle saved her young man from drugs, alcoholism and general debauchery, she understood that she had left him addicted to a kind of narcissistic love that she (or anyone else) could never fulfill.

Beauty cannot stand on its own. It needs Truth and Goodness. Michelle's character, Léa, tried all that, but the latter two came too late.

Only the French know how to do decadent with a moral twist.

Of course, I would watch the film only for the costumes and the hats, and the beautiful gardens that seemed to be everywhere. Film is only film, after all.

This Is What France Has Become

Yet, the telltale signs have been there for a while

This incredible story comes from GalliaWatch. I thought about posting something on Bastille Day yesterday, seeing as I've been tuned into the French Nouvelle Vague films for the past few weeks.  

But, this is absolutely incredible.

Bastille Day, 2009 - Honoring India.

Read the whole thing at GalliaWatch.

Yet, the telltale signs were there, in my short couple-of-months tour of the famous late 1950s French new wave cinema. All the films I watched were to do with adultery or some kind of debauchery. Almost all of them ended in suicide, murder or both.

It was startling to see this pattern. The Italian don't do this in their Neorealism films (which came just before the French Nouvelle Vague). Theirs are stories of human tragedies, errors of mistaken direction, weaknesses of character, grandiosity where none should be. Vittorio De Sica's "The Bicycle Thief" is a heart-wrenching story where the young boy beats hands down the self-centered brat of François Truffaut’s "400 Coups."

The Nouvelle Vague directors really made their characters aggressively pursue decadence and sin. And all for petty desires usually involving sex.

I don't have the time or the knowledge to make these links between this French decadence and the arrival of foreign troops in the Elysée gardens, but I will attempt to do so some time in the future. I would add that there seems to have been a precedence, where German troops were once honored in French official buildings. 

I've also posted a photo of the demure-looking new wife of the French President. Yet, this same woman has been posing in all stages of undress for magazines throughout her life, starting in her very early twenties.

Niagara II

Niagara Falls Triptych
Niagara Falls Triptych

[Click image to view larger triptych]

Niagara I

Road to NiagaraRoad to Niagara

Paul McCartney Was the Leader of the Beatles

And not John Lennon
English Tea, Paul McCartney

I've always thought that Paul McCartney was the lead musician (and lyricist) while the Beatles were still together. This was hard to prove, because when McCartney founded the group Wings, his music went down the tubes. And Lennon never wrote anything significant after the Beatles split.

In fact, I think that the reason Lennon got shot was due to a disappointed fan. After the brilliance of the Beatles, it is hard to come to terms with Lennon's grandiosity. Probably Lennon's shooter also blamed Lennon (via his untalented, ungracious wife, Yoko Ono) for the band's demise.

So, whatever happened with McCartney in Wings? Again, I say blame it on the spouse. The vegetarian Linda McCartney never left Paul's side throughout, even becoming part of his band. I suspect she had a lot of influence on McCartney's creations.

I recently came across McCartney’s 2005 album "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard." Many of his songs have that haunting Beatles quality to them, although they don't quite reach those heights. Still, it shows McCartney still has it in him to pull off those unexpected melody shifts, clever, even ingenious lyrics, and a certain charming optimism despite some of the dark moods of his songs.

Although my search goes on, I still think it was Paul who was behind the Beatles.

Listen to 30 second samples of "Chaos and Creation" here at Amazon.com.

For a complete Jenny Wren", go here to YouTube. Another hit on the album is "A Certain Softness", and here is the charming "English Tea."

Malia Obama's Peacenik T-Shirt

While MO looks all demure in a white sundress

I had sworn never to write about Michelle Obama's sartorial disasters. This isn't really about her, but about her daughter Malia. Also, it isn't about aesthetics and style, but about MO's hypocritical attitude as shown by her choices in her public attire. And, I think she's using her daughter to get her messages across about "spreading the wealth, and the peace."

While in Russia, Michelle was carrying a black clutch, which style experts identified as an Italian luxury good from VBH, which cost $5,950. The White House said it was an $875 knockoff.

