"These policemen are well familiar with what racism is. They knew exactly what they were doing when they ‘decorated’ the tree."

Said longtime civil rights activist Roy Edwards, quoted in "Minneapolis police decorate Christmas tree with racial stereotypes in majority-black neighborhood."

Hanging from the Christmas tree inside a Minneapolis Police Department precinct were half-crushed cans of Steel Reserve malt liquor and crumpled bags of Takis chips and Funyuns. There was a cup from the fried-chicken joint Popeyes and two packs of Newport cigarettes — pieces of actual garbage accented by a single strip of yellow crime-scene tape that didn’t quite cut it as tinsel....

“These pieces of trash were deliberately chosen to represent how certain officers feel about the community they serve: that black people are a stereotype to be mocked and the lives of those they serve may as well be reduced to trash in the gutter,” said City Councilman Phillipe Cunningham, who represents constituents in the majority-black Near North neighborhood where the MPD’s 4th Precinct is located.

The two Minneapolis police officers who created the display were placed on leave Friday in response to fierce backlash from both the African American community and public officials, including Mayor Jacob Frey, who described the tree as “racist, despicable, and well beneath the standards of any person who serves the city of Minneapolis.”

Edwards, Cunningham, and Frey are absolutely right.

"They've shot the potato in such lavish detail and lighting that it looks like a jewel. It also harks back to the famous The Potato Eaters by Van Gogh."

"If you pay attention, you see the beauty in the potato, a huge richness of colours in its skin. Each potato is different. These are portraits of individual potatoes. So, it's both still life and portrait photography."

"I’m looking around Scotiabank Arena, the home of the Toronto Maple Leafs, and it’s a depressing sight."

"It’s two-for-the-price-of-one in half the arena. The hockey rink is half curtained off, but even with that, organizers are scrambling at the last minute to cordon off more sections behind thick black curtains, they say due to a lack of sales. I paid $177 weeks in advance. (I passed on the pricey meet-and-greet option.) On the day of the event, some unsold tickets are slashed to single digits."

Writes Maureen Dowd in "Curtains for the Clintons" (NYT).

Why did the Clintons think they could fill arenas — and at prices like that? It's so delusional. Dowd tries to answer the question, and the main speculation is that Hillary is running for President again. But the empty seats in the arena were so predictable, so it shows the opposite of what she would need — the sense that people are clamoring for more Clinton.

The Clintons refuse to be discarded. It has been their joint project for half a century to be at the center of the public scene and debate.... Nothing they have done lately suggests that they have learned anything, including their obtuse post-#MeToo comments about Monica Lewinsky..... Their pathological need to be relevant in America is belied by a Canadian arena, where stretches of empty seats bear witness to the passing of their relevance. It’s a pity.

"To be fair to my doctors, they did ask me, 'Are you working with anything toxic?' And I’d say, 'No no, I’m working with all natural materials, and we’d all move on,'"

"I was so certain that these mussels, which the government said I could eat safely and buy in the market as food, could never be bad for me."

Said Gillian Genser, quoted in "An artist suffered mysterious symptoms for years. Then she realized her sculpture was poisoning her" (WaPo).

She felt agitated. She’d wake up nearly unable to move. Hearing vanished from one ear. Her muscles cramped and her speech slurred....

For 15 years, Genser had been grinding up mussel shells to create a sculpture of Adam, the first man... By using a natural material, like mussel shells, to depict a biblical character, she wanted to comment on humanity’s skewed relationship with the now-contaminated natural world.

But the shells contained lead and arsenic from the polluted environment, and she was inhaling the dust. It's very sad that this woman got poisoned, but I don't think inhaling shell dust is ever a good idea. She was working 12 hours a day for years grinding shells with a dentist's drill, and I'm not seeing that she used any sort of respirator or dust-protection mask. And some of her description of the intention of the artwork seems like an after-the-fact grasping at greater meaning:

“The work was an environmental statement. It’s about reconsidering what people’s first perception of the ecosystem should have been, rather than this idea that we have dominion over all the animals,” she said. “So it’s very interesting and ironic that Adam, as the first man, was so toxic. He poisoned me. Doesn’t that make sense, because we poisoned the world starting with this very poor notion?"

But what isn't an after-after-the-fact grasping at greater meaning? Why are we talking about "Adam" in the first place?

ALSO: What sort of doctors accept the idea of "natural materials" as a good enough answer? There are many toxins and allergens in nature!

"That whole 'so you can have it all.' Nope, not at the same time. That’s a lie. And it’s not always enough to lean in, because that shit doesn’t work all the time."

Said Michelle Obama, and good for her!

Quoted in New York Magazine.

The sentiment is important and plainly true, but I think what's getting more attention is her use — in a public setting — of the word "shit." I think it's interesting that she said "that shit doesn’t work all the time" and not "that shit don’t work all the time." This wasn't a descent into the vernacular. She was keeping it lofty, but choosing to deploy the expressive, valuable word "shit."

