It was Seven Years Ago Today...

We weren't digital at first, so the first digital photo I have of Amalia is actually of her a few months after she was born:

A lot has changed, since then, for instance, she has gone from eating chairs to cooking eggplant:

Happy Birthday, Amalia!

Oh, Pat, Oh, Pat.

The thing about Buchanan is that he is very right about some things, as he is here in this well-thought-out critique of the West's mishandling of the Russian situation. What mars this article, as it does nearly every one of Pat Buchanan's articles, is that he simply cannot keep his deep-seated hatred of Jews and Mexicans down. Now, he does, in fairness, keep his comments focused on specifics, and does not rant against "the Jews" or "the Mexicans", in fact, these examples are one where one could reasonably support his position.

However, this is Pat Buchanan, and one is surely unsurprised that an article about events in Europe, comparing the West's isolation of Mussolini and Italy with current Western policy towards Russia, would, of course, have to use as examples of evil-doing events in Mexico and Israel.

With that caveat (and I do not throw charges of hatemongering around lightly, but it is impossible to see Buchanan without puzzling over his two constant and bitter enemies, as most tragi-comically illustrated by his apologia a few years ago, when he denied anti-semitism and went on to blame a kabal of Jewish elitists for branding him as an anti-Semite. I, for one, deny his anti-semitism. He is not an anti-Semite, as he seems to have a fondness for some Semites, namely, Arabs. He is, however, an old-fashioned Jew hater, and ought to be recognized as such), I highly recommend this article.

Once again, we see the Bushies taking a look at the situation and taking the utterly wrong position on it.

It has been crazy, but fun these last few weeks.

As you have noticed, if you are the sort who still comes around here, I have not posted much this summer.

The usual: catering gigs, camping, spending some (not a lot) of time in the studio, etc.

Things are quieting down a little bit, though. So, perhaps some food stuff, some art stuff, not much on politics, since I am only slightly more anti-Obama than I am anti-McCain (McCain has to make a really good, appeal to the base pick for a running mate to make me endorse him).

On the topic of Art, I have an ugly space between our house and the neighbors'. It is devoid of sunlight, so plants will not do. It is visible only to the meter reader and us, when we feed the feral cat, so it is probably a fairly low priority. However, it might make a nice place to stick some outdoor sculpture.

As to food, the exciting thing is our tomato crop. Lots and lots and lots and lots. Red, juicy, ripe and ready for sauce.

We are eating pasta quite a bit. When the eggplant gets bigger, it will be time for a Keilholtz Gardens Ratatouille.

In the markets, I am still feasing on stone fruit: pluots, freestone peaches, nectarines, and I recommend that you do the same. I might even make a batch of bellinis. A little sweet for my taste in general, but who can resist pureed white peaches with prosecco (and a splash of grenadine for color)?

Ah, It is that Time Again.

Well, we are at the culmination of the every-four year hand-wringing festival, when various sorts try to out compassion each other with their reasons as to why the Olympics' host country is not worthy of the honor.

Frankly, once the games were hosted by Hitler, Brezhnev and the Mormons, how can anyone worry about sullying them at all? Anyway, the politics of the Olympics is a pretty dull topic, the stuff that Carters are made of. Why not hold the Olympics in China? Ah, yes, China has an evil government. True (although I find it hard to fault them in their handling of Tibet and the Falung Gong/Falun Dafa cult). China is a demented post-Communist dictatorship hell-bent of destroying itself? Well, yes. And you will have to bear with me in my utter lack of charity here, but...so what?

Should the Olympics only be held in pure countries? Unfotunately those tend to be few and far between.

So let's give three cheers for Old Peping, and I have been staying up too late watching swimming and gymnastics (I am not so interested in track), rooting for the Californians, Italians and Germans (I really wish that they listed the athlete's home districts and religions, though, to make sure that I am not cheering on a Mormon or West Virginian).

I don't know whether Natalie Coughlin is a Mormon or not, I frankly doubt it, but she was born in Vallejo, grew up in Benicia, trained in the pool that Amalia has her swim lessons in, went to Cal, takes cooking seriously (which is why I dount that she is a Mormon) and shops at our favorite farmers' market. So, unless someone brings allegations of Smithism or Youngism, she is our family's choice for victory (also, Italians have never been dominant in swimming, so I can dismiss them).

As for the Aussies, well, I like Australians, much more than I like the Englisch, but I am Anti-Australian on principle. And I have no choice but to root for the Rhodesian girl, given the mess that her people have to face under that lunatic Mugabe.

And that leaves us with the French. Now I am always torn by things French, because I love France and the French, although I am a devout Francophobe. Possibly because they are so easy to overrun and to occupy, it is just so hard not to love the poor little inept buggers. Of course one of the things that I find charming about the French is their snarling, and I am congenitally disposed to favor the cocky. I find underdog victories tedious. I like the beautiful favored horse owned by the aristocrats to win over the scrappy little misfit owned by an Irish tavern keeper. So, I have to say there was a part of me that thought it would be amusing if the French did as well in swimming as they thought they would. It would be unusual, as they are not normally a great swimming nation. Swimming is a sport for Teutons, and the French are quite mongrelized with Celtic blood. But if their snarl got them to the top, more power to them.

