it started with a whimper, then it picked up a little, then it whimpered to an end.
no climax. if the alito hearings had been a lover, you'd have been smart to kick it out of bed.
this is the oppostion party? this is how they do the brave stands?
i'm not talking about a filbuster. 1 of the nelsons brothers (that's how i see the 2 senators named nelson, they're like the really bad pop band of the 80s) has already given indications that he's willing to vote for alito.
so i'm not talking about that. i'm talking about asking tough questions and then asking follow ups. too often i felt like i was watching toy poodles who'd been housebroken long ago.
they'd bark a little at you while you were sitting on the couch but if you stood, they'd whimper and run out of the room.
that's not an opposition party.
it's sad that the democrats think that makes 1.
when alito kept fudging and refusing to answer, they should have treated him like a hostile witness. by the last day, every 1 of them should have used their time to hit on the same issues.
over and over.
diane feinstein, to name 1 of the worst offenders, could shoot scattershot (although she acted as though she were tossing out lillies throughout the hearings) in the other days but on the final day, she didn't need to be bringing up new issues. this is where you make the case to the people.
not where you suddenly introduce a new topic.
and for some 1 who interrupted ted kennedy repeatedly the day prior as he asked about caps, wasn't it strange that she didn't have a question on that? when kennedy was speaking yesterday, she couldn't stop interrupting. today? she's moved on.
miss diane gets my vote for most useless and i'm not fan of kohl. but miss diane was supposed to be fighting for women and instead we got a timid school marm trying to get the rowdy class to like her.
it's not just her. that's a point c.i. made tonight in the roundtable. c.i. pointed out that arlen specter couldn't stop treating her like she was a 'special' and not a real senator. he referred to her 'dramatic entrance.' there was another specific example c.i. brought up but i'm forgetting it now. but the point is, she is treated that way by others on the committee.
as an adult, she should ask them to cut it out. instead she seems tickled by the patronizing attitude.
i'm looking for the non-action figure miss diane. she comes non-fully poseable. she's in a seated postion. you can extend her legs or bend them depending upon whether you want her to sit in a chair or to sit on the floor. she wears a lovely dress with several layers. she comes with white gloves and the cutest little purse that matches her hat, her belt and her shoes. the non-action figure has a silly grin pasted on its face and is called 'miss diane, girl senator.'
the tea set is purchased separately.
so where we are we?
in it by ourselves. we can Take Action: Call Your Senators Today (link from now, the national organization for women). but let's not make the mistake of thinking our opposition party will fight or even knows how to.
'good sports,' they want the press to fight their battles.
that's the sort of thinking that's led them to the huge defeat of 2002, a history breaking moment as the repubes took control of the white house, the senate and the house.
but they just can't learn.
'what if the press gives us a mean editorial?' well they have. but even when they give the dems a nice editorial, it doesn't really have any effect.
people need to know that you will fight for them. not that an editorial board thinks you are all 'swell guys' and 'a respectable lady.' you're not trying to gain admittance to a country club, you're trying to reassure voters that you have what it takes.
they blew it on the alito hearings.
i could note the exceptions like charles schumer, ted kennedy and russ feingold. but what's the point?
i don't mean that in a defeatist mode. really, what's the point?
the democrats can have many strong fighters but it is meaningless if they can't get behind the fighters. instead they run from murtha, for instance, or they leave barbara boxer out to dry.
it's stupid.
i think every 1's getting the idea that tom delay isn't that popular in his own party. but until the all scandals, did they break ranks and say 'tom delay is crazy!'?
no, they supported their strong members. (i think tom delay is nuts but for his party he is a strong member.) a democrat takes a stand and there's no natural tendency to say 'yeah! me too!' instead the other elected members rush to distance themselves from murtha, or howard dean, or barbara boxer, or . . . go down the damn list.
let's put it in sports terms since that's the only thing many seem able to understand. you can have some 1 who can slam dunk the ball everytime they make it down the court. but if the rest of the team can't do defense, you're not a championship team. the la lakers were unbeatable when they worked as a team. when that fell apart, so did their winning streak.
dick durbin, i'll single out. he was strong. i'll note that today because i might not tomorrow since he's another example of a problem. he takes a strong stand and then, under pressure from astroturf and the echo chamber, apologizes. if the criticism isn't coming from your base, tough it out. that's what the republicans do.
democrats and republicans stand for different things.
the vision of the 2 parties is different (or is supposed to be). instead of realizing that they had acted weak repeatedly and that's what hurt their election turnout, they've made a point to seek out 1 guru after another to help them craft a message or some other nonsense.
the message matters somewhat. how you present it, this is coming from some 1 who made a living in public relations, matters even more. you can sell tons of crap, and it happens every day, not because it's any good, but because you present it effectively.
part of that requires showing strength. the democrats can line up 1 guru after another and it won't make a damn bit of difference. they can frame until their little heart's content. or they can demonstrate repeatedly 'we support religion too!' none of it matters if you come off as weak.
there needs to be some discipline in the senate and in the house.
the hearings demonstrated that there's not even any discipline from a small group serving on a committee.
that doesn't mean overdose on the macho. (the way the republicans do.) that does mean that diane feinstein, for instance, could have tried channeling a little marcia clark in her questioning.
and a single topic should have been agreed upon for the final day of the hearings. 'we'll hit on this over and over.'
feinstein may have thought her 'oh here's another thing' questioning today was helpful. if the issue mattered to you (and it did matter to me, i just wish she had been effective and pressed alito on it), you're thinking, 'why hasn't she brought this up before?' it's a distraction. this was the summing up to the jury, closing the sale day. they treated it like the 1st day of the hearings.
let me close by quoting c.i. because we all agreed that c.i. captured the final day of the hearings perfectly:
So what has today been like? Not as lively as yesterday. "Enough of that. Let me move on." Who said that? Which Democrat? Does it matter? Doesn't that seem like those two sentences summed up much of what's gone on so far today? (Diane Feinstein said it today to Alito, for those who missed it.)
and check out kat who wrote something yesterday that can make you laugh as you cry.
the common ills
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
kats korner
diane feinstein
now
1/12/2006
1/11/2006
alito hearings: the mint julup exploded on my best dress! starring lindsey graham and diane feinstein
let me say what i'm willing to bet everyone wants to but no one wants to be the 1st to do so: diane feinstein, are you trying to help or hurt?
over and over she plays 'miss diane' with the white gloves and 'oh my's.
miss diane, it's the 21st century. you are a us senator. try acting like 1.
now maybe she's confused because she's got lindsey graham playing like the heroine to a tennessee williams play that he never had time to write: the mint julup exploded on my best dress!
'i am sorry,' blanche, er, lindsey sobbed to alito, 'that you had to go through this. i'm sorry that your family had to sit here . . .'
oh the tragedy! oh the drama!
poor alito! asked questions!
i can barely hear lindsey crying due to the rustle from his crinoline petticoat.
but diane feinstein was worse than a joke, she was a distraction.
yesterday it was all 'miss diane you are so pretty' nonsense. and she basked in it.
today, ted kennedy's reading an article by a cap member. what's being read is pretty shocking.
he's leading to a question and the thing has soundbyte written all over it.
what happens?
miss diane interrupts him. 'read the last sentence.'
twice.
miss diane, in your own time, where you 'let things pass,' and you have no follow ups, you can read that last sentence. (it applied to women.)
what you shouldn't do is step on someone's powerful moment.
i was listening to the hearings on pacifica and hope you were too.
but i wondered what ted kennedy's face looked like during that?
did he realize his soundbyte was blown?
and did everyone get that diane thought she was being silly. 'read the last sentence.'
twice she interrupts and sounds so delighted.
as though teddy were given a toast and she'd just cut him off to say, 'oh look, the grants brought baked beans! yoo hoo! over here!'
can someone have a talk with diane feinstein?
from a p.r. perspective, she needs it explained to her that she didn't just butt into ted kennedy's time, she destroyed a soundbyte that could have been on all the news networks - well, not fox 'news.'
it was a powerful moment - until she piped off. twice.
now in her own time, she wastes everyone's. she won't follow up on anything. she wastes time playing the 'girl' which is embarrassing from any senator but especially 1 of her advanced years.
so i'll ask it, is she trying to help us or trying to hurt us?
if she's trying to help us, she needs some 1 to explain to her the importance of not butting in on some 1's sound byte.
the importance of not being 'cute' in the hearings but instead doing your job.
this isn't a social, it's not a dance. conduct yourself like a senator or get off the committee.
there are many reasons to sing barbara boxer's praises. 1 of them is that she can lay it out without trying to pour on the filigree. she doesn't need to 'girl' it up. she's a strong woman, a confident 1. that's how she conducts herself and that's 1 reason so many respect her.
diane feinstein needs to be diane feinstein. but if she thinks playing it like shirley temple is appropriate, she needs to rethink being on the committee.
for a summary of the hearings as of early into them this morning, see c.i.'s entry.
i know it's important to follow the hearings (if you're able to, they can be very frustrating, i've got friends over to listen) but i hope you're making time for democracy now as well. here's a headline from them today:
NSA Denies Whistleblower's Demand To Testify Before Congress
Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting the National Security Agency has denied the request of whistleblower Russell Tice to testify before Congress. Tice, a former intelligence agent at the NSA and Defense Intelligence Agency who has spoken out against the domestic spy program, was told he is not free to testify because staff members on Capitol Hill do not have high enough security clearance to hear the secrets he has to tell. Tice first spoke out on record on Democracy Now last week.
democracy now
the common ills
pacifica
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
over and over she plays 'miss diane' with the white gloves and 'oh my's.
miss diane, it's the 21st century. you are a us senator. try acting like 1.
now maybe she's confused because she's got lindsey graham playing like the heroine to a tennessee williams play that he never had time to write: the mint julup exploded on my best dress!
'i am sorry,' blanche, er, lindsey sobbed to alito, 'that you had to go through this. i'm sorry that your family had to sit here . . .'
oh the tragedy! oh the drama!
poor alito! asked questions!
i can barely hear lindsey crying due to the rustle from his crinoline petticoat.
but diane feinstein was worse than a joke, she was a distraction.
yesterday it was all 'miss diane you are so pretty' nonsense. and she basked in it.
today, ted kennedy's reading an article by a cap member. what's being read is pretty shocking.
he's leading to a question and the thing has soundbyte written all over it.
what happens?
miss diane interrupts him. 'read the last sentence.'
twice.
miss diane, in your own time, where you 'let things pass,' and you have no follow ups, you can read that last sentence. (it applied to women.)
what you shouldn't do is step on someone's powerful moment.
i was listening to the hearings on pacifica and hope you were too.
but i wondered what ted kennedy's face looked like during that?
did he realize his soundbyte was blown?
and did everyone get that diane thought she was being silly. 'read the last sentence.'
twice she interrupts and sounds so delighted.
as though teddy were given a toast and she'd just cut him off to say, 'oh look, the grants brought baked beans! yoo hoo! over here!'
can someone have a talk with diane feinstein?
from a p.r. perspective, she needs it explained to her that she didn't just butt into ted kennedy's time, she destroyed a soundbyte that could have been on all the news networks - well, not fox 'news.'
it was a powerful moment - until she piped off. twice.
now in her own time, she wastes everyone's. she won't follow up on anything. she wastes time playing the 'girl' which is embarrassing from any senator but especially 1 of her advanced years.
so i'll ask it, is she trying to help us or trying to hurt us?
if she's trying to help us, she needs some 1 to explain to her the importance of not butting in on some 1's sound byte.
the importance of not being 'cute' in the hearings but instead doing your job.
this isn't a social, it's not a dance. conduct yourself like a senator or get off the committee.
there are many reasons to sing barbara boxer's praises. 1 of them is that she can lay it out without trying to pour on the filigree. she doesn't need to 'girl' it up. she's a strong woman, a confident 1. that's how she conducts herself and that's 1 reason so many respect her.
diane feinstein needs to be diane feinstein. but if she thinks playing it like shirley temple is appropriate, she needs to rethink being on the committee.
for a summary of the hearings as of early into them this morning, see c.i.'s entry.
i know it's important to follow the hearings (if you're able to, they can be very frustrating, i've got friends over to listen) but i hope you're making time for democracy now as well. here's a headline from them today:
NSA Denies Whistleblower's Demand To Testify Before Congress
Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting the National Security Agency has denied the request of whistleblower Russell Tice to testify before Congress. Tice, a former intelligence agent at the NSA and Defense Intelligence Agency who has spoken out against the domestic spy program, was told he is not free to testify because staff members on Capitol Hill do not have high enough security clearance to hear the secrets he has to tell. Tice first spoke out on record on Democracy Now last week.
democracy now
the common ills
pacifica
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
1/10/2006
pacifica continues bringing you live coverage of alito hearings while npr's gas air provides you with paul bremmer
if you listened to pacifica's live coverage of the alito hearings, you were informed. if you listened to npr you got gas air as terry 'that's so gross!' interviewing paul bremer. i hope someone's planning to fact check that interview because terry's all about exploring feels and moods and seems lost when dealing with any topic not taught in art history.
day 2 of the hearings and npr still doesn't think they're worthy of live coverage. remember that when they beg money for next time. pacifica, or at least 1 station, is having a 1 day fundraisher on mlk day so remember who provided you with live coverage.
ruth told me about the fundraiser. she had a ruth's morning edition report during the week - today, in fact. i asked her about that because it's always great when she does 1 of her reports.
she said due to the screw ups with the e-mail accounts, she's been dictating today and sunday's to c.i. over the phone. she feels bad about that because she knows c.i. is pressed for time as it is.
we talked about the hearings and we've got some points we'll both be making tonight during the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin.
but 1 point i'll make now is that monday it sure was sweet - sarcasm - to listen to white men rush to say that sandra day o'connor can be replaced by a man and that it's practically reverse discrimination to suggest otherwise.
why there's no difference that a woman could bring.
which was blown out of the water this morning when some 1 made some stupid comment about diane feinstein's looks and then it was turned into a mini joke to be picked up on. if there were several women on the committee, instead of just 1, would that have happened?
i don't think so.
there were so many overtones of 'the little lady' during these 'jokes.'
as c.i. noted:
If you're following the hearings, you know that poor little Alito can't remember membership in a group he saw fit to list on his resume in the eighties.
