Monday, December 12, 2005

Word Games Of The Worst Sort


So Bill (“Hide Muffy Before He Dissects Her”) Frist is “throwing down the gauntlet” as Sen. Charles Schumer put it regarding Sam (Sc)Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Fristy wants an “up-and-down” vote on this guy; he’s entitled to that, but shouldn’t the Senate Judiciary Committee go through the formality of screening him first?

This quote in particular from the CNN story stood out for me (and I consider the phrase "Democratic stalling" to be highly pejorative, by the way):

“Sam Alito, who has a modest judicial temperament ... is someone who deserves advice and consent by the Senate," Frist told "Fox News Sunday."
Here and here are examples of (Sc)Alito’s “modest judicial temperament,” by the way.

The reason why I’m highlighting this quote is because it illustrates either a horrible job of paraphrasing what Frist said by the CNN correspondent (possible), or it communicates to me that Frist views the “advise and consent” role as one in which the Senate counsels the president’s nominee instead of the president (likely, given the way Frist operates).

I would call that an abdication of the duties of a member of Congress, elected to, in effect, do “the people’s business.” Frist is saying to me that, for him, it is a given that (Sc)Alito will be confirmed and his duty at this point is to provide counsel to him somehow in his capacity as a U.S. Senator. If Frist sincerely believes that, then he either doesn’t know how to do his job or doesn’t care.

Actually, if I were Frist, I’d be more concerned about my financial matters these days than anything else.

Indignity Even Unto Death

After a hectic couple of days performing seasonal errands and tasks (wrestling with the tree, shopping, wrapping presents, stringing lights, squeezing in our yearly jaunt to Longwood Gardens in Chadds Ford, PA), I was trying to figure out whether or not I should write an appreciation of Richard Pryor and/or Eugene McCarthy, try to decipher the latest legal maneuvers in the Valerie Plame matter (are Rove and his lawyers going to find a way to drag EVERY MSM journo who had some familiarity with her into this mess in an attempt to save Rove's sorry butt, or is Viveca Novak the end of the line?), or comment on N.J. governor-elect Jon Corzine's "business as usual" appointment of Robert Menendez to complete his term in the U.S. Senate, bypassing other worthy candidates such as Rush Holt and Nia Gill, with the appointment of either Holt or Gill sending a message that Corzine intends to put forward a boldly different agenda than some "cookie cutter" wish list handed to him by traditional Democratic special interest constituencies in that state (and on a wholly unrelated note, I should point out that James Wolcott's latest post on the dear MSM is a "must read," by the way - hat tip to Atrios).

And then I read this (via Atrios also...that God this guy can do the digging that he does).

Imagine that you have raised a child from an infant to a fumbling toddler, playing with anything he or she can get their hands on, then to the point where they are a boy or girl settling into a school routine playing with toys guns or hiding in a woods pretending to be on "patrol," then to the point where they are a pre-teenager and they get it into their heads that they have the praiseworthy goal of serving our country in the military, possibly following in the footsteps of a family member, and as a parent or other family member you support this young man or woman by any means available to you until they graduate from high school, and then they may either complete a two or four-year degree or choose not to pending completion of service, and then they get sent off to fight a war for reasons that have shifted like specs of sand in the wind and, God forbid, they are killed.

All of the sacrifice. The late nights sitting up with them while they recover from a sickness or a bad dream. The celebration of their school or extra-curricular accomplishments. Summers at the shore, sports outings, concerts with them, or the first time at the circus. The silly jokes, the pillow fights...the hurts and bitter, angry tears. The parent-teacher conferences, the last-minute school projects. The debt, requiring a second or even a third job or assistance from family members. Trying not to lose your mind the first night they're out driving a car after they get their license. The first date or prom. All of the prayers, and hopes, and dreams of the future.

And you get a phone call telling you that they're dead, and all of their dreams die with them (and yours).

And the government in whose name they lost their lives can't even respect them enough to treat their remains properly (to say nothing of the fact that the Secretary of Defense can't even sign the letters notifying the parents of the deaths of their children).

Never forget who brought this all to you. Never forget who is responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in American history.

Impeachment should only be the tip of the proverbial iceberg here. Truly investigating, prosecuting, and sentencing those responsible could take years.

Let it take those years. Those who have died deserve no less.

Update 12/13: I kept reading this great post from David Sirota and trying to find a way to disagree with him, but I couldn't.

Saturday, December 10, 2005

More "Imperial Hubris"

As noted in this article from today's Philadelphia Inquirer (registration required), Dubya recently appeared at a Repug fundraiser in Minnesota that netted a cool mil for the party and Rep. Mark Kennedy, the presumptive party nominee for a Senate seat in an upcoming election (I wonder if that's the race that Al Franken was thinking about entering?).

Anyway, at this bash, Dubya uttered this line given to him by his handlers:

"This is a Senator Kennedy I can work with."
Oh, OK. Would you "work" with him in the same manner that you "worked" with Ted Kennedy on the sham "No Child Left Behind" legislation?

According to this Buzzflash commentary:

The president's key education initiative is a well-intentioned attempt to change education in the United States. It could lead to real changes, if Bush had actually funded the plan rather than treat it as a nice photo op to show he really cared.

According to Senator Edward Kennedy, the author of the legislation and Bush's main prop in 2001, "in the two years since the No Child Left Behind Act was passed, the Bush Administration has cut its funding, reneged on promised resources for better teachers and smaller classes, and worked to divert millions of dollars to private school vouchers... President Bush's new budget for 2005 will leave over 4.6 million children behind. Still pending before Congress is President Bush's 2004 budget which provides schools with over $7.5 billion less than promised in the No Child Left Behind Act. And there is every expectation that the President will propose again not only to cut resources for public school reform, but to divert scarce public education dollars to private schools."

Enough said.
By the way, I continue to look for data on this that shows increased funding on either the federal or state level, but I'm not having any luck at the moment. If I do, I'll update this post accordingly.

I find myself just about running out of words anymore to truly communicate my loathing for Dubya's contemptible gall and arrogance. And isn't it a sight to see that he popularity has rebounded so dramatically from a dismal 37 or so percent to a slightly-less-than-mediocre 42 percent? Fa la la...

At least Dubya's predecessor called him on one of his "big lies" recently.

Friday, December 09, 2005

When Your Wishing Goes Too Far

So the company symbolized by the omnipresent, black, big round-eared rodent is back to try and rewrite a timeless work of Western literature once more to suit its scandalous, money-making agenda, I see.

I guess what gets me the most about this story (hat tip to HuffPo) is the fact that Disney's people show no scruple whatsoever about the fact that, by changing the human character of A. A. Milne's wonderful books from a little boy to a little girl for a production they're filming to commemorate Pooh's 80th anniversary, they're acting in a way that I'm sure would be contrary to the author's original wishes. Also, by removing Christopher Robin, they're trying to imagine interaction between an inanimate character and a human child in a way that Milne never envisioned.

(I thought it was interesting to read about the Pooh legacy that Christopher Robin Milne had to overcome in his life, by the way.)

Basically, Disney is taking the wonderful, creative aspects of the story and trampling all over them in a sea of corporate-marketing "speak" that is an unbelievable perversion (and of course, those responsible are totally oblivious to that fact).

By our estimation, the grossest example of this by Disney to date has been their decision to take "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," a tortured story filled of adult elements such as violence, abuse of power and unrequited pride and lust, and turn it into some kind of feel-good kiddie story that ends in a nice, clean manner, happily tying together worthy themes and lessons as if Pixie dust had been sprinkled all over it (not once, but twice, mind you).

What could be next from Disney? Who can say? But my guess would be...

Pinocchio 2010 - A half-human, half-animatronic little boy attempts to live a normal life but is instead wooed to Redmond, Washington by two ruthless corporate recruiters, Foulfellow and Gideon. His puppeteer father Geppetto, upon hearing the news, purses him and, following a phony lead, ends up on the space shuttle. Pinocchio then has to journey to another galaxy to save him, with both becoming trapped inside the HAL 9000 master computer.

Dumbyabo - The son of an elephant that merrily stamps from circus to circus, ignoring all of the blight and misery along its path, is treated as a carnival freak until it comes under the tutelage of Rove The Mouse, who helps teach him to fly and maintain a happy denial of the consequences of his actions.

