Those of you who know me know that I'm an ardent Clash fan. I can only account for this by saying that my early musical upbringing on late 60's rock was derailed by the infusion of U2 when I was in Junior High School. Once I heard their seminal Under a Blood Red Sky record, I became obsessed with the idea that Rock didn't have to be about sex and drugs but could in fact change people's lives. This view, unfortunately, has been slowly eroded by the crap that marks music from the mid 1980's to the present (save for the notable exceptions of the Pixies, Pavement and some others).

Anyway, the jump from U2 to the Clash was a short one. I think the first song I ever heard by the Clash was their cover of Bunny Wailer's Police and Thieves. I didn't think much of it at the time, mainly because I wasn't a big reggae fan. But when a friend lent me the US version of their self titled debut, I simply couldn't stop listening to it. I had never heard any song like White Man in Hammersmith Palais, and it was this song that cemented my devotion to this band. The raw power and energy they were able to capture on vinyl simply amazed me. It was about this time that the Clash released Combat Rock and then began their quick disintegration. Aside from a couple of songs, chiefly Straight To Hell, I didn't have any patience for it.

Why am I telling you all of this? Because I was given as a gift a book entitled The Return of the Last Gang In Town. I'm only through the first couple of chapters and it's absolutely fascinating. For instance, I had no idea that Mick Jones was playing with the likes of Rat Scabies (Damned) and Chrissie Hynde (Pretenders) before forming the Clash. I had no clue that he was only a missed phone call from becoming the guitarist in the Sex Pistols.

So, I'll be posting several nuggets of interest as I wend my way through this book. Hopefully some of you are interested. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

This New York Times article highlights the motivations of the former Ba'ath party officials in Iraq: money.

This really shouldn't come as a surprise. In fact, monetary motivation is ultimately behind the US invasion of Iraq as well. The War On Terror^TM and Operation Iraqi Freedom^TM are often painted in terms of "good v. evil" or "religious fundamentalism v. free society", but all of this rhetoric is really a ruse designed to distract the ignorant masses from the realpolitik reasons why we're strutting around Baghdad: oil, money and power.

There is one interesting factiod nestled deep within the NYTimes article:

Not everything party members did was a quest for money, though. For example, a cadre of party workers was responsible for monitoring every senior high school student in the nation for ideological loyalty and potential party membership. The records were in large ledgers, each a yard wide and two feet thick. The names of students were listed vertically, and across the top were 10 political and social issues on which they were judged — the student's position on the Mother of all Battles and the uprising that followed, whether the student was a friend of the president or had any relatives who were enemies of the party.

hmmm...sound familiar?

 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

You can read it here. Frankly, it's a bit of a pain to sift through all the questions and answers, so allow me to sum up:

1. Thom Yorke can't eat donuts
   
2. Someone posted this: "Please shut up and sing. No one wants to hear some stupid rich rock star complain about the evils of capitalism." Thom replied with this: "Please don't come to our shows. Please don't buy our records"
   
3. He likes Michael Moore as evidenced by this post: "think he's a very brave man. heard a rumour that the boo's were dubbed on louder. much louder at the oscars actually the room was deafening cheers. his new book's great and he's even more angry than i am..."
   
4. He'd like to see Kraftwerk, The Pixies and the Talking Heads play a festival show

I guess it's not all that interesting.

sorry. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

The first sentence of this Washington Post article is...well...you decide what it is:

President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Thursday that the invasion of Iraq was not to blame for the recent wave of terrorist violence and that the bombs that devastated two British facilities in Turkey proved the need to press ahead with the military campaign.

Let's parse that, shall we...

"the invasion of Iraq was not to blame for the recent wave of terrorist violence"
What are they trying to say? If they're saying that the two are completely unrelated, then they must think we are a bunch of morons. If however they are saying that the "invasion" isn't to blame, but the "occupation" and daily military operations are, then I agree.

