so yesterday, i had some women over to talk about the war. i knew a few of them had expressed (mild) opposition to it. i wasn't sure about the others.
but we need to be taking this topic to the people in our lives (close and more distant) because we need to take the opposition to a new level. i think it worked. there were 2 (out of 30) who were for the war. the rest were against it. we spoke of why we felt the way we did. we spoke of what was going on that bothered us the most.
consider it my attempt to steal goldie's house party.
but what goldie (and her mother marlene) had in mind worked and we all need to be attempting that.
so i did wednesday afternoon and it went very well. i hope you'll try something similar.
until we're all talking, nothing's going to change.
1 woman said it best, for me, when she said, 'we're at war and it's like we can't talk about it but we can spend hours obsessing over american idol.'
you're the 1 who can change that. only you. it doesn't matter what i do. it doesn't matter what someone else does. you have a power and you have a voice.
wednesday night kpfa's flashpoints had 2 women on discussing these sort of gatherings. 1 was an iraqi-american and the other was with christian peacemarker teams. listen to the interview and maybe you'll agree or maybe you'll disagree. but we need to be trying something.
i'm not spitting on the peace movement. i think united for peace & justice and others like codepink have done a wonderful job. but we need to be taking it into our neighborhoods. not just to the big rally in our area or the national rally. this issue needs to be something we discuss.
how are you with children being killed? is it okay to kill some children? that's one of the issues the 2 women addressed.
on monday, ray mcgovern was a guest discussing confronting donald rumsfeld last thursday. that's another thing people should be doing if they have the opportunity and, if they don't, they should be talking about it. even if it's just 'can you believe ray mcgovern confronted donald rumsfeld?' some 1 may ask you why. that's the perfect time to explain.
or some 1 may find some courage hearing of mcgovern.
you never know.
look at what kat's done since saturday:
"Kat's Korner: Pink's not dead or silent"
"Kat's Korner: Need deeper? Check out Josh Ritter's The Animal Years"
"Kat's Korner: Richie Havens: The Economical Collection"
"Kat's Korner: Neil Young's Living With War -- key word 'Living'"
the war is in every 1 of those reviews.
i feel like i'm preaching to the converted here.
let me post c.i.'s iraq snapshot from today:
Chaos and violence continue.
Today? The parliament continued to make the issue of who heads the Iraqi oil ministry the main topic. (Does that not demonstrate how important that position is?) As the AFP notes, yesterday was the self-imposed deadline the US backed Iraqi prime minister designate Nuri al-Maliki had set for finaliing his cabinet. The deadline was missed.
This as Rod Barton, an Australian Defence sciene intelligence officer, has made statements that Australia was lied into war. Speaking to the Australian Broadcasting Company's Kerry O'Brien, Barton also addressed the issue of US torture:
KERRY O'BRIEN: Why do you believe he was beaten to death and how clear is the evidence that he was beaten to death?
ROD BARTON: I now know, and I didn't know this when I wrote the book, that he underwent a process called purgatory when he was arrested. Purgatory is, again, by this Special Forces 626. When they arrest the person they're trying to disorient the person. They put a hessian bag over the person's head and for three days or more the person is beaten, deprived of food and sleep and so on. There was a lot of stuff he was involved with. He developed poisons for assassination purposes. But I believe, I now know, that he knew about actual operations of assassinations of Iraqi dissidents overseas. And I believe that was the information that they were trying to get from him when they beat him again. The autopsy showed that he died not of a brain tumour or a brain aneurysm, or whatever they told me - not of natural causes, but the autopsy showed he died of blunt force trauma to the head. In other words, someone hit him too hard on the head.
Back in Iraq, as factions move towards the consolidation of militaries, Grand Ayatolla Hli al-Sistani has "ordered all Shi'ite mosques to close for three days" in Zubayr reports the Associated Press. This as AFP is reporting that "official sanction" will be needed for clerics in Iraq. As part of the agreement, "capital and Iraqi forces" cannot raid mosques without US troops being present. Presumably 'sanctioning' of cleric will take place with US permission as well. (US military spokesperson, Rick Lynch, stated of the deal: "That's news to me, that's a surprise to me.")
In Baghdad, as noted on KPFA's The Morning Show newsbreaks anchored by Sandra Lupien and by CNN, roadside bombs have claimed the lives of at least three American troops today (Lupien also noted the death of two Iraqi soldiers from a roadside bomb -- as does Reuters). The Associated Press notes a roadside bomb took the lives of five "municipal workers." (CNN also puts the number of dead at five and notes one wounded.) Reuters, which puts the previous number at four, reports assailents shot and killed a "judicial investigator near a courthouse." Courthouses and schools continue to be the targets for violence. And the corpse of a police officer was discovered ("hands bound, signs of torture and shot in the head").
In Baquba, Reuters notes that a school teacher was killed and her fourteen-year-old nephew wounded by assailants. Is this the same woman, Widad al-Shimri, whose death the AP reports? They identify her as a Shi'ite "history professor" and note that her seven-year-old daughter was also killed. So at least one educator was killed in Baquba, possibly two. Also in Baquba, at least twenty-five men, suspected gunmen, have been arrested "wearing army uniforms" but not with the army.
In Haqlaniyah, US troops have fired on abandoned hotel where resistance fighters were believed to be while, in Kirkuk, assailants "ambushed and killed a police lieutenant colonel."
that's what's going on.
that's what we have brought about.
so let's get creative on getting the word out.
5/11/2006
5/10/2006
more on hud's lead liar alphonso jackson
it is official. though i have yet to get the promised e-mail, blogger/blogspot has reviewed and decided that i am not a robot.
no more word verification.
now that i've been cleared of the charges, i feel the urge to scream, 'i'm actually part cyborg! like jamie on the bionic woman!'
HUD Secretary Turns Down Contractor Who Criticized Bush
Meanwhile, Housing and Urban Development Department Secretary Alphonso Jackson is coming under scrutiny after he revealed he cancelled a proposed deal with a government contractor who made critical comments of President Bush. According to the Dallas Business Journal, Jackson said the contractor had been selected for a government advertising contract. But the contractor was ultimately not selected after he told Jackson he didn’t like President Bush. Jackson said: "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe." In response, Democratic Congressmembers Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Henry Waxman of California called for a full investigation of Jackson’s contract decisions. In a letter to Jackson, the Congressmemembers wrote: "If this account is accurate, your comments and actions were improper and most likely illegal. Federal contracts should be awarded based on merit, not on whether a contractor likes or dislikes President Bush."
that's from democracy now and i thought i'd start with that because i ended with hud last night.
jackson has a history struggling with the truth, a public history. c.i. passed this on because i'd written about it yesterday. billie had sent this to c.i. to provide a little background on alphonso jackson:
Then there was the Thrilla on Marilla--the lightweight bout between Fielding and Alphonso Jackson which kept us occupied for a few weeks in the winter of 1993. The councilman and the Dallas Housing Authority chief, you may recall, got uniquely physical during a tense meeting in Mayor Bartlett's office. When it was over, no one was at all surprised that someone would want to stomp grapes on Paul Fielding's face--his major in college was, no doubt, the art of bringing out the worst in people. What surprised everyone is that Jackson actually did it.
A diminutive, soft-spoken, horn-rimmed-glasses type, Jackson simply gathered himself into an absolute fury and, like a bull at Pamplona, rammed Fielding face first into the unyielding metal frame of a partially opened door. Blackening eyes. Mangling facial nerves. Sending ears to ringing.
Jackson blew his opportunity to become a sympathetic figure in the eyes of Fielding detractors when he panicked, dissolving into a choke mode--not only denying that he'd beaten Fielding up, but frantically concocting off-the-wall scenarios about what happened. In one, the mayor, who actually witnessed Jackson's handiwork along with half the mayor's staff, was blamed for the bludgeoning.
so he gets into a fight and then lies about it. the author of that piece, by the way, was laura miller who no longer writes for a periodical, she's now mayor of the city of dallas.
and jaime s. jordan provides an update in the dallas business journal, which originally broke the jackson story, that has an interesting footnote:
(On May 3, Tucker told the Business Journal that the contract Jackson was referring to in Dallas was "an advertising contract with a minority publication," though she could not provide the contract's value.)
so on wednesday of last week hud spokesperson dustee tucker was maintaining that the story was true, but yesterday, saying it wasn't.
in congress, house represantives henry waxman and barney frank are asking questions:
In a letter to HUD Secretary Jackson, Reps. Waxman and Frank ask for an explanation of the Secretary's public admission that he decided not to award a contract to a contractor with "a heck of a proposal" because the contractor expressed a negative view of the President.
jackson has more problems. from representative louise slaughter's letter to alphonso jackson:
I was troubled to read recent news reports about the nature of certain contracts awarded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Specifically, I am concerned that a HUD contract has been awarded to a company allegedly involved in illicit activities including bribery, gambling, and prostitution.
Last week, Harper's Magazine's web blog posted an update to its coverage of the federal contracts awarded to Shirlington Limousine and Transportation, Incorporated of Arlington, Virginia. This report indicated that HUD had awarded the company a $519,823 contract. As you may know, the company's president, Christopher D. Baker, has an extensive criminal history including drug possession, attempted robbery, and car theft along with other offenses over the last decade. Additionally, allegations have been bade that suggest that individuals involved in an ongoing Congressional bribery investigation used the limousine service to provide escorts and other services to federal officials in exchange for federal contracts. The fact that a contract from your agency has been awarded to a company embroiled in such a serious criminal investigation raises significant questions about the HUD's procurement process.
This comes on the heels of reports that at an April 28th Dallas real estate forum, you stated that individuals or organizations who had expressed their opposition to President Bush would not be eligible to receive federal contracts. All qualified organizations and businesses should have the opportunity to compete in the federal procurement process, and contract should be awarded to the company that can do the best work at the least cost to the government. Awarding federal contracts based on political affiliation is not only inappropriate, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Therefore, I request that you release all documents and communications in your possession pertaining to any HUD contracts with Shirlington Limousine. Thorough examination of these documents is critical to eliminating suspicion of inappropriate or illegal activity in awarding Shirlington Limousine a federal contract. I also ask you to clarify your comments regarding the eligibility of Administration opponents to compete for federal contracts.
I hope you will swiftly honor my request for the release of all pertinent documents to restore the integrity to the procurement processes of your department.
and just to remember what he said, from an article credited to kutv and associated press:
"I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I don't like President Bush.'" Jackson told the group, which promotes business opportunities for minorities in the real estate industry."He didn't get the contract," Jackson said. "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."
whether he's a lie face or trying to back peddle now (like he did when he got into the physical altercation), he needs to step down or fired.
now kat did another review last night: "Kat's Korner: Need deeper? Check out Josh Ritter's The Animal Years." i really love this cd. 'girl in the war' is, musically, the sort of magic brian wilson probably still wishes he could do.
and tonight? goldie, pay attention. she's reviewing pink's new cd tonight. i know a lot of community members have been waiting for it. she actually had this 1 written (i think the free design is the other 1 left that's already written) but she saw something online and decided to rewrite it. i'm really excited and i bet you are as well. so be sure to check for it. and check at the common ills because she posts her music reviews there, not at her own site: kat's korner (of the common ills). she started there and that's her contribution to the community.
the plan is 7 reviews over the next 2 weeks. she's done 3 so far with the 4th going up tonight. if you missed the other 3, the link to animal years is up above and the other 2 are:
"Kat's Korner: Richie Havens: The Economical Collection"
"Kat's Korner: Neil Young's Living With War -- key word 'Living'"
i would like to write about today when i blog tomorrow. (can you follow that?)
but be sure to read c.i.'s "Other Items" and wally's "THIS JUST IN! HILLARY CLINTON LOVES THE BOYZ WHO CHEAT ON HER!" for the latest on hillary. in fact, doesn't she resemble the character of senator in "Head on Home (a musical in four scenes)"?
no more word verification.
now that i've been cleared of the charges, i feel the urge to scream, 'i'm actually part cyborg! like jamie on the bionic woman!'
HUD Secretary Turns Down Contractor Who Criticized Bush
Meanwhile, Housing and Urban Development Department Secretary Alphonso Jackson is coming under scrutiny after he revealed he cancelled a proposed deal with a government contractor who made critical comments of President Bush. According to the Dallas Business Journal, Jackson said the contractor had been selected for a government advertising contract. But the contractor was ultimately not selected after he told Jackson he didn’t like President Bush. Jackson said: "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe." In response, Democratic Congressmembers Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Henry Waxman of California called for a full investigation of Jackson’s contract decisions. In a letter to Jackson, the Congressmemembers wrote: "If this account is accurate, your comments and actions were improper and most likely illegal. Federal contracts should be awarded based on merit, not on whether a contractor likes or dislikes President Bush."
that's from democracy now and i thought i'd start with that because i ended with hud last night.
jackson has a history struggling with the truth, a public history. c.i. passed this on because i'd written about it yesterday. billie had sent this to c.i. to provide a little background on alphonso jackson:
Then there was the Thrilla on Marilla--the lightweight bout between Fielding and Alphonso Jackson which kept us occupied for a few weeks in the winter of 1993. The councilman and the Dallas Housing Authority chief, you may recall, got uniquely physical during a tense meeting in Mayor Bartlett's office. When it was over, no one was at all surprised that someone would want to stomp grapes on Paul Fielding's face--his major in college was, no doubt, the art of bringing out the worst in people. What surprised everyone is that Jackson actually did it.
A diminutive, soft-spoken, horn-rimmed-glasses type, Jackson simply gathered himself into an absolute fury and, like a bull at Pamplona, rammed Fielding face first into the unyielding metal frame of a partially opened door. Blackening eyes. Mangling facial nerves. Sending ears to ringing.
Jackson blew his opportunity to become a sympathetic figure in the eyes of Fielding detractors when he panicked, dissolving into a choke mode--not only denying that he'd beaten Fielding up, but frantically concocting off-the-wall scenarios about what happened. In one, the mayor, who actually witnessed Jackson's handiwork along with half the mayor's staff, was blamed for the bludgeoning.
so he gets into a fight and then lies about it. the author of that piece, by the way, was laura miller who no longer writes for a periodical, she's now mayor of the city of dallas.
and jaime s. jordan provides an update in the dallas business journal, which originally broke the jackson story, that has an interesting footnote:
(On May 3, Tucker told the Business Journal that the contract Jackson was referring to in Dallas was "an advertising contract with a minority publication," though she could not provide the contract's value.)
so on wednesday of last week hud spokesperson dustee tucker was maintaining that the story was true, but yesterday, saying it wasn't.
in congress, house represantives henry waxman and barney frank are asking questions:
In a letter to HUD Secretary Jackson, Reps. Waxman and Frank ask for an explanation of the Secretary's public admission that he decided not to award a contract to a contractor with "a heck of a proposal" because the contractor expressed a negative view of the President.
jackson has more problems. from representative louise slaughter's letter to alphonso jackson:
I was troubled to read recent news reports about the nature of certain contracts awarded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Specifically, I am concerned that a HUD contract has been awarded to a company allegedly involved in illicit activities including bribery, gambling, and prostitution.
Last week, Harper's Magazine's web blog posted an update to its coverage of the federal contracts awarded to Shirlington Limousine and Transportation, Incorporated of Arlington, Virginia. This report indicated that HUD had awarded the company a $519,823 contract. As you may know, the company's president, Christopher D. Baker, has an extensive criminal history including drug possession, attempted robbery, and car theft along with other offenses over the last decade. Additionally, allegations have been bade that suggest that individuals involved in an ongoing Congressional bribery investigation used the limousine service to provide escorts and other services to federal officials in exchange for federal contracts. The fact that a contract from your agency has been awarded to a company embroiled in such a serious criminal investigation raises significant questions about the HUD's procurement process.
This comes on the heels of reports that at an April 28th Dallas real estate forum, you stated that individuals or organizations who had expressed their opposition to President Bush would not be eligible to receive federal contracts. All qualified organizations and businesses should have the opportunity to compete in the federal procurement process, and contract should be awarded to the company that can do the best work at the least cost to the government. Awarding federal contracts based on political affiliation is not only inappropriate, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Therefore, I request that you release all documents and communications in your possession pertaining to any HUD contracts with Shirlington Limousine. Thorough examination of these documents is critical to eliminating suspicion of inappropriate or illegal activity in awarding Shirlington Limousine a federal contract. I also ask you to clarify your comments regarding the eligibility of Administration opponents to compete for federal contracts.
