September 11, 2010

9/11/2008

This is my 9/11 memorial from a couple years ago. A new assessment is required (given the continually disintegrating atmosphere), but it will have to wait at least another year.



Thursday, September 11, 2008

There was crazy barge traffic on the river today. I couldn't see all of them over the trees, but I could see the stacks and hear the engines. My legs were burning, so I took the flat high path into Portland instead of dipping down by the river. I could hear the tug straining to push the barges a bit faster than the usual lazy saunter you see them do. On the way back, pedaling through Lannan Park, there was one tug shoving its load upriver in the locks, while up at the switchback by 22nd Street another rig was waiting its turn on the upriver side. By the switchback, at about the point where I noticed the unusual amount of barge traffic, a UPS 747 flew low over the river. About an eighth of a mile up, another UPS plane flew over. Commerce was bubbling in the overcast mid-morning.

Construction trucks were jamming the path on the downtown side of Portland, pushing me behind schedule. Usually that's one of the stretches I can put my head down and fly (or some reasonable facsimile thereof), but today it was more like the riverwalk stretch, where I have to dodge in and out of pedestrians, lollygaggers, Belle of Louisville workers having a smoke break, etc. I never regained my momentum, deciding instead just to chill for the rest of the ride. I jumped off the path up by the skatepark, and took a leisurely wheel through the neighborhood instead of running Adams Street uphill to my house. It took me an extra ten minutes. I need to stay on my bike more, or get up to the Y and get on a stationary when my bike breaks down. The end of the season is approaching, and my condition is more like the beginning of the season.

There is, of course, the symmetry. Fractal geometry tells us there's symmetry down to infinity. Seven years almost to the minute prior to my noticing the first UPS plane, the North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed. This will be our generation's symmetry, replacing the previous generation's Pearl Harbor, stapled forever into our public consciousness by state-of-the-art television coverage in the media capital in the world.

I was doing inventory at the Clarksville store. It was not a pleasant day for several reasons: I had to be there at 6 a.m., and I am not a morning person; Inventory is never pretty, especially when (like me) you are lax on paperwork organization; it's never fun spending the day with the regional manager, and so on. By 8:30 we were done with the front end so that the arriving salespeople could put the showroom back together and open the store. I was back in the warehouse when a CSR came back and said "come up and look at this, a plane flew into a building in New York". And there it was, the smoking North Tower.

Both towers were down by the time we went to lunch. We had several TVs turned to the news in various points throughout the store, but we decided against running the news on the main feed to the salesfloor, thereby avoiding having over a hundred replications of burning towers glaring at the front door like some J. G. Ballard stage set. Information gleaned in passing seeped in like rumor. Between finishing up the inventory, waiting on customers, and the confusion in the media, we weren't quite sure what was going on. The inventory group (including my regional manager) decided on Hooters for lunch. Now, there's not a lot that annoys me more than Hooters: if you wanna decent steakhouse burger, head over the Logan's at the corner of the lot, where you can get a well-executed (though somewhat unimaginative) pepperjack burger. If you're going to engage in inappropriate work behavior, don't make it borderline: head back across the river to the Gold Showclub on Market. We can stop along the way and cash in a couple twenties for a fistful of ones. When we get there, we can toss back scotch & sodas, discuss the upcoming fourth quarter retail season, and express our undying admiration for the big girls. Hell, we can go to White Castle for all I care – anywhere but Hooters, with its crappy overpriced bar food and empty promise of naughty girl/high school cheerleader sex, a tableau with cameltoe. But there they were, standing around the office, "Hooters for lunch?" I carefully considered my job and decided that this was only the second to last straw.

Waiting for my lunch, I was mentally tabulating the bill to see if it would fit on my debit card in case RM didn't pick up the tab (he didn't). One thing worse than a crappy overpriced lunch is a crappy overpriced lunch with a bounced check fee added. RM was droning on about my filing system or lack thereof, while I was focusing my energy on maintaining the bland laid back exterior which functions like a wax seal between the boiling acid of my contempt and the rest of my workaday world. "The most important thing to me," he says, "is to see you make progress on corralling the paperwork in the store." "No," I thought, "the most important thing to you is that I maintain my cool and not rip your fucking throat out." After a quarter hour or so, I was able to shut down my interior monologue and ride the somber wave of the day. My compatriots at the table were unusually muted in their pro-forma ass kissing. Though we still didn't really know what was going on, there was a gray pall that mirrored the rain outside. Our words were empty, their masks having been torn away. Words were placeholders for long dead ghosts. We didn't pretend otherwise, for at least the time being.

The oddest thing: that old PE song, "911 is a Joke", kept running through my head. A bitter joke indeed. We have yet to figure out just what the joke is.

Today was cloudy and muted as well. John McCain saw his pal Rudy Giuliani get booted from the primaries with his "Noun, verb, 9/11" platform, so he wisely decided that this is the one time he best not overestimate the gullibility of the voting populace. He invited his nemesis Obama to join him in not making hay of the stars -n- stripes on All Fall Down Day, and Obama eagerly accepted the draw, understanding that he could do no right with the Injured Middle American anyway. NPR, engaged in wall-to-wall Sarah Palin coverage, let the date pass with a modest mention or two. The BBC uncharacteristically went for the biggest drama, setting each of their main desk correspondents on either side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. As for the rest of the media outlets . . . well, it doesn't matter, they're dead to me. NPR only survives because I forget how to reset my clock radio.

