Cosign all. I'm not sure I disliked her before but I think she seems FUN now.
I'm also really into Chelsea's emails.
My reaction / arc has been the same as heebie's.
Omg, Clinton has been fun for exactly one year.
But now, I can really hear her reading that outloud.
To be fair "coldly strategize years in advance and execute flawlessly" sounds like fun to me, so.
I was intensely and personally grateful for her full-throated defense of late-term abortions. Had I not already been slowly converted to liking her over the past few months, those minutes would have quickly converted me.
I like her more than I did 6+ months ago. This general election is going a lot better for the left than we might have expected. If the worst controversy (both substantively and in terms of appearances) is the e-mail thing, that's not bad.
That being said, I feel like "Nasty women coldly strategize years in advance, and execute flawlessly, or at least learn from 2008." is faint praise.
What? No, it's totally awesome.
Always liked her, thought VW was wrong at the time and wrong in a common/predictable way. But am glad to see others coming on board.
And I do think/hope, but I do think realistically, that this kind of liking will continue once in office. You want your executive branch to actually execute well, and being a charismatic locus for some vague projected sense of "change," which has been her one big area of electoral weakness though not one that was a big deal for me, is far, far less important once in office.
Of course, if she fucks up something big in a big way, then people won't like her. As well they shouldn't.
That being said, I feel like "Nasty women coldly strategize years in advance, and execute flawlessly, or at least learn from 2008." is faint praise.
And yet, it's really hard to do.
My experience has been similar to what H-G describes. I identify three related factors behind my shift in attitudes; first is simply that the election heightens my sense of partisan identification*. Second is that I appreciate the effort that goes into running a successful political campaign. Third is just the pleasure of watching somebody do something well -- particularly in the debates.
* And, personally at least, I haven't noticed much hippie-punching from her during the campaign, which I appreciate. It's also not a campaign which has emphasized policy, so there may be less need for her to demonstrate "seriousness."
9 yes there is nothing more appealing to me than someone with a calculated and elaborate long-game.
I like her personally (she totally passes the "have a beer" test for me), and a coldly calculating knife fighter is exactly what the Democrats need in charge right now. I'm dreading four years of her running foreign policy, though. Obama was already bad enough and I can't much see it improving under HRC.
I'm dreading four years of her running foreign policy, though. Obama was already bad enough and I can't much see it improving under HRC.
Me too, but I'm curious to hear your reasons.
14 - I was trying to figure out the other day what a reasonable metric would be for testing my "no better than Obama, but no worse" belief about Hillary's foreign policy. It's basically impossible to do because how do you know what hypothetical third-term Obama would do with a hypothetical foreign policy crisis in 2019? And because people's priors on this issue cause different interpretations of the tea leaves of hawkishness or dovishness.
I mean, who the hell would be good?
the pleasure of watching somebody do something well -- particularly in the debates
All three debates were absolutely brutal beatdowns*. That pretty much put the lie to her not being a "natural politician"; she may not be the smile-and-a-backslap kind we're used to describing that way, but she handed him his ass over and over again and seemingly effortlessly sidestepped every attack he launched. It was like watching Mayweather pick guys apart round after merciless round.
*Granted, she has been blessed with an incompetent opponent, but as has been noted, he was competent enough to decimate a dozen or so other experienced and accomplished Republicans.
17: American foreign policy has been shit my entire life. I do kinda suspect that the person in the White House is directed by the permanent FP establishment more than vice versa, so maybe nobody would make much of a difference there.
Also I do not look for reasons to praise Condi Rice but "Can't wait for November 9!" was world-class.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/clintons-obviously-more-aggressive-foreign-policy/
I agree overall about her being more hawkish than Obama...The most plausible story I can tell myself about her being better is that she must have witnessed at State how the intel. agencies and particularly the Defense Dep't tend to dominate bureaucratic decisionmaking by default if the White House lets them, and may be less inclined than Obama to let them.
I agree overall about her being more hawkish than Obama...The most plausible story I can tell myself about her being better is that she must have witnessed at State how the intel. agencies and particularly the Defense Dep't tend to dominate bureaucratic decisionmaking by default if the White House lets them, and may be less inclined than Obama to let them.
