Sorry about my absence but I’ve been busy working on my new carbon-positive car. So far, it’s tuned to go about 15 miles on a bale of hay. But I’m negotiating with the horses’ union about upping that to 18. And I’m hoping like hell that Congress doesn’t get involved.
Giddy-up.
Oops. You won’t believe this. But I lost all the words I needed to write to you. I sat down to tell you all kinds of crazy things. And I put on the right kind of music – Art Tatum, this time – to make me think about writing to you. I even re-arranged my desk so that everything would feel and look like it should feel and look when I’m thinking about writing all kinds of crazy things for you. I removed, for example, the old and curling sticky-note from my monitor that said “Memo to Self: Annoy Daughter.” My daughter has a similar one. It just reads a little differently.
But I couldn’t find the words to the stories I wanted to tell you. They were just gone. Lost, perhaps, in the whirlwind of wintry activities. I’ll bet I lost them while shoveling the snow. Or skiing in it. Or while plowing snow with the horses. Or when I hooked them to the sleigh. Or was it when I relented to my daughter’s pleas to “skip school” and play outside with her yesterday.
Whatever. I just can’t remember where I left those words.
Perhaps they just don’t matter.
Indeed.
–
Enough words, enough sentences! O Real life,
Artless and unmetaphored, be mine.
Come into my arms, sit on my lap.
Come into my heart, come into my lines, my life.
– Valery Larbaud (from: “Music After Reading”)
–
Oh wait, here are some words:
–
Please
By Nanao Sakaki
Sing a song
or
Laugh
or
Cry
or
Go away.
–
Charles Grodin’s John Stewart media moment:
–
And here’s one of my sister-in-law’s latest paintings. It’s called “Swan Choker,” by Elizabeth Zechel.
Busy, Busy Congress: Yep, there’s clearly no time to discuss impeachment. Not when the Dem-controlled Congress is busy debating and voting on bills like H. Res. 847, a bill “recognizing the importance of Christmas and Christianity.” On Tuesday, this bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 372-9. Whew. But I’m wondering why they didn’t throw Santa and Rudolph into the mix as well. Fucking Santa-hating Dems. I knew we couldn’t trust them.
But, seriously, hats off to Peter Welch for going halfway on this bill. Instead of joining the more level-headed folks like Woolsey, Lee and Ackerman by voting “no” on it, Welch simply voted “present.” It’s kind of the chicken-shit way of saying I don’t like what’s happening here but I’m too scared to actually vote that way. But, hey, at least he didn’t vote “yes.” Perhaps he, too, was pissed about the Santa exclusion.
I’m just glad that the impeachment issue isn’t distracting them from all this important business.
From the Department of Oops: As all of Vermont knows by now, the magazine U.S. News & World Report has admitted that they made a mistake by listing Montpelier High School (MHS) as the “number 5” high school in the nation earlier this month. Ironically, it was the principal of MHS who found the math error that put the school in the number 5 spot when it should have really been ranked at number 500. And he did the right thing, too, by reporting it – thus putting MHS in the running for one of the most honest schools in the nation.
But here’s where it gets really bizarre [editor’s note: I feel Snarky lurking]. While U.S. News & World Report was double-checking its MHS error, it found some other facts about the state that it wanted to clarify. Here, for your reading pleasure, is a partial list of the other Vermont errors that the magazine would like to clear up:
–
Oprah Update: It just keeps getting better. Now Oprah is telling the media that her recent Double O tour with Obama doesn’t mean that she’s against his primary opponent, Hillary Clinton. Here, exactly, is what she said:
“I’ve always said this, that my being in support of Barack Obama is not my being against Hillary Clinton or anybody else,” Winfrey said. “It’s just that for this moment in time, this is what I know I am supposed to be doing. I feel compelled to do this. So my vote for is not a vote against anybody. It’s just a vote for.“
Well, at least this confirms that she’s a Democrat. Because that’s exactly how they talk about the war. You know, kind of like:
“I’m against the war but that doesn’t mean I’m not for the troops or the commander or the weaponry that is making the war a war. It’s just that for this moment, I’m against the war. That’s why I vote for it.”
