Alien Infiltrates White House?

Yesterday, Gawker did a thing on some recent official White House photos. While glancing through them, Fosco's eyes were drawn to something strange. Here is the pic:


I've circled the thing that bothers me (on the far right, behind President O). Now Fosco doesn't know much about interior decorating or antique furniture (he leaves that to people more qualified), but what exactly is that thing? It looks like a wok on legs. And not very sturdy, oddly ugly legs at that. Now I'm sure that that thing is a very very expensive thing. And probably a very very old thing. But I still don't understand what it is and what it is doing there. It's like some sort of proto-organic life form.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Should Obama Help Elkhart?

Tomorrow, President Obama will make a speech in Elkhart, Indiana--a town very near where Fosco grew up (he still knows people who live there). It will be O's first visit with ordinary (trust me: very ordinary) Americans since becoming president. He will use the speech to play up the stimulus package and he couldn't have chosen a better place. Elkhart currently has the highest unemployment in the US (eighteen percent, according to Elkhart's mayor). This piece in USA Today offers the whole sad story about Elkhart.

You see, up until a few years ago, Elkhart used to call itself the "RV Capital of the World." They even have an RV Hall of Fame (Fosco has not visited yet, but Todd volunteers to give tours there on Sundays). Of course, the bad news for Elkhart is that the RV industry is not going to recover. Ever. The cheap-gas era is over. And I don't see "the electric RV" in my crystal ball. And the Senate Republicans can cut income taxes as much as they want (not that they really want to cut taxes for the lower middle class), but it's not going to bring RV jobs back to Elkhart.

I mean, I'm sure some of the Neo-Confederates would only be too happy to offer some low-paying, no benefits jobs to Elkhartians (let's open another WalMart!), but that's not really the kind of jobs that Elkhart needs, right? Hey, I have an idea: what if we invest in education and infrastructure! Maybe we could re-train some workers and set others to work on our crumbling transportation and electrical grids. Hmmm. I wish someone were proposing that kind of plan...

But do you know what's so maddening about Elkhart? The entire local economy has been "cratering" (to quote a geriatric schizoid) for over a year; and yet, this deeply racist and die-hard fundamentalist city still couldn't bring itself to vote for Obama last November. Fosco wants to fly back to Elkhart and grab each McCain voter by the collar and shake him or her: if the election had gone differently, do you really think John McCain would be giving a flying fuck about your hick-ass town right now? But hey--I'm sure you'd find unemployment less hopeless as long as there were fewer overseas abortions and a family of certifiable morons living in the Vice President's mansion.

At least some people in Elkhart have come around. As the USA Today article notes:

This area did not vote for Obama in November, but The Elkhart Truth newspaper is on board with that message now. "President Obama needs to help Congress understand that the stimulus package isn't about politics. It's about survival," the newspaper said in a Sunday editorial.

Maybe it would help if the residents of Elkhart (and other cities in Indiana) made a few calls to their elected representatives--and thought twice about voting for the Republican ones next election cycle.

Another Obama convert (sort of):

It feels that way to Ed Neufeldt, a father of seven who lost his $20-an-hour job in September. He had been building RVs at Monaco Coach for 32 years when his boss came out of a meeting in tears and announced that the company was closing its plant, putting 1,400 out of work.

Neufeldt, 62, has two children living at home, and two of his grown daughters and their husbands — all four also RV industry workers — are out of work as well.

When his unemployment runs out next month, "I don't know what I'm going to do," Neufeldt says. "I've been trying to find a job, but there aren't any jobs out there. I can't even get a minimum-wage job."

He didn't vote for Obama, but he's backing him now. In fact, Neufeldt will introduce the president at Monday's town-hall-style meeting. "Sometimes you don't care too much for the coach," he says, "but you're praying for him to win."

After eight years of a president who essentially ignored large portions of the electorate because they didn't vote for him (remember black people in New Orleans?), I think we finally may have elected someone who is willing to help all Americans--regardless of whether they can reciprocate with votes/donations. And while Fosco suspects that there are a number of people in Elkhart who don't really deserve Obama's help, it makes it all the more moving that they are going to get it anyway.

I hope Obama can help Elkhart. And I hope Elkhart can bring iself to acknowledge him when he does.

Must We Defeat the South Again?

Here's a fascinating analysis by Michael Lind, suggesting that our main obstacle to progress is not Republicans, but the South. As Lind notes:

The votes against Obama’s stimulus package came from a Southern confederacy of Republicans and conservative Democrats. Their message to America? Drop dead.

Word. Could we maybe lose the South now? Please? (Sorry, Jill--maybe you could relocate to Santa Fe?)

Inaugural Candids

This will probably have made the rounds on all the internets by the time you read it, but if you haven't seen this amazing picture of Obama's Inauguration (by David Bergman), you need to do so. What's great about it, of course, is that it is made up of 220 separate photos. The detail is absolutely insane--spend a few minutes zooming in on people. You are never going to see so many extremely cold people in one place (no, not even in this picture [NSFW]).

But, to save you the time of finding to good bits, Fosco has singled out a few of his favorite scenes within the scene.

Here is cellist (and Harvard alum) Yo-Yo Ma capturing the moment for posterity:

Not everyone was as excited about this moment. Here is some unidentified guy who woke up too early:

George Bush and Dr. Strangelove really don't look that happy to be there either:


My favorite, however, is this snapshot of three Supreme Court Justices. No, that's not your great-grandmother--it's Ruth "Bader" Ginsburg. What the hell kind of hat is Nino Scalia wearing? And, um... is Clarence Thomas asleep? Sorry, Clarence, looks like your attempts to destroy the Black community have failed. Dick.


If you find any other good ones, send them along.

