A lot of seizures lately, so my brain is mostly mush. The post below reads like mush. No apologies from me - seizures are part of my milieu, and the brain bruising they cause (and the short circuiting of my already minimal English language skills) is part of this life of mine.
I also forgot to mention that I am shit eating grin happy to vote tomorrow, because the end is nigh for the thugs and criminals who looted the national treasury on behalf of their friends, set environmental policy back 20 years, started two wars on a foundation of intentional lies while ratcheting up the powers of the national security state. So even though my vote will not count but for the local issues questions on my ballot, I am casting it joyfully as my way of saying "fuck you assholes" and seeing them out the door.
Though too far short of impeachment and war crimes trials, I'll take it.
November 3, 2008
Polling
According to the National Weather Service it is 79 degrees here in Tulsa, Oklahoma, hardly a fall day despite the leaves blanketing lawns up and down my street, which means it doesn't feel much like voting season to me. Yet tomorrow I go to the polls to register my votes for president, senator, congressperson and a few local races and issues. Though I live in the heart of red country (it still makes me chuckle, in this season where Barack Obama is routinely, and wrongly labeled a socialist that the color most often associated with that political persuasion is identical to that color used to code the most conservative states) and my vote will not in any way affect the outcome of the presidential race, I am still very much looking forward to casting my vote tomorrow anyway. Oklahoma may well turn out to have the widest margin of victory for John McCain, but in my own head I am adding my voice to millions of others in saying "enough" to those who have run this country into banana republic territory.
Similarly, the Senate race here is rather pathetic. This is the home of James Inhofe, one of the more rabid right wingnuts to ever occupy a seat in the US Senate. The last polls I could find indicate he is leading Andrew Rice anywhere from 16-22 points, so my vote there will also make no difference, but I'll happily cast it anyway. As for the 1st district, it seems John Sullivan will win re-election rather easily. Again, I'll happily cast a vote against him, even if it seems futile.
I've only been surprised by two things this election season. The first is one I am happy to have been wrong about. Very early on, in conversations with friends, I was asked if Obama could win the Democratic nomination, and if so, the presidency. I said "no", and emphatically on both counts. My reasoning is simple, and now utterly discredited. I felt Clinton had the money, the name recognition, and the organization to handily take the nomination. I also felt that there are plenty of very conservative democrats out there who would find voting for a black man difficult, if impossible to do. I presumed, wrongly, that people would get into the polling booth and say "hell, no, I'm not voting for a black man".
And I am deliriously happy to have been proved a dunderhead about this. Nevertheless, that same reasoning was part of my calculation should Obama manage to swing the nomination. In a general election against McCain, a man many Democrats have come to admire and consider a middle of the road, bipartisan kind of guy (which he certainly is not), those same conservative democrats would be peeled away to vote Republican, and it could comfortably not be about race at all, but rather a better fit with an alleged Republican reformer. Those who did find race to be a show stopper could talk themselves into McCain by buying into the centrist talk.
Again, it would seem, I am going to be wrong as all hell. and again, I am overjoyed that is the case. I am still not sure what any of this proves when it comes to politics and race, given the incredible blunders of the McCain campaign since the general election got underway, but it has altered the extent and depth of my cynicism about America.
The second surprise relates to the rather nasty campaign McCain has run. I fully expected there to be plenty of surrogates to bring back the ghosts of Ayers and Wright, and the inevitable "surrender to terrorists" meme that was so popular in 2004. And those things all materialized, right on cue. The distinction this time that turns this sort of standard issue Republican ugliness into something extraordinary was the extent to which these attacks came directly from the mouths of the Republican candidates for president and vice president. I admit to a bit of shock at how easily McCain and Palin both fell into a comfortable groove with the "palling around with terrorists" charge, the casual pronouncements about the lack of patriotism on the part of Obama, the rabid zeal with which they both attempted to paint the Democratic nominee as not only unfit for office but potentially treasonous. It was pretty revolting and I really was surprised that so much of it originated with the candidates themselves, and not the usual semi-anonymous surrogates, which would at least allow the pretense of disassociation.
So I've been completely wrong about how this campaign would turn out, and I am content to be so. I still have very serious problems with the Democratic party and its behavior in the Bush years. And to those lefties who feel Obama is going to be some sort of hard charging progressive liberal, all I can say is, get right with what he really is, politically, or those of you who remember 1992 will experience all over again that sense of betrayal when it turned out Clinton was not a real friend of the left, but a corporatist centrist. Obama, who is intelligent, thoughtful, and quick on his feet is the far better choice in this election, and I cast my vote for him unequivocally. I do so, however, in recognition that he is very much a Democratic centrist, and not a committed progressive liberal.
Similarly, the Senate race here is rather pathetic. This is the home of James Inhofe, one of the more rabid right wingnuts to ever occupy a seat in the US Senate. The last polls I could find indicate he is leading Andrew Rice anywhere from 16-22 points, so my vote there will also make no difference, but I'll happily cast it anyway. As for the 1st district, it seems John Sullivan will win re-election rather easily. Again, I'll happily cast a vote against him, even if it seems futile.
I've only been surprised by two things this election season. The first is one I am happy to have been wrong about. Very early on, in conversations with friends, I was asked if Obama could win the Democratic nomination, and if so, the presidency. I said "no", and emphatically on both counts. My reasoning is simple, and now utterly discredited. I felt Clinton had the money, the name recognition, and the organization to handily take the nomination. I also felt that there are plenty of very conservative democrats out there who would find voting for a black man difficult, if impossible to do. I presumed, wrongly, that people would get into the polling booth and say "hell, no, I'm not voting for a black man".
And I am deliriously happy to have been proved a dunderhead about this. Nevertheless, that same reasoning was part of my calculation should Obama manage to swing the nomination. In a general election against McCain, a man many Democrats have come to admire and consider a middle of the road, bipartisan kind of guy (which he certainly is not), those same conservative democrats would be peeled away to vote Republican, and it could comfortably not be about race at all, but rather a better fit with an alleged Republican reformer. Those who did find race to be a show stopper could talk themselves into McCain by buying into the centrist talk.
Again, it would seem, I am going to be wrong as all hell. and again, I am overjoyed that is the case. I am still not sure what any of this proves when it comes to politics and race, given the incredible blunders of the McCain campaign since the general election got underway, but it has altered the extent and depth of my cynicism about America.
The second surprise relates to the rather nasty campaign McCain has run. I fully expected there to be plenty of surrogates to bring back the ghosts of Ayers and Wright, and the inevitable "surrender to terrorists" meme that was so popular in 2004. And those things all materialized, right on cue. The distinction this time that turns this sort of standard issue Republican ugliness into something extraordinary was the extent to which these attacks came directly from the mouths of the Republican candidates for president and vice president. I admit to a bit of shock at how easily McCain and Palin both fell into a comfortable groove with the "palling around with terrorists" charge, the casual pronouncements about the lack of patriotism on the part of Obama, the rabid zeal with which they both attempted to paint the Democratic nominee as not only unfit for office but potentially treasonous. It was pretty revolting and I really was surprised that so much of it originated with the candidates themselves, and not the usual semi-anonymous surrogates, which would at least allow the pretense of disassociation.
So I've been completely wrong about how this campaign would turn out, and I am content to be so. I still have very serious problems with the Democratic party and its behavior in the Bush years. And to those lefties who feel Obama is going to be some sort of hard charging progressive liberal, all I can say is, get right with what he really is, politically, or those of you who remember 1992 will experience all over again that sense of betrayal when it turned out Clinton was not a real friend of the left, but a corporatist centrist. Obama, who is intelligent, thoughtful, and quick on his feet is the far better choice in this election, and I cast my vote for him unequivocally. I do so, however, in recognition that he is very much a Democratic centrist, and not a committed progressive liberal.
October 19, 2008
Some Sensible Words
Colin Powell is, in my view, a war criminal. His dishonest performance in front of the United Nations was the final push that a lot of fence sitters needed to agree to invade Iraq. The fact that he knew he was telling a very Big Lie constructed of hundreds of small ones annihilated any credibility he had, in government, and in public life.
On Meet The Press Powell endorsed Obama, a move that had been predicted for months. Turns out his comments just outside the studio were more interesting than those spoken in front of a national TV audience. His comments about taxation are particularly useful, and bear repeating amidst the constant insanity of tax-cutting-because-we-can mania. Too bad he didn't choose to say those on the air.
On Meet The Press Powell endorsed Obama, a move that had been predicted for months. Turns out his comments just outside the studio were more interesting than those spoken in front of a national TV audience. His comments about taxation are particularly useful, and bear repeating amidst the constant insanity of tax-cutting-because-we-can mania. Too bad he didn't choose to say those on the air.
October 18, 2008
"Liberal" Is Equivlaent To "Traitor"
This Representative from Minnesota is quite special.
The money quote:
The money quote:
What I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or Anti-America? I think the American people would love to see an expose like that.Joe would be so proud!
October 16, 2008
Maverickism
I'm confused.
If John McCain is truly the maverick we are bludgeoned into believing he is, why was it left to Bill Kristol the choice of Sarah Palin as running mate?
Much has been said and written about how McCain failed the very first executive test as a presidential wannabe: the choice of vice presidential candidate. Palin was a truly odd, and now obviously reckless choice, but at least we believed McCain himself had made the pick.
Curiouser and curiouser.
If John McCain is truly the maverick we are bludgeoned into believing he is, why was it left to Bill Kristol the choice of Sarah Palin as running mate?
Much has been said and written about how McCain failed the very first executive test as a presidential wannabe: the choice of vice presidential candidate. Palin was a truly odd, and now obviously reckless choice, but at least we believed McCain himself had made the pick.
Curiouser and curiouser.
October 13, 2008
The Anti-Government Industry
I am nearly finished with a great little book by Garry Wills, entitled "A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government". It is a concise treatment of the origins of modern anti-government thinking, and it is a delightful eye opening read. The most important thing I carry away from it (among many many useful things) is the practical streak that those who founded this country almost all shared. They had their beliefs and ideologies, but more than anything, a practical way of adapting their viewpoints to match reality, and thus create the best master governing document extant in the western world.
The book was published before W. took office, so it doesn't examine in any way the last frontier of anti-government sentiment in our country - the neo-conservatives who have been running it for the last eight years, and for longer at the congressional level. Wills may not have chosen to include them in his book had it been written later, and for that, we have Thomas Frank and his explosive "The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule", which deconstructs what happens when those who believe the federal government is not a legitimate authority take possession of the levers of power.
This pair of books go very nicely together. I recommend them both heartily to anyone who enjoys learning something new.
The book was published before W. took office, so it doesn't examine in any way the last frontier of anti-government sentiment in our country - the neo-conservatives who have been running it for the last eight years, and for longer at the congressional level. Wills may not have chosen to include them in his book had it been written later, and for that, we have Thomas Frank and his explosive "The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule", which deconstructs what happens when those who believe the federal government is not a legitimate authority take possession of the levers of power.
This pair of books go very nicely together. I recommend them both heartily to anyone who enjoys learning something new.
October 11, 2008
Exactly Right
Frank Rich sums up the McCain/Palin effort to delegitimize Barack Obama as a candidate for president.
All’s fair in politics. John McCain and Sarah Palin have every right to bring up William Ayers, even if his connection to Obama is minor, even if Ayers’s Weather Underground history dates back to Obama’s childhood, even if establishment Republicans and Democrats alike have collaborated with the present-day Ayers in educational reform. But it’s not just the old Joe McCarthyesque guilt-by-association game, however spurious, that’s going on here. Don’t for an instant believe the many mindlessly “even-handed” journalists who keep saying that the McCain campaign’s use of Ayers is the moral or political equivalent of the Obama campaign’s hammering on Charles Keating.
What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.
By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.
That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8.
We all know what punishment fits the crime of murder, or even potential murder, if the security of post-9/11 America is at stake. We all know how self-appointed “patriotic” martyrs always justify taking the law into their own hands.
October 9, 2008
To The Reichstag!
Put Godwin aside, for the moment.
Consider the recent assertions by the McCain/Palin campaign that Senator Obama is "palling around with terrorists". It has been spoken by Palin at her rallies, spurring cries of "terrorist!" and "kill him!". The locals who introduce either candidate continue the disingenuous maneuver of using Obama's middle name every time they mention him, in an effort to paint him as "other". McCain has just released an ad for the web (which inevitably get lots of free air time on the various cable news programs - talk about return on the dollar!) which reaffirms that Obama is friends with a violent terrorist and "cannot be trusted" with the presidency.
They say this:
And people believe it:
I realize we are not in second grade any more, but go ahead and take a moment to read that over again, and really contemplate what it means. A major party candidate for the highest office in the land, and possibly the most powerful office on earth, is accusing his opponent of being a sworn enemy of his own country. That is exactly what those statements and ads amount to - an accusation of murderous treason on the part of a US Senator with aspirations on the presidency.
And those making these assertions know full well there is not a shred of truth in them.
So while I am not usually inclined to make a serious comparison between the Republican party and the Nazis, I am free to make it now, and it sticks. This is the "Big Lie" tactic, where one political party or figure asserts the other party or candidate is in fact, the enemy, a person who intends to commit treason and destroy his own country. Not content to frighten Americans with "the terrorists" from some foreign land, they have moved to equating a fellow serving senator with those who really would strap on a bomb or steal an airliner and murder American citizens. It is astonishing when you really consider the magnitude of the accusation, and the likely ripple effects it is engendering now that will be in play well after McCain loses the election and returns to the senate.
Bereft in this campaign without a policy leg left to stand on, they have descended to the lowest form of political discourse, beyond the usual shots at character involving hints and allegations of financial wrongdoing or sketchy family background. This entire "Obama is a terrorist" meme is directly on par with the "he's a Jew" or "he's a communist" labels used in Germany in the 1930's to paint people as enemies of the state and all good Germans everywhere. There is absolutely no substantive difference between what the Brown shirts were doing then, and what McCain, Palin, and their campaign surrogates are engaged in today.
Consider the recent assertions by the McCain/Palin campaign that Senator Obama is "palling around with terrorists". It has been spoken by Palin at her rallies, spurring cries of "terrorist!" and "kill him!". The locals who introduce either candidate continue the disingenuous maneuver of using Obama's middle name every time they mention him, in an effort to paint him as "other". McCain has just released an ad for the web (which inevitably get lots of free air time on the various cable news programs - talk about return on the dollar!) which reaffirms that Obama is friends with a violent terrorist and "cannot be trusted" with the presidency.
They say this:
And people believe it:
I realize we are not in second grade any more, but go ahead and take a moment to read that over again, and really contemplate what it means. A major party candidate for the highest office in the land, and possibly the most powerful office on earth, is accusing his opponent of being a sworn enemy of his own country. That is exactly what those statements and ads amount to - an accusation of murderous treason on the part of a US Senator with aspirations on the presidency.
And those making these assertions know full well there is not a shred of truth in them.
So while I am not usually inclined to make a serious comparison between the Republican party and the Nazis, I am free to make it now, and it sticks. This is the "Big Lie" tactic, where one political party or figure asserts the other party or candidate is in fact, the enemy, a person who intends to commit treason and destroy his own country. Not content to frighten Americans with "the terrorists" from some foreign land, they have moved to equating a fellow serving senator with those who really would strap on a bomb or steal an airliner and murder American citizens. It is astonishing when you really consider the magnitude of the accusation, and the likely ripple effects it is engendering now that will be in play well after McCain loses the election and returns to the senate.
Bereft in this campaign without a policy leg left to stand on, they have descended to the lowest form of political discourse, beyond the usual shots at character involving hints and allegations of financial wrongdoing or sketchy family background. This entire "Obama is a terrorist" meme is directly on par with the "he's a Jew" or "he's a communist" labels used in Germany in the 1930's to paint people as enemies of the state and all good Germans everywhere. There is absolutely no substantive difference between what the Brown shirts were doing then, and what McCain, Palin, and their campaign surrogates are engaged in today.
September 8, 2008
True Left
You read and hear all the time about how far to the left Barack Obama is. This is a standard canard of the Republicans during presidential campaigns, (never true) designed to convince stupid voters who cannot think for themselves that the Democratic nominee is some sort of flaming commie stooge. Of course it is a naked lie, no matter how many time they repeat it.
This year's version goes thusly:
"Senator Orrin Hatch appeared and took this recurring shot used by the Republican attack dogs: "In all honesty the two Democrats are very fine people but they both are extremely left. They are both to the left of Bernie Sanders, who is the socialist from Vermont, if that doesn't tell you something I don't know what does. If you use the term liberal it really means something here."
Of course, neither the candidate's voting records nor their stated and practiced political philosophy proves this point - to the contrary they explicitly debunk it.
And Bernie Sanders has something to say about this:
Link
This year's version goes thusly:
"Senator Orrin Hatch appeared and took this recurring shot used by the Republican attack dogs: "In all honesty the two Democrats are very fine people but they both are extremely left. They are both to the left of Bernie Sanders, who is the socialist from Vermont, if that doesn't tell you something I don't know what does. If you use the term liberal it really means something here."
Of course, neither the candidate's voting records nor their stated and practiced political philosophy proves this point - to the contrary they explicitly debunk it.
And Bernie Sanders has something to say about this:
Q: As far as this redbating goes, what do you think Republicans are trying to scare people about – about you?
A: First of all, is they assume that when people hear the word socialist what they are talking about is the Soviet Union and communism. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders wants to renegotiate permanent normal trade relations with China – and George Bush just loves it by the way, and corporate America loves and is very proud of investing tens of billions of dollars in China, rather than in the United States, which is an interesting irony. And the Chamber of Commerce is very upset that the Chinese government wants to liberalize labor law in China, interestingly enough. You know, clearly what they are trying to do is what they always do, is confuse the social democratic policies which have been very successful in countries like Finland, Denmark, Sweden, other European countries – which guarantee healthcare to all people through a national healthcare program; which make sure that preschool education is available to all working families regardless of income; where in most cases college education is free or very inexpensive; where workers have more vacation time than they do in the United States; where unions are stronger… So, instead of looking at what goes on in some of the social democratic countries, which have virtually eliminated childhood poverty, while we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world – instead of looking at those policies, what they do is say, "This is socialism." Socialism we equate with communism, or authoritarianism, and lack of democracy. So, it's not a new tactic, it's been going on for about 40 or 50 years.Now that's true left!
Link
September 3, 2008
Open mic night
I admit I am taking no small amount of glee in Republicans recent misfortunes, so many of which center around the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's VP pick. Teen pregnancy aside (yes, abstain from ragging on the youngsters) she is the gift that keeps on giving, with an abuse of power investigation only the tip of the rotten ice berg.
Mike Murphy, a former McCain adviser, and Peggy Noonan, formerly a speech writer for Ronald Reagan and indubitably still in puppy love with him, are caught on an open microphone during a stint on MSNBC giving their assessments of the Republican National Convention.
The video with all of the unintended truthy goodness.
And for the video impaired, the transcript:
Chuck Todd: Mike Murphy, lots of free advice, we'll see if Steve Schmidt and the boys were watching. We'll find out on your blackberry. Tonight voters will get their chance to hear from Sarah Palin and she will get the chance to show voters she's the right woman for the job Up next, one man who's already convinced and he'll us why Gov. Jon Huntsman.
Mike Murphy, a former McCain adviser, and Peggy Noonan, formerly a speech writer for Ronald Reagan and indubitably still in puppy love with him, are caught on an open microphone during a stint on MSNBC giving their assessments of the Republican National Convention.
The video with all of the unintended truthy goodness.
And for the video impaired, the transcript:
Chuck Todd: Mike Murphy, lots of free advice, we'll see if Steve Schmidt and the boys were watching. We'll find out on your blackberry. Tonight voters will get their chance to hear from Sarah Palin and she will get the chance to show voters she's the right woman for the job
(cut away)
Peggy Noonan: Yeah.
Mike Murphy: You know, because I come out of the blue swing state governor world: Engler, Whitman, Tommy Thompson, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush. I mean, these guys -- this is how you win a Texas race, just run it up. And it's not gonna work. And --
PN: It's over.
MM: Still McCain can give a version of the Lieberman speech to do himself some good.
CT: I also think the Palin pick is insulting to Kay Bailey Hutchinson, too.
PN: Saw Kay this morning.
CT: Yeah, she's never looked comfortable about this --
MM: They're all bummed out.
CT: Yeah, I mean is she really the most qualified woman they could have turned to?
PN: The most qualified? No! I think they went for this -- excuse me-- political bullshit about narratives --
CT: Yeah they went to a narrative.
MM: I totally agree.
PN: Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it.
MM: You know what's really the worst thing about it? The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical.
CT: This is cynical, and as you called it, gimmicky.
MM: Yeah.
August 20, 2008
Almost trivial
A very good article about how simple it can be to have your personal email and financial accounts hijacked. We are constantly reminded that everything we do online is permanent and searchable, but few people really contemplate the potential consequences involved.
August 12, 2008
...pretty as a picture, right in the very front row...
Errol Morris delves once again into the issue of photography as truth in the case of the Iranian "4 missiles or three" images.
Inevitably, he adds perspective and context that went missing from the many rounds of Internet gotcha! that followed in the days the alterations were revealed.
Inevitably, he adds perspective and context that went missing from the many rounds of Internet gotcha! that followed in the days the alterations were revealed.
July 14, 2008
Sober Rock
I haven't had a drink in over ten years, but Foghat's "Road Fever" from Foghat Live is still a down and dirty, head banging piece of loud slide guitar, four-on-the-floor rock nastiness.
Best played at volume setting 11.
That is all.
Best played at volume setting 11.
That is all.
June 26, 2008
Supremes Get It Wrong
I suppose the clumsy syntax of the Second Amendment bears some minor responsibility for leaving a crack of daylight through which the NRA have jammed a jackhammer, but it is to the Supreme Court's everlasting shame it chose to abdicate its responsibilities.
There is no coincidence that Scalia's majority opinion reads exactly like Bush administration talking points, as his hysterical dissent in the Guantanamo related case did.
There is no coincidence that Scalia's majority opinion reads exactly like Bush administration talking points, as his hysterical dissent in the Guantanamo related case did.
March 18, 2008
Self-Evidence
There is nothing more irritating then reading a column in a major national newspaper in which the author has that light bulb moment the rest of us experienced decades ago. You know, the one where he/she discovers that Republicans have no principles other than the Law Of Maximum Short Term Gain. The corollary to it is that those same fraudulent "free market" profiteers inevitably turn to government to assume the destructive debt they incur in the chase of imaginary money - derivatives, shitty loans, outright theft.
It is revolting in the extreme, but typical. I call your attention to the Enron-Arthur Andersen criminalities of the late 1990's early 2000's. Cast back a little farther and you run into the wall of the S&L rip off of the early 1980's.
But remember kids, regulation is evil and the government is the enemy. Except when it isn't.
EJ Dionne, this is your wake up call.
It is revolting in the extreme, but typical. I call your attention to the Enron-Arthur Andersen criminalities of the late 1990's early 2000's. Cast back a little farther and you run into the wall of the S&L rip off of the early 1980's.
But remember kids, regulation is evil and the government is the enemy. Except when it isn't.
EJ Dionne, this is your wake up call.
August 9, 2007
A side note
I never did finish any of my useless ruminations on guitar players, rock music, and the albums of Led Zeppelin.
I probably never will.
This blog has utterly lost its focus which is in some part a mirror of its author's internal clutter and messiness.
Alas.
This is a bit I posted to a discussion thread on Flickr.
