Mer and I attended the dress rehearsal 2/6 for the Chinese Cultural Center’s performance, which will be held 2/14. The dress rehearsal was sparsely attended – the ‘real’ day will be jam-packed. The performances consist of routines executed by different combinations of Center members in a variety of silk outfits. These routines are somewhere between martial arts exercises and dances and involve swords, fans, ribbons, flags, and empty hands. All to the accompaniment of the drum group, which includes our yoga teacher and friend, Gail Rubin. My favorite performers included Tiffany Lin and the Monkey King.

Chinese New Year 30 pictures

Click the picture above for the album and a full screen slide show.

Flickr photoset from 2007 (8 pix):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mjhinton/sets/72157594537596955/

Cal Thomas Official Web Site – The President and the Republicans 

Still, it is hard to disagree with what the president said in his opening remarks to the Republicans: “I don’t believe that the American people want us to focus on our job security. They want us to focus on their job security. I don’t think they want more gridlock. I don’t think they want more partisanship. I don’t think they want more obstruction. They didn’t send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political steel-cage match to see who comes out alive. … They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done, and to solve the problems that they’re grappling with every single day.”

A real debate about who is best equipped to solve those problems (and what created them) is what the country needs. The public wants to hear competing ideas discussed in a civil, if spirited, way. We are fellow citizens, after all, not each other’s enemies. There are forces that wish to destroy us. We shouldn’t help them by destroying ourselves with partisan bickering that does not serve the interests of the country.

President Obama promised to continue the public dialogue. He should. It’s good for him, for the Republicans and for the country.

Cal Thomas Official Web Site – The President and the Republicans

Oh, but let’s rewind to the beginning of that same kiss-and-make-up column:

Cal Thomas Official Web Site – The President and the Republicans 

“I am not an ideologue,” the president claimed, but of course he is. Dictionary.com defines “ideologue” as “a person who zealously advocates an ideology.” President Obama is a self-described “progressive.” A progressive is a throwback to the early 20th century. Progressives believe in an intellectual hierarchy that gets to decide what is best for the “uninformed” masses. They use government to impose their worldview on others. Progressives generally seek ways around the Constitution and its philosophical foundation, the Declaration of Independence, because they see these documents as impediments to their objectives. Note Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s comment to the press about comprehensive health insurance reform: “We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, we will parachute in.” Damn the Constitution; damn the people. That’s the attitude of progressives.

Progressives use the tax code to enforce their utilitarian view of the world. They believe that if I make more money than others, I “owe” the others.

Cal Thomas Official Web Site – The President and the Republicans

So, we are “fellow citizens, not enemies” but Progressives (Liberal-Socialist-Communist-Fascists) damn the Constitution and the People. Thanks for that olive branch, Cal. Asshole.

- – - – -

Think Progress » ABC Panelists Criticize Ailes’ Evasion Of Why Fox News Cut Away From Obama-House GOP Conversation 

As ThinkProgress reported last week, Fox News was the only major cable news network to not show the entirety of President Obama’s conversation with House Republicans at their annual retreat. Fox cut away from the event 20 minutes early and instead began attacking the President for “lecturing” to the lawmakers.

Yesterday on ABC’s This Week, Arianna Huffington challenged Fox News President Roger Ailes about this decision:

HUFFINGTON: Roger, you clearly are in ratings, but if you are in ratings, can you explain to me why FOX went away from the meeting the president was having in — why did you go away, 20 minutes before the end?

AILES: Because we’re the most trusted name in news.

Guest host Barbara Walters cut off the conversation though, since the show was over. However, discussion on the topic then continued in the green room, even though Ailes wasn’t present. Both Huffington and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman criticized the network for its hypocrisy:

HUFFINGTON: Their framing of the President is that he’s radical, that he’s taking us down a dark, fascist or Bolshevik future — depending on the day. And there he was, rational, charming, and in full command of his facts. So the narrative fell apart and so the cameras stopped showing what was happening.

KRUGMAN: Yeah, I mean it’s — I thought it was actually quite funny except it has real consequences. There you have Roger Ailes, with this powerful, popular news network, whining about how the media are unfair to Republicans. I mean, he is a powerful person in the media — and of course, you know, “Fair and Balanced” is truly Orwellian and we know that. So it’s clear that Fox — I felt like yelling to him, “you can’t handle the truth,” because that was what was actually happening on the Fox coverage.

