-
-
A Cotton Wool Christmas
-
It wasn’t the Grinch who stole Christmas; it was Northern Europe.
As a child born and raised in Central Africa, I was very aware of this confiscation. It outraged my mother, who was also born and raised in Africa.
We lived in British colony of Southern Rhodesia; and we were dominated by British immigrants who insisted on “dreaming of a white Christmas.” Well, tough luck.
As my mother liked to point out, not one more flake of snow fell in Central Africa than fell in the Holy Land, where Jesus Christ was born.
But we were — indigenous Africans and settlers alike — in the thrall of snow imperialism.
Being so close to the equator, snowfall was a meteorological impossibility. So those under the European cultural thumb decorated everything in sight with cotton wool. We could only dream of a cotton-wool
Christmas.Unlike my mother, my father felt no pressure from the European and North American inauthentic portrayal of Christmas as a white, cold affair. He didn't mind that the retailers edged their windows in cotton wool or that the Anglican Church went along with the Northern Hemisphere’s implication that Joseph and Mary struggled through the snow to get to the manger in
Bethlehem.The one thing my parents agreed upon was that Christmas began on December 24 and lasted for the traditional 12 days.
Not only was no snow substitute allowed in our house, but also no commercially produced ornaments; flowers and greenery were fine. As a result the whole family would go to a marshy area, known as a vlei, on Christmas Eve and cut great quantities of ferns which would be strung along the picture rails.
Decorations could be added to the green frieze, but only if we made them out of painted paper. Mostly, we stuck fresh flowers in it. It was a green Christmas.
When it came to food, my mother relented completely and we made English Christmas pudding (boiled for hours in muslin), fruit cake and pies made with mincemeat (an all-fruit mixture).
We weren't a drinking family, but a bottle of sweet sherry appeared at Christmas. My mother — who otherwise drank only tea and sometimes coffee (no water, milk, alcohol or sodas) — would take, ostentatiously, a very small glass of sherry. Having downed this half-ounce or so of fortified wine, she'd announce that she wasn't responsible for her actions, that she could feel her legs getting heavy and that she was drunk.
My brother and I watched Christmas after Christmas to see if there was any sign that there had been a physiological or psychological change in Mamma,
but none was recorded.We then ate a very English meal and listened to very English Christmas carols, like “The Holly and the Ivy” and “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen.” My mother, who hadn’t signed her separate peace treaty with Germany, wasn’t too keen on “Silent Night.”
It wasn't until I had turned 20 and was working in London at United Press International that I saw real snow. Sorry, Mamma, it beats cotton wool and it makes for a splendid Christmas, even if things were a bit different in Royal David’s City two millennia ago.
Now for some wassail. – For the Hearst-New York Times Syndicate
- 2 responses
-
-
-
Time for Congress to Belly Up
-
At Christmas, vintners, distillers, and brewers dance a discreet jig. They know that maiden aunts who drink only Communion wine all year will get red-faced on Cabernet Sauvignon this time of year. Accountants will lose count of their sips of eggnog. Lawyers will surrender to the siren song of gin descending on ice. O holy night!
The English song claims that a "little bit of what you like does you good." Those words encapsulate the abandon and jollity of the secular Christmas.
But there is a terrible exception: Congress. Democrats and Republicans are at each other's throats like pit bulls, releasing their jaws only to get a better grip.
If ever there was a need for an intervention by John Barleycorn, it is now.
Republicans and Democrats need to meet each other in what Australians call the raising of the glass. A laugh, a nudge, a wink, an off-color remark, and the nation's legislators may again be able to take care of the nation's business.
Only 30 or 40 years ago, Congress was more like the House of Commons in London, the Dail in Ireland, and the Palace of Deputies in Paris: It was awash in what Thomas Jefferson called "ardent spirits" – and bipartisanship.
Congress contained some unlikely party animals. One committee chairman, the epitome of severity by day, would at 6 p.m. break out a bottle of Scotch whisky. Another legislator revered for his sagacity would have a tray of drinks served by his mistress at 11 a.m. Journalists would exchange information on which offices to hang around for better stories after the corks had popped.
Those were also days when one did not necessarily know a particular member's party or voting record. In newsrooms, journalists would sing out, "What party is so-and-so from California?" Apparently, those who had enjoyed a noggin the night before found it easier to make accommodation by day.
How, then, did the greatest deliberative body ever conceived dry out, abandon conviviality and good sense, and become the hissing reptile house we know?
If you want, you can blame Newt Gingrich and the 1994 GOP revolution, after which calls of "Cheers!" gave way to vindictive leaks to journalists about the after-hours activities of one's colleagues.
There also was a journalistic revolution. After Watergate, reporters began to cover the foibles as well as the purposes of politicians. Blind eyes weren't turned to romancers or drinkers. Cameras on the floor scared Congress into sobriety. The irony is that journalists, known for their intemperance, helped drive the political class to abstinence.