Just to be clear, the "or at least learn from 2008" is that part I thought was faint praise. Sure, cold strategy and flawless execution, great. But learning from big unforced errors she's already made seems like a more basic expectation.
And yet, it's really hard to do.
Plenty of people manage to not give money to Mark Penn once, let alone on an ongoing basis.
I don't want to make too much of this. I only vaguely remember what was wrong with Penn and I realize that she had her reasons at the time. There's no point in bringing up him or other problems from either primary. I agreed from the start that I'm feeling relatively good about her and the election. I just thought that the end of the OP was a tiny bit funny or incongruous or whatever.
Let me link to a very long and pointless list of the same thing in fiction.
18: she is scary prepared, and it's very impressive. The convention was also very well thought out.
what if the apparant unforced errors of 2008 were all part of the long-game though
16 - See if she ratchets tensions back up with Iran, e.g. by imposing sanctions on Iran for their actions regarding the Yemeni Civil War. (As far as I can tell, we're involved in the war right now pretty much solely to make Saudi Arabia and Jordan feel like we still love them.)
I have to admit I was wrong about the potential for people being enthusiastic about Hillary. Granted she ended up with an absolute perfect opponent to generate feminist solidarity on her behalf, but I thought she was the Democratic equivalent of Jeb Bush, which is not exactly the case.
Cosign all. I'm not sure I disliked her before but I think she seems FUN now.
Still a hard disagree on this one.
22 gets it exactly right.
I'm voting for her because of: the laws she'll sign or veto; the judicial appointees she'll send up; the executive appointments she'll make and the policies and regulations they'll promulgate. OK, I know that on all of these I'll have disagreements. But of the top two candidates and parties in my winner take all purple state, Clinton and the Democrats are the ones most likely to do things that I want done.
I have basically every policy concern everyone else has but maintain that she seems like a blast, I would fully, like, take a last-minute road trip to Baltimore with her.
Yeah, in 2008 I thought she was pretty much the worst possible candidate - boring to Democrats, UTTERLY DESPISED MUSKET TAXGAYBORTION to the other lot. but I've come to appreciate her, especially the expert copcraft of provoking the shit out of Trump.
What's all this talk about fun? I thought we hated fun.
I'm also hard-stanning 1978 Hillary Rodham's glasses.
I was intensely and personally grateful for her full-throated defense of late-term abortions
Eh. Late term abortions are the easiest thing to defend ever. I am waiting for the fill-throated defense of first term.
You have to be pretty risk adverse to not take your chances in the court of public opinion by contrasting the extreme difficulty women (and the men in their lives) go through in those late term abortions situations. If you are against the late term abortions that are performed, you are a monster who has not place in society. You should be mocked and have stones thrown at you.
I dislike the dynasty aspect, but I like her. She is rock solid and can handle anything.
ignore typos. I was getting pissed off just thinking about it.
I think I've linked to this before, but worth quoting John Scalzi's comments on Clinton.
I believe that the vast majority of the bullshit said about Hillary Clinton is just that: bullshit. Hillary Clinton gets shit because apparently she's always been an ambitious woman who is not here for your nonsense. And maybe, like any human who is not here for your nonsense, but especially a woman who is not here for your nonsense (and who has gotten more of it because she is a woman), she just gets tired of the unremitting flood of nonsense she has to deal with every single goddamn day of her life. ...
People, I flat out fucking admire Hillary Clinton for having dealt with all that bullshit for 30 years and yet not burning the whole world down.
So that's the first thing, and it's unfair that it's the first thing, but since that's what gets shoved on you the moment you open your mouth about Hillary Clinton, that's what the first thing has to be.
But let me also tell you that I like her intelligence, her attention to detail, her ability to speak at length about the subjects that matter to her and that she thinks would matter to you, too. I like she doesn't have a problem being the smartest person in the room, even if you do. ... I like that she tried things and failed at them and picked herself up and kept going and got better at them because of it. I like that she cares about people who aren't just like her. I like that she's ambitious. I like that she's fearless. I like that all the right people hate and loathe her. I like that she plows through them anyway.
There are things I don't like about her too, but not nearly as many, and none of them enough, to reduce my admiration for her for these other things.
38.2: In my experience, the opposite is true. People are comfortable with early abortions, and don't like the idea of late-term abortions because they don't know how rare they are, and how terrible the circumstances are when they are performed.
