Now I'm REALLY upset!
Last night I watched a great doc called Howard Zinn: You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train. I was spellbound, but Zinn is the type of person who floats my boat anyway. Still, there's plenty I didn't know about him. If you haven't seen this doc, here's a little taste:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehc3V1g5pm0
After I watched the film, I thought about how a generation of old-school activists is dying off. Though Zinn is still very much alive, he turns 86 this year. Not a hell of a lot of time left.
This thought came to me because of all the calls at TPM for muzzling ourselves in response to Obama's resounding failure to lead on the FISA Amendments. I naturally take Zinn's view, which is that now is the perfect time to act up, speak out, protest such an outrageous stance. Speaking out is what democracy is.
But that's me. I may be Obama's age, but I'm an old-school radical in my soul.
Little did I know that while I was having these thoughts about Zinn last night, George Carlin's heart finally failed to continue beating. I didn't learn this news until this morning, but I was struck by the reality of my prediction. See, George Carlin was an old-school activist too. His shit-disturber message and reflex was the same as Zinn's (and mine, I guess), he just packaged it differently. I am in mourning that Carlin is gone.
In tribute to Carlin, here's one of my favorites, his wisdom about America and war:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaS2bRGS86c&feature=related
(Hope I did this right. This is my first post.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehc3V1g5pm0
After I watched the film, I thought about how a generation of old-school activists is dying off. Though Zinn is still very much alive, he turns 86 this year. Not a hell of a lot of time left.
This thought came to me because of all the calls at TPM for muzzling ourselves in response to Obama's resounding failure to lead on the FISA Amendments. I naturally take Zinn's view, which is that now is the perfect time to act up, speak out, protest such an outrageous stance. Speaking out is what democracy is.
But that's me. I may be Obama's age, but I'm an old-school radical in my soul.
Little did I know that while I was having these thoughts about Zinn last night, George Carlin's heart finally failed to continue beating. I didn't learn this news until this morning, but I was struck by the reality of my prediction. See, George Carlin was an old-school activist too. His shit-disturber message and reflex was the same as Zinn's (and mine, I guess), he just packaged it differently. I am in mourning that Carlin is gone.
In tribute to Carlin, here's one of my favorites, his wisdom about America and war:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaS2bRGS86c&feature=related
(Hope I did this right. This is my first post.)
Advertisement
I love that Carlin rant - classic.
Also, for those of us with little kids, we'll miss George Carlin narrating Thomas and Friends.
June 23, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Today Terry Gross replayed excerpts from her Fresh Air interviews with Carlin from 1990 and 2004. Damn, he was smart. In one segment he talks about his love of language.
June 23, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn kids. Whatever. I refuse to apologize to them for prattling on about the world-historical narrator every time Thomas came on. Give it 20 years and they're gonna be askin' me about Carlin, and that's when it becomes my turn to roll my eyes.
June 24, 2008 5:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I saw that documentary a couple of years ago. I did enjoy it, but I had read his book (of the same name You Can't be Neutral on a Moving Train), which I enjoyed much more. Don't get me wrong, I love Howard Zinn, but the documentary made me a little uncomfortable with the idolization of him. He has certainly spent his whole life being an activist and I have so much respect and admiration for him. He writes articles for Z magazine and he, like others of his generation, is extremely skeptical of the election, and thinks that people are getting much too worked up about it, because in the end nothing is going to change. He might be right, but god I hope not.
anyway, nice post.
June 23, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's true, the move is a love letter to Zinn, and a rather slow-moving one at that. Since I haven't read the book, I could ignore the idolatry and focus on the development of his ideas.
Two pivotal moments came when he went to his first labor demonstration in Times Square as a kid (amazing footage of a demonstration), and when he bombed a French town during WWII and learned later that it was one of the first uses of napalm by the U.S. He narrates the stories in a calm, storytelling style (quite the opposite persona from Carlin's stage persona).
June 23, 2008 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you readytoblowagasket. Great post.
And a good reminder of how similiar we really all are around here. Just this morning somebody cited Zinn as a reason for me to calm down about FISA (they argued that if I reread A People's History of the United States I'd have a different perspective.) But Zinn leads you to another conclusion entirely. As for myself, I'm familiar with his work but was never an ardent fan of his for whatever reason.
But we all know his work because most of us around here do share some intellectual foundations.
Cool.
June 23, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, destor. But I am still in debt to you for all the great posts and fall-down funny comments you've written at this site.
I'm also still trying to figure out how People's History would in any way relate to FISA, espouse abrogating our rights, or advocate temperance. That's a stumper.
