Asymmetric Books and Literature

For those seeking a moderate contra-opinion on Barack Obama, The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate is a good choice. I haven't read The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality by Jerome Corsi, but my understanding is that it feeds a certain hatefulness absent in my personality.

It's a brisk read and focuses exclusively on Obama's career as an elected official which began in 1996 when Obama was able to disqualify all of his opponents for the state senate on technical grounds:

Mr. Obama writes that even if the voters were not impressed by this speech, "enough of them appreciated my earnestness and youthful swagger that I made it to the Illinois legislature."

In real life, it did not matter what Mr. Obama said on the stump or whether South Side voters were impressed. What mattered was that, beginning on Jan. 2, 1996, his campaigners began challenging thousands of petition signatures the other candidates in the race had submitted in order to appear on the ballot. Thus would Mr. Obama win his state Senate seat, months before a single vote was cast.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Mr. Obama's petition challengers reported to him nightly on their progress as they disqualified his opponents' signatures on various technical grounds -- all legitimate from the perspective of law. One local newspaper, Chicago Weekend, reported that "[s]ome of the problems include printing registered voters name [sic] instead of writing, a female voter got married after she registered to vote and signed her maiden name, registered voters signed the petitions but don't live in the 13th district."

One of the candidates would speculate that his signature-gatherers, working at a per-signature pay rate, may have cheated him by signing many of the petitions themselves, making them easy to disqualify.

In the end, Mr. Obama disqualified all four opponents -- including the incumbent state senator, Alice Palmer, and three minor candidates. Ms. Palmer, a former ally of Mr. Obama, had gathered 1,580 signatures, more than twice the 757 required to appear on the ballot. A minor, perennial candidate had gathered 1,899 signatures, suggesting the Obama team invested much time working even against him.

It goes on to document his support for the Chicago machine status quo and against reformers, both liberal and conservative; his nefarious associations with William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright; and his inauspicious senate "career." This is the most valuable part of the book, astonishing the reader with Obama's complete lack of accomplishment balanced only by his extraordinary mendacity.

Even the events Obama highlights as "experience" "makes the case" against him such as his double cross of John McCain, when Obama promised to support John McCain's campaign finance reform only to switch towards his party's status quo at the last minute.

In fact, if there's a thesis to Freddoso's book it's that Obama not only isn't a reformer, but the exact opposite: a politician who never says "no" to liberal special interest groups like teachers' unions and is a solid vote for liberal conformity (Obama is famously the "most liberal senator" according to National Journal.).

The media's obsession with Obama is less interesting. We've heard the "thilla' in my legga'" quote from Chris Matthews a million times.

The book is very current. I'd say following developments up until June of this year.

The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate by David Freddoso

The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality by Jerome R. Corsi

I'm listening to Elizabeth Royte on Dennis Prager and she's making a lot of sense: Bottled water is a sham; it's actually worse for you than tap water for its lack of fluoride, costs money, and is bad for the environment.

Think about, as Ms. Royte suggests, all of the landfill space; petroleum- used in the making of the bottles (Plastic is made from oil, folks.), transporting it around the country, and picking it up from the supermarket; and money (11.5 billion a year) wasted on a completely useless product.

I will henceforth be a tap water evangelist. I'll start with my friend, Jason, whom I visited yesterday and depleted his huge water stash by two bottles. My wife, on the other hand, may not make the switch, as she brings a stubborn tap water prejudice with her from Mexico.

Bottlemania: How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It by Elizabeth Royte

Garbage Land: On the Secret Trail of Trash by Elizabeth Royte

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism, 3rd Edition (Complete Idiot's Guide to) by Ph.D., Bob O'Gorman, M.A., Mary Faulkner

Like most Catholics raised in a Catholic country (Mexico), my wife knows very little about Catholicism. I could have waited for Barack Obama to start some kind of Catholicism Head Start program, but I decided to go out and buy a book instead. I picked up the Idiots Guide to Catholicism.

I'm not very impressed with the book. It handles the basics- the seven sacraments, Mary, etc., albeit in a sometimes inappropriately jokey manner ("Is it 'real' [presence] or is it Memorex"), but adds a good amount of political commentary, some of which is actually against church teaching and some of which is just fashionable nonsense.