Snow White And The Seven Republicans - The smiling, totally domesticated and obsequious Caucasian princess performs the wishes of her diminutive housemates, who spend their days engaged in the labor of mining for coal to put in the Christmas-day stockings of anyone who dares to utter "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays" to anyone who isn't exactly like them.
And as we know when it comes to politics, Disney is so receptive to hearing points of view that conflict with their own, aren't they? And they're so "pro-union" also, as we know (hmmm....)

In the fairy-tale world I imagine where there is no place for Disney, I envision people of all races, ethnicities, and personal preferences of other types particular to themselves being able to express themselves freely in the absence of any "brand" or corporate presence whatsoever. That is my dream for the future.

Besides, Disney still have to atone for "Home On The Range."

Thursday, December 08, 2005

You Wanna Bet?

She actually has a point about Ross Perot influencing the 1992 election in Clinton's favor, but of course she'll never give him credit for anything (being the "serial rapist" that he's supposed to be in her eyes, referring to Clinton of course).

As for everything else in this story, it's just more of the same.

(Oops, forgot this one also - my bad.)

Let Me Take You Down


Our TV was broken and I was listening to Monday Night Football on the radio, broadcast by announcer Jack Buck and analyst Hank Stram (I’m pretty sure the game was between New England and Miami), when CBS broke in with the announcement that John Lennon had been shot in New York City. I first thought, wow, how awful. Maybe it was a mugging or something and somebody winged him.

A few minutes later, CBS broke in again with the news that he had been shot four times. That’s when I started to get the sinking feeling. By the time a third broadcast came soon after that announcing that he had died, I was numb and it barely registered at first.

The days that followed would be filled with a mourning that I didn’t know I could feel for a non-family member. The loss of any human life is terrible, but this was shocking and a violation of a sort that was inconceivable.

I had all kinds of reactions and I did a few different things in response to Lennon’s murder; some good and some bad. One of the better things I did, I believe, was to become active in Handgun Control, Inc. The organization would become more visible months later after James Brady, Ronald Reagan’s press secretary, was severely wounded in an assassination attempt on the President some months after Lennon’s murder. Brady, along with his wife Sarah, would join Handgun Control, Inc. and take the lead in the effort to try and stem the violence caused by handguns in this country.

Despite my idealism at that time, I came to realize later that no gun legislation would have prevented Chapman from killing Lennon. Chapman bought the .38 caliber Charter Arms revolver in Hawaii under an assumed name (“John Lennon,” I believe) and transported it illegally to New York where he performed his almost unspeakable act.


Chapman's murder of Lennon ushered in a mini-wave of assassination attempts of prominent people. As I noted, John Hinckley, Jr. would shoot Reagan in March of 1981, and Mehmet Ali Agca would shoot Pope John Paul II two months after that. I would argue that Hinckley and Agca saw that the assassination of a prominent person could be used as a powerful tool to mold public opinion based on Chapman's cowardly act of barbarism and had that in mind when they did their deeds. I realize, though, that that's only my theory that probably will never be substantiated. At any rate, these are all grim milestones in the almost-never-ending quest to cheapen human life.

In a related note, I stated earlier in my post about the 1,000th person executed in this country since the reinstatement of capital punishment that, in accordance with my faith, I should oppose the death penalty. However, the fact that Chapman, Hinckley, and Agca remain alive while all of their victims have since died makes that position difficult for me.

Years after Lennon's murder, I watched Andrew Solt’s excellent documentary “Imagine,” which has just been re-released on DVD (Yoko Ono, ever the businesswoman of sorts, having timed the release to coincide with the 25th anniversary of this dark act - her opportunism aggravates me a bit, though). In a way, I found it humorous that Lennon and Ono would decide to film just about every waking moment of their lives in a fit of true artistic egotism, but I am also glad that they did because I believe that, at times, it inadvertently showed their vulnerability.

Two of the moments that stood out for me are as follows:

1) A drifter manages to show up at Lennon and Ono’s New York estate (around the time that “Imagine” the album is being recorded in 1972), and Lennon, disheveled, greets him at the front door with his entourage. The kid tells Lennon how much his music meant to him, and Lennon thanks him but tells him that it’s all subject to his own interpretation, basically. Lennon then invites the kid in for a bite to eat, which of course is filmed also.

2) Lennon and Ono read fan letters and laugh nervously when someone claiming to be a psychic tells him that he will be assassinated.

There was also the argument with Al Capp during one of the “bed-ins,” with Capp being genuinely obnoxious as far as I’m concerned, and Lennon flipping out at a New York Times critic.

I think the best thing for me to do right now is provide this link to a feature article in The Philadelphia Inquirer for more background (registration required), and I’m also going to present this column from longtime Philadelphia TV news anchorman and writer Larry Kane which appeared in the paper today also (his point about our “idols” being the product of our own perceptions is excellent):

25 years later, John Lennon still lives

By Larry Kane


Too many modern celebrities - many of them with only marginal talent - revel as they walk the red carpet, glamour and self-indulgence written in their superficial and forced smiles.

It is really our fault. We idolize and live vicariously through the famous faces we watch. And today, on the 25th anniversary of the murder of John Lennon, I think about how different he was - how relevant he made himself to a generation of admirers, not by wanting to be adored, but by hoping he would be respected.

He is what I call the poster boy for imperfection. In life, and in his amazing afterlife (he's still all over the radio), we see him as a person whose personal decisions we would want to avoid, but whose personal convictions and search for the truth are things to admire.

Adoration never came easily to Lennon. His father abandoned him; his mother was rarely around. He grew up angry and determined to make the establishment aware of his presence by acting out in school. When that phase ended, be began burying himself in sketching, and thankfully for us, music. His band, the Quarrymen, became the Beatles. Lennon sensed early that his talent alone was not enough. His decision to invite Paul McCartney to join the band was courageous and, as it turns out, historic.

The irony of his life is that the more successful he was as an artist, the more traps he fell into as a person. Pill-popping turned to alcohol and drug abuse, which plagued him until the mid-1970s. But unlike the stars who lived in a bubble, Lennon was not afraid to share his private side in public. Almost every song he wrote was about how he was feeling at the time. "I'm a loser," he wrote at the age of 25, "and I'm not what I appear to be." When he was 30 and in love with Yoko Ono, he penned the beautiful "Imagine," a song that did not become one of the bestselling recorded hits of all time until Lennon was dead. Why? Because he dared to say, "Nothing to kill or die for/ No religion, too."

His angriest music was written in 1973, when he was fully invested in drugs. Yet, in 1980, he wrote "(Just Like) Starting Over," an affirmation that after five years as America's most famous stay-at-home dad, he was back and ready to entertain again.

His life was filled with mistakes and redemption. He was a womanizer who loved only three women - wives Cynthia Lennon and Yoko, and May Pang, the alluring and insightful secretary with whom Yoko fixed him up. He was a womanizer who became an ardent feminist in the late '70s, a pacifist who became one of the most public supporters of police and firefighters, a domestic abuser who transformed himself into a student of the frustrating social history of women.

Lennon, who could display daunting selfishness, was unselfish in his pursuits, giving his music away to other artists, to the detriment of his own career. He was also, delightfully and dangerously, one of the few people I've ever known who said in public what he thought in private, a man who spent much of his adult life thinking about other people, whether it was victims of bigotry in his native Britain or migrant laborers in California, those who had little, those of abundance who gave little.

My travels with him (and the other Beatles) were electric. My arguments with him about war and peace and his public righteousness made us both red in the face and dry in the mouth. He was especially vitriolic and profane when he told me I was an (expletive deleted) fool to leave New York to come back to broadcast in Philadelphia.

Even now, you hear the question: "Where were you on the night of Dec. 8, 1980?", just as others once asked, "Where were you the day John Kennedy was shot?"

I can still remember the words of Frank Rizzo, then Philadelphia's mayor, who had warned me during a 1975 Lennon visit to Philadelphia that Lennon should have more protection. I picked him up at 30th Street Station, where he came alone on an Amtrak train. When he met the thousands of people behind the Channel 6 studios, he stood fearless, enjoying the moment. He had come to Philadelphia to host a weekend charity broadcast. Weeks before he died, he told me he'd met more people in the flesh on that Philadelphia weekend than at any other single time in his life.