I hope you will swiftly honor my request for the release of all pertinent documents to restore the integrity to the procurement processes of your department.
and just to remember what he said, from an article credited to kutv and associated press:
"I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I don't like President Bush.'" Jackson told the group, which promotes business opportunities for minorities in the real estate industry."He didn't get the contract," Jackson said. "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."
whether he's a lie face or trying to back peddle now (like he did when he got into the physical altercation), he needs to step down or fired.
now kat did another review last night: "Kat's Korner: Need deeper? Check out Josh Ritter's The Animal Years." i really love this cd. 'girl in the war' is, musically, the sort of magic brian wilson probably still wishes he could do.
and tonight? goldie, pay attention. she's reviewing pink's new cd tonight. i know a lot of community members have been waiting for it. she actually had this 1 written (i think the free design is the other 1 left that's already written) but she saw something online and decided to rewrite it. i'm really excited and i bet you are as well. so be sure to check for it. and check at the common ills because she posts her music reviews there, not at her own site: kat's korner (of the common ills). she started there and that's her contribution to the community.
the plan is 7 reviews over the next 2 weeks. she's done 3 so far with the 4th going up tonight. if you missed the other 3, the link to animal years is up above and the other 2 are:
"Kat's Korner: Richie Havens: The Economical Collection"
"Kat's Korner: Neil Young's Living With War -- key word 'Living'"
i would like to write about today when i blog tomorrow. (can you follow that?)
but be sure to read c.i.'s "Other Items" and wally's "THIS JUST IN! HILLARY CLINTON LOVES THE BOYZ WHO CHEAT ON HER!" for the latest on hillary. in fact, doesn't she resemble the character of senator in "Head on Home (a musical in four scenes)"?
5/09/2006
hud run by a liar
i'm still a 'robot' in blogger/blogspot's b.s. eyes tonight.
the key word to type (when i post, to prove i'm not a robot) is 'ujkqmqa' - and they've got it in drippy b.s. writing.
on the plus side, c.i. and kat's complaints about how hard it was to read this bullshit obviously resulted in the option to hear the letters since it's unlikely many could read their slanted, curved letters.
again, don't they have better things to do? there were 2 outagges last week.
and maybe they should actually read a site before they flag it as done by a 'robot'?
i can't imagine any 1 read my site and would think i was a 'robot.' they might think i was a bitch, or worse, but no 1's ever accused me of being a robot before.
mike's sick. he's got chicken pox. i spent a few hours at his house tonight talking to his parents. he was asleep the whole time. when i got back here, i wasn't even sure i'd blog because i'm so pissed at this 'robot' nonsense.
i really think it's offensive. and i think they need to check a site before they flag it.
kat posted a new review last night, "Kat's Korner: Richie Havens: The Economical Collection" and is planning to have another 1 up tonight.
i love richie havens but that's not a cd for me - for all the reasons listed in the review. i have richie havens' albums and this is really more for new listeners. there's a richie havens collection i love. it's called resume: the best of richie havens. it has 17 tracks (1 song's a medley so you get 18 songs) on it, only 6 of which appear on the 'best of.'
did you catch kat's review saturday: "Kat's Korner: Neil Young's Living With War -- key word 'Living'"? that's what i've listened to today, neil young's living with war. i agree that the last track is the 1 you ditch quickly. i'm already over that 1. but the rest of the album is really strong and i'm amazed at how many good cds have come out this year. i hope a lot of other people quit playing 'war got your tongue?' because until they do, the war drags on.
i've got some friends coming over tomorrow afternoon to discuss the war and i'm going to try to serve trina's latest 'Pasta salad with avocado dressing in the Kitchen' - i'm not a good cook. i can be talked through over the phone. but i have found trina's recipes to be practical and becky-proof.
so let's do some news and then i'll post this thing (if blogger/blogspot allows me to).
is alphonso jackson a crook or just a liar? he's the secretary of hud (housing & urban development) appointed by the bully boy. the associated press reports that he gave a talk in dallas, tx and told the group present that he refused to grant a contract to 1 company because the representative of the company didn't support the bully boy:
"He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something ... he said, 'I have a problem with your president,'" Jackson told the group, according to the newspaper.
"I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I don't like President Bush.'" Jackson told the group, which promotes business opportunities for minorities in the real estate industry.
"He didn't get the contract," Jackson said. "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."
if the story is true, hold on for that, alphonso jackson is 1 more idiot who thinks he works for the bully boy when, in fact, he works for the people of the united states.
dustee tucker, hud spokesperson, says jackson made the whole thing up. so he's a liar?
She acknowledged that Jackson did not tell the audience the story was made up. But, she said, Jackson used the "hypothetical" story to describe the ruthless politics of Washington. She said the secretary was trying to convey that Washington is a place where political opponents, rather than stabbing you in the back, "will stab you in the chest."
i believe the knife was held by jackson and he waved it in a threatening manner. he needs to go. he is not fit to hold that office. is he a liar? let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's a liar. the liar then wants to set a tone where you either love you some bully boy or you get no contracts. jackson knew that his story (lie?) would be repeated. that's why he bragged about it. he is unfit to hold that office and his ass needs to be kicked to the curb.
the key word to type (when i post, to prove i'm not a robot) is 'ujkqmqa' - and they've got it in drippy b.s. writing.
on the plus side, c.i. and kat's complaints about how hard it was to read this bullshit obviously resulted in the option to hear the letters since it's unlikely many could read their slanted, curved letters.
again, don't they have better things to do? there were 2 outagges last week.
and maybe they should actually read a site before they flag it as done by a 'robot'?
i can't imagine any 1 read my site and would think i was a 'robot.' they might think i was a bitch, or worse, but no 1's ever accused me of being a robot before.
mike's sick. he's got chicken pox. i spent a few hours at his house tonight talking to his parents. he was asleep the whole time. when i got back here, i wasn't even sure i'd blog because i'm so pissed at this 'robot' nonsense.
i really think it's offensive. and i think they need to check a site before they flag it.
kat posted a new review last night, "Kat's Korner: Richie Havens: The Economical Collection" and is planning to have another 1 up tonight.
i love richie havens but that's not a cd for me - for all the reasons listed in the review. i have richie havens' albums and this is really more for new listeners. there's a richie havens collection i love. it's called resume: the best of richie havens. it has 17 tracks (1 song's a medley so you get 18 songs) on it, only 6 of which appear on the 'best of.'
did you catch kat's review saturday: "Kat's Korner: Neil Young's Living With War -- key word 'Living'"? that's what i've listened to today, neil young's living with war. i agree that the last track is the 1 you ditch quickly. i'm already over that 1. but the rest of the album is really strong and i'm amazed at how many good cds have come out this year. i hope a lot of other people quit playing 'war got your tongue?' because until they do, the war drags on.
i've got some friends coming over tomorrow afternoon to discuss the war and i'm going to try to serve trina's latest 'Pasta salad with avocado dressing in the Kitchen' - i'm not a good cook. i can be talked through over the phone. but i have found trina's recipes to be practical and becky-proof.
so let's do some news and then i'll post this thing (if blogger/blogspot allows me to).
is alphonso jackson a crook or just a liar? he's the secretary of hud (housing & urban development) appointed by the bully boy. the associated press reports that he gave a talk in dallas, tx and told the group present that he refused to grant a contract to 1 company because the representative of the company didn't support the bully boy:
"He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something ... he said, 'I have a problem with your president,'" Jackson told the group, according to the newspaper.
"I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I don't like President Bush.'" Jackson told the group, which promotes business opportunities for minorities in the real estate industry.
"He didn't get the contract," Jackson said. "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."
if the story is true, hold on for that, alphonso jackson is 1 more idiot who thinks he works for the bully boy when, in fact, he works for the people of the united states.
dustee tucker, hud spokesperson, says jackson made the whole thing up. so he's a liar?
She acknowledged that Jackson did not tell the audience the story was made up. But, she said, Jackson used the "hypothetical" story to describe the ruthless politics of Washington. She said the secretary was trying to convey that Washington is a place where political opponents, rather than stabbing you in the back, "will stab you in the chest."
i believe the knife was held by jackson and he waved it in a threatening manner. he needs to go. he is not fit to hold that office. is he a liar? let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's a liar. the liar then wants to set a tone where you either love you some bully boy or you get no contracts. jackson knew that his story (lie?) would be repeated. that's why he bragged about it. he is unfit to hold that office and his ass needs to be kicked to the curb.
5/08/2006
msnbc plagiarizes the associated press
i've got unexpected company tonight and planned to just highlight something c.i. did this afternoon because it's worth noting. i get into my account and now i'm apparently a 'robot' because i have some stupid ass 'word verification' added at the bottom of this post.
you know, i think blogger/blogspot has a lot more important things to do than harrass real people. unless i'm mistaken, last monday no 1 could post at all until the west coast employees had their lattes (that was up at the discussion boards - it's sarcasm).
seems to me they have a few more important things to focus on.
here's c.i.'s thing about how msnbc decided to 'borrow' from the associated press:
Question for the day? Does MSNBC think it's okay to rip off the Associated Press without crediting them? (This was pointed out to me by someone at one of NBC's rival networks.)
First here's what appears at MSNBC (credited to "MSNBC News Services" and link takes you to the "report"):
Insurgents often try to prevent Iraqi citizens from cooperating with their country's new democratically elected government by attacking government workers and killing men who have been recruited into Iraq's military and police forces.
CBS is running an Associated Press article (no individual author credited at CBS, however it's Sameer N. Yacoub's "Bombs Kill U.S. Soldier and 7 Iraqis"):
Insurgents often try to prevent Iraqi citizens from cooperating with their country's new democratically elected government by attacking government workers and killing men who have been recruited into Iraq's military and police forces.
That's word for word. CBS notes it is an AP article. MSNBC pulls the paragraph and runs it without crediting it to AP. (Note: First paragraph contains a link to a CBS & AP story. That's another article -- one with joint credit.)
if company leaves early, i'll post again. if not, that's it for tonight.
you know, i think blogger/blogspot has a lot more important things to do than harrass real people. unless i'm mistaken, last monday no 1 could post at all until the west coast employees had their lattes (that was up at the discussion boards - it's sarcasm).
seems to me they have a few more important things to focus on.
here's c.i.'s thing about how msnbc decided to 'borrow' from the associated press:
Question for the day? Does MSNBC think it's okay to rip off the Associated Press without crediting them? (This was pointed out to me by someone at one of NBC's rival networks.)
First here's what appears at MSNBC (credited to "MSNBC News Services" and link takes you to the "report"):
Insurgents often try to prevent Iraqi citizens from cooperating with their country's new democratically elected government by attacking government workers and killing men who have been recruited into Iraq's military and police forces.
CBS is running an Associated Press article (no individual author credited at CBS, however it's Sameer N. Yacoub's "Bombs Kill U.S. Soldier and 7 Iraqis"):
Insurgents often try to prevent Iraqi citizens from cooperating with their country's new democratically elected government by attacking government workers and killing men who have been recruited into Iraq's military and police forces.
That's word for word. CBS notes it is an AP article. MSNBC pulls the paragraph and runs it without crediting it to AP. (Note: First paragraph contains a link to a CBS & AP story. That's another article -- one with joint credit.)
if company leaves early, i'll post again. if not, that's it for tonight.
5/07/2006
we're in the home stretch at the third estate sunday review. we have a small feature on anthony arnove's book iraq: the logic of withdrawal. dona thought an illustration might liven up the edition. so i've scanned this and am posting it here so that we can use it there. it's an important book, so please read it. new content will start going up at the third estate sunday review shortly. (2 things by ava and c.i. -- something that will excite readers.)
5/05/2006
b.p. (brief post)
brief post tonight.
jim's asked ava and c.i. to scrap the tv commentary they'd already done a rough draft on (and made time to watch the show and call friends working on and around the show). jim thinks a) that they really do amazing writing (ava and c.i.) under pressure and b) the issue needs to be addressed. (stephen colbert.)
i agree it needs to be addressed. this was prompted by counterspin's decision to air the speech with no critique of it (and the implied approval and rah-rah that has upset a number of people).
if it works out, it will probably be 1 of those 'great' moments. but if it doesn't ...
i blame counterspin. they need a women's desk. 1 that is vocal. if they had 1 and sought input from it, that nonsense wouldn't have been on the air today.
jim really didn't grasp that it was putting them both under pressure. dona made that very clear in the long conversation (they bailed on it, ava and c.i.). jim's right that the piece needs to be written and i understand why ava and c.i. are the best choices. it's their beat. they can get people on the phone who saw it live.
and before i wrote my thing on it, i talked to c.i. about it and there are points that c.i. can make that no 1 else is making.
go read wally's 'THIS JUST IN! WHICH RAT WILL BE THE LAST TO LEAVE?' - it's funny and made me laugh.
in fairness to jim, he was his usual energetic self. he gets really jazzed on an idea and doesn't notice that every 1 else isn't going 'awesome!' if ava and c.i. can do this (i think they can) with minimal damage to their weekend (i'm not so sure), it'll be worth reading and worth doing. but ay-yi-yi.
after ava and c.i. left the call (at the same time), betty said, 'well am i the only 1 who wants to cry right now?' it was only when that was said and the long conversations that followed that jim started to grasp he was being a little overbearing. he'll apologize tomorrow night (he's already said he will) and hopefully everything will be fine. by the end of the call, jim was feeling really bad. he's just enthusiastic. and others, including me, could have stepped in and should have. jim thought c.i. was joking but there was no joking on c.i.'s part or ava's. they've both had very long weeks and were hoping that since they made time to knock out most of the work for their review, they'd be able to relax and we'd have a simple session. now that's all been shot to hell.
if it had been approached differently (or broached differently), it wouldn't have gone the way it did. i think every 1 can agree it needs to be dealt with and that ava and c.i. have the following and the abilities to address it.
listening to counterspin today, i was really insulted that they chose to present the 'jokes' the way they did - with no critique of it. they need a strong women's desk and they need to put those sort of items past a woman's desk.
i'll stop here because i want to be sure i don't end up spilling some of the points c.i. made when we were on the phone earlier this week. but there are a number of problems with the 'jokes' and i think it will be tackled wonderfully this sunday.
jim's asked ava and c.i. to scrap the tv commentary they'd already done a rough draft on (and made time to watch the show and call friends working on and around the show). jim thinks a) that they really do amazing writing (ava and c.i.) under pressure and b) the issue needs to be addressed. (stephen colbert.)
i agree it needs to be addressed. this was prompted by counterspin's decision to air the speech with no critique of it (and the implied approval and rah-rah that has upset a number of people).
if it works out, it will probably be 1 of those 'great' moments. but if it doesn't ...
i blame counterspin. they need a women's desk. 1 that is vocal. if they had 1 and sought input from it, that nonsense wouldn't have been on the air today.
jim really didn't grasp that it was putting them both under pressure. dona made that very clear in the long conversation (they bailed on it, ava and c.i.). jim's right that the piece needs to be written and i understand why ava and c.i. are the best choices. it's their beat. they can get people on the phone who saw it live.
and before i wrote my thing on it, i talked to c.i. about it and there are points that c.i. can make that no 1 else is making.
go read wally's 'THIS JUST IN! WHICH RAT WILL BE THE LAST TO LEAVE?' - it's funny and made me laugh.
in fairness to jim, he was his usual energetic self. he gets really jazzed on an idea and doesn't notice that every 1 else isn't going 'awesome!' if ava and c.i. can do this (i think they can) with minimal damage to their weekend (i'm not so sure), it'll be worth reading and worth doing. but ay-yi-yi.
after ava and c.i. left the call (at the same time), betty said, 'well am i the only 1 who wants to cry right now?' it was only when that was said and the long conversations that followed that jim started to grasp he was being a little overbearing. he'll apologize tomorrow night (he's already said he will) and hopefully everything will be fine. by the end of the call, jim was feeling really bad. he's just enthusiastic. and others, including me, could have stepped in and should have. jim thought c.i. was joking but there was no joking on c.i.'s part or ava's. they've both had very long weeks and were hoping that since they made time to knock out most of the work for their review, they'd be able to relax and we'd have a simple session. now that's all been shot to hell.
if it had been approached differently (or broached differently), it wouldn't have gone the way it did. i think every 1 can agree it needs to be dealt with and that ava and c.i. have the following and the abilities to address it.
listening to counterspin today, i was really insulted that they chose to present the 'jokes' the way they did - with no critique of it. they need a strong women's desk and they need to put those sort of items past a woman's desk.
i'll stop here because i want to be sure i don't end up spilling some of the points c.i. made when we were on the phone earlier this week. but there are a number of problems with the 'jokes' and i think it will be tackled wonderfully this sunday.