41:
That is my point. People don't like the idea bc they don't know anything about it. It is a really easy argument to win if you present ANY information. But you have to try. Too few people try so we've let these women and doctors be demonized.
43 sounds right--if you point out that late term abortions basically don't happen in the absence of a real disaster, many people come around pretty quickly, for the same reasons people favor rape or health of the mother exceptions--ok, ok, fine, I guess the woman didn't do anything WRONG to get herself in this situation. I mean, it's still very welcome to see someone with a national stage make the late-term argument unequivocally. But it's a lot harder to flip people on non-disaster abortions.
Remember that time Hillary Clinton cited Kissinger's support in a primary debate? Or promised to implement a no-fly zone in Syria during the presidential? It's moments like these that give me pause.
P. S. The general election is not over.
We should implement a no-fly zone in Syria.
If someone named Grumpster was running for president, I'd totally vote for them.
46: A no-fly zone in Syria means going to war with Russia, which would be completely insane.
If "coldly strategize years in advance, and execute flawlessly" described a TV character instead of a female politician, it would be everyone's favorite Klingon.
I'm not even sure we could implement a no-fly zone in Syria. The Russians have serious AA there. It is just all around Bad Idea Jeans.
You should prob edit my comment in 10, as well.
I guess a no-fly zone in Syria without Russian cooperation is probably a very bad idea (also - not what Hillary has proposed), but I do think there's a bit of denial in the US about how bad Syria is, just because it doesn't involve US troops getting shot on the news. I mean it's obviously awful for people there. But the crisis is also insanely destabilizing to Europe and the rest of the middle east and is all around bad in a "foreign policy disaster" sense not just a "horrible humanitarian nightmare" sense. I have no idea whether or how the US or US military can do anything to fix it, which is why I'm a lawyer involved in fighting over money for kids' TV programs and not someone in actual power, but it's also not clear that our strategy of, basically, doing nothing is the best possible response in the best of all possible worlds.
53 seems to be written way too permissively.
I find the idea that Clinton is going to plunge the US into a war with Russia over Syria intrinsically implausible. The US isn't going to start unilaterally shooting down Russian planes over Syria in the near future. Clinton has said as much.
And Tigre is right -- the Syrian crisis is both horrifying and very destabilizing for Europe. Marine Le Pen has been leading the polls in France for months on the backs of Syria.
not clear that our strategy of, basically, doing nothing is the best possible response in the best of all possible worlds.
Not 100 percent clear that it's not either. There's no scenario here that doesn't involve a lot of people dying.
56: I don't actually think she is. I just think it's a dumb thing to have said and doesn't speak well of her judgment in these matters.
Don't disagree with 57. I do kinda disagree with 58, because she's made clear repeatedly that any no-fly zone would only be done after negotiations sufficient to avoid deadly confrontation with Russia.
57
Probably a lot of people in Syria are going to die regardless. If we can avoid WW3 to reduce that number significantly it is probably worth it. Clinton at least seems to be someone the Russians are nervous about, which may be a positive towards getting them to stop being asshats.
I like Hillary and felt that way long before it was cool.
It's okay if I don't particularly like a presidential candidate in order to vote for her, right?
We're talking like like (not sexually), I take it: on the order of "would have a beer with". With Hillary, no, I don't especially. A large part of this is because I know someone very much like her, someone who's a leader of a largish organization. There are the same mannerisms: nodding and smiling (without the smile reaching the eyes) upon listening to someone's remarks, for example. Her face is wreathed in a smile, and it's ... automatic, on auto-pilot. Guess what? You're taught to do that in leadership training.
It's okay. As Oprah, so I hear, recently said, you're not voting for a best friend. It's not a problem.
I mean that my acquaintance does that leadership nodding and smiling. It looks just like Hillary. It's a learned presentation.
That said, I don't mean to shit on the parade, not by any means! I'm thrilled to death that Trump is going down, and maybe Hillary has a shot at actually getting some things accomplished with (crosses fingers) a Democratic Senate.
I would say I liked Hillary but it would feel like sucking up to the boss's boss's boss's boss's future boss's future boss.
