Juxtaposin’: Manhatta(n)

Blowhard, Esq. writes:

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

It’s a New Day in America!

Fenster writes:

At a time of rancor and divisiveness it is good to remember: it’s a new day in America!

It’s always a new day in America.

America . . . it’s a new day!

President Frank Underwood

A new day in America, you’re gonna be proud again.

Donald Trump, announcing his economic agenda

It is a new day in America, and it is a time for all of us to step forward together for children, since they own the future.

Marian Wright Edelman, Children’s Defense Fund, on Obama’s election

Americans wanted hope and they got it; from the Palatino/Gotham typeface combinations, to the bright, optimistic photography—everything laddered back to the fresh, “new day in America” messaging.

Meredith Post, A Historical Perspective—The Rise of Branding in Politics, writing about Obama’s branding strategy

Whoa, it’s a new day in America, and you know why? A thing happened that is GOOD for transgender people, specifically involving their God-given right to drop the kids off at the pool in public places. For real! A federal appeals court in Virginia has ruled that banning trans people from using bathroom facilities that match their gender identities is WRONG AND BAD under Title IX.

Evan Hurst, Radical Liberal Judges Affirm Bizarre Transgender Pooping Rituals, Wonkette

It’s a New Day in America – Now What?  Ralph Egues from the National Hispanic Landscape Alliance takes a look at what the new administration in Washington means for labor in sodgrass.

Ralph Egues, Turfgrass Producers International

We’re at an eve of a brand new day in America, and it feels good being here in Chicago. All this technology, I’m being beamed to you, like in Star Wars and stuff. It’s great.

Will.i.am, quoted in Kari Coe, 8 Times Rappers Became Holograms, XXL

It’s a bright new day in America, filled with challenges and opportunities for the future. . . . Microbes are an incredible tool from an engineering perspective, as they are programmable, self-repairing, ubiquitous, exist in limitless variety, and require little upkeep. 

Jack M. Cackler, Powering the Future with Microbes, The Harvard Crimson

It’s a new day in America, and what better way to celebrate the first African-American president than with Al Pacino’s thriller 88 Minutes? What, you don’t understand why that’s appropriate? Maybe that’s because you’re racist.

The Flop House Podcast

I hope this is a new day in America, and I hope and pray the restriction to 30/100 patient limit for buprenorphine doctors is lifted immediately.

Terry Carson, quoted in Probuphine: A Game-Changer in Fighting Opioid Dependence, National Institute on Drug Abuse

Back to the study hall, men. Tomorrow is a new day in America, and many challenges remain. But always remember the motto of our great Dominican college:,  Veritas. Truth.

Father Raymond St. George, quoted in Let the Word Go Forth, Knights of Columbus, Columbia Online Edition

I believe we are on the brink of a new day in America. “God is not finished with America yet!”

Dan Cummins, Make America Godly Again

It is a new day in America. . . . When you support John Hagee Ministries, you are part of “our voice” that is taking all the gospel, to all the world, for every generation.

John Hagee, Righteous Revolution

Thirty years ago, affirmative action may have been a necessary step to open the doors of American universities and companies. It helped to correct a history of racial discrimination propagated by whites, but it’s a new day in America.

Dana White, Who Says I’m Inferior?, Heritage Foundation

It’s a new day in America and nothing seems clear except perhaps uncertainty. . . . The great need for new public works practically everywhere across the entire nation has become obvious to all.  

Sergeant Brownfield, Brownfield Listings

Why We’re Liberals brings clarity and perspective to the possibility of a new day in America.

Eric Alterman, Why We’re Liberals: A Political Handbook for Post-Bush America, The Nation Institute

Fascism’s New Day in America

Rick DLoss, Socialist Currents

But what I did not expect was the level of comradery and esprit de corps and enthusiasm here in D.C. like it’s a new day. It’s a new day in America, man.

US Rep. Clay Higgins, D-La., looking forward to the Trump-Pence administration

It’s a new day in America, and it is a new day at Express.

Express Employment Professionals CEO Bob Funk announcing new benefits for its full-time corporate employees

It’s a new day in America, if an exceptionally gloomy one, and it’s a new era for Diane, who quits the firm she co-founded with plans to retire to the South of France, only to lose her life’s savings in a Madoff-like investment scheme. 

Sam Adams, on the Good Wife spin-off show The Good Fight, Slate

 

The sun is now rising over Nairobi. It’s time for a new day in America as well. It’s time to listen.

