Why dance to music when you can dance to speech?

Me improvising to Theresa May’s resignation speech pic.twitter.com/LdXqO9QSqx

— Kelsey Ellison ⚡️at MCM COMIC CON LONDON (@KelseyEllison) May 24, 2019

"That was how Theresa May’s premiership ended this week, wrecked by her blindness and secretive obstinacy, in loneliness, desertion and despair."

"That" = another damned "Game of Thrones" reference.

I'm reading "Theresa May Meets Her Lonely End/It would be understandable to feel sympathy for anyone so isolated and vilified. I don’t" by Jenni Russell in the NYT. Pretty melodramatic, no? We're in decline, I'm coming to think, and you see it in the need for TV-show-style narrative. I would prefer for our politics to be boring, but we've become addicted to politics as entertainment, and I don't think we'll find a way out. Writing that, I see that I'm being melodramatic... meta melodramatic. So far gone!

"Prime Minister Theresa May on Tuesday suffered a humiliating defeat over her plan to withdraw Britain from the European Union..."

"... thrusting the country further into political chaos with only 10 weeks to go until it is scheduled to leave the bloc. The 432-to-202 vote to reject her plan was one of the biggest defeats in the House of Commons for a prime minister in recent British history.... Now factions in Parliament will seek to seize the initiative, an unpredictable new stage in the process of withdrawing from Europe, known as Brexit.... With no consensus behind any one pathway, and a vanishing window for further negotiation, more radical solutions are rising to the fore. One group of lawmakers is campaigning for a repeat referendum, which could overturn the mandate to leave, and another favors leaving the European Union on March 29 without a withdrawal agreement, a move that experts warn could lead to shortages of some foods and an economic downturn."

From "Theresa May’s Brexit Deal Is Crushed by Parliament, Sending Britain Into Uncharted Waters" (NYT).

UPDATE: A poll. Haven't done a poll in a while....

A revote is...

completely unfair. You can't have do-overs until you win.

absurd not to be able to do. If it's a bad idea, it shouldn't be that there's no way out.

I'm sorry but I don't like only having those 2 options.

 

pollcode.com free polls

Everybody dance.

Whypic.twitter.com/zvy36cafkG

— Jeremiah Stephan Dunleavy IV (@JerryDunleavy) August 30, 2018

Everybody. Everywhere.

That makes me want to see Trump dance. Here"

An excellent press conference — Donald Trump and Theresa May.

I'm monitoring MSNBC in the run-up to the press conference with Trump and Theresa May...

... and they cannot stop talking about the balloon. Every 10th word is "balloon." Meade keeps saying the balloon looks like Mika Mika Brzezinsk (as the balloon and Mika appear on split screen).

In case you don't know what I'm talking about:

“It’s going to swamp his Twitter feed. There’s no way he doesn’t see this,” an organizer said of the "Trump Baby." https://t.co/xhUkayWXck

— The New York Times (@nytimes) July 13, 2018

ADDED: The idea is that Trump is a big baby, but they're all: "BALLOON!!!"

IN THE COMMENTS: Balfegor said:

It is a rather cute balloon . . . it is probably going to be repurposed by Trump supporters into pro-Trump material, like that Trump chicken balloon.

That's what I thought too. For anyone who likes Trump, the balloon — if you stare at it long enough — feels pro-Trump. It's the magic of Trump. All the negative energy gets flipped into positive.

AND: I listened to the whole press conference. Great questions. Great support from Trump to Theresa May. Loved the byplay about the reporter's hat. Loved all the "fake news" shtick.

"In the interview with The Sun, Mr. Trump second-guessed Mrs. May’s handling of the main issue on her plate: how Britain should cut ties to the European Union."

