Skip to content

Friday Night Music

Friday, June 28, 2013

Okay, it’s somewhat depressing, but the obituaries do provide great fodder for this feature, which I am really contemplating either retiring or lightening up on the no repeat artists rule.

Anyway, Bobby Bland died this week, so he’s the featured artist. I do remember listening to some of his music on my first transistor radio, but I will be the first to admit that I didn’t know he was such a giant figure in the blues world. Unfortunately, as is often the case with the late 50s, early 60s acts, it’s not easy to find good video as opposed to songs accompanied by pictures of 45s. Anyway, I settled on this, and the fact that he’s accompanied by B.B. King is just icing on the cake. You have to wait through a minute and a half intro, but the music is worth it.

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

American Blind Justice

Friday, June 28, 2013

This is one of those stories that is so outrageous that it is beyond my poor literary power to express. Still, I will do my mite by passing it on, in hopes that the outrage will spread and, in the end, that outrage might cause some semblance of justice to prevail.

Our tale takes place in San Diego, a reddish area in a generally blue state. It seems a fellow named Jeff Olson took it into his head to protest against the Bank of America. He chose to do so by writing slogans on the public sidewalk in front of the bank using “Creatology” chalky crayons, a toy designed for kids to do artwork on sidewalks and driveways. It’s suited for that purpose, because it washes off with water. Many months after his presumably ineffective protest, Olson was arrested for vandalism, at the behest of BOA, prosecuted by an elected prosecutor who has gotten money from BOA and apparently expects more. Olson faces 13 years in prison, and yes, you read that right.

But as Bob Dylan once wrote, take the rags away from your eyes, now’s not the time for your tears.

As would any good lawyer, his lawyer prepared to defend him on free speech grounds. It’s a reasonable defense, because even if, in the abstract, what he did constituted vandalism, if he is being selectively prosecuted for the contents of his vandalism, as he surely is, then the prosecution would be unconstitutional. We can all agree, I’m sure, that he would not have been prosecuted if he’d written “I ? the Bank of America” on the sidewalk. So, it’s a great defense, except he won’t be allowed to make it because Judge Howard Shore has ruled the laws barring disappearing chalk drawings take precedence:

During pre-trial motions prosecutors introduced a motion to prohibit Olson’s defense attorney Tom Tosdal from using the words First Amendment, free speech, free expression and other similar terms during the trial. The judge agreed saying jurors should focus on whether Olson committed vandalism and not why he did it.

(via Buzzflash)

And just to make sure that there is no unseemly criticism of the judge by Olson, his lawyer, the jurors, or anyone else within the judge’s power to restrain, he issued a gag order preventing them (this is a misdemeanor case, remember) from discussing it in public. Even that wasn’t enough for the judge, however, because “[t]he clearly pro-bankster jurist even rebuked the mayor of San Diego for calling the trial a waste of time”. The mayor is a Democrat, in case you hadn’t guessed.

By the way, now is the time for your tears, because the story’s over, or at least we’ve come up to the present.

Moving on: it appears that the prosecutor has mayoral ambitions of his own, presumably shaded red. So one must ask oneself, are his political calculations on the mark? Will the bad will he generates for this persecution be outweighed by the financial reward from BOA? Personally, I’m not sure he’s done himself a political favor here, but for his sake I hope he got something in writing from BOA before he went after this guy.

So welcome to America, the land of equality before the law. Think about it. If he serves 13 days, much less 13 years, that will be 13 days more than any of the bank presidents that led the criminal enterprises that pushed our economy off the cliff. We’re I Jerry Brown, and assuming he has pardon power, I’d step in right now.

Filed in Corporate Crime, Corruption, Equal Justice | | Comments (0)

The Court rules on gay rights

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

We got a bit of good news out of the Supreme Court yesterday, proving among other things that race remains the final frontier in this country. Who would have thought that the Supreme Court would protect gay marriage one day after reinstating Jim Crow.