Ultimately - again, despite his frequent self-absorption - Lennon was in love with people more than with his daunting celebrity persona. Today we remember him as a man who made beautiful music. We also should remember him as a continuing challenge: to overcome our worst aspects, to learn to think less about ourselves, and more about the world and the people around us.
For more on John Lennon, click here.

Update 12/9: Philadelphia Inquirer columnist John Grogan's latest on this is absolutely too well done to ignore. That being said, though, one news source did manage to "blow off" everything I've mentioned in this post; the Bucks County Courier Times had absolutely nothing on any of this yesterday.

Food For The Holidays

I apologize because it took me way, WAY too long to get around to this, but Preston and Steve's Camp Out for Hunger has one more day to go, and that’s tomorrow (and as luck would have it, it sounds like a “noreaster” is going to hit tomorrow also). I think their goal is at least 76 tons of food, but hopefully they can surpass that.

Here, here, and here are other places to go if you want to help in your own way, and here is a shining example of someone who did just that.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Dubya vs. Dean


Regarding this story…do I wish Howard Dean would keep his mouth shut? Of course (and I support the guy). I particularly feel that way because the sentiments he expressed were already communicated in a moving and articulate way by Rep. John Murtha. But before anyone starts dumping on Dean, I would ask that you consider this:

- He said when the Iraq War started that it would increase the risk of terrorism to this country (can't find a current link - sorry...). He was predictably hooted down by the right wing echo chamber. However, Dean turned out to be right.

- He made
that unfortunate remark about Tom DeLay returning to Texas “to begin serving his sentence.” Again, he was hooted down (and I cringed when I heard what Dean said). However, I think recent developments have caught up with Dean’s original remark (and as Atrios noted today, even the high and mighty Wall Street Journal is sending a signal to DeLay that he’s on his own at this point).
I checked CNN to read more about Iraq today, but I noticed something else that was interesting. I was going to note that their “Quick Vote” question was “Do you think we’ll win the war in Iraq?” or something like that, and the choices were “Yes, in the short term,” “Yes, though it will be a long haul,” or “No,” (I’m paraphrasing all over the place here), and “No” was selected overwhelmingly. I was going to note that Dean was a lot more correct on this than Bush will ever be.

However, the Quick Vote question was just pulled, and it is now, “Can Iraq be rebuilt even as the insurgency continues?,” with Yes and No as the choices (a lot less provocative of a question, I must say), and again, the “No” choice was picked overwhelmingly.

Am I pointing all of this out to gloat about how great the Dems are and how arrogant and clueless the Repugs are? A bit, yes – I won’t lie to you (though the Dems, as a party, have to mirror the "John Edwards" model of this issue, namely stating that they were wrong but our service people were correct and heroic all along regardless, though many of the Dems are reluctant to do that, to their eternal folly).

But I am mainly continuing to “beat this drum” to call attention to the fact that our service people have been betrayed and they need to be redeployed out of Iraq ASAP. Everybody who knows what he or she is talking about on this says the same thing; that our continued military presence is fueling the terrorist insurgency.

Our people should NOT be over there serving as targets. They’ve done the best they can.

And regarding this story…well, let’s just say that “I’m from Missouri,” Mr. President (or could this speech have been a distraction from this?).

- Show me pictures of these accomplishments.

- Give me testimonials from Iraqis who are willing to go on the record.

- Establish milestones like
Jack Reed and John Murtha have said and show me something like a project flowchart to measure our progress.
Do it, or get our service people the hell out of there!

Then And Now

I thought the story from this link was interesting, though I didn’t understand the context of the very last quote from Yale professor Gaddis Smith.

As you can see, the story provides some background to the attack on Pearl Harbor which took place 64 years ago today and the commissions that investigated the attack versus the 9/11 commission and the publication of its findings, which turned out to be a best seller.

I’ve heard people say for awhile now that President Franklin D. Roosevelt knew that the attack on Pearl Harbor was coming, but did nothing to stop it to deliberately facilitate our entry into the war (Roosevelt, being dead by the time the commissions were holding their hearings, was unable to defend himself). Based on what I’ve read, I’m moving a little in that direction, but I will only say that I think he knew SOMETHING was coming (maybe an attack on Wake Island only?) and he wanted to use that to get us into the war to help England (after all, the entire Japanese fleet was moving towards this country…how could he not know that?). Again, based on what I’ve read to date, I’ll never believe that he deliberately let the attack on Pearl Harbor take place knowing how terrible it would be. In the same way (again, based on what I’ve read to date), I’ll never believe that Dubya knew that 9/11 would happen. Like Roosevelt, I think he knew something was coming, but he didn’t expect it to be as catastrophic as it was.

I think Roosevelt’s actions showed a bit of guile and deception for what he believed to be a just cause; Dubya’s actions (ignoring the al Qaeda threat even though Richard Clarke and others were warning him not to do so as forcefully as they could) only showed willful arrogance and incompetence.

I pondered all of this a few months ago as I watched “Victory At Sea” on my Mitsubishi VHS player, getting a bit depressed over the irony.

Speaking of the 9/11 commission and its most recent findings, here is a link to a recent story in the Inquirer (registration required) which is truly scary (and remember…it was a bipartisan commission).

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Seasons Greetings, Stupid


You can just about take for granted any more that a story such as this one will appear at about this time every year from now on.

I think part of the problem is that those who feel Christmas is being slighted by wishing someone "Happy Holidays" don’t understand the flexibility that our founders built into the U.S. Constitution regarding religion when they wrote the so-called “Establishment Clause” in the First Amendment. The amendment states that there can be no federally sponsored religion, but it also allows for the states to do pretty much whatever they want, including celebrating whatever holiday is applicable for people of other faiths. Another part of the problem is that the people stirring this up (Falwell, O’Reilly and the other “usual suspects”) are trying to create controversies wherever they can in a continual effort at distracting us from taking a good, hard look around and realizing what a mess the politicians they support have truly made of this country (such as that Texas congressman who wants to look into the college bowl “scandal”).

Also, as far as the “Christmas Only” crowd is concerned, anyone celebrating Hanukkah or Kwanzaa is out of luck, right? What a great attitude – so in keeping with the teachings of the individual whose birth we’re celebrating.

In a partly related vein, I should note that I came across a CNN/Money story of what the “hoi poloi” are going to buy for themselves this year (Dubya’s “haves” and “have mores”). In the story, they mentioned something called an “Oculas”. Here is a description from the story:

So when I saw the Oculas, I knew it was the perfect gift for him. This egg-like multimedia shell not only lets you shut yourself off from the rest of the world, it offers 5.1 surround sound and the built-in leather chair will even give you a massage as you blast away the Covenant Elite (note: I think the "Covenant Elite" reference pertains to a video game or entertainment system they mentioned earlier - have to check, even though it's beside the point). Everything from lighting to the whisper quiet door is controlled by a touchscreen within the Oculas. The price? Just $43,166.
Now, click here and tell me what you think this thing looks like. Go on – don’t be shy (ho, ho, ho).

Rummy, Take A Powder


And he dares to compare this fiasco in Iraq to the battle for Iwo Jima in World War II (link here)…

So you don’t believe the stories from the reporters provide “context,” Mr. Secretary? Maybe it’s because you’ve ordered our fine service people to provide nothing to them except boilerplate about how well everything is supposed to be going. Please forgive the poor reporters who are getting killed all over the place for trying to do their jobs (which you hypocritically note “must be difficult” a sentence or two after your original slam at them).

Better bloggers than I have made a convincing case for the proposition that Rumsfeld should no longer have a job because of how he has managed this war (“managed” is a charitable way to put it for him as far as I’m concerned). I think that’s why, periodically, Bushco starts some media buzz along the lines of replacing him every now and then just to see how people react (I was hooked in myself a little while back). A day or so ago, Think Progress (via Atrios) noted that that solid Democrat (ugh) Joe Lieberman could be tabbed to take over for Rummy, since he’s as zombified on the outcome of Iraq as anyone else in this clueless administration.

When will Rumsfeld be replaced? Tomorrow? Next Week? Never? I have no idea. I will only say this; practically all politicians make decisions on the basis of whether or not they’ll win popular support over them versus how much they’ll lose, as we know (the whole “risk/reward” thing). I say “most” because the people in Bushco aren’t completely acting like typical politicians; since they’re so beholden to “the base,” they won’t do ANYTHING that offends that constituency. I believe Bushco’s die-hard supporters would see terminating Rummy as a betrayal more than anything else, and that is why he won’t go anywhere (now, watch me get proven wrong tomorrow…).