For those too lazy to follow the link nor read the discussion (okok, I know all four of you are really busy) it was in the context of the trend amongst many Flickr photographers to get caught up in the technical perfection of photos and perhaps losing sight of composition and, most importantly, subject and impact. The famous photo of Jimi Hendrix on his knees on stage at Monterey in 1967, summoning forth flames from his guitar was posed as an example. Iconic photograph of an out of the world moment, captured on film but not following any of the rules of photography as taught in schools or touted on photo sites.
A bit of back and forth (including an unwanted correction by me about where the photo was taken - the OP said "Ashbury" which had nothing at all to do with Monterey), and then I mentioned this:
My problem has become this: nothing has changed. More of ours are dying now than ever before, Iraq is a squalid, internecine street fight we can neither control nor suppress, and our country is becoming irrelevant to human progress. An impediment, even.
Makes me wish for those old time, over sized barf bags airlines used to have in every seat back pouch.
Fuck it.
Maybe writing convoluted irrelevancies about music and other shit that interests me the way shiny things entrance monkeys is the way to go. My anger is otherwise uncontrollable...
I probably never will.
This blog has utterly lost its focus which is in some part a mirror of its author's internal clutter and messiness.
Alas.
This is a bit I posted to a discussion thread on Flickr.
For those too lazy to follow the link nor read the discussion (okok, I know all four of you are really busy) it was in the context of the trend amongst many Flickr photographers to get caught up in the technical perfection of photos and perhaps losing sight of composition and, most importantly, subject and impact. The famous photo of Jimi Hendrix on his knees on stage at Monterey in 1967, summoning forth flames from his guitar was posed as an example. Iconic photograph of an out of the world moment, captured on film but not following any of the rules of photography as taught in schools or touted on photo sites.
A bit of back and forth (including an unwanted correction by me about where the photo was taken - the OP said "Ashbury" which had nothing at all to do with Monterey), and then I mentioned this:
We actually agree - if the image doesn't have something to captivate the eye or the mind or the soul, no amount of post processing or multi-thousand dollar gear is going to compensate for that. I do think the technical aspects have their place, and can improve a great image into something beyond that (my superlative well is running dry), but without the undefinable "it", all of that falls by the way side.And that sentiment, that photograph, brings basically back where I started with my posts in March of 2003 - the first one being about the opening salvo of death-bringing bombs falling on Baghdad while Dan Rather tries to suppress the hard on he obviously had going under the news desk as buildings and the humans in them were blown literally to pieces.
When I was a kid I read a lot of books about the Second World War. Many of them were heavily illustrated with photographs, some of them quite remarkable both in terms of subject and emotion, and the technical captures themselves.
One, however, stays with me and played a large role in defining my thoughts and feelings about war generally. It is a lousy photograph, from a technical standpoint - bad composition, lighting, exposure, so on and so forth. But the subject remains imprinted on my brain.
It shows the flattened body of a German infantryman after being run over by a tank he had been walking in front of, as part of a long column. All you can really see is this flat, muddy, uniformed figure, surrounded by a torn up dirt road turned to swampy mud, with a stopped tank behind him. It isn't gory, there are no body parts or blood apparent - you can almost believe it is just an empty uniform, lying in the mud.
Almost.
My problem has become this: nothing has changed. More of ours are dying now than ever before, Iraq is a squalid, internecine street fight we can neither control nor suppress, and our country is becoming irrelevant to human progress. An impediment, even.
Makes me wish for those old time, over sized barf bags airlines used to have in every seat back pouch.
Fuck it.
Maybe writing convoluted irrelevancies about music and other shit that interests me the way shiny things entrance monkeys is the way to go. My anger is otherwise uncontrollable...
November 16, 2006
You've Been Euphemized
Oh Joy!
Oh Bliss!
Hunger has been eradicated in the United States!
Oh, wait. Maybe not.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/15/AR2006111501621.html
Oh Bliss!
Hunger has been eradicated in the United States!
Oh, wait. Maybe not.
Well. *I* for one am relieved. Wouldn't want anyone in the richest nation on earth to go HUNGRY.The U.S. government has vowed that Americans will never be hungry again. But they may experience "very low food security."
