At the Democratic convention, as Hillary beams, the crowd chants "Lock him up!"

I'd fallen asleep by then, because it was my bedtime and because I'd already watched a bunch of speeches. As I texted to my son, "I can't just be watching some coach." 

But this morning I was reading "'There Was a Whole Lot of Sass for a Gathering of Democrats': The Best and Worst Moments From Night 1 of the Convention" (full access link), with the NYT opinion writers giving individual opinions on concise topics, and, asked what was the worst moment, Charles M. Blow said, "It dragged on too long — and the unfortunate image of delegates chanting 'Lock him up' from the convention floor."

So I'm watching — and sharing — the relevant clip. Hillary looks great and seems to be doing what needs to be done, at least in that minute. I wonder what Blow thinks is so "unfortunate" about the delegates chanting "Lock him up." That criminally prosecuting the former President was deeply wrong or, at least, reflects badly on Democrats? That it reminds us of the chant "Lock her up" and creates a lot of dissonance for Democrats? 

"We all need a mom.... We really all need a tremendous hug in the world right now. But in our country, we need you to be 'Momala' of the country."

Says Drew Barrymore to Kamala Harris. This comes just after Barrymore begins the interview by trying to draw out Harris about her relationship to her 2 step-children. This sequence of topics and the redeployment of the family name "Momala" into the political sphere seems carefully planned, and it is an effort to tap Barrymore's immense warmth for the benefit of the Democratic Party vice presidential candidate, who is, I would say, insufficiently warm and puzzlingly fake:

Kamala's response is to nod and smile and murmur a "yeah" that sounds rather dubious.

What — if anything — is she thinking? I'll guess: 

"Biden’s Appeal to Black Voters Needs an Overhaul."

Writes Charles M. Blow, at the NYT.

The president’s speech [at Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C.] was a chance to offer a vision for his second term, but there was hardly any vision in it. It focused on what his administration has done and not what it will do. It landed like someone coming to collect a payment for services rendered rather than to celebrate victories with a partner before mapping out future plans.... 

"Born in 1943 to a New York family of tactile pragmatists (her father helped invent the X-Acto knife), Glück, a preternaturally self-competitive child..."

"... was constantly trying to whittle away at her own perceived shortcomings. When she was a teenager, she developed anorexia — that pulverizing, paradoxical battle with both helplessness and self-control — and dropped to 75 pounds at 16. The disorder prevented her from completing a college degree. Many of the poems Glück wrote in her early 20s flog her own obsessions with, and failures in, control and exactitude. Her narrators are habitués of a kind of limitless wanting; her language, a study in ruthless austerity. (A piano-wire-taut line tucked in her 1968 debut, 'Firstborn': 'Today my meatman turns his trained knife/On veal, your favorite. I pay with my life.') In her late 20s, Glück grew frustrated with writing and was prepared to renounce it entirely...."

From the NYT's annual roundup of short essays about people who died in the past year — "The Lives They Led" — I've chosen a bit of Amy X. Wang's essay on the Nobel Prize-winning poet Louise Glück.

I loved the X-Acto/exactitude theme — the whittling away, the meatman and his trained knife, and the potential to end up with nothing.

ADDED: I wondered if — in 20 years of blogging — I had ever before used the word "exactitude." It's a great word, and I thought, perhaps I'd never used it. But I see I've used it twice, both times in 2018.

"While violence is never the ideal, self-defense has a morally universal appeal and justification."

"And there comes a time when defense is the only option, when standing upright is the only appropriate posture. Describing the events in this case, even Montgomery’s police chief pointed out that members of the riverboat’s crew 'came to Mr. Pickett’s defense.'"

Writes Charles M. Blow in "The Montgomery Brawl Was, for Some, a Clarifying Moment" (NYT).

This is the incident we discussed here 2 days ago, in "The joy that Black people across the country are feeling over the Montgomery Riverfront Uprising, aka the Alabama Sweet Tea Party, is filling my soul."

The better term for what happened, rather than "self-defense," is "defense of others." One man was attacked by a few men and badly outnumbered, and those men, in turn, were badly outnumbered by a much larger group that came in on the side of the one man. It got chaotic, and what happened seems to have gone well beyond what was needed to rescue that man. As a viewer of the viral video, you may find yourself enjoying that extra dose of payback.

ADDED: As I said in the comments to the 2-day-old post: "It really is an example of 'try that in a small town.'" I hope Charles Blow and others who are finding some form of joy in that video take a new look at what Jason Aldean was singing about. 

"Even when our clothes wore thin, ripped or got stained, my mother would convert them into quilts, cutting tiny geometric shapes..."

