Elena Kagan...White House bars interview with brother! Alarm Bells go off amidst furor!

Quite a few alarm bells went off over the past twenty-four hours - when the White House maneuvered a surprise about-face - and turned down a request by the New York Times to attend a class on constitutional law headed up by Elena Kagan's brother who happens to be a teacher.

In addition, the Barack administration barred access to Kagan's cousin.

Pundits on noon-hour tabloid news shows were in a frenzy as they tried to fathom this highly-unusual dragonian turn-of-events.

One astute anchor-person noted that when Sonia Sotomayor was being confirmed, the White House openly invited the press to meet her family and friends without restriction.

"They wanted to give the impression that this was one of those great rags-to-riches stories. The Supreme Court Justice nominee was an inspiring example of a common individual who rose from humble beginnings to a lofty perch in the highest court in the land."

The move to prevent a dialogue with Elena's brother and cousin has caused an outcry!

Also, the bizarre conduct of White House staff, has sent up a red flag!

What are "they" afraid of?

Obviously, there must be a skeleton in Kagan's - um - closet!

News at 11 on YouTube!

http://www.thetattler.biz/

Illegal Immigrants...New York Times & Mayor Bloomberg agree with moi!

There's a border there for a reason!

(duh)

A few days ago, in response to a column written by a Los Angeles Times journalist, I penned my thoughts on the escalating illegal immigrant problem in California which is running rampant.

Of course, my die-hard readers were not surprised when I didn't mince words!

After all, I believe in calling a spade a spade.

Post: 01/04/10

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2010/01/latinoscrystal-ball-portends-disaster.html

I expected a few shrinking violets - and host of supporters of the illegals' cause - to lambast me for being too harsh.

But, frankly, I was pleasantly surprised when the New York Times staff echoed my sentiments a day or two later!

In the article - in which they noted they supported Mayor Bloomberg's position that illegal immigration must end in this country - they further argued that illegal immigrants should assimilate (my words exactly) into the American cultural landscape and learn to speak English.

That evening, I dashed out and snapped up a bottle of bubbly - and later, as I drafted a post - toasted the Mayor's Office and the New York Times editorial staff.

You betcha!

Suppose us wrinkly old white dudes have to stick together to the bitter end, eh?

Amen!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Bloggers...abandoning blogs according to New York Times! Misleading info...

I would be remiss if I did not respond to the New York Times article just recently in which a reporter asserted that bloggers were abandoning their sites in droves. (06/07/09)

For starters, some of the reporter's statements were terribly misleading.

According to the journalist, one source - Technorati (the largest blog site in the world) - alleged that blogs were sitting idle and not being updated on a regular basis.

Although that bold-faced statement warranted a follow-up interview with at least a blogger or two to confirm the facts - the reporter was inclined to accept Technorati's observations as true.

In this instant case, the lack of journalistic ethic on the part of the writer, has left egg on the face of the New York Times staff.

The truth of the matter is that Technorati has been experiencing quite a few ongoing glitches at their site which account for the reason a handful of bloggers may have been reluctant to follow through in recent days.

For example, when I first signed up with Technorati, my blog posts at google's Blogspot (The Tattler) and WordPress (Pop Culture) were pinged on a daily basic; consequently, my material was always current and up-to-date.

So, time-sensitive notices about local and National events - and spur of-the-moment news flashes - were published quickly enough for readers to act upon them.

However, in recent weeks Technorati has been experiencing a number of technical problems which they have not been very quick to fix in spite of their professional obligation to do so.

Specifically, it should be noted in my own instant case, that although I wrote daily posts for weeks-on-end - on more than one occasion - Technorati falsely reported that no new posts had been published for days!

On those occasions did Technorati staff incorrectly assume I abandoned my blogs, too?

No wonder their data is out-of-whack!

Notwithstanding the aforementioned, once the flaws in the Technorati software came to my attention, I began to ping the posts daily since the automated system was not reliable from the get-go.