June 24, 2008 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
People's History is a fairly objective (in my opinion) look at parts of our history that we would rather not see in their full horror and context. It also holds out the notion that huge changes are needed and necessary for every new generation, but the imperatives and methods change with each.
I think if Zinn was a little more optimistic, he would understand why I cite his book as evidence that FISA is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. When we have a 230 year history of violating the Constitution as a matter of tradition, then a single vote on a single bill is hardly important in the grand struggle.
I think he is also a pragmatist, which can easily turn to cynicism if left unattended, so losing a battle to win the war would resonate with his crowd of activists.
Just one man's opinion, as always.
June 24, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
One thing Zinn maintains consistently across the generations is that change comes from the bottom up.
June 24, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I absolutely agree, which is precisely what I think we are seeing this year. It's just that we have the added bonus of getting a top-down assist in the effort this time. I, for one, plan to use that for all its worth once the opportunity presents itself come January 20, 2009.
June 24, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hum.
Before Zinn, there was Dos Passos:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dos_Passos
I think anyone that suggests Zinn should have read this FIRST, or fuck off with your pomposity.
Oh, reading through "smoke and steel" by Carl Sandburg might not hurt either.
http://www.bartleby.com/231/
Not to mention browsing through the Library of Congress:
http://www.loc.gov/index.html
I'm sorry, but I'm getting a little tired of people that seem to worship Zinn, who is kinda like a pizza roll before the six course gourmet meal that is primary and contemporary sources.
There are archives at the New York Times and the New Republic that would knock your socks off. Read op debates about social security AT THE TIME it was being debated in Congress, and you might hear some old familiar strawmen.
Primary sources are always best. Here at TPM, you can assume that the majority of people have moved some way beyond "Zinn."
'kay?
Thanks.
June 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, Worker Bee, how about you fuck off first? Zinn is a good starting point for people who have been let down by the US school system or have an overly rosy view of American history. Talk about pompous.
June 25, 2008 5:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
You don't think you've been maybe pushing Zinn a leetle too hard? What are you? A book seller?
Come on.
People don't need to spend $20 when there is better information out there. Actual women and minorities who actually lived through those times.
Sorry I tried to broaden your narrow world view. It won't happen again. All hail Zinn. The first AND last word on women and minorities in America.
June 25, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bee, I admire Zinn's work at Spelman College. I admire that he has a conscience. I admire that he speaks out.
I admire his act of writing even more than the finished product.
June 25, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought he had a conscious, too. Until this:
http://www.powells.com/biblio/9781583227596
Understand, Gasket, I am highly sympathetic to Zinns POV. This sickened me, though.
June 25, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
In support of Bee
Rather than cite lengthy academic tomes correctly making the case that Zinn has practiced a lot of hackery, which I don't have time to look up,
I think this anonymous reviewer on Amazon gets Zinn right succinctly.
He's a revisionist propagandist, a hack as to facts, not a revisionist historian worthy of respect as an historian. He sold out history for agitprop.
To the names that the anonymous reviewer suggests as more honest leftist historians, I would add Garry Wills. Highly recommended, he's a great writer as well as historian.
What the anonymous reviewer gets right there is that Howard Zinn fandom is actually of interest as to cultural history of the 1980's, The popularity of People's History of the United States is part and parcel of the whole Political Correctness thing blooming in the 1980's. Definitely not to be taken at face value, though, as practicing history that even attempts accuracy. It's ironic that the postmodernist movement (which more honestly tried to approach the problem of "you can't be neutral on a moving train") was blooming at the same time, and when it did so it was often used to deconstruct classic capitalist-oriented narratives created for pop culture consumption. Meanwhile, Zinn was way ahead of them, working on constructing a Marxist alternative narrative as purposedly slanted and inaccurate or more so than any of the American history textbooks written before it.
If you want to read 80's Marxist agitprop done for pop tastes, Zinn is your man. Read some
P.S. The documentary on Zinn sounds to me like it's part of the start of a retro revival 80's thing. I wouldn't be surprised if a resurrection of Andrea Dworkin is next. And Bee, you rightly mention the ability of people to easily read original sources now on the internet, to do their own history research. But most won't do that, I still see most people looking for someone to do a narrative from that for them, this is why I am so skeptical of some of the internet triumphalist blather.
June 25, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
oops, my Amazaon link didn't work. I am going to quote the review in full in case this link doesn't work again:
As long as I am here, I'd like to add, regarding the Manichean thing,
no one who dislikes Bush types and other conservatives adjusting the facts to fit their narratives should be supporting Howard Zinn's methods. He plays the same exact game, only from the opposite side.