Pearce Godwin, Founder & President of Listen First Project

Folks, together we embark on a new day in America where we ask not what our country can do for us, but what we can do to make our country’s beef jerky great again.

Phil A. Mignon, Three Jerks: the original filet mignon beef jerky

 

Allah has blessed us and has helped us against those who reject faith.  Who reject hope.  Who reject change.  Who reject a dawn of a new day in America and in the world.

Imam Plemon, The Significance of Barack Obama

It’s a new day in America! Drown your sorrows (or celebrate your victory) with big-ass tires, V8 power, and a classic nameplate.

Tom McParlan, Get A Crazy Discount On A Corvette Right Now And Feel Better About America

Now it’s a new day in America and the monsters are crawling out of the shadows again.

Justin Rosario, We Should Be Extremely Worried About The Spike In Anti-Semitic Violence, The Daily Banter

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

The Unpersoning of Louis C.K.

Blowhard, Esq. writes:

Over at New York Magazine’s Vulture, progressive media critic and RogerEbert.com editor Matt Zoller Seitz proclaims that “Louis C.K. is Done”:

Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, and Harvey Weinstein’s entire body of work has been retroactively contaminated by multiple accounts accusing them of sexually predatory behavior ranging from sexual harassment to rape. These stories change our perception of their art, whether we would like them to or not. This is not just unavoidable, it’s a necessary part of processing art and coming to terms with it.

When disturbing stories about respected artists come from the distant past, we treat them dispassionately, as just one detail among many. Present tense or near-present tense revelations hit us differently because we share the same world as the artist, breathe the same air, feed the same economy. We think of them as contemporaries, even as people we know. This kind of revelation changes the relationship between the artist and the art, in a way that places an unasked-for, unfair burden on the audience. This is what’s happening culture-wide. And it’s not the fault of people who didn’t report it, or audiences who aren’t sophisticated enough to separate the art from the artist. It’s the fault of the artists for being secret creeps or criminals, and the fault of the system for making it possible for them to act this way for years without being punished.

Also:

C.K. betrayed the trust of the women he exposed himself to. Their experiences should always be considered first when his name is discussed and his legacy debated…

There’s no reason to feel remorse for disinvesting affection we sunk into artists who are later revealed to be criminals or abusers. There’s no reason to have qualms about stamping their work “Of Archival Interest Only” and moving on to something new — not just new work, but a new paradigm for relationships in show business, and all business. The women who came forward opened themselves to being ostracized and re-traumatized. The only reason they spoke up is to make show business, and the world, safer and more humane. Time to listen.

While reading this article, I was struck by the finality of the judgment. Now that C.K. is a confirmed “gross” “sexual predator” (because so saith The New York Times), welp, it’s time for us all to leave him behind and move on. Off to the leper colony with you Louis, to join Cosby, Spacey, and Weinstein. Esquire reports that C.K.’s new movie will not be released while HBO, FX, and his previous friends are all cutting ties.

I’m not the first to notice that contemporary progressivism, despite its contempt for religion, is in many ways little more than a secular version of Christianity. For example, its rigorously enforced dogma (political correctness, no platforming), obsession with the Devil (racism and sexism), veneration of its saints, and uptight sexuality. But it’s starkly unlike traditional forms of religion in two significant ways. First, whereas traditional religions make distinctions between levels of sin — e.g. “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” a venal sin v. a mortal sin — nearly all of these Hollywood harassment claims are being treated as equally terrible. From Weinstein allegedly raping women to Weinstein coming on to women in his hotel room to Spacey hitting on a 14-year-old boy to Spacey hitting on a 18-year-old man to C.K. masturbating in front of women to Matthew Weiner telling a co-worker she “owed” it to him to let him see her naked to Dustin Hoffman telling an off-color joke — all are equally offensive and equally deserving of vilification. The idea that people might draw distinctions or even dismiss some of the charges doesn’t seem to occur many.

Second, going back to the Seitz piece, while traditional Christianity has a deserved reputation for harsh, condemning, fire-and-brimstone denunciations, that strain is counterbalanced by its root belief in charity, forgiveness, and redemption. What it takes with one hand, it gives with the other. Not so the proggy adherents of the Church of Our Lady of the Current Year. Seitz may be disappointed by C.K.’s exile, but the underlying, unspoken assumption is that permanent exile is the only solution. Perhaps I’m incorrect and Seitz would agree that Weinstein et al. can redeem themselves via the proper rituals: intense therapy, a Mea Maxima Culpa late night tour, and buying an indulgence, er, donating a ton of money to the right charity. But it’s still telling how that road isn’t even hinted at.

