Skip to content

Friday Night Music-School Days

Friday, September 21, 2018

So, this is going up a bit early, because in a short while I’ll be hitting the road to attend the first of two events connected to my high school reunion ( HPHS!!!! SAY IT LOUDER! WE’RE THE BEST). I won’t say how long it’s been, but if you guessed that the first digit is a five (and there’s another digit after that), you’d be absolutely correct.

When you think about it, there’s not really that many songs out there about the high school experience. I even did a Duck Duck Go (I have foresworn Google) and didn’t find much. I did find one list, which included this song, which speaks to one facet of the educational experience. It takes a while for them to get to the actual song, but I thought it made sense to put up this version. Given that I’m a geezer now, it seemed appropriate that it be sung by geezers.

Of course, there’s a bit of a dark side to the educational experience. I have to say that my own high school experience was relatively pleasant, and I can think of only one teacher I truly loathed, but at the time I could probably have related to this next song in ways I can’t now. I’m putting up two versions, one from the movie and Cindy Lauper’s performance at the Berlin Wall. It’s a great song.

 

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

An anomaly

Friday, September 21, 2018

Sometimes it’s tough being an ultra right wing organization. The problem is, you’re best strategy for success as an organization is failure. Just ask the NRA and the arms manufacturers that back it (we’ll put Russia aside for the moment). Turns out that times are toughwhen you’re on top:

The NRA is losing membership fees, and it’s running up huge deficits as a result. These grim findings, based on an audit obtained by OpenSecrets, raise doubts about the long-term prospects of the radical gun lobbying group.

“The document offers the first look at the NRA’s finances in the wake of the 2016 elections,” OpenSecrets reports. “It shows that for the last two years, the NRA saw plummeting income from dues-paying members, and that has, in turn, fueled growing deficits.”

Specifically, the NRA ran up a $14 million deficit in 2016, which then ballooned to $31 million in 2017. That’s a stunning reversal from 2015, when the NRA posted $27 million in positive assets.

There may be multiple reasons for the decline. It may be that younger people are as turned off to guns as they are to cars, and as NRA members die (there are good things about the fact that people die) they are not being replaced by other addle-brained individuals. But I think, in the main, the NRA is the victim of its own success:

The gun industry, which the NRA represents, is also suffering huge sales losses in the Trump era. Traditionally, gun sales soar when there is a Democrat in the White House because the NRA and its allies in the right-wing press gin up hysteria about gun ownership being outlawed.

But without that artificial panic, gun sales have plummeted.

If Hillary had won, the NRA would be doing just fine.

It’s somewhat interesting that the arms industry isn’t stepping in and making up for the funds the NRA has lost from dues. It must be nice to have a bunch of suckers pay for your lobbyists, and maybe they just can’t quite believe those days may be past.

For sure, this is not an isolated phenomenon. I’m sure Act Blue is bringing in more money now than before Trump got elected. But it remains a fact that these right wing groups thrive on casting themselves as imperiled victims, and that, in their heart of hearts, they’d really much rather that the Democrats win, so they can keep the till well filled. Maybe that’s the real reason they’re pulling back on political spending:

So far this season, the NRA has committed to spend just $3 million to help Republicans. That’s down from $19 million in 2016, and $11 million in 2014 at this same juncture in the midterm election cycle.

After all, if the Republicans lose big time, the NRA can start scare mongering about gun confiscations, etc., and their real clients, the gun manufacturers, will start raking in the cash again.

Filed in Grifters | | Comments (0)

Nothing new here

Wednesday, September 19, 2018

Dave Collins, a columnist at the Day, did a survey of Republican legislators in this part of the state to see if any of them could explain how Stefanowski can eliminate the state income tax. He noted at the beginning of his piece, that there’s a talking point that the notion is really just “aspirational”.

I’m not sure it’s true that those are official talking points. Curiously, they would belie the actual promise of gubernatorial candidate Stefanowski, who doesn’t hedge at all about being able to eliminate a tax that provides half the state’s revenue.

He never wavers on the notion that it is possible, even though he admits he has no idea how it would be accomplished until he gets into office and starts working on the budget.

In chatting with GOP candidates from southeastern Connecticut this week about their impressions of Stefanowski’s promise to end the income tax, none could explain how it would happen. Most sounded generally skeptical but, to a person, they all suggested it was a noble goal.

I suppose it is a noble goal, to a Republican. We Democrats have goals like health care for all, equality before the law, voting rights for everyone, etc. They strike me as more noble than getting rid of one of the few taxes that hits the rich as much as the rest of us, at least on a percentage basis.

Collins appears to recognize that, as Dean Baker might say, Mr. Arithmetic precludes reaching this noble goal, unless, that is, one decides to completely defund the state government, or institute new, or raise, other taxes, like the sales tax, that hit the lower and middle classes harder than the rich.

I’m not sure whether Collins is genuinely puzzled at the inability of the local Republicans to grapple honestly with this issue. If he is, then one must ask where he’s been for the past 38 years, since ever since Reagan (at least) the Republican modus operandi has been to lie about the magic effect of tax reductions for rich people. Stefanowski proposes a more extreme version of what Sam Brownback did to Kansas.

What’s that definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. But lets give the Republicans their due. They don’t really expect different results. The intent is to destroy the ability of the government to act effectively, thereby proving their assertions that government can’t work, though they leave out the part about it not working when it’s run by people who don’t want it to work. Make no mistake, if the Republicans take over Connecticut’s government, this will be one of many things they will do to destroy the state’s economy, leaving it to the Democrats to do what they’ve been doing for years now: clean up their mess.

If Collins is aware of this basic history, he makes no mention of it. It’s almost as if this sort of thing just started yesterday. It really is time for the press, on both the state and national level, to stop the both-siderism, and call out the Republicans for what they are. In that respect, three cheers for Paul Krugman, who is doing just that. 

Filed in Local issues, Republicans | | Comments (0)

You’re welcome, Rachel

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

My wife and I were in a hotel in Maine Friday night, which means we had access to a television for the first time in quite a while, and, more importantly, reason to watch. The last time we watched television was in another hotel room, the night of the first vote on Obamacare repeal. Friday Night was Paul Manafort flip night, so we settled to wallow and watched Rachel Maddow. 

Turns out, we weren’t alone. Rachel had higher ratingsthat night than any other television show, including the loathsome Hannity.

She couldn’t have done it without us, as I’m sure we put her over the top. 

Filed in Media | | Comments (0)

Heather ducks debates

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Bob Statchen, the Democratic candidate for the 18th Senatorial District (my District) has a letterin today’s New London Day in which he wonders why it is that Heather Somers, the incumbent Senator, has failed to respond to his own, and third party, requests that she debate him. He suggests a variety of reasons for her reluctance:

Possibly Senator Somers’ strategy is to rely on her built-in name recognition as an incumbent and reduce exposure for a challenger. Possibly Senator Somers has not developed a coherent economic policy which she is ready to discuss. Possibly Senator Somers is not prepared to defend her legislative record from the past two years. Whatever the case, the people in this district deserve better. I urge newspapers, community organizations and individual citizens to encourage Senator Somers to engage in the democratic process and give voters the ability to make an informed choice.

All good explanations, but let me suggest another. Heather is much more comfortable in front of single issue audiences, where she can tell the people what they want to hear. That way she can go to the folks on the other side of the issue, and tell them what theywant to hear, with no one on the other side the wiser. She’s largely gotten away with this sort of thing, but not always. I understand she actually tried to snooker the people at Rise Up Mystic, but they weren’t having it from the woman who said, in 2016, that it really didn’t matter who got elected president as the decision in the 18th Connecticut Senatorial District was far more important, but if she really had to say then she had to allow as she’d be voting for the stable genius because while she didn’t like what he said, she didn’t like what Hillary had done, the exact nature of those evil deeds going unstated, of course. She also takes care to try to stay safely on both sides of an issue on which she’s voted. She was for banning bump stocks, but, sadly, her amendment that would have rendered the ban meaningless was voted down, so she had no choice but to vote against banning them. 

In a debate, you’re more or less forced to take a firm position on things in front of a diverse audience, and Heather doesn’t like to do that. She’s even more uncomfortable defending herself now, because she has cast votes (e.g., her pro bump stock vote) that are hard to defend anywhere except in the fever swamp of the far right voters she can’t afford to offend.

In a way, it’s hard for to understand her reluctance, because the New London Day, which ordinarily supplies the questioners for these debates, has treated her with kid gloves throughout her political career. But talking out of both sides of her mouth has worked well for her, so my guess is that unless forced by circumstances, she’ll avoid any forum in which she has to take a firm position on anything. 

Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

A rancid Democrat bites the dust

Thursday, September 13, 2018

One of the many positive effects of the Trump backlash is that it is cleansing the Democratic Party of some of its DINO elements, though I must pause to admit that the DCCC is still recruiting them. But stuff like thisis sort of satisfying.

In New Hampshire, of all places, a 27 year old refugee, Safiya Wazir, from Afghanistan has won a primary against an entrenched Democrat.

Wazir’s unlikely path to New Hampshire politics began when she was 6, and her family fled the Taliban in Afghanistan and moved to Uzbekistan, where she was taunted by classmates who called her “terrorist” and “Taliban kid.”

She lived in Uzbekistan until 2007, when she was 16 and moved with her parents to Concord. She graduated from Concord High School and became an American citizen in 2013. Three years later, after juggling jobs at Walmart and the campus library, she received a degree in business from NHTI, the local community college.

Married with two daughters, ages 5 and 2, and pregnant with a third child due in January, she said she never considered running for office until earlier this year, when a friend who works for the New Hampshire Children’s Trust suggested she consider challenging Patten

Her opponent, Dick Patten, represented a district which had a substantial refugee population. Naturally, you might think, he would do what he could to support those constituents and would express admiration, if nothing else, for Wazir’s ascent from those horrific beginnings. But you’d be wrong. He ran a hateful campaign against immigrants, with a giant heaping scoop of misogyny added.

“It used to be the Heights would support a Heights person,” said Patten, her opponent, a former police dispatcher first elected to the New Hampshire House in 2010. “But the Heights has changed, basically, from what it used to be. We have many immigrants in there now, and she’s from Afghanistan so she was treated like the princess.”

…

Patten accused immigrants of taking welfare benefits from longtime residents and questioned how Wazir can be a legislator and a mother.

“She’s got two kids with a third on the way,” Patten said. “How are you going to be in the State House with two kids and one on the way?”

Patten said he is now planning to support Wazir’s Republican opponent, Dennis Soucy, in the November election because Soucy and his wife “have been on the Heights for over 50 years.”

She crushed him, 329 to 143. Those couldn’t have been all immigrant votes, so maybe the people of the Heights are more human than Patten.

I’ll give the New Hampshire establishment Democrats credit. They don’t seem terribly upset that their long time compatriot has been shown the door:

Ray Buckley, chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, said Wazir represented an important generational, gender, and ethnic shift in the district, and her voice would be particularly significant for the state’s growing refugee community, who can now turn to someone with “experiences and challenges like them.”

He called her win “very exciting news” and said she ran a “real campaign” while Patten “misunderstood the mood of the electorate this year and believed he could win without making a significant effort.”

If Trump manages to cleanse this sort of filth out of the Democratic Party, he will have accomplished some good in his lifetime.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

Only the Trump Administration could make Iran look good

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

I am not partial to theocracies, no matter the creed pushed by the state in question. So I have no use for Iran. But I’m a fair minded guy, and even I can see when the Iranians have right on their side. Consider this one of the Trump Administration’s most awesome feats. They have managed to make Iran look good, or at least in the right:

Amid the Trump administration’s almost weekly lash outs against Iran — mostly on its presence in its own region and on the nuclear agreement the United States is now violating — comes a particularly stunning demand: That Iran do more to protect U.S. interests in Iraq.

Here’s what’s going on:

On Friday, three mortar bombs landed inside Baghdad’s Green Zone, a fortified area where the U.S. embassy is located. There were no casualties.

That same day, Iran’s consulate in Basra (around 330 miles southeast of Baghdad), was attacked and torched by demonstrators, who have been protesting massive corruption and the cuts to their basic services there for weeks.

And on Saturday, the U.S. Consulate there was attacked by rockets. Again, no real damage, no casualties.

Totally ignoring the fact that Iran’s own consulate was destroyed — along with Iraqi government offices — the White House on Tuesday released a statement holding Iran accountable for an attack on the U.S. consulate office there:

Over the past few days, we have seen life-threatening attacks in Iraq, including on the United States consulate in Basra and against the American embassy compound in Baghdad. Iran did not act to stop these attacks by its proxies in Iraq, which it has supported with funding, training, and weapons.

Holding Tehran directly responsible for the attack, the statement promised retaliation. Iran, meanwhile, has resettled its consular staff at a new location in Basra, striking back at the White House by calling its statement, “shocking, provocative, and irresponsible.”

It somewhat strains belief that as part of some deep (Iranian) state conspiracy, the Iranians would have plotted to utterly destroy their own consulate as cover for a relatively harmless attack on an American consulate. Perhaps the Trumpers have been spoiled by Fox News. They seem to think that they can get away with any lie on the broader world stage because they can get away with any lie to the braid dead Americans who watch Fox.

Filed in Crazies, The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music: channeling Trump

Friday, September 7, 2018

This song has an odd history. This video is not, I’m sure, by the actual artist, whose name may be lost to history.