In spite of that dedicated effort on my part to ensure readers would receive all updated posts in a timely fashion, Technorati still managed to prevent material posting in a timely manner (sometimes for durations of twelve or thirteen days).

To make matters worse, Technorati's site crashes often, which adds to the frustration.

When a blogger attempts to log in, a bizarre message - The Monster got loose - may flash across the screen and instruct the individual to try back later (without any explanation).

Also, I can't count the number of times I have logged in to my account and received the startling message that my blog (The Tattler) didn't exist!

Duh!

As to the other issues raised by the New York Times?

The reporter asserted in the article that bloggers were abandoning their blogs because they were frustrated by the fact their arduous efforts were not panning out in spite of the fact they busted their butts - with the ultimate aim - of being "discovered".

For instance, the reporter surmised that because book deals (bloggers were eagerly anticipating) were not forthcoming - and fame did not come knocking on their door with a promise of untold overnight - that disenchanted bloggers were opting to jump ship.

If that was/is the case for many - who are now seeking recognition elsewhere because of their failed attempts on the Internet - the truth of the matter is that a multitude of artists over the years (in a myriad of fields of creative expression) have similarly offered up their talents in a non-paying capacity with the express hope they would be catapulted into the spotlight.

For example, comics have often signed up for open-mike night at celebrated nightclubs, with the express hope that a talent scout in the audience might recognize their talent - and ultimately - land 'em gainful employment.

Actors have also been known to perform on stage in equity-waiver theatres - to specifically showcase their talent - in order to land a starring role in a major production on Broadway or in a feature film.

All things considered, it appears that the New York Times really screwed up on this one!

Took a blustery blogger to set the record straight, eh?

http://www.julianayrs.com/

Kirsten E. Gillibrand...photo of chat with Hillary curious! Oh, to be a fly on wall!

Ha!

That photograph of Kirsten E. Gillibrand and Hillary Clinton - the newly-crowned Secretary of State - on the front section of yesterday's New York Times was a titillating sight!

Those photogs were right on the ball, weren't they?

Now there was a moment captured on film worth a thousand words.

The expression on both their faces, well, very intriguing.

Oh, to have been a fly on the wall when that little bit of chit-chat went down.

Were they comparing notes, do 'ya think?

News at 11!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Barack Obama...bid for change speech falls on deaf ears at Stock exchange. Dow drops 300 points...

In spite of the fact thousands braved a wintry blast on Capitol Hill today - to warm-up to the 44th President's promise of "change" for Americans across the Nation - the stock exchange turned a cold shoulder.

Same old, same old?

After hearing the new President's inaugural address, investors went back to selling stocks - promptly sending the major indexes down sharply - according to New York Times newsies who have been monitoring nervous markets in recent days.

"Traders on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange paused at times to watch the inauguration ceremony and President Barack Obama's remarks, but the transition of power did not erase investors' intensifying concerns about the struggling economy," one reporter astutely noted.

At the close of the day, the Dow Jones Industrial average plummeted more than 330 points (about 4 percent).

Elsewhere on the economic front, Standard & Poor's 500-stock index fell 5.2 percent.

Does this telling turn-of-events bode well for middle America's great white hope, Barack Obama?

News at 11!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Bill Clinton...maneuvers for No. 2 spot?

Rumors - which have been fleshed out a smidgen in a recent TIME magazine report - abound that Bill Clinton has been stealthily scheming with key players in the background in a bold-faced effort to pitch Hillary's prospects for the VP ticket in the upcoming election this fall.

Has he conceded she'll lose the shot at top dog?

On the heels of the startling scoop, the New York Times proceeded to report at week's end that the maneuverings are definitely not fiction.

But, writers came up empty-handed (again) when it came to quoting direct sources, since the elusive tattle-tales behind-the-scenes preferred to remain anonymous, for obvious reasons.

In the Hillary camp, top-level organizers are adamant that neither Mr. Clinton nor anyone else in the camp had given up on Hillary's candidacy for Prez. In fact, they emphasized that "no efforts" were being made to position their hapless candidate to be a potential "running mate".

