Sunday, May 28, 2006

Carly Simon's Christmas albums



Okay, we need everyone to note the two covers above. They were too wide to both fit in full. You've got the title for both. You can click on them and make them better. We like Carly Simon, no, we love Carly Simon. And we all love her Christmas Is Almost Here.

In fact, when we were picking out our favorite Christmas songs in December, Wally selected "Twelve Gates To The City" from this album.

Which one? No, your eyes do not deceive. Those are two different back covers. The first, or top, one which lists the song tracks came out in 2002 and was entitled Christmas Is Almost Here. The second, released in 2003, was the same album plus two additional tracks ("White Christmas" and "Forgive"). This one was also called Christmas Is Almost Here.

Pay attention to that for the next feature that's going up. Also pay attention to the album (either version). It's worth listening to. But remember that both versions have the same title.

April Oliver got a fiancial settlement, whether Wikiepedia tells you it happened or not, It Happened

Slow readers are the right wing? We're suspecting that. A group launched an e-mail campaign about comments on April Oliver here. We're not sure what piece they're noting. Possibly a mention in Katie Was a Cheerleader." That ran April 16th and we hope we're not over-estimating their abilites to think that they could have completed reading a feature in around forty-two days. (Maybe they just made it up to the April Oliver mention?)

We delighted in noting that all thirty-two e-mails were more or less the same.

When you can't think for yourself, why should you be able to write for yourself?

Here's the story. CNN and Time magazine get together to produce a news magazine (NewsStand). Valley of Death details Operation Tailwood (the use of sarin in Laos on American troops captured or who had gone AWOL). The televised program creates a stir.

CNN and Time, which wanted attention and wanted that program, get nervous with the reaction. (Including the usual nonsense of "I will never watch again!" e-mails.) Worse (our opinion) they've got the Pentagon on their backs and God forbid CNN (or Time) ever lose access to the Pentagon. So they turn on April Oliver.

They don't tell her that they've turned on her. They tell her they need to do an investigation into the story. They let her think that they (CNN and Time) are on the same side as Oliver. And that a journalistic investigation will be conducted. The witch hunt wasn't about journalism. It was about taking the heat off CNN and Time. (Not unlike the recent "investigation" into CBS' story on Bully Boy's National Guard 'service.') Lawyers aren't journalists and a legal review is rarely about journalism.

April Oliver was led to believe they were on the same side. It should have been a wake up call to every journalist. When those investigations start, you're not part of a team. Retain your own lawyer immediately and don't agree to be silent. Oliver got burned, Mapes got burned. Take it to heart. Realize that the media has power and use it to make your case in. Not aftewards, when no one's too interested in reporting anything other than a "I can't belive they came to those conclusions" soundbyte. While the investigation is going on, reporters are interested. You talk then. You make your case then.

You will be screwed over, it happens every time.

The e-mails have noted that Oliver was "wrong" or "proven wrong." That's an interesting take, it's just not true.

CNN would like for you to believe that fiction as would Time magazine. But it's fiction.

Heavily reported was the witch hunt. Less reported was what happened when the matter headed for the court. From pages 308-309 of Reese Schonfeld's Me and Ted Against the World: The Unauthorized Story of the Founding of CNN:

On January 17, 2000, Oliver, Moorer, Singlaub, and their lawyers and associates met to take Admirable Moorer's deposition. Throughout the morning, lawyers for the plantiffs lobbed easy questions at him, suggesting that Oliver had been harassing him and had misrepresented his answers in the documentary. Then it was Roger Simmons's turn.
Oliver had hired Simmons, a gentlemanly country lawyer devoted to history and the Constitution, out of Frederick, Maryland. She had spent her Christmas break with him, reviewing documents. Immediately after the interviews with Moorer, she'd entered her notes into a computer and kept the handwritten originals.
Simmons knew that Admiral Moorer had great respect for history and was a man of honor. He opened by asking Moorer if he had said, "The difference between a democratic and communist government is that in a democratic government we advertise and discuss our faults and that in a communistic government they cover them up." Moorer agreed that he had. Then Simmons talked Moorer through a brief history of the Vietnam War, and discussed Moorer's distinguished military career.
Finally, Simmons presented Moorer with a computer printout of April Oliver's handwritten notes from their interviews. Question by question, Simmons asked the Admiral if the notes fairly refelcted Moorer's recollections of his conversations with Ms. Oliver. Time after time, the Admiral agreed that the notes were accurate. His answers indicated that Oliver had quoted him correctly about Operation Tailwind. Moorer admitted that sometimes defectors were killed and that he had been told by Singlaub that killing defectors was a priority. When asked about the use of sarin, the poison gas, Moorer said, "If the weapon [sarin] could save American lives, I would never hesitate to use it."
Moorer seemed to have confirmed the two basic points of Operation Tailwind. One, that some American defectors in Laos had been killed, and two, that sarin had been used to rescue American pilots. After Moorer's deposition, it was apparent that CNN's retraction was premature, cowardly and dead wrong.

Oliver got a huge settlement as a result of this. But the impression is still that the Operation Tailwind reporting was "wrong" and had been proven to be "wrong." No such thing happened. CNN and Time never conducted a journalistic investigation. The goal was always (our opinion) to placate the Pentagon. They hired Floyd Abrahms who knows about the First Amendment but very little about journalism (his son knows even less).

The only time journalism entered into the picture was when Oliver was named in a law suit and she got her own attorney. When that happened, the witness who had disputed had to admit that the quotes were accurately presented.

A visit to Crap-apedia, fails to turn up these facts. We were informed by several angry e-mailers that Wikipedia says the story was wrong (it doesn't state that) and that's the end of the story.

Crap-apedia. Where to start? How about with another article? (Which we will do.) For now, we'll just note that we supported the idea of Crap-apedia . . . and then we visited. Crap-apedia has no excuse for being unaware of what happened on January 17, 2000. But Crap-apedia has so many mistakes, we're sad to say, that it's practically filled with crap.

Laura Flanders and Anthony Arnove discussed realities about Iraq Saturday on RadioNation with Laura Flanders

Saturday on RadioNation with Laura Flanders, Flanders had a great deal to cover (and, no surprise, she did so -- and did so wonderfully). We're going to focus on one guest, Anthony Arnove, the author of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal. This was a wonderful discussion (between Flanders and Arnove and, later, between them and callers).

Flanders asked him to speak of the liberation talk being bandied about (that we're over there for 'liberation') and he noted that "The rhetoric's been used by many countries" to take control of an area and then went on to offer some examples (including the Phillipines -- which, he reminded listeners, Bully Boy had seen as a good model).

"What's interesting is that the argument that's been put foward," the we must stay to liberate talk, Arnove said, "has been put foward by people who call themsevles liberals."

This despite the fact that the occupation has fueld and continue to fuel the "secretarian conflict in Iraq."

The longer the occupation continues, the bigger the mess.

"It gets worse the longer the United States stays," he noted.

Also discussed was the bait and switch of "reasons" for the war. WMDs as the invasion began, 'liberation' and 'democracy' after it was underweigh. But we aren't supposed to notice that or to comment on it any more than we're supposed to comment on the oil that Iraq has.