Related

  • In the comments to his article on his Facebook page, Seitz adds: “…I’m basically done with Woody Allen. I decided a couple of years ago that as a survivor of childhood domestic violence, I am obligated to believe Dylan Farrow. As a result, I can’t stomach his work anymore. And even if I still had doubts about that, the way he continues to rub the audience’s noses in age-inappropriate relationships, one after the other, is just unseemly. Like he’s getting away with something and laughing about that. My daughter is named Hannah because my wife and I loved HANNAH AND HER SISTERS, so none of this is easy for me to say.” It does not logically follow that because you were victimized by trauma X, you are therefore “obligated to believe” every other person who alleges to be victimized by trauma X. As a friend points out, it makes about as much sense as saying, “I’ve been mugged by black men, therefore I am obligated to believe anyone who says they were mugged by a black man.” Furthermore, saying you are “obligated to believe” or that “all women must be believed” is nothing more than saying, “I have faith in my church.” What happened to the use of our reason, judgment, and the weighing of evidence? Are the residents of Maycomb, Alabama in To Kill a Mockingbird “obligated to believe” Mayella’s charges against Tom Robinson? Were we “obligated to believe” all of the charges in the Satanic ritual abuse cases?
  • The same friend also wonders why Bill Clinton continues to get a pass in all of this. Remember during the 90s when fuddy duddy conservatives said that sexual sin matters and liberals screamed, “It’s just sex, get over it! Don’t force your private morality into the public sphere!” PEPPERIDGE FARM REMEMBERS.
  • Can someone explain to me why David Bowie’s entire discography shouldn’t also be stamped “For Archival Use Only”? Jezebel certainly seems to think so. (And if they don’t think so, why the fuck not?) Rebecca Solnit’s excuse that it was a different time and culture certainly didn’t apply to the Confederacy in the Civil War Statues debate, so why should it apply to Bowie? Isn’t this current Hollywood scandal the Confederate Statues 2.0?
  • In the 80s there was a dopey family sitcom called GROWING PAINS that some may recall. There’s an episode where one the kids meets his idol, a rock star played by young Brad Pitt. His idol turns out to be an asshole. The kid is upset. Cool dad Alan Thicke tells him, “Sometimes your heroes are assholes, sometimes artists you hate are nice people. Who cares?” To think that some cornball TV show has more wisdom and maturity than 99% of our respected thought leaders.
Posted in Movies, Performers, Politics and Economics, Sex | Tagged , , , | 8 Comments

Question Du Jour: Civil War Edition

Blowhard, Esq. writes:

Serious question: What does the average American know about the Civil War other than “The South was racist and in favor of slavery. The North and South went to war. The North defeated the South.”?

Is a random citizen’s understanding much deeper than that? If not, why should I care about their thoughts on the war, what it meant, Confederate statues, etc.?

Posted in History, Politics and Economics | Tagged , | 6 Comments

USG: A Version History

Blowhard, Esq. writes:

Here’s a fun game: imagine the United States government is software. What would its version history look like? Inspired by Moldbug, Fabrizio and I were kicking the idea around and here’s what we came up with:

1776: America 0.5
1781: America 0.6
1787: America 0.7
1789: America 1.0
1865: America 2.0
1917: America 2.5
1933: America 3.0
1991: America 3.3
2001: America 3.5

Needs some tweaking but I think that’s a pretty good start.

Related

  • Is Trump the first president of USG 5.0?
Posted in History, Politics and Economics | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Couldn’t Do It Today

Fabrizio del Wrongo writes:

Posted in Politics and Economics, Television | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Brazile 2020?

Fenster writes:

Is anyone thinking as I am that there is something a little–odd? revealing?–about how Brazile is handling this affair? She didn’t have to start it up and surely knew she was punching people with power.

Her old buddy George Stephanopoulos seems in an interview to want to give her room to walk back from the ledge and her response is that critics can go to hell. There are the peculiar Seth Rich statements. She’s going on Tucker Carlson tomorrow.

I have thought that this could all be part of a gang-up by the disparate Dem forces who want to push Hillary from the stage, forcibly if necessary.   While that may be the case there is still something reckless about Brazile’s way of doing it, and even if people are happy at the damage she is doing she might still “never work in this town again.”

So if she has made herself so toxic that no one will hire her, what is going on? Maybe she sees one of those buy-low sell-high opportunities that Trump grasped a couple of years back?