"He cast doubt on whether he was willing to negotiate a new trade deal between Britain and the United States, and praised Mrs. May’s Conservative Party rival, Boris Johnson, as a potentially great prime minister.... 'Well, I think the deal that she is striking is not what the people voted on,' Mr. Trump said in the interview, speaking of the approach Mrs. May is taking to Britain’s exit from the European Union, or Brexit, under which the British economy would effectively continue to be subject to many European regulations. Speaking of Mr. Johnson, who resigned this week as foreign secretary in protest over Mrs. May’s Brexit strategy and who has long been seen as likely to challenge her for her job, Mr. Trump said: 'Well, I am not pitting one against the other. I’m just saying I think he would be a great prime minister. I think he’s got what it takes and I think he’s got the right attitude to be a great prime minister.'"

From "As May’s Government Teeters Over Brexit, Trump Gives It a Shove" (NYT). The Sun article is here.

ADDED: Also in the NYT, "Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and the Rise of Radical Incompetence/Like America’s president, Brexiteers resent the very idea of governing as complex and based in facts," by William Davies (who has a forthcoming boook titled "Nervous States: How Feelings Took Over the World"):

A common thread linking “hard” Brexiteers to nationalists across the globe is that they resent the very idea of governing as a complex, modern, fact-based set of activities that requires technical expertise and permanent officials. Soon after entering the White House as President Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon expressed hope that the newly appointed cabinet would achieve the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” In Europe, the European Commission — which has copious governmental capacity, but scant sovereignty — is an obvious target for nationalists such as Prime Minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary....

What happens if sections of the news media, the political classes and the public insist that only sovereignty matters and that the complexities of governing are a lie invented by liberal elites? For one thing, it gives rise to celebrity populists, personified by Mr. Trump, whose inability to engage patiently or intelligently with policy issues makes it possible to sustain the fantasy that governing is simple....

Not a design flaw.

3 of 14 tweets by J.K. Rowling, apparently provoked by somebody who called Theresa May a whore.

In The NYT and The Washington Post, the British election tops the Comey story.

Maybe there's some principle of journalism that dictates that a foreign election gets front-page priority over domestic news, but I looked at these pages this morning and thought: The Comey testimony — so hyped on yesterday's front pages — fizzled.

Here's The NYT:

And here's The Washington Post:

Sometimes the going-big gamble backfires.  After the intense promotion of the Comey testimony before it took place, I think The New York Times and The Washington Post would have doubled down if they'd drawn any good cards at yesterday's hearing.

IN THE COMMENTS: Biotrekker said:

Not the NYT print edition in NYC. It is a full banner about Comey and goes full Trump Derangement Syndrome. "Comey Bluntly Raises Possibility of Trump Obstruction and Condemns His ‘Lies’"

I can see the facsimile of the front-page of New York edition at nytimes.com:

"Too much is too much!" says the severed head of Theresa May on the cover of the new Charlie Hebdo.

Via AdWeek, where Richard Horgan says: "From a U.S. perspective, it’s impossible not to think of the wrath that descended upon comedian Kathy Griffin last week for her posed, bloody Trump image shot by Tyler Shields."

After the London Bridge terrorist attack, Theresa May calls for embarrassing conversations.

"So we need to become far more robust in identifying [terrorism] and stamping it out across the public sector and across society. That will require some difficult, and often embarrassing, conversations."

What's hiding behind that weasely "embarrassing"? She didn't deign to say anything that embarrassed her. It was all "society should continue to function in accordance with our values" and "the whole of our country needs to come together." And "conversation." Bromides. Oh, well, maybe that is embarrassing, but I don't think that's what she meant.

"Saying you’re going to be a bloody difficult woman right at the start of the negotiations..."

"... tends to make sure you do get a bad deal rather than working with partners across Europe. Theresa May has made us look like ogres across Europe. We’re a laughing stock."

"Saying you’re going to be a bloody difficult woman" — It sounds like the sort of thing feminists in America would celebrate. It's a giant step — an ogre step — beyond "She persisted." I mean, I know that sort of thing doesn't work when the woman is on the conservative side, but it's funny to think about how these insults can be flipped and how they would be flipped if a conservative were criticizing a liberal.

