Filibustero Si!

Any of you fainthearted or otherwise palpitating over the idea that we are irreversibly reduced to a one-party national government (ed: and a mighty bad anti-human-values party that would be) might find some solace in the following.

From March 1, 2005 speech by WV Senator Robert C. Byrd:

In 1939, one of the most famous American movies of all time, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” hit the box office. Initially received with a combination of lavish praise and angry blasts, the film went on to win numerous awards, and to inspire millions around the globe. The director, the legendary Frank Capra, in his autobiography “Frank Capra: The Name Above the Title,” cites this moving review of the film, appearing in “The Hollywood Reporter,” November 4, 1942:

Frank Capra’s “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” chosen by French Theaters as the final English language film to be shown before the recent Nazi-ordered countrywide ban on American and British films went into effect, was roundly cheered...

Storms of spontaneous applause broke out at the sequence when, under the Abraham Lincoln monument in the Capital, the word, “Liberty,” appeared on the screen and the Stars and Stripes began fluttering over the head of the great Emancipator in the cause of liberty.

Similarly cheers and acclamation punctuated the famous speech of the young senator on man’s rights and dignity. ‘It was... as though the joys, suffering, love and hatred, the hopes and wishes of an entire people who value freedom above everything, found expression for the last time....

For those who may not have seen it, “Mr. Smith” is the fictional story of one young Senator’s crusade against forces of corruption, and his lengthy filibuster for the values he holds dear.

My, how times have changed. These days Smith would be called “an obstructionist.” Rumor has it that there is a plot afoot in the Senate to curtail the right of extended debate in this hallowed chamber, not in accordance with its rules, mind you, but by fiat from the Chair.

The so-called “nuclear option” purports to be directed solely at the Senate’s advice and consent prerogatives regarding federal judges. But, the claim that no right exists to filibuster judges aims an arrow straight at the heart of the Senate’s long tradition of unlimited debate.

(snip)

(In my opinion Byrd deserves Nobel nom for not using the "nucular" spelling to which the minority president is so prone.)

And now, we have this, circa March 16, evidence that there may still be warm-blooded elected representatives who actually find the interests of real people at least as important as the pocketbooks of the rich lobbyists and corporations:

Washington - Senate Democrats threatened Tuesday to block virtually all business in that chamber if the Republican majority carried out a plan to unilaterally impose rule changes that would ensure confirmation of President Bush's most controversial judicial nominations.

The threat, issued by Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), sharply escalated a partisan disagreement that could put the brakes on an array of legislative business in the upper chamber, where Democrats used the threat of a filibuster to block votes on 10 appellate court nominees last year.

The showdown, which could come as early as next month, looms because Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), reflecting the frustrations among most of his 54 Republican colleagues, has said he might seek to break the logjam over Bush's court appointments by abolishing the use of the filibuster to block nominations. Instead, he would force through a rule that enables a simple majority of 51 to bring nominations to a vote.

Such a ploy is considered so politically explosive within the Senate that when it was first proposed in 2003, Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), a former majority leader, described it as the "nuclear option."

Reid and his fellow Democrats, in effect, called Frist's bluff on Tuesday by issuing a preemptive strike, saying that Democrats would respond to any Frist action by continuing to work with Republicans only on matters that affected U.S. troops or that ensured the continuity of government operations.

"Beyond that, we will be reluctant to enter into any consent agreement that facilitates Senate activities, even on routine matters," Reid said in a letter to Frist. Nearly all Senate business requires unanimous consent; for example, one senator can prevent committee meetings from taking place simply by objecting.

(snip)

Thank the good Senator Reid here

Working on yourJersey patois?

No retreat baby,
No surrender!

Signing My Checks "Yours Insincerely"

I get a terrific charge out of making and following connections, whether it be pursuing literary leads, discovering common acquaintances or interests, or just encountering some coincidence worth cherishing. Sometimes the satisfaction may be as simple as the closure of getting a question answered - but it often feels deeper, evoking sand-grain universes and the ecological interconnectedness Marvin G sang of (and Odum wrote of). Whatever it is, for me connections can be powerfully satisfying, and no matter what I might consciously plan, more than a little of my remaining cerebral processes always seem on the lookout for linkages, whether I intend it or not. The James Burke "Connections" series harmonizes well with much of this personal infatuation. The Internet and search engines of course are often just the hydrocortisone this sort of itch needs. Timely mini-example, given bloom peak: who was the forsythia named for?

I think I promised a little John Hiatt backstory a while ago. Regardless, I need to get it into words whether I did or didn't, whether you asked or no.

