Sunday, September 6, 2009
Obama = Wimp
Someone needs to say it. Obama is going to roll over for the Republicans every time. He's pretty much given up the public option because some idiots came out and called him Hitler. Obama cuts a stupid deal with Big Pharma and promises not to use the government to bargain to bring down prices. Looks like we will be in Afghanistan forever. Now Van Jones resigns because Glenn Beck talked about him. Pretty soon Obama won't even try to do anything for fear it might make FOX News sad. All this does is empower FOX News and give them more credibility. I'd really like to hear from these gas-huffers screaming about socialism and vague cries about "losing their freedom" to point out what Obama has actually accomplished. Honestly, where is the fire in this man we saw in the campaign? This has the most cowardly administration I've seen in my lifetime.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
A Nightmare That Would Make Lovecraft Proud...Interpretations Welcome
I don't think I've ever written about a dream that I've had on this blog, but this one is worth putting down, definitely. I'd like to read any comments people might have on it, I'm not one to interpret dreams, but this one might be worth a try. I have a dream maybe once a year that’s truly memorable, this is the most memorable I've had in a decade, perhaps ever.
I find myself in an old abandoned house without light except for some pale rays of sun filtering through the dusty, cobweb-covered windows, giving everything a gray appearance. It's as if I were in a world drained of color. There is little if any furniture inside, some debris is piled in corners or along where wall meets floor. I walk through the house, finding several rooms not unlike the one I started in and I discover what must be the front door, a blinding rectangle of light until my eyes adjust. The door itself was removed long ago, I walk through it onto the large, covered porch and I had to squint my eyes because the scene before me is so bright.
The world is divided into two halves -- a pure blue sky above and a field of gold below. A slow breeze moves through the gold -- it might be wheat. It's incredibly thick and waist-tall, the field rolls onward for miles, some blue mountains are off in the distance, but they're twenty to thirty miles away. The house itself had lost its paint many years ago to reveal the dark gray, almost black old boards underneath -- some pieces of siding here and there are falling loose. In its time it was a presentable place, but was always somewhat humble. I walk out into the field, the sun is warm and inviting, I explore and go around behind the house where I find a strange sight. There's a wooden fence, or the remains of a fence only perhaps thirty feet in length which is situated fifty feet to the rear of the house.
On either side of the fence are two stout creatures with bodies like a mans', but they're only a head taller than the wheat. They're covered in a dark, patchy fur and wearing leather and animal pelts crudely sewn together. Their heads are mostly bald, revealing a wrinkly, purplish skin. Their faces have shorter fur on them, with small black eyes hidden deep among the fur. Also they have a strange sort of mouth that sticks slightly out from their face -- a cross between a snout of a swine and that of an alligator, with teeth like an alligators; sharp and randomly placed.
But it's what they are doing that is most strange. Around the fence the wheat is somewhat shorter, and next to the fence itself the ground is bare -- the earth underneath is cracked and parched. The creature on the side of the fence close to the house has a pile of small, dark bottles, and he's throwing them over the fence from a distance of perhaps 20 feet from the other creature. The creature on the opposite side tries to catch the bottles with its short arms, and mostly fails at this. The bottles fall to the ground, most land safely in the surrounding wheat only to bounce and roll. However some fall too close to the bare earth -- here they break and the contents literally sizzle on the hot ground. The creature attempting to catch the bottles does occasionally catch one, then it opens the bottle, pulls something out of the bottle and takes a bite out of it, the creature holds the remainder in one hand while attempting to catch more bottles in the other. The only sounds the two make is grunting, one as he throws and the other as he attempts to catch -- and a sick smacking sound that the creature makes as it crudely eats. They do not seem to notice me.
I am curious what's in the bottles, so I walk some distance away from the scene searching for a bottle that was might have been missed and bounced a bit too far. I wade through the waist-tall wheat, finally I discover one hidden on the ground somewhat covered in dirt and dust. It's about the size of a baby food bottle I think, as I wipe away the dust and discover to my horror that a small human fetus is inside of the bottle. It looked like a "pickled punk" one might expect to have seen at a freak show perhaps a century ago. The water is a muddy, pale, putrid stuff while the fetus is a pink pulpy mass. The second I discovered what it was, to my horror the thing began to move. It rolled its head about blindly, its mouth was a small red circle on a pink body that began to open and close like the mouth of a fish out of water. Its little limbs moved and jostled the water about -- and worst of all I could FEEL it move the bottle about in my hand. I dropped the thing and jumped back as if I had been holding a live spider.
I looked up and the two creatures had stopped their sick game and for the first time they were studying me from afar. I walked slowly away, and they soon continued. The field seemed endless, but I walked some distance until the house was a small black box in the distance and the two figures were no longer visible. I stopped and suddenly everything was utterly still. I stared at the house, perked my head and listened. There was no longer any wind, instead a different sound, very distant began.
I looked away from the house in the opposite direction and far in the distance it appeared that a large cloud was casting a shadow on the ground and it was slowly approaching. But there were no clouds. I squinted and saw that the ground was turning black, very far off and approaching. But it was not only turning black and approaching, but it was covering the ground in the opposite direction of the house as far as one could see to one's left and right, as if some black tide were coming in. I stood still as it drew closer I could see what was happening but I failed to understand. The earth itself was being consumed into...literally nothingness. This "force" which consumed the earth left a blackness, as it moved closer I could look down through where the earth once was and I could see stars, galaxies billions of miles away. Now that I had a closer look, I could see that the earth did not just disappear as if covered by a cloud, but it was broken off into "shards" which were the quickly consumed by the blackness. It was as if the edges of a piece of glass where broken off into shards; and the shards quickly melt away like water droplets on a piece of red-hot iron.
But perhaps most horrifying of all was the sound the process made, it was a thundering mixture of two sounds. One was that of large pieces of wood when they're bent and snapped, or the falling of trees -- deep popping, snapping, cracking, squeaking. The other sound which mingled with this was that of a hungry, crackling fire. This grew nearly deafening as it approached. The sky seemed untouched by this process, but I took little time to note this, as it was much closer to me now. The speed of the disintegration of the earth was perhaps at a rate of five miles per hour -- one that could be outrun, but was more than slow and steady. I broke into a run back to the house and saw the earth, matter and reality for what I was sure would be the last time. This was different from just dying or some massive destruction of mankind -- this was a literal destruction of reality itself.
As I got close to the house, the two figures had disappeared. I had perhaps one minute to decide what to do -- obviously it would continue to consume the field and I could not continue to run for what looked to be twenty or thirty miles of field. The house seemed the only place it made sense to go, so I did. I went around to the front and entered, my eyes blind in the contrasting darkness. Immediately I almost tripped and felt my feet kicking bottles around the floor. The entire floor of the house was covered in those sickening little bottles, I had to wade through them to keep from stepping on them in my half-blindness lest I fall, or perhaps worse -- let one of those things out. They rolled along the hardwood floor, clinked against one another -- the entire thing was horrible. I found a place on the floor to sit and I huddled into a fetal position in a dark corner, much like those sick figures in the bottles. The snapping, churning, raging sound outside grew louder and all I could think was, "This is it."
It was at this point that I woke, sweaty and I jumped so violently when the dream ended that I think I woke up nearly in mid-air. I have few dreams that I remember, and the ones I recall rarely have much of a storyline to them. Needless to say this one has stuck out more than any I've had for maybe 10 years. It was so vivid, and yet unlike most nightmares where monsters jump out from the shadows -- this was downright poetic, literary and full of symbolic imagery. As strange as it was, I wouldn't mind having more like it...
I find myself in an old abandoned house without light except for some pale rays of sun filtering through the dusty, cobweb-covered windows, giving everything a gray appearance. It's as if I were in a world drained of color. There is little if any furniture inside, some debris is piled in corners or along where wall meets floor. I walk through the house, finding several rooms not unlike the one I started in and I discover what must be the front door, a blinding rectangle of light until my eyes adjust. The door itself was removed long ago, I walk through it onto the large, covered porch and I had to squint my eyes because the scene before me is so bright.
The world is divided into two halves -- a pure blue sky above and a field of gold below. A slow breeze moves through the gold -- it might be wheat. It's incredibly thick and waist-tall, the field rolls onward for miles, some blue mountains are off in the distance, but they're twenty to thirty miles away. The house itself had lost its paint many years ago to reveal the dark gray, almost black old boards underneath -- some pieces of siding here and there are falling loose. In its time it was a presentable place, but was always somewhat humble. I walk out into the field, the sun is warm and inviting, I explore and go around behind the house where I find a strange sight. There's a wooden fence, or the remains of a fence only perhaps thirty feet in length which is situated fifty feet to the rear of the house.
On either side of the fence are two stout creatures with bodies like a mans', but they're only a head taller than the wheat. They're covered in a dark, patchy fur and wearing leather and animal pelts crudely sewn together. Their heads are mostly bald, revealing a wrinkly, purplish skin. Their faces have shorter fur on them, with small black eyes hidden deep among the fur. Also they have a strange sort of mouth that sticks slightly out from their face -- a cross between a snout of a swine and that of an alligator, with teeth like an alligators; sharp and randomly placed.
But it's what they are doing that is most strange. Around the fence the wheat is somewhat shorter, and next to the fence itself the ground is bare -- the earth underneath is cracked and parched. The creature on the side of the fence close to the house has a pile of small, dark bottles, and he's throwing them over the fence from a distance of perhaps 20 feet from the other creature. The creature on the opposite side tries to catch the bottles with its short arms, and mostly fails at this. The bottles fall to the ground, most land safely in the surrounding wheat only to bounce and roll. However some fall too close to the bare earth -- here they break and the contents literally sizzle on the hot ground. The creature attempting to catch the bottles does occasionally catch one, then it opens the bottle, pulls something out of the bottle and takes a bite out of it, the creature holds the remainder in one hand while attempting to catch more bottles in the other. The only sounds the two make is grunting, one as he throws and the other as he attempts to catch -- and a sick smacking sound that the creature makes as it crudely eats. They do not seem to notice me.
I am curious what's in the bottles, so I walk some distance away from the scene searching for a bottle that was might have been missed and bounced a bit too far. I wade through the waist-tall wheat, finally I discover one hidden on the ground somewhat covered in dirt and dust. It's about the size of a baby food bottle I think, as I wipe away the dust and discover to my horror that a small human fetus is inside of the bottle. It looked like a "pickled punk" one might expect to have seen at a freak show perhaps a century ago. The water is a muddy, pale, putrid stuff while the fetus is a pink pulpy mass. The second I discovered what it was, to my horror the thing began to move. It rolled its head about blindly, its mouth was a small red circle on a pink body that began to open and close like the mouth of a fish out of water. Its little limbs moved and jostled the water about -- and worst of all I could FEEL it move the bottle about in my hand. I dropped the thing and jumped back as if I had been holding a live spider.
I looked up and the two creatures had stopped their sick game and for the first time they were studying me from afar. I walked slowly away, and they soon continued. The field seemed endless, but I walked some distance until the house was a small black box in the distance and the two figures were no longer visible. I stopped and suddenly everything was utterly still. I stared at the house, perked my head and listened. There was no longer any wind, instead a different sound, very distant began.