5/04/2006
flashpoints
BC Professors Protest Honoring Condoleeza Rice
In Massachusetts, nearly 100 Boston College professors have added their names to a letter protesting their university's decision to award Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice an honorary degree. Rice has been announced as a commencement speaker for graduation ceremonies later this month. The letters' authors, including theology department chair Rev. Kenneth Himes, wrote: "On the levels of both moral principle and practical moral judgment, Secretary Rice's approach to international affairs is in fundamental conflict with Boston College's commitment to the values of the Catholic and Jesuit traditions and is inconsistent with the humanistic values that inspire the university's work."
mike asked me if i could work in a headline from democracy now (they really should put him on the payroll of that show - he's always getting the word out).
kpfa's flashpoints? it has had a great week. i was tempted to note it each day but i was afraid i was setting a pattern. i'm happy to get the word out on the show, it's great, every 1 obviously cares. but i don't want to be tied down to something for every post.
so i thought i might be setting an expectation after last week if i did daily entries on kpfa's flashpoints. i did pass on 1 thing to c.i. and c.i. noted it at the common ills. and i did note janis karpinski being on last night (and i called the blog twins - mike and elaine - to ask them to note it at their sites).
monday, flashpoints did an amazing job covering the protests. it was even more powerful because they had breaking news. they didn't get it by calling up the new york times and asking, 'anything happening?' in bakersfield, california, people gathered at a park to begin their march. the police turned out in full force and they were told they couldn't march. a woman participating (or wanting to) went over to the police and asked 1 officer if they could march or not? the 1 guy said basically, 'sure keep it peaceful.' they start trying to bust people. including the woman who was reporting it for the show. it was nothing but bullying and intimidation. so what they decided was that they would not be defeated. they gathered again that night to march and the woman was reporting to dennis bernstein right before their march to city hall started. tuesday, c.i. noted that the incident wasn't in the new york times biased coverage. when i read that entry, i called c.i. and asked, 'you know kpfa's flashpoints covered this?' c.i. didn't know that but was happy to provide a link later in the day to it. so if you spent a buck for your new york times
tuesday, you need to listen to monday's flashpoints for some of what the paper of record couldn't be bothered with telling you. (and though there is no charge to listen to flashpoints, i'll do the plub here, pacifica is about to go into fundraising and it will last for the month, so if you have money to give and you value free speech and radio that gives you the information you need, the information that the corporate media won't provide you with, you should donate. i won't bother you with a plug again. but if you've got the money, you should give.)
tuesday's show featured an interview with craig murray (former uzbekistan ambassador for great britain). murray's book (he discussed it on democracy now) is coming out in the united states but there's some editing going on (british government). murray talked about how it the wmd claim for war with iraq was not believable. he also talked about how torture was going on and evidence of it was ignored. but probably the most interesting thing for readers will be the fact that bully boy was in bed with uzbekistan when it was known by our state department to have a despotic, abusive leadership. our state department labeled it such. that was under bill clinton's presidency. 'wait!' you say, 'bully boy had his own state department.' yes, but this happened while he was governor of texas. he was in bed with them while he was governor of texas. making deals, etc. which, it seems to me, the then state dept. should have been aware of and should have taken action (legal) against the bully boy.
laila el-haddad was also on the show discussing life for palestinians, something you don't hear about very often. she is a regular on the show and i want to get her name in before i forget it. dennis bernstein's name i knew from ruth. but i've had trouble figuring out the names of others.
so laila el-haddad, dennis bernstein and robert knight are 3 names i know so far.
which brings us to wednesday show. janis karpinski, the brigadier general (like c.i., i will call her that because i disagree that she should have been stripped of her title) who was made the fall guy for abu ghraib was interviewed by dennis bernstein. i'm going to assume most people know her story and just add that she wasn't over military interrogations and the actions taking place in abu ghraib were not under her control.
these are some notes i made. i'm not ruth. i don't do short hand. so consider it a very rough transcript. so if you are interested in what you read of the interview, listen to the show.
1 key point was on the testimony of general sanchez where he told congress he didn't know anything about the photographs. karpinski: 'but nobody asked him the real important question' "did you know anything about the authorizations for the techniques that we saw in the photographs?" because he would have to say yes, if he were telling the truth.'
she added, 'he signed an 8 page memorandun ... authorizing a laundry list of techniques ... to include all of those techniques listed on that rumsfeld list stripping them naked, using unmuzzled dogs ... but nobody asked him that question while he was testifying under oath.'
she was very clear that 'he authorized what was going on.' and she clarified that, 'in those photographs ... there wasn't any interrogation taking place in those photographs.
but they were not, those photographs were not taken in the course of interrogations. in fact, those photographs were going to be used interrogations to get the prisoners, the detainees to start talking.'
she said a laptop would be opened, they'd show the person the photos and tell them to start talking or 'tomorrow, you're on the bottom of the pile.'
dennis bernstein asked about the abuse of women prisoners. karpinksi noted that 'there were photographs of women being abused' and that there were 'several pictures of women directed to raise their shirts and show their breasts.'
but most interesting to me was her comments on november 2003 when an investiagtion occurred over 3 military intelligence soldiers (interrogators) who 'went to cell block 1b where the female prisoners were held and 1 stood guard 'while the other 2 went and abused female prisoners . . . some statements that they actually physically raped female prisoners.'
this got out because the 3 men were bragging about what they did. the 3 were given a written reprimand (general papas did this) and sent the men back to the united states. don't you feel safer knowing that?
chain of command? she said, 'secretary of defense does not operate in a vacuum so everything that he was doing to be crystal clear he would have talked to his boss the vice president ... if you recall during his confirmation hearings ... they just rescinded the memorandum and said "it's been rescinded so it's not"' an issue (i think she said 'an issue' at the end, but i'm not sure so i'm leaving it out of the quote). she then traced the authorization gonzles gave (the 'quaint' memo) which went to gonzales and then to the commanders in the field and you trace it back up to the bully boy.
on rumsfeld, she noted that general miller was giving rumsfeld reports, he was informed. he was interested in knowing which techniques worked quickest, etc.
kpfa's flashpoints is on right now and i want to listen. violence is going on in san salvador, mexico. people in san salvador were attacked by the police. a boy was shot in the head. i want to hear this so i'm posting.
thank you to c.i. and wally and mike and readers who got the word out on yesterday's post. i've gotten a great deal of e-mail on it. also thanks to elaine who tossed aside the peace or reality quote she often ends with to suggest that every 1 instead read my post from yesterday.
by the way, read wally's 'THIS JUST IN! AIN'T EASY TO IMPRESS ALBERTO GONZALES!'
because i'm sure the news he's sending up will be all over the place tomorrow.
oh, i just remembered sherry's comment.
In Massachusetts, nearly 100 Boston College professors have added their names to a letter protesting their university's decision to award Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice an honorary degree. Rice has been announced as a commencement speaker for graduation ceremonies later this month. The letters' authors, including theology department chair Rev. Kenneth Himes, wrote: "On the levels of both moral principle and practical moral judgment, Secretary Rice's approach to international affairs is in fundamental conflict with Boston College's commitment to the values of the Catholic and Jesuit traditions and is inconsistent with the humanistic values that inspire the university's work."
mike asked me if i could work in a headline from democracy now (they really should put him on the payroll of that show - he's always getting the word out).
kpfa's flashpoints? it has had a great week. i was tempted to note it each day but i was afraid i was setting a pattern. i'm happy to get the word out on the show, it's great, every 1 obviously cares. but i don't want to be tied down to something for every post.
so i thought i might be setting an expectation after last week if i did daily entries on kpfa's flashpoints. i did pass on 1 thing to c.i. and c.i. noted it at the common ills. and i did note janis karpinski being on last night (and i called the blog twins - mike and elaine - to ask them to note it at their sites).
monday, flashpoints did an amazing job covering the protests. it was even more powerful because they had breaking news. they didn't get it by calling up the new york times and asking, 'anything happening?' in bakersfield, california, people gathered at a park to begin their march. the police turned out in full force and they were told they couldn't march. a woman participating (or wanting to) went over to the police and asked 1 officer if they could march or not? the 1 guy said basically, 'sure keep it peaceful.' they start trying to bust people. including the woman who was reporting it for the show. it was nothing but bullying and intimidation. so what they decided was that they would not be defeated. they gathered again that night to march and the woman was reporting to dennis bernstein right before their march to city hall started. tuesday, c.i. noted that the incident wasn't in the new york times biased coverage. when i read that entry, i called c.i. and asked, 'you know kpfa's flashpoints covered this?' c.i. didn't know that but was happy to provide a link later in the day to it. so if you spent a buck for your new york times
tuesday, you need to listen to monday's flashpoints for some of what the paper of record couldn't be bothered with telling you. (and though there is no charge to listen to flashpoints, i'll do the plub here, pacifica is about to go into fundraising and it will last for the month, so if you have money to give and you value free speech and radio that gives you the information you need, the information that the corporate media won't provide you with, you should donate. i won't bother you with a plug again. but if you've got the money, you should give.)
tuesday's show featured an interview with craig murray (former uzbekistan ambassador for great britain). murray's book (he discussed it on democracy now) is coming out in the united states but there's some editing going on (british government). murray talked about how it the wmd claim for war with iraq was not believable. he also talked about how torture was going on and evidence of it was ignored. but probably the most interesting thing for readers will be the fact that bully boy was in bed with uzbekistan when it was known by our state department to have a despotic, abusive leadership. our state department labeled it such. that was under bill clinton's presidency. 'wait!' you say, 'bully boy had his own state department.' yes, but this happened while he was governor of texas. he was in bed with them while he was governor of texas. making deals, etc. which, it seems to me, the then state dept. should have been aware of and should have taken action (legal) against the bully boy.
laila el-haddad was also on the show discussing life for palestinians, something you don't hear about very often. she is a regular on the show and i want to get her name in before i forget it. dennis bernstein's name i knew from ruth. but i've had trouble figuring out the names of others.
so laila el-haddad, dennis bernstein and robert knight are 3 names i know so far.
which brings us to wednesday show. janis karpinski, the brigadier general (like c.i., i will call her that because i disagree that she should have been stripped of her title) who was made the fall guy for abu ghraib was interviewed by dennis bernstein. i'm going to assume most people know her story and just add that she wasn't over military interrogations and the actions taking place in abu ghraib were not under her control.
these are some notes i made. i'm not ruth. i don't do short hand. so consider it a very rough transcript. so if you are interested in what you read of the interview, listen to the show.
1 key point was on the testimony of general sanchez where he told congress he didn't know anything about the photographs. karpinski: 'but nobody asked him the real important question' "did you know anything about the authorizations for the techniques that we saw in the photographs?" because he would have to say yes, if he were telling the truth.'
she added, 'he signed an 8 page memorandun ... authorizing a laundry list of techniques ... to include all of those techniques listed on that rumsfeld list stripping them naked, using unmuzzled dogs ... but nobody asked him that question while he was testifying under oath.'
she was very clear that 'he authorized what was going on.' and she clarified that, 'in those photographs ... there wasn't any interrogation taking place in those photographs.
but they were not, those photographs were not taken in the course of interrogations. in fact, those photographs were going to be used interrogations to get the prisoners, the detainees to start talking.'
she said a laptop would be opened, they'd show the person the photos and tell them to start talking or 'tomorrow, you're on the bottom of the pile.'
dennis bernstein asked about the abuse of women prisoners. karpinksi noted that 'there were photographs of women being abused' and that there were 'several pictures of women directed to raise their shirts and show their breasts.'
but most interesting to me was her comments on november 2003 when an investiagtion occurred over 3 military intelligence soldiers (interrogators) who 'went to cell block 1b where the female prisoners were held and 1 stood guard 'while the other 2 went and abused female prisoners . . . some statements that they actually physically raped female prisoners.'
this got out because the 3 men were bragging about what they did. the 3 were given a written reprimand (general papas did this) and sent the men back to the united states. don't you feel safer knowing that?
chain of command? she said, 'secretary of defense does not operate in a vacuum so everything that he was doing to be crystal clear he would have talked to his boss the vice president ... if you recall during his confirmation hearings ... they just rescinded the memorandum and said "it's been rescinded so it's not"' an issue (i think she said 'an issue' at the end, but i'm not sure so i'm leaving it out of the quote). she then traced the authorization gonzles gave (the 'quaint' memo) which went to gonzales and then to the commanders in the field and you trace it back up to the bully boy.
on rumsfeld, she noted that general miller was giving rumsfeld reports, he was informed. he was interested in knowing which techniques worked quickest, etc.
kpfa's flashpoints is on right now and i want to listen. violence is going on in san salvador, mexico. people in san salvador were attacked by the police. a boy was shot in the head. i want to hear this so i'm posting.
thank you to c.i. and wally and mike and readers who got the word out on yesterday's post. i've gotten a great deal of e-mail on it. also thanks to elaine who tossed aside the peace or reality quote she often ends with to suggest that every 1 instead read my post from yesterday.
by the way, read wally's 'THIS JUST IN! AIN'T EASY TO IMPRESS ALBERTO GONZALES!'
because i'm sure the news he's sending up will be all over the place tomorrow.
oh, i just remembered sherry's comment.
5/03/2006
goldie's (and marlene's) house party last weekend to end the war
tonight, at last, the story of goldie's (and marlene's), house party.
but first, c.i. forwarded a reply to an e-mail that came into the common ills. a blogger (not in the community) took issue with me for my opinions on stephen colbert and then slammed me for writing about dynasty. c.i. replied that he (yes, it was a he) shouldn't try to 2nd guess me.
'rebecca writes with instinct, with a good sense of p.r. and quite a bit more. while you see "only" talk of a tv show, you miss quite a bit including the point "strong women characters." you also fail to grasp that she's been promoting goldie since last week and drawing it out builds anticipation. the post on "dynasty" is an attention getter that will draw in more than the usual readers. that's what rebecca is all about and what she's always been about. which is why with little help outside of the community, she's managed to become very popular. possibly she could do "cat blogging" or whatever other tired fad/phase has been around for 10 years now? instead, she writes exactly as she wants and, in doing so, has 1 of the most intense and dedicated readerships you can only dream of as you play "from the center" with your dull posts. thanks for sharing. feel free to share again with some 1 who gives a damn. -- c.i.'
that was very nice of c.i. and attached was a note to me that if it were elaine, this might not be forwarded but i would want to know about it. i would.
so some little centrist feels the need to rag on me to c.i.?
1st why did he think c.i. would give a damn?
perfect stranger whines and c.i.'s going to say 'oh perfect stranger, you're right, let me trash a lifetime friendship!'?
what those types never get is that elaine, c.i. and i cannot have a wedge shoved between us. centrist, you're late to the party, all the presents have been opened, the candles blown out and the cake and ice cream all gone.
i wrote about dynasty for a number of reasons last night. 1) i did watch the show. 2) the female characters were strong and that was a breakthrough. 3) joan collins did make a difference in the way women were seen on tv. 4) i knew there were other dynasty fans out there. (i got more e-mails on last night's post then i've gotten on anything.) 5) postponing goldie would build the moment (milk it?). 6) if even 1 reader who dropped by for the dynasty post stayed around it would be a success.
your male concept of what the net is, centrist, isn't mine.
i think i achieved all my intended goals. but i doubt that any 1 trying to get us to all rally behind joe lieberman would grasp that.
so let's talk goldie and marlene.
last weekend, while some were able to go to nyc for the rally and march, many others were not able to. daughter goldie and mother marlene were not going to let the moment pass by without doing something.
goldie's the 1 who usually thinks of things for her friends. this time mom was inspired by her daughter's spirit (i'm inspired by goldie's spirit as well). so they threw a sleep over for young females and women. goldie invited her friends and marlene invited her friends (many of whom were the mothers of goldie's friends). as friday approached a few had yet to r.s.v.p.
turns out there was no need to worry. not only did every 1 r.s.v.p. by friday evening, many of the women asked if they could bring a friend, sister or family member.
they ended up with 62 females gathered together on saturday to talk about the war and the state of the world. (64 counting goldie and marlene.)
they couldn't go to nyc. they could've said, 'oh i can't go, maybe next time. let's stay home and watch gilmor girls!' they didn't do that. they ended up with their own rally right there in their own home.
that's pretty amazing. i don't want to make it all about the numbers and i'm happy for any reader who did something whether they got together with just 1 friend or more than 1, but 64 is amazing.
marlene said the thing she heard most often from her friends was that they had a lot on their mind but never really felt like they had a chance to talk about it. some of them have jobs where anything resembling a 'political discussion' is frowned upon. as marlene pointed out, the country's at war, how can some employers think the topic is off limits? but some do. then the 1s who pick up their children after school are never sure where others stand.
what every 1 found out, marlene said, was how many were opposed to the war. a few had talked to each other about it in groups of 2. that's why 1 woman asked if she could bring her sister. her sister was the only 1 'keeping me sane' during this illegal war.
there were 2 women who didn't work outside of the home and marlene made a point to note that this hadn't freed up their discussions. it had left them feeling as isolated as the women who had an off limits stamp on the topic at their jobs.
goldie's big worry before saturday night was 1 her friends had. most were very against the war because it's an issue that goldie raises and discusses. she's taking a speech class now, the first 1/2 of the term was a foreign language, the 2nd 1/2 is speech. and there's not a speech she gives, improv or rehearsed, that doesn't put the war out there.
they had to give 1 on the founding fathers and goldie didn't just do a history, she took what they said and would apply to the illegal war we're in today. so her friends have had some 1 raising the issue and they've done research on their own and are really up to speed on what's going on.
their concern was that the mothers and other adults wouldn't a) understand where they were coming from and/or b) let them speak.
goldie had to say at 1 point, marlene backed her up on this, 'that's a very important point but ___ had the floor.' the mother, who had interrupted her own daughter, apologized and yielded the floor to her daughter. that only happened the 1 time.
that's pretty amazing when you consider the number present. but goldie is something. she is a force to be reckoned with.
so the evening started with every 1 just saying their name and telling a detail or 2 about themselves. then they munched on snacks while they watched eyewitness in iraq.
that was the perfect choice because a) it's powerful and b) it's only 28 minutes long.
every 1 was more than ready to talk and if it had been a longer movie, they probably would've ended up stopping it. so they then went around discussing, taking turns and listening to each other. goldie said her friends were really impressed with their own moms because they really were worried that they'd be dismissed or not listened to.
goldie had to reassure them that this wouldn't happen. she told them friday during lunch, 'if we're not listened to, we stage a walk out!'
goldie's not even 13, folks. she is amazing.
so the daughters got to share their thoughts and this is a big deal. it was a big deal to them but it would be a big deal to any 1. think about when you were young and something was important to you. did your parents listen to you? some did, some didn't.
saturday night, the mothers (aunts and friends) listened to our future leaders.
it wasn't a 1 way street. the daughters listened to the mothers, and other adults, as well.
the only other potential problem came when, at 11 pm, 1 of the mothers said, 'this has been good but you girls should probably go to sleep now.'
goldie didn't blink, marlene said. goldie informed the woman that she was very happy to have her as a guest and that even though the invitations clearly stated every 1 would stay up until midnight, if the woman was tired, she could go on to sleep.
the woman, to her credit, laughed and said, 'goldie, you are right. tell you what, i think i can handle 1 more hour.'
both goldie and marlene report that each grouping was impressed with the others.
marlene said goldie's best friend's mother told her she felt embarrassed when she heard her daughter speaking because her daughter had put so much time and energy into the issue. she had no idea. she knew her daughter was 'into music and boys' but she'd never seen this serious side before. and she said her daughter had put more time into the issue than she had 'and i'm the adult.'
goldie's friends that were in the speech class had some visuals from speeches they'd given. (1 class, when the students could pick a topic, goldie begged every 1, boy or girl, to talk about the war. and they all did. she's our future president, folks.)
