Kingwood Marine dies in Iraq

From the Houston Chronicle:

A 20-year-old Marine from Kingwood was killed in Iraq Thursday, only months after he had finished basic training, his family said.

Lance Cpl. Luke Yepsen was a Marine Corps infantryman who had just completed boot camp in August before leaving for Iraq in October. He was shot during combat Thursday in Anbar province.

"He looked trim and fit and healthy, and he was real proud of his new uniform," said Jim Bailey, remembering the last time he saw his nephew. "It's all so sudden, and he was so young."

Click here for the rest.

This hits home. Forgive the pun, but Kingwood is where I grew up. Back in the day, I was fairly patriotic myself. Obviously, I never joined up, but then we weren't in an extended war in the mid 80s when I was this kid's age. Who knows? He could be me, or any of my buddies with whom I went to high school--most of us were pretty conservative and patriotic; like Cpl. Yepsen, many of my pals went to Texas A&M, which is extraordinarily pro-military. I know we've lost nearly 3,000 servicemen since this thing began, but this one really makes me sad.

We've got to get out of there.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

PAUL MCCARTNEY: ROCK STAR

No, really, I mean it.

It seems like these days Paul's reputation is pretty much that of ex-Beatle who does the occasionally decent pop song. They roll him out from time to time at big events like the Super Bowl, or the 9/11 patriot bash, whatever, to do some of his old Beatle favorites mixed with a few from his solo catalogue, which are politely tolerated by the crowds. Paul hasn't helped much over the last couple of decades to change this bland boomer image, releasing crap singles like "Biker Like an Icon" or "Freedom" or that awful theme song for that awful Tom Cruise movie Vanilla Sky.

But trust me, Paul has always had the ability to rock as well as Led Zeppelin or the Who, and still does. Case in point: Paul's little remembered late 70s period. That was when, in my humble opinion, Paul was in his best form.

From Wikipedia:

Back to the Egg

Back To The Egg is the final studio album by Wings and was released in 1979...After the release of London Town, following the exit of both guitarist Jimmy McCulloch and drummer Joe English, McCartney hired two new members with a view to recording a raw rock and roll album after the soft rock of London Town and getting Wings back on the road.

And

On 3 October, Wings recorded two tracks, "Rockestra Theme" and "So Glad To See You Here" with many celebrity guests under the heading of Rockestra. The Who's Pete Townshend, Pink Floyd's David Gilmour, Led Zeppelin's John Paul Jones and John Bonham (in one of his last performances) all took part. Paul McCartney in a 2001 interview with VH1 said that Keith Moon was to have taken part in "Rockestra" but died one month before the recording sessions took place. A highlight of the album, "Rockestra Theme" would win the 1980 Grammy for Best Instrumental Performance.

And

Unfortunately, the critical reaction was not warm upon the album's release.

Click here for the rest.

Fuck the critics. Back to the Egg is a masterpiece. My old pal Ken once told me that his take on the album's lack of success is that it was up against some pretty stiff competition. For instance, here are the top Billboard albums for 1978:

1 Bee Gees/Various Artists/Soundtrack-Saturday Night Fever RSO

2 John Travolta/Olivia Newton-John/Soundtrack-Grease RSO

3 Fleetwood Mac-Rumours Warner Bros.

4 Billy Joel-The Stranger Columbia

5 Steely Dan-Aja ABC

And for 1979:

1 Billy Joel-52nd Street Columbia

2 Bee Gees-Spirits Having Flown RSO

3 Doobie Brothers-Minute By Minute Warner Bros.

4 Cars-Cars Elektra

5 Supertramp-Breakfast In America A&M

Say what you want about Paul, that's some pretty stiff competition; all of these are fantastic albums, even the Bee Gees stuff and the Grease soundtrack, and those weren't the only great albums out around that time either--don't forget about Pink Floyd's The Wall, or Fleetwood Mac's Tusk. Indeed, one could seriously argue that the late 70s was something of a golden age in terms of rock and pop in this country--punk was doing alright, as well, and new wave was just starting to come into its own.

Anyway, the point here is that Paul's most rocking era was kind of buried under it all. I mean, I remember hearing some tracks from Back to the Egg on the radio at the time when I was a kid; it's not like nobody knew what was going on, but nobody seems to remember today that Paul was a legitimate rocker in his own right, worthy of sharing the stage with the likes of Pete Townshend and Robert Plant.

Actually, that's just what he did back in '79, during a benefit concert he put together for the people of Cambodia, who were at that point enduring the minor genocide so dramatically recounted in the film The Killing Fields. Several Brit bands participated, doing their own sets, but the whole thing was capped off by a massive band using all the musicians involved that Paul decided would constitute the revival of Rockestra.