When it first came out, sometime in my high school years, it shot to the top of the Big D Swinging 60 survey. It was getting plenty of air time until, all of a sudden, they just stopped playing it, as if it had never been released. One suspects the realization dawned that it might be considered offensive to some.

It’s not great music, of course. It just occurred to me that with a few modifications to the lyrics it could easily pass for what must be going through the mind of a certain very stable genius right now.

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

I didn’t do it

Friday, September 7, 2018

The following letter was provided to CTBlue anonymously by a highly placed person in the White House who removed it from the desk of the person currently holding the office of the President of the United States, before that person could read it

Most Highly Exalted Extremely Stable Genius:

In case you would prefer not to read this whole letter (I know you don’t like to concentrate for long periods) you might want to skip to the last paragraph.

I am writing to add my voice to the other ultra-loyal members of your staff who have assured you that they had nothing to do with the anonymous op-ed in the failing New York Times. It simply boggles my mind that anyone would think that you are a petulant, clueless ignoramous from whom the world must be protected. I can’t conceive that anyone would compare your intellect to that of a fifth or sixth grader. That’s so unfair to fifth graders! And by that, I mean, of course, that no fifth or sixth grader could be expected to have as sure a grasp of complicated issues as do you. It would take at least a seventh grader, for sure!

I also want to assure you that in no way do I think your mental illness has affected your ability to function as president. We all have our days when we can’t do anything but fly into twitter rages at our enemies. It’s only to be expected.

I know that things don’t look good for me and that the finger of suspicion has been pointed at me by multiple people, but the truth is, I only want to continue to serve our nation by advancing your agenda of packing the courts with corporate whores, gutting our health care system, screwing American workers, lowering taxes on the rich, imprisoning children, and destroying our environment, to name just a few! I am deeply grateful that you gave me the opportunity to help you achieve these objectives, so why would I go running to the New York Times and tell them that you’re an intellectual basket case, mentally unstable, totally ignorant, with the attention span of a three year old? No one needs to be told these things anyway, because it is so obvious that you are exactly the very stable genius you told us you were.

So, please ignore those whispering in your ear that I’m the one who wrote that piece. The last thing you want to do is give the failing New York Times the satisfaction of seeing the wrong person get fired just because it looks like he wrote that op-ed.

To summarize, I didn’t have a thing to do with that op-ed. Let Bart Simpson explain it in detail.

Filed in The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

A hypothesis on the sudden appearance of Democratic spines

Friday, September 7, 2018

I started blogging back in 2005. The site was hosted on an apple Mobile Me page, which (I checked just now) has disappeared into the internet ether, which means I can’t link to one of the first, if not the first, things I posted: a rant against “wuss Democrats”. I believe that from time to time I have repeated my complaints about such Democrats. In fact, I know I have.

So, it is somewhat gratifying to read about the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee fighting the good fight against Kavanaugh. It may be quixotic, but over time the windmills will come down. Maybe not this time, but at some point in the future. It is not lost on me that some of those making the most noise have presidential ambitions.

I would humbly submit that one of the reasons, if not the main reason, that the Democrats, or at least some of them, have started to grow spines is that they have become aware that their sinecures and/or aspirations for higher office are endangered by the restiveness of the base they have taken for granted for so long. Not only has corporate Democrat, and Speaker in waiting, Joe Crowley, been pushed aside, but Ayanna Pressley took out Michael Capuano in Massachusetts. The latter case is possibly the most interesting. On a policy level, there was not much to separate the two, but Pressley made the case that Capuano was simply not an aggressive enough advocate. It’s all well and good if a legislator votes the right way, but more is required these days. It wasn’t good behavior that led to the current Republican lock on all three branches of government.

Our own congressman here in the Second might learn a lesson from all this. Joe’s a great guy, but he’s in the Capuano mold. I get his tweets. I know he doesn’t actually send them, but they speak to his priorities and his perception of how he should function in his job. What I see is a stream of announcements about jobs being created here or job training there. All well and good, but the Republic is in mortal danger, and it would behoove him to get out in front of his base. We need more rock throwers, and those rocks should be thrown in many directions, including at the media. We should be accusing them of bias born of both siderism. As things stand now, we are defending the press while it continues to blame “both sides” for our current troubles.

Anyway, it’s good to see the first faint stirrings of fighting spirit among the Democrats. If we want more of that, and assuming we win the House and or the Senate, we have to think long and hard about replacing the geriatrics currently at the helm with new people oriented toward open warfare against the Republicans. It may be our only hope.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)