However, in the event that somehow Rummy does get shown the door, here is my candidate to replace him (I tried to set up John McCain for it earlier as mentioned in the prior post I linked to above, and color me embarrassed on a couple of different levels for that).

Monday, December 05, 2005

Rock's First All-Star Benefit Concert


It has been my great pleasure over the last few days to view and listen to the brand new DVD production of The Concert For Bangladesh, the benefit concert produced, arranged, and made to happen on just about every level by George Harrison in 1971 (the non-limited deluxe edition with Harrison on the cover).

This link takes you to the concert website which provides historical background on the conflict between East and West Pakistan at that time that ultimately led to the trail of suffering for the Pakistani refugees attempting to settle in Bangladesh, only to be thwarted by famine, poverty, and disease. There are some obvious parallels, I believe, to the crisis for which Harrison provided aid and the human misery currently holding sway in Northern Uganda and the Darfur region of the Sudan.

On August 1, 1971, there were actually two sets performed by the musicians, one in the afternoon and one in the evening. I purchased the three-LP vinyl set many years ago, and even since then, I have never been able to determine whether the afternoon or evening sets were recorded for the three-LP collection and film, or if it was some combination of the two. It’s a small matter, actually, because the terrific quality of the performances makes it a moot point. As is pointed out in a recently-filmed interview segment with some of the remaining performers, the “buzz” generated by the audience from the afternoon show added to the excitement of the evening show.

The DVD begins with an excerpt of a news conference George Harrison and Ravi Shankar gave announcing and promoting the concert, and then leads into the show with Harrison’s stage introduction to the Indian musicians and their performance. At first, I couldn’t understand why Ravi Shankar asked everyone not to smoke, until I realized as the show progressed that the non-Indian musicians smoked like chimneys, so to speak.

Harrison, in the introduction, asked people to realize that the Indian music (“Bangla Dhun”) was more “serious,” but the musicians certainly seemed to enjoy themselves as they played, particularly Shankar on the sitar and Usted Ali Akbar Khan on the sarod during the “Gat,” or quicker-paced part (the “jam,” if you will). Shankar and Khan seemed to play their mini-solos off each other like seasoned session players.

When the Indian musicians left, Harrison returned with the “all-star” band and led off with three numbers from “All Things Must Pass” (for my money, the best of the Beatle solo albums). “Wah Wah,” provided a rousing start, with the more contemplative “My Sweet Lord,” and a by-the-numbers-but-satisfying version of “Awaiting On You All.” The first band performer to be showcased was Billy Preston, which was appropriate partly because of his contribution to the Beatles, and his soulful reading of “That’s The Way God Planned It,” included a spirited, unrehearsed dance that whipped up the crowd (which caused Phil Spector, who engineered the sound, to ask repeatedly in a panic, “Where is he? Where is he?” when he couldn’t hear Preston at the mike, something noted on one of the four documentaries on the Special Features Disk #2).

Ringo Starr then performed “It Don’t Come Easy” (his synchronization with fellow drummer Jim Keltner throughout the performance was very nearly perfect), and Harrison performed “Beware of Darkness” with an unexpected twist of letting Leon Russell sing one of the verses. After the band introduction (where Harrison notes humorously that he “forgot Billy Preston”), Harrison performed “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” trading off with Eric Clapton on a couple of solos (I thought it was interesting, given that I am basically a non-musician, to watch Clapton cue Harrison, who subsequently cued the rest of the band, when it was time for Clapton to finish his solo and end the song).

It probably goes without saying that there are a whole bunch of stories behind this production, but probably the most visible one was that of Clapton. In one of the special features documentaries, Harrison noted that, after Clapton agreed to perform, telexes were sent back and forth to London to get a confirmation that Clapton would fly over for the performance, but nothing could be confirmed. Harrison contacted Jesse Ed Davis to play lead guitar in case Clapton couldn’t make it, though Clapton eventually showed up after missing the “sound check.” Of course, Clapton being who he is, he stepped onstage just about without the benefit of a rehearsal and played very well. I though it was also interesting to hear Clapton mention that he was playing his great solos on “the wrong guitar,” having left his Fender Stratocaster in London.

To his credit, Clapton was also very candid in one of the documentaries about his personal problems during that time, noting euphemistically that he had been in “semi-retirement” for about two and a half years, though also noting that hard drugs had become a big problem in music towards the end of the 60s, particularly heroin, implying his own use. He and others on the documentaries felt that part of the great appeal of the concert was that it was a revival of the music of the ‘60s without all of the excesses (I cannot recall who noted that multi-act concerts had gotten a black eye after Altamont, and that is why there had not been any for some time, but fortunately, the Concert for Bangladesh changed that).

The next featured performer was Leon Russell, who ripped through a medley of “Jumpin’ Jack Flash,” by the Rolling Stones and “Youngblood” by Lieber/Stoller and The Coasters. Others would note after the concert that the highlight of the show was the performance by Bob Dylan that would soon follow, and he was terrific, but for me, Russell’s set was positively electric. He was about to explode in popularity as a solo performer, and his revivalist sort of gospel-influenced rock with the shouts back and forth to the backup singers got the crowd back into the show once again, helped considerably by a couple of blazing guitar solos from Don Preston (with Harrison nearly missing his cue a couple of times on the chorus). Harrison then performed an acoustic version of “Here Comes The Sun,” with Pete Ham of Badfinger, one of the many supporting musicians and singers.

In one of the documentaries, Harrison noted that, when Dylan first saw the stage at Madison Square Garden and watched everyone setting up during the sound check, Dylan said, “Hey, this isn’t my thing,” and Harrison said, “It isn’t mine either, and I’ve never fronted a band or anything like that, but at least you have.” Because of Dylan’s hesitation, Harrison noted “Bob ?” on the song list after “Here Comes The Sun,” and very nearly towards the beginning of Dylan’s performance, it wasn’t known if he would even show up that afternoon. However, show up he did, fortunately. Ringo Starr noted later that, since no one knew exactly what he would be performing, everyone just “went with it, and we played a 4/4 time throughout for his afternoon set,” but when the evening came along and Dylan started, Starr’s reaction was, “Oh, now we’re playing a waltz.”

The first song Dylan performed was “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall,” followed by “It Takes A Lot To Laugh, It Takes A Train To Cry.” On the Dylan set, Harrison played a slide guitar accompanied by Ringo on tambourine, which I thought was interesting. You can’t tell that from the film, and in fact a lot of the camerawork was a constant source of irritation to me, until I watched the “Making Of The Movie” featurette and realized what an enormous technical challenge Saul Swimmer faced in making the film. Now, we take for granted the precise framing of shots when filming music performances, along with the sweeping camera movement and synchronized editing with the music, but in terms of technological innovation, this concert took place in the stone age. The fact that that is reflected somewhat in the camerawork, which seems to constantly be a step behind the performance, does not convey all of the hard work that went into filming this show (the only moment of note in that department was the split screen of Shankar and Khan finishing their performance of “Bangla Dhun,” which was actually typical for many films during that time).

Dylan then expertly brought “Blowin’ In The Wind,” and “Just Like A Woman” back once more before concluding. However, one mystery to me regarding his set is the absence of “Mr. Tambourine Man” on the DVD. I checked some message boards, and some people said that the film ran out during the song, and that is why it appears on the original vinyl LP and the CD but not the DVD. That makes sense – one of the problems Swimmer noted was that no one knew at the time to “stagger” the filming of the concert, so on occasion, the cameras ran out of film at the same time. However, I also read a post that said the performance shows up on a version of the DVD for European distribution. I may never know the answer conclusively, but I don’t think that detracts from the DVD. Besides, a previously unseen version of “Love Minus Zero/No Limit” played during the evening set appears as a special feature, and it is truly a gem, more than making up for “Mr. Tambourine Man” as far as I’m concerned (other special features include “If Not For You,” with Harrison trying hard to provide on harmony vocal for Dylan on the duet, and a raw version of “Come On In My Kitchen,” a Robert Johnson blues standard brought to life in a rollicking fashion by Harrison, Clapton, and Russell).