Noting Howard Zinn, whom Flanders pointed out wrote the preface and afterword to Arnove's book, Arnove discussed how, in 1967, Zinn had published Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawl. Also addressed was how we need to get honest and look at what was going on because he didn't want to be back on Flanders' show ten years from now talking about the logic of withdrawing from Iran, Venezuela . . .

We have used military agression to maintain our economic control and until we can face that, we'll be in that "long war" (over and over) that Bully Boy keeps insisting we're in.


With Memorial Day on Monday, Arnove noted that "the United States is not honoring those who sacrificed as George Bush claimed" but instead just piling up more casulities and fatalities.

"They've had to come up with a new series of lies to keep us in Iraq," Arnove noted.

The only way to combat that is to stay informed and to stay active. Forget Arnove being on with Laura Flanders in ten years to talk about another war -- when he said that Howard Zinn published Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawl in 1967 and began with the preface of not wanting to be on the show in ten years . . . We thought he was going to finish the sentence with, "Still talking about why we need to withdraw from Iraq."

We didn't leave Vietnam in 1967, or 1968, or 1969, or 1970, or 1971 or . . .

It's really past time to be active and aware and, as Ava and C.I. note in their TV commentary that will go up in a bit, posting at a web site about a book with a controversial title being carried into an Abu Ghraib trial by a witness doesn't really cut it for your coverage of the week on Iraq.
(But yes, a site did just that. That was their coverage of Iraq for the week. A few sentences about a book whose title, Ava and C.I. note, rhymes with "runt." If you're confused, the word starts with a "C.")

It's past time to get serious and it's a real shame that so many have so little to say. Laura Flanders always has something to say.

Broadcasting over local airwaves on Air America Radio, over XM satellite radio and online,
RadioNation with Laura Flanders can be heard from seven to ten p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Saturday and Sunday nights. Here's what's scheduled for tonight:

SUNDAY:
MASSIE RITSCH, of Washington's Center for Responsive Politics, on Ken Lay's days as W's biggest donor.
A Media Roundtable with GARANCE FRANKE-RUTA, Senior Editor with The American Prospect and DOUG HENWOOD, Nation Contributor and Editor of the Left Business Observer.
Then the return of our independent bookstore hour with JOAN GRANIER from Odyssey Books in South Hadley, MA. And PEGGY HALEY of Book People in Austin, TX.

Radio highlights for Sunday (and one for Tuesday)

Radio highlights for Sunday. All of the programs are available online -- you can listen for free with no registration or "day pass." So what's going on today? You've got science and a look at the "Selfish Gene," you've got the topic of war resistors, Asian and Pacific Islander heritage month, independent bookstores . . . and more.

This evening on WBAI (time given is Eastern Time Zone):


Sun, May 28, 6:00 pm: Equal Time for Freethought
Funddrive Program: Religion, Science, Dubya and the "Selfish Gene." For this special fund drive program, we will be traveling along the crossroads of religion and science, and chatting a bit about the relevance of science for a progressive understanding of political activism, and we will perhaps delve a bit into how science may become politicized, even subtly. Offering as premium, Dr. Niles Eldredge's latest book,
Why We Do It: Rethinking Sex and the Selfish Gene.


Today on KPFA (time given is Pacific Time):

Sunday Salon
Sunday, May 28th, 09:00a.m.
This week on Sunday Salon...
Hour 1: Conscientious objectors -
Hour 2: Reduce your travel woes

Annual API Heritage Month Special
Sunday, May 28th, 6:30p.m.
Annual Celebration of Asian & Pacific Islander Heritage Month on KPFA.


Today on RadioNation with Laura Flanders (Air America, on the airwaves, on XM satellite and online, airs from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm Eastern):

SUNDAY:
MASSIE RITSCH, of Washington's Center for Responsive Politics, on Ken Lay's days as W's biggest donor.
A Media Roundtable with GARANCE FRANKE-RUTA, Senior Editor with The American Prospect and DOUG HENWOOD, Nation Contributor and Editor of the Left Business Observer.
Then the return of our independent bookstore hour with JOAN GRANIER from Odyssey Books in South Hadley, MA. And PEGGY HALEY of Book People in Austin, TX.

And Tuesday on KPFA:

La Raza Chronicles
Tuesday, May 30th, 7:00p.m.
Puerto Rico and her Diaspora.

Music Spotlight: Kat reviews the Dixie Chicks' Taking The Long Way

Kat's Korner: Dixie Chicks Taking The Long Way home while NYT gets lost along the way

Kat: The Dixie Chicks Taking The Long Way came out Tuesday. The album brings up a number of issues and the big question is where to start?

With the CD itself, of course (though a number of 'critics' seem confused). What do you have if you purchase the CD? One of the strongest albums of the year.

The Dixie Chicks take the long way but it's their only way. That's lyrically (as many have noted) but it's musically as well. Wide Open Spaces was a musical world away from Home. They might as well have been recorded by two different groups. Taking The Long Way continues down the same road.

Wouldn't kiss all the asses that they told me to
No I could never follow
No
I could never follow
Its' been two long years now
Since the top of the world came crashing down
And I'm getting it back on the road now
But I'm taking the long way


That's from the first track and it sets the tone for the album. It's what has a lot of 'geniuses' saying that the group sounds like Fleetwood Mac. The song's called "Taking the Long Way Around" (written by Emily Robison, Martie Maguire, Natalie Maines and Dan Wilson) and it continues musical progression made on Home as well as on "Too Far From Texas."

What-what-what?

Oh, that's right your big critics in your big papers, like the New York Times, Jon-Boy and Kelefa for instance, who weigh in but know nothing, they don't mention that song. Because they're talking out their asses -- but we'll get to them soon enough.

It's a sad, sad story
When a mother will teach her
Daughter that she ought to hate a perfect stranger
And how in the world can the words I said
Send somebody so over the edge
That they'd write me a letter
Sayin' that I better shut up and sing
Or my life will be over
I'm not ready to make nice
I'm not ready to back down
I'm still mad as hell
And I don't have time
To go round and round and round


The lyrics quoted above are being read as only applying to what Natalie Maines and the Dixie Chicks went through following Maines telling an audience at a London concert that she was ashamed the Bully Boy was from Texas. The song (also written by Robison, Maquire, Maines and Wilson) does have that meaning. It also has additional meanings.

Shut up and sing, shut up and smile. Find me a woman who's never been told that, urged that and we're going to be looking at a doormat who never takes a chance or takes a shot -- someone just pleased as punch with whatever she's got and might be handed.

The Dixie Chicks have always been about sisterhood. And they've always been slammed for it. "Dixie Chicks with D**cks" was a popular sneer circa 1998. Your foolish critics can't tell you that because they don't live in the real world and the Chicks didn't register with them until 2003.
But the Chicks have long been slammed by sexists.

These songs on this album, Natalie Maines is singing for everywoman. Consider her the heir to Jackson Browne's legacy in terms of her voice/persona. That's always been the case. And like Browne, with each album, the world around has come closer and closer. (Unlike Browne or any other man, Maines isn't allowed to be angry.)

