Mrs. Crabby

Michelle Obama laid it on heavy in recent campaigning about how bad we have it.

In a New Yorker profile, she is quoted in a stump speech made throughout South Carolina as characterizing America as “just downright mean.”

She said the country is divided, life is not good, the people are “guided by fear” and cynicism.

“We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day,” she told churchgoers in that primary state. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime.”

She ain’t seen nothin’ yet.  Wait till the mainstream reporters really get warmed up with their Rezko qq.  Then she’ll really howl.

“Let me tell you, don’t get sick in America!” she exclaimed.

Especially when U. of Chi Hospitals are your option.  Lots of insurance needed to help cover her $316,952 salary there as an administrator — up from $121,910  once her man became a U.S. senator.

She’s — ahem — conflicted about her success, or was in 1985 when she wrote her undergraduate thesis, “Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community,” in which she makes a heartfelt cry:

Princeton both humiliated her and corrupted her, Michelle Vaughn Robinson complains in an undergraduate prose that is all the more touching for its clumsiness. By condescending to the young black woman from a Chicago working-class family, the liberal university made Michelle feel like an outsider. Worse, by giving her a ticket to financial success, Princeton caused her to feel that she was selling out to the institutions she most despised.

We call it guilt.  She’s made it big, and that ain’t bad, but she feels bad about it and wants us to feel bad too.  Grrrrrr.

Tone it down, says Oak Park Dem

Oak Park’s Dem committeeman and one of its state senators, the astute and up-and-coming Don Harmon, warns against harsh words and the like among Dems in this primary:

The nominating process has almost run its course. While I believe and hope that Sen. Obama will be our party’s nominee, I would certainly support Sen. Clinton, were she nominated. More so than ever before, we Democrats need to rally ’round our nominee, and do so in a manner that engages independent voters and Republicans troubled by the course of current events. Fights within families often include the most hurtful words, but just as often lead to healing. In a campaign where words matter, let us all begin the healing by choosing our words more carefully.

He speaks for a lot of Dem professionals, who are worried about divisions in the party that will give the lie to their candidate’s bringing an end to divisions in the country.

Wuxtry. J-dean beats rap. He got the gist of it.

The Medill-Northwestern journalism dean is off the hook because he can’t be proven wrong.  He

did not violate any policies in using unattributed quotes in alumni magazine columns last year.

Provost Dan Linzer said that he concurred . . . that Dean John Lavine had accurately captured the essence of student sentiments about courses in his column, “Letter from the Dean.” [Italics added]

He used quotation marks, right?  To capture the essence?  Winking as he did so?  The quoted statements

cannot be [verified, but] sufficient material does exist . . . to demonstrate that sentiments similar to the quotes had been expressed by students,” . . . .  [Italics added again]


This was pretty truthy stuff?

“The author of a [column] like the “Letter from the Dean” could not reasonably be expected [to] have retained for a year the notes or e-mails documenting the sources of quotations used in the letter.”


But The Daily Northwestern asked every student, none of whom vouched for the blind-quote affirmations of the dean’s class:

[Columnist] Spett sought out the 29 students in the class Lavine had described and, he said, asked all of them if they had made the statements in Lavine’s story. All said no.


But the dean is not guilty, as it were of a criminal charge, when the matter was much more a civil complaint, of which he’s supposed to be innocent — a regular Caesar’s wife, being a teacher of mass communicators in a prestige-heavy institution.


Are we henceforward to look on Medill grads’ work as crafted so that we can’t pin a thing on the writer?  He’s in the clear, is he?  No matter the “caveat lector” that has to accompany his writing?

That antic-ridden marriage

You can’t beat letters to the editor for revealing the pulse of the nation.  As noted here yesterday, in epistola veritas (see below).  At issue is a column in Wednesday Journal of Oak Park & River Forest which referred to Hillary Clinton as a cuckquean, which is female for cuckold.

So came this protest arguing that it was “misogynistic” to define Clinton’s political success “by the unfortunate and inappropriate sexual antics of her husband.”

Here’s where the national pulse is revealed (in part), in saying that tomcatting around is “unfortunate and inappropriate” and falls not under adultery — which by definition doth cuckold or cuckquean make — but under “antics.”

The writer adds, “Had Sen. Clinton been a man, this would never have been written.”  Of course not.  He would have been not a cuckquean but a cuckold.

Meanwhile, she’s a heroine to women?  Putting up with that schmuck all those years?  How so?

Scratch a liberal and . . . what?

