Now, onto the CANTO TALK program this week. I am thrilled to be joining Silvio in chatting with American Conservative Warrior Princess, Teri O’Brien. She is a dynamic and engaging BlogTalkRadio.com host herself, and the conversation will center around the topics of the day — including Michelle Obama’s Oscar appearance. (Click HERE for live podcast, 7 pm PST/9 pm CT/10 pm EST this Thursday, Feb. 28th).
Anyway, just when we thought we had made it through this thing without many obnoxious leftwing lectures, other than the one lame MacFarlane remark about the “Christian right,” who shows up to highjack the thing but the First Klingon herself? When Mooch, looking like a drag queen with her usual ridiculously excessive makeup, with members of the military as props, hijacked this show, it was like finding a dead rat at the bottom of your salad.
Now, we find out that the repulsive Hollywood pig Harvey Weinstein engineered this whole thing. Hey, Mooch, I’ve got an idea for you? Why don’t you enlist your pal Harvey in your “Let’s Move” routine? He looks like he could use a little help in that department. And as long as I ‘m going there, let me suggest that you might want to get David “More Chins Than a Chinese Phonebook” Axelrod and Robert “I was sworn to secrecy about that drone thing” Gibbs on that Stairmaster while you’re at it. Gee, I wonder if we would have heard any speeches about targeted killings and transparency if a Republican were conducting this drone campaign …
Seriously, I understand that the Obamas owe Hollywood big time for all the campaign contributions, and that Hollywood limousine libs are among the most enthusiastic members of the Cult of Obama, but this routine last night was way over the top. The only saving grace was that the Celebutard-in-Chief himself didn’t show up.
Whether it’s economics, biology, or criminology, the Left is permanently at war with reality. Some of its most militant combatants are radical feminists, who refuse to accept the fact that there’s more to the difference between men and women than our plumbing. Unfortunately, as the recent insane decision by the Obama administration to lift the ban on women in direct combat shows, feminists have been very successful at infecting our society with their ridiculous, wrongheaded and destructive view of gender differences. Oh wait …there aren’t any gender differences. That’s what the New York Times, Time magazine, and every other irrelevant Lame Stream Media rag has been telling us for at least 40 years.
It’s not enough that feminists have managed to convince at least one, and probably two, generations of women that the ultimate in liberation is to hit the sheets with as many guys as possible, comfortable that their state-mandated contraception will eliminate any unpleasant, style-cramping consequences, or knowing that in a worse case scenario, in which they find themselves in what we used to call “a family way,” they can quickly and easily get rid of that inconvenient tissue mass and move on as if it never happened. It’s also not enough that they have practically made it a crime for little boys to be boys in public schools. It’s not even enough that they have forced the government to recognize their “right” to weaken the U.S. Military and threaten our national security. Now they want our panties.
The Obama administration’s latest effort to exploit the murder of 20 first-graders in December, and to create a wedge issue that will appeal to “The View” and “Ellen” audience, as in suburban women who are unfamiliar with, and therefore terrified of firearms, in the 2014 elections, appears to be focused on the “infinitely reasonable” idea of requiring “universal background checks” for gun purchases. Who could be against that? I submit that any freedom-loving American who appreciates the genius of our Founding Fathers not only could be, but should be, opposed to this idea.
Think about it. How is it possible to enforce “universal background checks” without gun registration? It’s not possible, and that is blatantly obvious. Historically, gun registration has been a prelude to gun confiscation, which is what Obama and his merry band of Marxists have wanted for decades. If that fact doesn’t persuade you, then the fact that Barack Obama, who has despised the 2nd Amendment and worked to destroy it during his entire adult life, is telling us how “reasonable” universal background checks are should. Still not convinced? How about this evidence? The Obama (In)justice Department has admitted it. Check out this excellent video from the NRA.
Dear Readers: On tonight’s Canto Talk show, I join the other co-founders of the SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition, Sarah B. and Dawn Wildman, to discuss the Tea Party movement at its 4-year anniversary. The focus will be on how citizen activist can better use pop culture to support the ideals of fiscal restraint, limited government, and citizen participation. (7 PM PST, 9 pm CT/ 10 pm EST – CLICK HERE FOR SHOW LINK)
I previously wrote about how BuzzFeed Politics has combined “the culture” and savvy crafting into a highly effective tool for undermining Republicans with subtle and not-so-subtle mockery. “Look at the goofy cat, look at the goofy celeb, look at the goofy Republican” is more dangerous to us than a 5000-word article in The New York Times Sunday Magazine.
The post was so wrong on substance, I just had to click over to the source.
And therein I learned what millions of very low-information young liberals already knew — there is this website called Upworthy which is one giant liberal activist social media machine which creates viral social media memes in the cause of liberal political activism….
The social media has helped propel the video to over 600,000 views as of this writing. It’s on target to exceed Warren’s Factory Owner rant.
There is nothing like Upworthy or BuzzFeed on the right. The closest we have come is Twitchy, Michelle Malkin’s brilliant website.
Are you surprised that Obama won the youth vote even though his policies are a complete disaster for the young?
We are losing the fight to the lowest of low information voters, who are pushed toward a liberal agenda by very smart and talented people who understand the power of social media in a way we don’t.