The WaPo article on the subject is titled "Michelle Obama swore when criticizing Sheryl Sandberg’s ‘lean in’ mantra, and the Internet lost it." (I think it's illiterate to use the word "swore" to refer to excretion-related words. Swearing is a solemn declaration to God, and the bad kind of swearing takes the Lord's name in vain. "Shit" is not the Lord's name.)

[I]n what may be an unprecedented slip-up, Obama said the line that threw the audience and Internet into a frenzy. Upon hearing her utter a profanity...

I wouldn't call "shit" a "profanity" either. ("Profanity" is desecrating something holy, and shit isn't holy at all, though sometimes it made sacred, by saying "holy shit," but that proves my point: It starts low and can be elevated. What's profane is to say "God" as an expletive, which people do all the time without setting the internet atwitter.)

... the packed 19,000-seat arena lost it, erupting in cheers and laughter. Many on social media praised Obama for being “real” about the struggles working women face.... The uncharacteristic remark even appeared to catch Obama off-guard. Author and political commentator Touré Neblett tweeted that “everyone freaked out ... Michelle, too.” Neblett added that Obama quickly apologized before saying, “I forgot where I was for a moment. I thought we were at home, y’all... I was gettin’ real comfortable up in here.”

Oh, I don't think she "forgot." She was taking a little risk, but she was doing something Trump does all the time, saying something short and striking that will get everyone talking about her. It's perfectly fine. It's America.

And now that we're paying attention, we will need to talk about whether Sheryl Sandberg is full of shit with her "Lean In" book. Getting after Sandberg was already something that was happening, so Obama did a fine job of making herself part of that trend. Now, Sandberg has been in trouble lately because of a revelation that she "and other Facebook executives had tried to cover up Russians using the site to promote propaganda." (I'm quoting the WaPo article). That has nothing to do with Sandberg's 5-year-old best seller and her advice to women to "lean in." But Obama chose this moment to denounce Sandberg's much-touted advice as "shit." That shit sticks.

I googled "shit sticks" in an effort to get to the most common phrase about shit sticking, but I ended up at a Wikipedia article, "Shit stick":

Shit stick means "a thin stake or stick used instead of toilet paper" and was a historical item of material culture introduced through Chinese Buddhism and Japanese Buddhism. A well-known example is gānshǐjué/kanshiketsu (lit. 乾屎橛 "dry shit stick") from the Chan/Zen gōng'àn/kōan in which a monk asked "What is Buddha?" and Master Yunmen/Unmon answered "A dry shit stick".

The illustration is mindbending:



"Gaki zōshi 餓鬼草紙 "Scroll of Hungry Ghosts", a gaki condemned to shit-eating watches a child wearing geta and holding a chūgi, c. 12th century."

A photo.

View this post on Instagram

As much as our family is going to miss this dog, we’re comforted to know he’ll bring the same joy to his new home, Walter Reed, that he brought to 41.

A post shared by George W. Bush (@georgewbush) on Dec 2, 2018 at 6:55pm PST

Alec Baldwin as Trump again last night — "Don't cry for me, Argentina."

Many good moments in last night's cold open. Even some Trumpsters will laugh.

"The remains of former President George Herbert Walker Bush will return to Washington in the most dramatic and distinguished fashion possible, occupying the plane that normally serves as Air Force One."

"President Donald Trump told reporters of the plan aboard the aircraft as they returned from the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 'So what we’re doing with the plane – we land, and then they come in, and these are great people that run these aircraft. They are unbelievable,' he said. 'And they’re taking apart – I don’t think this section. The section up front, They’re taking all of the seats out. ... We’re sending the plane, this plane, to Houston. And it picks up the casket.'"

The Daily Mail reports.

"It’s the Art of the G-20, by Donald Trump. The 45th president is writing his own rulebook..."

"... on how to claim credit and respect on an international stage where many leaders have looked down on him for years. But just as his famous 1987 book counseled, Trump’s global deal-making was as much about style as substance, with grandiose talk the most important ingredient of all. The president arrived back in Washington on Sunday feeling triumphant, believing his latest international trip to be a resounding success. During his overnight flight on Air Force One, Trump seemed vindicated after dealing with a long buildup of pressure to the summit in Argentina. 'It’s an incredible deal,' he told reporters of his agreement with China to temporarily pause new tariffs. 'It goes down, certainly — if it happens, it goes down as one of the largest deals ever made.'... But behind the veneer is a more complicated reality...."

From "The art of the G-20, by Donald Trump/After two years of pugnacious foreign relations, the president is finding new ways to claim dealmaking prowess in an international arena" (Politico).

How to make your own Skittles.

This amused me:



That's one of 10 in a series, which you can see here. I've also watched the making of gourmet Cheetos. Very entertaining!

