January 2003 Archives

I would not want to be Hugo Chavez right now.  Apparently he's trying to shut up the media and the people aren't gonna take it.  Keep an eye on The Devil's Excrement for more Venezuela news.

"What happens when the voice of the people gets as fake as a television laugh track?

That's what's happening to the "letters to the editor" column in scores of newspapers today, thanks to a tactic known as "AstroTurf." Borrowing a trick from lobbyists, interest groups are using phony grass roots letter writing campaigns to puff up their support."

The Christian Science Monitor on Astroturfing and the harm it can cause.

"This may seem like good political strategy, but it's bad for democracy.

One of the reasons Americans are turned off by politics is because of the inherent cynicism they see in the political debate. Every position seems like a commodity, espoused not out of belief but for tactical advantage. It's bad enough when politicians do it.

We shouldn't let our views, and the places we express them, be so cravenly manipulated. Keep off the AstroTurf, and let the sun shine in!"

And as a timely reminder that bad strategies exist and propogate on and from all sides of the political specturm I received a Astroturfing solicitation from MoveOn today and they're not even offering a free totebag.  Granted, they do say that your own words are best, but it still smells funny

"Though you will find suggested letters below, they are really only a quarry for you to use in writing your own letter.  The best letter to the editor is your personal and heartfelt response to something you read.  Find something in a news article or (even better) an op-ed or editorial that stirs you -- often because it's unbearably silly or dangerously misguided.  "How can s/he write that?"  Then, as you frame your response, feel free to draw on whatever part of one of the letters below that you find useful.  Your own words are always best.  The letter doesn't have to be -- probably shouldn't be -- as formal or technical as the sample.  We were simply trying to give you the resources to make your own statement for peace. "

Horrible, terrible, ghastly.  Makes "Dude, Where's My Car" look like "Citizen Kane."  I made it through 15 minutes before throwing up my hands in disgust and pushing eject angrily. 

Not sure why I expected anything different.  Cameron Diaz and Christina Applegate should have made it tolerable, but didn't.  Thats how bad it was.

STAY AWAY!

"The Bush administration is preparing to release supersensitive electronic intercepts obtained by the National Security Agency that officials say prove that Iraq has repeatedly lied to United Nations inspectors, plotted among themselves about how to conceal weapons material and even appeared to boast afterward at their success in doing so, NEWSWEEK has learned."

Sounds like it could be a smoking gun.  If the intercepts are as compelling as this article implies, I can't see any reasonable argument left for UN members.  While France and Germany,  for their own domestic political purposes, will probably make noise over the existing resolution not providing for war, neither will probably put up a fight if the US decided to ask for a second resolution.  I guess we'll see soon enough. 

Early Jazz-Rock fusion. Boston-native Tony Williams started playing with Miles Davis at age 17 and 7 years later had his own group, Lifetime, which was one of the early pioneering fusion groups. This album is definately their weirdest. Combining hard-bop and psychedelic rock it showcases Williams' amazing solo skills on a few tracks, and his unfortunately pedestrian vocal skills on others. Stick with the non-vocal tracks (which really aren't too horrible) and you'll enjoy the album a lot more.

John Zorn and John Medeski's "Emergency" project is a homage to Lifetime's groundbreaking second album, "Emergency", which was a pioneering fusion album.

The Masada songbook may be aging chronologically, especially considering John Zorn's typically shotgun approach to musical styles, but this album shows, once again, that the music will never get old. I'm a huge Bill Frisell fan, love Marc Ribot's guest-work with MMW and others (oddly enough I'm not so enthusiastic about his own stuff) and knew basically nothing about Tim Sparks, other than that Bill Frisell loved him and he had an album of jewish guitar works out on Tzadik, John Zorn's label.

Each track is a Masada song arranged and performed by one of the three guitarists. The performances on this CD are stellar and the recording top-notch. I can see this album quickly becoming one of my all-time favorites.

"So where does that leave us? If you can't use the intelligence you have to sway world opinion it's not much use -- unless the world trusts you. And this is where the Bush team's habit of twisting the truth has got them in deep trouble."

Scott comments on today's NY Times article discussing the decision over what evidence can be declassified for the UN.  His comments sum up some of my discomfort with accepting the Administration's arguments at face value.  Their penchant towards saying whatever will sway the audience no matter how off-base and un-supported has resulted in the public regarding them with a good degree more skepticism than they might normally be due.