So often when I ask readers to follow us on Facebook and Twitter, I’m met with comments about privacy concerns on Facebook and “I don’t do Twitter” type responses. Fair enough, but at least understand the swarm effect a website like Upworthy can create based on dumbed-down politically-savvy social media interactions, and how that swarm may result in Elizabeth Warren being on the Democratic 2016 ticket if Hillary doesn’t run.
When I read about plans for Republicans planning to narrow the digital divide, I can’t help thinking we are fighting the last war.
As in-fighting in our own movement continues, I am reminded of the left’s struggle and rebirth after 2002. That’s where we are now. It’s easy for many on our own side to lose sight of the long game, the perpetual fight – the fight against the left’s permanent infrastructure, which is one that embodies a nexus of politics, media and culture combined. The power of cultural memes and viral messaging to counter political ideology doesn’t just happen autonomously. To speak to the low information audience today, you need to create the infrastructure of the future.
Our existence is about more than just the issue of the day that consumes our attention, or the candidate we’re all fighting over today. Our existence depends upon weaving technology, new media and culture into our messaging and into our mechanisms. That’s infinitely more than just “incorporating social media” or “bridging the digital divide.” It requires creating a culture unto its own.
When you do the permanent infrastructure right, tackling individual elections suddenly becomes easier. Just remember, that LOLcat might mean more to politics than you ever imagined possible.
Andrew Breitbart used to say, “Politics is downstream from culture.” That should be the mantra of our movement, and of all who invest in it.
And fans of The Shrine now I am all about the pop culture references!
Location: Old Poway Park in Poway, CA 92064 (14134 Midland Rd, between Adrian St & Aubrey St)
The focus of the rally is to serve as a call to action to citizens who value their individual liberties. It will be an informational rally featuring speakers discussing topics such as: The Legitimacy of Executive Orders that Circumvent Congress and Subvert the Constitution, Zero Tolerance Policies at Schools and Gun-Free Zones, and Gun Control Laws.
Conservative Humorist Evan Sayet will also be there.
Dawn Wildman (SCTRC President) Knowing with every breathe I breath that police are there to serve me not the government, I was floored to read that San Diego Police Chief Lansdowne expects to help President Obama confiscate guns from the law abiding populous of our fair county. We need to show him and others who think they know what is “for our own good” that we are serious about our gun ownership rights.
The SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition, with thousands of registered members in the San Diego County and greater Southern California area, has spearheaded many citizen action items related to state and national legislative measures. SCTRC is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to promoting the principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets.
In fact, I will be joining my two other SoCal Tea Party co-founders Dawn Wildman and Sarah B. on Canto Talk this Thursday (Feb. 21st) to discuss the 4th anniversary of the Tea Party (click here at 7 pm PST/9 pm CT/10 pm EST on Feb. 21st to listen). We are all decidedly female, and very much mothers. Not a Koch brother in sight!
That post was shared by Sarah Palin –
On Twitter
And Facebook
I have been a long-time supporter of Sarah Palin, so this was a thrilling development. For a more humorous take, in which I use my resemblance to Palin and her nemesis Tina Fey for comedy effect at an early tea party event, check out this video:
Dear Readers: This week on Canto Talk, my favorite military historian, Barry Jacobsen, will be sharing a different view of the past. He will be joining Silvio and I to discuss History’s Most Romantic Couples. As our show is on Valentine’s Day, this seems like a great time to switch gears to a slightly sweeter topic (click HERE for podcast; the show will be Thursday, Feb. 14, 7 pm PST-9 pm CT, 10 om EST).
So, this week, the Shrine of Flaming Capitalism will feature some noted couples in history. I continue with #7-9.
The Romance of John and Abigail Adams John Adams, a 24-year-old lawyer in Braintree, Massachusetts, first met the teenage Abigail Smith in the summer of 1759 at her father’s home in Weymouth. John’s initial impressions were less than complimentary: “Not fond, not frank, not candid” was the overall assessment in his diary. But from these inauspicious beginnings a romance developed that would sustain this most famous of American couples through fifty years of marriage, five children (three of whom they outlived), multiple homes in numerous cities and towns across three countries and two continents, lengthy separations, and all the rigors of eighteenth-century life—not to mention a revolution, wars, and a wide array of political and diplomatic crises.
What we know of John and Abigail’s relationship stems largely from the letters they wrote to one another, of which some 1,160 have survived to the present day. Their earliest extant note, written from John to Abigail in October 1762, shows just how much had changed between them in the three short years since they first met. “Miss Adorable,” John wrote. “By the same Token that the Bearer hereof satt up with you last night I hereby order you to give him, as many Kisses, and as many Hours of your Company after 9 O Clock as he shall please to Demand and charge them to my Account.” In time their flirtatious correspondence evolved to reflect a deeper, more abiding relationship, but they never lost what Abigail described as “that unabated affection which has for years past, and will whilst the vital spark lasts, burn in the Bosom of your affectionate A Adams.”
Along with that affection and intimacy, Abigail and John proved to be kindred spirits, with shared interests in and a common outlook on the world around them. Abigail had never received a formal education, but her access to some of the finest libraries in Massachusetts and her voracious love of reading gave her a wide-ranging knowledge that allowed her easily to serve as John’s equal in any intellectual debate. Her place as John’s primary political advisor was merely a logical extension of her role as wife and manager of their household in a partnership of equals.