June 25, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh and Bee, I am hoping that retro revival doesn't start up in earnest until after the election, as Obama's foreign policy advisory team is like a top ten wanted list for Zinniacs and their buddies the Chomskyites. :-) If he wins and doesn't get out of Iraq soon enough, though, we will see it. If so, it will be interesting to see a minority face being painted as the enemy....
June 25, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm quite sure we will arta. I'm afraid Zinn isn't particularly good ammo against it.
:(
Thank you.
June 25, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Judging by some of your comments, no, I would say many people here have not moved beyond Zinn. Based on the comments here, I would guess that many people haven't moved beyond their navel.
June 25, 2008 5:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now this is something that a David Seaton might say.
June 25, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I previously posted in Oregonactivist's thread on this issue, I believe that Obama should be held to account for any failure to filibuster or block the FISA bill.
As many of you may recall, I was a rabid supporter of Obama over the primary, but I will not stand by for any "Reid-styled" pussyfooting on this bill. Similarly, I won't stand for "pissy-pants" democrat parsing or excuses for inaction on this shitstained bill, by anyone. If you choose to defend inaction, prepare for a shitstorm of ridicule from myself and others.
June 23, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to say, Centerpunch, the strong reaction against FISA by many TPMers has given me renewed faith in my comrades here (little nod to Howie again). I was afraid that 8 years of despotic rule by the Bush administration had completely broken our country's spirit. I was afraid that I was one of the few ready to blow a gasket about some issues (other than racism, I mean).
(I adopted the nick, btw, as a description of how I felt about the government's ineptitude and callousness over the drowning of New Orleans in 2005, and I've kept it ever since.)
But FISA surprised me. Suddenly people I've dueled with were saying exactly what I would say, and with the same fierceness of conviction. So count me in on remaining steadfast about FISA.
I realize the bill will likely pass the Senate, and I don't have any answers yet, except to recognize that we can and should do better.
June 23, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Gasket,
I'm glad to see that something pushed you to the blogging-point (though the specific inciting incident fills me with bile.)
June 23, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Slouch. Thanks for stopping by. Looking forward to your next post. :-)
June 24, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
You did it right.
June 23, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kudos for a fine first post, though I rarely agree with your biting comments on other posts. Nonetheless, your points are well taken. Obama has no problem positioning himself opposite McCain on Iraq, yet he hews to the center on civil liberties. Courage would win more votes than playing it safe. I think it's time we expected a little more from our candidate. And I am grieving the loss of Carlin, too.
June 23, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cite other civil liberties where Obama's stance fails to please you. FISA is about wiretapping. There are more aspects to the Fourth Amendment, and to civil liberties. Obama, unlike McCain, supports habeas corpus. He supports closing Gitmo. He believes that police officers should be required to video record interrogations to prevent false confessions. He supported the Illinois moratorium on the death penalty.
I also hope that Obama exercises a futile filibuster (futile because the votes are there for cloture and it will do NO good). I would love to see it. But some have gone over the top in characterizes Obama as the second coming of George Bush for something he hasn't even had an opportunity to do (filibuster).
Last, I hope that Centerpunch and others here will spend just as much time excoriating Reid and his colleagues as they do Obama. This notion that Obama has a higher duty than other Democrats to stop this is beyond ludicrous. They all carry the same moral responsibility here. Every minute spent crucifying Obama on this should be matched with equal minutes crucifying every other Dem, in either chamber, who voted yes. That's all I ask.
Yet on TPM, there is disproportionate criticism of Obama vis a vis other Democrats (particularly the ones who already voted).
June 24, 2008 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Constitution's prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure is a critical civil liberty, albeit one of many. Obama garners more criticism than his Congressional colleagues precisely because he is running for national office and is therefore subject to the opinion of every American voter, not just those in a specific Congressional or Senate district. It is true that the opinions of every member of Congress should be subject to scrutiny, but Obama's stance on FISA signals a willingness to sacrifice principle for fractional increases in support. Had he stood on principle, he might have gained just as much. Criticizing him does not mean I don't support him. I've come too far and worked too hard for Obama to abandon him, and his stands on other issues — including habeas corpus and other civil liberties — is far superior to any Republican's views. But the criticism is fair, nonetheless.
June 24, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
# Howard Zinn points for posting. He'd like that.
Beyond Carlin, the one I really miss is Bill Hicks. Always lots of music with his exploding politics, religion, sex.
June 23, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't recall Zinn running for president to prevent an additional four years of the world's worst presidency. Carlin either.
When you're in the position of running against an opponent whose best quality appears to be truthiness, and in addition you're a multiracial, elite, Harvard-educated constitutional law professor and inexperienced Senator, then you cannot always afford to be as outspoken as others who have little to lose for an entire country.
