On What Propaganda is Condemned and Countenanced at Pyeongchang Winter Olympics

The 23rd Winter Olympiad in Pyeongchang, South Korea had a reoccurring theme of Peace, as was evident from the Opening Ceremonies.  It was well known that athletes from North and South Korea would march as a unified team into Pyeongchang Olympic Stadium.  

One of the draws for casual sports fans to watch the Olympics is the Opening Ceremonies. The pageantry of the Opening Ceremonies, as expressed through artistic expression as well as thematic choice sets the mood for the Olympic Games.  Afterwards, there is the Parade of Nations, when all of the competitors gather in a gesture of unity and good will.  During this long march of nations, television viewers often have to endure commentary from NBC announcers to add color and context to the visuals.  Often this dialogue is pap or seems scripted.

However, when the Japanese team made their debut at the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, NBC Asia correspondent Joshua Cooper Ramos offered an incredible generalization.  Ramos claimed that Koreans looked with admiration to Japan as an important example of cultural, economic and technological transformation.




Several hours after uttering this insensitive and insulting insinuation, NBC Sports issued a hasty apology.

NBC paid $967 million for broadcast rights for the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, and it would seem that they did not want to insult their hosts.

With that in mind, one wonders why NBC keeps pushing North Korean propaganda while covering the Winter Olympics.  No doubt that a unified Korean team marching during the Parade of Nations was a big story.  It epitomizes the international aspiration of brotherhood and exemplifies the Pyeongchang Game's theme of Peace.  

[Front Center] Vice President Mike Pence [Back Center] Kim Yo Jung, sister of DPRK dictator Kim Jun Un

It is understandable that an Olympic broadcaster would want to capitalize on controversy by showing how close Vice President Mike Pence was seated to North Korean Kim Jong Un's sister Kim Yo Jong during the Opening Ceremonies.




The coverage of the North Korea cheerleaders during the womens' hockey game between Korea and Switzerland does raise eyebrows.  It was a cute featurette to have a piece about the some of the 200 woman squad of  the North Korean "Army of Beauty" cheerleaders leading chants during the 0-8 rout of Korea.  Some say that the synchronized chants of the North Korea Beauty Cheerleaders stole the show. But what what telling is what they chanted and how they performed.  These NPDK cheerleaders chanted "Unity" waving "neutral" flags of a unified Korea. After each goal by their opponent, they chanted: "Cheer up!".  Perhaps that exemplifies a cultural trait.  


What has been shown but little explored are instances in which the female Beauty Squad use big heads of a Korean man.  Hmm.  Who could this be?  


It is dubious that it was an everyman Korean.  The Big Head looks rather like an idealized image of North Korea dictator Kim Jong Un. What does it say about the consequences of  "Unity".  Is that something that all Koreans also believe?

UPDATE 02/12/2018  BBC News quotes Korean media that the DPRK Army of Beauties cheerleaders were holding up big heads of Kim Il-sung, the grandfather of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un (the first of the Hermit Kingdom's Juche post World War II dictators).  Yet the South Korean Unification Ministry insists that the cheerleaders were just holding up cut outs of "a good looking man". 

Appraising the Impact of Tillerson at Foggy Bottom

Over the weekend, Trump Administration Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was accused of saying that the President, his boss, was a "f***ing moron". This exasperated expletive was alleged uttered after President Trump's rousing remarks before the 2017 Boy Scouts Jamboree. When these comments came to public light, Tillerson held a news conference which denied that Vice President Pence needed to convince him to stay at Foggy Bottom because he never considered resigning.  It is notable, however, that Tillerson did not back away from the original insulting allegation. This has led pundits to ponder how long Tillerson will remain as Secretary of State.

In the Politico Magazine, Rich Lowry wondered if anyone would notice whether anyone would notice if Tillerson left his position at Foggy Bottom.  In the Trump Administration, foreign policy leads seem more driven from the Oval Office (or perhaps Twitter postings) than from Cabinet officials. Secretary of State Tillerson has voiced policy positions, particularly on Climate Change and Qatar, which seem at odds with President Trump.  Moreover, @POTUS Trump has posted Twitter thoughts which undermine Tillerson attempts to achieve diplomatic solutions with North Korea.

