There is a lot of news today, so this will be an extra long post.
CNN:
North Korea fired three ballistic missiles Monday morning, according to South Korea's military.
The missiles were fired from areas around Hwangju county, in North Hwanghae province, towards the Sea of Japan, South Korea's military said in a statement.
Officials said the launch was believed to be of mid-range Rodong missiles, and flew about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) "without giving any prior navigational warning."
...In a statement, the US said it "strongly condemns" the multiple launches, which came at a potentially embarrassing time for North Korea's only real ally, China, which is currently hosting the G20 summit in Hangzhou.North Korea is like a spoiled child which occasionally acts up when it wants attention. Surprisingly, this shot across the bow was aimed at China, not the U.S.:
The launches also came hours after Chinese President Xi Jinping told his South Korean counterpart at the G20 that Beijing opposes the deployment of the United States' THAAD missile defense system to South Korea.
"Mishandling the issue is not conducive to strategic stability in the region and could intensify disputes," Xi was quoted as telling Park Geun-hye, according to a report from China's official Xinhua News Agency.
The stated purpose of the THAAD system is to defend South Korea from missile attack from the North, but Beijing views it as an attempt to shift the regional power balance in favor of US allies.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has previously said the deployment of the anti-missile system could jeopardize "China's legitimate national security interests."Having North Korea show exactly why the THAAD system is needed just as China throws out a diplomatic objection to it is hugely embarrassing to China.
"THAAD has a range that could hit weapons in China," said Yvonne Chiu, an expert on military policy and diplomacy at Hong Kong University.
She added that China was understandably concerned "about having a US made, US run missile system in its backyard."
Don't be surprised when the day comes where millions of Chinese troops flood into North Korea and remove the government. While China has never really shown a tendency to imperialism, even they have their limits. Ironically, the North Koreans would probably be better off under China's rule than their own.
Back in domestic politics...
New York Times:
The only reason this issue is even mentioned is because Hillary Clinton's public appearances have been far and few between:
[Donald] Trump has pointed to [Hillary] Clinton’s noticeably scant schedule of campaign events this summer to suggest she has been hiding from the public. But Mrs. Clinton has been more than accessible to those who reside in some of the country’s most moneyed enclaves and are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to see her. In the last two weeks of August, Mrs. Clinton raked in roughly $50 million at 22 fund-raising events, averaging around $150,000 an hour, according to a New York Times tally.
And while Mrs. Clinton has faced criticism for her failure to hold a news conference for months, she has fielded hundreds of questions from the ultrarich in places like the Hamptons, Martha’s Vineyard, Beverly Hills and Silicon Valley.But there is more to it than just gathering campaign contributions:
Mrs. Clinton’s aides have gone to great lengths to project an image of her as down-to-earth and attuned to the challenges of what she likes to call “the struggling and the striving.” She began her campaign last year riding in a van to Iowa from New York and spent much of last summer hosting round-table discussions with a handful of what her campaign called “everyday Americans” in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Yet some of the closest relationships Mrs. Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have are with their longstanding contributors. If she feels most at ease around millionaires, within the gilded bubble, it is in part because they are some of her most intimate friends.It was easier for her to deal with "everyday Americans (read: Democrats) last year, than to deal with "everyday Americans" (read: ALL Americans) this year. Now it is easier for her to chum around with her buds (read: wealthy Americans). For example:
At a private fund-raiser Tuesday night at a waterfront Hamptons estate, Hillary Clinton danced alongside Jimmy Buffett, Jon Bon Jovi and Paul McCartney, and joined in a singalong finale to “Hey Jude.”
“I stand between you and the apocalypse,” a confident Mrs. Clinton declared to laughs, exhibiting a flash of self-awareness and humor to a crowd that included Calvin Klein and Harvey Weinstein and for whom the prospect of a Donald J. Trump presidency is dire.See? Hillary is just like everyone else. Haven't you all done this at one time or another? Oh wait, maybe in your dreams...
Hillary runs in a different class than most Americans:
To businessmen who complain to Mrs. Clinton that President Obama has been unfriendly to their interests, she says she would approach business leaders more like Mr. Clinton did during his administration, which was widely considered amicable to the private sector.
When financiers complain about the regulations implemented by the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul, Mrs. Clinton reaffirms her support for strong Wall Street regulation, but adds that she is open to listening to anyone’s ideas and at times notes that she represented the banking industry as a senator.
The wealthy contributors who host Mrs. Clinton often complain about her opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and express concerns that Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont pushed her to the left on trade and other issues. Mrs. Clinton reminds them she has both opposed and supported trade deals in the past.