Which OS are You?

"MOSCOW - Russia on Wednesday deported an American woman suspected of having contacts with Islamic extremists, the Federal Security Service said. A duty officer at the service identified the woman as Megan McRee and said she was placed on a flight to Los Angeles. The Russian airline Aeroflot confirmed that a passenger by that name was en route to Los Angeles. Officials at the U.S. Embassy could not immediately be reached for comment. According to the security service, the woman had lived in a neighborhood of Moscow for a long period without registering her visa as required by law. The FSB also said she had made contact via the internet with a number of Islamic extremist organizations and proposed various "scenarios" for terrorist actions in the United States. The duty officer, who declined to give his name, said he had no further details. But the state-run TV Rossiya channel later broadcast a report saying that the woman had attempted to contact al-Qaida and the Islamic Brotherhood. The report did not specify what sort of responses she may have received. The Rossiya report also said the woman had told authorities she had left the United States several years ago because she was being persecuted by the CIA (news - web sites) and that she had lived in Romania before coming to Russia."

So, I saw this article on DrudgeReport and for whatever reason, mostly because I love crazy folks with CIA paranoid delusions, decided to do a search for "Megan McRee" on google. First off, here's her CIA story. I also noticed several postings by her (presumably, the address was a Megan McRee at mail.ru) talking about security vulnerabilities in some Verisign credit card processing software that she used in her web design business. A few more search's and I find she's authored a online personals software package that she sell's, as well as managing herself at "IslamicPersonals.com." which appears to be an Islamic matchmaking service.

Megan McRee, Oolitsa Yelninskaya 
   Dom.19, Kv.44
   Moscow,  112252
   RU

   Domain Name: ISLAMICPERSONALS.COM

   Administrative Contact - 
        Megan McRee -  admin@codegirlclassifieds.com
        Oolitsa Yelninskaya
        Dom.19, Kv.44
        Moscow,  112252
        RU
        Phone -  +7-095-141-12-52 
        Fax -  

Nothing really exciting, but I found it interesting so I thought I'd share

They're here, they're green, get used to it.

I also found his views on health-care intriguing.  A lot of it was tied to tort-reform, which I'm a little suspicious of, but anything that removes the accountants from health-care decisions can't be bad.

Well, it sounds to me like we're going to war.  I just hope Powell is able to convince the UN to come along with us, otherwise we are going it alone and if we don't have the world with us, and things go badly, we're in for a terrible mess.

That being said, I though it was a great speech.  I found a lot I agreed with, and a lot I disagreed with

In agreement:

1. The $1.2 billion for hydrogen vehicles, and $15 billion for worldwide AIDS relief are bold moves.  I hope they come into being as presented, and if they do I will bow down.   Energy independence is the key to extricating ourselves from the mess we're in now, and relieving the suffering of the third world can only help our public image.
2. The only mention of a war on drug was oriented towards dealing with treatment, $600 million worth.  Granted some of it was "faith-based" which bugs me, but the fact that the sole mention was in regards to treatment indicates a shift away from the dark side.  
3. Project Bioshield ($6 billion worth) is a good sized part of the kind of homeland security initiviatives that have been missing.  This, combined with the joint department intelligence center between the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, and Pentagon is a good move forward.  It's not the kind of ideas that Gary Hart will be presenting, but its a definate move forward.

Now, for the stuff I disagreed with

1. Abortion - when will the right get that pro-choice means pro-choice, not pro-abortion.  If you don't want an abortion, don't get one.
2. Cloning - this is so short sighted I can't even express it.  If we don't take the lead, technically and morally, someone else will.
3. Faith-based initiatives - I appreciate what he's trying for, public service in all shapes and forms, but there's a reason for the seperation of church and state, and giving money to groups that WILL push their beliefs is totally contrary to the spirit of the Constitution.
4. Economy and tax cuts - No further comment.  Suffice it to say the Democrats aren't the only ones for economic redistribution, but at least they're redistributing to the little guy.
5. Ballistic missles != terrorism and anyone who thinks that is a mouth-breathing retard.  The attempt to link missle-defense and terrorism needs to end, because it just makes everyone involved look idiotic.  If you want to make a case for missle-defense, cite North Korea.

