The Anchoress

Last night I gave you Children of Bodom shredding Vivaldi, via my Elder Son. Today you get this, via my son Buster.

Listen to this man sing Nessun Dorma in this live recording! Holy crap! Goosebumps! Those high notes are supported from such a depth - yet sound so effortless - I have to think his testicles were holding them up! Astonishing! (H/T Buster)

Children of Bodom playing…I’m not sure, is it Vivaldi? Awesome. (H/T Elder Son)

“The Ambiguously American Candidate.” That’s what I thought yesterday when I saw this photo.

It is striking to note that Obama’s plane flys around the world sporting an iiiiittty bitty American flag (out of camera range when he walks down to tarmacs) and many prominent O symbols. I wrote to a pal yesterday:

“A tiny little flag near the serial numbers, the big Obama symbol everywhere - including, apparently, on HIS seat in first class.

It’s starting to really make me uncomfortable. Obama is clearly trying to send a signal that he is a “citizen of the world’ type before he is an American. That Obamaland is a state unto itself. Or a state of mind.

Apparently the Great Seal of Obama was not a mere glitch in his campaign. The O symbol takes precedence over the American symbol for this candidate, and - to his credit - he’s being really up front about his priorities.

And I thought Bill Clinton was a narcissist.

In fairness - to some extent, you do need a big ego to run for the American presidency, but on the other hand, this pre-dominant O symbol begins to make me uncomfortable. Is all of this meant to instill confidence in a man who has only 143 days working experience in the Congress (with no signature piece of legislation to his name) a whisper thin resume and some dubious policy ideas?

Or is it a promise of things to come: Obamaland! - we don’t know what it means, yet, but it’s change, and it’s hope and we hope in change, because apparently, America is just not acceptable in its current hopeless form, so unchanged, these last 230 years.

Obama’s seeming ambiguity about his own citizenship, his own allegiance and his need to put his own self and his own symbol before the symbol of the nation he says he loves and wants to lead…it’s Un. Comfortable.

Shouldn’t the American President be - at the very least - unambiguously American?

And shouldn’t the future American President know what committees he is on, and what committees he is not on while he’s talking policy?

“Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon.” Barack Obama, Sderot, Israel July 23, 2008 - [emphasis mine - admin]

He’s not on that committee. What’s that about?.

So, today - we learn that Obama really really wants photos of him amid an adoring crowd in Berlin. He wants it so badly, he’s distributing flyers in German to help bring out the adorers.

Big O symbol on the paper, nary an American flag in site. He is an American running for the American presidency, right?

Say this for Obama: he’s being very upfront about his preferences and his ambitions. If he wins, no one can say we didn’t see megalomania from, well…say this moment:

Generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal. — Barack Obama, June 2, 2008

And his wife has already promised us that if Obama wins:

Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

Every time I read that, I think of the opening of Orwell’s 1984, when Winston Smith gets out of bed to begin his compulsory exercises and - when he’s not quite attending and not touching the floor with his hands - the inter-active drill leader (who can see him) calls out to Smith by name, admonishes him and gets him re-focused.

Smith was certainly involved and informed.

But this is America. In America, you’re free to be uninformed, if that’s what you really want. It’s called personal liberty. Your choices may not be the best choices, but they’re your own. And that is invaluable.

“The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog.” - G.K. Chesterton, Broadcast talk 6-11-35

If Barack Obama wins the White House, we can expect the return, I suppose, of the greatly mocked and quickly hidden Great Seal of Obama, in that slightly nauseating shade of UN-blue. And there will be lots of non-campaign campaign types of events, too, I’ll bet.

If the congress and senate remain in Democrat hands, and the SCOTUS gets a few new members - well, it’s going to be very interesting to see all the change.

UPDATE: More on Joe Klein’s meltdown, which is linked to above under “dubious policy”.

UPDATE: Was very interested (but only mildly embarrassed) to receive this picture from an Obama fan, showing McCain’s plane with the small flag by the registry numbers:


So, McCain does not have a prominent flag on his plane, either. But it must be said, McCain is also not passing out flyers for a big campaign speech in Berlin or designing his own “presidential seal.” McCain has not yet declared that his candidacy became the moment - FINALLY! - when America started to employ her millions of unemployed workers and began taking the old and sick off the teeming streets and bringing them into hospital. And his plane is not carrying around a guy who is an “ambiguous” American. McCain is unambiguous about his country, so perhaps his little flag is less jarring; we DO know who he is.

In fairness, it would be objectionable to see Obama use the flag merely as a “prop” when he has more than once suggested that he’s uncomfortable with the “flagwaving” stuff. He’s sort of roped himself into a corner now. If he doesn’t use the flag he’s ambiguous; if he does, he’s a “phony” - the flag has become a lose-lose for Obama, and I can appreciate that at this point he’s better off not waving one. He should probably find out what committees he is actually named to, in the Senate, though.