Howard Wolfson - Hillary's Director of Communications - stated for the record,

"Senator Clinton is solely focused on being the Democratic nominee. I have seen no interest on her part in being Vice President."

So, what gives?

Friends close to Bill have sworn up-and-down that slick Willy's "musings" have been more than just piffle. In fact, they have allegedly whispered that the former president believes that an Obama-Clinton ticket could help unify the party.

Apparently, he's worried, too. In one conversation he inferred that Obama might wave off an overture, when he argued to confidants that Hillary had at least "earned a meeting with Obama to discuss the possibility."

Ouch!

A pain in the butt? More like a groveling ne'er do well, if you ask me.

"If she's not going to be the nominee, then he wants her in the second spot. In the long run, it's the best way for her to run again in 2016," a friend in the shadows chipped in.

2016!

If I am not mistaken, most voters are under the impression that a vote for Barack Obama ultimately brings a screeching halt to the "Clinton" regime. After all, isn't that what Obama's campaign message is supposed to be all about - change?

The idea of Hillary clinging on to 2016 is a staggering thought.

Is she plotting to rise up to the stature of - Mother Teresa - one day? Minus the skirt, of course!

The unexpected scenarios have caused me to reflect a little.

Has Hillary finally recognized the fact that the party is finally over?

If so, is pride just getting in the way?

At this juncture, it is probably best to quote the scriptures,

"When pride comes, then comes disgrace; but with humility comes wisdom"

Come clean now, Hillary. The truth will set you free.

Bill, there you go again!

Peru...hot surf destination?

According to the New York Times, Peru is poised to become the new "it" spot on the international surfing circuit.

No wonder.

The country has 1,500 miles of rugged coastline, monster swells that rival those of Hawaii's legendary northern shores, and few tourists — for now.














Do you suppose the bodacious babes have anything to do with it?
(Máncora, Peru)

Hillary Clinton...gender card boo-boo by Obama & others!

This past week, I reported that Hillary Clinton was expressing angst over the fact the candidates in the Presidential race appeared to "gang up" on her at the debates on Tuesday evening.

In support of my post, I cited an e-mail communication, in which Clinton's camp wrote,

"Dear Julian,

If you saw the debate Tuesday night, or if you've seen the news coverage since, then you know that this campaign has entered a new phase.

On that stage in Philadelphia, we saw six against one. Candidates who had pledged the politics of hope practiced the politics of pile on instead. Her opponents tried a whole host of attacks on Hillary."

Consequently, I was little surprised when I encountered a small article in the local daily the next day, alleging that Hillary was pulling the "gender card" and crying foul.

In today's paper, it was reported that Barack Obama scoffed at Hillary's alleged complaint that she was being forced to "compete in the all-boys club" of presidential politics.

Obama boldly went on to lament that he would never use his race to shield himself from attacks.

Well, I LOL.

In Law, there is a term...being on "point".

It essentially means to focus on the underlying, key issue, to avoid getting side-tracked.

Attorneys often go "off point" in court, in a deceptive effort to take attention away from the real issue, cause confusion - and hence - facilitate "smoke-and-mirrors" tactics to confound the matters at hand.

A clever trick!

But, Hillary Clinton never made that allegation.

As she correctly noted in today's New York Times,

"I don't think they're piling on me because I'm a woman. I think they're piling on me because I am winning."

For once, I have to side with Mrs. Clinton.

Overzealous, trigger-happy critics (and foes) jumped the gun, and consequently, fired off blanks!

Yeah, the boo-boo was not only made by Barack Obama - but key players in the political race, as well.

Advice to Mr. Obama?

Cooler heads prevail, Sir!

Dalai Lama...sophisticated New Yorkers don't bat an eye!

There was a big flap in the State Capitol last week when the Chinese caught wind of the President's plans to meet with the Dalai Lama in honor of the Congressional Medal bestowed upon him by the U.S. Government.

I reported in my own posts last week that Chinese Officials demanded - no other word for it, folks - that the honor be "revoked".