Now, we should all say how thrifty Michelle is by substituting the real thing for a knockoff. But why go for a copy of an expensive, status-heavy model? Why not go for an original, cheaper clutch, with no designer ambitions?

Well, I think Michelle just wants it both ways: to make a style statement, but not get cornered for being too high-fashion conscious. Her fake clutch, though, proves the exact opposite.

She also aims to have it her way with her daughter Malia, although Malia would beg to differ in her modern pre-teen rebellious ways. Malia was in Moscow wearing a simple (cheap?) t-shirt with the famous Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament symbol (the peace sign)  printed on it. In fact, she wore two variations of this peacenik t-shirt. Michelle looks demure and neutral in a white sundress standing next to Malia .

I’ve never seen Michelle make blatant, non-aesthetic, political statements with her clothing. In fact, wherever she goes wrong with her style, it is a problem of bad choices rather than ideological statements. She dresses to look good, not to flaunt an ideology.

So, why would she allow Malia to dress in this “non-fashion” sense? I’m sure she pretty much controls what her daughters wear. The only rationale I can come up with is that she condones the message, and allows her daughter to sport her and her husband’s radical political views, without getting into trouble themselves. After all, pre-teens will be pre-teens, and since when do they listen to their parents anyway?

This reminds me of the statements Michelle made in public which Obama never corrected. “My wife says what she wants” is his way of using her as a scapegoat for his beliefs. As a presidential candidate and then as president, he has every right to tell his wife not to behave in ways that would sabotage his position. Unless, of course, he doesn’t think her actions are doing him any harm.

So, Malia’s public attire is just another saga of the Obama family manipulating the public (and each other) to get their messages across.

But, Malia is looking strange these days. She has worn her hair in this dreadlock style before, but never so untidily. Also, she’s sporting dark glasses, short shorts, and ugly gray sweat pants.

At times, she looks like a junior recruit to the Black Panthers.

Veronica, Also Known As Speedwell

A roadside attraction


Aptly named speedwell (and veronica), this purple flower grows in country fields and along highways, and is a welcome sight during the summer.

King David The Adulterer

Love and Infatuation

"David's Promise to Bathsheba", by Frederick Goodall, 1888

I've been watching a lot of French New Wave films. Rather than go into a detailed description of the styles and techniques of these films, I would like to just comment on the storylines.

Almost all the films I watched dealt with adultery. And at some point, someone gets shot or commits suicide.

I felt a certain repulsion watching these films, despite some of their exquisite imagery (and certainly intelligent directors). But, one film stood out. Louis Malle’s "Les Amants" with Jeanne Moreau almost vindicates this ugly theme.

Jeanne has a strict and inattentive husband, with whom she lives in the country. She has a city lover who is also a polo player. Then, after a clandestine meeting with a man who gives her a ride after her car breaks down, this man becomes the one for whom she leaves her wealthy husband and chic lover.

Malle’s beautiful scenes of these two together (under the same roof as Moreau's husband, no less), almost redeem the sordid theme. Fortunately, no-one gets shot (or commits suicide) in this particular New Wave adultery film.

Whenever I see films of adultery, I try to compare them to King David's lapse of judgement, and where, in fact, a murder does take place.

I think first that David truly repented of his sins. Also, that the Bible believes in love. Or love at first sight, as seems to be the case with David. The infatuation that David had for Bathsheba is not necessarily condoned – too many things happened to David as a consequence of this action. But David’s sincere emotions are surely part of human nature, and perhaps that is why this Biblical story is accepting, allowing David to marry the woman he commits adultery with, and whose husband he has murdered.

Strange New World

And "families"

The Jackson family

The Madonna family

The Jolie family

Losing Farmland in Ontario

Critiques say it is due to high immigration levels

[Click on image to see larger version]

Here are some quick shots of farmland on the road from Toronto to Ottawa. Rural Ontario is still quite expansive. But, here is an article from Immigration Watch Canada, about what is negatively affecting Ontario's farmland:

According to the Ontario Farmland Trust, 600,000 acres of Ontario farmland were lost to non-farm uses between 1996 and 2006...

Ontario has been losing farmland to short-sighted development for many years, but the process accelerated in 1991 when uninterrupted high immigration levels were introduced...

Loss of farmland endangers future food security. High quality farmland that is near population centres will probably become crucial...[A]re these great immigration "humanitarians", who see nothing wrong with surrendering food security to the "unselfish" creation of multiculturalism and diversity...prepared to [say]: "Let them eat diversity!!" if their food supply is curtailed?

Many Canadians … place pro-immigration ideology high above basics such as preserving good farmland. They ignore the fact that 40% of Canada is north of 60 degrees latitude and that only about 5% of Canada's land mass is farmland.

Mercer and Nationhood

From Mercer’s email to me:

> The other laughable issue is the accusation that I lack a healthy
> nationalism. Again, bloggers proudly display their absolute ignorance--they
> have no qualms about never studying the object of their expansive, idiot,
> smug comments.
>
> What's this if not an argument for authentic nationhood?
> http://www.ilanamercer.com/NationStateMass%20Immigration.htm. Nation,
> State & Mass Immigration
>
> There are stacks more in my immigration archive but one wouldn't expect
> anything but empty assertions from this corner.

My response:

Firstly, the internet is an impersonal venue, and criticism of other bloggers and sites is in fair order. But rudeness is not my trait nor my character.

Secondly, I do not have the time to cull through all the essays that you have written, believing that the important information should come from the WND posts I read at times, and your blog I visit, also at times.

I am not here to discuss philosophical and political-philosophical issues. I am neither a politician nor philosopher. But, I have a great interest in nationhood.

During my brief visits, these are the things that caught my attention: (I do not have the time to find the links.)

1. On a comment about collective feelings of grief, you made that sound like an impossibility, since only “individuals” feel grief. Yes, nations grieve, nations rejoice. This is not a communist thing. Of course it is composed of individuals, and of course each individual grieves idiosyncratically. But, a collective grief does occur. I was struck by your inability to see this.

2. Your defense of [Canadian] Conrad Black, who has been cavorting from one country to another as long as his business and personal gains are met, surprised me. This is what I meant that at times your “legality” of issues sometimes trumps the “morality”. Why spend so much time defending him?

3. I’ve never seen you write, except briefly at the very end of this essay identifying “nation” and “state”, about your American way of life. Perhaps that is your style. Perhaps it is all too new. As a new immigrant, for example, do you think you could love America? Have you ever loved Canada, South Africa, Israel? Is America now a convenient place? Anyone can write your quaint description of a small town USA, but still have no nationalistic feelings.

Since you have already quoted Lawrence Auster in your article about immigration, did you come to America because you were like: “…those immigrants were not just anyone who wanted to come; they were people who loved America and were becoming fully a part of it”, as he describes Reagan’s letters on his blog, albeit with apprehension?

4. Your defense of Michael Jackson, which I heard on a radio station a while back, was worthwhile, and interesting. I of course esteem and honor the rule of law system that the Western system has put together. But, I also believe it came from a deeper, moral source. A non-Judeo Christian West could never have come up with these specific kinds of laws to protect people. I understand someone has to keep reminding us. But there is something strange defending (unless one is a defense lawyer, and hats off to them) such a strange man. What example is he to children, what regular "little" sins does he commit? Anyway, yes the law can absolve him, but look at him now.

So, your insinuation of my simplistic mind reminds me of my field of expertise, which is art and design. Many times, the most insightful and succinct observations, and usually the most honest, come from the non-experts. If I listen to them, my work usually becomes all the better (peppered with my expertise, of course). I believe daily life is the same, as the Minute Men keep showing everybody - pundits, politicians and journalists alike.

KPA

Like Clockwork: Update On Mercer, II

And she still "freely" uses the word "idiot"



I guess Mercer is reading my blog. I hope Ezra Levant is doing the same!