Think Progress » ABC Panelists Criticize Ailes’ Evasion Of Why Fox News Cut Away From Obama-House GOP Conversation

Standing outside the car, I was trying to gather a mess of colorful strings and rags (parachute? hammock?). Michal Patten walked up and said something. I woke up.

[*] Surreal seems more apropos of a dream in which I discuss my dreams – possibly with a dead man.

Think Progress » Will Scott Brown Stick By Birther Candidate Who Compared Obama To Osama Bin Laden? 

With Scott Brown’s victory in the special Senate election in Massachusetts on Tuesday energizing conservatives in the state, the Boston Globe reports that “several Tea Party activists are now considering candidacies.” Yesterday, Brown endorsed Boxford Republican Bill Hudak’s campaign against Rep. John Tierney (D-MA).

But Brown’s first endorsement might backfire. As Northeastern University journalism professor Dan Kennedy notes, Hudak is a birther who once compared President Obama to Osama bin Laden:

Down the road at 165 Herrick Road, William and Angela Hudak have more of the same anti-Obama signs lined along the front of their property. One large, roughly 6-foot-by-4-foot sign stands back from the road, up against their house, with words – such as socialist, Marxist, and lazy – surrounding the same picture of Obama dressed as Osama Bin Laden. [...]

Hudak asserts that Obama was not born in the United States but in Kenya, according to affidavits that he made available to the Tri-Town Transcript. He said that Obama has ties to the Muslim faith through an extremist cousin that is from Kenya.

“There is a lot more going on here than anyone knows,” Hudak said.

Brown has already been criticized for inching towards the birther fringe for speculating in 2008 that then-candidate Obama was born out of wedlock. Brown refused to apologize for his speculation when asked about it by ThinkProgress last week.

In an interview with the Gloucester Daily Times, Hudak said that he and Brown were “very like-minded.” With Hudak’s extreme views exposed, will Brown stand by his endorsement of this birther, whom he claims will help “bring the voice of the people [to] Washington?”

– DJ Carella

Think Progress » Will Scott Brown Stick By Birther Candidate Who Compared Obama To Osama Bin Laden?

Update 1/22/10: This isn’t the worst example of Republican revisionism (or lying, if you prefer). That would be Rudy Giuliani claiming there were no terrorist attacks under Duh-duh-duhbya’s reign of terror. Yeah, right.

Think Progress » Brown-endorsee Hudak now claims that he’s not a birther.

Yesterday, ThinkProgress noted that Senator-elect Scott Brown (R-MA) had endorsed a Republican congressional candidate, Bill Hudak, who told a newspaper in 2008 that President Obama “was not born in the United States but in Kenya.” Brown’s staff tried to distance him from Hudak yesterday by saying that Brown didn’t approve the endorsement “press release before its release or the quote that was attributed to Scott.” But in an interview with the Gloucester Daily Times today, Hudak said that he and Brown “are really close” and that “there’s no question” that Brown gave him “his endorsement.” Hudak also denied that he was ever a birther:

Regarding the November 2008 article, Hudak said he does believe the president is a U.S. citizen.

“There’s no basis that I’ve been able to find” that calls Obama’s citizenship into question, he said. “No matter what people think, he is the president of the United States. You don’t get to that level without being fully vetted.”

Think Progress » Brown-endorsee Hudak now claims that he’s not a birther.

Think Progress » Brown victory party featured flag calling for a ‘second’ revolution, tea party-inspired civil war. 

McQueen, a tea party organizer, has repeatedly used tea party websites to call for a revolution. In one of his posts, he explains that the country would be better served by splitting states between Democratic and Republican:

We are now as divided as America was in the 1860s. When two people find they can no longer communicate, while living under the same roof, they often split apart and go there seperate ways. So what if . . . we took the United States and just split it in half . . . 24 states become The United States of the Democrats and 24 states become The United States of the Republicans (including Ron Paul supporters and Libertarians etc . . .). California and New York can be split in half and go the the side they choose.

Think Progress » Brown victory party featured flag calling for a ‘second’ revolution, tea party-inspired civil war.

And here’s a new basketball league for the Confederate States of Republicans:

Think Progress » New basketball league open to whites only, to get away from the ‘street-ball’ played by ‘people of color.’ 