Here is a clip of them performing the old rock and roll standard "Lucille." Pay close attention: at a particular point in the song, Paul, while singing, flips off Townshend, apparently because the angry guitarist didn't want to wear the official silver Rockestra tail coat--Pete gives Paul an appropriate dirty look. Here is a clip of them performing the "Rockestra Theme," a tune written by Paul for Back to the Egg, as the Wikipedia article observes. Again, there is more interplay between Paul and Pete about Townshend's reluctance to wear the appropriate suit. Great stuff.

But wait, there's more. Here is a video for the Back to the Egg track "Old Siam, Sir." It really rocks. And, finally, here is a video from the same album of the song "Getting Closer," yet another cool McCartney rocker.

Anyway, I think I've made my point. When he wants to be, Paul's solo music is as relevant as anything in the overall classic rock cannon, and I'm proud to call myself a McCartney fan. Take that "Ebony and Ivory." (No, no, I totally agree with that song's anti-racist message; it's just that it's so damned sappy...)


Cover for the album Back to the Egg


Rockestra performing "Lucille," only moments after Paul flips off Pete

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

FRIDAY CAT BLOGGING

Frankie



Paz



Phil



Sammy



Be sure to check out Modulator's Friday Ark for more cat blogging!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Lobbyists swarm around Democrats

From the big guy himself over at the Daily Kos:

Now I don't want to oversimplify this issue. It's actually complex. There's nothing inherently wrong with lobbyists -- at their best, they help elected officials understand complex issues. For example, the net neutrality folks have to "lobby" members of Congress about the importance of the issue, and how it affects consumers. All issue groups, friendly or not, employ lobbyists to promote their agenda.

The problem is the appearance (and oftentimes fact) that government is for sale to the highest bidder.

Click here for the rest.

Kos, who is often described as a far-left liberal in the mainstream news media, strikes me as being much closer to the center than is popularly understood. His support for lobbying, in principle, is a case in point. Yes, legislators do, indeed, depend on lobbyists for information, but that's a big problem. The information provided by lobbyists is always biased, no matter what the ideology of the lobbying group is. Consequently, legislators get a distorted view of issues. It seems to me that legislative bodies, and especially Congress, have the resources and ability to do their own research, which would hopefully provide a more balanced view of reality. That is, I think lobbying should be banned. Given the way that the entire lobbying system appears to provide massive incentives for bribery and campaign finance shenanigans, I don't think I'm suggesting anything over the top: the practice of lobbying makes me really worry about democracy in our nation. Besides, legislators supposedly represent citizens, not corporations and special interest groups--it really pisses me off that these groups get more democracy than I, a plain and ordinary citizen, do.

Okay, how's this? I'll support lobbying if I, and all other Americans, get the same kind of access to legislators that lobbyists get. That seems only fair.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

4-year-old suspended after hugging teacher's aide

From the AP via the Houston Chronicle:

School administrators gave a 4-year-old student an in-school suspension for inappropriately touching a teacher's aide after the pre-kindergartner hugged the woman.

A letter from La Vega school district administrators to the student's parents said that the boy was involved in "inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harassment" after he hugged the woman and he "rubbed his face in the chest of (the) female employee" on Nov. 10.

DaMarcus Blackwell, the father of the boy who attends La Vega Primary School, said he filed a complaint with the district. He said that his son doesn't understand why he was punished.

Click here for the rest.

Now, of course, anybody with half a brain is going to condemn this. I think that any reasonable standard for what constitutes sexual harassment is going to exclude four year olds simply by virtue of the fact that, as articulated by his father, the kid "doesn't understand why he was punished." That is, I think an individual has to have some kind of understanding of sex in order to actually sexually harass someone. Like I said, it's a no-brainer; conservatives and liberals both can probably agree on that.

I'm more concerned about why this happened. It's a safe bet that the standard conservative take on this would be something to the effect that suspending this boy is an example of political correctness running wild. But then, to me, that's not very likely if only because this took place in Waco, Texas, which is not at all known for its leftist ways--indeed, Waco, a.k.a. "Jerusalem on the Brazos," a Southern Baptist enclave, is one of the most conservative towns in the Lone Star State. If p.c.'s going to be running wild someplace, I certainly wouldn't be trying to find it in Waco.

A liberal take on the event might see it as an example of paranoid school officials overreacting for fear of lawsuits or other legal action. That's possible, I suppose, because we've seen the same thing happen again and again on the issue of prayer and other religious observances in the schools--numerous teachers and administrators seem to have very little understanding of church-state issues, and it's not surprising that sometimes they err on the side of what they perceive as being caution. But busting a four year old for sexual harassment is pretty damned cautious. Stupid, even.