Harrison wrapped up the show with “Something,” messing up the words and having a bit of a laugh over it. This was in keeping with all of the good spirit throughout the show, which seemed to almost reverberate back and forth between the audience and the musicians. As a bit of trivia, I thought it was interesting to note that Harrison was ostensibly singing about Pattie Boyd, his wife at the time, while he played the tune with Clapton, who would begin a relationship with Boyd after she divorced from Harrison in 1977, marrying Clapton in 1979 until their divorce in 1989 (yielding the songs, “Layla,” and “Wonderful Tonight, by Clapton, as well as Clapton’s searing cover of Billy Myles’ “Have You Ever Loved A Woman,” about her, making Boyd a true legend in rock music).

As an encore, all the musicians returned to perform “Bangla Desh.” As they furiously ripped through the rousing finale, it seemed as if Phil Spector’s attempt to recreate a live “wall of sound” with the almost ridiculously overcrowded stage had finally succeeded.

The main documentary on the Special Features disk #2 presents remembrances from Ringo Starr, bassist Klaus Voorman, Billy Preston, Jann Wenner of “Rolling Stone” magazine, Leon Russell, UN General Secretary Kofi Annan and many others interspersed with heaping doses of the great music (Harrison noted that John Lennon told him to use “the power of the Beatles” to get the musicians and otherwise make the concert happen). One documentary about the making of the film contains interviews from sound engineers Norm Kinney and Steve Mitchell where they describe “having to cram 44 audio tracks into 16,” and also with Swimmer who describes having to “blow up” the filmed shots of the performers frame by frame to 70 MM to accommodate the sound.

The film documentary also includes a brief interview for a local news station with concert goers camping out at MSG in advance to buy tickets; the news reporter conducting the interview is a newbie journo wearing a wide-lapelled powder blue polyester sports jacket named Geraldo Rivera (not yet looking inside Al Capone’s vault). The album documentary shows Harrison discussing some of the business problems related to the concert, primarily the fact that the distribution company of Capitol/EMI, the label upon which the concert was recorded, held up release of the record over money. That was resolved eventually, of course, and also included in the documentary is a film clip of Johnny Mathis presenting the 1972 Best Grammy award to Ringo Starr for the album, which beat out “American Pie,” by Don McLean and “Moods” by Neil Diamond.

Harrison noted that the concert raised about $250,000 which went to UNICEF primarily for oral re-hydration solution to treat the cholera from which the refugees were suffering. Others interviewed recently said that the concert helped people to feel “a renewed sense of activism,” with Clapton saying that this was a time “when we could be proud of being musicians…we weren’t just thinking of ourselves for five minutes.” Shankar, quite simply, called the concert “a miracle.”

I thought the quality of the video on the DVD was quite good given the primitive master from which it was copied, and I listened to the concert in either of the two Dolby options, and the clarity of the sound was wonderful. The DVD can also be viewed with English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese subtitles.

I am proud to give my most enthusiastic recommendation to this new DVD release. If you care about the music of this period to any degree whatsoever, buy this set.

Sunday, December 04, 2005

Three Quick Ones

- This partial score: Dead Marines 10, Al Qaeda 1.

(Bushco and its minions sure have a knack for pushing bad news off the front pages in a hurry, don't they? - hat tip #1 to Atrios).

- The blogger Digby reports that Judge Alito has an interesting notion of how police should use deadly force (fortunately, his sadistic interpretation was overruled when the case got to the Supreme Court - hat tip #2 to Atrios).

- I haven't said much about the legal troubles of congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham in CA, who was convicted this week and resigned from the House, mainly because the story has been covered so well by other bloggers. Well, Itsez has more on Cunningham, particularly when he was much younger and remembered as a decorated war hero, and I doubt seriously that you will find information included in his post anywhere else. We know what Cunningham is now, but not too many of us remember what he used to be, and in this case, I think that's important.

Update 12/6: Brendan at Brandoland has a great post today on Cunningham's nonsense (call girls, luxury suites, Cunningham applying some "grease" to the tune of about $100 grand to get some starting-out contractor on a "preferred provider's" list for Dick Cheney - amazing that these guys continue to think that they can get away with this stuff).

Froma Harrop of the Providence (R.I.) Journal weighs in also (some of her stuff is awful from time to time, but she's nailed a few columns pretty well too, including this one).

Saturday, December 03, 2005

Flash: Joe Biden Uses Rogaine!

These days, if the Inquirer bends any further to the right, so to speak, I'm afraid it will herniate itself.

The headline "story" in the Entertainment section of today's paper from blogger Dan Rubin has to do with an ad aired by Moveon.org outlining its stand on the war in Iraq (leaning towards the Dems, as much as they can claim to have a single position anyway - problem there - but so what?). Anyway, Rubin reports that someone at the Wall Street Journal noted that, in the video of the ad, our troops are shown wearing shorts, when in fact that is the permitted uniform of British troops. Also, a couple of conservative blogs noted that, in print versions of the ad, the troops shown to be wearing shorts were suddenly wearing long pants instead.

I don't know about you, but maybe I'm missing something here. I don't consider these revelations to be "cutting edge" journalism of any sort. Sure, there was a goof in the ad. However, when told about it, a Moveon spokesperson absolutely stood by the claim in the ad that 150,000 of our troops did not make it home for Thanksgiving (in Rubin’s post, that is noted in the very last paragraph). Isn't that more important than a pair of pants?

I left a comment on Rubin's original post on this topic (the post first appeared a day or so ago before it showed up in print today), but when the story appeared online today, no comments appeared with it. In my response, I noted that Rubin identified up front that Moveon has strong ties to the Democrats, but the Wall Street Journal's editorial page is basically a mouthpiece and a source of talking points for the radical right, and nothing was said about that. Beneath the story online, a link appeared to Rubin's blog; I clicked on the link to find out if my comment was still accessible online. Alas, the link no longer worked. How convenient!

As you can see, “liberal bias” is raging unchecked again. And speaking of which, the Inquirer reported the story that I linked to in my Jeff Gannon/Baghdad Bob post about the phony news our government is planting in the Iraqi newspapers, but they didn’t include the quote from Ted Kennedy that was included in CNN’s original online story. I guess it’s too inconvenient for the paper to present an opposing viewpoint.

Friday, December 02, 2005

Save "Tookie" Williams

I have to admit that I've been "on the fence" with this for a little while. Thanks to The Bulldog, though, you can consider my mind made up.

Also, here is a link to related articles from The Huffington Post.

I still support capital punishment in principle (goes against my religion, I know), though I have serious questions about how it is practiced in this country. When you read The Bulldog's great post, though, you realize that executing "Tookie" Williams would be one step closer to that state's de-evolution into Texas.

And by the way, this country carried out its 1,000th execution recently since the death penalty was reinstated in 1977. Did Kenneth Lee Boyd deserve it? By all accounts, probably, but I wasn't present at his trial, so I'll never know for certain.

As Bruce Cockburn wrote and sung, "Everybody loves to see justice done...on somebody else."

Jeff Gannon, Meet Baghdad Bob

Oh, isn’t this just peachy?

Also, I like the way CNN buries the quote from Ted Kennedy as far down as they possibly can on the page. Still, though, I recognized a lot of the story reproduced from this article, so they’re definitely going in the right direction in trying to figure out what “the Lincoln Group” is all about (I’m not surprised they’re still looking for interns).

Meanwhile, 10 more of our Marines were killed by a roadside bomb today (link).

“Freedom” marches on.

Let's Fix The "Net"


It’s taken me a little while to get around to this since I’ve got other site-related stuff on my plate as well as other things, but Mark Westphal of Yardley, a member of our services who never seems to miss an opportunity to take a shot at lefties when the mood hits him, was at it again recently with this letter published several days ago in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

It will be interesting:

When younger voters discover that the ever-increasing taxes on Social Security and Medicare they are paying to support mostly wealthier older Americans are taking a huge chunk out of their paycheck - for many, the largest chunk. ("The young did indeed 'Rock the Vote,'" Nov. 22).

When they discover that Social Security and Medicare will be bankrupt in 30 years and all the money they have put into it will have been spent.
Note: I have a link below to an in-depth interview Rolling Stone Magazine conducted with Paul Krugman that puts the lie to this garbage.

When they realize they will have nothing, when they could have been putting all that money into their own accounts.

When they remember the party that tried to reform Social Security was slammed by the liberal media and liberals in Congress - who had no reform plan - and the only response left is massive tax increases and/or massive service reductions.
Ah yes, the dreaded “liberal media.” What "liberal media" are we talking about anyway, Mr. Westphal? Do you mean the New York Times, where Judith Miller wrote her propaganda with impunity that hastened the run-up to our current debacle in Iraq? Or do you mean the Washington Post, where Richard Cohen said that Patrick Fitzgerald should forget about investigating who leaked Valerie Plame's identity because the matter is too confusing for him to figure out (or where Cohen recently said that the Dems saying they were wrong to vote for the war are as bad as Bush for actually starting it)? Or Time Magazine, which proclaimed George W. Bush "Man Of The Year" last year?

When you find "liberal media" somewhere in print, please let me know.

When politicians discover that there are more votes in the younger generation than among senior citizens.
Assuming more and more of them aren’t killed off because of Bushco’s illegal war.


Actually, Westphal did bring up something I wanted to get into anyway at some point, and that is the current state of Social Security (which, as we know, was created by President Franklin D. Roosevelt as a means to provide income for people in retirement as a "safety net" of sorts, and not, as Dubya and the Repugs would have you believe, as a means to get rich). With Dubya’s scheme having been rejected because the vast majority of the people in this country saw it for the scam that it truly was, we are at a point where we need to reach a consensus on this through INTELLIGENT dialogue based on well informed and well reasoned opinions.

I referred to the Krugman link previously. Here it is. I believe that brings us up to speed.

The question now, of course, is where do we go from here. I have two ideas on this that I would like to see put into place:

1) We currently have a $90,000 ceiling on income subject to social security withholding. Get rid of it. That would ensure the program’s solvency for decades.

2) I think Bushco should appoint an independent, bipartisan commission to look into Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, since the latter program is in more of a predicament than Social Security is right now. Since Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton did a good job with the 9/11 Commission, I think we should approach them on this for starters. If they decide to pass on it, I’m sure we could find a pair of reasonable adults each from one of the two major parties to work on this.

The biggest conservative gripe on this is that the Democrats complain without offering a plan of their own. I have to reluctantly admit that they have a point, though the Democrats have often responded that this issue is not something for which we should attempt to apply a quick fix. That is correct also. We can afford to take a bit of time on this to truly fix the problem, but not too much.

This takes you to a Moonie Times story of some House Democrats, including Robert Wexler of Florida, working on their own pet proposals on Social Security, which of course need to be hammered into an overall plan offered by the party. There has been movement on this issue, but in “fits and starts.” It’s too important not to screw up, however, especially for the party that created it to begin with.

One more thing: apparently, The Inquirer has a link out there somewhere to a “five point plan” of theirs to fix Social Security, but after repeated link attempts and keyword searches, I was unable to find it. Maybe they’re getting ready to auction it off or something in anticipation of the upcoming Knight Ridder fire sale.

More Sleight Of Hand


The only good news as far as I’m concerned that comes out of this report is the fact that Bushco can no longer blame Hurricane Katrina for their abysmal job performance, which they have done with plenty of assistance from the corporate media. I guess, though, that this is about what you should expect from an administration that reclassified fast food workers as manufacturing employees to inflate its statistics.

(He “won’t rest until all Americans find a job”…just shut up already, willya?)

Here’s a dose of reality, along with this. Happy Reading!

Update 12/6: Kevin Drum also tells us what's going on for real (yet another hat tip to Atrios).

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Which One Am I Looking For?


This item appeared near the bottom of Philadelphia Inquirer writer Dick Polman's column about Dubya's most recent droning of his tired bromides concerning the Iraq debacle yesterday:

(Defense Secretary Donald "The Army You Have") Rumsfeld did suggest a solution the other day: He wants everyone to stop using the word insurgents, which he considers too positive. That's not likely to happen, however; Webster's dictionary defines an insurgent as "a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government."
I think Rumsfeld stumbled onto something with that remark, actually, but not for the reasons he thinks. "Insurgent" to me implies that there is in fact someone who could be in a role of trying to fight for good where evil exists, or perhaps not. At any rate, there is a clearly defined assumption that one side is good and one side is evil when you use that word.

Given that, where is "good" and where is "evil" right now in Iraq (notwithstanding our service people, who have been typically used as pawns by Bushco in its effort to expand its oil empire through expenditure of blood, limbs, and lives). The Sunnis were "bad" when we first invaded, partly because Saddam Hussein was one of them, but then became "good" when we realized that we had to win them over to some marginal degree to get the Iraqi constitution ratified. The Shiites have been "good" in a way, though they are closely tied to Iran and the murderer Al Zarqawi is most definitely one of them, so that makes them "bad," right? Well, yes and no. They are the majority, and Allawi and Chalabi (sounds like a Catskills nightclub act, doesn't it?), who are "reformed" Shiities, are the people we want to run the country (as if no one can see through that ruse...). And as for the Kurds, they have been "good" throughout since basically they have what amounts to their own country and they want us out and to be left alone, but if they end up having to fight the Shiites who want to establish an Islamist fundamentalist satellite state of Iran instead, then would the Kurds be "bad" if they fought back?

And don't think that none of this could happen. When our people leave, it's even money that civil war will bust out all over the place.

Actually, as I considered all of this, I recalled something I read about on Eschaton earlier today, where Atrios linked to Crooks and Liars. The site had video of a press conference with Rumsfeld and General Peter Pace, and torture was briefly discussed. This is from C & L (hat tip to Atrios).

In a surprising event, General Pace actually corrected Rumsfeld publicly over policy. Let's hope his job isn't in jeopardy.

General Pace: "It is absolutely the responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene to stop it,"

Rumsfeld: "But I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it."

General Pace: "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it ."

Thank you General-for demonstrating how a true military man should behave in a time of war while once again exposing Rumsfeld as the buffoon that he is.
No, I don't think that's quite the perfect word. Actually, I think Atrios was on target when he simply said, "Our leaders are truly scum."

Yep, that's the word that works for me!

Mosh This


Bushco has now come up with what I believe is a truly innovative way to thoroughly indoctrinate this entire country in the ways of right-wing intolerance. According to the Huffington Post and Campus Progress, our tax dollars are now being spent to “spread the word” through rock music (here are the details).

Well, I think “Junkyard Prophet” (can’t resist trying to work in some sort of token religious reference, can they?) should find a way to pay homage to the individual for whom they are fronting while he and his cronies wreak their havoc. I believe they should do this to the tune that our commander-in-chief (shudder) would recognize, namely “My Sharona” by The Knack (property of Capitol/EMI), featured prominently on all of the “Bush and his iPod™” stories from last spring. These guys should be able to “shred” through brainless pop stuff from the 70s if they’re legit anyway.

I am here to help with this composition – I hope you like it.

Flyin’ round in Air Force One, havin’ fun
But too much of the country is really hurtin’
Landin’ at a party for my “have mores”
Speakin’ out for Cheney and Halliburton
Never gonna stop givin’ up, always for my base
Can only have a better time with white powder on my face
I-I-I-I-I, woooh!
I’m a stoner

Hangin’ out with Tom DeLay, what the hey
Beat the rap, then liberals he’s gonna capture
Pray to Jesus, then some drinks, many drinks
Getting ‘faced in time to enjoy The Rapture
Livin’ like a straight arrow dry drunk – man, that’s hard
Can’t trade on daddy’s name like I did with the National Guard
I-I-I-I-I, woooh!
I’m a stoner
Rock on, dudes!

More Tools For Terrorism


This link takes you to a Daily Kos diary by the blogger “ademption” who reports on a recent interview Wolf Blitzer conducted with Sy Hersh, who wrote an article called “Up In The Air” in the most recent issue of “The New Yorker.” I just finished reading it, and all I can say is thank God that this type of reporting is still out there so we can be informed without the corporate stamp of approval we would get from other publications (subscribing to The New Yorker and dropping Time has been one of the best moves we’ve ever made).

As I read the article and had the same reaction as “ademption,” I had that feeling of “déjà vu all over again,” as Yogi Berra once said. It seemed to me that, with this current plan of helping the Iraqis to select targets for the air bombing that will escalate as our ground forces depart, we’re teaching new technologies to yet another group of people who may use it to attack us one day with it.

(I also shared the reaction of “ademption” to the news of Dubya’s isolation and retreat from reality. I try not to contemplate that too much because the implications truly are terrifying. This is more of a reason to impeach Bush now!)