A new professional basketball league called the All-American Basketball Alliance (AABA) sent out a press release on Sunday saying that it intends to start its inaugural season in June, with teams in 12 U.S. cities. However, the AABA is different from other sports leagues because only players who are “natural born United States citizens with both parents of Caucasian race are eligible to play in the league.” AABA commissioner Don “Moose” Lewis insists that he’s not racist, but he just wants to get away from the “street-ball” played by “people of color” and back to “fundamental basketball.” Lewis cited the recent incidents of bad behavior by NBA players, implying that such actions would never happen with white players:

“There’s nothing hatred about what we’re doing,” he said. “I don’t hate anyone of color. But people of white, American-born citizens are in the minority now. Here’s a league for white players to play fundamental basketball, which they like.” [...]

Think Progress » New basketball league open to whites only, to get away from the ‘street-ball’ played by ‘people of color.’

And if the Mad Hatters haven’t taken to the streets to prevent fall elections from taking place, then, maybe, there still room for hope:

Think Progress » After Brown’s Win, Steele Still Pessimistic About GOP’s Chances To Win House And Senate Majorities In 2010 

Despite the backlash from his colleagues on the Hill, and in the wake of Scott Brown’s (R-MA) victory in the Massachusetts, Steele still proclaims pessimism about the GOP’s chances in 2010. “You just can’t stop and think, ‘well OK now we’ll win in Maryland, we’ll win Delaware and we’ll win everywhere in the country because we won in Massachusetts.’ Every place is different,” he told a local Maryland radio show today. And on ABC this morning, Steele again said the GOP probably won’t win back the House and Senate:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Scott Brown wins in Massachusetts. Does this mean that the Republicans are going to take the House and Senate in November?

STEELE: Oh, I think we are very well on our way at this pace to certainly narrow the margin in the United States Senate as we will in the House and we’ll see how the rest of it plans out.

Think Progress » After Brown’s Win, Steele Still Pessimistic About GOP’s Chances To Win House And Senate Majorities In 2010

Of course, Steele isn’t eligible to play in the AABA, so maybe he no longer speaks for the Grand Old White People’s Party.

Let’s hear it for the good people of Massachusetts, who have near-universal health care and same-sex marriage: Thanks for denying that to the rest of us, MA! That tumbling sound may be Ted Kennedy or the Founding Fathers in response to the Mad Hatters. Let’s hope this little bit of extra rope is all it takes for the Radical Wrong to hang themselves before the Fall.

You think “it’s the economy, stupid”? Then how in the hell can anyone vote for a Republican? From Hoover to Raygun to Duhbya, the Republicans are for the rich getting richer and corporations getting freer. “A rising tide lifts all yachts.” — Warren Buffett. And all it takes to make galley slaves of the rest of us is the mistaken belief that anyone can become rich / win the lottery / win American Idol / become President (Duhbya, Palin).

[I'm reprinting the following from last fall.]
– - – - -

Enjoy yourselves, my dear conservative friends. Yes, you were victorious in one race on Tuesday. Savor. But, please, mind the crowing and gloating – it underscores how desperate you are for any positive sign.

Read the info at the following link, which includes more than one progressive victory [last fall], as well, while missing the progressive sweep in Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Think Progress » ThinkFast: November 4, 2009

Remember, even in yesterday’s races, Republicans were tearing at each other for this bone. The movement to exterminate the RINOs is alive and well. This is a shrinking, hardening, increasingly ugly “party” not likely to court anyone the least bit open-minded. Harsh? Read the philosopher king of conservatives, calcified Cal Thomas.

Cal Thomas 

The Left has put aside the original Constitution in favor of a "living document" that they believe allows them to do whatever they want and demand more tax dollars with which to do it.

Can they be stopped? …

Lawyers are busy writing language only they can understand which seeks to circumvent the intentions of the Founders. But it will be difficult to circumvent the last four words of the Tenth Amendment, which state unambiguously where ultimate power lies: "…or to the people."

Americans who believe their government should not be a giant ATM, dispensing money and benefits to people who have not earned them, and who want their country returned to its founding principles, must now exercise that power before it is taken from them. The Tenth Amendment is one place to begin. The streets are another. [mjh: Don’t forget your guns and hateful signs!] It worked for the Left.

Cal Thomas

Give me your paranoid, your loony. The nation isn’t united by the Constitution – according to Cal – instead, the majority hates the Constitution and will destroy the stalwart True Believers, who must take to the streets and water the Tree of Liberty. (No, no, don’t pee on it!)