"... stacking them, grouped by color and kind, into miniature towers, like sleeves of saltines with the packaging removed. It was in that poverty that I first saw how beauty and pride of appearance were used as ways of conveying dignity in a world intent on divesting you of it.... I have become consumed with the idea of freedom, with running toward it, with embracing it. I want freedom in all things: thinking, working, loving and living. That’s one reason I look forward to becoming one of those men with the quirky suspenders, bow ties and orange socks. I’ve often been delighted by how older men lean into sartorial whimsy.... They return to that magic that we all enjoyed as children.... So I bide my time‌‌, but if the years are kind and life allows, I want one day to be the old man with the orange socks."

Writes Charles M. Blow in "I Want to Be the Old Man With the Orange Socks" (NYT). 

It made me think of that excessively popular poem that begins "When I am an old woman I shall wear purple/With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me." Full text of poem and story behind it here. 

"I Want to Be the Old Man With the Orange Socks" is so close to When I am an old man I shall wear orange socks. 

"... Lightfoot may be a harbinger, or at least a warning, for the other big-city Black mayors..."

"... will their mostly non-Black citizens feel that their safety is being prioritized and secured under Black leadership?"

Concludes Charles Blow, in "The Spectacular Fall of Lori Lightfoot" (NYT).

"When California was drawing up its Constitution to join the Union, the state debated excluding Black people."

"The delegate who brought forth an exclusion resolution said that with migrating free Black people, the state could find itself 'flooded with a population of free Negroes,' which would be 'the greatest calamity that could befall California.' In that way, what [Scott] Adams said, while racist, was less outside the bounds of America’s troubled ideological canon and more in step with it on the question of having a functional, egalitarian, pluralistic society."

The last 2 paragraphs of "The ‘Dilbert’ Cartoonist and the Durability of White-Flight Thinking" by Charles Blow (in the NYT).

"Mr. Walker, I believe you when you say that you’re not smart.... You are the personification of a game being played by Georgia Republicans..."

"... a wager that any Black Republican — in your case, an empty intellectual vessel — can beat the Black Democrat, a man who is thoroughly qualified and utterly decent. Walker is Georgia Republicans’ attempt to undermine the image of Black competence, by making a mockery of Black people, by replacing a thinker with a toady. It seems clear to me that Walker will inflate or deflate his intellect to fit a function. The truth is irrelevant. This is at the heart of Trumpism."

Writes Charles M. Blow in "Herschel Walker Says He’s ‘Not That Smart.’ I Believe Him" (NYT). 

Did Hershel Walker say he's "not that smart"? Yes. He said it in the context of managing expectations for the debate: "I’m this country boy, you know. I’m not that smart. And he’s a preacher. He’s a smart man, wears these nice suits...." 

"When I see those Black bodies at the border, I am unable to separate them from myself, or my family, or my friends. They are us."

"There is a collective consciousness in blackness, born of the white supremacist erasure of our individuality. Your accomplishment is never your own, but a credit to the race. Your sins are never your own, but a stain on the race. In America, and throughout the diaspora, all Black people are linked together like a chain of paper dolls."

Writes Charles Blow in "The Mendacity of Joe Biden" (NYT).

"In fact, I don’t even believe that most people have any real concept of what critical race theory is."

"It’s just a collection of words that hint, to them, at agitation and aggrievement: a theory that mentions race and that is critical, or, in their minds, criticizes.... So the rush by states across the country to ban the teaching of critical race theory in schools isn’t really about a real threat. Very few schools even teach C.R.T. as a core part of their curriculums, if at all... This attack on critical race theory is no different than the rush during the Obama administration by states to ban Shariah law in state courts, even though there was absolutely no threat that Shariah law would be recognized or used in those courts.... The freakout about critical race theory is also not dissimilar from the ongoing attack on trans people, particularly people who were assigned male at birth.... Now states are moving to ban trans girls and women from participating in high school and college sports, although this is not really an issue...."

Writes Charles M. Blow in "Demonizing Critical Race Theory" (NYT).

If "most people" lack "any real concept of what critical race theory is," then why don't Democrats and others communicate the information? Instead, as Blow describes in his column, Republicans use the term to generate anxiety about what those terrible left-wingers want to do to us. 

I challenge proponents of Critical Race Theory to speak to ordinary people in terms they can understand and explain the theory, why it's a theory, and what is meant by "critical." Don't just tell us conclusions and demand that we accept them and don't just introduce another confusing term. That is, don't just say that there is "systemic racism." Explain the theory and what is critical about the theory. 

