Sunday, July 30, 2006

A Note to Our Readers

Hey --
Another Sunday. Later than expected due to a number of things.

Highlights? Got 'em:

NYT Finally reports on Ehren Watada
Blog Spotlight: The Power of Three
Humor Spotlight: Wally and Cedric note a re-recording of "You've Got A Friend" with new lyrics
Blog Spotlight: Betty on travel and Rebecca's wedding
Blog Spotlight: Mike and Wally offer assistance to Justin Timberlake

New content? We got it and the following worked on it:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and me, Jim;
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review;
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ils);
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix;
Mike of Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz;
and Wally of The Daily Jot


"Recommended: Danny Schechter News Dissector" -- want coverage of Israel's actions in the Middle East? You got a one stop site. Use it. All worked on this feature (all listed above). All includes Dallas who, as usual hunted down all the links you see and also added input on all features. Thank you, Dallas.

"Non-Think Progress Plays Bash the Bitch" -- this was a suggestion from an offended friend of Ava and C.I.'s. Read it, you'll see why. If the org wants to play smart ass, hey, come join us. But last time we checked, they were one of those "We can win elections, we can make the system better, stronger, we have the power . . ." So it seems more than a bit strange that Paris Hilton's being used for cheap, easy laughs and a round of bash the bitch. All worked on this.

"Slam poetry" -- one of two pieces that should have appeared her. The next, not slam poetry in any sense of the word, goes up next week. We're too tired. All worked on this and "Rotten, Rotten, Rotten" actually came when someone remembered the line from a play (probably Rebecca) and C.I. said, "Cactus Flower" (the movie -- and isn't sure if it's in the play or not). All worked on this.

McKinney v. Lieberman -- who you gonna root for? -- tone and purity arguers say Lieberman must be supported for the party and point to others as being unreasonable. How do we know they're guilty of what they accuse? Look at their silence on Cynthia McKinney. All worked on this.

"TV: What Could Be Lower Than A Cesspool?" -- Ava and C.I. always do the TV commentary solo. This is a strong piece and headache for all of us. A reporter friend of C.I.'s ("And the site's" adds C.I. meaning this one) called and asked if we could work something in. C.I. asked what "Column on autism." Sure. That's an issue we all care about and it's a very strong issue to C.I. and Ava. They read the thing (late in the process and after they'd written their review). They were outraged. They woke the reporter, did he know this would outrage them? Yeah, he was outraged as well. They worked it into the review. (Did so rather quickly, when they finally had time. They also read the column in question over the phone to a friend they mention with a teenage autistic child to make sure they weren't the only ones offended by the column.)

"Sense of Purpose" -- The nightmare piece. When/if we pick this up again, we have not just a second part but a third. A number wanted to bail on this. Why? What can be included and what can't? Can a brother be mentioned? We're not sure. The person thinks their brother would be fine with it but hasn't ever asked. (He's been noted, on the same issue, once here before and it wasn't a problem.) People were pulling things right and left. Though C.I. and Ava both encourage that, C.I. said, "I'm not reading over it, leave in anything you want on me or about me just get the damn thing up and over." That's our kind of spirit! You're reading about a third of it. This is long. We've e-mailed other portions to people noted (but not named) to make sure they're fine with being mentioned. If they are, good chance you'll see another part of it (possibly two parts). If they're not, this was a one shot we thought would be longer. It's our statement of purpose ("Sense of Purpose" is a song by Pretenders off Packed! C.I. adds and believes it comes with an exclamation point at the end but no one wants to get up, walk down the hall and grab the CD). All worked on this.

"Editorial: Does Condi Rice understand her job duties?" -- this is the six of us (Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.). When Ava and C.I. finished the TV review (second time), we debated whether we needed an editorial? "Sense of Purpose" could work as that. C.I. pointed out that the Lynne Stewart editorial we have planned to write, for the last three weeks, has lost out each week. Next week, Lynne Stewart editorial if nothing else. We're agreed on that. Stewart's facing thirty years sentencing. She's over sixty, she's a grandmother, she has cancer. Her crime? Defending her client. Law broken? None. She wasn't convicted of breaking a law. Hopefully you already know the case (we've noted it here before, Mike's noted it at his site repeatedly and C.I.'s written about it quite often at The Common Ills before the focus shifted to Iraq mainly/only). Next week's editorial.

That's it for this week. "Sense of Purpose" isn't aimed at the community or our regular readers. (Ty says put in that he loves discussing music with Susan.) But for those who don't want to hang, we've changed our message beneath our title. Ava, C.I. and Jess argued for the quote from Cher -- it's from her album . . . (C.I.'s thinking of the title) 3614 Jackson Highway. When you're not in the mood for the dumb asses, go to the book of Cher. See you next Sunday.

-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.