I looked away from the house in the opposite direction and far in the distance it appeared that a large cloud was casting a shadow on the ground and it was slowly approaching. But there were no clouds. I squinted and saw that the ground was turning black, very far off and approaching. But it was not only turning black and approaching, but it was covering the ground in the opposite direction of the house as far as one could see to one's left and right, as if some black tide were coming in. I stood still as it drew closer I could see what was happening but I failed to understand. The earth itself was being consumed into...literally nothingness. This "force" which consumed the earth left a blackness, as it moved closer I could look down through where the earth once was and I could see stars, galaxies billions of miles away. Now that I had a closer look, I could see that the earth did not just disappear as if covered by a cloud, but it was broken off into "shards" which were the quickly consumed by the blackness. It was as if the edges of a piece of glass where broken off into shards; and the shards quickly melt away like water droplets on a piece of red-hot iron.
But perhaps most horrifying of all was the sound the process made, it was a thundering mixture of two sounds. One was that of large pieces of wood when they're bent and snapped, or the falling of trees -- deep popping, snapping, cracking, squeaking. The other sound which mingled with this was that of a hungry, crackling fire. This grew nearly deafening as it approached. The sky seemed untouched by this process, but I took little time to note this, as it was much closer to me now. The speed of the disintegration of the earth was perhaps at a rate of five miles per hour -- one that could be outrun, but was more than slow and steady. I broke into a run back to the house and saw the earth, matter and reality for what I was sure would be the last time. This was different from just dying or some massive destruction of mankind -- this was a literal destruction of reality itself.
As I got close to the house, the two figures had disappeared. I had perhaps one minute to decide what to do -- obviously it would continue to consume the field and I could not continue to run for what looked to be twenty or thirty miles of field. The house seemed the only place it made sense to go, so I did. I went around to the front and entered, my eyes blind in the contrasting darkness. Immediately I almost tripped and felt my feet kicking bottles around the floor. The entire floor of the house was covered in those sickening little bottles, I had to wade through them to keep from stepping on them in my half-blindness lest I fall, or perhaps worse -- let one of those things out. They rolled along the hardwood floor, clinked against one another -- the entire thing was horrible. I found a place on the floor to sit and I huddled into a fetal position in a dark corner, much like those sick figures in the bottles. The snapping, churning, raging sound outside grew louder and all I could think was, "This is it."
It was at this point that I woke, sweaty and I jumped so violently when the dream ended that I think I woke up nearly in mid-air. I have few dreams that I remember, and the ones I recall rarely have much of a storyline to them. Needless to say this one has stuck out more than any I've had for maybe 10 years. It was so vivid, and yet unlike most nightmares where monsters jump out from the shadows -- this was downright poetic, literary and full of symbolic imagery. As strange as it was, I wouldn't mind having more like it...
Friday, July 31, 2009
Return of the Right-Wing Rent-A-Mob (and Another Example of How FOX Plays Their Viewers For Fools)
Anyone with a decent memory of the ugly side of American politics will recall the manufactured mob during the recount of the 2000 presidential election. Essentially right-wing operatives were bussed in to act as normal citizens from the surrounding community who were demanding a halt to the recount.
Well it appears we are going to return to that over the next month as Democrats attempt to hold town hall meetings about healthcare during the August recess. Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks who created the tea parties have circulated a memo about how to interrupt and rattle Democrats. Here are some parts of it:
“Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive...The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early...The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions.”
After finding out about this I go to TheFOXNation.com and see the following story at the top of the page: “Town Hall’s Gone Wild!” With the following summary: "Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress." Yep...just as spontaneous as the tea parties -- the right-wing is very coordinated and good about staying on message, and meanwhile they think their supporters are the biggest fools in the world.
http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/31/3100375-right-wing-harassment-strategy-against-dems-detailed-in-memo-yell-stand-up-and-shout-out-rattle-him
Well it appears we are going to return to that over the next month as Democrats attempt to hold town hall meetings about healthcare during the August recess. Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks who created the tea parties have circulated a memo about how to interrupt and rattle Democrats. Here are some parts of it:
“Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive...The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early...The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions.”
After finding out about this I go to TheFOXNation.com and see the following story at the top of the page: “Town Hall’s Gone Wild!” With the following summary: "Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress." Yep...just as spontaneous as the tea parties -- the right-wing is very coordinated and good about staying on message, and meanwhile they think their supporters are the biggest fools in the world.
http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/31/3100375-right-wing-harassment-strategy-against-dems-detailed-in-memo-yell-stand-up-and-shout-out-rattle-him
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Which Is Worse; Smokers or Perfume-Wearers?
Smelling perfume or cologne has a 75% chance of giving me an instant headache that can last for hours. It can be just walking by someone who has a lot on them, walking through the perfume section of a mall or sometimes just opening a magazine with the free samples in it which themselves aren't even opened. I get a headache immediately. It's virtually guaranteed if I come in contact with an idiot who has bathed in the stuff; and if I had to be around them for any amount of time my headache would develop into a migraine.
On the other hand smelling a cigarette probably has a 25% chance or less of doing this -- and I generally have to be around it longer and perhaps even in an enclosed space with it. One whiff isn't enough, and I know because I go to bars and rarely get a headache there. I think it’s because almost all of the chemicals in perfume are synthetic toxins. The National Academy of Sciences reports that 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances today are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum, including known toxins capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders and allergic reactions.[1] Cigarettes may have some synthetic materials in them and are unhealthy, but in terms of chemicals it's not even close.
I'd like to know why we are so quick to ban smoking from public places and there's nothing said at all about people wearing perfume, especially excessive amounts of it. What I and other people experience is an allergic reaction that instantaneously causes us a health problem ranging from a headache to nausea in some people. Given the choice I’d rather smell a cigarette.
FOOTNOTES
1. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9682.php
On the other hand smelling a cigarette probably has a 25% chance or less of doing this -- and I generally have to be around it longer and perhaps even in an enclosed space with it. One whiff isn't enough, and I know because I go to bars and rarely get a headache there. I think it’s because almost all of the chemicals in perfume are synthetic toxins. The National Academy of Sciences reports that 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances today are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum, including known toxins capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders and allergic reactions.[1] Cigarettes may have some synthetic materials in them and are unhealthy, but in terms of chemicals it's not even close.
I'd like to know why we are so quick to ban smoking from public places and there's nothing said at all about people wearing perfume, especially excessive amounts of it. What I and other people experience is an allergic reaction that instantaneously causes us a health problem ranging from a headache to nausea in some people. Given the choice I’d rather smell a cigarette.
FOOTNOTES
1. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9682.php
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Healthcare Bill REQUIRES You To Buy Coverage or Pay a $1,000 Fine?
I have one concern about the bill; it REQUIRES you to buy coverage. This was one reason I liked Obama instead of Hillary, she was for requiring people to buy coverage, even docking their paycheck if they refuse to do so -- same as if they are paying child support. During the election Obama said he just wanted to require parents to cover their children. Now, I am sure most people want healthcare, but what if you don't? According to some stories I have read online you will be fined $1,000 for not purchasing healthcare. What if you don't have a job? How can someone pay $1,000 if they can't afford to buy healthcare in the first place? Forcing people to purchase healthcare and fining them is a terrible idea -- issues of personal freedom aside, this would be a GIFT to the health insurance companies if we don't have a extremely cheap public option included.
I don't consider myself much of a policy wonk, I am more fascinated with how people think politically...but the truth is I don't know a lot about this bill myself, and that's the problem for most people. Everyone wants reform, but even I, a person who consumes a lot of news, I don't have a clear idea of what this bill contains so I don't know if I want it to pass or not!
This appears to be the week that will decide whether a healthcare bill is passed, or at least the direction of it. The Republicans are united and channeling the spirit of Machiavelli a little more than usual when Jim DeMint of South Carolina says, "If we can stop him on this it will be his Waterloo...it will break him." Neo-Con Bill Kristol said this is the week to "go for the kill." This all started when we suddenly started to hear about how the healthcare bill was "on the ropes" -- suddenly it was in crisis. I remember hearing that and I wondered in the back of my mind if that was the set up for another part of the fight against it, and it was.
I don't consider myself much of a policy wonk, I am more fascinated with how people think politically...but the truth is I don't know a lot about this bill myself, and that's the problem for most people. Everyone wants reform, but even I, a person who consumes a lot of news, I don't have a clear idea of what this bill contains so I don't know if I want it to pass or not!
This appears to be the week that will decide whether a healthcare bill is passed, or at least the direction of it. The Republicans are united and channeling the spirit of Machiavelli a little more than usual when Jim DeMint of South Carolina says, "If we can stop him on this it will be his Waterloo...it will break him." Neo-Con Bill Kristol said this is the week to "go for the kill." This all started when we suddenly started to hear about how the healthcare bill was "on the ropes" -- suddenly it was in crisis. I remember hearing that and I wondered in the back of my mind if that was the set up for another part of the fight against it, and it was.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The Re-Direction and Deflection of America's Confused Anger
We all know there's an anger that has shown itself in various forms for the past year or so. It started when the economy went south -- people were angry at the big banks and the government for bailing them out. Meanwhile average people watched as the stock market made their 401k into a 101k. The AIG bonuses infuriated people, right-wingers eventually defended them. People openly criticized greed as a philosophy, especially when unregulated, and the public wanted government to act, they even trusted government. But the anger element was never very focused.
Then came the tea parties which FOX News essentially took over on tax day in April, but gave little mention to them this past July 4th. Keen observers saw that what was going on was a shifting of the general, confused anger out there away from the corporations and toward the government. Never was the message totally coherent; Obama is a socialist/fascist, Obama is raiding my child's piggy bank, a raise in taxes is equivalent to the end of America as we know it. There were conspiracy theories about Obama's birth certificate, the Federal Reserve, etc. But it didn't matter, so long as where blame was placed wasn't at the feet of corporations and unregulated capitalism.
Now as the economy slowly improves it appears that we will climb out of this recession without learning our lesson as we did during the 1930s. Some new rules will go into effect regarding leverage; some easily broken laws regarding CEO compensation will be instated. Bernie Madoff -- more a symbol than a man -- has been sent to prison; a total distraction if there ever was one.
I am talking more about social consciousness and consensus, and perhaps this hasn't been fully decided yet. It feels that there is a war going on about not who we ought to blame, but who we should be most angry toward. It's very possible we will only become more cynical about both government and business, something that will only help the regressive forces in society. Once people are cynical they will yet again vote based on petty nonsense rather than their own interests. The problem is, if the recession drags on Obama and the government will receive more pressure from the public who thinks the economic stimulus is failing -- but if we recover too quick we will have learned nothing from the experience and can expect it to revisit us later.
Then came the tea parties which FOX News essentially took over on tax day in April, but gave little mention to them this past July 4th. Keen observers saw that what was going on was a shifting of the general, confused anger out there away from the corporations and toward the government. Never was the message totally coherent; Obama is a socialist/fascist, Obama is raiding my child's piggy bank, a raise in taxes is equivalent to the end of America as we know it. There were conspiracy theories about Obama's birth certificate, the Federal Reserve, etc. But it didn't matter, so long as where blame was placed wasn't at the feet of corporations and unregulated capitalism.