1 grandmother had come along and she was probably the biggest hit with every 1 because she had tales of what she did in high school in the final years the war was waging in vietnam. she'd think she was finished and be asked for another story.
she called marlene on monday to thank her for the party and to say that those are stories she never shares these days because she didn't think any 1 cared.
so it's was a multi-generational meeting of minds.
every 1 ended up realizing that there was no wall on the war between any 1 attending. they all felt a lot stronger from sharing and realizing that they shared an opposition to the war. 30 minutes before midnight, they started brainstorming on what to do next and decided that these house parties needed to continue. the next 1 will focus on females as well and be in june. for that they got 10 volunteers to agree to host at their homes. (64 is a lot of people for a living room. marlene and 2 women ended up having to move the coffee table, the chairs and the counch out into the hall just to have room for every 1.) after that, in august, the plan is to try to bring in the men - 'and boys,' goldie added.
but with ground rules because goldie says boys don't like to just talk about what they think or feel, they like to tell you what they think you think and feel. (i'm not kidding, she's our future president. she knows the score already.)
so 1 of the things the 10 house parties in june will work on is a set of guidelines for august's house parites and they will be included with the invitations so that, if there are any problems, some 1 can do like goldie did when they almost lost an hour of their discussion time -- 'the invitations clearly stated...'
the 1 thing that marlene would do differently is the music. every 1 brought music (they could've brought an article, book or poem) except for 4. they weren't able to listen to all the music so the adults had to narrow down their choices and the young girls had to do the same with their choices. that was fine. but the first 1 to play was a mother and she didn't talk about it. she probably assumed that it would be clear. then the next turn went to 1 of goldie's friends and since the woman hadn't spoken, the girl just said 'this is bright eyes.' then a mother went with the next cd. then goldie jumped in and said, 'okay, bright eyes' and gave a brief speech about the cd they'd already listened to and then introduced the pink cd. after that, every 1, adult or young female, spoke for at least 2 minutes on why the cd had been selected.
marlene thinks that either the young girls were more passionated about the music or more convinced that not every 1 would know the cd. so for june's house parties, they're all going to start with a selection from the younger group. after goldie got every 1 prodded, people were really opening up. they'd talk about the 1 or 2 songs on the cd that made them bring it and maybe 1 of those songs or another 1 was a song they'd slow danced to. which would cause every 1 to laugh. marlene said she thought it was a really good way for both groups to get to know each other.
the question i didn't want to ask was the 1 i saved for last with goldie. i was afraid i'd be discouraging when i asked, 'so what does this mean?'
goldie replied that it didn't mean the war ends tomorrow. and she really paid attention to the stories the grandmother told because she was using them for the examples. she closed with 'it's going to be a long fight.'
goldie for president!
the smartest and coolest person in the nation.
goldie's writing about the house party for this sunday's polly's brew so be sure to check that out. she did her 1st column in the 1 that went out last sunday and it was 'just me saying hi' is how she explained it. it was a lot more than that but you're going to want to read about this. there's 1 story that she shared which is so wonderful that i told her i loved hearing it but i wasn't going to put it up here because she really needs to write about that in her column.
sherry and i had the same question for marlene - why goldie? we figured it either had to be for goldie hawn or the rapper. marlene said that in the final 3 months of her pregnancy, she got so huge it was a major trip just to get off the bed. during that time, she was still responsible for writing the checks and sending out the bills. she wrote the check for the cable bill, put it in an envelope and stamped it. but she asked her husband to mail it because that morning she didn't feel like walking out to the mailbox. he was in a hurry and didn't put it in their mailbox on the way to the car. he planned to mail it from work but then forgot and then lost it (not realizing he'd lost it).
so 1 day a final notice comes in. she asks him, 'did you mail that check in?' of course he did. they probably haven't processed it yet. then, a little bit later, the cable goes off. at which point he remembers that maybe he didn't mail it. maybe.
he told her she'd have to take care of it and her attitude was that she wasn't taking care of it because if he'd just put the envelope in the mail on his way to the car that morning, there'd be nothing to take care of or if he'd remembered, when the final notice came in, that he never mailed the envelope, it would have been taken care of then.
so there was no cable and when others would offer to take care of it, she would say, 'no, he needs to write the check and he needs to mail it. it's his mess.' so her sister brought over some videocassettes. it was a lot of jim carrey and steve martin movies (marlene likes them) and 3 goldie hawn films (housesitter, butterflies are free and protocol). she really didn't know goldie's movies. she knew who goldie was from interviews on tv and in magazines but she doesn't think she'd ever seen a film with goldie hawn.
the movies made her laugh and as she watched them over and over, she decided that was what she wanted her daughter-to-be to be like. 'some 1 who may make a mistake, but picks herself up, has a sense of humor and is going to get through life just fine.' that's why goldie is named goldie.
that may be 1 reason goldie is so cool but 1 reason for sure is the fact that she's got an equally cool mother. by the way, whether her husband took care of it himself or got some 1 to, the cable was back on when she and goldie came home from the hospital. marlene says, 'of course that only happened after i'd given birth and realized iwas making a lot out of the lost envelope.'
kpfa's flashpoints tomorrow (they've had a great week). janis karpkinski is being interviewed by dennis bernstein right now. if you read this and think, 'i missed it!' remember you can hit either link at the start of the sentence and listen to an archived broadcast.
but first, c.i. forwarded a reply to an e-mail that came into the common ills. a blogger (not in the community) took issue with me for my opinions on stephen colbert and then slammed me for writing about dynasty. c.i. replied that he (yes, it was a he) shouldn't try to 2nd guess me.
'rebecca writes with instinct, with a good sense of p.r. and quite a bit more. while you see "only" talk of a tv show, you miss quite a bit including the point "strong women characters." you also fail to grasp that she's been promoting goldie since last week and drawing it out builds anticipation. the post on "dynasty" is an attention getter that will draw in more than the usual readers. that's what rebecca is all about and what she's always been about. which is why with little help outside of the community, she's managed to become very popular. possibly she could do "cat blogging" or whatever other tired fad/phase has been around for 10 years now? instead, she writes exactly as she wants and, in doing so, has 1 of the most intense and dedicated readerships you can only dream of as you play "from the center" with your dull posts. thanks for sharing. feel free to share again with some 1 who gives a damn. -- c.i.'
that was very nice of c.i. and attached was a note to me that if it were elaine, this might not be forwarded but i would want to know about it. i would.
so some little centrist feels the need to rag on me to c.i.?
1st why did he think c.i. would give a damn?
perfect stranger whines and c.i.'s going to say 'oh perfect stranger, you're right, let me trash a lifetime friendship!'?
what those types never get is that elaine, c.i. and i cannot have a wedge shoved between us. centrist, you're late to the party, all the presents have been opened, the candles blown out and the cake and ice cream all gone.
i wrote about dynasty for a number of reasons last night. 1) i did watch the show. 2) the female characters were strong and that was a breakthrough. 3) joan collins did make a difference in the way women were seen on tv. 4) i knew there were other dynasty fans out there. (i got more e-mails on last night's post then i've gotten on anything.) 5) postponing goldie would build the moment (milk it?). 6) if even 1 reader who dropped by for the dynasty post stayed around it would be a success.
your male concept of what the net is, centrist, isn't mine.
i think i achieved all my intended goals. but i doubt that any 1 trying to get us to all rally behind joe lieberman would grasp that.
so let's talk goldie and marlene.
last weekend, while some were able to go to nyc for the rally and march, many others were not able to. daughter goldie and mother marlene were not going to let the moment pass by without doing something.
goldie's the 1 who usually thinks of things for her friends. this time mom was inspired by her daughter's spirit (i'm inspired by goldie's spirit as well). so they threw a sleep over for young females and women. goldie invited her friends and marlene invited her friends (many of whom were the mothers of goldie's friends). as friday approached a few had yet to r.s.v.p.
turns out there was no need to worry. not only did every 1 r.s.v.p. by friday evening, many of the women asked if they could bring a friend, sister or family member.
they ended up with 62 females gathered together on saturday to talk about the war and the state of the world. (64 counting goldie and marlene.)
they couldn't go to nyc. they could've said, 'oh i can't go, maybe next time. let's stay home and watch gilmor girls!' they didn't do that. they ended up with their own rally right there in their own home.
that's pretty amazing. i don't want to make it all about the numbers and i'm happy for any reader who did something whether they got together with just 1 friend or more than 1, but 64 is amazing.
marlene said the thing she heard most often from her friends was that they had a lot on their mind but never really felt like they had a chance to talk about it. some of them have jobs where anything resembling a 'political discussion' is frowned upon. as marlene pointed out, the country's at war, how can some employers think the topic is off limits? but some do. then the 1s who pick up their children after school are never sure where others stand.
what every 1 found out, marlene said, was how many were opposed to the war. a few had talked to each other about it in groups of 2. that's why 1 woman asked if she could bring her sister. her sister was the only 1 'keeping me sane' during this illegal war.
there were 2 women who didn't work outside of the home and marlene made a point to note that this hadn't freed up their discussions. it had left them feeling as isolated as the women who had an off limits stamp on the topic at their jobs.
goldie's big worry before saturday night was 1 her friends had. most were very against the war because it's an issue that goldie raises and discusses. she's taking a speech class now, the first 1/2 of the term was a foreign language, the 2nd 1/2 is speech. and there's not a speech she gives, improv or rehearsed, that doesn't put the war out there.
they had to give 1 on the founding fathers and goldie didn't just do a history, she took what they said and would apply to the illegal war we're in today. so her friends have had some 1 raising the issue and they've done research on their own and are really up to speed on what's going on.
their concern was that the mothers and other adults wouldn't a) understand where they were coming from and/or b) let them speak.
goldie had to say at 1 point, marlene backed her up on this, 'that's a very important point but ___ had the floor.' the mother, who had interrupted her own daughter, apologized and yielded the floor to her daughter. that only happened the 1 time.
that's pretty amazing when you consider the number present. but goldie is something. she is a force to be reckoned with.
so the evening started with every 1 just saying their name and telling a detail or 2 about themselves. then they munched on snacks while they watched eyewitness in iraq.
that was the perfect choice because a) it's powerful and b) it's only 28 minutes long.
every 1 was more than ready to talk and if it had been a longer movie, they probably would've ended up stopping it. so they then went around discussing, taking turns and listening to each other. goldie said her friends were really impressed with their own moms because they really were worried that they'd be dismissed or not listened to.
goldie had to reassure them that this wouldn't happen. she told them friday during lunch, 'if we're not listened to, we stage a walk out!'
goldie's not even 13, folks. she is amazing.
so the daughters got to share their thoughts and this is a big deal. it was a big deal to them but it would be a big deal to any 1. think about when you were young and something was important to you. did your parents listen to you? some did, some didn't.
saturday night, the mothers (aunts and friends) listened to our future leaders.
it wasn't a 1 way street. the daughters listened to the mothers, and other adults, as well.
the only other potential problem came when, at 11 pm, 1 of the mothers said, 'this has been good but you girls should probably go to sleep now.'
goldie didn't blink, marlene said. goldie informed the woman that she was very happy to have her as a guest and that even though the invitations clearly stated every 1 would stay up until midnight, if the woman was tired, she could go on to sleep.
the woman, to her credit, laughed and said, 'goldie, you are right. tell you what, i think i can handle 1 more hour.'
both goldie and marlene report that each grouping was impressed with the others.
marlene said goldie's best friend's mother told her she felt embarrassed when she heard her daughter speaking because her daughter had put so much time and energy into the issue. she had no idea. she knew her daughter was 'into music and boys' but she'd never seen this serious side before. and she said her daughter had put more time into the issue than she had 'and i'm the adult.'
goldie's friends that were in the speech class had some visuals from speeches they'd given. (1 class, when the students could pick a topic, goldie begged every 1, boy or girl, to talk about the war. and they all did. she's our future president, folks.)