Might I suggest that this is actually evidence of what I've been saying for years now about public schools? If the schools' main function is to indoctrinate children into the culture of obedience and authority, and I strongly believe that to be true, then enforcing the letter of the law, no matter how harsh it is, comes as absolutely no surprise. The schools are utterly driven by rules and mandated procedures--all this "zero tolerance" bullshit we've been hearing about for so long is simply an extreme manifestation of the obedience mandate. Teachers and administrators are deeply immersed in this philosophy, day after day, year after year. It makes complete sense that common sense would sometimes lose out in such an environment. To me, this kid's bust in Waco walks hand in hand with the way that goth kids dressed in black were rounded up and harassed at schools across the nation for months in the wake of the Columbine killings. Sure, it makes no sense to you and me, but a rule's a rule, and the schools are all about obedience and authority, so kids have got to face the consequences and all that crap. Pretty twisted, but that's business as usual.

Man, quitting teaching was the best decision I've ever made.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Tinker Bell, Pinochet And The Fairy Tale Miracle Of Chile

From ZNet, my favorite muckraker Greg Palast on the "market" reforms brought down to Chile by the so-called "Chicago Boys," students of Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago, that ruined the nation's economy:

The Chicago Boys persuaded the junta that removing restrictions on the nation's banks would free them to attract foreign capital to fund industrial expansion.

Pinochet sold off the state banks - at a 40% discount from book value - and they quickly fell into the hands of two conglomerate empires controlled by speculators Javier Vial and Manuel Cruzat. From their captive banks, Vial and Cruzat siphoned cash to buy up manufacturers - then leveraged these assets with loans from foreign investors panting to get their piece of the state giveaways.

The bank's reserves filled with hollow securities from connected enterprises. Pinochet let the good times roll for the speculators. He was persuaded that Governments should not hinder the logic of the market.

By 1982, the pyramid finance game was up. The Vial and Cruzat 'Grupos' defaulted. Industry shut down, private pensions were worthless, the currency swooned. Riots and strikes by a population too hungry and desperate to fear bullets forced Pinochet to reverse course. He booted his beloved Chicago experimentalists. Reluctantly, the General restored the minimum wage and unions' collective bargaining rights. Pinochet, who had previously decimated government ranks, authorized a program to create 500,000 jobs. In other words, Chile was pulled from depression by dull old Keynesian remedies, all Franklin Roosevelt, zero Reagan/Thatcher. New Deal tactics rescued Chile from the Panic of 1983, but the nation's long-term recovery and growth since then is the result of - cover the children's ears - a large dose of socialism.

Click here for the rest.

Upon the occasion of his recent death, much has been written about the brutality of Augusto Pinochet's bloody reign, and America's complicity in the coup that installed him, and these writers are absolutely right to trash as many of the involved parties as possible. Far less has been written, however, about the failed economic experiment under him that casts great doubt on the philosophy of free market fundamentalism that so captures the US establishment's mind today. In short, as Palast observes in his article, laissez faire capitalism in Chile was a total disaster, and the nation's economy had to be bailed out by further reforms that would make the free trade set shudder.

Amazingly, the failed market reforms in Chile are understood in the US these days as a success, somehow supporting the idea that we need to deregulate here even more. I'm strongly reminded of President Reagan's false reputation as the great tax cutter: rarely do politicians and pundits acknowledge that after the Gipper had successfully cut taxes more than any of his predecessors had ever done, he then was forced to raise taxes more than any of his predecessors had ever done. That is, his tax-cutting legacy is a lie, as are all of the economic gains they supposedly stimulated. Like the Chile myth, however, free market fundamentalists get teary-eyed discussing how great his example was in this area, and use it as support for doing more of the same today.

All of this leads me to believe more strongly that the whole neoliberal, supply side, free market thing simply doesn't work in the real world: supporters are forced to fabricate historical "evidence" to support their views. And most Americans swallow it. Pretty sad if you ask me.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

America's Injustice System is Criminal

From CounterPunch:

Before jumping to the conclusion that an innocent person would not admit guilt, be aware of how the process works. Any defendant who stands trial faces more severe penalties if found guilty than if he agrees to a plea bargain. Prosecutors don't like trials because they are time consuming and a lot of work. To discourage trials, prosecutors offer defendants reduced charges and lighter sentences than would result from a jury conviction. In the event a defendant insists upon his innocence, prosecutors pile on charges until the defendant's lawyer and family convince the defendant that a jury is likely to give the prosecutor a conviction on at least one of the many charges and that the penalty will be greater than a negotiated plea.

The criminal justice (sic) system today consists of a process whereby a defendant is coerced into admitting to a crime in order to escape more severe punishment for maintaining his innocence. Many of the crimes for which people are imprisoned never occurred. They are made up crimes created by the process of negotiation to close a case.

This takes most of the work out of the system and, thereby, suits police, prosecutors, and judges to a tee. Police do not have to be careful about evidence, because they know that no more than one case out of twenty will ever be tested in the courtroom.

Click here for the rest.