Got it.
–
Oh hell, I’ve got to go try and find Rusty in the woods….
I like the sound of the woods, especially with snow on the ground. I like the crunching of my feet as I climb a hill or move along a path. I like to catch the sight of a scrambling deer up ahead of me. I like the sound of snow falling from a branch. I like how it all seems to make sense.
For years I was an environmental activist. Now I’m an environmental practitioner. I used to work in an office talking about the environment. Now I work in an environment we call the woods and talk to horses. I like it this way. But, hey, that’s just me.
I wrote a “to do” list the other night that made me smile. It went like this:
1) Cut trees.
2) Haul trees.
3) Split trees
4) Write about trees.
It started out to be a serious list of my next day’s activities. But it became a nice mantra about where I stand now in this so-called life. I like it this way.
I cut trees based on the “worst first” approach. As in, the worst tree gets cut first, thus leaving room and light for the best trees to flourish. In this manner I visualize the woods as a giant garden in need of “pruning.” At best, I will be a very, very old man if I ever truly get to see the ultimate end to my efforts. But, then again, there really will be no end to these efforts. They will live on, and I like it that way.
My woods are young – mostly a hodge-podge of softwoods trying to rebound after a hundred years or so of being pasture. I still encounter the labyrinth of barbed wire and make shift stonewalls that used to keep the sheep and cows confined to our hillsides that rise above the Winooski’s North Branch. I like to study the boundaries. I imagine the decisions based on contour, property boundaries, thoughts of rotation, the natural movements of wildlife and just plain necessity.
I don’t like the sound of my chainsaw. Or its smell. When I’m working in my own woods, I find myself organizing my work so that I get as much of the chainsaw work done and out of the way in a flourish of activity so I can get back to the “quiet” work: scouting trees and trails, and hitching the horses to the loads.
I like the sounds of the horses breathing and moving in the woods. I like to watch them and learn about what’s lurking. As a prey animal, they know what’s out there. It’s deeply embedded in their DNA to know what’s out there. Watch them and see for yourself.
And I like the sound of the chains and the harness as they jangle and rattle as we move along together. I like to watch their ears as I speak to them – somehow knowing the difference between my singing and blathering and my verbal commands. As well-trained draft horses, they respond to verbal commands as much as to the commands delivered through the lines attached to their bridle. When I say “gee,” they move to the right. “Haw” means to move left. “Back” is back and “whoa” is whoa. And a quiet kiss and/or “step up” means to start walking.
When we’re all on the same page it’s magical. When we’re not, it’s usually my fault. And that’s usually because I’m not focused. Or I’ve been lazy by giving them too many days off. Or I’m in a hurry. They’ll let me know when I’m off, that’s for sure.
I was off the other day. I had given my trusty Big Jim too many days off. And the logs I had ready for him to pull weren’t big enough to really get his mind set on work. Worse, I had him pulling the logs down a hill and right back toward the path that leads home – or to the barn and his pals, in his mind.
As we came down the hill with a small maple log I stumbled and fell and, worse, the snow-slicked lines slipped out of my hands. Off he went on his own – well, him and the log. “Whoa!” I called out. And as if to remind me that I hadn’t been doing my job of working with him enough of late, he kept on moving toward home. Luckily, after about the fifth “whoa” and about 500 yards of chasing, he stopped and I caught him.
I knew what to do then: work him. And so I unhooked the log, re-hooked it on the other end, repositioned Big Jim, and had him drag it right back to where it was supposed to go in the first place. I like to think we both learned something that day. I think I taught him that he’s not going to get away with not listening to me and he taught me that I wasn’t going to get away with giving him too much time off. And so we continued our little dance in the woods.
On most days, it sure beats politics.
Celebrification of Politics Update: Never mind all that complaining I did about celebrities and politics yesterday. Because today I see the light. And it’s shining from none other than Sean Penn. Yeah, the same Sean Penn who recently made the best movie I’ve seen in a long, long time: Into the Wild. As you’ll see in the video below, Penn is endorsing Dennis Kucinich. And he has to put up with some hecklers in the process. Notice how Penn deals with the heckler – it’s a bit different than the Ann Coulter method of squawking like a hawk child (or something like that).
Speaking of Penn, you can also read one of his recent screeds at CounterPunch by clicking here. Unlike Oprah, he’s talking about issues. Imagine that.
Iowa Update: My home state of Iowa is now less than a month away from delivering a shocker to the nation in the form of a surprise in its first-in-the-nation presidential caucus. On the Dem side, my guess is that the surprise will be a better-than-expected showing by John Edwards. He’s been able to be positive over the last several weeks as Obama and Clinton get down and dirty with one another. And, as history indicates, Iowans like the candidate who is positive at the end – even if it’s the long shot. Remember, in 2004 John Kerry was way behind Dean and Gephardt and then leaped over both of them when they started to sling the mud. (The “scream” came AFTER the caucus.)
Edwards is also said to have a very strong and deep organization in Iowa, led by a very enthusiastic union presence. That’s critical given the odd nature of the caucus process. Remember, Iowans don’t go into a voting both to quietly and anonymously mark their preference. Instead, they go into a room full of people and are instructed to publicly “caucus” with the others in the room who share their presidential choice. And if there aren’t enough of you with a certain candidate, you discuss amongst yourselves which of the leading candidates you’re going to join. Sooner or later, someone wins.
So if you’ve got a strong organization with deep support, these people will be strong, visible and vocal during the caucus. And if you’ve tried to remain focused on the issues and not cutting the throat of the other candidates, their supporters are more likely to swing into your camp during the caucus process. At this point, Edwards is hoping that the growing disdain between the Obama and Clinton camps will mean that he’s the second choice of both camps and, as a result of the caucus process, walk away with a victory. Got that?
The Obama campaign understands it. That’s why they’ve started going negative with Edwards, especially within the union crowd. And it wouldn’t surprise me to see Clinton follow suit real soon.
One thing’s for sure, Iowa is loving the attention. And the money. It’s better than ethanol.
Welch Update: It’s good to see that Vermont’s Congressman Peter Welch has come out against the latest Dem plan to trade some domestic funding for continued funding of the Iraq War. Hmm, I wonder if he had any thoughts about that Barre meeting with anti-war activists when he made that decision? Let’s hope Welch’s actions will match his rhetoric this time. But, more than that, let’s hope he does more than just vote against this ridiculous compromise. He could, for example, lobby the Dem leadership to scrap the entire plan. If he’d like some help leading a sit-in at Pelosi’s office, I think I know some folks who’d join him….
Defining Political Losers:
Sue Allen of the Times Argus was one of the panelists on Vermont This Week last week. And while discussing next year’s campaign for governor, she said that Doug Racine had to be careful about entering the race and losing because another loss could ruin his political career. Okay, and why doesn’t the same standard apply to the Progressive Party’s Anthony Pollina? Pollina, of course, has done nothing but lose one campaign after another for one decade after another but media folks like Allen don’t bury his political career. Instead, they give his every utterance of “intent” a front-page story. But if Racine loses two races – after having won many more than that – he’ll be considered politically dead? I don’t get it.
Giuliani Update: Here’s a fun little summary of Giuliani’s appearance last Sunday on Meet the Press. I saw it and it was bizarre. Let’s hope the Republicans nominate him.
For more on Giuliani’s appearance, check out the Rude Pundit’s take.
Whew. Thank goodness for Oprah Winfrey. Not only does she keep me informed about which books to read, I can now count on her to tell me whom to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. I love you, Oprah. Now, please, will you send me one of those free cars?
Bah-fucking-humbug on the Oprah stuff. Or, if you’d prefer: Enough already. Like everyone else who allows their self to come into contact with the mainstream media, I’ve been bombarded with the news of Oprah and Obama. For days I just let the Double O blather just pass me by with little more than a mental smirk and a large dollop of hope that it would all go away soon. No such luck.
Finally – as in, today – I decided to actually read a couple articles on the Oprah/Obama phenomena. Perhaps I was missing something. Perhaps the Double O Express was fomenting a new revolution that would address the issues that I hold near and dear to my heart. Maybe Oprah and Obama were outlining a way to end the war. Or perhaps they were describing how an Obama administration would be implementing single-payer health care. No such luck.
Nope. This is all celebrity all the time – with nary an issue in sight. Well, unless you consider “hope” an issue. Consider, for example, the Chicago Tribune article from this morning on the Oprah/Obama gathering in South Carolina yesterday. First, the headline: “Obama, Winfrey Draw Thousands.” And if you dive into the article to try to find out what they spoke about to those thousands of people you’ll be as unsatisfied as I was.
The article doesn’t, for example, include the words “war,” “Iraq,” “health care,” “economy,” “environment,” “global warming,” or “education.” Nor does it even hint at any of the issues that accompany these words. Instead, readers get a sugary-sweet verbal concoction of words that describe the scene. Like this:
Obama drew energy from the crowd, stretching out his arm and holding the microphone to the audience to capture its roar. At times, the metal bleachers behind him rumbled under stomping feet.
Oh great, Obama’s the new Jimmy Swaggart.
And when the article finally stops drooling over the entire celebrification (my word, not yours) of the event, it offers this passing glance to the issues and/or issue messages:
On Sunday, Winfrey and Obama delivered messages rich with references to faith, historical moment and the possibilities ahead, in effect urging the crowd to set aside doubts.
Okay. I’m all for setting aside doubt. But can it be based upon more than the fact that the man running for president is standing next to Oprah Winfrey and saying things like “my campaign is about hope and setting aside doubt.” Silly me, I was looking for the substance.
But, as we all know, none of this was about substance. It was simply the latest and greatest episode of political celebrification. It was about the photo-op. It was about the bright lights. It was about the aura of the moment – the great spectacle of money and the pursuit of power coming together. Issues be damned. Because the issues would have ruined the moment.
Of course, none of this was meant for a Chicago Tribune or New York Times article. It was meant and designed for the photographers at the Tribune and the Times. And, of course, the television cameras. Snap, crackle, pop – soak up the moment. Believe! Be happy! Have faith! And don’t – whatever you do – get all bogged down by those buzz-killing issues!
I give.
Well, it took all of about 12 hours for the Dems in Congress to do what they always do when the Bush regime shreds the Constitution: They called for an inquiry. Yeah, that’ll show ‘em. You know, kind of like how Vermont’s own Senator Patrick Leahy has Karl Rove quaking in his boots over his endless – and toothless – threats to subpoena him over the Justice Department’s “lawyer-gate.” Not. From what I can tell, Rove just shut the door on that yapping dog and has cheerfully moved on to rake in his millions in silly book deals.
An inquiry? Are you serious? The Bush team is turning this nation into a Banana Republic and, along the way, the Dems would like to ask a few questions. And I’m betting that if they even get the chance to ask the questions, it’ll sound something like this: “Excuse, me, sir, but are you sure you didn’t know anything about the [fill in the blank]?” And the follow-up will sound something like this: “Are you double certain you really, really didn’t know?”
By this time, the Republicans will start screaming about something frivolous like an advertisement by a lefty group and the whole nation will fall deep into a heated discussion about the ad, the ad-buyer’s behavior, and the like. And then Peter Welch and Leahy will proudly vote to condemn the ad – only because the Republicans made them.
Yeah, we see where this is going. Because we’ve seen it all before.
But, remember, the Dems who keep calling for one useless “inquiry” after another are the same folks who say that impeachment would be a “waste of time.” Instead of one very focused action that would aim to expose all the nonsense and truly assert its Constitutionally proscribed powers, these Dems will yip and yap and beg and whine and hope beyond hope that – in the end – they’ll get some of their questions answered. Could someone please inform them that they’re a separate – but equal! – branch of the U.S. government. And, while you’re at it, bring ‘em a few hundred spines.
Speaking of Unfocused Dems: Vermont’s Speaker of the House, Gaye Symington, a Dem, called reporters to her office yesterday to announce a whole new way of talking about business in Vermont. Wow. At first blush it looked like the Speaker was going to come out swinging and leave her usual meandering mush behind her. No such luck. Both at the little press event and in her “draft” written material, Symington showed all her – and her party’s – usual timidity by stating over and over again that her thoughts and plans really weren’t “finalized” yet. Well, Gaye, call us when you get it all worked out.
Here, for example, is how Gaye reaches out and grabs her audience with the beginning of her report:
Attached is a still-evolving outline of my vision for opportunities for economic development in Vermont. This outline is a work in progress that I am using to solicit input and to encourage others to think about Vermont’s economic development strategy.
Sorry, Gaye, but this whole thing reads like a really bad funding proposal. You’re just fishing. And that might work for your other job as a fundraiser for the Intervale but – ahem – you’re writing this as the Speaker of the House. And, in that capacity, people expect you to have a vision, not a “still-evolving outline of my vision.” I mean, who’s advising her on this stuff? We’re not talking about some obscure notion here, either. This is economic development, and you’re asking people to “think about it”? Yeah, Gaye, most of us think about it constantly – and we think about it very intensely when the bills need to be paid. Welcome to the discussion.
How about this, Gaye: Why don’t YOU think about it and then come out swinging with a plan? And perhaps some vision of your own too. Oh yeah, and we’d prefer if it was a focused vision rather than an evolving vision.
The more I think about it the more I think Symington just put her finger on the ills of the Democratic Party as a whole: Evolving Vision. It’s a problem. Worse, it’s embarrassing and destructive.
–
Bobby Sand on the Mark Johnson Show: If you do nothing else to further your own political education this weekend, do this: Go to Mark Johnson’s website and download the podcast of his show today with Windham County State’s Attorney, Bobby Sand. It was/is an amazing hour or so of radio. Sand, of course, is the prosecutor who has been very vocal – and active – on the ridiculous nature of the drug laws in this state and nation.
The back and forth between Johnson and Sand was extraordinary, with Sand coming across as enormously thoughtful and articulate. He has, of course, been on the receiving end of Governor Douglas’ barbs and back-stabbings (instructing the state police to ignore Sand on future drug arrests in his jurisdiction). But Sand didn’t stoop to Douglas’ neener-neener level and, instead, just remained focused on the bizarre, hypocritical, destructive and Byzantine nature of our drug laws.
Shortly after Sand left the show, Douglas’ spokesperson, Jason Gibbs, called into the show and immediately contaminated a rather heady discussion into the same old neener-neener that has been spilling from the Douglas team on this issue. My favorite part was when Gibbs said that Douglas wouldn’t be willing to meet with Sand unless “he changed his stance” before the meeting. Huh? Yo Jason, the purpose of a meeting is to share information, listen to the other side and then decide how to proceed.
Sorry, but it just feels nothing short of childish for Douglas to publicly condemn a state prosecutor, instruct law enforcement officials to ignore him, and then refuse to even meet with the man. But I think I know why he’s doing it: Sand would run circles around him. The guy is bright, ethical, focused and tenacious. Hmm, can we get him to run for governor?
Just listen to the podcast. Congrats on a fine show (again), Mark.
–
Encounter in the Woods: I’ll leave you with a little story from my day in the woods. I had my Belgian Big Jim out pulling firewood when I noticed he had his head up and was giving that snorting sound that usually indicates a deer, moose or other kind of animal is in the area. He’s funny that way. He weighs close to a ton but he’s scared to death of deer. Never mind that whenever he even sees them, they’re running away from him. It doesn’t matter. He’s just scared of them. So I deal with it, talk to him and refocus his attention back to the job at hand.
But his time I looked up and saw an orange hat in the distance. It was a muzzle-loader hunter on the prowl. I called out to him, hoping that he wasn’t mistaking Big Jim for the ultimate buck or something. He walked down, apologized for hunting there without permission and then looked down at the long chunk of the maple tree I was about to hook to Big Jim.
“That’s the hard way to get your firewood,” he said.
And then I looked up, nodded to his gun, and replied: “Yeah, and that’s the hard way to get your food.”
Long day. Good day. A day in the woods. No complaints here.
Well, let’s see, I’m sure I can come up with something for you word hungry heathens of the computer never lands. Perhaps I’ll go the J.D. route. No, not Jack Daniels. J.D., as in the man behind the Five Before Chaos fame and his slovenly use of linkdumps when the wild-eyed bastard can’t figure out how to string a few hundred words of his own together. So, here you go:
The Prog Dilemma: I’ve been reading the Prog Blog of late, even commenting over there from time to time. I find the Vermont Progressives to be a mental conundrum. On one hand, their talk on the issues can be quite good. Take, for example, Rep. Dave Zuckerman’s piece on end of life care. And Doug Hoffer and Chris Pearson’s stuff can be really good as well.
But then there’s the whole cult of Anthony Pollina thing that makes me want to flee the room as fast as I can. Sorry, but he just feels like one, big energy, money and time suck over there. Imagine, for example, if the Progs could free themselves from the Pollina cloud and focus on the issues and the local campaigns that have truly brought them whatever success they can claim. And imagine if the one million dollars Anthony’s out trying to raise right now for his — and his alone – campaign was, instead, being raised for an issues oriented campaign and a full slate of Prog candidates for the state legislature. That’s a lot of dough with a huge possibility for truly changing the debate, building a base and putting new Progs under the golden dome.
But it probably won’t happen. Instead, the Pollina show will go on, an obscene amount of money will be raised and spent, enormous amounts of grassroots energy will be called on to participate in his latest losing venture, and then we’ll all be serenaded with the same post-election rhetoric that always follows a Pollina loss: Look how good he did in the Kingdom! Yawn.
If, as they so often claim, the Progs are strong in the Northeast Kingdom, how about a full-on organizing strategy up there that would seek to steal some legislative seats? If they love Anthony there, let him stump for a whole new generation of candidates. Because it’s time for the Progs to build a party, not another cult of personality. Been there, done that with Bernie.
The CIA Eats the Joint: The New York Times is reporting tonight that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is admitting to destroying critical evidence surrounding its interrogation techniques (read: torture). Here’s an excerpt from the lead article:
The Central Intelligence Agency in 2005 destroyed at least two videotapes documenting the interrogation of two Al Qaeda operatives in the agency’s custody, a step it took in the midst of Congressional and legal scrutiny about the C.I.A’s secret detention program, according to current and former government officials.
–
The existence and subsequent destruction of the tapes are likely to reignite the debate over the use of severe interrogation techniques on terror suspects, and their destruction raises questions about whether C.I.A. officials withheld information about aspects of the program from the courts and from the Sept. 11 commission appointed by President Bush and Congress. It was not clear who within the C.I.A. authorized the destruction of the tapes, but current and former government officials said it had been approved at the highest levels of the agency.
Damn. It just keeps getting worse. It’s a good thing Congress didn’t bother itself with impeachment…(snark, snark).
Speaking of impeachment: Niranjan Ramakrishnan has a fun little piece over at CounterPunch suggesting that if Nancy Pelosi won’t move the Bush impeachment bills perhaps we should just move to impeach her instead. Oh boy, and I can hear all the good little Dems saying “but, but, but…”. I’m beginning to think that’s all the good little Dems ever say anymore. If they like your issue, they don’t like your tone. If they like your tone, they don’t like your tactics. If they like your tactics, they don’t like your timing. Good grief they’re tedious. But, hey, take your time Dems. I mean, it’s not as if we’re at war or anything…
–
Speaking of Dems: The Carpetbagger Report has a guest blog entry from an ACLU honcho today about the new “intelligence” bills floating around the U.S. Congress. And, surprise, surprise, it asks an all too familiar question: Why won’t the Dems lead? Read it.
–
God is my Co-Pilot: Mitt Romney tried to pull a Kennedy today and speak about his religion and its relation to his presidential bid. I tried to read about it but the whole thing just totally creeped me out. And then I found Sam Smith’s typically brilliant analysis of it and thought it would be best just to share it with you. Read it. Read him. And simply rejoice in the voice of reason.
–
Finally, much of the Vermont media and blogosphere today featured photos of the official U.S. Capitol “holiday” tree that originated from our own Green Mountain National Forest. And much of the commentary went something like this: Ain’t we grand! Whatever. But the best part of this tree story is what the good old loggers wrote at the base of the tree before it was shipped to D.C.: “This End Down.” Priceless.
Thanks for playing.
Yeah, that’s what I’m doing: waiting for the farrier. And, around here, it’s kind of like waiting for Godot. Tick, tock, tick, tock. But the good farriers are few and far between so you just keep waiting and keep hoping that the fine fella will come and put the winter shoes on my boys. We’ve got work to do, you know. Trees to pull. Sleds to pull. And fun to be had.
So, while I wait for the sound of his truck to pull up, let’s blog. Ready. Set. Go.
My Brother the Rock Star: I just learned from my brother’s blog that he’s written the introduction to Lee Ranaldo’s new book . Yeah, Lee Ranaldo, as in: Lee Ranaldo from Sonic Youth fame (and a wee bit of fortune). Damn, why is it that older brothers have all the fun? But it gets better. The artwork for the book was done by Curt Kirkwood of Meat Puppets fame. As some of you may remember, my alter ego from last year, Snarky Boy, attended the Meat Puppets concert in Burlington and had plenty of good things to say about it. Congrats, bro. And, since you failed to get me the free tix to either the Sonic Youth or Meat Puppets concerts, I look forward to a signed copy of the book (hint, hint).
Cheap Bastards: I loaded up on newspapers yesterday on my way to court. The last thing I wanted to happen was to be stuck conversing with the old bastards I was arrested with. Just kidding, Boots and Will. Included in the stack was the Wall Street Journal, one of my favorite papers (no kidding). If you can hold your nose – or keep your sides from splitting from the laughter – while getting through its “opinion” pages, it’s a pretty good paper as far as pretty good papers go.
But I wasn’t laughing while reading Andy Laperriere’s op/ed entitled “No Bailouts for Borrowers.” In it, Mr. Laperriere is rip snort over the calls for legislation that would aim to help the homeowners who are on the edge of foreclosure due to the slimy practices of certain loaners of late. Funny, isn’t it, that the Wall Street Journal didn’t mind it when the federal government started forking over billions of dollars to help prop up the slimy loaners? They thought that was just fine. In fact, they called it a necessary step to “stabilize the markets.” But when it comes to a rather benign action like holding the foreclosure agents at bay for 90 days, the Wall Street Journal and its knuckle-dragging opinionators scream holy-hell about a waste of taxpayers’ money.
It kind of reminds me of certain war policies. You know, like handing over billions of dollars to rogue military contractors but then asking soldiers who get their legs blown off to return a few thousands dollars of their sign-up bonuses because they didn’t “complete their tour.” Bastards. No, make that: Shameless bastards.
Zapping the Elderly: Speaking of the Wall Street Journal, they also had a very bizarre – and disturbing – article entitled “The Graying of Shock Therapy.” Yep, it’s about the growing use of shock therapy on the elderly to literally zap them out of depression. The article features 93-year-old Ida Galvanoni who had this to say after three-shocks-a-week since October:
I’m smiling more now; I can see it in myself. I don’t get so distraught.
Sorry, but this is more than a bit disturbing, especially when you consider this eerie note of caution on the practice of zapping the elderly from the article:
One concern is the risk of administering shocks to someone who is actually suffering from dementia rather than depression.
Yeah, that would suck. And why don’t you waterboard them for some family secrets while you’re at it?
But, don’t worry, the medical profession is all over this one. A doctor from the University of Toronto, for example, told the Wall Street Journal that “elderly patients should be carefully monitored for confusion after [shock] treatment.” You think?
