Liberal Fascism, Jonah Goldberg
This is the best book that I’ve read in a while. I love studying political movements. I’m determined to finish this book quickly. I appreciate Goldberg’s sarcastic writing style. Sarcasm is under-appreciated in our society. It’s not dense, but it’s long. There’s a lot of material in each chapter, and most of it is completely unfamiliar. Having attended a Christian elementary and high school, I’m familiar with many of these concepts since history was taught with a Judeo-Christian worldview. However, Goldberg’s book shocks because it exposes so many different perspectives.

The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek
There might be an impromptu book club around this. It’s on Read to Lead and is a conservative classic.

After the Hangover, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
A few weeks ago, I discovered BookSneeze through Thomas Nelson Publishing. They give bloggers free copies of books in exchange for reviews. The only problem is that you can only get one book at a time. I’ve also seen numerous reviews of this book lately, so I’m excited to read it.
Completed May 17, 2010

Spoken from the Heart, Laura Bush
I’ve been waiting for the release of this book. Reading the reviews, it should be good.

Sign Me Up! A Marketer’s Guide To Email Newsletters that Build Relationships and Boost Sales, Blumberg, et al. &
The Truth About Email Marketing, Simms Jenkins
These are a priority this month. In a previous post Mr. Jenkins was nice enough to comment here, so I look forward to reading his book!
Sign Me Up! Completed: May 9, 2010

Writing to Change the World, Mary Pipher
I keep wanting to start this, but other things happen. I will read this book in May.
Completed: May 16, 2010

Conscious of a Conservative, Barry Goldwater
This is another conservative classic that’s been on my reading list for a while. It’s also on Read to Lead. Today, Goldwater’s classic was on clearance at Barnes & Noble. Clearance stickers and books make a dangerous combination.
Completed: May 8, 2010

Were I already not overwhelmed with books, I would have picked up Carrie Fisher’s biography because it looks hilarious, and the new biography on Anne Boleyn by Alison Weir. Boleyn is a fascinating character, and biographers have only recently given her attention. Last year, I read a biography from the 70s that essentially chronicled her through the spin that Henry VIII created during her trial and death. I’ve also read newer biographies of Elizabeth I that have been much more sympathetic to her mother. Weir’s perspective looks interesting.

If anyone ever gets the impression that I’m a stuffy high-brow conservative, who only reads biographies and political books, rest assured that my taste is also middle America plebeian. Earlier, I penciled in the release of Dead in the Family, the latest Sookie Stackhouse novel by Charlaine Harris, on my calendar. I ran to Target when it was released on Tuesday and bought it. I only have about 30 more pages to read. I try to feed the brain with more “smart books,” but who can resist the occasional fun novel?
Completed May 7, 2010

She’s the second-most admired woman in the country after Hillary Clinton. Per Politico:

When Gallup asked 1,025 adults nationwide to name the woman they admire most, 16 percent picked Clinton. Palin was the only other woman to be mentioned by at least 10 percent, being selected by 15 percent of those surveyed.

Clinton has been in the public eye for nearly 20 years now, whereas Palin a little over one. Given Palin’s grassroots following, no. 1 book, and unbelievably successful booktour, this is not a big surprise. Honestly, this poll is probably more of an indicator of who’s been in the news the most. Top of the Ticket notes that Clinton has been ranked since 1993, the year she moved into the White House:

When I read the fashion piece in the New York Times by Cathy Horyn comparing Sarah Palin and Michelle Obama, I was happy to see someone try to print something questioning M. Obama’s choices, even if she gets some facts wrong about Palin. She writes:

It’s hard to see now why so many columnists got their tights in a twist over Ms. Palin’s spending $75,000 of perfectly good Republican money at Neiman Marcus during the 2008 Republican convention. Have you seen Neiman’s numbers lately? After 18 straight months of declines, it wouldn’t be surprising to find a little shrine erected in Ms. Palin’s honor.

In November, the NYT, the same publication where Ms. Horyn writes, interviewed Lisa A. Kline, the stylist behind Wardrobegate. The article set the record straight that Palin had nothing to do with all of the money spent at Neiman Marcus. Palin even spends a considerable amount of time writing her side of the story in Going Rogue. She remembers looking through the clothes and being shocked to find an $80 pair of pantyhose and wondering why they were better than $5 drugstore brands. She also writes at length about wearing her own clothes, borrowing a pair of black Theory pants from a staffer and supporting Alaska designer, Paige Adams-Geller by wearing Paige jeans on the campaign. When she traveled to meet Senator McCain about the possibility of becoming his running mate, she packs two Ann Taylor suits. The last time I checked, neither Theory nor Ann Taylor are expensive brands. They make up many professional wardrobes of average American women.

I do agree with Ms. Horyn in the lack of scandal in how Mrs. Obama favors expensive labels, and by expensive, I mean expensive.

Mrs. Obama, though, has successfully separated the personal from the political. Indeed, the only thing more surprising than the storm over Ms. Palin’s “Pretty Woman” makeover is that almost no one has raised an eyebrow over Mrs. Obama’s wearing of non-American labels, which include Nina Ricci and Junya Watanabe, and some of the most expensive at that.

In the 1960s, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, a true fashion icon, gave up French designers because the public wanted her to wear American.  In the 1980s, Nancy Reagan was vilified for wearing expensive labels despite close connections to designers and a personal fortune to buy them. Barbara and Laura Bush always wore high-end, respectable labels but they  weren’t fashion industry darlings like the current FLOTUS. They did pull out the designer frocks when it counted, and Oscar De la Renta famously dressed Laura Bush.

While we’re in a recession similar the early 80s, Michelle Obama is praised for wearing expensive designers that most Americans can’t dream of wearing or even walking in their stores.*  Even her “cheap” J. Crew outfits cost over $500 each. When was the last time the average American woman spent $500 on a singal outfit? Hardly a peep is made when Mrs. O wears $500 sneakers to serve soup, orders custom-made, thigh-high boots from an elite French shoemaker or carries a $900 clutch. Because Mrs. Obama is a progressive and mirrors the politics of the fashion elite, they gush over her. As Horyn notes:

Mrs. Obama’s choices are all insider, apart from her shorts and those strategically worn plebe numbers from Target and Talbots. If she got any more insider, she’d be backing down a runway. She wears Rodarte, Jason Wu, Sophie Theallet, Narciso Rodriguez, Thakoon, Isabel Toledo and Rick Owens, labels that in terms of creativity and price are at the highest level of fashion. Go much higher and you hit couture.

That’s nearly more elite than the labels Nancy Reagan wore and she was labeled a cold-hearted fashionista. The only problem is that the Reagans clearly had the money to spend on those clothes. What about the Obamas? Neither of them have the income to afford that level of dressing. That level of dressing requires at least a $150,000 investment each year. To pull that off, you need Cindy McCain levels of income. The President only makes $400,000 plus an expense account of $50,000. Their daughters’ elite school, Sidwell Friends starts at $30,000 per kid. (It’s nice. I frequently used to walk by it when I lived in Upper Georgetown.)

What’s more likely is Mrs. O shares the same elitist, progressive politics of the design world and isn’t afraid to drop names when they gift her items. And when she drops the names of international designers, they make those snobby Europeans feel even more warm and mushy on the inside since the Obamas are “restoring” the profile of America. It’s like having a permanent red carpet on CNN. I was always led to believe that it’s in bad taste to spend copious amounts of money in a recession, even when you can afford it. But then, the Obamas are always the exception to every rule.

Interestingly, the Huffington Post attacks Horyn for her remarks about Mrs. O:

We think Sarah Palin is incredibly attractive, and looks great in a tailored and crisp style that suits her look. Michelle Obama experiments with looks, a seeming reflection of the many moods, roles, and self-images of women today. More power to them both, as they reflect, via their sartorial choices, on the multi-tasking challenge of all modern women.

Odd, “experimenting” with your style is not what’s typically praised in the fashion world. Fashion icons–Jackie Kennedy, Audrey Hephburn, Grace Kelly and modern celebrities like Renee Zellweger, Sarah Jessica Parker and Sienna Miller are known for distinct fashion tastes. In order to be a fashion icon, you’re supposed to have a recognizable style, not experiment. If Michelle Obama is still experiementing with her “style” well into her forties, she’s not an icon. And if her “style” is the frumpy cardigan and belt look, I can see why the labels are falling over themselves to save their precious liberal FLOTUS from worst dressed lists.

If Mrs. O had the politics of say, Sarah Palin, would her fashion choices be lauded?

*During my senior trip to Los Angeles, we went shopping on Rodeo Drive and quickly discovered no one could afford to buy anything. In Gucci, a salesperson closely follow us before escorting us out. The only store that showed any kind of customer service was Ralph Lauren, a plebian American designer. When I splurge on expensive clothes find them on sale at Marshall’s, I usually end up buying one of Ralph Lauren’s lines or Michael Kors, another American designer.

H/T: Don Surber

Anyway, this is to premise my questions on this year’s White House Christmas decorations, which are the pinnacle of Christmas regalia.

I looked at a number of sites showcasing this year’s decorations. I don’t know. It’s not bad, but it’s not great. Something is just off. This isn’t to slam the Obamas because I disagree with nearly every policy they support or sometimes dislike the First Lady’s wardrobe. I just love Christmas and look forward to seeing the White House decorated each year. For the record, I also disliked a few years of the Bush Administrations’ decorations, particularly 2006 when I got to tour the White House at Christmas.

The theme this year is “Reflect, Rejoice, Renew,” which is perfectly fine. Vague themes are harder to decorate around since they have no parameters. My favorite year to date was in 2001 when Laura Bush chose “Home for the Holidays” and had an abundance of flocked trees, icicles and “snow.”

Overall, the decorations are just ok. I think that might be my problem. There’s no “wow!” factor. It’s Christmas at the White House for goodness sake. Decorations should be magical or over-the-top. This year is ok, but it’s not anything special. They look like decorations that could be seen in my mom’s living room or any random issue of a holiday decorating magazine. There’s nothing original.

My biggest issue is the tree in the Blue Room. Something is just off. I think that it’s the  proportions. The gold bows simply overpower the tree, and you don’t notice that it’s covered with unique ornaments. I think it would look better if the ornaments were oversized to match the giant ribbon. When you have a huge tree, decorations need to be big as well.

Compared to up close:

I do like the cranberry mantle decorations in the Red Room. I’m a fan of using fruit and natural decorations

And I love the red topiaries in the Green Room.

There you have it. It’s ok and everything matches, but it looks like Michelle hired an upscale florist found in every American city. It’s not what I would expect with the resources of the East Wing staff who spend months working on Christmas plans. The White House should look more impressive than any random house in upscale suburbia, which is most evident in this slideshow. Pinecone wreaths in the East Hall?