Their letters not only reflected this emotional and intellectual interdependence; they also became symbols of it. Abigail found writing to John “the composure of my mind.” John, even more strikingly, asked, “Is there no Way for two friendly Souls, to converse together, altho the Bodies are 400 Miles off?— Yes by Letter.— But I want a better Communication. I want to hear you think, or see your Thoughts. The Conclusion of your Letter makes my Heart throb, more than a Cannonade would. You bid me burn your Letters. But I must forget you first.”
In the 1770s and 1780s, as John’s work toward the creation of a new American nation expanded—from first representing Massachusetts in the Continental Congress, to spearheading the move toward independence, to representing the United States in France, the Netherlands, and Britain—he and Abigail faced longer and longer periods apart. This naturally strained their relationship, especially when John’s preoccupation with business caused him to fail to write as frequently or as fully as Abigail demanded. He brought even worse trouble upon himself when he foolishly heaped praises on the “handsome, and…exceedingly brilliant” French ladies he met in Paris. Abigail could hardly let that stand; she fired back with a lengthy missive expounding on “how much female Education is neglected… tho I acknowled it my happiness to be connected with a person of a more generous mind and liberal sentiments.”
No quarrel, however, lasted for long and they soon resumed addressing one another as “My Dearest Friend.” Through all the difficulties of John’s time as vice president and president, they found respite from politicking and social obligations in their time together. When the moment arrived for John to leave the political scene, after his defeat in the election of 1800, he wrote to Abigail, “I am very glad you consented to come on… It is fit and proper that you and I should retire together and not one before the other.” Partners to the end, they spent the remainder of their lives in Massachusetts. They wrote no more letters to one another. There was no need—they were together.
In the 16th century, one woman forever changed the course of Mexico’s history. She served Hernan Cortes as his translator and mistress and without her assistance, the Spanish conquistador would likely have been defeated. She was a woman who had many names, Malintzin in her youth and Donna Marina, after she had been christened. However, today the name she is frequently remembered by is La Malinche or simply, Malinche. Her name has become synonymous with hatred and scorn. Many look upon her as a traitor and hold her responsible for contributing directly to the conquest of her people.
Early accounts of her life indicate she was noble-born to a father who was the ruler of the Nhuatl-speaking village of Paynala. Generally, her date of birth is attributed to the year 1505 with the year of her death, 1529. However, there is some evidence that she may have lived longer. Malinche received an education, which was rare for a female in her society. Undoubtedly, it was her father’s status that afforded Malinche this privilege. Unfortunately, her father died when she was still a young girl and this tragic event forever changed her life.
Hernan Cortes and La Malinche holding court
Before long, Malinche’s mother remarried and gave birth to a son. Sadly, Malinche was no longer welcome in the home and was either sold or given away to Maya slave-traders. Perhaps, the mother was forced to abandon her child. Some speculate that Malinche threatened the son’s future inheritance. Regardless, the chain of events that followed held greater consequences than anyone could imagine.
In 1519, Cortez and his men won a battle against a Mayan settlement in the area of present-day Tabasco. As a form of tribute, 20 Indian slaves were presented to the Spaniards. Malinche was amongst them. Her unique knowledge of Nhuatl, the Aztec language, as well as Mayan dialects, came to the attention of Cortes. Another translator was already a part of Cortes’ entourage, a Spanish priest by the name of Geronimo de Aguilar.
This priest was imprisoned by the Mayans for several years and had learned their language. This proved an invaluable asset to Cortes. However, they soon encountered Indians who only spoke N’huatl. The priest initially played a role in these translations. The representatives of Montezuma would speak N’huatl with Malinche, who in turn would translate their words into Mayan for Aguilar. The priest would then translate the Mayan into Spanish, for the benefit of Cortes.
Before long, however, Malinche learned Spanish and became the direct interpreter for Cortes. Cortes utilized Malinche’s linguistic abilities to his advantage in his negotiations with the Aztec Empire. Indeed, Malinche arranged and mediated the introductions and meetings between Montezuma and Cortes. Montezuma carefully considered the Spanish conquistador the return of Quetzacoatl. However, this illusion evaporated when he realized Cortes’ true intent.
La Malinche serving as translator for Hernan Cortes
Malinche became more than just an interpreter for Cortes. Christened with her new name of Dona Marina, she became the Spaniard’s mistress and in 1522, bore him a son named Don Martin Cortes. Their child represents one of the first known Mestizos, an individual whose blood is a mixture of European and indigenous American. However, after the affair between Cortes and Malinche came to an end, she married another Spaniard named Juan Jaramillo. Their union produced a daughter, Maria Jaramillo.
Malinche’s ability to communicate and negotiate with various tribes allowed the Spanish to march through territories without being attacked. They picked up converts along the way. Many indigenous people joined Cortes and fought by his side. These tribes were motivated to join the Spanish, in hope of defeating their long-standing enemy, the Aztecs. This brutal and mighty empire had subjugated them for far too long.
Today, in Mexico a derogatory name to call someone is a “malinchista”, a person who turns their back on their own culture. Interestingly enough, some do not consider Malinche a traitor. Some view her as a heroine, helping spread the word of Christianity. For others, she was a woman in love, who had no choice but to follow her heart and protect her beloved Cortes. Malinche is viewed as well with honor by those who consider her one of the first “mothers” of the Mestizo race. Regardless of how one perceives Malinche, she forever changed the course of Mexico’s destiny.