"the bombs that devastated two British facilities in Turkey proved the need to press ahead with the military campaign"
First of all, if we accept the first premise at face value, then this part of the statement makes absolutely no sense at all for a couple of reasons:

1. If there's no correlation between the military campaign and the "recent wave of terrorist violence", then why would "pressing ahead" have any effect?
   
2. The last time I checked, our military campaign was in Iraq, not Turkey.

Points to whoever gets the reference in the title. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

The Oklahoma Atty. Gen. is dropping fraud charges against Bernie Ebbers because he doesn't want to interfere with the ongoing federal investigation of Worldcom CFO Scott Sullivan. Apparently Bernie is a federal witness.

Witness? Can't you throw him in jail and ask questions later? If the CFO is liable, then the CEO and chairman is absolutely liable.

This guy is almost as evil as Ken Lay. He should be dragged through the streets of all major US cities and citizens should be allowed to flog him with their cell phones.  

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

So Dagwood had this idea where he was going to write letters to elected officials and then post their replies. I'm stealing that idea, except I'm only going to write letters to Rick Santorum...mainly because he's such an asshole.

Here's the first one:

Hi Ricky!

So great to write to you!!!

I was really interested in your speech on the floor last week about not getting caught up in "the passion of the day."

I was wondering if this statement: "We'll have our opportunity someday, and we'll make sure there's not another liberal judge. Ever!" was an example of not getting caught up in the passion of the day?

How about that man on dog comment...was that a similarly dispassionate statement?

anywho...looking forward to your reply!

sincerely,
TJ Griffin

hi, my name is Rick....I'm the one on the left.
I'm an asshole. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

Yes, yes, it's a stupid title I know...but I choose it if only to point out this fact: California Republicans were so eager to oust Gray Davis only to let one of their own do the same damned thing Davis planned to do...push the fiscal burden onto future generations of Californians. Here's an excerpt from this scathing press release by California State Senator Thomas "Rico" Oller in February 2002:

Gray Davis hangs his deficit reduction plan on rosy revenue projections, sizeable federal reimbursements and billions in long-term borrowing. His Pollyannic budgeting practices are disturbing, but the massive borrowing he has proposed is even more alarming. In essence, Davis is promising that future legislators and future governors will cut future budgets in order to pay back the loans that Davis took out this year.

"Rico" is oddly silent on the Governator's new bond issue. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

But I'm posting it anyways.

First of all, if you are a parent who allows their 12 year old son to stay at Michael Jackson's ranch, then you are a complete moron and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for putting your child in the hands of an obvious freak. Secondly, it is very likely that you, as the parent, will also accept a ludicrous amount of money in a settlement to keep the details of the affair out of the newspapers and, more importantly, out of the courtroom. If you do this, I will personally come to your house and kick your ass because you are only perpetuating the problem, which will likely result in more abuse, for the sake of your own financial benefit.

Finally, can't we excommunicate Michael Jackson and force him to live in exile in a gulag or something? 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

"I, Dagwood Reeves, hereby call for action regarding the dishes, which have been sitting in the sink, unwashed, since last night. Also, I call for action regarding the bed, which has been unmade since around 6:30 am. Furthermore, ladies and gentlemen, I call for the general sweeping and vacuuming of the entire house, which is in a general state of dustiness, grittiness, and cat-hairedness, due in part to two good-for-nothing cats who serve no other purpose than to "hairify" the house and yowl piteously and annoyingly when their food dishes are empty."

Isn't that cute? I called for action regarding cleaning the house, and yet, if experience is any indication, I have very little intention of doing the dishes, making the bed or vacuuming (although I have every intention of strangling at least one of the cats).

Now pretend for a moment than my name is John D. Rockefeller IV, and I am a senator from West Virginia, and the issue at hand is not cat hair but a CIA memo attached to a letter from Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith that was leaked to the Weekly Standard in order to keep alive the idea that Saddam and Osama were in cahoots, even though there hasn't been a shred of evidence to support the idea, even after President Bush himself declared that the idea has no merit.

