Ignoring the inauguration
If you’ve seen very little about our incoming president at this website recently, it’s because I’m simply not interested. As someone who hardly ever watches TV and gets his news about the world primarily from the Internet, where one chooses what one reads about and does not have things shoved into one’s face, I am aware, in a vague, distant sense, that there is this obsessive Obama phenomenon going on. And I know, without looking into it, that it’s 100 percent hype. And the hype includes the inauguration itself, which I do not intend to watch. I may view it at some later point on tape, but I decline to participate in the collective orchestrated orgasm of the inauguration of the first nonwhite president. (I might have been reluctantly willing to watch it, but was decisively turned off by Obama’s selection of the anti-American leftist Joseph Lowery and the sodomite bishop Gene Robinson, whose ordination destroyed my church, to deliver prayers as part of the inaugural event.) The hype and the ecstasy will pass, and then there will be the reality of Obama as president. At that point I’ll start paying attention.
Ray G. writes from Dearbornistan:
My wife and I are also avoiding television this weekend, up to and including Tuesday. What with MLK Day (now whole weekend) and Barry Dunham’s “Immaculate Inauguration,” we simply can’t take anymore political correct “celebration” pushed by our intrepid newsmedia (PR Dept. for BHO) 24/7.Vincent Chiarello writes:
Among my many blessings, I consider not having a television set one of my most Divinely inspired. I have, for nearly a decade, been immunized from the filth that now is considered “mainstream” entertainment, and the vapid ruminations of “inside the Beltway” types that are as predictable as they are repugnant. I cannot fathom how any even quasi religious parents raising children today can consider having their growing children watch the sewage that would flood their screen. Because I live in the Washington, D.C. area, however, I have not escaped the clutches of The Washington Post, whose coverage of the 44th president cannot be described as anything less than hagiography.
On further thought, I would say this. There are two ways of understanding the inaugural phenomenon: as substanceless hype, albeit the biggest hype in history, and thus to be ignored, as I said above; or as nothing less than a historic re-symbolization of the United States of America as an empire under a leftist, nonwhite god-emperor. (Here is evidence for that assertion.) If the latter is the case, I still think it’s better to avoid any contact with the inaugural phenomenon, so as not to let oneself be affected by it, either to feel excited or to feel crushed. One should keep one’s distance from the whole thing. Later, after Obama becomes president, after the orchestrated hype and emotions of the inaugural event have passed, there will be plenty of time to look objectively at what is happening and deal with it.