Come September 12th, McCain will be back on his horse, making up for the time he conceded today. 9/11 will come up. Maybe even Obama will bring it up first in an effort to outflank him. Either way, the fractals will spread before us, the patterns will repeat, and the words will again don their masks. Somewhere else, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist will once again devalue Third World rage against the US because, surely, only the US Government (or, of course, the Mossad) could actually pull off an operation like 9/11. Someone else somewhere else will pontificate about chickens and roosting. 9/11 barely merits a dip in the noise these days, and the spirals will only amplify as time moves forward, muting themselves again in symmetrical units (10, 20, 25, 50, 75, 100) until it all blends together in the background wash like tires on wet pavement.

September 12th, 2001 was very quiet. Down here on the river, no planes marked the Ohio on the way in to Standiford Field. The constant roar of planes into the UPS hub was silenced. The Jazz Posse beachhead on Rufer Avenue was in another world without the treetop approaches of the UPS planes. Louisville, with its disproportionate level of air traffic, seemed frozen in time. Today, September 11, 2008, commerce clots the river and the skies above.

Tonight at Target, I am reminded of George Bush's exhortation to BUY! for America. It worked pretty well for a while. We pulled out our plastic and bought our way out of recession. The problem is, we kept buying and buying to keep the wolves from the door, but now our cards are maxed, and the wolf is calling again. Sooner or later we're going to have to deal with that recession we avoided, and it looks like the time is now.

Fractal patterns, repeating endlessly: the economy expands, the economy contracts. Information, even culture itself, has become fractal, repetitious, self-replicating. 9/11 moved from event to caesurae to trace to a fractal reflection in the time that it took to focus. True, 9/11 was big enough that the monster choked, but, soon enough, 9/11 was subsumed – first the t-shirts and politicians with t-shirt sloganeering, the commentators reterritorializing with every masked word out of their mouths. Then the jingoist public figures, "God Bless America" in the seventh inning stretch, the conspiracy theory to close the circle. We can, as a people, explain away anything . . . just drown it in noise and repetition and assume that, like the sun, it will rise every morning.

Coming out of Target, I decided I needed noise in a very literal sense, so I slipped Pig Destroyer into the Maxx's CD player and gave it a boost. Not long after 9/11, Tony put an "Operation Infinite Justice" window hanger in the front door of 138 Adams – it was the one with the American flag and the burning tower in the background, with a bald eagle shedding a single tear in the foreground. He figured he needed an American flag beard on the door. That was not paranoid behavior at the time.

Tonight, I will pour myself a glass of green iced tea, print out some more CD covers, and do my best to avoid election coverage. I've got a show tomorrow. Thankfully, I'm finishing this thing early enough that I can get up in the morning and get back out on my bike. Unless it rains.

September 9, 2010

Jackassery All Around

So the Dove World isn't going to be burning Korans after all. Not to fear! Westoboro Baptist Church is stepping up to the plate! Korans will be roasted on 9/11!

Sheesh. Jackassery all around.

No, burning Korans is not the same as building an Islamic cultural center near the site of the World Trade Centers. Burning Korans is an act of marginalization, an act of hate. Building an Islamic cultural center is a bid for acceptance. There is not an equivalence.

Both acts are protected. If assholes want to burn Korans, we can't stop them. Anyone can build a church anywhere zoning permits.

We should expect counter protests from the Muslim world. One good protest deserves another. Burn some Korans, they'll burn some bibles, or some American flags, everyone will have a good time, then they'll go home. No harm, no foul.

Perhaps some more extreme Muslims will go further. General Petraeus says that it could put American lives in danger. Is that Pastor Jones fault? No, even if it is a foreseeable consequence of his hateful action, a response beyond all measure can not be a legitimate part of the equation. Burn some bibles, sure. Killing people? That's not on him, that's on the killers. We lefties come down on the Israelis for the murderous response against the Turkish aid vessel trying to breach the blockade of Palestine, but the aid vessel was bent on confrontation, and they got it. The Israeli response was provoked . . . beyond all measure, but provoked. In the same way, we can't blame the bible freaks if Islamo-fascists kill anyone over the Koran burning.

We also, as progressives, can't continue to let nutjobs like Terry Jones and Fred Phelps stand as representatives for Christianity while we continue to differentiate between violent, radical Muslims and the mainstream of the Islamic faith. We can in no way find it "understandable" that a Muslim would be driven into a homicidal rage by the burning of a Koran, while not tolerating anti-Islamic sentiments post-9/11. Violence is violence, hate is hate. There should be zero tolerance for hate.

In spite of the surfeit of positive religious role models in my life, I am profoundly skeptical of religion, though ultimately it is clear that the problem is with the human, not the "divine". In both the Muslim world and the Christian world, there is jackassery all around.

September 5, 2010

The Outbox

Another compendium of half-formed ideas . . .


Hit the North! (Redux)


Bonus time up north! Another week of virtually perfect weather up out of the heat. My my!

Nice and quiet this time - just Sharri & I with mom & dad. We spent a little more time cruising the countryside, checking out little places we haven't seen been to before, like Christmas Cove (above), Mission Point, Good Harbor Beach, and a few other places. Dad fired up the party barge and we got most of the way into the southern lake, and at a much more relaxed pace. We also spent a little more time tearing around at full speed in the powerboat.




Not as much reading this time, either. I did pick up Ted Morgan's memoir, My Battle of Algiers.

One of these days, I'll spend more time talking about Up North . . . just not right now.

All in all, a nice mellow end to the summer, especially given how annoying August has been. The summer has a whole has been a tad bit more annoying than I would like, which is kinda a drag, since I spend the whole year looking forward to summer. Oh well, onward and upward.