Still…there may not be - as I suggested below - a nefarious idea behind “pictures of Dear Leader exiting his plane without an American reference in sight.” I was writing late on three hours sleep as I mentioned to Rand, so I will plead only a half-addled, not fully-addled case.

MEANWHILE: Over at Maggies’ Farm, they’re looking at another quasi-religious-sounding quote from Obama and saying they don’t want Obama or any other politician trying to bring “meaning” into their lives via government.

“They want a sense of purpose, a narrative arc to their lives, something that will relieve a chronic loneliness or lift them above the exhausting, relentless toll of daily life. They need an assurance that somebody out there cares about them, is listening to them — that they are not just destined to travel down a long highway toward nothingness.“

Sounds like “these sheep” need a shepherd. I know a good one I can recommend! Hillary talked about the “politics of meaning” years ago and everyone said, “what does that mean?” Do we know, yet?

Lucas With the Lid Off - Fun music, great video all done in one continuous shot:

Cantaloop by Us 3 - riffing off of Herbie Hancock

George W. Obama: Jim Geraghty identifies what would be an Obama Bushism, if such things were being observed and tallied:

“You know, it’s always a bad practice to say ‘always’ or ‘never.’” — Obama, speaking in Amman

I know another:

“Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.”

But I never could stay awake through that movie. Hot Air finds another.

The verbal gaffes must be because Obama is tired. I can accept that; traveling knocks the crap out of me, and Obama really is “only human”. But I can’t help noticing that Bush, of course, was never tired when he misspoke, or human. He was and is - always - just stoopit, right?

A Premature Inaugurator: That would be Obama, again, with James Lewis thinking about Berlin, which some think will make or break Obama’s world tour. I predict the press will make it glorious for him.

Has Obama an Air of Inevitability?: Hillary used to have one of those, too. He’s not president yet.

I can’t help all the Obama stuff; when it seems like he is 70% of all the news coverage out there, it’s what you get, sorry.

For all that coverage: you’d think he’d be doing better in the polls, especially when one measly reporter showed up for McCain in New Hampsire. But July polls don’t say much, anyway.

More Important: Is Turkey in the throes of an Islamic revolution? Something to keep watch of.

Good read: The Complex Success of the Surge.

Good Discussion: Althouse and her commenters look at another battle regarding the dispensing of birth control and whether faith - and the freedom to practice and express it under the Bill of Rights - should be considered. The conversation is always good over there.

Bad headline: I don’t like it, anyway it sounds too much like old FOX network programming.

“Bad Robot”: That’s actually not fair, because I’ve always thought Lanny Davis to be a straight-shooter and not-at-all robotic, but I like the kids voice saying “bad robot” at the end of “Lost”, and since it follows the “Bad Headline” and it’s about Davis’ daring to break with narrative orthodoxy to consider that Bush may have done some good in Iraq, it sort of works. Okay, it’s a bad headline, too. But those kids are cute. And Davis is provocative and moving in his piece.

“Bad Anchoress”: My second radio interview…the first one I’ve heard. I sound like Minnie Mouse on helium. I did an interview with Ed Driscoll at PJM, for their XM radio thingie, POTUS ‘08. There is NOTHING more hideous than hearing your own voice for the very first time. I do not have Julie’s dulcet tones. Sadly, I say “you know” more than Hillary, and I need to slow down…I sound like SUCH a New Yorker! Also, I kept saying “NY Times” instead of “New Yorker.” Argh. Also, probably, I shouldn’t drink coffee while I do those things. I think I need a better sounding phone, too. So…if you’re interested…I shriek and stumble through the last 15 minutes.

“Bad Tax-Players”: Only the little people like you and me have to pay those gasoline taxes.

“Bad Couric”: She’s causing grumblings by some on the left and chortles by some on the right for not fawning over the Barack. I suspect she’s a little peeved that he beat Hillary and that played into her interview. Kind of odd, though, to look at this rich man (he’s only a little rich; worth just a few million) being put through the paces by this much richer woman (15 million a year, I think?).

I don’t have any conclusions to draw on it; it just struck me that these past few years have felt like the playing out of rather sick sort of soap opera/psychodrama, where all the players - from Bush, to Clinton, to McCain to Obama, to Huffington to Limbaugh, to Cronkite and Couric to Nancy Pelosi - are super-wealthy and privileged breathers of the rarefied air; they’re all spinning in their little orbits plotting revenge, positioning for power, trying to trip each other up and serving themselves before they even think of serving us.