Why can't that be done clearly and straightforwardly? People are right to feel anxious and suspicious about something so big and powerful that can't be talked about. To say "In fact, I don’t even believe that most people have any real concept of what critical race theory is" is to blame the people for failing to understand what isn't being discussed clearly. That's perverse and elitist.

Blow writes "Very few schools even teach C.R.T. as a core part of their curriculums, if at all," but that only shows why it's obtuse to ban teaching CRT. What's being taught are lessons influenced by the CRT ideology. Students are not in danger of becoming empowered to think at the level of the academics who originally propounded the theories, whatever those theories are. They are taught history and other subjects and those subjects may be skewed when they are entitled to the truth and not ideological indoctrination.

Here's a NYT column headline I took the wrong way: "Democrats Repent for Bill Clinton."

I thought finally — probably because of the desire to oust Andrew Cuomo — there is a demand that Democrats denounce Bill Clinton for his mistreatment of women in the workplace.

But no. The column (by Charles Blow) isn't about that at all. It's not even mentioned. Blow's focus is on "Black and brown Americans and the poor":

Two major pieces of Clinton-signed legislation stand out: The crime bill of 1994 and the welfare reform bill of 1996.

I view the crime bill as disastrous. It flooded the streets with police officers and contributed to the rise of mass incarceration, which disproportionately impacts Black men and their families. It helped to drain Black communities of fathers, uncles, husbands, partners and sons.... Part of the goal of the bill was to blunt Republican criticisms that Democrats were soft on crime....

Then there was the welfare reform bill, which Clinton promised would “end welfare as we know it.”...

Nothing against Blow for highlighting these issues. I just wanted to record my reaction to the headline to underscore, once again, that the gender politics of the Democrats has been incoherent for a quarter of a century, and I have been forced to disapprove of them the entire time. 

And by the way, Bill Clinton is the first presidential candidate I voted for who actually won. I was 41 years old, so I waited a long time.

"Pepe [Le Pew] was set to appear in a black-and-white Casablanca-like Rick’s Cafe sequence. Pepe, playing a bartender, starts hitting on a woman at the bar..."

"He begins kissing her arm, which she pulls back, then slamming Pepe into the chair next to hers. She then pours her drink on Pepe, and slaps him hard, sending him spinning in a stool, which is then stopped by LeBron James’ hand. James and Bugs Bunny are looking for Lola, and Pepe knows her whereabouts. Pepe then tells the guys that Penelope cat has filed a restraining order against him. James makes a remark in the script that Pepe can’t grab other Tunes without their consent...." 

From "Pepe Le Pew Won’t Be Appearing In Warner Bros’ ‘Space Jam’ Sequel" (Deadline Hollywood). 

The actress, Greice Santo, is unhappy to have her big scene cut: "Even though Pepe is a cartoon character, if anyone was going to slap a sexual harasser like him, Greice wished it would be her. Now... she doesn’t have that power to influence the world through younger generations who’ll be watching Space Jam 2, to let younger girls and younger boys know that Pepe’s behavior is unacceptable."

If I remember the old cartoons correctly, the other cartoon characters always let Pepe know his behavior was unacceptable... though I think that was mainly because they were cats and he was a skunk.

"Barack Obama continues his rather strange mission to confront and correct young liberal activists...."

" Wednesday morning on Peter Hamby’s Snapchat show, 'Good Luck America,' Obama said this: 'If you believe, as I do, that we should be able to reform the criminal justice system so that it’s not biased and treats everybody fairly, I guess you can use a snappy slogan like "Defund the police," but, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done.' It was not the first time Obama had taken aim at these young activists. Last year he also took a swipe at wokeness and 'call-out culture,' saying, among other things: 'If all you’re doing is casting stones, you’re probably not going to get that far. That’s easy to do.'... [T]he politician navigates the system, while the activist defies it. The politician builds a coalition by using middling philosophy and policies that appeal to the most and offend the fewest. The activist is driven more by purpose, morality and righteousness.... Obama is a good man and a great politician. History will always record him as such. But he is not an activist.... His presence as president was his greatest symbol of change: a smart, competent Black man, devoid of personal scandal, who brought class and professionalism to the White House.... That simple act, him doing his job well, was monumental in the quest for racial progress. But none of that negates the legitimate cries of the activist that much more must be done, that Obama altered a racial image, for the better, but wasn’t able to alter the system of oppression.."

Writes Charles M. Blow in the NYT.

My tag for this is "Obama attacked from the left."

"Could we maybe just accept that identity politics isn't an effective political strategy? And could Democrats just stop with it, like now?"

