Great Take on the OWS Crowd

Found at Scratching to Escape:

a teaser:

Father: “Son I saw you on the news with a sign protesting Wall Street.”

Son: “Yeah Dad. It was cool. We sat around, told them how we feel and let them know that Wall Street won’t get away with what they’re doing. In fact, I’m calling from the protest. We’re going to stay until they listen to our demands”

Father: “It looked more like you were eating pizza and texting”

Son: “I had to let my girlfriend know I would be on television.”

h/t Leeann

Another Sarah Palin Post

Ran across this on OpinionJournal.com yesterday…

Notable & Quotable
September 9, 2008

Howard Fineman writing in Newsweek on the Republican vice-presidential candidate:

Democrats dare not issue [Sarah] Palin a pass—she’s too dangerous a foe. Normally vice presidential candidates fade into the background. Nobody is expecting that with Palin; indeed, her newfound celebrity has made even Obama look dull.

The usual rule is that voters don’t trust attacks from people they don’t know, but Palin is turning the adage on its head. Democrats are determined to attack her credibility, even if it gives her more visibility. “We’ve got to go after her, and fast,” a top Democratic strategist, who asked for anonymity when discussing strategy, told me.

The Anchoress Hits One Out of the Park

Read me. NOW.

I’ve never watched any of the Godfather movies, but even I recognize the brilliance in The Anchoress’ latest piece.

She titled it: The Humbling: “The One” goes to Don Clinton, and not only is it hilarious, it’s replete with sources for each of her points. Funny & factual – who can ask for more?

So, it appears that “The One” is going begging to Don Clinton, hat in hand:

The One strides in confidently and extends his hand to The Don. The Don looks up, contemplates the proffered hand, and watches The One’s smile fade as it is not shaken. The One retracts his hand, and tilts his head, comprehending, but not liking it. Still, he needs this meeting.

Don Clinton nods slightly, and with a silky hand motions The One to take a seat. Don Clinton’s blue eyes are grave, but there is a noticeable twitching about his mouth, as though he is suppressing a smile, or sucking on a peeled grape. He remains silent. The One looks about the room in discomfort, waiting for an opening. Don Clinton makes a point of playing with his pinky ring, and gives him none. Finally, clearing his throat and assuming a cavalier affect, The One speaks:

The One: Uh, thank you, Mr. President, for seeing me in your beautiful offices.

Don Clinton nods, but says nothing. More praise is due.

The One: I, um, think it’s er…a wonderful, a wonderful testament to your, eh, your um, unquestionable commitment to em, the uh, your solidarity with the black community.

Don Clinton, remembering when The One played the race card on him, narrows his eyes and does not smile. He leans back in his chair and waits, squinting through the smoke, his cigar tilting upward in his mouth, ala FDR. More praise is due.

The One: It – it was a masterstroke of erm, brilliant racist-baiting, erm…a stroke of masterburbating, uhhhh, stroking, ermmm…a master…stroke…of getting back at the Republican jerks who impeached you and foreplaying, I mean forestalling any future innuendo or scandals intern erm…in turn.

Don Clinton’s eyes are ablaze with anger. The One, too cool to cower, crosses his legs and wishes for a teleprompter.

Baldilocks Gives a Helping Hand (and needs one, as well)

Baldilocks has a new project underway. Seems that once upon a time (clear back in 2006), a certain senator of Kenyan descent made a promise to a Kenyan village. The village school needed help, and the Senator, while visiting there, promised that help would come – He would make it happen. Oddly enough, the village interpreted that as financial help, since the Senator was a wealthy man. They renamed their school in his honor: it’s now the Senator Obama Kogelo Secondary School.

But alas, the good Senator got distracted by life and political campaigns, and the Kenyan village got thrown under the bus (a very crowded place, the underside of that bus — but I digress).

Baldilocks also has a Kenyan father, who came to the States via the same program that brought the Senator’s father to the States. Baldilocks is not a fan of the Senator or his political/philosophical beliefs, but she does believe in helping those who need help, and in keeping promises. You can read more about it here and here.