In particular, TIG sees the Church's history the same way as liberals see American history- as deeply flawed, as having made considerable progress (more liberal), but with much farther to go. Specifically, the Church has become less "Eurocentric" and needs to ordain women. Well, the Church started in Africa and has always tried to evangelize "non-whites" and propagate its universal morals, and ordination of women isn't a matter of "exclusion" or "patriarchal power" or "rules made when people thought the world was flat" (nobody thought the world was flat) so much as following the example of Jesus (who only chose men). In any case, the matter is settled.

More troubling is the commonly held idiocy that Europeans ruined a beautiful American civilization, you know the one without the wheel or writing already in decline with the cannibalism and human sacrifice, slavery and stuff (The Church protected Indians.).

It also has beautiful things to say about liberation theology, the Marxist-derived nonsense officially condemned by the Church.

From harmful nonsense like LT, The Idiot's Guide goes on to praise the puerile foolishness of "women's Asian, black, Latino theology." Now that's inclusive- a bunch of exclusionary theologies-one for each group.

I can go on and on. TIG assumes that rituals don't help the religious ("Maybe they just listen to the words"). TIG reads both more and less than it should into Vatican II. No mention of the devil.

TIG does teach about the Catholic Church, but adds too much liberal and mildly anti-Catholic commentary for it to be a strict guide. The jokes are unfunny and it's overall effect is to make the reader not think it very important to be Catholic. In other words, it's not a book you'd give somebody to strengthen their faith or to educate a potential convert. It wouldn't even be one to give somebody wanting to objectively know official Catholic teaching.

If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans by Ann Coulter

I just did a dishonest thing. I sat at Borders and read IDHABTBR and then placed it back on the shelf without paying for it (They did get $10:00 in coffee and carrot cake as well as whatever an American Girl book costs).

Anyways, IDHABTBR is a collection of Coulter's witty remarks. She divides the book by subject (Communism, Hillary Clinton, Colleges, etc.) and introduces each one of those with a little essay.

The book makes for fun light reading. The quotes are more sledgehammer than rapier, but the essence of political humor- to lampoon things that are essentially true but unacknowledged- is here. My favorite: "For liberals, having been blacklisted is like having been descended from the Mayflower" (or something like that).

My friend turned me on to this video of Joanh Goldberg on the Daily Show. Since I'm in the middle of reading Liberal Fascism, I interrupted my normal youtube viewing, Cumbia videos, and gave it a shot.

Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning by Jonah Goldberg

Jon Stewart is totally at a loss here and out of his depth which is usually shallow enough for even him to reach the bottom. Notice how Stewart completely misses the point. He swallows the line that modern liberals are for individual freedom. Really? So, mandated health care, universal and compulsory pre-school, higher taxes, hate crimes, hiring and firing rules, and light bulb inspections translate to greater liberty? Right.

Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning by Jonah Goldberg

I'm breaking records getting through Jonah Goldberg's new book, Liberal Fascism. It's very good, especially as history; a little too colored by modern arguments, perhaps, but very good nonetheless. I'll have a more thorough review once I'm finished, but I'd like to offer one semi-pro criticism:

Jonah weakens the glue with which he attaches fascism to the left by missing the main reason the left hates what they consider fascism. Yes, in tactics, liberals with their statist solutions to perceived problems resemble fascists much more than conservatives who generally feel that suffering is relieved a little at a time and through individual virtue.

But, liberals don't hate Nazis for their progressive tax rates, mandatory kindergarten, or forced vegetarianism. The left hates Nazis because Nazis wanted to rid the world of "inferiors," the very people the left likes, and subjugate the non-preferred (gays, Jews [it's OK to hate Jews if you're a poor Palestinian, though], Gypsies, non-whites, etc) instead of offer them affirmative action.

The left also shuns Mussolini, with his glorification of ancient Rome, a "strong" society.

They don't mind Communists because Communists (Castro, Che, Chavez, Ho Chi, Lenin, Sean Penn et al.) supposedly fought for the underdog. In other words, had Hitler just exterminated Sam Walton, jocks, and cheerleaders, the left would be wearing T-shirts of Hitler in a beret. Had Mussolini been Maya, liberal educators would give East LA school children Mussolini coloring books.