OK? Imagine that for a moment. Now imagine me "considering" making my own request for a Department of Justice inquiry into the matter of who leaked the top secret memo. Wow! I'm not even actually calling for action, but considering calling for action. Not only that, I'm considering calling on the Department of Justice to investigate the matter, which is a lot like considering calling on the two worthless cats to do the dishes, make the bed and sweep up. A bold move on my part, eh? Especially when you consider all the other people in the house who don't have the guts to call for such decisive action, such as my wife. Especially when you consider that the cats have never done a lick of housework and probably never will. So you can see that I am "doing" "more" than others, who are doing "nothing."

Yes, I know that might sound lazy and stupid, but let me assure you that I have a plan—a secret plan! Well, it was a secret until it was leaked to my wife when I assured her that the house would definitely be cleaned, somehow, by the time her parents come to visit in January. Although she found it difficult to follow my advanced logic, I patiently explained to her that it would be more "strategic" for me to wait until sometime around the end of December to "pull the trigger" on the dishes, right before the in-laws arrive.

"But that means we'll have to live in filth and eat from paper plates until almost January," she protested. "What good will that do?"

"Exactly," I said, arching an eyebrow, amazed at my own brilliance. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by Dagwood :: permalink ::

The first sentence of this Washington Times article is so funny, i think i'm going to plotz.

Saudi Arabia continues to fund and export its Wahhabi brand of Islam, making it a "strategic threat" to the United States in the worldwide war on terror, the chairman of the U.S. government commission on religious freedom said yesterday.

I mean, the statement itself isn't funny, save for the fact that Michael Young (aka. chairman of US government commission on religious freedom) is the person who said it.

Thank you Mr. Young, for deciding for us which religions should be free. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

I was excited to find this web site. Then a little less excited. Then a little less. Then not at all. Why? Because there's not one mention of Martin Chavez anywhere. Still, it's worth checking out if you've got time to kill during those long, painful days between editions of The Onion. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by Dagwood :: permalink ::

That's the ratio of Bush administration judicial nominations confirmed to those who have been blocked. It's what was printed on a sign during the 30 hour all night "debate" last night...the Republicans didn't like that sign:

Republicans, meanwhile, objected to a large purple sign reading "168 to 4" that Democrats posted on their side of the chamber. The Senate has confirmed 168 federal judges tapped by Bush, while Democrats have blocked four. Democrats were told to remove the sign until it was their turn to speak.

This morning, the President called for an up or down vote on the judges who are being filibustered, calling it "playing politics" and "shameful":

``The senators who are playing politics with their nominations are acting shamefully,'' said the president, flanked by Texas judge Priscilla Owen and California judges Carolyn Kuhl and Janice Rogers Brown. Bush called it ``ugly politics.'

You know what's shameful? Nominating these right wing lunatics to the bench while a country that is divided so closely in the middle can't tell the difference. That's fucking shameful. Here's what's shameful:

Charles Pickering: Consistently injects his ideology into his rulings without regard for the constitution. He has a history of trampling civil rights and equal rights. He once went to the mattresses in an unsolicited attempt to reduce the sentence of a man convicted of cross burning.

Priscilla Owen: Believes Roe v. Wade was a travesty of justice. Even Alberto Gonzales, President Bush's White House Counsel, accused her of committing "an unconscionable act of judicial activism."

Carolyn Kuhl: oh ideologue, sweet ideologue. Our good friend Carolyn went to bat for Bob Jones University (crazy conservative religious school....oh....and racist...forgot about that one) when they were denied tax exempt status. She tried to overturn Roe v. Wade...more than once. She also sought to place limits on sexual harassment protections. She's a real woman's woman.

Janice Rogers Brown: the piece de resistance...among other things, JRB is one of the few African Americans (aside from Clarence Thomas) that consistently fights legislation which seeks to assist the African American community. Just ask the NAACP.

So yes, Mr. President, someone is playing politics, but it certainly isn't the Dems.

 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

So, my good friend Gwydion has a little blog about the things he loves and/or hates. He started a new feature called "Poetry I Love" and his first post was this poem...which everyone and their mother has had read to them at one time or another, usually during a graduation ceremony. This came as quite a shock to me since I consider this poem to be one of the biggest pieces of poo I've ever come across in any literary work. I told Gwydion as much in the following email:

THE FUCKING ROAD NOT TAKEN?
THAT'S THE POEM YOU LOVE!!!!!???!!!?

That's fucking pathetic....it's like saying your favorite bread is Wonder, or your favorite song is "Stairway to Heaven".

That's just piss poor....and, really, I wouldn't be bothered this much if it weren't for this fact:

YOU'RE A FUCKING POET!!!!! YOU HAVE A MASTERS IN POETRY!!!!

Didn't you read a lot of poems? Weren't there about a bazillion better poems than the most hackneyed, over-quoted poem ever written? I can think of ten off the top of my head that are better than that piece of main stream garbage...AND I WAS A FUCKING ACCOUNTING MAJOR!

And you....getting all high and mighty about not reading Harry Potter....really now.
The amount of street cred gained by refraining from JK Rowlings, is nowhere near what's been lost by saying "the road not taken" is one of the poems you love....it's just the way the scales map out my friend.

Now, usually I confine my ignorant rants to email but in order to prove to you, the casual blog reader, that I am indeed an idiot whose ignorance knows no bounds, I feel it is necessary to post Gywdion's reply:

You are so, so wrong.

I could -- but won't -- write you a paper on why you're wrong, but I'll just say this:

I'M THE ONE WITH THE FUCKING M.A. IN POETRY, YOU JACKASS, SO TRUST ME!

Okay, since you graced me with a few more words than that, I'll also say:

DAMN, WHAT DO YOU THINK I AM, A MORON? YOU ARE THE MORON, MY FRIEND.
YOU JUST DON'T KNOW IT.

Okay, well, since that isn't a particularly intelligent response, I will actually also add:

The prosody Frost relies on in the poem is deeply brilliant, by which I mean that the integration of form and function (the rhyme scheme, the internal rhymes and off-rhymes, the plodding meter) is absolutely seamless, as many with more letters after their names than I have already noted.

Furthermore, the true genius of the poem is not revealed in its surface sentiment but in the way in which the sentence structure -- the fucking sentence structure, for God's sake -- actually mirrors the psychology of the speaker, which is damned hard enough to do when you don't have to worry about rhyming and cadence, as in a play, but which becomes nigh on impossible in formal poetry.

Finally, I'll just say that when I've taught MANY STUDENTS about writing, no matter what their age level, my FIRST lesson has always been about avoiding cliché in writing. This is, of course, a tricky lesson to learn, especially for young writers; but the harder lesson to learn-- in fact, it might be impossible -- is how to write well enough that your own fresh uses of language BECOMES a cliché within, say, two generations of your death. In other words, you jackass, Robert Frost was brilliant BECAUSE what we now think of as cliché HE INVENTED. The road less traveled? Him. Good fences make good neighbors? Him. These phrases didn't exist before Frost, just like about 100 other clichés didn't exist before Shakespeare. In other words, the very thing you're railing against this poem for -- and, I might add, showing your cute little TJ-style crack-me-up ignorance -- is the thing that makes it greatest of all. What you call "mainstream garbage" is nothing more than the most original, purely American writing in history.

So there :)

Gwyd

I could post the my other responses to Gwydion which in typical third-grader-schoolyard-style contained such phrases as "nuh-uh" and "you shut up!", but I won't.

I will however say this: for as learned a man as Gwydion is, he simply couldn't resist ending his email with "So there."

 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

The Washington Post reports that about 1,300 returning military personnel have filed claims against their employers for being fired, not receiving schedule promotions or pay raises, or other issues ranging from vacation accrual and pensions.

