So, I was not the only one to think it was cynical to pick up Sarah Palin as veep nominee... Even Republican agree :
9/4/08
Sarah Palin's speech
Ok we were expecting a lot of this first national speech, so now we know : she can read!
9/3/08
Scandals and gossip
There is something quite strange for someone bored by details of the privacy of others, to see the media, starting with those "serious", enjoyed with things, which are nothing else than gossip. What is surprising is the implacable march of something incredibly reactionary and normalizer.
It's not only that we know that this one (John Edwards) has cheated on his wife with this one, nor even that we know when and how... It's not only that we know that the daughter of this other one (Sarah Palin) is pregnant before to be married or that her husband was arrested more than 20 years ago for driving under the influence of alcohol... It's not only that there are people to peel biographies, investigate, reveal or create "scandals", and others to buy them, "friends" to be paid for their secrets and bargain their betrayal... in short, a whole system implying terrible and sordid things... I assume it could be funny. The point is mostly what it reveals about what is asked to a candidate for the presidency of the USA, which has absolutely nothing to do with the exercise of his functions: to fulfill archaic moral values.
Then they will say that what sets to end the career of John Edwards, is not his affair, but the fact that he has lied. Certainly. The subtlety of reasoning is amusing, which does not see that if he had lied about wether putting socks on or not, his career would continue its running. Or they will say that the pranks of Sarah Palin's family are an issue because of what they reveal the lack of seriousness of the McCain advisors, who has not enough study her record before choosing her as running mate, disregarding the fact that these pranks are none of our buisness.
It is indeed the fact that candidates are expected about their moral values, which astonishes me. It is indeed the fact that they are not only men or women brought to manage records, but entire families engaged to reassure on the probity of a candidate. It is this curious confusion which questions not only the program, but also the values of a man, his morals and his faith.
Who is candidate in this election? What does he stand for? Before who? Those are the questions inevitably arose by Michelle Obama's speech at the DNC, in which she gave so many details, going as far as telling how her husband ask her out, to give an image of good and perfect straight white bourgeois and reassure America.
Sometimes, people are struggling to convince they fulfill the perfect son-husband-father model. Sometimes one detail of their lives betrays their inability to be entirely submited to such values. And this is certainly the least they can do. But the fact that these values and expectations are not questioned, this has to be surprising and inhuman.
It's not only that we know that this one (John Edwards) has cheated on his wife with this one, nor even that we know when and how... It's not only that we know that the daughter of this other one (Sarah Palin) is pregnant before to be married or that her husband was arrested more than 20 years ago for driving under the influence of alcohol... It's not only that there are people to peel biographies, investigate, reveal or create "scandals", and others to buy them, "friends" to be paid for their secrets and bargain their betrayal... in short, a whole system implying terrible and sordid things... I assume it could be funny. The point is mostly what it reveals about what is asked to a candidate for the presidency of the USA, which has absolutely nothing to do with the exercise of his functions: to fulfill archaic moral values.
Then they will say that what sets to end the career of John Edwards, is not his affair, but the fact that he has lied. Certainly. The subtlety of reasoning is amusing, which does not see that if he had lied about wether putting socks on or not, his career would continue its running. Or they will say that the pranks of Sarah Palin's family are an issue because of what they reveal the lack of seriousness of the McCain advisors, who has not enough study her record before choosing her as running mate, disregarding the fact that these pranks are none of our buisness.
It is indeed the fact that candidates are expected about their moral values, which astonishes me. It is indeed the fact that they are not only men or women brought to manage records, but entire families engaged to reassure on the probity of a candidate. It is this curious confusion which questions not only the program, but also the values of a man, his morals and his faith.
Who is candidate in this election? What does he stand for? Before who? Those are the questions inevitably arose by Michelle Obama's speech at the DNC, in which she gave so many details, going as far as telling how her husband ask her out, to give an image of good and perfect straight white bourgeois and reassure America.
Sometimes, people are struggling to convince they fulfill the perfect son-husband-father model. Sometimes one detail of their lives betrays their inability to be entirely submited to such values. And this is certainly the least they can do. But the fact that these values and expectations are not questioned, this has to be surprising and inhuman.
8/30/08
McCain's running mate
I wonder to what extent this is not misogynist to pick up a woman just because she is a woman?
Anyway I do not perfectly understand a pro-lif... anti-abortion woman, as I would not understand a pro-slavery black for instance... oups, sorry...
8/29/08
DNC : Day 4 : Obama's acceptance speech
Of course, the man must have become completely crazy before the bubble he represents in the eyes of others ; of course the man intends to get into a sleight of hand by confiscating the power of a people, whom the expression is reduced to moronic and compulsive applause, but it would be cynical and kill-buzzer for not enjoying this speech by Barack Obama, who embraces all oratorical technics with such a skill; calm his taste for lyricism, getting a little more precise, a little more concrete; brings together all the watchwords and other arguments heard these days (the patriotism of John Kerry, attacks against McCaine by Joe Biden and others, and so on.) And succeeds to give them more scale, more impact; uses anaphora to increase in strength his speech; and speaks from experience to sustain his motivation.
There is something completely insane to do exactly what you are expected to do, specially with so much talent, but it is also very beautiful.
There is something completely insane to do exactly what you are expected to do, specially with so much talent, but it is also very beautiful.
8/28/08
DNC : Day 3 : Boring
There's something highly conservative in this endless succession of all these speeches, all built with the same pattern, respecting, with such a rigourous care, whith so little inventiveness, the same rules.
Those variations or stylistic composition, repeating over and over the same slogans, using the same old anaphora, and cynically scattering real stories of real lives of real people, are tiring.
Those variations or stylistic composition, repeating over and over the same slogans, using the same old anaphora, and cynically scattering real stories of real lives of real people, are tiring.
8/27/08
DNC : Day 2 : Hillary Clinton's stylistic composition
Something enabled me to recognize a political meeting today, more easily than the day before. Something, which happens in every political meeting throughout the world, in democracies as well as in dictatorships : the compulsive repetition of watchwords.
Dozens of people came, thus, to say at some moment in their speeches, for instance : "McCain more of the same".
Those different slogans ("Unity", "Hillary", "Obama", etc.) were supported by thousands of signs raised in the public in a very well organized perfect timing.
So, Hillary Clinton's speech was a really talented moment of stylistic composition, as it happens to be a must-do in every political carreer.
8/25/08
Joe Biden's biography
On Saturday, I received, like everyone, this...
...wondering why nobody raised the question about who had organized the visit of Joe Biden in Georgia: Himself to get in the race for vice-presidency, which he refused 3 weeks ago? ; Obama's staff to launch the two weeks of hysterical speculation which followed? ; A coincidence due to his chair in the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate?
In addition, I would be curious to know who provided the only biography of Joe Biden, which all American media air this weekend, which emphatically underlines the most relevant points to support the choice of Obama: the tragedy of his journey, which inevitably arouses empathy, his anchorage among blue-collar workers, which answers the will of his running mate to change Washington and could bring him their votes; his diplomatic experience, which compensates for the weaknesses of the Democratic nominee and his tough character to go after MacCaine...
Is this the man who is well chosen or his biography well written?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