In vino veritas, said the old Romans, accepting strong drink as truth serum.  Now it’s In epistola veritas, as in letter to editor during a political campaign.  No?  What if you’re an Oak Parker (IL) indignant at what a columnist said about her favorite female candidate?  I discuss it in my Wednesday Journal blog:

The fire-Hubbuch movement is under way. Good. Throw him and his out on the street. It’s in this letter from an Oak Park woman whose attention he caught with a column in which he mentions Hillary as “the most famous cuckquean in American history,” explaining . . . that this is “a woman whose husband strays” from connubial obligations.

She is left holding the shame bag, as it were. 

But fire Hubbuch?  What’s that about? 

You should have pulled this [column] or excised part of it. Remarks regarding Hillary Clinton’s qualifications for president were derogatory to all women.

So.  Douse the column, says the writer, warming to the task of advising the editor.  She closes:

Hubbuch lacks intelligence and sensitivity. You have control over his employment.

There it is.  Did you get that?  She wants him not only edited but dismissed.  In epistola veritas.  She’s a Hillary supporter, a Democrat, indeed a former Cook County judge, slated by Chi Ald. Ed Burke’s committee some time back.  She’s a liberal.

BUT WHEN THE COLUMNIST WRITES WHAT SHE DOESN’T LIKE, SHE WANTS HIM OUT OF THERE!

Puts me in mind of that new book, Liberal Fascism.

Hands off!

Hot item here about saying mass, about Vatican ruling that would be widely violated, sez I:

Stricter rules for Mass including disallowing taking Communion in the hand and time limits on homilies may soon be initiated by the Vatican.

Aimed at “extravagancies.” says Divine Worship honcho in La Stampa. 

In sermons too:

Provisions include restricting to 10 minutes homilies and ensuring they be exclusively based on the Gospel readings.

This will call for urgent dispatching of grief counselors to rectories worldwide.  No more beginnings followed by a succession of middles-without-end, no more rhetorical flights about the world scene.

Who do they think these preachers are, “blocks, stones, worse than senseless things”?  O tempora, O mores!

As for communion:

“The Vatican wants the host placed directly into the mouths of the faithful so they don’t touch it (with their hands) because many don’t even realize they are receiving Christ and do this with scant concentration and respect,” Archbishop Ranjith said.

The anti-in-hands rationale, soon to be repeated in further rollbacks of post-Vatican II innovations:

Ranjith said the practice was “illegally and hastily introduced by certain elements of the Church immediately after the Council”.

. . . .

“Ranjith said the measures to bring back “dignity and decorum” to Mass celebrations were in line with Pope Benedict’s wishes.


But the archbishop backed off:



“The article published on Monday by Turin daily La Stampa contained a collage of phrases citing him (Ranjith) that led to conclusions which were out of place,” a Vatican Radio broadcaster said.

Archbishop Ranjith has now denied any plans are afoot, saying instead on Vatican Radio “the hope is that the existing norms will be regularly applied and that the Eucharist be celebrated with devotion, seriousness and nobility.”


A collage of phrases, eh?  Out of place, eh?  Will have to remember that one.

He can run things?

We have already heard of Hillary’s incompetence as manager.  Here’s the ultimate anti-Hillary Dick Morris and wife Eileen McGann on B.O. as manager:

The best evidence of Obama’s readiness to lead the nation is the ability with which he has run for president. After all, what is more difficult, complicated, or challenging than getting elected president? What other life experience better illustrates one’s qualification to hold the office than a manifest skill in seeking it. For anyone who has ever been elected president, the race that sent them to the White House was the single most important event in their lives and dwarfs any other experience they might have had before running.

As we have watched Obama surmount the hurdles that lay in his path, we cannot help but be impressed with his judgment. Adam Wallinsky, who served on Bobby Kennedy’s staff, once singled out good judgment as JFK’s most salient characteristic. Obama has faced so many delicate questions and issues and seems always to have the right feel for how to handle them.

We will be hearing more about this about O., I think.  Already there’s a lot.

Tip-top reviewing

Chi Trib books section, demoted some time back to a Saturday feature and on a diet with other book sections in recent years, repays rather close attention, I am finding in recent weeks.  Today, for instance, It talks up a mystery book about Chicago written not in recent years at all:

Sixty years ago, Chicago newspaper writer Fredric Brown, a Gary teenager who’d started his career as a proofreader on a Milwaukee paper, won an Edgar Award for best first novel from the Mystery Writers of America. His book was “The Fabulous Clipjoint,” and it’s still considered one of the best crime novels about Chicago.