#9 LORD HARRY SMITH AND JUANA
The Napoleonic Wars not only impacted Lord Nelson and Emma Hamilton, but also set up the circumstances for the meeting of this historic couple.
The manner of their meeting was unprecedented. During the lawless mayhem that followed the capture of Badajoz by Wellington, a 14 year old Spanish girl sought the protection of Captain Harry Smith.
The French had ignored the longstanding rule that a town must be surrendered after sufficient breaches had been made in its walls. As a result, once the allied army gained access, their behaviour was brutal since they assumed that the remaining Spaniards were French sympathisers. Harry Smith married Juana since it was the only way to protect her. Years later when he was knighted, Juana became Lady Smith….
It will however be the couple’s achievements and legacy in South Africa that they are best associated with, after the exceptional circumstances of their first meeting. Travelers to Natal are reminded of this by the towns of Ladysmith and Harrysmith.
Dear Readers: This week on Canto Talk, my favorite military historian, Barry Jacobsen, will be sharing a different view of the past. He will be joining Silvio and I to discuss History’s Most Romantic Couples. As our show is on Valentine’s Day, this seems like a great time to switch gears to a slightly sweeter topic (click HERE for podcast; the show will be Thursday, Feb. 14, 7 pm PST-9 pm CT, 10 om EST).
So, this week, the Shrine of Flaming Capitalism will feature some noted couples in history. I continue with #4-6.
Nelson’s affair with Emma Hamilton was the biggest scandal of the age. Their actual liaison lasted only six years, but it transformed their lives, their respective positions in society, and the public’s perception of them both.
Horatio Nelson first met Lady Hamilton on 12 September 1793. He was a 35-year-old post captain and she was the 28-year-old wife of Sir William Hamilton, the British Envoy to Naples. Emma was a great beauty and a celebrated artists’ model, and she was also famous across Europe for performing ‘attitudes’, which were performances in which she moved quickly from one dramatic pose to another.
Mired in retirement in Norfolk for the previous five years, Nelson had hardly seen a woman since he had returned to sea six months before their meeting, and he was impressed by Lady Hamilton. He wrote to his wife Fanny that Emma was a ‘young woman of amiable manners who does honour to the station to which she is raised’.
The second meeting between Nelson and his future mistress was altogether more dramatic. By 1797 the Italian Court, including Emma and her husband, were terrified that Naples would be invaded by French troops. They were hugely relieved in the following year by Nelson’s victory over the French fleet at Aboukir, in the ‘Battle of the Nile’, and they craved the presence of the hero and his fleet in Naples. Emma wrote him a passionately admiring letter.
When Nelson arrived in September, Emma welcomed him in spectacular fashion and he was immediately captivated by her. Emma’s husband was also fond of Nelson and, bonded in their determination not to allow Naples to capitulate to the French, the three dubbed themselves the ‘Tria juncto in uno’. By the end of 1798, a French invasion seemed inevitable and the ‘Tria’, along with the Neapolitan royal family, their courtiers, hundreds of foreign travellers and many Neapolitan aristocrats, fled to Sicily.
Nelson, Emma and Sir William soon rented a large house in Palermo together, along with Emma’s mother and various English friends. The English press speculated about the close friendship between the ‘national hero’ – Nelson – and Lady Hamilton. Nelson’s wife begged to be allowed to visit him, but he rebuffed her harshly. Emma had encompassed all his attentions.
By 1944, when she met Juan Peron, she was earning about 6,000 pesos a month. She had learned the value of appearances, making sure that she was seen in all the best restaurants and cafes. When Eva met Juan Peron, he was a colonel in the Argentine army, and had just been made both Secretary of Labour and Secretary of War after the army had seized control of the government in 1943. Almost twice Eva’s age at 48, he was a childless widower, his first wife had died of uterine cancer six years before. In early 1944, an earthquake rocked the small town of San Juan at the foot of the Andes mountains killing 6,000 people. Peron came up with the idea of an artistic festival to raise funds for the victims. Eva attended the gala concert with a close friend, but she left that night with Peron (expressed in the song “I’d be Surprisingly Good For You.” Peron had a mistress at the time, a young girl that he used to introduce to people as his daughter. Eva took care of the mistress by hiring a truck to move her stuff into Peron’s apartment, kicking the mistress out on the street (In Evita, this is the “Another Suitcase in Another Hall” sequence).
Eva had now hitched her wagon to Peron’s rising star. Juan Domingo Peron was born on October 8, 1895. Although his paternal grandfather had been a doctor, Peron’s father became a farmer and landowner. Like Evita, Peron was illegitimate, but he seems not to have suffered the psychic wounds that Eva suffered from, although it was not public knowledge. By the time Peron turned 16, his parents had married. Peron attended military school and joined the army at the age of 21. He was tall, taller than most Argentine men at the time, macho, with black hair and a movie star smile. He suffered from a mild form of psoriasis that required medicine that also made him look good in photos. He had traveled to Europe in 1939, staying for two years, visiting all the facist countries. He was particularly taken with Mussolini, attracted to the pomp and ceremony of the facist rallies. Like most successful politicians, Peron was charismatic. While other members of the government avoided the press like the plague, Peron was always ready to talk to them. He also had the ability to reflect and interpret the mood of his supporters and also to shape it. He appeared enigmatic and evasive at times. While Secretary of Labor, Peron helped the government to establish the minimum wage, paid holidays, and medical care for the workers, which was revolutionary at the time in Argentina and hated by the wealthy landowners. The Oligarchy or Aristocracy as they are called in Evita had been the dominant political power in Argentine life. in 1930, 1,804 people owned the equivalent in area of Holland, Switzerland and Belgium. They were mainly conservative and more concerned about keeping and consolidating their power. The army coup changed all that and in particular Peron’s courting of the working class who had been overlooked by previous regimes.
