The Big Whatever

I've heard that song before...

Like I was saying, you can't tell where the gov stands partywise.  He says he's a Republican, so he is one.  He certainly behaves like one.  And yet, and yet...Anyway, I'm not the only one who thinks this.  Here's today's LA Times on the same subject.

Bush on la migra...

Well, at least he comes from Texas, so he did get some of it right, but putting the National Guard on the border?  First off - what National Guard?  Aren't they all in Iraq?  Do they have even the minimal specialized training given to Border Patrol agents, who are the most hapless and most maligned law enforcement group in the country?

And how does W fight off the Minutemen and others on his right flank?  And the guest workers - will they be allowed to join unions?  Will they be covered by minimum wage laws?  Who will represent them in disputes with employers and the various government bureaus that will have to formed to enforce the new structure?

Has anyone thought this through at all?

Geeks and politics

Really like what iPAC is up to, and I agree with most of what they're promoting-limiting DRM; sane copyright laws; rethinking patents, etc.

But...

RE: FireHatch 

As much as Hatch is wrong and Ashdown right on geek issues, I think we need to be wary in the area of single-issue politics. A careful reading of Ashdown's site leads to his wacky position on abortion rights: states should decide for themselves in "female only" elections. This is not only absurd, it's patently unconstitutional-you can't have elections restricted by gender. Ashdown has a similar position on guns, and a very vague position on health care. He's basically a "states rights" kinda guy with a good heart, and a soft spot for business, what used to be called a "country club Republican." I'd like to see a real Democrat running, butthat's just me, and I don't live in Utah. Ashdown calls himself a Democrat, but only because he thinks Dems are "kinder to the poor." Yes, Hatch has to go, but remember that a member of Congress will vote on many issues, not just tech.

When you've lost________, you've lost America...

For LBJ, it was Cronkite.  For W, it's Rex Morgan, MD .  Here's Friday's strip: Our hero is brooding over the traumatic injuries suffered by his patient, a GI serving in Iraq. "Is It worth it," he asks, as have many of us.

Oh people, look around...

This is is all the evidence that I need - the last days are coming.
For those that wondered, yes, the chapter headings are song lyrics.  No, they're not my songs; get a little history, will ya...

I am a union man...

The AFL-CIO is cutting down on staff.  The president of the organization says that a major restructuring of labor law in this country is necessary for the union movement to thrive, or even survive.  How likely is it that we will get these changes?  Since the early days of the Reagan administration, the government has been fiercely anti-union.  There was a brief respite with Clinton when, at least, no further harm was done, but that's now the good old days.

This country, rabble-roused by the Repubs and besotted with the whole new-economy-work at home-Staples has got that-I'll fax you from my cell phone - scene--has shown labor the door, and the door overlooks a cliff that drops us straight into  oblivion.  How did this happen?  Some of it is our own fault: there's no doubt that unions can seem wasteful and intimidating to those who don't know what's at stake, and labor hasn't been good at putting out its message since the 'seventies (remember the "Look for the union label" song?).  But what's at stake is so important - the right of working people to make a living and to see some reward and a chance at progress.  A lot of people; most people; will never be able to work at home or telecommute.  The few manufacturing jobs left in this country cannot be phoned in; cops and nurses and mechanics and firefighters can't do their work from the web.

What, exactly, is the Demos plan, by the way, to reverse this?  It's not enough to say that we object or to simply point out this immoral mess. We need a fucking clue, and candidates who can bee seen as part of a solution.  Detachment, high-mindedness and too much of the long view won't get it done next time.

And don't even start me on the national ID card.

So here's the deal...

...It's going to be a return to the policies of the '80s--the 1880s that is.  Bush won't sign the Kyoto agreement; Social Security is going to be a free-for-all; and Gary Bauer et al will have the keys to the front door on Pennsylvania Ave.  OK, so be it; now, what do we do?  Don't mourn, says Marilyn, organize.  Sounds like good advice to me.  Now where shall we go to get organized....to the right with Leiberman and Gephart, to the left with--who, again? To the center with Hillary and Obama (too early for him; but wait, wait...)   Listen to eveyone from Dowd to Sheer: no one (least of all your humble servant) has got a clue on what to do with the Democratic party except don't do what we did again.  Progressives (and you know who you are; so does W) are going to have to regroup and prove ourselves relevant, because the DLC bunch is going to be gunning for us.

Next Sunday (14th), it's a day of  jazz: At 10.30 I'll be at Spazio with Steve Carr and Kirk Smith; then at 4.30 Steve and I go over to  Henri's,  at 21601 Sherman Way (at Owensmouth) in Canoga Park to host the jazz jam 'till 8.30.  Played a rehearsal with Pat Longo's big (loud) band this A.M.  Nice to see Thom Mason and Jack Redmond again. 

Oh--the WC Fields boxed set hits the stores tomorrow.  See you at Fry's...

Catching Up

Well. as the fires die down and the bleeding stops, what are we left with?  We're still fucked, but we now know better why...Mike A. says Leiberman would have been a better candidate--appeal to the right with strong backing of the war, unimpeachable on "Moral" issues.  But why, exactly, is Leiberman still a Democrat anyway? I've been wondering that for several years.  Are we so horny to win that we'll just run anyone?  I think progressives are going to be shunned for a  while in the rush to win at any price.  Gotta go now.

Gigs for the near future:  Spazio next Sunday and week from Wednesday;  Patti's show at TAS next Saturday; leading the jazz jam for Hammond next Sunday at Henri's in Canoga Park.  More details anon.

We're fucked...

I don't know what happened; I really thought that Kerry had it won. I may get up tomorrow and find he has won, but right now it don't look good. Was he a "rotten" candidate, as my friend in Chicago says? and if so, why? And who would have been better? Clark was a johnny-come lately; Dean was impossible from the start; Kucinich has my heart, but that was never gonna work; Edwards is too slick in some ways. So who is out there that would have been able to do it, and who do we look forward to in four years? Maybe get Powell to run as a Democrat... I don't see Edwards in a big comeback: how do you separate him from Kerry?

So now Bush has to: extricate us from Iraq; clean up the Middle East; fix Medicare, Social Security and health care; get people working in the US; restore our standing in the world, and more. And--several of these are issues he barely recognizes as being issues.

That's why we're fucked.

It's even...

...according to the L.A. Times poll of today. Bush/Kerry. I mean with Nader at one per cent. I think Kerry could win, especially with the news from Iraq so tragically bad of late. I'd really like to see Kerry win, as opposed to Bush lose, but I'll settle for whatevr kind of regieme change I can get. at this point.

I'm still hearing a lot about "News bias," so called. Patrick's column today had a "debate" between Michael De Luca and Laurence Bender. yeah--there's a pair to draw to for political advice. And yesterday on NPR, interviews regarding the news coverage had more middle Americans decyring the lack of objectivity in the press. "They're supposed to be fair and unbiased," is the whine; and DeLuca says Fox News is exactly that. Guess what--they're not,and they're NOT SUPPOSED TO BE. Where did people get that idea? Of course the news has a slant--get off your motherfucking ass and get more than one opinion, or don't blame those whose living depends on selling you their ideas when they try to do just that.

Does anyone else remember when the New Yorker used to run items from the various New York City papers--there were once eight--describing the same event from (often vastly) different perspectives? The tag for the series was "What paper do ya read?" implying that not only was there a choice, but it was a fair assumption that you might read more than one, as well as listten to the radio and read a newsmagazine, and talk to other equally-informed citizens.

I've gotta go, and I haven't proof read this. So be it.