Here's to an exciting fall.



* * * * *

In Rotation

Sir Richard Bishop: All Strung Out
Mahler: 9th Symphony
Various: Dirty Dirty (featuring Son House, Charlie Patton, Charlie Poole, Cliff Carlisle, Skip James, Dock Boggs, Yank Rachel, Lottie Kimbrough, Blind Willie McTell, Frank Hutchison, Willie Eason, Memphis Minnie, Washington Phillips, Homer Callahan, and more)
Ennio Morricone: Crime & Dissonance
OST: The Limits of Control
Shostakovich: 5th Symphony
The Milkshakes: Live from Chatham
Various: Psych Funk 101

* * * * *

Blame the Government

There was a gag order dropped in the Roger Clemens hearings, so we won't be subjected to the annoying media circus as much as we could have been. In the short time that they were allowed to speak, both Clemens and his lawyer made a clear outline of how they were going to run this in the press: it's us against the government. In other words, Clemens wasn't going to try to plead ignorance (a la Barry Bonds), or attack his opponents from his morally superior perch (a la Lance Armstrong), he was going to join the Tea Party in running against Obama.

It's the government, people. They want to take away your guns. They want to build mosques in your backyard. They want to take away your income by taxing you. They want to let everybody in the country. They want the socialists to take over. They want to marginalize and persecute the good Christians.

They want to put Roger Clemens behind bars.

God, guns, and a free Roger Clemens. That's America.

On one level, I do agree with the faithful: we have no business trying Roger Clemens for lying to Congress. Congress had no business wasting their time investigating PEDs in sports. They have much more important things to worry about.

* * * * *

Summertime Blues


I recently re-read Jack Kerouac's San Francisco Blues. The basic premise is that the series of poems are short bursts ("choruses") of blues, with the final line of one poem leading into the next "chorus". The poems are limited to fitting onto one page of a notebook small enough to fit into Kerouac's pocket.

The poems themselves are a mixed bag, and I have no interest in even approximating Kerouac's voice. I am interested in the notebook schtick, and I like the sharp, jagged rhythms of the best of the blues poems.

I'm going to try to scare up 75 poems or so for next summer. We'll see how that goes.


7.

hotcha! State Fair time in the old town
the natives are out
  flashing displaced graphics
  and hysterical edge
  life during wartime's perpetual state

  one dimensional
eyes of jungle cats
"look, she's gonna pop right fuckin' here!"
off to the side
rivers & tributaries
gently swirling backwaters
there's a pickaninny in that case, over there
Kentucky detritus collecting in puddles
  & eddies off to the side
filtering into the rivers
throbbing thick blood behind the temples
anger just below the
hysterical above


9.

hello, then!
the grass grows thinner, browns out
sandy, sandy pine
gone white
clarity in the air

who knows
what runs in the clear pines
"Take to the mountains," he said,
"if the government is a problem.
Make them come get you
& then shoot down on them
from high rocks."
          not the same, perhaps
but mixed oak, maple, birch
pine
provide cover

white nation, white nation
curtain drawn, it's here
it's down the street
"no one gets my gun"


13.

edge of town used to be
Wendy's & The Flap Jack Shack
up over the hill
from sandy orchard & sparse grain

corn's imperative barely met here
by narrow wizened farmers
Eastern European Catholic features
sharpened by wind & struggle
         up north
         isolation subtext
growing's a struggle waged alone
wheat not corn
cherries and apples not grapes

the damn wineries came in
grapes a spreading fungus
cherry trees displaced, brittle, dead, cracking
new tasting rooms run by old farmers
first the corn, now the grapes
in Gills Pier
Polish saints protect us
from the modern world

Once again, effing Blogger wipes out all my typographical stunts, so you'll have to wait until it gets published to see the final versions. [UPDATE: the new Blogger editor allows different kinds of indents, so the poems above are in their actual forms]

And by the way, did you know Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay also owns the original scroll from Kerouac's On the Road? Gotta love Wikipedia.

Oh, and more on the state fair in an upcoming post.

* * * * *

The Reds? Are You Kidding Me?


Well, my Tigers drained all the drama out of the AL Central by collapsing around All Star break instead of at the end of the season. They're playing okay baseball right now, but at ten back, they're not catching the Twins because, unlike the Tigers last year, the Twins won't fold. For the record, I don't see the Sox catching the Twins either, Manny or not.

But, what's this? The Reds in first place? Sure didn't see that coming.

As they say, stay tuned. I would love to see the Reds deep into the post season.

* * * * *

USA! USA! USA!

If you are sleeping on the world basketball championships, wake up. "America's B Team" is playing some of the most fun basketball you're going to see for quite a while.

Basketball traditionally breaks down its starting five into specialized roles, and anyone who recruits an all-star team generally defines the roles, and then finds the best players to fill those roles. This version of the US National team went with the best players, regardless of position. As a result, it's a team full of guards and small forwards, with Tyson Chandler and Kevin Love being the only big men on the team. As a result, you've got Lamar Odom, normally a 2-3 even though he's 6' 10", playing center, as well as Andre Iguodala, Rudy Gay, and Danny Granger, all muscular 2-3's, playing power forward.

I see the mark of Kryzewski on this team: he's trying to really establish himself as a basketball genius, not just a motivator of young men. He's trying to go to the logical extension of the Bob Knight defense-first school, pumped up Nolan Richardson-style. This is an amazing chance to see just how exciting defense can be.