Now as the economy slowly improves it appears that we will climb out of this recession without learning our lesson as we did during the 1930s. Some new rules will go into effect regarding leverage; some easily broken laws regarding CEO compensation will be instated. Bernie Madoff -- more a symbol than a man -- has been sent to prison; a total distraction if there ever was one.
I am talking more about social consciousness and consensus, and perhaps this hasn't been fully decided yet. It feels that there is a war going on about not who we ought to blame, but who we should be most angry toward. It's very possible we will only become more cynical about both government and business, something that will only help the regressive forces in society. Once people are cynical they will yet again vote based on petty nonsense rather than their own interests. The problem is, if the recession drags on Obama and the government will receive more pressure from the public who thinks the economic stimulus is failing -- but if we recover too quick we will have learned nothing from the experience and can expect it to revisit us later.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
ACLU Sues to Help Westboro Baptist Church
This is why I tend to like the ACLU, they are about free speech. They have defended street preachers, and now they are defending the controversial "God Hates Fags" Westboro Baptist Church against a ban at funeral protests. If you want to read more on the specifics see the link at the bottom of this entry.
I only discovered this story by going to TheFOXNation.com. But I wonder; why wasn't this on the liberal news websites I went to? Two reasons, first the conservatives love to point out something they consider bad about the ACLU. And why do they consider this bad? Because Christians are ashamed of the Westboro Baptist Church because they hold a mirror up to Christians’ faces and force them to see what their Bible really says in its most raw, unfiltered form. I am glad they are around, if you ask me, they're the only Christians who really interpret their Bible correctly.
Too many people think religion is OK because they know a watered-down version of it, the Westboro Baptist Church gives it straight, no chaser. I don’t like wishy-washiness – let 'em find out how shit really smells. Furthermore, unlike them, I support their right to free speech that might offend me personally.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/A0A89306243B2894862575EC0075A6A0?OpenDocument
I only discovered this story by going to TheFOXNation.com. But I wonder; why wasn't this on the liberal news websites I went to? Two reasons, first the conservatives love to point out something they consider bad about the ACLU. And why do they consider this bad? Because Christians are ashamed of the Westboro Baptist Church because they hold a mirror up to Christians’ faces and force them to see what their Bible really says in its most raw, unfiltered form. I am glad they are around, if you ask me, they're the only Christians who really interpret their Bible correctly.
Too many people think religion is OK because they know a watered-down version of it, the Westboro Baptist Church gives it straight, no chaser. I don’t like wishy-washiness – let 'em find out how shit really smells. Furthermore, unlike them, I support their right to free speech that might offend me personally.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/A0A89306243B2894862575EC0075A6A0?OpenDocument
Friday, July 3, 2009
The Palin Drama Continues -- Caribou Barbie Leaves Government
I forget who it was exactly, but I believe it was Shannyn Moore, radio talk shot host from Alaska who said that Sarah Palin's big political ambitions combined with her intelligence level is like putting a rocket engine on a golf cart; you're never sure where it's going to end up.
Today is another chapter in her ever-unfolding drama, resigning as governor later this month. I have to think, doing this on a Friday, the day everyone uses to "dump" news and on a holiday weekend, it would seem she doesn't want to attract a lot of attention...for once. Maybe there's something else going on yet to be revealed.
Now that she's outside of government, one wonders how she will cater the attention she loves so much. Supposedly she's writing a book, is she going to tour the country and rile up the gas-huffing, knuckle-draggers in "real America" who love her so much?
Is she looking to run for president? Of course, but Jesus, has 24-hour cable news really made politics a perpetual campaign? The election isn't until 2012, that’s a long time. She didn't even finish one term as governor – easy fodder for any political opponent. What other than her ego alone makes Caribou Barbie think she's qualified?
In her brief speech about stepping down she spoke in a tone of victimhood of the "new political environment" and “blood sport” -- one she has sought to attract and encourage, whether it's accusing David Letterman of being a pedophile, using her children as political props or accusing Obama of palling around with terrorists and doing nothing when crowds call for his head, literally. She gets what she deserves as any attention and power-hungry individual would in her position, I hope the media continues to chew her up and spit her out.
Today is another chapter in her ever-unfolding drama, resigning as governor later this month. I have to think, doing this on a Friday, the day everyone uses to "dump" news and on a holiday weekend, it would seem she doesn't want to attract a lot of attention...for once. Maybe there's something else going on yet to be revealed.
Now that she's outside of government, one wonders how she will cater the attention she loves so much. Supposedly she's writing a book, is she going to tour the country and rile up the gas-huffing, knuckle-draggers in "real America" who love her so much?
Is she looking to run for president? Of course, but Jesus, has 24-hour cable news really made politics a perpetual campaign? The election isn't until 2012, that’s a long time. She didn't even finish one term as governor – easy fodder for any political opponent. What other than her ego alone makes Caribou Barbie think she's qualified?
In her brief speech about stepping down she spoke in a tone of victimhood of the "new political environment" and “blood sport” -- one she has sought to attract and encourage, whether it's accusing David Letterman of being a pedophile, using her children as political props or accusing Obama of palling around with terrorists and doing nothing when crowds call for his head, literally. She gets what she deserves as any attention and power-hungry individual would in her position, I hope the media continues to chew her up and spit her out.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Michael Jackson's Death and Why It's Not a Loss for Music
First, sure it's sad when people die. However I don't agree that music lost a great artist today for two reasons: Jackson didn't play any instruments and he didn't write a lot of his own music, especially later in life. He danced and sang, he was an entertainer, which is a fine thing in its own right, but he wasn't a major musical artist. But my bigger point is that even if he HAD done those two things, people wouldn't care because our priorities are all wrong in terms of real musical artists today. I have to wonder if Shostakovich had lived into our time and died, perhaps the greatest composer of the past century, would it get more than a passing mention on the CNN crawler? I don't know.
The only reason Jackson's death should garner such attention is because he was a Citizen Kane of his time. In his own way he was a minor titan of capitalism, and a controversial figure -- which I won't go into here because it's not relevant.
The media is mourning because soon they won't have the antics of Michael Jackson to cover any longer -- but if this is all about music, why should I care?
The only reason Jackson's death should garner such attention is because he was a Citizen Kane of his time. In his own way he was a minor titan of capitalism, and a controversial figure -- which I won't go into here because it's not relevant.
The media is mourning because soon they won't have the antics of Michael Jackson to cover any longer -- but if this is all about music, why should I care?
Monday, June 22, 2009
Is Iran "Obama's Rwanda"? Should We Get "Involved"?
First, I want to qualify this entry with the following: I think it's terrible what's happening in Iran. If you haven't seen the video of young Neda literally dying on camera, blood gushing out of her mouth and nose, it is something that needs to be seen. That's what state terrorism looks like. And I like the internet as much as anyone else, but I think this "cyber revolution" is going to be brutally crushed by good old-fashioned government violence.
However, I have gradually become more and more concerned about the media coverage of Iran and the tone. It feels a little like they are pushing for some sort of intervention. I have heard the term "Obama's Rwanda" thrown around a time or two; implying that Clinton regrets not intervening there, Obama will regret not intervening here. They seem to be ramping up, there's a slight feeling here that some sort of military force could be employed. I don't like that, not in the least. As tragic as it is, we should be realistic about this and shouldn't get involved in other people's affairs -- I don't have the appetite for it and I don't think the American people do either. Why should we take that upon ourselves? Despite the protests, that country is fairly evenly split, any sort of intervention has the potential to do much more harm than good.
As for the Republicans here at home, they are just using this as a "political football" -- they don't give a goddamn about the Iranian protesters. They want to criticize Obama for anything they can, any time they can. And when all is said and done, I don’t know what good Obama’s words would do anyway. Finally, I find it odd that several neo-cons were hoping that Ahmadinejad would be re-elected and now seem to be advocating for some kind of intervention. But then those egg-head chicken hawks should be ridiculed, not quoted on television as if they had credibility.
However, I have gradually become more and more concerned about the media coverage of Iran and the tone. It feels a little like they are pushing for some sort of intervention. I have heard the term "Obama's Rwanda" thrown around a time or two; implying that Clinton regrets not intervening there, Obama will regret not intervening here. They seem to be ramping up, there's a slight feeling here that some sort of military force could be employed. I don't like that, not in the least. As tragic as it is, we should be realistic about this and shouldn't get involved in other people's affairs -- I don't have the appetite for it and I don't think the American people do either. Why should we take that upon ourselves? Despite the protests, that country is fairly evenly split, any sort of intervention has the potential to do much more harm than good.
As for the Republicans here at home, they are just using this as a "political football" -- they don't give a goddamn about the Iranian protesters. They want to criticize Obama for anything they can, any time they can. And when all is said and done, I don’t know what good Obama’s words would do anyway. Finally, I find it odd that several neo-cons were hoping that Ahmadinejad would be re-elected and now seem to be advocating for some kind of intervention. But then those egg-head chicken hawks should be ridiculed, not quoted on television as if they had credibility.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Republican Argument against Public Healthcare
The Republican argument against a public health care option seems to be this:
But there's a problem with this. First, lets assume people who DON'T have private health insurance can't afford it or at least don't think they can. So they may or may not go to the public option. Either way, the net effect on private insurers of them getting insurance from the government is minimal.
Now, if other people start to leave private health insurance for the public option and it causes the private health insurers' prices to rise for everyone else they insure (because they have less money coming in) -- it seems to me that the Republicans are saying prices can essentially go no where but up. I say this because, are they not the ones who preach how competition and free markets LOWER prices and makes everything more efficient? If a cheaper option doesn't force them to lower prices, what the hell will, a more expensive one?
Could there be some correlation between the fact that our health care here costs more than anywhere in the world and we are the only industrial country in the world without a public option of some kind? Just throwing crazy ideas out there... And why would the government's prices be so low when all we hear about government is how INEFFICIENT it is? It seems Republican's real faith in the market is rather thin to say the least -- but then free markets as we know, are to exist in reality, exclusively for the poor.
A public option will attract many people away from private insurance, this will force private insurers to raise their prices, and government by its nature can overpower the private insurers and will run everyone else out of business, leaving us with only public health care.
But there's a problem with this. First, lets assume people who DON'T have private health insurance can't afford it or at least don't think they can. So they may or may not go to the public option. Either way, the net effect on private insurers of them getting insurance from the government is minimal.
Now, if other people start to leave private health insurance for the public option and it causes the private health insurers' prices to rise for everyone else they insure (because they have less money coming in) -- it seems to me that the Republicans are saying prices can essentially go no where but up. I say this because, are they not the ones who preach how competition and free markets LOWER prices and makes everything more efficient? If a cheaper option doesn't force them to lower prices, what the hell will, a more expensive one?