The image that people most associate of Eva, the smiling, laughing blonde came from her first starring role on film, which she got because Peron provided the film stock to the production company. She also in 1944 became the first president of the newly formed actor’s union in Argentina. Soon Eva added a political radio show to her line-up caled “Towards a Better Tomorrow,” which consisted solely of content designed to promote Peron. From being apolitical, Eva took to politics with a vengeance. Using the most ordinary language, designed to appeal to the working class, Eva conveyed what she wanted people to believe about Peron. Eva’s political education at first consisted of her sitting in on Peron’s meetings with his supporters. By now they were living together openly. She would sit quietly, not saying anything, but absorbing everything. She was seen as inconsequential and unimportant.
In 1945, Peron became Vice-President of Argentina, but while he was popular, he was also accumulating enemies, even amongst the army. Rumors began that Eva had been a prostitute on her way up. This was used to explain her ‘hold’ as it were over Peron. Prostitutes, far from being seen as victims, were considered to be exploiters of men. Only a prostitute or a femme fatale could hold such sway over a powerful man like Peron. What they didn’t realize was that it was the other way around, Peron was the one who held sway over Eva. Like other power couples, it was also thought that it was ambition not love or sex that held them together.
Taj Mahal, the magnificent monument that stands at the heart of India has a story that has been melting the hearts of millions of listeners since the time Taj has been visible. A story, that although ended back in 1631, continues to live on in the form of Taj and is considered a living example of eternal love. It’s the love story of Shah Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal, two people from the course of history who set an example for the people living in present and the future to come.
An English poet, Sir Edwin Arnold best describes it as “Not a piece of architecture, as other buildings are, but the proud passion of an emperor’s love wrought in living stones.” The story that follows next will prove why the statement is true. Shah Jahan, initially named Prince Khurram, was born in the year 1592. He was the son of Jehangir, the fourth Mughal emperor of India and the grandson of Akbar the Great.
In 1607 when strolling down the Meena Bazaar, accompanied by a string of fawning courtiers, Shah Jahan caught a glimpse of a girl hawking silk and glass beads. It was love at first sight and the girl was Mumtaz Mahal, who was known as Arjumand Banu Begum at that time. At that time, he was 14 years old and she, a Muslim Persian princess, was 15. After meeting her, Shah Jahan went back to his father and declared that he wanted to marry her. The match got solemnized after five years i.e., in the year 1612.
It was in the year 1628 that Shah Jahan became the Emperor and entrusted Arjumand Banu with the royal seal. He also bestowed her with the title of Mumtaz Mahal, meaning the “Jewel of the Palace”. Though Shah Jahan had other wives also, but, Mumtaz Mahal was his favorite and accompanied him everywhere, even on military campaigns. In the year 1631, when Mumtaz Mahal was giving birth to their 14th child, she died due to some complications. While Mumtaz was on her deathbed, Shah Jahan promised her that he would never remarry and will build the richest mausoleum over her grave.
It is said that Shah Jahan was so heartbroken after her death that he ordered the court into mourning for two years. Sometime after her death, Shah Jahan undertook the task of erecting the world’s most beautiful monument in the memory of his beloved. It took 22 years and the labor of 22,000 workers to construct the monument. When Shah Jahan died in 1666, his body was placed in a tomb next to the tomb of Mumtaz Mahal. This magnificent monument came to be known as “Taj Mahal” and now counts amongst the Seven Wonders of the World. This is the true story of the Taj Mahal of India, which has mesmerized many people with its bewitching beauty.
So, this week, the Shrine of Flaming Capitalism will feature some noted couples in history.
#1 ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA
As I began researching this topic, every single “Historic Couples” list that I came across began with this entry. As it features ancient Egypt, men in togas, and the ultimate sacrifice in the name of love, I am going to agree and keep with this tradition.
Cleopatra VII of Egypt is often remembered for her legendary powers of seduction and mastery at building shrewd alliances. Still, her final political and romantic partnership—with the Roman general Mark Antony—brought about the deaths of both lovers and toppled the centuries-old Ptolemaic dynasty to which she belonged. Earlier in her reign, Cleopatra’s relationship with another Roman general, Julius Caesar, had allowed her to wrest the throne from her brother and co-ruler Ptolemy XII when civil war erupted between the two siblings in 48 B.C. Her strong ties to the mighty and growing Roman empire bolstered Cleopatra’s position, particularly after her son Caesarion—believed to be Caesar’s child—became her co-regent.