An Apology for Our Way of Life

Fosco was generally a fan of Obama's Inaugural Address, especially his inclusion of "non-believers" in the list of people who make up this country (Fosco's friend Todd was pleased with this as well). And as for the Bushies who were offended by Obama's obvious repudiation of the previous administration? They can suck it.

But now, two days later, Fosco remains a bit troubled by one line from the address in particular:

We will not apologize for our way of life nor will we waver in its defense.

There are (at least) two ways to read the defiance in this sentence, depending on what you think Obama means about "our way of life."

If this phrase means things like sexual and racial equality, free speech, something like democratic representation, and some level of tolerance for difference, then sign me up. Those are good things and there is no need to apologize for the social benefits of a liberal democratic society. However, who is actually asking us to apologize for these things? Other than maybe a few mullahs? If this is what the line means, I like it; but it's not really a line with very broad application.

However, there are plenty of things about our "way of life" that we really ought to be apologizing for. Our CO2 emissions. Our addicted consumerism. Our economic exploitation of the Third World. Our consumption of an obscene amount of the world's resources (per capita). Our narcissism and exceptionalism. Cultural imperialism. SUVs, hedge funds, high fructose corn syrup, and celebrities. Now Fosco is not speaking to you as someone who is above these things; he is as much caught up in this "way of life" as the rest of us (well, except for the SUV part). But there is a lot about our way of life that is indefensible. And even though it can be hard (very hard) for us to change how we live (to live more simply, more sustainably), that still doesn't make our current way of life right.

So yeah, maybe when it comes to some things about our way of life, we do owe the world an apology. And we also owe a commitment to make things right. And I wish Obama had been more clear about this.

From the Annals of Burying the Lede

You may have already seen something like this, a pictorial compilation of all of the newspaper front pages from January 21. It's a nice Obama collage and very much speaks to the relief that almost everyone feels right now.

Fosco's favorite part is the front page of the Philadelphia Daily News, seen below as surrounded by a number of other front pages from that same day:

I don't see the word "Obama" anywhere on that page. Clearly, this is independent journalism at its finest.

To grammatically write

Why did Chief Justice Bald Spot mess up Obama's oath of office? Was it to slightly spoil the Obama sound bite (that would otherwise be played ad nauseam for the rest of human history)? Was it to subtly draw people's attention to Article II of the Constitution (a passage that is sorely under-read by schoolchildren)? Or was it for some other nefarious purpose?

According to Harvard know-it-all Steven Pinker (incidentally, a man who looks like an old lesbian), Robert flubbed the oath because of his aversion to split verbs. Pinker notes that the oath, as written in the Constitution, splits the verb "will execute" by the addition of the word "faithfully." As Pinker notes:

Instead of having Barack Obama “solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States,” Chief Justice Roberts had him “solemnly swear that I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully.” When Mr. Obama paused after “execute,” the chief justice prompted him to continue with “faithfully the office of president of the United States.”

Why did this happen? As Pinker points out, some legal style manuals tend to strictly adhere to a rule against split verbs. Presumably, Roberts's legal training has rendered him unable to read aloud bad grammar.

Except, Pinker also has some good news (especially for Fosco's students): split verbs are not bad grammar. In fact, they're often the best way to adequately express a thought:

Any speaker who has not been brainwashed by the split-verb myth can sense that [many split-verb] corrections go against the rhythm and logic of English phrasing. The myth originated centuries ago in a thick-witted analogy to Latin, in which it is impossible to split an infinitive because it consists of a single word, like dicere, “to say.” But in English, infinitives like “to go” and future-tense forms like “will go” are two words, not one, and there is not the slightest reason to interdict adverbs from the position between them.

Thank you, Steven Pinker. From now on, Fosco will happily split his verbs.

Extra Credit: Fosco intentionally used six split verbs in this post (not including the obviously awkward title). Did you notice them?

Extra Extra Credit: Identify every time Fosco UNintentionally splits a verb in any (or all!) of his previous posts.

Extra Extra Extra Credit: Buy Fosco a book. Right now, he could use pretty much any novel in French. Contact Todd for Fosco's address.

More Inaugural Thoughts

• If you didn't watch, check out Gawker's Top Ten Inaugural Moments (with video!). I like it when they call Rick Warren a "doughy hate-walrus."
  
• Both Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd were taken ill at the Inaugural lunch. Both are reportedly fine. I blame the pheasant.
  
• If I were Michelle, I would be thinking: "You mean now I have to spend all night in a ball gown?" I'm exhausted already and I'm only watching the whole thing. It's a grueling day.

• Chris Matthews: "I gave Val Kilmer a ride back to his hotel last night."
  
• I'm glad we have a president who flashes the "shaka," instead of the "shocker." From the NYTimes liveblog:
  
  
• Reviews of the speech are still mixed, mainly because I think expectations were for something more rhetorical. However, as commentators read the text more closely, a kind of admiration is taking over. This might be exactly the speech Obama needed to make, even if it's not quite the one we wanted to hear. Read the text.

• Fosco has completely come around on Michelle's dress. It was perfect and gorgeous. Check out some more of Isabel Toledo's work here.

Goodbye Bush Street. Hello Obama Avenue.

In case any of you were doubting that San Francisco rocks, here is further proof.

From a piece in SFGate:

On inaugural morning a mysterious group descended on Bush St. and covered up every mention of Bush with Obama stickers.

This is what it looks like:

Unfortunately, workers are removing the stickers as we speak. However, maybe this will spur the city government to permanently change the street name. Wouldn't that be cool?

Regime Change: Live Blogging the Inauguration

10:00 AM PST: Well, I think you can make it through the rest of the day without Fosco's commentary. Thanks for your company this morning. Happy America!

9:56 AM PST: As the Bush helicopter disappears from sight... our long national nightmare is over.

