Simon Cowell quits American Idol. . . that gotta hurt! Not for Simon, but for the show.

Both Fox and Simon said that the show will survive. I disagree.

I don't think the show will go off air, but it will not have the same rating or audience number as before. So what if Ellen DeGeneres is a judge now, the show will be funnier, but still not the same. Simon is the top reason for most people to watch American Idol; he's rude, but often right, and these what people like. American Idol without Simon Cowell is like ice tea without the tea, what's the point?

Moreover, I think Simon's X Factor will cast the net wider, because of so many ways, including the fact that it's a new show. And if Paula Abdul joins the panel, it will definitely put American Idol under the bus.

Ever since I was enchanted with Mia Michaels's dance routine, I've been having urges to do a contemporary dance; weird, huh?

As far as I can remember I've never known contemporary dance until I began to watch Fox's So You Think You Can Dance. There's something about the movements which often, especially Mia's, capture the emotion of the songs really well.

I want to be able to dance contemporary.

Yup, I think so, it's way too easy to be a critic, especially when you are Simon Cowell; but, unfortunately this blog post is not about him, it's about being a critic.

When you are in a democratic country like the USA or Indonesia, the chance of being blasted by critics are high. It's not wrong, but sometimes people just need to step back and look at the reality and the facts.

For example, the President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, recently said that Indonesia was economically better off in 2009 despite of the recession. The comments that this article gets are provocative; most are really, ignorant comments. One comment said something like it's nice to be complimented but the facts are often wrong. And, I said to myself, this person has not even seen the report from the Ministry of Finance; how ignorant!

It's easy to be a critic, may be because we were taught to judge people from we were young. Remember, "Don't talk to a stranger!". The media have a lot to do in shaping the public's perception also. For example, I found that the media always attribute the words "Islam" or "Muslim" after or before the word terrorism or terrorists. They don't do that to other religion, and people still wonder why people fear Islam so much.

It's easy to be a critic, may be because they think democracy equals full liberty. That is an interpretation I found ridiculous. Democracy is not full liberty, there is no such thing. We live in a country governed by laws. The laws dictate what we can and can't do. Democracy is a governmental ideology, hence, what can and can't do is still on the hands of the government. Even when there are no governmental laws, there are still norms, ethics, that guides our behaviours.

It's easy to be a critic because our "hero" said so. Most of us are probably unaware about politics, and most just follow one party; and suddenly the party's opinions become bible--the opinions are always true. Look at how many Republicans think President Obama wanted to turn US to become an Islamic nation because Sean Hannity said so. Look at how many Republicans think President Obama never uttered a word about terrorism in his Cairo speech because Megyn Kelly said so; and those who believe were just too ignorant to even read the full transcript of the speech.

So, my point is, it's easy to be a critic, but stop, and look at the facts. Find the right information, digest and analyse the information that we have, then we can critic. In today's age of information, we should not be one step behind just because we are too lazy or too ignorant to find and analyse the information.

A few days ago, I finished reading a book titled Manusia Indonesia by Mochtar Lubis. It's the full transcript of Mochtar's speech on 1977, along with some responses and responses to those responses.

The speech is a provocative and, of course, controversial. The main content of the speech is six characteristics of Indonesians. Well, five of them are bad characteristics, only one that I found positive. These are stereotypes of Indonesians; but, just like any stereotype, it's neither totally right nor wrong.

The speech was 32 years after Indonesia's independence, and there are some particular sentences that I found intriguing; one of them is Mochtar's hope that there will be manusia pancasila by 2000. However, when I look at how the youngsters now act, it seems that the stereotypes are even more true.

I will not dwell to explain or describe the six characteristics. I will be posting an article about it for Diaspora, I just need to find an angle for it.

Just one more thing. . .

Happy New Year!!

Two powerhouse interviewers, one subject. Barbara Walters and Oprah Winfrey were interviewing Sarah Palin, as Palin is on a media tour for her best-selling book "Going Rouge: An American Life".

This blog thread, however, is my thought on Oprah's interview. [Have not watched Barbara's yet]

Part 1

Oprah started the interview with three topics. Clearing the controversy about Oprah snubbing Palin on the campaigning months; Palin's first involvement with McCain's campaign team; and, the media.

So far, Oprah is quite fierce, very tentative I must say. I don't care about the snubbing part, so let's skip that. I was quite surprised, though, when Palin immediately said "Yes!" when McCain asked her if she's ready to be a VP. She also said she was disappointed with the treatment that the media gave her. I agree with that, I think Palin was being blindsided by the media. Am I surprise? No. She was a no one to those outside Alaska, and suddenly she was a VP candidate. She was very naive and she admitted that:

"I was naive to think that the media would leave my kids alone."

Part 2

Interesting, very interesting.