that was a big theme. that and the press lies. knight ridder got it wrong, this news source got it wrong. why if alito wasn't in the mainstream, picking up on that again, would they all be for him?
yes, because republicans close ranks.
diane feinstein? i'll blog on her tomorrow night. i wasn't impressed.
c.i. also noted the upcoming issue of ms. featuring jane fonda on the cover:
Ms. Winter 2006 Issue
Available on 7,757 newsstands across the country January 17. Exclusive: Jane Fonda Talks Sex, Politics & Religion with Robin Morgan
The renowned actor/activist sat down with her friend, Ms. editor Morgan, to take on the "most impolite dinner-conversation subjects." Listen in on their lively discussion.
jane fonda alone makes it worth checking out. but robin morgan doing the interview means even more so. robin morgan was addressing the issue of terrorism long before 9-11. addressing realities for women that the adminstration still doesn't want to touch.
so be sure to look for that issue on january 17th. there's more in it but i've got to run an errand before we start the roundtable tonight.
day 2 of the hearings and npr still doesn't think they're worthy of live coverage. remember that when they beg money for next time. pacifica, or at least 1 station, is having a 1 day fundraisher on mlk day so remember who provided you with live coverage.
ruth told me about the fundraiser. she had a ruth's morning edition report during the week - today, in fact. i asked her about that because it's always great when she does 1 of her reports.
she said due to the screw ups with the e-mail accounts, she's been dictating today and sunday's to c.i. over the phone. she feels bad about that because she knows c.i. is pressed for time as it is.
we talked about the hearings and we've got some points we'll both be making tonight during the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin.
but 1 point i'll make now is that monday it sure was sweet - sarcasm - to listen to white men rush to say that sandra day o'connor can be replaced by a man and that it's practically reverse discrimination to suggest otherwise.
why there's no difference that a woman could bring.
which was blown out of the water this morning when some 1 made some stupid comment about diane feinstein's looks and then it was turned into a mini joke to be picked up on. if there were several women on the committee, instead of just 1, would that have happened?
i don't think so.
there were so many overtones of 'the little lady' during these 'jokes.'
as c.i. noted:
If you're following the hearings, you know that poor little Alito can't remember membership in a group he saw fit to list on his resume in the eighties.
that was a big theme. that and the press lies. knight ridder got it wrong, this news source got it wrong. why if alito wasn't in the mainstream, picking up on that again, would they all be for him?
yes, because republicans close ranks.
diane feinstein? i'll blog on her tomorrow night. i wasn't impressed.
c.i. also noted the upcoming issue of ms. featuring jane fonda on the cover:
Ms. Winter 2006 Issue
Available on 7,757 newsstands across the country January 17. Exclusive: Jane Fonda Talks Sex, Politics & Religion with Robin Morgan
The renowned actor/activist sat down with her friend, Ms. editor Morgan, to take on the "most impolite dinner-conversation subjects." Listen in on their lively discussion.
jane fonda alone makes it worth checking out. but robin morgan doing the interview means even more so. robin morgan was addressing the issue of terrorism long before 9-11. addressing realities for women that the adminstration still doesn't want to touch.
so be sure to look for that issue on january 17th. there's more in it but i've got to run an errand before we start the roundtable tonight.
1/09/2006
skip gas air terry 'that's gross' and listen to the alito hearings on pacifica
did you catch pacifica's live coverage of the alito hearings?
if you are following them or want to the follow them, i hope you're using pacifica. npr isn't providing the live coverage.
gas air? terry 'that's gross' had 2 guests, a historian and some 1 to discuss classical music. both white, by the way. no, i didn't listen to npr.
i did visit the site to see if they'd rethought their decision that hearings on a potential supreme court justice was just another day in the senate?
they didn't.
and that's too bad.
for a number of reasons.
1) they are supposed to be public radio and this is of public interest.
remember how they took their bows and tried to act modest when they aired the party conventions that the networks wouldn't?
all that talk about obligations to the public?
somehow the supreme court, lifetime appointment, isn't an obligation.
2) best reason they should have covered?
if gas air's terry 'that's gross' had been present when john cornyn was speaking, i think the senate building would have floated right off the ground.
common ills community member billie has talked a lot about cornyn, he's her senator, and his cornyisms.
i enjoy it anytime c.i. posts any of billie's 'look, here he goes with another cornyism!' comments. but i wasn't prepared for him.
as i listened to him ramble from 1 topic to another, i would have thought the man insane if i honestly believed he meant a word he said.
at 1 point, he was speaking of school prayer and working himself into a case of the dry heaves over students wanting to pray at a school football game when all the sudden something else caught his attention and he started ranting that depictions of sex and violence are allowed but public expressions of religion are not.
okay, help me out here, but are students allowed to depict sex at a sporting event? i'm remembering get balled out by an assistant principal just for kissing in the bleachers. and violence?
is corny calling football violent? i thought he was from the state of texas?
if you're looking for easy laughs, always stand within ear range of john cornyn because his cornyisms will have you rolling on the floor.
the other thing was hearing christine todd whitman tell the senate how to vote and how to do their job. unless i'm remembering wrongly, todd whitman could have used some 1 explaining what an epa administrator does?
but there she was, doing the bully boy's bidding yet again, telling congress not only that they should vote for alito, but also the meaning of the senate.
has christy forgotten that she never won that senate race? she challenged bill bradley and she lost.
but she's always been the insider playing outsider so maybe this time she confused herself?
1 thing i was pushing to get highlighted at the third estate sunday review this weekend was c.i.'s 'NYT: Dexy & John will never forget that summer when . . ." so if you missed it, check that out. it's an important read. another heads up i want to note is that trina has started her own site, trina's kitchen. trina is a member of the common ills community and she is also mike's mother. she's also a really great person so look forward to her posting at trina's kitchen on saturdays.
let me do 1 more shout out. if you're a common ills community member, read your round-robins. gina and krista do an incredible job on those and this week, it's not weekly, it's day by day by day . . . throughout the alito hearing.
mikey likes it
the common ills
trinas kitchen
pacifica
alito
if you are following them or want to the follow them, i hope you're using pacifica. npr isn't providing the live coverage.
gas air? terry 'that's gross' had 2 guests, a historian and some 1 to discuss classical music. both white, by the way. no, i didn't listen to npr.
i did visit the site to see if they'd rethought their decision that hearings on a potential supreme court justice was just another day in the senate?
they didn't.
and that's too bad.
for a number of reasons.
1) they are supposed to be public radio and this is of public interest.
remember how they took their bows and tried to act modest when they aired the party conventions that the networks wouldn't?
all that talk about obligations to the public?
somehow the supreme court, lifetime appointment, isn't an obligation.
2) best reason they should have covered?
if gas air's terry 'that's gross' had been present when john cornyn was speaking, i think the senate building would have floated right off the ground.
common ills community member billie has talked a lot about cornyn, he's her senator, and his cornyisms.
i enjoy it anytime c.i. posts any of billie's 'look, here he goes with another cornyism!' comments. but i wasn't prepared for him.
as i listened to him ramble from 1 topic to another, i would have thought the man insane if i honestly believed he meant a word he said.
at 1 point, he was speaking of school prayer and working himself into a case of the dry heaves over students wanting to pray at a school football game when all the sudden something else caught his attention and he started ranting that depictions of sex and violence are allowed but public expressions of religion are not.
okay, help me out here, but are students allowed to depict sex at a sporting event? i'm remembering get balled out by an assistant principal just for kissing in the bleachers. and violence?
is corny calling football violent? i thought he was from the state of texas?
if you're looking for easy laughs, always stand within ear range of john cornyn because his cornyisms will have you rolling on the floor.
the other thing was hearing christine todd whitman tell the senate how to vote and how to do their job. unless i'm remembering wrongly, todd whitman could have used some 1 explaining what an epa administrator does?
but there she was, doing the bully boy's bidding yet again, telling congress not only that they should vote for alito, but also the meaning of the senate.
has christy forgotten that she never won that senate race? she challenged bill bradley and she lost.
but she's always been the insider playing outsider so maybe this time she confused herself?
1 thing i was pushing to get highlighted at the third estate sunday review this weekend was c.i.'s 'NYT: Dexy & John will never forget that summer when . . ." so if you missed it, check that out. it's an important read. another heads up i want to note is that trina has started her own site, trina's kitchen. trina is a member of the common ills community and she is also mike's mother. she's also a really great person so look forward to her posting at trina's kitchen on saturdays.
let me do 1 more shout out. if you're a common ills community member, read your round-robins. gina and krista do an incredible job on those and this week, it's not weekly, it's day by day by day . . . throughout the alito hearing.
mikey likes it
the common ills
trinas kitchen
pacifica
alito
1/06/2006
pacifica will cover the alito hearings live & the round-robin schedule
Mon., Jan. 9 through Fri., Jan. 13The Pacifica Radio Network is bringing you the Samuel Alito Senate Hearing for nomination to the United States Supreme Court live!Verna Avery Brown teams with Mitch Jeserich from Free Speech Radio News and Pacifica National Affairs correspondent, Larry Bensky, to bring you the controversial nomination hearing of Samuel Alito for United States Supreme Court, live.
Anchors: Larry Bensky, KPFA; Verna Avery Brown, WPFW; Mitch Jesserich, FSRN.The schedule of hearings includes a one hour pre-show on the opening day, and an half-hour wrap-up show each evening. Live analysts will join us in the booth and via telephone throughout the hearings.
Pacifica will be bringing you live coverage (as they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearings). That's great if you live in an area Pacifica broadcasts in, right? Well, online access permitting, many people live in areas where Pacifica broadcasts because they provide live webcasts (as well as archived ones). This isn't Renee and Steve yucking it up with Cokie on NPR Monday where maybe you'll get a (canned) story about the hearings that day. This is live coverage. No cutting to "cute" stories about a fisherman who . . . (fill in the anecdote, NPR loves their "cute" fisherman stories). So this starts Monday (unless the hearings are postponed for some reason). You can listen via webcast, live streaming (which you can use any day of the week, at any hour, to listen to Pacifica programming, live or archived programming).
ruth saw the announcement (italics) and c.i. posted it as a heads up. pacifica is public radio. they see it as a public service, broadcasting the hearings. and npr? they'll be offering their usual soft talk and crappy music. so if you're interested in hearing the hearings, you won't hear them on npr, not live. but you can hear it on pacifica. so if you're interested in following closely, please listen.
(i say 'if' because as a woman who's had an abortion, i'm honestly scared to death that alito will be confirmed and that reproductive rights will be destroyed. i'll listen because i have to hear and try to figure out how it's going. but i can understand if some 1's so frightened that they need the distance that following it in the next day's paper will provide.)
the democrats in the senate have already hinted that this isn't something important enough to filibuster.
it's just a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. nothing big there.
they think they need to save the ammo for something really important. maybe funding wild flowers on the side of arizona highways? but this, it's not a biggie. if you wonder why the democrats are in the minority party, look no further than the fact that going into a confirmation hearing for the biggest appointment congress can make, the most long lasting, they're rushing to offer whispers that they're taking the filibuster offer off the table.
check out buzzflash's "Thank God our current Senate Democrats weren't at Lexington and Concord!":
If the patriots had held their powder at Lexington and Concord, this nation might still be under a monarchy. (Well, in a way we do still have King George in power, but that's another story.)
This thought comes to mind because the Democrats in the senate are now thinking of "keeping their powder dry" and letting Sam Alito, who believes in unbridled executive branch power (aka, monarchy, dictatorship, etc.) get greenlighted to a seat on the Supreme Court. Forget, for a moment, that Alito is opposed to the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party platform; Alito is opposed to democracy.
Scalito, as he is called, believes in having a Republican president violate the Constitution by simply making a statement giving his interpretation of any law passed by Congress when he signs it. According to Scalito, this Republican presidential interpretation then becomes the law, not the "intent of Congress."
The man who Bush would have join the other absolute power of the Republican executive branch supporters on the Supreme Court came up with this idea while serving in the Reagan Administration. He urged adopting the "executive branch statement of interpretation" quietly and gradually, so it wouldn't draw much press or legal attention.
that pretty much sums it all up, doesn't it? i try not to pick on john kerry but was it just last week that he sent out that e-mail asking for donations to the 2006 races? the 1 that said we needed to reach into our pocketbooks because the democrats will fight?
maybe we should demand a test drive 1st?
as with the tragedy of john roberts jr. being confirmed, the gina & krista round-robin will have daily special editions. c.i. posted a schedule and there are some additions. i'm printing c.i.'s schedule but adding to it and since i use lowercase. this is the schedule for when the roundtabls will take place. the friday roundtable (if the hearings go on that long) will run in a special round-robin on monday morning. (and the round-robin monday will feature a roundtable because we participated in 1 tonight. it's mainly predicitions.) here's the line up:
Monday: Francisco, Susan, Eli, Shirley and Martha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, ty, dona, elaine, wally, mike, nina, cedric, betty, kat, mia, and me
Tuesday: Marcia, Charlie, Keesha, Eli, Eddie, Billie, Rob, Kara, Brad, Beth, Keshawn and Liang, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, ty, elaine, wally, mike, cedric, betty, wally, mike, nina, dominic and me
Wednesday: Bonnie, Eli, Joan, Maria, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson (ruth's grandson), ava, jess, dona, jim, elaine, wally, mike, kat, kayla, kendrick, and me
Thursday: Erika, Eli, Brady, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson, ava, jess, ty, dona, cedric, betty, elaine, wally, mike, nina, kat, zach, and me
Friday: Miguel, Eli, Lynda, Keesha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, wally, betty, elaine, kat, mia, cindy and me
so you can look forward to that. other names may be added but as of right now, that's the way that the schedule stands. wally decided to do every night because eli was. we're all pretty impressed with eli. he's not just the oldest member of the common ills community, he's also 1 of the sweetest and 1 of the wisest. there are other people who will participate in other ways in the special editions. and 'judge' will give us a peak at strategies like last time.
pacifica
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
the daily jot
ruths morning edition report
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
buzzflash
Anchors: Larry Bensky, KPFA; Verna Avery Brown, WPFW; Mitch Jesserich, FSRN.The schedule of hearings includes a one hour pre-show on the opening day, and an half-hour wrap-up show each evening. Live analysts will join us in the booth and via telephone throughout the hearings.