The best way to lose more of the fourth amendment, or fail to restore the rights already violated, is to elect McCain. Does anyone really believe that Carlin would have dumped on Obama and help him lose?
I wasn't Neutral on a Moving Train in 1968. I refused to vote for that warmonger Humphrey, instead voting for the Socialist (the next "best" thing to today's Nader), and helping to get Nixon elected. I stood on my fucking principles.
Like the ex-smoker who campaigns against smokers, I campaign against the myopic tree-gazers.
June 23, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is criticizing one action of his helping him lose? And it's exactly because he's a Harvard educated constitutional law professor that so many are angry and disappointed. I'm not advocating withdrawing support, monetarily or any other way. To brush this under the rug only serves to reinforce the caricatured Obama supporter which is neither beneficial to him, his candidacy, our government, or our country.
June 23, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is said that both McCain and WJ Clinton don't understand today's political ethos -- the Internet both preserves one's past and communicates more quickly and widely. This site is included in that ethos. We also cannot retract what has been posted and cached, and anyone can read our thoughts not of the day but of the instant.
If this and similar complaints about the cowardly turncoat Obama sway uncommitted voters or falsely inform the traditional media, then the complaints have been harmful. For example, the vituperative intercourse between a few Obama and Clinton supporters led the media to suggest the Conventional Unwisdom that Obama could not win over older women or hispanics or poor whites without advanced education.
Canards like these dominate today's media and prevent Obama from getting his message out, the message he hopes to get him a win.
If you're upset (and I think that immunity is overblown compared to really serious stuff like nuclear proliferation, politicization of the Justice Department, torture, habeas corpus, etc.), then let the Obama campaign know. Don't persuade fence-sitters that Obama is not worth trusting or enemies that Obama is losing support.
In today's political atmosphere, trivia gets exaggerated and becomes unduly influential. Real issues or clear displays of character become lost in the noise.
June 23, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems to me that if you want to go to a web site where Obama is either not criticized or criticized only in the gentlest language that you could go to one of his campaign sites.
People come here to talk about issues. Who wins the election is secondary to that conversation. Don't ask people to mute their thoughts and feelings.
June 23, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on, Destor. I've seen you more reasonable than this.
He wasn't saying Obama shouldn't be criticized. He said the criticism should be reasonable. Expecting a junior senator from Illinois to change 230 years of Constitutional violations with one vote or one speech on a single bill is unrealistic.
He also advocated that we put this into perspective with the bigger issues that continue to pollute the landscape like rotten tomatoes left in the sun. Smell that stench? Way worse than FISA.
I truly believe what he is advocating is a return to our senses and a little solidarity at this critical time in the general election. We need to stick together and perhaps temper our criticism in public forums with a little bit of strategic necessity.
Barack has to run and be elected by all Americans not just the progressive netroots who take every difference of opinion as a reason to raise our rhetorical swords and charge into battle.
June 24, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think TPM's policy is no vituperative intercourse between co-commenters.
June 24, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's okay if you start by asking: "May I proceed to the next level of vituperativity?"
June 24, 2008 8:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
As long as we don't have to ask Daddy Marshall for permission.
June 24, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know how this is even a valid complaint of Zinn, exregis. Zinn has lived his life in the service of making a difference. As a teacher, activist and writer, he has been better than a president.
Um, actually, about politicians Carlin said, "The public sucks. Fuck hope. Fuck hope." But you might not want to watch that clip.
June 23, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's fucking classic Gasket. Seriously. The timing, the delivery...classic.
June 23, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
To use Zinn as a exemplar for Obama is unfair to both. One is trying to improve the lot of 310,000,000 people didactically, the other by running for and serving as president.
Let's look at Democratic Party mindset: some Moslems are complaining that Obama is not visiting mosques whereas he is visiting churches and temples. Obama is slighting a reasonably large group of supporters (more Moslems than Jews in the USA, for example).
Yes, Obama is somewhat defaming Moslems and that is wrong. Should Obama take a whirlwind tour of mosques now to show his interest or should he wait until after the election? In a reasonably decent democracy we know the answer. In George Carlin's world (a man I appreciated back in the sixties, and whom I resembled later with gray ponytail and short beard), we also know the answer. And they are not the same.
Republicans stick together even when it is not in their interests or when it is against their principles, like Collins in the Senate on Iraq timetable resolutions. We Democrats need to stick together as well, enthusiastically, until we neutralize the widespread poison in the administration -- the Supreme Court, the Justice Department, the CIA, the Orwellian treatment of science and life, our worldwide reputation, and on and on and on.
So go ahead and tear down the only nominee we have. Purity is much, much more important than starting to fix an entire nation. Noli turbare circulos meos.
June 24, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great comment and great Archimedes quote that I had to look up.