This is where I start to disagree. The main topic for this part of the interview is how Sarah Palin was "constructed" by the McCain's aides to be a presentable VP candidate. Here's a very interesting point that Palin said:

"He's (John McCain) is a maverick, he's a bold man. The choice he just made is all about empowering woman, though. He's all about equality. He's about the everyday working class individual who can succeed in this country; and, he chose someone who reflects that. . . ."

If I were Oprah, this will be my next questions:

"But, a lot of people, including women, feel that Senator McCain choose you to reel in Secretary Clinton's supporters. Do you think that's partly true? Has it ever crossed your mind?"

These questions were not asked. Funny enough, the topic was a big controversy when Senator McCain announced his running mate. A woman whom a lot of people did not know about, while Hilary Clinton was just suspending her campaign. There's something fishy, isn't there? So, I really would like to know Palin's answer.

There's one more questions I would like to ask regarding the topic of "being made" by McCain's aides. But, I think I'll leave it until I watch Barbara's interview.

Part 3

Unprofessional? A journalist asking what newspaper does Palin read is an unprofessional? Annoyed when a journalist ask her stands on abortion repeatedly? Blaming that a journalist did not give her a chance to hear her stand on abortion.

Here's a question. Can you just name one newspaper? If a VP candidate is frustrated with a simple question, how would she deals with global issues? If a journalist repeatedly ask your stands on an issue, isn't that a repeated chance for you to clear the air?

To me, Sarah Palin is making so much excuses about the issue of Katie Couric's interview. Here's an interesting article to counter Palin's excuses: Palin's Katie Couric Lies

Part 4

This is, I think, the fun part of the interview so far. The topic, Levi Johnston. I think that Oprah nailed the question here. Oprah asked how Palin felt when someone who has been inside "the circle" is now outside talking bulls about her. I don't want to spend so much time here, but seriously think Palin was talking as a mom in this part. Very loving and caring, although, her thanksgiving invitation to Levi-- I don't buy it.

Part 5

"She's not retreating; she's reloading" - Sarah Palin's father

She's running for President alright. She didn't say it when Oprah asked the question (and when Oprah rephrase the question), but I think she's eyeing the presidency seat, or at least she has thought about it.

Anyway, this part is really interesting. Oprah was asking about Palin's decision to step down from the Governor's seat. She was implying that she did it to "save" Alaska from the troubles that her opposition brought. I'm not convinced, however; and, I don't think Oprah either. Palin could have done more in her seat as the Governor of Alaska, but, perhaps, the stress was too much for her. Either way, I'm not convinced.

To close this thread, I just want to say that Sarah Palin is quite a character. She is fascinating and, please, don't underestimate her. Even though I think that she was, or may I say is, not ready for the highest executive seat in the government, she is a force to be reckoned it. She is very likable and a "speaker" of a different approach from a conservative Republican.

FYI, I don't think Oprah was harsh to Sarah Palin. I would love to see Oprah push to envelope further thought.

Just finished reading the complete document of "Rekomendasi Tim 8". If you ask my thought on the recommendations, I think Tim 8 did what it supposed to do (even more) but it is expected. Nothing really stands out, but one thing--Century Bank saga.

Take a look at this:

"Tim 8 berdasarkan Keputusan Presiden No. 31 Tahun 2009, Tim 8 bertugas untuk melakukan verifikasi fakta dan proses hukum atas Kasus Chandra M. Hamzah dan Bibit Samad Rianto."

"Tim 8, based on Keputusan Presiden No. 31 Year 2009, Tim 8 is mandated to verify facts and law processes of Chandra M. Hamzah and Bibit Samad's case."

Based on the official mandate above, my perception is Tim 8 was established to independently look at the case of Chandra and Bibit--only this case. However, they went beyond the border and mentioned the Century Bank case. How did that happen?

Perhaps, there is indeed a link. But, can they prove it?

However, Denny said, the team, also referred to as Team 8, could not yet conclude to what extent the two cases were connected.

"It's part of the verification process we need to further probe," he added.

The Jakarta Post, Wed, 11/11/2009

At first, I thought that it's inappropriate for Tim 8 to include the case in the document. But, as I read it further, it's clear to me that the team has a strong suspicion to this, and they recommend a further investigation on it. I think, just like Martha Stewart say it, it's a good thing.

Moving on the content.

I already said that the recommendations are expected; which means that Tim 8 did what they supposed to do--verify and explore further what the public has known. And, it is an open recommendation, meaning that the public is encouraged to comment on the document.

I also like how, finally, Tim 8 actually recommends institutional reform, especially law institutions. Seriously, it's about time.

I do hope, however, that Tim 8 would explore further. It said that the police was "trying to hard" to make the case; and, I would like to know why rather than just "Yes".

Now, we just need to wait for the President's decision on the case.