"I'm a black woman who votes Democratic consistently, not once did I hear a Democratic candidate in this election cycle speak directly to my concerns and needs as a black woman. My vote for Biden was to remove Trump, not because I felt the Democratic party had a vested interest in my concerns. And by the way, the concerns of black people (and women in particular) extend far beyond police brutality -- an overwhelmingly black male issue that has taken up all the air in the room when we speak of black injustice. As a mother and small business owner my my issues regarding race surround around the poor teaching of history in public education (that often skims over slavery/Indian removal), lack of access to capital for my business (despite black women being one of the fastest growing entrepreneur groups), and poor maternal/female health (black women receive worse healthcare and have worse outcomes than white women.) But by all means, continue to patronize and tell me that I should vote Democrat because I am a black woman. I understand that representation matters but identity politics as a complete political strategy is infantilizing and condescending and it needs to stop."

That's the top-rated comment — with over 1500 up-votes — on the NYT column by Charles M. Blow "Exit Polls Point to the Power of White Patriarchy/Some people who have historically been oppressed will stand with their oppressors." 

Blow finds it "unsettling" that so many people voted for Trump, especially that more Hispanic and black people voted for Trump in 2020 than in 2016, which he attributes to "the power of the white patriarchy and the coattail it has of those who depend on it or aspire to it." 

"Some people who have historically been oppressed will stand with the oppressors, and will aspire to power by proximity," Blow theorizes. They're susceptible to "Trump’s brash, privileged chest trumping and alpha-male dismissiveness and in-your-face rudeness." 

By the way, the usual cliché about coattails is that the lead candidate is able to bring along lesser candidates. He has long coattails, and they ride in on the coattails or they grab the coattails and are pulled along. Blow's image is that "white patriarchy" "has" "the coattail... of those who depend on it." That is, the weak person is wearing the garment with long tails and the oppressors are grabbing onto them. But what kind of people wear a coat with tails?! 

 

I'm steppin' out, my dear/To breathe an atmosphere /That simply reeks with class/And I trust that you'll excuse my dust/When I step on the gas...

"In a disturbing number of the recent cases of the police being called on black people for doing everyday, mundane things, the calls have been initiated by white women."

"And understand this: Black people view calling the police on them as an act of terror, one that could threaten their lives, and this fear is not without merit. There are too many noosed necks, charred bodies and drowned souls for these white women not to know precisely what they are doing: They are using their white femininity as an instrument of terror against black men."

From "How White Women Use Themselves as Instruments of Terror/There are too many noosed necks, charred bodies and drowned souls for them to deny knowing precisely what they are doing" by Charles Blow (NYT).

"People can’t empathize with what it truly means to be poor in this country, to live in a too-small space with too many people..."

"... to not have enough money to buy food for a long duration or anywhere to store it if they did. People don’t know what it’s like to live in a food desert where fresh fruit and vegetables are unavailable and nutrient-deficient junk food is cheap and exists in abundance. People are quick to criticize these people for crowding into local fast food restaurants to grab something to eat. Not everyone can afford to order GrubHub or FreshDirect. Furthermore, in a nation where too many black people have been made to feel that their lives are constantly under threat, the existence of yet another produces less of a panic. The ability to panic becomes a privilege existing among those who rarely have to do it. I wholeheartedly encourage everyone who can to stay home, but I’m also aware enough to know that not everyone can or will, and that it is not simply a pathological disregard for the common good. If you are sheltering in place in an ivory tower, or even a comfortable cul-de-sac or a smartly well-appointed apartment, and your greatest concern is boredom and leftover food, please stop scolding those scratching to survive."

From "Social Distancing Is a Privilege/The idea that this virus is an equal-opportunity killer must itself be killed" by Charles M. Blow (NYT). Blow is discussing the WBEZ article — "In Chicago, 70% of COVID-19 Deaths Are Black" — that were were talking about here, last night.

I'm reading "Are There Benefits to Intermittent Fasting?" in The New York Times.