9:48 AM PST: And here comes the Bush goodbye. I like this part. Think he'll give a big middle finger to everyone? We've been through a lot together, George... Ciao.

9:45 AM PST: Not rave reviews for the speech, even from the MSNBC commentators. Although everyone liked the outreach to the Muslim world (as they should).

9:40 AM PST: Finally. Doesn't America feel warmer? Happier? Sexier? I agree.

9:37 AM PST: Joseph Lowery benediction: "When yellow will be mellow"? Seriously? That was freakin' goofy.

9:33 AM PST: Should we really have so much praying? Isn't it a bit much?

9:32 AM PST: Poetry interlude with Elizabeth Alexander. You know how Fosco feels about Inaugural poetry. This one? Meh. "What if the mightiest word is love?" Not a terrible line.

9:26 AM PST: A strangely campaign-like speech at first, no? Lots of policy talk. A resounding rebuke to Bush/Cheney on all fronts, though.

Some highlights:

• One resonant line for Fosco: "begin again the remaking of America"
  
• Love the shot of Malia taking a photograph of her dad speaking.
  
• Great cutaway to Bush during part about not giving up our ideals in favor of our safety.
  
• Message to the world: "We are ready to lead once more." Nice.
  
• Shoutout to "nonbelievers" along with the religious. I like that.
  
• Very well-written passage speaking to the Muslim world and Third World. Strange to have a president who acknowledges the rest of the world (especially without making threats).
  
• "when the levees break" = fuck off, GWB.
  
• "duties" is an important word. Bush seemed to think our primary duty as citizens was shopping. I think Obama has something grander in mind.
  
• He gets choked up during his quote of Washington. Me too. That was a masterful moment.

9:04 AM PST: Oath time. Whoa--what the hell was that? Did Roberts know the oath or was he making it up too? Was Obama too nervous? A surprisingly real moment in an otherwise tightly choreographed spectacle. Wait, is Obama still president? Do we have to do the oath again?

9:00 AM PST: Love Yo-yo Ma. A nice change from Bush's Inaugural performance by Rascal Flatts. Did you know that you could design Rascal Flatts' new CD cover? I mean, assuming you could create something crappy enough.

8:57 AM PST: That's one heckuva bible that Jill Biden is holding.

Is it me, or did that oath sound a little made-up? Was John Paul Stevens ad-libbing?

Hey, there's Bruce Springsteen! Shouldn't he be performing?

8:55 AM PST: Aretha Franklin's backup choir: "Ring ring ring ring ring ring."

8:50 AM PST: Rick Warren talks a good game, I'll give him that. He certainly enunciates distinctly. Oz: "His enunciation reminds me of Chris Berman."

8:48 AM PST: Rick Warren: "[God,] You are loving to everyone you've made. Except homos."

8:45 AM PST: Feinstein speaks: CA power, baby. Maybe she should be Senate majority leader...

She's channeling that movie trailer announcer guy: "In a world..."

And there's that trademark Bush smirk. I wonder if Botox could wipe that away.

8:43 AM PST: It's my senator, Dianne Feinstein! Hey, she still owes me a reply.

8:38 AM PST: After eight years of inappropriate presidential nonverbal behavior, it's nice to see Obama's expression. He knows exactly what he's supposed to look like.

8:32 AM PST: Ouch. Bush is getting booed. And they're singing "Hey, hey, goodbye." Is this an inauguration or a basketball game? It's not in the best of taste, but what does it tell you about the Bush Administration? And after a presidency marked by his complete insulation from any dissent, I can't help but feel a little happy that he is going to hear some of it now.

8:31 AM PST: Matthews: "This is the network that has opened its heart to change." Damn it, Chris... you're making Fosco's defense of you look silly.

8:29 AM PST: Most sentimental caption for a future commemorative item... Chris Matthews reading Sasha and Malia's minds: "My daddy's president." Gag.

8:24 AM PST: Sasha and Malia look incredible: adorable and professional at the same time. Nicely done, Michelle. Fosco is digging Sasha's orange and pink ensemble (although those colors don't always quite work together).

8:21 AM PST: The MSNBC commentators are ripping on Old Bush's apparent frailty. He does look like he might not live through the ceremony.

Wait: who invited the Bush twins? Don't they have something else to do? Isn't it Happy Hour somewhere?

8:18 AM PST: They're keeping Jimmy Carter away from Clinton and Old Bush. Carter fucking hates those guys. Seriously. Isn't that interesting?

8:15 AM PST: Olbermann: "President Clinton looking unusually somber." Hillary looks great in blue, doesn't she?

8:13 AM PST: Speaking of GILFs, there's Joe Biden's mother. I'm glad she is able to see him take the oath--God willing, of course.

8:12 AM PST: And there's Al Gore. Remember how he was supposed to be our president? And now John Kerry. Sure wish he had been a better candidate.

8:07 AM PST: Hey, where'd they find Dan Quayle? I thought he was living under a pseudonym in Argentina.

8:04 AM PST: Very excited to see John Paul Stevens give the oath to Biden. JPS is one of the good ones. It's a shame that Obama has to receive the oath from John Roberts, that smug bastard. Oh well, at least it's not pubic hair aficionado Clarence Thomas.

8:00 AM PST: Michelle looks gorgeous, but her hair is having a little trouble (perhaps because of wind?).

7:59 AM PST: Chris Matthews can't stop comparing the Bushes to the Romanovs. Another unfortunate comparison.

7:55 AM PST: Motorcade, motorcade, motorcade. I'm glad that MSNBC has a real-time map of the motorcade's location. Look, cars!

7:50 AM PST: Bush looked a little less happy when he heard the Obama cheers. Do you think GWB and Obama are talking in the limo?
GWB: "You know, you're a surprisingly handsome man..."
Obama: "It sure looks cold out there."