There's not a clunker on the album. Lyrically or musically. Lyrics? Women can identify. So can any man who's refused to stand down in the face of adversity. If you could get into Jackson Browne's Running On Empty, you can get into this album. It's a glimpse that makes some uncomfortable but that's always been true of the Dixie Chicks. "Goodbye Earl" wasn't for the weak hearted. "Bitter End" will call to mind "Rosie" from Running On Empty -- but when Browne sings it, we're supposed to either giggle that he got in a nod to masturbation or else be overpowered that a man could lay it so bare.

Many years ago, in the now defunct Musician magazine, Joni Mitchell was interviewed by Bill Flanagan. (Skip the version that appears in Flanagan's Written in My Soul -- he leaves out many important details such as Joni explaining how the charts could be, and were, rigged.) Speaking of then newcomer Aimee Mann, Mitchell said:

Do you think they accept it [exposing one's self in song] from a woman? I don't know. The feedback that I get in my personal life is almost like, "You wanted it, libertine!" I feel like I'm in the same bind. That's not going to stop me, I'm still going to do it but I don't feel like I have the luxury because of my gender to do this. Uh-uh. It's just as hard. The things that to me as a writer have the most vitality are those kind of details. Those are the things that would make a novel or a screenplay good and have some depth as opposed to just being a caricature. I sacrifice myself to them. I'd never really say that ws easy. I just don't know any other way to be. If I could think of a way to change and get consistently strong so that I could sing about strong things . . . no, it's a delicate thing. I wouldn't go putting it into a gender bag at all.
But I know what you mean about Aimee. A guy could not get up and deliver that. But I don't think there are many people that can, period. For the people that can, it's not even a risk; it's just kind of an inevitability.

That just explained Long Way Home for anyone still confused.

The Dixie Chicks are using their own lives (as they have before) and that's making a few nervous. Most of the guys I've heard singing (in their day to day non-performing lives) "If the roadie don't mind" (Browne's "The Load Out") have never been on stage or dealt with a roadie. There was something more they were relating to.

The same is true of this album, it's very easy to relate to. The harmonies are tight (and reminiscent of some of the strongest vocal groups -- including Fleetwood Mac when they're actually harmonizing), the production is first-rate (this isn't tripping back to the seventies and the LA sound despite what some reviews tell you) but equally important is the music and if you can listen to "Bitter End" or "Silent House" and not be pulled in, then this isn't the album for you -- go look for another return of Mimi or wait for Justy's new product to be unleashed on the public.

Vocally, Robison and Maguire provide solid harmonies throughout. Lead vocals? Natalie Maines has always had similarities to Stevie Nicks and those shine through on this album. She can do the contralto Nicks uses so effectively these days as well as the soprano that Stevie turned into a sacrificial offering during the xillioneth performance of "Rhiannon" somewhere on the never ending tour of 1975 and 1976.

Forget the nay sayers. If you're reading this and didn't stumble across this site, you'll love the album. You'll love the honesty, the strength of it all. Yes, lyrically, yes, musically, yes in every way.

Is there a weak spot? Track nine. Track nine's a little too sunshine-day and has nothing really to say that fits with the rest of the album. It won't make you groan and it's over quickly enough that by the time you're onto the next song and lost in the backing vocals of "Voice Inside My Head," you'll have forgotten it.

In the sixties, vocal groups offered a range of personas. The tough-girls were the Shangri-Lahs. (Some try to argue for the Ronettes and, while they were tougher than many, they weren't the ones who would inspire Steven Tyler -- they would inspire Eddie Money which puts their 'toughness' into perspective.) But the Shangri-Lahs got stuck on the side of Let's All Polish Up Road (no motorcycle to hop onto after the crash of their "Leader of the Pack"?) and it's been starts and stops for women since then. The closest thing afterwards for women may have been the Go-Gos but a disaster of a performance as the musical guest on Saturday Night Live did more to destroy them then Belinda Carlisle's desire to be cute ever could.

Solo, women could and have been strong with chart success. But as a group of stength, it's been a long road of smile pretty, don't make waves, act like a lady. Along comes the Dixie Chicks. They're not new to crossover success, they pulled that trick while Bill Clinton was still in the Oval Office. And only someone ignorant of the charts could argue otherwise.

Which brings us to our critics of today. And, in the spirit of the Dixie Chicks, I'm not ready to make nice.

Let's start with Jon-boy by noting he loves to trash the women (study his reviews for Rolling Stone). He's also had it in for Stevie Nicks for years and was part of the subgroup at Rolling Stone that derided her talents and acomplishments. He was part of the whole "Lindsey Buckingham is Fleetwood Mac!" movement.

They tried for years, Rolling Stone, to pass that propaganda off as reality. Christine McVie and Stevie Nicks provided the big hits for the band. Once Lindsey's over-inflated opinion of himself took hold, the albums got a lot more gimicky (Fleetwood Mac's albums, his own were always "silly" as Jon-boy would note with pride and approval while hectoring Nicks) and you can thank your phallus worshipping critics for all of that -- chief among them the likes of Jon-boy -- idiots who never could stop crediting Buckingham for every bit of success the group had. As they sought refuge writing music reviews and articles for publications not noted for their music coverage, reality began to overcome fantasy at Rolling Stone and Stevie Nicks actually got some respect from the magazine.

Those boys who tried to crown Buckingham a rock star (a crowning that never took -- though they all sat around waiting for the head to emerge) never forgave Stevie for her succes or for not having a penis. Well in your dreams, Jon-boy, she can be whatever you need her to be.

Along comes Kelefa. Not a dumb critic. Not a useless one. But one who frequently writes with such a fact-free approach that she'd be better off starting those pieces with, "I'm about to go on and on about something I know nothing about." That was true last year when she laughable wrote of certifications based on shipments. (That was the pre-SoundScan age, as I pointed out at my site.) So what's a critic with an assignment to do but crib from Jon-boy?

That's why she doesn't tell you about "Too Far From Texas." (Jon-boy will always be at war with Stevie, that's his excuse.) What's "Too Far From Texas"? Ask the insta-expert Kelefa, I'm not here to spoon feed her.

Instead, let's "turn to the crystal blue mirror -- as always it is truthful." Stevie lyric but let's leave Kelefa uninformed since her "It's Dixie Chicks vs. Country Fans, but Who's Dissing Whom?" demonstrated she's happy to occupy space in the land of confusion.

There are two chief points she misses. C.I. called at noon to ask if I was going to note Kelefa in my review because otherwise, "I'm going to have to do an entry on it -- I'm getting too many complaints from friends and, when I finally read it, I saw why."

Kelefa tells you that the Dixie Chicks are in the midst of a war with country music fans. Kelefa's got a Bully Boy mentality of you're either with us or you're against us going on and it's not pretty. Her own non-existant claim isn't about WMD, it's in the midst of a laughable "therefore . . . therefore . . . therefore" sentence. I don't have a great deal of time to waste on her nonsense so we'll just note that she's apparently gotten 'bad intel.' (Jon-boy may be the one behind the Niger forgeries!)