Like the police, whose mission most people think is one of public safety but is actually about making busts, the courts aren't really about truth and justice, which is what most Americans believe. Rather, the court system is about getting convictions. It's a subtle difference in emphasis, but counts for everything in terms of day to day reality. Yes, justice is often done by our court system, but seemingly just as often, injustice is done, too. As long as the system has built-in incentives for the people who run it to ignore and deemphasize critical evidence that would free defendants, we're not really a free nation.

And this is the kind of "democracy" that we would impose on Iraq and Afghanistan? No wonder they're fighting back.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Is Bush’s Intransigence Clearing the Way for Impeachment?

Rascally Rob Salkowitz over at Emphasis Added dares to think the unthinkable in the wake of Bush's apparent rejection of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations:

The fact is, Bush is extremely unpopular in the country, has no friends among the Democratic majority in Congress (with the exception, as always, of Lieberman), has shown himself to be ballot-box poison for Republicans outside the Deep South, and is visibly losing his handpicked war. He and Vice President Cheney, along with various members of the Administration, have left six years of ticking Constitutional timebombs that could constitute a lengthy bill of particulars if explored fully by an Investigatory Committee, or could very easily precipitate a Constitutional crisis (by, say, failing to comply with a subpoena) wherein Congress would have Impeachment as a recourse.

Against that eventuality, Bush could, up until last week, count on the institutional support of the power Establishment. Whatever their problems with him, their fear of populist uprising was always great enough to rise to the defense of the institution of the Presidency.

Now that it’s clear Bush has no use for an Establishment that was clearly sticking its own neck out to give him cover, it’s no longer certain that moves toward removing Bush and Cheney from office would be met with such unanimous and authoritative opposition. In fact, I’m sure there are many conservative, partisan Republicans making cold-blooded calculations about the value of propping the obviously-unfit Bush up for another two years – to say nothing of those who are actually concerned that our national interests will be irreparably harmed if Bush isn’t stripped of his destructive and obstructive powers.

Click here for the rest.

So I've been calling for impeachment for years now, but then, that's pretty easy for me to do because, you know, I'm a crazy leftie who doesn't really mind if society is upended as long as we get some justice out of it all in the end. Rob, however, while definitely a liberal, is much closer to the political center than I am, and most likely more intelligent, to boot: when you have somebody with his smarts politically positioned the way he is calling for impeachment, it, for me, constitutes the beginnings of the proverbial writing on the wall.

As I said, Rob's no flaming leftist - for instance, he's blasted Noam Chomsky on his blog on at least one occasion - but his analyisis reminds me greatly of something the bespectacled and politically explosive linguistics professor once said about Nixon's near-impeachment. Chomsky's view, in contrast to the standard narrative about Watergate and all that, is that Nixon so offended the ruling elite, or "power Establishment" as Rob puts it today, by slowly but surely whittling away at their piece of the power pie that they essentially allowed the impeachment movement to proceed--this assumes, of course, that such forces had the ability to shut it down whenever they desired, but I don't really think that's too much of a stretch to believe.

(Here is an essay written in 1973, before Nixon's resignation, where Chomsky lays out the power dynamic, but prematurely concludes that the establishment so needed a powerful presidency that they would never allow an impeachment to happen. Chomsky later admitted that he underestimated how strongly Nixon had pissed these people off.)

If Rob's right, that may very well be what's happening right now. Bush's utter rejection of the ISG report has conceivably so offended the "power Establishment" that it is within the realm of reason to imagine that they will soon get out of the way, and allow the current impeachment movement to go ahead unimpeded.

History repeats. I hope.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Nobel winner: Fight poverty to attack terrorism

From the AP via the Houston Chronicle:

Economist Muhammad Yunus accepted the Nobel Peace Prize today for his breakthrough program to lift the poor through tiny loans, saying he hoped the award would inspire "bold initiatives" to eradicate a problem at the root of terrorism.

Yunus, a 66-year-old Bangladeshi, shared the award with his Grameen Bank, which for more than two decades has helped impoverished people start businesses by providing small, usually unsecured loans known as microcredit.

"We must address the root causes of terrorism to end it for all time," Yunus told hundreds of guests at City Hall in Oslo, Norway. "I believe putting resources into improving the lives of poor people is a better strategy than spending it on guns."

And

Yunus is the first Nobel winner from Bangladesh, an impoverished South Asian country on the Bay of Bengal. Nobel Committee chairman Ole Danbolt Mjoes said the award was partially intended as an outstretched hand to the Islamic world in an era when Muslims are often demonized because of terrorism.

Click here for the rest.