Sine qua non is a good one as well. We must actually take control before we expect ourselves to change anything.
The general election is part of that process and may require sacrificing some our precious progressive purity in pursuit of a potentially larger purpose.
June 24, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's stance has nothing to do with the GE. That's bullshit.
June 24, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's stance has to do with preserving the complicity of Dems' knowledge about Bush's illegal spying before 9/11. Pelosi, Harman, Rockefeller, Graham all knew about it.
June 24, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's stance is that as an outsider there is only so much change he can advocate from within that corrupt system. As president, he has the ability to completely change the national narrative whole-cloth.
To expect presidential performance out of a junior senator from Illinois is not reasonable, your tin-foil hat theories notwithstanding.
I have no doubt that Barack is far more aware of the what the existing power structure of this country has wrought in the United States Congress. I also have no doubt that should be so fortunate as to elect him president that he will make it his mission to convince us to fix it.
Because, really, this is all our fault.
Since every American finally won the right to vote with 1965's Voting Rights Act, average turnout for most primary elections has been criminally negligent. We have failed in our Constitutional responsibilities. We are fully to blame for the vile conditions under which Obama must now succeed, so perhaps we should take a little more responsibility and provide a little room to maneuver.
One last question: Do you think throwing the entire leadership of Congress under the bus is the best way to win this election?
June 24, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tweet. Two minute penalty - Use of "under the bus."
Term no longer acceptable in polite discourse.
June 24, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about: Toss the entire Congressional leadership to the wolves?
June 24, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Toss Reid and Pelosi, that's for sure.
June 24, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
See, we can agree on something. :O)
June 24, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You misread me. I wasn't doing that.
I was making connections between what Zinn says about speaking out and the hot debates in the comment threads about FISA. Zinn backs me up, since I've been speaking out against FISA.
I haven't actually spoken out against Obama. Naturally I think he should take the position I believe in. I know he won't, which is why I didn't support him. I know why too: It's not because this issue will turn the election, it's because the Dems are complicit in allowing Bush to break the law.
I'm not making Obama responsible for past actions of his fellow party members, only future actions, since he now leads our party. I'm not tearing him down, I'm holding him to his obligation to serve me. In that way I'm being very Zinn. :-)
I repeat: This has nothing to do with electability in the fall. It has to do with preserving the damage the Dems have already done to the Constitution by abrogating their responsibility for oversight since 2001.
June 24, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
KRUSTY: I could even tell the FCC to take a hike. Look at this list of words they won't let me say on the air. (Hands Bart a piece of paper.)
BART: Aww! All the good ones. Hmm, I never even heard of number nine
KRUSTY: That's two-ing thirteen while she's eleven-ing your five.
BART: Can I keep this?
KRUSTY: Sure, no twelve off my ass.
June 23, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
best quotation ever
-comic book guy
June 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good lord, gasket - I can't believe this is your first post. You've been so active in the TPM community for so long.
Good job. I agree. FISA has me very disappointed.
I'm curious: You've long been a (fair-minded) critic of Obama. How would your opinion of Obama change if he participated in a filibuster, or managed to revise the legislation in committee to drop immunity?
With Obama as the more-than-de facto head of the Democratic party now, it's hard to imagine that this legislation has even gotten as far as it has without his tacit support.
June 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Allsburg. I know, can you believe this is my first? I've only been commenting here since January. But I jumped right into the comment threads; I've never been much of a lurker, I guess. :-)
I don't see how Obama can get away with filibustering the bill at this point, although he seems to be suggesting today that he might. I agree that Dems in both houses are complicit, but I think the Senate needs to make a huge show of defending civil liberties.
Can the Dems win the WH and defeat this bill? I think they can if they are united behind a strong message of revising it. Can the Dems win the WH and pass the bill without revisions? Probably. They can also lose, and that makes me feel ill when I think about it.
The question is, do the Dems as a party have a strong message? Not that I can see.
I recognize Obama's in a tough spot. The right is tracking his every move on this.
If the Senate passes the bill before the 4th of July, Dems will have given the Republicans a big fat red-white-and-blue present. I'd much prefer they leave it hanging or defeat it before the holiday break.
I know I didn't exactly answer your question. What are your thoughts about what Obama should do?
June 23, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a pretty funny link. I always thought Obama was promising to personally filibuster telecom immunity. A real Mr. Smith deal. Looks like he intends to vote against cloture if someone moves it and call it a day.
June 23, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Each journey starts with but a step, grasshopper.
Sorry BG, I had to.
June 23, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just make sure you look both ways before you take that step, right?
June 24, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah. I give him the grasshopper schtick, and wake up to this.
Harsh, man, harsh.