Finally...Iraq:

The evidence presented:

"The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons materials sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax; enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them, despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb.

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. "

If all of this is true, and the intelligence behind it is sufficient, the UN should be convinced of the case behind war.  If they are not, and the solid evidence behind these assertions is presented to the UN, I'm for war.  But that evidence better be ROCK FUCKIN' SOLID and the only objection in the UN would have to be crazed socialist rantings with no basis in reality.

This all being said this is my initial reaction, 30 minutes after the fact.  I've attempted to get my thoughts down here before the TV punditocracy influenced my thought patterns.   I'm sure my thoughts will be distilled both by the professional punditocracy, and the less-professional, but equally-insightful blogitocracy, over the next day or two, and I will present them as they do.  But what fun is a blog if you can't see someone's mind at work ;)

Just in time! 

Wow.  I removed my blogroll and went from 3% space free to 75% free.  I guess having that on every page was a bit too much ;)

I've bought myself some time by eliminating some lesser-used categories (which apparently take up some amount of space, who knew). It's apparent however that I'm going to have to move this blog at some point in the near future to somewhere with more disk space, and a slightly less silly use of said space. I plan to maintain this space here in support of Salon in any case.

Hmm, somehow I've managed to use almost all of my 40 mb of allocated space. I'm trying to figure out how to rectify this, but in the meantime posting will be sparse

"Nothing is more beautiful, more elevating, more important in a speech than fact and logic. People think passionate and moving oratory is the big thing, but it isn't. The hard true presentation of facts followed by a declaration of how we must deal with those facts is the key. Without a recitation of hard data, high rhetoric seems insubstantial, vaguely disingenuous, merely dramatic. Without a logical case to support rhetoric has nothing to do. It's like icing without cake.

Once the facts and the declaration are put forward it's fine to use eloquence if you can muster it, and ringing oratory too if it will help people to see things as you do, and help them lean toward taking the course of action you recommend.

So to sum up: Moving oratory is what you use to underscore a point. It is not in itself the point.

George W. Bush is being told by some pundits and others that ringing oratory is what he most needs in his State of the Union address tomorrow night. That is exactly wrong. "

Once again I find myself surprisingly in agreement with Peggy Noonan.  She and I both agree that tomorrow's State of the Union address is the last chance Bush has to credibly put forward his facts.  Time to show your hand or the world will continue to call your bluff.  Show us all to be completely wrong with some substantial, credible, hard evidence and I think you'd be surprised how the tide could turn.

""Col. Dave Hughes, USA, Ret., is the only character who has popped up in the plot every time I've investigated the roots of a technology revolution," futurist author Howard Rheingold wrote in "Smart Mobs," his 2002 book about the sociology of constant Internet connectivity."

Dave Hughes, LONG-time fellow WELL and Colorado resident is a personal hero of mine - not-wiring the un-wired for many years now.  76 years old and, still hard at work and finally getting some national recognition - in this case in a great article on CNN - for his lifetime of hard work.  Read the article, check out his website and go join the WELL to read his years of writing. 

"Powell has long been a reluctant warrior. The former four-star general and decorated Vietnam veteran once questioned the need to go to war to liberate Kuwait. Later he counseled against military interventions in the Balkans. Now he is telling America's war-wary allies that there is no peaceful way to disarm Saddam Hussein. While the French argued that U.N. inspectors had "frozen" Iraq's weapons programs, Powell was blunt and dismissive. "Inspections," he told reporters categorically last week, "will not work." One senior State Department official explains Powell's change of heart as a gradual awakening: "People ask why Powell is becoming increasingly hard-line. It's because every day, when we wake up in the morning, the facts are clear that Iraq has gone back to its old ways and is refusing to disarm, and trying to prevent the inspectors from disarming them. It's a big decision, especially for a former general who knows what this is all about.""

A Newsweek article touching on Powell's change of heart, the concerns of our allies and the odds on the rush to war being a bluff attempting to bring about cooperation from Iraq.

"Meanwhile, Britain's war critics, both in Parliament and in the press, are far less timid than their counterparts in America. Using the type of strident language that's rarely heard by elected U.S. officials, one on-the-record Labour Party chairman recently told the Telegraph: "We have no justification at all for a war on Iraq. The logic of the situation beggars belief. It is manufactured by George Bush, and oil is a factor."

