This is not a cute kitten or a small child doing something comical or any professional body dancing Gangnam style. It is not funny at all. It is serious and interesting and impressive and thought-provoking and lovely and true.
It's seven minutes 39 seconds long, and it's worth your full attention. I hope this young man is one day President. Or, at very least, entirely happy and successful in his life. He is shimmering with goodness and cleverness and authenticity. He is another example of why the grouches are wrong when they complain of the Young People of Today.
Showing posts with label American politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American politics. Show all posts
Wednesday, 12 December 2012
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
The most shocking thing on the internet today
I have two reactions to this. Shock that such a thing should be happening in a modern industrialised nation, and awe and wonder for the American people who will not be denied. Some of them are waiting in queues for eight hours to cast their ballots. They chant: 'We want to vote'. I take every hat I own off to them.
I take my hat off too to the magnificent Rachel Maddow, who, as always, manages to temper her outrage with humour. Although in this case, the outrage is almost too much for her.
I take my hat off too to the magnificent Rachel Maddow, who, as always, manages to temper her outrage with humour. Although in this case, the outrage is almost too much for her.
Thursday, 18 October 2012
Most patronising thing on the internet today
Morning Joe is a current affairs programme on MSNBC. I watch it most days, even though it sometimes drives me nuts. If you are obsessed with American politics, as I am, it is very informative, and they often have very good guests, like the wonderful Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post or the excellent Richard Wolffe.
The chemistry between the hosts, Joe Scarborough, a rather bombastic Republican, and Mika Brzezinski, a mild liberal, is supposed to be sparky and even flirty, but I often find it troubling. Scarborough has a habit of literally shouting Brzezinski down, and she, to my intense fury, sometimes lets him. But not today. Today, the binders of women thing has pushed her over the edge, and she holds her own, even though every single man on the set is metaphorically patting her on her pretty blonde head.
For the record, I think her point is valid. Binders full of women is indicative, to many female sensibilities, of a wider malaise in the Romney mind. There was a reason that it was the number one trending hashtag on Twitter. It was compounded by the self-serving story not being true, and also by the unfortunate remark about the ladies having to go home early to cook dinner for their families. Remember, Mitt Romney would like to repeal Roe vs Wade. In other words, he does not want females to have control over their own bodies. In this context, the binders really do say something.
But the fellas on the set do not want to talk about that. No, Sir. Let's just not talk about the lady stuff. Because, you know, it's for ladies.
It's twenty minutes, so quite long. But it is acutely illustrative and really interesting. I just warn you, the patronising levels are very, very high. You may find that your brain is about to explode. Mine was.
The chemistry between the hosts, Joe Scarborough, a rather bombastic Republican, and Mika Brzezinski, a mild liberal, is supposed to be sparky and even flirty, but I often find it troubling. Scarborough has a habit of literally shouting Brzezinski down, and she, to my intense fury, sometimes lets him. But not today. Today, the binders of women thing has pushed her over the edge, and she holds her own, even though every single man on the set is metaphorically patting her on her pretty blonde head.
For the record, I think her point is valid. Binders full of women is indicative, to many female sensibilities, of a wider malaise in the Romney mind. There was a reason that it was the number one trending hashtag on Twitter. It was compounded by the self-serving story not being true, and also by the unfortunate remark about the ladies having to go home early to cook dinner for their families. Remember, Mitt Romney would like to repeal Roe vs Wade. In other words, he does not want females to have control over their own bodies. In this context, the binders really do say something.
But the fellas on the set do not want to talk about that. No, Sir. Let's just not talk about the lady stuff. Because, you know, it's for ladies.
It's twenty minutes, so quite long. But it is acutely illustrative and really interesting. I just warn you, the patronising levels are very, very high. You may find that your brain is about to explode. Mine was.
Thursday, 11 October 2012
Strange political story of the day
Rachel Maddow is on a tear at the moment. I suspect I may be putting quite a lot of these videos up as the presidential race hots up. But I'm not sure I shall find an odder and sadder story than this one.
Part of the reason I like Maddow so much is that she is really passionate about what she believes. With some presenters, that can tip over into bombast, but she manages to avoid that tiger trap, mostly through the use of humour. She is clearly horrified by this, but I think she deals with it with a very deft lightness of touch.
Part of the reason I like Maddow so much is that she is really passionate about what she believes. With some presenters, that can tip over into bombast, but she manages to avoid that tiger trap, mostly through the use of humour. She is clearly horrified by this, but I think she deals with it with a very deft lightness of touch.
Friday, 17 February 2012
Jaw-dropping thing of the day
If I had my way, I would put up Rachel Maddow clips every day. She has a particular genius for teasing out the astonishing stories that the rest of the media gloss over. She has been on about the really strange and alarming vaginal probe law that is being passed in Virginia for a few days now. Yesterday, she brought that together with Bob Dole, Viagra, and Rick Santorum. For anyone interested in politics and morality and hypocrisy, it is a brilliant mix. Also, you get the bonus of watching the very professional Andrea Mitchell actually lost for words, live on air. It's fourteen minutes, which is long in internet terms, but it is worth every moment of your time:
Saturday, 4 February 2012
Riveting political hypocrisy of the day
Rick Santorum, who is running for the Republican nomination for president, will soon disappear from public consciousness, as Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney duke it out. But before he does, it is worth contemplating something interesting about his candidacy. He has, from the very beginning, wrapped himself in the cloak of piety, religious belief, and general godliness. Whenever challenged about his policies on homosexuality and abortion, he always states that he stands where he stands because his bible tells him so. Christianity, in this case, is automatically conflated with goodness and kindness. His policies might sound harsh, but they cannot be, by definition, because of the milk and honey of his devout belief.