We took a hike with friends on New Year’s Day in Elena Gallegos, a park in the foothills of the Sandia Mountains (Albuquerque, New Mexico). The trails were slushy. It was another beautiful, sunny day in New Mexico.

12/11/08 2am

[first published 13 months ago]

To: Rush Limbaugh
From: Roger Ebert
You should be horse-whipped for the insult you have paid to the highest office of our nation.
Having followed President Obama’s suggestion and donated money to the Red Cross for relief in Haiti, I was offended to hear you suggest the President might be a thief capable of stealing money intended for the earthquake victims. …

Tens of thousands are believed still alive beneath the rubble. You twisted their suffering into an opportunity to demean the character of the President of the United States.

You have a sizable listening audience. You apparently know how to please them. Anybody given a $400 million contract must know what he is doing.
That’s what offends me. You know exactly what you’re doing.

A Letter to Rush Limbaugh :: rogerebert.com :: Opinion

Your Pet May Predict Your Personality 

The 44-question survey delved into the five dimensions of personality thought to encompass the spectrum of personality types:

• Conscientiousness. Common behaviors include self-discipline, sense of duty, and a tendency toward planned vs. spontaneous behavior. 
• Extraversion. Tendency toward being gregarious, enthusiastic, positive, and energetic. 
• Agreeableness. Includes attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness, affection, and sociability. 
• Openness. Includes traits such as appreciation for the arts, curiosity, creativity, and nontraditional thinking and behavior. 
• Neuroticism. Includes characteristics such as being easily stressed, anxious, or easily worried.

"In terms of personalities I would say Woody Allen is at one end of this spectrum and the "Dude" from the Big Lebowski is at the other," Gosling says.

Forty-six percent of those who took the survey identified themselves as dog people, while 12% said they were cat people. Twenty-eight percent said they were both and 15% said they were neither.

Cat People vs. Dog People

According to the findings, self-identified dog people were 15% more extroverted, 13% more agreeable, and 11% more conscientious than cat people.

Cat people were about 12% more neurotic and 11% more open than dog people.

"These are not huge differences," Gosling says. "There are certainly many, many cat people who are extroverts and many, many dog people who aren’t."

Your Pet May Predict Your Personality

Puh-lease. THE five dimensions of personality? I used to joke that “multiple personalities” were classified as a disorder by people who didn’t have one. I’ve always disliked the need people in social sciences feel to pretend they are physicists or mathematicians working with laws and certainties. Come on: 5 dimensions?

For the sake of argument, let’s pretend that 6 billion people fit into 5 boxes – or one box with 5 corners. Is everyone ready to sign-off on these five? Hell, there’s only one negative attribute in the bunch. I wish only one in five people exhibited a negative dimension 20% of the time.

Look at the list again. How is it ordered? Is the “spectrum of personality types” – I like the suggestion that maybe personalities are analog, not digital, but I bet the proponents don’t believe in gradations – between Neuroticism (Woody Allen) to Conscientiousness – not the Dude, man. Does the Dude represent Extraversion or Agreeableness or Openness. Try to arrange those 5 traits in a spectrum. (OK, now I’m playing physicist.)

What about all these very precise – not the same as accurate – percentages? Doesn’t 13% sound more scientific than “a little more than one in ten”? Yeah, precise numbers are the “big boy pants” of the social sciences. Try to reach any conclusion based on the numbers presented.

I won’t blame Gosling for the intellectual sloppiness of the writer and/or editors in using the word “predict” when they mean reveal or indicate. In the end, I’m most irritated by this article and study ignoring one underlying question: Are you drawn to things/people/animals that are like you or to things/people/animals that are unlike you?

If you are open, aren’t you open to a pet that says nothing about your personality? Likewise, if you are agreeable? What’s more neurotic than having a pet that contradicts the predictive powers of one’s pet? Perhaps, only the conscientious take pains to find the right predictive pet.

I’ve had 3 dogs and numerous cats (to which I am allergic – what does that say about my personality, that I choose to live with irritation?). And, given the “spectrum” (hear the sneer) above, by process of elimination, I am neurotic.

Remember: There are 3 kinds of people – those who are good with math and those who are not. Or, there are two kinds of people – those who think there are two kinds of people and those who don’t.