The appropriate response to Syria is to stop sending them weapons, accept a shitload or refugees, and encourage all parties to come to the bargaining table. Waving our dicks around enforcing a no-fly zone is unlikely to be a helpful activity, and encourages out allies to prolong the war in pursuit of unrealistic outcomes. Enforcing a no-fly zone without Russian cooperation is, as has been said, a terrible idea, and I've not heard any good reasons why the Russians would be willing to cooperate, give that its their client we want to enforce the no-fly zone against.
Why do you have to like somebody to want to have a beer with them? If it is assumed that you are going to have a beer and the question is who you will have the beer with, then I guess it makes sense. But if we're assuming you're going to spend time with a given person and the question is whether or not to have a beer, I don't see why how you feel about the person should matter.
66- I feel like that's a weird question from you. And I am a weird Muslim for answering it, but people sometimes equate drinking with someone and letting their guard down with that person socially.
That's not "a beer". That's like a evening of beers and maybe some whiskey.
Very few presidents get shitfaced. Same with people running.
Clinton's plan to change this dynamic, as Patrick Healy reported in July, is to get Republicans roaring drunk. ("Mrs. Clinton's ability to use alcohol as a political lubricant came up repeatedly when allies and advisers were asked how she might work with Republicans.")
Stuff White People Like:
1. Committing felonies.
2. Acquitting other white people who have been charged with felonies.
3. Complaining about how black people are committing felonies and getting away with it.
All that should really go in the other thread, though. More on-topic for this one, Sam Wang is on to us:
I'll be honest - I have little tolerance for readers who show up here looking for reassurance in the Presidential race. Occasionally I run into people who say they come to my site and feel relieved. The implied complacency is annoying. It is antithetical to why I do this.
I haven't followed the trial at all, but TPM says:
Prosecutors had tried, according to news reports, to provide evidence that the Bundy brothers had conspired and planned the refuge takeover in advance while the defense alleged it was spontaneous
And certainly the half-assed packing of snacks and underpants gnomes strategy for achieving liberty (tm) doesn't really give a feel of a plan that had been thought through much.
Extreme emotional distress! They drove a thousand miles and sat around for 6 weeks before the red mist cleared! They're the real victims here.
While it's tempting to interpret their lack of preparedness on the snack front as a clever long-game setup for their eventual defense at trial, that doesn't seem consistent with their overall approach.
And I think I have more rural Western cred than pretty much anyone else here. Except ogged, of course.
You've got the most Northern cred, teo.
I dunno, I might have to compete with NW for Northern cred.
I guess I'm probably the commenter who lives furthest north full-time.
The debates made me like her more personally except on the other hand it's all so very coached and rehearsed, so it's hard to know, as I guess you already said. Fortunately, nothing in the universe matters less than whether I like her personally.
I still don't consider this all in the bag, because it is my worry that keeps bad things from happening so I have a terrible responsibility here. I am very much looking forward to it being over. I think the deep well of unhappiness and worry within me will have to find something less tawdry and universe-besmirching to pour forth upon once this is done.
That was probably supposed to sound a notch funnier and a notch less dire.
I guess I'm probably the commenter who lives furthest north full-time.
Probably, but if anyone lives more than 100 miles north of Stockholm, Helsinki or Oslo, they would probably be farther north than Anchorage.
Probably, but if anyone lives more than 100 miles north of Stockholm, Helsinki or Oslo, they would probably be farther north than Anchorage.
Right, but not very many people live that far north even in Scandinavia.
I suspect that teo is our most northerly resident commenter, but IIRC he's not a native-born Alaskan, and so either ttaM or I will be the most northerly-born commenter... (there's a mile or two in it at best). Unless we have any actual Scandinavians.
61°22' or fight!
(says the man at 52°52')
95 David Weman's natural habitat is Stockholm.
A bunch of sovereign citizen types suffering no consequences for taking up arms against the federal government is an awesome thing to happen a week and a half before an election in which the likely loser has urged his supporters to take up arms if he loses.
I don't like her in the sense that if we met I think we'd find it hard to find anything to talk about, but I don't dislike her either. The "Have a beer" test is a pernicious thing to introduce into the process of electing a senior office holder anyway. Was she a good Senator? On balance not too bad. Was she a good SoS? On balance OK. Then feel positive about electing her because she's shown she can do top level jobs competently (which is more than BHO had in 2008).
The "have a Campari with a twist" test was rejected for being out of touch with middle America.
I was more thinking of the "Pick the Mondavi product in a blind test with half a dozen Côte de Nuits Grand Crus" test. Competence is paramount.
The link in 74 describes exactly what I expect to happen - Complete gridlock driven entirely by the refusal of the Freedom Caucus to do anything that might even remotely reflect well on Clinton. We're looking at 4 more years of Debt Ceiling standoffs and stupid investigations. If a special prosecutor is appointed for some reason I'm willing to bet we get an impeachment attempt.
When did the "Which candidate would you rather have a beer with?" first surface? Maybe with the Clinton v Dole election? It was all over the place during Gore v. Bush, when of course everyone would rather have had a beer with frat-boy W. who was not supposed to drink.
Wasn't it already clear from how Comey publicized the no-charges decision that he wants to push the election?
I guess, but FBI stanning for Trump seems like such a weird choice.
FBI: no strangers to authoritarian governance.
103 I don't see why they would wait for a special prosecutor. I would think an impeachment attempt was pretty much guaranteed regardless.
But DJT doesn't have the attention span or executive ability to be authoritarian. He's a thieving bag of cats incapable of remembering the orders he gave yesterday. I feel queasy.
111: So he'd give them their head. Lawnorder!
I'm finding my monthly cigarette and the reporting of Pete Williams very soothing right now.
Hahaha oh man of COURSE they were Anthony Weiner's emails of course of course.
So the new scandal is Weiner sent Hillary a picture of his dick?
He's incredible. Of course of course of course at the bottom of it all it's not like, spooky Russia, or plotting legislators, it's just vortex of need, Anthony Weiner.
Tell me again the differences between the erroneous pre-Brexit polling and the U.S. presidential election polling? Loud, so I can hear you through this paper bag? I've been having vicious "Dewey Defeats Truman" hallucinations for months, but briefly they'd been receding.
Let's have a contest to see how long, even in the wake of all this, it takes for one of us to get a dick pick out of Anthony Weiner. I say like 45 mintues.
The pre-Brexit polling was within the margin of error. The people who polled in Dewey vs Truman didn't know what they were doing by today's standards.
Look at the front page of the WaPo right now if you want to be filled with rage.....
Also, is anyone else getting mountains of spam from "Donald J Trump"? Multiple messages every day in the spambox, which I clean daily because I'm a tidy animal.
maybe precipitating ragnorok is weiner's kink and he's a pervert genius
The pre-Brexit polling failed to accurately predict the outcome because it assumed that millennials would actually vote according to their expressed preference to Remain. They didn't turn out.
And so far, at least based on early voting results, Democrats are indeed turning out.
That's all I've got.
The pre-Brexit polling accurately said it was too close to call. The pundits failed to accurately pundit.
Look at the front page of the WaPo right now if you want to be filled with rage.....
You're not kidding.
WaPo, I fled to you from the Clinton-hatin Times cause you were free with my ".edu".....and this is what you give me?
Chris Cillizza is such a douchecanoe. This is my Narrative and everything must fit it! Hillary was ahead so therefore she must have a bad week!
I'd have been more willing to forgive if in the headline, "FBI to review Clinton emails found on Weiner's device," they'd gone with "unit" instead of "device".
FBI stanning for Trump seems like such a weird choice
Roy Cohn is the common denominator there.
OK, too impatient to catch up:
As some of you know from the other place, my family went to see her speak last Saturday, and she was so good. Here's the thing: it was a small enough venue (gym of large urban HS) that I really don't think it was just crowd energy. That is, I didn't fall in love with (the wonderfully liberal) Rep. Mike Doyle who spoke before her. It wasn't this heightened situation where they could have brought out a literal wet blanket and gotten me excited.
But A. Tim Kaine was great; I don't know if he had just introduced the line, or if it was flukey timing, but it was the first time I'd heard his, "after being helped in all my campaigns by strong women, and now I'm proud to be helping a strong woman," and it was fucking great. And B. Hillary was great. I was wondering what kind of speech it would be: I knew she was headed to another event in Philly, and given the scale, I kind of expected a simple rah-rah troop-rouser. But instead it ran the gamut from humble self-appraisal to opponent-taunting to policy-discussing, all with a through-line of good humor that, in contrast to the debates or the SNL depictions, never felt forced. That is, there were little jokes embedded, and she delivered them comfortably, like a pro.
Now mind you, all of this is just theater criticism. But as theater goes? She did great. And it was a stark reminder of just what bullshit mass media coverage of her is (as if we need that). And beyond the theater, I don't think she hit a single off note politics/policy-wise. That is, there was no hawkishness, no pro-Israel bone in a heavily (heavily) Jewish neighborhood, just the sort of talk you'd want from a liberal Democrat. OH yeah, and she talked a decent amount about Trump voters, and IMO did a really nice job of expressing the "I"ll be President for everyone" idea without pandering or sucking up to assholes. In a way, that was the most impressive part.
Now I don't remember if I wrote this here when they did a commercial in our house last spring (a commercial that, sadly, seems destined not be run). The focus was on CHIP, and they chose us because we're not a typical CHIP family*. And before the crew came out, they did pre-interviews on the phone, and that was what forced me to really articulate why I'm pro-HRC, and it really comes down to this: I believe in government, in self-governance, in the idea (as Charlie Pierce always says) of commonwealth. But that shit needs competence, dedication, and true believers to really work (it's all too easy to fall into cronyism**, no matter how you write the rules). And that's what HRC is. I don't want flash, I don't want talk: I want work. And nobody denies that she works harder than anyone else.
*indeed, I've always, solipsistically, viewed us as sort of the beau ideal of why we need a nanny state: give people a good safety net, and they'll start new businesses serving their communities
**or just a hands-off, let-business-do-as-they-will attitude
But DJT doesn't have the attention span or executive ability to be authoritarian. He's a thieving bag of cats incapable of remembering the orders he gave yesterday.
This has dark sitcom potential: President Trump hires a bunch of actual fascist yesmen, who are always trying to implement Real Fascism in America and almost succeed but are thwarted by Trump's lack of attention span. Every episode ends with him making an "ain't I a stinker" face.
JRoth, you neoliberal, you're failing to consider the most important thing, emails she didn't send that may or may not be classified and may or may not be significant in any way that are somehow involved in an investigation of Anthony Weiner, an person at least somewhat connected to her through his former wife.
131: Ahh, I saw a purposeful-hat-wearing-man outside that i thought might be you. Yes, both Kaine, with his "strong men supporting strong women" theme, and Clinton were excellent. It was very good theater, especially given the opportunity to compare local guys like Fetterman--whose politics are great but really only has one shtick--to the real professionals. The way it affected the surprisingly diverse people around me was intense.
And you're right that she was excellent on policy. She was emphatically pro-abortion, period. She tore Toomey a new one. The only theater mistake I noticed was she referenced an opening act who didn't actually show (I think the state Attorney General, whoever that is now?). The only pandering was the unavoidable pro-Steelers stuff. She was able to say that there is a place for Republicans to vote for her because she's the sensible adult in the room, without insinuating she would give them anything policy-wise.
It's okay if I don't particularly like a presidential candidate in order to vote for her, right?
Of course!
We're talking like like (not sexually), I take it:
Well, we're talking like like (not sexually), I'm pretty sure. But one of the weirdest things I've seen this electoral season: opponents of HRC making statements that suggest she's some kind of sexed-up cougar, or something. E.g., a few weeks ago, NPR interviewed a Trump-supporting Mormon woman who objected to Hillary's "flirty" behaviour during one of the debates. Flirty? Really?!
(And then there was the guy who worried she might start a nuclear war if she got too emotional during her "time of month"...this is surely an argument for better sex ed in the schools?).
I've always liked HRC. And I've never wanted/expected her to be "likeable."
I heard that comment! I was entirely surprised. I read that shimmy as "shake it off", especially coming after Trump's crazy list of her flaws.
Everybody I know apparently went to see Clinton.
Honestly there's not that much going on in Pittsburgh. A Dexy's Midnight Runners tribute band could probably draw a few hundred.
I also really like Tim Kaine. But then, I would: I'm a sucker for that educated-by-the-Jesuits thing.
37:
I remember from the Ian Carmichael version of the Peter Wimsey character, shown on PBS in the early seventies, a scene from "The Unpleasantness at the Bologna Club." Wimsey has Bunter make inquiries among the staff of a mansion about the young woman, an artist and a suspect, who lives there. Bunter carefully reports that she is "not likeable, but they like her."