7:47 AM PST: The floodgates open: here come the senators. Wait, who invited Joe Lieberman? That guy's a dick.

7:46 AM PST: As much as Fosco dislikes Lynn Cheney, he still doesn't think it fair that everyone calls Jill Biden "Dr. Jill Biden" and yet ignores Lynn Cheney's doctorate.

7:45 AM PST: Hmmm. Why does Rachel Maddow instantly recognize VP Cheney's daughter?

7:43 AM PST: Barbara Bush is a GILF.

7:41 AM PST: Ted Kennedy! He looks healthy as an ox. Much commentary on his hat. Where is Kenneth Cole to help us understand?

7:36 AM PST: An interview with a member of the crowd who slept in an office building last night. That makes me tired just hearing it.

7:29 AM PST: And America wonders: will the hero pilot attend the Inauguration? Who did he vote for? What is his favorite food? What else can he teach us about how to live our lives?

7:28 AM PST: If I were Barack, I would state my name in the oath as "Barack Hooooooooo-ssein Obama." And then turn to the camera and wink.

7:25 AM PST: Oh Doris Kearns Goodwin, I don't know how to quit you.

7:17 AM PST: David Axelrod: "Within five minutes of the end of the oath of office, we'll have repealed half of Bush's stupid executive orders." Or something like that.

7:15 AM PST: Fosco hates crowds and that one looks like his worst nightmare. Even with all that Obama love, I would probably get trampled to death.

7:05 AM PST: I am sympathetically cold.

7:02 AM PST: On MSNBC, Eugene Robinson says that this looks a lot like the Million Man March. That seems like a problematic comparison.

6:55 AM PST: Michelle brings a gift for Laura. Let's speculate: lingerie? "Change" t-shirt?

6:51 AM PST: It's time for coffee at the WH with GWB and Dick.
Obama: Good morning, Mr. President.
GWB: So long, suckers!
Dick: Myeh!

6:49 AM PST: Michelle is wearing a yellow/green Isabel Toledo. I like the choice of designer, but I question the color.

6:44 AM PST: Good morning, Obamaketeers! Welcome to history. Thank goodness MSNBC is inexplicably interviewing Kenneth Cole. Seriously. Fosco wishes he hadn't spent so much energy of late arguing for MSNBC's journalistic seriousness...

Shaken Like A Polaroid Picture

Fosco has lived in California almost three years and he finally felt his second earthquake tonight (you may remember his first). This one was tiny by comparison, an itty-bitty 3.8 on the Chareth Richter Scale.

In fact, the only reason Fosco felt it at all was that he was lying in bed trying to go to sleep early (at 10 pm!) so that he will be well-rested for all-day Inauguration history-in-the-making tomorrow (which inexplicably does not run on Pacific time...). As Fosco lay in the dark sleeplessly, he felt the bed give a tiny hop. Like a small bunny, really. A quick visit to the USGS site confirmed.

Fosco also did his geological duty, joining fifteen other Santa Cruz residents in reporting their impressions to create the "Shake Map":

You can see that, for Fosco and his cohort, the whole thing was basically a light blue kind of experience. Dare I even say "Carolina"?

And now Fosco returns to bed. Assuming Northern California remains intact seismically, he will see you all tomorrow morning for some Obama.

My Last Night with Bush: Reading is FUNdamental!

Time is running out... And Fosco still has a few last things to say about the Bush Administration!

Fosco has been challenged recently on his jokes about Bush's literacy. Fosco has responded, but here's another "brick in the wall." From Michiko Kakutani, acknowledged Queen of Book Critics, in an NY Times article:

[Obama's] predecessor, George W. Bush, in contrast, tended to race through books in competitions with Karl Rove (who recently boasted that he beat the president by reading 110 books to Mr. Bush’s 95 in 2006), or passionately embrace an author’s thesis as an idée fixe. Mr. Bush and many of his aides favored prescriptive books — Natan Sharansky’s “Case for Democracy,” which pressed the case for promoting democracy around the world, say, or Eliot A. Cohen’s “Supreme Command,” which argued that political strategy should drive military strategy. Mr. Obama, on the other hand, has tended to look to non-ideological histories and philosophical works that address complex problems without any easy solutions, like Reinhold Niebuhr’s writings, which emphasize the ambivalent nature of human beings and the dangers of willful innocence and infallibility.

I think this is perceptive. One thing Bush never acknowledged was "the ambivalent nature of human beings." And we've all suffered for it.

Rick Warren Loves God. And Himself. Mostly Himself.

Pompous blowhard Pastor Rick Warren (who, as Fosco has noted, is only getting younger) has been laying low lately, hiding from the roaming gangs of gay bullies who want to prevent his Inaugural Invocation. Warren (seen at right, walking on water) has announced his reticence in a statement explaining that he plans to "let his [Inaugural] prayer speak for itself." That's all well and good, but what else of interest does his statement say?

Well, in case you had doubts, Fosco can assure you that Rick Warren's self-esteem remains intact. As he notes in his statement:

his desire is that his prayer and preaching can be pastoral and that he and President-elect Obama can model civility as men of consequence in these difficult times. [emphasis added]

Wow, somebody sure likes himself. A lot. And it certainly does put all those gays of inconsequence in their place.

You know, it's not like he even needed the phrase "as men of consequence" for the sentence to make sense or read well; but, it's like he couldn't resist

1. equating himself with Obama.
   
2. bragging about his own importance.

Oh Rick, doesn't your bible tell you that the meek shall inherit?

Fine Dinin': The Inaugural Edition

A couple a recent articles about fine dining with an Obama twist (because every news story for the next week has to involve Obama in some way).