Pacifica will be bringing you live coverage (as they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearings). That's great if you live in an area Pacifica broadcasts in, right? Well, online access permitting, many people live in areas where Pacifica broadcasts because they provide live webcasts (as well as archived ones). This isn't Renee and Steve yucking it up with Cokie on NPR Monday where maybe you'll get a (canned) story about the hearings that day. This is live coverage. No cutting to "cute" stories about a fisherman who . . . (fill in the anecdote, NPR loves their "cute" fisherman stories). So this starts Monday (unless the hearings are postponed for some reason). You can listen via webcast, live streaming (which you can use any day of the week, at any hour, to listen to Pacifica programming, live or archived programming).
ruth saw the announcement (italics) and c.i. posted it as a heads up. pacifica is public radio. they see it as a public service, broadcasting the hearings. and npr? they'll be offering their usual soft talk and crappy music. so if you're interested in hearing the hearings, you won't hear them on npr, not live. but you can hear it on pacifica. so if you're interested in following closely, please listen.
(i say 'if' because as a woman who's had an abortion, i'm honestly scared to death that alito will be confirmed and that reproductive rights will be destroyed. i'll listen because i have to hear and try to figure out how it's going. but i can understand if some 1's so frightened that they need the distance that following it in the next day's paper will provide.)
the democrats in the senate have already hinted that this isn't something important enough to filibuster.
it's just a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. nothing big there.
they think they need to save the ammo for something really important. maybe funding wild flowers on the side of arizona highways? but this, it's not a biggie. if you wonder why the democrats are in the minority party, look no further than the fact that going into a confirmation hearing for the biggest appointment congress can make, the most long lasting, they're rushing to offer whispers that they're taking the filibuster offer off the table.
check out buzzflash's "Thank God our current Senate Democrats weren't at Lexington and Concord!":
If the patriots had held their powder at Lexington and Concord, this nation might still be under a monarchy. (Well, in a way we do still have King George in power, but that's another story.)
This thought comes to mind because the Democrats in the senate are now thinking of "keeping their powder dry" and letting Sam Alito, who believes in unbridled executive branch power (aka, monarchy, dictatorship, etc.) get greenlighted to a seat on the Supreme Court. Forget, for a moment, that Alito is opposed to the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party platform; Alito is opposed to democracy.
Scalito, as he is called, believes in having a Republican president violate the Constitution by simply making a statement giving his interpretation of any law passed by Congress when he signs it. According to Scalito, this Republican presidential interpretation then becomes the law, not the "intent of Congress."
The man who Bush would have join the other absolute power of the Republican executive branch supporters on the Supreme Court came up with this idea while serving in the Reagan Administration. He urged adopting the "executive branch statement of interpretation" quietly and gradually, so it wouldn't draw much press or legal attention.
that pretty much sums it all up, doesn't it? i try not to pick on john kerry but was it just last week that he sent out that e-mail asking for donations to the 2006 races? the 1 that said we needed to reach into our pocketbooks because the democrats will fight?
maybe we should demand a test drive 1st?
as with the tragedy of john roberts jr. being confirmed, the gina & krista round-robin will have daily special editions. c.i. posted a schedule and there are some additions. i'm printing c.i.'s schedule but adding to it and since i use lowercase. this is the schedule for when the roundtabls will take place. the friday roundtable (if the hearings go on that long) will run in a special round-robin on monday morning. (and the round-robin monday will feature a roundtable because we participated in 1 tonight. it's mainly predicitions.) here's the line up:
Monday: Francisco, Susan, Eli, Shirley and Martha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, ty, dona, elaine, wally, mike, nina, cedric, betty, kat, mia, and me
Tuesday: Marcia, Charlie, Keesha, Eli, Eddie, Billie, Rob, Kara, Brad, Beth, Keshawn and Liang, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, ty, elaine, wally, mike, cedric, betty, wally, mike, nina, dominic and me
Wednesday: Bonnie, Eli, Joan, Maria, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson (ruth's grandson), ava, jess, dona, jim, elaine, wally, mike, kat, kayla, kendrick, and me
Thursday: Erika, Eli, Brady, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson, ava, jess, ty, dona, cedric, betty, elaine, wally, mike, nina, kat, zach, and me
Friday: Miguel, Eli, Lynda, Keesha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, wally, betty, elaine, kat, mia, cindy and me
so you can look forward to that. other names may be added but as of right now, that's the way that the schedule stands. wally decided to do every night because eli was. we're all pretty impressed with eli. he's not just the oldest member of the common ills community, he's also 1 of the sweetest and 1 of the wisest. there are other people who will participate in other ways in the special editions. and 'judge' will give us a peak at strategies like last time.
pacifica
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
the daily jot
ruths morning edition report
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
buzzflash
1/05/2006
reply to e-mails
i had some e-mail about yesterday's entry which was a joint entry c.i. and i worked on together.
first question was 'why did it post so late?' i got the idea late in the day. i wanted to work on it with c.i. because i do think there need to be more joint entries. things are really busy for c.i. right now and i left a ton of messages and noted in all of them, 'call me when you get this, no matter what time it is' which did happen.
i explained what i wanted to do and c.i. was cool with it. we discussed songs and i was really pushing for 'american pie'. c.i. pointed out 'it's so long!' and it is. it was also late and i wish that hadn't been the case. but we worked and worked on it.
some of it we just tossed in hoping to go back and fix it later.
then it was so late and i said 'i'm too tired' and c.i. said, 'you know what? that's cool. ellie greenwich and barry mann often ended up with something people liked when they threw something in and weren't able to fix it later.'
my favorite line (6 e-mails asked that) is the 1 about 'naomi and the book of baghdad' which c.i. came up with. c.i. said 'baghdad' like they do on the bbc and it just sounds so much better that way 'naomi and the book of baghdad.'
was it fun?
hell yes. if we hadn't had fun, it would have been awful. it was late but the time flew.
why did we do it together?
because the lack of disclosure on the part of you know who 1st surfaced together.
c.i. was contacted by a man wanting my phone number. why? i have no idea. he didn't seem to read what i wrote. so i'm guessing he saw 'sex' and thought 'score.'
i didn't know him. i was on vacation. c.i. called and i checked my e-mail throughout as most of my regular readers know. but the 1st time c.i. called i got told about the e-mail and how the guy, who doesn't know me and doesn't know c.i., is asking c.i. to give out my phone number.
that was sort of freaky and everything that followed was as well.
but we both got drug into this and i felt we should write it together.
it was so late and i made the mistake of saying 'i wish you'd write something about it' and then called back because mine was up and c.i.'s wasn't. c.i. was trying to write something. c.i. reads some of it to me and i say 'okay, that's a book.'
and turns out that c.i. worked and worked on it. no sleep at all last night and i honestly feel bad about that.
i know c.i. was tired all day and i urged that there be no posts tonight.
i hope that's the case.
so why 'american pie.' for a number of reasons. but 1 is that the daily howler died.
i'm sorry that's the case.
i'm sorry bob somerby goes out the way he does.
but that's the way it goes sometimes.
1 e-mail asked 'is kim gandy screamed' a knock at kim gandy?
no. 'dreamed' and 'screamed' rhymed which was the main reason we came up with it. c.i. did raise that after we came up with the line: 'people won't think this is an insult, will they?'
so we debated that line last night and then decided that these are times when you scream, that you scream when you're in pain and that 'the scream' is a famous work of art.
most of all, kim gandy will not go quietly into the night. she is going to fight for what is right with everything she has. (she seems like a giant on tv because she's so strong but she's actually not that tall.) if you're smart, you seem her as the warning system. when something's wrong, she says so. she doesn't sugar coat and she doesn't sit there with a silly grin on her face when she's interviewed. if it's wrong, she says it's wrong.
she's an important voice and 1 that i'm glad exists because she's a fighter and we need her so badly now. sometimes we have to fight and feel like we're on our own. with kim gandy heading now, we aren't. she's a real leader and 1 that this country needs now more than ever. she's an inspiration. if you don't read her column regularly, you should start reading it. you can find it and other things at now's website.
if you know about her, you know what i'm talking about. i don't know what to make of the naacp yet. they have a new leader and i'm waiting to see how that goes. but julian bond is a brave voice and hopefully the new leadership will follow in his footsteps.
there are so few really brave voices. there are a lot of people who try to appease the bully boy and then a year or 2 later they whine that they were tricked or they were fooled. when you're dealing with a bully, you have to fight. kim gandy knows how to fight.
what other songs did we consider? c.i. named some carly simon songs and they were good choices. we also thought about the beatles 'i am the walrus' and jefferson airplane's 'plastic fantastic lover' for melodies.
the other big question was from people who laughed and they were wondering if that was okay?
yes, it's supposed to be funny. but considering the way the world is today, i would urge you to laugh anytime you see the chance.
there was a lot of feedback on this and i'm so glad that so many enjoyed it.
first question was 'why did it post so late?' i got the idea late in the day. i wanted to work on it with c.i. because i do think there need to be more joint entries. things are really busy for c.i. right now and i left a ton of messages and noted in all of them, 'call me when you get this, no matter what time it is' which did happen.
i explained what i wanted to do and c.i. was cool with it. we discussed songs and i was really pushing for 'american pie'. c.i. pointed out 'it's so long!' and it is. it was also late and i wish that hadn't been the case. but we worked and worked on it.
some of it we just tossed in hoping to go back and fix it later.
then it was so late and i said 'i'm too tired' and c.i. said, 'you know what? that's cool. ellie greenwich and barry mann often ended up with something people liked when they threw something in and weren't able to fix it later.'
my favorite line (6 e-mails asked that) is the 1 about 'naomi and the book of baghdad' which c.i. came up with. c.i. said 'baghdad' like they do on the bbc and it just sounds so much better that way 'naomi and the book of baghdad.'
was it fun?
hell yes. if we hadn't had fun, it would have been awful. it was late but the time flew.
why did we do it together?
because the lack of disclosure on the part of you know who 1st surfaced together.
c.i. was contacted by a man wanting my phone number. why? i have no idea. he didn't seem to read what i wrote. so i'm guessing he saw 'sex' and thought 'score.'
i didn't know him. i was on vacation. c.i. called and i checked my e-mail throughout as most of my regular readers know. but the 1st time c.i. called i got told about the e-mail and how the guy, who doesn't know me and doesn't know c.i., is asking c.i. to give out my phone number.
that was sort of freaky and everything that followed was as well.
but we both got drug into this and i felt we should write it together.
it was so late and i made the mistake of saying 'i wish you'd write something about it' and then called back because mine was up and c.i.'s wasn't. c.i. was trying to write something. c.i. reads some of it to me and i say 'okay, that's a book.'
and turns out that c.i. worked and worked on it. no sleep at all last night and i honestly feel bad about that.
i know c.i. was tired all day and i urged that there be no posts tonight.
i hope that's the case.
so why 'american pie.' for a number of reasons. but 1 is that the daily howler died.
i'm sorry that's the case.
i'm sorry bob somerby goes out the way he does.
but that's the way it goes sometimes.
1 e-mail asked 'is kim gandy screamed' a knock at kim gandy?
no. 'dreamed' and 'screamed' rhymed which was the main reason we came up with it. c.i. did raise that after we came up with the line: 'people won't think this is an insult, will they?'
so we debated that line last night and then decided that these are times when you scream, that you scream when you're in pain and that 'the scream' is a famous work of art.
most of all, kim gandy will not go quietly into the night. she is going to fight for what is right with everything she has. (she seems like a giant on tv because she's so strong but she's actually not that tall.) if you're smart, you seem her as the warning system. when something's wrong, she says so. she doesn't sugar coat and she doesn't sit there with a silly grin on her face when she's interviewed. if it's wrong, she says it's wrong.
she's an important voice and 1 that i'm glad exists because she's a fighter and we need her so badly now. sometimes we have to fight and feel like we're on our own. with kim gandy heading now, we aren't. she's a real leader and 1 that this country needs now more than ever. she's an inspiration. if you don't read her column regularly, you should start reading it. you can find it and other things at now's website.
if you know about her, you know what i'm talking about. i don't know what to make of the naacp yet. they have a new leader and i'm waiting to see how that goes. but julian bond is a brave voice and hopefully the new leadership will follow in his footsteps.
there are so few really brave voices. there are a lot of people who try to appease the bully boy and then a year or 2 later they whine that they were tricked or they were fooled. when you're dealing with a bully, you have to fight. kim gandy knows how to fight.
what other songs did we consider? c.i. named some carly simon songs and they were good choices. we also thought about the beatles 'i am the walrus' and jefferson airplane's 'plastic fantastic lover' for melodies.
the other big question was from people who laughed and they were wondering if that was okay?
yes, it's supposed to be funny. but considering the way the world is today, i would urge you to laugh anytime you see the chance.
there was a lot of feedback on this and i'm so glad that so many enjoyed it.
so bye, bye bob somerby
the following is the tune of don mclean's 'american pie' and was written by c.i. and myself. we've grown tired of the conflicts of bob somerby. there's more i could say but i'll leave it at this tonight. it says it all and if it's a puzzle to you, trust that the person its here for fully gets it.
a long, long time ago ... i can still remember how
that howler used to make me smile.
and i knew if i clicked the link,
that it could make me think,
and maybe make me laugh for awhile.
but larry summers made me shiver,
new republicans you'd prop and deliver,
depressing my morning routine ....
i couldn't take another read.
i can't remember if i cried
when i heard about your conflict inside
but something ended the crazy ride
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
did you write the (slam) book on joe (wilson)
and did you sell your soul?
if a buddy tells you so
do you repeat GOP spin?
who will save your mortal soul
who will walk through you slow?
well i know you're friends with him
cause i saw you dancing in the gym
you both took out your knives
went after joe wilson with spin and lies.
i was a depressed woman in a funk
pissed off at the election and the bully punk
and i knew that the howler was sunk
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
now for the next election cycle we're on our own
and that might make some moan and groan
but you're off in the dlc zone
the jester jumping the king to push the queen
in a coat borrowed from time magazine
in a voice that came from you and you know who
and while the queen was acting a hawk
you were silent on iraq
you were clowning to the max
self-disclosure was real lax.