And unlike Bush, Blair does not have an entrenched neoconservative movement like the one in the U.S. that's been beating the drums of war so effectively for the past year. Neocon hawks both inside the administration (Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz) and in the political press (the Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal) have been lobbying for war with Iraq almost since the moment the World Trade Center was attacked. They're convinced that toppling Saddam will not only make America safer but, after the regime change, also be the first crucial step in redrawing the entire Middle East.

"There's very little of that neocon culture here, or that messianic sense of this war," notes Kettle. "Nobody thinks we can redraw the map of the world. And Blair certainly does not talk about it.""

A good Salon article on the difficulties Tony Blair faces trying to sustain the rush to war in the face of a country thats not really interested in what Bush has to say.

I don't have a whole lot to say about this album yet - actually two albums reissued on one CD - as I just received it yesterday, other than that I like it and it's made Sun Ra's influence on MMW extremely apparent.  However, I wanted to note that it makes for VERY interesting accompaniment to the Super Bowl.  I often enjoy watching sporting events with a musical soundtrack, since 9 times out of 10 the announcers aren't saying anything interesting anyhow, and I find the time better spent with some music going on.  This proved especially true with this album and the Super Bowl.  I'll have more to say about the music when I give it a closer listen later this week.

Incidentally, not that I'm a huge football fan, but congratulations to the Buccaneers for hopefully shutting up Bill Romanowski, and by extension the local Denver-area media who can't get over the fact he left the Bronco's for the Raiders.  If nothing else, at least this means football is over.  Bring on the All Star Game!

Repeat after me: No two hours is ever wasted when a wet Kirsten Dunst is involved (even with the silly looking red hair).  That's always been my subliminal mantra, but never has it stood more true than with this movie, which by and large could have been an enourmous waste of time.

That being said, this movie was not as horrible as I was expecting.  It was pretty predictable Hollywood action formula but a few things stood out.

1. The performances of Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin and J.K Simmons (aka Vern Schillinger from HBO's Oz) as JJ Jameson were great. 
2. I'm aware there was some re-editing involved in order to remove some featured World Trade Center shots in the movie, but I wonder what else was added/removed.  There's some interesting sequences that I'm curious to know if they were added later.  Specifically some of the comments of the crowd on the Brooklyn Bridge, but also a few other items which I'd be interested to learn the provenance of.  I don't suppose there's anyway to find out.  Note that this does not make the movie any more interesting, but I'm the curious type.

"Two years into his presidency, on the eve of his second State of the Union address, almost exactly a year before the 2004 presidential primary season begins with the Iowa caucus, President Bush faces trouble everywhere he turns. War with Iraq seems inevitable even as crises in Venezuela and North Korea simmer, and al-Qaida remains menacing and elusive. On the domestic front, unemployment is still rising, the stock market continues to slump, budget deficits are climbing again -- and the president's only answer is a massive tax cut for the rich, while states and cities slash funds for public safety, healthcare and education. A broad spectrum of scientists agree that global warming is getting worse, but the administration insists the issue needs more study.

It's hard not to notice a disconnection between the challenges facing the U.S. and the Bush administration's response. And what if, against this already gloomy backdrop, things get worse on several fronts at once?

Salon asked six writers to look at worst-case scenarios on the domestic and international scenes. What if deficits mount and the war with Iraq is messier than expected? What if joblessness continues to rise but states' unemployment insurance funds collapse? What if al-Qaida rebuilds while the Palestinian situation festers? "

We've heard plenty of the 'best-case' scenarios from the Administration and their supporters.  Salon summarizes the best-case arguments, and presents their own view on the worst-case.  Are those supporting our current Administration willing to live with these consequences, which, Salon concludes, include

• Continued Arab support of the Intifada despite the installation or election of more democratic regimes in the Middle East
• Anger against the US policies growing leading to Palestinian style suicide bombings in the United States justifying furthur good-guy-bad-guyism from the Administration ensconsing us in our own Isreali-style vicious circle.
• Widespread economic breakdown in American states and local municipalities caused by Bush's bizarre economic policies.
• Environmental catastrophe
• Women's abortion rights overturned

Those holding their tounge about the Administration's stupidity because they support war against Iraq need to take a look at these articles and see if they're willing to accept these consequences for the rest of the us.

Another fine example of why its important to keep Salon around.  Subscribe now!

"That Subliminal Kid" is DJ Spooky's tagline.  This album makes it readily apparent why this is the case.  DJ Spooky leads Matthew Shipp and friends down the Thirsty Ear "Blue Series" road exploring, in this case, the intersection between Spooky's brand of heady turntablism and Shipp and friends free jazz freaking.  Also making an appearence is Billy Martin of MMW in the form of his breakbeats album, "illyB Eats Vol.1".  Throw in some hip-hop-esque beat poetry and you have a really interesting album.

I've reworked my "Recent Listening/Watching" section because it was kind of boring.  The entries on the sidebar now lead to some thoughts about albums and such.  Sometimes they'll be blank, but they'll always at least include a link to somewhere for more information, and will usually include at the very least some useless blathering.

"Egged on by prizes ranging from a GOP bumper sticker (75 points) to a leather portfolio (525 points), eager partisans used the site's automated e-mailer this month to spam just about every newspaper in the country with a letter to the editor that begins: "When it comes to the economy, President Bush is demonstrating genuine leadership …" (Try it yourself by signing on as member "slategop2003@hotmail.com," password "slate.") To the thinly masked glee or disdain of bloggers everywhere, nearly 50 papers—including the Boston Globe and the Financial Times—actually ran the thing, each one under the name of a different, and presumably genuine, local author. "

Slate reveals the source of the recent astroturfing I mentioned here earlier this week and offers a devious plan of their own.

"Instead of getting mad, though, why not get even? An option on the site allows letter-writers to compose and send their own messages in lieu of the canned statements, meaning the technology used to push Bush's agenda can be used to bash it as well. For an ironic Gen X-er, what better reward for e-mailing 100 anti-war letters to the editor than a GOP Team Leader fleece pullover?"

"In an interview in his State Department offices two weeks ago, Powell suggested that the inspections regime was in its infancy. "The inspectors are really now starting to gain momentum," in part because the United States had just begun providing intelligence, he said. He noted that a report from U.N. weapons inspectors due next Monday was not a final document, but only "the first formal, official report."

But this week, Powell flatly said: "The question isn't how much longer do you need for inspections to work. Inspections will not work."

In the interview two weeks ago, Powell proudly noted the "defining conversation" he had with Bush on Aug. 5, when he urged the president to make an effort to win U.N. support for a confrontation with Iraq. "He always had in his mind that it was preferable to multilateralize this," Powell said.

Yesterday, with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw at his side, Powell said it was "an open question right now" whether the United States would even seek a U.N. resolution authorizing military force. He said the administration believes it has sufficient authority under earlier resolutions, adding that even without U.N. backing, "I'm quite confident if it comes to that we'll be joined by many nations.""

Colin Powell has changed his mind on Iraq, at least publically.  There is now effectively no opposition within the Bush administration to war with Iraq.  Whether this is a further scare tactic to try and bring about "full cooperation and transparency" (as defined by Condi in a NY Times op-ed and Wolfowitz speaking at the CFR this week) or an honest change of heart we'll probably never know, but war is that much closer now.

""Every community in this country is vulnerable," Mr. Hart said in a speech at Iowa State University, which attracted a crowd of nearly 200 on a night with a wind chill of minus 25 degrees. "Not one American soldier should cross the Iraqi border until this country is prepared for the inevitable retaliatory attacks."

Mr. Hart, who was considered a centrist Democrat in the 1980's, now seems firmly in the liberal wing as he opposes the Iraqi war and criticizes the 2001 tax cuts. But the candidate known for "new ideas" in 1984 is making a pitch this time for "a primary of ideas," of which he again has no shortage. Drawing on a book he wrote recently while earning a doctorate in philosophy at Oxford, he calls for America to take on the civic virtues of a republic, as exemplified by ancient Rome and extolled by Thomas Jefferson. "

The NY Times weighs in on Hart's speech in Iowa, his role in creating the "Iowa Caucus" as political institution and his chances for the Democractic nomination.  His position on war with Iraq is one of the most sensible responses to Bush's claims of Iraqi-al-Qaeda terrorism I've heard yet.  If the axis of Iraq and al-Qaeda is so dangerous, and Iraq is inevitably going to gives its weapons of mass destruction to al-Qaeda to use against us, why is it that we are increasing the risk of it happenning before we're ready to handle the consequences?