Arriving late, and under-dressed mentally, Kelefa has no idea what the Chicks have been up against since they started. She probably thinks Toby Keith dissed Maines for the first time after the London concert. That's not reality. Reality is a lot of blustering boys were offended by the group long before Bully Boy illegally invaded Iraq. It's a size-envy thing. The Chicks outsold them and the Chicks didn't do it via Vegas-country. If Kelefa knew what was what, she'd know that it was the same thing Loretta Lynn was up against (the same thing that resulted in her songs being banned). Or Patsy Cline or any woman who didn't follow the 'rules.'

But Kelefa doesn't know her history so she's convinced that there's some new war going on when it's the same war that's been going on for years. You listened to "The Pill" or you listened to "Bandy The Rodeo Clown." I think if she'd been writing about a genre that had emerged more recently, Kelefa would be far less likely to stereotype the audience. But she does that while accusing the Dixie Chicks of making the same mistake she has made.

That's the way it goes at the Times with few exceptions. They just make up "facts" and write them down and an article with, for instance, fourteen factual errors gets two mistakes noted in the corrections and the Times figures that's enough (that writer, by the way, is back with the Times again -- proving that Jayson Blair can be put upon the cross but others who pass fiction off as fact never pay for their crimes).

The Dixie Chicks have been talking about the audience and that apparently shocked Kelefa because in her mind it's all the same thing. In her mind, Juice Newton, Lee Greenwood,
Willie Nelson, damn it, it's all the same thing!

If you tried to talk bluegrass with Kelefa (which does come to bear when you're talking the Dixie Chicks), she'd probably stare into space or go running down the hall, "Jon! Jon! What's blue grass!"

When Lynn had eight songs banned from the radio, it didn't end her career because everyone in country music wasn't opposed to those songs. The country audience is a bit more complex than Kelefa understands. (The Dixie Chicks grasp that, Kelefa's the one acting the fool.)

Kelefa appears to see Reba McEntire as the mouthpiece for all of country music. Why she thinks that, who knows? McEntire hosted a TV awards show which doesn't make her the last word in country music it just means she had the highest TVQ of anyone they could get. That TVQ comes from being the faded star of a cancelled show. (Quick, Reba, go record "Delta Dawn"!)

McEntire doesn't like the Dixie Chicks and got off a snide remark upfront. Kelefa would have you believe it brought the house down. It didn't. That's partly due to the fact that McEntire can't deliver a would-be funny line without jerking her head around as though she's gone into a seizure. It's also because the artists aren't all in McEntire's camp.

In the future, Kelefa might want to watch the shows she summarizes (both the awards show and 60 Minutes) and not just read about them.

Next Kelefa wants to tell you that the animosity towards the Dixie Chicks hasn't been experienced by Tim McGraw and Faith Hill. They called out the government's response to Hurricane Katrina. (They've both done more privately, but that's what they did publicly.) In 2005, calling out the Bully Boy on something everyone could see with their own eyes is nothing like, in 2003, saying we need to think before rushing into war and maybe, just maybe, listen to the people.

Only in Kelefa's mind are the two events comparable.

McGraw can kick a poser like Toby Keith's butt (and Keith knows that) and Hill & McGraw are a couple.

The Dixie Chicks aren't men and they've got no high profile relationship with a country star male who can act as a shield. What they have had goes to why McEntire loathes them and it's nothing new, unless your name is Kelefa.

McEntire loves her some Bully Boy, but the conflict predates the installation of the chimp-in-chief. McEntire shot to fame and, with dopey tales of how she remembers her dead dog to work up emotion for 'sad' songs, immediately went the Queen Bee route. She's to be worshiped and adored as the exception (to the rule). It's Reba against the (female) world. It's there in her music, it was on display in her crappy TV show where, trying to do a conservative version of Roseanne, Reba made sure she came off more angelic than Della Reese and Roma Downey combined.

Now off camera, she was fond of sick outs, but in front of the camera, she was the Angel of the Administration. (Just touch her cheek before you leave her, Bully.) "My husband done left me!" allowed her character to trade barbs with the woman who stole her man and kept Reba center stage. Without a sidekick. With no female friends popping into multiple episodes. This wasn't Roseanne.

How she was supposedly paying for food for all those (nonworking) people in her house was the sort of detail that, like Bully Boy's tax code, careful study reveals to be a crock. She crowed, over and over, "I'm a survivor" and it didn't reach the tweeners of the WB and didn't reach out to women that might have been the show's intended audience. Probably because most women don't picture living close by to the woman who stole their husband -- but she's a survivor! No need for assistance from the government, she's a survivor! No need to tackle the issue of insurance or any other thing that someone who had to work for a living while feeding six people would have to face. It was dream-time in the non-reality based world of der 'homeland.'

She's an exception and the point is made in her lousy I-done-lost-another-man songs over and over. Queen Bees are nothing new (except to Kelefa) and that's always been at the heart of the conflict between McEntire and the sisterhood of the Dixie Chicks. One stood for empowerment and the strength you can gather within a group, the other stood for herself and only herself.

To deal with the more recent issue of party politics and war, Kelefa doesn't bother to tell readers (probably because she has no idea) that McEntire was offering her corn-pone slams on the Dixie Chicks right after Natalie Maines remark. (Reba apparently supports "110%" the right of "our armed forces" to die in an illegal war.) As someone said of McEntire, "She was born trash, she'll die trash. The only question is whether or not she'll apologize for cheerleading a war that's cost so many lives?"

Though Kelefa either doesn't know or doesn't tell readers, Reba hobknobs with the Bully Boy family in Houston (Internet pals with Poppy! Keep it clean, Reba!), supported Bully Boy's 2004 run (well that's at least $2000 that didn't get wasted on bad plastic surgery) and of course got into the White House first when Poppy was president. (The Dixie Chicks, pre-Maines, performed at Bill Clinton's inauguration.)

That's the backstory readers aren't told.

Current truths also go missing. When Kelefa's going to write about the Dixie Chicks current career status, she needs to note McEntire's: Reba needs a hit real bad. In 2004, when the Bully Boy was riding higher, so was Reba. But like the Bully Boy's polls in the last two years, Reba's taken a tumble. Her last two singles? The most recent peaked at sixty and the one prior at thirty-three. For all Kelefa's cautionary tales of the Dixie Chicks, they charted higher this year than did Reba. And, to repeat, the low rated sitcom Reba has been mercifully cancelled. (Survive that.) (ADDED: C.I. advises me that although Reba was cancelled, on May 17th, the CW ordered thirteen episodes of the show for next year. Which is sort of the sucker punch we've come to expect when we get a little good news these days.)

There's something sad about aging Queen Bees. They don't become aware, they just spin around uselessly and damage the world around them. Reba cheerleaded the Bully Boy and cheerleaded the war. If anyone has something to apologize for, I'd say it's the fifty-plus loud mouth with the brassy (dyed) red hair who pushed a war when she damn well should have been old enough to know better. But war cheerleaders and war pornographers never apologize.