Some folks are disappointed that the court ducked the chance to make gay marriage a constitutional right, but I’d like to argue that it might have been a good thing, particularly because the effect of the DOMA ruling is that any gay couple that likes can come here to Connecticut, get married, spend some money here, and then go back to where they came from and have their marriage recognized by the federal government.

Here’s the argument. I will assert without citation, because I think most would recognize that I’m right, that legislative acts are more readily accepted by the populace at large than judicial fiat; particularly federal judicial fiat; that state legislative acts are more readily accepted than federal legislative acts, and that state court fiat is more readily accepted than federal judicial fiat.

Consider the abortion issue. I recall distinctly that New York legalized abortion prior to Roe v. Wade, and I see here that a couple of other states did as well. It is quite possible that other states would have followed. As the right to a safe legal abortion became gradually more widespread, from the ground up, so to speak, it might very well be the case that it would not have become the divisive issue it remains. The Supreme Court cut off that evolutionary process, giving the abortion foes a rhetorical cudgel they would not have, had legalization emerged from the state legislatures, or even the state judiciaries.

There are a lot of reasons that this argument might be wrong in the case of abortion, but I would argue that it is easier to make the case that gay marriage will continue to spread and that it will become ever more acceptable, until half of the hold out states (those saddled with Bush era bans on gay marriage) would be happy to have the Supreme Court invalidate their bans. The other half, and we know where they would be located, would stand alone against a country in which the institution was widely accepted. Even they would begin to feel some pressure to catch up with the rest of the country. A company looking to relocate to Texas might think twice, for instance, if it meant subjecting its gay employees to an environment in which their marriages were not respected.

At that point, a Supreme Court decision requiring same sex marriage would be relatively non-controversial. It might take a few more years, but the upside is that it removes the issue as a hot button that the right can press for generations. It makes the process look far more legitimate; as indeed it would be. Evolution on the abortion issue might never have happened, but it seems pretty clear that we are evolving rapidly when it comes to gay rights. 10 years ago the Republicans were putting anti-gay initiatives on the ballot in order to turn out their base; now they are putting rhetorical distance between themselves and the anti-gay movement because it is becoming a loser issue for them. The gay-rights side is now winning statewide initiatives and that process will only accelerate as more citizens of Fox Nation are lowered into the ground. There is far more support for gay rights than for abortion rights, and much of the opposition is relatively apathetic. The more the movement is rightly perceived as emerging from the states, the easier the transition will be.

Filed in Equal Justice, Lawyer stuff | | Comments (0)

Privatizing the security state. What could go wrong?

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Digby raises a good point at Hullabaloo, about the fact that there is a lot of money to be made by expanding the security state. We pour billions into collecting haystacks of data and then start searching for the needles, and some folks are getting very rich indeed as more and more of the work involved in getting us to Orwell is outsourced, which, in turn, leads to ever more vigorous lobbying for ever more intrusive spying. Meanwhile, we taxpayers, in addition to losing our freedom, are getting almost no bang for the buck when it comes to actual protection from the people the NSA claims to be hunting.

This seems to be an American disease, though I suppose the British will emulate us. There are certain state functions that it is desirable to keep outside of private hands, but we seem to have totally lost sight of that fact. Before privatizing our spying we privatized our prisons, which now lobby for more criminal laws. Educational “reformers” are panting to put our public school systems safely into the hands of for-profit entities. Somehow we are to believe that the lower teacher’s pay that will inevitably result will yield better educational outcomes. Chicago even privatized its parking meters, with predictable results. And let’s not forget our worst in the non-third world health care system, afflicted as it is with the twin evils of for-profit hospitals and for-profit health insurance companies.

We have come to a strange place in our national life. It was once a given that there are certain services and activities that were peculiarly the province of the state, such as running prisons, distributing vital commodities, such as water, and that there were other services, such as education, for which there should be a public option, providing an assurance that everyone, regardless of their financial position, could get that service at high quality. This notion may no longer be expressed in polite company. It appears to be an article of faith that anything the government can do, for-profit rent seekers can do better. The fact that experience proves otherwise never sinks in.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism | | Comments (1)

The Free Press, Post 9/11 edition

Monday, June 24, 2013

A few weeks ago I commented on the fact that the mainstream press has a very limited attention span, and that the recent re-revelations about the extent to which Washington is spying on us all had effectively driven a number of faux scandals off the front page and out of the mass media mind.

