Inspiration

Among all the wonderful performances so far at the 13th Van Cliburn Internationional Competition taking place in Forth Worth is one I found particularly inspiring.

The 20-year-old blind Japanese pianist, Tsujii Nubuki, stole my heart with his preliminary round performance of the 12 Opus 10 etudes of Chopin, Images Book 1 of Debussy, and the Liszt Paganini Etude, La Campanella, a work requiring copious amounts of pianistic "sharpshooting." He made it to the semi-final round, and his second semi-final performance is later today. He played the Schumann Quintet last Friday as his first semi-final round performance.

In the midst of all the pyrotechics, he exposed his beautiful soul in the first of the Images, Reflets dans l'eau. If you don't have time for the entire performance, do stay with it through that one.

It's a bit of an effort to get there, but it's well worth it.

1. http://www.cliburn.tv/

2. "Click here to launch webcast." At this point you may have to downloaded a video streaming plug-in, Silverlight, from Microsoft. Do take the time to do it.

3. At the botom left of the screen, click "Preliminary Archives"

4. At the bottom right of the screen, click the right arrow until Tsujii Numuki appears, then click on his photograph.

And while you're at it, take some time to find his performer portrait as well as admiring the wonderful technical feat the Cliburn people have accomplished with live streaming of the entire competition.

__________________________________________

Update later in the day: I just finished watching his performance of Beethoven's Opus 106. I am speechless. This was exquisite, a rare moment in music. And he's only 20 years old. And blind. One does not expect artistry at this level from such young performers. And once again he exposed his soul to us in the most exquisite way possible, a blind man playing a work by a deaf composer. This is the triumph of the human spirit.

__________________________________________

Update 2: He was selected as one of the 6 finalists.

The Daily Humiliation of Robert Gibbs

Ana Marie Cox does it again.

I would suggest that Mr. Gibbs spend a few minutes at the Truman Library Website reading the Chronology of Desegration of the US Armed Forces. Here's just a snip. (HT/Pam's House Blend)

July 26, 1948: President Truman signs Executive Order 9981, which states, "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." The order also establishes the President's Committee on Equality of Treatment and opportunity in the Armed Services.

July 26, 1948: Army staff officers state anonymously to the press that Executive Order 9981 does not specifically forbid segregation in the Army.

July 27, 1948: Army Chief of Staff General Omar N. Bradley states that desegregation will come to the Army only when it becomes a fact in the rest of American society.

July 29, 1948: President Truman states in a press conference that the intent of Executive Order 9981 is to end segregation in the armed forces.

You Should Be Ashamed, Mr. President

I read about this yesterday on Towleroad and just can't get it out of my mind. It angered me yesterday, and the more I think about it the angrier I get.

This is what caught my eye:

"Shepard told The Advocate that she received the Obamas’ invitation on Monday...Upon arriving at the White House on Wednesday, Shepard first met with the president in the Oval Office. The meeting was short -- 'it was supposed to be 10 minutes, but his meeting beforehand ran long and I only had a minute or so with him' -- but it was long enough for Obama to assure Shepard that he was still a supporter of the hate-crimes bill named in honor of her son...."

Apparently Shepard has concerns that Harry Reid is going to attach the hate crimes bill to a DoD appropriations bill which she believes hurts its chances. She is urging people to call their Senators.

The context of all of this is the harsh criticism Obama has been receiving for what is beginning to look like his throwing his GLBT supporters under the bus. It is obvious to me that Obama simply used Judy Shepard to get the photograph above. Obviously he wasn't interested in discussing anything with her. He could easily have started what he was doing next a few minutes late, just as he was late to him appointment with Judy Shepard.

As much as I love and admire Judy Shepard, I can't stop wondering why Obama isn't talking to any GLBT people about what is supposedly going on. Why did he choose a straight person for this "meeting?" To my thinking, at least, he just wanted to use her and her reputation and her connection with a famous hate crime for a photo op.

Shame on you, Mr. President.

Obama MIA on Gay Issues

Pulitzer Prize winning Eugene Robinson can't help but notice that the self-described "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans" has gone missing in action.

From today's Washington Post ...

Believe it or not, often I can see the other side of an argument. I know that tough gun control laws save lives and make our communities safer, for example, but I also see clarity in the Second Amendment. I support affirmative action, but I realize that providing opportunity to some worthy individuals can mean denying opportunity to others. Thinking about some issues involves discerning among subtly graded shades of gray.

On some issues, though, I really don't see anything but black and white. Among them is the "question" of granting full equal rights to gay and lesbian Americans, which really isn't a question at all. It's a long-overdue imperative, one that the nation is finally beginning to acknowledge.