LB will remember if that exchange is in the book, which I've never read.
I like your title better than the real one.
Bellona?
Dammed if I'm going to look it up.
There's too much English and Irish content at this blog, at the expense of Wales. I say this because I have been watching Hinterland, of course, and also because I have a mad crush on the Welsh actor Richard Harrington (Captain Blamey in Polkdark: need I say more?). Anyway, Hinterland makes Wales seem like the "nordic noir" of the British Isles: all cold and dark and lonesome, which reminds me of Canada. Beneath that superficial sense of calm and reasonableness, there's some seriously crazy shit running underground, and maybe running amok.
Anyway, Hinterland: I recommend.
144: Right that time, same as in Dhalgren.
Beneath that superficial sense of calm and reasonableness, there's some seriously crazy shit running underground, and maybe running amok.
Ooh, speaking of, I've been meaning to tell you I've been past the Jane ancestral home and business twice this fall, and it's thriving and healthy (the home part as The C/ake and S/hake shows no signs of slowing down so don't let anyone tell you cupcakes are not a thing in that neighbourhood). One time it was raining, and the sunny day I was in a hurry, I will send a photo next time.
My mother had an adventure at The House of Providence that you mentioned on another thread. She and the nuns ended up doing a dance to Gaia I am not making this up. I said, "what does the Pope think of that?", she whispered, "I don't think they like the Pope very much". This all came about because she misunderstood a poster for an environmental awareness weekend there and overcame her fear of the convent hoping to get tips on getting weeds out of her lawn.
That's all I've got to report.
On reflection, should have google proofed the second establishment. No one's going to care what they do at the cupcake place.
The House of Providence
What?! Seriously? My great-aunt Mary Ellen McTragedy (Aunt Nell, aka Sister Mary Noreen) ran that convent with a firm hand; she ran a tight ship.
We're talking the House of Providence in Kingston, right?
142: Huh, the Internet is miraculous, here's the clip of old Bunter.
||
JPJ, I was thinking of you (and Canada) recently. There's a song that I remember fondly from childhood, from a political folk album from the early 80s. Occasionally it drifts through my head and I try to look it up online and never find it.
Until last week! It's now on youtube, I was happy to hear it again, and it was really interesting listening to the rest of the album and hearing songs about political controversies which feel very remote. For example Newfoundlanders -- a Newfie identity/pride song, that's pretty fun, but I have no idea what motivates it.
|>
When does Clinton fatigue set in ? Nov 1st, or in 3.5 years ?
My great-aunt Nell (Sister Mary Noreen) was the daughter of a man who was "too sick" (too alcoholic, that is) to regularly work. She entered the convent at age 16; but her father made her come out, because she was too young to make such a commitment. She worked at Harry's Cafe in Perth for a summer, before taking the vows. She then became a school principal, and a force to be reckoned with.
Aunt Nell, of the House of Providence in Kingston.
149: That's the place! I liked seeing the picture of your aunt.
Their website is lovely, I'd forgotten they have a seed sharing program, and they have an office of Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation. It may just be a different kind of tight ship.
151: Joey in the song is Joey Smallwood, who's credited or blamed for bringing Newfoundland into Confederation in 1949. I know someone whose grandparent won't speak his name. I know a few people from there, my generation, who call themselves "first generation Canadians".
When me and sisters were kids, we used to laugh at how Aunt Nell used to give our dad props for bringing his pay cheque home ("o John, you're such a good provider!"). We laughed; we thought this was hilarious. And then I learned of Aunt Nell's childhood (the spendthrift, ne'er-do-well-father; the mother moaning by the fire), and I felt chastened, and embarrassed.
I once brought home a pay Czech. He owed me $5.
151: So excellent, Nick S., thank you.
And someday maybe I'll tell you about O.J. Abbott (Oliver John Abbott), little English Home Boy, wee little English lad who was sent to Canada at the tender age of 8 years old, to live amongst the Irish farmers (my peeps), who sang with Pete Seeger at Newport in 1960. He learned his songs from my ancestrals, and was known for his faithful renditions of the old Irish songs. Which he learned at the lumber camps of northern Ontario, best I can make out.