As for Kelefa, there should be some embarrassment factor for her. Not just for being so ignorant but also for the fact that she works at a paper that was instrumental in lying us into war. Instead, she wants to lecture the Dixie Chicks who (pay attention, Kelefa) don't need a lecture about whining over lost fans because they haven't whined. They've accepted any fall out. They're not running from anything. They're upfront about it on the CD and in interviews.

Having proven she knows nothing about emo and knows nothing about how albums are certified, today Kelefa wanted to demonstrate to America that she also knows nothing about country music. Having done that, quite successfully, it may be time for her to try taking some responsibility?

For instance, when she next has gas and finds herself bored, maybe she could do the readers a favor and light her farts instead of attempting to have them put to the printed page.

That would certainly do the world more good than her accusing the Dixie Chicks of the dastardly deed of "having conflated politics and culture" -- that's what art is. (Combining and bringing together are the definitions I'm using.) So the Dixie Chicks mine their own experiences and end up with an amazing album, an amazing work of art. How do you know it's amazing. It sends the Timid, forever two years late when it comes to music coverage, in a frenzy over the fact that three women might actually have something to say. Yes, we're back to the ones screaming "Shut up and sing!" It may surprise some that the Times would join in on that but they were, after all, one of the biggest sellers of the war on Iraq -- and, point of fact, they still sell the war. Today they pushed their limited scope into the music section.














Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

Humor Spotlight: "Betinna" (Betty) on guess who -- "His Head Is Fat"

Betty wasn't joking when she said her online novel was going to move a little darker in tone.  Even so, she'll still crack you with up with her tales of Betinna and her husband Thomas Friedman.

His Head Is Fat

"Stop pestering me with questions!" screamed Thomas Friedman in the middle of last week. By Thursday, when it was twenty minutes before his column was due, he was blaming me for the fact that he couldn't think of anything to write.

"Oh, do what you always do! Invent something!" I hollered back at him.

Reading his "Outsourcing, Schmoutsourcing! Out Is Over" Friday, I saw he did just that. It was part insta-column, part Friedman's "Greatest Hits" -- a CD padded out with really medicore tracks. He was phoning it in. He invented characters and he went with the topic he thinks he's the expert on.

When he refused to answer my questions about the Nicky K reference, I pointed out that when he invents someone, he might want to think it through a little better.

"After all, for weeks you've been lamenting the state of the sciences and there you are jawboning that an engineer becoming a limo driver is 'progress,'" I sneered.

That hurt. I know because he said to me, "Betinna, that hurt."

He moped for days. He refused to answer my questions.

"You have hurt me," he said waving a hand.

It didn't hurt his appetite. We're having to buy his canned cheese by the case. I've started to wonder if it's giving him cramps. (The gas he already had.) For three nights, he tossed and turned. One night he said, "Let's buy her!"

I bolted upright in bed and stared down at his pudgy face. He sleeps with two pillows propped under his head so you can't even make out the end of his chin, it's all waddle.

"Look at her!" he murmered excitedly in his sleep. "Let's buy her!"

That pig. I can't believe he's been sleeping with prostitutes. Well, I shouldn't be surprised. I mean look at him, he'd have to pay -- or I guess he'd call that "outsourcing" someone's duties -- mine?

Have at it, Fat Boy. Outsource my duties all you want.

But staring at his jowls, I realized how little I knew my husband Thomas Friedman and how little I knew of him.

Back when he had my doped up on those "vitamins," I thought the sun rose and sat on his fat ass. Put on the Judy Miller wig? Sure thing. Put on the Peggy Noonan mask? Sure thing. Play Bill Keller and kiss your ass? Sure thing.

He was happy then. Not with me, he was still critical of me. Running me down, trashing the "backwater village" I hail from. Watching him mutter "Mmmm, that's good cheese," I was tempted to pull one of the pillows out from under his head and slowly smother him with it.

I might have to if it weren't for the fact that a) I want some answers and b) that pig's paying for my college education. After all I've had to put up with, he can damn well pay my tuition until I graduate.

I'll ride this marriage out until I get the diploma. Maybe I'll even be validictorian and give a speech like Jean Rohe did, only instead of John McCain, I'll zero in on Thomas Friedman?

I just find him so disgusting these days. Even him sitting on the couch near me, not next to me, is enough to grate on my nerves. I'll hear him panting (he's a mouth breather and any activity at all causes him to pant) and just want to snap at him, "Do you have to make all that noise!"

I also feel that for all his touted intellect (touted by him), he's not that smart. I'm honestly embarrassed by him. Take Friday's column. It wasn't funny, it wasn't needed. With the UNICEF report on malnutrition in Iraq coming out days before, why did he think anyone needed to hear him go on and on about outsourcing again? It's like being married to Dustin Hoffman in "Rain Man."

As soon as I got off those vitamins (and started slipping them to him shortly after), everything became a lot clearer to me. I started noticing a lot more. Like how all of his comments are really simplistic. It was probably when I started participating in protests against the war that I realized how useless and disgusting he truly was. He helped sell the war and he's never been held accountable.

I was thinking about all of that today when I sat down to watch "Democracy Now!" He was missing one of the video cassettes, on which he'd taped every episode of "Saved By The Bell,"
so he was mainly rushing around the living room looking for it while complaining, "Betinna, this is the one where Slater wears a bathing suit!" I ignored him and turned the TV to "Democracy Now!" Arundhati Roy was the guest.

He was fretting over Slater in, I'm guessing, a bikini brief and how that moment might be lost forever when all the sudden he heard his name.

Arundhati Roy was explaining the type of news they get from America in India, "Well, in India, I think you get FOX News and CNN and, of course, the BBC. But also a lot of newspapers in India do publish American columnists, famously Thomas Friedman."

His chest puffed out so wide that the belt to his shorty robe popped loose.

"I love a good news show," he said plopping down on the couch beside me.

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest today for the hour is Arundhati Roy. She just recently flew in from New Delhi, India. She is the author of a number of books, her Booker Prize award-winning book, "The God of Small Things", and then her books of essays, "The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire", "The Checkbook and the Cruise Missile" among them. Arundhati, you were just talking about what is happening in India. Thomas Friedman, the well-known, much-read "New York Times" columnist and author, talks about the call center being a perfect symbol of globalization in a very positive sense.

"Much read," Thomas Friedman chuckled. "See, Betinna, she does want me on her show. Maybe I should have my people call her."

"Your people?" I asked annoyed that he was interrupting.

"Yes, you. You are my people."

"Oh shut up," I told him.


ARUNDHATI ROY: Yes, it is the perfect symbol, I think, in many ways. I wish Friedman would spend some time working in one. But I think it's a very interesting issue, the call center, because, you know, let's not get into the psychosis that takes place inside a call center, the fact that you have people working, you know, according to a different body clock and all that and the languages and the fact that you have to de-identify yourself.

"You know," Thomas Friedman said, not shutting up, "she may have a point. I bet I could spend a day or two at a call center and have a wonderful book. I could write about how little Jose can go from speaking with Miguel in Spanish one moment and then answer the phone and speak in fluent English."

"Spanish isn't the native tongue of India," I hissed. "Besides, she was making fun of you."