Subtitle: "The best diet is the one where you are healthy, hydrated and living your best life. If you want to fast, it offers similar weight-loss benefits to just cutting calories." And I'm not at all impressed by the science — quotes from a couple nutrition professors who say that fasting is nothing more than another way to restrict total calories. But I do love this comment, from someone who adopts the old Marcel Duchamp pseudonym "R. Mutt"* and says he's in Timbuktu (aren't we all?):

Interesting article but as others have stated it focuses more on the weight loss benefits and not on the many other aspects of fasting. Our bodies and metabolisms have evolved to deal with a continuous cycle of feast or famine ... if it is all one or the other we will have problems. Living in an age where near unlimited access to an abundant supplies of food (both good and bad) encourages overeating and unfortunately if you live in a neighbourhood with limited access to a good grocery store you will be forced to eat mostly processed foods. The quality of what you are eating while doing an intermittent fast is a crucial component. I am lucky to have access to healthy food and have for most of my life incorporated different approaches to fasting into my day and have come to realize that as we age our metabolism slows and we must adjust our diet accordingly. I am only eating one nice healthy meal a day and feel great; have lost weight, more energy and clarity of mind, skin is feeling and looking better, senses mental clarity have been heightened, less aches and pains ... that's good medicine. I am also physically active which is another important component in the overall feeling of well-being. A fasting couch potato in my opinion would probably not reap the same benefits. It's not rocket science ... whether intermittent fasting or not, listen to your body and adjust your eating habits accordingly. And please remember to "stop eating all the time" guys ;-)

Hey! I'm writing about fasting on Thanksgiving! Why not fast for Thanksgiving? I see — also in The New York Times — "The Horrible History of Thanksgiving/Before you fill your plate, please remember why we mark this day," by Charles Blow, who says:

I spent most of my life believing a gauzy, kindergarten version of Thanksgiving, thinking only of feasts and family, turkey and dressing.

I was blind, willfully ignorant, I suppose, to the bloodier side of the Thanksgiving story, to the more honest side of it.

But I’ve come to believe that is how America would have it if it had its druthers: We would be blissfully blind, living in a soft world bleached of hard truth. I can no longer abide that.

Well, hell, how can you feel that bad and have it just be step 1, before step 2, "fill your plate"? No plate for you! How can you be all "I can no longer abide" and proceed to the piles of turkey and high-carb side dishes? It reminds me of Lewis Carroll's walrus:

"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.

Whether we can expiate all of America's sins by fasting on the feasting day, I don't know. I doubt it.

"If seven maids with seven mops
Swept it for half a year.
Do you suppose," the Walrus said,
"That they could get it clear?"
"I doubt it," said the Carpenter,
And shed a bitter tear...

The Walrus was weeping over the great quantities of sand on the beach. He cared! He mused, and he went about his way, doing everything he wanted. But he still cried all the while. Wasn't that good of him?

How about fasting for Thanksgiving? Will you join me? If R. Mutt is right, we may get some "clarity of mind" and an "overall feeling of well-being." Ah, that sounds to good for us! Better to cry and simultaneously stuff your face. That's the new American tradition.
_____________________

* It's the famous signature that made a urinal art:



Duchamp explained:

Mutt comes from Mott Works, the name of a large sanitary equipment manufacturer. But Mott was too close so I altered it to Mutt, after the daily cartoon strip "Mutt and Jeff" which appeared at the time, and with which everyone was familiar. Thus, from the start, there was an interplay of Mutt: a fat little funny man, and Jeff: a tall thin man... I wanted any old name. And I added Richard [French slang for money-bags]. That's not a bad name for a pissotière. Get it? The opposite of poverty. But not even that much, just R. MUTT.

You remember "Mutt and Jeff":

"In fact, Trump killed the old Republican Party and now he alone animates the zombie party that lurched forward after its death."

Writes Charles M. Blow in "Donald Trump, Life of a Zombie Party/And an army is blindly following" (NYT).

Yes, Blow is always against Trump, but it's a good line. It fits within a concept I've been tracking under the tag "what Trump did to the GOP."

"But, now that the children have graduated [from college] and moved back into my house as they search for jobs and eventually first apartments..."

"... I will say the thing that we as parents are not supposed to say: What happened to my empty nest? The very definition of home has changed. Mine will always be their family home, their spiritual home, but it cannot be their primary home. This is now my primary home, alone. I know that this arrangement is temporary, and I want to help my children out in every way possible, but it would be dishonest to say that their reappearance in 'their rooms,' which I now call guest rooms, has not been jarring. No matter how much I try to resist the urge, I’m reverting to my last-phase parenting mode — worrying about whether they’re eating enough and eating healthfully, washing their clothes and taking them to their rooms...."

Writes Charles Blow in the NYT. He also says: "Since my oldest son was 6 and my twins were 3, I have been a single dad." I had to look him up in Wikipedia to try to fill in the facts. It says he's divorced, he's openly bisexual, and his kids went to college at Yale, Middlebury, and Columbia. I'm not sure why young people with such advantages in life don't have jobs immediately upon graduating from college or why they'd want their father musing about their situation in the New York Times. I see that Blow's home is in New York City. Who's lucky enough to have multiple guest rooms in New York City? Is this really a story of real estate?