I had happy occasion one time back in the mid-80's to attend a free outdoor lunchtime performance by a local rock band featuring my brother-in-law on guitar. The jerky rhythms and quirky wordplay of one tune, "Falling Up," stuck with me. Keith debriefed me that the composer was one Mr. Hiatt. That led to the acquisition of "Riding With the King," revealing numerous other numbers confirming the gifts of this word-loving singer-songwriter. "She Loves the Jerk" is another highlight that might ring a bell if you've been here before, and title tune has gained some attention due to coverage by BB/Slowhand. Besides the aforementioned, I have a special soft spot for the down-at-the-heels ambience of "Death By Misadventure" and "You May Already Be a Winner," but there isn't a cut here that lets me down. Give this disk a few spins - and then explore further. "Bring the Family," "Slow Turning," and "Stolen Moments" are all top-notch, and those by now might be considered classic old disks, the most recent harking back to 1990 but all still with plenty of life to 'em. Sorry if your coterie can only tolerate the latest - they made great stuff way back then too. You risk bleakness in life if you don't make room for this guy in your playlist.

And what about connections you ask, thinking I'll never make one? I promise if you invest a few hours in JH you'll find plenty. Every listening does it for me. But aside from that I'll see and raise you two. Current reading is "Glimpses," by Lewis Shiner. This is music-oriented fiction (I am greatly enjoying, and wouldn't you know it there is a connection story here too, maybe never to be made explicit but clued in earlier music-writer posts here for the Sherlocks among you), so there are plentiful tune and artist references. But it is still a thrill to find a Hiatt mention threaded in amongst the Beach Boys, Doors, Beatles, Kinks, Marley et al.

More consequential dos. Recounting my virginal Hiatt awakening to hiking companion long ago, we pieced together the realization that the leader of Keith's band had occupied an apartment above Marshall back in the '80's, earning the sobriquet "Thumper" for his incessant heavy-footed drum practice. It's a small world after all (don't put those words to music whatever you do).

Falling Up

I'm gonna lower my standards and raise my price
I'm gonna take your lunch and your bad advice
Until my worse idea gets the big reward
Until I get out of this raggedy Ford
And into a shiny new two-seater
Dress my girlfriend up like a cheetah

I'm gonna sign my checks Yours Insincerely
For all of the money that you hold dearly
When my ego swells and my output dwindles
You can tell the world that you've been swindled
By the man who would have been so bitter
Had he never reconsidered

Falling up
To the top of the junk pile wearing a big smile
Falling up
To the top of the heap with my tongue in my cheek
I can't sit down 'cause I'm falling up

Well I used to think I had some duty
Now I only want the booty
And unless you've recently been anointed
Don't tell me you're disappointed
In the man who would have been so bitter
Had he never reconsidered

Now I pay no mind to innovation
Just over and over with the same sensation
Til I'm a short short subject on a long tape loop
That comes and goes like the hula hoop
In one ear and out the other
Nothing there to stop it brother

Falling up

[(c) John Hiatt]

Fake News? - Naw, Couldn't Be!

Those with sufficient savvy to explore a variety of media these days know that virtually all our major US newspapers now are fundamentally quite conservative. Most are actually owned by a very small number of quite-conservative ideologically-minded non-souls. Some papers have the courage - more likely an odd blend of chutzpah and whackiness - to turn an occasional editorial over to a sharp-tongued Texan like Molly Ivins or a wild firebrand Economics professor like Paul Krugman, but if you're paying attention you know how the deck is stacked. Outside of limited-audience papers, in the United Snakes of America our press is pretty well locked-down to an unofficial but very rigid policy of "don't bite the mandate that feeds you." Unless your pseudonym is Gannon and you are willing to turn homosexual tricks, even access to the White House press room is likely to be dicey. The New York Times and Washington Post, two papers repeatedly tagged by the right wing talk show spawn as liberal bastions, barely qualify as journalistic outlets these days using the standards of a time when reporting was free-wheeling and iconoclastic and actually involved investigation and independent thinking. (Of course these papers are paragons of reporting compared to the talk shows or Fox Snooze, but it would be a sad day if we were reduced to settling for those sorry self-flagellating venues as a point of comparison.)

So I think it says something when the Seattle Times, the long-acknowledged conservative establishment newspaper in town, features the (lower) front-page headline "In Bush's agencies, P.R. blurs into news", with subhead in print version - I kid you not - "FAKE NEWS." Any of you with sufficient detective skills to have actually tracked down these words on an obscure blog are doubtless well aware of a good deal of the backstory here. (Extra points for double-clicking "Comments" at end of column and identifying yourself.) The story briefly touches on the multitude of news-manipulation schemes on which this nefarious bunch of non-representative anti-democracy non-elected ideologues are spending your tax dollars. And, to give credit, what do you know - the article is from the New York Times. Whether in the self-lashing category or not, who can say. But mainstream media are so far behind the pace in terms of performing actual critical review of the doings of government these days that kudos for baby steps seem appropriate. Thank you Times and Times again.

And if you are able to work up at least some serious "harrummph" over this (and if not, why in hell are you here - reading this, first off, but even more so, taking up space on the planet?), the Stop Fake News site might also be of interest.