It's too bad that Rajon Rondo didn't work out for this team, but if you turn the rock over and can't hit jumpers, the international game punishes you even more than the American game does. On the other hand, I'm glad they gave Eric Gordon a chance, because his inside/outside game goes well internationally, and his lack of a mid-range game doesn't get exposed like it occasionally does stateside. Kevin Love also does well in this set up, since he's more than happy to mix it up physically with anyone you can throw at him.

Overall, the defense is breathtaking, but the offense will make or break this team. They are currently undefeated, but now they're playing for real in the one-and-done round. Catch it if you can.

* * * * *

Uh, Starfish?

So, I'm thinking of creating an animal metaphor to represent my truly enviable attributes to the world at large. Let's see, I could be a strong, soaring eagle, or a powerful bear, or a graceful deer. I could be a sage owl, a proud lion, a faithful hound, or an inscrutable cat. I could be a showy peacock, a bizarre giraffe, a timeless elephant. I could be a slimy lizard, an indestructible cockroach. Or I could be a starfish.

A freaking starfish.

To be fair, the Tea Party didn't choose this metaphor for themselves. It comes from a book written by Rod Beckstrom called The Starfish and the Spider. The idea, in short, is that decentralized organizations are stronger because you can't kill them by cutting off the head - hence, the spider v. the starfish metaphor. This idea could probably as easily applied to Al Qaeda . . . and it does make sense.

You can follow the metaphor out to its logical conclusion. A starfish is capable of surviving and regenerating lost limbs, which makes it a uniquely durable organism. But if these "decentralized" organisms have superior survival characteristics, then why hasn't evolution determined that more of these types of organisms would end up higher on the evolutionary ladder? It seems that maybe nature prefers centralized biological systems after all.

Not trying to make a specific political point here, just pointing out the obvious.

* * * * *

More Rhetorical Genius Courtesy the Commonwealth

“Many of these mandates affect small business owners who don’t have the resources to hire an army of lawyers and accountants to comply with all these burdensome regulations. The more time small business owners spend pushing paper, the less time they have to focus on creating jobs.

That would be the representative of Kentucky's fourth, Geoff Davis.

'Cause, you know, if it weren't for all that paperwork, these people would be out there pulling jobs out of their asses.

* * * * *

Chamber of Horrors

So, this is old news, but I've been avoiding talking about the Chamber of Commerce because they make me crazy.

What's with this "crisis of confidence" bullshit anyway?

There has been a lot of chatter in the news about how the recovery has not translated into more jobs. The Chamber of Commerce essentially says that business owners are sitting on their money because of a "crisis of confidence" . . . which, of course, they explicitly blame on the Obama administration.

Now, "crisis of confidence" the kind of talk that should drive the stereotypical self-sufficient American superman completely nuts. If you have a "crisis of confidence", then whose fault is that? What kind of wimpy psychobabble is that?

There are obvious alliances between NGOs and political parties - unions and Democrats, the Chamber and Republicans. Ostensibly these NGOs will align with the party that will do them the most good, and it is understandable that they would be semi-permanent alignments given the philosophical underpinnings of the parties. Of course, these NGOs will campaign for the political parties that they are aligned with. Maybe I'm projecting here, but it seems to me that the Chamber has become more of an advocacy group for Republicans than an advocacy group for businessmen. Unions always seem to work for the best interests of their constituents, and to the degree that those interests are addressed by Democrats, unions work for Democrats. The Chamber seems to be working for the best interests of Republicans, and to the degree that those interests match the interests of businessmen, The Chamber works for businessmen. That may seem to be a subtle distinction, but it's not. The fact that their stated primary purpose is actually a secondary purpose makes them untrustworthy. Sort of like Fox News, if you know what I mean.

And besides, the real businessmen know that the best time to make your move is when your competition is suffering a "crisis of confidence".

* * * * *

That's it for now. I'll do the Kentucky State Fair art post next.

August 14, 2010

Clearing Off the Desk

Hit the North!

Must be the heat - I've been pretty dead this summer. Two hours a day on the road, often over 100 on the way home, hot enough that the air conditioners never catch up at home . . .

Was up in Michigan over the fourth of July, spent the next week there, and did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Went to the beach once, dropped Sharri in Fishtown & stayed in the car, never spent any time in Traverse City except for a quick trip to the Meijers. Never took the speedboat all the way down into the southern lake. Lazy, lazy, lazy. Did hit up Dog Ears used books in Northport and scored a copy of John Cage's M, though I probably overpaid for it. Other than that, I read the last installment of Larsson's Millennium trilogy, got a good start on Zizek's latest, and was never late for cocktail hour.

We're going to try to sneak up there again in about a week. Bonus time out of the heat!

* * * * *

Speaking of Which

This summer has been brutal. Just sayin'.

* * * * *

In Rotation, Part One

Tom Verlaine: Warm and Cool
Brainbombs: Obey
The Minutemen: Buzz or Howl, Double Nickels
Pandit Pran Nath: Ragas of Morning and Night
Brahms: German Requiem
Rangda: False Flag
Kinit Her: Divine Names
Body Collector: New Eden
Mahler: Das Lied von der Erde
Yellow Swans: Bring the Neon War Home


* * * * *

A Modest Proposal

So I don't have a problem with an Islamic cultural center near (not at, near!) "ground zero", but it seems that some people are sensitive to the issue. I suppose I can see where they are coming from, so I have an idea that could help solve the problem without singling out those of the Muslim faith: let's have a complete moratorium on the construction of all churches, mosques, synagogues, ashrams, temples, etc., as well as all buildings with religious sponsorship or intent, such as cultural centers, schools, universities, soup kitchens, youth centers, etc. Let's just not license any of these and related-use buildings in the entire United States and all its territories for the next ten years.