After Julius Caesar’s murder in 44 B.C., Rome fell into civil war, which was temporarily resolved in 43 B.C. with the formation of the second triumvirate: Octavian, Caesar’s great-nephew and chosen heir; Mark Antony; and Lepidus, a Roman statesman. Antony took up the administration of Rome’s eastern provinces, and he summoned Cleopatra to Tarsus, in Asia Minor, to answer charges that she had aided his enemies. Hoping to woo Antony as she had Caesar before him, in 41 B.C. Cleopatra arrived on a magnificent river barge dressed as Venus, the Roman god of love. A besotted Antony followed her back to Alexandria, pledging to protect Egypt and Cleopatra’s crown. The next year he returned to Rome to prove his loyalty to the triumvirate by marrying Octavian’s half-sister Octavia; Cleopatra, meanwhile, gave birth to Antony’s twins and continued to rule over an increasingly prosperous Egypt. Antony and Cleopatra were reunited several years later, and Cleopatra had another son, Ptolemy Philadelphos, in 36 B.C. Having left his wife, Antony declared Caesarion to be Caesar’s son and rightful heir (as opposed to his adopted son, Octavian) and awarded land to each of his children with Cleopatra. This launched a war of propaganda with the furious Octavian, who claimed that Antony was entirely under Cleopatra’s control and would abandon Rome to found a new capital in Egypt.
In 32 B.C. Octavian declared war on Cleopatra, and in 31 B.C. his forces trounced those of Antony and Cleopatra in the Battle of Actium. The following year, Octavian reached Alexandria and again defeated Antony. In the aftermath of the battle, Cleopatra took refuge in the mausoleum she had commissioned for herself. Antony, falsely informed that Cleopatra was dead, stabbed himself with his sword. On August 12, 30 B.C., after burying Antony and meeting with the victorious Octavian, Cleopatra closed herself in her chamber with two of her female servants and committed suicide. The method she chose remains unknown, but Plutarch and other writers advanced the theory that she used a poisonous snake known as the asp, a symbol of divine royalty. According to her wishes, Cleopatra’s body was buried with Antony’s, leaving Octavian (later Emperor Augustus I) to celebrate his conquest of Egypt and his consolidation of power in Rome.
Isabella was born in the family of Juan II, King of Castile. At that time Spain was a separate, independent kingdom, and if the Castile and Aragon were Christian states, the neighboring Granada belonged to Muslims – the Moors. Isabella was brought up in an atmosphere of hatred towards other religions and, apparently, still in his childhood dreams that drive them from Spain.
Isabella′s father was a man of good-natured and gentle, but the mother suffered from bouts of hysteria. The girl grew up in the small town of Arevalo in a simple situation, because in the age of four, she lost her father and her mother was forced to leave the palace, as well as the throne of Henry′s stepson, selfish and greedy people.
The first significant event in her life has become engaged to a young heir to the throne of Aragon – Prince Ferdinand. Isabella had tales of the bridegroom, that impressionable girl fell in love with his chosen one in absentia. And reality does not disappoint Isabella.
When in 1469 she saw Ferdinand, then literally gasped in admiration: it is so – tall, charming, self-confident – she presented her prince.
The first years of married life have been very happy for her. In 1470 Isabella had her first child, and four years later, Henry died, making thus princess queen of Castile. Two major states united Spain. There was a very good opportunity for the fight against Muslim Granada. Isabella used this opportunity to great advantage in his power. Interests and values Ferdinand coincided with her own, and in 1480 Aragon and Castile began to successfully fight against the Moors.
#3 HENRY II AND ELEANOR OF AQUITAINE
Who said love and romance was always going to be hearts-and-flowers? The relationship between England’s King Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine was nothing if not tempestuous — on a civil war scale!
On 18th May 1152, the young prince Henry married Eleanor of Aquitaine, the cast-off wife of King Louis VII of France. This in itself was to have far-reaching political consequences, and at the time the marriage scandalised the houses of Europe. Eleanor was eleven years Henry’s senior. Strong-willed and impetuous, she was rumoured to have had lovers in both Prince Raymond of Antioch and Henry’s own father, Geoffrey of Anjou. In fact, Geoffrey strongly advised Henry not to get involved. She was also closely linked to Henry by blood, being within the fifth degree of kinship which was prohibited by the church, and this was precisely the excuse by which Louis had got his marriage to her annulled.
Still, the marriage worked. Their characters complimented each other: Eleanor was a powerful enough personality to hold her own in Henry’s company, and was able to act as regent for him when he was away. She bore him 6 children who survived: among them four sons, Henry the Younger, Richard, Geoffrey and John. Yet, like Henry himself, she was fiercely protective of her inheritance, and valued it above loyalty to her husband. This would inevitably result in friction, with Eleanor supporting her sons against their father in defence of Aquitaine.
Eleanor was a powerful enough personality to hold her own in Henry’s company…
Contemporary chroniclers failed to understand this driving force within her, and interpreted her ‘fickleness’ as a variety of women’s perceived weaknesses. The most persistent rumour was that Eleanor turned against her husband out of jealousy over his infidelities. Henry undoubtedly had two bastards, Geoffrey ‘Plantagenet’ and William ‘Longsword’, and there is also no doubt that the great love of his life was Rosamund Clifford, with whom he took up in 1173 and who died in 1176. Henry is supposed to have contemplated divorcing Eleanor for Rosamund in 1175, and wagging tongues suggested that Eleanor poisoned her the year after. It has also been suspected that Henry had a liaison with Margaret, daughter of King Louis, who had been married to Henry the Younger and was then betrothed to Richard for years whilst she remained in the custody of Henry.
Certainly, it is likely that these rumours contributed to Richard’s distrust of his father. But Henry and Eleanor had been to all intents and purposes estranged since the birth of John in 1167, and her actions are always geared towards her sons and Aquitaine. Henry’s little peccadilloes were of more interest to the chroniclers than they seem to have been to Eleanor (though the implications of a divorce are likely to have stung her into action)
Now…just because this is my favorite Bollywood song, and I feel like listening to it today, I share this gem with you.
ham jo chalne lage chalne lage hain ye raaste when we started walking, these roads are also started walking
haan haan manzil se behtar lagane lage hain ye raaste yes, yes; these roads began to seem better than the destination
aao kho jaaye ham, ho jaaye ham yuun laapata come on, let’s lose ourself. let’s become unreachable
aao milon chale, jaanaa kahaan naa ho pataa come, let’s walk for miles, let we don’t khow where to go
baithe baithe aise kaise koi rasta naya sa mile we are getting the new roads just by walking like this together
tu bhi chale, main bhi chalu, honge kam ye tabhi faasle you keep walking, and so will i; only then these distances will become smaller
baithe baithe aise kaise koi rasta naya sa mile
tu bhi chale, main bhi chalu, honge kam ye tabhi faasle
aao tera mera naa ho kisi se wasta come, neither you nor i will be anybody’s business
aao milo chale jaanaa kahaan naa ho pataa come, let’s walk for miles, let we don’t khow where to go
aankhe khole ninde bole jaane kaisi jagi bekhudi with open eyes, dreams are speaking that what kind of recklessness is arosed this
yaha, waha, dekho kaha leke jaane laai bekhudi here and there, see where is this recklessnes taking us
aankhe khole ninde bole jaane kaisi jagi bekhudi
yaha, waha, dekho kaha leke jaane laai bekhudi
aao mil jaayega hoga jaha pe raasta come on, we will get the raod where it would be
aao milo chale jana kaha na ho pataa come, let’s walk for miles, let we don’t know where to go
Dear Readers: Last year, while I was recovering from a broken hip, I became engaged in the “Circle of Moms – Political Blogs” contents. I felt like the real winner, because I mad e several good friends among independent conservative mothers across the country. One of them, Katya of “Sitting at the Edge of the Sandbox, Biting my Tongue” will be joining us on Canto Talk this Thursday (Feb. 7th, 7 pm Pacific/9 pm Central/10 pm Eastern Standard Time, click here to listen).
Trying to decide whether to take my daughter to a Goth production of Prokofiev’s Cinderella is making me miserable. I’m not a big fan of sanitizing tales, but I’m just not sure a 5-year-old enjoy this particular version. I suspect the production is geared to grown children. It’s only natural that choreographers are catering to hipsters in a city where they outnumber kids.
I wrote about our local plastic bag ban a few weeks ago. Well, the other night during the dinner our 5-year-old told us that some man came over to talk to the kids about the ban at her elementary school assembly. The need to inform elementary school children about the ban is not immediately obvious to this parent.
The speaker told students that when people don’t properly dispose of plastic bags birds and animals may get caught in them or eat them and die. I’m sure he had a lot of other drivel to share, but that’s what our 5-year-old picked up on, naturally. Me and DH looked at each other. We talked about littering, and how all littering is bad, not just plastic bags. Fortunately, however, people in our town are responsible and can be trusted to put their garbage into garbage cans, even without the new law.
We also said that paper bags are not very good because the break often, and that people use plastic bags again and again, in their garbage cans and to pick up dogs’ poop. We told her that it was wrong to invite the guy who talks about why he supports the ban, but not invite anyone with a different point of view, because there are many sides to this story. DH said that we’d like to hear about what is going on at the assemblies, and that there will be lot of things she’ll hear in school, and that the most important are math, reading and writing. Everything else is just someone’s opinion.
I don’t think there was an age-appropriate way to explain that plastic bags production requires fewer resources and is, therefore, cleaner. So we didn’t go there. But the most important point was yet to be made. The reason we oppose the ban, we said, is because if some people think that paper is better, they can ask for paper, and if some people think that plastic is better, they can ask for plastic. Or if a store decides that they don’t want to give out plastic, they can stick with paper. This way everybody can do what they think is appropriate. My daughter looked at me for a second or two and gave me the most beautiful mischievous smile.
Katya also offers a savvy fashion perspective:
Michelle Obama’s inaugural get-ups weren’t attheireye-poppingbest. And yet in her usual display of opulence FLOTUS 44 went through something like twenty five changes, which, of course give plenty of fodder to your humble blogger.
Lets start with her pre-party children’s inaugural ensemble. While an ostrich might be preferable to a peacock, it’s still an ostrich. Hi-Lo hemline is easy to overdo, and if anyone knows about overdoing, it’s Michelle. Unfortunately, this McQueen shirt is one of those garments that one pretty much has to be a model to get away with.
FLOTUS might need a little extra room in the fabulous upper arm area
On to the outdoor daytime inaugural look. For the afternoon festivities MO wore a helmet and a pair of blood-stained gloves.
In order to create smart 21st century work force the Golden state heavily subsidizes education. Then we import programmers form India, and many of our homegrown engineers are also foreign-born. But it’s the American-born (and Hispanic) students that are having all the fun.
