The New Yorker just published a great set of “visual commentaries” on the Obama victory. All seven illustrations are worth checking out (Obama as Jackie Robinson! as Adam?), but as a die-hard New Dealer, I like this one most:
Leaving aside the cigarette holder, since Obama stopped smoking a few years ago, I think it’s apt. Obama would look good in a top hat.
So good. My favorites: Obama with the Sears above him, everyone watching McCain concede, the new First Family, BHO pointing.
I can’t say I’m much less elated now – 48 hours after Election Day – than I was then. I am, however, immersed in media related to what is now being called the Obama Administration.
II. Global reaction to Obama’s victory in the Times and on MPR.
III. A quote from a great piece in the Times from Robert Gibbs, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama, which sums up why I voted for BHO:
People went to the polls and elected Barack Obama because they believed the fact not only that he could do what he said, but that he would try to do what he said.
IV. A funny op-ed piece on the importance of having a Skinny Black Guy as president.
A lot of bigots woke up yesterday to the reality of our modern world. To them I say, just because you have a high metabolism, it doesn’t mean that you don’t have a fierce moral vision and the right ideas to fix this country. It just means that you don’t gain weight easily.
V. A great graphic from Patrick Moberg’s graphics blog:
(Via my friend Matt – who’s using his blog to put up audio from the Grant Park rally.)
And one on Palin: a schadenfreude-filled story on the infighting that weakened the GOP’s ticket.
It’s been a warm, overcast, humid day here – more late May than early November. Around two, the clouds thickened and cast a dusk-like pall over the campus. Around then, I clicked on some link somewhere and watched this incredible bit of an Obama speech last night. No lie: as the video culminated with the riveting call-and-response (around 4:30), the clouds parted and a golden beam of sunlight came right through my office window.
I love that this classic agony-of-defeat video has been edited for a higher purpose – getting out the damn vote. Get to the finish line!
The Internet does not lack for anti-Palin tunes, but this is an especially good one:
Thanks to Shannon for the tip to Friday Playdate.
I like the snow and the rain of autumn, but this ain’t bad, either:
I’ve struggled, lo these many years, with a serious issue comprising two interlocking problems:
1. The distinction between “compose” and “comprise” (which are not synonyms, no matter how those hacks at the New York Times use them) and
2. A mnemonic device for remembering that distinction.
Finally, Saturday, subconsciously inspired by multiple readings of this usage post and certain child-induced nocturnal stressors, I woke up in the middle of the night with what appears to be (2), thus perhaps dissolving (1) with a laser-like beam of certitude. Forthwith:
The synonyms “comprise” and “contain” both contain the letter “i” whereas the synonyms “compose” and “make up” do not.
I know; I know. It’s no “every good boy deserves fudge” or even a “Roy G. Biv.” But it works for me, and maybe it’ll work for you. Now, where’d I put that mnemonic for the amendments to the Constitution?
This clip from Talking Points Memo is almost unbelievable. I’d suspect CGI, if the reporter’s questions weren’t so authentically wingnutular. It’s amazing that Biden can sit through this kind of crap.
1. Name the person who, when asked in 2000, “Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?” responded, “Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.”
a. Karl Marx
b. Eugene Debs
c. Leon Trotsky
d. John McCain
2. Name the person who, in summer 2008, defended her home region’s unique wealth-spreading mechanism by saying, “We’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively [we who] own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” [sic]
a. Karlotta Marx
b. Eugenia Debs
c. Leonora Trotsky
d. Sarah Palin
I love this little bit of Tim Krabbé’s fantastic bike-racing novella, The Rider: Absurdist advice is the best kind of advice.
(Free trivia: Krabbé and I share a birthdate, thirty years apart.)
From electoral-vote.com this morning, a little eye-opener:
“RNC Paid for $150,000 for Palin’s Clothes”
Politico went through the financial report the RNC just filed with the FEC and discovered that the Republican National Committee has spent $150,000 for clothes and accessories for Sarah Palin since she was tapped for the VP slot in late August. One shopping trip to Neiman Marcus cost them $75,062.63, for example. They also spent over $4700 on her hair and makeup. Remember how the Republicans howled at John Edwards $400 haircut (which included a house call by the barber)? Google for: Edwards “$400 haircut” and you’ll get 27,000 hits. That was major news for a week. That aside, a far more damaging effect of this revelation is that Palin keeps saying she is just an ordinary small-town hockey mom. It is likely that if Joe-the-plumber’s wife were to rack up $150,000 in clothing expenses in a single month, Joe might ask how she was planning to pay the credit card bill since the median annual salary for plumbers is $37,514. Palin is already being ridiculed all over the place, and this provides more fodder for the comics.