I'm not sure, but this may be the first time I've read, heard, or seen this point of view expressed in the mainstream US news media, and it took a Muslim Nobel laureate to point out the obvious. Of course, that's no surprise: it only makes sense that an individual from the Islamic world would have better insight as to why the terrorists "hate us." As for me, I've been saying from almost the beginning that the real reason we have to put up with terrorism is because Western businesses and the governments they control exploit the hell out of the world's weaker nations, treating their peoples and resources as stuff to steal, hoarding the lion's share of their wealth. Ever wonder why we spend so much money on Israel? They're our enforcer over there, continually beating the hell out of their subjugated Palestinian population as surrogates for the rest of the Middle East. You know, to make the oil business function more smoothly.

If we're really interested in ending terrorism, we're going to have to end this big rip off and start using our national power to help the world rather than exploit it. I can't claim credit for this point of view, though. It goes back to at least the mid nineteenth century when Marx was writing, and probably earlier. Heck, by the time socialist playwright Bertolt Brecht was writing in the 1920s and 30s, it had been articulated into art.

Here are the lyrics to Brecht and Kurt Weill's song "What Keeps Mankind Alive" from their musical The Threepenny Opera:

You gentlemen who think you have a mission
To purge us of the seven deadly sins
Should first sort out the basic food position
Then start your preaching, that's where it begins

You lot who preach restraint and watch your waist as well
Should learn, for once, the way the world is run
However much you twist or whatever lies that you tell
Food is the first thing, morals follow on

So first make sure that those who are now starving
Get proper helpings when we all start carving
What keeps mankind alive?

What keeps mankind alive?
The fact that millions are daily tortured
Stifled, punished, silenced and oppressed
Mankind can keep alive thanks to its brilliance
In keeping its humanity repressed
And for once you must try not to shriek the facts
Mankind is kept alive by bestial acts

Ain't that the truth. Here's a link to a free download of Tom Waits taking it on, quite masterfully--be sure to scroll down to find it.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

ANOTHER MEL GIBSON MOVIE I WON'T SEE
'Apocalypto' does disservice to its subjects

From the San Francisco Chronicle by way of my buddy Mark:

Problem is, there exists no archaeological, historic or ethnohistoric data to suggest that any such mass sacrifices -- numbering in the thousands, or even hundreds -- took place in the Maya world.

Third, once Gibson paints this bloody picture of 15th century Maya civilization, the ultimate injustice is handed the pre-Columbian Maya. As the jungle hero escapes the evil city and is chased to the edge of the sea by his antagonists, with literally nowhere else to turn, Spanish galleons appear, complete with a small, lead boat carrying a stalwart friar hoisting a crucifix. For Gibson, the new beginning for these lost Mayan people, the Apocalypto, evidently is the coming of the Spaniards and Christianity to the Americas.

Although this film will undoubtedly create interest in the field of Maya archaeology by way of its spectacular reconstructions and beautiful jungle scenes, the lasting impression of Maya and other pre-Columbian civilizations is this: The Maya were simple jungle bands or bloodthirsty masses duped by false religions, resulting in the ruin of their mighty but misguided civilization, and their salvation arrived with the coming of Christian beliefs saddled on the backs of Spanish conquistadors.

As archaeologists struggle to accurately reconstruct ancient Maya society, obstructed by their decimation via Western diseases; destruction of their books, art and history by Spanish friars; and their subjugation and exploitation by the conquistadors, such films as "Apocalypto" represent a significant disparagement of that process.

Click here for the rest.

Jeez, what is it with this guy? For a mediocre actor, he's one hell of a culturally backward asshole director. After ripping on the Jews in his Jesus snuff flick The Passion, and then after ripping on the Jews during his drunk driving arrest a few months ago, he comes back with this shit? You know, the Mayans are oppressed to this day: the Zapatista movement in Mexico is strongly supported by some of the poorest of the poor within the borders of our neighbor to the south, and it is no coincidence that they are Mayans. Nonetheless, conservative Catholic Gibson wants to push the idea that the arrival of the Catholic Conquistadores in Central America was somehow good for them. What a nut! That's almost along the lines of telling African-Americans that slavery was good for them.

But then, Mel Gibson is a racist, which we know for sure, so I have no right to be surprised by any of this.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

FROM THE REAL ART SPORTS DESK
Texas gets the best of LSU

From the Houston Chronicle:

The game was a rematch of last year's NCAA regional final, won by LSU 70-60 in overtime. The teams feature different lineups, with a combined seven starters gone, including the Longhorns' starting lineup that has been replaced by four freshmen and a sophomore.

Abrams, a sophomore guard, hit his two 3-pointers during a wild 42-second spurt. His last — which came from beyond the NBA 3-point arc — gave the Longhorns (6-2) a 76-75 lead with 1:04 remaining.

After Damion James missed two free throws with 17 seconds left, the Tigers had one final chance to win. Following a timeout, Garrett Temple missed a wide-open 3-point attempt from the top of the key, and James grabbed the loose ball as time expired to send Texas to its third straight win over a top-10 foe.