June 24, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somehow, I can't get very terrified that dittoheads who believe Obama is a terrorist Muslim country club elitist are going to have the first clue how he voted on FISA or why.
Bush is going to sign the FISA bill. If you love Bush, you'll be happy. If you are one of the 70+% of Americans who don't approve of Bush, you might think voting against whatever he is signing was a good idea.
June 23, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is what I'm talking about: Ever since Obama's FISA fumble, bluebell sounds like BevD.
June 23, 2008 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
My expectations are low, but I think that the senate should yank immunity from the house bill in committee and pass it (or fail to get cloture). Then it'll go nowhere (again), or the President will have to veto the bill. In any event, only serious wonks will be able to understand that Dems killed it. Once you start talking about cloture, or reconciling legislation, 98% of the American public doesn't know what the hell is going on, and certainly aren't going to blame Democrats when they "wanted" to pass FISA legislation.
June 24, 2008 1:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
'Bout time Gasket! Keep 'em coming!
June 23, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
O Gasket! You can't fool me - you are always looking for a gasket to blow. This was like a gift to you from Obama.
It's like extra gaskets to blow, so keep blowing, baby!
LOL!
June 23, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena, that was funny!
June 23, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed! :-)
June 23, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gasket: you had all those opinions and you never saw the Zinn doc? My, my. But I do applaud your efforts to educating yourself.
Here are two more docs to look at:
MANUFACTURING CONSENT
THE CORPORATION: you can watch this for free - legally - on the net:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3969792790081230711
Each journey starts with but a step, grasshopper.
June 23, 2008 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gasket, I figure you will ignore clearthinker's rude comment, but I just want to say that it really has honed it's patronizing comments to the point that, for me at least, they represent the state of the art. I'm going to copy this one and recycle it. I just can't imagine anyone doing it better.
June 23, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Makes me feel sad for the rest, BG. ;-)
June 23, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gasket. That hurt me. Thanks for reviving those revolting lyrics.
Just for that, I'm gonna ask Clearthinker is he could loan you that book from his library. Maybe he could bring it over?
Who knew Zinn would be gettin' all the laughs, and not that possum? Ark. Ark. Mars Attacks.
June 23, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gasket never ignores me. Even when he promises to, he can't just get me out of his head.
He clearly recognizes quality when he sees it.
June 23, 2008 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do seem to find you irresistible, clearthinker.
June 23, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I admit I have a bit of a backlog to get through, clearthinker. It is funny that I hadn't seen the Zinn doc until now, but the timing, for me, ended up being perfect. I have seen Manufacturing Consent and expect to see The Corporation now that you provided a link. Lucky me, it's free! Thanks!
June 23, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, we're all George Carlin and Mollie Ivins (and MKLK and Ghandi, etc.) now.
June 23, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
MLK
June 23, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gasket. :) Such a gentleman.
Time for an avatar, methinks.
June 23, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gentleman. Ha! I seem to have concealed my white trash roots pretty well. ;-)
I'm having avatar commitment issues.
June 23, 2008 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dr. Gasket.
If you're looking for avatars, I got this one half-price. Granted, the other side of this head isn't nearly as attractive, but if you find it out there, I suspect the price would be appealing.
June 23, 2008 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you overpaid.
June 23, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just for that, I'm gonna continue with your Carly song.
"Nobody does it half as good as you
Baby you're the best."
Yeah. How's THAT feel, eh? Painful, eh? A song like that smearing up yer 1st post! Hell, we may all get together and sing it to you....
You're probably right about the overpaying though. Damn. Wonder what Genghis paid for that freakin' collar? I could use a hat like that.
June 24, 2008 12:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay! Okay! I'm sorry! You're right, I was wrong. Some comments are really off-limits.
I still have James Bond on my mind from the other day.
June 24, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Read your title, dude. It attracted every upset & imbalanced mind in the tri-state area. How else did you think we'd respond?
Baby, you're the best.
June 24, 2008 12:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just thought they'd stop by to see what in the hell I was bitching about now.
June 24, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think there's hope on FISA, just look at what people's abuse accomplished today - "Vero possumus" is now extinct!
Verrrrrro Posssssssumus. (I just love the sound of it.)
However. If anyone was paying attention, the fact that the campaign approved such a completely idiotic "Seal" a couple of days ago MIGHT just signal that the campaign's brains are elsewhere. (Sorry, they're likely not being applied to FISA either.) They're planning HRC this week, massive Hollywood fund-raiser, shifting staff out into all 50 states..... So, I donno.... I'm just gonna sit back for a few days, and wait & see if the grown-ups return to work soon. Bein' hopeful. Or whether..... this was the work of the adults. (Egads.)