1 grandmother had come along and she was probably the biggest hit with every 1 because she had tales of what she did in high school in the final years the war was waging in vietnam. she'd think she was finished and be asked for another story.
she called marlene on monday to thank her for the party and to say that those are stories she never shares these days because she didn't think any 1 cared.
so it's was a multi-generational meeting of minds.
every 1 ended up realizing that there was no wall on the war between any 1 attending. they all felt a lot stronger from sharing and realizing that they shared an opposition to the war. 30 minutes before midnight, they started brainstorming on what to do next and decided that these house parties needed to continue. the next 1 will focus on females as well and be in june. for that they got 10 volunteers to agree to host at their homes. (64 is a lot of people for a living room. marlene and 2 women ended up having to move the coffee table, the chairs and the counch out into the hall just to have room for every 1.) after that, in august, the plan is to try to bring in the men - 'and boys,' goldie added.
but with ground rules because goldie says boys don't like to just talk about what they think or feel, they like to tell you what they think you think and feel. (i'm not kidding, she's our future president. she knows the score already.)
so 1 of the things the 10 house parties in june will work on is a set of guidelines for august's house parites and they will be included with the invitations so that, if there are any problems, some 1 can do like goldie did when they almost lost an hour of their discussion time -- 'the invitations clearly stated...'
the 1 thing that marlene would do differently is the music. every 1 brought music (they could've brought an article, book or poem) except for 4. they weren't able to listen to all the music so the adults had to narrow down their choices and the young girls had to do the same with their choices. that was fine. but the first 1 to play was a mother and she didn't talk about it. she probably assumed that it would be clear. then the next turn went to 1 of goldie's friends and since the woman hadn't spoken, the girl just said 'this is bright eyes.' then a mother went with the next cd. then goldie jumped in and said, 'okay, bright eyes' and gave a brief speech about the cd they'd already listened to and then introduced the pink cd. after that, every 1, adult or young female, spoke for at least 2 minutes on why the cd had been selected.
marlene thinks that either the young girls were more passionated about the music or more convinced that not every 1 would know the cd. so for june's house parties, they're all going to start with a selection from the younger group. after goldie got every 1 prodded, people were really opening up. they'd talk about the 1 or 2 songs on the cd that made them bring it and maybe 1 of those songs or another 1 was a song they'd slow danced to. which would cause every 1 to laugh. marlene said she thought it was a really good way for both groups to get to know each other.
the question i didn't want to ask was the 1 i saved for last with goldie. i was afraid i'd be discouraging when i asked, 'so what does this mean?'
goldie replied that it didn't mean the war ends tomorrow. and she really paid attention to the stories the grandmother told because she was using them for the examples. she closed with 'it's going to be a long fight.'
goldie for president!
the smartest and coolest person in the nation.
goldie's writing about the house party for this sunday's polly's brew so be sure to check that out. she did her 1st column in the 1 that went out last sunday and it was 'just me saying hi' is how she explained it. it was a lot more than that but you're going to want to read about this. there's 1 story that she shared which is so wonderful that i told her i loved hearing it but i wasn't going to put it up here because she really needs to write about that in her column.
sherry and i had the same question for marlene - why goldie? we figured it either had to be for goldie hawn or the rapper. marlene said that in the final 3 months of her pregnancy, she got so huge it was a major trip just to get off the bed. during that time, she was still responsible for writing the checks and sending out the bills. she wrote the check for the cable bill, put it in an envelope and stamped it. but she asked her husband to mail it because that morning she didn't feel like walking out to the mailbox. he was in a hurry and didn't put it in their mailbox on the way to the car. he planned to mail it from work but then forgot and then lost it (not realizing he'd lost it).
so 1 day a final notice comes in. she asks him, 'did you mail that check in?' of course he did. they probably haven't processed it yet. then, a little bit later, the cable goes off. at which point he remembers that maybe he didn't mail it. maybe.
he told her she'd have to take care of it and her attitude was that she wasn't taking care of it because if he'd just put the envelope in the mail on his way to the car that morning, there'd be nothing to take care of or if he'd remembered, when the final notice came in, that he never mailed the envelope, it would have been taken care of then.
so there was no cable and when others would offer to take care of it, she would say, 'no, he needs to write the check and he needs to mail it. it's his mess.' so her sister brought over some videocassettes. it was a lot of jim carrey and steve martin movies (marlene likes them) and 3 goldie hawn films (housesitter, butterflies are free and protocol). she really didn't know goldie's movies. she knew who goldie was from interviews on tv and in magazines but she doesn't think she'd ever seen a film with goldie hawn.
the movies made her laugh and as she watched them over and over, she decided that was what she wanted her daughter-to-be to be like. 'some 1 who may make a mistake, but picks herself up, has a sense of humor and is going to get through life just fine.' that's why goldie is named goldie.
that may be 1 reason goldie is so cool but 1 reason for sure is the fact that she's got an equally cool mother. by the way, whether her husband took care of it himself or got some 1 to, the cable was back on when she and goldie came home from the hospital. marlene says, 'of course that only happened after i'd given birth and realized iwas making a lot out of the lost envelope.'
kpfa's flashpoints tomorrow (they've had a great week). janis karpkinski is being interviewed by dennis bernstein right now. if you read this and think, 'i missed it!' remember you can hit either link at the start of the sentence and listen to an archived broadcast.
5/02/2006
dynasty
okay, tomorrow night goldie. not tonight. we spoke on the phone for about 2 hours and i spoke to her mother for at least an hour. at the end of it, her mother said, 'you probably have too much.' i said, 'no, i'll just sit down, read over everything and pull some together.'
she said, 'well you have more energy than i do, i'm just going to crash in front of the tv and watch dynasty.'
i said, 'oh i used to love that show. i haven't watched it in syndication but i know every episode.'
that's when she says, 'oh, no, this is a reunion special.'
i said 'what!' and i'm grabbing for the papers. i see the arts section of the new york times which i never got to. there it is. i'm reading parts of it to her and i see this 1 part about al corely only on being on the show for a year.
what?
when tv talk 'years' in tv, they usually mean seasons. he was on the first season of dynasty - which wasn't a full season and he was on the second season. that's when he leaves, with 2 seasons under his belt. so goldie's mother and i, her name is marlene by the way, are talking about that and then we're talking about dynasty. she said she had a pint of mint cholocate chip in the freezer that she'd puchased for this and that she used to watch the show with friends. i usually watched it on the phone with friends. she said we should watch together and i did have some ice cream in the freezer too (rocky road).
so we watched and laughed and remembered.
it was really fun and we were talking about alexis and fallon and how big a deal they were. a lot of people compare it to dallas but dynasty was way ahead of dallas. joan collins didn't play a dish rag like sue ellen. she wasn't always the victim. the women on dallas were like house pets until pam left bobby (many, many years later - and after dynasty was a hit). they were useless.
donna reed came on as miss ellie and a lot of people didn't like that. i didn't have anything against barbara bel geddes but i honestly thought donna reed brought a little life to the show.
i really felt like you had to enjoy being a doormat to watch dallas if you were a woman.
marlene didn't believe what i'd said. why? she felt the same way.
'what was the best soap on prime time?' she asked and we both said 'knots landing!' together.
but it wasn't until dynasty that knots landing finally became a decent show.
they didn't know what they were doing with that show. then dynasty came along and showed that women could do a little more than say 'oh bobby' and 'oh j.r.'
or lucy with her prolonged childhood. if it weren't for the sexually acting out, she would have had nothing to offer as a character.
and never det me started on that hideous woman ray krebbs married.
but for awhile, it was the only show in town. then came dynasty and women weren't just sitting on the sidelines while bobby and j.r. and jock duked it out over ewing oil.
dynasty also had hotties. not a lot.
the first year was the best. you had matthew blaisdel who was hot. you had al corley who was hot. and john james who was just so pretty.
i don't think he could act at all but he was very pretty.
after corley left they brought on jack coleman and he was just not my type, that face shape was just not anything i'd be interested in. it was like a box with a little pointy chin attached.
after the first year of alexis (the 2nd season), dynasty had such an impact that abby (donna mills) went from annoyance on knots landing to first class bitch.
we were done with the family type drama and in soap territory.
and then knots landing took off. and women could be front and center.
joan collins, linda evans and pamela sue martin pushed it. give them and dynasty credit. but blake carrington always had to come out on top. on knots landing, abby could win, she could lose.
and once that happened there was real reason for karen to stand up for val. i thought i was the only 1 who never cared for val during all that time of nuttiness but marlene was worse about val than i was. 'she left her kid years ago and she's going to spend her whole life whining?' and we couldn't stand laura until she was about to leave richard. the women were dish rags on that show. even abby was 'little sister' depending on her big brother.
dynasty allowed women to do more than sit around the table shooting glances. sue ellen was so boring. pam was a drip until she left bobby.
so we talked about that and we talked about the scenes that got included and the 1s that didn't.
where was sammy jo? we saw her in 1 scene, for a 2nd.
just because heather locklear didn't want to do the reunion doesn't mean they couldn't use the scenes.
i didn't see kathleen beller sit down with the cast but they showed kirby.
marlene pointed out that they didn't show diahann carroll either. she wasn't invited to the chat. but that's how they treated her character the whole time. the minute that she wasn't playing kirby's mother, they didn't know what to do with her.
i liked joan collins' fire and humor. i did wonder about the fact that alexis wore wigs.
was she supposed to or was that a glitch? in one episode, she had short hair, then we see her at her apartment lifting free weights and wearing this hideous blue body suit and her hair's very long.
joan collins changed tv. there's no getting around it. linda evans, no offense, but she was 1 person. when joan collins came on, suddenly it was 'women.' and women were more than the aunt beas. joan collins showed that a mature woman could be a lead, could be sexy and funny. she didn't have to be some 1 standing on the sidelines. she was powerful, she was mean, she was tender, she was funny and she looked incredible.
but you could love alexis, you just couldn't identify with her. marlene said she always identified with fallon. me too!
as played by pamela sue martin, we both agreed. emma samms was hideous.
they shouldn't have even had her on the show. she was part of the colbys. they brought her back on dynasty just to spin off that show. then what, she got kidnapped by a ufo or something? i didn't watch, no 1 did. the worst thing about it being cancelled was that emma samms came over to dynasty.
she was awful. it was like battle of the bad daytime stars between her and jack coleman. you felt like they'd slashed the budget and moved the show to daytime.
heather locklear was good as sammy jo, we both agreed on that.
but pamela bellwood was always too nutty and creepy.
'1 life ends and another begins, little lindsey,' she said and that was probably her best moment.
sammy jo was so much better after she came back - her voice was lower (i think heather locklear had taken voice lessons) and she was much more complex.
worst guest star?
we think henry kissenger was on and he would be the absolute worst.
after him, we'd say ali magraw.
but we could take her with jeff. it was just when lady ashley was going after blake.
why any woman wanted blake was beyond both of us.
al corley was hot. whether stephen was gay or straight, he was hot.
after dynasty, he ended up on bare essance. marlene watched that religiously. i saw the mini-series. i'm not sure if he was in that or not. but i remember genie francis was and she was in the show. but linda evens, who was in the 'mini-series' (2 episodes) wasn't in the tv series and donna mills wasn't either.
when people watch desparate housewives, they're seeing a bunch of tiny girls. joan collins played a woman. alexis wasn't a bimbo.
we were talking about least favorite storylines. (anything with emma samms.) and it was just amazing how much we could remember.
what would have made the special better? just have pamel sue martin, al corely, linda evans and joan collins talking.
with john james and michael nader (dex) missing, we started wondering what they did that kept them from being on or being invited.
so that's the point of tonight's entry. and if you were a young girl or woman when dynasty came on, you know how much of an impact joan collins, linda evans and pamela sue anderson had on tv.
she said, 'well you have more energy than i do, i'm just going to crash in front of the tv and watch dynasty.'
i said, 'oh i used to love that show. i haven't watched it in syndication but i know every episode.'
that's when she says, 'oh, no, this is a reunion special.'
i said 'what!' and i'm grabbing for the papers. i see the arts section of the new york times which i never got to. there it is. i'm reading parts of it to her and i see this 1 part about al corely only on being on the show for a year.
what?
when tv talk 'years' in tv, they usually mean seasons. he was on the first season of dynasty - which wasn't a full season and he was on the second season. that's when he leaves, with 2 seasons under his belt. so goldie's mother and i, her name is marlene by the way, are talking about that and then we're talking about dynasty. she said she had a pint of mint cholocate chip in the freezer that she'd puchased for this and that she used to watch the show with friends. i usually watched it on the phone with friends. she said we should watch together and i did have some ice cream in the freezer too (rocky road).
so we watched and laughed and remembered.
it was really fun and we were talking about alexis and fallon and how big a deal they were. a lot of people compare it to dallas but dynasty was way ahead of dallas. joan collins didn't play a dish rag like sue ellen. she wasn't always the victim. the women on dallas were like house pets until pam left bobby (many, many years later - and after dynasty was a hit). they were useless.
donna reed came on as miss ellie and a lot of people didn't like that. i didn't have anything against barbara bel geddes but i honestly thought donna reed brought a little life to the show.
i really felt like you had to enjoy being a doormat to watch dallas if you were a woman.
marlene didn't believe what i'd said. why? she felt the same way.
'what was the best soap on prime time?' she asked and we both said 'knots landing!' together.
but it wasn't until dynasty that knots landing finally became a decent show.
they didn't know what they were doing with that show. then dynasty came along and showed that women could do a little more than say 'oh bobby' and 'oh j.r.'
or lucy with her prolonged childhood. if it weren't for the sexually acting out, she would have had nothing to offer as a character.
and never det me started on that hideous woman ray krebbs married.
but for awhile, it was the only show in town. then came dynasty and women weren't just sitting on the sidelines while bobby and j.r. and jock duked it out over ewing oil.
dynasty also had hotties. not a lot.
the first year was the best. you had matthew blaisdel who was hot. you had al corley who was hot. and john james who was just so pretty.
i don't think he could act at all but he was very pretty.
after corley left they brought on jack coleman and he was just not my type, that face shape was just not anything i'd be interested in. it was like a box with a little pointy chin attached.
after the first year of alexis (the 2nd season), dynasty had such an impact that abby (donna mills) went from annoyance on knots landing to first class bitch.
we were done with the family type drama and in soap territory.
and then knots landing took off. and women could be front and center.
joan collins, linda evans and pamela sue martin pushed it. give them and dynasty credit. but blake carrington always had to come out on top. on knots landing, abby could win, she could lose.
and once that happened there was real reason for karen to stand up for val. i thought i was the only 1 who never cared for val during all that time of nuttiness but marlene was worse about val than i was. 'she left her kid years ago and she's going to spend her whole life whining?' and we couldn't stand laura until she was about to leave richard. the women were dish rags on that show. even abby was 'little sister' depending on her big brother.
dynasty allowed women to do more than sit around the table shooting glances. sue ellen was so boring. pam was a drip until she left bobby.
so we talked about that and we talked about the scenes that got included and the 1s that didn't.
where was sammy jo? we saw her in 1 scene, for a 2nd.
just because heather locklear didn't want to do the reunion doesn't mean they couldn't use the scenes.
i didn't see kathleen beller sit down with the cast but they showed kirby.
marlene pointed out that they didn't show diahann carroll either. she wasn't invited to the chat. but that's how they treated her character the whole time. the minute that she wasn't playing kirby's mother, they didn't know what to do with her.
i liked joan collins' fire and humor. i did wonder about the fact that alexis wore wigs.
was she supposed to or was that a glitch? in one episode, she had short hair, then we see her at her apartment lifting free weights and wearing this hideous blue body suit and her hair's very long.
joan collins changed tv. there's no getting around it. linda evans, no offense, but she was 1 person. when joan collins came on, suddenly it was 'women.' and women were more than the aunt beas. joan collins showed that a mature woman could be a lead, could be sexy and funny. she didn't have to be some 1 standing on the sidelines. she was powerful, she was mean, she was tender, she was funny and she looked incredible.
but you could love alexis, you just couldn't identify with her. marlene said she always identified with fallon. me too!
as played by pamela sue martin, we both agreed. emma samms was hideous.
they shouldn't have even had her on the show. she was part of the colbys. they brought her back on dynasty just to spin off that show. then what, she got kidnapped by a ufo or something? i didn't watch, no 1 did. the worst thing about it being cancelled was that emma samms came over to dynasty.
she was awful. it was like battle of the bad daytime stars between her and jack coleman. you felt like they'd slashed the budget and moved the show to daytime.
heather locklear was good as sammy jo, we both agreed on that.
but pamela bellwood was always too nutty and creepy.
'1 life ends and another begins, little lindsey,' she said and that was probably her best moment.
sammy jo was so much better after she came back - her voice was lower (i think heather locklear had taken voice lessons) and she was much more complex.
worst guest star?
we think henry kissenger was on and he would be the absolute worst.
after him, we'd say ali magraw.
but we could take her with jeff. it was just when lady ashley was going after blake.
why any woman wanted blake was beyond both of us.
al corley was hot. whether stephen was gay or straight, he was hot.
after dynasty, he ended up on bare essance. marlene watched that religiously. i saw the mini-series. i'm not sure if he was in that or not. but i remember genie francis was and she was in the show. but linda evens, who was in the 'mini-series' (2 episodes) wasn't in the tv series and donna mills wasn't either.
when people watch desparate housewives, they're seeing a bunch of tiny girls. joan collins played a woman. alexis wasn't a bimbo.
we were talking about least favorite storylines. (anything with emma samms.) and it was just amazing how much we could remember.
what would have made the special better? just have pamel sue martin, al corely, linda evans and joan collins talking.
with john james and michael nader (dex) missing, we started wondering what they did that kept them from being on or being invited.
so that's the point of tonight's entry. and if you were a young girl or woman when dynasty came on, you know how much of an impact joan collins, linda evans and pamela sue anderson had on tv.
5/01/2006
stephen colbert spits on women (past and present) and the web and e&p don't see the problem
oh that stephen colbert, he so damn funny. so crazy.
open a window so we can all get a breath of fresh air.
we need it.
we really need it.
stephen colbert's been praised across the web (will the offenders please step up?).
anybody notice a problem?
no?
okay, how about this, you ever heard of helen thomas?
anybody?
that's 1.
that's 1 dc reporter who doesn't leave the white house to go "make love to your wife."
this is from editor & publisher - presumably a thinking press organ (write up's credited to e & p staff):
Addressing the reporters, he said, "Let's review the rules. Here's how it works. The president makes decisions, he’s the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know -- fiction."
somehow, in their intrepid write up, they can't note the thing that should be obvious to them - women do work for editor & publisher, don't they? what are they all queen bees or just to damn scared to stand up and say 'that's wrong'?
read that b.s. and you'll realize why the work ava and c.i. do is so sorely needed. e & p offers commentary in spots. they never question the sexist remark, the sexist assumption that all reporters are male (or straight and married). must be a pretty diverse crowd over at e & p - what, you've got the white man who drinks jack daniels, the white man who drinks beer and the white man who doesn't drink anything?
that's a pretty observant bunch, huh? supposed reporters that can say a damn word when the 'funny' guy renders all women invisible with that remark - pretty damn disgusting.
helen thomas doesn't go home to her wife.
and guess what? she's not alone.
not anymore.
in the old days, it was helen thomas, sarah mcclendon and a smattering of others like may craig.
when they started out they had to prove they could do the job because, back then, it was assumed that reporters were naturally male.
back then.
back when?
last night.
to pretend that stephen colbert did not utter an insulting remark is surely an act of desperation and those rushing to applaud him might want to check themselves real damn quick.
it's not funny. it's not cute.
in a room full of a large number of female journalists, he insulted all women.
in a room that was only open to the female gender because of mavericks like thomas and mcclendon, he insulted all women, past and present, living and dead.