"Tonight we took a big step," Barnes said.

Click here for the rest.

Okay, I normally don't deal with basketball here at Real Art. Actually, I normally don't deal with basketball at all. To this day, I can still hear from back in seventh grade Brad Smith's voice yucking it up on our church's court at my expense: "Yuk, yuk! Reeder can't make a layup! Yuk, yuk!" Whatever. Brad's downhome adolescent humor ultimately did a disservice to what appears to be an exciting sport; it made me shun basketball to this day. But I digress. I break my basketball silence for the occasion of my undergraduate school, to which I have the most loyalty, upsetting my gradute school, to which I am loyal, but not when those loyalties are directly at odds with one another. That is, and this is for my fellow Longhorn Matt over at Caffeinated, I've got burnt orange blood, not purple.

So, I just have to say, for the record, "Hooray! We beat LSU!"

Hook 'em 'Horns!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

President slips to all-time low in the Zogby
Poll as key demographic groups jump ship

From the Zogby webpage courtesy of AlterNet:

The poll showed that Bush’s troubles clearly stem from trouble with the war in Iraq. Just 24% give him positive marks for his handling of the war, down from 39% who gave him a positive rating six months ago for his handling the way. Even among Republicans, a minority – 47% – think he has handled the war well (52% of Republicans gave him negative marks for his leadership on the war in Iraq). Not a single demographic group in the Zogby poll gave the president a majority positive rating for his handling of the war.

Asked whether the Iraq war has been worth the loss of American lives, just 34% responded positively, equally the lowest percentage recorded in a long series of Zogby polls on the question. The poll comes on the heels of the announcement that more than 2,900 Americans had been killed in the war.

Click here for the rest.

Well, I suppose that definitively answers the question about whether the recent election results were about the war: apparently, only the hardcore right-wing has the stomach for this bullshit anymore. Unfortunately, the wildly unpopular and incompetent President Bush still has two more years as Commander-in-Chief, which means at least two more years of meaningless death and destruction in the Fertile Crescent.

You know, if Bush is so utterly loathed by so many Americans, why the hell are the Democrats so shy about impeachment? Damn it! I want my fucking impeachment!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

TOM DELAY'S GOING TO HAVE A BLOG!

From US News and World Report courtesy of AlterNet:

Tom DeLay's back, this time on the Internet. Friends tell us that the powerful former House majority leader, dubbed the "Hammer" for his tough persuasion tactics, this week unveils TomDeLay.com, where he'll blog—DeLay's Daily—on newsy issues and build a coalition he's calling Grassroots, Action, and Information Network.

Click here for the rest--it's not much more, just a blurb actually, but go there if you must.

Oooooohhhhh. I'm licking my lips right now. DeLay might have been great at twisting arms and funneling illicit cash to and from crooked cronies, but he generally did all that behind the scenes. As far as I could tell, whenever he actually waded into the rhetorical fray he tended to be about as nuanced as his "Hammer" nickname might suggest. That is, taking down Tom's blog posts ought to be about as easy and fun as shooting fish in a barrel. Or Dick Cheney's buddies in the face, take your pick. Nothing like tearing apart an asshole retard. Maybe I'll make a weekly feature out of it, "Taking Down Tom" or something along those lines.

He hasn't made any posts yet, but the page is up already. Click here for some goooood blog trash. Heh. I can't wait. I really do need a whipping boy these days and the deposed Lizard King is just perfect for the role.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Richest tenth own 85% of world's assets

From the London Times courtesy of AlterNet:

The richest 2 per cent of adults own more than half the world’s wealth, according to the most comprehensive study of personal assets.

And

Although global income was distributed unequally, the spread of wealth was more skewed, according to the study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research of the UN University.

“Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and high-income AsiaPacific countries. People in these countries collectively hold almost 90 per cent of total world wealth,” the report said.

And

In terms of wealth distribution the US was among the most unequal, whereas Japan had one of the lowest levels of inequality. Britain ranked with Russia, Indonesia and Pakistan in wealth inequality.

James Davies, Professor of Economics at the University of Western Ontario, and one of the authors of the report, said: “Income inequality has been rising for the past 20 to 25 years and we think that is true for inequality in the distribution of wealth.

Click here for the rest.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, this isn't about jealousy, or the "right people" using wealth in the "right way" in order to expand the economy, or any of the other classic conservative justifications for economic inequality: it's about the ability for an individual to control his own destiny; it's about democracy. That is, there are two kinds of power, political and economic, and, when you get right down to it, there's very little difference between the two because wealth is easily translated into governmental influence. That so few people have so much money stands in utter contradiction to the democratic principles we so greatly value. Freedom and self-government are simply impossible when private power is so intensely concentrated. This situation is intolerable.