But til then, my battle-cry can only be....
Verrrrrrrro Possssumus!
June 24, 2008 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, you're so retro - check out Radiohead's remake, that's the bomb.
June 24, 2008 4:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody Does it Better (hope this is the best Radiohead clip on Youtube - Flash keeps cutting out on me)
June 24, 2008 4:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unrelated, but in the vein of recommending beautiful falsetto covers, you might enjoy this.
June 24, 2008 5:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yah, I know..... How the mighty are fallen.
June 24, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
The spy who loved me. Fits with FISA.
June 24, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can't believe that it's your first time either. You've always seemed so "experienced." Was it everything that you dreamed it would be?
Congrats on a nice first post. I must quibble of course. Other than exregis upthread, I haven't seen people argue that anyone at TPM should be "muzzled." Most of those arguing against critics of Obama's FISA position have been arguing that telecom immunity is not that important, not that Democrats should be never criticize Obama. Of course, we may not have been reading the same threads.
So criticize away. I just don't happen to agree with you in this case.
And in case, keep on blogging.
June 23, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Genghis. I think. I'm actually thrilled you graced my thread with your amazing technicolor dreamshirt. Livens up the joint.
It's weirder to post than I thought it would be. I have to keep reminding myself that I'm the one who wrote this. Maybe I'm in denial. Maybe I'm too shy for this.
I think destor can back me up on the militant muzzling movement, since he's been hammered to a pulp since Friday. Good thing he's got lots of padding.
June 24, 2008 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, quibble aside, it was meant as a compliment.
That's just because it's your first time.
I was one of his antagonists. But not because I wanted him to shut up. Heck, this has been the first good debate had since Clinton conceded. Though I can easily believe that there were people telling you all to shut up. I just didn't see them.
June 24, 2008 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
THE Gasket posts!
Almost blowing his gaskets...
...and admits to avatar commitment issues.
Puppet Theater replay at 11:00 am.
As for CT, he calls you "grasshopper" because he likes ya. 'Tis an affectionate gesture. I felt it on another thread. He looks like he's made of stone, but he's made of Kool-aid too. ;-)
June 23, 2008 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently only chicks with swords get me.
I'm lucky to have you around!
June 24, 2008 1:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not only chicks with swords.
June 24, 2008 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely upset about my 4th Amendment Rights. Trolling the communication ocean for possible threats to America is a recipe for disaster.
Two questions:
1) The Dems had this issue all but won, by public opinion and by their staunch and lasting united opposition. Do you think House (and/or Senate) Dems are getting something in return for capitulating? If so, what? Karl Rove testimony on the USA scandal, Hatch Acti Violations, etc? Respect for Congressional sub poenae in general? Those millions of missing emails? Is there anything that might make this worthwhile? If the Dems are getting anything in return, it may have to come at some later time, so as not to seem like an obvious deal.
2) Can legislation be passed in the next Congress to undo this legislation, should it pass, and revive the lawsuits, should they be dismissed? (If such legislation is passed, I guess we could just file new lawsuits, so perhaps whether the present ones are dismissed doesn't really matter..)
June 24, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Heckuva first post. Rec'd.
June 24, 2008 5:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
The immunity involved in this FISA bill is for CIVIL LIABILITY SUITS ONLY. We can still hold telecoms responsible for CRIMINAL ACTS in violating the 4th amendment.
For an analogy, remember the healthcare debate between Hillary and Obama. We argued that mandates would never fly because it would not pass. Obama was for the art of what is possible.
This is the same freaking thing people. If an adequate FISA bill was not passed, the Repubs would have a field day screaming about how the dems will not keep us safe. They would scream from the rooftops about how the dems would not even update the 1978 FISA bill to today's technology standards.
Come on people. We can still get these criminal asshats. The only thing that is given up is a handful of people filing lawsuits punitive damages. While that does suck, it is a small concession in the grand scheme of things.
June 24, 2008 7:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are you sure this isn't like his voting against caps on credit card interest rates because the caps were too high?
Why not wait to see what he does. He said he would filibuster telco immunity. Maybe he will. He'd look great on the floor of the Senate, his voice going, close to collapsing, but reading those recipes into the Congressional Record all night long.
June 24, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice job, Gasket. Add me to the list of those surprised that this is your first "post," though if you add all the comments, you'd have a mighty healthy blog of your own.
I'm definitely in the minority on this site - perhaps a minority of one, in fact - who was not terribly surprised or distressed by Obama's position on FISA. There really was little political upside in taking a stand on this and it would have given the Republicans a huge issue with which to bludgeon him in the election. I am, however, amused by the thrashing about of his more zealous followers who are shocked, shocked that the pure Senator Obama has taken a position they disagree with for political expediency, or worse, has taken a fairly centrist position he actually believes in, but that does not square with their vision of him as a liberal crusader. Did someone say triangulation? More on this to follow, I hope.