I've also been reading his latest book, Restoration of the Republic and so far I'm intrigued by his ideas on restoring the people's faith in their government through public service, and the resulting marginalization of monied interests in the corridors of power.

[via Political Wire]

The best part are the people in the forums who don't get the joke.

[via Metafilter]

"This is an historic moment for the Web. Salon is calling the question that many in the Internet community have long debated. Will people pay for quality editorial content online? So far it hasn't proven to be a good model. The same people who think nothing of paying $5 for a latte, $40 for a bottle of wine, $35 for a subscription to a magazine they see once a month and may never glance at, haven't quite managed to pull out the credit card for another $30 for hot news every weekday from Salon. "

A good piece from the executive editor of AlterNet on why you should be paying for a Salon subscription, and sums up some of what's great about us Salon Blogger's home on the web.

"Many of this demographic apparently likes Salon's smart yet restrained liberal writers like Jake Tapper and Joe Conason, as well as the similar strong voices coming from inside the magazine like Joan Walsh and Gary Kamiya, and especially the prodigious work of the considerably younger Michelle Goldberg in New York (when she can stop worrying about those darn sectarians organizing the peace marches). Salon has terrific cultural coverage; smart takes on movies and music, excellent technology writing, and sometimes clever writing about sex and relationships."

"Digital technologies are not only making it easier to copy all sorts of works, but also sharply reducing the costs of creating or distributing them, and so also reducing the required incentives. The flood of free content on the internet has shown that most creators do not need incentives that stretch across generations. To reward those who can attract a paying audience, and the firms that support them, much shorter copyrights would be enough. The 14-year term of the original 18th-century British and American copyright laws, renewable once, might be a good place to start."

The Economist wants shorter copyright terms!  Unfortunately, they are also calling for more support for copyright enforcement technologies to make the 14 year term profitable and worthwhile for content providers.

[via Lessig Blog]

--
Composed with Newz Crawler 1.3 http://www.newzcrawler.com/

One of the first DVD's I bought (along with The Fifth Element) way back when, this is a funny yet grim film-noir by Oliver Stone about bad luck getting worse and sick twists.  Great cast (Sean Penn, Jon Voight, Billy Bob Thornton, Joaquim Phoenix, Claire Danes, Jennifer Lopez, and many others) and an awesome score by Ennio Morricone, a favorite of mine.

I wasn't impressed.  A few funny gag's, and some continuing jokes from the previous movies, but it really dragged and was really reaching for laughs.  Stick with the first one.

Two Loons for Tea is a guitar/vocal duo from Seattle.  I never would have heard of them except for a mention on the Fredheads mailing list which mentioned the huge body of amazing Seattle-area musicians participating on the CD, including Brad Houser, Eyvind Kang, Dale Fanning, Jessica Lurie, Mike Dillon and the inimitable Skerik.  The more I delve into the Seattle music scene, the more juicy nuggets I dig out.  While Two Loons for Tea is most definately pretty straight ahead pop, the contributions of all these musicians is definately evident and it is a most entertaining album.

Incidently, I noticed that Jeff Bezos, the man behind Amazon.com was somehow involved in this album.  A little research revealed that Jonathan Kochmer, the guitarist, was one of the first 10 employees at Amazon, developing a lot of the backend software that ran the early ecommerce pioneer.  He was making music with Sarah Scott, the vocalist, when he was offered the job. 

This is the best Charlie Parker compilation I've heard.  Rhino almost always does a good job with these and this is no exception hitting almost all the high points from his Savoy, Dial and Verve recordings and with liner notes as good as the music.  If you're looking for somewhere to start with Bird, this is the place. 

CDT has the text of both the Wyden and Grassley amendments mentioned below and Grassley's comments before the Senate.  The potential toothlessness lies here:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, commencing 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, no funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense, whether to an element of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or any other element, or to any other department, agency, or element of the Federal Government, may be obligated or expended on research and development on the Total Information Awareness program unless--

[...]

(2) the President certifies to Congress in writing, that--

(A) the submittal of the report to Congress within 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act is not practicable; and

(B) the cessation of research and development on the Total Information Awareness program would endanger the national security of the United States."

...or do they?

"Saying they feared government snooping against ordinary Americans, U.S. senators voted on Thursday to block funding for a Pentagon computer project that would scour databases for terrorist threats.