Not only will that solve the problem of hurt feelings between religious sects, but it will make all those secular humanist haters put there money where their collective mouth is: okay, bitches, time for y'all to shut up with your damn moral superiority & start running the soup kitchens!

Whatsa matter, Ayn Rand got yer tongue?

* * * * *

Something I've Never Been Clear On


I know that many Libertarians (and maybe this is just the new wave of pre-Tea Party Ron Paul boosters, not the actual "intellectual core" of the movement) support the party because they oppose centralized power. The reasoning here seems to be that if the government is severely reduced, then centralized power disappears.

"Nature abhors a vacuum." - does anyone really believe that if government moves away from centralized power, then nothing will move toward centralized power? Does anyone believe that Libertarianism, no matter how dreamy the concept of "leave me alone to do my own thing" may be, is anything other than an expressway for the chiefs of capital into the corridors of power? Oh wait, they're already there. And Libertarianism solves that . . . how?

* * * * *


Bobby Jindal Phone Home; or, Another Reason to Get Off Facebook


So an old high school classmate of mine posts this nice little quote:

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong it's reign by working upon the ...prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. ~ Abraham Lincoln

I was initially somewhat taken aback by this quote, given the person who posted it: an Indiana farm girl who never made it out of town for any length of time, and never (as much as I knew her which, admittedly, wasn't/isn't much) prone to any kind of political progressiveness in any direction, left or right.

And then come the comments: from one, "that's called socialism". What the hell? What's being critiqued here is exactly the opposite of socialism, it is the influence of capital and the bosses of capital on governance. When I politely pointed out that socialism is not being critiqued (at the time, I thought my classmate understood and believed in the quote, so I was more or less siding with her), someone else gave a hysterical response along the lines of "not socialism - open your eyes! judgment day is coming and we will all have to answer to the lord!" - actually, that is much shorter and not nearly as hysterical as the actual comment, but I'm not going back through two months worth of Farmville on her wall to find the exact words.

And then I got it. Abraham Lincoln . . . red, white, and blue American hero . . . "Corruption in high places" . . . Obama . . . socialism. A direct line of (Glenn) Beckian logic. I don't know for sure if my classmate really understands the quote or not, but it's clear that a chunk of her social group (and, by extension, mine too) doesn't have a clue.

Look: I am not, and will never be, an Obama apologist. I like him just fine. I voted for him because he wasn't George W. Bush, and so far he hasn't magically transformed into George W. Bush, so I've got to say he has fulfilled all the expectations I had of him. The fact of the matter is that corporations have been enthroned, and the government that our constitution created, the government that has defined itself according to that document down through the years, is incapable of changing that. Whoever makes it through the system is complicit in its crimes. Some, including Obama, will make the moral compromises, reasoning that the only way you can change the system is from within. The question remains: is he fooling himself, us, or both?

The maddening thing is, though, that the mainstream of those who oppose Obama want more corporate control, not less. And now, Glenn Beck has whole segments of the nation participating in Orwellian doublespeak for fun and for profit. Hence, the Lincoln quote that means exactly the opposite of what Lincoln himself intends it to mean.

Just like Bobby Jindal doesn't think the federal government has a function. Until, that is, it does. And then, it just sucks. Until he's in national office, then it doesn't.

Nice to know people don't feel the need to make sense any more.

* * * * *

While I'm on the Topic

Bobby Jindal really, really, REALLY needs to shut the fuck up. The only thing I want to know from him is what the state of Louisiana is doing to clean up the BP disaster. If he contradicts himself one more time, his brain will collapse onto itself, and he will morph into Sarah Palin.

* * * * *

Lincoln Part 2

I'm waiting for the first Tea Party politician who dons a stovepipe hat and says "I'm a gonna free this country like Lincoln freed the slaves." My money's on Palin, since she's always running her lemon, you got to figure she's an odds-on favorite to say damn near anything. Bobby Jindal's on the board, but this one's Palin's race to lose.

One thing you can be sure of is that politician won't come from the South. Most of the good ol' boys in the South remember the dirty secret that the average Faux News viewer glosses over: Lincoln stood for everything the Tea Party is against. If the Tea Party were to cast Satan as president, his template would be Lincoln.

You want centralized power? Lincoln was willing to go to war to enforce that. You want limits on local autonomy? Lincoln said "no slaves". You want to play fast and loose with the constitution? Lincoln considered the Bill of Rights a much more important document. You want a federal income tax? Yup, blame Abe.

But still, we have Beckian logic to contend with. Someone is going to try it.

* * * * *

In Rotation Part Two

Hasil Adkins: Moon Over Madison
AMM: The Crypt
Billy Childish: The '82 Cassettes
Calexico: Live in Nuremburg
Dandelion Abortion: Complete cassettes
Jeff Simmons: OST - Naked Angels
Queen Victoria: "Auld Lang Syne" 7"
The Body: All the Waters of the Earth Turn to Blood
Borbetomagus/Hijokaidan: Burning at Both Ends

* * * * *

The Media is Killing Me

There have been all kinds of discussions about privacy and the media age, specifically about how younger people don't have the same privacy issues that anyone from the pre-text message generations does. Like that tattoo that's going to look like shit in about twenty years, the text generation doesn't seem to care about the red-ringed eyeball, vacant stare, plastic cup full of who-knows-what pictures that get posted online. I guess they figure they'll deal with it when it comes around.