This may be more Peter, Paul & Mary — and more Christmas — than you really want...

... but here, I found this...



PP&M swoop into NYC in an animated flying sleigh and we see the twin towers....



It was 1988.

"Ronan Tynan, the Irish tenor, had called earlier in the day to ask if he could drop by, and when he showed up, [he was asked] to sing to the president."

"Mr. Tynan sang two songs, the first 'Silent Night' and the second a Gaelic song. As he sang 'Silent Night,' [former secretary of state, James A. Baker III said], 'Believe it or not, the president was mouthing the words.' Mr. Baker held Mr. Bush’s hand and rubbed his feet for nearly a half-hour...."

From "'I Love You, Too': George Bush’s Final Days" (NYT).

"As a prosecutor, you build a case by having your cooperating accomplice witnesses plead guilty to the big scheme you are trying to pin on the main culprit."

"After all, what makes these witnesses accomplices, literally, is that they were participants in the main culprit’s crime. That’s the scheme you’re trying to prove. So, on guilty-plea day, the cooperator comes into court and admits guilt to the same conspiracy on which you are trying to nail the lead defendant. That gets you 90 percent of the way home.... This kind of guilty plea signals to the world, including to all the other suspects, that the accomplice is ready to testify that the criminal scheme existed — it is not a figment of the prosecutor’s fevered imagination.... With respect to the president and 'collusion,' Mueller does not have a crime he is investigating. He is investigating in hopes of finding a crime, which is a day-and-night different thing. The lack of a crime means the 'accomplices' are not really accomplices....  [I]f you turn a prosecutor loose to investigate political campaign activities — you are apt to find unsavory conduct that is not criminal but that some people will lie about.... But the convictions [Mueller] has amassed, even if they are only for false statements or are otherwise unrelated to the Trump-Russia rationale for the investigation, prove that many people Trump brought into his campaign were corruptible and of low character...."

Writes Andrew McCarthy (National Review).

"[A]ny variance in skin tone is obscured by lighting and makeup that have the effect of creating a stultifying homogeneity, which is the point and amounts, ultimately, to an eerie celebration of whiteness."

From "The Rockettes and Race: A Very White Christmas" by Ginia Bellafante (NYT).

Key fact: 10% of the Rockettes are black.

Also, on the day when Bellafante saw the show — which is called "Christmas Spectacular Starring the Radio City Rockettes" — "The crowd was overwhelmingly white."

ADDED: I thought the whole point of that Rockettes kind of dancing is that they move as if they are all one. E pluribus unum, one might say. That's the style, so why go to the show at all if you feel "stultified" by "homogeneity"?

AND: I've never gone to see the Rockettes (despite living in NYC for 10+ years). I'm just not interested in that kind of dancing, and all my life I've heard elite opinion disparaging them. But they're still around, and some people are going to the show. If I did attend the show because I wanted to write about it, I would be aware of my own difference from Rockettes enthusiasts, and I'd try to understand why the people who love it love it. I wouldn't present my emotional response as objective, and I hope I wouldn't distance myself from the crowd. There's something especially bad about putting yourself above other people — thinking you're the one with the good taste — and then racializing the difference.

"Abigail was right to be confused. Under her state’s law, what Grant did was not technically illegal..."

"... even though he later admitted that he knew Abigail wasn’t consenting to sex with him. That’s because in Indiana, sex only becomes rape when it’s compelled through force or threats, if the victim is mentally disabled and can’t properly consent, or if he or she is unaware that the sex is occurring. Abigail knew she was having sex. She just didn’t know it was with Grant.... When you have sex with someone, are you agreeing to sleep with just the physical entity before you? Or is it something bigger and more complex? Many people might think a man who deceives his sister-in-law into sex by pretending to be his identical twin should be prosecuted. But what of the man who deceives a woman by pretending to be some other fake, more successful — or even single — version of himself? And what of the legions of lies behind so many online dating profiles where people falsely advertise themselves using the scantest of information?"

From "She Thought She Was In Bed With Her Boyfriend, Until She Saw His Face/'I was like, I feel violated. This feels wrong. But I don’t know if it’s illegal'/This woman's case has exposed a loophole in rape laws" (BuzzFeed News).

ADDED: I puzzled over what's wrong with the sentence "Many people might think a man who deceives his sister-in-law into sex by pretending to be his identical twin should be prosecuted. " It's that there's no antecedent for "his." ADDED:  No. Wait. That's not the problem. The 2 "his"s refer to the man who you might think should be prosecuted. What's confusing is that we're not told who his identical twin is. We can infer that it's his sister-in-law's husband, of course, but you have to stop and think about it, and that's awkward, because of the "his"s.

"Revolution... It is a revolution... worse than 1968. This is the beginning of the revolution."

Lots of pictures in The Daily Mail of Paris on fire.