June 24, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congrats Gasket!!!! Your first post made it to #1 on the pop charts today. (in my best Casey Kasem voice) :)
June 24, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! Thanks to your help, mageduley (and everyone else). I'm shocked. Must be a slow news day. ;-)
June 24, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's stance is that as an outsider there is only so much change he can advocate from within that corrupt system. As president, he has the ability to completely change the national narrative whole-cloth.
To expect presidential performance out of a junior senator from Illinois is not reasonable, your tin-foil hat theories notwithstanding.
I have no doubt that Barack is far more aware of the what the existing power structure of this country has wrought in the United States Congress. I also have no doubt that should be so fortunate as to elect him president that he will make it his mission to convince us to fix it.
Because, really, this is all our fault.
Since every American finally won the right to vote with 1965's Voting Rights Act, average turnout for most primary elections has been criminally negligent. We have failed in our Constitutional responsibilities. We are fully to blame for the vile conditions under which Obama must now succeed, so perhaps we should take a little more responsibility and provide a little room to maneuver.
One last question: Do you think throwing the entire leadership of Congress under the bus is the best way to win this election?
June 24, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, that was Clinton's stance. Obama promised to change everything.
No it isn't. He wants to be president. Show me this Change I've Been Waiting For.
I can't read his mind. That's what I find frustrating. I can only read his actions.
I think Pelosi and Reid should go. I think any Dem who hasn't delivered should lose their seat. I think some will in November. I'm not the only one who's pissed.
June 24, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, many multi-term representatives and senators certainly deserve to lose their seats for sure.
You get no argument from me that anyone with more than two terms needs to go. That may get rid of effective legislators, but more than anything it will rejuvenate our democracy.
Thirty or forty years in Congress is way too long and not in keeping with the idea of the Citizen Statesman who serves and then returns to his community.
June 24, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
How George Carlin wanted us to remember him.
June 24, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
George taught me how to swear, and what to do with my stuff. *Sniff*. We're all going to miss him.
June 24, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please dont muzzle. Though FISA is as intrusive as Bill Clinton's Echelon, it could go beyond that. But Im up in arms about the precedents, no one knows what they are collecting, if they are filtering only intenational, should we set a bad precedent and immunize persons before evidence is presented, should we encourage companies to break the law because "the law is what the government says it is." Plus the whole did our president commit a crime thign, that ol chestnut again. Obama, I am watching and I have the audacity to hope.
June 24, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you really want to get upset about the world, and America's role in eff-ing it up, try reading Naomi Klein's book "Shock Doctrine" -- that will not only make the hair on the back of your neck stand up; it will also make you feel grief for the future of the world we have remade in Milton Friedman's image. Corporatism rules, and most of us don't even know it.
When they (i.e., the Bush administration) mobilize to sell off oil leases (which will encumber some of the nation's most precious natural resources for the benefit of private parties) for next to nothing, it is not becuaee the nation desperately needs increased oil production to deal more effectively with the "Global War on Terrorism" -- that';s the pretext, to be sure -- but the reality is that the GWOT isa a pretext for another GOP crony boondoggle, where national resources are subcontractred on the cheap to cronies. When did we the people authorize these clowns to replace good government and public service with a plan to subcontract the government to private interests on the cheap (to GOP cronies no less)? When did we sign off on that?
June 24, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Shock Doctrine is scary and compelling. Not for wimps.
At least see Amy Goodman's interview with Naomi Klein.
June 24, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
The smash and grap tactics of the Bush administration have been so obvious, and we've been so unable to cope with them that I'm afraid we're already beyond redemption.
June 24, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
There was a brief period right after Hurricane Katrina when the country was united like I'd never seen in my lifetime.
I remember the period distinctly, because I had turned to the Internet for information. I read everything I could find. Ex-military right-wingers were examining the satellite imagery until they found the submerged yellow school buses, which they then diligently counted and tallied estimates of seats per bus and how many people could have been bused out of danger.
It was the news media's worst moment, for which they've forgiven themselves and proceeded to distract us with trivia. It was photojournalists' best moment.
Only on the Internet was where I could see images of the living and the dead, like the body that had gotten caught on a fence and was exposed like a scarecrow to the elements, or the photo of people on a bridge while a dead body floated by on the river below.
The moment has passed. We've been corralled back into our tribes.
June 24, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do believe posting agrees with you, Gasket. You started off REALLY upset... and ended up.... very Zinn.
Good one.
June 24, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink