Thursday, February 26, 2009
I'm Away From My Desk, But Will Return Soon
Sometimes blogging has to take a back seat to other matters, such as family. I'm preoccupied with the latter now and hence have had to bypass a few post ideas lately. For those faithful few who follow this blog, I'll be posting again within days. -- MJ
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Senator Cornhole Does The Wall Street Shuffle
By Manifesto Joe
It comes as no surprise to some of us that Texas' junior U.S. senator, John "Cornhole" Cornyn, is one of Congress' most servile right-wingers. But just how servile Sen. Cornhole is to the "repeal the New Deal" crowd on Wall Street wasn't quite apparent until the past week.
In an e-mail to Texas MoveOn members, MoveOn Executive Director Justin Ruben of Austin wrote:
You're not going to believe this.
In the midst of an economic crisis caused largely by Wall Street greed, our senator skipped this week's vote on the stimulus plan so he could meet with —- wait for it —- Republican donors from Wall Street.
Sen. John Cornyn wasn't just fiddling while Rome burned -— he was actually hanging out with the arsonists.
He showed us that congressional Republicans aren't fighting for their constituents who got laid off or watched their retirement savings disappear or lost their health coverage. They're just looking out for their big-money corporate friends.
Ruben went on to say that MoveOn mounted a radio ad campaign that has aired in a few Texas markets -- it's surprising that they could find any in this state -- and solicited for contributions to help fund the campaign. If you're interested in helping, visit MoveOn.org.
For more details on the kind of right-wing pond scum Sen. Cornhole was cavorting with Monday, instead of being in Washington for the cloture vote on the stimulus package, here's a link to Ben Smith's blog on Politico.
I have no doubt about how Sen. Cornhole would have voted had he been there -- against anything President Barack Obama advocates. But the point is, he was elected to represent Texans, not the Wall Street high-finance goons who are largely responsible for the nation's economic debacle.
Here's your special Valentine, Texans, direct from loving Sen. Cornhole his own self. Just goes to show that being a right-wing Republican means never having to say you're sorry.
But I'll say it -- Sen. Cornhole, you're sorry.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
It comes as no surprise to some of us that Texas' junior U.S. senator, John "Cornhole" Cornyn, is one of Congress' most servile right-wingers. But just how servile Sen. Cornhole is to the "repeal the New Deal" crowd on Wall Street wasn't quite apparent until the past week.
In an e-mail to Texas MoveOn members, MoveOn Executive Director Justin Ruben of Austin wrote:
You're not going to believe this.
In the midst of an economic crisis caused largely by Wall Street greed, our senator skipped this week's vote on the stimulus plan so he could meet with —- wait for it —- Republican donors from Wall Street.
Sen. John Cornyn wasn't just fiddling while Rome burned -— he was actually hanging out with the arsonists.
He showed us that congressional Republicans aren't fighting for their constituents who got laid off or watched their retirement savings disappear or lost their health coverage. They're just looking out for their big-money corporate friends.
Ruben went on to say that MoveOn mounted a radio ad campaign that has aired in a few Texas markets -- it's surprising that they could find any in this state -- and solicited for contributions to help fund the campaign. If you're interested in helping, visit MoveOn.org.
For more details on the kind of right-wing pond scum Sen. Cornhole was cavorting with Monday, instead of being in Washington for the cloture vote on the stimulus package, here's a link to Ben Smith's blog on Politico.
I have no doubt about how Sen. Cornhole would have voted had he been there -- against anything President Barack Obama advocates. But the point is, he was elected to represent Texans, not the Wall Street high-finance goons who are largely responsible for the nation's economic debacle.
Here's your special Valentine, Texans, direct from loving Sen. Cornhole his own self. Just goes to show that being a right-wing Republican means never having to say you're sorry.
But I'll say it -- Sen. Cornhole, you're sorry.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
The Great Bill Evans Remembered
This is a little tribute to one of the finest jazz pianists ever. And listen to this -- also playing is one of the greatest bass players ever, Eddie Gomez. He gets his bow out for this one. Enjoy. --MJ
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Is A Capitalist Meltdown Upon Us?
By Manifesto Joe
I'll only be 53 on my next birthday in late July, yet it already seems like I've lived a tiring amount of history. Only 20 years ago, the world saw the meltdown of Soviet-style communism -- and many observers, largely neo-conservatives, interpreted that as an ideological culmination, "the end of history." There was even an influential book written with that title. (Does anyone remember that author now? And, does he want to remember that book? Yeah, I know -- Francis Fukuyama.)
It appears that reversals of fortune can happen quickly. Now it looks like the allegedly venerable ideology of "free-market" capitalism is on the ropes, and in serious danger of going down. Who would have thought it?
Die-hard Marxists did. I've never been one of them, even as a long-ago radical all of 23 years old. I still know three people who have continued to call themselves Marxists in total defiance of dismissal or ridicule, and they are probably gloating a lot now. The economic train wreck they kept dogmatically predicting finally seems to be in front of us.
But even as America sleepwalked through our Second Gilded Age (circa 1981-2005), I grew skeptical of the Marxist vision. "Historical inevitability" always sounded like a religious tenet, without the pure superstition; and Marxism itself, a sort of quasi-religion for embittered atheists.
We should be as cautious about awarding hard-line socialists a victory here, as much as "we" (in the editorial sense) should have checked for our wallets the minute Reagan started talking about trickle-down and Phil Gramm started talking about deregulation. The past century should have taught us that the answer lies in between.
Starting with the excesses of laissez-faire: America has, for the past 30-ish years, seen the roller-coaster ride that happens with that sort of economic policy. An elite grows very rich, a minority near the bottom slips much further down, and most people tend to stagnate in the middle.
There are cycles of boom and bust. The booms are good for most people, but especially good for a few. The latter group inevitably forms a "Why Should I Have To Pay Taxes?" lobby and gets bonanzas from lawmakers eager to please. And since these are the people of ostentation and material success, their influence is great among fashionable "thinkers" of the day.
Now the big bust is upon us. It's a bit like 1933 all over again -- not as grim or total in devastation, but it's likely to get worse. President Barack Obama has warned us that this is so.
But history, with its entire lesson, should be heeded, and it seems like Obama is one who will do so.
There were very good reasons for the meltdown of the Soviet empire 20 years ago. Contrary to right-wing mythology, Reagan and his military buildup had little to do with it. Post-Soviet Russian economists recall the problems as internal, and any intellectually honest person knew what they were. There's no need for me to recite the litany here -- Americans heard it all for decades.
But let's face it, die-hard socialists out there -- state-run enterprises have a poor track record. The employees seem to lack incentives to produce. Cooperatives tend to degenerate into personal conflict, power struggles and chaos. And as for the concentration of power in the hands of "vanguard revolutionaries" -- the horrors and enormities of that have been abundant just in the past century.
I don't think it's hard to argue for a sense of balance and measure. In America, it seems like the compromising wheeler-dealers -- the FDRs, the Trumans, the LBJs, the Ted Kennedys -- got more done for working Americans than any of our homegrown radicals ever did.
But there is little doubt that there's been a sea change, and it's been back toward socialist thinking. The Nobel Prize committees have not been known for their sympathy toward socialist-leaning economists, yet Nobel Laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz has more or less come out in favor of the nationalization of U.S. banks. That would be a major step toward socialism of some fashion. Why not? We've just given the bastards $700 billion in taxpayer money to keep them in business. Here's a link to the interview with Stiglitz.
And, it appears that such state power would be the only thing to force the shameless swine who run these enterprises to behave themselves. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., made a speech on the Senate floor about the Wall Street oinkers who had themselves awarded $18.4 billion in bonuses while their enterprises got in on the aforementioned $700 billion, because of reckless and disastrous mismanagement. Here's another link to reports on this issue, and to a video of McCaskill's speech. Be patient, the video seems very rough.
So, what should be the ultimate American destination, in an era of "capitalist" meltdown? The Swedes, with a hybrid socialist-capitalist system, don't seem to do badly, with avowed Socialists predominantly in power since 1929. Their booms are smaller, but so are their busts. Their people don't live in fear of homelessness or inability to afford basic health care. Right-wing humorist P.J. O'Rourke, when asked about the Swedes' seeming happiness with their stable system, said that they are all insane -- but that their insanity is distributed equally among the people.
It's a funny line. But there's nothing funny about facing a mortgage foreclosure, or about the welfare rolls shrinking even as joblessness is rapidly expanding. With a growing U.S. underclass, it may be time to take a second look at the socialist mind-set -- despite the old Marxist baggage. Nobody requires us to go to extremes.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
I'll only be 53 on my next birthday in late July, yet it already seems like I've lived a tiring amount of history. Only 20 years ago, the world saw the meltdown of Soviet-style communism -- and many observers, largely neo-conservatives, interpreted that as an ideological culmination, "the end of history." There was even an influential book written with that title. (Does anyone remember that author now? And, does he want to remember that book? Yeah, I know -- Francis Fukuyama.)