During his nomination hearings, Tillerson was vilified for his role at Exxon and connections to Big Oil. But through these petrochemical connections, Tillerson was said to have cultivated good relations with the Russian Federation.  It does not seem that Tillerson has neither been effective in lessening tensions with Moscow nor distancing the Trump Administration from accusations of Russian collusion.

One of Tillerson's virtues was that he had more of a business background than a political resume, thus his organizational skills might be different at Foggy Bottom.  Perhaps this may be true on paper, but Secretary of State Tillerson seemed reluctant to clean house at the State Department. In April 2017, well after his confirmation, Tillerson indicated that he was in no rush to fill nearly 200 State Department posts.  In August 2017, Tillerson announced that there would be fewer promotions at State. These may have been an attempt at pruning an overstaffed State Department, but it also gave the opportunity for Obama Administration holdovers to exert undue influence in Foggy Bottom.

One of the major motivations for many loyal Trump voters is to "Clean the Swamp". In other words, to divest power from progressive elites who have burrowed their way into the bureaucracy.  This is especially true in the State Department. But this is impossible to achieve if the chief acts like a short termer.  In late July 2017, Tillerson confided with friends that he did not expect to last a year on the job.  Notwithstanding his recent denial of resigning over the moron kerfuffle, Tillerson is not taking the broad measures to clean house. The Iran Deal is an example in which the State Department has been enthusiastic in promoting and preserving, yet it is in conflict with Mr. Trump's campaign promises as well as inklings from the West Wing.  A cabinet official who is deemed a short termer will have little sway with the bureaucracy in aligning with the President's foreign policy predilections.

Secretaries of State can take different tacks to their job.  Henry Kissinger, who was Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford, took a leading role in formulating the realpolitik and detente foreign policies.  George Schultz, President Reagan's long serving Secretary of State, did not seek the limelight and was able to earn the loyalty of State Department officers by staffing for professionalism rather than political concerns.  Hillary Clinton, President Obama's First Secretary of State, did her bosses bidding by racking up frequent flier miles in visiting diplomatic outposts rather than take the lead on foreign policy.

Aside from trying to shrink the size of the State Department by attrition and to stop relying on special envoys, it is unclear how Secretary of State Tillerson is making a difference at his job.  Moreover, the friction between Tillerson and Trump on personal and policy fronts, makes his position tenuous.





At a time in which Americans have been distracted by ephemeral issues like the NFL Taking the Knee during the National Anthem and dealing with disasters, such as hurricanes and the Las Vegas shooting, there are serious foreign policy concerns brewing.  North Korea continues to be belligerent.  The world will no longer buy the peace through bribes for worthless promises of non-aggression or denuclearization.  While the United Nations has applied additional sanctions, this does not seem to be achieving the objective of de-escalation of tension or DPRK regime change.





Considering a prospective conflict with North Korea, it would be unwise to have Secretary Tillerson leave his Secretary of State post at this time.  However, presuming this situation with the Kim Jung Un regime comes to a head in the near future, it would be prudent to have a Secretary of State who is more in tune with the Commander-in-Chief's expectations for Foggy Bottom and who more accurately reflects (at least in public) the President's foreign policy positions. 

Scuttlebutt on the Sony Hack Cyberwar Skirmish

Former Speaker of the House  Newt Gingrich opined that America lost its first cyberwar associated by the Sony Hack, which demanded that the feature film "The Interview" be withdrawn from distribution. 

So America's freedom of speech is subject to the whims of a tinpot dictator (albeit with a few nuclear bombs) from the Hermit Kingdom of North Korea. 

A corporation like Sony Pictures may harbor concerns about liability associated with the publicized threats made by the anonymous hackers calling themselves "Guardians of Peace"  against movie-goers who attended the now cancelled Christmas day opening.  

Voices from both side of the political spectrum, from former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) to Alan Dershowitiz.  But Sony Pictures pulled "The Interview" from all prospective platforms.  There may also have been pecuniary motive for the move.  If the picture is never officially released, Sony Pictures could recover from insurance money, otherwise they would absorb the $41 million production costs.  

This does not explain Hollywood's cowardice towards pissing off Pyongyang. After Sony Pictures cancelled "The Interview",  the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema in Austin, Texas announced that it would show "Team America: World Police"(2004),  Alas those puckish plans were foiled by Paramount Pictures which refused to offer the Trey Parker and Matt Stone's film which satirizes Kim Jon Un's father Kim Jong-il due to "circumstances beyond their control." Those who want to revel to "I'm So Ronery" can still see it on Netflix or through Amazon Instant Video. 

