... you can write about whatever you like.
And please think of supporting this blog by doing your shopping through the Althouse portal to Amazon, which is always right there in the sidebar. Thanks!March 2, 2021
"FBI Director Christopher Wray resoundingly said Antifa and other leftists were not part of the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6. "
"'We have not, to date, seen any evidence of anarchist violence extremists or people subscribing to Antifa in connection to the 6th,' Wray told the Senate on Tuesday. 'We're coming after it' if there's violence from both the left and the right, he added, but in the Capitol, there wasn't evidence of leftists adding fuel to the insurrection... Wray said the bureau is seeing 'quite a number of what would we call militia violent extremists' as the FBI builds its cases agains the rioters. He specifically mentioned the groups the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. He added that they have seen in their investigations instances of 'racially motivated violent extremists' who advocate for White supremacy. 'One of the things that is happening as part of this is that as we build out the cases on the individuals when we arrest them for the violence, we're getting a richer and richer understanding of the different people's motivations,' he said. 'But certainly as I said, militia violent extremism and some instances of racially motivated violent extremism, especially advocating for the superior [sic] of the white race.'... 'The problem of domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country for a long time now and it is not going is a way any time soon,' Wray said...."
From CNN's ongoing coverage of testimony this morning from FBI Director Christopher Wray before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"A study published in PLOS One suggests that the type of fiction a person reads affects their social cognition in different ways."
"Specifically, literary fiction was associated with increased attributional complexity and accuracy in predicting social attitudes, while popular fiction was linked to increased egocentric bias.... 'We distinguished between literary (e.g. Don Delillo, Jonathan Franzen, Alice Munroe) and popular fiction (e.g. Dan Brown, Tom Clancy, Jackie Collins), and showed that it is by reading literary fiction that you enhance your mindreading abilities — you are better at inferring and representing what other people think, feel, their intentions, etc.'... [E]ngaging with literary fiction is thought to be active; it asks readers to search for meaning and produce their own perspectives and involves complex characters. Popular fiction, on the other hand, is passive; it provides meaning for the readers and is more concerned with plot than characters.... 'The literary type pushes us to assess others as unique individuals, to withhold judgment, to think deeply. It is important, but it can paralyze us in our attempt to navigate the social world. The popular type reinforces our socially-learned and culturally-shared schemas; a mode of thinking that roughly corresponds to what Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman calls System 1: fast, automatic, well-practiced... I submit that for a well functioning society a continuous tension between these two types of thinking styles – and thus both types of cultural products that, among other factors, promote them. Too much literary, and we disintegrate as a society. Too much popular, and we ossify. Neither scenario is auspicable.'"
From "Reading literary versus popular fiction promotes different socio-cognitive processes, study suggests" (PsyPost).
I'm totally distracted by the question whether "auspicable" is a word. I can see that "auspicabile" is an Italian word, and the quote is from the author of the study, Emanuele Castano of the University of Trento and the National Research Council in Italy. There must be a word for a word that is newly slipping from one language into another. I accept it. I understand it. He could have said "auspicious," but it's charming that he didn't. These are the kind of thoughts I have, and they demonstrate that I'm the sort of person who, when reading fiction, pretty much only reads literary fiction.
Before you gear up to call me a snob — I say, with my enhanced mindreading ability — I assure you that I just don't like popular fiction. I bought a novel the other day because I wanted to quote a particular passage — here — and I decided to try to read it. Here's how it began:
"China Tries To Discredit Female Uighur Witnesses By Releasing Private Sexual Health Data/The officials said the information..."
"... was evidence of bad character, in an effort to invalidate the women’s accounts of abuse in Xinjiang," HuffPo reports.
“One reason that the Communist Party is so concerned about these testimonies from women is because it undermines their initial premise for what they’re doing there, which is anti-terrorism,” said James Millward, a professor of Chinese history at Georgetown University and expert in Xinjiang policy. “The fact that there are so many women in the camps ... who don’t have the faintest appearance of being violent people, this just shows how this has nothing to do with terrorism.”
"The Eyes of Texas is non-negotiable. If it is not kept and fully embraced, I will not be donating any additional money to athletics or the university or attending any events."
Wrote one alumnus quoted in "'UT needs rich donors': Emails show wealthy alumni supporting 'Eyes of Texas' threatened to pull donations/Emails obtained by The Texas Tribune show alumni and donors threatened to stop supporting the university financially and demanded that the university president take a stronger stance supporting 'The Eyes of Texas'" (The Texas Tribune).
"The Eyes of Texas" is a song traditionally played at the end of football games, with players remaining on the field to sing the song along with the fans. Recently, all the players except the quarterback left the field.