It appears that reversals of fortune can happen quickly. Now it looks like the allegedly venerable ideology of "free-market" capitalism is on the ropes, and in serious danger of going down. Who would have thought it?
Die-hard Marxists did. I've never been one of them, even as a long-ago radical all of 23 years old. I still know three people who have continued to call themselves Marxists in total defiance of dismissal or ridicule, and they are probably gloating a lot now. The economic train wreck they kept dogmatically predicting finally seems to be in front of us.
But even as America sleepwalked through our Second Gilded Age (circa 1981-2005), I grew skeptical of the Marxist vision. "Historical inevitability" always sounded like a religious tenet, without the pure superstition; and Marxism itself, a sort of quasi-religion for embittered atheists.
We should be as cautious about awarding hard-line socialists a victory here, as much as "we" (in the editorial sense) should have checked for our wallets the minute Reagan started talking about trickle-down and Phil Gramm started talking about deregulation. The past century should have taught us that the answer lies in between.
Starting with the excesses of laissez-faire: America has, for the past 30-ish years, seen the roller-coaster ride that happens with that sort of economic policy. An elite grows very rich, a minority near the bottom slips much further down, and most people tend to stagnate in the middle.
There are cycles of boom and bust. The booms are good for most people, but especially good for a few. The latter group inevitably forms a "Why Should I Have To Pay Taxes?" lobby and gets bonanzas from lawmakers eager to please. And since these are the people of ostentation and material success, their influence is great among fashionable "thinkers" of the day.
Now the big bust is upon us. It's a bit like 1933 all over again -- not as grim or total in devastation, but it's likely to get worse. President Barack Obama has warned us that this is so.
But history, with its entire lesson, should be heeded, and it seems like Obama is one who will do so.
There were very good reasons for the meltdown of the Soviet empire 20 years ago. Contrary to right-wing mythology, Reagan and his military buildup had little to do with it. Post-Soviet Russian economists recall the problems as internal, and any intellectually honest person knew what they were. There's no need for me to recite the litany here -- Americans heard it all for decades.
But let's face it, die-hard socialists out there -- state-run enterprises have a poor track record. The employees seem to lack incentives to produce. Cooperatives tend to degenerate into personal conflict, power struggles and chaos. And as for the concentration of power in the hands of "vanguard revolutionaries" -- the horrors and enormities of that have been abundant just in the past century.
I don't think it's hard to argue for a sense of balance and measure. In America, it seems like the compromising wheeler-dealers -- the FDRs, the Trumans, the LBJs, the Ted Kennedys -- got more done for working Americans than any of our homegrown radicals ever did.
But there is little doubt that there's been a sea change, and it's been back toward socialist thinking. The Nobel Prize committees have not been known for their sympathy toward socialist-leaning economists, yet Nobel Laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz has more or less come out in favor of the nationalization of U.S. banks. That would be a major step toward socialism of some fashion. Why not? We've just given the bastards $700 billion in taxpayer money to keep them in business. Here's a link to the interview with Stiglitz.
And, it appears that such state power would be the only thing to force the shameless swine who run these enterprises to behave themselves. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., made a speech on the Senate floor about the Wall Street oinkers who had themselves awarded $18.4 billion in bonuses while their enterprises got in on the aforementioned $700 billion, because of reckless and disastrous mismanagement. Here's another link to reports on this issue, and to a video of McCaskill's speech. Be patient, the video seems very rough.
So, what should be the ultimate American destination, in an era of "capitalist" meltdown? The Swedes, with a hybrid socialist-capitalist system, don't seem to do badly, with avowed Socialists predominantly in power since 1929. Their booms are smaller, but so are their busts. Their people don't live in fear of homelessness or inability to afford basic health care. Right-wing humorist P.J. O'Rourke, when asked about the Swedes' seeming happiness with their stable system, said that they are all insane -- but that their insanity is distributed equally among the people.
It's a funny line. But there's nothing funny about facing a mortgage foreclosure, or about the welfare rolls shrinking even as joblessness is rapidly expanding. With a growing U.S. underclass, it may be time to take a second look at the socialist mind-set -- despite the old Marxist baggage. Nobody requires us to go to extremes.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Advice For Obama About Iraq: Voices From The Past
By Manifesto Joe
President Barack Obama has made clear that, while he isn't going to do anything rash, he intends to make a clean break from many Bush administration policies, and in particular those regarding the Iraq war. That sounds like great news to me.
But, I'm a believer in history, and in the lessons of context that it teaches. It's a good idea to listen to voices of experience, from the past, and Obama should heed them. Here are a couple:
"If you're going to go in and try to topple Saddam Hussein, you have to go to Baghdad. Once you've got Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's current there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the United States military when it's there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave?"
Then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, in 1991.
"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,' and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq ... Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different -- and perhaps barren -- outcome."
Former President George H.W. Bush and former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, in their book "A World Transformed" (1998).
It all seems a bit confusing. But I am hopeful that President Obama is a student of history and can learn from it. Clearly, our rulers of the past eight years have been astonishingly oblivious to its lessons.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
President Barack Obama has made clear that, while he isn't going to do anything rash, he intends to make a clean break from many Bush administration policies, and in particular those regarding the Iraq war. That sounds like great news to me.
But, I'm a believer in history, and in the lessons of context that it teaches. It's a good idea to listen to voices of experience, from the past, and Obama should heed them. Here are a couple:
"If you're going to go in and try to topple Saddam Hussein, you have to go to Baghdad. Once you've got Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's current there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the United States military when it's there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave?"
Then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, in 1991.
"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,' and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq ... Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different -- and perhaps barren -- outcome."
Former President George H.W. Bush and former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, in their book "A World Transformed" (1998).
It all seems a bit confusing. But I am hopeful that President Obama is a student of history and can learn from it. Clearly, our rulers of the past eight years have been astonishingly oblivious to its lessons.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
While Watching Inauguration, Thoughts Of A Long-Dead Sibling
By Manifesto Joe
My only sibling, a sister, was killed in an auto accident in 1981, only three weeks after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as president. Today, while watching the inauguration of Barack Obama, I thought of her, and what she would think about America today if she's been watching this on some fourth-dimension TV set.
"An African-American president, in 2009? I thought it would take a century," I can almost hear her say. Then, during the parade, "They're a great-looking couple. Listen to the screams -- it's like Elvis came back from the dead. ..."
"Joe Biden? I remember that young smart-mouth from back in the Seventies. He was still in the Senate last year, and now he's vice president? Unbelievable."
I felt sad that my big sister, who would have been pushing 55 now, didn't live to see this day.
I also felt great pride in America, more pride than I've felt in a very long time.
After 28 mostly depressing years, it really is, at last, "morning in America." I hope you can see us now, Sis.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
My only sibling, a sister, was killed in an auto accident in 1981, only three weeks after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as president. Today, while watching the inauguration of Barack Obama, I thought of her, and what she would think about America today if she's been watching this on some fourth-dimension TV set.
"An African-American president, in 2009? I thought it would take a century," I can almost hear her say. Then, during the parade, "They're a great-looking couple. Listen to the screams -- it's like Elvis came back from the dead. ..."
"Joe Biden? I remember that young smart-mouth from back in the Seventies. He was still in the Senate last year, and now he's vice president? Unbelievable."
I felt sad that my big sister, who would have been pushing 55 now, didn't live to see this day.
I also felt great pride in America, more pride than I've felt in a very long time.
After 28 mostly depressing years, it really is, at last, "morning in America." I hope you can see us now, Sis.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Bush's Final Days, Part 4: Doo-fus! Doo-fus! Doo-fus! ...
By Manifesto Joe
Get those extended-forearm salutes up, loyal subjects. Il Doofus has spoken, ostensibly for the last time.
I have to admit that, in his Thursday night farewell address to the nation, Bush and his speechwriters put the best possible face on myriad historic disasters. (See attached video of some of the speech, from MSNBC.) It almost made the manure palatable. Fortunately, not everyone's memory is that short. (See second attached video.)
During the debates on Bush's role in history -- like, is he the worst U.S. president of all time? -- there were comparisons made with presidents who were generally regarded as ineffectual. Such officeholders would be Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and a couple of others.
I can't find who it was, but one historian said that being ineffectual was never Bush's problem. Il Doofus, he explained, has really been quite effective -- at pursuing disastrous policies. Over and over. And over again.
And then, I will add, proclaiming them successes.
It's past 11, but here's the film anyway:
Now, for equal time, here's Scotty McClellan on Keith Olbermann's MSNBC Countdown show, at long last being something resembling an honest man.
Four days to go.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Get those extended-forearm salutes up, loyal subjects. Il Doofus has spoken, ostensibly for the last time.
I have to admit that, in his Thursday night farewell address to the nation, Bush and his speechwriters put the best possible face on myriad historic disasters. (See attached video of some of the speech, from MSNBC.) It almost made the manure palatable. Fortunately, not everyone's memory is that short. (See second attached video.)
During the debates on Bush's role in history -- like, is he the worst U.S. president of all time? -- there were comparisons made with presidents who were generally regarded as ineffectual. Such officeholders would be Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and a couple of others.
I can't find who it was, but one historian said that being ineffectual was never Bush's problem. Il Doofus, he explained, has really been quite effective -- at pursuing disastrous policies. Over and over. And over again.
And then, I will add, proclaiming them successes.
It's past 11, but here's the film anyway:
Now, for equal time, here's Scotty McClellan on Keith Olbermann's MSNBC Countdown show, at long last being something resembling an honest man.
Four days to go.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Bush's Final Days, Part 3: On Katrina Response, Stunningly Delusional
By Manifesto Joe
Il Doofus held his final D.C. press conference Monday, and used the occasion to try to rewrite history per the events of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. People who were paying attention back then remember this as a turning point in public perception of Bush. He certainly wasn't exposed as incompetent for the first time, but that time was somehow most telling. FEMA's resources had been slowly gutted over years, and he had put unqualified political hacks in charge of a crucial agency.
Here's video from last night; and mind you, this is coming through the MSM looking glass. From Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN:
Another thing to remember is the role of the National Guard during natural disasters such as hurricanes. Because the U.S. has relied heavily upon Guard troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Guard wasn't exactly prepared to respond to a disaster as incredible as Katrina. Let's take a trip back to 2005, courtesy again of the MSM:
And, long after the initial destruction, things just didn't seem to get much better in New Orleans or surrounding parts of the Gulf Coast:
Now -- here's what Il Doofus had to say to the Washington press corps in his final conference with them, as reported by The Associated Press:
"Don't tell me the federal response was slow when there were 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed. ... Could things been done better? Absolutely. But when I hear people say the federal response was slow, what are they going to say to those chopper drivers or the 30,000 who got pulled off the roof?"
Well -- judge for yourself. Delusional, or just a common liar?
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Il Doofus held his final D.C. press conference Monday, and used the occasion to try to rewrite history per the events of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. People who were paying attention back then remember this as a turning point in public perception of Bush. He certainly wasn't exposed as incompetent for the first time, but that time was somehow most telling. FEMA's resources had been slowly gutted over years, and he had put unqualified political hacks in charge of a crucial agency.
Here's video from last night; and mind you, this is coming through the MSM looking glass. From Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN:
Another thing to remember is the role of the National Guard during natural disasters such as hurricanes. Because the U.S. has relied heavily upon Guard troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Guard wasn't exactly prepared to respond to a disaster as incredible as Katrina. Let's take a trip back to 2005, courtesy again of the MSM:
And, long after the initial destruction, things just didn't seem to get much better in New Orleans or surrounding parts of the Gulf Coast:
Now -- here's what Il Doofus had to say to the Washington press corps in his final conference with them, as reported by The Associated Press:
"Don't tell me the federal response was slow when there were 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed. ... Could things been done better? Absolutely. But when I hear people say the federal response was slow, what are they going to say to those chopper drivers or the 30,000 who got pulled off the roof?"
Well -- judge for yourself. Delusional, or just a common liar?
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Bush's Final Days, Part 2: Shoulder Massages And Instant Nostalgia
By Manifesto Joe
One of the stated purposes of my blog is to remind everyone that Bush isn't really from Texas. Not that our bragging rights down here have ever been all that great, but it would be good for the rest of the country to know that not all genuine Texans are that dumb.
This was originally posted April 2, 2008. It's a concise reminder of how Bush, that Yale and Harvard grad with the frat-rat manners and oilfield-trash affectations, embarrassed Texas, the nation, and most of all, himself. And this was just one of many examples.
There's been a news report that German Chancellor Angela Merkel does not plan to attend the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing because of China's human rights record.
George W. Bush, the report said, plans to be there. It's my theory that Merkel isn't going to show because she doesn't want another of those shoulder massages like Bush gave her a couple of years ago at the G-8 Summit.
I wonder, did he call her Merkie-Merk? -- MJ
One of the stated purposes of my blog is to remind everyone that Bush isn't really from Texas. Not that our bragging rights down here have ever been all that great, but it would be good for the rest of the country to know that not all genuine Texans are that dumb.
This was originally posted April 2, 2008. It's a concise reminder of how Bush, that Yale and Harvard grad with the frat-rat manners and oilfield-trash affectations, embarrassed Texas, the nation, and most of all, himself. And this was just one of many examples.
There's been a news report that German Chancellor Angela Merkel does not plan to attend the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing because of China's human rights record.
George W. Bush, the report said, plans to be there. It's my theory that Merkel isn't going to show because she doesn't want another of those shoulder massages like Bush gave her a couple of years ago at the G-8 Summit.
I wonder, did he call her Merkie-Merk? -- MJ
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Bush's Last 10 Days, Part 1: Recipe For Fiscal Disaster
By Manifesto Joe
As the countdown to Bush as ex-"president" begins, it might be good to put into context why some Americans, even some U.S. historians, regard Il Doofus as the worst "president" of modern times.
The federal deficit for the current fiscal year is being projected at $1.2 trillion. That's more than the entire national debt was at the time Jimmy Carter left office in January 1981.
The Congressional Budget Office report lays much of the blame for this spike on lower tax revenues due to the recession, and on $400 billion spent to bail out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and various financial institutions amid the mortgage crisis. Bush policies did a great deal to contribute to all of the above, but that's another post. For now, let's stick to the budget.
The deficit for fiscal 2007-08 was about $455 billion, consistent in real dollars with what was being run annually during the Reagan and Bush I presidencies. It's not too shocking, until you consider that Bush II inherited what had been the largest surplus the federal government has ever run, some $230 billion in fiscal 1999-2000, from departing President Bill Clinton's administration.
The surplus decreased to $158 billion during fiscal 2000-01, which Bush presided over some of. Bush apologists have tried to make an end run out of this, saying that declining revenues due to a briefly sour economy were responsible. They've also pointed out that the Clinton surpluses occurred even though federal tax cuts were passed in 1997, an apparent argument for supply-side policies.
That's fair enough, up to a point. But by 2001-02, the federal government was in the red again, and that continued year after year until the aforementioned $455 billion deficit was reached. How did this happen?
Bush spent the first months of his presidency pushing tax bonanzas, mainly for his rich friends, through the Congress, along with scraps from the rich man's table for the rest of us, amounting to $300 per person. His economic plan basically rolled back the relatively modest Clinton tax increases on the wealthy, passed by the narrowest of margins in 1993.
Students of fiscal policy know that it's anything but simple, but a few policy effects during this administration seem clear. It didn't take long to turn surpluses into deficits, and arguments that this isn't related to tax policy are, at the very least, unconvincing.
Then, after 9-11, Bush the "decider" decided to take the country to war(s). The first one, in Afghanistan, seemed and still seems like a defensible action, despite the toll on the Afghan people. The second, the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, was in hindsight clearly elective. Aside from being an act of aggression, it turned out to be one of the most expensive mistakes a U.S. administration has ever made.
According to a July 2008 update, military operations alone in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost $872.6 billion. Some $661.1 billion of that was for ops in Iraq. Source: Congressional Research Service data.
Even conservatives need to put this into perspective. Would Winston Churchill have held fast to big tax cuts for the wealthy during an expensive war, and even have audaciously pushed for more such cuts?
George W. Bush did. And in so doing, the U.S. was set up, and knocked down like bowling pins, for the $1.2 trillion annual deficit we now face. Now tell me that, as a "president," this buffoon didn't suck great big green ones, with warts on them. His decisions were consistently the worst that could have been made, and yet he stubbornly continues to defend them. I don't think future generations will find his defense convincing.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
As the countdown to Bush as ex-"president" begins, it might be good to put into context why some Americans, even some U.S. historians, regard Il Doofus as the worst "president" of modern times.
The federal deficit for the current fiscal year is being projected at $1.2 trillion. That's more than the entire national debt was at the time Jimmy Carter left office in January 1981.