Not to mention the fact that so many people worldwide live in squalor while their "betters" live it up in the lap of luxury. That's intolerable, too, but really, I shouldn't even have to point it out. Like my post a couple of days back observes, our economy is sinful.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

WATCH THE BEATLES' YELLOW SUBMARINE RIGHT NOW

From Wikipedia:

Released at the height of the psychedelic pop culture period of the 1960s, the movie Yellow Submarine was a box-office hit, drawing in crowds both for its lush, wildly creative images, and its soundtrack of Beatles songs. The original story was written by Lee Minoff, based on the song by John Lennon and Paul McCartney, and the screenplay penned by four collaborators including Erich Segal.

As with most motion picture musicals, the music takes precedence over the actual plot, and most of the story is a series of set-pieces designed to present Beatles music set to various images, in a form reminiscent of Walt Disney's Fantasia (and foreshadowing the rise of music videos and MTV fifteen years later). Nonetheless, the movie still presents an entertaining modern-day fairy tale that caters to the ideals of the "love generation".

The dialogue is littered with puns, double entendres, and Beatles in-jokes, many scripted by Roger McGough. "Blue Meanies" is sometimes used as a slang term for the police, although many viewers will have missed this (see List of slang terms for police officers). The term "Blue Meanies" is actually a metaphor for bad people in government and corporate, who force their wills on good people (Pepperlanders), and carelessly deplete and ruin the natural environment, resources, colour and landscape. They are carefree about their destruction ways and will do whatever necessary to crush those (The Beatles) who oppose them.

Click here for the rest.

Without a doubt this film continues to be the weirdest and most psychedelic cinematic experience I've ever encountered. And, man, what kind of staying power it has: I've loved this movie at virtually every stage of my life, as a young child, as an older child, teenager, twentysomething, and now in my late thirties, which is appropriate, I suppose, because it was released the year I was born, 1968. It really is a great deal of fun. How could it not be with all those cool Beatle songs, weird sound effects, and George Martin incidental music? Not to mention the fact that it's got some pretty good politics driving the plotline. Anyway, the John Lennon post yesterday wasn't enough, I feel, to adequately memorialize his death twenty six years ago, so why don't you go feast on the recently pirated and uploaded full length Yellow Submarine, courtesy of Throw away your TV.

Click here to see the film.



$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

JOHN LENNON

October 9, 1940-December 8, 1980

"Gimme Some Truth"

I'm sick and tired of hearing things
From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocritics
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth

I've had enough of reading things
By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth

No short-haired, yellow-bellied, son of tricky Dick
Is gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
With just a pocketful of hope
Money for dope
Money for rope

No short-haired, yellow-bellied, son of tricky Dick
Is gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
With just a pocketful of soap
Money for dope
Money for rope

I'm sick to death of seeing things
From tight-lipped, condescending, mama's little chauvinists
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth now

I've had enough of watching scenes
Of schizophrenic, ego-centric, paranoiac, prima-donnas
All I want is the truth now
Just gimme some truth

No short-haired, yellow-bellied, son of tricky Dick
Is gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
With just a pocketful of soap
It's money for dope
Money for rope

Ah, I'm sick to death of hearing things
from uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocrites
All I want is the truth now
Just gimme some truth now

I've had enough of reading things
by neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
All I want is the truth now
Just gimme some truth now

All I want is the truth now
Just gimme some truth now
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth

That's exactly how I feel today. Here's a cool video for the song.



$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

FRIDAY CAT BLOGGING

Sammy



Frankie



Phil



Paz



Be sure to check out Modulator's Friday Ark for more cat blogging!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

IRAQ STUDY GROUP REPORT:
MEET THE NEW BOSS, SAME AS THE OLD BOSS

From the American Prospect courtesy of Eschaton:

No Middle Ground

The trouble is that the Iraq Study Group is ultimately providing false hope for an extended war. Its assessment is appropriately bleak. For example, "Key Shia and Kurdish leaders," the commission finds, "have little commitment to national reconciliation." Now, given that these leaders comprise the Iraqi government, one might think that would lead to the conclusion that Iraq is doomed to an intensifying sectarian conflict, and unless one believes it is in the United States' interest to pick a side in someone else's civil war, that means it's time to go home. Instead, the commission, despite its own better judgment in its report, is gearing up for what Hamilton called "one last chance at making Iraq work." It's hard to see what's responsible about this.

And

But take a closer look. First, the commission isn't actually calling for withdrawal; it's calling for a reorientation of military effort -- troops won't conduct combat missions, they'll just be helping Iraqi forces conduct them. This is new lipstick on a very old pig. Despite what the commissioners said at today's press conference, it's just a marginal tinkering with the years-old strategy of "putting an Iraqi face" on security operations.