while naomi read from the book of baghad
we were gathered in central park
but you were somewhere in the dark
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
new york times in the summer scandal
judy miller left without shelter
kicked off her peerch and falling fast
she landed foul upon the grass.
but you never wrote of her or him
and in the end that did you in
now you're the daily fool
who broke his own rules
a crank, no longer cool.
as the truth tried to take the field
spin, you refused to yield
even so you've been revealed
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
there we were all in defeat
no time left to clown on the beat
the constitution taking heat
but bob be obtuse
bob be a bore
bob tell us about 99 once more
cause you've got so little to say about today.
as i watched you divert from the stage
my hands were clenched in fists of rage
not even joan baez speaking real
could break your faustian deal
and as smoke poured from the screen
robert novak wasn't that mean
the day the howler died.
there was a time when i sang the blues
but you could cheer me up with your views
those days have long faded away
i went back to the source within
where i found strength to begin
and no sexists were allowed
and in the streets kim gandy screamed
the women gathered and the women dreamed
not a word of you was spoken
your promise had long been broken
and the three women i admire the most
naomi, gandy and gloria the most
said that this was no time to coast
and the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
a long, long time ago ... i can still remember how
that howler used to make me smile.
and i knew if i clicked the link,
that it could make me think,
and maybe make me laugh for awhile.
but larry summers made me shiver,
new republicans you'd prop and deliver,
depressing my morning routine ....
i couldn't take another read.
i can't remember if i cried
when i heard about your conflict inside
but something ended the crazy ride
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
did you write the (slam) book on joe (wilson)
and did you sell your soul?
if a buddy tells you so
do you repeat GOP spin?
who will save your mortal soul
who will walk through you slow?
well i know you're friends with him
cause i saw you dancing in the gym
you both took out your knives
went after joe wilson with spin and lies.
i was a depressed woman in a funk
pissed off at the election and the bully punk
and i knew that the howler was sunk
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
now for the next election cycle we're on our own
and that might make some moan and groan
but you're off in the dlc zone
the jester jumping the king to push the queen
in a coat borrowed from time magazine
in a voice that came from you and you know who
and while the queen was acting a hawk
you were silent on iraq
you were clowning to the max
self-disclosure was real lax.
while naomi read from the book of baghad
we were gathered in central park
but you were somewhere in the dark
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
new york times in the summer scandal
judy miller left without shelter
kicked off her peerch and falling fast
she landed foul upon the grass.
but you never wrote of her or him
and in the end that did you in
now you're the daily fool
who broke his own rules
a crank, no longer cool.
as the truth tried to take the field
spin, you refused to yield
even so you've been revealed
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
there we were all in defeat
no time left to clown on the beat
the constitution taking heat
but bob be obtuse
bob be a bore
bob tell us about 99 once more
cause you've got so little to say about today.
as i watched you divert from the stage
my hands were clenched in fists of rage
not even joan baez speaking real
could break your faustian deal
and as smoke poured from the screen
robert novak wasn't that mean
the day the howler died.
there was a time when i sang the blues
but you could cheer me up with your views
those days have long faded away
i went back to the source within
where i found strength to begin
and no sexists were allowed
and in the streets kim gandy screamed
the women gathered and the women dreamed
not a word of you was spoken
your promise had long been broken
and the three women i admire the most
naomi, gandy and gloria the most
said that this was no time to coast
and the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
1/03/2006
2006 focus
RUSSELL TICE: Well, the National Security Agency is an agency that deals with monitoring communications for the defense of the country. The charter basically says that the N.S.A. will deal with communications of -- overseas. We're not allowed to go after Americans, and I think ultimately that's what the big fuss is now. But as far as the details of how N.S.A. does that, unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to say that. I don’t want to walk out of here and end up in an F.B.I. interrogation room.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, you have worked for the National Security Agency. Can you talk about your response to the revelations that the Times, you know, revealed in -- perhaps late, knowing the story well before the election, yet revealing it a few weeks ago -- the revelation of the wiretapping of American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, as far as an intelligence officer, especially a SIGINT officer at N.S.A., we're taught from very early on in our careers that you just do not do this. This is probably the number one commandment of the SIGINT Ten Commandments as a SIGINT officer. You will not spy on Americans. It is drilled into our head over and over and over again in security briefings, at least twice a year, where you ultimately have to sign a paper that says you have gotten the briefing. Everyone at N.S.A. who's a SIGINT officer knows that you do not do this. Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that’s a gospel to a SIGINT officer.
i love democracy now and think it's 'always worth watching' like marcia always quoted saying at the common ills (i think her new phrase is 'always informing you' for 2006 judging by c.i.'s latest entry). but i figure that most of you are already watching. i watch. but you can also listen to the show or you can read the transcripts. i'm pulling from a transcript, in fact.
so if you can't watch it and maybe can't get listen either through radio or the net, you can read the transcripts. here's 1 that you should, 'National Security Agency Whistleblower Warns Domestic Spying Program Is Sign the U.S. is Decaying Into a "Police State."'
this is your country. are you going to go through 2006 wasting your time and the time of people around you focusing on trivia or are you going to take part in your country?
did you make some resolutions on 2005? i think they're pretty useless. but maybe you do that.
how are they going? have you stuck by them? if so good for you. if not, well start over. and regardless we can make a resolution, even me, to be better informed in 2006. that requires information, access to it, and it requires paying attention.
democracy now is one hour a day monday through friday. don't have an hour to give? are you a speed reader? you can probably read the transcripts quickly.
janeane garofalo often tells people that they can spare ten minutes a day and with just that they can watch or listen to or read the daily headlines at democracy now. so listen to janeane if you won't listen to me.
but we saw huge changes in 2005. i don't just mean the crimes of the bully boy. we know about that. we've discussed that. but we saw the people get involved in large numbers. we need to keep that trend going in 2006.
for my high school readers (and my now 3 middle school readers), you do a wonderful job. you talk about the events and get the word out. you put some adults in this country to shame. if you're an adult and you're reading this, have you wasted 2005 talking about trivia or have you made a point to use time with your friends to talk about things that matter to you and to the country?
everybody likes to have fun. i like to have fun. but there's a place for that and there's a place for doing things that matter. in 2006, we'll have fun here. we'll talk about men's bodies, we'll laugh, we'll joke, we'll dish. but we'll also continue to address important issues. that includes railing against sexism because sexism is still very real and still with us. we'll talk about the bully boy and the war.
we can do that and much more.
but a lot of e-mails came in, usually after people spent the holidays with their families, about how they were surrounded by trivia.
if that's a problem facing you, take the lead and make the change. don't wait for someone to talk about something that matters, bring it up yourself.
that's how we'll make a difference. that's how we'll participate in the world around us.
that doesn't mean you can't talk music. kat does. but she's not whining that britney's pregnant or some such nonsense. she's talking about how music matters to us, how it can matter to us, what it can say and the reality that these days there's a lot of crap out there.
are you a couch potato? c.i. and ava, who aren't couch potatoes, take on tv every week in their reviews at the third estate sunday review. but, unlike the pristine types, they aren't blindly gushing over tv shows. they don't, for instance, see a woman, usually in a push up bra, and think it's a break through for feminism. they're looking at what the show's saying and what it isn't saying. they're looking at representation, and if you read their latest you know that african-americans are still under represented in the midseason replacement shows. you can discuss entertainment and do it in a way that matters as opposed to blindly shouting out 'watch veronica mars it is so cool and it's like my hero joss is back!' now hearing that from a teenager would be sad enough but from a middle aged woman? but, as readers know, there exists such a woman who apparently suffered through high school and therefore the country must suffer as she desparately searches for a tv show aimed at teenagers that can restore her wounded ego by allowing her to relive high school her way.
my young readers are too young to remember this in real time but hopefully they've heard it. bill clinton was elected in 1992 and 1 of his campaign promises was to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military. guess what? didn't happen. huge b.s. from the right and colin powell throwing road blocks. oh it would destroy the military! oh the military has to be beyond sexual relations and gays and lesbians would harm that! oh the fears in the showers! forget that gays and lesbians have always made up a part of the armed services. that was the lie repeated over and over. so bill did the best that he could do (i hope it was the best that he could do at that time) for the time and created the don't ask don't tell policy. that says that no 1 can be asked what their sexuality is and that you don't tell. as long as you keep your head down (and continue the message of shame - the compromise was a deal with the devil), you can serve.
so when ava and c.i. looked at navy ncis, which is t's favorite of all their reviews, they noticed when the show opened with two officers, a male and a female, rolling around on top of each other. pretending to have sex. the show has military advisors and they didn't object. so the whole sex issue is phoney. it's only an issue when it's same-sex. and that's the approach ava and c.i. took in discussing the show. that's how you can talk intelligently about entertainment, that's called perspective. a middle aged woman typing 'joss is so dreamy' isn't contributing anything but to her further decline as a semi-rational adult.
so let's all try to be as mature as my high school (and 3 middle school) readers are. i think we can pull that off. let's look at the world around us and talk about it. we can still have fun. and we can have blow off days where all we do is have fun. but let's make 2006 about something more than trivia.
"The Common Ills Year in Review 2005" is a must read and so is kat's "Kat's Korner: 2005 in Music" but tonight i want to make a comment about "Ruth's Year End Report" because i had some e-mails on that. ruth is talking about when kenny tomlinson was out to destroy npr and pbs. my attitude, and it's up here in real time, was 'what's the point?' ruth and i have discussed it back then and since. there isn't a problem between ruth and i; however, some who didn't know the history read it today and e-mailed to ask me why ruth was mad at me? she's not.
and it's not that she suddenly agrees with my point of view. she just remembers what happens everytime the left fights a brave battle to 'save' npr or pbs. we give our time, we give our money and after it's over npr and pbs give us shit in return. they don't make a point to say 'hey, the left fought for us so they are out there. maybe we should put some more of them on as guests?' they keep doing the same crap they did before which is center-right and right guests who are officials from the government or elected officials or from center and center-right think tanks and the people, all the people not just the left, are once again left out in the cold.
that's why my attitude was 'what's the point?'
pbs espeically. they're about to turn their back on the public. the transfer to digital broadcast, when complete, will mean the 'public' will have to pay for cable or digital tv to receive pbs. that's not 'public television' - not when over 73 million americans do not currently have cable or digital tv. not when a healthy portion of the public won't be able to afford it.
they take all this corporate money and it keeps them from airing anything to hard hitting, no matter how true the thing is. so quit calling yourself 'public television.' you're not public television. and does the public really need to see suze orman at 1 of her fundraiser/workshops spouting her easy nonsense into a microphone while she works the room? that's good television? that's an informercial and pbs hawks her tapes, her books, her videos.
so my attitude is if they go away i won't cry. i'll watch if something interesting is on (which is about once every three months) but i don't 'pledge.' my tax payer dollars already take care of my 'pledge' and their programming doesn't reflect my interests.
npr is even worse with their silly shows on the morning that straddle the fence between pure waste of time and a few morsels of information.
i've done the pbs/npr battle before and learned then that they didn't give a damn about the public. they care about not offending the right wing members of congress. that's the basis of every decision, 'how much can we do and not upset the republicans' and that makes for crummy broadcasting. it doesn't make for public television or public radio.
but that was my opinion back then and i was open about it. ruth knew it and we talked about it then. i also, because ruth has become a good friend, made a point to note a few 'save pbs' and 'save npr' things while noting that i was doing that out of respect for ruth.
we have no problem, ruth and i. but to some readers who didn't know the background, there was a question of 'is ruth mad at you' and she's not. people can disagree and get along. back then ruth and i disagreed on the need to save npr and pbs. we didn't hate each other. i didn't pull a pristine and slam ruth's writing and suggest that she's a no talent the way pristine did when she attacked kat. ruth and i and it was on a topic that was important to ruth so i tossed out a few links to help out a friend on a cause they were supporting. i don't regret that. i doubt ruth does. and she shouldn't regret trying to defend npr and pbs because that was her honest reaction and where she was at. she's no longer at the same place and that's fine too.
she mentioned me, i think, largely because we are friends and she was attempting to give me a link but also because she was talking about realizing how you can fight and fight for pbs and npr and they never appreciate you. that's why she uses the word 'manipulated' to describe how she feels since the last big battles.
hope that clears it up for the readers who had missed the original discussions on npr and pbs.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, you have worked for the National Security Agency. Can you talk about your response to the revelations that the Times, you know, revealed in -- perhaps late, knowing the story well before the election, yet revealing it a few weeks ago -- the revelation of the wiretapping of American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, as far as an intelligence officer, especially a SIGINT officer at N.S.A., we're taught from very early on in our careers that you just do not do this. This is probably the number one commandment of the SIGINT Ten Commandments as a SIGINT officer. You will not spy on Americans. It is drilled into our head over and over and over again in security briefings, at least twice a year, where you ultimately have to sign a paper that says you have gotten the briefing. Everyone at N.S.A. who's a SIGINT officer knows that you do not do this. Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that’s a gospel to a SIGINT officer.
i love democracy now and think it's 'always worth watching' like marcia always quoted saying at the common ills (i think her new phrase is 'always informing you' for 2006 judging by c.i.'s latest entry). but i figure that most of you are already watching. i watch. but you can also listen to the show or you can read the transcripts. i'm pulling from a transcript, in fact.
so if you can't watch it and maybe can't get listen either through radio or the net, you can read the transcripts. here's 1 that you should, 'National Security Agency Whistleblower Warns Domestic Spying Program Is Sign the U.S. is Decaying Into a "Police State."'
this is your country. are you going to go through 2006 wasting your time and the time of people around you focusing on trivia or are you going to take part in your country?
did you make some resolutions on 2005? i think they're pretty useless. but maybe you do that.
how are they going? have you stuck by them? if so good for you. if not, well start over. and regardless we can make a resolution, even me, to be better informed in 2006. that requires information, access to it, and it requires paying attention.
democracy now is one hour a day monday through friday. don't have an hour to give? are you a speed reader? you can probably read the transcripts quickly.
janeane garofalo often tells people that they can spare ten minutes a day and with just that they can watch or listen to or read the daily headlines at democracy now. so listen to janeane if you won't listen to me.