Could there be some correlation between the fact that our health care here costs more than anywhere in the world and we are the only industrial country in the world without a public option of some kind? Just throwing crazy ideas out there... And why would the government's prices be so low when all we hear about government is how INEFFICIENT it is? It seems Republican's real faith in the market is rather thin to say the least -- but then free markets as we know, are to exist in reality, exclusively for the poor.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Sarah Palin Insinuates Letterman is a Pedophile?
We all know Letterman cracked some jokes about Palin's knocked-up daughter getting knocked up at a baseball game, jokes that even he admits were in bad taste, but Palin, the perpetual opportunist decides to insinuate that Letterman is a pedophile saying "it would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman."
This power-hungry woman will play up anything for attention and milk it for all it's worth. She's also playing up her false-populism too; "Laughter incited by sexually-perverted comments made by a 62-year-old male celebrity aimed at a 14-year-old girl is not only disgusting, but it reminds us some Hollywood/NY entertainers have a long way to go in understanding what the rest of America understands." Yes, goddamn entertainers, the New York Times, intellectuals, urban dwellers and anyone else who doesn't think exactly like "pure" backwoods gas-huffers. Sarah Palin only likes stupid people...who would vote for Sarah Palin and wonder if Letterman might in fact be a pedophile after all.
This is what I'd call the conservative, "invasive parental ideology" at its best:- We hate government but we want it to "protect the children" (but not feed them), purify all entertainment to meet the standards of those who Buy-Bull (Bible) and harp about how goddamn holier than thou you are.
This power-hungry woman will play up anything for attention and milk it for all it's worth. She's also playing up her false-populism too; "Laughter incited by sexually-perverted comments made by a 62-year-old male celebrity aimed at a 14-year-old girl is not only disgusting, but it reminds us some Hollywood/NY entertainers have a long way to go in understanding what the rest of America understands." Yes, goddamn entertainers, the New York Times, intellectuals, urban dwellers and anyone else who doesn't think exactly like "pure" backwoods gas-huffers. Sarah Palin only likes stupid people...who would vote for Sarah Palin and wonder if Letterman might in fact be a pedophile after all.
This is what I'd call the conservative, "invasive parental ideology" at its best:- We hate government but we want it to "protect the children" (but not feed them), purify all entertainment to meet the standards of those who Buy-Bull (Bible) and harp about how goddamn holier than thou you are.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Right-Wing Shootings Continue...FOX Blames Liberals
Well it seems pretty well-established, only hours after it occurred, that this latest shooting at the Holocaust Museum in Washington was from an anti-Semitic man who called himself a white supremacist. His website says that he was in the military. Is anyone re-thinking the attacks they threw at that Homeland Security report some months ago that warned of Right-Wing Extremism as a result of lone wolves, and mentioned veterans?
Of course not, I turn on FOX News and Glenn Beck's reaction to all of this is to have a segment about how anti-Semitism is a result of the political Left because we don't support Israel as much as they'd like and because the Nazi's were a leftist movement...riiiight. Of course, anti-Semitism and white supremacy, how further to the Left can you get than that after all? Jesus H Christ.
I didn't need a report to tell me we were going to have a rise in Right-Wing violence, you can literally feel it in the air.
Of course not, I turn on FOX News and Glenn Beck's reaction to all of this is to have a segment about how anti-Semitism is a result of the political Left because we don't support Israel as much as they'd like and because the Nazi's were a leftist movement...riiiight. Of course, anti-Semitism and white supremacy, how further to the Left can you get than that after all? Jesus H Christ.
I didn't need a report to tell me we were going to have a rise in Right-Wing violence, you can literally feel it in the air.
Monday, June 1, 2009
See, I Told You So
No I am not quoting the title of Rush Limbaugh's second book, but just making a quick follow up to my last post because it's appropriate unfortunately with the assassination of Dr. Tiller.
It seems that right-wing violence is on the rise and there's just a lot of idiots out there who easily snap when we don't have a borderline retard in the White House who is white and as stupid as them who makes them feel like they're still special and privileged in a society that is largely changing around them. Expect more to come.
It seems that right-wing violence is on the rise and there's just a lot of idiots out there who easily snap when we don't have a borderline retard in the White House who is white and as stupid as them who makes them feel like they're still special and privileged in a society that is largely changing around them. Expect more to come.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Right-Wing Violence on the Rise, Irresponsibly Urged on By Conservative Media
In my mind, it started last July when Jim Adkisson entered a Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee and murdered two people. His four page suicide note is the rant of the archetypical angry and dispossessed man who feels his plight is the fault of "liberalism." He spent much of the final page urging other, equally dispossessed Americans not to go down alone, but to take out as many liberals as they could.
On the 4th of this month Richard Poplawski shot and killed three policemen in Pittsburgh after they were called to his home. Poplawski was a conspiracy nut by most reports. He feared new measures from the Obama administration that would take away his guns; he also spoke on various websites of how Jews were controlling the country and how we would soon descend into a race war.
There was an increase in right-wing violence and militia groups during Clinton's term as president. The Oklahoma City bombing of 1995 killed 168. Eric Rudolph bombed a gay nightclub and the 1996 Summer Olympics. But there were other crimes as well, like an increase in abortion clinic bombings and shootings. I emphasize that I'm not speaking of mainstream conservatives here, this militia activity only applies to the most extreme fringe of that movement.
Most people can watch Glenn Beck cry for his country and walk away unscathed, but there's some unstable individuals who are being pushed to the edge by this "Obama backlash." And I think it's somewhat attributable to right-wing hyperventilating and hyperbole. Both Jim Adkisson and Richard Poplawski were big fans of the most extreme talking heads for conservatism today, which also happen to have a huge megaphone. Adkisson was found to have books by Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly. Poplawski posted Glenn Beck videos on various web sites. I am not for censorship, and my real concern is that the fuse has already been lit for a number of people who just needed a spark.
The bigger problem is, more inevitable and powerful forces are at work here. Homeland Security sent out a warning just today[1] that the recession, Obama's election, rumors of gun restrictions and the inability of returning military to reintegrate into society create a perfect environment for the rise of right-wing violence. HS, however, in no way links violence with the media. The media itself however, slow-witted as it is, has finally began to link the recent barrage of shooting sprees we have seen across the nation with our economic recession. And the killings committed for political reasons have been far outnumbered by those of the average desperate individual who just wishes to spread his pain around before he off's himself.
I'm not calling for censorship, but I have a bad feeling that a "big one" is coming down the pike. These people aren't afraid to use force and they're only pacified when we prove to be a country open-minded enough to "elect" a borderline retard to the White House.
Conservatives Love to "Tea Bag," Who Knew?
Anyone paying attention to politics right now knows of these "tea parties." Literally they Republicans are THRUSTING these sweaty, frenzied bags down the throat of the public. But seriously. First of all, it has been exposed that these aren't grassroots movements at all, but are in fact manufactured from above with the appearance of coming from below, exactly like the culture war itself.[2]
But more important to me is the tone at these rallies isn't anti-tax. There are people holding up signs at these rallies against socialism, gay marriage, immigration, evolution and questions as to whether Obama is an American citizen. These are just the worst, left over elements we saw from the McCain-Palin rallies who have co-opted a legitimate libertarian message which was largely created by Ron Paul supporters months ago. These people have no coherent message; these are sore losers plain and simple. I hope they come across much like the 9/11 truth movement.
============================
Footnotes
1. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf
2. http://www.prwatch.org/node/8334
On the 4th of this month Richard Poplawski shot and killed three policemen in Pittsburgh after they were called to his home. Poplawski was a conspiracy nut by most reports. He feared new measures from the Obama administration that would take away his guns; he also spoke on various websites of how Jews were controlling the country and how we would soon descend into a race war.
There was an increase in right-wing violence and militia groups during Clinton's term as president. The Oklahoma City bombing of 1995 killed 168. Eric Rudolph bombed a gay nightclub and the 1996 Summer Olympics. But there were other crimes as well, like an increase in abortion clinic bombings and shootings. I emphasize that I'm not speaking of mainstream conservatives here, this militia activity only applies to the most extreme fringe of that movement.
Most people can watch Glenn Beck cry for his country and walk away unscathed, but there's some unstable individuals who are being pushed to the edge by this "Obama backlash." And I think it's somewhat attributable to right-wing hyperventilating and hyperbole. Both Jim Adkisson and Richard Poplawski were big fans of the most extreme talking heads for conservatism today, which also happen to have a huge megaphone. Adkisson was found to have books by Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly. Poplawski posted Glenn Beck videos on various web sites. I am not for censorship, and my real concern is that the fuse has already been lit for a number of people who just needed a spark.
The bigger problem is, more inevitable and powerful forces are at work here. Homeland Security sent out a warning just today[1] that the recession, Obama's election, rumors of gun restrictions and the inability of returning military to reintegrate into society create a perfect environment for the rise of right-wing violence. HS, however, in no way links violence with the media. The media itself however, slow-witted as it is, has finally began to link the recent barrage of shooting sprees we have seen across the nation with our economic recession. And the killings committed for political reasons have been far outnumbered by those of the average desperate individual who just wishes to spread his pain around before he off's himself.
I'm not calling for censorship, but I have a bad feeling that a "big one" is coming down the pike. These people aren't afraid to use force and they're only pacified when we prove to be a country open-minded enough to "elect" a borderline retard to the White House.
Conservatives Love to "Tea Bag," Who Knew?
Anyone paying attention to politics right now knows of these "tea parties." Literally they Republicans are THRUSTING these sweaty, frenzied bags down the throat of the public. But seriously. First of all, it has been exposed that these aren't grassroots movements at all, but are in fact manufactured from above with the appearance of coming from below, exactly like the culture war itself.[2]
But more important to me is the tone at these rallies isn't anti-tax. There are people holding up signs at these rallies against socialism, gay marriage, immigration, evolution and questions as to whether Obama is an American citizen. These are just the worst, left over elements we saw from the McCain-Palin rallies who have co-opted a legitimate libertarian message which was largely created by Ron Paul supporters months ago. These people have no coherent message; these are sore losers plain and simple. I hope they come across much like the 9/11 truth movement.
============================
Footnotes
1. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf
2. http://www.prwatch.org/node/8334
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Remind Me: Why Did I Vote For Obama Again?
OK, I admit, the title of this blog is a little disingenuous; I don’t (yet) regret my vote for Obama. I like the man Obama. I think his concern for people is genuine. But something is going on; something feels very “amiss,” for lack of a better word.
First some relatively minor criticisms to get out of the way. The main reason I voted for Obama was McCain appeared all too eager to start another war. But Obama sending 17,000 troops to Afghanistan and essentially keeping us in Iraq another two years isn’t change.[1] I believe he’s going to be bogged down in Afghanistan for years to come. Meanwhile we’re hemorrhaging, this isn’t the time for another adventure. As Mos Def said on “Real Time with Bill Maher” last week, “I don’t care about Bin Laden, how about we fix New Orleans?” On top of this, although he closed Gitmo, Obama is allowing the CIA to continue the policy of rendition; abducting people and taking them to foreign countries where they can be held and possibly tortured.[2] Obama has kept the PATRIOT Act.[3] The Obama administration has even “threatened to halt intelligence co-operation with Britain” if they allow evidence of torture committed under the Bush administration to become public there.[4] But no one in the media wants to talk about this, they would rather discuss Michelle Obama’s arms.