The Congressional Budget Office report lays much of the blame for this spike on lower tax revenues due to the recession, and on $400 billion spent to bail out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and various financial institutions amid the mortgage crisis. Bush policies did a great deal to contribute to all of the above, but that's another post. For now, let's stick to the budget.
The deficit for fiscal 2007-08 was about $455 billion, consistent in real dollars with what was being run annually during the Reagan and Bush I presidencies. It's not too shocking, until you consider that Bush II inherited what had been the largest surplus the federal government has ever run, some $230 billion in fiscal 1999-2000, from departing President Bill Clinton's administration.
The surplus decreased to $158 billion during fiscal 2000-01, which Bush presided over some of. Bush apologists have tried to make an end run out of this, saying that declining revenues due to a briefly sour economy were responsible. They've also pointed out that the Clinton surpluses occurred even though federal tax cuts were passed in 1997, an apparent argument for supply-side policies.
That's fair enough, up to a point. But by 2001-02, the federal government was in the red again, and that continued year after year until the aforementioned $455 billion deficit was reached. How did this happen?
Bush spent the first months of his presidency pushing tax bonanzas, mainly for his rich friends, through the Congress, along with scraps from the rich man's table for the rest of us, amounting to $300 per person. His economic plan basically rolled back the relatively modest Clinton tax increases on the wealthy, passed by the narrowest of margins in 1993.
Students of fiscal policy know that it's anything but simple, but a few policy effects during this administration seem clear. It didn't take long to turn surpluses into deficits, and arguments that this isn't related to tax policy are, at the very least, unconvincing.
Then, after 9-11, Bush the "decider" decided to take the country to war(s). The first one, in Afghanistan, seemed and still seems like a defensible action, despite the toll on the Afghan people. The second, the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, was in hindsight clearly elective. Aside from being an act of aggression, it turned out to be one of the most expensive mistakes a U.S. administration has ever made.
According to a July 2008 update, military operations alone in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost $872.6 billion. Some $661.1 billion of that was for ops in Iraq. Source: Congressional Research Service data.
Even conservatives need to put this into perspective. Would Winston Churchill have held fast to big tax cuts for the wealthy during an expensive war, and even have audaciously pushed for more such cuts?
George W. Bush did. And in so doing, the U.S. was set up, and knocked down like bowling pins, for the $1.2 trillion annual deficit we now face. Now tell me that, as a "president," this buffoon didn't suck great big green ones, with warts on them. His decisions were consistently the worst that could have been made, and yet he stubbornly continues to defend them. I don't think future generations will find his defense convincing.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
'Mister Roberts': A Wonderful Allegory On Fascism
By Manifesto Joe
Have you ever worked for a boss who seemed more than a bit like Mussolini?
The American classic Mister Roberts (novel, 1946, followed by the Broadway play in 1948 and the movie in 1955) would have to strike a familiar chord if you have. "Fascists" live and work all around us, every day. It's a state of mind. All that most of them lack is the opportunity to practice it on a grand scale.
The fascist in Mister Roberts is Capt. Morton, played most memorably on screen by the late James Cagney. (See the attached trailer.) Morton, the captain of a cargo ship operating in the Pacific during World War II, doesn't kill anybody. But what authority he exercises is that of a six-bit tyrant, so he's toxic to a lot of human spirits.
The guy who actually runs the crew and the ship is Lt. Doug Roberts, portrayed in a signature performance on stage and screen by Henry Fonda. He's a good intermediary between the inept swine of a captain and the crew below, but he's bored and anxious to actually get into the fight during the waning days of the war.
I've seen the film version of Mister Roberts a few times, and it reminds me of employment situations, time after time. Ultimately, it's fun to watch -- but it drives home the sad point that there are plenty of Mortons out there, basically just cancers festering on or near the tops of businesses or government agencies. There's an exchange in which Capt. Morton gets to explain to Roberts how he came to his malignant point of view. (" 'Hey, boy -- my friend seems to have thrown up on our table' ... I took it. I took it for years. Now I don't have to take it no more!' ")
What the novel, play and film depict is a microcosm of what tragically takes place from time to time among nations, on a broad and murderous macro scale. Most of us have known several Mortons -- and potential Mussolinis.
Here's an old-fashioned trailer, from 1955 -- in Cinemascope.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Have you ever worked for a boss who seemed more than a bit like Mussolini?
The American classic Mister Roberts (novel, 1946, followed by the Broadway play in 1948 and the movie in 1955) would have to strike a familiar chord if you have. "Fascists" live and work all around us, every day. It's a state of mind. All that most of them lack is the opportunity to practice it on a grand scale.
The fascist in Mister Roberts is Capt. Morton, played most memorably on screen by the late James Cagney. (See the attached trailer.) Morton, the captain of a cargo ship operating in the Pacific during World War II, doesn't kill anybody. But what authority he exercises is that of a six-bit tyrant, so he's toxic to a lot of human spirits.
The guy who actually runs the crew and the ship is Lt. Doug Roberts, portrayed in a signature performance on stage and screen by Henry Fonda. He's a good intermediary between the inept swine of a captain and the crew below, but he's bored and anxious to actually get into the fight during the waning days of the war.
I've seen the film version of Mister Roberts a few times, and it reminds me of employment situations, time after time. Ultimately, it's fun to watch -- but it drives home the sad point that there are plenty of Mortons out there, basically just cancers festering on or near the tops of businesses or government agencies. There's an exchange in which Capt. Morton gets to explain to Roberts how he came to his malignant point of view. (" 'Hey, boy -- my friend seems to have thrown up on our table' ... I took it. I took it for years. Now I don't have to take it no more!' ")
What the novel, play and film depict is a microcosm of what tragically takes place from time to time among nations, on a broad and murderous macro scale. Most of us have known several Mortons -- and potential Mussolinis.
Here's an old-fashioned trailer, from 1955 -- in Cinemascope.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
A Little Night Music For New Year's Eve
By Manifesto Joe
Jazz has been called "America's classical music." There's been a wealth of material there for over a century, and it actually benefits in many cases from smaller musical combos, more so than Euro-classical usually does.
This video shows four musicians doing quite a bit of justice to a 1966 Duke Ellington/Billy Strayhorn composition, Mount Harissa. I had never heard these musicians, the Alexandria Kleztet, before; the Ellington album is a late big-band jazz classic (Far East Suite).
By the way: Duke Ellington (1899-1974) hasn't lacked for recognition, obviously; but his frequent collaborator, and a composer by himself of many standards (Take the A Train, for one) is now largely forgotten. Do a Google search for Billy Strayhorn (1915-1967). Great musical genius.
Enjoy.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Jazz has been called "America's classical music." There's been a wealth of material there for over a century, and it actually benefits in many cases from smaller musical combos, more so than Euro-classical usually does.
This video shows four musicians doing quite a bit of justice to a 1966 Duke Ellington/Billy Strayhorn composition, Mount Harissa. I had never heard these musicians, the Alexandria Kleztet, before; the Ellington album is a late big-band jazz classic (Far East Suite).
By the way: Duke Ellington (1899-1974) hasn't lacked for recognition, obviously; but his frequent collaborator, and a composer by himself of many standards (Take the A Train, for one) is now largely forgotten. Do a Google search for Billy Strayhorn (1915-1967). Great musical genius.
Enjoy.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Cheney Not Merely Evil, He's A Confessed War Criminal
By Manifesto Joe
Now that Christmas is over, so is my brief spirit of holiday forgiveness. Some things are unforgivable. "Vice President" Dick Cheney is one of those things.
It's obscene that this man isn't in prison by now, let alone that he's still in office. It's not a mystery, though. The abilities of, and inclination for, investigation of the executive branch for high crimes and misdemeanors have been greatly diminished.
Cheney has essentially admitted that he lied the U.S. into the Iraq invasion, which resulted in over a million deaths. So he's now a confessed mass murderer.
Here's video of Keith Olbermann on this subject, plus the vicious beating of the shoe-throwing Iraqi journalist. (So much for nation-building.)
In this second video, also from Olbermann's Countdown on MSNBC, constitutional law Professor Jonathan Turley indicates that not only Cheney, but Il Doofus himself, could perhaps be vulnerable to prosecution for war crimes in their authorization of waterboarding. Cheney has just about flatly confessed:
I'll be blunt. I understand it's going to be hard to get a lot of people excited about bringing this rogues gallery to justice in coming years. Memories are short. Also, the vast majority of people who were victims of these policy decisions were brown-skinned and not Americans.
But, to quote Professor Turley, what has been undermined in the past eight years has to do with who we are, as Americans. The Obama administration should put prosecutions of this kind on a burner, even if it has to be a back one.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Now that Christmas is over, so is my brief spirit of holiday forgiveness. Some things are unforgivable. "Vice President" Dick Cheney is one of those things.
It's obscene that this man isn't in prison by now, let alone that he's still in office. It's not a mystery, though. The abilities of, and inclination for, investigation of the executive branch for high crimes and misdemeanors have been greatly diminished.
Cheney has essentially admitted that he lied the U.S. into the Iraq invasion, which resulted in over a million deaths. So he's now a confessed mass murderer.
Here's video of Keith Olbermann on this subject, plus the vicious beating of the shoe-throwing Iraqi journalist. (So much for nation-building.)
In this second video, also from Olbermann's Countdown on MSNBC, constitutional law Professor Jonathan Turley indicates that not only Cheney, but Il Doofus himself, could perhaps be vulnerable to prosecution for war crimes in their authorization of waterboarding. Cheney has just about flatly confessed:
I'll be blunt. I understand it's going to be hard to get a lot of people excited about bringing this rogues gallery to justice in coming years. Memories are short. Also, the vast majority of people who were victims of these policy decisions were brown-skinned and not Americans.
But, to quote Professor Turley, what has been undermined in the past eight years has to do with who we are, as Americans. The Obama administration should put prosecutions of this kind on a burner, even if it has to be a back one.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
A Couple Of Laws Might Curb Food Waste At Hospitals, Nursing Homes
By Manifesto Joe
The holiday season is as good a time as any to bring up a little-noticed scandal: the mind-boggling amount of food that is wasted in hospitals and nursing homes. And it's time to raise an angle on this problem that is generally not discussed -- that nutritionists and their staff members simply don't know or care what to serve to sick, old people.
I'm not going to present readers of this post with a lot of stats -- if you've ever had a relative stay in a nursing home, or spent any time in a hospital, you've seen the many untouched trays, three times a day, day after day. The waste must surely amount to billions of dollars over time. And a little legislation might be an answer.
I will present only one statistic, unattributed. It's estimated that about 10 percent of all waste that comes from hospitals is food. Think of how much this adds to the cost of health care in America -- it must be significant.
And it isn't simply that some sick people can't eat much, or that the food is unappetizing (although it often is). Quite often, what the staff brings to individual patients or residents is totally inappropriate.
One relative of mine who has been in nursing homes and hospitals for years is a colostomy patient. In other words, she shits into a bag, in the front, because inflammatory bowel disease made the surgery necessary. She's also lactose-intolerant.
So, what have we seen them bring her over the years? Plates with such offerings as lasagna (with plenty of acidic tomato sauce, and lots of cheese), lightly steamed broccoli, barbecued chicken on the bone with lots of sauce, crispy tacos and other Tex-Mex fare, all manner of raw salads, beans, milk-based pudding -- you get the idea.
It's all very tasty if done well, and also reasonably nutritious. But there's one big problem: She can't eat any of this stuff. She couldn't eat most of it even before she underwent a colostomy.
We supplement her diet, so thankfully she isn't starving. She would be if she had to depend solely on the tender mercies of these institutional kitchens. And there are many sick old people who do have to depend on them. There are alternative trays, substitutions, between-meal snacks and so forth, but often they aren't an improvement in digestion for the infirm. Salami sandwiches and Fritos don't do the job any better for these folks.
Obviously some of this can be written off to human stupidity. Poorly paid staff members simply don't read the diet cards, or don't care anyway. You run across one occasionally who is almost unspeakably stupid ("I didn't know there was milk in cheese.") But much of it rests with a kind of organizational insanity.
The professionals involved, the dietitians, are trained to deliver nutritious food to the old and the sick; but they're sending out food that's mostly appropriate for people with healthy digestive systems. That doesn't serve most of their clientele.
In other words, the stupidity goes all the way to the top, as usual.
My wife and I, both advocates for sick, elderly parents, have been fighting this battle for years, with few if any results. The scrubs just don't get it, no matter how much you point out such obvious imbecility to them.
Regrettably, it's going to take a couple of laws to improve things here.
(1) Dietary standards for the sick and elderly.
It's time to put an end to a "one size fits all" approach to food for people in hospitals and nursing homes. Blenders and food processors are cheap. They would pay for themselves if the infirm got food they wouldn't have to chew and could actually digest.
And the institutions should be liable for malnourishment of people who have special problems such as diabetes, food allergies or lactose intolerance. A couple of class-action lawsuits would probably make those dietary cards required reading.
(2) Recycling requirements. Some food waste from these institutions is inevitable, but why does it all have to go to the landfill?
In my innocent youth, I assumed that all that food that sick and old people didn't eat eventually ended up in barnyard pens, as hog slop. That would make sense. (Sorry, Jewish, Muslim and vegetarian friends -- some of us carnivorous Gentile infidels still eat those filthy animals.)
I don't remember when it was, but I was told that, no, that food just gets tossed. I recall mention of health regulations that require that it be thrown away. How f*****g stupid can society be?
At the very least, this food could be recycled for compost. And in the case of food that obviously hasn't been in contact with anyone's saliva, why the hell couldn't it be ground up and sold, or even given, to pig farmers to feed to their swine? Sounds sort of like a green solution to me.
Contrary to the conception that libertarians and conservatives have about liberals and progressives, many of us have indeed met a rule or a regulation that we didn't like. They are certainly not desirable for their own sake.
But there are times when law is the only instrument to stop insane behavior. We have a couple of examples of that here.
I hope someone in Washington, or in Austin and other state capitals, cares enough about this scandal to file a couple of bills and try to end it.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
The holiday season is as good a time as any to bring up a little-noticed scandal: the mind-boggling amount of food that is wasted in hospitals and nursing homes. And it's time to raise an angle on this problem that is generally not discussed -- that nutritionists and their staff members simply don't know or care what to serve to sick, old people.
I'm not going to present readers of this post with a lot of stats -- if you've ever had a relative stay in a nursing home, or spent any time in a hospital, you've seen the many untouched trays, three times a day, day after day. The waste must surely amount to billions of dollars over time. And a little legislation might be an answer.
I will present only one statistic, unattributed. It's estimated that about 10 percent of all waste that comes from hospitals is food. Think of how much this adds to the cost of health care in America -- it must be significant.
And it isn't simply that some sick people can't eat much, or that the food is unappetizing (although it often is). Quite often, what the staff brings to individual patients or residents is totally inappropriate.
One relative of mine who has been in nursing homes and hospitals for years is a colostomy patient. In other words, she shits into a bag, in the front, because inflammatory bowel disease made the surgery necessary. She's also lactose-intolerant.
So, what have we seen them bring her over the years? Plates with such offerings as lasagna (with plenty of acidic tomato sauce, and lots of cheese), lightly steamed broccoli, barbecued chicken on the bone with lots of sauce, crispy tacos and other Tex-Mex fare, all manner of raw salads, beans, milk-based pudding -- you get the idea.
It's all very tasty if done well, and also reasonably nutritious. But there's one big problem: She can't eat any of this stuff. She couldn't eat most of it even before she underwent a colostomy.
We supplement her diet, so thankfully she isn't starving. She would be if she had to depend solely on the tender mercies of these institutional kitchens. And there are many sick old people who do have to depend on them. There are alternative trays, substitutions, between-meal snacks and so forth, but often they aren't an improvement in digestion for the infirm. Salami sandwiches and Fritos don't do the job any better for these folks.
Obviously some of this can be written off to human stupidity. Poorly paid staff members simply don't read the diet cards, or don't care anyway. You run across one occasionally who is almost unspeakably stupid ("I didn't know there was milk in cheese.") But much of it rests with a kind of organizational insanity.
The professionals involved, the dietitians, are trained to deliver nutritious food to the old and the sick; but they're sending out food that's mostly appropriate for people with healthy digestive systems. That doesn't serve most of their clientele.
In other words, the stupidity goes all the way to the top, as usual.
My wife and I, both advocates for sick, elderly parents, have been fighting this battle for years, with few if any results. The scrubs just don't get it, no matter how much you point out such obvious imbecility to them.
Regrettably, it's going to take a couple of laws to improve things here.
(1) Dietary standards for the sick and elderly.
It's time to put an end to a "one size fits all" approach to food for people in hospitals and nursing homes. Blenders and food processors are cheap. They would pay for themselves if the infirm got food they wouldn't have to chew and could actually digest.
And the institutions should be liable for malnourishment of people who have special problems such as diabetes, food allergies or lactose intolerance. A couple of class-action lawsuits would probably make those dietary cards required reading.
(2) Recycling requirements. Some food waste from these institutions is inevitable, but why does it all have to go to the landfill?
In my innocent youth, I assumed that all that food that sick and old people didn't eat eventually ended up in barnyard pens, as hog slop. That would make sense. (Sorry, Jewish, Muslim and vegetarian friends -- some of us carnivorous Gentile infidels still eat those filthy animals.)