"I'm sure you're mistaken," he replied. "I have many fans. From all over the world."

"Yeah," I snapped back, "but these fans, are any of them that the rest of us can see!"

"Well, I never," Thomas Friedman huffed.


Aruhndhati Roy was speaking. She said, "We have the highest number of custodial deaths in the world. And we have Thomas Friedman going on and on about how this is an idealistic -- ideal society, a tolerant society. Hundreds -- I mean, tens of thousands of people killed in Kashmir. All over the northeast, you have the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, where a junior noncommissioned officer can shoot at sight. And that is the democracy in which we live."

"Betinna!" Thomas Friedman whined, his voice climing several octives as he said the one word, "I don't think she likes me!"

"She doesn't. No one does. Shut up and let me watch this."

Thomas Friedman stared at me for a moment, his bottom lip trembling, his eyes welling with tears.

"WWWAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!" he suddenly spat out.

Then he was on the carpet, face down, pounding his fists into the floor.

Figuring he'd tired himself out, I ignored him; however, when the show went off, I saw that he was still at it.

Stepping over him, I headed for the kitchen and called back to see if he wanted a grilled cheese sandwich?

He just kept crying and pounding.

"Turn off the water works, you big titty-baby, or I'm not making you lunch."

"You are a cruel, cruel woman!" Thomas Friedman said rushing up behind me.

I turned around and looked at his blood-red yes, red from crying. I noticed the snot dripping from his nose and landing on that John Bolton-like mustache. Does he ever clean that?

"I cannot live in a world where I am abused!" he moaned.

"Well keep it together for a few more days, we've got company coming over for Memorial Day and I've already made the cole slaw," I said jerking my arm free from his grip.

"You cruel, cruel woman," he muttered.

"Knock it off, Banarama. Do you want a grilled cheese sandwich or not?"

"I want a little respect," Thomas Friedman pouted, wiping his nose on the hem of his shorty robe.

Yeah, that'll get him respect.

"Betinna, this Arundhati Roy, this French woman, she insulted me. Your husband! She insulted me."

"She isn't French," I said plopping some butter into the skillet. "And if you think she insulted you, you better start praying I never write a book about you. I might call it 'His Head Is Fat.'"

Thomas Friedman gasped.

Looking over my shoulder, I saw that he had both sets of fingers in his mouth, biting nervously.

"Betinna, you wouldn't dare!"

"Don't push me," I declared as I put some bread into the skillet. "Just don't push me."

Screaming, he flew out of the kitchen and moments later I heard the front door slam. All I could think was, "I hope he finished tomorrow's column. Rent's almost due."












 


Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

C.I. on The New York Times

C.I. on The New York Times
 

NYT: When someone contradicts their own sworn testimony, the paper just yawns

In this morning's New York Times, Neil A. Lewis' "Court in Abuse Case Hears Testimony of General" covers the testimony of Geoffrey D. Miller (Major General) in the case of Santos A. Cardona. Caronda's being left to hang on the 'few bad apples' nonsense.

From the article:

He said he recommended that military dogs could be used to help with "custody and control" of detainees at the prison.

But he denies that was intended to be carried over to interrogations. He denies it and someone changes their previous testimony:

Col. Thomas M. Pappas, the top military intelligence officer at Abu Ghraib, testified in the earlier trial of Sergeant Smith that General Miller had recommended the use of dogs during interrogations. But on Wednesday in the current trial, he testified that General Miller did not make any such specific recommendations.

Cardona's already been smeared with abusing for "entertainment purposes" in other recent coverage. But does America buy that and will the court-martial? Are we going to continue to kid that the techniques just floated over, like seeds on the wind?, from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib?

If so, for how long are we going to buy into that nonsense and see underlings punished for carrying out orders? From Democracy Now!'s "Col. Janis Karpinski, the Former Head of Abu Ghraib, Admits She Broke the Geneva Conventions But Says the Blame 'Goes All the Way to The Top:'"

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about General Miller. Who is he?
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: General Miller was sent to visit Iraq by Secretary Rumsfeld and the Undersecretary Cambone. And they came -- General Miller came to visit from Guantanamo Bay. He was the commander of detention operations at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and he was sent to assist the military intelligence interrogators with enhancing their techniques. And he brought with him the techniques that were tested and in use at Guantanamo Bay. And he brought a team of about 20 people, 22 people with him to discuss all aspects of interrogation operations, and actually, he did an in-brief. I was invited to participate or to attend to listen to his in-brief, because he was working almost exclusively with the military intelligence people and the military intelligence interrogators while he was there.
But we owned the locations that he was going to visit, and he ultimately selected Abu Ghraib to be the focus of his efforts, and he told me that he was going to make it the interrogation center for Iraq. He used the term, he was going to 'Gitmo-ize' the operation and use the M.P.s to assist the interrogators to enhance interrogations and to obtain more actionable intelligence. I explained to him that the M.P.s were not trained in any kind of interrogation operations, and he told me that he wanted me to give him Abu Ghraib, because that's the location he selected.AMY GOODMAN: You're both generals?
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: Yes. He was a two-star.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the dogs? Is that when the dogs were introduced?
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: Shortly after his visit, he -- again, he was spending most of his time with the commander of the Military Intelligence Brigade, Colonel Pappas. In his in-brief, his introduction when he first arrived there with his team, he responded to one of the interrogators, the military interrogator's question, and he was listening to the comments, the criticisms that they were doing these interviews and they were not obtaining really valuable information, so he was there to assist them with different -- implementing different techniques to get more actionable intelligence.
And one of the interrogators just asked the question about what he would recommend that they could do immediately, because they thought that they were doing a pretty good job with identifying the people who may have additional value or more military intelligence value, and General Miller said -- his first observation was that they were not -- they were being too nice to them. They were not being aggressive enough. And he used the example at Guantanamo Bay that the prisoners there, when they're brought in, that they're handled by two military policemen. They're escorted everywhere they go -- belly chains, leg irons, hand irons -- and he said, "You have to treat them like dogs."

Papas has changed his story, changed what he previously testified to, and the article treats it as something to squeeze in right before the close. Perfectly in keeping with the New York Timid. It's news and not bury-it-at-the-bottom-of-the-story news. You lead with it. Someone's testified under oath and then recants the testimony and you're covering the case, you cover it as big news.

But you can't count on reality in the paper of no record more and more. For reality on Iraq, Jonah notes Aaron Glantz's "A New Iraqi Government? Don't Believe the Hype" (Common Dreams):

There's a lot of hype about Iraq's new "government."
In a speech to the National Restaurant Association in Chicago, George Bush called the new government a "turning point in the struggle between freedom and terror."
He called the government "something new" – a constitutional democracy in the heart of the Middle East.
One thing it probably won't lead to is an end to the occupation. In speeches both George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair refused to give a timeline for withdrawal of their armies from Iraq, meaning the more than 150,000 foreign troops in Iraq will probably not be coming home any time soon.