In other Theresa May news, the Telegraph has an entire article about how you can tell a man in the audience listening to Theresa May speak is mouthing the word "bollocks." If May were liberal, it would be possible to denounce the man as a despicable sexist.

"One can’t help but wonder what Trogneux’s ex-husband must make of the double freak occurrence of losing his wife to a teen-ager, only to have him turn out, decades later, to be the... Président de la République."

"Her elder daughter, Laurence, was in Macron’s class.... [W]hen Macron’s parents heard about the affair, they initially thought their son was seeing Laurence. 'You don’t understand, you already have your life,' Macron’s mother reportedly told a tearful Trogneux, who refused to promise to break off the affair. 'He won’t have children!' He has no biological children.... [Now that] he is elected, the leaders of France, Germany, and the U.K. will have zero biological children among them. (Angela Merkel has two stepsons; Theresa May and her husband of thirty-six years were unable to have children. May spoke about the pain of that realization after a political rival suggested that she had more of a stake in the future than May by virtue of being a mother.)"

From "Emmanuel Macron and the Modern Family," by Lauren Collins (in The New Yorker).

ADDED: The Prime Minister of Italy,Paolo Gentiloni, 62, also has no children, so "With Macron, the leaders of Europe's 4 biggest economies have a combined 0 biological children."

President Trump, by contrast, has 5 children, the youngest of whom is named Barron, which is pronounced the same as "barren."  (I was going to say Trump is not barren, but "barren" is a word that applies only to women, and interestingly enough, the etymology is, according to the OED,  based on the root bar which means "man, male," so that what when you say a woman is "barren," it means "male-like.")

"A Daily Mail front page that declared 'Never mind Brexit, who won Legs-it!' next to a photograph of Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon and British prime minister Theresa May..."

"... has prompted widespread outrage," The Guardian informs us.

Inside the paper there was was more ogling at the female leaders, with a headline reading: “Finest weapons at their command? Those pins!” A column by Sarah Vine referred to Sturgeon’s legs as “altogether more flirty, tantalisingly crossed … a direct attempt at seduction”.

Ludicrous, of course, but The Daily Mail is very trashy, so who looks unless we're in the mood for utter garbage? DM seems to be at least 50% about how women look.

Here's the page:



I love this satirical response to DM:



It's not fair, since these politicos don't work for The Daily Mail, but it fits for my long-time "men in shorts" theme.

IN THE COMMENTS: Paddy O said:

Are there any pictures of the Queen sitting like that? I doubt it. Though, Princess Dianna was well-known for her legs, with some claiming she singlehandedly took down the pantyhose industry. I suspect the DM is making a commentary of sorts. Kind of like Althouse's old "let's take a look at those breasts" post. Show leg, people notice leg. Front and center legs get a highlight. It's worth noting that the satirical response includes men doing leisure activities, whereas the women are in a business/political situation. Are there examples of men in shorts meeting together to discuss significant national transitions? That would seem to be the equivalent.

I said:

You know, this makes me think the photo op really was botched. They don't have to be on low, cushioned chairs. The photographers shouldn't be at such a low angle. It's distracting to have the legs occupying so much foreground, diminishing the significance of the heads.

The legs can be there, and I like seeing women in skirts, but whoever set up the photo op should have arranged things to make the women seem more dignified.

What if the men — properly clad in suits — were absurdly manspreading? We'd all laugh at that.

Here's how Margaret Thatcher looked, wearing a skirt and sitting next to Reagan.