Just to remind anyone who may have forgotten about the group I’m comparing the Iraqis to, here is a history lesson from the “Third World Traveller” web site.

In March 1985, the Reagan administration issued National Security Decision Directive 166,29, a secret plan to escalate covert action in Afghanistan dramatically.

Abandoning a policy of simple harassment of Soviet occupiers, the Reagan team decided secretly to let loose on the Afghan battlefield an array of U.S. high technology and military expertise in an effort to hit and demoralize Soviet commanders and soldiers.

Beginning in 1985, the CIA supplied mujahedeen rebels with extensive satellite reconnaissance data of Soviet targets on the Afghan battlefield, plans for military operations based on the satellite intelligence, intercepts of Soviet communications, secret communications networks for the rebels, delayed timing devices for tons of C-4 plastic explosives for urban sabotage, and sophisticated guerrilla attacks, long-range sniper rifles, a targeting device for mortars that was linked to a U.S. Navy satellite, wire-guided anti-tank missiles, and other equipment.

Between 1986 and 1989, the mujahedeen were also provided with more than 1,000 state-of-the-art, shoulder-fired Stinger antiaircraft missiles.

By 1987, the annual supply of arms had reached 65,000 tons, and a "ceaseless stream" of CIA and Pentagon officials were visiting Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) headquarters in Rawalpindi and helping to plan mujahedeen operations.

At any one time during the Afghan fighting season, as many as 11 ISI teams trained and supplied by the CIA accompanied mujahedeen across the border to supervise attacks, according to Yousaf and Western sources. The teams attacked airports, railroads, fuel depots, electricity pylons, bridges and roads.

CIA operations officers helped Pakistani trainers establish schools for the mujahedeen in secure communications, guerrilla warfare, urban sabotage and heavy weapons.

Although the CIA claimed that the purpose was to attack military targets, mujahedeen trained in these techniques, and using chemical and electronic-delay bomb timers supplied by the U.S., carried out numerous car bombings and assassination attacks in Kabul itself.
Somehow, I neglected to mention earlier that the person who benefited the most from acquiring all of this knowledge from us was a particular mujahedeen member, a former Saudi engineer from a prominent family named Osama bin Laden.

To be fair, I should point out that our intervention in Afghanistan officially began in 1979 under the administration of Jimmy Carter, but it escalated greatly under Reagan.

Yes, we should do whatever we can to help our people get out of there, particularly when it comes to transitioning military responsibilities. However, let’s not deceive ourselves into thinking that there will be no future cost that we will be called upon to bear for this.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

For A "Dark Horse"


In memoriam for "the quiet one" on the fourth anniversary (I'll have more to say about his crowning achievement in a few days, maybe sooner).

The Lies That Never Die


First

Richard Cohen of the Washington Post, a writer I once admired, had this to say in his most recent column, in which he equates Democrats who have finally found their voice on the Iraq debacle with the Repugs who authorized this tragedy (reprinted in today’s Bucks County Courier Times).

“I do not hold the new war critics to a higher standard than those who led us to war or who still think it was a dandy idea. But we will learn nothing from this debacle if the word 'mistake' can be used like a blackboard eraser just to wipe the slate clean. This is no different than what Bush was trying to do: The intelligence was bad, not his wretched judgment.”
Cohen also criticizes others who led us into this mess without a thorough examination of the issues and ramifications followed by an equally thorough discussion and debate. Funny, but I seem to recall a certain columnist for the Washington Post who was a leading cheerleader for this tragic misadventure. He can write all of the apologies and other mea culpas that he wants to, but that will never absolve him of his own complicity.

Also, is Cohen seriously trying to persuade us into thinking that Bush should somehow not be held accountable for “bad judgment” (“fanatical predisposition to attack Iraq against all common sense arguments pleading with him to do otherwise” is more like it). To equate those criticizing the war with Bush partly for this reason is nonsense bordering on obscenity as far as I’m concerned.

Second

In today’s Inquirer, someone called Victor Davis Hanson, who bills himself as “a senior fellow at The Hoover Institution” issued this pronouncement:

Almost every responsible U.S. government body had long warned about Saddam's links to al-Qaeda terrorists. In 1998, for example, when the Clinton Justice Department indicted bin Laden, the writ read: "In addition, al-Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al-Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al-Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."

Then in October 2002, George Tenet - the Clinton-appointed CIA director - warned the Senate in similar terms: "We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade."
It was almost too easy to find this column to refute this.

At this point, I won’t even bother to seriously try to explain why someone would still say this after nearly 2,100 of our people have been killed in Iraq, as well as thousands of our people injured and thousands more innocent Iraqis killed or wounded.

The Clinton Administration was trying to document, for the record, some level of activity between Hussein and bin Laden. Bushco, for the purposes of attacking a country they had their eye on anyway, made it sound like there was an ironclad, working relationship, when in fact bin Laden considered Hussein to be more of an infidel than Bush. When Condoleezza Rice warned of “a mushroom cloud over New York City” if we don’t invade Iraq, she was working for Bush, not Clinton. The same holds true for Colin Powell when he held up a vial of what was supposed to be the distilled version of the Sarin nerve gas at the U.N. and said that it could take out the entire New York subway system (which he later regretted in a truly feeble display of self aggrandizement).

Mr. (Dr.?) Hanson, why don’t you just go back to your musty texts and continue drafting your history of the Peloponnesian War? Leave any commenting on the present day to people who have a sense of context and an appreciation for the dire straits currently facing this country, OK?

Third

Dr. Earl Tifford, a professor of history at Grove City College and a former professor of military history at the U.S. Air Force Air Command and Staff College, wrote this in a column that appeared today in the Courier Times:

The Vietnam War was a sideshow in a larger struggle between the East and the West. Likewise, Iraq is a theater in a larger global struggle with al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the nations that support them, primarily Iran and Syria.
While this statement from Tifford is truthful I believe, he is disingenuous not to point out that there was already a Communist presence in Vietnam when we sent our “advisers” there in the late 50s and gradually built up our military presence over time. There was no such presence (at least, not one of significance) of al Qaeda or Hezbollah in Iraq before we attacked that country over two years ago. Say what you want about Saddam Hussein, but he kept everyone in line (through brutal means, I know, but he did what he set out to do).

Tifford also goes on to conjure up images of a long, horrific war between this country and the Muslim crazies, with WMD being used all over the place. He may be right; I don’t know. All I can do (and all any of us can do) is to live our lives as best as we can and truly support our troops by exercising the soundest possible judgment regarding the outcome of this war and their general well being. This can be accomplished through well-reasoned dialogue and analysis, and also by telling the nut jobs on either side of this issue in no uncertain terms exactly what they should do when that needs to be said.

It will be very hard to continue doing this as we seep through propaganda such as that which I have described above. However, that is what we must do.

A Bit Of Convergence


(I’m referring to sports and politics, by the way.)

I swear that I don't want to get into this stuff, but then I do anyway...

So former Phillies pitcher Billy Wagner, designated the "closer" because he finishes baseball games and usually ensured a win, decided to sign with the New York Mets because the Mets were willing to pay him $24 million for three years to throw a baseball better than anyone else.

(Man, did I choose the wrong line of work, or what?)

To be fair, Wagner is an elite pitcher, though I seem to recall a particular home run he gave up this year to Craig Biggio of the Houston Astros, Wagner's former team, that allowed Houston to sweep the Phillies in a make-or-break series to help ensure that Houston would get the last playoff spot. Oh, and did I mention that Biggio and Wagner are friends?

Well, you would think that Wagner would show some class and not say anything negative about his former club, wouldn't you? In that event, you would be wrong.

Wagner said that the Phillies were interested in being competitive, but weren't interested in winning. He may have a point, but you know what? If I knew that I was about to make $24 million dollars, I would shut my mouth and count my blessings.

Besides, I did some poking around and came up with this link. Funny how many games this guy lost to injuries and also whined about wanting to be traded. Try taking a look in the mirror next time Billy, OK?

And speaking of immature primadonnas, Arlen Specter weighed in recently on the matter of the Eagles' handling of Terrell Owens, saying that it was a possible violation of antitrust law (I was referring to T.O. with my characterization, but I guess it could apply to Specter and the Eagles also). Registration is required for the Inquirer story, as usual.

