Sunday, January 22, 2006


West Wing and Commander in Chief

Both of these shows are lame attempts by Hollywood to demonstrate that Democrats and/or women are better presidents than Bush. Tonite WestWing is trying to show that the TV democrats do FEMA better than Bush's FEMA did New Orleans last summer. The other day, the Geena Davis = Hillarious stand-in was shown doing a great job standing up to N.Korea. Not that Hillarious' husband WeeWillie did that good of a job, there; he let Maddy Albright go over there and get cozy with KJI, and then let that whole issue slide while he focused on denying any boinking with Monica.

The whole point of Commander in Chief is to show that Hillarious will be a good, strong, “manly” type of president, who can handle anything that’s pitched her way. As long as Hillarious has time to work out a PC answer, she will certainly say the thing that is most likely to p..s off the least number of people. The pre-packaging of Hillarious is an interesting dance. She’s got to look tough, supportive of the military, strong against terrorism, strong on national defense and international policy, yet somehow anti-Bush at the same time.

The thing that drives the democrats crazy is that Bush has broken the mold. He says what he thinks and he sticks to it, regardless of the media’s howling and wailing, in spite of the showboating by bloated old-time democrats such as fat Teddy and Pelos!

Now tonite, West Wing is doing Hollywood’s trashing of nuclear power plants. In one scene one of the twits asks “why do they build these things so close to population centers?” The real question is why haven’t we built more of these, everywhere? In 20 years, the US is going to be a third-rate nation, after losing the upcoming energy wars, because we are the only ones who haven’t continued to expand our nuclear power generating capacity. We haven’t built a new nuclear plant in ?? years, and none are in the pipeline. Since our political system involves pandering to the loudest contingent of potential voters, no politician has the balls to stand up and make the case for nuclear power. We will continue slogging along in the status quo, because it takes the least effort, and no one can be blamed that way. Meanwhile, Venezuela and Iran turn into hardline anti-US, anti-west, oil exporting OPEC giants; now Bolivia with all its gas is about to join them; who’s next?

Would anyone be surprised to learn that China and Russia are sitting behind the scenes watching, pulling a string or two, and laughing?


This afternoon, I uploaded Camilla’s marked up version of Bach’s excellent Prelude from Suite No. 1 in G Major for Unaccompanied Cello onto my cello webpage:

Then I posted the link on the Cello Heaven forum.

This morning I played two hours, easily working through the faimiliar Suzuki pieces. I noticed today, that I was getting rich, sonorous tones from the cello whenever I hit certain of the notes dead-on. The closer I got to the exact note, the more the cello hummed. I’d seen this before for a few notes, but today, it seemed to happen with more than half of the first position fingerings.

It was really Nice!

I read somewhere that celli improve with playing. The wood apparently “learns” and adapts to the sounds being produced. I like to believe that’s what is going on here. In any case, I really felt good playing today. I felt like I was approaching that “beautiful sound”. I need to focus on maintaining bowing rhythms. I’m trying to use the entire bow when possible for half notes, etc.

For a few minutes at the end of my session today, I tried the first few measures of Bach’s Prelude from Suite No. 1. I didn’t get very far, but for a moment or two, I actually did “hear” it.

Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home