If that is not sufficient evidence that Hollywood waved the white flag for the Hermit Kingdom, New Regency pulled the plug on the Steve Carell project "Pyongyang", which was slated to start up in March, 2015. And George Clooney spent a week asking a large number of Hollywood executives to sign a petition protesting the Norks blackmailing Hollywood through the Sony Hack.  Tellingly, no one had enough courage to sign the petition.  During World War II, studio produced propaganda pieces like Bugs Bunny cartoons sending up der Fuehrer. Now, such Tinseltown execs like the fortitude to sign a meager memo protesting business blackmail and standing up for freedom of speech. 

During his end of the year press conference, President Barack Obama opined that Sony Picture executives made a bad choice in pulling the film and that they should have talked with him.  It seems that running a rough cut in front of State Department officials was insufficient. Our Dear Leader's messianic charisma, Obama's renown negotiating skills and his steadfastness in setting red lines (and then ignoring them) surely would have made a difference.  But President Obama promises to study the problem and offer a measured US response to North Korean Cyberwar provocation. After all, Mr. Obama will be 6,000 miles closer on golf courses in Hawaii to offer leadership.

The United States does have limited options in dealing with North Korea.  There are virtually no economic sanctions left to use.  Moreover, Pyongyang is insulated by charity from the Peoples' Republic of China so the NORKS can continue create trouble with the US.  We can not forget that the Hermit Kingdom does have nuclear capabilities.  Then there is the small matter of the DRK having 10,000 missiles aimed at our treaty ally South Korea, where we incidentally have 37,000 soldiers stationed.  

There may be black operations by the US which should not become public, as well as behind the scenes diplomatic de marches with DRK allies in Beijing.  But the best public responses that I have heard so far involve Hollywood using the Oscars ceremony on Washington's Birthday to use "The Interview" actors James FRANCO, Seth Rogen and Randall Park to come out in character and joke around.  While at the same time, the Pentagon sponsors a joint training operation with the South Korean, Japanese and American military forces in the Sea of Japan.

But considering the cravenness recently displayed by Hollywood, it is more likely that the Oscars would be hosted by the actual Kim Jong Un with a special appearance by Sony Picture's Racial Inclusion Czar, the Reverend Al Sharpton.

h/t: Steve Sack

Obama White House Channels JFK?

In response to the uproar over President Obama normalizing relations with Cuba without gaining any real concessions from the Castros, White House spokesman Josh Earnest invoked the spirit of JFK.  Earnest intimated that President Kennedy would change his policy of isolation after seeing that it did not bring about the desired change.

Really?  Is this wisdom akin to Mr. Obama's assertion that he heard the 2/3rds of Americans who did not participate in the Midterms shellacking of President Obama's Democrats in the House and Senate?  Of course, such perspecaciousness is unsurprising for a Commander-in-Chief who can see fallen heroes in a Memorial Day audience, especially Navy Corpsemen (sic). 

While the left and the right may seek to claim the mantle of Camelot after 50 years, it certainly seems like a stretch to imply that a Cold Warrior such as JKF, would give up for nothing.  After all, President Kennedy gave the final  approved for the Bay of Pigs invasion (before he withdrew air cover during the operation thus dooming the mission).  And Kennedy stood up to the Soviets during the Cuban Missile Crisis.  Furthermore, JFK  plotted several assassination attempts against Fidel.  It seems with his spurious assertion that Josh Earnest continues to be the ironic Obama spokesman.

But pro arguendo, should American foreign policy toward economically isolating Havana change after 50 years?  Well, 190 other nations have not been observing the boycott and what sort of political and economic liberalization has occurred in the island prison state?   Hmm, foreign tourists enjoy white  sandy beaches in Cuba but are cordoned off from the grime the common people live with through tourist apartheid separated by barbed wire fences.  Many regular Cubans seek to work as "sex workers" since prostitutes can garner some hard currency from tips.  Western companies can invest, but they must partner with the kleptocratic communist Cuban government  which keeps 92% of the joint venture worker's salary.

Then consider President Obama's diplomatic skills.  Once again, the 44th President is coddling a dictatorial government who is actively opposed to our interests, without winning anything in return. Wonder what our Dear Leader will offer Kim Jong Un in the wake of Sony Hack Attack in appeasement?

h/t: A.F. Branco 

Was Hillary Clinton's Smart Power Speech Being Too Clever By Half?