Sometimes I wonder…how can they possibly know what’s “good” for us? They’ve never had the muffler fall out of their car while driving with two little kids squabbling in the back seat. They haven’t planted their own gardens with a little one “helping” and then weeded it, and watered it and shared the harvest with neighbors. Have any of them ever rolled coin to get a haircut? Do any of them know the price of a gallon of milk? How can they possibly relate to those of us who are dreading winter because the heating oil prices will be through the roof?

The rest of us sit around watching them, reacting to them, allowing them to hold sway over our lives and our imaginations…electing them and re-electing them, so they never go away. We give them too much. Of everything. The return is unequal and unsatisfying.

Thoughts like those are why I’m really glad I’m going to host this online retreat next month. It will be good to turn them off - turn all of it off - for a few days.

Be open and be free

Just typing the header gave me a chuckle - it’s a brilliant premise. This piece by Confederate Yankee is pretty darn clever, and it signals to those comedy writers who doubted it that there is plenty of room for real satire involving both candidates in this campaign. Unfortunately, due to formatting, I can’t excerpt it here - you must go read it for yourself. Like I said - pretty clever. And cute, too, since these two can’t seem to get together for a debate…read it all

Also, I don’t know if I agree that this is a “great” ad, I’m posting it here, just in the interests of fair play. Obama’s getting all that continual and free press…just seems like McCain is due a little attention:

Wait! I like this one better!

More here

So, apparently the New York Times, on the heels of this Rasmussen Report which suggests that the voting public is finding the press just a tad too “in the tank” for Sen. Obama, has rejected a John McCain op-ed meant to respond to Obama’s Times-featured op-ed from last week.

Glenn says,

Not only did the Op-Ed editor, David Shipley, a former Clinton staffer, reject the thing…he was a bit condescending about it:

“‘It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece,’ NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain’s staff. ‘I’m not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written…I’d be pleased, though, to look at another draft.”

Ouch! So, the press can give Obama 24/7 coverage with gushing-and resume-padding
free-publicity but they can’t give John McCain a couple of inches in their grubby little papers because…sniff…he isn’t saying anything new! Obama - it seems, according to the Times - “said something new!”

Well, of course Obama had said “something new”! When you’re a candidate with no paper trail, a scant 140 days of experience in Congress, no legislative successes and frequent flip-flops ummmm refinements to policy, you’re going to have something new to say almost every time you speak. Sometimes something really, really new. Or, sometimes, nothing much.

Poor John McCain has been steadfast in his opinions on foreign policy and war, and he actually has - you know - experience and history, so he’s not “saying anything new,” and therefore…apparently…he should not be heard until he and refines himself a bit.

I’m not even much of a McCain fan, but the Times decision strikes me as so outrageous, controlling and foreign to the concept of the free exchange of ideas in an election season. The NY Times says “revisions are often requested”, well, okay, but when Obama is getting the equivalent of millions of dollars of free and uncritical exposure, why can’t McCain just be allowed to say what the hell he wants for a few hundred words?

Thankfully, Matt Drudge has published the op-ed in its entirety on his site, and good for him for doing so! It is fair, and in doing so, Drudge lets the dead tree press and the mainstream media - those all-important “mediating intelligences and gatekeepers” to whom the alternative medias are supposed to lie prostrate - know that they’ve made a big blunder; that they truly are not the only game in town, any longer.

Of course, whether alternative media will be allowed to survive in the next few years will be very interesting to watch, but right now, Drudge’s reach is rather vast, and - even if this slight by the Times gets ignored by every network news outlet - it will be known.

Meanwhile, congratulations NY Times! In one fell swoop, you’ve created an underdog, taken attention away from your preferred candidate, given credibility to the charge that you are “in the tank” for Obama and unfair to other candidates, given satirists and Saturday Night Live, Mad TV, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report (among others) something to riff on (if they dare to) and convinced many, many more people that they cannot trust the press to allow them an honest and unfiltered look at either candidate. Quite a day’s work!

And a quiet “atta boy” to Mr. Drudge, as the NY Times would call him. I have to believe that even the most fervent Obama supporter would approve of Drudge’s promotion of free speech and open debate in an election season of great consequence. What could be more liberal than giving the other guy his say? And who would want to think that their guy got elected because the press suppressed debate? No one I know.

Well, at least this distracts from the idea that maybe Iraqis are not so overjoyed by Obama’s visit, after all.

In that spirit, I’ll post the thing, too:here.

Interesting: Jimmie Bise has a rather in-depth analysis of the Times’ choice and it’s worth reading and considering - he writes:

I don’t think I’ve seen a better example of [left-leaning media bias] than what happened with McCain’s op-ed. What’s interesting to me is that if you asked Shipley if his decision was biased, he’d be honestly flummoxed by the question. That’s because the bias wasn’t intentional and it wasn’t malicious. It came from his own unchallenged assumptions and just a little bit of innate arrogance…[] while Shipley was delighted with the newness of what Obama was saying, he never noticed that Obama is taking the old position still held by John McCain. In other words, he’s blind to the relative positions of each candidate and entirely focusing on the superficial “newness” of Obama’s new stance.

More:
Ed Morrissey
Okie on the Lam has more - good new links - and a very clever photoshop.
Hot Air
Big Lizards
Gateway Pundit notes a pro-Hamas editorial that made the NY Times’ very selective cut.
Ed Driscoll
Roger L. Simon

Last week, in linking to Michael Totten’s piece on Kosovo and its affection for Bill & Hillary Clinton, there were some questions about whether Clinton’s legacy there was really a good thing, given the abuse the Orthodox Christians have suffered there (see comments section at that link).

Totten begins to answer those questions in this first installment of a two-parter that continues looking at the region - and the religion question - The Bin Ladens of the Balkans, Part I:

Kosovo’s war, then, wasn’t religious. It was ethnic. Christians did not fight Muslims; Serbs fought Albanians. Serbian nationalists ethnically-cleansed Kosovo’s Catholics right along with the Muslims.
[...]
90 percent of all Kosovar Albanians, Catholic and Muslim alike, were displaced from their homes by Milosevic’s armed forces during their ethnic-cleansing campaign. In 1999 they were allowed to return to their homes under NATO protection. Enraged mobs then set to firebombing Serb houses and Serbian Orthodox churches.

Five years later, in 2004, violence exploded in Kosovo once again following rumors that Serbs chased Albanian children into the Ibar River where they drowned. Serb and Albanian gunmen fired shots at each other from their respective sides of the river. Mobs of enraged Albanians burned Serb churches and houses for three days. According to U.N. spokeswoman Isabella Karlowitz, 16 churches and 110 houses were destroyed. Dozens were killed. Hundreds were wounded.

Neither Catholic citizens nor Catholic churches were touched in either of these spasms of violence. The fact that the violence was ethnic rather than religious doesn’t mean it was better, but it does mean it was different from how it is sometimes perceived from abroad.

Totten includes a lot of pictures of Christian memorials and shrines - it’s an interesting read. And remember, Totten manages to keep going on the strength of reader donations; if you like his work, please consider hitting one of his paypal buttons!

Two interesting science stories that make you go “hmmmmm….”

First from Instapundit: Much of Earth’s oil reserves can be traced to a single volcanic eruption, scientists say.

Second - and if this is real - it is both fascinating and and ethanol idea I can really get behind: a video about making fuel, even jet fuel from algea.

Like I said, if it’s real…cooooooool.

I still reject the “climate change” hysteria; but alternative energy ideas are always worth exploring.

A long, long time ago, in answering a question from a reader about why we Catholics make such fusses about things I wrote of Advent and the Incarnation:

God kisses the earth, and nothing has been the same since…But no, maybe that’s not quite it, maybe God doesn’t just kiss the earth, for a kiss cannot last.

Rather, God comes, as bridegroom - the real bridegroom who weds himself to us, divinity to humanity -and shares with us that most intimate privilege of marriage, the joining of two into one, the mutual dependence, the mutual commitment. What God has brought together, no man may separate. We are One. But every marriage, even the best, needs constant attention, constant giving…constancy. Call the repetitious seasons of Advent, then, year after year, a renewal of our wedding vows, complete with honeymoon…

Pope Benedict XVI - what a writer; what a teacher! - ended his very well-received time with the young people at World Youth Day ‘08 by praying the Angelus with them. It’s a prayer of remembrance, gratitude and supplication and in it Benedict identifies the “moment of engagement” that preceded the wedding, in this lovely talk:

From the close of the Randwick (Australia) Mass, the Pope’s introduction to the Angelus:

Dear Young Friends,

Dear young people, we too must remain faithful to the “yes” that we have given to the Lord’s offer of friendship. We know that he will never abandon us. We know that he will always sustain us through the gifts of the Spirit. Mary accepted the Lord’s “proposal” in our name. So let us turn to her and ask her to guide us as we struggle to remain faithful to the life-giving relationship that God has established with each one of us. She is our example and our inspiration, she intercedes for us with her Son, and with a mother’s love she shields us from harm.

H/T Whispers in the Loggia

I don’t know if we’ve ever had a more readable and listenable pope.

The next time you happen to hear a church ringing the Angelus bells, (I know, it’s rarer all the time) take a moment to remember and give thanks for Mary’s “yes!” And if you’re so inclined, let us pray…