but we saw huge changes in 2005. i don't just mean the crimes of the bully boy. we know about that. we've discussed that. but we saw the people get involved in large numbers. we need to keep that trend going in 2006.
for my high school readers (and my now 3 middle school readers), you do a wonderful job. you talk about the events and get the word out. you put some adults in this country to shame. if you're an adult and you're reading this, have you wasted 2005 talking about trivia or have you made a point to use time with your friends to talk about things that matter to you and to the country?
everybody likes to have fun. i like to have fun. but there's a place for that and there's a place for doing things that matter. in 2006, we'll have fun here. we'll talk about men's bodies, we'll laugh, we'll joke, we'll dish. but we'll also continue to address important issues. that includes railing against sexism because sexism is still very real and still with us. we'll talk about the bully boy and the war.
we can do that and much more.
but a lot of e-mails came in, usually after people spent the holidays with their families, about how they were surrounded by trivia.
if that's a problem facing you, take the lead and make the change. don't wait for someone to talk about something that matters, bring it up yourself.
that's how we'll make a difference. that's how we'll participate in the world around us.
that doesn't mean you can't talk music. kat does. but she's not whining that britney's pregnant or some such nonsense. she's talking about how music matters to us, how it can matter to us, what it can say and the reality that these days there's a lot of crap out there.
are you a couch potato? c.i. and ava, who aren't couch potatoes, take on tv every week in their reviews at the third estate sunday review. but, unlike the pristine types, they aren't blindly gushing over tv shows. they don't, for instance, see a woman, usually in a push up bra, and think it's a break through for feminism. they're looking at what the show's saying and what it isn't saying. they're looking at representation, and if you read their latest you know that african-americans are still under represented in the midseason replacement shows. you can discuss entertainment and do it in a way that matters as opposed to blindly shouting out 'watch veronica mars it is so cool and it's like my hero joss is back!' now hearing that from a teenager would be sad enough but from a middle aged woman? but, as readers know, there exists such a woman who apparently suffered through high school and therefore the country must suffer as she desparately searches for a tv show aimed at teenagers that can restore her wounded ego by allowing her to relive high school her way.
my young readers are too young to remember this in real time but hopefully they've heard it. bill clinton was elected in 1992 and 1 of his campaign promises was to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military. guess what? didn't happen. huge b.s. from the right and colin powell throwing road blocks. oh it would destroy the military! oh the military has to be beyond sexual relations and gays and lesbians would harm that! oh the fears in the showers! forget that gays and lesbians have always made up a part of the armed services. that was the lie repeated over and over. so bill did the best that he could do (i hope it was the best that he could do at that time) for the time and created the don't ask don't tell policy. that says that no 1 can be asked what their sexuality is and that you don't tell. as long as you keep your head down (and continue the message of shame - the compromise was a deal with the devil), you can serve.
so when ava and c.i. looked at navy ncis, which is t's favorite of all their reviews, they noticed when the show opened with two officers, a male and a female, rolling around on top of each other. pretending to have sex. the show has military advisors and they didn't object. so the whole sex issue is phoney. it's only an issue when it's same-sex. and that's the approach ava and c.i. took in discussing the show. that's how you can talk intelligently about entertainment, that's called perspective. a middle aged woman typing 'joss is so dreamy' isn't contributing anything but to her further decline as a semi-rational adult.
so let's all try to be as mature as my high school (and 3 middle school) readers are. i think we can pull that off. let's look at the world around us and talk about it. we can still have fun. and we can have blow off days where all we do is have fun. but let's make 2006 about something more than trivia.
"The Common Ills Year in Review 2005" is a must read and so is kat's "Kat's Korner: 2005 in Music" but tonight i want to make a comment about "Ruth's Year End Report" because i had some e-mails on that. ruth is talking about when kenny tomlinson was out to destroy npr and pbs. my attitude, and it's up here in real time, was 'what's the point?' ruth and i have discussed it back then and since. there isn't a problem between ruth and i; however, some who didn't know the history read it today and e-mailed to ask me why ruth was mad at me? she's not.
and it's not that she suddenly agrees with my point of view. she just remembers what happens everytime the left fights a brave battle to 'save' npr or pbs. we give our time, we give our money and after it's over npr and pbs give us shit in return. they don't make a point to say 'hey, the left fought for us so they are out there. maybe we should put some more of them on as guests?' they keep doing the same crap they did before which is center-right and right guests who are officials from the government or elected officials or from center and center-right think tanks and the people, all the people not just the left, are once again left out in the cold.
that's why my attitude was 'what's the point?'
pbs espeically. they're about to turn their back on the public. the transfer to digital broadcast, when complete, will mean the 'public' will have to pay for cable or digital tv to receive pbs. that's not 'public television' - not when over 73 million americans do not currently have cable or digital tv. not when a healthy portion of the public won't be able to afford it.
they take all this corporate money and it keeps them from airing anything to hard hitting, no matter how true the thing is. so quit calling yourself 'public television.' you're not public television. and does the public really need to see suze orman at 1 of her fundraiser/workshops spouting her easy nonsense into a microphone while she works the room? that's good television? that's an informercial and pbs hawks her tapes, her books, her videos.
so my attitude is if they go away i won't cry. i'll watch if something interesting is on (which is about once every three months) but i don't 'pledge.' my tax payer dollars already take care of my 'pledge' and their programming doesn't reflect my interests.
npr is even worse with their silly shows on the morning that straddle the fence between pure waste of time and a few morsels of information.
i've done the pbs/npr battle before and learned then that they didn't give a damn about the public. they care about not offending the right wing members of congress. that's the basis of every decision, 'how much can we do and not upset the republicans' and that makes for crummy broadcasting. it doesn't make for public television or public radio.
but that was my opinion back then and i was open about it. ruth knew it and we talked about it then. i also, because ruth has become a good friend, made a point to note a few 'save pbs' and 'save npr' things while noting that i was doing that out of respect for ruth.
we have no problem, ruth and i. but to some readers who didn't know the background, there was a question of 'is ruth mad at you' and she's not. people can disagree and get along. back then ruth and i disagreed on the need to save npr and pbs. we didn't hate each other. i didn't pull a pristine and slam ruth's writing and suggest that she's a no talent the way pristine did when she attacked kat. ruth and i and it was on a topic that was important to ruth so i tossed out a few links to help out a friend on a cause they were supporting. i don't regret that. i doubt ruth does. and she shouldn't regret trying to defend npr and pbs because that was her honest reaction and where she was at. she's no longer at the same place and that's fine too.
she mentioned me, i think, largely because we are friends and she was attempting to give me a link but also because she was talking about realizing how you can fight and fight for pbs and npr and they never appreciate you. that's why she uses the word 'manipulated' to describe how she feels since the last big battles.
hope that clears it up for the readers who had missed the original discussions on npr and pbs.
12/30/2005
the year 2005
the year in sex and politics and screeds and attitude
to the left, if this doesn't screw up in posting, is jake gyllenhaal.
so sherry e-mails and says that i have to do a retro on 2005. and that i 'must, must, must! include the photo of jake gyllenhaal!' from september 5, 2005's people magazine. she says it's a hot photo of 'the dirty boy cleaning up.'
sherry, do you have any idea how hard it is to find a magazine, in 1 day, from september 5th?
i went into boston, looked all over. found the mag at 1 used store and flip through but some 1 has already been there and torn out the page. so i go to t's to get my hair done and i'm telling her about it and she says, 'uh, hello, look around!' and sure enough in t's salon, the magazines do go back. we were going through them all and i was about to give up hope when t finds it. so thanks to t, we have the photo. the photo was taken by gama.
sherry, do you know that the trouble was only beginning? i usually play with the photos to make them pink to go with the site. but i really had to up the pixels to get the pic to turn out.
but we have it.
jake gyllenhaal is picked by sherry, darla and katie as personafying sex and politics and screeds and attitude for 2005.
at katie's urging, i saw brokeback mountain, the new film by ang lee. i like jake and think he was hot in the good girl with jennifer aniston and in a film c.i. recommended a long time ago called loving & amazing. but i wasn't looking forward to brokeback mountain due to heath ledger. he's over praised for the film.
but that's the whole problem with heath ledger, he's overpraised. he's a p.r. creation from the buzz, phoney, on the mel gibson dud (the patriot) to 10 things i hate about you, the films that 'made' him didn't really. i haven't seen such created buzz since a time to kill. but this wasn't just p.r., it was bad p.r. with, in both 10 and the patriot, being praised by 'critics' who didn't exist and that blowing up in the press.
it's not the rumors that heath's bald that bother me, it's just that he has all the magentism of a stick of butter. so he brings that same thing, the only thing he's been able to demonstrate so far, to the screen again and you see critics bending over backwards to impose their beliefs, desires upon the blank that is heath. so i wasn't impressed, obviously. (i did wonder how he ended up with michelle williams who is a wonderful actress and think that there's got to be something i'm missing but, whatever it is, the camera's been missing it too.)
so he's james vander beek before the fade currently but getting a lot of praise for a watery, out of focus performance. but jake is the real deal. and when darla and sherry joined katie in urging me to see the film, i knew i had to. it is a great film.
so the year 2005?
cocks & dicks?
for those who've forgotten or weren't readers then, shortly after i started, i explained that a dick is not a good thing. hillary clinton made the dick list early on and she's only remained on it. she found her voice to put herself front and center for 'values' voters by moving away from a strong support for abortion rights to her weak, watered down current approach (she's the heath ledger of the senate - which does explain the ridiculous hair cut they both sport). but she's 1 of the many suffering from 'war got your tongue' as hillary, the woman who was against the vietnam war, who helped draft and argue for nixon's war crimes to be included in the impeachment charges, now has nothing to say but 'send more troops into the quagmire!'
so hillary's the loser on the democratic side (or so-called democratic side) for 2005.
the winner?
i'd go with barbara boxer in the senate. she's strongly supportive of abortion rights and she's got a position on the war and she's not afraid to raise the issue of impeachment. while hillary tries to figure out which way the wind is blowing (out her ass?) barbara boxer can stand up and one of the best examples is being willing to stand with shirley tubbs jones in raising issues in january about the 2004 vote.
best in music?
this is a list pulled from e-mails.
bright eyes, tori amos, cowboy junkies, dolly parton, james blunt, joan baez, rolling stones, carly simon, black eyed peas, jack johnson and especially green day.
worst in music?
britney spears. while most of the disney kids were smart enough to lay low because they're superficial nonsense got old in 1998, britney just won't go away. no time to record a new album? well follow last year's best of with a remix cd of old crap.
some 1 forgot to explain the basics to her, so let me try. a woman who is most famous for being seen as a sex object doesn't sell cds to her young base via 2 marriages and 1 pregnancy. when she returns to the studio, she'll have to learn those basics. you can't be a 'focus of desire' to kids and live her life. apparently no 1 on her payroll grasped that.
with her limited talents, all she really had was her image and it's gone. it took long enough but she's finally entered her tiffany grows up phase and it will play as well (and as profitable) for her as it did for tiffany.
cindy sheehan is the pick for person of the year. she got a dialogue started in the summer of protest despite a lap dog media, despite the likes of hillary clinton and republicans (or are they the same thing?) and most of all despite the bully boy. reminding every 1 that war has a cost, cindy sheehan demonstrated the power of speaking out.
bully boy is the pick for villain of the year. it was a tight race. would his brain (karl rove) beat him? would his poor taste (karen hughes) pull it out in the final moments? what about donny rumsfeld who seems to be doing variations of 'i was only following orders?' but the dishonor belongs to bully who was nowhere to be found as hurricane katrina hit (shades of 9-11) only managed to take a break in his vacations twice. 1 time was to try to escape camp crawford, the other time was to rush back to d.c. to sign into law the 'no 1 has a right to privacy while i occupy the white house!' (terry schiavo). lying us into an illegal war, destroying the economic futures of so many (and possibly the country), blasting away at the wall between church and state, spying on americans ... the list could go on forever. fortunately, we only have 3 more years of the reign of the bully boy.
t had a pick and it was patricia arquette for hottest, most do-able woman. she's just started watching medium this year and wondered why she'd never noticed patricia before? i told her it was partly due to the fact that they had patricia in silly films like 'i just married a pre-teen mormon!' and other junk. but she is a good actress and, as ava and c.i. would point out, medium is a good fit on her.
the grooviest, sexiest, smartest people of the year? my readers.
trend of the year: protesting, speaking out!
huge losers of the year. the mainstream press. be thankful for real broadcasters like amy goodman, laura flanders and the entertainer janeane garofalo who blows the mainstream media out of the water. three strong women worth noting. i'm including janeane on the list and i know she's a comedian. but she means to make you laugh, the mainstream press doesn't mean to make you snicker at it. amy goodman gives you the best news program there is and laura flanders is like a news magazine with a wide range of topics.
and the mainstream press? the year of woody, the year of judy, the year of matty cooper. the year the white house asks that this be withheld or that be and the mainstream press goes along with it. the year that they showed no interest in the downing street memos. this was an embarrassing year for them. maybe more so than 2002 when they couldn't stop cheerleading? what was the difference? we have a network now where truth can get out to large number of people. they stand exposed.
so that's a look at the year 2005. on the plus side, a lot of people woke up. let's continue the trend.