Here she is sledding:



AND: Here's a New Yorker article by one of my favorite writers, Janet Malcolm, about photographing Queen Elizabeth in 2011:

My first impression was of a vaguely familiar elderly couple posing for a formal portrait in a corner of the palatial Minneapolis hotel ballroom where their fiftieth wedding anniversary is being celebrated. The pair were seated on an ornate settee, and my attention was drawn to the woman’s sturdy legs in beige stockings, the right knee uncovered where the skirt of her pale-blue silk dress had hitched up a bit as she settled her ample figure into the settee; and to her feet, in patent-leather pumps planted firmly on the fancy hotel carpet. Her white hair was carefully coiffed, in a sort of pompadour in front and fluffy curls on the sides, and her lipsticked mouth was set in an expression of quiet determination. The man—a retired airline pilot?—was smaller, thinner, recessive. They were sitting a little apart, not touching, looking straight ahead. Gradually, the royal couple came into focus as such, and the photograph assumed its own identity as a work by Struth, the plethora of its details somehow tamed to serve a composition of satisfying serenity and readability.

"Actually, I'm not as brash as you might think."

I'm reading the transcript from today's press conference with President Trump and UK Prime Minister Theresa May. I'll put the full transcript below the fold and just highlight one thing:

QUESTION: People are fascinated to know how you're going to get along with each other, you're so different; the hard-working daughter (inaudible), the brash TV extrovert. Have you found anything in common personally yet?

TRUMP: Actually, I'm not as brash as you might think. (LAUGHTER) And I can tell you that I think we're going to get along very well. You know, it's interesting because I am a people person. I think you are also, Theresa. And I can often tell how I get along with somebody very early, and I believe we're going to have a fantastic relationship....

MAY: ... I think we have already struck up a good -- good relationship. But you asked what we had in common. I think if you look at the approach that we're both taking, I mean, one of the things that we have in common is that we want to put the interests of ordinary working people right up there, center stage....

That's not what most of us mean by personal. It may be that the personal is political, but it would be a logical fallacy to think you can just flip that and say the political is personal. But I'm glad they put on a nice show of hitting it off. 

Watch Theresa May doing her first Prime Minister's Questions...

"... she... seemed to impersonate Margaret Thatcher...."

Because she's a woman, so, exhibiting political strength, she gets compared to a woman (the only woman who's held her position).

And didn't you — if you watched that and if you're, like me, American — think about Hillary Clinton? Why doesn't Hillary Clinton step up to challenging questioning by opponents? She hasn't even done a press conference — and the press is on her side — since last December!

Well, soon enough, we'll see her in a debate with Donald Trump. She'll have practiced, with somebody who'll be trying to impersonate Donald Trump, and she'll have worked out some steely demeanor to counter his domineering presence. Maybe she'll impersonate Margaret Thatcher.

"The story of how Theresa May, the United Kingdom’s Home Secretary, became the presumptive Prime Minister is one of tragi-farcical, politico-comic self-destruction."

Writes Amy Davidson in The New Yorker. Read the whole thing. I just want to excerpt the part about how one of May's rivals, the Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom, flamed out after the Times of London published an interview with the headline: "BEING A MOTHER GIVES ME EDGE ON MAY—LEADSOM" that began "Tory minister says she will be better leader because childless home secretary lacks ‘stake in future.'"

It went on to quote Leadsom, who often included the phrase “as a mum” in her pro-Leave statements, as saying that May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.” This, she said, set her apart from May as a potential leader. She added, “I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children, so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t,’ because I think that would be really horrible.” But, she went on, “genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.” In other words, Andrea has children; Theresa hasn’t....

As a matter of logic, this disparagement of childless leaders is ludicrous... And, as a matter of politics, Leadsom’s comments were a wreck. She insulted the childless, and she seemed personally cruel to May, who has quietly said in the past that she is, indeed, sad about having never had children. (May, who is fifty-nine, has been married to her husband, a banker she met when they were both students at Oxford, for thirty-five years.)

... [Leadsom]  responded... by attacking the Times, tweeting that the story was “truly appalling and the exact opposite of what I said. I am disgusted.” Leadsom demanded that the paper release the transcript, which it did, along with the audio, and which not only confirmed the story but made Leadsom look worse. When the Times asked, “What is the main difference between you and Theresa May?,” her children and her “huge” family were practically the first things that Leadsom mentioned, after a passing reference to her knowledge of the economy and her “optimism.”