Or, maybe they just have a different way of dealing with media in general.

The rantings here are, I believe, partially a product of media fatigue. I generally am not affected as much as some, but I think it's clear that it's getting to me.

Like . . . recently, there was a story about rivers & property rights in Colorado on NPR. Essentially, one group of people thinks that Colorado laws about the status of rivers means that, like roads, they are public. The property owners on the river think, on the other hand, that only the water is public property, and that all the land and rocks under & around the river are private property. Therefore, if you are floating down the river and pull off to the side, you are on private property. If the river is shallow and you are standing in it, you are standing on private property. If you are rafting and you hit a rock in the middle of the river, you are trespassing (I'm not exaggerating this at all).

Now, obviously there can be a reasonable middle ground reached. The state could define the rivers as public with thorough safeguards for landowners. If the landowners played their cards right, they could totally have lost the battle and won the war.

But that's not the way it gets played these days. Every issue is a moral issue, and not in and of itself: it is moral in the sense that you are on the proper side of the issue, and not caving in to the immorality of base atheistic/humanist culture (i.e., those on the other side of the issue). The issue and facts of the issue are irrelevant (see Beckian logic, above); the only thing that matters is that you are on the side of God.

Let's not believe for one second this applies only to "conservatives". The other day, I commented on a post attacking the US government for trying to stop the latest Wikkileak. My point was simply that not only did the US government oppose the leaks, but some human rights organizations (such as Amnesty International) opposed them as well . . . the reason being that it was possible that Afghani collaborators with the US could be exposed and subject to brutal retaliation courtesy the Taliban. The poster replied that, while of course he didn't want to see people die, that it was only normal that enemy collaborators should be punished, and that he supposed the collaborators should be shipped to the US, but that there were already too many "weasels" in the US and we didn't really need any more.

Ah yes . . . "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". It has been pointed out that the worldwide Islamic insurgence is the closest thing to a proletariat revolution that we have right now. That may be the case, but if indeed that is an acceptable shape of revolution, then we are right to reject Marxism. Islamic revolution does represent change, but for the better? Obviously not, especially if you are the one underneath the burqa.

The poster was on "us v. them" autopilot as much as any Republican senator. I am constantly trying to break these codes here, to maintain my partiality with open eyes and active mind. I am appalled when codes take over, no matter what the code is.

And yet, media fatigue is pushing me to the limits as well. After the Colorado river story, my response wasn't "what a bunch of assholes - can't they just work out a compromise instead of showboating to their constituency on some vague 'property rights' routine?" My response was to question the very nature of private property - as in, maybe property itself is the problem, and not the ability to compromise.

Or maybe I'm one step behind on the evolutionary media-digesting wheel. Maybe the kids will be alright.

* * * * *

Was That Donnie Walsh On the Other Line?


Just when I was about ready to resign myself to another miserable Pacers season with dreams of 2011 dancing through my head, Larry Bird goes and makes a move that makes the Pacers . . . well, not exactly playoff-ready, but more interesting than I thought they would end up being.

The Pacers managed to snag Darren Collison and James Posey in a four team deal that sent Troy Murphy to the Nets. Why the fuss? The Pacers, who haven't had a decent point guard since Mark Jackson, may finally have a decent point guard. Collison, who made quite an impression last season filling in for Chris Paul, is generally regarded as the fastest guard in the NBA, though his lack of size and strength make him somewhat of a defensive liability, especially against half-court offenses. And Posey, though overpaid, will be very useful around the basket.

Okay, not D-Wade and Bron action, not Stoudemire action, but better than Matt Barnes by a fair amount. The Pacers made an immediate upgrade at their weakest point (pun intended), and Collison gets one full season to audition for the position on a more permanent basis. If he passes the audition, and if Roy Hibbert continues improving, then the Pacers can go spend money in 2011 with the knowledge that they are solid at the one and five, very good at the three with the additional comfort that Granger can play two if necessary, have a good prospect at 2 - 3, big upside at the backup one, and plenty of aggressive, spirited fouls coming off the bench (Tyler, get well soon, will ya?). It sounds for all the world like the Pacers are finally becoming good chicken stock just waiting for the main ingredient to be added.

Props, Larry. I didn't see this one coming. It's almost as if you had an angel whispering in your ear . . .

July 28, 2010

Shut Up and Show Me the Ring(s)

In amongst all the LeBron mania, it's easy to look past what the Lakers have been doing this summer. They tried hard to get Raja Bell, but ultimately failed. They re-signed Derek Fisher, who, in spite of his limitations, is money in the playoffs. They signed Steve Blake, a good half-court quarterback, to back up Derek Fisher. And now, they've added Matt Barnes.

Sure, not as sexy as Bron-Bron and Wade and Bosh (or even Mike Miller), but I like the method to this madness. Think about it: when the Lakers titled in 2009, they knew that they couldn't stand still, so what did they do? They added Ron Artest who, even at his worst, is going to cause problems for the opponent's 2 or 3, and sometimes even the 1 and 4. Turns out that the mercurial Artest was just enough to push the Lakers over the top for 2010.

Unlike LeBron, who decided he was going to use his influence to put together a fun-time he-man's club with all his friends, Kobe decided to go after the players that pissed him off the most (on the court, at least) - last year Artest, this year Bell and Barnes. Kobe figures that if a player is annoying (and good) enough to get under his skin, then he can do the job against anybody. LeBron, Wade, and Bosh are big kids, Kobe is an assassin.