12/28/2005
'the then-liberal new republic' (somebody tell pristine)
NADER'S 'UNSAFE' AT 40
William Greider writes: Ralph Nader and dozens of old friends got together recently to celebrate the fortieth birthday of a book -- Unsafe at Any Speed, his auto industry expose. It has its origin in "The Safe Car You Can't Buy," which first appeared in The Nation in 1959. The book was the starting gun for the consumer movement and, much more, for citizen activism. At the gathering Nader introduced some early collaborators -- Village Voice columnist Jim Ridgeway, who wrote a riveting account of Nader's campaing in the then-liberal New Republic, and publisher Richard Grossman, who created a hard-hitting genre known as "Nader books." Some of his young deep-digging associates described their work in what is an ongoing fight. The old crusader, we are pleased to report, has not mellowed.
the above is from the january 2, 2006 issue of the nation, page 27. c.i. saw it in the magazine and thought i might find it interesting which i do. 'the then-liberal new republic.' talk about a blast from the far away past.
people like 'pristine' just don't get that the new republican isn't liberal and hasn't been in decades. it's not their fault that they're uninformed, i guess.
i mean it's not like they can take the trouble to, i don't know, READ!
every 1 of my readers know that robert parry is 1 of my favorite voices that speaks to me and i've read every 1 of his books (and give them out as gifts). if any 1's confused about the new republican, all they have to do is pick up one of his books. but if you're a woman of a certain age who cares more for watching tv shows about high school kids, reading probably isn't high on your list of things to do.
you're probably, instead, chasing down the american idol cds and finding other ways to make yourself a useless adult because god forbid you know a thing about the world around you beyond what is on your tv screen.
that's more than sad, it's flat out disgusting. to be so far past 18 and to be so into what 15 year-olds are doing is disgusting. i should say, 'to be so into what you think 15 year-olds are doing' because i have high school readers and 2 middle school 1s and they're much more interested in the world around them then 'pristine' is.
it's not her fault that she's uninformed. of course it is her fault, since she had freak out (1st freak out, she's had multiple freak outs) over what was originally written, that the new republic attempted to encite violence against arundahti roy. that's apparently a-okay with 'pristine.'
she loves to read her new republican. it gives her 'ideas.' guess she can't count on veronica mars for everything, huh?
well, she reads the arts coverage in the new republican anyway. she can't seem to move away from music and tv. and everything she writes about is 'the best!' and 'the most wonderful!' she's like a wide-eyed intern at a p.r. firm. (i saw many like her when i was in p.r.) she's just such an eager beaver desperate to be noticed. you'll never catch me linking to the new republican because i do have a code of ethics.
if a mag is:
1) neocon
2) publishes falsehoods regularly (it goes way beyond stephen glass but she probably never even heard of him - they did make a movie but no refugee from a joss whedon show was in it)
3) anti-woman
4) encourages violence against women
i don't link.
i have self-respect. i have ethics.
to act like a p.r. intern year after year means 'pristine' has to chase trends, has to prop them up constantly and can't ever have a moment of critical thought.
this is really sad.
so when you wonder, if you still do, why she can't speak out against the war, the answer's simple: veronica mars hasn't addressed the war yet. 'pristine' can't mouth anything, repeat it, unless it's first been said by a 20 something playing a high school teen.
i was so busy with family last weekend but if i'd known they'd be doing 'all puff and no politics (parody)' at the third estate sunday review, i would've tried so hard to make time for that. i'm glad ruth was there because i know the gang was short handed. but they did a great edition and speaking of great, please check out betty's 'the prig of paxil' because she was so frustrated by that.
we were doing the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin last night and betty was just dogging it. i told her that thomas friedman had been off for 6 weeks and this was her getting back into the swing of things post so not to be hard on it no matter what it was like. i hadn't read it yet. after we all got off the phone, the 1st thing i did was read it and it's hilarious. betty deserves praise for that and if it hadn't been so late last night, i would've called her. tonight's her church night so i won't bother her because she has so much to do on wednesday nights. but i'm calling her tomorrow to say 'stop it' because it's funny. she's too hard on her work.
William Greider writes: Ralph Nader and dozens of old friends got together recently to celebrate the fortieth birthday of a book -- Unsafe at Any Speed, his auto industry expose. It has its origin in "The Safe Car You Can't Buy," which first appeared in The Nation in 1959. The book was the starting gun for the consumer movement and, much more, for citizen activism. At the gathering Nader introduced some early collaborators -- Village Voice columnist Jim Ridgeway, who wrote a riveting account of Nader's campaing in the then-liberal New Republic, and publisher Richard Grossman, who created a hard-hitting genre known as "Nader books." Some of his young deep-digging associates described their work in what is an ongoing fight. The old crusader, we are pleased to report, has not mellowed.
the above is from the january 2, 2006 issue of the nation, page 27. c.i. saw it in the magazine and thought i might find it interesting which i do. 'the then-liberal new republic.' talk about a blast from the far away past.
people like 'pristine' just don't get that the new republican isn't liberal and hasn't been in decades. it's not their fault that they're uninformed, i guess.
i mean it's not like they can take the trouble to, i don't know, READ!
every 1 of my readers know that robert parry is 1 of my favorite voices that speaks to me and i've read every 1 of his books (and give them out as gifts). if any 1's confused about the new republican, all they have to do is pick up one of his books. but if you're a woman of a certain age who cares more for watching tv shows about high school kids, reading probably isn't high on your list of things to do.
you're probably, instead, chasing down the american idol cds and finding other ways to make yourself a useless adult because god forbid you know a thing about the world around you beyond what is on your tv screen.
that's more than sad, it's flat out disgusting. to be so far past 18 and to be so into what 15 year-olds are doing is disgusting. i should say, 'to be so into what you think 15 year-olds are doing' because i have high school readers and 2 middle school 1s and they're much more interested in the world around them then 'pristine' is.
it's not her fault that she's uninformed. of course it is her fault, since she had freak out (1st freak out, she's had multiple freak outs) over what was originally written, that the new republic attempted to encite violence against arundahti roy. that's apparently a-okay with 'pristine.'
she loves to read her new republican. it gives her 'ideas.' guess she can't count on veronica mars for everything, huh?
well, she reads the arts coverage in the new republican anyway. she can't seem to move away from music and tv. and everything she writes about is 'the best!' and 'the most wonderful!' she's like a wide-eyed intern at a p.r. firm. (i saw many like her when i was in p.r.) she's just such an eager beaver desperate to be noticed. you'll never catch me linking to the new republican because i do have a code of ethics.
if a mag is:
1) neocon
2) publishes falsehoods regularly (it goes way beyond stephen glass but she probably never even heard of him - they did make a movie but no refugee from a joss whedon show was in it)
3) anti-woman
4) encourages violence against women
i don't link.
i have self-respect. i have ethics.
to act like a p.r. intern year after year means 'pristine' has to chase trends, has to prop them up constantly and can't ever have a moment of critical thought.
this is really sad.
so when you wonder, if you still do, why she can't speak out against the war, the answer's simple: veronica mars hasn't addressed the war yet. 'pristine' can't mouth anything, repeat it, unless it's first been said by a 20 something playing a high school teen.
i was so busy with family last weekend but if i'd known they'd be doing 'all puff and no politics (parody)' at the third estate sunday review, i would've tried so hard to make time for that. i'm glad ruth was there because i know the gang was short handed. but they did a great edition and speaking of great, please check out betty's 'the prig of paxil' because she was so frustrated by that.
we were doing the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin last night and betty was just dogging it. i told her that thomas friedman had been off for 6 weeks and this was her getting back into the swing of things post so not to be hard on it no matter what it was like. i hadn't read it yet. after we all got off the phone, the 1st thing i did was read it and it's hilarious. betty deserves praise for that and if it hadn't been so late last night, i would've called her. tonight's her church night so i won't bother her because she has so much to do on wednesday nights. but i'm calling her tomorrow to say 'stop it' because it's funny. she's too hard on her work.
12/27/2005
a few thoughts on the year 2005
Student Admits to Book Watch List Hoax
And in Massachusetts a college student has admitted he fabricated a story about being questioned by federal agents for seeking to borrow a book by written by Mao. The report first appeared in the Standard-Times in New Bedford Massachusetts and was picked up around the world. The student initially told his professors about the visit and claimed Mao's Little Red Book was on a watch list of books.
that's from democracy now.
as c.i. noted today, i had an anecdote i was working involving mao's little red book and a little black dress. student hoax has rendered it useless.
but guess what else is rendered useless? the next person speaking out about something that really happened. student hoax didn't just call his own honesty into question, he called everyone's honesty into question.
so if a some 1 claims in the next few months that something similar happened, they'll have a harder time being believed because some 1 couldn't tell the truth.
i honestly think it's disgusting.
let's note reality hear on planet earth. danny schechter has an article worth reading called 'The News About the News: More Media Decline in 2005:'
Perhaps it's just me-but news seems to be coming our way faster and with a greater fury than ever before. A tsunami of "Breaking News" bulletins courses through the veins and ganglia of what passes for an information system. A corporate news system pumps it on more platforms dedicated to "more news in less time" on the web, on TV, on the radio, and now on the phone. It's hard to escape the deluge.
Before we have time to digest it, or understand any story's implications, it's on to the next, making it more and more difficult to focus on any one item or connect it with another. The author Larry Beinhart of "Wag the Dog" fame speaks of the proliferation of "fog facts" in which important information systematically disappears from view.
No wonder a paralysis of analysis has set in with "on message" spin machines making it harder and harder for us to assess trends objectively, construct meaning or let us think for ourselves. Rather than inform, much of the news often disinforms distorts and deceives. Rather than strengthen our society by talking truth to power, our media system increasingly undermines democracy by making a civil discourse harder and harder to practice. The loud-mouthed partisans in the punditocracy turn substantive debate into noise. Heat, not light, proliferates.We are all under attack-some from bombs, others from bullet points. The media system has become a battlefield of competing values and often the absence of any values.
2005 was a year in which the media not only brought us news but also became part of the news as scandals usually associated with government and politicians rippled through the media companies, their boardrooms and newsrooms.
it seems not all that long that the election of 2004 had taken place. 2005 has moved so quickly. we had the downing street memos. we had the hurricanes. we had john conyers standing brave when others waivered. we had the 'summer of protest.' c.i. called that right. i could tell you the grief we gave c.i. for that phrase when we were all working on an editorial at the third estate sunday review. but looking back, that's exactly what it was and the protests continue.
i remember thinking 1/2 way through 2004, 'at last the country is waking up.' that was nothing compared to 2005.
my favorite e-mails are the 1s where some 1 writes to say they thought they were all alone until they stumbled across the community. as a part of the community, i do understand that feeling.
i am glad and proud to be part of a community that stood up against the war loudly and proudly while others had their thumbs up their ass and couldn't find a voice (some still can't now, you know who i mean).
musically, i finally found a cd to listen to as much as i do otis redding's otis blue, jack johnson's. i'm not even sure of the title. it lives in my multi-disc cd player.
speaking of community, i wasn't able to help out with the latest edition of the third estate sunday review last weekend. but it's a great edition and i hope you'll check it out. i'll note their editorial tonight.
Editorial: Bully Boy Spying and Lying But The Press Wants To play "Some Say"
George Bush and the other purveyors of pain can take a day off from spying on Americans without due process to celebrate the holidays with their families. Dick "the Grinch" Cheney made a "surprise" visit to Iraq the other day. His black heart feels no pain for the tragic loss of life that his greed has caused. How dare he show his face in a country which is destroyed by his insatiable quest for black gold and his obscene lust for profits for his company Halliburton and the other war profiteers?
The pain that these people have caused the world is inestimable. The people of the world want an accounting of the pain and for the people who seem to be getting off Scott free to be brought to some kind of justice for the damage they have wrought on humanity.
The above is from Cindy Sheehan's "Language of the Heart" (BuzzFlash). As 2005 draws to a close, it seems appropriate to note the voice that touched off the summer of portest that woke up the country. The invasion/occupation continues. Both in Iraq and in the oval office.But we can now talk about bringing the troops home now (even as the mainstream media snickers at the idea -- how many publishers of newspapers have sons and daughters or grandsons and daughters serving in Iraq?). We're also hearing "impeachment" pop up quite a bit.Most of all, we're hearing about the government spying on citizens. Apparently, it's okay to spy on activists, for the Pentagon to. Which is why news of that (or news of the NYCPD spying on activists) is a one day story.
The mainstream press has demonstrated a little more interest in the issue of the NSA spying on citizens.
If Bully Boy's last name was "Clinton," he'd be simmering in hot water about to boil. Instead, reporters who do cover the story seem to struggle real hard to find the silver lining of "balance" that can raise the reasonable doubt that the actions of the NSA (ordered by the Bully Boy) were not a crime. (In fact they were a high crime.)
The commander-in-chief caveat gets walked around the block a lot. It's so hard for some to grasp that the Constitution does not make a president the commander-in-chief of the general population. Commander-in-chief of the military, yes. Not commander-in-chief of non-military Americans. Unless the mainstream press is attempting to argue that we've traded a democracy for a military junta, it's a point they should have absorbed some time ago.
They also seem to really struggle trying to attempt to figure out why FISA was created in the first place. FISA is the secret court that can issue warrents for wiretaps, the court that Bully Boy elected not to utilize when he attempted a power grab that spat on the very notion of checks and balances.
We frequently feel as though we run a remidial school for the mainstream press here so let's once again open our books (or web pages) and let's note Democracy Now!'s "An Impeachable Offense? Bush Admits Authorizing NSA to Eavesdrop on Americans Without Court Approval:"
JAMES BAMFORD: Well, before I get into that, just one other comment on what we just have been talking about. When the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was created in 1978, one of the things that the Attorney General at the time, Griffin Bell, said -- he testified before the intelligence committee, and he said that the current bill recognizes no inherent power of the President to conduct electronic surveillance. He said, 'This bill specifically states that the procedures in the bill are the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance may be conducted.' In other words, what the President is saying is that he has these inherent powers to conduct electronic surveillance, but the whole reason for creating this act, according to the Attorney General at the time, was to prevent the President from using any inherent powers and to use exclusively this act.
Now that was a long quote for those with short attention spans. And surely "reporters" who've spent the last few years being spoonfed probably haven't developed the skills to analyze. So let's walk you through that slowly. Griffin Bell was the Attorney General of the United States of America. Under President Jimmy Carter. At the time that the FISA courts were being created. When Congress was considering the bill that would create the FISA courts, ATTORNEY GENERAL Bell testified that the bill did not create a new power for a president.
So one of Bully Boy's many talking points can be rejected now.
Another fun talking point is to argue that apparent minimal briefings to a small number of members serving in the Congress implies Congressional consent. That talking point is laughable on its face. Congressional consent is not something that's granted lightly nor something that should take place away from the public eye.
Furthermore, note this:
Daschle: Bush Administration Was Denied Spy Authority
In Washington, former Senate Minority leader Tom Daschle has disclosed previously unknown details that challenge the Bush administration's claim it has legal authority to eavesdrop on Americans and foreign nationals in the US. The White House says the authority was implicitly granted in the joint Congressional resolution authorizing the use of force passed shortly after 9/11. But in today's Washington Post, Daschle claims the Bush administration requested, but was denied, the authority it now claims it was granted.
Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle: "Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words 'in the United States and' after 'appropriate force' in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused."
Consent was not granted by Congress. Daschle states that the administration attempted to carve out those powers but was rebuffed.
Some argue that the Bully Boy doesn't have to answer to Congress at all. One talking point is that he notified them (some, in a minimal manner) and that's all he needed to do. Again, is this a democracy or a military junta?If it's a democracy, we have rules both for the governed and for those doing the governing.
Now they haven't been applied for the bulk of Bully Boy's tenure but we're talking about a very serious issue. To cover it, the mainstream press may need to leave their "Bully Boy says" versus "some critics argue" stance. Just as if they witnessed a shooting, they'd be unlikely to report, "the accused states that he did not shoot the person but some witnesses argue that he did. We'll leave you with both arguments and won't venture to state the obvious facts."2005 has been a wild ride. The fatigue and depression following election 2004 lifted slowly, but it did lift. Americans are taking issues quite a bit more seriously than the mainstream press. Maybe it's a desire to start those vacations that won't end until after New Year's Eve? Maybe it's just a tendency to want to have fun, fun, fun during this seasonal time?
But the fact is Americans were spied on by their government. First, Bully Boy says only if one end of the call was international. Now it turns out that Bully Boy's claim was yet another lie. The spying took place without utilizing the court in place to grant permission -- the court created for that very reason. This is a power grab that would leave Richard Nixon gasping in awe at the sheer audacity of the move. So perhaps it's finally time for the mainstream press to attempt reporting and not mere stenography?
As Kat noted at the end of a recent music commentary, "Truth to power in 2006."
[This editorial was written by The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jess and Jim, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, and Ruth of Ruth's Morning Edition Report.]
And in Massachusetts a college student has admitted he fabricated a story about being questioned by federal agents for seeking to borrow a book by written by Mao. The report first appeared in the Standard-Times in New Bedford Massachusetts and was picked up around the world. The student initially told his professors about the visit and claimed Mao's Little Red Book was on a watch list of books.
that's from democracy now.
as c.i. noted today, i had an anecdote i was working involving mao's little red book and a little black dress. student hoax has rendered it useless.
but guess what else is rendered useless? the next person speaking out about something that really happened. student hoax didn't just call his own honesty into question, he called everyone's honesty into question.
so if a some 1 claims in the next few months that something similar happened, they'll have a harder time being believed because some 1 couldn't tell the truth.
i honestly think it's disgusting.
let's note reality hear on planet earth. danny schechter has an article worth reading called 'The News About the News: More Media Decline in 2005:'
Perhaps it's just me-but news seems to be coming our way faster and with a greater fury than ever before. A tsunami of "Breaking News" bulletins courses through the veins and ganglia of what passes for an information system. A corporate news system pumps it on more platforms dedicated to "more news in less time" on the web, on TV, on the radio, and now on the phone. It's hard to escape the deluge.
Before we have time to digest it, or understand any story's implications, it's on to the next, making it more and more difficult to focus on any one item or connect it with another. The author Larry Beinhart of "Wag the Dog" fame speaks of the proliferation of "fog facts" in which important information systematically disappears from view.
No wonder a paralysis of analysis has set in with "on message" spin machines making it harder and harder for us to assess trends objectively, construct meaning or let us think for ourselves. Rather than inform, much of the news often disinforms distorts and deceives. Rather than strengthen our society by talking truth to power, our media system increasingly undermines democracy by making a civil discourse harder and harder to practice. The loud-mouthed partisans in the punditocracy turn substantive debate into noise. Heat, not light, proliferates.We are all under attack-some from bombs, others from bullet points. The media system has become a battlefield of competing values and often the absence of any values.
2005 was a year in which the media not only brought us news but also became part of the news as scandals usually associated with government and politicians rippled through the media companies, their boardrooms and newsrooms.
it seems not all that long that the election of 2004 had taken place. 2005 has moved so quickly. we had the downing street memos. we had the hurricanes. we had john conyers standing brave when others waivered. we had the 'summer of protest.' c.i. called that right. i could tell you the grief we gave c.i. for that phrase when we were all working on an editorial at the third estate sunday review. but looking back, that's exactly what it was and the protests continue.
i remember thinking 1/2 way through 2004, 'at last the country is waking up.' that was nothing compared to 2005.
my favorite e-mails are the 1s where some 1 writes to say they thought they were all alone until they stumbled across the community. as a part of the community, i do understand that feeling.
i am glad and proud to be part of a community that stood up against the war loudly and proudly while others had their thumbs up their ass and couldn't find a voice (some still can't now, you know who i mean).
musically, i finally found a cd to listen to as much as i do otis redding's otis blue, jack johnson's. i'm not even sure of the title. it lives in my multi-disc cd player.
speaking of community, i wasn't able to help out with the latest edition of the third estate sunday review last weekend. but it's a great edition and i hope you'll check it out. i'll note their editorial tonight.
Editorial: Bully Boy Spying and Lying But The Press Wants To play "Some Say"
George Bush and the other purveyors of pain can take a day off from spying on Americans without due process to celebrate the holidays with their families. Dick "the Grinch" Cheney made a "surprise" visit to Iraq the other day. His black heart feels no pain for the tragic loss of life that his greed has caused. How dare he show his face in a country which is destroyed by his insatiable quest for black gold and his obscene lust for profits for his company Halliburton and the other war profiteers?
The pain that these people have caused the world is inestimable. The people of the world want an accounting of the pain and for the people who seem to be getting off Scott free to be brought to some kind of justice for the damage they have wrought on humanity.
The above is from Cindy Sheehan's "Language of the Heart" (BuzzFlash). As 2005 draws to a close, it seems appropriate to note the voice that touched off the summer of portest that woke up the country. The invasion/occupation continues. Both in Iraq and in the oval office.But we can now talk about bringing the troops home now (even as the mainstream media snickers at the idea -- how many publishers of newspapers have sons and daughters or grandsons and daughters serving in Iraq?). We're also hearing "impeachment" pop up quite a bit.Most of all, we're hearing about the government spying on citizens. Apparently, it's okay to spy on activists, for the Pentagon to. Which is why news of that (or news of the NYCPD spying on activists) is a one day story.
The mainstream press has demonstrated a little more interest in the issue of the NSA spying on citizens.
If Bully Boy's last name was "Clinton," he'd be simmering in hot water about to boil. Instead, reporters who do cover the story seem to struggle real hard to find the silver lining of "balance" that can raise the reasonable doubt that the actions of the NSA (ordered by the Bully Boy) were not a crime. (In fact they were a high crime.)
The commander-in-chief caveat gets walked around the block a lot. It's so hard for some to grasp that the Constitution does not make a president the commander-in-chief of the general population. Commander-in-chief of the military, yes. Not commander-in-chief of non-military Americans. Unless the mainstream press is attempting to argue that we've traded a democracy for a military junta, it's a point they should have absorbed some time ago.
They also seem to really struggle trying to attempt to figure out why FISA was created in the first place. FISA is the secret court that can issue warrents for wiretaps, the court that Bully Boy elected not to utilize when he attempted a power grab that spat on the very notion of checks and balances.
We frequently feel as though we run a remidial school for the mainstream press here so let's once again open our books (or web pages) and let's note Democracy Now!'s "An Impeachable Offense? Bush Admits Authorizing NSA to Eavesdrop on Americans Without Court Approval:"
JAMES BAMFORD: Well, before I get into that, just one other comment on what we just have been talking about. When the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was created in 1978, one of the things that the Attorney General at the time, Griffin Bell, said -- he testified before the intelligence committee, and he said that the current bill recognizes no inherent power of the President to conduct electronic surveillance. He said, 'This bill specifically states that the procedures in the bill are the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance may be conducted.' In other words, what the President is saying is that he has these inherent powers to conduct electronic surveillance, but the whole reason for creating this act, according to the Attorney General at the time, was to prevent the President from using any inherent powers and to use exclusively this act.
Now that was a long quote for those with short attention spans. And surely "reporters" who've spent the last few years being spoonfed probably haven't developed the skills to analyze. So let's walk you through that slowly. Griffin Bell was the Attorney General of the United States of America. Under President Jimmy Carter. At the time that the FISA courts were being created. When Congress was considering the bill that would create the FISA courts, ATTORNEY GENERAL Bell testified that the bill did not create a new power for a president.
So one of Bully Boy's many talking points can be rejected now.
Another fun talking point is to argue that apparent minimal briefings to a small number of members serving in the Congress implies Congressional consent. That talking point is laughable on its face. Congressional consent is not something that's granted lightly nor something that should take place away from the public eye.
Furthermore, note this:
Daschle: Bush Administration Was Denied Spy Authority
In Washington, former Senate Minority leader Tom Daschle has disclosed previously unknown details that challenge the Bush administration's claim it has legal authority to eavesdrop on Americans and foreign nationals in the US. The White House says the authority was implicitly granted in the joint Congressional resolution authorizing the use of force passed shortly after 9/11. But in today's Washington Post, Daschle claims the Bush administration requested, but was denied, the authority it now claims it was granted.
Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle: "Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words 'in the United States and' after 'appropriate force' in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused."
Consent was not granted by Congress. Daschle states that the administration attempted to carve out those powers but was rebuffed.
Some argue that the Bully Boy doesn't have to answer to Congress at all. One talking point is that he notified them (some, in a minimal manner) and that's all he needed to do. Again, is this a democracy or a military junta?If it's a democracy, we have rules both for the governed and for those doing the governing.
Now they haven't been applied for the bulk of Bully Boy's tenure but we're talking about a very serious issue. To cover it, the mainstream press may need to leave their "Bully Boy says" versus "some critics argue" stance. Just as if they witnessed a shooting, they'd be unlikely to report, "the accused states that he did not shoot the person but some witnesses argue that he did. We'll leave you with both arguments and won't venture to state the obvious facts."2005 has been a wild ride. The fatigue and depression following election 2004 lifted slowly, but it did lift. Americans are taking issues quite a bit more seriously than the mainstream press. Maybe it's a desire to start those vacations that won't end until after New Year's Eve? Maybe it's just a tendency to want to have fun, fun, fun during this seasonal time?
But the fact is Americans were spied on by their government. First, Bully Boy says only if one end of the call was international. Now it turns out that Bully Boy's claim was yet another lie. The spying took place without utilizing the court in place to grant permission -- the court created for that very reason. This is a power grab that would leave Richard Nixon gasping in awe at the sheer audacity of the move. So perhaps it's finally time for the mainstream press to attempt reporting and not mere stenography?
As Kat noted at the end of a recent music commentary, "Truth to power in 2006."
[This editorial was written by The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jess and Jim, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, and Ruth of Ruth's Morning Edition Report.]
news you shouldn't miss
i hope everyone had a pleasant weekend. posting late due to the fact that we all worked on one entry. here it is:
"News roundup including did Bully Boy break the law?"
Did Bully Boy break the law by authorizing spying on American citizens and circumventing the FISA courts? If so, how many years can someone be sentenced to for that crime? We'll highlight a radio discussion on that issue, but first, news on Iraq, Morocco, Afghanistan, the Phillipines, Russia, Chile, Israel, activism and more.
As reported on The Daily Iraq Wire, December 25th wasn't a day of peace in Iraq. Two bombs went off in Iraq injuring seven Iraqis. In addition, a reported al Qaeda group in Iraq announced Sunday that they had kidnapped and killed four Arabs who had been "working with the US authorities and the Iraqi government in the fortified Green Zone in central Baghdad."
Monday violence and unrest continued. Deepa Babington, reporting for the Irish Examiner, notes that Baghdad saw five explosions today killing eight and wounding thirty-eight. Outside of Baghdad, there were attacks in Falluja where a suicide bomber killed himself and two police recruits. In Dhabab, five Iraqi soldiers were killed.
Reporting for IPS, Gareth Porter reports today a "looming confrontation" between Shi'ites in Iraq and the American officials who are urging the disbanding of Shi'ite paramilitary groups. American officials fear groups may have close ties to Iran. The "looming confrontation" emerged when American officials decided to make an issue of the "torture houses" run by Shi'ites. "Decided?" Major R. John Stukey and others first reported the existance of "torture houses" in June of 2005. From June to November, US officials remained silent.
As of Monday, US military fatalities in Iraq stand at 2169, official count with 56 of those fatalities for the month of December. Iraq Body Count, which gathers totals by following media reports, estimates that as few as 27,592 and as many as 31,115 Iraqis have died thus far since the invasion.
In other war news, Agence France-Presse reports the American military is claiming that "very soon" the number of troops serving in Iraq will drop from 19,000 to 2, 5000.
In activism news, NOW is calling for action on Samuel Alito, Jr.'s Supreme Court nomination:
There is work to be done, both in Washington, DC and throughout the country. As a part of Freedom Winter 2006, NOW and Feminist Majority Foundation are working together to bring grassroots activists to DC between January 3 and January 20. We're also encouraging activists to organize in their communities.
More information can be found online at NOW as well as online at the Feminist Majority Foundation. In related news, Ms. Magazine has compiled "the top ten news stories for women in 2005." Topping the list, Sandra Day O'Connor's announcement that she will step down from the Supreme Court bench. Planned Parenthood has also compiled a look back at the year 2005. Their look back begins with a listing of the five best and five worst places to get birth control prescriptions filled:
Best
Brooks/Eckerd Corporation
Costco
CVS
Harris
Teeter
Kmart
Worst
Rite Aid
Target
Walgreens
Wal-Mart
Winn-Dixie
In international news, Al Jazeera reports that Augusto Pinochet will finally stand trial for the deaths and disappearances carried out under his dictator regime as the head of Chile. Chile's Supreme Court, in a three to two vote, ruled that Pinochet is fit to stand trial. The BBC reports that charges will be filed Tuesday against four US marines for rape. The four are currently at the US embassy in Manila and "it is unclear whether it will hand over the marines." Abdul Rahman Khuzairan reports, for Islam.Online. net, that on Sunday a sit in was staged in Casablanca by Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Forum "to protest the mass grave found recently with the remains of 82 people." Canada's Star Phoenix reports that Monday in St. Petersburg, shoppers in one store were exposed to a mysterious gas: "Boxes containing timers wired to glass vials were discovered at the scene of the attack and three other stores in the same chain in Russia's second-largest city." And in Tut-tut Tuttle news, the Finanical Times reports that car dealer and contributor of $70,000 worth of donations to the GOP in 2004, Robert Tuttle continues to stumble in his post as US ambassador to England. For the second time, Tuttle has been forced to issue a correction to the BBC following an interview. Embassy work, not as easy as moving cars off a lot.