Students have been petitioning to get rid of the song — something I wrote about last October. I didn't take a position on the racial problem with the song and whether it's enough to overcome the pull of tradition, but I did undertake my own independent analysis of the lyrics:
The state has eyes and is always watching you: "The Eyes of Texas are upon you/All the livelong day/The Eyes of Texas are upon you/You cannot get away/Do not think you can escape them/At night or early in the morn/The Eyes of Texas are upon you/'Til Gabriel blows his horn."
There really is something wrong with this song. It's oppressive even if you don't know the background story. It speaks of surveillance and endless oppressive work. Maybe a lot of college kids think the song is just funny and surreal. Eyes that you cannot escape.
"Though I may be late, I am willing to admit that I was ignorant to the truth of Dr. Seuss’ writings until recently. I have unknowingly read many of his books to my own children."
"But now that I am better informed, I am committed to advocating for change. Because when we know better, we should do better."
Writes Maureen Downey (in the Atlanta Journal Constitution).
So drearily earnest...
She means well. Is she anxious about what else she may be unknowingly doing... such as depriving children of the fun of reading Dr. Seuss or generating morbid fears about strange manifestations of racism or being too subservient about taking instruction from dull people who are oversure of their puritanical notions of racial correctness?
Downey links to what she calls a "fantastic list" of other books to give to children, but it's not just a list. It's an opinionated blog post, "Dr. Seuss was racist. Why are we still reading his books?"
... I pulled out the extensive collection of Dr. Seuss books that I have in my home and re-read them with a critical lens only to find that the themes of anti-Blackness, white supremacy, and Orientalism are garishly prevalent. I have used Dr. Seuss books in my classroom for the last ten years. I feel disgusted knowing that I not only celebrated these texts, but the life of Theodore Geisel. Dr. Seuss books will no longer have a place in my home. The messages that children absorb through literature will impact their racial beliefs. Without proper support in navigating the harmful messages from books like Dr. Seuss’s, children are likely to transfer what they read to their play and social life....Go to that link to see the suggestions of books to read in place of particular Dr. Seuss books. The book covers are depicted, so you can get a sense of the kind of drawing that anti-Seussers think could work as a substitute for his highly idiosyncratic work. But these substitutes just have blandly realistic, sentimental illustrations that depict people of color. If you want to replace Dr. Seuss, the first thing you'll need some exciting, inventive drawing! And you've got to have a little edge to the story. It can't be just love is important and nice people are nice.
March 1, 2021
"It’s been quite baffling and painful for me to have people assume I’m a racist and believe that I said the ridiculous things I’m accused of saying..."
"... that 'racism is over,' that 'white supremacy doesn’t exist,' or 'white privilege doesn’t exist,' or that I defended the use of blackface or said horrible things about black teenagers in general. I’m surprised by how quick some colleagues who barely know me were prepared to accept those accusations and even add more on a Times alumni Facebook page. Someone to whom I don’t think I’ve spoken since 1994 said 'calling him only a racist is being nice.' An editor I happily worked side by side with in 1989 and have had brief but cordial chats with maybe once every ten years when we bump into each other on the street said I seemed 'dismissive of people of color and their views' back then. Someone I thought I’d been very nice to when she left the paper attacked me for using the expression 'third world' in a story that was, as always, approved by several Times editors.... My girlfriend thinks I have a high-functioning Asperger aspect to my personality — I’m empathic about suffering but I also very much misread audiences.... [W]hat’s happened to me has been called a 'witch hunt.' It isn’t. It’s a series of misunderstandings and blunders. I may be the only living Times reporter who has actually covered a witch hunt — in Zimbabwe in 1997. They inevitably end worse for the accused. I’m at least getting my say."
From "NYTimes Peru N-Word, Part One: Introduction" by Donald McNeil (Medium). Interesting how he chooses to play the disability card with that "high-functioning Asperger aspect to my personality." I wonder how much of what the wokesters call "whiteness" (and maleness) could be repackaged as "high-functioning Aspergers" and received with some empathy as part of the rainbow of diversity.
Here's the piece McNeil considers a story about a real witch hunt — "Zimbabwean Tribal Elders Air a Chief Complaint":
The actor who plays Prince Charles in "The Crown" and the actress who plays Princess Diana both won Golden Globes last night.
Here they are — Josh O'Connor and Emma Corrin — in their biggest scene together in the finale of Season 4:
I've watched Season 4 twice (and the rest of "The Crown" once), and I love this scene. Charles is both horrible and yet — somehow — sympathetic.
"You think we couldn't do that too? Theatrically hug the wretched and dispossessed and cover ourselves in glory all over the front pages?"
Is Sandra Lee sending "peace and loving healing" to Andrew Cuomo?
I'm reading "Andrew Cuomo ex Sandra Lee wishes ‘peace, healing’ after 2nd accuser steps forward" (NY Post):
“Sending everyone peace and loving healing regards from Malibu! The best sunsets ever thank God for the Ocean!” Lee posted on Instagram Saturday night, alongside a photo of a beach.
The post was made hours after The New York Times revealed [accusations from] Cuomo’s 25-year-old former aide, Charlotte Bennet, is accusing the 63-year-old governor of asking her inappropriate personal questions at work... days after another former aide, Lindsey Boylan, publicly accused the governor of attempting to kiss her on the mouth at his New York City office in 2018....
I'd say Sandra Lee is keeping her distance. This is a woman I had never paid any attention to until I was looking up Cuomo's Wikipedia page yesterday. I can't remember exactly why, but I suddenly needed to know where he went to law school. The answer is Albany Law School. Isn't that interesting?
I got to reading the "Personal Life" section. There was that marriage to the 7th child of Robert F. Kennedy. And then there was an 8-year relationship with Food Network host Sandra Lee. I was curious enough to click through to Lee's Wikipedia page, and that led me to some of the biggest laughs I've had all year. Lee has an approach to cooking that she calls "semi-homemade." In practice, this involves using lots of processed foods and combining them in ways so ludicrous that it kind of has to be a spoof.
"Instagram ads tend to focus more on warm images of cooing babies cuddled by radiant, fully covered mothers and less on the agony..."
"... of aggressive feedings and the mess of midnight cleanups. The disconnect can leave first-time parents underprepared during a transitional period often described as the fourth trimester...."
Here's the 30-second ad that aired during the Golden Globes.
Frida worked with the network on a 30-second edit that blurs or covers nipples that are visible in the original 75-second ad — a “fairly robust editing process at NBCU’s insistence,” said Chelsea Hirschhorn, the company’s chief executive, in a statement. She added that the point of the ad remained intact — “that the physical and emotional breastfeeding journey puts an unrivaled pressure on women to ‘perform,’ and no longer should women be expected to prioritize making milk over their own physical discomfort.” On YouTube, the original ad, which was posted on Feb. 24, already has more than 1.4 million views.
Here's that 75-second ad, where you will see nipples. You'll also see women in the shower trying to massage their clogged lactating breasts with the handle end of an electric toothbrush and the front end of dildo vibrator.
By the way, do you know what the NYT meant by "aggressive feedings"? I'm presuming the aggression is on the part of the baby.
And do you like that term "fourth trimester"? I can see that it's been around for a while, but this is the first time I've noticed it. The message — as I hear it — is that the mother's body and the baby's body are still a single unit. Your body is not yet all yours again. The baby is still sharing it.
"We all knew that the Biden administration was going to be bad. But none of us even imagined just how bad they would be and how far left they would go."
"He never talked about this. We would have those wonderful debates. He would never talk about this. We didn’t know what the hell he was talking about actually. His campaign was all lies. Talked about energy, I thought I said, 'This guy actually, he’s okay with energy' He wasn’t okay with energy. He wants to put you all out of business.... Joe Biden has had the most disastrous first month of any president in modern history.... The Biden administration is actually bragging about the classroom education they are providing to migrant children on the border. While at the same time, millions of American children are having their futures destroyed by Joe Biden’s anti-science school closures.... He is cruelly keeping our children locked in their homes, no reason for it whatsoever. They want to get out... Joe Biden is only implementing [a vaccine] plan that we put in place.... Yet Biden said just a few days ago that when he got here, meaning The White House, there was no vaccine. He said, there’s no vaccine. Oh, good. Say it again, Joe. Now I don’t think he said that, frankly, in a malicious way. I really don’t. I actually believe he said that because he didn’t really know what the hell was happening."
From Donald Trump's CPAC speech.
That's a clear demonstration of an approach to attacking Biden: He's not malicious. He just doesn't know what the hell he's talking about or what the hell is happening. That gives room for people who think Joe's a likeable good guy to feel okay about the criticism. Joe's not malicious. He's just very confused. When you get to the confusion part of the attack, be sure to include the words "what the hell."
Oh! That reminds me. It's March 1st. You know what that means. I lost my big bet. I told you back on January 27th about the bet I have here at Meadhouse: "Biden will oust himself from the presidency by March 1st." When did I make the bet? I'm not sure but I alluded to this bet on December 15th, when Biden gave an overlong speech: "There was no reason to make him go this long... not unless the idea was to make us get comfortable with the idea of phasing him out and swapping in Kamala at the earliest possible moment — say, around March 1st."