By a voice vote, the Senate voted to ban funding for the Total Information Awareness program, under former national security adviser John Poindexter, until the Pentagon explains the program and assesses its impact on civil liberties."

The provision has been tacked onto the Omnibus Appropriations Bill currently being considered by the Senate.  If it makes it through the House and Senate, TIA wouldn't be able to be operationally deployed, and here's the key, EXCEPT IN CASES OF NATIONAL SECURITY.  Given this Administrations penchant for using their executive powers, this provision would seem a little more toothless than the article is making it out to be.  The text isn't up yet, but I'll keep an eye out for it to see if I'm missing something from the Post's summary.

"viadrudge"

The Des Moines Register covers Gary Hart's appearence yesterday at the University of Iowa.

"Gary Hart expects to be the butt of Leno and Letterman monologues if he decides to seek his party's presidential nomination, some 15 years after his last bid ended with an infamous picture on a boat called "Monkey Business."

But Hart said a likely war in Iraq will bring an end to any laughter.

"Go ahead, bang away, show the picture, have your fun. I'm prepared for that," the Democrat said Wednesday in Des Moines. "Then let's move on, because when our sons and daughters are dying overseas, really how many times can you laugh?""

An early taste of what I'm sure will be many more questions to come and his early strategy for dealing with them.

"The survival of his marriage to wife Lee and President Clinton's subsequent public infidelity have made his indiscretion "ancient history," he said.

"I took full responsibility. I apologized to all concerned on national television," Hart said, calling Clinton's indiscretions "quite a different circumstance.""

Hart's best bet to deal with this silliness is to point out that he didn't pull any of the Clinton "oh I didn't realize that was sex" crap and came right out, apologized, and withdrew from public life until recently.

As indicated in the Orlando Register, he has to be careful though to not make too light of what happenned:

"Hart still is working on the proper word for what he did.

"I already got criticized for using the word 'folly,' " Hart said in a calm discussion Wednesday with reporters. "If somebody can think of a better word for the incident in my life that I'm thinking about, then I'll be happy to think about it."

Asked whether the 1987 episode would disqualify him if it happened today, Hart said he didn't know. "I'm not the best person to make that judgment." Some see an arrogance in his soft-pedaling of the affair. "Earth to Gary: You had a scandal," said Larry Sabato, political scientist at the University of Virginia, skeptical that Hart's party will accept him again.

"There is tremendous resistance within the Democratic Party to him re-entering," Sabato said. "They don't want reminders of Hart. They don't want reminders of Clinton. Democrats don't want to go through this again. I think all of us wonder why this man can't live in peace. You lost, Gary. Go home.""

Hopefully his ideas will be interesting enough to people to make it irrelevent.

[via Political Wire]

A great album. I first bought the Trio's 99->00 album and was so impressed with the lineup's chemistry that I had to pick this up as well. This may be Metheny's best trio - Pat on various Guitars, Larry Grenadier on bass and Bill Stewart on drums sound like they can read each other's minds. Every song is incredibly tight. This album, unlike 99->00 which was more straight hard-bop-esque jazz, touches on pretty much all of Metheny's stylistic incarnations, for better or worse. I tend to think better, because this is an incredible group of musicians that can make just about anything interesting.

"President Bush is set to endorse using nuclear power to explore Mars and open up the outer Solar System. "

I like the idea, but how do we pay for it, we've got countries to invade and tax-welfare to dole out.

Looks like MMW has rolled out a long overdue new web site. Their previous site was pretty but painful to navigate. The new one is nice and clean, and even has a nice band history and bios, a whole bunch of pictures and their Uninvisible video, and a new message board. I'll be seeing them here in Denver in a few weeks. Yay!

Gary Stock (the man behind googlewhacking) noticed my recent post and Demonstrating Genuine Leadership, pointed me towards his work scouring the Internet looking for more GOP astroturfing, and it appears he's turned up quite a goldmine.

Hart should be touching on just about every major issue over the next week or so in his series of speeches:

• "Political Corruption and Campaign Financing" at Iowa State
• "The United States and The World" at Unitarian Church of All Souls, NYC
• "Homeland Security After 9/11" at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, NYC
• "National Security in the 21st Century" at Tufts University, Boston
• Friends of Libraries Authors Breakfast, Philadelphia
• "US Security in the 21st Century" at New Mexico First 2003