11 years old, actually, at the time of the taping of this concert (presented on PBS's "Great Performances" a week or so ago). I worry a bit about Jackie Evancho. She has an extraordinary singing voice, and as I understand it, she went to a production of "Phantom of the Opera" at the age of eight, got really turned on to singing, and came out with this BIG, mature sounding voice. And she loves to sing.

But many a talented young singer has been launched into a professional concert career MUCH too soon, when they should be nurturing and gently training their voice and not trying to push it into areas beyond it's capabilities before it's mature enough to handle it.

Operatic arias, such as O mio babbino caro from Puccini's comic opera "Gianni Schicchi" (with which she shot into prominence) is a fairly easy aria and well within her capabilities, but something like Nessun Dorma from Puccini's "Turandot" is totally inappropriate for her voice on a couple of counts. First, it was written for a tenor (the part of Calàf in the opera), and second, it is not a very easy aria to sing, even for a full-voiced tenor (signature piece for Luciano Pavarotti). I did notice, however, that she sang a much abbreviated version of it.

I am especially dubious about David Foster, the record producer and promoter who seems to be "masterminding" her singing career—and choosing her repertoire (such as Nessun Dorma, not because it suits Jackie's voice, but because it's one lots of people, including non-opera fans, are familiar with).

I dunno. . . .   She's got a great career ahead of her if she doesn't blow her voice out early. That's happened to too many talented young singers.

But—

Back to our regular broadcast.

"I found them [Democrats], basing too many political blather based on shit scientifically just plain FALSE"

Uh—do you ever proof-read what you write, GfS?

GfS, it is possible to have a cohesive and integrated political philosophy without belonging to a political party. But it is much more common for people to know so little about politics, or the history of the country (you, know:   we tried that before and it either did or did not work), that all they can do is make their political choices (who and what to vote for) on a strictly emotional level, engendered by the lazy habit of listening to television rabble-rousers.

Another common mistake is to think that when one has voted, one's political duties are over. A famous President, when presented with a docket of actions that a number of people felt he should make to put the country on a more stable course, said, "I agree with you. Now, MAKE me do it!"

If you don't like what Obama is doing, or feel that he is not living up to his campaign promises, don't just sit there and bitch! Write! Telephone! Sign petitions! Talk to people! Simply pissing and moaning on this web site may make you feel like the Westbrook Pegler of Mudcat, but it doesn't do a damned bit of good. LEAN on him. Let him know what you want him to do! MAKE him do it!

(Gutless wonders!!)

As to Ayn Rand and her adoption by the Tea Party:

pdq uses a typical "framing" tactic in an attempt to draw question to anything I say by dubbing me "Propaganda Minister."   Then he proceeds to make false statements about what I believe.

A transparent debating tactic, pdq, and a cheap shot. That sort of thing merely indicates that you are aware of the weakness of your own position.

pdq's screed was in answer to a post I made on another thread to which I linked. If anyone is getting in on this late, here it is again:   CLICKY.

From pdq a few posts above:   "One thing that gives Ayn Rand depth is that she lived in Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution and her father's family business was seized (along with the building, which the family also owned) and their property was given to Red's loyal friends. Rand's family was left impoverished and fled to another city in fear for their lives. She new exctly what can happen when a government has unlimited power."

Rather than giving Ayn Rand (Alissa Rosenbaum) depth and understanding, this traumatic uprooting during her childhood marked her indelibly for the rest of her life, leaving her personality with an underlying theme of anger and resentment. She had a very dominating personality, ruled the people in her inner circle with an iron hand, brooked absolutely no question. Discussion with her was impossible. You sat at her feet and she made pronouncements. And she was totally devoid of humor. This I get from people who knew her personally.

The following is a very good article, a book review of a recently publish biography of Ayn Rand. It's a little over 2,000 words, but well worth a read.

Ayn Rand.

Good insights into the nature of the Patron Saint of the Tea Party.

Don Firth