Even so, our democracy is in fearful shape, so try and get a congressman to have a little Christmas cheer. Not enough, mind you, to get Nancy Pelosi dancing on a table or John Boehner embracing her. We don't want Mitch McConnell crying in his beer, and we are stuck with Harry Reid the way he is. He's a Mormon.
Merry Christmas to all. — For the Hearst-New York Times Syndicate
- one response
-
-
-
Newt Gingrich Then and Now
-
As Newt Gingrich rises in the polls, so do eyebrows in Washington.
A lot of people in Washington — lobbyists, political groupies and
journalists — know Newt. Some have known him since he first came to
Washington in 1979 as a young congressman from Georgia.That was back before the name had a distinctive persona associated with
it. Before, too, some of his outlandish statements on foreign policy,
himself and anyone who doesn't agree with him. Before, also, his own
outlandish personal conduct during the impeachment of President Bill
Clinton, made him a study in hypocrisy.When I was publishing the trade and policy journal Defense Week, Gingrich
gave a speech at the publication's annual conference. He projected the
image of a enthusiastic, idealist congressman who wanted to do the best
for the defense of the nation.Afterward, I walked him to his car and he asked me to come up to Capitol
Hill and help him with his writing. I didn't think I could help him and,
as
a journalist, I didn't think that would be a good idea. But I did tell him
that I was sure that he probably wrote well because he spoke well. That is
a truism that I stand by.Clearly, Gingrich had plans for himself and he had seen the importance of
projecting his ideas through good or at least capable writing.It wasn't until Gingrich began what has been called the “bomb throwing” in
Congress, the rise that would lead him to the House speaker's chair and
his chaotic term there that we became aware of the three dominant forces
that make Newt Newt.Also why people have been watching Newt's poll numbers with apprehension.
Gingrich is known for his ideas (a moveable feast), his passion (for
whatever he is involved in or whomever he is supporting) and his love of
history (as his personal possession).When Gingrich assumed the speakership, Gingrich the revolutionary became
Gingrich the post-revolutionary autocrat.He conducted himself as though he were not speaker but prime minister.
Former supporters were appalled. And many congressmen, including Joe
Scarborough, turned permanently against him.The blatant way Gingrich encouraged his talk-radio supporters with special
accommodations in the House upset the press corps. He acted in ways that
even the most world-weary scribes were appalled by. Gingrich was good copy
and bad news all at the same time.One legacy is the pervasive lack of civility in Congress.
In the end, after being censored for ethics violations by the House and
the kind of frenetic managerial incompetence Gingrich was known for, even
Republicans had had enough and Gingrich fell in a palace coup – the way
prime ministers fall in Britain.Mark Twain said if you tell people you are an early riser, you can sleep
'til noon. Gingrich has worked out that if you tell people you are an
intellectual and an historian, you can cherry pick history to your own
purposes with no fear of serious contradiction.Gingrich the politician has found it useful to parlay his time teaching
history at West Georgia College into a treasure trove of half-truths and
self-likenesses that have kept the less-educated enthralled with the
self-confessed great man.In fact Gingrich, who does have a lot of ideas and who has produced more
than 20 books, including volumes of historical fiction, is obsessed with
history in as much as he sees himself as an historical figure: a change
agent. He has made clear that he — this fairground barker of a politician –
combs history for figures he can find something of himself in.I once told Gingrich that his hair, which was very spiky at the time,
was a metaphor for his ideas – going off in all directions. I'm pretty
sure he wanted to be compared to some figure of English history –
Cromwell, Pitt, Disraeli or, the real compliment, Churchill. He has said
that he is a cross between Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.My experience with Thatcher is that she didn't like pretentious people.
She would have snorted, I think.Recently, Gingrich boasted that he commanded $60,000 as a public speaker.
Really? I didn't pay him anything, but that was when he was new and humble.
— For the Hearst-New York Times Syndicate
- no responses
-
-
-
Bisengaliyev: The Galloping Violinist
-
Marat Bisengaliyev and the Kazakh National Philharmonic Orchestra's performance on Monday at the Kennedy Center's Terrace Theater was as thrilling as a horse race in the steppes. The virtuoso violinist-conductor chose pieces that were technically demanding, but he and 21 of the orchestra's string players galloped expertly through them.Bisengaliyev opened the program with Edward Elgar's “Salut d'Amour.” He told the audience that the British composer, who was also a violinist, “is my favorite composer.” And he played the work with all the romance of the composer's intent for it: an engagement gift.Two works by Almas Serkebayev, a Kazakh composer who now lives in America, “Kyu dlya Marata” and “Shalkyma,” nearly jolted listeners off their seats with their intensity. The orchestra's lissome, long-haired female violinists leaned into “Kyu dlya Marata,” like crack Kazakh riders hanging onto galloping horses manes. As Bisengaliyev played Serkebayev's “Shalkyma” with the orchestra, he twirled around the stage and tossed his head of black hair. It was music that required both technical and physical stamina of the players.Bisengaliyev matched his love of Elgar with his love of pizzicato. He chose a number of pieces, particularly Isaac Albeniz's “Asturias” and Leroy Anderson's “Fiddle, Fiddle,” with a finger-numbing amount of string plucking.For his encore, the violinist chose a “reconstructed” Elgar piece: a waltz that moved from a dreamy to dizzying tempo, and ended with a plucked string.