The reviewer, Dick Adler, reviews crime fiction for Publishers Weekly and other publications and blogs at The Knowledgeable Blogger, “for lovers of crime fiction — which he’d better update, since it calls him “a former” reviewer” for the Trib.

I have already ordered The Fabulous Clipjoint — set in the Tip Top Tap, atop the Allerton hotel on Boul Mich in 1948 at the latest — from ABE Books.  The book aims to “preserve forever, like bugs in amber, the seedy pleasures of our shared pasts,” Adler tells us — invitingly to a Chicagoan who was then in his late ‘teens.

 “We walked north two blocks on the east side of Michigan Boulevard to the Allerton Hotel. . . . The top floor was a very swanky cocktail bar. The windows were open and it was cool there. Up as high as that, the breeze was a cool breeze and not something out of a blast furnace. We took a table by a window on the south side, looking out toward the Loop. . . . ‘Beautiful as hell,’ I said. But it’s a clipjoint.”

That sort of stuff is not great, but it’s clean and clear.  So is Adler’s discussion of it:

Ed [one of two prime protagonists] knows he has to find out what happened [to his murdered father] but can’t do it himself. So he heads for Janesville, Wis., where the J.C. Hobart carnival is doing business and looks up his uncle, Ambrose Hunter, a barker and roustabout who is the smartest man Ed has ever met. They head back to Chicago, where they pick up Wally’s trail, bribe a friendly detective, act like tough guys (not easy for the boyish Ed or the short and tubby Am), meet a swell dame who loves Ed and lies to him, and actually solve the murder.

Adler sold me, and his brief account of Frederic Brown’s writing life — “a man who often told his wife he hated writing” — did the same for a man he compares to Hammett “and other crime icons.”  I look forward to the ABE copy, which I’m getting for under $5, shipped.  An excellent service, that.

Man or Superman?

Here’s a site devoted to B.O. as Him Whom We Have Been Waiting For, spouting in millenarian fashion and being received in the same spirit.  Prominent is this quote:

“… a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany … and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama” – Barack Obama, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
January 7, 2008.

[Frantic update: If he said this in New Hampshire or anywhere else, this web site is the only one who reported it, or heard it, for that matter.  In short, it’s a gag.]

[Another update: Hillary does it too:

In Rhode Island, Hillary Clinton took on the Obamamania that has swept Democratic primary electorates by directly ridiculing the speeches of her opponent as unrealistic appeals by someone posing as a secular saint. “Now I could stand up here and say: Let’s get everybody together. Let’s get unified. The skies will open. The lights will come down. And you know the celestial choirs will be singing. And everyone we know will do the right thing. And the world will be perfect,” Mrs. Clinton said with bitter sarcasm.

[Peas in a pod, she and the Obama-as-Messiah fellow]

Reader Nancy Thorne:

What Obama really is is a throw back to a period of unenlightenment.  His change and reform are but camouflage for 1920 – 1930 hard core socialism and isolationism.   His campaign has become a dangerous movement.  Obama is wholly unqualified and is as radical as any person who has ever run for the presidency.  He’s a 1960’s anti-war war radical with the template of a college student.  His success would not bode well for the land of the free and the home of the brave. 
Two other readers so far (responding to my earlier e-mail blast), have wondered if he’s antichrist.  That’s not language I use, but to one of them, I replied:
As they say in far lesser circumstances, it’s scary.  The guy’s self-esteem is at the heart of it, I fear.
That is, he may really believe what he’s saying about himself.
 
Here’s quite a rundown and sampling of what others worry, including a lede item from Mother Jones magazine, in “Barack Obama’s Messiah Complex.”

The girl who couldn’t talk straight

To paraphrase Maurice Chevalier, thank heaven (Barack does) for little girls (as in go-girl), little (not real little) Afro-American girls like Mary Mitchell, who can come to the aid of their Afr-Am heroines, getting them out of hot water.

I  understood exactly what Michelle Obama meant when she expressed a renewed pride in America. Look at what’s happening.

Michelle committed a hugely self-revealing boo-boo born of some sort of frustration, digging deep in her psyche for her undifferentiated angst about being you know what in America, but to the rescue came Mary, not only columnizing but commandeering the entire multi-color front page of the splashiest newspaper west of the New York Post.

Michelle: I’ve always been proud of U.S.

PRIDE IN AMERICA | No reason to apologize — she had it right the first time

Go girls!