Now, you can take the position that there’s nothing new in this story, as I did and to some extent still do. That’s not a defense of the Obama administration, which has managed to out-do Bush in its rush to institute an Orwellian state. The Obamaites have an advantage. No one expects it from a Democrat, and they do it while they smile, which Cheney, et. al., could never pull off.

Even if you argue that there’s nothing new here, that doesn’t mean it’s not an issue, nor that Greenwald and Snowden, for whatever reason, have done anything but a public service in putting the issue front and center again. Except, of course, they didn’t, and this is perhaps a corollary of my theory of the Attention Deficit infected media.

Nowadays, it’s not the message, it’s the messenger. Anyone with half a brain should realize that while what Snowden is currently doing, or how he came to do what he did, is marginally interesting, the real issue is the government spying. But that’s not what we’re seeing. The press can’t get enough of Snowden watching, and though there was some initial follow up regarding the real issue, there’s been precious little lately.

And no wonder. The press, or at least the “journalists” that dominates our discourse, no longer pretend to be anything but the tools of the corporations that pay their salaries and the powerful “sources” they cultivate. How else do you explain David Gregory’s suggestion to Glenn Greenwald that he should be prosecuted criminally for breaking this story? (Fun and games with Gregory here) It’s a risk, of course, that Gregory’s never run; the people that leak to him do so from a position of power with the express or implied consent of the people for whom they work.

This plays wonderfully into the interests of the security state. Rather than debating the acts of a government which will ineluctably destroy freedom of the press, along with a raft of other freedoms (second amendment “rights” always excluded of course), our mainstream press corps can talk of nothing other than how and whether the government will be able to properly punish the guys who revealed its criminal behavior.

So the Obama Administration is a double winner in this case. The NSA leaks have effectively killed the non-scandals (and the AP perhaps scandal), and they have successfully diverted attention from the real NSA scandal to the fate of a 30 year old computer geek and the guy to whom he spilled the beans. It’s win-win for the forces of totalitarianism, enabled by the comfortable Washington press corps.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism, Media | | Comments (0)

Midsummer getaway

Saturday, June 22, 2013

This post will have nothing to do with politics, unless in the course of it I make some snarky comments about rich people, with whom I am currently surrounded.

As I mentioned yesterday, my wife and I find ourselves staying at the Hopkins Inn in LItchfield County. This came about sort of through happenstance. Our son asked if we might be taking a weekend somewhere, in which case he would like to use our house to entertain some friends, our house being half way between Boston and New York. Arms ever so slightly twisted, we agreed to vacate; chose this weekend, and here we are, in what is, if not a foreign country, a place far different culturally from our end of Connecticut. Today we went to the Hollister House, that boasts what it bills as an English style garden. I am not qualified to judge, but it is a very lovely place. We were told by the owner that there will be an article in this month’s Martha Stewart Magazine about the place, so I figured I’d beat her to the punch and do a little photo spread in CtBlue.

I guess you would call this a formal garden.

20130622-201717.jpg

Another view

20130622-201800.jpg

A bench, but quite a beautiful bench.

20130622-201841.jpg

Athena, or at least it looks like Athena, presiding over the whole thing.

20130622-201924.jpg

I have no idea what kind of flower this is, but I loved the deep purple color.

20130622-203638.jpg

Now, for something completely different. On Friday we visited the Hopkins Winery, which is right next door to the Inn, and afterwards I wandered about in the vineyard, and came upon this, which sat among what looked like the remains of some sort of demolished structure. A weird thing to come upon in the middle of nowhere.