She wants to help that Kenyan village with their school. But she can’t do it alone. As Sgt Mom and Timmer can attest, military retirement paychecks don’t exactly give one a lot of discretionary income. She needs knowledge and expertise about fund-raising, among other things.

What the Obama School needs:
• Water
• Sanitation
• Electricity
• Remodeling
• Security
• Maintenance
to bring water to the school by sinking a borehole and building a water tank, erect a perimeter fence, complete the science laboratory and add much needed new classrooms, additional latrines, and a school dining hall

For the things that are in constant demand–e.g. school supplies, wages for security guards, spare parts–I’d say that a two year funding is enough.

The school’s principal suggested a minimum of 8.2 million Kenyan shillings which is equal to roughly $129,220 at today’s rate. That shouldn’t be too tough.

So here’s what we have:

• Domain name: obamaschool.org
• Email address: obamaschool@gmail.com

What we need:

Someone to assist in setting up the website … And someone here in the states who knows about the logistics of these things.

If you can help Juliette help the school, regardless of what name it bears, please do.

The Lost DaVinci

Or is it just hidden?

There’s some interesting stuff going on over in Italy, related to discovering artworks that have been painted over. Technology continues to amaze me (I’m easily amazed, but even so…).

Seems that once upon a time, DaVinci began a mural – a battle scene. For centuries, common wisdom was that he’d been unsatisified with his efforts, and destroyed the mural, and it was painted over by another artist, Giorgio Vasari. But in 1977, a young art apprentice was inspecting Vasari’s frescoes, and found two words painted near the top of the wall: “Cerca Trova.” The words were practically invisible from ground level. They translate to “Seek: You will find.”

Skeptical colleagues discounted the discovery. Yet they were the only words on the six enormous frescoes that cover the walls today. To Dr. Seracini, it could mean only one thing: The da Vinci mural must still be there, concealed behind Vasari’s paintings. “We are talking about the masterpiece of the masterpieces of the Renaissance,” says Dr. Seracini, “way more important than The Last Supper or the Mona Lisa.”

Da Vinci and those who commissioned the work left no direct account as to why the master gave up on the mural. Whatever its technical flaws, the painting’s inventiveness and savage passion dazzled artists throughout Europe for a half century before it disappeared from view. “One writer at the time says it is the most beautiful thing in existence, twice as beautiful as the ceiling in the Sistine Chapel,” says Syracuse University art historian Rab Hatfield, a member of the Italian commission overseeing the project.

Dr. Seracini, a professor at the University of California, San Diego, wasn’t the first art scholar to be seduced by the mystery of Leonardo’s missing mural. No one, however, has pursued it with such technical acumen.

Not long ago, art conservationists had only a trained eye to guide their work. Today, sophisticated scientific techniques are becoming part of every art expert’s tool kit. This spring in Vienna, for instance, restorers relied on X-ray fluorescence to analyze the solid gold of a priceless 16th Century sculpture. In France, University of Michigan physicists probed the walls of a 12th Century chapel with nondestructive terahertz beams. In Pittsburgh, NASA scientists used molecules of atomic oxygen to wipe a Warhol painting clean of the lipstick smear left by a vandal’s kiss.

Since that discovery in 1977, Seracini has made use of every technological advance to pursue his search for the DaVinci mural. That search will culminate next year, using a portable neutron-beam scanner that is still in development. Seracini is hopeful the hidden DaVinci will be found.

I hope so, too.

source

Discuss Amongst Yourselves…

…Because I’m really curious to see some thoughts on this.

In Peggy Noonan’s column today (Friday), she compares the Old America and the New America. She’s talking about the election, of course, but I found her thoughts interesting.

… 2008 will also prove in part to be a decisive political contest between the Old America and the New America. Between the thing we were, and the thing we have been becoming for 40 years or so. (I’m not referring here to age. Some young Americans have Old America heads and souls; some old people are all for the New.)

Mr. McCain is the Old America, of course; Mr. Obama the New.

* * *

Roughly, broadly:

In the Old America, love of country was natural. You breathed it in. You either loved it or knew you should.