'oh but it's so damn funny!'
what colbert did was not funny.
it was insulting.
and i'm not that desparate for giggles that i have to pretend it wasn't insulting.
colbert could have as easily said 'spouse.'
he didn't. why not?
well he's never appeared all that aware.
but let's be real clear here, what he did should have been greeted with howls. in the old days, women's groups would be coming down on him and the guys and gals giggling right now would think twice. they'd probably still titter in private. but they'd realize it was too insulting and had made people too angry for them to chuckle in public.
it's the sort of 'joke' they'd tell about african-americans when none were in the room.
so they'd avoid people like me and make sure they kept their chuckles private.
that our supposed left wing net wants to act like we had a gift from heaven via our lord stephen colbert last night is disgusting. but hey, e & p paved the way.
they're picking & choosing.
what they're picking is 'colbert so funny! he insulted bully boy so we should rush to applaud him even if he just stripped women of decades of accomplishments in the process.'
it sure is nice to know that while the anti-bully boy movement claims to want every 1, it's still okay to act as though women are invisble. that says a lot about 'priorities.' or maybe just a lot about what's important to you.
for all the chuckle heads, out there, you want to explain the women's national press club and how about eleanor roosevelt's press conference association?
want to explain to me why they were created in the 1st place?
oh, i know why they were created. i don't need the lesson. but maybe some of the howling with laughter set do.
women had to fight for the right to cover dc. they had to fight for the ability to ask a question. i'm not joking.
colbert made light of their struggle and light of the female reporters present.
i won't. it's not funny to me that he stood up at a press club function with members who were male and female and thought it was 'funny' to just address the men.
it's disgusting.
'spouse' to 'husband' was it would have taken for him to be inclusive. 1 word but that was too much for him. and apparently, it's too much to expect that our brave left males will step up to the plate and say, 'hey, that wasn't funny.'
i will. women came before me, they came before you (whether you are female or male). i won't devalue their contributions or forget their struggle.
but i'm not a silly comic making stupid films about being a 40 y.o. virgin.
if i could act, i doubt i'd be convincing as some 1 scared of sex - another difference between myself and stephen colbert.
he's gotten a lot of mileage out of this 'i can't relate to women' shit.
maybe at some point he'll be called on it?
probably not. it's easier to giggle along and, in the process, say it's okay to destroy and spit on the accomplishments of women. yeah, we're so starved for funny that it's okay to spit on women and it's okay for males (and some women i'm sure) to go along with it. for the 'cause' - obviously.
editor & publisher is supposed to be a press trade journal. their organ. when it won't speak up for women in its ranks, what use is it?
if you don't get how insulting his 'bit' was, this is from adam bernstein's january 8, 2003 obituary of sarah mcclendon that ran in the washington post:
As one of the few women after World War II writing about politics in the nation's capital, Ms. McClendon was pitted against discrimination, condescension and exasperation among politicians and her peers. It wasn't uncommon for her to be reproved by presidents who did not want to be bothered with her because of her sex, brusque manner and the small circulation of the papers for which she wrote.
that was a fighter. i doubt colbert's fought for anything besides the right to offend. apparently editor & publisher just wants to fight for their right to be pig headed and chuckle when half the ranks get insulted. and our left web is eager to go along.
open a window so we can all get a breath of fresh air.
we need it.
we really need it.
stephen colbert's been praised across the web (will the offenders please step up?).
anybody notice a problem?
no?
okay, how about this, you ever heard of helen thomas?
anybody?
that's 1.
that's 1 dc reporter who doesn't leave the white house to go "make love to your wife."
this is from editor & publisher - presumably a thinking press organ (write up's credited to e & p staff):
Addressing the reporters, he said, "Let's review the rules. Here's how it works. The president makes decisions, he’s the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know -- fiction."
somehow, in their intrepid write up, they can't note the thing that should be obvious to them - women do work for editor & publisher, don't they? what are they all queen bees or just to damn scared to stand up and say 'that's wrong'?
read that b.s. and you'll realize why the work ava and c.i. do is so sorely needed. e & p offers commentary in spots. they never question the sexist remark, the sexist assumption that all reporters are male (or straight and married). must be a pretty diverse crowd over at e & p - what, you've got the white man who drinks jack daniels, the white man who drinks beer and the white man who doesn't drink anything?
that's a pretty observant bunch, huh? supposed reporters that can say a damn word when the 'funny' guy renders all women invisible with that remark - pretty damn disgusting.
helen thomas doesn't go home to her wife.
and guess what? she's not alone.
not anymore.
in the old days, it was helen thomas, sarah mcclendon and a smattering of others like may craig.
when they started out they had to prove they could do the job because, back then, it was assumed that reporters were naturally male.
back then.
back when?
last night.
to pretend that stephen colbert did not utter an insulting remark is surely an act of desperation and those rushing to applaud him might want to check themselves real damn quick.
it's not funny. it's not cute.
in a room full of a large number of female journalists, he insulted all women.
in a room that was only open to the female gender because of mavericks like thomas and mcclendon, he insulted all women, past and present, living and dead.
'oh but it's so damn funny!'
what colbert did was not funny.
it was insulting.
and i'm not that desparate for giggles that i have to pretend it wasn't insulting.
colbert could have as easily said 'spouse.'
he didn't. why not?
well he's never appeared all that aware.
but let's be real clear here, what he did should have been greeted with howls. in the old days, women's groups would be coming down on him and the guys and gals giggling right now would think twice. they'd probably still titter in private. but they'd realize it was too insulting and had made people too angry for them to chuckle in public.
it's the sort of 'joke' they'd tell about african-americans when none were in the room.
so they'd avoid people like me and make sure they kept their chuckles private.
that our supposed left wing net wants to act like we had a gift from heaven via our lord stephen colbert last night is disgusting. but hey, e & p paved the way.
they're picking & choosing.
what they're picking is 'colbert so funny! he insulted bully boy so we should rush to applaud him even if he just stripped women of decades of accomplishments in the process.'
it sure is nice to know that while the anti-bully boy movement claims to want every 1, it's still okay to act as though women are invisble. that says a lot about 'priorities.' or maybe just a lot about what's important to you.
for all the chuckle heads, out there, you want to explain the women's national press club and how about eleanor roosevelt's press conference association?
want to explain to me why they were created in the 1st place?
oh, i know why they were created. i don't need the lesson. but maybe some of the howling with laughter set do.
women had to fight for the right to cover dc. they had to fight for the ability to ask a question. i'm not joking.
colbert made light of their struggle and light of the female reporters present.
i won't. it's not funny to me that he stood up at a press club function with members who were male and female and thought it was 'funny' to just address the men.
it's disgusting.
'spouse' to 'husband' was it would have taken for him to be inclusive. 1 word but that was too much for him. and apparently, it's too much to expect that our brave left males will step up to the plate and say, 'hey, that wasn't funny.'
i will. women came before me, they came before you (whether you are female or male). i won't devalue their contributions or forget their struggle.
but i'm not a silly comic making stupid films about being a 40 y.o. virgin.
if i could act, i doubt i'd be convincing as some 1 scared of sex - another difference between myself and stephen colbert.
he's gotten a lot of mileage out of this 'i can't relate to women' shit.
maybe at some point he'll be called on it?
probably not. it's easier to giggle along and, in the process, say it's okay to destroy and spit on the accomplishments of women. yeah, we're so starved for funny that it's okay to spit on women and it's okay for males (and some women i'm sure) to go along with it. for the 'cause' - obviously.
editor & publisher is supposed to be a press trade journal. their organ. when it won't speak up for women in its ranks, what use is it?
if you don't get how insulting his 'bit' was, this is from adam bernstein's january 8, 2003 obituary of sarah mcclendon that ran in the washington post:
As one of the few women after World War II writing about politics in the nation's capital, Ms. McClendon was pitted against discrimination, condescension and exasperation among politicians and her peers. It wasn't uncommon for her to be reproved by presidents who did not want to be bothered with her because of her sex, brusque manner and the small circulation of the papers for which she wrote.
that was a fighter. i doubt colbert's fought for anything besides the right to offend. apparently editor & publisher just wants to fight for their right to be pig headed and chuckle when half the ranks get insulted. and our left web is eager to go along.
peace, participation & immigration rally
c.i. called earlier to say 'i'm still in demonstrations.' i said don't worry about it, i'll do 2 entries tonight. and people can just deal or not.
seriously, you're dealing with a community that's active. we're not sitting in front of cnn waiting for it to explain the world around us to us.
and we all bring our own unique thing to the table. which is true of all community members as well. both bringing their own unique thing to the table and also getting out in the world around them.
friday, we all got together in nyc. by plane, train or automobile to be dinonne warkick about it. ('planes, trains and automobiles.') i didn't go to dc on sunday. i was wiped out from saturday's peace activities and working on the third estate sunday review. c.i. did. and today? is still at the immigration rights demonstrations.
so if some 1 in the community feels robbed, don't. (i think it's mainly nonmembers who complain now.) if you want people who just watch the news and tells you about that, then you can get that anywhere.
we're not doing that.
we're not 'arm chair warriors' who fondle our remotes lovingly.
so what's the trade off?
that you're not going to have dozens of posts. live with it. cedric called me to see if i thought he should post tonight? his regular days are tuesdays and thursdays. he's doing volunteer work, he's got a job, he's got friends (including 3 cool old guys) and family. i asked him why he felt he needed to post and he brought up that every 1 was tired after nyc and he thought it might take some pressure off. great idea but he needs to take some time for him.
me? i'm in courtney love mode. i'm smoking my cigarettes raging on the internet. (i've always pictured courtney doing that since the mid 90s. i may be wrong but if i am don't spoil the illusion for me.)
my next post is going to be a 'what the hell is every 1 thinking?' post. treva, ruth's friend, is wonderful. i love her. i saw this weekend why ruth thinks we are so much alike. she really doesn't care. she's going to speak her mind.
i have to force that sometimes but we do have speaking our minds in common.
so what did you do today? t and me were at demonstrations. we were so tempted, after, to get some drinks but not spending was also something that was advised. so instead, we went to her apartment where all she had was soft drinks. we really could have used something stronger to celebrate but, for the cause, we stuck with that.
as i noted before, she closed her shop down for today. hair and nails would just have to wait.
what did we see?
people who gave a damn.
in the united states of apathy, that was pretty damn amazing. young and old. we saw people marching to support the cause and people marching because the cause was their lives.
it was pretty powerful and i ended up with goose bumps during a few of the speeches.
here's a section of "Music Roundtable"' (third estate sunday review):
Ruth: You know, I want to toss this to C.I. I heard a story about something earlier this week.
C.I.: Are you talking about the conversation I told you about?
Ruth: Yes.
C.I.: Okay. A lazy ass, I won't say "friend," bothered me on the phone. Ruth, I've forgotten the conversation so give me a moment or jog my memory.
Ruth: You'd stated something about the immigration protests.
C.I.: Right, thank you. Okay, so it's a call from out of the blue from someone who attends no anti-war, peace rallies. Someone who does nothing but sit on their ass and complain. I was commenting about the diversity at the rallies, with people speaking in so many voices and from their own personal experiences. To which L.A., "Lazy Ass," replied, "I know what you mean! I can't believe we're focusing on this issue!" That wasn't what I meant and I corrected that. But LA's feelings were that the immigration protests were drowning out the peace movement, of which LA is not a part of. That's not the case and people need to get over that. This, the immigration rights movement, isn't this top-down movement. It's a case of something very important that effects so many on a very personal level. The driving force is a different thing. It's not a threat to the peace movement. If there's a fault with the peace movement, it's the inability to connect more people on a personal level. But it's not a competition. I think what L.A. and anyone else feeling that way fails to grasp is the factors that distance the war, factors that the peace movement is working to overcome, which are less in place with immigrant rights. On the most basic level, broadcast media, in English, can distance people from the war, and does. It can try that with the immigration issue. But it's less successful there because you just have to look around and there's your friend it effects, or your family member or you. The media can't lie on this issue and get away with it. There's no need for a fact check online or anywhere else because you have your own eyes and your own experiences. It's an immediate rejection of the mainstream's portrayal of "the Senate proposal is good." No, it's not. It may be good for big money, but it's not good for the people. Those attempting to use the mainstream airwaves to sell this crap to the public forgot that this isn't the unions that they've demonized forever, or some government program or government agency that they've long attacked. This is very real and very immediate. And very personal. Add in that the mainstream media has long ignored immigrant concerns and issues so there's no "base" they can build on. You watch whatever chatty fool say, "This is the good proposal" into a mike and you know they're lying. It took how many months for the public to face up to the fact that both the Bully Boy and the media lied to them [about the war]? It didn't take that stretch of time with regards to immigration because, though the media rendered that portion of the population invisible, it is a fabric of life in the United States. There are connections between immigration and the war -- Camilo Mejia has done an amazing job giving voice to the connections -- but this issue [immigration] wasn't a 'wait and see' one. A lot of people could, and did, sit out before the invasion and in the early months of it. "What if I speak out and it goes wonderful?" Or, "What if WMD is found!" Or planted. What if? You can't play what if when lives are at stake and it was immediately clear that we were talking about lives, even if the mainstream wasn't, when this scape goating of immigrants started up. For the people taking part in those protests, it is very real and very immediate.
Dona: So what does that mean for the peace movement?
C.I.: Well, I'm not sure that's the right question. I understand what you're getting at but I don't want anyone reading that question and misunderstanding it as these protests that are going on are something that gets done and "Now we focus!" I know you're not saying that, but I want to be clear on that because I know a lot of people giving their everything to the immigration issue and I don't want to do or say, or not say, anything that devalues their incredible contributions, work and heart. In terms of any movement, when people speak out, it leads to more speaking out. That's why you have clampdowns and compromises. Which is really the only choices that governmental powers have [other than addressing the concerns]. They think they can ignore, and try to, but that's rarely the case. So -- and this is why it's important for musicians to speak out to make sure everyone's not saying, "I thought this was a musical roundtable!" -- any time people come together to fight for a cause, it helps other causes. The civil rights movement helped sparked a number of movements. The questioning and speaking out in recent past and more distant past, impacted the peace movement today as surely as it did, and does, the immigrantion protests. At the protests, to compare and contrast with the peace movement, you're hearing stories that are spoken of with the same sort of intensity that Cindy Sheehan speaks. And, like her voice before Camp Casey, these are voices and stories that the media hasn't given voice to. Take the nonsense about the Mexican flag. Talk to students and they'll tell you, "So what?" As they should. Why wouldn't they bring a Mexican flag or any other flag to a rally on immigration? There hasn't been a lot of second guessing from the movement itself. Now people outside of it, including that hideous man who was on Democracy Now! trashing them for using the flag, second guess it. But it got attention. That wasn't the goal, the goal was to honor heritage. And though some on the fringes and some outside clucked over the flag, the ones involved that I know, have no second thoughts and no, "We better ban flags!" attitude. There is very much a sense of ownership of the movement. Not singular ownership, but a group ownership. And the support that is given to one another participating is amazing. That's because it is a personal issue, and I'm speaking of what's going on in California, I can't say that it's the same elsewhere. I'd hope it would be but I don't know that. It's very personal and very real. The challenge for the peace movement, and Naomi Klein has pointed this out for over two years now, is to bring the war home. You say that and some freak out. When she was debating the issue of protest on Democracy Now!, Toad freaked out and went to Chicago '68 immediately. That's not what she's talking about and people would do well to lose the Nervous Nelly quality. She's speaking of a very hard task, which is demonstrating that it's not "over there" and it's not something that only effects some people. I wish I'd heard the people that Elaine, Wally and Jayson spoke with or the one that Rebecca did because I'm not sure this is what they were getting at. The movement is successful and growing each day. But for it to really drive the message home, the connections need to be made, the war, like the troops, needs to be brought home. That's not a cry for violence. That's saying we need to connect what the media and the government don't: what goes on "there" is here. This is effecting everyone. Not just Iraqis, not just troops, not just the families of troops. That connection is still not being made. And until it is, the numbers will continue to grow but not to the size that is needed. By the way, I've gone on way too long, but screw it. I had an e-mail from a woman who felt that no one was noting the children of the fallen. She's one and it's her issue. We have noted it at The Common Ills before and we will work it in as soon as I can again. But that's her issue and she was very straightforward about it so I want to toss that out now since I don't know when I'll be able to get to it. Each death in Iraq of a parent, Iraqi, British, American, what have you, does impact. And for children, and Cedric and Wally lost their fathers at young ages so they could speak to this better than I can, it's a different level of impact. It's awful when anyone loses someone they love but to lose someone when you're still getting to know them or before you are able to is a disaster, I can't think of a better word, sorry, that isn't always noted. I'm not minimizing the effects on a parent or a spouse, or a friend or lifetime partner or anyone. But with children, there's an added level.
consider that a rough draft because i spoke to ava today and she said that she wanted to go into it with the notes and fix the typos. i said 'not tonight!' she was participating in the rally in nyc.
people need to slow down and take time for themselves.