I don't remember when it was, but I was told that, no, that food just gets tossed. I recall mention of health regulations that require that it be thrown away. How f*****g stupid can society be?
At the very least, this food could be recycled for compost. And in the case of food that obviously hasn't been in contact with anyone's saliva, why the hell couldn't it be ground up and sold, or even given, to pig farmers to feed to their swine? Sounds sort of like a green solution to me.
Contrary to the conception that libertarians and conservatives have about liberals and progressives, many of us have indeed met a rule or a regulation that we didn't like. They are certainly not desirable for their own sake.
But there are times when law is the only instrument to stop insane behavior. We have a couple of examples of that here.
I hope someone in Washington, or in Austin and other state capitals, cares enough about this scandal to file a couple of bills and try to end it.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Monday, December 22, 2008
RIP, Dock Ellis: 1945-2008
By Manifesto Joe
Former major league pitcher Dock Ellis died Friday at the age of 63. Dock was a one-time All-Star who won 138 games in 12 seasons -- a very good pitcher, but not remembered as a great one. He won't make the Baseball Hall of Fame, not by a long shot.
Even if his career stats had been more impressive, Dock would have had a tough time making the Hall anyway, for one big reason. He's mainly remembered for an evening in June 1970, when he pitched a no-hitter -- high on LSD.
It apparently wasn't premeditated. Dock had a few days off and flew back to his home turf in the Los Angeles area, where he partied insanely with friends, as he was apt to do when off the mound.
In the morning of one of those days, he took a hit of acid. He appears to have lost track of the time, but his girlfriend happened to pick up the morning paper and reminded him: Hey, Dock, aren't you scheduled to pitch tonight in Pittsburgh? (Dock was in the Pirates' starting rotation.)
Oh, shit, he must have said. So Dock was on a plane before long, and made it back to Pittsburgh before the game.
It was described as the ugliest no-hitter ever. Dock didn't tell any sportswriter until years after his retirement that he was blasted on acid, but he admitted to recalling only bits and pieces of the game amid his euphoria. He walked eight batters and hit one with a pitch. (He usually had good control.)
But he said that he focused on that catcher's mitt -- I'll bet it was glowing. Anyway, nobody got a hit, or scored, for the opposing San Diego Padres. Bill Mazeroski and other Pirates teammates made stellar defensive plays. And Willie Stargell hit two home runs. The Pirates won, 2-0, and Dock got his no-hitter, even though he started talking about it in the dugout, which violates a taboo in baseball.
Dock was known for his antics, and for being erratic and combative. He wore curlers to a game once, apparently in response to sportswriters' comments about his changes of hairstyle. He said the gel would help him throw his spitball. He beaned Reggie Jackson once so badly that Reg had to be carried off the field. He chased a heckler in the stands decades before Albert Belle. He threw at a succession of Cincinnati Reds batters before being pulled from the game.
He somehow had a couple of great seasons, and several good ones, but was through at age 34. He was doing booze and coke in frightening amounts, he himself said. In 1980, he went through rehab and reportedly stayed clean thereafter.
But before passing any judgment on Dock, or others of his generation -- pitcher Bill "Spaceman" Lee once told a reporter that if the commissioner was going to fine all players who smoked pot, "He'd be a very rich man" -- let's fast-forward.
Give me Dock Ellis or Bill Lee over any of the steroid beefcakes who have been setting tainted records in recent years. The older guys were doing what they were doing mainly for pleasure, and largely at the long-term expense of their careers -- not setting juiced-up records.
These guys may have been colorful in the wrong way. But Barry Bonds always came off like a calculated business plan in the form of an athlete. He will be remembered that way, like an automaton.
Yeah, the Babe never did acid. That's probably because it hadn't been discovered yet.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Former major league pitcher Dock Ellis died Friday at the age of 63. Dock was a one-time All-Star who won 138 games in 12 seasons -- a very good pitcher, but not remembered as a great one. He won't make the Baseball Hall of Fame, not by a long shot.
Even if his career stats had been more impressive, Dock would have had a tough time making the Hall anyway, for one big reason. He's mainly remembered for an evening in June 1970, when he pitched a no-hitter -- high on LSD.
It apparently wasn't premeditated. Dock had a few days off and flew back to his home turf in the Los Angeles area, where he partied insanely with friends, as he was apt to do when off the mound.
In the morning of one of those days, he took a hit of acid. He appears to have lost track of the time, but his girlfriend happened to pick up the morning paper and reminded him: Hey, Dock, aren't you scheduled to pitch tonight in Pittsburgh? (Dock was in the Pirates' starting rotation.)
Oh, shit, he must have said. So Dock was on a plane before long, and made it back to Pittsburgh before the game.
It was described as the ugliest no-hitter ever. Dock didn't tell any sportswriter until years after his retirement that he was blasted on acid, but he admitted to recalling only bits and pieces of the game amid his euphoria. He walked eight batters and hit one with a pitch. (He usually had good control.)
But he said that he focused on that catcher's mitt -- I'll bet it was glowing. Anyway, nobody got a hit, or scored, for the opposing San Diego Padres. Bill Mazeroski and other Pirates teammates made stellar defensive plays. And Willie Stargell hit two home runs. The Pirates won, 2-0, and Dock got his no-hitter, even though he started talking about it in the dugout, which violates a taboo in baseball.
Dock was known for his antics, and for being erratic and combative. He wore curlers to a game once, apparently in response to sportswriters' comments about his changes of hairstyle. He said the gel would help him throw his spitball. He beaned Reggie Jackson once so badly that Reg had to be carried off the field. He chased a heckler in the stands decades before Albert Belle. He threw at a succession of Cincinnati Reds batters before being pulled from the game.
He somehow had a couple of great seasons, and several good ones, but was through at age 34. He was doing booze and coke in frightening amounts, he himself said. In 1980, he went through rehab and reportedly stayed clean thereafter.
But before passing any judgment on Dock, or others of his generation -- pitcher Bill "Spaceman" Lee once told a reporter that if the commissioner was going to fine all players who smoked pot, "He'd be a very rich man" -- let's fast-forward.
Give me Dock Ellis or Bill Lee over any of the steroid beefcakes who have been setting tainted records in recent years. The older guys were doing what they were doing mainly for pleasure, and largely at the long-term expense of their careers -- not setting juiced-up records.
These guys may have been colorful in the wrong way. But Barry Bonds always came off like a calculated business plan in the form of an athlete. He will be remembered that way, like an automaton.
Yeah, the Babe never did acid. That's probably because it hadn't been discovered yet.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Even Conservatives Should Hurl Shoes: Bush Is A Waste Of Skin
By Manifesto Joe
By now, I'm sure everyone who has a TV set has seen the Iraqi journalist throw his shoes at Il Doofus at the Baghdad news conference. I understand he also called Bush a dog. That seems insulting to canines, known in Western cultures for loyalty and unconditional love. But I also understand that in Arab culture, dogs are ill-regarded, considered unclean animals.
While thinking about what to post about the incident, it occurred to me that a former friend of mine, a staunch Texas-bred conservative, would lament about seeing an A-Rab insult our president. He would lament further about how liberal Democrats are set to take control of most of the federal government. How could this have happened?
I hate to sound like fellow Texan Ross Perot, of whom I am no fan. But to paraphrase him, it's this simple.
Conservatives: You folks blew it. It's that simple.
You blew it when you bet the farm on a man who is, arguably, the most pathetic waste of skin ever to sit in the Oval Office.
Let's forget Il Doofus' penchant for butchering English, his broken Spanish, his prodigal youth, his utter lack of intellectual curiosity, his smirking conceit, and on and on. One can't expect perfection of anyone, and some might even regard Bush's human idiosyncrasies as endearing.
Let's just stick to measurable results. It's hard to think of one sound decision Il Doofus has made in nearly eight years in office. This is a man who cut taxes deeply for the wealthy, threw a few scraps from the table to con the middle class into thinking they were getting something, then pursued a stunningly expensive elective war.
The result is an annual deficit that could approach $1 trillion for his final budget.
This is a "president" who doggedly stuck with the ideology of deregulation, even as a meltdown of subprime mortgages was imminent, and years after the chicanery of Enron and Arthur Andersen was evident. Now the taxpayers are stuck with a financial bailout of shocking proportions, and in the middle of a recession.
Back to the war: It's not hard to understand why millions of Iraqis would loathe Il Doofus. Those millions would not include the estimated million or so who have died as a direct result of Bush's unnecessary war. It's said that dictator Saddam Hussein was responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis. Some sources say that Bush, in his own bungling way, has got Saddam matched there.