Mercer's behavior consistently belies her qualifying phrase at WND of "Return to Reason", showing that her reason has not returned (to her), but has escaped in full gallop.

I guess it is my criticism of Palin that she attributes to being made by "an idiot, or an envy-riddled female."

No other condition fits if the charm of Palin is lost on someone.

Actually, that is not true. I had a moment of excitement at the arrival of this backwater politician, giving speeches in some kind of Alaskan style, with a handsome husband and a brood of children.

But, further, reasoned, analysis, allowed me to think about her real affinities, rather than get pulled in by her charisma. And I frankly think her charisma is overrated - if you keep hearing it, you begin to believe it. I equate her with Obama, in this regard.

Hmmm, "Reaganesque charisma." I guess some writers will use any metaphor to ram in their point.

Sorry, I still don't buy it.

Of course, only now, after her original praise, does Mercer start to point out Palin's serious inconsistencies.

Like I said, I have a feeling that she's reading my blog.

And that's a good thing.

Michael's Ultimate Creations

His zombie offspring


Here is a recent photo of Michael Jackson's kids. You can tell them apart from the other two children by their zombie-like stares. The offspring of celebrity weirdoes and criminals are heartbreaking. I wonder how OJ’s kids can ever live normal lives. Actor Phil Hartman was shot and killed by his wife (who later committed suicide), while their children slept. I wonder how their kids are doing.


Here is one of Hartman's childred being carried away from the scene of the crime by police.

The strange thing is that I feel less sorry the Jackson's offspring. Maybe a second-generation of weirdness is just too much. These kids were "created" under weird circumstances, unlike OJ's and Hartman's children. I can relate much less to the Jackson children than to those of the other two, and hence empathize less with them.

Maybe that is the morale of Jackson's life. Don't mess with nature.

Like Clockwork: Update On Mercer

And her continued incoherence


I've been doing my own personal series of what makes so-called non-liberal pundits tick [1, 2, 3]. I've had to resort to this generalized term of "non-liberal" because many of these writers are not conservatives, but tend to follow an amalgam of beliefs and philosophies that is certainly distinct from liberalism.

In any case, I recently clicked on Mercer's blog to see if my previous post on her ("What exactly is Ilana Mercer?") still has any bearing, or if it was even fair. I have to admit that one of the reasons I read very few pundits is their overall lack of consistency. Mercer still strikes me this way.

Mercer has an article up at her regular WND (creation of that rather shrill editor Joseph Farah) entitled, "A July 4th toast to Thomas Jefferson."

I won’t discuss the full article except for this quote:

[T]he Declaration of Independence is at once a statement of individual and national sovereignty.

A few years back, I used to communicate with Mercer via email, and also through her comments section.

At some point, the interactions got really weird. I think one thing that started it off was my criticism of article she wrote equating Jews with the Chinese. I said there is no comparison, Jews are better. This didn't sit too well. Of course, her response had a whiff of "you are racist" to it.

The next point of contention is a series of emails about nationhood, where I garnered the title "idiot" however discreetly, from Mercer's eminent pen.

Never mind that, but any serious writer who calls an email correspondent an idiot is exhibiting some lack of discipline, and frankly is slightly unstable.

But, here is the part I would like to get to, regarding nationhood. I wrote this to Mercer:

On a comment about collective feelings of grief, you made that sound like an impossibility, since only "individuals" feel grief. Yes, nations grieve, nations rejoice. This is not a communist thing. Of course it is composed of individuals, and of course each individual grieves idiosyncratically. But, a collective grief does occur. I was struck by your inability to see this.

Prickly pens aside, this point was lost on Mercer.

This was a few years ago. Regarding national feelings as both an individual and a collective experience, notwithstanding the lack of intellectualism she accused me of in her unpleasant email, I was right and she was wrong, as Mercer writes my exact point in her WND article.

Here is the full email on nationhood. Surprisingly, Michael Jackson comes up there too.