But these are mere disappointments compared to these huge bailouts and the way we are throwing money around. First, lets have no illusions, Obama has surrounded himself with Wall Street-types and lobbyists, top to bottom. Take William Lynn, Raytheon's recently departed top lobbyist. Obama made him Deputy Secretary of Defense.[5] As for Wall Street types, take Lawrence Summers and his “protégé” Timothy Geithner. Summers is a man who helped to get rid of the Glass-Steagall Act which was put into place after the depression, which could have helped prevent the situation we find ourselves in today through stricter regulation.
There is a blatant double standard with how this money is being used. We are literally throwing money at the banks to the point that they are trying to give it back in some cases. Hundreds of billions of dollars. Meanwhile the auto industry is asking for a mere pittance by comparison; $22B. And what are they told? They’re told that bankruptcy might be an option for them. The wizard behind the curtain tells them to go away and come back with another restructuring plan, and it better be suitable this time. And asking for concessions from the auto industry unions is common while they would have allowed $165B in bonus payouts for AIG if there hadn’t been outrage among the public.
And then Obama essentially “fires” the CEO of GM. Sure, maybe he deserved it, but it shows the different manner with which the auto industry and the banks and are being handled. Gloves off for one, kid gloves for the other. Remember the “outrage” at the CEO’s of the “Big Three” for arriving in Washington in private jets? I wonder how those bank CEO’s arrived at the White House for the cushy meeting they had with the President himself? I agree with the Republicans on this one, I don’t like the government “firing” a CEO at a private corporation, but if we are going to do it, fire some of these bankers as well. Or at least cap their pay, Obama has made it _appear_ that he’s done that, in fact what he has done in this regard is very weak.[6]
To the Republicans I say shut up about socialism. If this was socialism would do a better job of keeping up with where the money is going and how it’s being used. If this was socialism the Treasury Secretary wouldn’t give provisions allowing tax payers to give bonuses to employees at failed corporations. If this was socialism we would fire the people currently in place and take over the corporations for the benefit of everyone. What we are doing is giving money away to rich people who spent their days essentially making money out of thin air and taking stupid gambles.
The paranoid conspiracy theorist in me makes connections and sees this entire crisis as just “too convenient.” Here’s how it goes for the fun of it. First of all, we have learned that all of the “wealth” we thought we had in the Bush years was essentially based on inflated housing prices and people living on debt. Meanwhile we have become an almost entirely “service-based” economy. We make nothing tangible anymore. There are two types of economies in America, the real one which includes manufacturing and the auto industry, and the “money wizards” like the banks who sit around making money out of thin air and come up with great ideas like credit default swaps. We are gradually getting rid of all our “real economy” while giving tons of money to this “fake economy” to prevent the entire house of cards from collapsing (much of the money is going overseas too, don’t forget). And since property values in the country have hit rock bottom and we are broke these banks can essentially move in and grab up the “real world.” So it’s not only a wealth transfer, it’s a property transfer and a transfer of the real and tangible for the imaginary. We are paying for our own coffin and digging our own grave.
But then that’s just the paranoid, conspiracy theorist in me, surely the world isn’t that controlled? It always comes back to the question of evil intent or incompetence, and we can only hope it’s the latter.
I think the government has to spend, and spend a lot, and that’s never pretty, but the way it’s being done really just feels wrong in almost every aspect. I find myself agreeing with Republicans when they want to slow down these huge bailouts, but the problem is whenever we oppose the same thing, they do it for all the wrong reasons. Republicans just oppose spending period, and want to give more tax cuts to the rich and hope that will magically solve our problems. That option is thoroughly discredited. In the future I don’t want to hear anything about the glories of the free market from anyone who has supported these bailouts. The free market only exists for the poor who don’t get bailouts.
-------------------------------
1. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gXhIn6Dsn59np7LYG6eYS5GubXUAD977ODC00
2. http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama#USA_PATRIOT_Act
4. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/4513620/US-accused-of-threatening-Britain-over-terrorism-torture-evidence.html
5. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1874165,00.html
6. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008703273_apbailoutexecutivepay.html
First some relatively minor criticisms to get out of the way. The main reason I voted for Obama was McCain appeared all too eager to start another war. But Obama sending 17,000 troops to Afghanistan and essentially keeping us in Iraq another two years isn’t change.[1] I believe he’s going to be bogged down in Afghanistan for years to come. Meanwhile we’re hemorrhaging, this isn’t the time for another adventure. As Mos Def said on “Real Time with Bill Maher” last week, “I don’t care about Bin Laden, how about we fix New Orleans?” On top of this, although he closed Gitmo, Obama is allowing the CIA to continue the policy of rendition; abducting people and taking them to foreign countries where they can be held and possibly tortured.[2] Obama has kept the PATRIOT Act.[3] The Obama administration has even “threatened to halt intelligence co-operation with Britain” if they allow evidence of torture committed under the Bush administration to become public there.[4] But no one in the media wants to talk about this, they would rather discuss Michelle Obama’s arms.
But these are mere disappointments compared to these huge bailouts and the way we are throwing money around. First, lets have no illusions, Obama has surrounded himself with Wall Street-types and lobbyists, top to bottom. Take William Lynn, Raytheon's recently departed top lobbyist. Obama made him Deputy Secretary of Defense.[5] As for Wall Street types, take Lawrence Summers and his “protégé” Timothy Geithner. Summers is a man who helped to get rid of the Glass-Steagall Act which was put into place after the depression, which could have helped prevent the situation we find ourselves in today through stricter regulation.
There is a blatant double standard with how this money is being used. We are literally throwing money at the banks to the point that they are trying to give it back in some cases. Hundreds of billions of dollars. Meanwhile the auto industry is asking for a mere pittance by comparison; $22B. And what are they told? They’re told that bankruptcy might be an option for them. The wizard behind the curtain tells them to go away and come back with another restructuring plan, and it better be suitable this time. And asking for concessions from the auto industry unions is common while they would have allowed $165B in bonus payouts for AIG if there hadn’t been outrage among the public.
And then Obama essentially “fires” the CEO of GM. Sure, maybe he deserved it, but it shows the different manner with which the auto industry and the banks and are being handled. Gloves off for one, kid gloves for the other. Remember the “outrage” at the CEO’s of the “Big Three” for arriving in Washington in private jets? I wonder how those bank CEO’s arrived at the White House for the cushy meeting they had with the President himself? I agree with the Republicans on this one, I don’t like the government “firing” a CEO at a private corporation, but if we are going to do it, fire some of these bankers as well. Or at least cap their pay, Obama has made it _appear_ that he’s done that, in fact what he has done in this regard is very weak.[6]
To the Republicans I say shut up about socialism. If this was socialism would do a better job of keeping up with where the money is going and how it’s being used. If this was socialism the Treasury Secretary wouldn’t give provisions allowing tax payers to give bonuses to employees at failed corporations. If this was socialism we would fire the people currently in place and take over the corporations for the benefit of everyone. What we are doing is giving money away to rich people who spent their days essentially making money out of thin air and taking stupid gambles.
The paranoid conspiracy theorist in me makes connections and sees this entire crisis as just “too convenient.” Here’s how it goes for the fun of it. First of all, we have learned that all of the “wealth” we thought we had in the Bush years was essentially based on inflated housing prices and people living on debt. Meanwhile we have become an almost entirely “service-based” economy. We make nothing tangible anymore. There are two types of economies in America, the real one which includes manufacturing and the auto industry, and the “money wizards” like the banks who sit around making money out of thin air and come up with great ideas like credit default swaps. We are gradually getting rid of all our “real economy” while giving tons of money to this “fake economy” to prevent the entire house of cards from collapsing (much of the money is going overseas too, don’t forget). And since property values in the country have hit rock bottom and we are broke these banks can essentially move in and grab up the “real world.” So it’s not only a wealth transfer, it’s a property transfer and a transfer of the real and tangible for the imaginary. We are paying for our own coffin and digging our own grave.
But then that’s just the paranoid, conspiracy theorist in me, surely the world isn’t that controlled? It always comes back to the question of evil intent or incompetence, and we can only hope it’s the latter.
I think the government has to spend, and spend a lot, and that’s never pretty, but the way it’s being done really just feels wrong in almost every aspect. I find myself agreeing with Republicans when they want to slow down these huge bailouts, but the problem is whenever we oppose the same thing, they do it for all the wrong reasons. Republicans just oppose spending period, and want to give more tax cuts to the rich and hope that will magically solve our problems. That option is thoroughly discredited. In the future I don’t want to hear anything about the glories of the free market from anyone who has supported these bailouts. The free market only exists for the poor who don’t get bailouts.
-------------------------------
1. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gXhIn6Dsn59np7LYG6eYS5GubXUAD977ODC00
2. http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama#USA_PATRIOT_Act
4. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/4513620/US-accused-of-threatening-Britain-over-terrorism-torture-evidence.html
5. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1874165,00.html
6. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008703273_apbailoutexecutivepay.html
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Hey Children, What's That Sound?
I can never tell if the real world reflects my own perceptions or if my existence has become so "bubble-like" that I often see what I want to see. However, what I think I am picking up on lately is a shifting zeitgeist, a new "spirit of the age."
For lack of a better phrase, people seem "less prudish" -- inhibitions seem to have been lowered, people are more willing to openly talk about taboo subjects and “throw ink” on collectively held myths. I'm seeing things said and done by people that would have been shocking a decade ago, and no one seems to care. Some have told me that this new expression comes with an angry tinge attached to it; it's not enough to "do your own thing" people today are in your face about it.
It's as if our collective consciousness had been in a cage for a decade, a rubber band stretched to its limits. I have to think this has everything to do with the new President and the ousting of the Republican Party from power in a literal and ideological sense. But I don't think we are undergoing something entirely new, the pendulum is sweeping out the old and bringing in something else. After the cultural revolution in the late-60s there was a similar period in the early-70s. I would argue that with the economy as it is, this resembles the 30s in some sense, which was perhaps an even more radical period of history. Something's changed, and I think it has translated from the political realm into the cultural one.
There's something else I'm picking up on besides a throwing off of repression; it feels like our culture is improving in quality, and is slightly less disposable. The best word to describe the 90s was "bland" regardless of a Democratic president. "Cultural Chernobyl" indeed. The 2000s haven't been a lot better, but the Internet has really made us capable of seeking out what we want instead of what we are handed on one-way mediums like television and radio.
Regardless of the advent of the internet, this is something I've felt only in the past month. There seems to be an eagerness to delve into the subtle over the overt, the full spectrum over the primary colors. In the Bush years I could see a McDonalds being built beside old faithful and a Starbucks installed in the head of the Statue of Liberty...I don't expect that anymore. I sense some sort of "return to quality and permanence" -- less plastic and styrofoam, more concrete and steel. Instead of a mall, build a bridge. I've even toyed with the idea in my wildest dreams that the post-modern error may be concluding and we may once again have some standard for judging art and logic will again have a place in society.