"He (Bush) has ruined the Republican brand," lamented one conservative officeholder. Well, it's not completely Bush's fault, although largely. Conservative Republicans have long been known for economic ideologies that reward the wealthy and punish everyone from middle class on down. It's an approach that tends to work only as long as there is general prosperity, and as long as there is a powerful propaganda apparatus to persuade lots of people to vote against their own interests.
The right has also been characterized by a might-makes-right foreign policy that has made the U.S. a target of hate the world over. This went on all through the Cold War, but at least then there was arguably a reason for it, since even paranoids can have enemies. But the entire planet, at least the part that thinks, knows now that Saddam Hussein didn't have shit for WMDs and was being contained. Even the Bushies had to admit at some point that the "intelligence" was bad.
I'll speculate that the "intelligence" was irrelevant to Il Doofus, as any intelligence has generally been. He thought his elective war was going to be easy -- that Iraqis would not be throwing shoes, but rather rose petals at American feet. (And then, there would be all that wonderful oil!)
Even conservatives need to face it. This man has been King Midas in reverse. Everything he touches turns to feces. Even if one considers the limitations of conservative ideology, Bush has pursued some thoughtless sort of "conservatism" so artlessly that he makes the likes of Ronald Reagan look shrewd in comparison.
For those who want to see it again, here's YouTube video of the shoe-throwing incident:
Included is Il Doofus' moronic reaction, consisting mostly of snickering and smirking and stupid jokes.
I'll say it once more: Conservatives, you blew it. Now, from all sides, let the size 10s fly.
Postscript: That journalist is a pretty good pitcher. Too bad that back when Bush was frontman for the Texas Rangers, the team didn't have an extra dude with that much control and velocity.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
By now, I'm sure everyone who has a TV set has seen the Iraqi journalist throw his shoes at Il Doofus at the Baghdad news conference. I understand he also called Bush a dog. That seems insulting to canines, known in Western cultures for loyalty and unconditional love. But I also understand that in Arab culture, dogs are ill-regarded, considered unclean animals.
While thinking about what to post about the incident, it occurred to me that a former friend of mine, a staunch Texas-bred conservative, would lament about seeing an A-Rab insult our president. He would lament further about how liberal Democrats are set to take control of most of the federal government. How could this have happened?
I hate to sound like fellow Texan Ross Perot, of whom I am no fan. But to paraphrase him, it's this simple.
Conservatives: You folks blew it. It's that simple.
You blew it when you bet the farm on a man who is, arguably, the most pathetic waste of skin ever to sit in the Oval Office.
Let's forget Il Doofus' penchant for butchering English, his broken Spanish, his prodigal youth, his utter lack of intellectual curiosity, his smirking conceit, and on and on. One can't expect perfection of anyone, and some might even regard Bush's human idiosyncrasies as endearing.
Let's just stick to measurable results. It's hard to think of one sound decision Il Doofus has made in nearly eight years in office. This is a man who cut taxes deeply for the wealthy, threw a few scraps from the table to con the middle class into thinking they were getting something, then pursued a stunningly expensive elective war.
The result is an annual deficit that could approach $1 trillion for his final budget.
This is a "president" who doggedly stuck with the ideology of deregulation, even as a meltdown of subprime mortgages was imminent, and years after the chicanery of Enron and Arthur Andersen was evident. Now the taxpayers are stuck with a financial bailout of shocking proportions, and in the middle of a recession.
Back to the war: It's not hard to understand why millions of Iraqis would loathe Il Doofus. Those millions would not include the estimated million or so who have died as a direct result of Bush's unnecessary war. It's said that dictator Saddam Hussein was responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis. Some sources say that Bush, in his own bungling way, has got Saddam matched there.
"He (Bush) has ruined the Republican brand," lamented one conservative officeholder. Well, it's not completely Bush's fault, although largely. Conservative Republicans have long been known for economic ideologies that reward the wealthy and punish everyone from middle class on down. It's an approach that tends to work only as long as there is general prosperity, and as long as there is a powerful propaganda apparatus to persuade lots of people to vote against their own interests.
The right has also been characterized by a might-makes-right foreign policy that has made the U.S. a target of hate the world over. This went on all through the Cold War, but at least then there was arguably a reason for it, since even paranoids can have enemies. But the entire planet, at least the part that thinks, knows now that Saddam Hussein didn't have shit for WMDs and was being contained. Even the Bushies had to admit at some point that the "intelligence" was bad.
I'll speculate that the "intelligence" was irrelevant to Il Doofus, as any intelligence has generally been. He thought his elective war was going to be easy -- that Iraqis would not be throwing shoes, but rather rose petals at American feet. (And then, there would be all that wonderful oil!)
Even conservatives need to face it. This man has been King Midas in reverse. Everything he touches turns to feces. Even if one considers the limitations of conservative ideology, Bush has pursued some thoughtless sort of "conservatism" so artlessly that he makes the likes of Ronald Reagan look shrewd in comparison.
For those who want to see it again, here's YouTube video of the shoe-throwing incident:
Included is Il Doofus' moronic reaction, consisting mostly of snickering and smirking and stupid jokes.
I'll say it once more: Conservatives, you blew it. Now, from all sides, let the size 10s fly.
Postscript: That journalist is a pretty good pitcher. Too bad that back when Bush was frontman for the Texas Rangers, the team didn't have an extra dude with that much control and velocity.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
It's Over: Chicago Sit-Down Strike, Final Chapter
By Manifesto Joe
They didn't get what they should have -- that would have been their discarded jobs back. But workers at Chicago's Republic Windows & Doors factory have voted to end their sit-in after winning a partial victory. A $1.75 million deal will give them their legal severance and accrued vacation pay.
U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., helped broker the deal, according to The Associated Press report. For the workers, Gutierrez said, it works out to about $7,000 each.
Here's the news link to this development.
They shoulda done better. But there are times when you gotta take what you can get.
I guess this won't be like the Flint sit-down strike -- but maybe it's a start.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
They didn't get what they should have -- that would have been their discarded jobs back. But workers at Chicago's Republic Windows & Doors factory have voted to end their sit-in after winning a partial victory. A $1.75 million deal will give them their legal severance and accrued vacation pay.
U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., helped broker the deal, according to The Associated Press report. For the workers, Gutierrez said, it works out to about $7,000 each.
Here's the news link to this development.
They shoulda done better. But there are times when you gotta take what you can get.
I guess this won't be like the Flint sit-down strike -- but maybe it's a start.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Labor Wins A Round: Bank Of America Oinkers Make Credit Concession
By Manifesto Joe
It ain't over till it's over, but the workers staging a sit-in at Republic Windows and Doors appear to have won a big round in their fight for fair compensation. Bank of America, the financial monolith that got $25 billion of the federal government's financial bailout, appears to have felt the heat.
The Associated Press reports:
A resolution appeared closer Tuesday when BOA announced that it sent a letter to Republic offering to "provide a limited amount of additional loans" to resolve the employee claims.
Here's a link to the entire report.
It's hard to embarrass swinelike people, but seeing that BOA has taken so much bailout money from the taxpayers, it seems to me like they ought to extend Republic's credit enough to for the company to reopen the factory and save 250 jobs.
Instead, BOA oinkers had the audacity to act like they at least partially side with the protesting workers, "expressing concern" that Republic hasn't offered to pay the workers their legal entitlements. Looks like a laughable diversionary tactic to me.
Meanwhile, the sit-in continues. Stay tuned.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
It ain't over till it's over, but the workers staging a sit-in at Republic Windows and Doors appear to have won a big round in their fight for fair compensation. Bank of America, the financial monolith that got $25 billion of the federal government's financial bailout, appears to have felt the heat.
The Associated Press reports:
A resolution appeared closer Tuesday when BOA announced that it sent a letter to Republic offering to "provide a limited amount of additional loans" to resolve the employee claims.
Here's a link to the entire report.
It's hard to embarrass swinelike people, but seeing that BOA has taken so much bailout money from the taxpayers, it seems to me like they ought to extend Republic's credit enough to for the company to reopen the factory and save 250 jobs.
Instead, BOA oinkers had the audacity to act like they at least partially side with the protesting workers, "expressing concern" that Republic hasn't offered to pay the workers their legal entitlements. Looks like a laughable diversionary tactic to me.
Meanwhile, the sit-in continues. Stay tuned.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Workers Take Over Chicago Factory, Blame Company's Bailed-Out Creditor
By Manifesto Joe
This is an example of why a bailout, any bailout, is fundamentally a no-win situation for the taxpayer.
You may have heard news that workers at the Republic Windows and Doors factory in Chicago occupied the building and began a sit-in after the factory shut down Friday on three days' notice. Last time I checked, they're still there.