20130622-201953.jpg

We’ve visited two Connecticut vineyards on this trip. The Hopkins vineyard, here by the Inn, and Sunset Meadow Vineyards, in Goshen, a place name that should make all true Firesign Theater fans take notice. Connecticut wines aren’t bad, but you have to be among the 1% to make a habit out of them, and in truth and in fact, they are rarely good enough to justify the prices. We bought a couple of bottles at each vineyard, but only because, as tourists, we are licensed to spend money we don’t have and I do like to spend my money locally, within limits of course.

Unfortunately, tomorrow we return to the poor side of the state, but it’s been fun.

Filed in Pictures | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music

Friday, June 21, 2013

This is the Midsummer's Night isn't it, and summer begins, some went searching for a summer song. While I myself don't actually have the Summertime Blues this seemed like a decent choice, especially because I really don't have a whole lot of time to go looking around for music. We are on a bit of a mini-vacation, staying at the Hopkins Inn in Warren. I haven't blogged for awhile, for multiple reasons, but I'm hoping to start again in a few days, if not earlier.

Anyway, here's The Who:

 

 

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

There’s pressure, and then there’s pressure

Monday, June 17, 2013

Looks like Obama is about to cave once again, this time marching us, against his own better judgment, waist deep or more into the Big Muddy of Syria. Well, you can’t blame the man. He knows he’s only setting us up for trouble down the road, but the man is under a lot of pressure:

For two years, President Obama has resisted being drawn deeper into the civil war in Syria. It was a miserable problem, he told aides, and not one he thought he could solve. At most, it could be managed. And besides, he wanted to be remembered for getting out of Middle East wars, not embarking on new ones.

So when Mr. Obama agreed this week for the first time to send small arms and ammunition to Syrian rebel forces, he had to be almost dragged into the decision at a time when critics, some advisers and even Bill Clinton were pressing for more action. Coming so late into the conflict, Mr. Obama expressed no confidence it would change the outcome, but privately expressed hope it might buy time to bring about a negotiated settlement.

(via Heavy Pressure Led to Decision by Obama on Syrian Arms – NYTimes.com)

Obama has, for reasons that are unclear, never been terribly good about resisting pressure from those with whom he disagrees, also known as those he can never please. But, give the man credit, he’s great at resisting pressure from those with whom he purports to agree. In fact, it’s almost a badge of pride, for after all, how better to establish your beltway bona fides than to disagree with the dirty hippies, that annoying group of people who most always turn out to be right.

Consider the following. Bill Clinton, whose wife helped get us into Iraq and who himself apparently favored that ill-fated endeavor, apparently has credibility with the current president sufficient to help force him to get us mired in Syria. But how much influence do you think Al Gore, who has considerable credibility on climate issues, will have on the ultimate decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline:

Al Gore has called on Barack Obama to veto the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, describing it as “an atrocity”.

The former vice-president said in an interview on Friday that he hoped Obama would follow the example of British Columbia, which last week rejected a similar pipeline project, and shut down the Keystone XL.

“I certainly hope that he will veto that now that the Canadians have publicly concluded that it is not safe to take a pipeline across British Columbia to ports on the Pacific,” he told the Guardian. “I really can’t imagine that our country would say: ‘Oh well. Take it right over parts of the Ogallala aquifer’, our largest and most important source of ground water in the US. It’s really a losing proposition.”

(via Reader Supported News)

Fact is, no amount of pressure from his supporters can move this president, no matter how much he may agree with them in the abstract, or purport to agree with them. He is, in fact, impervious to pressure from the left. There’s always some impediment to doing the right thing, so long as one Republican or conservative Democrat has a problem with such an outrageous course of action.

President Obama on Wednesday night laid bare the political dilemma he faced in deciding the fate of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada as he told a group of high-dollar donors that the politics of the environment “are tough.”

Mr. Obama appears to be leaning toward approval of the pipeline, although he did not specifically mention it to the donors. But he acknowledged that it is difficult to sell aggressive environmental action to Americans who are still struggling in a difficult economy to pay bills, buy gas and save for retirement.