"Have we made poverty history?" asks The Independent of London? The debt relief in 2008 will go not to Africa but to Iraq and Nigeria. In addition the United States is backing off from it's earlier committments. Also reporting for The Independent, Maxine Frith notes that charities and aid workers believe that Live 8, and those involved in the concerts, "hijacked" the effort and gave the world a false sense of resolution when the problems of world poverty contine. Meera Selva reports from Africa that the people supposed to benefit from the concerts in London's Hyde Park have seen little difference in their lives. One woman tells Selva, "We have problems in Africa, big problems. What can plastic bracelets and pop concerts do to solve them?"
Reuters reports Israeli helicopters firing three missiles into Gaza. This comes as Al Jazeera reports that the Israeli government has announced intentions to build an additional 200 homes on the West Bank. The BBC reports, in other news from the region, that Ariel Sharon has been urged to "curb his appetite" by doctors as he awaits sugery "to close a small hole which doctors found in his heart after he had a minor stroke."
For The KPFA Evening News Anthony Fest spoke Monday evening to Christopher Pyle, "a consultant to Congress in the drafting of the surveillance act, today he teaches political science at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusettes." (What follows is a rough transcript, use the link to listen to the archived broadcast.)
Pyle: The Church Committee was set up because during the Watergate era we had discovered extensive domestic surveillance operations by a number of agencies including the FBI, military intelligence, the CIA and, the largest intelligence agency of all, the National Security Agency. It does electronic intercepts worldwide. It has stations around the world. It picks up communications off of statellites. It picks them off of landlines and it searches them with a dictionary of watch words. And during the 1970s, we discovered that the National Security Agency had maintained files on about 75,000 Americans and they particularly targeted political activists like Dr. Martin Luther King, the folk singer Joan Baez, and the anti-war protestor Dr. Benjamin Spock. We sought to end that massive surveillance, which had no judicial authority what so ever, by passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. That law said that if the government, when the government wanted to monitor electronic communications it had to go to a special court to gain a national security authorization, a speciall warrant. And for a number of years, it appears that the government did go to the special court and was able to conduct its monitoring with special warrants. But three years ago, the Bush administration decided that this was inconveinent for some reason that's not fully understood. And they just ignored the court and began collecting, uh, information rather broadly. The law itself says that it's the exclusive method by which monitoring may take place and that anybody who violates the law is guilty of a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
Fast: So there's no leeway for interpretation here, it's uh, it's black and white that if you don't go through the FISA court, you are in violation of the law?
Pyle: Exactly. So what we have here is the rather extraordinary situation of a president who has admitted to committing a felony. Now he says that Congress excused him by passing the resolution against al Qaeda but that says nothing about electronic surveillance. And then he says that the Constitution excuses him because the Constitution places him above the law. There's actually a secret memo produced by the Justice Department to justify torture that says that a war time president can ignore the criminal law of the United States. There's no basis for this in law, there's no basis for this in the history of Constitutional law and Constitutional interpretation and that's of course why the memo was kept secret because if it had ever seen the light of day it would have been laughed out of court. Well now it's seen the light of day and assertions based on that theory have seen the light of day and we're not laughing because we realize the government is really out of control.
Fast: Doubtless the techonology of surveillance is incrompably more powerful today than it was in the 1960s. Is there any indication yet exactly how wide, how wide a net the NSA was casting or how many people had been surveilled?
Pyle: No. The initial reports by the New York Times were that up to 500 people at a time had been targeted but perhaps thousands had been intercepted. And if they were, let's say, monitoring all e-mails and searching all e-mails in the United States for certain code words or phrases then it would be probably hundreds of thousands or millions of people who would have been monitored, not simply 500 people targeted at any given time. But we really don't know. But what we know is that the judges on the FISA court are extremely upset. One of them has already resigned because of this. The others want to know particularly whether this warrant-less spying was being used to then produce probable cause for specific warranted spying. In other words, infecting the very process with illegaly obtained information.
Fast: Since the administration was apparently conducting surveillance that was more in the nature of data mining then watching individuals is there any legal grounds under which they could conduct that kind of operation?
Pyle: No, that is what was known in the common law as a general search. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution forbids general searches. The second clause of the Fourth Amendment says that the warrants must be obtained that specify the place to be searched and and the things to be seized. The FISA warrants specify the persons who are the targets of the intercepts. There has to be specifity. There can't be a great dragnet collecting everything and then sorting it by computer and putting everybody under suspicion.
Did Bully Boy break the law? Better question, after trotting out Vicky Toe-Jam in print and on TV to put forward false claims about the Congessional act passed in the 80s to prevent the outing of CIA agents, why has the mainstream media been so reluctant to pursue people who helped with the drafting of the FISA act?
The above is news you may have missed and was compiled by Wally, Rebecca, Mike, Kat, Jim, Jess, Ty, Cedric, Elaine, Betty, and C.I.
kpfa
the kpfa evening news
christopher pyle
andrew fast
afghanistan
iraq
phillipines
morocco
poverty
augusto pinochet
russia
israel
birth control
the daily jot
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
the third estate sunday review
the common ills
"News roundup including did Bully Boy break the law?"
Did Bully Boy break the law by authorizing spying on American citizens and circumventing the FISA courts? If so, how many years can someone be sentenced to for that crime? We'll highlight a radio discussion on that issue, but first, news on Iraq, Morocco, Afghanistan, the Phillipines, Russia, Chile, Israel, activism and more.
As reported on The Daily Iraq Wire, December 25th wasn't a day of peace in Iraq. Two bombs went off in Iraq injuring seven Iraqis. In addition, a reported al Qaeda group in Iraq announced Sunday that they had kidnapped and killed four Arabs who had been "working with the US authorities and the Iraqi government in the fortified Green Zone in central Baghdad."
Monday violence and unrest continued. Deepa Babington, reporting for the Irish Examiner, notes that Baghdad saw five explosions today killing eight and wounding thirty-eight. Outside of Baghdad, there were attacks in Falluja where a suicide bomber killed himself and two police recruits. In Dhabab, five Iraqi soldiers were killed.
Reporting for IPS, Gareth Porter reports today a "looming confrontation" between Shi'ites in Iraq and the American officials who are urging the disbanding of Shi'ite paramilitary groups. American officials fear groups may have close ties to Iran. The "looming confrontation" emerged when American officials decided to make an issue of the "torture houses" run by Shi'ites. "Decided?" Major R. John Stukey and others first reported the existance of "torture houses" in June of 2005. From June to November, US officials remained silent.
As of Monday, US military fatalities in Iraq stand at 2169, official count with 56 of those fatalities for the month of December. Iraq Body Count, which gathers totals by following media reports, estimates that as few as 27,592 and as many as 31,115 Iraqis have died thus far since the invasion.
In other war news, Agence France-Presse reports the American military is claiming that "very soon" the number of troops serving in Iraq will drop from 19,000 to 2, 5000.
In activism news, NOW is calling for action on Samuel Alito, Jr.'s Supreme Court nomination:
There is work to be done, both in Washington, DC and throughout the country. As a part of Freedom Winter 2006, NOW and Feminist Majority Foundation are working together to bring grassroots activists to DC between January 3 and January 20. We're also encouraging activists to organize in their communities.
More information can be found online at NOW as well as online at the Feminist Majority Foundation. In related news, Ms. Magazine has compiled "the top ten news stories for women in 2005." Topping the list, Sandra Day O'Connor's announcement that she will step down from the Supreme Court bench. Planned Parenthood has also compiled a look back at the year 2005. Their look back begins with a listing of the five best and five worst places to get birth control prescriptions filled:
Best
Brooks/Eckerd Corporation
Costco
CVS
Harris
Teeter
Kmart
Worst
Rite Aid
Target
Walgreens
Wal-Mart
Winn-Dixie
In international news, Al Jazeera reports that Augusto Pinochet will finally stand trial for the deaths and disappearances carried out under his dictator regime as the head of Chile. Chile's Supreme Court, in a three to two vote, ruled that Pinochet is fit to stand trial. The BBC reports that charges will be filed Tuesday against four US marines for rape. The four are currently at the US embassy in Manila and "it is unclear whether it will hand over the marines." Abdul Rahman Khuzairan reports, for Islam.Online. net, that on Sunday a sit in was staged in Casablanca by Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Forum "to protest the mass grave found recently with the remains of 82 people." Canada's Star Phoenix reports that Monday in St. Petersburg, shoppers in one store were exposed to a mysterious gas: "Boxes containing timers wired to glass vials were discovered at the scene of the attack and three other stores in the same chain in Russia's second-largest city." And in Tut-tut Tuttle news, the Finanical Times reports that car dealer and contributor of $70,000 worth of donations to the GOP in 2004, Robert Tuttle continues to stumble in his post as US ambassador to England. For the second time, Tuttle has been forced to issue a correction to the BBC following an interview. Embassy work, not as easy as moving cars off a lot.
"Have we made poverty history?" asks The Independent of London? The debt relief in 2008 will go not to Africa but to Iraq and Nigeria. In addition the United States is backing off from it's earlier committments. Also reporting for The Independent, Maxine Frith notes that charities and aid workers believe that Live 8, and those involved in the concerts, "hijacked" the effort and gave the world a false sense of resolution when the problems of world poverty contine. Meera Selva reports from Africa that the people supposed to benefit from the concerts in London's Hyde Park have seen little difference in their lives. One woman tells Selva, "We have problems in Africa, big problems. What can plastic bracelets and pop concerts do to solve them?"
Reuters reports Israeli helicopters firing three missiles into Gaza. This comes as Al Jazeera reports that the Israeli government has announced intentions to build an additional 200 homes on the West Bank. The BBC reports, in other news from the region, that Ariel Sharon has been urged to "curb his appetite" by doctors as he awaits sugery "to close a small hole which doctors found in his heart after he had a minor stroke."
For The KPFA Evening News Anthony Fest spoke Monday evening to Christopher Pyle, "a consultant to Congress in the drafting of the surveillance act, today he teaches political science at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusettes." (What follows is a rough transcript, use the link to listen to the archived broadcast.)
Pyle: The Church Committee was set up because during the Watergate era we had discovered extensive domestic surveillance operations by a number of agencies including the FBI, military intelligence, the CIA and, the largest intelligence agency of all, the National Security Agency. It does electronic intercepts worldwide. It has stations around the world. It picks up communications off of statellites. It picks them off of landlines and it searches them with a dictionary of watch words. And during the 1970s, we discovered that the National Security Agency had maintained files on about 75,000 Americans and they particularly targeted political activists like Dr. Martin Luther King, the folk singer Joan Baez, and the anti-war protestor Dr. Benjamin Spock. We sought to end that massive surveillance, which had no judicial authority what so ever, by passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. That law said that if the government, when the government wanted to monitor electronic communications it had to go to a special court to gain a national security authorization, a speciall warrant. And for a number of years, it appears that the government did go to the special court and was able to conduct its monitoring with special warrants. But three years ago, the Bush administration decided that this was inconveinent for some reason that's not fully understood. And they just ignored the court and began collecting, uh, information rather broadly. The law itself says that it's the exclusive method by which monitoring may take place and that anybody who violates the law is guilty of a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
Fast: So there's no leeway for interpretation here, it's uh, it's black and white that if you don't go through the FISA court, you are in violation of the law?
Pyle: Exactly. So what we have here is the rather extraordinary situation of a president who has admitted to committing a felony. Now he says that Congress excused him by passing the resolution against al Qaeda but that says nothing about electronic surveillance. And then he says that the Constitution excuses him because the Constitution places him above the law. There's actually a secret memo produced by the Justice Department to justify torture that says that a war time president can ignore the criminal law of the United States. There's no basis for this in law, there's no basis for this in the history of Constitutional law and Constitutional interpretation and that's of course why the memo was kept secret because if it had ever seen the light of day it would have been laughed out of court. Well now it's seen the light of day and assertions based on that theory have seen the light of day and we're not laughing because we realize the government is really out of control.
Fast: Doubtless the techonology of surveillance is incrompably more powerful today than it was in the 1960s. Is there any indication yet exactly how wide, how wide a net the NSA was casting or how many people had been surveilled?
Pyle: No. The initial reports by the New York Times were that up to 500 people at a time had been targeted but perhaps thousands had been intercepted. And if they were, let's say, monitoring all e-mails and searching all e-mails in the United States for certain code words or phrases then it would be probably hundreds of thousands or millions of people who would have been monitored, not simply 500 people targeted at any given time. But we really don't know. But what we know is that the judges on the FISA court are extremely upset. One of them has already resigned because of this. The others want to know particularly whether this warrant-less spying was being used to then produce probable cause for specific warranted spying. In other words, infecting the very process with illegaly obtained information.
Fast: Since the administration was apparently conducting surveillance that was more in the nature of data mining then watching individuals is there any legal grounds under which they could conduct that kind of operation?
Pyle: No, that is what was known in the common law as a general search. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution forbids general searches. The second clause of the Fourth Amendment says that the warrants must be obtained that specify the place to be searched and and the things to be seized. The FISA warrants specify the persons who are the targets of the intercepts. There has to be specifity. There can't be a great dragnet collecting everything and then sorting it by computer and putting everybody under suspicion.
Did Bully Boy break the law? Better question, after trotting out Vicky Toe-Jam in print and on TV to put forward false claims about the Congessional act passed in the 80s to prevent the outing of CIA agents, why has the mainstream media been so reluctant to pursue people who helped with the drafting of the FISA act?
The above is news you may have missed and was compiled by Wally, Rebecca, Mike, Kat, Jim, Jess, Ty, Cedric, Elaine, Betty, and C.I.
kpfa
the kpfa evening news
christopher pyle
andrew fast
afghanistan
iraq
phillipines
morocco
poverty
augusto pinochet
russia
israel
birth control
the daily jot
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
the third estate sunday review
the common ills
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)