Before his inauguration, President Obama called himself a "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans." Now, with the same-sex marriage issue percolating in state after state and with the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy ripe for repeal, it's time for Obama to put some of his political capital where his rhetoric is.

Do not miss the rest of this article.

Judy Shepard Responds to Virginia Foxx's Non-Apology

Judy Shepard refuses to accept the bigot's sorry excuse for an 'apology'.

Is Virginia Foxx A Stupid Bigot, A Gullible Bigot, or Both?

As mentioned in an earlier post, the right wing hate groups have been busy as fire ants circulating lies in order to get politicians to vote against the Matthew Sheppard Act.

Yesterday the US House of Representatives was treated to a parade of ridiculous statements from stupid, gullible, and/or both bigots. Keith Olberman singled out the most heinous of the bigots, Rep Virginia Foxx R-NC, for his worst person in the world award. (Fast forward to about 2:40)

But it doesn't stop here. Foxx tried to back away from her bigotry by saying she was referring to an episode of 20/20 that "proved" the Matthew Sheppard incident was a hoax. Gotta' wonder what right wing whack job is feeing her this information and why she is falling for it hook, line, and sinker. (Well actually, I don't wonder about bigots who will grap onto any outrageous lie dangled in front of them if it suits their hate).

"The larger context of my remarks is important. I was referring to a 2004 ABC 20/20 report on Mr. Shepard's death. The 20/20 report questioned the motivation of those responsible for Mr. Shepard's death. Referencing this media account may have been a mistake, but if so it was a mistake based on what I believed were reliable accounts."

She could have spent about 30 seconds researching the 20/20 episode before making an even bigger fool of herself.

STATEMENT FROM JUDY AND DENNIS SHEPARD CONCERNING 20/20 UPCOMING REPORT ON THE MURDER OF MATTHEW SHEPARD

On November 26, 2004, 20/20 will air a piece that promised 'new information and facts' about Matt's beating and subsequent death. Dennis and I reviewed an advance copy of the show and were dismayed and saddened by the tabloid nature of the show, its lack of serious reporting of facts in evidence, and the amateurish nature of asking leading questions to the people who were interviewed.

I, too, was asked by 20/20 for an interview and agreed to do so to ensure that all of the facts were correctly stated. My only stipulation was that our legal advisor Sean Maloney, Matthew Shepard Foundation Board member and former senior White House staffer, had to be included in the interview to share his legal knowledge and expertise regarding Matthew's murder. He was quite eloquent in stating the facts pertaining to Matt's case, his knowledge of hate crimes in general, and in debunking 20/20's attempt to rewrite history. As you may or may not know, Sean was deleted from the interview entirely. The editing by 20/20 of my interview seems to leave out all of my relevant comments regarding the potential bias of the show and my deliberate restating of the facts of the case clearly ended up on the cutting room floor. My remarks were reduced to a few very personal maternal comments taken out of context to make it appear as if I agreed with 20/20's theories. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

This same subjective editing occurred with Dave O'Malley's interview. Dave, a Captain with the City of Laramie police force at the time, was Laramie's lead investigator in the case and worked in tandem with Rob DeBree, the lead investigator for the Albany County Sheriff's Department, to bring the case to trial and to provide the evidence necessary to convict both Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney. (Both law enforcement officers are in complete agreement with the facts as stated during the trials.)

Dave gave Ms. Vargas a detailed account of the case. He described the elements of hate and gay bias that were found during the extensive investigation and were substantiated in the large body of evidence collected for this case. Dave's comments were severely edited. Perhaps they were left out because he did not give Ms. Vargas the answer(s) she needed to maintain her 'new' theory concerning the murder. One of the most glaring omissions in the piece was the transcript of Aaron McKinney's in-custody interview which took place a few days after the murder. This occurred before any 'line of defense' had been established by legal counsel for the two defendants. Had that document been included, it would have shown an un-rehearsed and unemotional anti-gay account of the events before, during, and after leaving Matt tied to the fence.

Despite their promotional efforts to the contrary, 20/20 has not presented a 'new' theory. Much of this information was included in a Vanity Fair story in March 1999. What is new is the unfortunate downslide of a reputable news magazine show when its highly respected host retires. 20/20 has sacrificed years of professional journalistic ethics and values for a stab at revisionist history ... and ratings.

Right Wing Hate Groups Campaign With Lies

The American Family Association and the Traditional Values Coalition have been sharing "data" in their effort to stop the Matthew Shepard Act from being passed by the House of Representatives. (It did pass today, BTW).

The TVC has been named an official hate group by SPLC's Hatewach. I can't help wonder about when the American Family Association will be added to the list.

Here's an excellent debunking of one set of the TVC/AFA lies.