Over the weekend, when I stumbled across Clyde Haberman's take on the issue in the New York Times, I just LOL.

That's internet-ese for: laughed out loud!

When Mr. Haberman noted that the Communist party boss in Tibet denounced the Dalai Lama's actions in recent years as "splittest", he quipped,

"Now, there's a word you don't here often these days. Sounds like someone who likes his champagne in small bottles."

To be honest with you, when I proof-read my own article (where I also referenced the term) spell check reared its ugly head.

The dictionary came up empty-handed, too; no references!

However, there was an alternative offered up: splitter.

Webster notes,

Main Entry: split·ter
Pronunciation: \ˈspli-tər\
Function: noun
Date: 1623
1 : one that splits
2 : one who classifies organisms into numerous named groups based on relatively minor variations or characters — compare lumper
3 : split-fingered fastball

Ah, so maybe something was lost in the translation.

Maybe, the party boss was really inferring that the Dalai Lama was throwing a fastball, putting the screws to them, that sort-of-thing.

On the other hand, what would be so wrong with classifying organisms into numerous named groups based on minor variations or characters?

In that case, maybe he was calling His Holiness a "lumper"?

Well, he has been known to teach that sentient beings are "equal".

In that scenario, he has sort-of lumped us all together, I guess!

Mr. Haberman then reported that the Chinese threatened that if their demands were not met, there would be a serious impact.

Now, it got sinister.

Yes, Mr. Haberman managed to go where no other journalist had boldly gone forth before; he lamented, somewhat astutely,

"They offered no specifics. Maybe they'll stop sending us any more lead-painted toys, defective tires, toxic toothpaste, and tainted pet food. Wouldn't that be awful?"

Ha!

Haberman is a laugh riot, to be sure.

He proceeded to confidently report that in New York - sophisticated city-dwellers in the Big Apple - barely noticed the Dalai Lama on his recent visit; in spite of the fact His Holiness swirled through the streets in billowing saffron-colored robes.

And, in spite of the fact it was not even Halloween eve or in the vicinity of the Village.

Finally, he concluded with the notion that the United Nations were so much in the thrall of China, that they cast a blind eye to His Holiness. In fact, he duly reported that Officials didn't even have the courtesy, or good taste, to invite Tibet's spiritual leader for a look-see at the building.

Heck, the Chrysler Building - or the Cloisters - offer up better sight-seeing ops!

But, I do thank Mr. Haberman for telling it like it is - fall out - or no!

When you live in the moment - a Buddhist tenet - there is a whole world of possibilities.

For starters, not having to worry about repercussions!

Woody Allen...on Ingmar Bergman! Film news...

Several months ago, celebrated filmmaker Ingmar Bergman passed away.

Essentially, he was a director's director.

Yes, many behind the camera were in awe of the auteur - including Woody Allen - who knew him personally.

The New York Times recently asked Allen to reflect a little on Bergman.

"I've said it before to people who have a romanticized view of the artist and hold creation sacred: in the end, your art doesn't save you. No matter what sublime works you fabricate (and Bergman gave us a menu of amazing movie masterpieces) they don't shield you from the fateful knocking on the door that interrupted the knight and his friends at the end of the Seventh Seal."

According to Woody, Bergman enjoyed the process.

He cared little about the responses to his films.

It pleased him when he was appreciated, but as he told Mr. Allen once,

"If they don't like a movie I made - it bothers me - for about 30 seconds."

After all, it isn't possible to always please everyone.

"So amazing were his gifts as a storyteller that he could enthrall an audience with difficult material."

Although some walked out, and claimed after a screening that they didn't exactly understand the musings, they were inclined to confess they were gripped on the edge of their seats during every frame.

Bergman's allegiance was to theatricality. Although he was also a great stage director, his movie work wasn't just informed by theatre. The innovative director drew on painting, music, literature, and philosophy, according to the die-hard New Yorker.

Allen calls the renderings on film profound "Celluloid Poems"; in particular, those that focused brightly and insightfully on mortality, love, art, the silence of God, religious doubt, and failed marriage.