Did Donald Trump just say that he will run for President in 2024?
"[A] Republican president will make a triumphant return to the White House. And I wonder who that will be? I wonder who that will be? Who, who, who will that be? I wonder."
Said Donald Trump, near the end of his CPAC speech yesterday (transcript).
There's coy cuteness in the repeated "wonder" and the repeated "who": "And I wonder who that will be? I wonder who that will be? Who, who, who will that be? I wonder." It's like the old doowop song:I wonder wonder who who who who...
It's clearly a humorous locution. Check it out:
The "who" has got to refer to himself, don't you think? There's also the idea of making "a triumphant return to the White House." He's the only one who's been there before and can return, though it could be denied by saying it only means that Republicans have been there before and the Party can return one of its own to the place.
Rewatching the clip, I think he's saying "who... who," pausing, and saying "who, who, who," because he wants the crowd to chant "You! You! You!" There might be some of that in the crowd noise, but I don't think it's distinct enough to meet his expectations.
He proceeds to the last couple sentences of his remarks:
Standing before you today, I am supremely confident that for our movement, for our party, and for our country, our brightest days are just ahead. And that together we will make America prouder, freer, stronger and greater than it ever has been before.
Should we interpret to mean that he will run again? I think he's obviously teasing the idea. He gets something he wants simply by teasing a run, and why shouldn't he play that part while it's new and interesting?
He may be looking to pass his politics on to someone new. When I listened to the speech live, I was struck that he singled out Jim Jordan — out of all the CPAC speakers. He said:
I heard Jim Jordan did a great job.... oh, there he is... Hi Jim. I heard you were great. In fact, I hated to follow you. I want to follow other people. I could name them too. I like to follow other people. I heard you were great.
He highlighted Jordan and diminished everyone else. But this morning, I'm looking at the transcript, and I see that's just an intro to something I've heard before. Jordan was "a great wrestler," a "college champion," who "likes to win." And that's a set up for how much Trump likes to win and how much Trump has won:
In last year’s congressional primaries, 120, listen to this, it’s crazy. 120 of 122 candidates I endorsed won, 120. That’s almost as good as Jim’s wrestling record. And the two that lost were beaten by people claiming to be more Trump than their opponent. So I like those two people very much also. In the Senate, I was undefeated in endorsements with a record of 21 and 0....
So I don't think he was passing the torch to Jim Jordan. Maybe some day he will, but I think he wants the excitement and influence of seeming to run and of having a torch to pass if he decides not to run. Singling out Jim Jordan — to the extent that it was anything more than a rhetorical device to ease into the topic of winning — is a way to put all the would-be Republican candidates on notice that he has a power to name his successor and he's going to make a big show of exercising that power.
And his endorsements are huge — I was undefeated in endorsements.
February 28, 2021
At the Sunday Night Café...
... you can talk about whatever you like... including Trump's CPAC speech, which I'll probably write about in the morning. It's my quiet time now. Probably. So: Good evening.
The speech hasn't started yet... late for some reason... but you can watch live here.
"The second refrigerator can be a homey holdover or the latest model. And, for many, it can be aspirational. It may fulfill a yen for storage space."
"For others, its contents may function as edible insurance policies during lean years. And there are countless other reasons for a second fridge: frequent entertaining; storing kimchi or other specialties that take time to age; a tendency toward hoarding; or simply the cost of getting rid of a refrigerator.... The Vincents have passed on their love of multiple refrigerators to their daughter, Robyn Penniegraft, 46, who lives next door. Between the two households, they have five refrigerators for five people — not to mention other appliances such as an outdoor wine chiller and a stand-alone freezer from 1972, two years before Ms. Penniegraft was born. Appliances tend to arrive in 10-year intervals to the Vincent household — the 1982 fridge, the 1992 one. Ms. Penniegraft keeps a stand freezer and her second refrigerator in the family’s garage, side by side like fraternal twins. Last fall, the freezer contained a Noah’s ark of meat for the fried chicken and signature giant lasagnas she often cooks for friends; the other once housed the products that Ms. Penniegraft, a hair stylist, and her husband, Dante, mixed up for a now-defunct hair-care line."
From the comments:
"I imagine it will not be what we call a low energy speech."
Said Don Jr. — about the speech Trump will give at CPAC today — quoted in "Trump to speak at CPAC in first major address since leaving office, as GOP searches for path forward/Trump highly popular at annual conservative gathering" (Fox News).
The Trump speech is scheduled for 3:40 pm today (Eastern Time). Will you watch? Have you been starving for input from Trump or have you enjoyed the break? If the latter, how do you feel about the return of Trump? I'll do a survey:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