In the New America, love of country is a decision. It’s one you make after weighing the pros and cons. What you breathe in is skepticism and a heightened appreciation of the global view.

Old America: Tradition is a guide in human affairs. New America: Tradition is a challenge, a barrier, or a lovely antique.

The Old America had big families. You married and had children. Life happened to you. You didn’t decide, it decided. Now it’s all on you. Old America, when life didn’t work out: “Luck of the draw!” New America when life doesn’t work: “I made bad choices!” Old America: “I had faith, and trust.” New America: “You had limited autonomy!”

Old America: “We’ve been here three generations.” New America: “You’re still here?”

Old America: We have to have a government, but that doesn’t mean I have to love it. New America: We have to have a government and I am desperate to love it. Old America: Politics is a duty. New America: Politics is life.

The Old America: Religion is good. The New America: Religion is problematic. The Old: Smoke ‘em if you got ‘em. The New: I’ll sue.

Mr. McCain is the old world of concepts like “personal honor,” of a manliness that was a style of being, of an attachment to the fact of higher principles.

Mr. Obama is the new world, which is marked in part by doubt as to the excellence of the old. It prizes ambivalence as proof of thoughtfulness, as evidence of a textured seriousness.

Both Old and New America honor sacrifice, but in the Old America it was more essential, more needed for survival both personally (don’t buy today, save for tomorrow) and in larger ways.

The Old and New define sacrifice differently. An Old America opinion: Abjuring a life as a corporate lawyer and choosing instead community organizing, a job that does not pay you in money but will, if you have political ambitions, provide a base and help you win office, is not precisely a sacrifice. Political office will pay you in power and fame, which will be followed in time by money (see Clinton, Bill). This has more to do with timing than sacrifice. In fact, it’s less a sacrifice than a strategy.

A New America answer: He didn’t become a rich lawyer like everyone else—and that was a sacrifice! Old America: Five years in a cage—that’s a sacrifice!

In the Old America, high value was put on education, but character trumped it. That’s how Lincoln got elected: Honest Abe had no formal schooling. In Mr. McCain’s world, a Harvard Ph.D. is a very good thing, but it won’t help you endure five years in Vietnam. It may be a comfort or an inspiration, but it won’t see you through. Only character, and faith, can do that. And they are very Old America.

Old America: candidates for office wear ties. New America: Not if they’re women. Old America: There’s a place for formality, even the Beatles wore jackets!

What do y’all think?

And while you’re at it, what do you think about the classified documents that were found on a British commuter train? (oops)

It’s a war?

I’m hoping Sgt Mom will turn her brilliant sarcastic wit loose on this topic, but until then, in case you’ve not seen it yet…

time rag

I read about it over at Baldilocks, and then I followed her link to the transcript of the interview with Time’s managing editor, whose justification was the following (all emphases mine):

And by using that famous Iwo Jima image and saying basically what we have to do iswhat we did before World War II by creating a great national effort, national endeavor, to combat this problem.

Gee, and here I thought that when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor we had decimated our peacetime military so much that our guys were training with wooden cutouts of rifles and shouting “bang” when they’d shoot someone. Or have I confused my wars? Then again, maybe accuracy isn’t important if it gets in the way of whatever the point you’re making – what’s that old line? My mind’s made up – don’t confuse me with facts.

I think since I’ve been back at the magazine, I have felt that one of the things that’s needed in journalism, is that you have to have a point of view about things. You can’t always just say “on the one hand, on the other” and you decide. People trust us to make decisions. We’re experts in what we do. So I thought, you know what, if we really feel strongly about something let’s just say so. And we’ve done that a number of times since I’ve been back. We did the case for national service, a cover story last summer. The end of cowboy diplomacy where we said that foreign policy had to change. I think readers expect that. I think, look. You guys are up there all the time. On cable television, people are giving you their point of view, giving their opinions on something and people want to know that.

Funny – I always thought it was only in editorials where journalists were supposed to show how they felt, not news articles. But what do I know? I never went to journalism school – I’m just an ignerant amurrken who loves her country and respects its veterans and their sacrifices.