The recently passed Proposition 30 mandates a variety of tax hikes, some of them retroactive. It was sold statewide as a measure to help our beloved, hard-working, unionized, retired public school teachers. Now that the funding is secured interest groups are going after after it, which should be interesting:
Proposition 30′s victory at the polls may have ended the prospect of deep midyear budget cuts for California’s public universities, but students are in no mood to celebrate.
On Thursday, some of the very students who helped rally their campuses around the tax measure demonstrated across the Bay Area, demanding rollbacks to ever-rising tuition hikes and more space in overcrowded classes.
[...]
Young voters were considered critical to the measure’s success; polls released this fall by the Public Policy Institute of California found 70 percent supported it, compared to about half of all likely voters. Now, with deep budget cuts and much higher fees averted, student leaders have focused again on the bigger picture: ever-increasing tuition and fees and reduced courses and services.
Tax hike won’t solve the structural problems, eh? The funds the state is projected to collect are finite, and will diminish as businesses are closed and are driven out of state. Educational bureaucracies, on the other hand, can always expend. So ladyparts and their male companions are holding rallies, flexing their proverbial muscle, demanding their “fair share”. For instance, they are unhappy with the $372 fee on “superseniors” at CSU. Yep, $372.
I have an idea: instead of arguing over the sum of money required to pay each semester after the course load is complete, vote for robust economy. It helps when the foot soldiers of socialism are hungry and mean. They get a bone once in a while, like maybe dropping that $372 fee or the free Pill, but their lives will end in ruin. It doesn’t matter if the federal government bails out California. They will inhibit a country where opportunity diminished significantly and greedy politicians cannibalized their youthful energy. Their best hope is legal marijuana.
The communist forces in South Vietnam break a holiday ceasefire agreement and launch a nation-wide offensive against South Vietnamese, American and allied forces.
The veteran People’s Army of Vietnam (PAVN), backed by North Vietnamese regular forces (NVA), create havoc across the country in the initial surge. However, counterattacks by American and Army of Vietnam (ARVN) forces quickly contain communist gains. In the following months, the PAVN will be nearly annihilated as an independent force; and all gains will be lost.
Though the Tet Offensive is painted by the Western Press as a sign of the strength of the communist insurgency, and turn it into a propaganda victory for the communists; the military impact is disastrous for the communist guerrilla movement in South Vietnam. Ill-equipped to fight toe-to-toe with conventional forces, they Viet Cong/PAVN “hard-core” units are wiped out in the weeks of fighting; attempting to hold onto “hard targets”. For the remainder of the war, North Vietnamese forces will have to take the place of an indigenous South Vietnamese communist insurgency.
The Tet Offensive was one of the biggest turning points of the Vietnam War. Although from a purely military standpoint the U.S. and South Vietnamese forces emerged victorious, it was a strong psychological victory for the Northern Communists (American History).
The Original concept for the Tet Offensive came from General Vo Nguyne Giap of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, or North Vietnam. He knew that since the U.S. entered the war on the side of the south, the communists had been on the loosing end of the battle. So he concocted a three point plan with the hope of neutralizing the overwhelming American advantages in Firepower and mobility. He planned to combine the Chinese element of General Offense with the Vietnamese element of General Uprising. The plan was based around three points: that the South Vietnamese army would not fight but would collapse from the shock of the initial strike; that the people of South Vietnam would rally with the communist cause; and that the American morale would break from the “one two punch” (Zabecki).
Giap planned to launch the attack on the Vietnamese holiday of Tet, which was so important that a ceasefire had been called in order to celebrate. He did not tell his generals of the exact timing of the attack, however, until the last possible moment, in order to maintain secrecy. Because of this, the timing of the attack was off by 24 hours, launching a day early. The U.S. and Southern Vietnamese forces immediately stopped their ceasefire and met the offensive head on (Zabecki).
Before the attack, Giap attacked the marine base at Keh Sahn, near the 17th Parallel, using it as a feint to draw U.S. attention away from South Vietnam. The deception worked, drawing thousands of troops away from their primary objective (American History). However, Lieutenant Genral Frederick C. Weyand was not fooled. He noticed an increased amount of DRV radio traffic around Saigon, but a small amount of contacts for his patrolling troops. He convinced General William Westmoreland, the Commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, to let him pull more American Battalions back to Saigon. For this reason, there were 27 battalions in the Saigon area instead of the original 14 when the attack came (Zabecki).
During the attack, the DRV attacked five of South Vietnam’s cities, most of its provincial capitals, and about 50 smaller towns. In Saigon, they attacked several high value targets, such as the palace and the airport, and the U.S. embassy. But because of Weyands’ forsight, the U.S. forces pushed the DRV out of Saigon. However, Hue, another extremely important city in South Vietnam, was completely leveled, leaving thousands dead and 100,000 without homes (U.S. History).
Giap was ultimately wrong on two of his three assumptions. The people of South Vietnam did not rally to the communists, and the South Vietnamese army did not collapse, but fought well. Giap was however right on his third assumption. The U.S. did not have the will to do what was necessary to win. The United Stated defeated the communists decisively, but at the same time handed them a strategic victory. After the Tet offensive, the American public turned against the war, thinking it un-winnable. This change of heart damaged soldier moral greatly, giving the DRV a big advantage (Zabecki).
FLOTUS might need a little extra room in the fabulous upper arm area