Second, the commissioners say that we "must not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq." But that's exactly what the commission's recommendation entails. I asked the Iraq Study Group how many troops the training mission would require, and for how long. Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese gave the vaguest of answers, but he did say that it would necessitate "a considerable force" for logistics, training, force protection, and special operations. "We don't say specifically how long it will last," but it will require a "sustained period of time." There's a reason why the Pentagon is calling this the "Go Long" option.

Finally, it's unrealistic to suggest that with such a U.S. force in Iraq for such an indefinite timeframe, forces won't respond to insurgent or death-squad attacks if either directly fired upon or if their Iraqi counterparts aren't up to the challenge. Indeed, if U.S. troops are in a combat situation but are not positioned to respond as such, the Iraq Study Group's wishful thinking -- and the Pentagon's -- will put them in the worst of all possible situations.

Click here for the rest.

So, after trying to digest these ISG recommendations for the last couple of days, my own take is that this pretty much amounts to the Washington political establishment trying to head off some serious civil unrest over the war here in the US, more of a change in rhetoric than any actual change in policy, all for the purpose of making American voters calm down a bit over the endless killing and dying. The bottom line is that, if their suggestions are adopted, American soldiers are still in harm's way and still propping up a corrupt puppet government which does more to cause sectarian fighting than to end it: apparently, the "bipartisan" elder statesman consensus is that the US must dominate Iraq in the long run. It's like I keep saying. We'll never leave--the ability to influence oil markets, and therefore the global economy, by sitting right smack dab in the middle of petroleum central is just too much to give up on, and both Democrats and Republicans understand this.

You know, the notion that the extraordinarily weak Iraqi government is ever going to have the ability to take control of the desert nation is laughable at best, which is why it's pretty damned stupid to take seriously what these grey-headed fools have to say. Unfortunately, that seems to be exactly what both the mainstream media and politicians are doing, taking the ISG report seriously. So the whole Iraq fiasco has some cover for maybe a year or two while we wait to see if the Iraqi government can get it together. But I can tell you right now that it won't.

I suppose by then we'll have to convene another panel of grey-headed elder statesmen to cobble together some new rhetorical bullshit to keep us there for a few more years. Man, this shit sickens me.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES
Means "Who Polices the Police?"

From the AP via the Houston Chronicle:

LA officer held in cuffed teen assault

A police officer suspected of assaulting a handcuffed 16-year-old boy in a partially videotaped attack at a police station was arrested Thursday, authorities said.

Sean Joseph Meade, 41, was arrested for investigation of assault under the color of authority, Police Chief William J. Bratton said. The boy was not injured and remained in custody after Tuesday's attack, while police tried to find his guardians, Bratton said.

Meade, a 13-year member of the Los Angeles force, has been suspended, Bratton said at a news conference. The chief said he "felt that there was sufficient justification for an arrest" after he watched enhanced footage from the videotape Wednesday night.

Click here for the rest.

A thirteen year veteran did this. I can't help but wonder if the guy just cracked up for some reason or if this is business as usual with the only difference from the day-to-day grind being that it was video taped this time. Of course, as you probably know, I'm pretty much of the opinion that, generally speaking, this isn't unusual at all for cops. The only time we ever hear about it is when the abuse is particularly egregious or they get caught red handed, like this one--in such instances, the police establishment is forced to deal with the situation or face intense public scrutiny. But how often does internal affairs spring into action if no one's going to look bad? Yeah, you know what I think: not that often at all.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Scientists see evidence of recent water on Mars

From the AP via the Houston Chronicle:

A provocative new study of photographs taken from orbit suggests that liquid water flowed on the surface of Mars as recently as several years ago, raising the possibility that the Red Planet could harbor an environment favorable to life.

The crisp images taken by the Mars Global Surveyor do not directly show water. Rather, they show apparently recent changes in surface features that provide the strongest evidence yet that water even now sometimes flows on the dusty, frigid world. Water and a stable heat source are considered keys for life to emerge.

Until now, the question of liquid water has focused on ancient Mars, and on the Martian north pole, where water ice has been detected. Scientists have long noted Martian features that appear to have been scoured by water or look like shorelines, and have tried to prove that the Red Planet had liquid water eons ago.

"This underscores the importance of searching for life on Mars, either present or past," said Bruce Jakosky, an astrobiologist at the University of Colorado at Boulder, who had no role in the study. "It's one more reason to think that life could be there."

Click here for the rest.

Wow. I don't really have much to say about this that the excerpt doesn't already say, but this blows me away: there is a distinct possibility that there is liquid water on the red planet right now!!!!! That means that there may very well be life on Mars even while I type these words. Probably not intelligent life, I know, much more likely that it's microscopic in nature, but who cares? There's a damned good chance that we may soon discover that we are not alone! At the very least, the possibility of colonizing the fourth planet, in our lifetimes, has just increased astronomically.

I'm a geek, yeah, but this really is a big deal.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$