Economic determinism yay!
http://m.chinapost.com.tw/business/2016/10/29/482436/US-economy.htm
In Anne of Green Gables, Marilla Cuthbert wants a boy (she's not even thinking of a girl, until she meets Ann-with-an-e) who comes from Nova Scotia, or else from otherwise fairly close to home. She doesn't want a Home Boy from England, who might be a "street Arab." This was a thing in Canada, where over 100,000 children were sent from the UK to Canada between 1870 and 1930.
151: some context,
Another bit of context: on the 12th of July, my mum and her parents and siblings used to stay home, used to stay inside the house all day, because of the parades. And this in southeastern Ontario, not in northern Ireland. But my mother and her family were truly frightened by the Orange Order Lodge.
Also, once while in Edinburgh, Scotland, I witnessed an Orange parade. I felt a surge of anger in the blood.
I love Edinburgh so much, though. Ever since I first visited (and then I stayed there for a year) I have wanted to live in Edinburgh. The Castle; the Royal Mile; Princes Street: when I used to cross from the New Town to the Old Town, I used to say to myself, "I'm crossing over." Always gave me a thrill. The tomb of David Hume at Old Calton Cemetery, and Arthur's Seat. "The Athens of the North," and all of that bullshit, but I truly love Edinburgh.
I'm also pro-Hume, contra Kant, btw, but I guess that's another whole kettle of fish?
165: a relative of mine was hosting a Greek visitor and showing him round town, and mentioned the Athens of the North thing, remarking deprecatingly "of course it's really nothing like Athens " to which his guest replied forcefully that no it wasn't, he was from Athens himself, and Edinburgh had way more nice old buildings.
I'm more of an Edinburgh of the Seven Seas kinda guy myself.
164: Ah, Jane, will you ever speak to me again? My mother's family were Protestant farmers from county Fermanagh, and at some stage in the 1860-70s at least one of them emigrated to farm in Ontario but returned after five or ten years. I remember a great uncle being introduced to me when I was about eight, who described himself solemnly as "what you'd call a black Protestant", meaning, presumably, irreconcilable.
AIMHMHB *his* father, by great grandfather, used to split a bottle of whiskey with the local Catholic priest, but prefaced each session with a ritual toast "To hell with the Pope", while the priest waited tactfully outside the room. Then he would throw the cork from the whiskey bottle into the fire, to signify there'd be no further use for it, and the two men would sit up late, sometimes with my uncle Christopher, who was the source of that story and whose son is now active in Green politics, but that's another and even more improbable story ...
So no saving up for a cork trivet?
Anyway, I think I mentioned before that my dad was one of the people who 'recreated' the Fenian invasion of Canada. This involved binge drinking, part of Canada more westerly than those actually invaded, a hired bus, and a reciprocal invasion by drunk Canadians.
You've certainly been more interested in it, or even aware of it, than any other American I've ever had contact with.
My Irish ancestors seem to have settled in a part of Canada away from much sectarian feeling on either side. I was certainly unaware of any orange-marching when growing up. My family were Anglicans, probably Church of Ireland before, and not the characteristically more dissenting Scotch-Irish. My family, interpreted to me by my dad, were proud of the Irish literary renaissance and supporters of independence.
I just got an email noting that no parent has signed up to give the St Patrick's Day cultural presentation day. I'm contemplating signing up and going with a presentation on the significance of St Patrick for the Anglican Church of Ireland just to see what happens.
Back in high school one of my teachers, while American, was a full blown Ulster protestant partisan and would go off on anti-Catholic rants on St. Patrick's Day.
I guess that can be filed under "those were different times", since it never occurred to anyone to complain.
Or maybe just get the Fourth Graders to chant the mantra of all real drinkers: Mexican bars on St Patricks Day, Irish bars on Cinco de Mayo. I just need a rhyme.
I thought that's when real drinkers drink at home.
If no barf you want to see,
No green-decked fools around you be,
Five clear words show you the way:
Mexican on St Patricks Day!
Maybe good enough for the Fourth Grade.
Or you could be Anglican like me and repress all barf on every day.
176: Never go out on the amateur nights.
169.2 is great, and sounds like a Don Camillo story.
purposeful-hat-wearing-man
In case I need a new pseud.
There's too much English and Irish content at this blog, at the expense of Wales.
If you'd like, I could start calling people "cunt".