The dance Bully Boy's doing (and Blair as well) is very Nixonian. But we're not supposed to question it on those terms (in the mainstream media), we're supposed to believe that every remark Bully Boy manages to pass off as English is 'heartfelt,' 'noble' and 'true.' (For less flattering coverage in the paper of no record, go to John Burns today -- or any day -- covering the Saddam Hussein trial in a tone that one wishes Bully Boy would be on the receiving end of were he tried for war crimes but the paper would take a pass on that the same way they did on Nixon once he stepped down.)

Mia notes Patrick Cockburn's "Why the US May Have to Quit Iraq Sooner Than Planned" (CounterPunch):

The US and British armies in Iraq have both failed--though they could argue that the root of the failure is political rather than military. Three years after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein they control extraordinarily little territory in the country. Watching American forces in Baghdad since 2003 it always seemed to me that they floated above the Iraqi population like a film of oil on water.
Shia animosity towards the Americans and British forces is now beginning to look like that of the Sunni at the beginning of the guerrilla war. In Basra crowds spontaneously dance and cheer when a British helicopter is shot down just as the Sunni used to celebrate the destruction of every US Humvee in Baghdad (even then Tony Blair and George Bush claimed that the insurgents were just a small group of foreign fighters and Saddam Hussein loyalists).
The problem about the withdrawal is that it may be coming too late. The White House and Downing Street never took on board the sheer unpopularity of the occupation and the extent to which it tainted the Iraqi government, soldiers and police in the eyes of ordinary Iraqis. The Iraqi army and police are 230,000 strong and this figure is due to rise to 320,000 men by the end of next year. But in reality the allegiance of these forces is to the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish communities and not to the central government. The problem has always been loyalty rather than training.
The US and British armies in Iraq are becoming less and less relevant to political developments good or ill. Their presence is not acceptable to most Iraqi Arabs. They clearly cannot stop a civil war that has already started in the centre of the country. The main reason for keeping them there is to avoid a scuttle which would look like America's last days in Vietnam.


The reality you won't find in the New York Times. For a number of reasons but chief among them is they're not really interested in reporting news, they're more interested in 'shaping' opinion. And we've all seen where that's taken us.

This entry was lost and I am putting all the members highlights back in. However, there was a long section (now lost) about how war hawks are learning that traveling in packs might be good for media exposure but not necessarily good for votes. Instead of rushing to recreate it, we'll note Brandon's highlight and hope everyone's on the same page. From Tom Hayden's "Why Jane Harman Should Be Challenged" (The Huffington Post):

It must have been embarrassing for Rep. Jane Harman to read the front page of the [Los Angeles] Times this week that Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi "intends to force Harman to step down" from her slot on the House Intelligence Committee, partly because of "concern among Democrats that Harman is too moderate and inclined to accomodate the Republican agenda." [May 18]
If challenger Marcy Winograd has the money to mail that credible Times' summary to enough voters, she might even win a primary upset June 6.
As things stand, the challenge by Winograd and progressive Democrats already has forced Harman to change her rhetoric, finally calling the Bush Administration "lawless" on national television. In this case, the flip-flopping favors progressives, but it may not be enough for Harman.
It's no secret that Harman is the center of Democratic friction. She was one of a handful of Congressmembers invited into the secret White House briefings on what has mushroomed into a major scandal: the launch of domestic spying by intelligence agencies without warrants. The ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, Harman promised the White House to keep secret what she heard at the meetings.
She could have been a whistleblower, but chose not to be.
She could have refused the unconditional promise of secrecy, but chose not to.
She could have resigned the secret committee without comment, letting her silence do the talking, but chose not to.
Left to Harman, the spy scandal would still be a secret today. It was the New York Times, not Democratic leaders, who first broke the silence and secrecy.


(Actually it was James Risen and his book publisher that forced the breaking of the NSA story, but Hayden's short-handing.)

Remember to listen, watch or read Democracy Now! today (you'll need it months from now to figure out what the New York Times is downplaying). The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.










Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

Ruth's Public Radio Report

Ruth's Public Radio Report

Ruth: C.I. said, "If you want to post, that's fine, but you don't have to." Yes, I want to. I have missed posting while I was on vacation. I need to do a heads up and a thank you so I will do that and note a few observations as well.

Tomorrow:

KPFA's Sunday Salon
This week on Sunday Salon...
Hour 1: Conscientious objectors -
Hour 2: Reduce your travel woes

That airs from nine to eleven Pacific, eleven to noon Central and noon to two Eastern. The program is hosted by Larry Bensky. Be sure to listen.

Thank yous include all the members who e-mailed. I was wondering if three Saturdays missed would result in everyone thinking, "Thank God that old woman's finally shut up!" Apparently, that was not the result.

Thank you to Rebecca. Shortly before I was due to leave with Treva, the woman who was going to watch my grandson Elijah while I was on vacation had to cancel due to a family emergency in Florida. These things happen and I was prepared to cancel the trip when Rebecca called moments after I got off the phone with the woman. Rebecca immediately offered to fill in for the duration. That was not just a big help, it was a blessing.

On my end, Rebecca's wondered, there was never any reservations about her watching Elijah. I can also report that my son and daughter-in-law accepted the offer when I presented it to them without knowing anything other than I trusted the person. After they agreed, they asked who it was. My daughter-in-law met Rebecca when she visited during the winter and they have both heard of her from my grandchildren Jayson and Tracey. My son said, "I wished you'd told us it was Rebecca right away." Far from alarming either of them, Rebecca's presence was gladly appreciated.

I will say thank you to my children for making a point to invite Rebecca to dinner each night during the three weeks and I will note that they enjoyed having her. A few strong words were actually exchanged over who would be able to have her on the last night. She was a big hit.

Most of all with Elijah. Monday through Friday, I watch my grandson. I see him on the weekends as well. We have a pretty close bond. When I went to California, I took him with me.
I was not sure whether he would enjoy a two to three week road trip, however. What he did enjoy was Rebecca. She has a post about their early days together that you should read.

When she left Thursday, he did not want to her go. Friday was "Beck-uh" this and "Beck-uh" that. If she had not been out of the country on vacation, I would have phoned her just so Elijah could say hello. He knew her before this but he really took her during their three weeks together.

I will also note that she cleaned the house top to bottom, Tracey says she did that Wednesday night, which I had asked her not to do and not to worry about. I was expecting to come home to well lived in home and instead found it sparkling clean, so thank you, Rebecca.

In the e-mails, a few members expressed concern that WBAI had not gotten enough attention in terms of highlights. KPFA's website usually notes upcoming programs on a regular basis. Dallas usually does the links for me in my reports, and thanks to him for that, and we discussed that issue this morning. You really need to listen to WBAI to know what will be coming up. Jess did note a program on the station in a special entry he did this week. I called Rachel and Micah but was not able to reach Jonah. Both Rachel and Micah stated that they were not highlighting because it was special programming and they often learned of what was coming on shortly before it aired. WBAI is the station I listen to over the airwaves so if there was a dip in noting it, that can also be attributed to the fact that I was on vacation. Remember, however, that any member who notes a program in an e-mail will see it noted it at the site. If there is a program you are looking foward to, e-mail and C.I. will note it because if it interests you, it will probably interest other members as well. A sentiment that I heard Bernard White and Amy Goodman express, on WBAI, was that the station was the people's university and, at a time when NPR seems to exist as the graveyard for mainstream media, that is even more accurate. If you are interested in learning, you are seeking out information from the likes of WBAI.