(i'm the warrior woman - roar! - i can handle anything!)
i put that in because i really saw it today. i'd visited with every 1 in california last month. but i could only stay the weekend (i had to come back for a christening). i got to meet a few people involved in the immigration movement and they were wonderful. but today, it wasn't just hearing about it, it was witnessing it. and it was pretty damn amazing.
by the way, while i'm talking the third estate sunday review, if time permits, the upcoming edition should be pretty amazing. there are some really wild ideas being tossed around and i'm really excited about it.
the peace events in nyc?
the thing that still stands out to me is this cage that was pulled around to drive home the point about guantanamo and the way the prisoners there are treated. we need a lot more of that kind of creative, in your face, theater.
there were some wonderful speeches. you can always count on that. but what stood out to me besides the energy and passion from the crowd is the the cage. it drove the point home.
where's goldie?
i called her this afternoon and she told me, in a very grown up voice, 'rebecca, we're not supposed to use long distance today. we have to show solidarity with the immigrants.' i replied in an equally serious voice, 'my bad. i'll call back tomorrow afternoon to get the update.'
goldie is the future of our nation. forget condi, hillary or any other woman some 1 wants to toss out. our future president is alive and well and in middle school. she's going to change the world.
she's so much more together now than i did at her age. and i bet more than a lot of adults do today.
i've got a glass of wine, a cigarette going and otis singing from the speakers so let me stop here and work on the 2nd entry. 2 entries tonight. so don't feel cheated if c.i. doesn't post. it's been a busy day for all of us but it's been a killer 3 days for c.i.
forget president, goldie's the future c.i. that's how amazing goldie is. i'll call her tomorrow and get the news on how her and her mother's house party went this weekend.
be sure you read c.i.'s "NARAL advocates the rest cure" that went up early saturday morning. it's amazing.
seriously, you're dealing with a community that's active. we're not sitting in front of cnn waiting for it to explain the world around us to us.
and we all bring our own unique thing to the table. which is true of all community members as well. both bringing their own unique thing to the table and also getting out in the world around them.
friday, we all got together in nyc. by plane, train or automobile to be dinonne warkick about it. ('planes, trains and automobiles.') i didn't go to dc on sunday. i was wiped out from saturday's peace activities and working on the third estate sunday review. c.i. did. and today? is still at the immigration rights demonstrations.
so if some 1 in the community feels robbed, don't. (i think it's mainly nonmembers who complain now.) if you want people who just watch the news and tells you about that, then you can get that anywhere.
we're not doing that.
we're not 'arm chair warriors' who fondle our remotes lovingly.
so what's the trade off?
that you're not going to have dozens of posts. live with it. cedric called me to see if i thought he should post tonight? his regular days are tuesdays and thursdays. he's doing volunteer work, he's got a job, he's got friends (including 3 cool old guys) and family. i asked him why he felt he needed to post and he brought up that every 1 was tired after nyc and he thought it might take some pressure off. great idea but he needs to take some time for him.
me? i'm in courtney love mode. i'm smoking my cigarettes raging on the internet. (i've always pictured courtney doing that since the mid 90s. i may be wrong but if i am don't spoil the illusion for me.)
my next post is going to be a 'what the hell is every 1 thinking?' post. treva, ruth's friend, is wonderful. i love her. i saw this weekend why ruth thinks we are so much alike. she really doesn't care. she's going to speak her mind.
i have to force that sometimes but we do have speaking our minds in common.
so what did you do today? t and me were at demonstrations. we were so tempted, after, to get some drinks but not spending was also something that was advised. so instead, we went to her apartment where all she had was soft drinks. we really could have used something stronger to celebrate but, for the cause, we stuck with that.
as i noted before, she closed her shop down for today. hair and nails would just have to wait.
what did we see?
people who gave a damn.
in the united states of apathy, that was pretty damn amazing. young and old. we saw people marching to support the cause and people marching because the cause was their lives.
it was pretty powerful and i ended up with goose bumps during a few of the speeches.
here's a section of "Music Roundtable"' (third estate sunday review):
Ruth: You know, I want to toss this to C.I. I heard a story about something earlier this week.
C.I.: Are you talking about the conversation I told you about?
Ruth: Yes.
C.I.: Okay. A lazy ass, I won't say "friend," bothered me on the phone. Ruth, I've forgotten the conversation so give me a moment or jog my memory.
Ruth: You'd stated something about the immigration protests.
C.I.: Right, thank you. Okay, so it's a call from out of the blue from someone who attends no anti-war, peace rallies. Someone who does nothing but sit on their ass and complain. I was commenting about the diversity at the rallies, with people speaking in so many voices and from their own personal experiences. To which L.A., "Lazy Ass," replied, "I know what you mean! I can't believe we're focusing on this issue!" That wasn't what I meant and I corrected that. But LA's feelings were that the immigration protests were drowning out the peace movement, of which LA is not a part of. That's not the case and people need to get over that. This, the immigration rights movement, isn't this top-down movement. It's a case of something very important that effects so many on a very personal level. The driving force is a different thing. It's not a threat to the peace movement. If there's a fault with the peace movement, it's the inability to connect more people on a personal level. But it's not a competition. I think what L.A. and anyone else feeling that way fails to grasp is the factors that distance the war, factors that the peace movement is working to overcome, which are less in place with immigrant rights. On the most basic level, broadcast media, in English, can distance people from the war, and does. It can try that with the immigration issue. But it's less successful there because you just have to look around and there's your friend it effects, or your family member or you. The media can't lie on this issue and get away with it. There's no need for a fact check online or anywhere else because you have your own eyes and your own experiences. It's an immediate rejection of the mainstream's portrayal of "the Senate proposal is good." No, it's not. It may be good for big money, but it's not good for the people. Those attempting to use the mainstream airwaves to sell this crap to the public forgot that this isn't the unions that they've demonized forever, or some government program or government agency that they've long attacked. This is very real and very immediate. And very personal. Add in that the mainstream media has long ignored immigrant concerns and issues so there's no "base" they can build on. You watch whatever chatty fool say, "This is the good proposal" into a mike and you know they're lying. It took how many months for the public to face up to the fact that both the Bully Boy and the media lied to them [about the war]? It didn't take that stretch of time with regards to immigration because, though the media rendered that portion of the population invisible, it is a fabric of life in the United States. There are connections between immigration and the war -- Camilo Mejia has done an amazing job giving voice to the connections -- but this issue [immigration] wasn't a 'wait and see' one. A lot of people could, and did, sit out before the invasion and in the early months of it. "What if I speak out and it goes wonderful?" Or, "What if WMD is found!" Or planted. What if? You can't play what if when lives are at stake and it was immediately clear that we were talking about lives, even if the mainstream wasn't, when this scape goating of immigrants started up. For the people taking part in those protests, it is very real and very immediate.
Dona: So what does that mean for the peace movement?
C.I.: Well, I'm not sure that's the right question. I understand what you're getting at but I don't want anyone reading that question and misunderstanding it as these protests that are going on are something that gets done and "Now we focus!" I know you're not saying that, but I want to be clear on that because I know a lot of people giving their everything to the immigration issue and I don't want to do or say, or not say, anything that devalues their incredible contributions, work and heart. In terms of any movement, when people speak out, it leads to more speaking out. That's why you have clampdowns and compromises. Which is really the only choices that governmental powers have [other than addressing the concerns]. They think they can ignore, and try to, but that's rarely the case. So -- and this is why it's important for musicians to speak out to make sure everyone's not saying, "I thought this was a musical roundtable!" -- any time people come together to fight for a cause, it helps other causes. The civil rights movement helped sparked a number of movements. The questioning and speaking out in recent past and more distant past, impacted the peace movement today as surely as it did, and does, the immigrantion protests. At the protests, to compare and contrast with the peace movement, you're hearing stories that are spoken of with the same sort of intensity that Cindy Sheehan speaks. And, like her voice before Camp Casey, these are voices and stories that the media hasn't given voice to. Take the nonsense about the Mexican flag. Talk to students and they'll tell you, "So what?" As they should. Why wouldn't they bring a Mexican flag or any other flag to a rally on immigration? There hasn't been a lot of second guessing from the movement itself. Now people outside of it, including that hideous man who was on Democracy Now! trashing them for using the flag, second guess it. But it got attention. That wasn't the goal, the goal was to honor heritage. And though some on the fringes and some outside clucked over the flag, the ones involved that I know, have no second thoughts and no, "We better ban flags!" attitude. There is very much a sense of ownership of the movement. Not singular ownership, but a group ownership. And the support that is given to one another participating is amazing. That's because it is a personal issue, and I'm speaking of what's going on in California, I can't say that it's the same elsewhere. I'd hope it would be but I don't know that. It's very personal and very real. The challenge for the peace movement, and Naomi Klein has pointed this out for over two years now, is to bring the war home. You say that and some freak out. When she was debating the issue of protest on Democracy Now!, Toad freaked out and went to Chicago '68 immediately. That's not what she's talking about and people would do well to lose the Nervous Nelly quality. She's speaking of a very hard task, which is demonstrating that it's not "over there" and it's not something that only effects some people. I wish I'd heard the people that Elaine, Wally and Jayson spoke with or the one that Rebecca did because I'm not sure this is what they were getting at. The movement is successful and growing each day. But for it to really drive the message home, the connections need to be made, the war, like the troops, needs to be brought home. That's not a cry for violence. That's saying we need to connect what the media and the government don't: what goes on "there" is here. This is effecting everyone. Not just Iraqis, not just troops, not just the families of troops. That connection is still not being made. And until it is, the numbers will continue to grow but not to the size that is needed. By the way, I've gone on way too long, but screw it. I had an e-mail from a woman who felt that no one was noting the children of the fallen. She's one and it's her issue. We have noted it at The Common Ills before and we will work it in as soon as I can again. But that's her issue and she was very straightforward about it so I want to toss that out now since I don't know when I'll be able to get to it. Each death in Iraq of a parent, Iraqi, British, American, what have you, does impact. And for children, and Cedric and Wally lost their fathers at young ages so they could speak to this better than I can, it's a different level of impact. It's awful when anyone loses someone they love but to lose someone when you're still getting to know them or before you are able to is a disaster, I can't think of a better word, sorry, that isn't always noted. I'm not minimizing the effects on a parent or a spouse, or a friend or lifetime partner or anyone. But with children, there's an added level.
consider that a rough draft because i spoke to ava today and she said that she wanted to go into it with the notes and fix the typos. i said 'not tonight!' she was participating in the rally in nyc.
people need to slow down and take time for themselves.
(i'm the warrior woman - roar! - i can handle anything!)
i put that in because i really saw it today. i'd visited with every 1 in california last month. but i could only stay the weekend (i had to come back for a christening). i got to meet a few people involved in the immigration movement and they were wonderful. but today, it wasn't just hearing about it, it was witnessing it. and it was pretty damn amazing.
by the way, while i'm talking the third estate sunday review, if time permits, the upcoming edition should be pretty amazing. there are some really wild ideas being tossed around and i'm really excited about it.
the peace events in nyc?
the thing that still stands out to me is this cage that was pulled around to drive home the point about guantanamo and the way the prisoners there are treated. we need a lot more of that kind of creative, in your face, theater.
there were some wonderful speeches. you can always count on that. but what stood out to me besides the energy and passion from the crowd is the the cage. it drove the point home.
where's goldie?
i called her this afternoon and she told me, in a very grown up voice, 'rebecca, we're not supposed to use long distance today. we have to show solidarity with the immigrants.' i replied in an equally serious voice, 'my bad. i'll call back tomorrow afternoon to get the update.'
goldie is the future of our nation. forget condi, hillary or any other woman some 1 wants to toss out. our future president is alive and well and in middle school. she's going to change the world.
she's so much more together now than i did at her age. and i bet more than a lot of adults do today.
i've got a glass of wine, a cigarette going and otis singing from the speakers so let me stop here and work on the 2nd entry. 2 entries tonight. so don't feel cheated if c.i. doesn't post. it's been a busy day for all of us but it's been a killer 3 days for c.i.
forget president, goldie's the future c.i. that's how amazing goldie is. i'll call her tomorrow and get the news on how her and her mother's house party went this weekend.
be sure you read c.i.'s "NARAL advocates the rest cure" that went up early saturday morning. it's amazing.
4/29/2006
not much
so here we are in nyc and i'm dead tired. but i'm blogging lest there be cries of 'where is everyone?'
everyone's in nyc and geared up for the big protest.
i'm on my laptop, mike and wally are on one (trying to figure out what they'll write at their own sites supposedly - but too much laughter indicates more than that) and c.i.'s typing furiously away to get something pulled together.
c.i.'s addressing naral so be sure to read it. a group of us went to the threepenny opera tonight (or yesterday night - can you tell i just want to go to sleep?). others did other things. (that was partly due to the fact that begging and pleading - i should have tried stealing - couldn't result in enough tickets for us all to go.) i love the production more than when i saw it last week. i want to see it again and encourage you to see it as well if you're able to.
so today is a day of action. that's if you're in nyc or not. get out there and make yourself heard.
bonnie wondered what we were doing for the third estate sunday review this sunday? i don't think anyone's sure. i think it should be a week with 'best of's but i doubt that will happen.
i'm mainly staring at the screen. every now and then c.i. will read something to me and ask if i can follow? i'm amazed i can. i'm about to turn in. it's been a long night and the march is at noon. i'd hoped to write more than this but the key point is this: if you want to stop the war, you need to stop it. you do that by speaking out and protesting. not just tomorrow but every day. you make it a daily act. congress and the bully boy have taken us to year 4 and you can be sure they'll be happy taking us on through many more years. we, the people, are the 1s who can stop it. make yourself heard today.
everyone's in nyc and geared up for the big protest.
i'm on my laptop, mike and wally are on one (trying to figure out what they'll write at their own sites supposedly - but too much laughter indicates more than that) and c.i.'s typing furiously away to get something pulled together.
c.i.'s addressing naral so be sure to read it. a group of us went to the threepenny opera tonight (or yesterday night - can you tell i just want to go to sleep?). others did other things. (that was partly due to the fact that begging and pleading - i should have tried stealing - couldn't result in enough tickets for us all to go.) i love the production more than when i saw it last week. i want to see it again and encourage you to see it as well if you're able to.
so today is a day of action. that's if you're in nyc or not. get out there and make yourself heard.
bonnie wondered what we were doing for the third estate sunday review this sunday? i don't think anyone's sure. i think it should be a week with 'best of's but i doubt that will happen.
i'm mainly staring at the screen. every now and then c.i. will read something to me and ask if i can follow? i'm amazed i can. i'm about to turn in. it's been a long night and the march is at noon. i'd hoped to write more than this but the key point is this: if you want to stop the war, you need to stop it. you do that by speaking out and protesting. not just tomorrow but every day. you make it a daily act. congress and the bully boy have taken us to year 4 and you can be sure they'll be happy taking us on through many more years. we, the people, are the 1s who can stop it. make yourself heard today.
4/27/2006
fair asks for action; goldie (again) puts us to shame
okay, first off http://www.saveaccess.org(a coalition dedicated to preserving community TV)
(a coalition dedicated to preserving community TV)http://action.freepress.net/campaign/savethenet
(the action page for the SavetheInternet.com coalition)
do you watch public access tv? if you do, you know it's an important resource. if you don't, maybe it's not your thing, i still think you can get behind wanting to preserve it. that's the public's way of speaking out. it's a medium that can cover what cnn and others refuse to.
when cable companies were getting all these financial breaks, 1 reason justifying them was that they would create this public space where communities could be served. maybe public access isn't something you watch (or maybe you don't watch tv), but this is something that i think you can appreciate the conecpt of.
in terms of the net, are the communications company going to be able to 'steer' traffic by denying you the access you have now? the net's the 'information highway.' now they want to put toll boths on it and create a tiered system that's, another example, is a great deal like 1st class, coach, et al on an airplane.
who told them that they could do that? who let them think we were fine with them seizing our internet?
it's our internet. this is a public common.
did we get it for free?
hell no. i paid for it, you paid for it, people before us paid for it. because the net is something that the government spent millions in tax payer dollars.
this is our space and we shouldn't privatize it anymore than we should allow some 1 to privatize a national forest or a park.
so join fair in the fight to save the communications commons.
last lecture, in 1996, the telecommunications act passed full of promises about how we were going to see all these low band radio stations and that didn't happen. me? i said it wouldn't. i told every 1 that it wouldn't.
you know what else?
i didn't do a damn thing but shoot off my mouth.
i knew it was wrong but didn't make my voice heard.
i won't make that mistake again and i urge you not to.
end of lecture.