The workers say the factory was closed in violation of a law that requires a 60-day notice for a shutdown. They say they won't leave without assurances that they'll get severance and vacation pay.
What you may not have heard is the reason for the abrupt shutdown. The company's creditor, Bank of America, canceled Republic's line of credit. Republic's sales have tumbled in the sour economy, and with no line of credit, CEO Rich Gillman said the company had "no choice but to shut our doors," The Associated Press reported.
This is the same Bank of America that got $25 billion of the federal government's $700 billion financial bailout. That's over 3.5% of the total package. And they can't afford to extend a line of credit so that 250 mostly Hispanic wage earners in Chicago can keep their jobs?
SOCIALISM FOR THE RICH, "FREE" MARKET BUGGERY OF THE POOR
The Associated Press also reported that Bank of America, in a statement Saturday, said that it isn't responsible for Republic's financial obligations to its employees.
Exactly for whom, and to whom, is Bank of America, sucking at the federal tit to the tune of $25 billion, responsible and accountable?
It's in the public interest that people can get and hold jobs. These people can't pay taxes when they're in the unemployment line. Since this largess is coming from the taxpayers, we've got a perverse situation of collectivist capitalism for the bankers, and the icy sidewalk for the faceless mass of suckers who put up money for the bailout.
WHITHER THE BAILOUTS?
Along with many other people, I held my nose and voiced support for the bailout as a necessary evil. But this case illustrates why taxpayer-funded bailouts end up being no-win situations. It's a sort of blackmail -- the national economy would fall into a downward spiral of Depression proportions if financial institutions the size of Bank of America were allowed to go under. They seem to know this, and their behavior is commensurately unaccountable.
Chicago will easily survive a loss of 250 jobs at Republic. But multiply that scenario across the country, with many hundreds of struggling companies and overextended creditors, and you get a mental picture of what the U.S. economy is
facing.
This is an example of why bailouts need to have many strings attached to them, and very sturdy ones. In exchange for that $25 billion, the federal government ought to have pretty much leverage over what Bank of America uses it for. Republic operates at the level of a few million dollars per month, not in the billions like BOA. This is a microcosm of the kind of abuse that the many have endured, at the hands of the few, for decades.
A UNION SUNRISE?
A bright spot is that this incident may become a rallying point for the revival of a union movement in America. Here's more from the AP report:
"Across cultures, religions, union and nonunion, we all say this bailout was a shame," said Richard Berg, president of Teamsters Local 743. "If this bailout should go to anything, it should go to the workers of this country."
Outside the plant, protesters wore stickers and carried signs that said, "You got bailed out, we got sold out."
Leah Fried, an organizer with United Electrical Workers, obliquely compared the sit-in to the landmark 1936-37 General Motors sit-down strike in Flint, Mich., which helped unionize the auto industry. (Yeah, I know, there's the automakers bailout. That's another post.)
"We're doing something we haven't done since the 1930s, so we're trying to make it work," AP quoted Fried as saying. She pointed out that the occupying workers have been shoveling snow and cleaning the building during the sit-in.
Realistically, the financial bailout is a bitter concoction we're going to have to gulp down. But that doesn't mean we have to like it. And, for a dramatic change from '80s and '90s stupor, a lot of Americans seem to be waking up from virtual date-rape drugs and realizing who's been carrying out the assault on working people for many years.
I hope the 53-46% mandate for Barack Obama was only the beginning. Republic should trigger a reborn union movement in this country. Against the kinds of monolithic entities we now face, like Bank of America, lots of people getting together again is the only chance we have.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
This is an example of why a bailout, any bailout, is fundamentally a no-win situation for the taxpayer.
You may have heard news that workers at the Republic Windows and Doors factory in Chicago occupied the building and began a sit-in after the factory shut down Friday on three days' notice. Last time I checked, they're still there.
The workers say the factory was closed in violation of a law that requires a 60-day notice for a shutdown. They say they won't leave without assurances that they'll get severance and vacation pay.
What you may not have heard is the reason for the abrupt shutdown. The company's creditor, Bank of America, canceled Republic's line of credit. Republic's sales have tumbled in the sour economy, and with no line of credit, CEO Rich Gillman said the company had "no choice but to shut our doors," The Associated Press reported.
This is the same Bank of America that got $25 billion of the federal government's $700 billion financial bailout. That's over 3.5% of the total package. And they can't afford to extend a line of credit so that 250 mostly Hispanic wage earners in Chicago can keep their jobs?
SOCIALISM FOR THE RICH, "FREE" MARKET BUGGERY OF THE POOR
The Associated Press also reported that Bank of America, in a statement Saturday, said that it isn't responsible for Republic's financial obligations to its employees.
Exactly for whom, and to whom, is Bank of America, sucking at the federal tit to the tune of $25 billion, responsible and accountable?
It's in the public interest that people can get and hold jobs. These people can't pay taxes when they're in the unemployment line. Since this largess is coming from the taxpayers, we've got a perverse situation of collectivist capitalism for the bankers, and the icy sidewalk for the faceless mass of suckers who put up money for the bailout.
WHITHER THE BAILOUTS?
Along with many other people, I held my nose and voiced support for the bailout as a necessary evil. But this case illustrates why taxpayer-funded bailouts end up being no-win situations. It's a sort of blackmail -- the national economy would fall into a downward spiral of Depression proportions if financial institutions the size of Bank of America were allowed to go under. They seem to know this, and their behavior is commensurately unaccountable.
Chicago will easily survive a loss of 250 jobs at Republic. But multiply that scenario across the country, with many hundreds of struggling companies and overextended creditors, and you get a mental picture of what the U.S. economy is
facing.
This is an example of why bailouts need to have many strings attached to them, and very sturdy ones. In exchange for that $25 billion, the federal government ought to have pretty much leverage over what Bank of America uses it for. Republic operates at the level of a few million dollars per month, not in the billions like BOA. This is a microcosm of the kind of abuse that the many have endured, at the hands of the few, for decades.
A UNION SUNRISE?
A bright spot is that this incident may become a rallying point for the revival of a union movement in America. Here's more from the AP report:
"Across cultures, religions, union and nonunion, we all say this bailout was a shame," said Richard Berg, president of Teamsters Local 743. "If this bailout should go to anything, it should go to the workers of this country."
Outside the plant, protesters wore stickers and carried signs that said, "You got bailed out, we got sold out."
Leah Fried, an organizer with United Electrical Workers, obliquely compared the sit-in to the landmark 1936-37 General Motors sit-down strike in Flint, Mich., which helped unionize the auto industry. (Yeah, I know, there's the automakers bailout. That's another post.)
"We're doing something we haven't done since the 1930s, so we're trying to make it work," AP quoted Fried as saying. She pointed out that the occupying workers have been shoveling snow and cleaning the building during the sit-in.
Realistically, the financial bailout is a bitter concoction we're going to have to gulp down. But that doesn't mean we have to like it. And, for a dramatic change from '80s and '90s stupor, a lot of Americans seem to be waking up from virtual date-rape drugs and realizing who's been carrying out the assault on working people for many years.
I hope the 53-46% mandate for Barack Obama was only the beginning. Republic should trigger a reborn union movement in this country. Against the kinds of monolithic entities we now face, like Bank of America, lots of people getting together again is the only chance we have.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Madness That Somehow Perseveres: Austin's Own Roky Erickson
By Manifesto Joe
By the way, it's pronounced "Rock-ee," not "Roak-ee." (His given name was Roger, so I can understand why he lost it.) The singer/guitarist who fronted the Texas late-1960s psychedelic cult band the Thirteenth Floor Elevators has been back on stage in recent years. By all accounts, he still gives a great show for a dude who is diagnosed as schizophrenic and likely did way, way too much acid back in the day. Roky spent long stretches in mental hospitals. He is reported to still need his meds and lots of supervision.
Here are three videos from YouTube:
The more popular California-based psychedelic bands of the '60s had nothing on this one. Groovy, Roky. Your comeback is an inspiration.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
By the way, it's pronounced "Rock-ee," not "Roak-ee." (His given name was Roger, so I can understand why he lost it.) The singer/guitarist who fronted the Texas late-1960s psychedelic cult band the Thirteenth Floor Elevators has been back on stage in recent years. By all accounts, he still gives a great show for a dude who is diagnosed as schizophrenic and likely did way, way too much acid back in the day. Roky spent long stretches in mental hospitals. He is reported to still need his meds and lots of supervision.
Here are three videos from YouTube:
The more popular California-based psychedelic bands of the '60s had nothing on this one. Groovy, Roky. Your comeback is an inspiration.
Manifesto Joe Is An Underground Writer Living In Texas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