To make my point, let's use Goldberg's own examples:

Like Nazis, MECHA and Afro groups spend valuable brain cycles pondering race, including concepts such as "whiteness." Both Nazis and MECHis distinguish whites from other races, but the left isn't concerned so much in thought as in who's thinking. Thus, disadvantaged, powerless (Remember, think like a leftist.) racists can think any foolish thing they desire while white people must show proper deference to the "colored."

In another chapter, Goldberg points out that it was Germany's working class who supported Hitler. That's true, but Hitler didn't promise them dominion over the German elites; he promised all Germans power over their junior humanity.

Pan's Labyrinth
(In Pan's labyrinth, summary execution is fine if you're killing fascists.)

Finally, Goldberg recounts how the left turned on Mussolini after Mussolini decided to enter WWI. Well, Mussolini traded the goal of every worker being equal for every Italian being equal or, worse, that Italy be more powerful than other nations like Ethiopia. Of course they'd change their minds.

In summary, the left hates those who suggest that people or societies aren't equal and loves those who think that they are. What people actually do is much less important.

Goldberg may address this issue later on, but if he doesn't, he'd have misunderstood part of the left aversion to fascism.

Wow! What a story! What a great interview with Dennis Prager! I bought the book immediately after hearing this obviously intelligent, tough Marine (a great combination). After I read it, I want to give it to my students, many of whom face the very choice that Martinez faced. I have more to say later, but you should listen below.

Listen to Dennis interview Marco.

Hard Corps: From Gangster to Marine Hero by Marco Martinez

I think I'll follow Rowling's advice and question authority: Children don't need any more encouragement to be gay. And, we're tolerant enough, thank you. If children's books are to have messages, the messages should encourage children to strive for a traditional family. After all, it takes no courage whatsoever to be tolerant; it only requires not caring. Which message is more counter-cultural in 2007?

from here

Read more »

If you're interested in the history of Western Art and it's relationship to larger themes like religion and nature, but prefer learning in little, bite-sized chunks, the Guide to Imagery series is indispensable. Each book in the series takes a theme, like the New Testament or pagan gods and goddesses, and shows how artists have represented them over the years, paying special attention to the little bits of visual code (imagery) that recurred in a subject's depiction.

The art is beautiful, the magnum opera of Western civilization and a reminder when artists strived for beauty over shock and a more confident Europe sought to glorify its heritage and ideals in its art.

The editors order each of these high-quality paperbacks logically. The Old Testament book, for example, divides the paintings by the order their subject appears in the Bible and not the date of the work itself, which is a beautiful way to read, as it allows one to follow along with one's scripture reading. If you've already read the Old Testament, the Imagery book on the Old Testament becomes a sort of Bible picture book.

Each page features some encyclopedia-like information on the subject itself ("Zeus was god of...") and captioned lines pointing to the symbols contained in each painting. It's all very interesting.

This page is from the New Testament Book.

If one must find fault with these books it's that they're a little small at about 8"X5." It is a book on paintings, after all, and I, for one, would have liked to see the works of art in a little more detail-perhaps about the size of a notebook.

One must also bear in mind (what does that mean? "Bear in mind?") that the books are feather-weight reading, fun to thumb through and to pick up a few facts, but the books don't have an overarching theme, place the paintings in their contemporary cultural context, or even have a point to make; it's just the facts.

Old Testament Figures in Art (Guide to Imagery) by Thomas Michael Hartmann

Nature and Its Symbols (Guide to Imagery Series) by Stephen Sartarelli

Gods and Heroes in Art by Lucia Impelluso

Gospel Figures in Art by Thomas Michael Hartmann

Artists' Techniques and Materials (Guide to Imagery Series) by Antonella Fuga

Angels and Demons in Art (Guide to Imagery Series) by Rosanna M. Giammanco Frongia

Icons and Saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church (Guide to Imagery Series) by Alfredo Tradigo

I'm going to buy the latest Harry Potter Book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The only thing is that I haven't read any of the previous books or seen any of the movies except the Phoenix one. Am I making a big mistake? I was careful to read the James Bond books in order.

Big mistake to read out of order.