In this piece from the NYTimes, Washington restauranteurs consider whether Obama will revive Washington's fine dining scene, after eight years of a president who never once ate at a restaurant within the District. Gone are the Clintonista restaurants like the once popular (and famous) Red Sage. The Bush years, in contrast, have been notable mainly for the popularity of steakhouses (you know corporate lobbyists and their red meat).

Obama, in contrast, knows something about good food. His favorites in Chicago (a first-rate restaurant town, actually--second only to NYC in this country) are not incredibly adventurous (leaning toward Italian and Latin/Mexican), but they are, by all accounts, gastronomically distinguished. As celebrity chef Rick Bayless, chef at Obama's favorite Topolobampo, notes of Obama's culinary attitude:

“They really enjoy sitting around the table exploring the different flavors — they always eat tasting menus,” Mr. Bayless said in an interview. “He’s not one who sort of plunks down and says, ‘I’ll have the beef.’ He asks questions.”

That's good news--both because it's the right way to eat and because it offers a nice metaphor for Obama's openness to experience and new ideas. (Even so, Fosco is still not a fan of supposedly "upscale" Mexican restaurants like Topolobampo after once eating a terribly mediocre meal at the Border Grill.)

In DC, there is already a chef lining up to take Bayless's place as Barack's favorite. That would be wannabe celebrity-chef José Andrés:

José Andrés, one of Washington’s most prodigious restaurateurs, said he was hoping one of his Latin American-influenced establishments — like Café Atlántico or Oyamel — could become Mr. Obama’s Topolobampo away from Topolobampo. He said he had already checked with Mr. Bayless for a sense of Mr. Obama’s dining habits.

Fosco had a meal at Café Atlántico this past summer when he was in DC and he was actually quite disappointed. The dining room was crowded and so loud it was difficult to hear one's dinner companions. The waitstaff was alternately snotty and bored (and not particularly competent). And the food was not that good (especially the Jerk Chicken "Mofongo"). The vaunted mojitos? Well, the Magic Mojito (a "cotton candy deconstruction of the classic mojito") was fun to look at (see below), until the cotton candy melted into the drink; then, it just tasted like a typical mojito.

But hey, I'm sure Obama won't have to worry about the loud dining room nor the bad service. I also suspect the food may be a bit better on any night he eats there. And who knows? He may be able to get a reservation at minibar, which is where the culinary fireworks are anyway...

Speaking of Obama (were we?), the High Priestess of New American Cuisine, Berkeley's own Alice Waters, is preparing an inaugural dinner in DC on Monday. As the HuffPo article notes, Waters is famous for her commitment to "local/organic/seasonal/sustainable food." Her preliminary menu includes

Chesapeake Bay oysters and crostini; rockfish soup and a confit of saffron-spiked tomatoes, though if the fish don't look so great, she'll shift to winter vegetables; shoulder of local lamb with salsa verde, and an apple tart.

Sounds quite lovely, actually. To drink, Waters must momentarily suspend her culinary doctrine:

Yes, she knows the Veuve Cliquot Champagne, made in France and provided by the vineyard for the toast to President-elect Obama, is hardly carbon neutral.

"You try to eat as locally as possible but then you make exceptions" for such long-distance staples as olive oil and good bubbly.

Well, as we all know, Fosco can't disagree with Veuve Clicquot.

Democrats in Power: Poetry Relevant Again!

It's a good thing that America elects a Democratic president every decade--even just to give poets a reason to write something! You probably remember the ode to Bill Clinton in 1993 by Maya Angelou (pictured at right with fellow poet Charles Wright). It was called "On the Pulse of Morning," which, as a title, has an appealing rhythm to it. As Fosco recalls, the poem was a grand vision of Speaking Trees, Singing Rivers, and Crying Rocks (incidentally, not unlike several songs by Rush). It also contained these (unfortunate) rhyming couplets:

So say the Asian, the Hispanic, the Jew
The African, the Native American, the Sioux,
The Catholic, the Muslim, the French, the Greek
The Irish, the Rabbi, the Priest, the Sheik,
The Gay, the Straight, the Preacher,
The privileged, the homeless, the Teacher.

I'm not claiming that poetry is easy, but there must have been a better solution than rhyming "Greek" with "Sheik." Ah, the early nineties... such an innocent time!

Sadly, Oprah has refused to release Ms. Angelou from her underground containment facility to write a poem for Obama's Inauguration. So we must make due with lesser talents. Like the respected poet (and pathetic scholar) David Lehman. At the request of the AP, Mr. Lehman wrote this poem to honor Obama's Inauguration.



Probably the best thing I can say about the poem is that it's not terrible. And there is that good line referring to Obama as "thou still unravish'd bride of quietness." That's surprisingly catchy.

Apparently, the AP has asked a number of poets to do this, so we can look forward to offerings from many of the usual suspects of mediocre public poetry (I'm looking at you, Mr. Pinsky). On the other hand, even a poem about vaginas by Rita Dove will be preferable to that poem read at President Bush's first Inaugural:

Honkytonk U
by T. Keith

My grandmother owned a nightclub on the Arkansas-Oklahoma line
Momma put me on a greyhound, and I went
To stay with her in the summertime
I'd box up those empty long necks and stack'em in the back and make
A hand
Then at night she'd let me sneak out of the kitchen and sit in with the band
Yes, I have sacked some quarterbacks and broke my share of bones along the way
I knew it wouldn't
Last forever, semi-pro always means semi-paid
I started climbin' drillin' rig, I'm oil field trash and
Proud as I can be
Then I took my songs and guitar and sang'em to a man from Tennessee.

I've played every beer joint tavern from New York city out to Pasadena
Every corn dog fair and rodeo
And sold out every basketball arena
I like to get down with my boys in Afghanistan and Baghdad city
Too
I am a red, white and blue blood graduate of Honkytonk U.