Whether you listened to KPFA or WBAI or another Pacifica station, there were many strong programs during the fundraising drive. A big hit was Timothy Wise. I also have a number of e-mails on a documentary made by Canada's CBC on environmental pollution in the home. [C.I. note: Up Close and Toxic.] Brandon cannot say enough kind words about KPFA's Bob Dylan Birthday Special and there are also e-mails on Radio Chronicles' airing of John Ono Lennon and of Friday's Music Special: Modern Protest Music. I heard both of the last two.

Radio Chornicles was something Treva and I both wanted to catch so we listened on the road. It was a wonderful look at the music, activism and life of John Lennon. For people our age, we are superimposing several decades we lived through when we listen so I was delighted to read e-mails from younger people who were impressed with the special as well. Friday's noting of some of the music coming out today, music commenting on our times, was also delightful. The biggest question from the e-mails was, "Is Kat going to be reviewing Janis Ian's new album?" That is on her list but I called her last night to pass on the interest among the community in the album Folk Is The New Black. It was great to hear Ms. Ian's "The Great Divide" as well as two songs from Neil Young. The thing that stood out the most was probably Josh Ritter's "Girl In The War." The music to that really is magical and I have grown so used to Tracey and Jayson playing the entire CD of The Animal Years, that it was only hearing it on Friday's program, surrounded by other things, that I remembered the joy I felt upon first listen.

The vacation was a time of rest and fun. This really was the first vacation where I the passing of my husband was not so fresh that I was plauged by moments of sadness. I missed him, as always do, but there were no episodes of depression.

What was there? A chance to really get to know this country. I knew the community's feelings and took comfort in that. But I had no idea how prevalent the mood of the nation was in turning against the Bully Boy. I count only the states we stopped in, not the ones we drove through, and ended up with sixteen. Time and again, the talk was of how the Bully Boy had failed the nation. The outrage over the lack of prepartion for and the lack of response to Hurricane Katrina has not faded. The NSA issue is much more pressing than the mainstream media's polling implies.
People my age, really old, compared the Bully Boy to Richard Nixon with no hesitation.

In Arizona, I met some wonderful women who are doing their part and then some to get the word out. It does not really feel like an attempt to wake up the country because the nation is awake. Waking up Congress, on the other hand . . . .

In every discussion, at some point, the issue of the media would be brought up. If anyone or anything is more unpopular than the Bully Boy, it may be the press. During those discussions, I would note Pacifica and Democracy Now! and was pleasantly surprised time and again to find that people who had no Pacifica station for miles and miles knew of it. Democracy Now!? The program's reach is huge. Amy Goodman usually notes the various outlets it plays on but it is one thing to hear Ms. Goodman note it and another thing to hear, "Oh, I watch it on ___" or "Oh, I listen to it on ___" or "I always go to the website" and listen, read or watch.

I doubt it is yet reaching as many people as one of the big three networks' evening news broadcasts, though I may be wrong, but it surely reaching as many and probably more than anything on cable. In Chattanooga, Tennessee, we stopped to speak to a young man who was wearing a Democracy Now! t-shirt. Treva had told me of the program's reach but I had not really absorbed how great the reach was until our three week road trip. In North Carolina, we met people watch it on a channel called "The People's Channel" and that seemed appropriate because it is the people's news.

We also met a few community members by accident. When this Ruth would speak of Pacifica, I would be asked, "Ruth of The Common Ills?" I was able to meet Kayla and see her very cute newborn son. I also met ??? and asked him, "Why '???'?" He said it was "James Bond like" and also that another member already was noted by the same first name. If I had thought ahead, we would have attempted to meet up with some members while we were on the road. Our only set plans were to see the Grand Canyon, in a happier Thelma & Louise type visit, and to meet Eli whom I knew from the site, e-mails, columns in the gina & krista round-robin and phone calls. Eli is just as wonderful and wise as he comes off in his columns. He also won a permanent spot in my heart for greeting me with, "I thought you said you were old." (I am old.)

He has written of how having his great-granddaughter come to live with him while her parents are going through a divorce has been a blessing and I saw just how true that was. The house was alive with music and people talking. When you lose a spouse or partner after many years of living together, getting out into the world is important but you are often still coming home to your home that you no longer share with anything other than fond memories. We discussed that and how wonderful it was to see our homes come back to life.

His great-granddaughter plays the piano regularly which Eli's had tuned because that is the sort of thing you figure "Why bother?" when it is just you. I told him that I, like many members, had been worried because his children live far away, his wife had passed away and the friends they had around them had passed away, gone to live with their children or entered nursing homes. He asked me to note that he is doing "better than fine." Which is true, that house is alive. He also asked me to note that Wally and Wally's mother both call at least once a week just to chat and that he appreciates that now but he really appreciated it before his great-granddaughter moved in.

His plate is overflowing these days. Besides having his great-granddaughter to talk about the world with, just her presence has meant that some of the neighbors have opened up. (Eli stated that when you are an old man living alone, young neighbors tend to want nothing more than to wave at you and I would agree with that.) A young family next door have become good friends especially after learning that they shared politics and could discuss the day's Democracy Now! with someone. So see, the people's news program not only provides you with information you need, it also provides you with conversation.

The Grand Canyon was a place we always intended to visit, my husband and I. The children usually wanted either Disney Land or Disney World so we would vacation in Florida or California. Then, as we grew older, so many friends and family relocated to Florida that it became the destination. So finally, after all these many years, I saw the Grand Canyon in person. Photos do not do it justice. Forget the majesty of mountains we sing of, the Grand Canyon filled me with awe and wonder.

Camping out near there, a young woman came over to ask if we would be bothered if she played some music on her jam box? We both said no. She then came back over, sent by her mother, to explain that she wanted to play a CD and her mother had asked her to check with us. The CD? Neil Young's Living With War. We told her that not only did we not mind, we had packed that CD for our own road trip which led to an invitation to join her large family gathering. Speaking to her great-uncle, I was confronted with a self-described "always vote Republican" who had broken with his party after decades of voting straight ticket. That includes in 2004 when, he explained, he felt that the first term was "messy" but that, given the chance, he had faith the Bully Boy would make the second term about fixing the mistakes. He no longer has that faith. He told me that Bully Boy makes Nixon "look like a Boy Scout." It was a conversation I had many times as we traveled but it is one that still stands out because, as he said, he was someone who wanted to believe in and to support the Bully Boy but no longer can.

How this will translate into the election turnout in November, I have no idea. But, time and again, talking to people of all ages, I saw a nation that had no faith in the Bully Boy and eager, this especially from Republicans and usually over the NSA spying, to see him impeached. It is a nation that you only see covered as poll numbers by the media, but it is one that is outspoken and paying quite a bit more attention than the mainstream media or the Congress appear to be with what is going on.























Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
 
Poll1 { display:none; }