Well, Specter backpedaled a bit today. And given what should be a contentious, rancorous hearing for Judge Samuel Alito, he should devote his time to that as he conducts his job to the exclusion of all else.

One wonders why Specter would even open his mouth on the Owens situation to begin with, but maybe he was craving an easy headline or something.

A Show Of Support

This links to a column appearing in USA Today from a man named John Seigenthaler, who takes issue with Wikipedia for a “biography” of him that turned out to be patently false.

This caught my attention partly because I have links to Wikipedia all over the place on this site. I have no reason not to believe that the Wikipedia links contain information about anyone that is incorrect. I use these links to supplement something I have decided to write about already. If I saw something on Wikipedia that I didn’t know about beforehand, I would check other sources anyway to see if it is correct.

I’m sorry that Mr. Seigenthaler had this experience, and I cannot possibly imagine who would stoop so low as do perform a dirty trick on him like this. I wish him luck in trying to determine the guilty party.

However, I still believe that Wikipedia is a reliable site, and until I receive evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that that is true.

Monday, November 28, 2005

The Fall From Grace


Atrios noted a day or so ago that he couldn’t understand why liberals and Democrats in general support John McCain. This was prompted by the link on Eschaton to a story where McCain spoke at a fundraiser for George Wallace, Jr. in Wallace's bid to become Lieutenant Governor of Alabama.

(Here's more on Wallace Jr. by the way - what a charming fellow.)

Well, as luck would have it, I happened to come across this little item from Scumbag Santorum’s web site as a follow up to a radio news story:

McCain Comin' to Town to Support Santorum

Senator John McCain, Arizona Republican, supports Senator Rick Santorum's re-election with two fundraising events in Media, Pennsylvania and Villanova, Pennsylvania this Friday.

"McCain asked how he could help, and Senator Santorum is pleased that Senator McCain is willing to help in this capacity. Senator McCain is a strong, independent leader and Senator Santorum appreciates his support for his re-election," said Virginia Davis, Santorum campaign spokeswoman.

Evening with Senator John McCain for Santorum 2006

Friday, December 2, 2005

6:00 - 7:30 pm
Reception in Media, Pennsylvania
$1000 per person

7:00 - 9:00 pm
Reception in Villanova, Pennsylvania
$1000 per person

To attend either of these events, please contact Nadine Maenza at 610-948-4111
By the way, this should also be a wake up call to Bob "Check For A Pulse" Casey, Jr. Even with all of the misery in this country and Iraq at the moment, I'm telling you now that the Repugs are going to find a way to close the gap facing Santorum at this moment, and Casey had better have an answer (and Chuck Pennacchio also of course).

I think it’s pretty clear which side of the fence McCain is riding these days. I think also that, at this point, our media cousins can safely shed the “maverick” label they like to use regarding him and substitute “wingnut Repug conservative” in its place (kind of reminds me of Anakin Skywalker’s transformation into Darth Vader a bit, which is apropos since the 2000 version of McCain used a "Star Wars" reference).

I’m one of the Democrats/liberals Atrios was referring to on McCain, by the way. I definitely gave him more leeway based on his heroic story as a prisoner of war and his prior-to-now solid record as a moderate, centrist Republican, particularly in the area of campaign finance reform (also for the genuine contrition he showed when he was caught up to a minor degree in the savings and loan scandals of the ‘80s). However, anyone who sides with Santorum is no longer someone worthy of my respect, let alone my possible future vote.

By the way (on an unrelated note), Atrios has a post today on “gatekeeper media” which is absolutely a must-read for anyone who blogs to any degree whatsoever.

Made For Each Other

From CNN today…
Ramsey Clark, U.S. attorney general under President Lyndon Johnson, was added to the defense team (of Saddam Hussein) Monday as an adviser. Clark has been a civil rights attorney and controversial activist in recent years. He opposed the Iraq war and met with Hussein in February 2003, just before the U.S.-led invasion began.
Every now and then, Clark’s causes and wishes intersect with my own, most notably regarding George W. Bush. However, Clark has also defended the Achille Lauro hijackers who murdered American Leon Klinghoffer in 1985, Branch Davidian leader David Koresh, and Mumia Abu-Jamal, the convicted murderer of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. Clark also participated in the “Crimes of America” conference held in Teheran in 1980. So on balance, I would have to say that Clark epitomizes the left-wing zaniness that I find not quite as repugnant as jackbooted Repug intolerance.

Should Hussein be tried? Yes. Are the circumstances of his capture legally sound? I honestly don’t know (putting aside what I think of the war in general for a moment).

I took a few minutes to review some of the U.N. Security Council resolutions related to the war and Dubya’s speech to the U.N. in September 2002 to try and determine the answer. This sentence from Dubya stood out in particular for me.

"In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments."
Since the WMD claim has been proven false (at least, no WMD have been found and Bushco called off the search some months ago), the previous sentence may be the only legal basis for holding Hussein for trial. However, since so much of the rest of Dubya’s flimsy case for war has fallen apart like tissue paper, I’m not optimistic that the capture of Hussein on the grounds of preventing future terrorist acts won’t meet the same fate. I’m sure Clark will argue this strenuously.

Well, if nothing else, Hussein’s trial (which apparently has been suspended for the rest of this week) will provide enough of a show for the dear MSM to occupy itself while it gives barely a mention to this week’s casualties in this Godforsaken enterprise.

Sunday, November 27, 2005

Blood Money


The title of this post most definitely does not apply to our service people (shouldn't need to be said, but I guess it does).

I didn't expect to find this in today's Parade magazine, but fortunately, I did, Parade being a pretty mainstream newspaper magazine supplement.

"Being an Iraq War planner has paid off for some U.S. officials. Former CIA director George Tenet negotiated a $4 million book deal. Paul Wolfowitz - No. 2 at the Pentagon - is now at the World Bank, with a $300,000 tax-free annual salary, a mortgage allowance and a golf club membership. Retired Gen. Tommy Franks, who led the invasion, reportedly collected $5 million for his memoirs, and he now serves on the board of Outback steakhouses. In addition, Camden County, NJ has paid him $75,000 to give a speech. Paul Bremer reportedly gets as much as $40,000 to speak and received more than $100,000 for a book about his year as U.S. administrator in Iraq.
By contrast, what do the folks fighting the war make? Click here to find out.

Also, here's more on the jackals' feeding frenzy.

As always, let us send our prayers and best wishes to our brave service people as well as their families and friends. As for the rest, woe unto them now and forever.

A Teacher With No Class


For anyone who has never lived in or visited Bennington, VT, I should point out that it is a wonderful little community made up primarily of shops and scenes depicted in Norman Rockwell paintings (Rockwell lived for a time in Woodstock, VT, about an hour or so up Route 91 from Brattleboro) nestled between the Green Mountains and the Taconics in the southwest corner of the state. You enter Bennington via Route 9 from Albany, and when you cross the Vermont border, it becomes Route 7.

The first thing you see after you rise a hill about a mile or so later is the Old First Church with its towering white steeple, which is emblematic of the architecture in that area. Robert Frost, one of our finest poets, is buried in the church cemetery.

OK, enough of the travelogue. I'm not Rick Steves, and I don't pretend to be.

I'm pointing all of this out to give you some background. The town is made up primarily of craft people and artists (wood and stone workers, painters, writers, etc.) who, as much as any of them have a political inclination, tend to be liberal (deep down, I admit that I hate those labels, even though I call myself The Liberal Doomsayer).

So even though I'm sure the residents of the town understand the political viewpoint of teacher Bret Chenkin and probably agree with it for the most part, that doesn't give him the right to communicate that to a classroom of school kids.

In this story, I think the head of the school union is right, but I think the principal is an idiot for saying that "this needs to be investigated." Hey, Chenkin was told not to communicate his political opinion any more (even though, as the story states, Chenkin encourages debate, something that makes the Repugs shed "crocodile tears" because they want to reserve the privilege of free thought only for themselves). That's it. There's noting else to "investigate."

So Chenkin, as I said, should be polite about Dubya. That's extremely difficult I know, but calling him an imbecile here is one thing. Anyone viewing any content from this site chooses to do so. However, school kids, in addition to being young and impressionable, are a captive audience.

That all having been said, though, I'd like to see a teacher in the south or the Midwest "called on the carpet" the next time he or she makes a smart remark about Bill Clinton. After all, fair is fair.