Moving stuff.

Eating Like Abe

On Inauguration Day, Barry and Michelle will not only attend glittery gala balls all over Washington DC, including one for "wounded warriors" and "families of fallen heroes" (won't that be a jolly holiday?). But even better, the new President (and maybe even his family) gets to eat too--and not just a cold-cut platter (like they served at Bush's first inaugural), but a gourmet sit-down meal. In fact, Fosco has heard that Oprah offered to release her former chef, Art Smith, from her massive underground containment facility to prepare the meal for Obama and his guests; however, this offer was politely declined.

The menu still sounds good though. As you may have heard, the inspiration for Obama's inaugural is Abraham Lincoln. The official theme is something like "Lincoln 2: Die Harder" (honestly, Fosco wasn't paying that much attention). Apparently, the Inaugural Dinner will also participate in the Lincoln theme, with dishes "modeled after foods that Lincoln ate and enjoyed."

Fosco likes this idea quite a bit. He's actually a little interested in historical cooking (recreating historical food preparations, but without all the salmonella and maggots and all). Once Fosco even tried to recreate a Boeuf en Daube described by Virginia Woolf in To the Lighthouse. The results were a tad disappointing, but it was a fun experience.

Unfortunately, the Lincolnism of the Inaugural Dinner is a bit weaker than seems appropriate. As the naughtily-named Jake Tapper reports,

The luncheon's appetizer will be seafood stew in puff pastry -- scallops, shrimp, lobster -- served as a nod to the 16th president's love of stewed and scalloped oysters.

The main course -- duck breast with sour-cherry chutney and herb-roasted pheasant served with molasses sweet potatoes and winter vegetables -- is a nod to the root vegetables and wild game that Mr. Lincoln favored growing up on the frontier in Kentucky and Indiana.

The apple cinnamon sponge cake dessert is a nod to Mr. Lincoln's love of apples and apple cake.

You can find the full menu (with wine pairings) here. I guess the apple cake dessert makes some Lincoln-y sense, but the appetizer is certainly a stretch, no? A seafood stew filled with scallops and lobster is not quite the same thing as scalloped oysters. I guess both dishes share an origin in the sea; but then again, so do salmon and sea lion (and I only want to eat one of those on a bagel). As for basing the main course on Lincoln's childhood dinners of wild game and root vegetables, well it seems a little vague, doesn't it? In a way, this whole menus is a bit like saying: "Lincoln was known to eat food and thus we shall serve food." I suppose we can expect Obama to wear clothes to his Inauguration, much in the way that Lincoln was known to wear clothes.

Fosco was thinking it might be fun to try to cook the Inaugural menu and invite some friends over to celebrate. Luckily, the recipes are provided. It seemed like a good idea, of course, until line one of the first recipe:

6 (1 Lb) Maine lobsters

Hmmm. That's already $108 (plus tax) and we haven't even bought the scallops (twenty of them!) yet. Do you think Fosco could just serve Baloney Canapés?

Class(less) Bias

If you keep up with Sarah Palin news (and why wouldn't you? Everyone else does.), you know that she recently suggested that the media was harder on her than they are currently being on Caroline Kennedy and that this difference is due to a "class issue." I think Palin may be right, in a way. And so I actually want to take this question of a "class issue" seriously for a few minutes.

Let's just dismiss Palin's point about the media going easy on Caroline Kennedy. As Jason Linkins notes, this isn't true ("you know?"). From Kennedy's grammatical tics to questions about her lack of qualifications, the media has been on it all along. So let's just ignore Caroline Kennedy and consider Sarah Palin in isolation: did she have such a tumultuous tenure in the national spotlight because of her class? Yes, but maybe not in the obvious sense of that word.

Sarah Palin's problem is indeed a "class issue": she just doesn't have any. Seriously, is there any way to call her "classy"? Is she particularly excellent in any way? Is she particularly meritorious? Is she dignified? Elegant? She can't express a coherent thought in English. She barely graduated from college (from somewhere. And with a degree in... something). Her political experience derives from governing fewer people than live in Charlotte, North Carolina. Her immediate and extended family brings to mind nothing so much as a Spears family reunion.

But you know what's funny about Palin's complaints on this issue? She likes it that way. Her entire public image is explicitly based on her lack of class. What's strange is that she expects us to take her seriously despite this. I don't see any reason why we ought to pretend that intelligence, education, and dignity are irrelevant to holding national office (Alaska can can elect whoever it wants within its own borders). But that's a question that voters can settle (and hey, they did). It isn't the media's fault that America found Palin to be a confidently undereducated idiot (the most dangerous kind) and decided that's a bad thing. Thank goodness there are still enough people in this country who want to be governed by someone smarter than average.

As for Caroline Kennedy--even if she gets the Senate appointment, she will have to run again in two years. We'll see then how voters feel about her education, her speaking skills, and her qualifications. That's the kind of class that's important, both to voters and to the media. As for Governor MooseMunch? Well, maybe she could start by trying to read a book.

A Model of Reasonable Debate

You may have noticed that there are occasional disagreements in the Comments between Fosco and his good friend The BeeMaster (not pictured at right). Fosco and The BeeMaster go way back--in fact, The BeeMaster is one of the kindest people that Fosco knows. This may surprise you, as Fosco is pretty leftish and The BeeMaster is a fire-breathing conservative. But, stranger things have happened. In all honesty, Fosco likes to think that his ongoing discussion with The BeeMaster is a pretty nice example of Obama's dictum about "disagreeing without being disagreeable."