“You may be concerned about the temperature of the planet, but it’s probably not rising to your number-one concern,” Mr. Obama said. “And if people think, well, that’s shortsighted, that’s what happens when you’re struggling to get by.”

…

The challenge for Mr. Obama is to find a way to balance the political demands of supporters like Mr. Steyer, who has criticized the pipeline, with the insistence of Republicans, Canadian officials and some unions that the pipeline will create jobs and lower the cost of fuel in the United States. The president also faces pressure from some members of his party who argue that the economic benefits of the pipeline are too important to ignore. Last month, 17 Democratic senators signed on to an amendment backing construction of the pipeline. Included in the group were seven senators from conservative or swing states who are up for re-election in 2014.

(via New York Times)

It’s not really a challenge, as there’s no contest. Obama will cave. He believes more in the fake urgency of the need to balance the budget than in the real urgency of the dying planet. And since when has a Democrat caved in to union pressure except when the unions are aligned with corporate interests?

Filed in Obama | | Comments (1)

My fashion sense appreciated

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

We all get emails and all of us get spam, which may be a good thing, as it might make it harder for the NSA to get at the interesting stuff. And then there’s the stuff that’s betwixt and between. I mean I really hoped, as I began reading a recent email, that I had been discovered and appreciated, but as I read on I began to doubt it:

Hi

My name is Sam Bell and I am the Media Director of Cityblis.

My team and I have looked at your blog ctblueblog.com/ and we would like to give you exclusive access to our new media content database on the Cityblis platform called the Cityblis Media Center.

The Cityblis Media Center is front row access for media professionals such as yourself in the fashion and design industry. We curate thousands of independent designers from over 50 countries, giving you exclusives on their collections, trends, images, videos, press releases, event invitations, launch parties, media content and samples.

There are two possibilities here. Well, actually three. Starting with the most probable: 1) Sam and his team haven’t really been reading my blog; 2) Sam and his team have a serious problem with reading comprehension; or 3) I have been unwittingly writing in some secret code known only to the members of the “fashion and design industry”.

But still, this may be my big chance to break into the big time. Some of my readers know me, and can vouch for the fact that when it comes to sartorial elegance, I am at a level all my own. Scarcely a decade goes by that I don’t buy a new suit. So, what think any of you that read this blog? Should I start insightfully reviewing the latest fashion trends, now that I have the chance to get exclusives on collections, trends, images, videos, press releases, event invitations, launch parties, media content and samples? Maybe I can give out prizes, like tickets to launch parties.

Filed in Ramblings | | Comments (0)

Yet one more modest proposal

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

David Atkins asserts that someday it will be a crime for Wal-mart to pay its employees so little that most of them end up getting food stamps or some other form of government aid. I’m not sure about that, but it occurs to me that a sufficiently creative state legislature could do something about this.

Wal-Mart’s Achilles Heel is the fact that it has to have a physical presence in order to make money. It can’t pull an Apple and shift its operations to a tax haven or put all its stores in Alabama. You’d have to put some thought into how you do it, but what’s to stop the Connecticut legislature, for example, from imposing a tax on any business that employs more than 500 (or more, pick your number) people nationally, that has a given percentage of employees that collect government benefits. Wal-mart can’t fire people getting the benefits, for they’d have no one left to exploit, and you could make that illegal too if you felt it was a threat. (In fact, in Connecticut, it’s already illegal to discriminate in housing against a person based on their source of income. A four or five word change to the employment discrimination statute is all you would need to prevent Wal-Mart from further impoverishing its employees by threatening to fire anyone getting food stamps.) A bill like that might provide some incentive to Wal-Mart to pay a living wage or give employees full time work, in place of the part time marginal existence so many of them have to endure. Alternatively, it would provide some much needed funds to the state while making a teeny, but nonetheless satisfying, dent in Wal-Mart’s obscene profits. Worst case, Wal-Mart leaves Connecticut, but that’s really a best case scenario.

Filed in Corporate Crime | | Comments (2)