"Ruth's Public Radio Report" went up yesterday and i hope you checked it out already, but if not, please do. i love ruth. she is a wonderful (to use betty's daughter's favorite word) woman.
she's had a life and then some and she was 1 of the community members who'd check in at the common ills and read it and think. she didn't even feel up to suggesting a link (because she always undervalues how great she is). then c.i. noted how npr gets a pass from most despite the fact that it reaches a larger audience than fox or any of the other cable channels. so that inspired
ruth to do a contribution. it was her 'morning edition report' and she'd check the show morning edition. then she moved over to doing that and highlighting pacifica. then npr started to get a little more serious criticism (not just when their 'reporters' popped up on fox 'news' and didn't bother to disguise their bias). so she moved over to just highlighting pacifica because she really wants to get the word out on pacifica.
just reading her reports, i knew she busted her ass on those. i knew it from c.i. and kat as well because they've taken the reports down in dictated form sometimes. but saturday night/sunday morning, ruth tried to post (she usually writes it in an e-mail and c.i. will copy and paste it into the square that blogger has you post in). she kept losing it over and over and having to start over. tracey put in the call for help (tracey's ruth's granddaughter) and we put the third estate sunday review on hold because it is important to pitch in with the community and we all love ruth. for the rest of us, it was an eye opener.
she has so much more she'd like to put it into every report. i knew that and that's why i picked up coverage here but i really didn't know it until we helping her put together another version of
the report. she was so tired and so frazzled from all the blogger problems and thank goodness tracey called because i would hate to think of ruth staying up all night attempting to put that together. how it worked was the stuff ruth had in long hand, tracey gave to jim, mike, cedric, kat and me over the phone (we're responsible for those typos) and the stuff she wanted to develop more, she discussed with c.i., ava, jess and wally. betty, ty, dona, elaine and dallas were hunting down links and tags (c.i. also helped with tags). and by all working like that, ruth's amazing report went up early, early sunday morning. but what she does, forget what she'd like to do (because she always wants it to be more), is really too much work for just 1 person.
so we're all trying to beef up our own coverage so ruth can just say 'check __' and not have to write up a summary or something else. there are too many programs that need to be covered. and since it is a 'public radio report' it can act as her report and provide links to others covering pacifica.
ruth says i remind her of treva. that's her best friend from college and treva was able to join us in dc for the september protests and will be with us in nyc this weekend as well. treva is far more wonderful than i am. but i do appreciate the compliment/faith.
i am so thrilled to be able to share that goldie and her mother are having a 'women's night' saturday. goldie is 1 of my very cool readers and she is always trying to participate (and doing way more than a lot of adults). this time, her mother's joining her. it's a mothers and daughters, female friends saturday. mothers and daughters are going to discuss the war, share their feelings and have the sleepover goldie's had before with her friends but this time it will include
adults. they're really excited about it. they're going to show a short film and goldie says c.i. had suggested it so i'm guessing it's eyewitness in iraq: dahr jamail: an unembedded report.
goldie wrote me for a suggestion but a lot of my e-mails have been going to my 'junk folder.' i would have just deleted everything in that folder without looking if i hadn't read an e-mail tonight from goldie's mother. i'm glad i checked. and sorry that i wasn't able to read it before now but eyewitness in iraq is a wonderful choice.
they're going to have a short movie and then they're going to discuss the war. every 1 is supposed to bring a book, newspaper or magazine article or a song. it can be on iraq or activism.
and they'll go around and discuss what every 1 brought and why. (they'll also have the music on which should be really cool). goldie has 15 friends coming and her mother has 11 confirmed and hopes to hear from 5 more.
that is so amazing and that's what it takes to stop the war - bringing it to your area, bringing it to your circle. addressing it with the people around you. goldie's mother wrote as well (and when she was talking about goldie's e-mail, that's when i thought 'what?' and checked the junk folder) and said 'isn't my daughter amazing?' she is. and goldie's mother gives her daughter all the credit for this. not just for the idea but for making her 'give a damn about it and stop acting like it's something that happens and i have no say.' she says seeing goldie take this so seriously and really dedicate herself to this cause inspired her. i can understand that because goldie inspires me as well.
she should inspire you to do something. you may not be able to go to nyc, but you can do something. next week, goldie, her mother and i are going to speak on the phone and i'll write up a thing on how their function went.
goldie is amazing. she wants to start her own blog. her mother says maybe in a few years and that's due to her (rightful) concern about some of the predators online as well as 'the men who bash women, i've seen what some have done to you and really don't want that to happen to my daughter.' but here's something goldie is doing with her mother's permission: each sunday, she's writing a column for polly's brew.
polly's brew is by english member polly and goes out on sundays in e-mail form. her mother's fine with this contribution because it's 'closed' - only common ills members get this. the gina & krista round-robin goes out on fridays, polly's brew goes out on sundays and every 2 weeks we get the uk computer gurus.
goldie went with polly's brew because she knows polly has just started this up and she thought the english members might enjoy hearing about 'a kid's life in america as she wonders what can stop the war.' i think every 1 will be interested.
so that's what the amazing goldie is up to. what are you doing this week? come on you older teens and adults, is goldie going to do all the work? or are we going to step up to the plate?
not being able to go to nyc is not a reason for doing nothing. you do something. you put your mind to it like goldie has. that's how we stop the war.
from c.i.:
Iraq snapshot.
Thursday, as Pacifica broadcasts the Iraq Forum, things remain the same in Iraq: violence and chaos.
Condi and Donnie took the PR Express to Iraq. And did anything change? CNN reports that "many of the troops stationed north of Baghdad, in Balad and Dujail, say either they didn't know about it or didn't care." No, nothing changed. But it's an election year and nothing's more likely to put the dove in the pants of an Nixon or Bully Boy than an election year. Which is why there are the grumbles of maybe we'll draw down the numbers of some troops (while increasing the air strikes). The AFP reports Muwaffaq Bubaie, national security chief of Iraq, made noises of "a sizeable gross reduction of troops" at year's end.
Far from Fantasy Island, in Baquba, at least one Iraqi civilian and four Iraqi police officers died while at least two police officers were wounded in attacks on checkpoints today. As the day continued, the number of dead would rise to at least eleven.
Reuters notes a Romanian soldier and three Italian soldiers died due to a roadside bomb (Italy's Minister of Defence had revised the figures from three to two but AFP notes that the third has died and that a fourth is wounded). In Ramadi, two missiles were fired by a US plane. In Ramadi,an Iraqi soldier died from gun fire.
The Associated Press notes that today, sixteen more corpses were found (signs of torture).
As noted by Australia's ABC and WBAI's Wakeup Call, Jake Kovco remains in Iraq. Kovoco died in Iraq last week. Jacob Bruce Kovco was twenty-five years old and was to be honored this week in the Gippsland community of Briagolong. For that to happen, Kovco's body would need to make it to Australia. The wrong body was in the coffin. Brendan Nelson, Australia's Defense Minister, tells of breaking the news to Shelley Kovco and when the widow demanded to speak with Prime Minister John Howard, Nelson dialed the number. Nelson then angered family members (brother of the deceased, Benn Kovco, and mother of the deceased, Judy Kovco) by making statements regarding the death (which is still under investigation).
And in England, the Telegraph of London reports, the government's attorney general has backed off from the prosecution of of any British soldiers in the shooting death of Steven Roberts. Like the Kovco family, Samantha Roberts (wife of the deceased) continues to seek answers and feels that the government has been little help to her.
remember to make your voice heard.
(a coalition dedicated to preserving community TV)http://action.freepress.net/campaign/savethenet
(the action page for the SavetheInternet.com coalition)
do you watch public access tv? if you do, you know it's an important resource. if you don't, maybe it's not your thing, i still think you can get behind wanting to preserve it. that's the public's way of speaking out. it's a medium that can cover what cnn and others refuse to.
when cable companies were getting all these financial breaks, 1 reason justifying them was that they would create this public space where communities could be served. maybe public access isn't something you watch (or maybe you don't watch tv), but this is something that i think you can appreciate the conecpt of.
in terms of the net, are the communications company going to be able to 'steer' traffic by denying you the access you have now? the net's the 'information highway.' now they want to put toll boths on it and create a tiered system that's, another example, is a great deal like 1st class, coach, et al on an airplane.
who told them that they could do that? who let them think we were fine with them seizing our internet?
it's our internet. this is a public common.
did we get it for free?
hell no. i paid for it, you paid for it, people before us paid for it. because the net is something that the government spent millions in tax payer dollars.
this is our space and we shouldn't privatize it anymore than we should allow some 1 to privatize a national forest or a park.
so join fair in the fight to save the communications commons.
last lecture, in 1996, the telecommunications act passed full of promises about how we were going to see all these low band radio stations and that didn't happen. me? i said it wouldn't. i told every 1 that it wouldn't.
you know what else?
i didn't do a damn thing but shoot off my mouth.
i knew it was wrong but didn't make my voice heard.
i won't make that mistake again and i urge you not to.
end of lecture.
"Ruth's Public Radio Report" went up yesterday and i hope you checked it out already, but if not, please do. i love ruth. she is a wonderful (to use betty's daughter's favorite word) woman.
she's had a life and then some and she was 1 of the community members who'd check in at the common ills and read it and think. she didn't even feel up to suggesting a link (because she always undervalues how great she is). then c.i. noted how npr gets a pass from most despite the fact that it reaches a larger audience than fox or any of the other cable channels. so that inspired
ruth to do a contribution. it was her 'morning edition report' and she'd check the show morning edition. then she moved over to doing that and highlighting pacifica. then npr started to get a little more serious criticism (not just when their 'reporters' popped up on fox 'news' and didn't bother to disguise their bias). so she moved over to just highlighting pacifica because she really wants to get the word out on pacifica.
just reading her reports, i knew she busted her ass on those. i knew it from c.i. and kat as well because they've taken the reports down in dictated form sometimes. but saturday night/sunday morning, ruth tried to post (she usually writes it in an e-mail and c.i. will copy and paste it into the square that blogger has you post in). she kept losing it over and over and having to start over. tracey put in the call for help (tracey's ruth's granddaughter) and we put the third estate sunday review on hold because it is important to pitch in with the community and we all love ruth. for the rest of us, it was an eye opener.
she has so much more she'd like to put it into every report. i knew that and that's why i picked up coverage here but i really didn't know it until we helping her put together another version of
the report. she was so tired and so frazzled from all the blogger problems and thank goodness tracey called because i would hate to think of ruth staying up all night attempting to put that together. how it worked was the stuff ruth had in long hand, tracey gave to jim, mike, cedric, kat and me over the phone (we're responsible for those typos) and the stuff she wanted to develop more, she discussed with c.i., ava, jess and wally. betty, ty, dona, elaine and dallas were hunting down links and tags (c.i. also helped with tags). and by all working like that, ruth's amazing report went up early, early sunday morning. but what she does, forget what she'd like to do (because she always wants it to be more), is really too much work for just 1 person.
so we're all trying to beef up our own coverage so ruth can just say 'check __' and not have to write up a summary or something else. there are too many programs that need to be covered. and since it is a 'public radio report' it can act as her report and provide links to others covering pacifica.
ruth says i remind her of treva. that's her best friend from college and treva was able to join us in dc for the september protests and will be with us in nyc this weekend as well. treva is far more wonderful than i am. but i do appreciate the compliment/faith.
i am so thrilled to be able to share that goldie and her mother are having a 'women's night' saturday. goldie is 1 of my very cool readers and she is always trying to participate (and doing way more than a lot of adults). this time, her mother's joining her. it's a mothers and daughters, female friends saturday. mothers and daughters are going to discuss the war, share their feelings and have the sleepover goldie's had before with her friends but this time it will include
adults. they're really excited about it. they're going to show a short film and goldie says c.i. had suggested it so i'm guessing it's eyewitness in iraq: dahr jamail: an unembedded report.
goldie wrote me for a suggestion but a lot of my e-mails have been going to my 'junk folder.' i would have just deleted everything in that folder without looking if i hadn't read an e-mail tonight from goldie's mother. i'm glad i checked. and sorry that i wasn't able to read it before now but eyewitness in iraq is a wonderful choice.
they're going to have a short movie and then they're going to discuss the war. every 1 is supposed to bring a book, newspaper or magazine article or a song. it can be on iraq or activism.
and they'll go around and discuss what every 1 brought and why. (they'll also have the music on which should be really cool). goldie has 15 friends coming and her mother has 11 confirmed and hopes to hear from 5 more.
that is so amazing and that's what it takes to stop the war - bringing it to your area, bringing it to your circle. addressing it with the people around you. goldie's mother wrote as well (and when she was talking about goldie's e-mail, that's when i thought 'what?' and checked the junk folder) and said 'isn't my daughter amazing?' she is. and goldie's mother gives her daughter all the credit for this. not just for the idea but for making her 'give a damn about it and stop acting like it's something that happens and i have no say.' she says seeing goldie take this so seriously and really dedicate herself to this cause inspired her. i can understand that because goldie inspires me as well.
she should inspire you to do something. you may not be able to go to nyc, but you can do something. next week, goldie, her mother and i are going to speak on the phone and i'll write up a thing on how their function went.
goldie is amazing. she wants to start her own blog. her mother says maybe in a few years and that's due to her (rightful) concern about some of the predators online as well as 'the men who bash women, i've seen what some have done to you and really don't want that to happen to my daughter.' but here's something goldie is doing with her mother's permission: each sunday, she's writing a column for polly's brew.
polly's brew is by english member polly and goes out on sundays in e-mail form. her mother's fine with this contribution because it's 'closed' - only common ills members get this. the gina & krista round-robin goes out on fridays, polly's brew goes out on sundays and every 2 weeks we get the uk computer gurus.
goldie went with polly's brew because she knows polly has just started this up and she thought the english members might enjoy hearing about 'a kid's life in america as she wonders what can stop the war.' i think every 1 will be interested.
so that's what the amazing goldie is up to. what are you doing this week? come on you older teens and adults, is goldie going to do all the work? or are we going to step up to the plate?
not being able to go to nyc is not a reason for doing nothing. you do something. you put your mind to it like goldie has. that's how we stop the war.
from c.i.:
Iraq snapshot.
Thursday, as Pacifica broadcasts the Iraq Forum, things remain the same in Iraq: violence and chaos.
Condi and Donnie took the PR Express to Iraq. And did anything change? CNN reports that "many of the troops stationed north of Baghdad, in Balad and Dujail, say either they didn't know about it or didn't care." No, nothing changed. But it's an election year and nothing's more likely to put the dove in the pants of an Nixon or Bully Boy than an election year. Which is why there are the grumbles of maybe we'll draw down the numbers of some troops (while increasing the air strikes). The AFP reports Muwaffaq Bubaie, national security chief of Iraq, made noises of "a sizeable gross reduction of troops" at year's end.
Far from Fantasy Island, in Baquba, at least one Iraqi civilian and four Iraqi police officers died while at least two police officers were wounded in attacks on checkpoints today. As the day continued, the number of dead would rise to at least eleven.
Reuters notes a Romanian soldier and three Italian soldiers died due to a roadside bomb (Italy's Minister of Defence had revised the figures from three to two but AFP notes that the third has died and that a fourth is wounded). In Ramadi, two missiles were fired by a US plane. In Ramadi,an Iraqi soldier died from gun fire.
The Associated Press notes that today, sixteen more corpses were found (signs of torture).
As noted by Australia's ABC and WBAI's Wakeup Call, Jake Kovco remains in Iraq. Kovoco died in Iraq last week. Jacob Bruce Kovco was twenty-five years old and was to be honored this week in the Gippsland community of Briagolong. For that to happen, Kovco's body would need to make it to Australia. The wrong body was in the coffin. Brendan Nelson, Australia's Defense Minister, tells of breaking the news to Shelley Kovco and when the widow demanded to speak with Prime Minister John Howard, Nelson dialed the number. Nelson then angered family members (brother of the deceased, Benn Kovco, and mother of the deceased, Judy Kovco) by making statements regarding the death (which is still under investigation).
And in England, the Telegraph of London reports, the government's attorney general has backed off from the prosecution of of any British soldiers in the shooting death of Steven Roberts. Like the Kovco family, Samantha Roberts (wife of the deceased) continues to seek answers and feels that the government has been little help to her.
remember to make your voice heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)