Most recently, Fosco and The BeeMaster have been sparring over Rick Warren and Obama. The BeeMaster has taken issue with this Fosco post on Warren and has responded in the comments section to that post. As Fosco was in the middle of a very long response to The BeeMaster's response, he realized that he should just make the whole exchange into a post on the front page of Fosco Lives!. And so here is The BeeMaster's original comment, followed by Fosco's reply. And yes, Fosco will happily append any additional response by The BeeMaster into this post.

THE BEEMASTER'S COMMENT:
When watching the Rick Warren interview in question:

http://www.beliefnet.com/Video/Beliefnet-Interviews/Rick-Warren/Rick-Warren-Interview-On-Gay-Marriage-And-Divorce.aspx

it's a stretch to say he likens gay marriage to incest and pedophilia. In the same interview, he says divorce is a greater threat to the family than gay marriage. So following the same logic would bring us to the dubious conclusion that Rick Warren thinks divorce is worse than incest and pedophilia. Since this is nonsense, one of two things must be untrue. Either Warren doesn't think divorce is worse than gay marriage, OR he doesn't consider gay marriage the same as incest and pedophilia. Watching the interview, it's clear the latter and not the former is the case.

So what's the big problem with Rick Warren praying at the inaugeration? That he opposes gay marriage? Big deal - so does Obama.

The largest group opposed to gay marriage is evangelical Christians. Vilifying Rick Warren hurts, not helps, the cause of gay marriage. It casts its supporters as harsh and (ironically) intolerant. It makes evangelicals fear that, should gay marriage become legal, their churches could be forced to perform such ceremonies or that pastors speaking out against the practice would be accused of hate crimes. Rick Warren specifically mentions this fear as the reason he supported proposition 8. Being smeared for his view makes the point more profoundly than he could ever have.

The BeeMaster


FOSCO'S RESPONSE:
It's true that I feel some ambivalence on this topic. For one thing, I don't think Rick Warren is the worst thing ever. For the most part, he seems like a pretty likable and reasonable guy (and strangely enough, Fosco looks a little like him--although Fosco has more hair). I can see why he's built such a large and successful church. Sure, I'm having a little fun with his hair plugs and the title of his book, but I even do that with people that I like.

And yes, I do recognize that Obama is opposed to gay marriage as well (as the numerous robocalls on my answering machine on November 4 reminded me). I'm not thrilled about that either.

As for the Warren interview in question, I recognize that he views divorce as a much greater threat to marriage than gay unions. Good for him! I wish that point were made more frequently.

However, that interview still includes this exchange:

WARREN: The issue to me, I'm not opposed to that as much as I'm opposed to redefinition of a 5,000 year definition of marriage. I'm opposed to having a brother and sister being together and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.

BELIEFNET: Do you think those are equivalent to gays getting married?

WARREN: Oh , I do.

Now Warren is too savvy to use the normally-accepted words for his three examples, but he is clearly talking about
1. incest
2. pedophilia
3. polygamy
And then he explicitly agrees that these three examples are "equivalent to gay getting married." Now none of these may be as threatening to marriage as divorce (presumably because they are all much rarer), but he still makes this comparison (and has had ample opportunity to retract/clarify--especially in this transcript which includes several retrospective Warren clarifications.

So, while Warren's rhetoric may not be as inflammatory as some of the opponents of Prop 8, it's pretty clear that he wants to equate gay marriage with incest, pedophilia, and polygamy.

As for the question of whether Prop 8 would require churches to marry gay couples, I just can't understand how this keeps getting cited. As far as I can tell, every church can determine who they want to marry. Churches can set rules about marriage that go beyond (or even contradict) civil laws about marriage. The one I know best is the Catholic Church, which reserves the right to set all kinds of conditions on marriage. You can't just walk into a Catholic Church and get married. I believe the Mormons are the same. In fact, I suspect that there of plenty of churches in the South that would refuse an interracial marriage (and could legally do so).

Of course, civil authorities are not amused when rogue Mormons try to marry young girls to old men, but that's more of a case of certain child protection laws trumping religious freedom (something that, btw, pretty much all Americans agree on). And besides, that's a case of the State invalidating a religious marriage, not of the State requiring a religion to perform a specific type of marriage.

This is different, I also want to note, from recent cases in Connecticut where justices of the peace are required to conform to the law and marry gay couples. In those cases, justices of the peace are civil, not religious, authorities (although they may also have their personal religious beliefs). Civil marriage is an entirely different thing from religious marriage, and civil officials are required by law to perform any marriage that is legal. Religious officials are NOT required to perform any legal marriage, nor will they ever be.

I think Rick Warren is a smart guy and I just don't believe he is worried that his Saddleback Church will be forced to marry gay couples. He knows the difference between civil marriage laws and religious discretion in the case of marriage. I think he is bringing this up purely as a scare tactic.

As for hate speech argument, I still think Rick Warren is smart enough to know better. He's being cynical here. He knows the difference between hate speech and "politically incorrect" speech. I'm going to use race to make this point. When an old school Southern-fried racist says that Black people are inferior (or that they shouldn't marry white people), that's bigotry but it's not hate speech. Hate speech is speech that is intended to incite violence. So if Warren says that gay people shouldn't get married, he may be wrong (and he may be bigoted), but there is no court in this country that would call that hate speech. Now, if he were to say that his churchmembers should get a baseball bat and "teach gays a lesson," then we'd be in the realm of hate speech.

Now I'll be the first to agree that some gay activists (and, strangely enough, some evangelical conservatives like Huckabee) are trying to elide the distinction between bigotry and hate speech. But even liberal courts know better than to let this distinction slide. For all of the supposed liberal or conservative biases in the federal judiciary in the last twenty years, federal judges are still surprisingly protective of First Amendment rights (for which we can thank the ACLU?). All of this is a long-winded way of saying that, unless Rick Warren plans to call for gay-bashing, he doesn't need to worry about being prosecuted for hate speech. And this is the part that pisses me off: he knows this. He's a smart and sophisticated guy. Or at least, he should know this. Which leads me to the conclusion that Rick Warren is arguing in bad faith.