When you're champions, you don't rebuild, you tune up. What the Lakers have done is to make the NBA's best team even better. Right now, they can go with lineup of Fisher, Bryant, Artest, Gasol, and Bynum, and then sit them all down and run out a lineup of Blake, Vujacic, Odom, Barnes, and Theo Ratliff. Now, that second platoon in and of itself isn't going to scare anybody, but mix it up a bit, get a scorer on the court (maybe leave Gasol out on the court as a pivot with the second unit, put Odom out with the first unit and use Bynum in the middle), and with the exception of Bryant, there's not a hell of a lot of drop off.

The other thing that bothers me about the whole LeBron thing is that, in basketball, a team is never the sum of its parts. Both LeBron and Wade need the ball to be effective, and last time I checked, there's only one ball on the court when the whistle blows. Now, I take all of the Miami Three at their word when they say they will check their egos at the door, but that's not the same as meshing together as a team. Bosh won't be a problem, since he can get a fair amount of action cleaning up underneath. If I'm the point distributing the ball at crunch time, I'm looking for Wade first, LeBron second. As a matter of fact, force of nature though LeBron may be, Wade is easily the better offensive player. The question is this: will LeBron step aside to become the second option on the offensive end? Can he be a role player? More to the point, willing or not, does he even know how to be a role player? It's not like he's ever had to before.

From the beginning, I thought James and Bosh made sense. Or Wade and Bosh. Or James and Stoudemire. Or Wade and Stoudemire . . . well, you're starting to get the idea. Think of a modular basketball team: players have roles defined to varying degrees, but if two players with similar tendencies trying to do the same things are on the floor at the same time, then they're going to get into each other's way. And, as referred to earlier, scorers (as opposed to pure shooters) need the ball to score, and there's only one ball on the court. Both James and Wade make their living the same way: ball in their hands on the wing, creating, moving in to the rack and finishing, or dumping off to the big (Bosh, in this case), or kicking it back to an open shooter on the wing. Who's going to be the creator? Neither Wade or James is going to be the shooter on the wing. James could be one of the orbiting bigs, but Bosh has to be the main offensive focus underneath. There is no clearly defined role on offense for James. It would seem to me to be best if he became an offensive opportunist, maybe a pick and roll guy a la Karl Malone (with Bosh as the low post back-to-the-basket guy).

Whatever . . . they may be able to make this work, but it won't be easy, and at least one player is going to have to move far out of his comfort zone, and ego or no, that will be difficult. It is much easier with clearly defined modular roles, like maybe a slasher and an inside scorer . . . like Bryant and Gasol. The Lakers have a clear blueprint with two top notch scorers, and it is demonstrably hard to kick them off the track. There's not only one solution to the problem, or even a best solution, but the Lakers' solution is clearly effective.

As US National coach Mike Kryzewski has pointed out, one place where Miami will be immediately dominant is on defense. This will give them time to figure out the offense, and ultimately be the key that opens the door to a championship for them. Ironically, if Miami does win it all this year, it will most likely be in an ugly, Detroit Pistons-style championship team, not the super flashy Dream Team-style team. If you remember, the most recent superstar trio (the Celtics' Pierce, Allen, and Garnett), was also a defensive grind-it-out unit in spite of the offensive talents of all three.

But until the confetti falls, don't talk, show me the rings. Kobe has them, LeBron doesn't. Right now, if forced to bet, my money's still on the Lakers.

* * * * *

Don't take this to mean I'm down on LeBron for his free agent soap opera. While the whole TV special was appalling, and while I value a certain hometown fidelity, I am glad to see a player in control instead of the owners for a change.

But I've never been a Miami fan, and now I want them to loose every game. And I'm pissed at them for turning me into a Lakers fan again, no matter how marginally.

July 9, 2010

God III

from the Tom Stoppard play, Jumpers:

George: To begin at the beginning --
Dotty (off. Panic): Help! Murder!
(George throws his manuscript on the desk and marches angrily to the door.)
(Off.) Oh, horror, horror, horror! Confusion now hath made its masterpiece . . . most sacrilegious murder! -- (Different voice.) Woe, alas! What, in our house?
(George, with his hand on the door handle, pauses. He returns to his desk and picks up his papers.)
George: To begin at the beginning, is God? (Pause.) I prefer to put the question in this form because to ask 'Does God exist?' appears to presuppose the existence of a God who may not, and I do not propose this late evening to follow my late friend Russell, to follow my good friend the late Lord Russell, necrophiliac rubbish! to begin at the beginning: is God? (He ponders a moment.) To ask, 'Is God?' appears to presuppose a Being who perhaps isn't . . . and thus is open to the same objection as the question , 'Does God exist?' . . . but until the difficulty is pointed out it does not have the same propensity to confuse language with meaning and to conjure up a God who may have any number of predicates including omniscience, perfection and four-wheel-drive but not, as it happens, existence. This confusion, which indicates only that language is an approximation of meaning and not a logical symbolism for it, began with Plato and was not ended by Bertrand Russell's theory that existence could only be asserted of descriptions and not of individuals, but I do not propose this evening to follow into the Theory of Descriptions my very old friend - now dead, of course - ach! - to follow into the Theory of Descriptions, the late Lord Russell --!
(He continues smoothly, improvising off-script.)
-- if I may so refer to an old friend for whom punctuality was no less a predicate than existence, and a good deal more so, he would have had us believe, though why we should believe that existence could be asserted of the author of 'Principia Mathematica' but not of Bertrand Russell, he never had time, despite his punctuality, not to mention his existence, to explain, very good, keep to the point, to begin at the beginning: is God? (To Secretary.) Leave a space. Secondly! A small number of men, by the exercise of their intellects and by the study of the works both of nature and of other intellects before them, have been able to argue coherently against the existence of God. A much larger number of men, by the exercise of their emotional and psychological states, have affirmed that this is the correct view. This view derives partly from what is known as common sense, whose virtue, uniquely among virtues, is that everybody has it, and partly from the mounting implausibility of a technological age as having divine origins - for a while a man might believe that the providence of sheep's wool was made in heaven, he finds it harder to believe the same of Terylene mixture. (He leans into the mirror intently.) Well, the tide is turning his way, and it is a tide which has turned only once in human history . . . there is presumably a calender date - a moment - when the onus of proof passed from the atheist to the believer, when, quite suddenly, secretly, the noes had it. (And squeezes a blackhead in the imaginary mirror. The he straightens up and is the lecturer again.) It is now nearly fifty years since Professor Ramsay described theology and ethics as two subjects without an object, and yet, as though to defy reason, as though to flaunt a divine indestructibility, the question will not go away: is God?
Dotty (off): Rape!
George: And then again, I sometimes wonder whether the question ought not be, 'Are God?' Because it is to account for two quite unconnected mysteries that the human mind looks beyond humanity, and it is two of him that philosophy obligingly provides. There is, first, the God of Creation to account for existence, and second, the God of Goodness to account for moral values. I say they are unconnected because there is no logical reason why the fountainhead of goodness in the universe should necessarily have created the universe in the first place; nor is it necessary, on the other hand, that a Creator should care a tuppence about the behavior of his creations. Still, at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition, nothing is heard either of a God who created the universe and then washed his hands of it, or, alternatively, a God who merely took a comparatively recent interest in the chance product of universal gases. In practice, people admit moral values to give a point to the Creation. But when we place the existence of God within the discipline of a philosophical inquiry, we find these two independent mysteries: the how and the why of the overwhelming question: --
Dotty (off): Is anybody there?
George (pause): Perhaps all mystical experience is a form of coincidence. Or vice versa, of course.
(Dotty screams. It sounds in earnest. Of course, nothing can be seen.)
(Murmurs.) Wolf . . .
Dotty (off): Wolves! --Look out!
(George throws his manuscript down furiously.)
(Off.) Murder -- Rape -- Wolves!
(George opens his door and shouts at the enclosed Bedroom door.)
George: Dorothy, I will not have my work interrupted by these gratuitous acts of lupine delinquency!
(The Procession Music, which had been allowed to fade out, is brought up by the opening of the Study Door.)
And turn that thing down! --you are deliberately feigning an interest in brass band music to distract me from my lecture!
(He closes his door, and from behind it produces a quiver of arrows and a bow. These he brings downstage and places them on his desk.)
(Pleasantly.) Does, for the sake of argument, God, so to speak, exist?
(He returns upstage and finds an archery target, which he leans up against the upstage bookcase, resting on the day-bed.)
(To mirror.) My method of inquiry this evening into certain aspects of this hardy perennial may strike some of you as overly engaging, but experience has taught me that to attempt to sustain the attention of rival schools of academics by argument alone is tantamount to constructing a Gothic arch out of junket.
(He extracts an arrow from the quiver.)
Putting aside the God of Goodness, to whom we will return, and taking first the God of Creation - or to give him his chief philosophical raison d'etre, the First Cause - we see that a supernatural of divine origin is the logical consequence of the assumption that one thing leads to another, and that this series must have had a first term; that, if you like, though chickens and eggs may alternate back through the millennia, ultimately, we arrive at something which, while perhaps no longer resembling either a chicken or an egg, is nevertheless the first term of that series and can itself only be attributed to a First Cause - or to give it its theological sobriquet, God. How well founded is such an assumption? Could it be, for instance, that chickens and eggs have been succeeding each other in one form or another literally for ever? My old friend - Mathematicians are quick to point out that they are familiar with many series which have no first term - such as the series of proper fractions between nought and one. What, they ask, is the first, that is the smallest, of these fractions? A billionth? A trillionth? Obviously not: Cantor's proof that there is no greatest number ensures that there is no smallest fraction. There is no beginning. (With a certain relish he notches his arrow into the bowstring.) But it is precisely this notion of the infinite series which in the sixth century BC led the Greek philosopher Zeno to conclude that since an arrow shot towards a target first had to cover half the distance, and then half the remainder, and then half the remainder after that, and so on ad infinitum, the result was, as I will now demonstrate, that though an arrow is always approaching its target, it never quite gets there, and Saint Sebastian died of fright.
(He is about to fire the arrow, but changes his mind, and turns back to the mirror.)
Furthermore, by a similar argument he showed that before reaching the half-way point, the arrow had to reach the quarter-mark, and before that the eighth, and before that the sixteenth, and so on, with the result, remembering Cantor's proof, that the arrow could not move at all!
Dotty (off): Fire!
(George fires, startled before he was ready, and the arrow disappears over the top of the wardrobe.)
Help - rescue - fire!
George (shouts furiously): Will you stop this childish nonsense! Thanks to you I have lost the element of surprise!

July 6, 2010

If You Name the Tune . . .

. . . be ready to dance.





The BIG LIE, available everywhere cable television reaches.

brought to you by the If the Shoe Fits department of propoganda.