Am I just wearing "hope and change"-colored glasses? Don't get me wrong, I'm a pessimist by nature, even if I know that statistically speaking it means a shorter life-span. I just can't help feel that something’s going on out there and I don't think I'm alone...
For lack of a better phrase, people seem "less prudish" -- inhibitions seem to have been lowered, people are more willing to openly talk about taboo subjects and “throw ink” on collectively held myths. I'm seeing things said and done by people that would have been shocking a decade ago, and no one seems to care. Some have told me that this new expression comes with an angry tinge attached to it; it's not enough to "do your own thing" people today are in your face about it.
It's as if our collective consciousness had been in a cage for a decade, a rubber band stretched to its limits. I have to think this has everything to do with the new President and the ousting of the Republican Party from power in a literal and ideological sense. But I don't think we are undergoing something entirely new, the pendulum is sweeping out the old and bringing in something else. After the cultural revolution in the late-60s there was a similar period in the early-70s. I would argue that with the economy as it is, this resembles the 30s in some sense, which was perhaps an even more radical period of history. Something's changed, and I think it has translated from the political realm into the cultural one.
There's something else I'm picking up on besides a throwing off of repression; it feels like our culture is improving in quality, and is slightly less disposable. The best word to describe the 90s was "bland" regardless of a Democratic president. "Cultural Chernobyl" indeed. The 2000s haven't been a lot better, but the Internet has really made us capable of seeking out what we want instead of what we are handed on one-way mediums like television and radio.
Regardless of the advent of the internet, this is something I've felt only in the past month. There seems to be an eagerness to delve into the subtle over the overt, the full spectrum over the primary colors. In the Bush years I could see a McDonalds being built beside old faithful and a Starbucks installed in the head of the Statue of Liberty...I don't expect that anymore. I sense some sort of "return to quality and permanence" -- less plastic and styrofoam, more concrete and steel. Instead of a mall, build a bridge. I've even toyed with the idea in my wildest dreams that the post-modern error may be concluding and we may once again have some standard for judging art and logic will again have a place in society.
Am I just wearing "hope and change"-colored glasses? Don't get me wrong, I'm a pessimist by nature, even if I know that statistically speaking it means a shorter life-span. I just can't help feel that something’s going on out there and I don't think I'm alone...
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
The Urban Versus the Rural, My Inner-Debate, and Hate
First, a little background:- I come from a small town called Dallas (in Georgia, not Texas) -- the parents and I first moved there in 1989 when I was 10 from a slightly larger town. Dallas had a population of 3,000 then. You could only see two other houses from our front yard, yet Dallas still wasn't a "hole in the road." Soon after we moved there the area started to grow quickly, neighborhoods popped up, followed by all the major big box stores. But still it retains the atmosphere of a small town; and you can still hear a rooster in the morning from my parent’s front porch.
Fags love the city. Usually when a young gay person leaves a rural area of Georgia for Atlanta ("gay Mecca of the South"), they want to stay there. There's an "unspoken hierarchy" among friends -- who lives inside the "perimeter"/"fruit loop" and who lives in the wilderness. “Oh you live out there? Do you come in by car or by plane?” You always have to explain to these insulated souls (often non-Georgians) in which direction from Atlanta, and by how many miles away you live. But this all makes sense for a variety of reasons; in the city there’s more tolerant people, more high-paying jobs, more nightlife, there's a "gay community" and more opportunities for sex. I left Dallas in mid-2006 and moved in with my boyfriend here in Atlanta. We live in a small house a few miles from downtown.
As for myself, I suppose the city has advantages but I hate it, and I feel like it’s driving me insane.
--Driving Downtown: I would rather bob for cat shit in a deep fryer. I hate driving here; even if things are "closer" it often takes longer to get there because of traffic. Public transportation in Atlanta? Don’t make me laugh. And trying to figure out how to get somewhere in downtown Atlanta? It's not just the traffic; it's trying to find parking, trying to avoid getting lost, watching for photo-cops at every intersection and trying to avoid confusing one-way streets. A long drive in the country is a pleasure; here a short one’s a chore. In Dallas I drove almost daily, in Atlanta I go where I have to and stay in as much as possible. Someone tell me what genius invented poorly-marked one way streets?
--Pollution: When I say that there's more pollution here, I have first-hand experience -- a "sewage digester" is just outside of our neighborhood. Because of "repairs" being made to it, we could smell shit coming from this thing for the past few years, often worst during humid summer evenings. It's like a blanket of crap that literally covers the entire neighborhood for one or two days every other week. Doors and windows had to be closed tightly and try to avoid going outside as much as possible.
--Atmosphere: This is big. There are other types of pollution that come with the city. First there's either the urban blight or totalitarian architecture giving most cities the atmosphere of a post-apocalyptic wasteland on the one hand or a bland dystopian future on the other that makes me want to enter a dark room with a revolver and a bottle of hard liquor. Eyesores, graffiti, blacktop, cement, skyscrapers and garbage. Even if it's clean and safe, frankly I don’t like being around lots of people even when I am intending to get out of the house. It’s nearly impossible to just be alone. Frankly I feel a little like a prisoner here and I feel like I’m always in a crowd, to escape it I would have to drive for miles, trying to spot beauty in the city is a challenge and often is only seen in the sky itself.
--Crime: On "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs," right above air, food and drink is safety and security. This brings me to the topic of crime. There's a lot of crime here, and it has been on the rise for the past few years. The city of Atlanta has stopped hiring new police officers and has even shuttered some fire stations because of a huge budget deficit. If the boyfriend would let me or if I was forced to live here alone I would put bars on the windows and buy a gun.
--Noise: How some people are "lulled to sleep" by the sounds of the city I have no idea. ...Thanks, but I'll take crickets.
--No Nature: This goes along with the atmosphere and is another big one. For example: Behind my parents house, for over a mile there's nothing but deep, thick woods, and beyond that there’s little else. Even better, in Dallas there's something called the Silver Comet Trail*, a walking trail that spans across western Georgia to Alabama for about 60 miles, mostly through quiet forests. For someone who wants to be with nature but not drive far it's perfect, idyllic even. The irony of the situation is that here I have a walking trail that literally goes right beside this house -- however it goes right beside a semi-tractor trailer yard, ghetto apartments and finally ends at a train yard full of screeches, booms and other such racket.
Of course, there are numerous, predictable replies to this...
--"There's nothing to do in the country!" As for myself, I got out of the house infinitely more in the country than I do here, mostly because I hate to drive here. I went to the Comet Trail almost every day of the week. And while it's not exciting, driving to the 24hr Wal-Mart at 2am was a common activity as well, for no other reason than to do a little shopping and get out of the house. The point is; those are things I WANTED to do. If you complain there’s nothing to do, most likely the things you want to do hold no interest for me.
--"There's nothing but ignorant rednecks out in the country, particularly where you want to live!" First of all, that’s a stereotype, by and large, and a very arrogant view many urbanites hold. Secondly, I tend to keep to myself, and you're better suited to do that in the country where you have few neighbors. People assume that small towns are full of gossip; in fact my family as a whole hardly knows a handful of people in their town, and talks to them even less. Minding ones own business in the suburbs might be difficult, but that's not "country" -- country is where you can insert more than three sheets of paper between you and your neighbor’s house.
--"All the good jobs are in the city." This isn't true...and it still wouldn't justify living there. Many good jobs have sprung up in suburban areas these days, and downtown there's little other than service-sector jobs. Many companies have sought cheaper labor, cheaper land and lower taxes in the past few decades as the urban areas have become more upscale.
--"There's just as much crime in the country, but it's not reported as much." This is BS. You put more people in an area and you have more crime, you put less people in an area and you have less crime.
--"There's no public transportation in the country." Who uses it anyway? Just speaking of Atlanta, it’s very spread out and the public transportation we have goes nowhere interesting.
Some disclaimers:-- I'm not a romantic about the "small town atmosphere," I don't desire a white picket fence, everyone-knows-everyone situation, I would prefer to be able to see very few people and know even less. Second, I hear a lot of people talking about living in the country because they are concerned with economic or ecological collapse, lack of food, power outages, etc. Those sorts of concerns aren't on my mind at all when I think about this. Finally I wouldn’t call myself a country boy either, by which I mean I don’t hunt or fish.
It's a dilemma for me; I like my life in general, I just hate my environment more with each passing day; if that's possible. I should just be glad we aren't in an apartment in downtown, ugh, talk about a cage.
Oh well, maybe I'm just nostalgic, or maybe I just hate people. I dunno. I will say this, my parents were right for once. I thought the grass was greener, I’ve been on both sides of the fence now and I can tell ya, it isn’t.
----------------------
* See my photo's section for pictures of the trail.
Fags love the city. Usually when a young gay person leaves a rural area of Georgia for Atlanta ("gay Mecca of the South"), they want to stay there. There's an "unspoken hierarchy" among friends -- who lives inside the "perimeter"/"fruit loop" and who lives in the wilderness. “Oh you live out there? Do you come in by car or by plane?” You always have to explain to these insulated souls (often non-Georgians) in which direction from Atlanta, and by how many miles away you live. But this all makes sense for a variety of reasons; in the city there’s more tolerant people, more high-paying jobs, more nightlife, there's a "gay community" and more opportunities for sex. I left Dallas in mid-2006 and moved in with my boyfriend here in Atlanta. We live in a small house a few miles from downtown.
As for myself, I suppose the city has advantages but I hate it, and I feel like it’s driving me insane.
--Driving Downtown: I would rather bob for cat shit in a deep fryer. I hate driving here; even if things are "closer" it often takes longer to get there because of traffic. Public transportation in Atlanta? Don’t make me laugh. And trying to figure out how to get somewhere in downtown Atlanta? It's not just the traffic; it's trying to find parking, trying to avoid getting lost, watching for photo-cops at every intersection and trying to avoid confusing one-way streets. A long drive in the country is a pleasure; here a short one’s a chore. In Dallas I drove almost daily, in Atlanta I go where I have to and stay in as much as possible. Someone tell me what genius invented poorly-marked one way streets?
--Pollution: When I say that there's more pollution here, I have first-hand experience -- a "sewage digester" is just outside of our neighborhood. Because of "repairs" being made to it, we could smell shit coming from this thing for the past few years, often worst during humid summer evenings. It's like a blanket of crap that literally covers the entire neighborhood for one or two days every other week. Doors and windows had to be closed tightly and try to avoid going outside as much as possible.
--Atmosphere: This is big. There are other types of pollution that come with the city. First there's either the urban blight or totalitarian architecture giving most cities the atmosphere of a post-apocalyptic wasteland on the one hand or a bland dystopian future on the other that makes me want to enter a dark room with a revolver and a bottle of hard liquor. Eyesores, graffiti, blacktop, cement, skyscrapers and garbage. Even if it's clean and safe, frankly I don’t like being around lots of people even when I am intending to get out of the house. It’s nearly impossible to just be alone. Frankly I feel a little like a prisoner here and I feel like I’m always in a crowd, to escape it I would have to drive for miles, trying to spot beauty in the city is a challenge and often is only seen in the sky itself.