Former First Lady, New York Senator and the Obama Administration's first Secretary of State Hillary Clinton only attracted a small crowd when she spoke at Gaston Hall in Georgetown University. 

Much of the press focused on the empty seats.  Clinton staffers blamed the meager crowd on finals. Politicos pointed to poor staff preparation for having their principal speak before an optically empty house.  But this is not the first time which Hillary has been unable to fill the seats, as demonstrated by her rally in October 2014 at the University of Maryland, College Park. 

 Liberal media pundits like Dana Millbanks opined that Mrs. Clinton is a candidate who does not have the "new car" smell.  After all, Hillary has been in the national public eye since 1992.  So her presumed second run for the Presidency is about a quarter century after her life intertwined with the District of Calamity.

Pundits from Fox News questioned Hillary's political raison d'etre.  Democrat pollster Doug Schoen (and former adviser to President Bill Clinton) wondered what was Mrs. Clinton's rationale for running for the nation's highest office.  Monica Crowley quoted her former boss ex President Richard Nixon: "The only thing worse in politics than being wrong is being dull," and Crowley concluded that Hillary is boring.

Recently, I was able to have a civil exchange with rabid liberals from beyond the District of Calamity who had definite opinions on politics but admitted that they did not follow it closely.  When one of the interlocutors opined that he supported Hillary, I asked him to name one achievement which Secretary of State accomplished during her four years at Foggy Bottom.  This simple question was a stumper.  The best excuse that I heard during the exchange was that the world did not hate us like they did under the Bush Administration.  Ambiguous perceptions of being better liked in the world with a dash of Bush Derangement Sydrome does not make for a compelling general election campaign eight years after "43" left the Oval Office.

So it seems that both Hillary's supporters and detractors should shift away from worry about smart politics and concentrate on Hillary's concept of "smart power".  Does the former Secretary of State believe that empathizing with an enemy like Al Qaeda or its break-off successor ISIS is a successful strategy?  Can America realistically define the problem and shape the solution when negotiating  with the Mullahs in Iran from stopping their military nuclear ambitions, or will the US again be played like in North Korea and arguably as we are in Iraq with the six party talks?

Is a theory of smart power just being geopolitically too clever by half when interacting with unconventional diplomatic counterparts?  It is kind of hard to use "smart" power to aim to sing Kumbaya with others who are intractably oathed to obliterate you, as is demonstrated by Hamas' modus operandi viz-a-viz Israel.

h/t: A.F. Branco

Budgeting Time for Barack-etology

As March Madness begins in earnest today, President Obama took the time before his quick Spring Break trip to the Middle-East to fill out his NCAA March Madness Brackets.  

The Celebrity-in-Chief then taped an ESPN segment to explain his choices--

While the POTUS picks have been one in four during his tenure in the Oval, it calls for an even basic question--why is he wasting time on inconsequential items when he has a nation that he should be governing?

As sequestration comes into full effect, and the Obama Administration cancelled school tours of the White House and threatens the Easter Egg Roll (while still having costly golf outings with Tiger Woods and a St. Paddy's Day party), he vexes over college hoops.   As Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) call for US boots on the ground in Syria, additional missile interceptors are deployed on the West Coast for a North Korean nuclear ICBM threat and Iran is close to having nuclear weapons, our re-elected leader plays with Barack-etology? 

The law requires that the Executive Branch submits its Federal Budget by February 4th.  As it stands,  the Obama Administration won't have it done by April Fools Day. 

If it's any consolation,  Barack Budgets have gotten zero votes in  Congress. So it seems that he does better at his Bracketology than budgeting anyways. 

Perhaps we could profit from the POTUS picks and make up the sequestration shortfall.  But considering that he chose safe picks: Ohio State, Florida, Louisville and Indiana, it won't have much of a payout.  Unlike if someone chose in Paddy Pool chose Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the Conclave Championship --The Sweet Sistine. The man who became Pope Francis paid off at 33-1. 

We do not need  bread and circuses.  We need leadership from Washington.  A couple of weeks ago, President Obama went through the motions of a Capitol Hill charm offensive.  Then he cracks wise against Congress when setting foot on foreign soil. It make one wonder if he is serious about the responsibilities as the Leader of the Free World, or if he just seriously enjoys the spotlight and the trappings of the Oval Office.