When it comes down to it, if Rick Warren were just to say "I oppose gay marriage because it goes against my religion," I would have to accept that. I might disagree with him. And I may try to question whether Rick Warren is interpreting the Bible correctly. But I would have to be civil about it. Because, when it comes down to it, Rick Warren would be telling the truth and trying to communicate with me in good faith. And I recognize that Rick Warren does this most of the time. But when he resorts to using scare words and prophesying legal problems that will never materialize, I have to question his honesty.

All that being said, I definitely agree with The BeeMaster's assertion that gay-marriage activists have to deal with evangelical Christians in a constructive way (and Fosco hasn't always done this, I recognize). And I hope this exchange is a step in the right direction.

A Reasonable Response to an Anti-Gay Inauguration

In case you missed it while you were playing Rock Band 2 all weekend, Frank Rich had an excellent op-ed piece in the NYTimes about the whole Rick Warren inauguration kerfuffle. Fosco, like a lot of gays, has been trying to come to terms with Obama's choice in a way that doesn't minimize its hurtfulness without overplaying its importance (and Fosco will be first to admit that he has yet to find the right balance). Luckily, Frank Rich's column does all of Fosco's work for him.

[Before we begin, I have to know: do the older pictures of Warren (like the one above) raise the issue of whether he's now sporting a hair transplant?]

But back to Rich's column...

One of the questions raised by the Warren choice is that of the extent to which people with repugnant viewpoints should be allowed "at the table" as it were. To what extent can Obama maintain something like a "big tent" of political opinion without actively banishing large sections of the US populace (like the Christian right)? In this case, a distinction needs to be made between "at the table" and "at the head of the table." Rich is right on here:

But there’s a difference between including Warren among the cacophony of voices weighing in on policy and anointing him as the inaugural’s de facto pope. You can’t blame V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop and an early Obama booster, for feeling as if he’d been slapped in the face. “I’m all for Rick Warren being at the table,” he told The Times, but “we’re talking about putting someone up front and center at what will be the most-watched inauguration in history, and asking his blessing on the nation. And the God that he’s praying to is not the God that I know.”

Similarly, we have to raise the question of the balance between all the good that Rick Warren does (focusing on climate change, poverty and AIDS, for example) and his evil (comparing gay marriage to incest, pedophilia, etc.) Once again, Rich gets it:

Warren, whose ego is no less than Obama’s, likes to advertise his “commitment to model civility in America.” But as Rachel Maddow of MSNBC reminded her audience, “comparing gay relationships to child abuse” is a “strange model of civility.”

Rick Warren may be saying the right things on lots of different issues, but that doesn't change the fact that he has openly lied about gay marriage. It is one thing to say that his religion leads him to oppose gay marriage; it's another thing to raise fear and hatred by comparing gay marriage to the bogeymen of incest and child abuse. Once again, it is possible for us to condemn Rick Warren without condemning all religion.

The other big question here is why Obama, a strong supporter of (most) LGBT rights, thinks this is a good idea in the first place. Hint: there's hubris involved...

Much more to the point is the astute criticism leveled by the gay Democratic congressman Barney Frank, who, in dissenting from the Warren choice, said of Obama, “I think he overestimates his ability to get people to put aside fundamental differences.” That’s a polite way of describing the Obama cockiness.
[...]
When Obama defends Warren’s words by calling them an example of the “wide range of viewpoints” in a “diverse and noisy and opinionated” America, he is being too cute by half. He knows full well that a “viewpoint” defaming any minority group by linking it to sexual crimes like pedophilia is unacceptable.

Obama would love to be able to force a reconciliation between the gays and the evangelicals based solely on the power of his (admittedly commanding) personality. Unfortunately, however, there are conflicts that can't be mended through the power of personality or through the strategy of extreme inclusion. There are indeed issues on which we cannot "all just get along" and these are the issues that Obama, as someone who aspires to some version of progressivism, needs to take a stand on.

Of course, in the end, none of this will really matter much if Obama repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," opposes a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and works to pass ENDA. On this point, Rich quotes historian Timothy McCarthy:

McCarthy added that it’s also time “for President-elect Obama to start acting on the promises he made to the LGBT community during his campaign so that he doesn’t go down in history as another Bill Clinton, a sweet-talking swindler who would throw us under the bus for the sake of political expediency.” And “for LGBT folks to choose their battles wisely, to judge Obama on the content of his policy-making, not on the character of his ministers.”

If Obama does this, I'm willing to give him a pass on Rick Warren. So now let's get back to Rock Band.

I'm over Obama.

So Barry O has chosen Bear icon Rick Warren to pray at the Inaug. I suppose this isn't a huge surprise, except to those of us who briefly confused the word "progressive" with the word "pragmatist." Realistically, same-sex marriage is still seen as an issue on which it is possible for reasonable people to disagree and Barry is certainly making a fetish of "disagreeing without being disagreeable." Barry is sharp and he knows the best way to "govern from the center" is to kick the gays in the crotch. It's probably the right move politically.

For those of you who don't know, Rick Warren heads the Bareback MegaChurch in SoCal. He's written some book (about marine biology, I think) called The Porpoise Driven Life. He was an outspoken (and mendacious) supporter of Prop H8. Apparently, Rick Warren is some kind of "new evangelical" who is willing to take on climate change and global poverty. That's fine with me, as far as it goes. I guess that's an improvement over some evangelicals.

But at some point, wouldn't it be nice to see the words "new" or "change" applied to a movement that doesn't have the "same" "old" attitude toward the gays?