Hey Mom, as soon as you get back from that bus tour to Nashville, let’s stick your finger in the socket….
Seven Days Nails It: Mike Ives of Seven Days has filed a great story about the protests at the military recruiting centers last Friday. I guess we were lucky that the increasingly cantankerous, meandering and navel-gazing Peter Freyne wasn’t available to attend. Whew. Ives beautifully captures the mood of the event and puts a well-deserved spotlight on 15-year-old organizer-extraordinaire, Jaz Whitney. It’s just too bad that the feature photo had to include those old bastards. Guess which one is Boots? Hint: Look at the feet. Another hint: He’s A LOT older than I am. Congats, Jaz. And thanks, Mike.
Oops, out of time.
Note to readers: Click on “Go to the Full Blog” for today’s earlier post.
Another day. Another court appearance.
Yesterday we made the snowy trek to Burlington’s District Court to stand before a judge and T.J. Donovan, the state’s attorney, and very proudly plead “not guilty” to the charges of trespassing at the offices of our congressman, Peter Welch. Basically, it was a three-hour trip for a mere 30-seconds of the court’s time. And I got to utter these words to the judge who seemed like she wasn’t going to have much patience for any more: “I am not guilty, your honor. And I will be seeking a jury trial and invoking the necessity defense.” Next.
T.J. Donovan – sorry, but that’s just one cool name for a prosecutor – wants to cut a deal of some type. He told us before the court hearing that he’d be willing to drop the charges if we agreed to do some community service. Well, T.J., our actions WERE a community service. So our response to him was: Declare our attempts to meet with our congressman and ask him to stop funding the war a court-recognized “community service” and we’ll sign on the dotted line for a dismissal. Otherwise, let’s go to trial.
Personally, I’m looking forward to the opportunity to pick a jury and put on a trial that will seek to prove that our minor legal transgressions were necessary to prevent the larger legal evils of the Bush war and Congressman Welch’s continued double-speak on whether or not he’s going to continue funding it. And how much fun will it be to serve Welch and his staff subpoenas to be witnesses at the trial? I guess we might get another chance to ask him some “yes or no” questions, huh? Priceless.
People spend thousands of dollars to get Welch’s attention by way of campaign contributions – he’s now collected nearly $700,000 for his next campaign. This trial – with all the free legal help we’re being offered – will be, in comparison, a very cheap way to have a little one-on-one with the Congressman.
Welch has handled this all with the kind of fumble-fingers that one would expect from a rookie. Remember, when we went to his office in October we we’re simply asking for a meeting with him. He refused. And then his staff instructed the Burlington Police to have us arrested.
But Welch quickly realized that having constituents arrested for trying to meet with him looked kind of old-school Soviet Union and all. And so he agreed to meet with us in public, mostly to stem the tide of his political capital oozing like a sieve from a perplexed left. But, just to show that the vengeance will be his, Welch has never requested that the trespassing charges be dropped.
Whatever, Congressman. We’ll just keep picking the scab that is your very confused and confusing record on Bush’s war with Iraq. And, who knows, someone might even use the trial as an opportunity to announce a challenge to your re-election bid. This should be fun.
–
While awaiting our 30-seconds of court time yesterday, the very affable T.J. Donovan took the time to introduce us to Ian Carlton, the chairman of the Vermont Democratic Party. No, Carlton wasn’t there to discuss Donovan’s promising future as a statewide politician someday in the near future. Instead, Carlton was there to go head-to-head with his fellow Dem on a legal matter before the court. Carlton, you see, is a practicing attorney and – thus – had some non-partisan work to do involving a client who got caught stealing. Let’s just hope for the Dem Party’s sake that Carlton is a smoother party chair than he is a lawyer. In the three minutes of court time we witnessed, Carlton seemed to be doing his best Jerry Lewis imitation. Carlton, for example, got softly reprimanded for filling out the wrong paperwork for a plea deal and then almost fell into the lap of Donovan while tripping before the court. And why, oh why, did his clumsiness remind me of a certain political party and its relation to important issues of the day? Just wondering.
Recent Comments