Every year, the Agriculture Department issues a report that measures Americans' access to food, and it has consistently used the word "hunger" to describe those who can least afford to put food on the table. But not this year.
Mark Nord, the lead author of the report, said "hungry" is "not a scientifically accurate term for the specific phenomenon being measured in the food security survey." Nord, a USDA sociologist, said, "We don't have a measure of that condition."
The USDA said that 12 percent of Americans -- 35 million people -- could not put food on the table at least part of last year. Eleven million of them reported going hungry at times. Beginning this year, the USDA has determined "very low food security" to be a more scientifically palatable description for that group.
The United States has set a goal of reducing the proportion of food-insecure households to 6 percent or less by 2010, or half the 1995 level, but it is proving difficult. The number of hungriest Americans has risen over the past five years. Last year, the total share of food-insecure households stood at 11 percent.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/15/AR2006111501621.html
October 24, 2006
A glimpse of leather
Saw a bat as I was getting ready to let Rufus out to do his thing. I hadn't opened the door yet. A large flying insect was beating it's wings around the front porch light, and from behind the sliding glass doors in the kitchen I saw a sudden blur of flapping leathery wings. The bat half circled the light , then snatched it's prey and vanished into the dark up in the palm trees just as I opened the door.
Startling, but very cool.
October 22, 2006
Suffocation
I try to imagine not being able to breathe, reaching that point where the lungs will burst, your head explode, your vision narrowed to a pinpoint, and still the air doesn't come. I've been at the bottom of the pool longer than I should have, knowing that I could hold out for one more painful second then push off and find sweet air above the surface.
In my mother's case, the surface is a very long way away. A lifetime smoker, she was eventually diagnosed with Emphysema, and then C.O.P.D. The latter is a death sentence, a matter of when and not if, the rate of degeneracy the determinant. Then, not to my surprise, she was diagnosed with a cancerous tumor in her right lung. One type of surgery seemed viable, so she signed up for it and played it up to us as being relatively safe, as major operations involving lung removal possibly can be.
A month later and she remains in the ICU, unable to breathe on her own, fighting a host of smaller, nagging problems that have utterly inhibited her ability to begin recovery. After a lesser procedure we are told things are "improving", presumably relative to where things stood the week prior. The respirator tube has been moved from her mouth to a tracheotomy to kill off an infection in her throat and to render intubation a little less painful. She is also on light dialysis to speed up her kidney function, which had fallen way off when her system was unable to process enough waste. We are told the dialysis is nothing to worry about.
We shall see.
The hope is that in the next week or so she will be deemed strong enough to have the respirator turned off and begin breathing on her own, something that should have happened weeks ago. If it does come to pass, she may well be on her way to a long, but successful recovery. If she cannot, then she is at the bottom of the pool, staring up at the surface without the strength to launch herself toward air, fresh air.
In my mother's case, the surface is a very long way away. A lifetime smoker, she was eventually diagnosed with Emphysema, and then C.O.P.D. The latter is a death sentence, a matter of when and not if, the rate of degeneracy the determinant. Then, not to my surprise, she was diagnosed with a cancerous tumor in her right lung. One type of surgery seemed viable, so she signed up for it and played it up to us as being relatively safe, as major operations involving lung removal possibly can be.
A month later and she remains in the ICU, unable to breathe on her own, fighting a host of smaller, nagging problems that have utterly inhibited her ability to begin recovery. After a lesser procedure we are told things are "improving", presumably relative to where things stood the week prior. The respirator tube has been moved from her mouth to a tracheotomy to kill off an infection in her throat and to render intubation a little less painful. She is also on light dialysis to speed up her kidney function, which had fallen way off when her system was unable to process enough waste. We are told the dialysis is nothing to worry about.
We shall see.
The hope is that in the next week or so she will be deemed strong enough to have the respirator turned off and begin breathing on her own, something that should have happened weeks ago. If it does come to pass, she may well be on her way to a long, but successful recovery. If she cannot, then she is at the bottom of the pool, staring up at the surface without the strength to launch herself toward air, fresh air.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)