And, as she noted at an event last month on Cape Cod in Massachusetts, Mrs. Clinton points out that she worked cooperatively with Republicans when she served in the Senate and would do so as president.Notice how what she says in public isn't what she says in private? Admittedly, many politicians suffer from this condition. But that is the point: Hillary is just another politician, representing the wealthy.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the wealthy. But a president has to represent all of America, not just the well-heeled. Successful presidents like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton knew how to approach any crowd, and were happy to do it (or at least seemed that way). Our last two presidents, Bush and Obama, always seemed to represent the wealthy more than "everyday Americans". Just look at the way they solved the financial collapse: First, they saved Wall Street. Other than extended welfare benefits and "cash for clunkers", everyday Americans didn't see most of the trillions of dollars pumped out by the federal government and the Federal Reserve.
I just don't think we need another president who is "of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich". We have had enough of that the last 16 years.
Speaking of rich presidential candidates...
Gateway Pundit:
The headline says it all.
So while wealthy Hillary is courting the rich, wealthy Donald is courting a black church in Detroit. Say what you will about Donald, at least he is trying to reach the "everyday Americans", and not just people who can write large checks.
Back to Hillary...
Page Six:
Admittedly, the following is secondhand rumor from a nameless source, so take it for what it's worth:
Dr. Drew Pinsky is so afraid of Hillary Clinton and her supporters, he won’t blame them for the cancellation of his show on HLN, the sister channel of CNN.If true, it certainly explains why CNN has acted so favorably towards Hillary during this election. Actually, that fact tends to support this rumor more than the other way around.
“No, no, no. I just want them to go away!” he told one friend.
“Dr. Drew” was canceled eight days after Pinsky discussed Clinton’s health on a radio show, saying he was “gravely concerned not just about her health, but her health care.”
“CNN is so supportive of Clinton, network honchos acted like the Mafia when confronting Drew,” a source told me. “First, they demanded he retract his comments, but he wouldn’t.”
What followed was a series of nasty phone calls and e-mails. “It was downright scary and creepy,” a source close to Pinsky said.
Now on a semi-non-political topic...
Showbiz 411:
Mel Gibson’s “Hacksaw Ridge” has opened to solid and very good reviews at the Venice Film Festival.
But at today’s packed press conference, not a single person asked Gibson about his ten years of scandals. “Hacksaw Ridge” is set in World War II, and has a pacifist for a hero. Andrew Garfield, who is Jewish, is the star of the movie and gets Oscar like plaudits. But no one in the press conference asked Mel or Garfield about Gibson’s famous 2006 statements when he was pulled for drunk driving in Malibu. Gibson told Jewish police officer Jame Mee: “F— the Jews. The Jews are responsible for starting all the wars in the world.”
This came on top of the news that Gibson had built and operates Holy Family Catholic church in Agoura Hills, California— now with a tax free foundation worth $70 million–that disavows Catholic church policy, is not part of any dioceses, and blames Jews for the death of Jesus Christ. Also, Gibson’s father, Hutton Gibson, is an avowed Holocaust denier.This is why I don't give too much ear to celebrity stories, unless the celebrity has something intelligent to say (which is rare). This is especially true for actors and musicians, who tend to be the dullest knives in the celebrity drawer.
Is Mel Gibson a racist? Probably. Did Frank Sinatra have mafia connections? Probably. Did Marilyn Monroe sleep with JFK and RFK? Probably. Did Rob Lowe have sex with an underaged girl? Yes. Did Amy Winehouse die from alcohol abuse? Yes. Shall I go on?
The point is that celebrities tend to be a little screwed up, when they aren't completely bonkers. Yet they still manage to provide us with art. Does the person behind the art remove our enjoyment of the art? For me, it doesn't.
The key is the suspension of disbelief. When you watch The Road Warrior, would you spend the whole movie wondering about Mel Gibson's racism, or would you allow the movie to transport your mind to a dystopian future where his character is struggling to survive? If you are wondering about racism, you need to get a real life, because you clearly cannot appreciate art.
Admittedly, movies like The Passion of the Christ could make you wonder about Gibson's anti-semitism. However, the film is true to the Bible, which does arguably lay some blame on the Jews for Christ's death. Does this make the movie anti-semitic? I would argue no, because art must stand on its own. If it was an anti-semitic film, it could not stand. Even Christians would reject it, as any good Christian would have forgiven the Jews long ago. As Christ said, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Sorry Mel, but the definition of "neighbor" includes the Jews.
If art can stand on its own, then it doesn't matter what the artist thinks or does in private. How many times does a painting or song or movie or poem or book get a public interpretation which is different from what the artist intended? All the time. Great art is like a child: Sometimes it grows beyond what the parent(s) hoped it would be, or even grows in a different direction. We can always reject the art as flawed, but only after consideration. We owe the artist that much, especially an artist like Gibson who has given the world so much worthy art.
No comments:
Post a Comment