Reading the rest of her blog, I see she still hasn't produced much of a coherent style, or trains of thought:

* Ditzy Palin receives an undue amount of attention, including praise for Palin’s strange resignation speech. And Mercer cryptically says that Palin is hated by liberals and some conservatives – lumping the two very different approaches to criticism on Palin in one basket. So much for reason and logic.

* She has at least 4 or 5 emails (whose authenticities still have to be proven) between Sandford and his Argentinian mistress. For an “intellectual” blog, this is going on the sordid side.

* Mercer continues to have articles posted at Taki’s Magazine. I suppose writers like to be published, but Taki's is becoming everyone’s fallout place – those who get rejected elsewhere will get a spot there. So, a rich, slightly distasteful magazine editor becomes the keeper of conservative thought!

* For one who has access to some knowledge (technical, at least) on modern music, there is no critique by Mercer about the boring music of Michael Jackson. Instead, just because he hires a “hardcore” guitar player, his music becomes worthy. Mercer attempts to provide a more nuanced critique on Michael Jackson by linking to Lawrence Auster's thoughtful contemplations, as though that will cover her "progressive" praise for this hardcore guitarist, and by association for Jackson too.

But what's so great about these so-called progressive guitarists? I think their style has no nuance, everything is loud and fast. I get the feeling they’re more after emoting a feeling, rather than making intricate music. They certainly aren't the Mozarts (or even the Wagners) of our age.

* Finally, with undue praise for Palin (especially her strange resignation), and adding that this great guitarist who saved Jacksons' hip-hop music (actually, I never though Jackson was a "black" musician, except for his very strong beats) is a woman, Mercer pays unreserved hommage to women. As though her support of these figures was dependent on their sex, rather than on their worth. Certainly, that is the way she's writing about Palin.

Mercer: yet another closeted feminist.

Palin's Resignation

So much for women in politics


Sarah Palin is stepping down from her post as governor of Alaska. Maybe she read my article!

I have a confession to make. I've always found Sarah to be a little ditzy. And what she's doing seems to be the logic of a ditz.

If her plan is to run for president, she still has 2 1/2 to 3 years before the 2012 elections. What is she going to do until then?

Also, isn't it irresponsible to quit mid-term a position at which she is so successful? Why put the people of Alaska through the instability of her resignation, and then having to get used to another candidate?

Perhaps her multiple roles are getting to her. Too many odd things going on in her family, with a former boyfriend of her daughter’s a bit of a loose cannon, talk shows making disparaging jokes about her family, and even what appears like an unstable relationship (still) with Bristol.

I think if she wins the presidential nomination, and even the election, it will be for the same reasons that Obama won: that she managed to charm a lot of people and had more matter over substance.

Not a promising outlook for the future of American leadership.

Still, to be fair to her, maybe women take hits like hers (the liberal media certainly has been vicious towards here) differently, more personally, and she’s trying to protect her family. Also, I wonder if her husband is giving her the kind of support a wife would give a high-profile husband: making sure dinner was on the table, always at the side in full support, keeping the children out of trouble, etc.

But, if she’s trying to give women leadership a good name, she has failed.

Thriller Zombies

Frankenstein-like monsters rising out of the earth

From Jackson's music video "Thriller":
- Jackson as Frankestein  
- A Frankenstein-like zombie
coming out of a manhole

I have never seen "Thriller" fully, nor have I ever decided if it was a good song or a bad song. I just relegated it to "one of Michael Jackson's songs which everyone is crazy about."

Still, I think he did it at the zenith of his career. I think it will be remembered as his seminal piece.

Viewing "Thriller" on YouTube, I was struck by Jackson's "normal" features during his non-zombie appearances in the video.

Near the middle of the video, zombie-like creatures start coming out man holes and graveyards. Even Jackson appears as a zombie, but a very specific one: one that looks like Frankenstein. Just the example I used in my previous post. Another zombie must be none other than the real Frankenstein.

Self-recreation, unto death. That was the saga of Michael Jackson's life.

As for the song and dance routine, it doesn't cut it. Just a repetitive set of moves danced to a monotonous beat. Of course the standard, in dancing at least, is Fred Astaire.