--Crime: On "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs," right above air, food and drink is safety and security. This brings me to the topic of crime. There's a lot of crime here, and it has been on the rise for the past few years. The city of Atlanta has stopped hiring new police officers and has even shuttered some fire stations because of a huge budget deficit. If the boyfriend would let me or if I was forced to live here alone I would put bars on the windows and buy a gun.
--Noise: How some people are "lulled to sleep" by the sounds of the city I have no idea.
--No Nature: This goes along with the atmosphere and is another big one. For example: Behind my parents house, for over a mile there's nothing but deep, thick woods, and beyond that there’s little else. Even better, in Dallas there's something called the Silver Comet Trail*, a walking trail that spans across western Georgia to Alabama for about 60 miles, mostly through quiet forests. For someone who wants to be with nature but not drive far it's perfect, idyllic even. The irony of the situation is that here I have a walking trail that literally goes right beside this house -- however it goes right beside a semi-tractor trailer yard, ghetto apartments and finally ends at a train yard full of screeches, booms and other such racket.
Of course, there are numerous, predictable replies to this...
--"There's nothing to do in the country!" As for myself, I got out of the house infinitely more in the country than I do here, mostly because I hate to drive here. I went to the Comet Trail almost every day of the week. And while it's not exciting, driving to the 24hr Wal-Mart at 2am was a common activity as well, for no other reason than to do a little shopping and get out of the house. The point is; those are things I WANTED to do. If you complain there’s nothing to do, most likely the things you want to do hold no interest for me.
--"There's nothing but ignorant rednecks out in the country, particularly where you want to live!" First of all, that’s a stereotype, by and large, and a very arrogant view many urbanites hold. Secondly, I tend to keep to myself, and you're better suited to do that in the country where you have few neighbors. People assume that small towns are full of gossip; in fact my family as a whole hardly knows a handful of people in their town, and talks to them even less. Minding ones own business in the suburbs might be difficult, but that's not "country" -- country is where you can insert more than three sheets of paper between you and your neighbor’s house.
--"All the good jobs are in the city." This isn't true...and it still wouldn't justify living there. Many good jobs have sprung up in suburban areas these days, and downtown there's little other than service-sector jobs. Many companies have sought cheaper labor, cheaper land and lower taxes in the past few decades as the urban areas have become more upscale.
--"There's just as much crime in the country, but it's not reported as much." This is BS. You put more people in an area and you have more crime, you put less people in an area and you have less crime.
--"There's no public transportation in the country." Who uses it anyway? Just speaking of Atlanta, it’s very spread out and the public transportation we have goes nowhere interesting.
Some disclaimers:-- I'm not a romantic about the "small town atmosphere," I don't desire a white picket fence, everyone-knows-everyone situation, I would prefer to be able to see very few people and know even less. Second, I hear a lot of people talking about living in the country because they are concerned with economic or ecological collapse, lack of food, power outages, etc. Those sorts of concerns aren't on my mind at all when I think about this. Finally I wouldn’t call myself a country boy either, by which I mean I don’t hunt or fish.
It's a dilemma for me; I like my life in general, I just hate my environment more with each passing day; if that's possible. I should just be glad we aren't in an apartment in downtown, ugh, talk about a cage.
Oh well, maybe I'm just nostalgic, or maybe I just hate people. I dunno. I will say this, my parents were right for once. I thought the grass was greener, I’ve been on both sides of the fence now and I can tell ya, it isn’t.
----------------------
* See my photo's section for pictures of the trail.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Music Selection in Brick-and-Mortar Stores Today, A Nostalgic View
One of the strange things I have done for about 10 years is save all of my receipts, except for gas or food purchases. Why? Part habit, part practical reasons (returns) and a smidge of nostalgic reasons. Well, the latter caused me to go through a big pile of receipts that's still at my parent’s house last time I was there. I realized that DAMN I spent a lot of money at Borders Bookstore in my college years. I would bet that I slowly transferred them a few thousand dollars in a few years.
I have many fond memories of going to Borders after or between classes, that was essentially what I DID with my spare time. Other people hung out with friends or went somewhere, I went to look through books, and browse the classical music section. I'd often discover some new composer (thanks NAXOS!) and listen to it on the way back to school, and then read a review(s) of the disc in the computer lab if I had time. Let just put it this way: I was in heaven, and this normally cost less than $10, especially if it was on the budget label NAXOS. This was all helped by how I would try to save on things like food; back then, as now I would prefer to spend money on something tangible.
Anyway, in those days (2000-2004) the classical music selection was quite large, or at least large enough to where I could look through it for an hour once or twice a week without seeing too much of the same thing. But today it's hardly a shell of its former self. The last time I was in a Borders I covered the entire classical section in maybe 15 minutes, and it was hardly something I would return to pick through on a daily basis. I have to think that before long it will be like the classical section in a Best Buy -- which no one EVER bothers to look at. I mean, who really wants a grab bag CD of "The Best Romantic Adagios," random parts of random works by random composers and unknown performers?
According to "common wisdom" classical music is now purchased online more than ever before.* And while it's true that you can get more online than in any store, there's something about being able to BROWSE. There's something about making a new discovery and holding the item in your hand, looking it over. Sure I can and do browse online, but I can tell you 99 times out of 100 I won't buy it there, one reason is I hate waiting for it to arrive. For me the store acquired a sense of "place," it was somewhere I wanted to go, I liked the atmosphere, it fit in with my day, and in those days I had money and was willing to spend it.
I'm not blaming Borders, the reasons for this disintegration are numerous: One is that classical music isn't popular, and thus is the first to go in a store with limited shelf-space.** Make way for things that will sell...like trinkets that cause the store to look more like a "gift shop" than a bookstore.
There are other reasons, but one that gets little attention is that most people don't need more than one recording of a particular work that they like. I'm the opposite; I enjoy different "interpretations" or "renderings" if it's a favorite work. While there's probably hundreds of different recordings of Beethoven's 5th (to name a purely popular title), one will get most people by. And on top of this, since classical music doesn't tend to get old (and the composers are dead and not producing anything new) there's not as much incentive to explore more.
I'd be interested in anyone else's opinion on this; I have a feeling that this is the overall trend across the country. I visited Amoeba Music in San Francisco about 2 years ago where I was very impressed by the selection, but then it's probably the biggest new and used music store in the country.
============
*A lot of classical music is also downloaded by both legitimate (e-music, amazon.com mp3) and illegitimate (torrent, p2p, etc.) means today. Ironically, as far as downloads go, the legit means are often compressed and lower quality than the illegit means which are often in CD quality.
**I remember a report in 2006 that said classical music sales grew over every other genre of music, this is probably due in part to "classical crossover" -- in other words, classically trained singers like Andrea Bocelli or Josh Groban who might as well be Yanni or John Tesh as far as I'm concerned.
I have many fond memories of going to Borders after or between classes, that was essentially what I DID with my spare time. Other people hung out with friends or went somewhere, I went to look through books, and browse the classical music section. I'd often discover some new composer (thanks NAXOS!) and listen to it on the way back to school, and then read a review(s) of the disc in the computer lab if I had time. Let just put it this way: I was in heaven, and this normally cost less than $10, especially if it was on the budget label NAXOS. This was all helped by how I would try to save on things like food; back then, as now I would prefer to spend money on something tangible.
Anyway, in those days (2000-2004) the classical music selection was quite large, or at least large enough to where I could look through it for an hour once or twice a week without seeing too much of the same thing. But today it's hardly a shell of its former self. The last time I was in a Borders I covered the entire classical section in maybe 15 minutes, and it was hardly something I would return to pick through on a daily basis. I have to think that before long it will be like the classical section in a Best Buy -- which no one EVER bothers to look at. I mean, who really wants a grab bag CD of "The Best Romantic Adagios," random parts of random works by random composers and unknown performers?
According to "common wisdom" classical music is now purchased online more than ever before.* And while it's true that you can get more online than in any store, there's something about being able to BROWSE. There's something about making a new discovery and holding the item in your hand, looking it over. Sure I can and do browse online, but I can tell you 99 times out of 100 I won't buy it there, one reason is I hate waiting for it to arrive. For me the store acquired a sense of "place," it was somewhere I wanted to go, I liked the atmosphere, it fit in with my day, and in those days I had money and was willing to spend it.
I'm not blaming Borders, the reasons for this disintegration are numerous: One is that classical music isn't popular, and thus is the first to go in a store with limited shelf-space.** Make way for things that will sell...like trinkets that cause the store to look more like a "gift shop" than a bookstore.
There are other reasons, but one that gets little attention is that most people don't need more than one recording of a particular work that they like. I'm the opposite; I enjoy different "interpretations" or "renderings" if it's a favorite work. While there's probably hundreds of different recordings of Beethoven's 5th (to name a purely popular title), one will get most people by. And on top of this, since classical music doesn't tend to get old (and the composers are dead and not producing anything new) there's not as much incentive to explore more.
I'd be interested in anyone else's opinion on this; I have a feeling that this is the overall trend across the country. I visited Amoeba Music in San Francisco about 2 years ago where I was very impressed by the selection, but then it's probably the biggest new and used music store in the country.
============
*A lot of classical music is also downloaded by both legitimate (e-music, amazon.com mp3) and illegitimate (torrent, p2p, etc.) means today. Ironically, as far as downloads go, the legit means are often compressed and lower quality than the illegit means which are often in CD quality.
**I remember a report in 2006 that said classical music sales grew over every other genre of music, this is probably due in part to "classical crossover" -- in other words, classically trained singers like Andrea Bocelli or Josh Groban who might as well be Yanni or John Tesh as far as I'm concerned.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
My Emotional Journey Back to Music and the Lack of "Emotional Range" in Music Today
After a 2-3 year hiatus I have started listening to classical music again. The reasons I stopped were a combination of depression and the more practical fact that I had been moved into a new environment where I drove my car less -- that's where I had listened to music most. Over the past few months I've started listening again, and the memories and emotions flow back at a rate that's often a challenge to face, more on that later.
I wasn't raised on classical music, I was first drawn to it for it's complexity of sound; both in the number of instruments and the resulting range of colors and the complexity of form. That's the main reason I am drawn back to it, but another reason now more than ever is the complexity of emotion. Many complaints can be made of popular music today, but the one I will make is that the emotional range is both limited and overt, there’s nothing very subtle out there. Rock and "Alternative" today has a spectrum of happy, sad and pissed-off; and it's the same throughout the song, its one big episode. There's no ever-changing kaleidoscope of emotion.
Take Sibelius' "Night Ride and Sunrise," even if you've never heard it I think you will understand what I am getting at. To me it has three sections -- it begins with a exuberant, bouncy repeated theme on strings, eventually joined by a serious, "folk-like" theme on woodwinds which rides above but is driven by the turbulence below. The mood is extremely serious, exciting, driven, dark and entirely life-affirming. This climaxes like a whirlwind and then slowly disintegrates into the second, short middle section which is pure beauty; long, slow melodies on strings come at you like waves of pure emotion. The third section begins quietly with low pizzicato strings and short, playful woodwind motifs, later noble brass chords play under the introduction of the "Sunrise" theme introduced on woodwind. Variations of this carry us to grand but not bombastic climax.
This all takes place in 15 minutes. When's the last time you heard anything like that on the radio?