- no responses
-
-
-
We Are All in the Euro Zone in a Way
-
To paraphrase Leon Trotsky, you may not be interested in the euro but the
euro is interested in you.If the Europeans get it wrong and there is a cascade of defaults by
financially weak European countries, led by Greece and followed by Italy,
Spain and, maybe, Portugal, then a world financial crisis would result and
the euro might collapse.The epicenter of the crisis would be Europe; but every economy would be
shaken as currencies realigned, banks collapsed, and gold soared to even
higher and more unsustainable levels than today.If the euro collapses, so possibly would the European Union itself. That
would be a great historical regression, a reversal of a noble purpose. And
it would leave the continent vulnerable to the will of the strongest. In
this instance, Germany. No one thinks that is a good idea. Not even the
Germans.The European Union has one overriding purpose: peace in Europe. That was
the inspiration of its founders, who planned a customs arrangement in 1958
between six nations that had suffered two great wars and had a 2,000-year
history of internecine war. As the generation that had known war died out
and was replaced by generations that have known peace and prosperity, the
purposes of European integration became more clouded and more political.The committed Europeans wanted a form of European federation: a kind of
United States of Europe. But national interests prevailed and Europe has
been shaped instead by leaders who want a kind of United States-lite: an
affiliation of nations rather than a true union.Lacking a central political voice, Europe slipped into a rancorous family
arrangement where every nation – now 27 of them – is an in-law. Disparate
family members bound together in self-interest.This has resulted in dysfunction at many levels and created the impression
– emphasized by British Conservatives and American right-wingers — that
the whole enterprise has failed. In reality, there is more success than
failure.The so-called democratic deficit is the most glaring weakness. European
national legislatures are still where law is made, not in the European
Parliament, which has no power and is a sort of giant talk show – Sunday
morning talk show writ large.Instead, the power has been concentrated in the European Commission. Based
in Brussels, this is where Europe is governed by bureaucrats through
licensing and regulation. The commissioners reap the ire of politicians
throughout Europe and reflexively in Britain.The commission makes rules about everything and tries, so much as it can,
to “harmonize” products and labels. But French wine producers, Italian
pasta makers do not wish to be “harmonized,” even though they appreciate
the ease of intra-European trading, road subsidies and farm- support
prices.Poles appreciate the freedom of labor to move to more prosperous countries
and the workers in those countries resent the immigrants. Individuals,
particularly small business operators, object to health and safety
standards coming out of Brussels. But they don’t hesitate to run to the
European Court in Luxembourg if they feel they are not being treated right
by their own government. Indeed, the court is one of Europe’s successes.The rest of the world has been able to find a common voice in the European
Union, instead of 27 separate voices. The union has worked despite its
flaws.The common currency, the euro, is something else. It was wished into being
by strong, idealistic forces. Seventeen nations are in the currency union
and 17 finance ministers are not sleeping well.It was always known that the euro had one great weakness: no regional
flexibility. Overheated countries could not cool off by allowing their
currency to rise and weak ones could not boost their exports by devaluing
the currency. One size fit all, badly. Many economists warned of this
inherent weakness when the euro was introduced in 1999.But the European architects so wanted the building block of a currency
that they ignored the problem and forged ahead. It also had to be known
that certain countries were cooking the books, notably Greece, to get into
the euro.So why not disband the euro? How? If the euro is withdrawn, how to do that
without true chaos? Suppose Greece, Italy and Spain try to return to the
drachma, the lira and the peso? Who would convert their euros to drachma
or lira or pesos? Who would trade a known currency for a fledgling one? If
the euro were to be withdrawn altogether who would not want German marks
over Irish pounds?All the options for Europe besides riding out the crisis with, ironically,
lashings of German support, look catastrophic for Europe and nearly as
disastrous for us. We caused a global tremor with the housing bubble, but
the euro can cause the full earthquake. – For the Hearst-New York Times Syndicate - no responses
-
The European Dilemma: Austerity or Growth
May 14th, 2012
Guests: Darren Gersh, PBS's "Nightly Business Report"; Laure Mandeville, Le Figaro; Michael Fauntroy, George Mason University
Radio’s impact in Washington and the nation
May 7th, 2012
Guests: Tim Farley, Host and Program Director, Sirius XM Radio’s POTUS Channel 124
Elections here and abroad; crises in Syria and Sudan
April 30th, 2012
Guests: Arnaud de Borchgrave, CSIS; Ed O'Keefe, The Washington Post; and Christopher Chambers, Georgetown University
Word and phrase origins in the U.S. presidency
April 23rd, 2012
Guests: Paul Dickson, author; Carl Cannon, RealClearPolitics.com
Political “wars” in the 2012 election, and real wars elsewhere
April 16th, 2012
Guests: Michael Fauntroy, George Mason University; Ed Kelley, The Washington Times; Chuck Lewis, Hearst Newspapers