According to the Oscar-winning director, in spite of the dramatic themes, Mr. Bergman tended to be warm! amusing! jovial!

And did we doubt it?

Not surprisingly, he was also beguiled by the ladies.

Well, the way he lit the faces up on the screen (and the manner in which he artfully revealed their inner heartbeat) says it all, in my estimation.

In spite of all his quirks and philosophical and religious obsessions, Bergman was a born spinner of tales who couldn't help but entertain; in spite of the fact he was dramatizing the serious tomes of literary heavyweights such as Nietzsche and Kierkegaard.

One of my own favorite quotes of Kierkegaard is:

"You are that which you are in the process of becoming."

Mr. Allen admits that like all film stylists (I love that term!) - Fellini, Antonioni, and Bunuel - Bergman had his critics.

Allowing for what he refers to as "occasional lapses", Allen notes that people who know film best, the ones who make them - directors, writers, actors, and cinematographers - hold Bergman's work in the greatest esteem.

In closing, Mr. Allen noted that when he was asked how he was influenced by Bergman, he replied,

"He couldn't have influenced me. He was a genius and I am not a genius and genius cannot be learned or its magic passed on."

Amen!

http://www.julianayrs.com

David & Layla...faith-crossed lovers!

What happens when a young Jewish Lothario falls in love with a Kurdish beauty?

In the Independent feature - David & Layla - there's a lot of hand-wringing by the doting parents and fervent prayers for guidance from Allah and Abraham alike.

The romantic comedy was directed by Jay Jonroy and is set in New York.

In eye-catching opening scenes, interlaced with the credits, there are an enticing array of cultural images to digest.

In fact, the vivid montage sets an inviting tone as the upbeat storyline quickly unfolds.

The main character (David Moscow) - the producer of an ingenuous sex-show for cable - bumps into an exotic young woman on the street and cupid comes calling.

Fearing his "faith" might repel the green-card-seeking Immigrant (yes, there are a couple of subplots), the gushing romantic tells a fib. Under the guise of being Agnostic, he ardently pursues the woman in spite of protests from his devout conservative Jewish family.

Besides the religious differences, there are a number of other complications for the young horndog to surmount.

For example, there is the issue of his "tubes"; David reluctantly agreed to have them tied to appease a former girlfriend, not anxious to bear child.

On the threshold of marriage, a disheartened Layla (played by Shiva Rose) and her long-suffering parents are disturbed to learn that something funny is going on down there with David's "chromosomes".

In one amusing scene, Layla refers to him as a "unich".

"Eunuch", he protests without batting an eyelash.

At this juncture, she laments, "I Divorce You. I Divorce You. I Divorce you."

In some cultures, this is sufficient to cut the ties that bind, apparently.

Yes, it doth appear the coupling is doomed!

But, by way of a couple of amusing plot-twists, all the wrinkles are ironed out.

A festive Kurdish wedding heralds a titillating finale complete with marijuana-laced (green spice, eh?) banquet food enlivening the spirits of the unsuspecting guests.

There are a number of jokes at the expense of each faith - good-natured, nothing hateful - but throughout the film the Director/writer appears to be preoccupied with sex.

Maybe he was inclined to hold to the truism that "sex" sells and ventured down this path for commercial reasons.

But in this regard the script creaks; the gags are middle-aged - cliche - in fact.

For instance, in one scene the young man's parents wrestle over the issue of her performing a naughty sex act below the waist; in another, a hot-to-trot twosome interrupt a moment of ardent lovemaking to quarrel about condoms.

The material here is not fresh or original; it's pretty-familiar territory explored quite thoroughly - and exhaustively - in the genre in more provocative ways elsewhere.

"Layla & David" is bolstered - and succeeds admirably - in the main storyline that focuses on the clash of cultures and faith.

In a country like the burgeoning United States - where a melting pot is becoming more the norm - films focused on Interracial Marriage issues are ripe for the marketplace.

Although not a stellar piece of work, "David & Layla" is fun, entertaining, and worth the price of admission.

http://www.julianayrs.com