While there are emotions in classical music which you can't exactly label, there's also soundscapes and emotions which I can get close to "defining," and will list below. I don't find anything in music today that is expressing these neglected and complicated emotions the human spirit is capable of feeling.
A Nocturnal World
Shostakovich - Symphony 6 Movement 1
Honegger - Symphony 2 Movement 2
Sibelius - Symphony 3 Movement 2
Debussy - Nocturnes for Orchestra
Mahler - Symphony 7
Respect for the Rugged and Coldness of Nature
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 7
Sibelius - Symphonies 4, 6 and 7
Bax - Almost all the Symphonies
Rautavaara - Cantus Arcticus
The Nostalgic
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 5 Movement 3
Moeran - Symphony in Gm
Realistic Reflections on Death and Dying
Mahler - Symphony 9 Movement 4
Shostakovich - String Quartet 15
Beethoven - String Quartet 16
Rachmaninov - Isle of the Dead
Giddy/Exuberant
Lilburn - Symphony 1 Movement 1
Milhaud - Many of the Symphonies
"Transcendental"
Bantok - Hebridean Symphony Movement 1
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 9
Bach - Toccata and Fugue in Dm, Fantasia and Fugue in Gm
Bruckner - The Symphonies
Mahler - Symphony 10
Sad but Noble
Elgar - Symphony 2 Movement 3, Cello Concerto
Mahler - Symphony 5 Movement 5
Dramatic but Noble
Atterberg - Symphony 7 Movement 1
Dvorak - Symphony 9
Fevered and Stark
Bartok - String Quartets
Chavez - Symphony 5 Movement 1
Shostakovich - Symphony 4 Movement 1
Pettersson - Late Symphonies
Sessions - Late Symphonies
Penderecki - Symphonies
Pastoral
Vaughan Williams - The Lark Ascending, In the Fen Country
Beethoven - Symphony 6 (of course!)
Darkness and Desolation
Sibelius - Symphony 4
Shostakovich - Symphony 8, String Quartet 8
Tchaikovsky - Symphony 6 Movement 4
Miaskovsky - Symphony 13
Pettersson - Almost Anything
Tubin - Almost Anything
These descriptions are all very general of course; each of the pieces above contains a world of its own.
When I say that this is an emotional journey for me personally, I am serious. I could not say how many memories are invested in some of this music. This isn't disposable art, I could listen to this stuff my entire life, and thus the memories within it go way back. You don't notice it, but music incorporates itself into you're life without your awareness. If you're depressed like I was, more emotion often isn't the medicine for it. People who don't think classical music is the most emotional and can even be the darkest music out there have only heard Mozart and Beethoven. Composers of the 20th century (Modern period) produced music that, to me at least, really "speaks" in a very realistic way that can't be brushed aside as emotional excess like we have today.
I'm not going to say that people are emotionally simplified now because I am still drawn to this music and I think its part of human nature to have a sensibility for more than just a few colors, however I do think it requires patience.
I wasn't raised on classical music, I was first drawn to it for it's complexity of sound; both in the number of instruments and the resulting range of colors and the complexity of form. That's the main reason I am drawn back to it, but another reason now more than ever is the complexity of emotion. Many complaints can be made of popular music today, but the one I will make is that the emotional range is both limited and overt, there’s nothing very subtle out there. Rock and "Alternative" today has a spectrum of happy, sad and pissed-off; and it's the same throughout the song, its one big episode. There's no ever-changing kaleidoscope of emotion.
Take Sibelius' "Night Ride and Sunrise," even if you've never heard it I think you will understand what I am getting at. To me it has three sections -- it begins with a exuberant, bouncy repeated theme on strings, eventually joined by a serious, "folk-like" theme on woodwinds which rides above but is driven by the turbulence below. The mood is extremely serious, exciting, driven, dark and entirely life-affirming. This climaxes like a whirlwind and then slowly disintegrates into the second, short middle section which is pure beauty; long, slow melodies on strings come at you like waves of pure emotion. The third section begins quietly with low pizzicato strings and short, playful woodwind motifs, later noble brass chords play under the introduction of the "Sunrise" theme introduced on woodwind. Variations of this carry us to grand but not bombastic climax.
This all takes place in 15 minutes. When's the last time you heard anything like that on the radio?
While there are emotions in classical music which you can't exactly label, there's also soundscapes and emotions which I can get close to "defining," and will list below. I don't find anything in music today that is expressing these neglected and complicated emotions the human spirit is capable of feeling.
A Nocturnal World
Shostakovich - Symphony 6 Movement 1
Honegger - Symphony 2 Movement 2
Sibelius - Symphony 3 Movement 2
Debussy - Nocturnes for Orchestra
Mahler - Symphony 7
Respect for the Rugged and Coldness of Nature
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 7
Sibelius - Symphonies 4, 6 and 7
Bax - Almost all the Symphonies
Rautavaara - Cantus Arcticus
The Nostalgic
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 5 Movement 3
Moeran - Symphony in Gm
Realistic Reflections on Death and Dying
Mahler - Symphony 9 Movement 4
Shostakovich - String Quartet 15
Beethoven - String Quartet 16
Rachmaninov - Isle of the Dead
Giddy/Exuberant
Lilburn - Symphony 1 Movement 1
Milhaud - Many of the Symphonies
"Transcendental"
Bantok - Hebridean Symphony Movement 1
Vaughan Williams - Symphony 9
Bach - Toccata and Fugue in Dm, Fantasia and Fugue in Gm
Bruckner - The Symphonies
Mahler - Symphony 10
Sad but Noble
Elgar - Symphony 2 Movement 3, Cello Concerto
Mahler - Symphony 5 Movement 5
Dramatic but Noble
Atterberg - Symphony 7 Movement 1
Dvorak - Symphony 9
Fevered and Stark
Bartok - String Quartets
Chavez - Symphony 5 Movement 1
Shostakovich - Symphony 4 Movement 1
Pettersson - Late Symphonies
Sessions - Late Symphonies
Penderecki - Symphonies
Pastoral
Vaughan Williams - The Lark Ascending, In the Fen Country
Beethoven - Symphony 6 (of course!)
Darkness and Desolation
Sibelius - Symphony 4
Shostakovich - Symphony 8, String Quartet 8
Tchaikovsky - Symphony 6 Movement 4
Miaskovsky - Symphony 13
Pettersson - Almost Anything
Tubin - Almost Anything
These descriptions are all very general of course; each of the pieces above contains a world of its own.
When I say that this is an emotional journey for me personally, I am serious. I could not say how many memories are invested in some of this music. This isn't disposable art, I could listen to this stuff my entire life, and thus the memories within it go way back. You don't notice it, but music incorporates itself into you're life without your awareness. If you're depressed like I was, more emotion often isn't the medicine for it. People who don't think classical music is the most emotional and can even be the darkest music out there have only heard Mozart and Beethoven. Composers of the 20th century (Modern period) produced music that, to me at least, really "speaks" in a very realistic way that can't be brushed aside as emotional excess like we have today.
I'm not going to say that people are emotionally simplified now because I am still drawn to this music and I think its part of human nature to have a sensibility for more than just a few colors, however I do think it requires patience.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Night Owls Unite, Fuck Early Birds
There's nothing I hate more than the inherent double standard people have about sleeping hours. It’s like there are certain hours of the day you are supposed to be awake and productive and others where you should be asleep. Deviate from those and you are stereotyped and often hounded for it.
What pisses me the fuck off is how people don't mind waking you up if it's say, noon or 2pm. They will blast a TV or stereo, they have no qualms about it and often will laugh and say "Oh, you were STILL asleep?!" Yes, you stupid fucking dumbass motherfucker! I WAS, past-tense, WAS!
But if I woke them up at 2am -- well that’s a totally different story, you see, that’s not "OK," they have every right to sleep at that time because that’s when you’re supposed to sleep. That's when the "good people" are in bed, only "bad people" are awake at "ungodly hours." *
I tend to be a very nocturnal person, my body just won't stay on a schedule of going to bed at 11pm for any regular period, at least that’s been the story since my mid-college years. I tend to be the most energetic around 12-6am I'm not sure if you'd call it insomnia, but I really drag when I first get up but then I never feel like going to bed. I have to force myself to bed, usually right about the time I feel Im getting stuff done and could keep on forever.
I've always felt more productive and better, psychologically at evening and night. I like to go places at night which are normally crowded in the day -- supermarkets, walking trails, etc. I guess I do prefer to avoid people, but I don’t think that’s why I’m a night person. The calm, dark quiet just goes with my personality. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it as long as you're still getting 8 hours and take vitamins if you don't get a lot of sun, which I also prefer to avoid. (I'm a "white boy" and that’s all there is to it.)
Its the same way with me and rainy days -- its not that sunny days make me depressed, but rainy days give me a strange, almost giddy happiness sometimes that I can't express exactly. Someone give me a reason why rain is depressing?
---
* Note: I don't drink, I'm not a partier at all. These days I prefer to stay home than go out to a bar. Neither am I one of these people who wears a badge on their sleeve of how FEW hours of sleep they get each night, as if it were something to be proud of. I knew some people like that in college, to these people I say you are killing yourself at a young age, we can tell you’re loopy and you’re more likely to have a car accident, congradu-fucking-lations.
What pisses me the fuck off is how people don't mind waking you up if it's say, noon or 2pm. They will blast a TV or stereo, they have no qualms about it and often will laugh and say "Oh, you were STILL asleep?!" Yes, you stupid fucking dumbass motherfucker! I WAS, past-tense, WAS!
But if I woke them up at 2am -- well that’s a totally different story, you see, that’s not "OK," they have every right to sleep at that time because that’s when you’re supposed to sleep. That's when the "good people" are in bed, only "bad people" are awake at "ungodly hours." *
I tend to be a very nocturnal person, my body just won't stay on a schedule of going to bed at 11pm for any regular period, at least that’s been the story since my mid-college years. I tend to be the most energetic around 12-6am I'm not sure if you'd call it insomnia, but I really drag when I first get up but then I never feel like going to bed. I have to force myself to bed, usually right about the time I feel Im getting stuff done and could keep on forever.
I've always felt more productive and better, psychologically at evening and night. I like to go places at night which are normally crowded in the day -- supermarkets, walking trails, etc. I guess I do prefer to avoid people, but I don’t think that’s why I’m a night person. The calm, dark quiet just goes with my personality. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it as long as you're still getting 8 hours and take vitamins if you don't get a lot of sun, which I also prefer to avoid. (I'm a "white boy" and that’s all there is to it.)
Its the same way with me and rainy days -- its not that sunny days make me depressed, but rainy days give me a strange, almost giddy happiness sometimes that I can't express exactly. Someone give me a reason why rain is depressing?
---
* Note: I don't drink, I'm not a partier at all. These days I prefer to stay home than go out to a bar. Neither am I one of these people who wears a badge on their sleeve of how FEW hours of sleep they get each night, as if it were something to be proud of. I knew some people like that in college, to these people I say you are killing yourself at a young age, we can tell you’re loopy and you’re more likely to have a car accident, congradu-fucking-lations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)