Of course it would have been even funnier if the Germans had routed them, which is always a funny thing.

But lunch is over,and it is time to get on to more serious matters, like Amalia's learning plan for the semester.

Go Natalie!
Go Germany!
Go Italy!
Go France! Bah!

At Least Tribbles were cute.

Walking Sticks reproduce asexually. This means that if you keep walking sticks, you soon keep lots of walking sticks.

Let me tell you about Walking Sticks as pets: they utterly lack personality, being quite adapted to blending in and not attracting attention. Your cat will jump on your lap wanting you to pet it. Your dog will carry the leash to you, hoping for a walk. The Walking Stick will sometimes quiver if the table the terrarium is on is bumped. It makes it look like a twig swaying in the wind. It is really quite cool. We do it whenever we have guests.

"Hey, look at the walking sticks and what they do when we shake the table. Cool."

And that is about it from Cute Walking Stick tricks.

And their babies are just adorable. They look like little, emaciated praying mantises, sort of. And when they get older they move less. Sometimes you will see one in the same position for five days. You will think, "I think it's dead. Tomorrow I will take it out." And the next day it will be in a different position.

So, we have a whole new crop of walking sticks. We may have to find a home for them...or feed them to the lizard (hey, that is an advantage to a walking stick as a pet: who would even briefly think of feeding the kittens to the dog if the cat has another litter?).

Why I detest democracy, part 2,345,932,405,330

This moron is allowed to vote.

On the Parties

I don't have a lot of time, since I am cooking for a large banquet Friday and have a lot to do.

However, I was thinking about the two major parties and I was asking myself what it was that made people so ga ga over Obama. After all, he does not really offer much substance in terms of policy, he is not a very good looking man (and he tends to the same homeliness that Jack Kennedy suffered from, perhaps there is something to this O'Bama business after all). He offers a "visionary" stare and little else. And yet this man beat the establishment Democrat.

Well, this is the Achilles heel of the Democrat Party: they don't really like themselves as much as Republicans like themselves.

You see, for most young Democrats, voting for Obama was voting against the Democrat establishment.

While, on the other side of things, Republicans tended to vote for McCain, in spite of the fact that he was considered at odds with many planks of the Party Agenda.

When it comes down to it, the Republicans would have preferred a solid, establishment Republican, someone with a direct lineage to Ron Reagan, not a maverick of any sort. The problem is, not a one of those was running. You had Crypto-Democrat Juliani, the Libertarian Cowboy Doctor, a half-hearted campaign by Fred Thompson (who probably would have swept if he had really wanted to win), the pro-life Jimmy Carter, and a few other non-contenders who were clearly out of their league, except for one: a notorious flip-flopper governor of Taxachussetts who belongs to a whacky cult. Sure he claimed to be a solid Republican, but when it comes down to it, who really trusts a Mormon, especially one who has radically reversed his own "deeply felt" beliefs, usually around the time when he was playing to a different constituency?

So, the Republicans are really the stronger party when it comes to their base. The Democrats sure don't like the Republicans, but they are not so fond of the Democrats either (and who can blame them?). So they vote for the maverick, continuing the Perpetual Revolution. But if you are all about Perpetual Revolution, eventually you end up Green or Socialist or Rock and Hemp or whatever, and all of this drains life from what should be their organizing party.

How will this play in the election?

Good question. McCain must woo disaffected Democrats, but they seem more inclined to vote for Fidel Castro these days. If the Republicans are serious about winning, they will donate heavily to the Greens. But they won't, because that could backfire. So, they are going to sit out this one, let Osama inherit a mess and dig himself deeper into it and build a Congressional slate for the midterm election, then onward to groom a viable candidate for 2012.

Bush has been a terrible president. A wretched disgrace to Western Civilization. The very portrait of what is wrong with the Protestant establishment, the culmination of grave errors and evils that started with Martin Luther, John Calvin and Henry VIII.

And it is all downhill from here.

The problems Bush created are not going to go away. Indeed a few will just start to manifest themselves. And President Osama will make people long for the warm fuzzy days of competent leaders like Nixon and Carter.

My prediction? If we don't break into Civil War before then, 2012 will usher in a twenty year period of a complete GOP lock on power in both the legislative and executive branches.

And then where do we go? Will Europe have recovered her fortitude and culture? Can we retreat to the Cradle, Nursery, Elementary School, Gymnasium and University of Western Civilization, or will it still resemble the Hospice of Western Civilization?

I offer one solid solution:

The Catholic Phalange of the West and its leader.

Keilholtz for Duce!
Believe!
Obey!
Fight!