The little-observed oddity about Rick Santorum is that he does not seem to be a very nice man. I very rarely do ad hominem in politics, because I think it is often cheap and unfair. If you present yourself as good and kind and faithful though, you must expect those claims to be examined. There are numerous video clips from the campaign trail where Rick Santorum becomes impatient, dismissive and even aggressive when faced with dissent. I noticed this in particular with a group of bright, engaged university students, who were asking him about gay marriage. Instead of debating with them, he hectored and talked over them, in a most unChristian fashion.
Rachel Maddow, who goes where the rest of the press pack do not, has picked up on this, and had a brilliant segment on it in her show this week. She shows two really shocking moments, where Santorum loftily ignores, even mocks, the concerns of a brave little boy who asked him a question (I am always incredibly impressed by children who are bold enough to do this; it must be so nerve-wracking) and a mother with a child suffering from cancer. These are not hardy political opponents or toughened hacks. They are very ordinary members of the public, in some ways the most vulnerable among us: a worried mother, a young child. Santorum acts as if they count for nothing.
I don't know quite what I take from all this. But I was shocked. The Maddow segment is quite long, sixteen minutes, but if you have any interest in politics, morality, and people acting on their beliefs rather than just mouthing them, it's really worth a watch.
The little-observed oddity about Rick Santorum is that he does not seem to be a very nice man. I very rarely do ad hominem in politics, because I think it is often cheap and unfair. If you present yourself as good and kind and faithful though, you must expect those claims to be examined. There are numerous video clips from the campaign trail where Rick Santorum becomes impatient, dismissive and even aggressive when faced with dissent. I noticed this in particular with a group of bright, engaged university students, who were asking him about gay marriage. Instead of debating with them, he hectored and talked over them, in a most unChristian fashion.
Rachel Maddow, who goes where the rest of the press pack do not, has picked up on this, and had a brilliant segment on it in her show this week. She shows two really shocking moments, where Santorum loftily ignores, even mocks, the concerns of a brave little boy who asked him a question (I am always incredibly impressed by children who are bold enough to do this; it must be so nerve-wracking) and a mother with a child suffering from cancer. These are not hardy political opponents or toughened hacks. They are very ordinary members of the public, in some ways the most vulnerable among us: a worried mother, a young child. Santorum acts as if they count for nothing.
I don't know quite what I take from all this. But I was shocked. The Maddow segment is quite long, sixteen minutes, but if you have any interest in politics, morality, and people acting on their beliefs rather than just mouthing them, it's really worth a watch.
Sunday, 8 January 2012
Freak show of the day
Supporters of the Republican candidate Ron Paul have put out an attack ad on his rival, Jon Hunstman. Huntsman was ambassador to China, and speaks perfect Mandarin. This seems to freak out the Paulites. Here, look, the ad is saying: Jon Hunstman speaks Chinese, sometimes to Chinese babies (presumably political candidates should only be nice to American babies), thus he is a MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE. Oh, and also Chairman Mao, just in case you were wondering.
Batshit nuts in the head. They might as well go back to the 19th century and start talking about the yellow peril. I've watched this twice now and I feel as if my cranium might explode, it is so strange. Real actual people sat down in a room and thought this was a good idea.
The lovely Rachel Maddow has her take on it here, and widens it out into a fascinating discussion of New Hampshire politics in general.
Further reading here.
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Question of the Day
I love it when someone sharper and better informed than I asks, and then answers, the very question I have been holding in my head. Over at The Dish, Andrew Sullivan asks: Why can't Jon Huntsman gain traction?
If I were a Republican, I would be falling all over myself to nominate this fellow. He has two terms as governor, he is articulate, humorous, and speaks Mandarin. He served as ambassador to China, so he has an intimate understanding of possibly the most important world power for America's future. He is tall and handsome. That should not make a difference, but it does, because politicians have to make an impression on television; also, there is that thing where one must be able to visualise the candidate on the steps of the White House. Looking presidential is intangible, but it counts. And yet he is bumping along at one percent, whilst the crazy pizza guy and the incurably odd Mr Perry romp ahead.
Anyway, Andrew Sullivan tells me why this should be here. It's sad, but I think it may be true.
If I were a Republican, I would be falling all over myself to nominate this fellow. He has two terms as governor, he is articulate, humorous, and speaks Mandarin. He served as ambassador to China, so he has an intimate understanding of possibly the most important world power for America's future. He is tall and handsome. That should not make a difference, but it does, because politicians have to make an impression on television; also, there is that thing where one must be able to visualise the candidate on the steps of the White House. Looking presidential is intangible, but it counts. And yet he is bumping along at one percent, whilst the crazy pizza guy and the incurably odd Mr Perry romp ahead.
Anyway, Andrew Sullivan tells me why this should be here. It's sad, but I think it may be true.
Picture from Wikimedia Commons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)