The government alleged that when Ronald D. Brown, a driver for Stevens Transport Inc., a Dallas-based trucking firm, called his boss in May 2001 to say he had to report for military duty, he was told to park the truck in a truck stop and find his own way home. The cost of towing the truck was deducted from his final paycheck, the government said in the lawsuit.

That's pretty damned harsh if you ask me. I wonder if these companies are the ones that hang the "We Support Our Troops" and "These Colors Don't Run Signs" in their windows and on their websites.

They probably are, the bastards.
 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

The Bush Administration's all out war on the environment continues. Since we ignored the Kyoto protocols, it seems to me that everything else is probably out the window as well.

Anywho...read this feature from the Boston Phoenix...it's an old but still interesting look at the Bush administration's evolution in "enviromental policy". 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

As you're probably already tired of hearing about, Bill O'Reilly recently walked out on an interview with Terry Gross on NPR's Fresh Air. O'Reilly says that he walked out because Gross conducted the interview "in attack mode."

Some thoughts:

1. Bill O'Reilly, who would probably not want to be characterized as cowardly or weak, could not endure a full interview with Terry Gross, who is the most easy interviewer I can think of. Is he really that cowardly? That weak?

2. Bill O'Reilly, who would probably not want to be thought of as the kind of calculating person who pulls a well-timed media stunt to generate buzz for his new book, walked out of an important interview, generating buzz. Was the walkout just a coincidence?

3. If Gross wasn't going to ask O'Reilly the questions she did, what questions should she have asked him? Maybe she should have asked him about what kind of pets he has, or if he prefers a single thin pillow on his bed or a lot of big fluffy ones, or maybe a bunch of thin ones or just one fluffy one.

O'Reilly is a master of a certain trick that's used frequently by right-wing politicians and pundits. I'm sure that someone smarter than me has already given this technique a name, but since that person wasn't smart enough to walk out of an interview with Terry Gross while flogging his book about it, I'm unaware of what that name is. So I'll call it



The Fog encompasses a host of smaller tricks that are equally deserving of names and analysis, but let's just concentrate on The Fog for a moment. The Fog works like this:

The interviewer asks a question, such as: "In an interview last March, you told a guy who disagreed with you to shut up and had his mic cut. Wouldn't you say that's acting like a bully?"

Then the interviewee answers the question by saying something like: "Not at all. That guy made false accusations about President Bush. If you really want an answer to that question, you need to read the full transcript of that show. Then you'll find out what really happened. This whole thing was taken out of context."

Now the listener will have one of the following two reactions, depending on how he feels about the interviewee:

1. "Oh darn. Now I'm going to have to spend time reading through the transcript of Interviewee's show in order to find out why he cut that guy off and told him to shut up. I don't have time for that. I wish I lived somewhere where Interviewee does not, such as the sun."

or

2. "Booyah! Fuckin' Interviewee's really got the bases covered this time! Goddamn liberal media is always taking stuff out of context! Someday I'd like to read that transcript!"

The interviewee has taken the question and atomized it, spewing a fog of vague nonsense out as an answer, which works to his advantage regardless of where the listener's sympathies lie.

What amazes me is that reporters and interviewers always seem to be defeated by The Fog (especially when it's coming out of Dick Cheney's mouth) but if someone uses the same technique in everyday life, they're instantly identified as a stupid asshole:

Wife: Did you mail in the bills today?

Husband: If you want an answer to that, you need to go to the post office and search through the bins and see if the bills are there. Booyah! 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by Dagwood :: permalink ::

Dagwood's done a lovely satire of this worthless rag.

Me likey. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

Oh President Bush, must you stake your claim on destiny?

Hey, what's that on your shoulder right there....oh....it's a big chip. Mind the hubris, George.

In many nations in the Middle East, countries of great strategic importance, democracy has not yet taken root. And the questions arise: Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom and never even have a choice in the matter?

Listen, if you give them democracy, they will vote for an Islamic regime. So, you're not going to give them democracy...are you.

We're working closely with Iraqi citizens as they prepare a constitution, as they move toward free elections and take increasing responsibility for their own affairs.

I think by "working closely" he meant "handpicking elected officials". 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

Bobby Hatfield is dead. He was a "Righteous Brother."

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: they weren't brothers, therefore there's no possible way they could be righteous. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

So, this NY Times piece isn't that surprising. The Bush Administration simply doesn't talk about anything bad...it's part of their strategy. If they don't talk about it, it stays out of the news cycle. If someone else brings it up, they accuse them of playing politics.

There is one interesting quote from this article, however:

At the time of that war [the first Gulf ware], the Pentagon barred media coverage of coffins arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware. The ban was relaxed during the Clinton administration, but then reinforced by the second Bush administration in the run-up to the current hostilities in Iraq.

Looks like he learned a couple of tricks from daddy... 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

Don't go messin' with the Reagans. The Republicans simply won't stand for it.

The announcement would perhaps the first time a major broadcast network has ever removed a completed project from its schedule because of political pressure and under the threat of an advertising boycott.

Such are the times we live in. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

So, Linda Tripp get's paid $600k because the Defense Department invaded her privacy.

I guess taping someone's phone conversations isn't an invasion of privacy. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::

Without going into all the unpleasant and boring details of how I came to be the owner of the Worst Digital Camera Ever, the Kodak DC290, let me tell you the reasons why I hate it and why you should never, ever, in any circumstance, buy a DC290 and also should use extreme caution when buying a digital camera from Kodak, maker of the World's Shittiest Digital Camera:

• Batteries last about an hour!
  
  This is for normal use. I carry a spare set and a recharger for them around with me wherever I have my camera with me. If you use the flash, the batteries drain much faster. If you use the video display, you get about a half hour out of them.
  


• It's bulky! It weighs about 300 pounds! (ok, that's an exaggeration)
  
  A friend once said, "Hey, whatcha got there?!?" when I took my camera out of the the special backpack I keep it in because it's so huge and bulky that he thought it must have all kinds of exciting special features on it, like video capture and a wireless connection to the Internet. But it doesn't. It's a piece of crap!
  


• The "manual" viewfinder is crooked!
  
  No shit. If you use the low-tech "hole in the camera" viewfinder to take pictures, every single fucking one of them will turn out crooked. This is why I must hold my camera at an angle to compensate when I take pictures. This makes me mad at Kodak, maker of the World's Shittiest Digital Camera. Why not use the digital display thingy then? Well, because then I'd have to change the freakin' batteries every half an hour!
  


• It often decides when it will obey instructions to take photo and when it won't.
  
  I call my camera "Old Number Seven" because it acts like Mad Jack's mule on Grizzly Adams. Point the camera at something. Press "take the fucking picture" button. What happens about 25 percent of the time? NOTHING! This light on the back starts flashing for no good reason and I have to shut it down and restart it in order to take the goddamn picture. People have said to me, "Aw, that's the just way digital cameras are..." Really? If that's so, then DIGITAL CAMERAS SUUUUUUUCK!

Anyway, if you're walking around Albuquerque and you see this guy holding a camera at a 45-degree angle and saying, "Come on Seven, come on Seven..." followed by a stream of ear-melting expletives, that guy is probably me.

Time for my medication. Bye. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by Dagwood :: permalink ::

The Washington Post has a fascinating graphic charting Emperor Bush's approval rating since taking office. Among other things, it shows that we, the American people, are a pretty reactionary bunch.

The other thing I find fascinating about it is, if you look at the individual issues, his approval rating isn't that stellar. Most Americans approve of his job on the campaign against terrorism, but pretty much everything else is a loser: taxes, the economy, Iraq (but wait...isn't that part of the campaign against terrorism?), the budget deficit.

Dems take heed...drop the flag/gun issue and stay on message. People don't have jobs. 

:::::::::::::::::::::: posted by tj :: permalink ::