The Republican field was crowded at that point, with many bigfeet consuming all the oxygen and seemingly making it harder for outsiders to find sunlight.  Trump saw this as an opportunity.  In the case of the Republicans there were plenty of bigfeet but none were capable or willing to take on the issues that needed attention.  The issues themselves were being starved for oxygen, which Trump supplied, and the more opponents in the race the better.  Trump turned conventional wisdom on its head, and he did it by seeing an opportunity when others did not–a classic buy-low sell-high businessman’s instinct.

Does Brazile see something similar among the Dems?  Hillary won’t leave the stage.  Biden is well past his sell-by date but hovers, hovers.  Sanders excited a chunk of the base but he is old. And can he win if he continues to move from his old-fashioned leftism (which might attract middle America) to newfangled progressivism?  Warren has some of the same problem.  And Obama?  Obama is doing something no other recent president has done–attempt to run the party as an ex-president.  Roger Stone–a possibly crazy man but not someone I would ever bet against on political matters–is quite sure the plan is to run Michelle.

That is a lot of oxygen consumption.  The question is whether the situation is analogous to that of the Republican’s last time around, with the gaggle of opportunists unable to do the necessary things, being captives of the past.  And whether the stage is set for a dramatic play by someone who can cut through the fog.

It’s possible that Tulsi Gabbard could play that role.   Getting the party to walk back from its dangerous identity politics plank may require someone immune from charges of racism, sexism and so forth.  And Gabbard may be able to pull that off.

But why not Brazile?  Is the surplus drama that she has brought to her return to the national stage a way of saying she is ready for a starring role?  It does not matter that no one will hire her if she herself can establish herself as her own political force.  She’s got the name and brand recognition already.  She’s tough as nails.  She can speak truth to power, even the off-the-rails power brokers in her own party if necessary.  Does she see the buy-low sell-high moment for the Dems, and is she rushing to establish herself as the Trump-style disruptor before others take the plunge?  Brazile 2020?

Posted in Politics and Economics | 7 Comments

Our Mr. Brooks

Fenster writes:

David Brooks has long vacillated between culture mode and political mode and sometimes he splits the difference, as he does here.

When politics is used as a cure for spiritual and social loneliness, it’s harder to win people over with policy or philosophical arguments. Everything is shaped on a deeper level, through the parables, fables and myths that our most fundamental groups use to define themselves. . . . If politics is going to get better we need better myths, unifying ones that are built on social equality.

Like me, and ironically like the late Andrew Breitbart, Brooksie mostly ends up in places where culture trumps politics. That is the case with this column. And so I am sympathetic with it for the most part. I don’t doubt that various cultural ailments can and do drive political passions, with the passionate not always fully aware of the cause of their discontent, or why politics in the end does not work as the salve they would like.

That said, it would be nice if Brooksie were a little more balanced in his analysis. True, when he gets all abstract about it he says that idolatry can arise on both left and right as a result of the fraying of the cultural fabric. But when he discusses the matter in concrete terms the anomie is happening in middle America and the morbid symptoms are seen among Trump supporters. Is it too much to ask Brooksie to level with his own sophisticated audience that they are in this thing too?

Indeed a case can be made that many of the ailments afflicting middle America have come at the hands of smartypants who are willfully blind to the effects of their own actions and preferences on others. Am I mythologizing too much to suggest that, to put it crudely, globalists do not give two shits about deplorables?  Some of the anomie felt in middle America is surely related to the perception of being sidelined, neglected and disrespected.

And what is the reaction of Brooks’s Times readers to all this?  Double down on afflicting the uncomfortable and go into high dudgeon panic mode 24/7.  There’s a lot of myth visible here, too.  Let’s hear you, Brooksie, describe to your own readers in your best reasonable prose the extent to which their actions are driven by unseen demons.

All well and good to pine for moderation–the winning side always calls for that when they have their foot on your neck. I await the day that Brooksie-think meets Bannon-think to hash things out. Civil Wars–even ones fought out with ideas and on paper–have a way of bringing people together.  C’mon Brooksie, you can do it.

Posted in Politics and Economics | 6 Comments

Juxtaposin’: Tulsi Gabbard

Fenster writes:

Continue reading

Posted in Philosophy and Religion, Politics and Economics | 4 Comments

Inside a Bubble

Fenster writes:

If you find yourself in a hole the best advice is to stop digging.  What if you suspect you are in a bubble?  How would you know you are even in one?  And if you determine you are in a bubble what should you do?  Get outside of it?  Pop it?  Why not just stay there if it is pleasant, and if getting outside of it will produce unsettling feelings?

Continue reading

Posted in Politics and Economics, Sex, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment