I'm Paul Iorio, and here's my regular column,
The Daily Digression, which covers pop culture and beyond...MY OTHER WEBSITES: My homepage is at: www.paulliorio.blogspot.com
My photography site is: www.paulioriophotos.blogspot.com
Free MP3s of my original songs at myspace.com/paulioriosongs; and at www.CYQO.com/pauliorio; and at www.xfmuploaded.co.uk/pauliorio.My other music site (featuring my lyrics) is at: www.pauliorio.blogspot.com
My satire and humor website is at: www.ioriosatire.blogspot.com
My original screenplay website is at: www.pauliorioscreenplays.blogspot.com.
You can respond to Iorio's writings at pliorio@aol.com. (I don't think comments are enabled on this site, by the way.) Original photos on this site are copyrighted.
All posted text on this website was, of course, written solely by Paul Iorio. _______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for October 9, 2008
The New Irreverence in Chinese ArtPuncturing sacred cows, post-Mao: Wang Guangyi's
"Chanel No. 5" (2001). [photo by Paul Iorio]
While traveling alone by local train behind the
Iron Curtain as a teenager in the 1970s, I saw a
lot of telling, unforgettable images of everyday
Communist life. One of the smaller memorable moments
happened after I was briefly detained in Zagreb by the
local authorities (for being an American, which was
sufficient cause for suspicion in those days). As
the train zipped along a rural area just north of
present-day Bosnia, I looked out the window and saw
hard-working, happy peasants using sickles -- as in
hammer and sickle -- to harvest crops in a vast field.
And I thought that it looked just like a Communist
Norman Rockwell painting, an almost laughably
idealized vision of collectivist propaganda -- except
it was a real-life tableau. (Of course, there were no
such soft-glow scenes once I crossed into the far more
brutal Bulgaria, where there were plenty of rifles at
checkpoints and unhappy-looking workers who had
supposedly lost their chains, but that's a whole
different story.)
I thought about those Croatian peasants with sickles the
other day, as I walked through the awesome new exhibition
of Chinese Communist propaganda art from the Mao era, on
display at the Berkeley (Calif.) Art Museum (BAM).
I wasn't in the museum for more than three minutes
before I began laughing out loud at some of the
romanticized posters and paintings depicting an always
benevolent Mao greeting grinning workers or leading
some heroic charge or posing with red icons of decades
past. A priceless collection.
Also on display at BAM, and equally fascinating, is
post-Mao, modern Chinese art that shows, beyond a doubt,
that China has been hurtling at warp speed toward not
just economic transformation but cultural and artistic
metamorphosis, too.
There are paintings that poke fun at Mao and at the
Communist traditions of his day, stuff that would have been
considered an absolute sacrilege a couple decades
ago -- and now is on open display.
There are Chinese equivalents here to Rothko, Pollock,
Klee and Warhol, and it's breathtaking to see how far
China has come in terms of aesthetic experimentation
and liberation.
The exhibition also includes one of the most inventive
and stunning installations I've seen in any museum,
Wang Du's "Strategie en Chambre" (1998), an expansive
work centered around the figures of Boris Yeltsin and
Bill Clinton surrounded by mountains of newspapers and
topped by pure magic: an uncountable number of multi-colored
toys hanging from the ceiling, giving the effect of a Pollock
painting in the air or of Klee mobiles that have multiplied
madly or of a swarm of exotic insects hovering.
An astonishing work.
The exhibition, "Mahjong: Contemporary Chinese Art From the
Sigg Collection," continues at BAM until January 4, 2009.
A bubbly Mao, oh-so-pleased to meet Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels, in one of the dozens of pieces of
Mao-era Communist propaganda art now on display at the
Berkeley Art Museum. [photo by Paul Iorio]
* *
Detail of Wang Du's "Strategie en Chambre," featuring
dozens of multi-colored toys hanging from the ceiling.[photo by Paul Iorio]
But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for October 8, 2008
Last night, one presidential candidate praised bin
Laden and the other said he wanted to kill him.
It was McCain who hailed bin Laden, calling him
and his fellow Afghan warriors of the 1980s
"freedom fighters," and it was Obama
who said he wanted to "kill bin Laden."
The contrasts were stark elsewhere, too. Obama looked
comfortable, poised, Kennedyesque. McCain seemed like
he was waiting for a next round of interrogation from
his Vietnamese captors.
Obviously, McCain was coached to play it sotto voce
so as not to appear angry, but it had the opposite
effect; his idea of soft-spoken resembled a tense
prisoner talking low so the guards wouldn't hear him.
There were also failed attempts at jokes by McCain,
recalling the humor-impaired Nixon and Goldwater.
"You know, like hair transplants -- I might need one
of them myself," McCain joked at one point. Nobody
laughed.
And when Tom Brokaw asked him who he'd choose to head
Treasury, McCain responded awkwardly, "Not you, Tom."
Brokaw rolled with it in a good-natured way, saying,
"For good reason." But it was an inappropriate,
are-you-running-for-something moment.
Brokaw was right in trying to make sure
the candidates abided by the rules they had agreed
to -- but why did they agree to such lousy rules
in the first place? No follow-up questions by the
moderator and no rebuttals by the contenders made for
a constricted, repressed debate, until Obama finally
overrode the rules near the end and got the flow of
free speech going again.
Obama hit his high note with a passage that had some
of the force of a Shakespeare soliloquy. "Sen.
McCain...suggested that I don't understand. It's true.
There are some things I don't understand. I don't
understand why we ended up invading a country that had
nothing to do with 9/11..."
Obama could've made more of that, expanding it into
a real tour de force with: "And I don't understand why
McCain thinks the private sector can take charge of
our health care system when it can't even manage itself.
And I don't understand why a senator who votes
with George Bush 95% of the time thinks that he
represents a change from Bush. And I don't
understand why...." Etc.
Incidentally, at the end of the debate when the
candidates were milling among the people onstage, I
caught a camera shot on one network that showed
Obama reaching out to shake McCain's hand, and
McCain refusing the handshake and diverting him
instead to Cindy McCain, whose hand he shook.
(To be sure, there may have been another moment,
off-camera, in which they did shake hands.)
Again, a bit Nixonish.
It looks more and more like McCain will be holding
a press conference on November 5th to say, "Well,
you won't have John McCain to kick around anymore."
But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for October 6, 2008
Barack Obama has been taken to task
for his past associations, however remote,
with radicals from decades past. Isn't it time
the media started focusing on John McCain's defense
of right-wing extremists and outright fascists
associated with South Vietnam's Ky and Thieu
regimes of the 1960s?
McCain, of course, served in the U.S. Navy in defense
of Thieu and Ky, so one can understand his personal
reluctance to denounce the South Vietnamese leaders
who he sacrificed so much to support. He evidently
doesn't want to admit those five-and-a-half years in
a North Vietnamese prison were served for a big mistake.
Now that the passions of the Vietnam era have cooled
a bit, perhaps McCain can bring himself to say what's
obvious to most Americans today: Thieu and Ky
were neo-fascists, governing without popular support,
whose human rights violations equaled (or virtually
equaled) those of the North Vietnamese.
Ky, in particular, is indefensible by any measure of
modern mainstream political thought. Here's Ky in
his own words: "People ask me who my heroes are. I
have only one: Hitler. We need four or five Hitlers
in Vietnam," he told the Daily Mirror in July 1965.
Why does McCain, to this day, still voice support,
at least implicitly, for Ky and Thieu? At the very
least, McCain should, however belatedly, unequivocally
condemn Ky's praise of Hitler, if he hasn't already.
(My own research has yet to turn up a clipping in
which McCain has been significantly critical of
either leader.)
And why don't we hear outrage from pundits and
politicians about his support for Ky?
Yeah, I know, it was the policy of the U.S. government
at the time to back Ky and Thieu, but that's no
defense. If Nuremberg taught us anything, it's that
you can't hide behind I-was-only-following-orders or
it-was-the-policy-of-my-government when
defending your individual actions in wartime.
Maybe McCain thinks Ky is a maverick. Maybe
he thinks Hitler is a maverick, too.
Look, my dear late dad quite literally broke his
back as a U.S. paratrooper fighting against Hitler's
soliders in Germany and in Belgium. And he was among
those who busted open the gates of Hitler's slave camps
in western Germany, spring of 1945. What he witnessed
turned his stomach for the next six decades, and he'd
tell me about what he saw that day as a 19-year-old,
but only reluctantly, because it was such a bad memory.
So I know what a true patriot looks like.
A mere several decades later, we're supposed to
stand by silently as a major presidential candidate
says, "It's cool to support a guy who supports Hitler."
So now
I'm nauseous -- about McCain's backing of Ky and
and about the silence, the lack of outrage about that.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- And don't give me that crap about Ho being
the greater evil. Ho Chi Minh had broad popular
support, north and south, and no designs
on neighboring nations, so we had no business
appointing a president for the Vietnamese
people.
[parts of my column today first appeared in my column of
June 7, 2008.]_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for October 4, 2008
Hardly Strictly Tops Itself with Krauss & PlantKrauss, Plant and band at Golden Gate Park last night. [photo by Paul Iorio]
"This is, seriously, the best festival I've ever been to,"
said T-Bone Burnett from the stage, after performing an
immensely enjoyable set with Robert Plant and Alison Krauss
yesterday evening in Golden Gate Park in San
Francisco.
It was opening night of the annual Hardly Strictly
Bluegrass music fest, a free three-day extravaganza
featuring dozens of top rank folk-rockers, folkies and
singer-songwriters, among others, and the crowd was
bursting.
Burnett wasn't exaggerating. I can't remember the
last time I've seen such a sense of exuberant celebration
on such a vast scale, as if the city had just been
liberated and everyone had come to the park to rejoice
with beer, wine, smiling strangers, non-stop dancing -- and
the best live roots music of the year. (For the record,
I had water, straight up.)
The band seemed charged by the fact that the crowd was
charged, turning in a performance that was even more
electric than their show in Berkeley a few months ago
(and that's saying a lot).
As for Krauss's voice, I tend to run out of superlatives
when describing its beauty. Let me put it this way: I'm
a non-theistic guy but when I see and hear Krauss sing, I
know for certain there's a musical heaven.
Plant was almost Presleyesque (early Presleyesque)
in terms of charisma, stagecraft, vocal mastery.
And T-Bone's guitar work was often irresistible,
particularly when it resembled John Lennon's rhythm
playing with the early Beatles.
Hardly Strictly continues today and Sunday with an
incredible overabundance of greats, including
Elvis Costello, Iris Dement, Emmylou Harris and Nick
Lowe (all made possible by the massive
generosity of entrepreneur Warren Hellman).
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for October 3, 2008
Haven't seen the overnights yet, but I bet yesterday's
Biden-Palin match-up drew the largest audience ever
for any debate, probably largely because people wanted
to see a rank amateur slip and say something stupid
in front of around 60 million TV viewers.
Well, the slip didn't happen, and the headline is,
Palin Didn't Blow It, which isn't the same as
saying she won, because she didn't. It was Joe Biden's
to win, and he did so with Springsteenesque passion,
and when he got to the part about having been a single
parent and not knowing whether one of his kids was
going to make it, well, let's just say there
were a lot of undry eyes.
Biden showed heart and decency but also
confirmed he's still one of the smartest people
in the country on foreign policy. Not only did he
mention capturing and killing bin Laden (Palin didn't),
but he also showed the long-term path to
eliminating future Islamic terrorism:
education reform.
"There have been 7,000 madrassas built along [the
Pakistan-Afghanistan] borders; we should be
helping them build schools," he said. Biden sees
that Islamic terror will stop only when a new
generation of kids growing up in Pakistan (and
on the West Bank, for that matter) are
taught something other than jihad in class.
By contrast, Palin showed a lack of foreign
policy wisdom, calling Iraq the "central front
of the war on terror," despite the fact that
bin Laden and his gang are based elsewhere; and
saying "John McCain knows how to win a war."
(Does he really? The only war in which he fought,
Vietnam, was a defeat for the U.S.)
On domestic policy, she seemed oblivious to
the history-in-the-making going on in the financial
sector, as she spouted outdated cliches about
how the private sector handles things better
than the government. Evidently, she wants health
care to be run by the same private sector that has
just collapsed so spectacularly and that had to
be rescued by the government. (Maybe we should
put AIG and Lehman Bros. in charge of the U.S.
health care system.)
Still, there were no major gaffes on either side,
which means this debate is likely to be almost
completely forgotten by next Tuesday, when
Obama and McCain face off with Tom
Brokaw in Nashville.
* * * *
By the way, some cyber-hacker has evidently
been able to gain remote access to my email
account and may be sending emails from
pliorio@aol.com that are not from me. I'm
aware of this only because I received a sales
email from my own email address this morning
that I didn't send to myself. I'm going to be
working with AOL to solve this problem. In the
meantime, if anyone receives any sort of
uncharacteristic email from pliorio@aol.com,
please let me know immediately, because it may not
be from me! Thanks.
* * *
You know, when you do undercover journalism, as I did
in the 1990s, that targets a corporation like Moody's
(see below), you can expect that they're not going to
say good things about you. So if you hear smear coming
from someone at that company, tell them to shut the
hell up about their lousy fiction. (And feel free to
send me an email telling me what slander someone
there might be saying.)
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 29, 2008
As a journalist, I've been lucky enough to have
met and interviewed, usually one-on-one, some of
the greatest icons of cinema, from Woody Allen to
Tom Hanks, but, unfortunately, I was never able
to meet Paul Newman, who died the other day and
who I admired immensely.
I did, however, write and report about one of
his best films, "Cool Hand Luke" -- my favorite
Newman film, even if most critics prefer "Hud" --
in a story that I wrote and reported for The
Washington Post in 1994.
In my Post story, I asked physicians and other medical
professionals to assess the accuracy of the medical and
health information in feature films. And here's
what the pros told me about what would happen if a mere
mortal were to eat 50 eggs in an hour, as Newman's
character did in the film:
Doctors say Paul Newman's character in "Cool Hand Luke"
was behaving foolishly when he ate 50 eggs, most of them
hard-boiled, within an hour.
"I think you would get a protein overload," says
gastroenterologist Martin Finkel. "One would worry
about over-distending the stomach and rupture."
"You'd cause such an obstruction to your gastric
tract that you'd have constipation for days if
not weeks," adds Rose Ann Soloway, a specialist in
toxicology at the National Capital Poison Center.
"That's something that hard-boiled eggs do: they
really slow up metabolism in the bowels."
(The above is from my piece in the Post.)
Newman, of course, was exempt from the medical
realities that face the rest of us. Or at least
he seemed that way on screen, where he'll live on
forever.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 28, 2008
Regarding the financial crisis: what
rating did Moody's give AIG and all those failed
investment banks just before they collapsed?
Do those ratings constitute fraud or incompetence
on the part of Moody's? If Lehman had, say, a
triple A on Thursday and failed on Friday,
then of what value is a Moody's rating? Are some
news organizations hesitant to investigate Moody's
because they fear having their own credit
ratings downgraded? (
Full disclosure: I did
undercover journalism about Moody's in '93 for
a story that never came to fruition, taking
a "position" there for several weeks when I
was actually collecting info about them. But
the piece didn't pan out. For the record, my
undercover journalism reporting was confined to the
period between late 1992 and mid-1995; the best
of those articles were published by Spy magazine
and Details magazine, and I've posted them, along
with other pieces of mine, at
www.paulliorio.blogspot.com)* * * *
What John McCain Is Thinking Right NowMaybe I'll ditch her after the election. Yeah,
nobody will notice in that dead zone just before
Christmas, and she can say, "Trig needs my undivided
attention" -- just like that National
Review gal suggested. After the election.
Then again, I might not make it to the White House
with Sarah dragging me down.
But if she quits now, it'll be the Eagleton kiss
of death. I'm indecisive, they'll say. And then
I'd have to break in a brand new running mate.
Meg. I always liked Meg. She reminds me of me.
Standing up for 90 minutes really took it out
of me. And I'm trying to make amends with the
Letterman people, but they won't take my calls.
Ole Miss is pissed, too, 'cause I kept 'em
hangin'.
But back to Sarah. She didn't tell me about
that affair with the snow machine racer some years
back. She didn't say, "Let me introduce you to my
family: here's my daughter the slut, my husband the
cuckold, and me -- the adulteress." She never
said that.
But the press won't find out about all that tabloid
stuff until after the election. For now, everyone
only knows she's not exactly the brightest light
in the greater Arctic Circle region.
Not sure if my melanoma's back. Saw a spot yesterday.
Not certain about it. Haven't even told Cindy yet.
I'll keep it to myself for now. Nobody has to know
until after November 4. And then on New Year's Eve,
when everybody's preoccupied, I'll tell the
world, casually, "Oops, look what I found, one
of those spots on my lower back."
Could be nothing. But what if it's serious? And what
if Sarah has to take over? She thought Kissinger was
president in the 1970s. It took me 90 minutes to explain
to her what a borough in New York City is. At the U.N.,
she asked for a Spanish translator in order to talk
with the Brazilian ambassador. How can I work up
the courage to tell her goodbye?
Would Meg take the spot? How about Carly?
A private sector gal -- that's what's needed for this
financial mess. Or maybe a gook. That might
smooth things over with the Asian vote.
Lieberman hates Sarah. Oh, he says he loves her, but W
has his phone tapped. You should hear the private
stuff he says. His memoir is gonna tell all.
HarperCollins wants him to title it, "Diary of a Traitor:
My Life On Both Sides of the Aisle," but Lieberman
prefers "Remembrances of a Principled
Statesman," so there's a bit of a disagreement
there. And he knows about the snow racer, too.
And who is this Daily Digression fellow
anyway? That Oreo guy, calling me a failure
as a fighter pilot. That punk. Thankfully,
the big papers didn't run it.
I'll wait until after the Biden-Palin debate before
I think about replacing her with Meg. She might
do better than expected, if she keeps interrupting
Biden like she did in that debate in Alaska. Just
keep interrupting Joe, and if he overrides her
interruption, he'll look like a bully. Unless
Joe has some readymade zinger like, "Uh, governor,
in Scranton it's considered bad manners to interrupt
someone when he's talking." We'll see.
I wonder if Tina Fey is available?
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 27, 2008
Friday Night at the FightsFirst, am I the only one who noticed that the
debate organizers seem to have placed Obama's
microphone too low? The apparently low mic,
which Obama even tried to adjust at one
point, caused him to lower his face and eyes
more often than he usually does, not his best
angle, and to become less audible
when he lifted and turned his head. McCain,
being shorter, was exactly the right distance
from his own mic, giving him the
advantage in the first ten minutes or so.
But then Obama hit his stride and started
singing that bit that went, "You were wrong
about Iraq...," and he was crooning.
And that's when I realized that he doesn't
resemble JFK as much as he does the early,
skinny Sinatra -- cool, self-assured, the
consummate master at the podium (though lately
a bit of Gwen Ifill's style seems to be
seeping into his persona).
But McCain acquitted himself well, too,
though he came off more like the president of
a small-town bank in a 1950s Capra movie.
Around an hour in, McCain got emotional about
losing the Vietnam war, and I have to say I sort
of got choked up seeing how he was so personally
invested in that conflict, as wrongheaded as that
war was.
After standing for around an hour, it seemed as
if the 72-year-old McCain wanted a chair. Notice
that between the 68 and 73 minute marks, McCain
used the word "sit" three times (Obama, talking
about the same subject, didn't use the word at
all). And then he became frustrated trying to
pronounce "Ahmadinejad," though he did score points
caricaturing what a meeting with the Iranian leader
might sound like.
McCain soon became overly bold, calling for
an across-the-board spending freeze, which Obama
shot down expertly, noting there are some programs
that are underfunded and others that should be
phased out altogether. (By the way, McCain
should retire that "Miss Congeniality"
line, which he used twice last night.)
All told, both candidates did well, with a slight
edge going to Obama.
* * * *
PHOTO OF THE DAY:Here's a shot I snapped the other week of
a crowd lined up to watch eco-protesters in
Berkeley, Calif.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 26, 2008
Nice setlist for the Paul McCartney show at
Park HaYarkon, the biggest surprise being
"A Day in the Life," which he hadn't played
live anywhere until a few months ago, I hear.
Macca is apparently becoming less McCartney-centric
these days about the Beatles songs he performs,
as evinced by the inclusion of a Harrison tune,
"Something," which, truth be told, is effectively
a Harrison/James Taylor composition, though Taylor
has been too kind over the decades about the swipe;
a bona fide (as opposed to nominal) Lennon/McCartney
song, "A Day in the Life," which is arguably
a Lennon/McCartney/Martin composition; a Lennon song,
"Give Peace a Chance," credited to Lennon/McCartney,
though it's actually one of the many "Lennon/McCartney"
songs that was not written by both of them.
By the way, if Lennon were still alive, and I were
McCartney, I would push to renegotiate the
Lennon/McCartney credit on all the Beatles songs
that were written either wholly by McCartney or
by Lennon, so that authorship would go to the person
who actually wrote each track. I find it very unfair
that a masterpiece like "Yesterday" is not only
co-credited to Lennon, who didn't write a note or
word of it, but that Lennon is the first one listed
as the composer. Likewise, it's just as wrong that
McCartney is listed as co-writer of "Give Peace a Chance,"
a tune Lennon wrote alone and that the Beatles never
recorded.
Accuracy, transparency, honesty should trump all else
in both business and in the arts. The old days of
the 1950s, when some cigar-chomping mogul named
Morty would demand to have his name listed in songwriting
credits for a song he didn't write, are long over. Of course,
the Lennon/McCartney partnership was never that sort
of thing, but "Lennon/McCartney" is also not an accurate
credit when it comes to a large percentage of the Beatles
catalog. Unfortunately, renegotiating the record of
authorship in Lennon's absence -- with, say, Yoko Ono
and the estate of Lennon -- wouldn't feel right,
particularly given that a deal's a deal until both
sides say it's not -- and they both agreed in writing
to the co-credit -- and that Yoko may not be fully aware
of who composed what in each song.
One saving grace is that McCartney didn't have
to deal with a dishonest bandmate who tried to
falsely take credit for the brilliant
melodies and lyrics that he alone composed.
He was spared that nightmare.
Anyway, I'm digressing.
Regarding the HaYarkon show, which I didn't attend,
it's curious he played nothing from "Abbey Road"
(except Harrison's "Something"), the Beatles's
best album. Perhaps that's because he has
been playing the side two medley to death since
1989. But still, there are some unrealized
possibilities in the "Abbey" material; has he ever
tried expanding "Her Majesty" beyond a single verse?
Or playing "Golden Slumbers" as a free-standing song?
Also, he plays "Blackbird" all the time, but why not
try the exquisite "Mother Nature's Son," too? Maybe
together with "Blackbird."
Has he ever performed "Another Day" live?
Does it not come off well in concert? I think
it's one of his very best singles, despite the
rep given to it by "How Do You Sleep," which itself
is not a very good tune at all. I frequently play
"Another" on acoustic guitar in my apartment for
pleasure and thoroughly enjoy it.
"Mrs. Vanderbilt" is a very smart addition to
the setlist, though I'd prefer an emphasis on "Ram"
material like "Backseat of My Car," "Dear Boy," "Too
Many People," "Monkberry Moon Delight," etc. (Maybe
he should play the whole album at Radio City and
encore with the entire "Band on the Run" CD.) Truth is,
no single McCartney show could possibly include even half
of the great songs he's written.
* * * *
Back in the day, after Nixon nominated a dope
for the Supreme Court, Senator Hruksa of Nebraska
defended the nominee, saying: "[The mediocre] are
entitled to a little representation, aren't they?"
Well, Hruska would have just adored Sarah Palin. Her
IQ in terms of political thought and general reasoning
ability is almost certainly somewhere in the 90s, which
makes her not just average, but something even better for
those with a fetish for mediocrity: slightly below
average.
To be sure, an IQ can be highly variable within
any given person; Albert Einstein's IQ in physics was off
the charts, but his verbal IQ was probably around 103.
So Palin may have extraordinary abilities we don't know
about yet -- maybe she's highly intuitive when it comes
to predicting which sled dog will lead in the Iditarod,
not an insubstantial talent for those betting in the
tundra -- but we do know this, or should know this,
by now: Palin is astonishingly stupid
when it comes to political thought and policy
reasoning.
And I don't mean just un-intellectual or
anti-intellectual.
She lacks even basic common logic and sense in that
area -- and the self-knowledge to stay out of an
arena in which she's clearly overmatched.
Which leads to the question: what was John McCain
thinking when he chose her? Is there something in
his character that caused him to make such a reckless
decision, or is it that his judgment has become
rusty with age?
Remember, McCain does have the instincts of a
fighter pilot -- but of a fighter pilot who failed,
almost fatally. He was shot down and did not succeed on
his final mission. Granted, that aborted sortie over
Hanoi might not have been his fault -- great pilots are
often downed, even when they're flying expertly and
wisely -- but, then again, it might have been the
result of McCain making an aerial maneuver
that was too risky and careless, bold in a
dumb way.
Like his decision to choose Palin.
The latest evidence of Palin's unbraininess was on vivid
display last night on the "CBS Evening News," in an
interview with Katie Couric that was even more
revealing than her conversation with Charles Gibson.
Here's an annotated transcript (my remarks are in bold caps):
COURIC: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of
your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between
a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land
boundary that we have with Canada. It, it's funny that a
comment like that was kind of made to -- caric -- I don't
know, you know. Reporters --
[
OK, PALIN WAS ABOUT TO USE THE WORD 'CARICATURE'
BUT APPEARED TO BE UNSURE OF THE MEANING,
APPROPRIATENESS OR PRONUNCIATION OF IT.]
COURIC: Mock?
PALIN: Um, mocked, I guess that's the word.
COURIC: Explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy
credentials.
PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our, our next door
neighbors are foreign countries. They're in the state that
I am the executive of. [
THEY'RE IN THE
STATE?]And there in Russia --
COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations,
for example, with the Russians? [
EXCELLENT
QUESTION]
PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. [
TRADE MISSIONS
BACK AND FORTH? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? ARE REPORTERS
FACT-CHECKING THAT CLAIM?] We -- we do-- it's
very important when you consider even national security issues
with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space
of the United States of America [
AN INADVERTENTLY SURREAL
AND CARTOONISH IMAGE, SUGGESTING A GIGANTIC PUTIN
BALLOON AT A STREET PARADE], where, where do they go?
It's Alaska. [
SHE'S NOT MAKING A BIT OF SENSE
HERE] It's just right over the border. It
is from Alaska that we send those out
["WE
SEND THOSE OUT" MEANS WHAT?; AGAIN, SHE'S NOT MAKING
SENSE] to make sure that an eye is being kept on this
very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there.
They are right next to, to our state.
So there you have the annotated version.
In the interest of fairness, if Palin would like to
explain herself or be interviewed by me for the
Daily Digression, I can be reached
at pliorio@aol.com.
* * * *
POLITICAL QUOTE OF THE DAY: On today's "NewsHour,"
Rep. Barney Frank was more persuasive than I'd ever
seen him. He rocked the place. And he had a
terrific one-liner, saying that John McCain's
return to Congress to help write legislation
that had already been largely written was
like "Andy Kaufman as Mighty Mouse" miming
"Here I Come to Save The Day."
But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 24, 2008
Sen. John McCain (above) wants to postpone the presidential
debate because of the ongoing tragedy in Darfur. [photographer
unknown]* * * *
Hope Paul McCartney's show tomorrow at Park HaYarkon
turns out very well. But keep in mind that this
isn't the first time McCartney has had to deal with
death threats from religious right-wingers.
In 1966, when he toured the southern U.S. with the
Beatles, Christian fundamentalists vowed to kill
the band during performances in Texas and
elsewhere, after John Lennon made controversial
remarks about Jesus Christ.
Forty-two years later, only the fanatics's robes
and sheets have changed.
* * *
You know, it occurred to me the other day: if some
folks in the Noam Chomsky faction of the American
left substituted the words Taliban and al Qaeda with
the phrase Ku Klux Klan, they would have greater
clarity about bin Laden and the Afghanistan war of '01.
And if the religious right of America took a hard look
at the Taliban, they would see themselves in the mirror.
* * * *
Missed most of the Emmys the other night, but did
catch Teri Hatcher's yellow dress, which may have
been the highlight.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 20, 2008
Last Night's My Morning Jacket ShowJim James, rocketing. [photographer unknown]
Turns out that all the raves I've been hearing about
My Morning Jacket's current tour are accurate,
if last night's concert in Berkeley, Calif., was
any indication. At Friday's show, the band seemed
bent on doing nothing short of reinventing the
electric guitar jam for the late-Oughties, and
there were at least three or four guitar odysseys
that were thrilling, twisty, intense,
unpredictable and always awake to the
undiscovered possibilities of amplification.
And what a night for atmospherics! Fog turned
into mist and then into drizzle and then into
heavy fog and mist at the open-air Greek Theater,
while the group's light show (which I saw from
the hills above the theater) was caught in
the haze. At one point, a beam of lavender
in the heavy fog looked like a massive batch
of cotton candy in the sky.
Even band leader Jim James remarked on the
weather. "Thank you for waiting through the
mist and the rain," he said, noting that the
area looked like "a misty Scottish battlefield."
Then he and his band played a rousing "I'm Amazed"
-- the best song on their new album, and one of
the catchiest pop-rock tracks released by anyone
this year -- and the tune blazed like brilliant
autumn leaves in a grove.
"I love it when it starts turning Fall again, and
you start feeling nostalgic," James said, before
playing "Golden."
Last time he played this venue, in May, 2007, it was a
chilly night on the verge of summer, and he was doing a
solo acoustic set, opening for Bright Eyes and
(among other things) giving fans a preview of
"Touch Me, I'm Going to Scream (Part 1)"
a year before its release.
This show, supporting the amazing "Evil Urges" album,
was far more exciting and fun. Highlights included
"I'm Amazed," set-opener "Evil Urges," the Clashish
"Off the Record," the quirky "Highly Suspicious"
and the truly breathtaking, groundbreaking guitarwork
after "Run Thru."
This is one of the year's most exciting indie
tours, well worth checking out.
But I digress. Paul
[above, photo of Jim James from la.cityzine.com, circa March 2008.]_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 18 - 19, 2008
The Antonioni RevivalA couple weeks ago, the Venice Film Festival screened
Carlo di Carlo's "Antonioni su Antonioni," based on
interviews with the late filmmaker Michelangelo
Antonioni.
Last month, the National Gallery of Art in
Washington, D.C. had retrospective screenings
of many of Antonioni's films, including some real
rarities.
And some of his movies are -- finally -- making it to
DVD in the U.S. (though I still can't find a copy of
his first color film, 1964's "Il Deserto rosso").
So there seems to be a bit of an Antonioni revival
going on.
Re-watching several of his pictures recently, I came
away with a new appreciation of "Blow-Up," underrated
by those who overrate "L'avventura." I now see more
clearly its central meaning, metaphysically and otherwise:
we never get the entire picture; as human beings, we
have incomplete information about existence. And the
closer we get to the truth, the further away
it gets.
That also explains why the main character picks up
physical fragments -- a plane propeller, a shard of
Jeff Beck's guitar -- much as he sees only fragments
of what he photographed in the park that day. Beautiful
metaphor.
And when he blows up a photo in order to solve a
mystery, the photo becomes only more mysterious,
more ambiguous. The more he sees, the less he sees.
It's like sitting too close to the amplifiers at
a rock concert; you end up hearing less when it's louder.
My only beef is the ending, the mime tennis match, a
clever idea that doesn't really fit with the rest
of the film. The irresolution plays less well than
it does in "L'avventura."
Don't get me wrong, I love cinematic irresolution,
but you have to make it work, as Antonioini
did in "L'avventura" (or as David Chase did, many decades
later, in the "Pine Barrens" episode of "The Sopranos").
Antonioni knew form could get in the way of
expression; if what he wanted to express didn't
fit the narrative formula of conflict/climax/resolution,
then he'd jettison form.
By the way, it's also a lot of fun (in this short
life!) to run into a flock of pigeons, snapping
pictures wildly, as the main character does in
"Blow-Up." I tried that a couple years ago myself, and
here's the photo I shot (click it to enlarge it):
The central metaphor of "Blow-Up"
also applies to the flock of pigeons
sequence, too, because people who get
inside a flying flock of birds see
them less clearly than those who
watch from a distance.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- If you'd like to read some of my other writings
on cinema, published in such publications as The Los
Angeles Times, The New York Times, etc., please go to
www.paulliorio.blogspot.com. P.S. -- To any writer who wants to echo my original
insights on Antonioni and "Blow-Up": if you do
so, please don't forget to cite Paul Iorio as your
source.
_________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 18, 2008
So who knew the narrative would twist so unpredictably,
that the American economy would collapse so spectacularly
weeks before the presidential election? Pundits, hold
your predictions.
Also, I've never seen so many Republicans and Wall
Streeters become born-again socialists overnight.
Welcome to the fold. Solidarity forever, and all
that. Gee, I thought they were all for free markets
and de-regulation. This Sunday, let's hear George
Will admit he was wrong about unregulated capitalism
(fat chance).
And who knew Palin would start to fade like Sanjaya. Her
convention appearance now seems more like a stunt or like
someone slightly drunk who comes late to a dull party and really
livens things up but is soon forgotten.
* * *
Here're a couple photos that I've snapped in recent
weeks.
This one is of a sculpture, "Westinghouse-Fichet"
(1984 - 88), by French artist Bertrand Lavier, on
display at the Berkeley (Calif.) Art Museum. Consists
of an ottoman atop a refrigerator, a fresh juxtaposition
I'd never seen before.
* * *
Also, here's an everyday photo I shot the other week of
a street in San Francisco's Chinatown.
* * *
LOCAL NOTES: I sometimes videotape news shows when
I'm out and then fast forward through them later. The
other day, I noticed that the local CBS affiliate here
in the Bay Area had temporarily put its traffic reporter,
Elizabeth Wenger, in the anchor spot for one of its news
programs. All I can say is, wow, did she fill the chair
like a natural. Beauty, brains, youth. And a huge
future in broadcast news, I bet.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 17, 2008
What They Need's A Damned Good Whacking Some rich, homicidal, transient Syrian-born guy,
whose family has more houses than John McCain, is
now spending his leisure time lobbing death threats
at the world's greatest living composer,
Sir Paul McCartney.
The "reason" for the threats is that McCartney plans
to give a concert in Israel to celebrate its 60th
anniversary as a nation.
And that's evidently not to the liking of one Omar Bakri
Muhammad, also known as Omar Bakri Fostock.
Muhammad/Fostock said the following to London's Sunday
Express in last Sunday's edition: “If he values his
life Mr. McCartney must not come to Israel. He will
not be safe there. The sacrifice operatives will be
waiting for him.”
"Sacrifice operatives"? Sounds like a job description
invented by H.R. Haldeman. Terrorism has finally
gone bureaucratic. Next they'll have Sacrifice
Management, Sacrifice Research and Development, etc.
Look, I've been warning in print for decades about the
encroachment by Muslim militants on free speech and
artistic expression. First they came after Salman
Rushdie for writing a work of fiction. Then the militants
said, no, you can't even draw a cartoon of their
prophet Mohammed. Then, earlier this year, they
scared away Random House -- Random House, no less! -- from
publishing a book ("The Jewel of Medina") that
included a fantasy about religious figures. And
now McCartney's on their hit list for taking a
political stand.
It's long been a slippery slope when it comes to
the demands of Muslim right-wingers. What's next?
Are they going to threaten theater-owners who
screen the new Woody Allen movie because
they consider it sacrilegious? Are they going to
demand that the Uffizi Gallery remove religious
paintings by Giotto and Raphael because they're
the works of infidels?
No, we should not suspend free speech every time
Muslim militants throw a temper tantrum. Islamic
extremists must learn to be tolerant of expression
that offends them and should understand that violence
is not the only way to respond to a disagreement.
Hey, I support the creation of a Palestinian state
and a two-state (three-state?) solution, but I also
say: happy birthday, Israel; you've long since earned
your sovereignty.
And bravo to Sir Paul for his bravery in rebuffing the
militants and for insisting the show must go on.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 16, 2008
Watching the Newly Released "Get Smart" DVDs (and Loving It!)Agent 86, tracking down Yellowcake at Zabar's pastry counter. Given its ubiquity on YouTube and its cult
popularity in recent years, it's hard to
believe "Get Smart," the 1960s TV series,
hadn't been officially released on DVD in
the U.S. until last month.
Watching most of the first season the other
week, I was reminded why this was one of the
funniest sit-coms in broadcast tv history -- one
of the five funniest, in my view (the other
four being "All in the Family," "Sanford and Son,"
"The Honeymooners" and "Seinfeld").
Like "Seinfeld," and unlike the other three,
it took a couple dozen episodes for "Get Smart"
to hit its full stride, and when it did -- near the
end of the first season, with the two-parter "Ship of
Spies," a nice blend of humor and suspense -- it was
as good as sit-comedy gets.
For those about to rent the "Smart" DVDs, my
suggestion is to start with disc four of the
premiere season, which includes the final (and
funniest) episodes of the first season. Disc
one is somewhat spotty, revealing a series still
searching for its identity, a show still framed
as a sort of Spy-and-His-Dog type
thing, probably in order to make it more
palatable to middle America.
There is, of course, the endless succession of
gadgets and inventions, like the hilariously
malfunctioning Cone of Silence (and the more obscure
Tube of Silence), gun phones, hydrant phones,
hair dryer phones and the truly astonishing
cologne phone! Plus peg leg guns,
violin guns, purse guns. In 2008, some of
these inventions seem simultaneously
futuristic
and anachronistic (like that
rotary shoe phone).
And let's not forget the many inventive hiding
places of the ever-suffering Agent 44!
All told, it's as addictive as potato chips,
particularly in the late first season.
* * *
Other DVDs I've been watching lately:
"SANFORD AND SON" -- SEASON ONE: Within 29 seconds of the first episode of the first
season, I was roaring with laughter. But after
the first half dozen shows, it becomes
less startlingly funny, though still enormously
entertaining.
Redd Foxx is riotous even when he's just sitting
in his favorite chair, though I can't help but wonder
how much more brilliant the series would have been
as a Richard Pryor-Redd Foxx vehicle, with Pryor,
of course, in the Lamont role.
"Sanford and Son" differs from the other four
greatest sit-coms listed above in that it's a
two-person comedy, which is harder to sustain
than such ensemble works as "Seinfeld," "The Honeymooners,"
and "All in the Family," which all had four main
regular characters.
Sometimes "Sanford" resembles "The Honeymooners"
without an Alice or a Trixie, though Sanford and his
son have more modest dreams than Ralph and Ed. Where
Ralph and Ed hatched extravagant get-rich-quick schemes,
Lamont and Fred just wanted to break even or turn a
modest profit, for the most part. And the two programs
shared at least a couple plot lines in common (e.g.,
finding a briefcase full of money and being confronted
by the crooks who own it; mistaking someone else's
dire medical diagnosis for his own, etc.).
The best of season one is "A Matter of Life and Breath,"
in which Fred, and then Lamont, have a medical scare
that turns out to be a false alarm
Sadly surprising that Foxx wasn't given a shot on
network TV until this series, when he was already
in his fifties.
* * *
"SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE -- THE COMPLETE FIRST SEASON (DISC EIGHT)":Everybody has seen the very first episodes of
SNL countless times, but not as many have seen the
final few shows of the first season (which extended
until almost August of '76).
The quality on Disc 8 is variable, though there are
gems to be found, particularly on the program hosted
by Kris Kristofferson, which is must-see stuff,
powered by Kristofferson's presence in sketches
in which he plays, among other things, a congressman,
a tv ad pitchman -- and a gynecologist dating one
of his former patients. But the most hilarious sketch
is the tv cop show parody "Police State," starring
Dan Aykroyd -- an idea ripe for revival.
* * *
"THE JACK PAAR COLLECTION"Interesting DVD, with both monologues and
interviews from "The Jack Paar Show" of the
early 1960s. Paar's style so influenced
Johnny Carson that the two could pass for
close cousins. On this DVD, his guests
include a mostly humorless Barry Goldwater and
Robert Kennedy, still emotionally
fragile in the months after his brother's murder.
But his most impressive guest was Muhammad Ali, back
when he was called Cassius Clay, who seems to have
invented rap on the Paar show on November 29, 1963,
when he rhymes while Liberace plays piano. It
occurred to me: if you were to put a hip hop beat
behind Ali's rhymes, you'd have a terrific rap track.
I'm surprised someone hasn't done that yet.
* * *
ANOTHER TV NOTE: For at least the third time in recent
months, Al Roker, on "Today," has used the line "Hey,
I've got some pictures of dogs playing cards!," or
some variation of that, which he always passes off
as a spontaneous quip, which it ain't. I think
he needs some fresh material.
But I digress. Paul
[above, photo of Don Adams from Seattle Times.]__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 14, 2008
Who Will Palin Choose As Veep When She Succeeds McCain?Our nukes are about to fall into the hands of
the Taliban.
Lemme explain. But first, the short math.
Pollsters say Florida's not in play anymore and
is out of reach for Obama. That means ditto
for everything redder -- namely Georgia, Virginia,
Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada.
So let's see. The I-4 corridor ain't in play,
but metro Cincinnati is? That's humorous. Count
Ohio out for Obama. Count Wisconsin
out. Count the West Wing out, too.
McCain becomes #44 in January, and how long do you think
it will be before his melanoma recurs and metastasizes,
and doctors give him, say, six months to live?
(Look, I certainly hope that doesn't happen, but let's
look at realistic scenarios for a moment.) At his
age, the likelihood of recurrence is substantial.
And that's when our nukes fall in the hands of the
Taliban, aka Sarah Palin, who resembles Mullah Omar
(without the eyepatch) in oh so many ways (e.g., she's
a fundamentalist who acts like a book burning
religious crusader).
That's Palin, president number 45, who recently went on
Charles Gibson's show and casually declared war on, oh,
Russia, Iran, and other "spaz" nations, before heading off
to, presumably, dress a moose, whatever the hell that is.
She's likely to ascend to the presidency without ever
having given a national press conference, because I
doubt McCain will let her meet the press in the seven
remaining weeks till the election -- and after Nov. 4,
she doesn't have to.
The big question, for those with foresight, is: who
will Palin choose as her vice president when she
succeeds McCain? The answer is easy. She
would have to mollify the many moderates (not to
mention moderate-liberals and liberals) who would
be threatening mutiny and calling for her to step
down so that someone qualified could run the country.
And the only way for Palin to stop calls for
her resignation or impeachment (over, say,
Troopergate) would be to choose Joe Lieberman, who
would then reassure a trembling nation that the
mainstream is still in power and that he has arrived
on the scene to become Palin's Cheney.
* * *
Odd that Palin repeatedly referred to John McCain as
"McCain" in her second interview with Charles Gibson.
(What? She's not on a first name basis with her running
mate yet? Yet she repeatedly called Gibson "Charlie.")
* * *
Prediction: McCain starts using phrases
like "freak out."
Prediction: Obama starts using phrases
like "dern it" and "well, heck."
Prediction: Palin digs up some distant
gay cousin and trots him out, saying, "I love him just
the way God made him."
* * *
Tina Fey was funny last night on SNL as Palin, but
people tend to overstate the resemblance. After all,
Fey is a very attractive woman, Palin is not (Palin
misses being attractive by around 7%). "And I can
see Russia from my house" is a classic SNL moment.
SNL's season premiere was primo, at least for the
first hour. "Quiz Bowl," featuring a home-schooled
team; Kristen Wiig's glove commercial; and the Inchon
fight song sketch were absolutely hilarious. (Wiig
has a brilliant ability to play unhinged characters
in a manner that's both controlled and way
over-the-top.) But the high note was the Political
Comedian monologue on Weekend Update, which (unless
my Yuban was playing tricks on me) was a bit of comic
genius, or something quite like it.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 12, 2008
Sarah Palin is Fully Qualified to be the Principal
of a Public High School in AlaskaCharles Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin was a
magnificent piece of television journalism. Gibson
was even-handed, understated, more than fair, quietly
tough and unexpectedly lethal.
Palin sounded like an undergrad b.s.ing on an essay
question.
Incredibly, she claimed that Alaska's physical proximity
to Russia was one of her foreign policy credentials.
(Which, of course, would make the Mayor of Nome and
thousands of Eskimos experts on international relations.)
Gibson followed the logic of her claim and asked one of
the most brilliant questions of the political season:
"What insight into Russian actions, particularly in
the last couple weeks, does the proximity of the state
[of Alaska] give you?"
Palin's response was something you'd expect from a
not-so-bright candidate for student body president
of a high school: "They're our next door neighbors.
And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska."
Shockingly, she didn't even know what the Bush Doctrine
was (I knew instantly what Gibson was referring to,
with regard to the Bush Doctrine), and somewhat
less shockingly, admitted she had never traveled
outside America before her "trip of a lifetime" to
Kuwait and Germany last year.
And then there's her awkward use of language -- "We
must make sure that...nuclear weapons are not given
to those hands of Ahmadinejad" -- and Valley Girlisms
(she puts down "someone's big fat resume" like she's
talking about "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"; she says
the 9/11 hijackers did "not believe in American ideals"
(those hijackers were sooo grody!!!)).
In short, she's the new "American Idol" flavor of the
month -- and approximately as qualified as Sanjaya
or Fantasia to conduct foreign policy and manage
nuclear weapons.
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 10 - 11, 2008
The Seventh Anniversary of an Awful Day I actually liked the twin towers, aesthetically. I
particularly enjoyed walking through the World Trade
Center plaza on early Sunday mornings, when almost
nobody was around, because that's when the architecture
seemed to come alive without the busy distractions of
tourists and office workers. When the plaza was windswept
and desolate, it reminded me of the Acropolis, and the
towers themselves looked like a pair of Stanley Kubrick's
futuristic monoliths in "2001: A Space Odyssey."
I used to think: this whole city may be gone
in 700 years but those towers will stand like the Great
Pyramids forever, there is no erasing them. I used
to think that a lot in my countless walks through
that plaza. I had high hopes for those towers.
When I lived in and around (mostly in) Manhattan
from 1979 to 1996, I photographed the towers from
every angle imaginable: through the sculptures in the
plaza, from the Hoboken ferry on the Hudson, from atop
the south tower, from atop the unfinished World
Financial Center in '85, you name it.
On this 7th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks,
let me share several of my own original photos
of the towers, which I shot in the
1970s, 1980s and 1990s.
The real tragedy, of course, was the death of
thousands of people in those towers, so let's all
remember those who died on that awful day.
I shot this pic in 1984 through a sculpture in the World Trade Center plaza. * * *
The twin towers were the backdrop for a speech by Bill Clinton; I snapped this photo on August 1, 1994, at Liberty State Park in Jersey City. * * *
An early nineties photo that I snapped from across the Hudson. * * *
The twin towers, as seen from a hill in Hoboken, N.J.; I shot this in the 1980s.
* * *
Another picture I snapped from inside a nearby sculpture.* * *
I shot this one from a boat on the Hudson (early nineties). ____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 10, 2008
Once again, The Daily Digression is first.
In yesterday's Digression (see below), I coined
the term "Palinista" to refer to supporters of
Sarah Palin. Today, in her column in the New
York Times, Maureen Dowd also uses the
word "Palinista."
For the record, I coined it first.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for September 9, 2008
A couple hours ago, in Berkeley, Calif., eco-protesters
finally came down from the redwood in the oak grove
where they had been tree-sitting for the past 21 months.
There was no rioting or violence as there was last
Friday evening (see Daily Digression, Sept. 6, 2008), but
tensions were high until the sitters came down to earth
at around 1:30pm (PT).
I was at the scene a few hours ago and shot these photos:
Two activists voicing support for the tree-sitters earlier today. [photo by Paul Iorio]
* * *
A protester from "CopWatch" watches cops who were keeping activists away from the oak grove this morning. [photo by Paul Iorio]
* * *
The redwood where the final four tree-sitters sat, around ninety minutes before they came down from the tree. [photo by Paul Iorio]
* * *
Yes, "Save the Oaks" t-shirts were on sale at today's protest. [photo by Paul Iorio]
________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 8 - 9, 2008
The Temporary Palinization of America(And the Rise of the Palinistas)The B---- To Nowhere: She wants you to trust her with the launch codes. [photographer unknown]
If Sarah Palin had tried to run for president in
early 2008, she would have likely lost all the primaries,
trailing somewhere between Sam Brownback and Duncan
Hunter. As a complete unknown outside Alaska,
she would have had to meet the press and do interviews
in which voters would've plainly seen her vast
inexperience and lack of stature. Her funding would've
dried up, her mis-speakings would've been ammo for
Letterman and Stewart, and she would've dropped out
after the first couple primaries, fading back into the
Aurora Borealis just in time to host the next Iditarod.
In other words, she wouldn't have been able to earn
her spot on the presidential ballot -- though she's now
fully capable of being appointed to the ticket.
With a mere seven weeks or so until the general, McCain
can now cynically keep her away from almost all the top
national journalists -- and she can run the clock the
way she couldn't if she were a candidate campaiging a
year before the election.
Scripted by pros, stage-managed like an actor, Palin can
play "Tootsie" for several weeks, without having anyone look
too hard at who she really is. Meanwhile, lots of minor
pols now think they, too, are Sarah Barracuda -- or could
be, because Sarah didn't have any major experience before
ascending to the national stage, so it could happen to
them, too, they think. (By the way, get ready for
the Palinization of television advertising, an
onslaught of tv commericals for all sorts of products
featuring perky wifey types (Palinistas!) saying things
like, "I'm just a regular PTA mom, and I don't know
much about history, but I do know about my history
with laxatives." Etc.)
If you believe she's qualified to be president, then you're
effectively saying there's no such thing as being properly
qualified for the presidency, that the presidency is an
unskilled position that a virtual amateur can do as well
as a pro.
I mean, it's one thing to be responsible, as she was as
mayor, for events like the "Fishing Derby" and the
"Alaska Arbor Day Celebration," and quite another
to be in charge of enough uranium and plutonium to
end life on the planet. (As for her experience as
governor of a state with the population of Charlotte,
North Carolina, it should be noted that she has yet to
serve a full calendar year in that position.)
And a huge issue that the media is largely ignoring is
that she believes the religious theory of creationism
should be taught alongside the scientific theory of evolution
in the public schools.
That's akin to believing in voodoo or in a flat Earth -- and that's
what's called a red flag. It means, among other things, that
such a person lacks the mental ability to assess fact-based
evidence, which is not the sort of quality you'd want in a
Commander-in-Chief.
Imagine if Palin were to say she believes the world is flat and
that you can fall off the Earth by sailing across the Pacific.
You would need to know nothing else about her in order to
know she's not qualified to be president. Electing someone
who believes in creationism is like electing someone who
still thinks the sun revolves around the Earth (and,
astonishingly, one in five Americans still believes the
latter). Some pundits would note that truth, if they
weren't on such a sugar high from the jellybeans.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. --
Q: What's the Difference Between Sarah Palin
and Those Who Persecuted Copernicus?
A: Lipstick.
* * *
P.S. -- For those who think Palin's popularity is
sure to endure, I have two words for you:
Ross Perot.
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 6, 2008
I ran into a mini-riot in Berkeley,
Calif., on my way to hear the Dave Matthews Band
perform at the Greek Theater several hours ago.
As I walked along Piedmont Avenue at around 7pm
(Friday), a violent scuffle broke out between police
and eco-activists trying to stop the University of
California from cutting down a grove of oak trees.
Here are some photos I shot of the mini-riot.
The guy on the ground clashed with cops and was tossed around and beaten pretty badly. (Sorry for the bluriness, but I was in the midst of the melee and being jostled.) [photo by Paul Iorio.]
* *
Two cops detain an activist (he's beneath a guy's bare arm at center left) while a crowd surrounds the cops and chants, "Set him free." [photo by Paul Iorio]
* *
A woman smashes a metal pot/drum with a bar in the middle of Piedemont Ave. [photo by Paul Iorio]
Needless to say, I didn't make it to the Dave Matthews show
until late (just as a 4.0 quake hit that part of the
East Bay, I found out later), though I did get to hear
around 45 minutes of the gig from the hills above
the Greek Theater.
I arrived as Matthews was starting "Eh Hee," a song he
released as a digital single a year ago, which was
followed by a song I didn't recognize and then by a
full-band version of 2003's "Gravedigger," which
got fans going.
"It's a lovely evening," Matthews said from the stage
after that one -- and it was. Cool, dry, crisp, like
the first night of fall (after a day of 100 degree
heat).
The crowd was even more enthusiastic about
2002's "Grey Street," featuring some spirited
sax playing by whoever has replaced the late
saxophonist LeRoi Moore, who died a few weeks ago.
Anyway, I didn't have time to hear the rest
of the concert, and walked home along Piedmont,
where I'd seen violence a few hours before.
Things had become considerably more harmonious
at the site of the protests; some guy was playing guitar and
singing some Bob Marley song, cops were
mingling and talking with the activists -- and
I strolled home.
But I digress. Paul
________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 5, 2008
Probably John McCain's best speech yet, though
that's not saying much because he's not exactly known
for his oratory. The problem with his "change" theme
is he's implicitly saying he disagrees with the policies
of the Bush administration, though he actually claims
he does not disagree with them.
When he made his entrance, he, frankly, looked a bit
like a senior security guard, casually checking to see
that the stage was safe and in order for the arriving
candidate.
What has been glossed over by some news organizations
is that his speech was interrupted at least three times
by noisy protesters, who were quickly, muscularly whisked
away, Beijing-style, by security guards. They seemed to
almost blow McCain's cool at one point.
After his speech, the body language onstage was
telling. Palin looked like McCain's fling (because she
acted like his fling), though you'd never say the same
thing about Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina. Sure, McCain
and Palin briefly acted the expected role of candidate
and running mate, but for the most part, McCain
seemed to be distancing himself from her and even
appeared to be a little miffed at her, as if he had
found out hours earlier that there was real substance
to the rumor that Palin had once had an extramarital
affair with a snowmachine racer. Meanwhile, he gave a big,
big wave in the direction of Whitman, almost as if to say,
"Hold on, Meg, you're on standby."
Ah, how soon we forget the lessons of Eliot Spitzer:
the most puritanical are often the most secretly
promiscuous.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for September 4, 2008
Check out the sermons by Sarah Palin's pastor,
Ed Kalnins, staff crackpot at the way-out
Wasilla Assembly of God.
Plus, the inside word is that, yes, there is
some evidence to substantiate the charge
that Palin had an extramarital affair with
a snowmobile racer and biz associate of her
husband's.
So let me put all this together. A wild
and crazy church. A swingin' adultress
luv guv. And an underage daughter who's
havin' unprotected pre-marital sex with
an adult.
Sounds like the religious right has really
loosened up in recent years!
______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for September 4, 2008
The First EyeWitnessNews Candidate for Vice President!Now the McCain strategy is becoming clear: hire a
television newscaster as your running mate if you
wanna win!
Of all the skills required to become a successful
candidate, telegenicity is key.
McCain was looking for someone with the ability to look
directly into the camera and make it work, the ability to
play the space onstage, and a sense of what is
and is not effective on TV.
Palin's experience in broadcasting in Alaska has evidently
paid off. She has become the very first EyeWitnessNews
candidate for vice-president or president, and she
knows all the tricks and buzzwords.
News flash. Breaking news. We have a reporter on the way
to the scene now. This is developing news. We'll bring
you details as we learn them. Stay with us. Because
firefighters are getting the upper hand on that blaze.
70% contained. Everyone is breathing a sigh of relief.
They're lucky to be alive. We really dodged a bullet.
The tide has turned. What a difference a day makes!
Thank you for joining us. Stay tuned.
Yes, that's what a Palin presidency would sound like.
But could you please name one -- just one -- original
policy idea that she mentioned in her entire half-hour-plus
speech? Can you name one original policy idea that she
has ever had? If so, could you show me documentation
of that?
Unfortunately for Palin, her punch lines are already
getting stale. "Thanks but no thanks on that bridge to
nowhere": uh, Sarah, I think we already heard that one.
Like...last Friday. (Even Cindy McCain was almost
rolling her eyes in a cutaway shot.)
And then there was that odd appearance by McCain -- odd
in that he didn't properly close out his cameo
with a "see you tomorrow night" or something. Instead
he was led off the stage by nurse Sarah, who will make
sure gramps doesn't wander from the home and his meds and
onto the stage again.
Other notes on Night 3:
MITT ROMNEY: Inconvenient truth omitted from Romney's
auto-bio last night: he failed to mention that he came
from wealth, which gave him a gigantic advantage in his
later business pursuits.
And Romney's line about "homes that are free from
promiscuity" received an uneasy, embarrassed, tepid
response, the reason being that it's now known
the Palin home was the site of unprotected, underage,
unmarried sex. (At least we know they're not frigid in
Alaska!)
MEG WHITMAN: She looks sort of like a female version of
John McCain -- or John McCain's sister.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- The real double-standard about Palin is
that some female pundits, so relentlessly harsh
about the seemingly low IQs of guys like Dan Quayle
and W, overlook her obvious lack of stature and
appear to be charmed by Palin. If she were a guy
who called himself "an average hockey dad" and who
was as demonstrably mediocre and lacking in experience
as Palin is, a lot of female columnists would be
kicking the tar out of him. Instead, some who
ridiculed Quayle for every misspelling are making
excuses for Palin, suspiciously pulling their
punches.
______________________________THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for September 3, 2008
Lemme guess. Tonight, Sarah Palin will
give her Checker's Speech. Using the slick
broadcasting skills she learned in Alaska, she'll
get all choked up at the podium -- and then, in
a burst of righteous indignation and anger, she'll say
something like, "And to those of you in the news media,
I have a message for you: Leave my children alone!!!!!,"
and the audience will respond with three minutes of
wild applause.
Afterwards, some pundits will probably say the following:
"I think she might have saved her job tonight" and
"If there was any doubt going into the convention about
whether Sarah Palin could stand the heat, there is no
doubt anymore" and "Looks like she hit it out of the
hockey arena!" Mark my words.
* * * * *
Palin Ain't the Quayle of '08. She May Be The Harriet Miers. Elderly John McCain, with less energy than he had
as a young man, gets lazy about vetting his first major
nominee. All he knows is he needs A Woman on the
ticket, and it really doesn't matter much which Woman.
(Is this how McCain will choose his Attorney General
and Supreme Court nominees if he's elected?)
And so, with the same gambling instincts he showed as
a fighter pilot -- instincts that, by the way, got
him shot down over the Hanoi metro area -- he made a
bold, careless veep choice and let the
devil take the hindmost, as they say in his parts.
Well, now the devil is taking the hindmost.
Because Palin is fast developing the distinct
aura of a nominee who gets ditched within a
week or so of being nominated. Yes, Palin may be
the Harriet Miers of Campaign '08.
The Daily Digression has been digging around and
found there are even more question marks
about her than the press has revealed.
For example, far from being universally popular
throughout her career in Alaska, it turns out that
she was the object of a recall campaign several months
into her first term as mayor. In early 1997, a group
of around 60 Wasilla residents (a huge number of
people for a town that small) formed Concerned
Citizens for Wasilla, which objected strenuously to
several of her early decisions and wanted her removed
from office.
It's worth noting that she ascended to mayor of Wasilla
from the Wasilla city council, a position so tiny that I
couldn't find any coverage of her race
in the main newspaper in the area, The Anchorage
Daily News.
So, effectively, Palin was a part-timer before she
became governor of a state that has a smaller population
than the city of San Francisco.
Also the Digression has learned Palin has not been
shy about putting daughter Bristol, even when she
was a child, in the media spotlight when it was to
her advantage -- and that her household was recklessly
permissive when it came to guns.
When she was merely 9-years-old, in 1999, Bristol Palin
was covered in the Anchorage Daily News because of her
rifle-shooting education. "First-time shooter Bristol
Palin, 9, recently learned how to handle a rifle," went
the piece in the ADN. Can I ask a common sense
question, or is it too old-fashioned to ask what
the hell a 9-year-old is doing in the vicinity of
a rifle?
[Incidentally, it's important to note that Palin defines
herself as an "average hockey mom"; Barack Obama has never
defined himself as an "average hockey dad" -- and neither did
JFK. So we must, to some degree, scrutinize her on her own
terms.]
The New York Times and The Washington Post have uncovered
their own info about her, including:
-- the state legislature is investigating abuse-of-power
allegations against her
-- she was busted for drunk driving in 1986.
-- for two years, she belonged to an eccentric political party
that wanted to put the issue of Alaska secession to a
ballot vote
-- the father of Bristol Palin's daughter, Levi Johnston,
describes himself as "a fucking redneck," according to
several news organizations.
Question not asked by anyone: if Levi was 18 when he had
sex with 17-year-old Bristol, then doesn't that make
him an adult having sex with a child? Is that illegal
in Alaska? If so, then how come sex crime allegations
are being levied (or not levied) in an inconsistent
manner here?
More later.
But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 3, 2008
Notes on Day 2 of the GOP ConventionThere's something vaguely German about the whole gathering.
Even the music sounds like Wagner, though it isn't.
A few notes:
-- Norm Coleman: Reminds me of a Franklin Mint salesman,
practicing his sales pitch alone in front of a mirror the
night before going door-to-door. And what an ear for
catchy language: "Change the Republicans can
actually deliver."
-- Funny how the Repubs now claim to admire Martin Luther
King, when in fact they vehemently opposed him when he was
alive.
-- Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Looks like
the Anita Bryant wing of the party. I half expected
her to welcome us to the Florida sunshine tree! Also
has an ear for catchy language: "Minnesota is a really nice state
that loves you!"
-- Tommy Espinozzzzzzzzzzzzzza
-- George W. Bush: Might've coined something with that
"angry left" bit. Not quite "nattering nabobs," but
getting there.
-- Fred Thompson: Calls Obama "inexperienced" but believes
Palin is qualified because "she knows how to field dress a moose."
-- Joe Lieberman. Hadassah looks like she's thinking, "Joe,
how did we sink so low? Joe, how did we lose all our Connecticut
friends?" Michael Beschloss had a nice insight on PBS, saying
that Lieberman's speech sounded like a barely modified version
of the scrapped speech he had written to accept the GOP vice
presidential nomination. (He may have to give that speech
yet.) Probably right.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for August 29, 2008
After hearing Sarah Palin speak, I have to say
she sounds like the perkiest temp in the whole
typing pool.
A people person!!
And if she ever had to go head-to-head
with Ahmadninejad, why, she'd give that man 15
lashes with a wet noodle!
McCain has made an awful, cynical, dangerous
choice -- dangerous because McCain is old and
has health problems, and if he were
incapacitated as president, she would be the
one in charge of a nuclear arsenal that could
annihilate life on earth.
And get a load of these Churchillian aphorisms:
-- "Put people first!" (As opposed to what? Putting
iguanas first?)
-- "The people of America expect us to seek public
office and serve for the right reasons" (I'm sure
Vaclav Havel is hailing the arrival of a brilliant new
political poet.)
An "average hockey mom," as she describes herself, should
be in charge of average hockey teams, not of the most
powerful nation in the world.
McCain's strategic shrewdness (i.e., wedging into the
embittered Hillary-Ferraro vote) is neutralized by his
nominee's scary lack of experience, which inadvertently
inoculates Barack against such charges. A better wedge
would've been Kay Bailey Hutchison.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- By the way, Hillary and Geraldine should hold
a joint press conference by the end of today saying
that Palin is no friend of the women's rights movement
and she does not speak for them or their supporters.
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 29, 2008
Notes on Day 4 of the Democratic ConventionAnti-climax. The expectations were too high.
You cannot will an "I have a dream" speech into
creation.
Barack's speech was prose, not poetry this time -- and
predictable prose at that (except for the moment when he
slipped and almost said, "The market should reward
drunk driving" -- now that would've been an
unpredictable moment!).
His "you're on your own" bit was classic, as were his
great lines about bin Laden ("We must take out Osama bin
Laden and his terrorists," and "John McCain says he will
follow bin Laden to the gates of hell but he won't even
follow him to the cave where he lives").
But he should know better than to use a come-on like
"This election has never been about me; it's been
about you," which sounds like the sort of thing a car
salesman or prostelitizing evangelical would say.
(Whenever I hear a salesman say that, I immediately
know it's about him, not me.)
It occurred to me while listening to him that
no matter who gets elected in November, there's
bound to be gridlock once again. I mean, Obama has
a job right now, and so does McCain, and we don't
see either of them magically ramming through
legislation or inspiring their Senate colleagues to
action, so it's hard to believe they'd suddenly be
able to do so by merely moving to the co-equal executive
branch.
In '93, the Dems had control of both houses of Congress
and of the White House and there was still partisan gridlock.
Perhaps the change that has to happen in Washington is
more fundamental than what Barack wants to bring about.
Maybe our political system needs to be re-imagined and
re-structured with a greater emphasis on direct democracy
instead of representative democracy. What I mean is, bills
and issues that are regularly voted on by Congress, and
that are regularly jammed in gridlock, should perhaps
instead be voted on by the public in ballot referenda. That
way, we can put, say, universal health care to a public
vote, and if the people choose it, it becomes law.
No gridlock. No partisan bickering. No need to reach
across the aisle to massage the interests of some
corrupt congressman who wants an unnecessary bridge for
his district.
Anyway, I don't expect Barack will see any appreciable
convention bounce from this speech, which means he may
have already peaked in the polls. We'll see.
But I digress. Paul
________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 28, 2008
Notes on Day 3 of the Democratic ConventionWhat a surprise to see Barack show up at the
convention center last night. Great move.
Like a gust of wind into a smoke-filled room. I've
decided that Barack is post-neurotic. He doesn't
seem to have the hang-ups that most of us do,
which allows him to move further faster.
And it was revealing to see him shake hands
with various Dems (it's evident he has great
personal chemistry with Nancy Pelosi). Also,
wonderful to see Barack's great-uncle,
Charles Payne, who helped liberate Buchenwald.
Joe Biden's speech was characteristically forceful
and poignant, particularly when he imagined,
stream-of-consciousness style, the thoughts and
anxieties of everyday Americans as they try to
make ends meet.
It's clear that Biden speaks Middle Atlantic
fluently and can talk Philly Cheesesteak, too -- a
dialect essential to persuading swing voters.
The protracted ovation for Bill Clinton was truly
astounding -- and his calls for unity sounded
heartfelt. And he scored some points noting
that the GOP had control of both the White House
and the Congress in 2001, enabling them to
implement ideas that proved disastrous.
Other notes:
-- Beau Biden seems to be made of the same stern
stuff that his dad is made of. And there wasn't a
dry face in the crowd when he described that
horrific car accident.
-- Harry Reid should lay off history and stick to
politics. Saying that World War II was
partly motivated by oil on the Russian front is a
stretch at best. A quick refresher course: Hitler
was invading everyone in the 1930s/1940s, whether
they had oil or not. Austria, France, the Netherlands
didn't have any oil, but he invaded them, too. The
opening grafs of his speech should have been
better edited.
-- John Kerry: Roared like he rarely did in '04.
-- Evan Bayh: predictable.
-- Chet Edwards: bland.
All for now.
But I digress. Paul
_________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 27, 2008
Notes on Day 2 of the Democratic ConventionMore electricity than last night. If it wasn't
Hillary's finest moment at the podium, I don't
know what was. Funny, confident, spontaneous,
pithy: if she had been like this back in '07,
she might have won the Thursday night slot this
week. Lots of crowd-pleasing zingers: "No way,
no how, no McCain," "sisterhood of the traveling
pantsuits," etc. Plus, a stirring evocation of Harriet
Tubman at the end. (And, of course, any candidate
who opens with Davies has got to be gold.)
And the cutaway shots of Bill suggest he
might have a thing for her. (You think
they're having an affair?)
The big surprise of the night was keynoter Mark Warner.
I had no idea he was this great. Talk about
Kennedyesque. Came across like a guy who
knows how to get things done in an
innovative, effective way. Best line:
"In 4 months, we will have an administration
that actually believes in science."
But perhpas the most genuine moment of the night
came from the Republican mayor of tiny, cold
Fairbanks, Alaska, who looked like a throughly decent
fellow, his posture hinting at a lifetime of
shivering, his slightly too-large jacket probably
bought at one of the very few shops in Fairbanks
where you can actually buy jackets.
Other notes:
-- Montana governor Brian Schweitzer got the house
a-rockin'. Lots of unexpected pizazz.
--Did you feel the Steny-mania in the hall?
-- Janet Napolitano talked about "the burgeoning cities
and towns" in her home state.
--- Kathleen Sibeliuszzzz: better at governing than
at comedy. (To her credit, she didn't mention
"burgeoning cities and towns.")
-- And why the swipe at Franklin Roosevelt's
ahead-of-his-time vice president by a pundit on
PBS? Keep in mind that ol' Henry
believed what you probably believe now -- except
he believed it decades earlier.
Anyway, time to get back to the "burgeoning
cities and towns" in my region.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for August 26, 2008
Well, it's official: the first night of
the Democratic National Convention was a ratings
dud for the broadcast networks, who cumulatively
attracted a million fewer viewers than they had
on opening night in 2004, according to
TV Week's E-Daily Newsletter.
And the reason is no surprise (read my review below).
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 26, 2008
Notes on Day 1 of the Democratic ConventionThis is what Day 1 sounded like:
This son of a butcher, a baker and a candlestick
maker rose to heights previously undreamed of,
because he dared to dream the dream and hope the
hope and dare the dare and believe the belief, and
in his youth his father walked 50 miles through a
blizzard each day to get to his job in a steel
mill, where he was paid a mere dollar a day,
which he shared with his nine children
after he returned home from his daily
walk, sacrificing so that the new generation
would have a better life, but his spirit
was undimmed, his optimism undefeated, his faith
unquashed, his vigor undminished, his focus un-undermined,
even as his legs ached and he cried out for Extra
Strength Advil liquid capsules, as he drew succor from
his dream of a truly united United States of America,
in which black and white, blue and green, yellow and
red, chartreuse and violet, rich and poor, suburban
and urban, those who walk 50 miles a day and those
who merely walk 50 feet, those who believe, as he
believes, and still believes, that one America, one
nation, one vision, one people, shall prevail against
all divisions, blah, blah, blah.
And on and on. The stories of boot-strap triumph blend
together like a bunch of wallpaper, leaving the
audience with the false impression that wealth
in America isn't acquired mostly through inheritance,
as the facts show. Scratch the surface of almost
any rags to riches bootstrap story and you'll find that
the "self-made" person was actually the beneficiary
of government money or family money or drug money
or criminal theft or unethical business leverage
or a freakish winning at a casino or on a TV game show.
For now, such harsher truths aren't ready for prime time.
For the most part, the first day of the convention, as
seen on TV, was so overscripted and lacking in spontaneity
that it made the Oscars look like an experimental
improvisational performance.
Occasionally, and thankfully, the human element seeped
through all the calculation. Senator Kennedy's speech was
a highlight, if only because he looked surprisingly
robust and sounded like Classic Teddy, despite his terminal
illness. And the adorable Obama children virtually stole
the show, cutely interrupting their dear ol' dad, who
was piped in from Kansas City, Mo., showing everybody
what a real political star looks and sounds like.
Also: Caroline Kennedy looked great, sounded genuine
and has developed a slightly tougher edge that is
very welcome; she should run for Uncle Teddy's Senate
seat after he passes. Michelle Obama was winning
and quite a natural at the podium -- and also generous
(can you imagine Muriel Humphrey saying kind words
about Eugene McCarthy from the stage in '68?)
More later.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 25, 2008
Sorry to those who thought I'd be covering the
Outside Lands music fest in San Francisco last weekend.
As much as I wanted to attend, I couldn't because I
was holed up in the studio, doing final overdubs
on two new songs of mine, "Love's The Heaven You
Can't Reach" and "Three Minute Song," which I've released
today (my music site is www.pauliorio.blogspot.com).
In any event, I've covered multiple concerts by almost
all the festival headliners and sub-heds in the past
year or two (see below or in the Digression Archive for
my pieces on Radiohead, Wilco/Jeff Tweedy, Tom Petty,
Widespread Panic, etc.).
And keep in mind that Radiohead premiered its new
"In Rainbows" material at shows two years ago in the
San Francisco Bay Area and in a handful of other
cities (at concerts that no serious daily newspaper
in the Bay Area neglected to cover), while
Jeff Tweedy's unforgettable gig in Golden Gate Park
several months ago (following a Wilco show across the
Bay) was also a must-see and must-review event.
Anyway, now that my new songs have been released, I'm
back to Digressing!
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 23, 2008
Once again, the Daily Digression has been first --
this time, the first of the major blogs and
news organizations to have identified Joe Biden as
the likeliest veep nominee (see last Sunday's
column below).
And the Biden choice is perhaps the best strategic
decision in terms of vice-presidential picks since
JFK chose LBJ in 1960, as Biden complements Obama on
foreign policy the way Johnson complemented Kennedy
geographically. (The Biden selection probably won't
mean much in the opinion polls -- until the
vice-presidential debate, where Biden will surely
clean the clock of McCain's running mate.)
As a freelance journalist, I did some intensive
research around a year ago to see which of the
presidential candidates, if any, saw the 9/11 attacks
coming before the fact. And my digging showed that
Biden came the closest (by far) to sensing the clear
and present danger posed by the Taliban and bin Laden.
Listen to Biden on June 21, 2000, speaking on the floor
of the U.S. Senate: "We all know about Pakistan, the
gateway to Afghanistan for Osama bin Laden and his
buddies. Can anybody think of a better place to
beef up border security, so that terrorists can be
apprehended as they go to and from those Afghan training camps?"
Again, that was Biden in the year 2000, over a year
before bin Laden committed mass murder on U.S. soil.
And Biden had the danger sized up perfectly -- before
the fact.
To be sure, Biden wasn't completely alone in ringing the
alarm but he almost was. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was
also somewhat prescient in speaking out about the
Taliban. "The Taliban in their activities...there
[in Afghanistan] have placed them outside the circle
of civilized human behavior," said Pelosi, on June 13, 2001.
(The least prescient about 9/11? Dennis Kucinich.)
Candidates with hindsight are as plentiful as
gravel, those with foresight as scarce as gold.
In this case, the Democratic nominee for president
has chosen a running mate with the latter.
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 17, 2008
After deeply researching insider blogs,
convention schedules, travel plans
of both the candidate and his veep
contenders -- and applying simple common
sense -- I've arrived at an educated guess
as to who Barack Obama's running mate
will be.
In all likelihood, it's Joe Biden.
[posted at 6:44pm, Sunday, August 17, 2008]But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 13 - 14, 2008
I must confess I wasn't at all impressed by
the precision mass synchronization spectacles
of the opening ceremonies of the Olympics.
They didn't express much except a punishing
level of rehearsal. Orson Welles was able to do
more with simple hand shadows in "Citizen Kane" than
the organizers of the Olympics did with their
Himalayan-sized budget.
That said, the folks at NBC (particularly Brian
Williams, Tom Brokaw, Bob Costas and Matt Lauer)
are doing a super job making it interesting even
to viewers who couldn't care less about things
like the 50-meter freestyle competition. (Lauer
had a particularly humorous moment last week
touring a building in Beijing called The Studio
of Exhaustion from Diligent Service.)
* * * *
It occurred to me yesterday that our next
president will be someone who wasn't born
on the U.S. mainland -- a first (I think).
* * * *
If you want to remember Isaac Hayes at his very
best, and you've already seen "Shaft," check out
the "Wattstax" DVD, which captures primo Hayes -- intro'd
by a circumspect Jesse Jackson, no less.
* * * *
The Enduring Ambivalence About Jethro Tull Jethro Tull, reading the latest edition of
The Daily Digression? Of all the major 1960s/1970s bands eligible
for induction to the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame
who have not yet been inducted, few present a
more difficult problem of critical evaluation than
Jethro Tull. Watching a video of the band performing
in its absolute creative prime -- the period right
after "Benefit" and before "Aqualung," captured on a
DVD called "Jethro Tull: Live at the Isle of
Wight, 1970" -- I saw at once the reasons why
the band should be inducted and why they shouldn't,
though I lean toward the former view ("Aqualung" alone
should be their ticket in).
The DVD shows the band performing on the last
day of the Isle of Wight Festival of 1970, when
the crowd, having already heard The Who and
Jimi Hendrix on previous days, had dwindled
considerably. By day five, the audience was
gnarly, gamey, pissed off and fed up with
malfunctioning toilets and being pushed
around by fest organizers. To its credit, this
documentary/concert film, directed by Murray Lerner,
doesn't prettify this (or Tull's own performance,
for that matter).
Tull took the stage looking like they had just
stepped off the cover of "Benefit." Up close, you
can see that Ian Anderson had a case of stage fright
and, at least at this gig, was nervous, even dorky,
full of odd tics and idiosyncrasies, a strict
taskmaster who missed his own cues, while his
band was precise but clunky, for the most part.
It's when he puts down his flute, which he really
doesn't play very well, and sits with an acoustic
guitar for "My God" that you say, "Wow." Anderson is
relaxed, engaging, marvelously melodic, almost
hypnotic -- for the first three minutes and fifteen
seconds of "My God." And then he does embarrassing
schtick with his flute that even he sort of cringed
at in a 2004 interview included here.
I've long felt the band's best stuff was British
folk and folk rock like "Sossity," "Inside,"
"Reasons for Waiting," "Mother Goose,"
"For Michael Collins, Jeffrey and Me," "Slipstream,"
"Cheap Day Return," "Up the Pool," the "in the clear
white circles of morning wonder" part of "Thick as a
Brick" -- I almost never tire of hearing
those songs, none of which they played at Isle
of Wight. (Anderson should have hung out a bit
more with Maddy Pryor, by the way.)
Though the setlist here is disappointing (why only one
song from "Benefit"?), you see the dawn of
"Aqualung" taking shape, particularly on "Dharma
For One," where you can hear the band hurtling
toward its "Locomotive Breath" sound. (Turns out
Glenn Cornick had a lot more to do with the
overall sound during this period than you'd guess
from hearing the albums.) By show's end, the
previously angry crowd looked genuinely
thrilled.
The problem with bands that you enjoyed as a child
is that, in adulthood, you can't tell whether you
still like them because of nostalgia or because
of the group's musical value. I was barely
13-years-old, a suburban American kid living for
six months in Florence, Italy, when I first heard
of Tull. I remember the moment well: I was in the
front seat of a Fiat in central Florence in
November 1970, a couple months after Isle of Wight,
looking to the backseat where some cool older guy at my
school, St. Michael's Country Day School, was holding
a brand new copy of "Benefit" (with that "headband" cover)
and talking the band up.
At that time in Florence, "Woodstock" was in the
main movie theaters, "Led Zeppelin 3" was weeks
away from showing up in record store windows and
Italian singer Gianni Morandi had a big hit with a
protest song about the Kent State massacre.
But Jethro Tull, at least for a month or two in the
fall of '70, was the talk of the piazza, and their
melodies seemed to emanate from the medieval and
Renaissance alleys of the city, and there were rumors
flying that Tull was actually a group of 70-year-old men.
But the band's true heyday lasted only from 1969 to
1972, between "Stand Up" and "Living in the Past." The
subsequent albums, between '73 and '78, from "A Passion
Play" to "Songs From the Wood," were spotty at best,
though there are at least a few good songs or musical
moments on each. After 1978, they created almost nothing
worth listening to.
Even at their peak they were the object of an unusual
degree of derision. (I once heard the nickname Jethro Dull;
and the late, great Lester Bangs memorably eviscerated
the band with his famous line about Jethro Tull having
no "rebop.")
To be sure, they're not in the same league as the Stones
and the Who, though their melodies are more memorable
than those of a terrific band like Fairport Convention.
Tull can't be dismissed -- there's just too much good stuff
on albums two through six. "Live at the Isle of Wight,"
the best long-form concert by the group on DVD, is a
great way to take a close look at a band that still
provokes extreme ambivalence after all these years.
* * * *
A Year After "Sicko," Still No Universal Health Care This time last year, Michael Moore's documentary
"Sicko" was stirring such debate about the U.S. health
care system that some thought the film might actually
spur some sort of policy change.
No such luck. Hasn't happened. The rich keep
getting richer off of the sick, who keep
getting sicker.
As "Sicko" notes, the government provides
free postal service, free police protection, free
education -- and nobody denounces those programs
as "socialist." Why not also provide
something as basic as health care?
Imagine if you had to personally pay the police
department every time you called 911 for an
emergency (though, on second thought, it is true
that in some communities in New Jersey and Louisiana,
I hear you actually do have to pay the cops!). Same
thing as paying for an emergency room visit.
Maybe we need to re-think our socialism-phobia,
which almost nobody else in the world shares. Let's
take that fear apart for a moment.
Since unregulated capitalism failed spectacularly
in 1929, the United States has adopted and adapted
and refined some of the best ideas of
socialism -- e.g., FDIC, unemployment insurance,
social security, food stamps, etc. -- so that
now we're -- thankfully -- a capitalist-socialist
hybrid nation, in a sense.
Even arch-conservatives have seen the absolute
necessity of having a baseline level of government
involvement and regulation, without which we would
have complete catastrophe on several levels,
as we found out the hard way in '29.
Meanwhile, the communists have adapted and adopted
some of the best ideas of American capitalism so that
Russia and China are now also socialist-capitalist
hybrids.
In other words, nobody won the Cold War. We became
partly socialist, and the socialists became partly
capitalist. The U.S. has social security, and China has
Saks Fifth Avenue. In the process, the Soviet Union
ran out of money and collapsed, which probably
would've happened anyway, whether they had been nominally
communist or not, given the fact that their economy has
long been based on main exports vodka and corruption.
(And their totalitarianism, which almost nobody defends
anymore, had more to do with their own political
traditions and history than with the theories of Marx
and Engels.)
In "Sicko," we actually see the spectacle of
Americans "defecting" to communist Cuba in order to
get health care -- and it's no joke.
Oh, I can hear the conservatives now, talking about
the lack of freedom in Cuba. But let's dissect that cliche
for a moment, too.
In the U.S., every dissenter is free to savagely
criticize President Bush in the most radical ways,
but there's no real danger or risk in that.
After all, we work for corporations like
Hewlett-Packard and Oracle and Xerox and GE, not
for Bush. And if you work for Hewlett-Packard,
I dare you to go to the office tomorrow and start
criticizing your boss in order to see how your First
Amendment rights hold up. I dare you to go to work,
wherever you work, and say, my boss is a bum and my company
is run by a bunch of fascist thugs. First Amendment or
not, you'd likely be cleaning out your desk before the
day is done.
In America, you have very limited free speech rights
when it comes to the domain in which you really
reside: your workplace, where you spend most of your
day. Your actual residence is the fiefdom of Xerox or
GE or Oracle, not the U.S.
So, yeah, it's true: there is a public sector
tyranny in Cuba -- but there's a private sector
tyranny in America.
Just watch the final scenes of "Sicko" -- in which
Cuban firefighters in Havana stand to honor the New
York area firefighters who died so tragically on
9/11 -- and you'll realize we have a lot more in
common with the communists than we care to admit.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 3, 2008
Last Night in Berkeley, John Mellencamp Declares:
"Hatred Elected George Bush"Mellencamp performing last year (photo by Paul Iorio)John Mellencamp has never been known to hold
his tongue about much, and last night in Berkeley,
Calif., on the final date of his tour with Lucinda
Williams, he let it all hang out.
"It's that hatred that's getting people killed overseas,
it's that hatred that's getting -- well, let's call a
spade a spade -- it's that hatred that elected George
Bush," Mellencamp said to cheers from the crowd.
He then paused, chuckled a bit and said: "I'll probably
get arrested for saying that," as if realizing he had
said something a bit extreme.
Several songs later, before "Crumblin' Down," he dialed
back a bit on his comments. "I didn't mean to start
preachin' but I did a little bit," he said, adding at
another point that a lot of people think he
should "shut up about politics."
Mellencamp also talked unusually vividly, even by
his own standards, about the infamous racial incident
that happened last year in Jena, Louisiana.
"Down in Jena there was some kind of problem, you
know, and people thought it'd be a good idea if they
hung nooses in a tree," he began. "...That's a bad
idea no matter how you cut it. Hey, here's a
good idea:
[in an ironic, confidential tone]:
after the show let's all go...spray paint swastikas....That's
a good idea...That's not going to get a good result
no matter how you cut it. That is not the way we solve
problems. We're better than that." Fans cheered.
Then he launched into his song "Jena," played here a bit
like a Neil Young protest tune.
Mellencamp made his remarks at a sold-out gig at the
Greek Theater in Berkeley, last night (August 2),
supporting his recently released album, "Life Death
Love and Freedom." (I heard -- and recorded -- the gig
from the hills above the theater.)
His comments about "hatred" followed an anecdote he
told about an instance of racial discrimination he
experienced when he was a teenager in a rock band;
effectively, given the context of his story, he was
implying that
racial "hatred" played a part in
electing Bush.
His remarks, however, didn't upstage his music,
which was, at times, as good as live rock 'n' roll
gets; in fact, there are only a handful of acts
-- the Stones, Springsteen, U2, R.E.M., etc. -- who
can play rock with this level of mastery and intensity.
The last segment of the show -- in which he played
several of his best-known songs in rapid
succession -- felt sort of like a jet quickly
ascending over mountain peaks; his versions
of "Crumblin' Down" and "R.O.C.K. in the U.S.A."
had the irresistable force of the Rolling Stones
on their "Bigger Bang" tour, and it was almost
impossible not to dance (or not to move to)
the music.
Also notable were "Rain on the Scarecrow," a
defiant retort to anyone who thinks the Reagan era
was just an endless stream of jellybeans; "Check
It Out," the most enduring song from "The Lonesome
Jubilee"; and an unexpectedly strong "Human Wheels,"
as well as the half dozen or so new songs from his
latest album, "Life Death Love and Freedom," his best
CD in many years.
"Minutes to Memories," one of his finest songs, was
performed here solo acoustic, unfortunately flattening
a lot of the song's appeal, which has much to do with
its central guitar riff, absent here. For years,
I've enjoyed performing that song on acoustic guitar
for pleasure in my own apartment, and it works in a
bare arrangement, but only if you also include that
wonderful riff.
I remember Mellencamp splitting open Madison Square
Garden on December 6, 1985, with a vibrant, electric
version of that one, along with other tracks from
"Scarecrow," still his crowning achievement, in my
opinion. (That was the famous gig at which
Mellencamp generously offered to give everyone
their money back because he felt that a
slightly malfunctioning sound system was
diminishing the sound, when in fact it was
easily one of the greatest rock shows
I'd ever seen.)
Opening at the Greek was Lucinda Williams, playing
songs from her upcoming album "Little Honey," due
in October, and assorted songs from the past decade
or so, as well as a fun encore cover of AC/DC's "It's a
Long Way to the Top (If You Wanna Rock 'n' Roll)."
Ever since I first heard her perform, in 1988 at
Maxwell's in Hoboken, New Jersey, back when her
major song was "Changed the Locks," which she never
sings anymore, I've always had the urge to cry
whenever I hear her music.
I'm not joking: her stuff just breaks my heart,
and I get so sad when I hear it -- I don't know why
that is, though I do know that it has stopped me from
listening to her as frequently as I listen to, say, Bob
Dylan, whose brilliance she sometimes comes close to.
But remember: even at his most bitter and snarling,
Dylan had a marvelous sense of humor ("I can't help it
if I'm lucky" is worthy of a great stand-up comedian),
the missing element in her work.
I think the AC/DC cover is a really good sign. I'd
give a lot to hear her sing "You Shook Me All Night
Long."
my backstage pass to an AC/DC show in NY in '85.But I digress. Paul
________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for August 1 - 2, 2008
"Laugh-In" Is Forty, Dick Martin is Dead (But We'll Always Have Beautiful Downtown Burbank!)Jokes about Ralph Nader, Fidel Castro, the
Olympics, tensions between Pakistan and India,
the obsolescence of cash -- with a special
appearance by Regis Philbin. Sounds like
a new TV series, right?
Nope. I'm describing the first episodes
of NBC's "Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In," now over
forty years old but so ahead of its time in many
ways that it still seems progressive.
Or some of it does. Clearly, the mod garb and
slang are hopelessly outdated, more associated
today with Austin Powers than with anything else,
as are most of the topical references and silly
sayings such as "You bet your sweet bippy"
and "sock it to me," which never quite made
it into the lexicon after the 1970s.
But get beyond those superficial elements and
you'll see that "Laugh-In," as much as "Saturday
Night Live," was an exponential leap forward
pop-culturally -- and in prime time, no less,
where "SNL" proper never resided. Even today, a lot
of the stoned humor pioneered by "Laugh-In" is
relegated to the 11:30 hour or beyond,
or to cable.
The main thing, though, is that the series, at
least in its first years, is still very funny.
I recently rented a DVD of disc one of the first
season, which includes two episodes from early 1968,
and laughed and laughed.
Some of the one-liners are almost worthy of
Allen and Perelman.
"My grandfather is a sexagenarian," says one woman.
"That's amazing at his age," quips Dick Martin.
And there are humorous moments from Tim
Conway.
"Hey, man, I don't want my kids hearing all them dirty
words in the movies," says Conway. "They get enough of
that at home."
Elsewhere, Conway plays The Great Nervo, who makes
predictions about events that have already happened.
The two most entertaining regular features were the
opening cocktail party, at which partygoers would
tell a joke that sort of aspired to the level of a
New Yorker magazine cartoon (though many fell far
short of that goal); and "The Rowan & Martin Report"
(aka "Laugh-In Looks at the News"), a forerunner of
SNL's "Weekend Update."
The latter had a future news sub-segment, reporting
headlines from 20 years in the future, 1988 (oh,
how quickly a future date in time becomes a date
from the past in any sort of speculative comedy or
drama). It even joked about Reagan becoming president.
Among the more humorous future news bits: "Item.
White House. 1988. President Stokely Carmichael,
in his office in Hanoi, today once again repeated
that the United States must get out of America."
Some of the sketches were more cutting-edge than
most prime-time fare today. In one segment, Rowan
and Martin covered campus riots, play-by-play
style, as if they were sports events ("the winners
will be invited to meet Berkeley in the national
championship").
At another point, Sammy Davis Jr. and Joey Bishop
play government officials writing a press release
about an international incident at sea, gradually
altering the facts so that an accident in which 15
Russians were injured by Americans is changed to
one in which 15 Americans were deliberately hurt
by a Russian submarine.
One great thing about seeing this on DVD is that
you can finally slow down the ultra-quick cuts in
order to read the placards and bumper stickers that
whizzed by way too fast when they were first aired.
For the record, here's what was invisible to viewers
in 1968:
"Lower the Age of Puberty," "Get Our Boys Out of Berkeley"
and "Bullets are Forever."
Other highlights are abundant: a French juggler who
juggles plates but ends up breaking all of them; a
sight gag in which someone flamboyantly waves a sword at
Dan Rowan, who casually pulls out a gun and shoots him
(a similar bit got a lot of laughs many years later in
the movie "Raiders of the Lost Ark").
It's puzzling that other networks didn't counter-program
with their own knock-offs, though ABC tried and failed.
Ultimately, the show became passe by 1970 and was fully
eclipsed by the more outre "All in the Family" by 1971.
Its influence is still felt everywhere today from
"SNL" to "The Late Show with David Letterman," and
you can even see a stylistic thru-line from Rowan
to Letterman (though Letterman at this point has
become an original in his own category).
Last May, as everyone knows, Dick Martin died at
age 88, which is 23 years longer than his partner
lived. Their DVDs, obviously, live on, but rent
them with this caveat: make sure to get the
"Laugh-In" discs that have complete episodes, not
the best-of clip jobs, and stick to the stuff from
the early years.
* * * *
As soon as I finish reading the poems Coleridge
wrote on opium, the novels Hemingway wrote on booze,
the lyrics Lennon wrote on acid, and the works that
Ginsberg, Burroughs and Kerouac wrote on a variety
of recreational drugs, I'll read Princeton's study
(scientific, I'm sure) describing the underrated University
of Florida as a "party school."
But I digress
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 27, 2008
Last Night's Steely Dan Showreeling in the you-know-whatsAlmost everybody coming out of the Steely Dan
concert last night in Berkeley, Calif., was
smiling wide, as if they had just gotten
laid or were about to. The show was that
satisfying.
A couple hours earlier, from the stage, in the
middle of "Hey 19," Walter Becker even gave some
advice to the romantically inclined in the crowd.
"Sometimes on a summer night, way up in the hills of
Berkeley...after a Steely Dan show...you head home
with your beloved, the object of your affections,
and there's only one thing in mind: showing her
how much, how very much, you love her," said Becker,
who then proceeded to talk about one way to
have fun with your loved one.
"Go to the liquor cabinet," he said, and find
the stuff labeled "'100% guaranteed'...If you
break the seal, you're gonna feel real," he said.
"You understand what I'm saying?"
The crowd roared approval, as the band lit into
a soulful verse celebrating "Cuervo Gold."
From the beginning to the end of this two hour-plus
gig, Steely Dan was fully dedicated to making sure
everybody within earshot -- even the people up in the
hills, where I was -- was aesthetically satisfied
and entertained.
The pleasures were many. There were exotic sounds
from quirky instruments turning up like rare animals
at a zoo. One minute, the tenor sax and the tenor
trombone would be re-combining into new combinations,
then there would be mysterious guitar riffs creating
texture, nuance. Plus, and most important, you
could dance to it all, which a lot of people did.
As the summer night progressed, hits and new material
and obscurities came vividly to life: my favorites of
the night were "New Frontier," "Black Friday," "Peg"
and finale "Do It Again."
And there was Becker's colorful intro of
Donald Fagan: "Lead singer, pianist, singer-songwriter,
composer, author, producer, star of screen, stage
and television, man about town, stern critic of the
contemporary scene, please welcome, if you will,
the original, the originator, the one, the only
one, Mr. Donald Fagan."
After the show, as I walked back home, through my
favorite park in the world, I realized that the show
had caused me, for a time, to hear the sound of
chirping birds and the rest of the world in a brand
new way, which is one of the reasons I was
smiling, too.
But I digress, Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 27, 2008
A point missing in the discussion about
the surge in Iraq is that it's way too
early to declare "mission accomplished"
with regard to the lessening of hostilities
there. The surge is only a few months old,
and insurgents might easily re-surge later,
stronger than ever.
Remember: Tet was quashed, too, in early 1968,
but the guerillas came back with a vengeance and
fought on for several more years -- to victory,
in fact. (To be fair, McCain may not know about
all this, as I hear he didn't have access to
Cronkite in those years.)
Lately, McCain is sounding like a guy who drives
your car into a ditch and then wants to be
congratulated for replacing its flat tire, though
the car still remains in the ditch.
He's changing his heart
(you know who you are!): McCain has flip-flopped
from advocating a "hundred year"
presence in Iraq to supporting a
"time horizon" for withdrawal. * * *
Here's A New Idea for An Antonioni Exhibit....In the U.S., the neglect of Michelangelo Antonioni's
work verges on the criminal. Up until
recently, even some of his most popular films were
not available on DVD domestically.
Which is why it's so welcome to see that the
National Gallery in Washington, D.C., is in the
midst of a gourmet Antonioni retrospective, spanning
his entire career and including rarely-seen gems
like "L'eclisse," the last of the trilogy that
began with "L'avventura," and (especially)
"Deserto rosso (Red Desert)," which I am dying to
see because I'm told it experiments with color
(and birds!) brilliantly. (Check out
coverage of the screenings at washingtonpost.com.)
As I wrote in the Daily Digression on July 31, 2007:
"I've always had the feeling that if Michelangelo
Antonioni hadn't been a film maker, he would've
been a post-expressionist painter, because that's
the sensibility he brought to cinema. In fact, he
seemed to see film as an almost purely visual
medium, and the best example of that was the
dazzling end of "Zabriskie Point," which was
virtually one expressionist painting after
another, if you were to still each frame. I was
always waiting for Antonioni to take his aesthetic
to the next level and make a two-hour film that was
purely painterly visuals, with no plot, no story."
Here's an original idea for a museum exhibit
that is long overdue: a photography exhibition of
stills -- blown-up still photographs -- of around
forty moments or scenes in Antonioni movies. I thought
of this idea after recently watching "The
Passenger" and finding that I kept pausing the
film just to savor various visual images that were
as powerful and resonant as many great modernist
paintings. This most painterly of auteurs should
surely have his moving paintings stilled and
displayed by a major museum.
But I digress. Paul
[photo of McCain from thewashingtonnote.com]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 23 - 24, 2008
A few notes on DVDs I've watched (or re-watched)
lately:
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN: After
re-watching it the other day, I was struck by
how Hitchcockian the suspense was (particularly
the sequence in which Josh Brolin sees Javier
Bardem's shadow beneath the door). The
first time I saw it, I was very impressed and
literally on the edge of my seat (to coin a phrase!),
but second and third viewings reveal flaws,
among them: suspense dissipates after the
first hour, despite a nice star turn by Woody
Harrelson; Tommy Lee Jones's opening VO segues
into Brolin's first appearance onscreen, confusing
viewers into thinking the VO was Brolin's
(further, what Jones says about "old-timers" and
generations changing hands doesn't really come
into play later in the film); it's not
believable that the cop in the opening sequence
would separate Bardem from his oxygen tank in
the squad car; etc.
More significantly, the two main characters are
indistinctly conceived. Brolin's character is
initially drawn sort of like Kris Kristofferson's
memorable sunuvabitch in "Lone Star"; but that
persona is soon supplanted by a more typical
Coen Bros. character: the bumbler a la William
H. Macy in "Fargo." And it's an uneasy combination,
likely the result of competing, colliding visions.
Likewise, Bardem's character, truly a singular
creation of American cinema, is nonetheless
indecisively conceived. In the early part of
the film, he's scripted as a serial thrill killer
who kills for killing's sake. But as the
movie progresses, the concept of his character
shifts -- not through evolution -- to that of
a businessman in the underground economy who
is semi-reasonably trying to get back
money stolen from him. There's less duality
here than flawed concept.
Still, a great thriller -- and probably as good
as "Fargo," the Coen brothers's peak to date.
* * *
THERE WILL BE BLOOD: Unlike
"No Country For Old Men," "There WIll Be Blood"
gets better with each viewing. It unfolds much
more naturally and organically, and has the epic
sweep of a best picture Oscar winner, which it
didn't win but should've. And it's probably the
first major film since Kubrick's "2001: A Space
Odyssey" to be wordless in its first fifteen
minutes or so -- but with all meaning perfectly
conveyed. Seeing this right after "No Country"
makes the latter look like a cartoon. Paul
Thomas Anderson is like Coppola and Polanski in
his ability to create a complex plot that
yields new revelations on fifth and sixth
viewings. The brilliance is everywhere:
the baptism by oil, the thunderstorm of gold,
the "milkshake" sequence at the end, the
"Peachtree Dance" moment of truth with
Henry, etc.
The plot is sort of like an entrepreneurially
legitimate version of the entrepreneurially
nefarious sub-plot of "Chinatown," in which
Noah Cross and others are trying to bump people
off their land in order to turn the land into
valuable property. Of course, Plainview is more
honest, even if he tries to give them "quail
prices" at first. (And good to see Eli Sunday
"repenting" before his death.)
* * *
JESUS CAMP: Fascinating docu
about the thoroughly nauseating indoctrination
of kids into fundamentalist religion. The sort
of manipulation of impressionable children
depicted here is not just disgusting; it's
child abuse.
It also proves beyond any doubt that most people
in the modern era don't come to religion
naturally but through warped, intense brainwashing
at an extremely tender age. Left to their own
devices, these kids might have gravitated naturally
toward the wisdom of Aristotle, Nietzsche, Sartre,
Yeats, Bob Dylan, etc. -- all better writers
than the anonymous folks who wrote and revised
and (badly) translated the Bible.
* * *
A MIGHTY HEART: I expected
an earnest, well-meaning work but was
pleasantly surprised at how consistently gripping
it was, from beginning to end -- a very satisfying,
moving movie that refuses to be exploitative about
the tragic death of journalist Daniel Pearl. And
Angelina Jolie disappears into Mariane Pearl
the way a great actress should. You know, with
all the tabloid headlines about her these days,
we tend to forget that she's a first-rank actor
(and you can almost believe she might be a
presidential contender in 2020).
* * *
GANGS OF NEW YORK: Funny thing
is, "Gangs" could pass for futuristic. As an
evocation of Boss Tweed's Tammany New York, it's
magical, convincing. But the style of its characters
is so inventive and unfamiliar that it's almost a
depiction of a future era of thuggery, the way
Stanley Kubrick/Anthony Burgess created ultra-modern
droogs, who dressed flamboyantly and spoke in
pseudo-Shakespearian slang (a characterization
that, by the way, was reportedly based on
real-life 20th century street criminals in
St. Petersburg who wore Edwardian garb and
had their own Russian dialect).
At times, it's like walking through pre-Civil War
New York, the way it must've really been. You
also see that, before the Civil War, parts of
America still had a tin-whistle Colonial
resemblance, while the decades after the Civil War
were more akin to the modern era (in fact, that's
when the grandparents of most baby boomers
were born).
Anyway, I digress.
A masterful film, even if it has neither the epic
perfection of "The Godfather, Part 2" nor the concision
of "Goodfellas." After seeing it a second time, I had
opposite feelings simultaneously: it should've
been edited down to something more succinct and it
should've been expanded by another hour.
* * *
GRIZZLY MAN: It's one of
the best documentaries of the decade -- and
not just because it features footage of
a guy hours and days before he was eaten by a
brown grizzly bear in Alaska, though that's one
of its draws.
It's also a penetrating portrait of someone
with a death wish, a clinically depressed alcoholic
who replaced booze with the natural adrenaline
released by hanging out with deadly animals. The
doomed subject, Timothy Treadwell, revered and
anthropomorphized and sentimentalized bears, a fatal
misjudgment. But before that judgment becomes fatal,
we experience his obsessive love of wildlife
and Alaska, the very picture of untrammeled
paradise, though it's telling to see that even in
these remote reaches of the far north, where there's
almost no human population, he's still as full
of anger and frustration as someone living in a
crowded slum (witness his tirade around 80
minutes in).
Ultimately, the foxes almost upstage the bears
in this film; you'll never think of a fox the same
way after seeing how much they look like a mere whim
(Richard Thompson's instrumental during
the fox chase sequence is immensely enjoyable).
In the end, Treadwell filmed his own death, but with
the lens cap on -- an apt metaphor for someone shutting
his eyes to the danger nearby.
* * *
C.S.A.: CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA: Perhaps the most unimaginative mock-documentary ever
made. And I'm not saying that because I'm privately
offended by something in it, because I'm not offended by
it. I'm merely astounded by the degree to which the film
makers did not smartly (or even interestingly) (or even
competently) extrapolate from its premise to the future.
For the dim only.
* * *
DOCTOR ZHIVAGO: Finally saw the
double-DVD edition that was released a couple
years ago, though I must admit I have nothing
major to add to critical thought about this
flick right now. It has moments of indelible
beauty and other moments...not so indelible.
To my knowledge, no one has brought up the
fact that its theme song, "Somewhere My Love
(Lara's Theme From 'Doctor Zhivago')," is
overplayed to the point of distraction -- something
like 27 times. And while the theme is a classic
of its kind, the song doesn't seem to have an
ethnic Russian flavor the way, say, the music of
"Zorba the Greek" is distinctly Greek
and the music of "The Godfather" is Italian.
"Somewhere My Love" could as well be the theme
of a British period drama.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 21, 2008
The Next Coen Brothers PictureThe Fall movie season kicks off after Labor Day with the
Coen Brothers's comic take on paranoid movies, "Burn After
Reading," starring That "Oceans" Team Clooney and Pitt. The next Coen Brothers movie, "Burn After Reading,"
is a C.I.A.-themed comedy starring Brad Pitt, George
Clooney and John Malkovich.
I've not yet seen the film, due in theaters after
Labor Day, a traditionally fallow period for
releases, but it looks to be a send-up of the
sorts of paranoid movies that Clooney has starred
in in recent years.
After "Michael Clayton" and "Syriana," I thought
Clooney's next project might be the feature film
version of "The Man From UNCLE," an idea I'm sure
is kicking around Burbank these days, or will be
once someone reads this.
Frankly, I think Clooney works better in movies
less byzantine than "Michael Clayton" and
"Syriana," Paranoid Movies of the kind I poked
fun at in a feature for the San Francisco Chronicle
newspaper in '97 that included a usable game board
for The Paranoid Movie Game, which I'm re-printing
here, for your enjoyment!
Have hours of fun with The Paranoid Movie Game! (I conceived and designed and wrote the Paranoid Movie Game for the San Francisco Chronicle in '97 (the only elements not authored by me are the drawings within the boxes).] But I digress. Paul
[photo of Clooney and Pitt: photographer unknown.]__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 20, 2008
Last Night's Feist ShowFeist played Berkeley, Calif., last night
and was alluring, enchanting, impossibly
seductive. Hard to believe from
the fervent reaction of the mostly twentysomething
crowd that she wasn't always a Big Indie Star, but
as recently as a couple years ago, she wasn't.
"1234," of course, changed all that, and though
everyone has heard it a few million times,
the song is still astonishingly fresh and carefree
and irresistible -- perfect folk-pop magic, like the
memory of hiking through a forest as a child. Played
here at mid-set, it seemed to cast a spell on fans,
even the ones listening from the hills above
the theater, where I heard the show.
In a 90-minute set that featured much of her latest
album, "The Reminder," released around 15 months ago,
Feist was both bold and fragile, sexy and innocent,
guileless and knowing, spontaneous, loquacious, even
chatty, talking about everything from apartment living
to opening for Rilo Kiley. Highlights included
"Mushaboom" ("We'll collect the moments, one by one/
I guess that's how the future's done"), set closer
"Sea Lion Woman" and the second encore (don't know
the title of that one).
Opening act The Golden Dogs, a quasi-power pop
indie band from Toronto, is well worth checking out.
Very impressive set. I wish I knew the title of the
second song they played because it was truly
fabulous. Sort of a combination of the Velvets
and the Talking Heads and McCartney circa "Ram"
(and in fact they performed a wonderful cover
of McCartney's "1985"). I wouldn't be surprised
if they broke through in a big way.
The Golden Dogs, terrific band. But I digress. Paul
[photo of Feist from buzzworthy.com; pic of Golden Dogs from True North website.]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 18, 2008
OK, this is my last bit about that cover of
The New Yorker magazine. I just received my
subscription copy of the mag in the mail
(can't they put those postage address stickers
on the back, over the Saturn ad, so the covers
aren't defaced?).
Anyway, when you see the real cover, Barack looks
more like a U.S. Navy sailor during Fleet Week
than a practicing Muslim. And that empty chair?
They could've put Jeremiah Wright in that.
The other side of The New Yorker cover is,
literally, this advertisement (below) for the
Saturn Outlook luxury SUV, which sells for around
$30,000. Obviously, the front cover wasn't
so radical that it caused rich, conservative
back-cover advertisers to drop their ads.
"We hawk yer satire at the fronta da shop,
we hawk yer gas guzzler at da back."But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 17, 2008
No Riots Yet Over The New Yorker CoverAs The New Yorker's David Remnick noted last
night on "Charlie Rose," the best commentary about
his magazine's controversial Obama cover came
from Jon Stewart, who said the following:
"You know what [Obama's] response should've been? It's
very easy here, let me put the statement out for you:
'Barack Obama is in no way upset about the cartoon that
depicts him as a Muslim extremist. Because you know
who gets upset about cartoons? Muslim extremists! Of
which Barack Obama is not. It's just a fucking
cartoon.'"
And Remnick rightly wondered whether the cover's
detractors also took other satire, like "A Modest
Proposal," literally (which is something I also
wondered in my July 14th Digression, below).
Recently I read all TNY's cartoons from the
1920s to today, and one thing that struck me was
the courage it showed in the late 1930s and
early 1940s in skewering Nazism. Today, I see
that sort of welcome audacity in the famous
Jyllands-Posten cartoon series of 2005, which
is wearing very well with time.
The Obama cover: not quite as ballsy as this. But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- Remnick is also right when he expresses
distaste for editors and others who say, "I get it
but let's not publish this because THEY may not get it."
I can attest that that sort of attitude
does exist among certain people in publishing; my
last editor, a senior editor, at the San Francisco
Chronicle (let's call him "David," though that may or may
not be his real name) once asked me to delete the word
"ubiquitous" from a news story because he thought readers
might not understand such a "big" word. People are smarter
than you think, I told him -- or at least they're smarter
than "David," who also thought the phrase
"quid pro quo" meant cause and effect. Look, I prefer
simple, direct language in news stories, but sometimes
a word just fits, as ubiquitous, a pretty common word,
did in this case. (By the way, how did "David" manage
to flourish at the newspaper, where he's still employed?
The same way Donald Rumsfeld flourished at Defense (and
convinced otherwise bright people to back the Iraq war
in '03): by lying, which I'm sure my former editor
will be doing once he reads this.)
__________________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 16, 2008
Once again, the Daily Digression leads the pack!
In my July 14, 2008, column (below), I noted the
"irony-deficiency" of those critical of the
controversial cover of The New Yorker magazine.
On July 15th, in the Los Angeles Times, James
Rainey also wrote about such an "irony-deficiency."
(July 14th, of course, came before July 15th --
and his story was a riff on breaking news, not a
piece that was six months in the making.)
Rainey probably didn't even see my blog before
he wrote his thing, but there is a problem out there
with big media companies ripping off the ideas and
language of bloggers who have low readership like
myself. The Daily Digression, and other blogs, are
becoming a sort of backwater for good ideas that
journalists with tight deadlines at big newspapers
can steal with near-impunity.
If you guys are going to pilfer my ideas, and I'm
not implying Rainey did (neither of us invented
the phrase, after all), take a few seconds to say
or write: "As freelance writer Paul Iorio put it."
P.S. -- And if the Rainey story is actually bait --
a deliberate nicking of my material in order to
provoke a response for which they have a readymade
retort (e.g., "that's typical Paul") -- my response is:
I don't care if it's bait or not. If you steal my
material, I'm going to note it publicly and to your
editors. And if it's merely an innocent matter of
my idea preceding yours, I'm going to make sure people
know who came first.
* * *
There should be no compassionate release for
Susan Atkins. Let her die in prison -- that's
exactly what she deserves.
There are good, honest poor people out there
who have never committed an awful crime, who die
abusive, unspeakably cruel deaths because
they don't have money for the basics. Where is
the compassion for them?
Rather than focus time and energy on a homicidal
sadist like Atkins, let's instead focus our
generosity on poor people who are dying and in pain
because they can't afford medication, who are being
evicted by callous landlords who couldn't care less
that their tenant is dying, who are the targets of
muggers because they are weak from chemo, who are dying
in homeless shelters or on the street without even a
proper bed, etc. By contrast, Atkins has it made
in the shade.
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
extra! for July 14, 2008
The New Yorker Cover, and Sharpton's Irony-DeficiencyI actually talked once, one on one, with Al Sharpton,
in a telephone interview in late 1985, when I was a
writer/reporter for music trade magazine Cash Box
in New York. He was virtually unknown then and
organizing some sort of anti-drug benefit concert,
and I thought it would be a newsworthy item for my
weekly column, East Coastings.
It wasn't an in-depth Q&A, just a casual quickie
with some guy who was putting together a show for what
seemed like a good cause.
But around ten minutes into the conversation, I noticed
there was something really ugly about this guy Sharpton.
As gracious and nice as I was being to him, he simply
wouldn't let me be gracious and nice, and he kept raising
his voice as if he were trying to pick a fight.
And I would say something like, well, good luck with
the concert and thanks for the interview, and he would
shout for no reason at all as if he wanted an argument.
Strange, unpleasant fellow, I thought at the time.
It was only years later that I was told that Sharpton
was not the sort of activist he was pretending to be,
and that he was actually working as an undercover agent
for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (that sort of thing
is hard to confirm, but I've heard it from multiple reliable
sources). For the '85 conversation, he was directed to me
by a colleague who was, evidently, trying to cause problems
for me in some way or deflect attention away from himself
for some reason.
Let me further digress here for a moment to provide
full context. A few years later, as an independent
investigative reporter, working at first for the Village
Voice on spec, and then for a time for CBS's "60 Minutes,"
I did uncover disturbing information -- downright
nauseating information -- that linked my magazine Cash
Box with the worst sort of industry corruption. But keep
in mind, I was the one who uncovered and exposed this
nefarious activity. And, I should note, there were a lot
of music-news reporters at the time who didn't lift a finger
to voice support for (much less help) my investigation, even
though they knew full well what I had uncovered, and even
after I was nearly murdered in front of a shoe store on
West 72nd Street in Manhattan in a still-unexplained
assault during the week I went to "60 Minutes"
(October 13, 1990). [Advice for aspiring freelancers:
don't get physically injured while freelancing,
because you won't be able to afford to fix your
injury. You think the
government doesn't care
about your health care?! Corporate America
cares even less.)
I say all this to show the landscape in which Sharpton, the
FBI agent, phoned me, one of the honest guys at Cash Box.
(For the record, most of the editorial people at the
magazine had a lot of integrity; certainly my
writer/reporter colleagues in New York and Los Angeles
were honest pros; but it was on the business side, mostly
in the Nashville bureau, where there was extremely corrupt
activity.)
Anyway, in the subsequent years Sharpton eventually
made a name for himself as an activist, though few of
his supporters seemed to know his apparent history
with the FBI -- and even fewer know about his past
today, it seems.
When the Tawana Brawley scandal broke in 1989, it
didn't surprise me at all to see Al, the blowhard
who I had interviewed years before, at the forefront,
this time shouting lies as loud as he could in front of
every camera he could find. I had already experienced
his pick-a-fight attitude and deception, and all of
that was on grand display during the Brawley affair,
when Sharpton lied, lied and lied again for
personal gain. And I have yet to hear him apologize for
his role in the Brawley hoax, and until I do, I will
never consider taking him seriously or believing a word he
says.
If I had lied the way he lied about Brawley, I would
have never worked another day in any field. So tell me
why he's still on the public stage? It's not like
the man has changed; he has gone from championing
Brawley in '89 to defending liar Crystal Mangum in
'06.
But there are other reasons why Sharpton is abhorrent,
e.g., his religious fundamentalism, which puts him in bed
with Pat Robertson, and not just jokingly, either. In the
years since Brawley, he has become indistinguishable
from a right-winger with regard to issues of
censorship and First Amendment rights.
The latest example is typical. There was Al, earlier today,
yelling like people couldn't hear him, trying to gain
advantage by criticizing the witty, controversial cover
of The New Yorker magazine that satirizes perceptions
about Barack Obama. Seeing him on various news programs
today, it was clear Sharpton really was out of his depth,
without the brainpower to take on the sort of high satire that
he didn't understand. I mean, the guy is such a religious
literalist that you wonder whether he even knows what
irony is.
But there he was tonight on some nightly news show.
"Michelle in an Afro wig, [Obama] in Muslim garb: it
plays on all the ridiculous notions that we
hope we're getting out of American politics," Sharpton
told one television reporter.
Clearly, Sharpton is irony-deficient. Does he also
not understand Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" and
other serious satiric works of literature? Or pop
cultural touchstones like Elton John's "Texas
Love Song"? Does he take those works literally, too?
Until Sharpton decides to take some time out for a college
level course on satire, he really shouldn't be weighing in on
subjects he knows absolutely nothing about.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 14, 2008
Here are the two latest installments of my
comic strip series "The Continuing Adventures
of bin Laden, the Jihadist Pooch." (Another
dozen episodes are
at www.ioriocartoons2.blogspot.com.)
[Note: I know, I know -- every dog is unique and
has his or her own personality. Some dogs are
good-hearted, loving and even heroic, and they
don't deserve to be lumped in with a sick mammal
like bin Laden. So, to dog-lovers everywhere: it's
not my intention to de-individualize (de-humanize?)
dogs with my cartoon series.]* * * *
QUICK NOTES: Bravo to The New Yorker for
its ballsy cover of Barack and his wife,
making satirically explicit the implicit,
unspoken, irrational fears of the American
ring-wing...the Washington Post's Shailagh Murray
is a smart addition to PBS's "Washington
Week"....Very cool of Little Steven to celebrate
Bastille Day on last night's "Underground Garage,"
must-hear radio...For the record, The Daily Digression
was the first media outlet to speculate about an appearance
by Ted Kennedy at Invesco Field in August (see Daily
Digression, July 9, 2008, below); a couple days
later, on July 11, on "The NewsHour," the
always-interesting Mark Shields talked about his
own fantasy of a Ted Kennedy appearance in Denver...New
Newsweek poll showing Obama and McCain within a few
points of each other is probably far closer to the mark
than the previous ones showing a double-digit Obama
lead; the presidential race is shaping up to be yet
another near-50:50 contest that will be fought and won
in places like Gettysburg, not in the mountains of
Montana. And to those who think race is not a
significant factor in the election, I say: race
would be a substantial element even if the
vice-presidential candidate -- and not the
presidential contender -- was African-American....OK,
someone pointed out to me that a certain woman
has a wedding ring on her left hand. True, but there's
always hope, however distant, that her right hand
is available! (Just joking.) (I think.) (HD TV
is quite revealing.)
I heard the Feelies reunion shows in NY and NJ were great. So when do we get to hear them in northern California? (Also, anyone know where I can buy a new copy of "The Good Earth"? As you can see (above), my vinyl version is worn out!)But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 11, 2008
Second Takes On Recent Concerts I've Heard Listening to bootleg recordings of recent shows
I've heard, here are a few thoughts:
1) Mark Knopfler's "Cannibals" is a lot of fun
in concert, worth the price of admission in itself.
2) "Hot Corner" is the unexpected stand-out of the
recent B52s show in Berkeley, much better than
"Juliet of the Spirits," the 2nd single from the
band's new album.
3) Of all the songs Alison Krauss and Robert
Plant performed at their recent gig, "Please Read
the Letter" is the one I keep going back to.
4) If I rave any more about Jesca Hoop's set,
people might think I have a thing for her, so
I'll shut up.
5) The live verson of Death Cab's "I Will Possess
Your Heart" is addictive.
6) "Mr. Richards" is the best of the new
songs R.E.M. performed at its recent concerts
in Berkeley, though almost all the "Accelerate"
material is first-rate.
* * * *
Nothingness + Time = Matter Thanks to those who wrote to me about my "A does
not equal A" philosophical argument (The Daily
Digression, July 1, 2008, below). As I wrote,
my premise, if taken to its conclusion, debunks
certain fundamental ideas common to most
religions.
In my view, religious people of almost all
faiths focus too much on the mythological
moment of Creation -- and scientists focus too
much on the Big Bang, the moment when the
universe supposedly began.
But that's not how to look at it. The most likely
explanation of "Creation" is this, in my view:
in the beginning, there was no beginning, because there
was complete nothingness.
And nothingness, of course, did not require a creator
or a moment of creation.
Nothingness also has no beginning and no ending.
But nothingness plus time -- an uncountable amount of
time, trillions and trillions of millennia -- equals
matter, because (as I've noted before) time
is transformative. So nothingness over a vast
expanse of time will inevitably produce some
sort of small irregularity -- a wisp of gas, for
instance -- that, in further time, will lead to
another bit of matter and then another, setting
in motion the unfolding of the universe we
have today.
The element that most thinkers leave out of the
equation when discussing Creation is time, which
is really another form of nothingness and merely
our own contrivance, a way that we organize successive
instances of nothingness (and being) and stack them
atop one another to create order, something. Paradox,
obviously, did not need a creator, either.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 9, 2008
The Unspoken Debate About Obama's ElectabilityAn Imaginary DialecticANTI-OBAMA: Let me get this straight: the Dems
are nominating a guy who can't catch a cab in parts
of New York City, yet can win old south
states like Georgia and Virginia, where the
Confederate flag still flies. That's realistic?
PRO-OBAMA: You pundits are all the same. You said he
couldn't possibly win that U.S. Senate seat in '04, and
he won. You said he couldn't possibly win
the Democratic nomination for president, and he has won it.
And now you're saying he can't possibly win the presidency.
Some pundits ought to consider another line of work.
ANTI-OBAMA: But winning primaries is one thing; winning
the general is another altogether. George Wallace won
primaries and was probably on his way to the nomination in '72,
thanks to intense factional support that would not have
translated into a presidential win. I'd love to see how
Obama plans to win, say, Wisconsin, which Kerry
barely took.
PRO-OBAMA: Have you seen the major polls lately? Obama is
way ahead, sometimes by double digits, in all the major
swing states, including Wisconsin, Minnesota,
Michigan -- even Colorado.
ANTI-OBAMA: Yeah, and he was leading by double digits in
the polls in New Hampshire before he lost the New Hampshire
primary by double digits. So what does that tell you about
the reliability of polls about Obama?
PRO-OBAMA: But the polls were completely accurate in most
subsequent primary states. And voters have consistently said
they are more concerned about McCain's age than Obama's race.
ANTI-OBAMA: How stupid do you have to be to think a racist
is going to admit to a pollster, a complete stranger, on
the record, that he is a racist and wouldn't vote for
a black candidate?
PRO-OBAMA: Then how do you explain the crowds at Obama
rallies? How do you explain 70,000 people at a rally in
Oregon, a state where there are something like 7 black
people, I think. And he's drawing crowds in traditionally
red states. He's even campaiging in Montana. When was
the last time the interior west was seriously in play for
the Democrats?
ANTI-OBAMA: Reminds me of the student who doesn't want
to do the hard work of studying for a calculus exam and
instead spends all night doing something even more
difficult -- but by volition -- like investigating
the 19th century origins of mass transit in his hometown.
It's fun for him to go to Montana. And it's
a lot more scenic than campaigning in old-fashioned machine
areas of Pennsylvania where some white voters will
simply not vote for a black person. Period.
PRO-OBAMA: Every credible poll has him winning
Pennsylvania by a comfortable margin.
ANTI-OBAMA: Tell me exactly when all those bitter
Pennsylvanians suddenly fell into Barack's column?
Wasn't it just weeks ago that he couldn't win Pennsylvania
from Hillary no matter how much money he threw at it?
PRO-OBAMA: The money advantage he had over Hillary was
small compared to the money edge he has over McCain.
ANTI-OBAMA: Funny thing, if Obama had less money, he'd
probably do more. He'd be forced into a more meat and
potatoes strategy, parking in, say, Monroe County, Pa.,
or Grant County, Wisc. -- counties that were
virtually 50:50 in '04.
PRO-OBAMA: He can afford to lose Monroe County because
he'll make up for it by racking up larger totals in
Philadelphia than Kerry did. What you're
not seeing is that we're dealing with a different
electoral map this time. You're driving through
Yugoslavia with a 1988 road map.
ANTI-OBAMA: Things have changed since '88, but not
so much since 2004. I could drive through Yugoslavia
with a 2004 road map.
PRO-OBAMA: In retrospect, you'll see how historically
inevitable Obama's election was all along. McCain is an
antique -- what's the famous phrase in "The Godfather"?
"Pensa all'antica." He thinks in old ways. He's Crocker
Jarmon, to mix movie comparisons. Even looks a
bit like him. Obama's McKay.
ANTI-OBAMA: Obama may be historically inevitable -- but in
2020, not this year.
PRO-OBAMA: You'll be convinced when you see his acceptance
speech at Invesco Field this August. Smart idea. Barack
alfresco. The Dems can literally clear the air. The opposite
of the tear gas of '68. Barack and Hillary can elope in the
Rockies. Bill can join the "fairy tale" that has now become
reality. And maybe the party can even persuade Ted Kennedy to
make a swan song appearance for a closing night curtain call
with, among others, Jimmy Carter, for that public handshake
that didn't happen 28 years ago -- showing that we may
have our family squabbles, but in a crisis or a general
election, we come together.
ANTI-OBAMA: That's the movie version. The reality is that
lots of Hillary backers are going to vote for McCain, no
matter who the running mate is. As the cliche goes, people
don't vote the bottom of the ticket. He could choose even
Al Gore and it wouldn't have an appreciable effect. In
the end, McCain will win at least 300 electoral votes.
PRO-OBAMA: In the end, Barack will win with around 300
electoral votes.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for July 1, 2008
Here's the latest installment of my comic strip
series "The Continuing Adventures of bin Laden,
the Jihadist Pooch!" Click it to enlarge it!
(Another dozen episodes are
at www.ioriocartoons2.blogspot.com.)
[By the way, those ubiquitous "Unlikely Alliance"
ads featuring Al Sharpton and Pat Robertson were
created months after my own Daily Digression
column of December 18, 2007, about what I
called "The Robertson/Sharpton Religious
Conservative Axis" (archived below).]
* * *
Bee BalletWhile listening to the B52s concert in Berkeley
on Sunday night, and watching people in the audience
dance inventively, I wrote in my notebook: "The B52s
are really choreographers, or choreographers in
reverse, in that their music strongly suggests,
even compels, certain dance moves by listeners."
Yesterday morning, I got an email from the
brilliant conceptual artist Jonathon Keats that
shows he had been thinking independently along
that line -- about external stimuli suggesting
choreography -- for longer than I have. Except he's
now taking the idea to a whole different level.
The premise of his latest conceptual art
work -- and I hope I'm getting this half right -- is
that plants and flowers will suggest choreography for
dancing bees -- real bees. Keats has created what he
calls a "bee ballet" -- commissioned by the Yerba
Buena Center of the Arts in San Francisco -- made
possible by the planting of "hundreds of flowering
cosmos plants" in various neighborhoods in San Francisco
with the intention of having bees dance and buzz
around them in unpredictable patterns and ways.
With consultation from a Smithsonian zoologist, Keats
is creating choreography for bees by planting plants
and flowers that strongly suggest a pattern of motion
for the bees. But the audience will have to
imagine the dances created by the bees -- extrapolating,
of course, from the plant stimuli they're encountering.
Keats is sort of a 21st century combination of
Wittgenstein and Warhol, specializing in these
sorts of "thought experiments," as he calls them,
that dwell at the intersection of art, philosophy and
humor. (For example, he once sold his thoughts to
museum patrons and has literally copyrighted his
own mind.)
And he once mounted a petition drive in Berkeley to
create a binding city law, a Law of Identity, that
states A=A.
Yeah, I know that last one was meant as a bit of
absurdist humor, but the more you think about the
logic of it, the more A=A becomes less self-evident.
For example, the lamp-in-your-bedroom equals
the-lamp-in-your-bedroom. True or false? At first,
you say that that's obviously true. But then
you think about it and realize it's not so obvious at
all. Because the first iteration of the
"lamp in your bedroom" (A) happened a second or two
before your reiteration of "the lamp in your bedroom" (A),
so the second "A" is a different "A" because it
is conjured at a different point in time than
the first A.
Another example: if I were to say, "Paul Iorio equals
Paul Iorio," that's not really true. Because in
stating the equivalency, you're positing Paul Iorio at
two separate moments in time. And as Heraclitis once
said, "You can never step in the same river twice." Time
is transformative. Therefore, A does not equal A.
If you say "A" at 8pm and then "A" again at 8pm and
five seconds, the second "A" is not an identical
equivalent but a subsidiary reiteration of the
original A; you're saying the second A with the
idea that it is a copy, not the original.
(The implications of this demolish the idea of a
fixed soul, if you carry the logic forward, which
I won't do here because I don't have time.)
I could go on. (Of course, the preceding four paragraphs
about A=A are my own thoughts, not the thoughts of
Keats or anyone else.) But let me end with a photo I took of
Keats OuijaVote balloting system, which was on display
last winter at the Berkeley Art Museum.
For specifics about Keats's bee ballet, go to
http://www.ybca.org/tickets/production/view.aspx?id=6878 .
Keats' OuijuaVote balloting system. But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 30, 2008
Last Night's B52s Show, Etc. The first time I heard the B52's in concert was
in the summer of 1979, just as its first album was
being released. The quintet was playing Wollman
Rink in New York's Central Park and, if I'm not mistaken,
was opening for the Talking Heads.
I remember everybody in the audience seemed to
have a copy of New York Rocker, one of the great
music newspapers of the era, and a lot of people
were completely unfamiliar with the B52s, despite
the fact that local radio station WPIX (what
a fun and smart station that was back then;
remember the PIX Penthouse Party?) was playing
tracks from the debut.
From my perch in the rocks at the edge of
Wollman (where one could see and hear the whole
show perfectly), I was knocked out and thinking
I'd never heard anything like them before. The big
song of the night seemed to be "52 Girls," and
some people in the audience thought the name of
the band was 52 Girls, and there was one guy who
couldn't see the stage who was wondering whether there
were 52 girls in the band. Such was the mystery
and mythology surrounding the arrival of these wacky
space-age Athenians.
By this summer, punk had long since morphed
into various New Wave mutations, and the Ramones
had sort of gone Hollywood. (Their own Wollman Rink
show of '79 sparked open arguments among fans
leaving the gig; some loved it (as I did) and
some didn't; I remember "Don't Come Close," which
they didn't really play much after '79, sounded so
thrilling and buoyant that day.)
But getting back to he B52s. As I left the gig,
the main things I remember are that "52 Girls" was
the dominant song and the late, great Ricky Wilson was
the bandmember people were taking about most.
Fast forward 29 years later. Berkeley, Calif. The Greek
Theater. Last night. The B52s have returned after a
16-year absence with a new album, "Funplex," only their
third post-Ricky Wilson album since his extremely
untimely death in '85. The last time the B52s had an
album out, Bush was president, there was a bad recession
and Iraq was the center of foreign policy debate. In
other words, nothing has changed.
"Funplex" is a surprisingly vital album, and the
50-minute set the band played last night, as part
of Cyndi Lauper's "True Colors" extravaganza
(I covered the 2007 edition of that tour in this
space), was very danceable and very enjoyable. Set
included a half dozen new tunes ("Funplex" and
"Hot Corner" were the best of those), classics like
"Rock Lobster" and "Roam," and lots of humorous stage
banter (including a dis of Larry Craig). Great to hear
them in such fine form.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 29, 2008
Massive Indie StarIt takes around 9 seconds to fall in love with
Jesca Hoop's musicPlease let me rave embarrassingly about Jesca Hoop,
who opened for Mark Knopfler last night at the Greek
Theater in Berkeley. Her stuff is absolutely,
astonishingly, I'm-running-out-of-superlatives to
describe how brilliant a singer-songwriter she is.
Hadn't heard her name before last night, but I fell
in love with her music approximately 9 seconds into
her opening song.
Hoop understands that a three-minute song is its
own free universe, with as many time zones as you want
it to have, with melodies within melodies, with any
unpredictability you can get away with, using very
little sound to get a lot of effect.
In her five song set, she fell into melodies like water
into crevices, or a river into tributaries, and each
song -- "Summertime," "Money," finale "Seed of
Wonder," from her debut album "Kismet" -- topped the
previous one.
Amazing. I bet she'll she be as big as Feist within
a few years.
* * *
(and while I'm in a raving mood!)Knopfler: Better Than Ever Live30 years after his debut, he continues to astonishLast night, Mark Knopfler played the fifth
date of his U.S. tour in support of his latest
solo album, "Kill to Get Crimson," a further
resurgence in a career that keeps flying higher
almost each time out.
Among the peaks of the show: "True Love Will
Never Fade," the first single from the new one,
which had the power of an "Oh Mercy"-era Dylan
ballad; "Cannibals," which felt like an open
air celebration in New Orleans; "What It Is," which
(to me) evokes a vintage western flick (especially
when you hear it in the hilly woods above the theater,
where I heard both Knopfler and Hoop) ; encore
"So Far Away," always a sure shot; and the most
riveting "Sultans of Swing" I've ever heard him
play in concert.
In the 30 years since "Sultans" and the first
Dire Straits album were released (30 years ago this
October), Knopfler has successfully
re-invented himself so often that he could
conceivably play a set with no Straits material and
still satisfy fans, who love getting lost
in his guitar playing much as people used to
hang on every note of Jerry Garcia's jams. As
marvelous as his singing is, perhaps he should toy
with the idea of performing a series of completely
instrumental concerts; I thought of this while
listening to the inspired jam at the end of
"Marbletown," when Knopfler riffed with his
pianist like great conversation or two rapid streams
merging. This is a tour worth catching.
But I digress. Paul
[photo of Hoop from Minnesota Public Radio; pic of Knopfler from wordpress.com.]_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 28, 2008
Last Night's Robert Plant/Alison Krauss ConcertRobert Plant and Alison Krauss played such a
terrific show last night at the Greek Theater
in Berkeley that one hopes they turn their concerts
into a live album/DVD and release "The Battle
of Evermore" as their first single, because
"Evermore," at least last night, was as awesome
as anything I've heard live in years, with Plant's
singing recalling his 4th album prime, and Krauss
trading and weaving vocals with Plant like a
great tapestry.
It was the undisputed highlight of this concert,
and even in the hills above the theater, where
I heard the show, fans were entranced, charged.
But this was no Zeppelin or Plant solo gig, not
by a long shot. In fact, it was as much a Krauss
concert as anything else, and was sooo T Bone in
sensibility, and was actually a true and seamless
fusion of disparate styles, as well as an ironic
reclamation by a British rocker of his American
roots. (Originality, of course, is often the
inadvertent product of failed imitation; on
the way to following in the footsteps of
various blues legends, Zep became something
else altogether: a bona fide original in
its own right.)
Highlights were everywhere. T Bone did a marvelous
"Primitives," with the memorable line: "The
frightening thing is not dying/the frightening thing
is not living."
Krauss hit high notes with Gene Clark's "Through the
Morning, Through the Night," from Krauss/Plant's
"Raising Sand" album, and with the
haunting, siren-like "Trampled Rose." (Though
let me take this opportunity to say there are
way, way too many songs in popular music
about roses, an overrated, predictable flower.
And there aren't nearly enough tunes about, say,
the Venus Fly-Trap or Jimson Weed,
which would set an ominous Tone for a song,
dontcha think?)
But I digress.
There was also a fresh reimagining of "Black Dog"
on banjo. (Another way to have re-arranged that
one would have been to play it briskly
on acoustic guitar, scatting the main Page guitar
riff; try it -- it's fun.)
A couple missed opportunities: "Celebration
Day" could have been transposed for banjo to fine
effect (imagine that intro live!), and
"Bron-Y-Aur Stomp" could have leveled the place
in this context.
On the way home, I couldn't help but think of what
I'd written in this space before: that T Bone
should produce a musical version of "Robert Altman's
'Nashville'" for Broadway or Off-Broadway. The
main parts of "Nashville" are easily transferable
to the stage, and its music and story are fully
ready for rediscovery by a new generation.
For now, if I were Krauss and Plant, I'd provide
radio and MTV with their live "Battle of Evermore"
so everyone can hear it. Then again, it's 2008 -- an era
when everyone's a distributor! -- and that means it's
already all over YouTube. Check it out there.
But I digress. Paul
________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 27, 2008
One original photo I left out of the June 6th column
is a picture I took of Jim Campbell's "custom electronic
installation," part of his "Triptych" (2000), on display
at the Berkeley Art Museum. It's a glowing, space-age
looking thing on the wall -- and looks even more so
when you photograph it.
Part of Jim Campbell's "Triptych" (photo by Paul Iorio].
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 24, 2008
Here's the latest episode of my cartoon series "The
Continuing Adventures of Bin Laden, the Jihadist
Pooch!" (This particular frame was inspired by Jim
Borgman's Carlin-inspired cartoon of last week.)
My other cartoons in this series are at:
http://ioriocartoons2.blogspot.com.
* * * *
The other day, I came up with an idea for
a political bumper sticker, and here it is:
[Note: The Daily Digression tries to provide even-handed analysis and reporting about politics and pop culture (and beyond!) and does not formally endorse political candidates. If I come up with an interesting bumper sticker idea about McCain, I'll be publishing that one, too.]* * * *
Strange story. French president Sarkozy heard a
gunshot on an airport tarmac today. Rumor has it
he immediately surrendered and offered to set up
a coalition government in Vichy.
* * * *
If you don't live in northern California, you
probably don't fully appreciate the current
atmospheric situation out here, which is
downright weird. Over the last several days there
have been what they call "dry lightning"
strikes -- hundreds of 'em -- that have
sparked hudreds of brush and wild fires in the Bay
Area and beyond. No one fire is especially
dominant, but taken together, they have created very,
very unusual air-quality conditions. What I mean
is, when you step ouside in the SF Bay Area, you can
actually smell smoke, as if a fire were nearby. In fact,
in Berkeley, where I live and where there are no fires,
I can smell smoke in the hallway of my apartment house
from faraway infernos. This is a first for me and a lot
of people.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 23, 2008
A mid-summer's day obscenity bust: Carlin's mugshot for Milwaukee Summerfest arrest, 1972. There's now one less genius on the planet;
George Carlin has died.
I loved the guy's comedy, I really did. More than
any humorist other than Woody Allen, Carlin most
closely expressed my own feelings about religion, and
he was enormously bold and brave and funny about
doing so -- and a few hundred years ahead of his
time, too.
As he would be the first to admit, if he could, he's
not in heaven or in hell right now; he's dead, as we'll
all be eventually. But he created moments of pure
heaven while he was alive, which is the point (and maybe
the only point).
I've been fortunate enough to have interviewed
several of the greatest stand-up comedians of
all time (Richard Pryor, Woody Allen (who is also
far more than a stand-up)), but I never met or talked
with Carlin, and now I never will, which is only one
of the reasons I'm sad about his death.
police report on Carlin's Summerfest bust.
* * * *
Revolution is a powerful tool that should be
used only rarely and sparingly -- and only when all
legitimate channels are blocked and the level of
oppression is unacceptable.
If ever there was a case for revolution -- armed,
violent insurrection -- that case is vivid and
clear in the nation of Zimbabwe today.
Morgan Tsvangirai has withdrawn from the presidential
race because his supporters are being attacked and
massacred by allies of tyrant Robert Mugabe, who wants
to retain power despite his evident lack of popular
support. But Tsvangirai should do more than just
boycott the election; he should carefully and steadily
consider gathering weapons and arming guerillas for
a coup aimed at toppling the current regime.
Perhaps everyone should do the short math on this
one. Sanctions won't work (they rarely do). Condemnation
by the Security Council won't work (it rarely does).
Mugabe isn't going to budge (why should he?). And
Tsvangirai's supporters will continue to be targeted and
persecuted and killed (you can bank on that).
Let's hope the international community doesn't
vacillate about this situation Kofi Annan-style.
Unfortunately, Mugabe has made armed revolution
the only reasonable option for the oppressed in
Zimbabwe.
But I digress. Paul
[above, Carlin mugshot by unknown photographer]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
June 22, 2008
Last Night's Death Cab Concert Death Cab for Cutie performed a sold-out gig
last night in Berkeley, Calif., playing over half
of its new hit album, "Narrow Stairs," its
follow-up to 2005's "Plans," which (in my view) is
the band's peak work to date -- and this concert
made a better case for it than for the new one.
The show peaked in the middle, with the double shot
of "Soul Meets Body" and "I Will Follow You Into
the Dark," which is a fabulous song to hear outdoors
in the wooded hills above the Greek Theatre, where
I heard the whole show.
The best new ones were opener "Bixby Canyon
Bridge" and first single "I Will Possess Your Heart,"
which is somewhat in the spirit of the hypnotic, extended-play
mood of Wilco show-stopper "Spiders (Kidsmoke)," which
has spectacularly re-invented The Long Song
for modern indie consumption.
Also of note: a marvelous "Crooked Teeth" and set
closer "Transatlanticism," which had surprising
momentum.
Death Cab is evolving in interesting ways, though it
still reminds me of the unjustly overlooked indie band
The Connells -- and I can't help but think Ben Gibbard
sounds a bit like a cooler, more genuine
Al Stewart, though the band has more heft than either.
Opening act was Oakland's own Rogue Wave, which caught
fire nicely during its last two songs.
* * *
The Tree-Sitters, Day WhateverWalked by the controversial oak grove encampment in
Berkeley before midnight last night, on the way back
from Death Cab, and was astonished by the spectacle.
Two sets of metal barricades blocked the northbound
lane and sidewalk of Piedmont Ave. Two sets of barbed
wire fences surrounded the trees where environmental
activists have been living since late 2006 (see column,
below). Klieg-like night lights illuminated
the area like it was Stalag 17. Cops were everywhere.
Take it from my own first-hand experience: I have personally
seen Iron Curtain checkpoints inside Eastern Bloc countries
at the height of the Cold War that looked less fearsome
and fortified.
It's clear that what began as an act of vivid civil
disobedience has now become an out-of-control infection
in east Berkeley.
May I make a suggestion?
The sitters are confined to one tree, right? Then put
netting and cushions beneath that tree around 20 feet above
the ground. That way, if anyone falls, there will be no grave
injury. As it stands now, if someone falls and is
badly injured, then the university and the city will
have an exponentially more serious problem,
as well as a human tragedy. And the longer they stay
in the trees, the greater the chance of a mishap.
Currently, the mainstream student population at Cal
doesn't seem to care much about the oaks dispute.
(And frankly, as an issue, it doesn't rank nearly as
high in importance as, say, providing health care for
the uninsured -- now that's something worth
climbing a tree for!) But if one of the tree-sitters,
heaven forfend, were to be badly injured (or killed) as
the result of a fall, and if it were perceived to be
the fault of the authorities, you might have turbulence
similar to the People's Park riots of 1969.
On a more immediate level, a quick resolution of
this thing would free up police resources; it's
fair to say that last night there were probably
muggings and burglaries that were not prevented
because cops were deployed at the oak grove instead
of in high crime areas.
If the activists come down from the trees, they
can continue their protest by other means; if they
truly have popular support, they'll be able to
organize an effective boycott against
UC interests (they should study the effective tactics
used by Columbia University protesters to
force the university to divest from South Africa in
June 1984). While the sitters's cause may be just,
their tactics have gotten out of hand and are
backfiring.
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 19, 2008
The "Rad-Lab" on the Big DivideThis chemistry building and its chemicals, protected by this sign,
are mere feet from the Hayward earthquake fault in Berkeley, Calif.
[photo by Paul Iorio]Many years ago, the powers that be in California
said: let's build a radiation laboratory, a chemistry
building, a sports stadium, an amphitheater and a
student dorm on an active earthquake fault that is long
overdue for a big temblor.
And so they went ahead and built those buildings
within a mile of one another on (or feet from) the
great quaking Hayward divide, which is due for
a big one soon.
Of all the places in northern California, why pick an
active quake zone for your so-called rad-lab? Oh, I know,
it's been buttressed and retrofitted to
the nth degree, but I also know that almost no structure
can fully withstand a direct hit from an 8.5 quake.
And the easternmost chemistry building on the U.C. campus
looks much more flimsy and far less fortified than the
Lawrence lab; anyone can walk by and see shelves of all
sorts of chemicals, safeguarded by a paper sign on
the window that reads: "Steal Here -- Die Here!"
And let's not even think about what would happen if an
8.5 occurred when Memorial Stadium and the Greek Theater
were packed with people. Or rather, let's think long
and hard about it.
Problem is, there's no way any of those places are going
to be relocated anytime soon, though it's worth asking:
isn't there a better place for Lawrence Berkeley (and its
paranoid border guards) than the hill above the fault?
I bring this up now because yesterday's superior court
ruling about whether the University of California can
expand an athletic facility into an oak grove (see column,
below) notes the danger of building on a fault.
The Hayward divide seems to be the root source of
a free-floating community anxiety that attaches itself
to smaller issues like the decimation of oaks. But the
far greater concern should be the hazardous overbuilding
on the east side of the UC campus and the placement of
ultra-sensitive sites on treacherous turf.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 17, 2008
Protests Over Oak Grove Escalate in Berkeley A demonstrator blocks a truck traveling through a protest against the
proposed destruction of an oak grove in Berkeley, Calif. (She claimed the
truck was affiliated with UCB.)][photo by Paul Iorio]Early this morning, tensions surrounding the oak grove
protests in Berkeley grew considerably worse.
As most of you know, the University of California at
Berkeley wants to destroy a group of oak trees in order to
expand a sports complex on its property. But environmental
activists have been tree-sitting in the oaks since late
2006 to stop that from happening.
This morning campus police removed some of the
tree-sitters' supplies and fenced off the sidewalk
adjacent to the grove, where supporters of the
sitters had been regularly gathering.
This is all happening a day before a Superior Court
judge is expected to decide whether UCB has the
authority to begin construction on its long-delayed
project.
I arrived at the protests around 10:30 this morning
(June 17) and shot these pictures (click on a photo
to enlarge it):
A police officer looks on as a protester jumps atop a car in Berkeley. [photo by Paul Iorio] * * *
An activist plays a drum as protesters protest near the disputed oak grove. [photo by Paul Iorio]* * *
The save-the-oaks protest, as seen through a floppy hat. [photo by Paul Iorio]* * *
A police officer next to the barbed-wire fence surrounding the oak grove. [photo by Paul Iorio] * * *
The woman-blocking-traffic, seen from mid-range. [photo by Paul Iorio]* * *
The woman-blocking-traffic, seen in a tight shot. [photo by Paul Iorio] * * *
Here is the court order (below) served on the tree-sitters and posted on the fence beneath the oaks. [page one] [photo by Paul Iorio]
[page two] [photo by Paul Iorio]
[page three] [photo by Paul Iorio]
But I digress. Paul
[posted at 4pm, 6/17/08
updated on 6/18/08]_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 11, 2008
No Gold Glitters Like EmmylouI've heard Emmylou Harris perform twice in
the past couple years -- on her "All the Road
Running" tour with Mark Knopfler and at the
Hardly Strictly Bluegrass fest in Golden Gate
Park, where she appeared as Emmylou Coward at
a Coward Brothers show -- and came away from both
shows charmed and amused and impressed by how she
continues to grow artistically decades after
collaborating memorably with Gram Parsons on
"Return of the Grievous Angel."
"This Is Us" still sounds like a classic of
Oughties Americana, and her star turn singing
"The Scarlet Tide" with Elvis Costello was a highlight
of Hardly Strictly.
Now comes "All I Intended To Be," her latest album, and
there's already a bit of buzz around her original song
"Gold," though I haven't been able to hear the whole album
yet. I see there's a national tour behind it -- from Cheyenne
to Tennessee, as the song says -- but no California date
is listed, so I guess I'll have to be satisfied with seeing
her perform on Letterman tomorrow night.
But I digress. Paul
[Above, photo from 1970s -- photographer unknown.] ____________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 7, 2008
John McCain's Kind of Fascist? McCain has long voiced support, at least implicitly, for the regime of South Vietnam's former premier (and vice president) Nguyen Cao Ky, an open and enthusiastic admirer of Adolf Hitler. Has McCain ever denounced Ky? If not, why not?Barack Obama has been taken to task
for his past associations, however remote, with
radicals from decades past. Isn't it time the media
started focusing on John McCain's defense of
right-wing extremists and outright fascists associated
with South Vietnam's Ky and Thieu regimes of the 1960s?
McCain, of course, served in the U.S. Navy in defense
of Thieu and Ky, so one can understand his personal
reluctance to denounce the South Vietnamese leaders
who he sacrificed so much to support. He evidently
doesn't want to admit those five-and-a-half years in
a North Vietnamese prison were served for a big mistake.
Now that the passions of the Vietnam era have cooled
a bit, perhaps McCain can bring himself to say what's
obvious to most Americans today: Thieu and Ky
were neo-fascists, governing without popular support,
whose human rights violations equalled (or virtually
equalled) those of the North Vietnamese.
Ky, in particular, is indefensible by any measure of
modern mainstream political thought. Here's Ky in
his own words: "People ask me who my heroes are. I
have only one: Hitler. We need four or five Hitlers
in Vietnam," he told the Daily Mirror in July 1965.
Why does McCain, to this day, still voice support,
at least implicitly, for Ky and Thieu? At the very
least, McCain should, however belatedly, unequivocally
condemn Ky's praise of Hitler, if he hasn't already.
(My own research has yet to turn up a clipping in
which McCain has been significantly critical of
either leader.)
the Daily Mirror article in which Ky praises Hitler. But I digress. Paul
[
I should note for purposes of full disclosure that I do
have a sister (who I'm very proud of!) who is in politics
in the south, but my opinions are not necessarily her
opinions and hers are not necessarily mine, and we
usually don't discuss politics.]___________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 6, 2008
Jean-Luc Godard, May 13, 1968, the day more than a million protesters marched through Paris (photograph by Serge Hambourg). Stopped by the Berkeley (Calif.) Art Museum yesterday
to see what was on display and was knocked out by
Serge Hamburg's photos of the massive protests of
May 1968 in Paris against the de Gaulle regime
(the so-called Days of Rage). On display are 35
pictures, most of them riveting, especially
the shot of all the great faces near the banner
"Sorbonne Teachers Against Repression"; a photo
of Jean-Luc Godard filming the protests; a poignant
shot of student leader Jacques Sauvageat, almost
tearful amongst his comrades; and a few telling
shots of older pro-Gaullist counter-demonstrators.
Also of interest at BAM is a separate exhibit of
photos, by Bruce Conner, showing Mabuhay Gardens, San
Francisco's Max's Kansas City, in all its late 1970s
glory. And there's a series of striking posters
for the punk band Crime that are worth checking out.
poster for a Crime concert, on display at BAM.OK, equal time for Stanford's Cantor Arts Center; here's a photo I shot there a few years ago. A couple more original photos: an ubiquitous sight in Berkeley: a bumper sticker for KALX, the best radio station in the U.S. (along with WFMU), in my opinion (and not just because they've played my own music!). OK, it's a hokey shot, but I snapped this picture several hours ago of a dog trying to drive a truck. But I digress. Paul
[sll photos (and photos of photos) above by Paul Iorio.]______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for June 2, 2008
Night Two of R.E.M. in Berkeley: The Jangle Is Back! R.E.M., pre-"Accelerate," pre-post-Berry.Last night, R.E.M. played its second consecutive
show at the Greek Theater in Berkeley, Calif., and it
was even better than the first, pure proof that the greatest
jangle in modern American rock is back. And melancholy
is now, once again, danceable.
The news is the new stuff, from "Accelerate,"
which I covered in the previous column (below),
and that material sounds better each time out.
But what distinguished this particular gig was
the number of gems from the band's 1980s catalogue:
nine, which is more than they've usually
performed in recent years. And the choices were
mouth-watering.
Encore "Carnival of Sorts (Boxcars)," which
the band hadn't played in the U.S. since December
9, 1985 (though it had played the song twice in
Europe in 2003, according to reliable setlists),
was as fresh and intense as ever. (The first
time I heard "Carnival" in concert, at the
Beacon Theater in New York in '84, it was
also done as an encore, and it caused people to dance
in the aisles as wildly as I'd ever seen rock fans
dance at a concert (outside of a Grateful Dead show).)
Even Stipe was impressed with his band's performance
of "Carnival" last night -- an endearingly ragged version
that made it sound like you were hearing the group
perform it at one of its earliest shows. (For the record,
I heard this Greek show in the hills above the theater.)
"We had not rehearsed that song in about four or
five years," Stipe said from the stage after "Carnival."
"It's been awhile since we've played it. But it
sounded great."
The crowd roared in agreement.
"So somebody post it immediately," Stipe said.
Elsewhere, "Disturbance at the Heron House," one of
the three or four best R.E.M. songs of all time,
was nearly perfectly played. "Heron" is the sound of a
band in its prime, with every element in harmony, a
pastoral rush like a waterfall or a drive through a
great forest.
Look, I could go on and on -- about "South Central Rain"
and "Auctioneer" and "Electrolite" -- but you get the idea.
I bet parts of the show will be turning up on
YouTube soon, so catch it there.
But I digress. Paul
[collage of REM by Paul Iorio using a photo from the "Chronic Town" EP by an unknown photographer.]_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for June 2, 2008
Remembering Bo DiddleyThe only time I ever saw Bo Diddley perform was on
May 20, 1989, at Pier A in Hoboken, New Jersey,
where I was covering his concert for the East Coast
Rocker newspaper, which published my review around a
week later.
At the time, Diddley was middle-aged and largely
undervalued by a music industry that had made vast
fortunes off of his musical ideas. As I note in the
piece, his show was fascinating but more than a
little bit sad.
Here is a scan of my original manuscript (click on a page
to enlarge it):
[Bo Diddley review, page one][Bo Diddley review, page two][Bo Diddley review, page three][Bo Diddley review, page four]______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSSION
for June 1, 2008
Last Night's R.E.M. Show in Berkeley, Calif.Last night R.E.M. played the Greek Theater in
Berkeley, Calif., the fourth date of its tour
backing "Accelerate," its first studio album in
four years and probably its best since '96's
"New Adventures in Hi-Fi."
When last seen at the Greek, in October 2004, the
band was touring behind a less successful album, was
booked at this venue for only one night, and Michael
Stipe was wearing a John Kerry for president t-shirt.
What a difference four years make. The Kerry t-shirt is
gone, the band is now doing two nights at the Greek,
"Accelerate" is selling quite nicely, thank you, and
the group has rarely sounded better in concert.
And some of the new stuff is good enough to
compete with their classics (and this is coming from someone
who is R.E.M.'s age and is therefore biased in favor of their
1980s oeuvre!).
In concert, new album peaks included surprisingly
strong encore "Mr. Richards," opener "Horse to Water,"
"Man Sized Wreath," the first single
"Supernatural Superserious" and "I'm Gonna DJ," which
has grown substantially since they played it here
in '04; the title track and "Hollow Man" were less
effective live (or at least that's how it sounded
from my vantage point in the hills above the theater,
where I heard most of the show).
A third of the roughly two-hour set was from "Accelerate"
but there was also a good deal of smartly-chosen vintage
material, most notably "Wolves, Lower," a thing of real
beauty here, like watching springtime erupt at time
lapse speed.
And the encore featured a double dose of "Fables of the
Reconstruction" in the order heard on the album:
"Driver 8" and "Life and How to Live It," a bit
of a thrill.
If I were creating the setlist with an eye toward
including neglected gems, I would definitely add "Shakin'
Through" and "Near Wild Heaven" to the set (and the less
rare "Disturbance at the Heron House," "Pretty Persuasion,"
"9 - 9" and "World Leader Pretend"). And I have to
wonder why the band is so averse to "Stand." Simply put,
that song is as fun as anything they've ever recorded.
Crowd response ranged from enthusiastic to extremely
enthusiastic. Some tie-dyed Berzerkeley dude was dancing
so wildly during "Wolves, Lower" that, when I passed him
and his swinging arms, I came an inch or two from
ending up in the local E.R.
Elsewhere, even security guards and police officers were
clearly enjoying the music (and the harmonious mood of
the event, too).
More on this show -- and tonight's gig -- later.
Ah, my first R.E.M. show. "Pretty
Persuasion" exploded the place. Fans danced
aerobically during the encores. But I digress. Paul
[Full disclosure: I should note that I once sent a CD
of my own songs to the band's management but that
nothing ever came of it, and I'm not pursuing that idea now).]_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 28, 2008
It's all well and great that Yale University
honored Sir Paul McCartney a couple days ago
with an honorary Ph.D. Maybe this is also a
moment when we can try to figure out why no major
songwriter of the rock era ever spent a day as
a student at an Ivy League university (or at a
British equivalent, though Mick Jagger, with his
stint at LSE, which was a different sort of place
back then, comes close). Or at Juilliard.
To be sure, there are a lot of brilliant musicians
at Yale, its School of Music and its music department,
no question about it. But no songwriter of the caliber of
McCartney/Lennon/Dylan/Jagger/Richards/Townshend/Ray Davies/
Paul Simon/Brian Wilson/Buddy Holly/Chuck Berry was ever
a student, much less a graduate, of Yale or any other Ivy
institution. In some cases, the genius of a given
landmark band was non-Ivy (say, Paul Simon of Queens College,
or Dylan of the University of Minnesota) while the supporting
craftsmen attended an elite school (Art Garfunkel of Columbia
University, or Peter Yarrow of Cornell).
Why has this been the case? Do admissions people put
too much emphasis on the SAT? Or could it be, to put
it crudely, that a flower best blooms in dung -- at least
initially -- and might wither and die in an expensively
manipulated Ivy environment?
No first-rank songwriter of the rock era has ever come out of an Ivy League university, though a lot of lesser side players did. Witness genius Paul Simon of non-Ivy Queens College, and non-genius Art Garfunkel of Columbia University. And (below) Bob Dylan (University of Minnesota drop-out) and Peter Yarrow (Cornell grad). Genius: University of Minnesota drop-out.Non-genius: Cornell grad. The school that nurtured McCartney's genius was the
Reeperbahn in Hamburg -- a tough, tawdry district of
whores and speed and seedy clubs that allowed the Beatles
to perfect their sound in 7-hour shows every night.
McCartney, a "graduate" of the Reeperbahn, may well be
the world's greatest living composer (it's probably between
him and Dylan, graduate of clubland in Greenwich Village)
and is arguably a better songwriter than Yale's own Cole
Porter was. I can't think of a Porter song as great as
"Yesterday" or "Hey Jude" or "For No One," and I know
Porter's work well.
By the way, I recently picked up a copy of "Cole Porter:
American Songbook Series," a terrific 23-track CD of his
songs performed by various artists, and wondered who the
singer of "Anything Goes" was. To my surprise, I found
it was Porter himself, and he had a not-bad voice by the
singer-songwriter standards of the current, more liberated
era, when voice is considered more important than merely
having a voice, when expression is valued over technique
(though "American Idol," which has also yet to produce
someone of the stature of McCartney (or of even a Badfinger,
for that matter), runs counter to this trend). To be sure,
Porter sometimes sounded as if he were reading it from the
sheet -- and the final verses of "Anything Goes" are as
wordy as a bad blackboard lecture.
The highlight of the Porter CD is Bing Crosby's "Don't
Fence Me In," which sounds as adorably American as any
non-country song before Woody Guthrie, and the nadir
is an awful reading of "I've Got You Under My
Skin," which Sinatra owns (the definitive "Skin" is on
"Sinatra at the Sands" with Count Basie).
While I'm digressing about CDs I've been enjoying lately, I'm
also enthusiastic about "The Best of Laura Nyro," two CDs
with 34 tracks that cover almost all of her peaks. Certainly,
Nyro is not in the McCartney/Porter stratosphere of songwriters
(she's not even in the same league as Carole King), but
is nonetheless sorely underrated -- and her songs are
probably ripe for a revival.
The best way to hear Nyro's songs is to forget or
unhear the better-known versions that were later
turned into hits by MOR acts like the
Fifth Dimension and Blood, Sweat and Tears.
Listening to "Eli's Comin'" fresh, suppressing the
memory of the Three Dog Night hit, one realizes how
intense it is and that a band like the Rascals
probably could've turned it into something special and
soulful with Arif Mardin producing (a gospelish group
could cut a great version today). Other gems include
a live "Sweet Blindness," the familiar "Blowin' Away"
and the more obscure "Save The Country" and "Stoney End."
Lately I've been listening to "The Best of Laura Nyro," 34 songs, some of 'em underrated, on two discs. (Obviously, she's not in McCartney's league but worthy nonetheless.) - - - -
Recently re-watched the DVD of "The Aristocrats," which
I admire for its spirit of extreme outrageousness. I'd
love to see a sequel called "Taboo," with each joke
taking on a different sacred cow of some sort.
It's interesting that I didn't hear major controversy
about it back in 2005 (or maybe I missed it), because
you'd think it would have been targeted by fundamentalists,
who tend to regard a joke as advocacy of the joked-about
subject. (I mean, I used to tell jokes about taboo subjects,
Andy Kaufman style, decades ago -- during a very brief
period in my life when I actually performed stand-up
comedy -- and found that some of my dimmer pals took
my act as non-fiction autobiography (and some
still do, it seems!)
Anyway, the film is an equal opportunity offender -- except
when it comes to the ultimate daredevil sacred cow of
mainstream comedy: Islam. Now there's a
subject for a sequel.
-- -- --
Recently checked out a DVD called "Blind Shaft,"
thinking it was a quirky sequel to
"Shaft" in which John Shaft, a la "Ironside,"
continues his investigative work after
having gone blind. Wrong disc! Instead, it
was a riveting, ultra-realistic Chinese
feature from 2003 about criminality and
corruption in the coal mines of China. I hope
others make the same mistake
and rent it.
-- -- --
Haven't heard anything lately about David Letterman's
tick-head mishap. For those who haven't heard, a tick
became embedded in Letterman's back some time ago; it
was removed but the head of the tick still remains
under his skin, which, as any medical professional knows,
can be a very serious condition. We at the Digression
wish him a speedy recovery from his tick head crisis.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 22, 2008
"Do not go gentle into that good night/
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.-- Dylan Thomas
[photo from Look Magazine]______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 19, 2008
Ah, yet another audiotape from bin Laden: what a
better reason for another couple installments of my
own cartoon series "The Continuing Adventures of bin
Laden, the Jihadist Pooch." (If you want to see
the previous 12 episodes of the strip, go to
www.ioriocartoons2.blogspot.com.)
But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 13, 2008
To remember Robert Rauschenberg, who died earlier today,
here's a photo I shot of one of his works at the Norton
Simon Museum in Pasadena in 1999. It's called
"Cardbirds 1 - 7" (1971), a series of wall reliefs made
of cardboard.
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 11, 2008
The other day I saw a McCain bumper sticker in
Berkeley, Calif., for the first time and immediately
snapped a picture of it, as if it were a rare
variety of Macaw never before seen outside Natal.
Anywhere else, that sticker might not stick out, but
in Berkeley, arguably the most liberal place
in the nation, it did. Here it is:
the loneliest bumper sticker in BerkeleyI don't know if that means McCain is making inroads
in left neighborhoods or whether it was just somebody's
cousin visiting from Fresno, but I do know that, if bumper
stickers were ballots, Barack Obama would get close to
98% of the Berkeley vote. I have seen cars on Shattuck
that are like shrines to Obama, one with a cardboard
cut-out of him on the roof that probably
wouldn't clear the Caldecott Tunnel. There are
houses that look like Obama palaces, with signs
and pictures in every window. But you can hike
for miles in Berkeley without ever seeing a single
Hillary sticker or sign, though there
have been sightings, I'm told.
lots of these in BerkeleyBut California ain't a battleground state. The
main swing states right now are Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania, without which Obama could not possibly
win the presidency. And, in fact, he might not be
able to win the general
with them, if
Ohio or Florida also don't come aboard, though one
wonders how they could when even Oregon -- Democratically
reliable Oregon! -- is still a question mark,
as is Minnesota. (Anyone who thinks Georgia and
Virginia are in play is dreaming or joking.)
How is Obama going to do better than Kerry did in the
swing counties of the swing states? I'm talking 50:50
counties like Grant County, Wisconsin, and also
Iron and Washburn counties, which Kerry won by a goose
feather. I'm talking Monroe County, Pennsylvania, where
the vote was virtually tied in '04. It's hard to
believe Obama's money advantage over McCain will close
the gap (remember how Obama threw bucks everywhere during
the Pennsylvania primary but didn't budge in the polls?)
And the vice-presidential choice rarely affects the
outcome.
If Kerry could barely win Grant County, Wisconsin, how can Obama? Can he offset such losses here with big totals in Madison? Or will the black-o-phobic vote offset the Madison offset? No, Obama's only hope is he'll rack up totals greater
than Kerry's in liberal areas that will compensate for
his loss of the more moderate precincts that went
Democratic in '04. In other words, the enthusiasm
of his supporters in Madison will make up for his
losses in Washburn/Grant/Iron/etc. counties. Or in
Florida, they think his true believers in Miami
will offset his defeat along the I-4 corridor.
But his edge in, say, Dade County, will likely be
neutralized by white backlash in the panhandle. The
same thing that energizes his backers in Miami will
also energize the black-o-phobic McCain voters in Pensacola.
Let's look at Florida for a moment. The way liberals
have traditionally won statewide is to mount up votes
in the Miami area in order to overcome the panhandle
tally, which is always solidly Republican; the tie-breaker
is, generally, the central, moderate, suburban I-4 corridor.
Sure, Barack will fire up his supporters so that he gets maybe
three percent more in Miami than Kerry did; but that
will be offset by the fact that McCain will win the white
panic vote in the panhandle (where people still drive
around in pick-up trucks with Confederate flag license plates,
looking like extras from the final scenes of "Easy Rider") by
maybe four percent more than Bush got in '04.
When pundits say race is not an issue, what they're really
saying is "race shouldn't be an issue" or "race isn't
an issue among my circle of friends" or "I don't want to
admit that race is an issue." But it is, and not just among
the sorts of rural whites or blue collar workers who will
vote against a black candidate just because he is black.
(Further proof that racism is still alive and well in
America, as if we needed it, came last week with the
public exposure of racist email between Secret Service
agents, who are not exactly construction workers.
Of course, that was just the stuff they put in writing.)
Age, not race, should be the salient contrast in November,
but probably won't be. McCain is almost as old as senile
von Hindenburg was in his final years as president of
Germany -- and is almost as likely to be seen by the
rest of the world as a telling symbol of an empire past
its prime in foreign policy leadership, if he's elected.
Obama is so young that he could run again in 20 years and
still not be as old as McCain is now. And he may have to run
again because, in 2008, there is still too much racism
in America and are apparently not enough black, student
and liberal voters to elect Obama this year.
Is Obama ahead in counties like Monroe County, Pennsylvania, one of the 50:50 counties of '04? But I digress. Paul
___________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 6, 2008
[cartoon/photo by Paul Iorio]But I digress. Paul
__________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for May 3, 2008
A Brief History of the Next Few Years-- Jeremiah Wright will appear on the season
premiere of "Saturday Night Live" in
October, acting in a sketch that sends up the
TV sit-com "Sanford and Son," in
which he plays Redd Foxx's character to
Obama's Lamont (Fred Armisen), who
he calls "a big dummy."
-- When McCain and Obama choose their running mates,
pundits will inevitably say, "Voters don't vote
for the bottom of the ticket" and
"Running mates don't usually help but can hurt
a candidate's popularity."
-- In October 2008, there will be fear of a surprise
terrorist attack that never materializes.
-- Around October 20th, people will start talking
about having seen Christmas decorations in
department stores and about how this must be the
earliest arrival of the season ever.
-- Around Halloween, Republican advocacy groups will
run TV ads in key swing states showing Jeremiah
Wright's rants, and McCain will, of course, denounce
the commercials, while saying he has "no power to
tell them to take down their ads, any more than
Obama has the power to tell Rev.Wright to shut up."
-- Obama will go hunting in Ohio and shoot at, and
miss, several geese.
-- McCain will misspeak on the campaign trail, calling
the Sunni insurgents "gooks."
-- Liberals will get giddy in late October when the latest
tracking polls show Obama within three points in
Ohio -- and ahead by one point in Florida!
-- On election day, it will turn out that the late polls
were wrong and that Obama loses Ohio by seven points,
Florida by 12 points and Wisconsin by five. McCain
wins Iowa and Missouri by double digits The final
electoral and popular tally is a massacre for the
Dems, ranking somewhere between the defeats of Duakais
and Mondale.
-- During the Christmas season, "Good Morning America" will run
a holiday segment titled something like: "Why You Hate Your
Loved Ones During Christmas Get Togethers."
-- The press will start speculating about who President-elect
McCain will appoint to his cabinet, and the list will
include lots of new faces from Arizona.
-- Someone will coin the phrase "the Arizona Mafia" to
describe McCain's inner circle.
-- The White House press corps will be reconfigured
to include local reporters from
Arizona news outlets who have covered McCain
in the past and have had access to
him. There will be glowing, puffy stories
about the new First Lady; beauty and
grooming magazines will run features about
how you, too, can look glamorous
like Cindy McCain in just 12 easy steps!
-- There will be a honeymoon period during which
leading Democratic pundits will say over-generous
things like, "President McCain is doing far
better than expected in bringing together disparate
factions." David Brooks will say, "The
grown-ups are back in charge in Washington." McCain's
approval rating in March will hit a record 77%.
-- Mother Jones, the San Francisco Chronicle and
the National Review will all run cover stories with
identical headlines: "Is The Democratic Party Dead?"
The Mother Jones and Chronicle stories will be almost
identical, while the National Review piece will not.
-- The honeymoon will last a few months, until McCain
starts over-using his veto pen. David Brooks will
call him "principled." Mark Shields will call him
"Vito McCain."
-- In February 2009, Katie Couric will resign from
CBS News to join CNN in order to helm a series
that is "still in development." She releases a
farewell statement that partly says, "I bear no
ill will as my ship sails on to ever higher peaks."
-- In the spring of '09, The Washington Post will run
a front-page bombshell quoting anonymous, tearful
White House sources who have borne the brunt
of President McCain's frequent temper tantrums. "The
West Wing has now become a hostile work environment,"
says one staffer.
-- By Labor Day 2009, there will be early
speculation about the 2012 race that
will include the phrase, "But in politics,
three years is an eternity."
-- The New York Times Magazine will run a cover story
during the holiday season of '09 titled: "The Maturation
of Hillary Clinton." Newsweek will be even
bolder, putting her on the cover with the caption:
"The Front Runner in '12?"
-- A serious Draft Gore movement will spring up by
January 2010. Tim Russert will try to get Gore to
announce his candidacy on "Meet the Press," but Gore
will only say "it's too early to decide," which will be
taken as a "yes" by jubilant Gore supporters.
-- Vicki Iseman will receive a seven figure advance
from HarperCollins to write a tell-all memoir
about her relationship with McCain.
-- President McCain adopts a pet German Shepherd
that unexpectedly becomes vicious and bites a CNN
correspondent on the leg at the White House. (A tabloid
is forced to apologize when it runs the headline
"German Shepherd Bites Pit Bull.")
-- The New York Times quotes West Wing staffers about
the insiderish power of Cindy McCain; one source says,
"If the First Lady doesn't like you, you're out."
-- During a "Where in the World is Matt Lauer?" segment in
Yemen on "Today," Lauer comes under sniper fire by
Islamic militants who call him "The Infidel Lauer." Later,
the relieved anchor says, "This one could've easily gone
the other way."
-- In the spring of 2010, the Washington Post
will run a front-pager revealing that McCain
has been secretly seeing an oncologist and that
there is widespread speculation in the White
House that McCain's melanoma has returned. McCain
heatedly denies the reports.
-- Those presidential health concerns are swept from
the headlines for a time in the summer of 2010 by
the most turbulent hurricane season since
2005 and a Category Five storm that takes dead
aim at, yes, New Orleans, destroying all the
rebuilding of the past few years.
-- McCain will seize the moment and heroically
helicopter into New Orleans's Ninth
Ward, personally handing food and water to
the devastated victims. But there
will be a moment of confusion when he
says, "We must help the people of Vietnam
in their hour of need." His poll numbers
soar, as everyone forgets about
the gaffe and about the Post revelations.
David Brooks will call him "action Jackson"
-- On Christmas eve of 2010, McCain will admit that, yes,
he has had a recurrence of cancer that is not
life-threatening. The Post, angry that McCain had
dismissed its earlier reports about secret visits to the
oncologist as "fantasies by a once great newspaper,"
harshly questions his credibility and suggests he
should consider resigning. The phrase "credibility
gap" makes a comeback.
-- There will be jokes about McCain's afternoon
naps at the White House after McCain is caught
dozing at a leadership symposium in Arizona. Time
magazine will catch flak for running a photo
of a snoozing McCain on its
cover with the headline, "The Credibility Nap."
-- Cindy McCain will appear in a controversial photo
spread in Vanity Fair wearing a queen's crown
and eating jelly beans.
-- As it becomes apparent that McCain will not seek
a second term because of health issues, the 2012
race moves into gear. Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney,
Hillary Clinton and Dennis Kucinich all set up
exploratory committees, or hint that
they will.
-- Obama announces that he will not seek
another term in the Senate and will
retire from politics; shortly thereafter,
he files for divorce from his wife and
says he intends to relocate to Massachusetts,
one of the few states he won in '08, to live
with his "friend" Samantha Power.
-- Jeremiah Wright announces his candidacy for
Mayor of Chicago.
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 26, 2008
Shining Light on "Shine a Light"torn, frayed, mostly fabulousI finally got around to seeing "Shine a Light"
and couldn't help but think it might have benefited
from a more straightforward approach cinematographically
instead of the incessant cutting that makes this more
of an editor's film than a director's film, though
anything Martin Scorsese is involved with is a
Scorsese film, period. Then again, any movie the
Rolling Stones are involved with is a Stones film,
period, so there is almost a tug of war between
strong-willed auteurs here, with Scorsese
seen pleading for a setlist at one point, which
he definitely could've used to block and plan
shots for his cinematographers who seem to be
scrambling frantically to catch pictures of lightning
after the lightning has already struck, though every
now and then they do catch and bottle a bolt
or two.
But it would've been nice if one of the cameras had
caught, say, Darryl Jones playing the bass intro
to "Live With Me" instead of focusing on one of
the guitarists or had shown Charlie Watts doing
that vintage drum roll that opens "All Down
the Line."
The setlist is a masterpiece, around as good as the
one at the Olympia show in Paris captured in the
"Four Flicks" film, though one can quibble at the edges.
Perhaps the better-live-than-on-the-album "You
Got Me Rocking" might've worked better than the
better-on-the-album-than-live "Shattered," which
I've never heard performed successfully live.
And "Sweet Virginia" or "Dead Flowers" could have
best filled the "country" slot reserved here for
failed joke "Faraway Eyes." And "Respectable" would've
been the perfect song to play with the Clintons
in the audience. And what about a nod to "Bigger Bang"
with "Oh No, Not You Again," the best of the new
ones live.
The choices are otherwise dead on; "She Was Hot," a
highlight, has terrific, unexpected momentum; "Loving Cup"
now sounds like it was written with Jack White in mind
all along; "As Tears Go By" has a real pulse, thanks to
Watts; "Connection" is one of the band's best
overlooked songs of the 1960s, though Keith botches it
here (he did a far better version in Oakland, Calif.,
shortly after this gig).
And each guest star tops the previous one, with
Buddy Guy leveling the place with "Champagne & Reefer"
and with offhand artistry that is assured, authentic
(he livens up the place much as Dr. John did in
"The Last Waltz"). Christina Aquilera, trading vocals
with Jagger on "Live With Me," is a powerhouse, a hurricane,
always blowing audiences away. (Wish they'd brought her
on for the Merry Clayton part of "Gimme Shelter,"
not played here.)
This is a concert film with spliced-in archival footage
that is often hilarious and rare while heavily favoring
self-promo bits in which Jagger one-ups various
interviewers -- as opposed to the Maysles brothers's
"Gimme Shelter," which shows Jagger at both his wittiest
and unwittiest (remember the "philosophically trying"
remarks?). Though the film doesn't pretend to be any
sort of definitive docu on the Stones, one still wonders
where Brian Jones is in all the vintage footage;
Jones has gone from being wildly overemphasized as a Stones
member to, today, being almost completely erased from the
band's history. That said, it's telling that the group
got only better in the years after Jones's death (see:
"Exile," "Sticky Fingers," "Some Girls").
They performed almost half of the "Some Girls" CD,
likely to remain their best-selling studio album of
all time, now that the dust has settled, though at
the time who'd have guessed that its unlikely combination
of disco and punk, warring genres in their day, would
have eclipsed both "Sticky Fingers" and "Exile." But it's
the closest the Stones have come to a diamond seller
like "Nevermind" or "Boston," which they've never had,
even if their cultural influence has been far greater
than all but a few in the rock era. Today, it's easy to
see that "Some Girls," released 30 years ago this June,
had a sort of shock jock element that made it popular
among millions of non-Stones fans, though that
element was partly excised in this film, with the
deletion of an explicit verse from the title track,
a song rarely (if ever) performed by the Stones.
I was lucky enough to have heard the very first public
performance of "Some Girls" material by the Stones, on
the first night of their "Some Girls" tour, June 10, 1978,
a couple days after the album's release, at the Lakeland
(Florida) Civic Center -- and I saw the group from only
several feet away.
As I recall, the new album was erupting unexpectedly,
so the band was in an extremely good mood at this
kick-off gig in '78. In fact, they seemed
downright giddy and manic and drunk on (among other
things) their own effortless rock 'n' roll mastery.
I remember seeing Jagger take the stage to the
opening chords of "All Down the Line," as flashing
lights briefly illuminated his leap into the air
(he looked just like a whip or a lightning bolt) and
remember seeing him physically and playfully
push Ron Wood to the side of the stage at another point.
And I remember how eerie and spooky it looked and
sounded to see Jagger right in front of me singing that
falsetto part of "Miss You" -- and he was singing it
live for the first-time ever.
A year later, with those songs still ringing in my
head, I moved to Manhattan, where I lived for years at
the Beacon, 25 floors above the theater where the
concert in "Shine a Light" took place. In those days
I used to travel to the Beacon Theater by...taking
the elevator!
Which is part of what makes that final shot of "Shine a Light"
(in which Scorsese directs the cameraman to film from
above the Broadway marquee to the rooftops of the Upper
West Side, literally between the moon and New York City) so
magical to me. And it suggests an even better flick: a
movie of a concert on the Beacon roof, a la "Let It Be," in
which the Manhattan skyline co-stars.
the Stones's bestseller, released 30 years ago this JuneBut I digress. Paul
_________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 24, 2008
I was reading a transcript of the latest
audio recording from Osama bin Laden the
other day and wondering: is he dating? Does he
have a lover? Would bin Laden be a less violent
person if he had a sexual partner? Could we save
the world from his destructiveness by simply...setting
him up on a date?
Hence the origin of my screenplay, "Play It
Again, Osama," presented below:
Play It Again, Osama
By Paul Iorio* INT. OSAMA'S BACHELOR APARTMENT, SOMEWHERE IN WAZIRISTAN
OSAMA BIN LADEN (to himself): What's the matter with me?
Why can't I be cool like the Prophet Mohammed?
What's the secret?
An imaginary Prophet Mohammed, wearing a fedora and looking
and sounding like Humphrey Bogart, appears from the shadows.
PROPHET MOHAMMED: There's no secret, kid.
Infidels are simple. I never met one that didn't understand
a slap in the mouth or a slug from a .44.
OSAMA BIN LADEN: Yeah, 'cause you're Mohammed.
I'm not like you. When you lost Aisha, weren't you crushed?
PROPHET MOHAMMED: Nothing a little bourbon and soda
wouldn't fix. Take my advice and forget all the romantic stuff.
The world is full of infidels to fight. All you have to do is whistle.
OSAMA: He's right. You give the unbelievers an inch
and they step all over you. Why can't I develop that attitude?
[mimicking Mohammed] Nothing a little bourbon and soda
couldn't fix.
[He swigs a shot of Old Crow, gags.]
CUT TO:
INT. TORA BORA APARTMENT OF DICK AND LINDA CHRISTIE (OSAMA'S FRIENDS)
LINDA CHRISTIE: Osama's calling again. We've got to find him a girl.
Somebody he can be with, get excited about.
DICK CHRISTIE: We'll have to find him a nice girl.
LINDA: There must be somebody out there. Someone to take his
mind off losing Mohamed Atta. I think he really loved Atta.
DICK [picking up phone]: I know just the girl for him.
CUT TO:
INT. OSAMA'S APARTMENT
Osama is preparing for his date, which is in an hour or so.
Again, from the shadows comes an imaginary Prophet Mohammed.
MOHAMMED: You're starting off on the wrong foot.
OSAMA: Yeah, negative.
MOHAMMED: Sure. They're getting the best of you
before the game starts. What's that stuff you put on your face?
OSAMA: Canoe. It's an aftershave lotion.
MOHAMMED: You know, kid, somewhere in life
you got turned around. It's her job to smell nice for you.
The only bad thing is if she turns out to be a virgin --
or an agent for the JTTF!
OSAMA: With my luck, she'll turn out to be both.
TITLE CARD: Later That Night....
INT. OSAMA'S APARTMENT -- LATE AT NIGHT
The doorbell rings and Osama opens the door. It's Linda.
LINDA: How did the date go?
OSAMA: It never would have worked between us.
She's a Shiite, I'm a Sunni, it's a great religious abyss.
LINDA: [laughing]
OSAMA: You're laughing and my sex life
is turning into the Petrified Forest.
Millions of women in the Northwest
Territories and I can't wind up with one!
Osama takes a seat on the couch and Linda sits next to him.
OSAMA: I'm turning into the strike-out king
of Waziristan!
LINDA: You need to be more confident, secure.
OSAMA: You know who's not insecure?
The Prophet Mohammed.
LINDA: That's not real life.
You set too high a standard.
OSAMA: If I'm gonna identify with someone,
who am I gonna pick? My imam?
Mohammed's a perfect image.
LINDA: You don't need to pretend. You're you.
Osama nudges closer to Linda on the couch.
The imaginary Mohammed appears and speaks.
MOHAMMED: Go ahead, make your move.
OSAMA: No, I can't.
MOHAMMED: Take her and kiss her..
LINDA (getting up to go to the kitchen): I'll get us both a drink.
MOHAMMED: Well, kid, you blew it.
OSAMA: I can't do it. We're platonic friends.
I can't spoil that by coming on.
She'll slap my face.
MOHAMMED: I've had my face slapped plenty.
OSAMA: But your turban
don't go flying across the room.
Linda returns with two drinks.
LINDA: Here we are, you can start on this.
MOHAMMED: Go ahead, kiss her.
OSAMA: I can't.
The phone rings and startles Osama, as he answers it.
OSAMA (into phone): Hi, Dick. Yes, she's here.
I was going out -- I had a Polish date.
He hands the phone to Linda.
MOHAMMED: Relax. You're as nervous as Abu Jahl was before
I beat his brains out at the Battle of Badr. All you've got to do is
make your move.
OSAMA: This is crazy. We'll wind up
on al Jazeera!
LINDA (into phone): OK, goodbye.
LINDA: Dick sounded down. I think
he's having trouble in Karachi. I wonder
why he never asks me along on his trips.
OSAMA: Maybe he's got something
going on the side. A fling.
LINDA: If I fell for another man,
it'd have to be more than just a fling.
I'd have to feel something more serious.
Are you shaking?
OSAMA: Just chilly.
LINDA: It's not very cold.
MOHAMMED: Move closer to her.
OSAMA: How close?
MOHAMMED: The distance of Flight 175 to the south tower..
OSAMA: That's very close.
MOHAMMED: Now, get ready for the big move
and do exactly as I tell you.
Suddenly an imaginary Mohamed Atta appears and
confronts the Prophet Mohammed.
ATTA [to Mohammed]: I warned you to leave my ex-lover alone.
Atta draws a pistol and shoots Mohammed.
Osama looks a bit panicky now that Mohammed is gone.
LINDA: I guess I'd better fix the steaks.
OSAMA: Your eyes are like two thick juicy steaks.
Osama kisses Linda, who recoils, pushing him away.
OSAMA: I was joking. I was just testing you.
It was a platonic kiss.
LINDA: I think I'd better go home.
OSAMA: You're making a mistake.
Linda waves goodbye and leaves the apartment.
OSAMA: I attacked her. I'm a vicious jungle beast..
I'm not the Prophet Mohammed. I never will be.
I'm a disgrace to my sex. I should get a job at an Arabian palace
as a eunuch.
The doorbell rings.
OSAMA: That's the vice squad. [He opens the door, and Linda is there.]
LINDA: Did you say you loved me?
Osama and Linda embrace and kiss and the scene fades.
INT. OSAMA'S APARTMENT -- THE NEXT DAY
MOHAMMED: That's all there is to it.
OSAMA: For you, because you're Mohammed.
MOHAMMED: Everybody is at certain times.
OSAMA: I guess the secret's not being you, it's being me.
MOHAMMED: Here's looking at you, kid.
*with massive apologies to Woody Allen.
-------
But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 21, 2008
Oh! Ye bitter Pennsylvanians, come 'round to the polls,but drink not from the chalice of disappointment and
woe, or seek succor by clinging to thy religion and
thy guns, when ye cast ye ballots in the Primary of
the Greatest Publick Importance, at least this week,
until next month, when the next state decideth.
Thou must not delayeth thy journey to thy polls with vain
prayer or the reloading of thy guns. Thou must not
cling to that which provides false solace in grim
times. Thou must not pray out of bitterness in thy
voting booth upon the altar of discredited touch screens,
or place thy bullets amidst the paper ballots that have
largely replaced thy touch screens. Oh, ye bitter
Pennsylvanians, put aside thy clinging and loading and
praying to dodge the sniper fire on the way to the
Primary of Publick Importance!
But I digresseth. Paul
_________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 17, 2008
The 'Gotcha' DebateI just saw the ABC debate, in which four millionaires
who have top-notch health insurance talked for two
hours in prime time about everything except
health care reform. Or at least it seemed that way.
The short math is this: Hillary won the debate,
with Stephanopoulos coming in a close second,
Gibson third, and Obama fourth.
Thing is, Clinton has really grown to the point where
(now that she's losing) she finally seems like a
credible president. Too late. Too bad.
Obama seemed winded, weary, tired, on defense. The
Wright thing hurts him. The Ayers thing hurts him.
The flag lapel, Bittergate -- it all mounts up. Pretty
soon he looks pretty unelectable against McCain.
Gibson/Stephanopoulos seemed to be harder on Obama than on
Clinton, who they should've pursued on the sniper lie; the
question Steph should've asked but didn't is: what were
you confusing the Bosnia incident with?
The odd thing is that I began to think in mid-debate, gazing
at Obama, that he could very well become the most
unlikely general election winner in presidential history.
Reason I thought that is because they showed a clip
of McCain, who looked so old and creaky as he stumbled over
his words, and I felt that, with McCain's health problems, he
might become disabled by, say, a stroke, before
November and have to be replaced by his running mate,
probably Romney, who Obama could handily beat.
Just as Obama became a US Senator because of a
fluke -- remember how the main contender had to drop out
because of scandal, leaving the GOP to consider Mike Ditka as
a contender? -- so Obama could become president because
of the random nature of politics.
Anyway, Hillary has also become much more entertaining and got off
the best zingers of the night: Dick Cheney is the 4th branch
of government, this may be the first time a president
took us to war but refused to pay for it. I think that Crown
Royal has opened up whole new doors of perception for this
former Goldwater gal, who may yet be the nominee,
but probably won't.
-------------
If I were at NBC Entertainment, I'd immediately
start creating a new prime-time sitcom starring
Kristen Wiig (called "The Kristen Wiig Show" or
"The Kristen Wiig-Out!" or "Flip Your Wiig"
or something like that), in which the SNL
player would play a thirtysomething
nervous wreck in the style of some of the characters
she plays on SNL. It's becoming increasingly
obvious that in the constellation of stars
at SNL, she's outshining lots of 'em. (She nearly
brought down the house with her "just joking" bit
last week and with the "surprise party" sketch
from the previous week, and I'm still chuckling over
her Peter Pan; by the way, one of the magical things
about Penelope is the way she appears unexpectedly,
almost floatingly, in different parts of the master shot
throughout the sketch.) Just don't name it "The New
Adventures of the Old Kristen." Just joking.
---------
Wow, the Daily Digression seems to be setting
trends these days -- or at least it's preceding
the coverage agenda in some publications.
For example, The Digression has been talking for
weeks about Obama being the new Dukakis and/or
Stevenson (I called him "Adlai Dukakis" the
other day). Now, in Maureen Dowd's latest
column in the New York Times, she makes the same
comparison (though, truth be told, I don't think
she's a Daily Digression reader).
Also, I wrote an interesting line the day before
yesterday in one of my Digressions:
"One predicts the future, to the meager degree that one
can, by looking at the past, not at the future," I wrote.
Nice line (if I should say so myself!).
In today's Times, I hear an echo: "By looking into history,
we can see the future," the paper quotes some
guy saying in today's paper in a story about a Tibet
museum; I'd love to hear the interview tape on
that one; I may be wrong but I
bet it's one of those things where the reporter is
virtually putting the words in the source's mouth,
i.e., "Why does history matter? Is it because that's
how we see the future?")
There are other examples, too, both at The Times and
at other publications, but I don't have time to
detail it; I'm too busy coming up with the stuff
they'll echo in coming days.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- You know, I hear there are expensive journalism
schools that offer courses like: "How to Get Away with
Plagiarism in a Completely Legitimate Way by Slightly
Modifying an Idea or a Sentence, Putting the Words in
Someone Else's Mouth or Rushing Stolen Ideas From
Obscure Sources into Print Before the Originator
Does: 101." If they don't offer that course,
it's learned by some on the job.
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 16, 2008
Now More Than Ever, We Need an LBJStrong persuader.It's about health care, stupid.
Because this has gone on too long. The impasse
feels permanent, and probably is.
In order to provide health insurance for the
48 million Americans without it, we need a president
who's an arm twister, a son-of-a-bitch,
someone who's gonna make threats and make good on
them, step on toes, be merciless -- and all in an
effective way.
We need an LBJ.
Remember Lyndon? He could be rude and coarse and a
bully, but he...got...it...done. He rammed major
civil rights legislation through the
Congress as president -- even if he had to make ugly
ultimatums about canceling that bridge project in your
district or had to get in your face as he thumped your
chest with his finger.
And his tactics are, frankly, the only way the
8 million uninsured kids in this country will
be able to see a doctor if they're sick. (I mean,
think of it: 47 million people. That's the entire
population of South Korea! The whole population of
England is only around 10 million more than that.)
Problem is, there is no LBJ, or anyone nearly as effective,
running for president this year.
Yeah, Hillary is feisty but more often merely mean (and sort
of weak), and she has already failed at pushing through
health care. Whatever her excuses, her legacy so far has
been one of ineffectiveness.
Obama is a strong persuader -- but it's discouraging and
telling that his golden oratory about health care has not
inspired the current Congress to pass a single payer plan
or anything close to it. One has to wonder whether he'd
fare any better as president.
John McCain sounds like someone who has been rich too
long to understand what a shrieking nightmare it is
not to have health insurance; perhaps if he
were forced to use only Clearasil to combat his next
bout of melanoma, or to use Listerine to treat his
root canal, he'd get it. (And don't tell me
about the deprivations of McCain's youth; that was
too many decades ago to be relevant today.)
The 44th president of the United States is not
likely to provide health care to the 47 million
uninsured, because there's just too much money in
the Health Care Industrial Complex. I mean, making
huge profits off of sick people is what the insurers
and Big Pharma do, which is why I'm surprised
there isn't more of a popular uprising
and revulsion about it.
It seems as if protest -- coupled with a sympathetic
president -- is the only way sick people are going
to get care in this country.
If activists would put aside relatively marginal issues
for a time to focus on the Big Kahuna, we might be able
to save lives. In other words, come down from your oaks
(once you've saved them), take your minds off gay marriage
and the WTO for a couple years, and unite and focus solely
on effective, extreme civil disobedience and protest
that target the health care moguls who are making money
off the sick. Find out where the CEOs of the top Pharm
companies and health insurance providers live, and then
organize big raucous protests in front of their mansions
relentlessly.
If we can't get an LBJ in the White House in January,
then the people themselves will have to become the
arm-twisters.
But I digress. Paul
[above photo from Life magazine]_____________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 15, 2008
I betcha Barack tries a cowboy hat next.
Yup, any day now I bet Obama's handlers
are gonna put him in a Stetson and have him
do a two-step to George Strait or maybe have him
croon some Toby Keith for YouTube consumption.
And he'd better do that or something like it quick,
because this race is quickly shaping into a contest
between Dwight Dole and Adlai Dukakis.
Unpopular truth be told, Barack was right when he
said people cling to religion and guns out of a sort of
bitterness or desperation. Yes, religion is the opiate
of the people (as you-know-who once put it),
the delusion of last resort for the hopeless. But
I don't expect that my own non-theistic views about
religion will become mainstream for another, oh, 400
years or so. Until the mysteries explained
away by science are accepted by people who haven't
studied science, which is to say most voters, religion
will continue to exert its irrational hold on the
electorate.
How do I know that's likely to be true? By seeing how
far we've grown in 2008 from the literalist
Christianity rampant 400 years ago, in 1608, and then
extrapolating that trajectory into the next 400 years.
And the trajectory of the centuries is clearly in the
opposite direction of religion, or at least in the
opposite direction of fundamentalism. (One predicts
the future, to the meager degree that one can, by
looking at the past, not at the future.)
But then, see, I can speak the truth because I ain't
running for anything. Barack is.
And if I were running for office, I wouldn't say what he
said in San Francisco last week; it suggests that he doesn't
have the level of circumspection required of a world
leader. It implies that he is more prone to say, as
president, that (for example) some of the people of
the Northwest Territories of Pakistan are backward in their
fundamentalist beliefs -- which may be true but is not
something you want to say if you're negotiating with the
new president of Pakistan.
It's funny: now that Americans have gotten to know him,
Barack seems less too-black and more too-Harvard to his
opponents (which is always what happens when you get to
know somebody from a different ethnic group; at some point,
they stop being Irish or Mexican or Jewish or African-American
and start being that snob or that dullard or that
artist or that really intuitive guy -- i.e., an individual).
In the end, in November, the central irony of the
2008 election may be that the first major black candidate
for president, Obama, spouting rich guy Harvardisms too
true for the campaign trail, was defeated because he was
too white.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 14, 2008
humor by paul iorioLittle-Known Popes in Papal HistoryPope Benedict XVI is visiting the U.S. this week for
the first time since becoming pontiff in 2005, and he
is, of course, not the most famous pope in
Vatican history, though he's also not the most
obscure.
In fact, there have been many lesser-known popes
through the centuries, and now may be the time to
remember some of them. Here are ten:
POPE NAPOLEON THE 13TH
Mad Pope Napoleon the 13th's brief reign was marked by grandiose
plans and an obsession with Napoleon Bonaparte. He was deposed
when he tried to turn the Vatican into a nuclear power. (1952)
POPE LUCIFER
An experimental pope who advocated praying to the Devil and to
God in order to cover all bases. (431 A.D.)
POPE JESUS GOD THE SECOND
For all the arrogance of his name, Jesus God 2 actually turned
out to be somewhat humble and unassuming, noted mostly for his
punctuality. Was convinced the Old Testament had been penned by
a guy named Smith. (1564)
POPE MUHAMMAD THE FIRST
With the Ottomans threatening Western Europe, the Vatican
decided to throw Constantinople a bone by elevating a former
imam to the top spot. Muhammad the First, a lapsed Muslim who
fled Turkey and converted to Catholicism, fell from favor after
he proposed building minarets atop St. Peter’s Basilica. (1627)
POPE KEITH
A hippie pope known for his casual manner and affinity for
pop culture, he dispensed with Latin rites in favor of
"happenings." (Sept. 1974 to Sept. 1974)
POPE SASKATOON, GOVERNOR OF SASKATCHEWAN
As his expansive title suggests, Saskatoon might have been
a bit more preoccupied with claiming long-denied status
from the folks back home than with his duties as pope. (1910)
POPE LITERALIST THE 16TH
Took transubstantiation far more literally than most; after
a car accident, he insisted Vatican doctors give him a
blood transfusion using Chianti Classico instead of blood,
a fatal decision. Advocated medical care for the dead, who
he called the "as yet unrisen." (1960)
POPE JOHNNY THE FIRST
An American greaser of the 1950s -- and self-styled
"Method Pope” -- who rode a Harley to work. (1956)
POPE DIDDY
The first hip hop pope. Expanded the use of "signs of the Cross"
to include gang hand signs. (1998)
POPE RABBI GOLDSTEIN
Not officially a pope or a rabbi, and operating for a time
from a psychiatric facility in Antwerp, where he occasionally
broadcast a syndicated faith program called “This Week in Eternal
Damnation," he actually convinced several dozen people, mostly
Belgians, that he was the first Jewish pope. (1988)
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 8, 2008
Of all the cities in North America, I'd say
San Francisco is probably the last place
that one would want this year's Olympic torch to
pass through, unless you're looking for turbulence.
As everyone knows, San Francisco virtually
invented protest and demonstrations and civil
disobedience, I think. Or at least it perfected
dissent, raising it to a craft as a high as the
protesters on the Golden Gate bridge yesterday
morning.
The Chinese government is learning what the idiot
hijackers of United Flight 93 in 2001 also
quickly discovered: people in the Bay Area don't
acquiesce when it comes to tyranny and don't
take well to totalitarian types and will "place
their bodies on the gears of the machine"
to stop it from running altogether, if necessary,
to quote Mario Savio.
So it's as puzzling as a Puzzle Tree to see that
the powers-that-be are allowing The Torch to wend
its way through the streets of San Francisco tomorrow,
because there is no way that Free Tibet activists are
going to let that happen without incident. It's not
a question of whether there will be disruption on
Wednesday (or as the San Francisco Examiner once put
it, "Wensday"), but how much disruption there
will be.
* * *
Was listening to the "Moonlight" sonata the
other day and caught myself thinking,
this is almost as brilliant as "Street Spirit"
or "Lucky" (I bet Yorke/Greenwood's melodies
resonate into the far reaches of this century --
the part we won't be a part of -- and maybe
beyond. By the way, Radiohead headlines
a 3-day music fest in Golden Gate Park
in San Francisco in August, two years after
the band memorably premiered a dozen tracks
from its latest album, "In Rainbows," in
Berkeley and elsewhere.
* * *
NBC has an institutional memory that reminds
it that "Seinfeld" took a few years to find
its audience, and that may have played into the
its decision to renew "Friday Night Lights"
for a third season, starting in early '09 (after
a fall run on DirecTV).
By the way, I was re-watching Edward Burns's
amazing "The Brothers McMullen" the other night,
after not having seen it for many years, and
couldn't help but think of Coach Taylor's wife in
FNL every time Connie Britton, who plays Molly
McMullen, appeared on screen. It was Britton's film
debut, and it's easy to see her performance in
a whole new light, now that she's so identified
with "Friday Night Lights."
* * *
Wow, whatta setlist. Nearly half of the "Some Girls"
album, the cream of "Exile," rarity "As Tears Go By"
(not played in concert until the months preceding this
show), the underrated "She Was Hot" (from the not-underrated
"Undercover" album), and "Connection" from that treasure
trove of mini-gems, "Between the Buttons").
Can't wait to see "Shine a Light," Martin Scorsese's
Rolling Stones concert film docu. I'm told this is
the list:
Jumpin’ Jack Flash
Shattered
She Was Hot
All Down the Line
Loving Cup
As Tears Go By
Some Girls
Just My Imagination
Faraway Eyes
Champagne & Reefer
Tumbling Dice
You Got the Silver
Connection
Sympathy for the Devil
Live With Me
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
Satisfaction
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 6, 2008
Is The Impeachment of President McCain Now Inevitable?WASHINGTON, D.C. -- March 19, 2010 -- The Impeach President McCain
movement has gained enough steam this week, on the 7th
anniversary of U.S. involvement in Iraq, that it's now
considered more likely than not that articles of
impeachment will be introduced by the House Judiciary
Committee early next month, insiders say.
A bi-partisan majority in the House now agree that
the president's secret bombing raid on the suburbs
south of Tehran last week was the last straw and
proof that McCain is out of control, as he conducts
an ever-escalating and expanding war in both Iraq
and now in Iran without so much as consulting Congress
(in his defense, which he'll soon have to tell Judiciary,
McCain says he can't afford to reveal American
strategy publicly, as that would be revealing it to
the enemy, too).
And all this comes a mere 16 months after McCain's
solid electoral win over Senator Hillary Clinton in '08.
Today, in 2010, the triumphant landscape of '08 seems
distant. McCain's political capital is all gone. His
job approval ratings in some polls are as low as 17%.
And his increasingly surly, defiant press conferences
tend to stoke the flames of the Impeach McCain crowd.
Like last week when he declared, "When it comes
to waging war, I listen to the generals, not to the
people. The people are militarily illiterate."
Dems immediately noted that President McCain was
speaking a few blocks from a D.C. neighborhood burned
down in the summer of '08 by rioters angered by the
denial of the nomination to Sen. Obama -- a neighborhood
still not rebuilt. (By the way, where is Obama now? His
"burn, baby, burn" remark during the riots, caught by a
sneaky reporter's hidden mic, has likely ended his
political career for good.)
One White House correspondent says McCain may
try to head off impeachment proceedings by declaring
early that he will not seek re-election in 2012, due to
the recurrence of his skin cancer (which he also
is being secretive about). But not even that
will save his political skin if the Mahdi Army
keeps slaughtering Americans at a clip not seen since Tet,
because the public has clearly lost its patience with
a war it thought was coming to a close nearly two years
ago. McCain's latest "surge" (he seems to be addicted to surges
these days) has only strengthened the hand of Prime Minister
Sadr.
Insiders say Vice President Romney has spoken privately
to friends about the possibility of having to assume the
presidency soon and appointing his own vice president
(he is reported to have already broached the subject with
Sen. Joe Lieberman, floating the idea of a possible
Romney/Lieberman unity team).
In any event, all this this makes Romney the clear
front-runner for the GOP nomination in '12, if only
because he's likely to be the incumbent by then. The
DNC, meanwhile, is reportedly feverishly trying to
convince Al Gore to run again, assuring him that
he would have a clear shot at the nomination and
that there would not be the fractious infighting
that doomed prospects for the Dems in '08.
The fact that pundits are already looking beyond the
McCain presidency to the '12 race is a sign that Chief
Justice Roberts may soon be swearing in the 45th president
of the United States. But if war policy doesn't
change dramatically, a 46th president may be taking
office shortly after that.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for April 1, 2008
One of the reasons John McCain supports American
involvement in Iraq may be that he's seriously
uninformed about that war. In fact, he seems to
have a shockingly casual, almost amateurish grasp
of the basic facts about the conflict and
its ancillary issues.
I mean, there was the press conference last week
at which McCain said:
.
"Well, it's common knowledge and has been reported
in the media that al Qaeda is going back into Iran and
is receiving training and are coming back into Iraq
from Iran. That's well known and it's unfortunate."
Though his traveling companion, Joe Lieberman,
immediately corrected him, McCain still revealed a
lack of fundamental knowledge about the currents and
cross-currents in the region.
The big fear among foreign policy experts has always
been, post-Saddam, that there might be an unholy Shiite
alliance between Tehran and Baghdad. Is McCain also
unaware that Saddam was an enemy of bin Laden's and
that Saddam (for his own reasons) didn't want al Qaeda
to gain a foothold in Iraq because he saw the group
as a competing power base? (If we had been shrewd, we
could have built on and exacerbated the natural
animosity between the two.) One wonders whether
McCain would have supported the war if he had
been more knowledgeable about the issues involved.
To his credit, though, McCain hasn't yet
called the Sunnis "gooks." (Lieberman might
have warned him off that one.)
* * *
Hillary Clinton keeps using that line about answering
the phone at 3 in the morning, but, as I recall, when
she and her husband were in the White House, the
president wasn't even available for phone calls
at three in the afternoon! (Remember Bill's "sexy time"
in the middle of a weekday, when he had guests like Lloyd
Bentsen waiting in the lobby?) Then again, President
Clinton gave us results (e.g., peace, prosperity), so
maybe a bit of mid-day fellatio is part of the recipe
for successful policy-making. Give
me what he's drinking (just not so literally!).
* * *
Odd that Time magazine chose to publish a ranting
letter from Jeremiah Wright complaining about
a story in The New York Times -- a full year
after Wright sent the letter to the New
York Times (which ran a fair and accurate story, by
the way).
You know, I can't see how Wright could be considered
a very credible source these days about much of
anything, now that his history of making crackpot
comments has come to light.
I mean, how much credence can you give a guy who says
that "the government lied about inventing the HIV
virus as a means of genocide against people of color"?
It's hard to fathom the unhinged mindset of somebody
who would say something like that.
Wright's remarks recall nothing so much as Gen. Ripper's
lunatic belief that the communists were putting fluoride in
America's water supply in "Dr. Strangelove."
Beware if Wright starts writing letters that
mention his "precious bodily fluids."
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 29, 2008
Lately I've been looking at the three main
contenders for president and wondering
whether candidates were always this flawed or
whether I was just too young to notice the
imperfections in previous decades.
One candidate, John McCain, has an explosive temper
and has openly used the ugly ethnic slur "chink" to
describe Asians (he was in prison when "All in the
Family" was in its prime, which means he missed a
big part of America's cultural education and
evolution).
Another hopeful, Hillary Clinton, talks about
landing under sniper fire during a trip to Bosnia
in the 1990s. Earlier I was thinking the
same thing that one television pundit later voiced
on Friday night: was she confusing the Bosnia
incident with another event in which she
actually did come under fire? If not, then how
does she explain the fact that she fabricated
the incident?
Finally, we have Barack Obama, who stands by a
crazy pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who says lots of
really idiotic things.
Hey, Mike Gravel is starting to look nearly normal!
Elsewhere in politics, it was also recently revealed
that the former governor of New York whored until he
was caught, the new guv of New York slept around and did
cocaine, the former governor of New Jersey had threesomes,
the mayor of Detroit was caught having steamy extramarital
sex, McCain appears to have had a thing for that Vicki
Iseman woman, and so on and so on.
I'm starting to get the feeling that the whole world
is having a wild Dionysian bash but forgot to invite
me. As I sit here on a Friday night, watching the
AccuWeather forecast and sipping Yuban, I'm beginning
to suspect I've been thrown out of the gene pool by
whoever controls the guest list.
Anyway, back to the flaws of the White House hopefuls,
specifically Obama's response to the Rev. Wright
controversy (I wrote about Hillary's Snipergate
below, hence I'm not playing favorites).
Anyone who would say "the government lied about
inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide
against people of color," as Wright did, is
seriously and dangerously out of touch with
reality.
And anyone who has the temerity to say that the
U.S. brought the 9/11 attacks on itself (attacks
planned by bin Laden during the progressive Clinton
regime, when our military was actually siding with
Muslims and against Christians in a conflict in
the former Yugoslavia) is either stupid or
uninformed or both.
But what also bothers me is there were people
in the audience at his church applauding all
that crap.
Why didn't Barack Obama walk out in protest when
Wright started mouthing off like that? He should
know there are far higher values than loyalty in this
world. If Wright were a good friend of mine, I
would say, no friend of mine would be talking like
that, and I'd walk out in the middle of
his sermon and loudly tell people afterwards
that I strongly disagreed with what he said.
It's like sitting around with an old friend who
suddenly starts disparaging blacks and Jews; you
don't let it pass; you stop him right there and
make it clear that's not acceptable talk.
That's why Barack's speech on race was one
of his worst. It sounded so Adlai, so Taubman
building, so no-controlling-legal-authority.
What I didn't hear was genuine, visceral
revulsion at Wright's rants. I didn't see the
profile in courage of someone willing to take a
solitary, principled, "High Noon" stand and
walk out on both a friend who said the n-word
and the people who laughed when he said it.
The speech on race sounded like Obama's exit
interview -- just as Romney's hyped speech on
Mormonism felt like an exit. Don't get me wrong,
Barack will probably be the nominee, but it was
an exit speech in the sense that we all now
know -- and so does he, at least unconsciously -- that
he is not going to be elected president in
November. No way, no how. Clip this, save this,
put it on your frig, and tell me I'm wrong on
the morning of November 5th.
And don't tell me about all the national polls
that have him leading McCain by however many points;
instead show me one credible independent poll that
has Obama leading McCain in Florida. Or in Ohio.
Or even Wisconsin. Without those states,
he can't possibly win the electoral tally.
By the way, Wright: the murders of 9/11 were
done for religious reasons, which is to say for
irrational motives (see: the letter
of intent found in the luggage of Mohamed Atta,
full of a lot of religious mumbo jumbo about
the way and the light and the path and nonbelievers
and god and other such junk).
Later on, of course, months after the fact, bin
Laden ladled on political reasons for having
committed the 9/11 massacres, but only
when he discovered the attacks weren't playing
so well in the Muslim mainstream.
I wonder if there's a clip somewhere of Wright
screaming, "God damn bin Laden!," and of Barack
applauding when he said that.
But I digress. Paul
______________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 25-26, 2008
Intriguing but flawed story in today's
New York Times about East Germans escaping to freedom
during the Cold War by traveling to Bulgaria and
slipping across its border into Greece. The story
fails to note that Bulgaria is widely
and definitively known as having been among the
most -- if not the most -- totalitarian and brutal
of the Eastern Bloc nations (in fact, insiders used
to call it the 16th republic of the CCCP).
I'm surprised his editor allowed him to write it
without noting the country's overall Cold
War reputation. (Further, his story has the
unmistakable sound of a piece that a writer
writes when he subtly wants to even up a
score with another writer.)
It also quotes someone characterizing Bulgaria as
sunny and southern, which gives the wrong impression.
Yes, the small part of it that is near the Black Sea may be
a vacation spot, but that's not the bulk of Bulgaria, which
is mostly grey and drab and sober and insular and
super-provincial -- and not a lot of fun at all. And
any look at an atlas would tell you that it's
on the same latitude as New England (Sofia almost
never gets above 75 degrees, even in August).
As I've noted in this space before, I traveled through
Bulgaria (alone, by local train, as a
teenager in 1976) from its Serbian border to Sofia
through Plovdiv and to Edirne, which is the virtual
three-way intersection of Bulgaria, Turkey and
Greece (aka, Thrace).
And then I did it again in the reverse direction!
My impressions: it felt like a military state, as
opposed to a police state, which is what Yugoslavia
resembled. Its border with Serbia was a bit less
protected than the one at Edirne, a somewhat
scary checkpoint in that soliders rifled roughly
through passengers's luggage while wielding their
rifles and flashlights/spotlights in
intimidating ways.
In any event, it was sure easier to get
into Bulgaria from the Edirne checkpoint than it was
to get out. The border guards were far less uptight
(I didn't even have a double transit visa, required for
the return trip, but they bent the rules and sold me
one on the spot, enabling me to get back to Italy,
where I was studying at the time.)
As for the reverse journey from Bulgaria to Serbia,
through Dimitrovgrad, I mostly slept through it because
I'd become very sick on the train, probably because of
food poisoning at an Istanbul restaurant.
Frankly, I was more worried about returning through
Zagreb, where, days earlier, I'd been taken off
the train, stripped of my passport and briefly detained
by Yugoslavian cops (because I had an American passport).
In Bulgaria, I had no such personal encounter with the
authorities, though I had been taking notes and snapping
pictures at various points along the route, which might
have been considered provocative if they had caught me
doing it. In retrospect, I can see I was probably
simply lucky not to have had a run-in with the
Bulgarian border soldiers, who truly looked
and acted like serious motherfuckers.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 25, 2008
Stream of Hillary ("Can You Hear the Drums, Fernando?")
The snipers are out again tonight, shooting from the nearby
hills as part of a vast right-wing conspiracy, reminding
me of that night in Memphis when I was with Rev. Martin
Luther King, who I first met at age six -- and I have seven
paid campaign workers who will back me up thoroughly on this,
because I did see King when I was 12 and was the only
Barry Goldwater supporter in the joint when he spoke -- and
by the way I misspoke about meeting King at 6, I've been
distracted by snipers lately, coming at me from different
directions, giving me the vapors, reminding me I've seen
some "hard places come down in smoke and ash" in my 50
years as U.S. Senator, and, yes, I have the scars to prove
it, because Bill First once had me in a death grip on the
Senate floor as Trent Lott sniped at me with what looked like
a Confederate-era pistol from an upper floor, and suddenly
I flashbacked to that night in Memphis when I was at
King's side, presciently advising Jesse Jackson to drop
out of the South Carolina primary, but I digress and
should note that, if anything, I have had too much
foreign policy experience, having taken the SeaDream Cruise
of the Caribbean during spring break in college, coming
within 200 miles of Cuba and its snipers, and I don't
want to cry, but I really sincerely -- and this comes
from the heart -- I sincerely hate to lose, particularly
to a one-term Senator from Illinois, who stands in contrast
to my 53 years of Congressional experience, if you include
the times in my youth when I would walk by the Capitol
building late at night, a dangerous neighborhood with
potential snipers on rooftops -- experience that should
count for something, as should my experience as the
right-hand of Rev. King, who I cradled in my arms
in '68 on the balcony of that motel in Memphis, which
is in a state that has 11 electoral votes that I might
win if I become the nominee, though it looks like Barack
has it wrapped, and if he does win the nomination, I'll offer
him the second spot on the ticket, and I'll say, "I want
you by my side Barack, in case of snipers and to hear
my remembrances of Dr. King" -- but I must cut this short,
because I think I hear Kalishnikovs in the nearby hills,
I can hear the drums, Fernando, I can still "recall the
frightful night we crossed the Rio Grande," or it might have
been the Danube, or maybe the East River on the way to Zabar's.
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 19, 2008
Today's Anti-War Protests in Berkeley, Calif. A spirited group of protesters on Telegraph Avenue,
around 1:30pm today. [photo by Paul Iorio] Five years after the start of the Iraq war, anti-war
demonstators took to the streets of cities across
America -- and Berkeley, Calif., the traditional
epicenter of protest, was no exception.
Here are a few photos I shot around a couple
hours ago in Berkeley.
Another shot of the Telegraph Avenue
protesters. [photo by Paul Iorio].
* *
A contingent of demonstrators on Shattuck
Avenue, after 2pm today. [photo by Paul Iorio]--------------------
Now it emerges in a newly released audiotape that bin Laden's
delicate sensitivites are still offended by the little
cartoons that satirists in Europe published a couple
years ago. What a fragle flower this bin Laden
fellow is, no? People jump burning from the twin towers,
and bin is unmoved. But bin sees an episode of
Huckleberry Hound and he's in tears. Awww.
Well, bin, if ya liked the the Mohammed cartoons,
you're really gonna like my own cartoon series, "Bin Laden,
the Jihadist Pooch," which (much to my surprise) has
spread virally over the Internet since I posted the
series last October. Perhaps you've already seen the
cartoons. But if not, lemme take this opportunity to
reprint the best of the series right here and now.
Viddy well and enjoy!
Series by Paul Iorio.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 18-19, 2008
Race and the '08 CampaignWell, the good news for the Dems is they're going
to win the White House -- in 2012. President McCain
will announce in late 2011 that he won't seek a second
term (because of health issues), leaving the field
open to Dems ravenous for a long-denied
victory.
So the Dems should set their sights on '12 and in the
meantime fix the holes in their nominating process
that perennially give rise to factional candidates who
simply can't cut it in the general election.
The Super Delegates invention was supposed to do just
that, but instead comes across as an imperious imposition
by national party insiders. Maybe Dems ought to
experiment with truly new ideas -- such as (off the top of
my head): having double primaries. What I mean is,
follow the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday and with
a mail-in New Hampshire primary on Thursday that pits
the two top contenders (who won Tuesday's vote) against
one another, with delegates going to the winner of
Thursday's vote, winner-take-all. (The other primary
states could do the same.) That way, whoever
progresses to front-runner status becomes front-runner
with a 50%-plus majority, not with, say, a 27% plurality.
The 27% plurality thing is what's keeping the Dems from
nominating an electable general election candidate.
The comparisons of Barack's juggernaut to Jesse Jackson's
presidential campaigns of the 1980s don't really obtain,
because Jackson was never as popular as Barack is now.
Rather Barack's candidacy is starting to resemble
George Wallace's run in '72, which Wallace probably
would've won, much to the extreme chagrin of party
regulars, if there hadn't been tragedy on the
campaign trail.
Meanwhile, the general election is taking on a
different shape altogether, looking increasingly like
Adlai versus Ike, circa '56 or '52 -- take your pick.
And Rev. Wright just finished cutting McCain's Halloween
scare ad for the swing states. The GOP now doesn't
have to find some obscure footage of Obama and Sharpton
embracing; it need only run Wright's "God Damn America!"
clip on a loop in the purple states on the weekend
before the general election.
In order to believe Obama will become our 44th president,
one must be convinced that he can win Florida and Ohio, or
at least Florida or Ohio, and I don't see how he could
win either. (If there is a credible poll that puts him
over McCain in either state, please send it to me at
pliorio@aol.com, because I've not seen it.)
Don't get me wrong, if Obama's the nominee, he will
likely win more states than Mondale or McGovern or
even George Wallace -- his electoral total will probably
be even bigger than Michael Dukakis's, though only
slightly.
You know, around a week or so ago, before Rev. Wright's
sermon came to light, I saw some elementary school
kids -- black kids -- cheerfully walking on a sidewalk
as a car passed with an Obama for President bumper
sticker on it, and for a moment I had a sort of heartwarming,
almost corny, but genuine thought: their first memories
of a presidential election will be this one, in which
an African-American candidate is the leading Democratic
contender for the nomination. They will not know a world,
first-hand, in which blacks are prima facie excluded from
the top job in the land.
But the glow of that thought lasted only until the
Rev. Wright incident, which reminded me there
is still sickness and infection on both sides of
the racial divide.
As testament to that, one of the biggest issues that
is not even being discussed in the campaign (because
it's too incendiary) is legal reform to correct the
injustices that we've recently seen against both blacks
(in Jena) and against whites (in the Crystal Mangum
defamation case).
The Jena case points to a need for tort reform that
somehow takes into account the overarching context of
a crime (a reform that should go beyond the existing
"mitigating factor" standard).
The Duke case points to a horrifying hole in our legal
system that should be remedied by de-politicizing the
position of D.A., creating a serious penalty for
intentional aggravated slander (though this one would be
tough to pull off without infringing on 1st amendment
rights), understanding how serious the crime of false
accusation can be, etc.
Duke and Jena should both be exposed to the
disinfectant of sunlight in this campaign, otherwise
the infection on both sides of the racial divide will
continue to fester, and we'll continue to hear the
hate talk of the Rev. Wrights and the Bill
Cunninghams.
--------------------------
Stray thought: Of all the women I've known who
have changed their last names since college or
high school, I can think of only a few who have
changed it completely, without even hyphenating it.
So is the tradition of name-changing now mostly
a thing of the Boratian past? If we elect Clinton, might
she decide to turn into President Rodham somewhere
down the line?
-----------
OK, time to break for lunch and have a hamburger. Yes,
I've heard about how risky beef is this days, but frankly
a certain burger looks so good right about now I could eat
it all day, E. coli or not!
But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 10, 2008
Alan Dershowitz said it best, in Byron Pitts'
excellent report (does Pitts ever do anything but
excellent reports?) on "The CBS Evening News":
in most countries, what Eliot Spitzer did would
not even be illegal. Spitzer was about to have sex
(again) with an adult woman behind closed doors,
which is really his own personal business and not
ours (unlike Larry Craig, who was planning to
have sex in a public restroom with someone who
could have been underage, for all he knew). Sure,
there's an element of hypocrisy in both cases,
but that's not a hanging offense. I've always
thought we'd be a better nation if we had the
prostitution laws of Holland (and the health care
system of Canada!), but for now America is stuck
with its Puritanism and sexual provincialism, which
I hope doesn't claim another victim in Spitzer, who
should remain in Albany.
Still, it's becoming an unmistakable pattern:
politicians and others who codemn sexual deviance the
loudest are often those who are involved in such
activities themselves.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 9, 2008
I'm told Scarlett Johansson has recorded an
album of Tom Waits covers, "Anywhere I Lay
My Head," which'll be out in May and oughta
be interesting. Haven't heard it yet, but it's
amazing what -- at only age 23 -- she's already
accomplished in movies. She also appears
in will.i.am's pro-Obama video, "Yes, We Can,"
directed nicely by Jesse Dylan (son of
you-know-who). Great to see that Jesse has
become a successful film director, by the way;
I've only seen him in person once -- albeit,
in a very memorable setting, on a boat on which
ZZ Top was performing for a few dozen people or so
on the 4th of July in 1986. We were docked in
New York harbor, and I remember walking to a
side of the boat to take a look at the Statue of
Liberty, sidling next to a couple. "Doesn't she
make you weak in the knees?," said the woman to
her friend, referring to the Statue. And when
she turned her head I saw it was Martha Quinn,
the pioneering MTV VJ who I think every
twentysomething guy had a crush on in 1986. With
her was a guy who looked like a charismatic rock
star but who I didn't recognize; later I was told
he was Jesse Dylan. But I didn't get to meet him.
* * *
There may be some talented editors at HarperCollins
but I've never met one, though I have come in contact
with some exceedingly dim editors there.
Now comes word from The New York Times that
HarperCollins is publishing a new book by James
Frey -- you know, the guy who made stuff up in
a non-fiction book, abused the trust of his
editors and readers, etc.
Doesn't surprise me. A couple years back, I had
dealings with HarperCollins and saw first-hand how
profoundly stupid some of their decisions were.
I was writing a biography of Richard Pryor and interviewed
a source, corroborated by other info, who said Pryor
had done, uh, xyz some decades ago. An editor at
HarperCollins, through my agent, said
great, write it up as a sample chapter about Pryor
doing xyz. So I did. When the editor received it, he
suddenly pretended to be shocked -- shocked -- that I
had written that Pryor had done xyz. I told the dolt,
that's what you requested and that's what my info
was, so that's what I wrote. (Did he want me to
cover-up the info I'd uncovered?)
Well, he didn't really have a comeback for that. What
probably happened is that a top boss at the company
read the xyz thing and was shocked, and so my
editor suddenly had to appear shocked, too, even though he
had requested exactly that material.
Anyway, people wonder why people don't read anymore,
but I don't wonder. There's far, far more enduring value and
artistry in a single episode of "Friday Night Lights" or "The
Sopranos" than in most of the novels released by HarperCollins
in a given season. As for James Frey, I fell asleep
reading "A Million Little Pieces" even before the book
was exposed as a fraud.
* * *
The San Francisco Chronicle has yet another new
editor, a guy named Ward Bushee, who will need all
the luck he can get to save the struggling paper.
With the newspaper business collapsing almost
everywhere, my suggestion to Bushee is this: discontinue
the paper edition of the paper and publish it just
as an online daily. (That's where the industry is
going to be in ten years anyway, and here's your chance
to get there first.) And then I'd fire two features
editors who've been screwing up: David Wiegand, who
is a fraud, and Ed Guthmann, who is a thief.
(And this is coming from someone who wrote for the
paper for years.)
But I digress. Paul
________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 7, 2008
An Alternate Penalty for Florida and Michigan If there is no penalty for Florida and Michigan
moving up their primaries in violation of Democratic
party rules, then in 2012 there will be no disincentive
for other states to do the same. Suppose
Alabama wanted to be a playa and moved its primary
to, say, Thanksgiving of 2011, and Vermont leap-frogged
Alabama and moved its own contest to Halloween, causing
Iowa to protect its first-in-the-nation
status by having its caucus on Columbus Day.
If there is no penalty, then there will be no order to
the nominating process, and the national party will not
be able to ensure that its grand design and overall
strategy are respected.
So the question becomes: what should the penalty
be for Michigan and Florida?
Stripping them of their delegates may be a little
harsh -- and counter-productive, too, given that
the general election may hinge on a handful of voters
in either Florida or Michigan. The DNC's retaliation
shouldn't be scattershot in a way that affects
innocent voters along with the party insiders who
should be punished.
My suggestion is to make the penalty an inside baseball
thing. The DNC should say nobody at this year's Democratic
National Convention from Florida or Michigan will be
allowed to give the keynote or nominating speeches (or
any other formal speeches from the podium). That way the
punishment is limited to the politicians guilty of
violating the rules.
Regarding the idea of a do-over vote:
Hillary has said, why don't we do a do-over in just
Michigan, where Barack wasn't on the ballot, but not
in Florida, where he was.
But that's not really fair because Hillary campaigned in
Florida and Barack did not.
The big question is: why did Hillary campaign in
Florida when she knew and agreed that that primary
would not count? Barack honored the boycott; Hillary
didn't. Her campaigning in Florida back in January
implies a disingenuousness about her support of that
boycott; in other words, there is the appearance that
she was cynically figuring all along that the Florida
vote would have to eventually count (if only because
she planned to make a stink about disenfranchisement
later on, as she's doing now).
Because she appears to have unfairly manipulated the
boycott to her advantage (by campaigning in Florida),
any do-over should include both Michigan and Florida.
And the penalty should affect the insiders,
not the voters.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 5, 2008
Hold the Seltzer, PleaseOne thing that bothers me about the Margaret
Seltzer scandal is that it should've been
easy to figure out long ago. I mean, here's a
synopsis of the fraudulent book (as quoted by the
Washington Post):
It's "about her life as a half-white, half-Native
American girl growing up in South-Central Los Angeles
as a foster child among gang-bangers, running drugs
for the Bloods."
Hey, that almost sounds like a laugh line on Letterman!
Seriously, folks, some mysteries can be solved by
simple common sense. For example, if Joe Schmo claims
to have written, say, Allen Ginsberg's "Howl," and
yet Schmo's own work is far, far less excellent
than "Howl," then one can conclude that Schmmo must
be lying about having written "Howl."
Another thing that disturbs me about the Seltzer
affair is that while the book publishing biz was busy
falling for her outrageous lies, while the industry
and reviewers and agents were absolutely
abuzz about this untrue story that they wanted to be
true, they were rejecting a lot of terrific,
honest manuscripts -- including my own proposal
for a fresh, expert bio of Richard Pryor, and for a
solid anthology of my own non-fiction stories
(now available online at www.paulliorio.blogspot.com).
Same thing bothered me about the Jayson
Blair scandal. Sure, I greatly appreciate the
fact I was given the opportunity to write stories
for the New York Times in the 1990s (and I hope
I can do so again in the future).
But when the Blair scandal erupted, one of my
thoughts was: while Blair was fabricating stories
that wouldn't have been any good even if they had
been true, I was pitching several stories to The Times,
among them a groundbreaking piece on J.D. Salinger,
that the paper rejected (see story at
www.pauliorio.blogspot.com, and judge for yourself).
The paper was apparently too busy publishing Blair to give
me a fair hearing.
At the same time Blair was fabricating, I wrote a
very well-received (and scrupulously accurate)
media piece that still stands as the only story
about the tv networks's immediate coverage of
the 9/11 attacks. The Times rejected that story
(and others) for no good reason (The Toronto Star
ultimately ran it, and I thank that paper profusely;
the story can also be found at www.paulliorio.blogspot.com).
I sometimes wonder: if Jayson Blair hadn't been caught,
and he almost wasn't, he would've surely been promoted
up the ranks, with all flanks protected by management,
so that any whistle-blower who tried to complain about him
would be drummed out of the business, ridiculed and made to
look dishonest -- and you know that's true. And you have
to wonder how many Blairs-that-haven't-been-caught are
working in upper management at lesser newspapers than
the Times. At some companies it might be an epidemic.
But I digress. Paul
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for March 4, 2008
-- So who's going to win in Ohio and Texas tonight?
Hard to predict. The best comment came from
Obama: "Remember New Hampshire."
-- Everyone's talking about Hillary's cameo on
SNL but the funniest stuff came later in the program
when the always-inspired Kristen Wiig played Peter
Pan -- truly hilarious.
-- Regarding my column of February 22 (below): someone
is curious about whether I went far into Bulgaria
during my '76 trip. I did. I traveled alone by
local train across the entire length of Bulgaria -- and
then back again! -- snapping pictures and taking notes
all the way. My account of it can be read at
www.paulliorio.blogspot.com.
-- Also, an old friend wanted to know if I've ever
co-written a song. My response: I've written
countless songs over the decades but I have never
co-written a song with anyone. By the way,
MP3 versions of 60 of my songs are posted at
www.vibecat.com/pauliorio, and anyone with an Internet
connection can listen for free. And, yes, every note and
every line of all 60 songs were written solely by me
(only exception is "Waterboardin' USA," which is based
on a Beach Boys tune).
-- Also, I hope my "Holy Country Song" isn't
misunderstood -- I actually enjoy some gospel music
and think the folks at the CMAs have honored some
of the greatest recording artists ever. My song
is meant to be irreverent satire, and should be
heard in that spirit.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for February 29, 2008
Regarding Hillary's ad about answering the phone at 3am:
At three in the morning, in the White House, I want
a president who's in the process of getting a good
night's sleep, so that he or she is fully ready
for whatever events erupt when he or she is awake.
We're not electing a receptionist who's responsible
for fielding and filtering every call that
comes through the switchboard -- the president
hires smart and capable people to do that and to
handle emergencies that might crop up in the
overnight hours. Her ad presents a somewhat
disturbing vision of a Hillary presidency, in
which she pulls all-nighters by the phone, popping
speed, drinking Yuban and waiting anxiously for that
hypothetical world leader to call.
And by the way, if you're awake at 3am, then you're
almost certainly asleep -- or awfully wired and
tired -- at 3pm, which may not be the way you want to
arrange your day as president or as candidate.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- With the selection of Matt Gonzalez as his
running-mate, Ralph Nader has now exponentially
increased his chances of winning most voters in
some parts of Haight Street.
____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 26, 2008
Regarding the photo of Obama in Kenya: frankly, he
looks a bit like Chef Boyaredee, doesn't he?
Look, I took off my shoes when I visited the
Haghia Sofia, and that doesn't make me a Sunni.
There's always an element of when-in-Rome in
both state and personals visits abroad (didn't
I see footage of Bush in a dashiki during an
African visit?).
That said, Hillary is inadvertently doing Obama
a bit of a favor, giving him a taste of the
nasty ads he'll be facing from the Republican
machine come October.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for February 25, 2008
I really have nothing much to say about the Oscars
this year. I mean, I really admire Paul Thomas Anderson
and Daniel Day Lewis and "There Will Be Blood"
and the Coen Bros. -- and Cate Blanchett is exactly
as awesome as any woman can ever get, Hilary Swank
looks fabulous, and it's always great to see
Harrison Ford and George Clooney. But for the
most part it was snoozeville. I was even wondering
whether the writers' strike was still on when I saw the
Rogen/Hill bit, easily the most embarrassing and unfunny
comic segment in recent Oscar history.
And the overnight ratings have just come in, folks. The
80th Academy Awards telecast is now officially the
lowest-rated Oscar ceremony ever -- and they worked
overtime to earn that distinction, I can assure you.
Next year, here's an idea: bring back Steve Martin. Or
bring back David Letterman. I know his first try
didn't exactly light up the airwaves,
but Letterman is starting to look better and better
now that we've seen host after host fail.
But I digress. Paul
___________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 25, 2008
Regarding Ralph Nader, let me say this:
A man who stands atop a mountain at noon
stands in sunlight; the same man who stands
atop that same mountain at midnight stands
in darkness. He who refuses to change changes
anyway, because the world changes around him. In
his youth, Nader was progressive; in his old age,
refusing to shift with the times, Nader is an utter
reactionary, one of the world's truly despicable
fascist-sympathizers.
As Bob Dylan wrote: "Your old road is rapidly agin'/
Please get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand/
For the times they are a changing."
* * *
I'm flattered and gratified and a bit surprised that
my extremely irreverent cartoon series -- "Bin Laden,
the Jihadist Pooch" -- is being circulated on the web
as much as it is. I wrote, drew and posted the series
independently last October, not expecting it to
go very viral, but now I'm seeing it show up in lots
of places online.
And let me say if bin Laden or his people are
in any way offended by my series then I
just want to say that I sincerely and deeply
hope that you are offended on a fundamental level.
The series, "Bin Laden, the Jihadist Pooch,"
can be viewed at:
http://cartoonsbyiorio.blogspot.com.
Enjoy!
But I digress. Paul
___________________________
-- the daily digression column celebrates its first anniversary today. it made its debut on february 24, 2007. thanks to all those who have linked it to their sites, quoted it or written with comments. a second year of digressions begins today! ---THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 24, 2008
Ralph Nader in drag atop his beloved Corvair in the 1960s (or so say the people at Nader's nursing home). It was a bit heartwarming to see Tim Russert
raid the nursing home to give some airtime to an
apparent Alzheimer's patient, though it was obvious
the guy's cognitive functions were clearly
compromised, so it was sort of exploitative to
see such a mentally disabled guy on "Meet the Press"
(he said his name was Ralph Nader and apparently
couldn't tell the difference between Barack Obama
and George W. Bush, when shown photos of the two).
People at the nursing home, though not reliable,
tell me he was once an automobile exec, responsible
for the Corvair or something, and also that Russert
took the time to pick up another resident of the
home, Doris Goodwin, in a package deal for his
show; she provided the much-needed Theodore Roosevelt
angle on the '08 election, an insight now spreading
like wildfire on the blogs and among cutting edge
academic thinkers.
I mean, hey, Russert coulda put some innovative
theorist or a brilliant Stanford prof or even
me on his show to talk about the '08 election,
and he would've been better off. (My qualifications
are at www.paulliorio.blogspot.com. But I guess I
don't have the requisite experience as a
plagiarist, so that would disqualify me.)
After seeing Nader, I must admit I started to see the
Corvair in a new light. Looking at it from just the
aesthetic angle, and putting aside its considerable safety
flaws, I can now see its design as evocative of an entire
era of suburban pop culture in America -- it almost
qualifies as pop art, like a can of Tab. So in celebration
of the Corvair, I've posted a picture of Nader with his
classic vehicle (above).
* * *
Is Black the New Catholic? Truth be told, some Dems aren't backing Barack because
they think most of America is still a bit too racist to
elect a black president.
But think of it this way: if the GOP ticket was
Condi Rice/Alan Keyes and the Dem ticket was
John Edwards/Bill Richardson, Republicans in red
states would vote in droves against the white
ticket and for the African-American one. Which proves
there is no inherent aversion to electing a black
president among even conservative voters, if they
feel that candidate can best represent their interests.
When thinking of bigotry in the U.S., think of the
white racist in a red state who gets himself into
legal trouble and decides to hire an ace black attorney
because he knows he's one of best in the biz. That
white guy still has an underlying bigotry toward
blacks, but he hires the African-American because
he knows his interests will best be served by him.
Likewise, if a white bigot in Utah has to have delicate
heart surgery and must choose between a black
surgeon whose medical judgment has been proved
correct time and again and a veteran white surgeon
who has had several malpractice suits filed against
him, who do you think the racist would choose?
That sort of dynamic may come into play in November,
if Obama is the nominee. Swing rednecks in purple
states might think this way: "I don't like black people
very much, but this Obama guy is smart and has
good judgment and will do my bidding most effectively,
so I'm voting for him."
Could it be that Obama is more like JFK than we imagined?
Could it be that...black is the new Catholic?
Some months ago, which is to say centuries ago in political
years, there was misplaced concern that Mitt Romney's
Mormonism was like JFK's Catholicism -- a point of
prejudice that voters might not be able to overcome.
But voters ended up dismissing Romney for reasons
unrelated to his religious beliefs.
Turns out Mormonism wasn't the new Catholicism;
prejudice against African-Americans is apparently what
still needs to be overcome in '08 and what might
keep Obama from having his mail re-directed to
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue next year.
But that prejudice seems to be fading fast as voters
realize that...this guy makes sense. And just as the
redneck in Selma will hire a brilliant black attorney
to get him out of a legal jam, so some borderline racist
voters might hire Barack to carry out their agenda,
because they know he's more effective than his rivals.
As I've written before, the black/white division in
this country is getting to be quaint, an almost old
fashioned way of viewing American ethnic diversity.
Out here, in the San Francisco Bay Area, and along
much of the Pacific rim, the primary ethnic division
is between Asians and non-Asians, not between blacks
and whites. And as the population of other parts of
the country diversifies, the "black" classification
becomes increasingly meaningless and insignificant.
(I mean, does a dark-skinned Jamaican qualify as black?
How about someone of Jamaican-British ancestry who
has lighter skin than an Italian Calabrian? Ethnic
distinctions become increasingly irrelevant as more
diverse ingredients are added to the melting pot.)
More than race, age may be the driving factor in
the '08 campaign. It's probably less significant that
Barack is black than that he is the first post-baby
boomer, post-rock 'n' roll era candidate.
Over the decades, we've had our earful of boomer
candidates like Bill Clinton, who liked to don shades
and play bluesy sax like a jazzbo wannabe of the Beat era.
And we've seen amiable pols like Mike Huckabee, who have
a rock 'n' roll sorta cadence to their speechifying ways
on the road.
But Barack is the very first serious presidential
candidate who speaks with a hint of the cadence and
the rhythm of the hip hop generation. And I don't mean
hip hop in terms of race, I mean hip hop in terms of age
group, hip hop in terms of a rhythm and tone of talking
that almost qualifies as a separate pop culture dialect
from the rock 'n' roll dialect.
Obama's general flow of oratory is clearly influenced
by a post-rock era of expression, and that's probably
part of the reason why young people are responding to
the undertone and undertow of his message.
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what
you can do for your country" was like a succinct and pithy
pop song of its era.
But listen to the expansive rolling flow of the post-rock
generation(from an Obama speech of 1/26/08): "And as we
take this journey across the country we love with the message
we've carried from the plains of Iowa to the hills of New
Hampshire, from the Nevada desert to the South Carolina coast,
we have the same message we had when we were up and when we
were down: that out of many, we are one..."
The generational divide will be even more vivid if it's
Obama versus John McCain, who is not only pre-Run DMC
but pre-Beatles in general sensibility.
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 22, 2008
The Birth of a NationBack when it was communist and run by Tito, and
when I was a teenager, I traveled alone by local train
through Serbia and the rest of the Balkans, the area
that's now in turmoil because of Kosovo's secession.
Hard to believe today that all those diverse countries
in that region I traveled through -- Serbia, Bosnia,
Croatia, Slovenia, Kosovo, etc. -- were once part
of a single unified nation called Yugoslavia.
That said, Kosovo's independence is a very welcome
development, and Russia and China should get on board
and recognize its sovereignty.
Sovereignty is the only effective protection the
Kosovars have against the historically hostile Serbs
that surround them. Have Russia and China forgotten that
the entire Kosovar Albanian population was on its way
to being mass murdered by the Serbs in the late
1990s -- before the U.S. got involved and put an
end to the genocide (euphemistically called
"ethnic cleansing")?
I mean, Kosovo is not a heavily populated area,
by any means (the entire population of the country
has around 2 million people, which is roughly the
size of Houston, Texas; Pristina, the only "big
city" in that area, has around half the population
of Oakland, Calif.). So the fact that the Serbs
killed at least 6,000 Kosovars in 1999 alone is
significant -- and that's a low ball estimate,
because the military folks in Belgrade burned a lot
of bodies to cover up their atrocities. Not only
that, but almost everyone in Kosovo (90%, for
crissakes!) was run out of his or her home in '99
(remember the endless stream of Kosovar Albanians
making that long march to safety to Albania?).
Meanwhile, the sadistic Serbian government at
the time actually used mass rape as a military
weapon in towns like Pec and Djakoivica.
What more proof does Vladimir Putin require to
see that Kosovo needs the protection of sovereignty?
Or does he not see the reality because of an overriding
preoccupation with the loss of the Soviet empire?
Remember, less than two decades ago, Russia was
the seat of the vast Soviet Union, which included 15
republics (16, if you count Bulgaria), numerous European
satellites and various allies elsewhere. Today, the empire
is in fragments, and even the fragments of the fragments
have fragmented.
To be sure, Yugoslavia was never formally an Iron
Curtain country. While nominally allied with the Soviets,
Tito always maintained some independence from the
Kremlin. But it was still, essentially, part of the
Eastern Bloc, which is why it now must be a bitter reality
for Putin to see Yugoslavia splinter into not two or three
pieces but into six independent nations -- and, as of
this week, seven!
Loss of empire is a tough reality for any country. And
Putin is merely reflecting his constituents's passionate
desire to be strong again, on par with the U.S. again,
a playa again, feared by enemies again.
For four years, I lived in a heavily Russian/Ukrainian
neighborhood in Los Angeles, so I was constantly in contact,
on a daily basis, with Russian immigrants. And almost every
time I talked with them about their homeland, they said
the same thing (to a person): they wanted Russia to be
strong again, like it was during the Soviet era.
And one really nice guy -- his name was Vladimir,
and he used to let me use his fax machine -- would always
smile and flex his biceps like Popeye when he said he
wanted his country to be powerful again.
And I can imagine that if that's how they feel
in east West Hollywood, they must surely feel that
way in Russia itself (coverage of Kosovo's secession
on the Russia Today (RT) news service shows that).
As I mentioned, I traveled deep into south Serbia
in '76, an area very few tourists ever see, and went
just east of Kosovo before crossing into the most
Iron Curtainish of all Iron Curtain countries, Bulgaria.
And what I remember (besides the spectacular Balkan
Mountains scenery, among other things) is that it seemed
to get poorer and more rural the farther south I went.
The area between Kosovo and Bulgaria was, frankly,
downright depressing, full of "empty roads, solemn faces,
dreary checkpoints," as I wrote in my journal at the time.
Today it's still one of the poorest regions in Europe
(even though the Kosovar Albanians are better off than
the Albanian Albanians, which isn't saying much, given
the enduring paranoid legacy of Hoxha). Common
sense says Kosovo and Serbia both have better chances
of improving their lots as separate entities. And
let's face it, the Serb's fixation on Pristina as
their national birthplace has to be a secondary
consideration, given the murderous practical
realities of the past decade.
By the way, yesterday's rioting in Belgrade was carried
out by a suspiciously small number of people (or at least
the burning of the embassy was); it didn't
look much like a real riot or a populist uprising where
the streets are overflowing with people who are overflowing
with passion. There doesn't seem to be evidence of a
extraordinary popular groundswell in Serbia against Kosovo's
secession, so I bet the new nation stands.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 21, 2008
The John 'n' Vicki ScandalThe Man Who Missed the 1960s: did he discover free love only decades later? I've done enough journalism to know that when a story
like the one about John McCain in today's New York Times
appears, there is almost certainly a vast amount of
reportage that the paper is withholding.
In other words, The Times probably knows that McCain and
Vicki Iseman had had a sexual affair, but the paper isn't
reporting it because some editors at the Times don't feel
they've nailed it. I mean, I have no inside info about
this particular story, but I do know, from having written
and reported for almost all the major newspapers in the
U.S. on a variety of subjects, that that's usually the
pattern, that only a small percentage of what you know
to be true actually sees publication, particularly in a
story that's as potentially explosive as this one.
Look at the reporting about Mark Foley's serial flirtations
with underage pages. In that case, papers like the
St. Petersburg (Fl) Times had solid knowledge of Foley's
indiscretions but didn't go to press with it, probably partly
because of pressure from the Foley camp. (And the Larry Craig
incident wasn't reported until months after his arrest.)
Thankfully, the New York Times bowed to no such pressure
in this case, despite the fact that McCain himself made a
personal phone call to Bill Keller, who runs the Times.
No, my intuition tells me the Times is being very
restrained in its reporting and that there's a lot more
to this than has already been made public. Kudos
to Rutenberg/Thompson/Kirkpatrick/Labaton -- and Keller --
for running the story.
But I digress. Paul
The Iseman Trophy? (Doesn't she look like the sort of woman who would be Vladimir Putin's "special personal assistant"? Or NASA's first female moonwalker?)P.S. -- Now that he's in the national spotlight, McCain
is starting to show signs of a Nixonish furtiveness, if not
paranoia. Notice how he criticized Barack Obama for
saying that Obama would bomb Pakistan to kill bin Laden
whether the Pakistani government gave its consent or
not. McCain retorted that a world leader shouldn't
telegraph such intentions.
McCain is wrong. Sometimes you should telegraph your
intentions and sometimes you shouldn't. For example,
if we knew that bin Laden was in Karachi right now,
we would, of course, not signal to anyone that
we were about to attack his hide-out, lest we run
the risk of alerting bin Laden, who would then try
to escape.
But in speaking generally about whether we would
attack inside Pakistan if bin Laden were there, it
is important that we let the Pakistanis know
that our standing policy is that we're going to
take out Osama where ever we find him, without
asking any government's permission.
Telegraphing that intention in advance is strategically
important, because you don't want to run the risk of
surprising your allies in Pakistan with a bombing raid.
Telling them of your standing policy prepares them,
psychologically and otherwise, for the moment
when we do strike. (There are also examples where
signaling your intentions can serve as a deterrent
to bad actors. Remember the wisdom in the famous
lines in the Kubrick picture "Dr. Strangelove":
"Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of
the enemy the fear to attack" -- and "the whole point
of the Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret!
Why didn't you tell the world?!")
Psychologically, it appears as if McCain has
the mindset of a leader with a predilection
for secret foreign policy ventures. What
such leaders don't understand is that they're
conducting foreign policy at the behest of
the public, which has every right to know,
by and large, what's being done in its
name.
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 15, 2008
Don't act shocked. Don't act like it was an
isolated incident. Every four or
five months, there's a brand new massacre at some
school or at some mall, and every time it happens,
there is collective amnesia throughout the land.
Suddenly, conveniently, we forget all all about
the previous massacre that happened a mere few months
earlier, that one that happened at the mall in Colorado,
remember, the one in which the guy brought a bazooka into
a china shop and killed 87 people or something. Remember?
And remember the one before that, the one in Omaha, the
one where some guy in a trench coat opened fire during home
economics class? Or was that the one at the taco stand?
They all seem to blend together, like blood into blood.
Almost nobody in the media mentions the previous massacres
that happened two and five months ago when they mention
the current one. Could somebody tell me why that
is? Is it amnesia? Stupidity? Lack of journalistic
training? Pressure from the NRA? All four probably.
To show you how strikingly similar these shootings
have become, here's my Daily Digression column from
April 18, 2007 (after the Virginia Tech shooting):
Every few years we go through the same pattern in the
U.S.: there is an awful mass murder, everyone agrees the
massacre could've been avoided if there had been tougher gun laws,
and then we hit the snooze alarm. Several years later, there
is yet another unspeakable shooting, everyone agrees there should
be stricter gun control, and then we hit the snooze alarm again.
This time, following the tragic killings at Virginia
Tech, we will no doubt hit the snooze alarm once again.
Oh, there will inevitably be Senate hearings and high-minded
editorials in major papers, but that will all come to naught.
Because the gun lobby and the NRA are simply too influential.
Again, we will pursue all the wrong avenues. We will
focus on campus lockdown procedures when we should be focusing on
gun control. We will focus on monitoring creative writing
classes when we should be focusing on gun control.
-------
And here's my Daily Digression from December 10, 2007 (after
the Omaha shooting):Yet Another Tragedy Caused By Gun Permissiveness
Almost no news organization is reporting the Colorado
shootings this way: "In the wake of the Omaha
shootings...."
Yet every news organizaton should be mentioning Omaha
in its stories about Colorado. Context is Journalism 101.
But lots of tv news correspondents are saying, "Omaha?
What's Omaha? Ohhh that!! That was soooo 72 hours ago!"
So let's see: Omaha has been completely wiped from memory
now that there's this new shooting spree in Colorado.
And lemme guess the reason why certain tv newsers aren't
mentioning Omaha in stories about Colorado; they're
probably saying something like, "The shooter in the last
one used an AK-47 and the shooter this time used an AK-46,
which, of course, is a vast difference."
They fail to see that the common denominator is bullets.
Both shooters used bullets. If they hadn't, nobody'd be
dead today.
Now let's take a look at the real reason Omaha isn't
being brought up in stories about Colorado: it's
called the NRA. The NRA is so well-organized, so
lawyered up, with so many true believers who know
how to threaten you without threatening you, that
some news orgs take the path of least resistance
and leave out references to Omaha in stories about
Colorado, just as they left out references to Virginia Tech
in stories about Omaha, just as they'll leave out references
to Colorado in stories about the next shooting (and, by the way,
just as they left out references to Tawana Brawley in stories
about Crystal Mangum).
At some news organizations, they report the truth without fear
or favor -- unless the truth is too unpopular.
* * *
And here's my Daily Digression from December 7, 2007:Oooops! I forgot! Gays, guns and god are forbidden
topics during a presidential election year, which is
why you're hearing absolutely n-o-t-h-i-n-g about gun
control in the wake of the Omaha slayings.
So I now have a new personal policy. From here in, I'll
not extend sympathies to victims of gun violence who
weren't in favor of stricter gun regulations before being
shot. Because everybody, by now, can see plainly and in full
light that gun permissiveness is precisely the cause of all
these mass killings.
After every one of these slaughters, gun fanatics always
say the same thing, and that is: "If a nearby bystander
had been armed, the gunman could have been taken out."
OK, fine. let's put that theory to the test. Name one
major mass shooting incident -- Columbine, Virginia
Tech, etc. -- where an armed bystander (not a cop or
guard) saved the day by shooting the gunman. Name one.
The reason you can't name one is because there isn't
one, and the reason there isn't one is because in a
random shooting 1) victims are taken by surprise,
and 2) it's all over within minutes, before anyone
else can lock and load, and 3) the gunman typically
ends the rampage by killing himself.
Even in robberies that unfold over a longer period of
time, there is still massive and unpredictable risk
when an armed bystander intervenes (it often ends up
more like the robbery sequence (in the pastry shop)
in the movie "Boogie Nights" than like a Charles
Bronson flick).
----
Only thing I have to add is that the "Today" show is
my favorite morning program, but the people on that
show are profoundly stupid when reporting about gun massacres.
Don't be so disingenuous as to ask "Why" on a segment
about the Illinois shooting that doesn't even
mention gun control issues. Don't think we can't
read that. In reality, you're afraid of the NRA;
but your phony public explanation is that you're
trying to be fair to the NRA. (And by the way, what the
fuck are you doing giving podium to a liar like
Al Sharpton on Today? You know for a fact
he's an extravagant liar yet you still give him
airtime. What's the matter? Doris Goodwin wasn't
available?)
Anyway, "why" is not the salient question
in this case. "Why" is a notably dim question
in this case because everybody already knows "why."
Why it happened is because a mentally ill person
had easy access to guns. That's why. The important
question is "how," as in: "how are we going to
prevent the next one?"
And now there's almost a let's-throw-good-money-after-bad
syndrome at certain news organizations; they're
not mentioning the preceding massacres because they
haven't mentioned them for months, so they justify
their bad judgment by continuing to exercise their
bad judgment.
At least we can applaud Congress; they're busy
making sure that future gunmen don't inject steroids.
My condolences to all the victims of the Illinois
shooting who supported stricter gun control before
this latest massacre.
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 14, 2008
To celebrate Valentine's Day, I've posted a new MP3
of one of my songs, "I'll Love You Forever (But Not
in This Weather)," which people seem to be enjoying.
Just go to vibecat.com/pauliorio and click on the name
of the song! (No downloads, no passwords, no payment.)
Some backstory on the song: I wrote it in Berkeley in
2003. In 2004, I self-produced a cassette tape version
of it. In 2005, a friend I hadn't seen in decades heard
that song (and others I'd written) and funded/produced a
CD version of the song.
Unfortunately, I've never been satisfied with the production
quality of either edition, so yesterday I self-produced a
new version of "I'll Love You Forever (But Not in This
Weather)," which I think captures the song best.
The song was sort of inspired by Dean Friedman's "Ariel,"
The Small Faces's "Lazy Sunday Afternoon" and The Kinks's
"Apeman."
Anyway, as I said, people seem to enjoy it, so give it
a listen! (And happy Valentine's Day to -- I think
she knows who she is.)
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- Lyrics at www.pauliorio.blogspot.com.
________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 13, 2008
Can somebody please explain why the hell Congress is
currently having hearings on steroids use by
sports entertainers rather than working feverishly
to provide universal health care for all Americans?
Oh, and also, isn't it a scandal that our current
governmment hasn't found Osama bin Laden after
six and a half years of searching? Uh, maybe that's
worth a Congressional hearing, dontcha think?
But no: instead Congress is spending valuable
time and money documenting who injected various
sports entertainers in the ass with drugs
that helped them do their jobs better.
You guys on the Hill have your priorities
right this morning (I said ironically).
But I digress. Paul
___________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 12, 2008
I've seen all sorts of Berkeley
protests and demonstrations in my day, but the
ongoing scene outside the Berkeley city council
building, which I photographed a couple hours
ago, has got to rank among the most eccentric of
'em all. At this hour, members of the U.S. Marines,
and their advocates, are squaring off against anti-war
protesters, as scores of police in riot gear
stand by to keep the peace.
The confrontation is the result of a recent
Berkeley city council letter that stated that
the Marines and their recruitment office
were unwelcome and unwanted within city
limits -- a letter that the USMC and its
allies vigorously objected to. Tonight
the city council is expected to formally
retreat on its condemnation of the Marines, much
to the chagrin of some anti-warriors.
Here's how things looked during the 6pm hour:
Supporters of the Marines are waving a vast number of flags.---
the anti-war crowd was kept at a distance from the Marine supporters---
Marines, cops and even a counter-cultural banjo player mill in the protest area.----
police were in riot gear, just in case-----
If the photo developing machine hadn't chopped off the top of this pic, you'd see that some demonstrators had some wit -- like this guy with a sign reading, "I Can't Afford an Actual Sign."But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 10, 2008
Remembering Roy Scheiderwith this immortal facial expression, Scheider convinced millions of moviegoers that "we're gonna need a bigger boat."Sad to hear that actor Roy Scheider died a few
hours ago in Little Rock. Scheider was
very kind to me as a source in the spring of 2000
when I was busy writing and reporting a feature story
that had a fresh angle on the making of the
movie "Jaws," in which, of course, he starred.
I was so pleasantly surprised when he phoned me
at home and started talking at length -- and with
great humor and warmth -- about how "Jaws"
came to be. My story ran in the San Francisco
Chronicle on May 28, 2000, and here's the story
I wrote (before my editor made a couple minor but
counter-productive edits):
Reconsidering "Jaws"
By Paul Iorio When Steven Spielberg's "Jaws" was released 25 years ago this
summer, it was upstaged by its own mechanical shark and then by its
unprecedented commercial success. Today, after decades of repeated
viewing, it's easier to see the movie for what many think it really is:
a quality thriller in league with such Alfred Hitchcock classics as
"The Birds" and "Psycho."
What emerges from my own interviews with the film makers is that one
of the best things to have happened during the making of "Jaws" was the
malfunctioning of the main mechanical shark (and the two supporting
sharks).
"The shark didn't work," actor Roy Scheider, who plays police chief
Martin Brody, tells me. "And that left us with weeks and weeks
and weeks to shoot, to polish, to improvise, to discuss, to enrich, to
experiment with all the other scenes that in a movie like that would [usually]
get a cursory treatment."
"What happened was, [Robert] Shaw, [Richard] Dreyfuss and Scheider
turned into a little rep company," he says. "And all those scenes, rather than
just pushing the plot along, became golden, enveloping the characters. So
when the crisis came, you really cared about those three guys."
Those "three guys" are by now familiar to moviegoers everywhere:
Matt Hooper (Dreyfuss), an aggressive scientist from a wealthy family;
Quint (Shaw), a veteran fisherman unhinged by past trauma; and Brody
(Scheider), a phobic police chief from the big city trying to assimilate in
small town Amity ("A fish out of water, if you'll excuse the expression,"
quips Scheider).
Spielberg's problem in getting the shark to work was also one
of the main reasons he didn't show the fish until very late in the movie
(eighty minutes in, to be precise). This contradicts the generally accepted
explanation that the delay in showing the shark was a purely aesthetic
strategy meant to enhance audience anticipation and suspense.
"The shark didn't work," says screenwriter Carl Gottlieb, echoing
Scheider's words exactly. "It was a difficult piece of mechanical
equipment....It malfunctioned most of the time [so] we had no shark to
shoot."
Spielberg and Gottlieb got the idea for withholding a glimpse of the
monster until the end from the b-movie "The Thing," says Gottlieb. But
the decision was more along the lines of, 'this is a way we can get around
the fact that our main prop isn't working' rather than 'this is a choice
that we would've made in any case,' according to Gottlieb.
Gottlieb's screenplay was based on a best-selling novel by Peter
Benchley, though the finished film differs from the novel in significant
ways.
Benchley initially wrote a couple drafts of the screenplay, before
Pulitzer prize-winning playwright Howard Sackler ("The Great White Hope")
took on the task, writing a couple drafts of his own. Finally Spielberg
brought aboard Gottlieb, a comedy writer and actor who had won an Emmy
for his work on TV's "The Smothers Brothers Show," to write the final
script. Others also contributed to the screenplay, including Shaw, Scheider,
Spielberg, and writer John Milius ("Apocalypse Now").
The script was another element that was inadvertently helped by the
shark-related glitches, since the downtime gave Gottlieb more time to
write and revise. And the screenplay did undergo lots of changes. Hooper's
character (which was almost played by Jan-Michael Vincent instead of
Dreyfuss) changed from a womanizer who had an affair with Brody's wife
to that of the monomaniacal scientist in the film. Quint (almost played by
Sterling Hayden) developed "from this crazy lunatic to this guy with a real
reason to hate sharks," as Scheider puts it.
And Brody (a role originally sought by Charlton Heston) became an
everyman rather than a conventional action hero. "Every aggressive and
macho impulse I had in my character, [Spielberg] would grab me and pull
me back and say, 'No, don't talk like that, don't speak like that. You
are always afraid, you are Mr. Humble all the time,'" recalls Scheider.
"He would say, 'What we want to do is gradually, slowly, carefully,
humorously build this guy into being the hero of the movie.'"
The first scripts did not include the part of the film that Spielberg
and many others consider to be the movie's best: the nine-minute
sequence on the Orca that starts with the three main characters
comparing scars, progresses through Quint's Indianapolis monologue, and
ends with the three singing sea songs together.
How exactly did that sequence evolve? "Howard Sackler was the one
who found the Indianapolis incident and introduced it into the script," says
Gottlieb. "Scar-comparing comes out of a conversation that Spielberg had
with John Milius. John said that macho beach guys would try to assert their
manliness and would compare scars...So Steven said, 'Great, let's see if we
can do something with that.' So I wrote the scar-comparing scene."
Meanwhile, several writers took a crack at Quint's Indianapolis speech,
in which he tells of delivering the Hiroshima bomb aboard a ship that
subsequently sank in shark-infested waters. "Steven was worried about the
Indianapolis speech," says Gottlieb. "My drafts weren't satisfactory.
Sackler's draft wasn't satisfactory to him."
"The conventional historical inaccuracy that has found its way into
most of the literature about the movie is that Milius dictated the speech over
the phone and that it's basically Milius's speech. I was on the phone taking
notes and the speech is not Milius's speech. It's close, it's got elements of
it. But what Milius was working from was my drafts and Sackler's drafts."
[Milius did not respond to our request for comment on this.]
Gottlieb remembers the moment when the Indianapolis monologue was
officially born. "One night after dinner, Spielberg, me, [and others] were
talking about the movie," he says. "Shaw joined us after his dinner with a
wad of paper in his pocket. He said, 'I've been having a go at that speech. I
think I've got it now.'...The housekeeper had just packed up; she dimmed the
lights as she left. Shaw takes the paper out of his pocket and then reads the
speech as you hear it in the movie....He finishes performing that speech and
everyone is in stunned silence. And finally Steven says, 'That's it, that's what
we're going to shoot.'"
"It took two days to shoot that scene," says Gottlieb. "Shaw was
drunk one day, sober the other. What you see on film was a very clever
compendium of the two scenes....If you watch that scene, listen for the tap
[on the table] because that's where it cuts from sober to drunk. Or drunk to
sober, I don't remember which."
And indeed there is a tap on the table by Quint that splits the two parts
of the Indianapolis monologue. Shaw appears to be drunk in the first six
minutes of the sequence and sober in the last three minutes. (For those who
want to locate the splice on video, it happens at the 91-minute mark,
between the phrases "rip you to pieces" and "lost a hundred men.")
By all accounts, the shoot at sea, off Martha's Vineyard, was
nightmarish and difficult. Originally, Spielberg expected to spend only 55
days on the ocean but ultimately stayed for 159. At times, there was tension
and conflict among the cast and crew. At one point, Gottlieb fell overboard
and risked being sliced by a boat propeller.
Further, Spielberg insisted on having a clean horizon during the Orca
sequences, in order to emphasize the boat's isolation at sea. If some vessel
happened to be sailing in the background of a shot, Spielberg would have
one of his crew drive a speed-boat a half-hour or so away to the offending
craft to ask the sailor to consider taking another route. "A lot of times
there was no other way to go, so they'd say, 'Fuck you,'" says Gottlieb.
"So we had to wait for the boat to clear the horizon."
And if the film makers wanted some food while they waited, they
had to settle for turkey and tuna sandwiches that had somehow lost their
freshness in the heat and salt water at the bottom of the boat. They'd sip
coffee that was sometimes four-hours old. And occasionally, the waves
would cause the boat to pitch and bounce in place ("Not a great thing early
in the morning on a sour stomach," says Gottlieb).
"You'd go home at the end of the day sea-sick, sunburned,
windburned," says Gottlieb.
But when the main shark worked, it was a wonder to behold, says
Scheider. He recalls the moment when he knew the movie was going to
succeed: when he first saw the shark sail by the Orca on the open sea. "They
ran [the shark] past the boat about two or three feet underwater," says
Scheider. "And it was as long as the boat. And I said, 'Oh my god, it looks
great.' I remember that day. We probably all lit cigars."
When the movie finally wrapped, nobody knew for sure whether it
would succeed or fail. The first clue came when they brought the film to
technical workers for color-timing purposes. The techies, who were looking
at the film only for purposes of checking the color density of the negative,
were almost literally scared out of their chairs during certain scenes. "Guys
in the lab were jumping," says Gottlieb. "So we started to have a feeling."
Still, nobody was certain how the general public would respond. The
tell-tale moment came during a sneak preview of the film in Long Beach,
California, in the late spring of '75. Gottlieb remembers driving to
Long Beach in a limo with his wife and Spielberg. "We gave Steven...tea to
calm him down on the drive," says Gottlieb. "He was so nervous."
His nervousness apparently subsided about three minutes and forty
seconds into the screening when the invisible shark ripped apart its first
victim. The audience went nuts, drowning out dialogue for the next minute
or so. "You could tell from the crowd reaction that it was going to be a very
important movie," he says.
When the lights came up after the screening, top executives from
Universal Pictures quickly headed straight to the theater restroom -- "the
only quiet spot in the theater," says Gottlieb -- and proceeded to change
the film's release strategy on the spot. Realizing they had a massive hit
on their hands, the execs immediately decided the movie would not be opened
in a normal gradual fashion, but in wide release. Amidst the summer toilets
of Long Beach, movie industry history was made that night.
"The idea of opening a picture simultaneously on 1,500 to 2,000
screens was unheard of," says Gottlieb. "After 'Jaws,' it became standard.
Every studio had to have a big summer picture."
By mid-summer, the film was taking in a million dollars a day. Within
a couple months, it had become the biggest grossing movie of all time.
Today, its domestic gross stands at around $250 million, making it the
13th top grossing movie of all time.
"I see it the same way I saw it then," says Scheider. "It's a very good
action adventure film...Plus it's well-directed, it's well-acted, it's
beautifully shot, it's got a great score and a fabulous story. So why shouldn't
it be a classic movie?"
[this is my original manuscript; a slightly edited version ran in
the San Francisco Chronicle on May 28, 2000.]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 9, 2008
The Other Stars of February 9, 1964: The Chicks!Everyone knows the Beatles became megastars in America
44 years ago, after performing on "The Ed Sulliavn Show"
on February 9, 1964, but the other stars of the night,
the ones who became minor pop culture icons in their
own rights, were the screaming girls. Who can forget the
cutaways to the teenagers (and tweenagers) in the audience:
the modern-looking girl in horn rims, the one with braces who
stuck out her tongue, the carbonated girl who couldn't
stop jumping up and down? Who knows where they
all are now. (Sorry, boys, they're all in their sixties
at this point!)
Anyway, here's a gallery of the Beatles girls from that
legendary night:
Who can forget Brace Face?----
She invented modern Pogoing!----
Covering her ears, but not her emotions!----
Pure sugar: this cutaway shot shows the crowd just
as the Beatles take the stage for the first time (notice
how every girl's mouth is open in unison). ----
Sorry, girls, he's been assassinated. But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 6, 2008
A few quick notes on Super Tuesday:
-- Yes, Huckabee, the jihadist candidate, surprised
everyone with his strong showing among holy rollers,
people who believe Creation just took one night,
but he's still far, far behind McCain, who'll almost
certainly be the GOP nominee.
-- Romney will almost surely have a "brainwashed" moment
(it runs in the family, you know) in which he says he
has seen the light and will not continue to spend his
family's inheritance on what now is a vanity run for the
presidency.
-- Some pundit (I don't remember who) said it best:
if Super Tuesday had been on Thursday, Obama would have
won a majority of the delegates at stake that day.
Obama could still capture the nomination, what with
all the arcane party rules about super-delegates and
proportional allotment -- plus his own growing momentum.
His loss of California was a stunner; I wrongly predicted
an Obama win in Calif., not understanding the extent of
Hillary's support in Hispanic areas. (I was looking
at the Obama-mania in my own area, which doesn't have
many Hispanics.)
-- By the way, kudos to Ted Kennedy for taking time
to speak at a church on a blighted block of Oakland
last Friday. As I walked around the neighborhood near
the gathering (I didn't have time to hear him speak but
did drop by the event), I thought that he could have
taken the easy route and made the usual appearance at
someplace cushy like the Hyatt or the Commonwealth Club,
but instead he cared enough to visit an area that
obviously needs revitalization. I mean, across from
the church where Kennedy spoke was a boarded-up and
apparently burned-out building, and elsewhere was other
vivid evidence of urban rot.
And I thought: parts of this area look sort of like
the aftermath of Katrina. It looked like a Katrina
of neglect. A Katrina of neglect duplicated in
almost every major city in Amercia.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for February 1, 2008
the Barack Industrial Complex is alive and well in northern California!I don't know who the pollsters are talking to or
what their methodologies are, but I do know that
Barack Obama will win the California primary on
Tuesday. As I've been saying since last March,
in this column and elsewhere, there is absolutely
no evident enthusiasm for Hillary's candidacy in
the Golden State, no yard signs for Hillary,
very few bumper stickers for her -- and that's still
the case. But Barack signs and stickers are
everywhere, and leafletters enthusiastically hand
out copies of his latest speeches in front of local
supermarkets as if they were the next installments
in the Harry Potter series or newly uncovered Beatles
singles.
No, Barack will win here on Tuesday, and the only
suspense, it seems, is whether he'll win by a large
margin or a small one. Granted, I live in a very
liberal pocket of the state, but, even so,
it seems as if Hillary is showing no strength
even amongst her base of graying feminist pioneers.
Last night's debate made it obvious that we're
now looking at the Democratic ticket,
and Tuesday's primaries will determine only the order
of the ticket.
I have decided who I'm going to vote for on
Tuesday, but I don't want to publicly endorse
anyone, and that's because I'd like to cover the
upcoming campaign as a reporter for publications
other than my own Daily Digression, and I don't
want to be seen as an advocate for any one
candidate.
However, I'll give you a hint as to who I'm voting
for: with regard to the Democratic contest, I
think the progressive agenda might be better served
by a brand new strong persuader in the White House,
someone who hasn't already failed to build the
coalitions necessary to pass universal health care
legislation, etc.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- By the way, the description of last night's
debate as a "one-on-one" debate is sort of a misnomer.
I mean, a one-on-one debate would be a
debate in which Clinton and Obama are on a stage asking
each other questions without a moderator or outside
interviewers (not a bad idea, actually).
When I, as a journalist, label one of my interviews a
one-on-one interview, I'm referring to the fact that I
interviewed the person without anyone else being
in the room (see: my interviews with Heath Ledger,
Woody Allen, Annette Bening, etc.). Last night's debate
didn't fall in that category.
[photo of Obama Store by Paul Iorio.]_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 28, 2008
Our first female president should've been the second one from far right. It has long been my opinion that the first female
president of the U.S. should have been Caroline
Kennedy's mother, Jacqueline, a woman of
intelligence and great style and courage. (By
the way, Jacqueline Kennedy is also the only Kennedy
I've ever personally seen close-up; in the fall
of 1981, when I was briefly working at the editorial
headquarters of Doubleday in Manhattan, I passed
right by her in the hallway, and I remember how
incredibly elegant she was and how she somehow reminded
me of the Eiffel Tower.)
But, sadly, she is no longer with us, and so
we have to choose from the current field of candidates.
Caroline Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama
proves, if there was ever any doubt, that Hillary
Clinton is not the feminist icon she's been cracked
up to be and is not even the candidate that most
progressive women are supporting. Womyn may be
supporting Hillary, but women are not. (Womyn are
older females who were shaped by the rough draft of
early 1970s feminism rather than by the version of
feminism that was revised and amended in subsequent
decades.)
Let me put it a bit more vividly than many of my
readers would like: the main organ responsible for
a successful presidency is a couple feet north of
the vagina. Having a vagina does not necessarily mean
that you can push a feminist agenda more successfully
than someone with a penis. If Liddy Dole were our
first female president, she would not be a feminist
icon and would not even be seen as serving the
interests of women on issues like abortion rights,
gender segregation, etc.
Further, a mediocre female candidate, progressive or
not, is still a mediocre candidate. Witness Geraldine
Ferraro. (Who?, many younger readers might be asking.)
Ferraro is almost completely forgotten today by just
about everybody (except womyn, of course) -- or, more
accurately, is about as well-known today as William Miller,
Barry Goldwater's running mate in 1964. And for good
reason: she pioneered nothing, took no brave stands, put
out no original ideas, and came across as insufferably
local. (In fact, if she's known at all today by the
general public, it's probably because of the controversy
involving her husband -- which shows how easily she
could be outshone.)
All this means the following: being the first female
anything is no virtue or achievement if you're not good at
the job in the first place. I mean, there are plenty of female
Dan Quayles out there, and we shouldn't be giving such
people 10 extra points just because they have a clitoris.
In the 1990s, there was a mystique about Hillary born of
the mythology that she was somehow the brainy, underemployed,
mastermind of all that Bill did. But now that the curtain
has been parted, and we can actually see Hillary in harsh
light, we realize that the opposite is true, that the real
mastermind behind the Clinton administration, and behind
Hillary's own "work," was President Clinton.
Her candidacy is looking more and more like a "front"
candidacy, in which she fronts the ticket for the true
contender, her husband (how unfeminist!), who -- rest
assured, dear voters -- will be running things in the
WH if she's elected in November.
But a Hillary administration may not be as much of a
third Clinton term as you might think. For example,
if, say, bin Laden's location is pinpointed in Yemen,
and Bill comes into the Oval Office and says, "Hillary,
I think we should do an airstrike inside Yemen right
now," Hillary might just as likely say, in her scolding tone,
"Bill, I'm running things, not you, and I'll be deciding
whether I'm going to strike or not." And out of spite
or vain self-assertion, she might decide to override
Bill's smart suggestion just to show she, not he, is in
charge. Hence, a Hillary presidency might actually
(and dangerously) veer away from Bill's judgment
(even when Bill is correct) -- and for no good reason.
Hillary is not the first mediocre female candidate to have run for national office--
ah, the days when the term dynastic royalty actually meant somethingBut I digress. Paul
_________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 25, 2008
As things now stand, here's my prediction of how
the headlines will look on November 5, 2008:
The Thinking Behind My Electoral Map and MathFirst, Wisconsin. If Dems sneeze, they lose it, which
is why you hear nothing about gun control
during prez election years, seeing how all those
moose lodgers in Wisc love their guns and all. This
year, the male vote will tilt it the third of a percentage
required for McCain to win the state.
Second, New Hampshire only went Kerry because Mass. was
next door; Hillary has no such advantage.
Third, just as Gore lost Tennessee in '00, so Hillary
will lose Arkansas. She's really not of Arkansas the
way Bill is, and she turned her back on the state to
run from NY, so Ark will return the favor come Nov.
Fourth, Louisiana, Missouri and Iowa are never really
in play for the Dems unless a Perot is siphoning votes
from the GOP, though Katrina may have changed the
calculus slightly in LA.
Fifth, Ohio is almost always 5 points from the Dems's
reach, and will be so this time, too.
Sixth, a Florida win for Hillary requires a majority
of swing voters along the I-4 corridor, which will
give her 45 percent of the vote -- tops (I know
because I used to live around there).
Seventh: oops! Should have added Maine to
the McCain column on above map.
Eighth, all other states are self-explanatory.
Ninth, Barack would fare even worse, though not
as badly as you might think; on a good day for
Obama, take the above electoral map and add Minnesota
to McCain's column. But there would inevitably be
dirty TV ads against Obama by the Republicans that
would run in heavy rotation around Halloween in key
swing states like Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin,
and they'd go something like this: "Can America Trust
Barack Hussein Obama?" would be the refrain, with the
final frame featuring Obama embracing Al Sharpton.
Whoever Obama taps as his veep, the GOP would see
to it, through negative commercials, that his real
running-mate in the eyes of swing state voters is Al
Sharpton. Barack could mitigate this possibility
slightly by having a Sistah Soldier moment with
Sharpton, but the ads would still eat
into his totals in the upper midwest, at least.
* * *
Not That There's Anything Wrong With ThatHow to put this. Time and again I've watched
interview footage featuring Hillary Clinton and seen
the same thing, and maybe I should shut up
about it, but then again I'm a reporter, and reporters
are in the business of revealing, not concealing.
Anyway, back to the interview footage. Whenever Hillary
is interviewed by a drop-dead gorgeous woman, and this has
happened many times, Hillary sort of blushes and loses her
breath and sort of looks away and becomes somewhat shy in
the manner of someone who -- how to put this? -- has a
special appreciation of or passion for feminine beauty.
In other words, she sort of reminds me of how I, a
hetero male, react when I sit down and talk with a
super-model sort of woman. (You know how it is,
it's always sort of impossible to hide how you feel,
and it tends to come through even when you try to cover
it up.) Thing is, she doesn't seem to respond that
way to other interviewers, for whom she does her usual
bug-eyed thing.
And I'm talking about her involuntary, reflexive
reactions, as opposed to her conscious, deliberate
responses.
So what I am trying to say? I guess I'm observing that the
person who might become our 44th president appears to have
a, uh, special appreciation of feminine beauty -- not a bad
thing. And that her election may possibly -- just
possibly -- be a first for
two groups.
By the way, seeing how things in this column tend
to get around (and are stolen by the
same publications that reject my findings when I
pitch them), I bet the Hillary camp neutralizes
this by having her hug both a gorgeous actress
and her hunky husband at a campaign
event -- on camera, of course. Or stage photos in
which women are looking adoringly at Hillary instead
of vice versa. Or something like that.
* * *
My favorite headline of the week: CJR's "To Check the
Facts, You Need the Facts," which tops a story that
fact-checks one TV network's fact-checking. Leave
it to the CJ Review to see through the
daily chronicle of distortions and lies by
official sources.
Remember, this is an era when people see the
Virgin Mary in a coffee stain and UFOs in every
wisp of smoke, so fact-based perception and
analysis are in short supply everywhere these
days. Add to that the fact that several
major news organizations don't even discipline
the plagiarists in their number, much less the
people who merely get their facts wrong.
But I digress. Paul
[above graphic by Paul Iorio.]__________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 22, 2008
Remembering Heath LedgerMy Unpublished (or Mostly Unpublished)
Interview with LedgerWhat a shock and a tragedy to hear that Heath
Ledger died today.
It wasn't very long ago when I was sitting
around with Ledger in some hotel room in Beverly Hills,
conducting a one-on-one interview with the actor
for a story that I wrote and reported for the
San Francisco Chronicle. He was 21 then and rising
fast, so it hardly seems believable that he's
already gone.
To remember him, I'm posting here most of my
interview with Ledger, which has been unpublished
until now (except for 80 words of it, which I used
in one of my stories for a newspaper).
My interview with Ledger happened on June 3, 2000,
and my story on him -- also posted below -- ran in the
San Francisco Chronicle's June 25 - July 1, 2000 issue.
PAUL IORIO: I SAW ['THE PATRIOT"] LAST NIGHT.HEATH LEDGER: Yeah, so did I.
IORIO: WERE YOU AT THE [SCREENING]?LEDGER: Yeah. I was there. Snuck in.
IORIO: SO YOU GOT TO HEAR AUDIENCE REACTION AND ALL THAT?LEDGER: I was too consumed with the movie [laughs].
WHAT WAS YOUR OPINION OF IT?I loved it. Huge. Shit! Massive. Epic.
[DO YOU THINK] IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE A
"BRAVEHEART" KIND OF SUCCESS STORY?I have no expectations for what the movie's going to do.
[Ledger tries lighting a cigarette with a final match.]
That was the last match, too.
SECOND MATCH, NOTED FOR THE RECORD. AND SMOKING A
MARLBORO, HE IS. SO WHAT'S THE MOVIE IN WHICH
YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SMOKE. THAT'S "TEN THINGS" --"Ten Things I Hate About You."
RIGHT. THERE'S A SCENE IN THERE WHERE SHE'LL GO OUT WITH
YOU ONLY IF YOU AGREE TO --Quit smoking.
* * *
HOW DID YOU GET THE AUDITION [FOR "THE PATRIOT"]? ...The first reading I did was fucked. I went in there, I had two
scenes to prepare, and I was halfway through the second scene and I
dropped my head and I just said, "I'm sorry, I'm wasting your time,
I'm really embarrassed, God, I'm so sorry, I'm wasting your time and
I'm wasting my time, I'm sorry, if you want me to come back, I'll
come back and do it, but I gotta leave." And I walked out with my
head down and my tail between my legs.
WELL, THAT'S NO WAY TO GET THE PART! I MEAN, CERTAINLY
THEY MUST HAVE SAID, "FORGET HIM." AND THEN YOU CAME BACK?Yeah, they called me back.
THEY CALLED YOU BACK EVEN THOUGH YOU TOLD WHO --[The director] Roland [Emmerich] and [the producer] Dean
[Devlin] --
[TOLD THEM] THAT "I CAN'T HANDLE THIS RIGHT NOW"'?'Cause I was doing a lousy reading. I was just, like, not
there, and my morale was down by my feet.
* * *
WHERE DO YOU LIVE NOW?Well, I was in the States for about two and a half years. I
was in L.A. And then I packed up my stuff in L.A., closed down my
home and went to South Carolina to shoot "Patriot." And after
that I had two months off, so I went and fucked off to New York
and hung out there for a bit. And then I went straight from
New York to Prague, and I was there for two months...where I'm
shooting "A Knight's Tale." And I've got eight days off now
to do all this shit and then I go back and have another two months
there [in Prague] and then I've got two weeks off and I go to
Morocco for four months to do "The Four Feathers" That's why I
don't really have a home right now, I'm just living out of bags.
Which is kind of the way I've been for the last five years, I've
kind of been on the road, living out of bags, which is good.
WHERE DO YOU TEND TO LIVE ONCE THE DUST SETTLES?I don't know. I don't look that far ahead in the future. I
choose not to. If you live in the future or the past you
lose touch with the now. So I generally live every minute of
every day in the present. I don't have a diary, I don't have
a journal, I don't know what I'm doing tomorrow. I don't what
I'm doing after this. That's good. And it keeps
my life fresh and exciting.
[coughs] ...WHAT'S YOUR VIEW OF...PEOPLE WHO [OBJECT TO THE VIOLENCE
IN "THE PATRIOT"]?Well, they're all fucking idiots because they let their kids
watch fucking TV, they let their kids play computer games and
rip heads off people. They're hypocrites....It's ridiculous.
If they're going to complain about that, let them. Fuck
them, because, really, the world is so full of fucking shit
and chaos right now it's not funny. You put on the TV. I don't
watch TV. I haven't watched TV in fucking years. I don't have
one. I have one only for movies. I have a DVD and a video
player. I don't hook it up to fucking cable, nothing. It's
trash. And if they think ["The Patriot" is] trash, well,
fuck, there's something wrong. With computer games and all
that shit?! That's ridiculous. They don't have to worry about
this. They have to worry about the shit from the electronic
nanny they sit their kids down in front of so they don't have
to worry about their kids, so they don't have to create shit
for them to do and let them use their imagination and go, "hey,
go outside and run around in the garden." No, stick them in
front of here and you don't have to worry about them. They
can go fuck off. Fuck 'em. We're not teaching kids to do
[violence]. We're telling a story, that's all.
[top photo of Ledger is a still from the movie "The Patriot"; photographer unknown.]_______________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 21, 2008
Remember Martin Luther King, Jr. Today!To commemorate King, I'm re-running the Daily
Digression of September 6, 2007, which talks
about a television appearance by King. Here it is:
I recently watched the uncut version of the
Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s appearance in 1967 on
"The Merv Griffin Show," in which he talked at length about his
opposition to the Vietnam War. And it's truly astonishing
footage, if only because almost everything Rev. King
said on that show about the Vietnam War could easily apply
today to American involvement in Iraq (e.g., that the U.S.
is involving itself in someone else's civil war, that the
"enemy" is not monolithic, that an escalation or surge is
not the solution, etc.). In fact, it might be interesting to
get a transcript of his remarks and replace the word Vietnam
with the word Iraq.
And by the way, what also emerges from that interview
is how truly brilliant and unflappable and dignified
and poetic Martin Luther King was. Truly Lincolnesque.
(And modest, too; he insisted that his father
was the number one pastor at their church in Atlanta,
and he himself was merely his number two.) As revered as he is
today, he's still underrated (and, frankly, I couldn't
help but think that, in a perfect world, he should have
been the Democratic nominee for president in 1968).
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 16, 2008
But I digress. Paul
[all three graphics above by Paul Iorio, though the praying hands are
from assumptionmthealthy.com and the golf ball from north-cyprus-properties.com.]__________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 21, 2008
Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day!
To commemorate King, I'm re-running the Daily
Digression of September 6, 2007, which talks
about a television appearance by King. Here it is:
I recently watched the uncut version of the
Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s appearance in 1967 on
"The Merv Griffin Show," in which he talked at length about his
opposition to the Vietnam War. And it's truly astonishing
footage, if only because almost everything Rev. King
said on that show about the Vietnam War could easily apply
today to American involvement in Iraq (e.g., that the U.S.
is involving itself in someone else's civil war, that the
"enemy" is not monolithic, that an escalation or surge is
not the solution, etc.). In fact, it might be interesting to
get a transcript of his remarks and replace the word Vietnam
with the word Iraq.
And by the way, what also emerges from that interview
is how truly brilliant and unflappable and dignified
and poetic Martin Luther King was. Truly Lincolnesque.
(And modest, too; he insisted that his father
was the number one pastor at their church in Atlanta,
and he himself was merely his number two.) As revered as he is
today, he's still underrated (and, frankly, I couldn't
help but think that, in a perfect world, he should have
been the Democratic nominee for president in 1968).
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 15, 2008
Received my official ballot for the California Presidential
Primary Election the other day and was, as usual, sort of
amused by the presence of dozens of minor or completely
unknown contenders running as third, fourth, fifth and
even sixth party candidates.
So I decided to check out the official websites of several of them.
Two presidential contenders -- former Congresswoman Cynthia
McKinney, who thinks UFOs flew into the twin towers on 9/11
(isn't that what she thinks?), and Ralph Nader, who makes people
want to go out and buy a Corvair -- appear on the ballot
twice, in both the Green party and the Peace & Freedom party
categories.
Here are bits from the more obscure candidates' websites:
-- Mad Max Riekse of the American Independent Party. Mad Max is also running for president in 2012, in case you were
wondering. He's from a place called Fruitport, Michigan. Notable quotes
from Mad Max include: "Get the MM word out" and "Don't get
involved with other people's politics or wars." His website has had
1,121 hits.
-- Jared Ball of the Green Party.An assistant prof. Qualifications include: "I am the son of a
European-descended Jewish woman and an African-descended
Black man," he explains, and am married to a "powerful and dynamic
woman from Panama."
-- Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party.Her site has not been updated since last December. "Money is
the Mother's Milk of Politics," begins her website, which is
equally riveting throughout.
-- Kent Mesplay of the Green Party."Urgent," warns Mesplay, "Homeland Security is preparing
to seize Apache lands!"
-- Ralph Nader of the Green Party.I think everyone's heard quite enough from him for now.
-- Kat Swift of the Green Party. Her web page looks vaguely like a porn site and also
has a dynamic calculation of "the cost of the war in Iraq"
that changes upward every few seconds.
-- Michael P. Jingozian of the Libertarian Party."Attacks against Jingo have backfired," he insists, adding:
"We have many things going for us. First, people are mad."
-- Steve Kubby of the Libertarian Party."You can smell it in the air -- voters aren't happy,"
says his website.
-- Alden Link of the Libertarian Party. "New York City could convert the current U.N. building to
a hotel and gambling casino," says Link on his site.
-- George Phillies of the Libertarian Party."Under a Phillies administration, torturers will be despised,"
he says on his website.
-- Wayne Allyn Root of the Libertarian Party. Root describes himself as "a highly recognized sports oddsmaker
and prognosticator who now lives in Vegas."
-- Christine Smith of the Libertarian Party."As President, my priority will be the American people,"
she says on her site.
-- Stewart A. Alexander of the Peace & Freedom Party.Writes about a "gasoline boycott" and "free education."
-- John Crockford of the Peace & Freedom Party. "Abolish vagrancy laws," says Crockford, who runs a
website design business.
-- Stanley Hetz of the Peace & Freedom Party."I have obtained ballot access," Hetz writes. Writes one
Hetz fan: "Hetz is a very intelligent, well-spoken man."
-- Brian P. Moore of the Peace & Freedom Party.A Florida socialist. Qualifications include being "threatened
with arrest the other day by police in Brattleboro, Vermont."
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 10, 2008
Hillary Does. Big Girls Don't. I was re-thinking Hillary's Muskie Moment
this morning and started wishing she had
said the following when asked whether it was
hard for her to get up every morning and ride
chartered buses and eat any kind of food she
likes. And I wished she had responded with:
"Is campaigning hard for me? I'll tell you
what's hard: changing bed pans for a dying
loved one. That's hard. I'll tell you what's hard:
dealing with the aftermath of a nuclear explosion when
hospitals are overflowing with patients with gamma
burns. I'll tell you what's hard: ordering the bombing
of a major city because its leader has just bombed us.
I'll tell you what's hard: having a terrorist
make death threats to your family members by name.
No, compared to all that, compared to what a president
has to deal with every day, campaigning is easy,
it's a walk in the breeze."
As a voter and a citizen and a media person, I really
wish Hillary had answered the question that way. Because
I want to have a president who is tougher than me,
someone who is cool and composed and in charge
when the bombs and bullets are flying nearby. I don't
want a leader who is in the corner crying or praying or
hiding when a dirty bomb has just been set off in a town
where he or she has relatives. I want someone taking
charge and being smart and making terrific decisions.
Can you imagine what would have happened if JFK had
addressed the nation about the Cuban Missile Crisis
and started tearing up? What message would that
have sent to a belligerent, macho guy like Khrushchev?
This isn't like Johnny Carson or Tiger Woods crying;
they weren't in charge of the nuclear arsenal, for
crissakes!
I talked with the late Frank Zappa on the phone in
1988, and he weighed in about the presidential contest
of that year with words that have stuck with me
ever since:
"You don't want a Perfect Little Man in the White House,"
Zappa told me. "You want a motherfucker in there!"
But I digress. Paul
______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 9, 2008
Hillary, last night in ManchesterFirst, this wasn't the Michigan or South Carolina
primary, where there's a huge African-American vote
that would be expected to turn out for Obama. This
was New Hampshire, virtually all-white New Hampshire,
and a black candidate just came within a heartbeat
of a-winnin' against a very well-organized, mainstream
contenda. That's one of the main headlines from
last night.
Second: what up with them thar polls?
Third: On Sunday morning, after the debates
and before I was misled by the polls, I wrote
in this space:
"If Obama wins, it will be by a slim
margin, and there's a chance Hillary
could pull it off by a whisker."
(The complete column is below, under the heading
"January 6.")So from now on, I'm listening to my own instincts
and not to the pollsters!
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- If a news organization is going to
appropriate unique coinages and insights of
mine, would it please take the time to
cite the source (e.g., "as freelance
writer Paul Iorio wrote in his online column")?
___________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 7, 2008
Hillary's Muskie Moment Foretold by The Daily Digression!(by the way, I coined the phrase "Muskie Moment" before other reporters started using it)There's something about New Hampshire in the winter
that tends to bring out the tears even in candidates
for the toughest political office in the land. I grew
up in early childhood north of New Hampshire, in Maine,
a latitude that produces more singer-songwriters per
capita than any other place on Earth, perhaps because
the vast expanses of snow and the eternal
winters (relieved only by the whiff of rhubarb in the
summer) breed melancholy, introspection.
So I felt bad seeing Hillary tearing up in Portsmouth
today, just as Ed Muskie did all those years ago, but I
could also understand part of the reason why: those
New England winters. Notice that candidates, win or
lose, don't cry while campaigning in fun, warm places
like Santa Barbara or Key West.
Also, I must note that the Daily Digression sensed this
might happen; back on October 14, 2007, I opened my column
with the following words (highlighted in bold):
Hillary's lead in the polls may be widening
but it's not deepening. Hard-core Democrats I've
spoken with, men and women, have approximately
zero enthusiasm for her candidacy. And she irritates
even feminist friends of mine. Bad sign.
That also means she's too susceptible to having
a Muskie Moment in the snow that destroys her
candidacy. She almost had a Muskie Moment in Iowa
last Sunday, when that "double agent" asked her a
question that was off script. There's bound to be
one in the coming months, once things get tougher
and when there really are plants
and hecklers in the crowd.
The entire column is archived below, under the heading "October
14, 2007."
* * *
Could an Obama/Edwards Ticket Beat McCain/Lieberman?Now that it's obvious that Barack Obama is going to
win -- and win big -- tomorrow in New Hampshire,
another trend is emerging in subsequent primary
states: states where Clinton once had a double-digit
lead in polls in early December are now trending
unmistakably toward Obama.
Though post-Iowa state-by-state poll results are
scarce, the trajectory is the same almost
everywhere, with all signs pointing to Obama
winning the top five SuperTuesday states on
Feb. 5 (e.g., his home state of Illinois, California,
Georgia, New Jersey and even New York, where
Clinton serves as Senator).
And it's highly doubtful the next three biggest
SuperTuesday states -- Missouri, Arizona and
Tennessee -- would somehow be immune from the nationwide
trend toward Obama.
The speculation, at least on the Democratic side,
should now turn to who Obama will choose as his running
mate, a decision that, of course, would partly depend
on who the Republican nominee is going to be, and
that's uncertain at this point, though if I had to
guess, I'd call it for McCain. And, if I had to guess
again -- and, admittedly, it's way too early for this
sort of thing -- I'd say the Arizona senator has been
acting pretty chummy lately with his lonely comrade
in Iraq war boosterism, Joseph Lieberman, who would
provide That Special Blue State Wedge for a red
state candidate like Mac.
Meanwhile, Obama and his people must be
huddling around now, or will be huddling soon,
to draw up the proverbial Short List. And such a
list is surprisingly short when it comes to
potential veeps who have already been vetted by
voters and by the media and have had some
experience hiking the national campaign trail.
First, obviously, Obama would want to turn to
the candidates who came in second, third and beyond
in the primaries. But Hillary has too much pride
for the number two spot, and besides, the Democrats
can't afford to lose a Senate seat. Biden/Dodd/Richardson
are terrific statesmen but box office poison. Evan
Bayh's name always comes up in these things but,
face it, he couldn't even get through the
starting gate of the '08 race a year or so ago. Ditto
Vilsack. Obviously, a charismatic swing
state politician from Florida or Ohio might fit
the bill, but John Glenn is pushing 90, a bit of a drawback,
and Lawton Chiles is currently dead,
which would definitely rule him out.
Wesley Clark will probably be considered and rejected
(his '04 bid was anemic), as will Michael Bloomberg,
who will turn it down because he's thinking of his
own run. Oh, how the list is short of peeps who
wanna be the president's bitch for four years!
Of course, that leaves Barack with, pretty much, one
possibility. This next contender has already left
his job, so there'd be no loss in Congress, and
has plenty of time on his hands, which he's currently
spending on a (at this point) vanity campaign for
president. Further, he's already done the veep
thing and has a southern accent, which will play
nicely in some purple states. He needs no further
introduction, folks, he's That Two Americas guy
y'all been hearin' about: former Senator John
Edwards of one of those red states Obama would
love to pick off and put in the Democratic column
next November.
Then again, all bets are off if Oprah says, "yes."
But I digress. Paul
__________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
EXTRA! for January 6, 2008
Why McCain and Obama Will Win in New Hampshire on Tuesdaythe likely winners on TuesdayThe reasons Barack Obama
and John McCain will win
the New Hampshire primary
on Tuesday are these:
First, the Iowa win has given Obama momentum in a race that
had been virtually tied in New Hampshire.
Second, it was plain to see that Obama won last night's
debate and Clinton lost and even seemed unsure of
herself (see analysis below), which has probably added to
Obama's total by a couple percentage points.
Third, at the GOP debate, McCain trounced Romney, who
looked weak and was already suffering from negative
momentum from his Iowa loss.
Incidentally, The Daily Digression has not yet endorsed a
candidate for president and may not do so (I try to keep my
analysis as objective as possible).
But I digress. Paul
[posted at around 10:30 am [PT] on January 6.]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 6, 2008
I've purposely not read or heard any of the spin or
commentary about last night's presidential debates
because I want to come to my own analysis fresh.
That said, the debate winners last night were -- by many
miles -- Barack Obama and John McCain, and the big
losers were John Edwards and Mitt Romney.
Romney, rapidly losing his favorite son advantage
in New Hampshire, came off worst of all, particularly on
the health care issue when he implied that things like heart
attacks and strokes are business proposals, not
diseases, and that one could go into an ER and get
a "repair" for a thousand bucks.
Suddenly, Romney seemed like Poppy Bush being
mystified by a check-out scanner at the supermarket,
the blue blood who has been rich too long to understand
what a shrieking nightmare the American health care
system really is.
By contrast, McCain came across like the disciplinarian,
spanking Romney on immigration and sending him to bed
without his pork rinds. Mitt seemed thin-skinned, defensive,
like the son of somebody instead of his own man
(a bit like Haven Hamilton's "nice" son in the movie
"Nashville"), trying for that Reaganesqe effect but
not quite getting it. If McCain had a lead in the
polls going into the debate, he clearly increased it
with his performance last night. (Still, if nominated,
McCain might turn out to be the Dole of '08.)
On the Democratic side, Edwards seemed distracted, even
losing track of a question at one point, and otherwise
appearing flabby in direct contrast to Obama.
Obama was the star of the show, dwarfing everyone else
onstage, and completely comfortable with being a leader
in every instance.
Hillary tried a bit too hard to show that she understood the
nuances of various issues, inadvertently revealing that she
tends to get mired in unnecessary detail. For example, in
response to the question of whether we should unilaterally
strike bin Laden in Pakistan, she noted the "inherent
paranoia" about India in Pakistan and how that might play
into a surprise strike. And with regard to withdrawing from
Iraq, she brought up the ancillary issue of how we would
withdraw the translators (I'm no expert, but I would guess
they'd board the same planes that the soldiers are
boarding). In sum, she was being too...too.
Elsewhere the Dems all scrambled to say that they would
deliver the troops back to their hometowns within nine months
or a year or your pizza's free.
Hillary also repeated her much stated bit about working
hard for change. But working hard in the service of a flawed
policy is no virtue at all. One could, for example, work 20
hour days, 7 days a week, phoning world leaders and chewing
them out one by one, and that would certainly be working hard,
but it would also be working hard in the service of a
seriously misguided goal. The folks who gave us the Iraq
war worked around the clock to make the war
happen in '03 but we all would've been better off
if Rumsfeld and Co. had taken a long vacation in Cabo
instead. It's more important to work smart AND hard.
Meanwhile Richardson asks, "Is experience a leper?"
The answer to that is, "Sometimes." The wrong kind of
experience is a leper. To note an extreme example: in 1944,
Hitler was a very experienced world leader -- and a hard
worker, by the way -- but he was also clueless about
his own evil and wrongheaded policies.
Richardson keeps touting his own foreign policy
credentials but the bigger question is whether he has
foreign policy wisdom.
Just ask Richardson two simple questions to find out if
he's actually smart about foreign policy:
1) Did you support the Afghanistan war BEFORE the Afghanistan
war in 2001?
2) Did you oppose the Iraq war BEFORE the Iraq war in 2003?
If he answers yes to both questions, then he does have sound
foreign policy judgment. If he answers no to even one of the
questions, he doesn't.
All told, Richardson looked generally befuddled (if he's so
smart, how come he's not so smart?).
Also, another winner tonight was ABCs Charles Gibson,
whose performance as moderator was, in a word, perfect.
Gibson made sure that this was truly a debate and not
just a series of joint appearances, and he ended up creating
the most revealing candidate forum in many, many years,
a striking piece of television journalism.
In the wake of the debates and the Iowa results, my
best guess is that the winners on Tuesday in New Hampshire
will be McCain and Obama (though if Obama wins, it will be
by a slim margin, and there's a chance Hillary could
pull it off by a whisker).
For the first time, I can envision a debate stage, circa
Halloween, featuring Obama and McCain. It may not happen,
but after last night I can actually see how it might.
But I digress. Paul
[posted around 6:15am [PT] on January 6]_____________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 5, 2008
the best picture Oscar front-runner?After seeing Paul Thomas Anderson's "There
Will Be Blood," I couldn't help but think
the film may turn out to be
the major
picture of '07 -- and a front-runner for the best
picture Oscar, too (though, admittedly, I've not
yet seen some of the other major contenders).
It's the sort of epic, like "Citizen Kane" or the
flashback parts of "The Godfather, Part 2,"
that captures the thrill of a hard-scrabble
entrepreneur overcoming impossible obstacles to become
both a wealthy tycoon
and the apple that doesn't
fall far from the tree.
Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) is a grand American
cinematic character, halfway between Noah Cross
and Howard Hughes, who starts his career as a miner
and ends up an oilman, building a fortune on a foundation
of blood and petroleum, both spilled liberally
throughout the film.
The imagery is novel and riveting. The
scene in which oil literally rains everywhere from an
unexpected geyser may well take its place in future
years in the pantheon of unforgettable, iconic cinematic
images. And I think it's safe to say
there has never been a murder on the big (or small)
screen quite like the one that ends this film.
To those who recoil at some of the violence in the movie,
I say that Plainview is not nearly as ruthless and brutal
as many of America's pioneering entrepreneurs, Plainview's
predecessors, who stole land outright (they didn't just
offer an unfair buy-out, as Plainview did) and killed those
who stood in their way. (America's founding capitalists
were also immoral enough to use free labor, which cut
their overhead considerably.)
This may be Anderson's best film to date but I bet it's not
the greatest he'll ever make, because parts of "There Will
Be Blood" hint at a future, even more brilliant film, an
Anderson "Godfather," still yet to come.
But I digress. Paul
[photo of "There Will Be Blood" from variety.com]______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 4, 2008
In the wake of last night's Iowa caucuses, I really
don't have much to add to my column of three days ago
(see below) that accurately predicted that
Obama and Huckabee would be the winners of the Iowa
vote. My column, posted on January 1st, also correctly
noted the reasons why the victors would be Obama and
Huckabee, the reason being the fervor of their supporters
(the students and the evangelicals, respectively).
So I don't have anything else to add except to say that
lots of big budget news organizations got it wrong and
the no-budget Daily Digression got it right. Which
leads to the question: why don't certain editors give
me the next paid assignment that you're about to give
to the reporter who got it wrong?
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for January 1, 2008 (happy new year!)
Why Obama and Huckabee Will Win in Iowa on ThursdayIt Looks Like The Pews Versus the Dorms (Again!) in '08the likely winner in Iowa First, John Edwards, you can surrender Friday morning,
if you'd like, but you probably won't, you'll probably
say something like, this doesn't settle or prove
anything, though you know it does, definitively and
forever. Thursday's Iowa vote will permanently end
Edwards's presidential prospects but I bet he might
let it drag on through the snows of New Hampshire in
the hope that South Carolina will recognize kin in
someone who talks
like this. But it's over, John,
you bet the table's high limit on Iowa and lost, and (as
I wrote in a previous column) you're what Gephardt
was in '04: old news. You've served your party well
and honorably but, as Al Gore once said, it is now
time for you to go.
Second, Obama will probably win on Thursday for reasons
that are obvious to anyone who has attended one of his rallies:
he attracts true believers who support him with an unusual
level of intensity and who are likely to turn out to vote,
come blizzard or ice storm. Huckabee will win for the same
reason.
Just as in November 2004, the presidential race
is, again, coming down to The Students versus The
Evangelicals, The Pews versus The Dorms. As you may recall,
in Ohio, with the red vote and blue vote almost even, college
students started racking up totals for Kerry in Cuyahoga County
while churchgoers were coming out in droves for Bush,
both groups seeking to break the tie.
In all likelihood, both factions will again be the dominant
voting blocs on Thursday in Iowa, where I bet the finishing
order is Obama-Clinton-Edwards and Huckabee-Romney-McCain.
[
For the record, this was posted at 7:30am on
January 1, 2008.]sayonara
* * *
Condolences to Bhutto's son, but in all honesty I think
he needs a lot more seasoning before he assumes any
throne. And one of his profs should tell him
"Democracy is the best revenge" is not a very good
or true line, because it's not the best revenge if the
other guy wins. Perhaps "Democracy is the best policy"
would have been a better bit. Speaking of democracy:
who voted for him? Maybe what he meant to say was,
"Nepotism is the best revenge."
But I digress. Paul
[photos of Obama and Edwards by Paul Iorio.]
_______________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 28 - 30, 2007
During the Writers's Strike, SNL Still Airs -- On DVDE - I - E - I - OMy main girlfriend in my senior year of high
school brought me over to her house one night
in the spring of 1975 and after awhile phoned her
older sister in New York, who she wanted me to
meet. You've got to meet my older sister, she said
excitedly, her name is Marilyn and she writes for
"Rhoda" and is working on this new television show
for the fall (or was trying to become a writer for
this new television series).
So she dialed her in the kitchen, chatted some
sisterly chat and then handed me the phone. I talked
with her sister for a couple minutes at most and
remember I was sort of daunted speaking to this
star writer as she told me she was busy writing for a
brand new comedy series for NBC that would premiere in
several months (or perhaps she said she was trying to get
onboard the new series as a writer). Good luck, I said,
and we said goodbye.
I really didn't think of what she told me on the phone
that much until months later, late at night on October
11, 1975, when someone said something like come watch
this show, George Carlin's on.
It was, of course, the series premiere of "Saturday
Night Live," then dubbed "Saturday Night," and I instantly
figured out that that was the show my girlfriend's sister
had been talking about on the phone (by then she was an
ex-girlfriend because I had gone away to college, and so had she).
And when the credits rolled, either on that show or
on another one in '75, there was her name, in big
letters, on the tv screen: Marilyn Suzanne
Miller. Wow, I thought.
Anyway, that's a long, unnecessary but completely true wind-up
to saying that I recently re-watched six episodes -- numbers 13
to 18 -- from that golden first season of SNL and had a blast,
for the most part, doing so. Thing is, you get used to seeing
the first season material packaged with bits from the first five
seasons in best-of compilations and forget that there're lots
of forgotten sketches that are wildly funny amidst the overly
familiar classics.
In those six episodes are many of the all-time blockbusters
that still stand as SNL's very best material: "The Super
Bass-o-matic '76," "Lorne's Offer to the Beatles," "The
Ten-Letter Metric Alphabet," and Andy Kaufman's "Old MacDonald"
(Aykroyd's brilliant E. Buzz Miller didn't happen till the second
season).
Loose notes on the episodes:
Episode 15, with Jill Clayburgh as host, is a real gem,
though episode 16, with Anthony Perkins as host, is a snoozer;
Desi Arnaz should've cleaned his teeth (dentures?) before
going onscreen; Ron Nessen and Jerry Rubin were not very
funny people (though seeing Nessen intro Patti Smith was
almost surreal); Chevy Chase had great stuff in Update (he
once reported that Charles Manson was no longer a threat to
society "unless society happens to cross his path"), though
his falls were clearly causing him pain -- and at least
one of his falls could have easily broken his neck. And, no
doubt about it, the reputed tension between Chase and John
Belushi is plain to see onscreen, particularly during one
Update sketch in which Belushi hauls off and punches
Chase at full velocity (see photo).
Also: Laraine Newman has such an expressive face that she
might have been a great silent movie star in another era; the
Bee and Samurai sketches were almost all formulaic
and tedious; Kaufman's "Old MacDonald" is unbelievably riotous;
the weekly "Home Movies" segment was truly the YouTube of its
day; even in the great fertile age of SNL, for every genius
bit like the Bass-o-matic or the offer to the Beatles, there
were around 17 duds.
Anyway, the vintage DVDs will have to do until the writers's strike
is settled.
Here are some pics from the first season:
pure genius (above and below)---
the dawn and Dean of UpdateJohn and Chevy didn't get alongBut I digress. Paul
[photos of TV stills by Paul Iorio.]
P.S. -- So what ever happened to the relationship
between me and my girlfriend of 33 years ago (her
name is Judy, by the way)? Here's the
scoop (which even she doesn't fully know): I went to a party
in '75 (that she was not at) and snacked on some chips and
brownies and around an hour later started feeling a bit queasy.
And then I started feeling alot worse than queasy, as my heart
started racing and I felt sort of stoned though I hadn't
even had so much as a drink. I went home and slept it off
and when I woke up I felt fine but was wondering what had
caused the previous night's problem. And I remember that
I then wrote a letter to Judy, now away at college, and told
her that "something had happened" and that I'd had this
mysterious experience and didn't know what it was (hey, I
was 17, for crissakes!).
Shortly after I sent her the letter, the mystery was solved.
Later that day, the hosts of the party -- friends of mine
still -- confessed that they had (unbeknownst to me) put a
very large quantity of pot in the brownies that I'd eaten
the night before and that that had been the cause of my racing
heartbeat, etc. Not a funny practical joke, I must admit,
at least from my point of view. In any event, the letter to
my former girlfriend had already been mailed, obviously
before I could explain to her what had actually happened and
that there was no cause for concern, but I think the letter was
a turn-off to her and the damage had already been done. In any
event, we'd already drifted apart, and things were already
over anyway, so that was the last letter I wrote to her. [this day's column updated January 2, 2008]
___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 28, 2007
Benazir Bhutto was the absolute opposite of so many
cowardly politicians and public officials worldwide
who play it safe, don't cause controversy and are the
last to take a daring stand on any issue. She openly defied
death threats, enraged the backward people of the northwest
territories and generally showed more courage than Osama bin Laden
has ever shown, as he hides in his doghouse and releases
cowardly videos from a big distance. Can you imagine
bin Laden having the balls Bhutto had and appearing at
rallies amongst his fans in Waziristan? (By the way, the
next time a bin Laden vid turns up at al Jazeera, would it
kill those tv reporters to break a sweat and try to track
down its chain of custody? Who gave it to the guy who
gave it to the guy? Was there any video surveillance
capturing its delivery to Jazeera? But I digress.)
All condolences about Bhutto's death must go to us all,
because her murder is a global loss and may well cause
enough turmoil to topple Musharraf, which would be a revoltin'
development, to say the least, because the country could
then topple into the hands of the Taliban.
If Pakistan and its nukes were to fall into the hands of the
Taliban or al Qaeda, the U.S. would, of course, have no choice
but to act immediately -- militarily and unilaterally, if
necessary -- to take out the new regime before it becomes
entrenched. There can be no violation of one inviolable rule:
the Taliban/al Qaeda cannot have access to nuclear weapons
under any circumstances.
On July 9, 2007, in the Daily Digression (see below), I
wrote: "Our anxiety should be centered on Pakistan, not
on Iraq. Iraq is soo '03. Pakistan may soon become soo '08."
And that now appears to be the case, or almost the case. Iraq
is becoming far less of a factor in '08 politics than it was
even six months ago, and there is the nauseating possibility
that Musharraf could be deposed in coming months (right in the
middle of primary season, no less).
By SuperDuper Tuesday, the dominant issue in the U.S.
presidential campaign may be our involvement in the war
in Pakistan.
But I digress. Paul
P.S. -- By the way, some have implied that my new song
"I Killed Osama bin Laden" incites violence against the
al Qaeda leader. To which I respond: and your point is what?
Look, I'm not going to sit here and explain my song (my music
website is at pauliorio.blogspot.com) but I will say that I
think it would be great if Osama bin Laden were murdered.
__________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 26, 2007
I've still not seen several of the major feature films
of 2007 (I'm certain I'm going to be knocked out by
the new Paul Thomas Anderson), so I'm not going to
write a ten-best of '07 list yet -- though I will say
that the two most haunting films I've seen this year
were released in '04 and '05.
The first is 2004's "Before Sunset," Richard Linklater's
sequel to his 1995 film "Before Sunrise," and what a
pleasant surprise to see the new one outshines the
original -- in fact, it may be the best two-person
ensemble picture since "My Dinner With Andre." Julie Delpy
can create the sense of falling in love like few other
actresses of her generation, and the last sequence of
the film, in which she opens up gradually like a flower
to sunlight, is very true and poignant and moving and
lovely and I'm running out of words to express exactly
how much I adore it. And that last line ("I know") is
perfect.
The other film is 2005's "Nine Lives," directed by
Rodrigo Garcia, who also directed that memorable
episode of "The Sopranos" in which Carmela
has dinner and talks "Madame Bovary" with A.J.'s
schoolteacher. "Nine Lives" is pure ultra-realism,
nine separate, sometimes harrowing stories that climax
with the last, in which Glenn Close's character visits
a cemetery for a reason that becomes heartbreakingly
evident only if you're watching the last couple minutes
very closely and happen to notice the size of the grave
she's visiting. I'm surprised that some
otherwise perceptive crits didn't get or like it.
* * *
In terms of the best music released in 2007, I nominate
the following:
-- my bootleg tape of Jeff Tweedy live in Golden Gate Park
in San Francisco in October, an inspired performance of
nearly two dozen songs (amazing how strong the "Mermaid"
material is, not to mention "The Thanks I Get," "Passenger
Side," "I'm the Man Who Loves You," etc.). And I
sometimes wonder whether "California Stars" might
eventually become the unofficial (or maybe even the
official) state song of California.
-- my bootleg tape of Oakley Hall performing in
Berkeley, Calif., in May. I still don't know the
names of all the songs, but I enjoy them a lot and
listen to them more than I probably should.
I now see the band as a sort of indie Fleetwood Mac
and wouldn't be shocked if they came up with an
alt-country equivalent to "Rumors" in the future.
-- Bright Eyes's "Cassadaga," particularly the song
"Four Winds."
-- Arcade Fire's "Neon Bible," particularly "Intervention."
-- Paul McCartney's "Memory Almost Full," particularly "That Was Me"
(it's his best solo album in many years).
-- Feist's "The Reminder," particularly the irresistible "1234."
-- Bruce Springsteen's "Magic," particularly "Girls in
Their Summer Clothes," perhaps his best song since
"Brilliant Disguise" and one that I'd love to hear Brian Wilson
perform with the band that backed him on his "Smile" tour.
-- my bootleg tape of Paul Simon's '06 concert in
Berkeley, where he brought his more recent material to
vivid life and put a new light on some of his classics.
-- my bootleg tape of live versions of songs from
Radiohead's "In Rainbows," particularly "4 Minute
Warning" and "Down is the New Up."
* * *
Now that Sacha Baron Cohen has decided to forever abandon
his hilarious Borat and Ali G characters, maybe he might
consider developing a new persona that lampoons India-centric
hippies -- one of the last, uh, sacred cows not yet
touched by major satirists. A Mumbai Borat, if you will.
I thought of that after reading William Grimes's
marvelously witty review in today's New York Times
of Kirin Narayan's memoir "My Family
and Other Saints" (University of Chicago Press).
Haven't read the book yet, but the review is one of
Grimes's best. Here's an excerpt:
"Families can be so embarrassing. Imagine the agonies of
an adolescent girl whose house has become infested with
India-besotted hippies from all over the globe, whose
sarcastic father stumbles around in an alcoholic
haze and whose mother kneels at the feet of every
swami she meets. And let us not forget grandma, who
holds long conversations with her cow and once met
a 1,000-year-old cobra with a ruby in its forehead
and a mustache on its albino face...
....The god-saturated culture of India, which Paw
ridicules, seeps into Ms. Narayan’s pores. At the
same time she tries to interpret American culture in
Indian terms, a constant source of confusion. “Was
‘It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue’ a warning to the blue
baby Krishna that his wicked uncle King Kamsa
was sending demons to kill him?” she wonders. And why
was Bob Dylan saying, in another perplexing song, that
everyone would get pelted with rocks?"
Check it out in today's Times!* * *
Uh oh! Could my humble Daily Digression column be
spawning imitators, or at least an imitator?!! Maybe.
An old high school pal of mine, who I hadn't seen for
decades (until a couple years ago), emailed me recently
and said he was naming his own blog "But I Digress."
That, of course, has been my sign-off for my column
since Feburary '07, as I told him in an email the other
week, though that apparently has not deterred him from
naming his own column, which has yet to launch, after mine.
Just so readers of the Daily Digression know: my blog has
absolutely positively nothing to do with his blog (the pal's
name is Bill Epps) and vice versa. But I digress. Paul
[this day's column updated, 1/02/08]
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 22, 2007
My column on "The Pat Robertson/Al Sharpton
Conservative Religious Axis" (see below)
seems to have caused a bit of (welcome) controversy.
One reader wants to know what harm it does to
believe in god and in the other supernatural
phenomena in the Bible. My answer: the harm it
does is substantial; religion leaves you
stuck in false hope and delusion, and when
the delusion wears off, and you come to, you'll
end up in more despair than if you had accepted
reality all along.
Further (and more important), religion has a negative
insidious effect on other aspects of a person's
life in that it lowers the bar and the standard of
proof that one sets in order to believe other things;
that's probably part of the reason why many in Pat
Robertson's camp believed Iraq had WMDs, despite a
complete lack of evidence -- and why many in Al Sharpton's
camp believed the lies of, say, Crystal Mangum, despite
copious evidence to the contrary.
When you're raised to believe something because "the Bible
told me so," you're also more likely later in life to
believe stuff like "Iraq has WMDs because Rumsfeld told me so"
and "the Duke Three did it because Crystal Mangum told me so."
Belief in the supernatural cripples your powers of reasoning.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 18, 2007
The Robertson/Sharpton Religious Conservative AxisPat Robertson ("right") and Al Sharpton (right)
I recently re-watched some episodes of "All in
the Family" from its brilliant, edgy, thrillingly
audacious first season, and started wondering whether
the series, if it were premiering today, would ever
survive attacks from religious conservatives like
Pat Robertson and Al Sharpton.
Here's what might happen today. First, there would be
a boycott of its advertisers by Robertson. Second,
Sharpton would bring his bullhorn and protesters
to the Black Rock building in Manhattan. Then,
predictably, timid TV execs, with mortgages and private
school tuition to pay, would issue some insincere apology
and cancel the show in order to keep those paychecks
a-comin'.
I also recently re-listened to parts of Richard Pryor's
landmark comedy album "That Nigger's Crazy" and thought
the same thing: if it were released today, how long would
it be before the Robertson/Sharpton crowd forced the
record company to either withdraw the album or to at least
re-title it and delete some of its bits?
And then it dawned on me that America is now less
culturally progressive than it was in the early 1970s.
Back then, Americans seemed to understand irony a lot
better and appreciated artistic freedom a lot more.
Today, I don't think some people in the Robertson/Sharpton
camp understand the nature of irony, were never schooled
in classic satire, have never understood parody. When
they should've been reading Jonathan Swift or Voltaire
or Woody Allen in school, these cultural conservatives were
instead reading stories from the Bible of highly variable
quality (I mean, the story of Abraham and Isaac is not only
crappy, but more than a little creepy). They've not been
properly educated in how one can use, say, ethnic slurs
in the service of condemning ethnic slurs. And so now we're
all supposed to lower our standards to the level
of people like Robertson and Sharpton who simply don't
get it.
The Robertson/Sharpton people should 1) not take the Bible so
literally and 2) develop a sense of humor.
I mean, I watched one episode of "All in the Family" in
which Archie used the ethnic slur "dago." Now, I have an
Italian-American last name and am very proud of my
Italian-American heritage, but I laughed and laughed when I
heard him say the word "dago" because I understood the context
in which it was said: an actor, Carroll O'Connor, was
portraying an ignorant, bigoted guy in a way that showed us how
hilariously ridiculous his ignorance and bigotry was. But if
you're schooled in literalism, which is to say unschooled, you
won't get it, and you'll probably end up insisting that
better-educated people lower themselves to your level of
miseducation.
* * *
The VeepstakesCould an Obama/Bloomberg ticket be in the works?For months, everybody has been talking about how
the presidential race of '08 might be a repeat of
the Giuliani versus Clinton U.S. Senate race that almost
happened in 2000.
But what was the ultimate fate of that match-up? And does
it tell us anything about what might happen in the 2008 race?
To recap: Giuliani quit the Senate contest (due to health
problems) and Clinton won against a weak second.
So is Giuliani fated to repeat that same pattern of
entering a high-stakes race, becoming a near front-runner
and then dropping out (for whatever reason)?
One could argue that that pattern already has repeated
itself, because Giuliani has effectively dropped out of the
race, or at least out of the early contests in Iowa, New
Hampshire and South Carolina, which may turn out to be
tantamount to dropping out of the race altogether (though
that is yet to be determined).
The other part of that equation is that, absent Giuliani,
Hillary wins against a nominal Republican opponent (that,
too, is yet to be determined).
By the way, now that Obama is a truly viable contender, it
may be time to speculate about who he'd choose for
his running-mate. My guess: Michael Bloomberg.
How an Obama/Bloomberg ticket would fare, of course, depends
on who the GOP nominates. Possibilities include:
Huckabee/Giuliani, Giuliani/Huckabee, Giuliani/McCain,
Huckabee/McCain -- though a McCain/Lieberman ticket
ain't in the cards in '08 (yes, McCain is presidential,
but actually he's more like a retired ex-president than
a future one). Least likely match-ups: Kucinich/Tancredo,
Gravel/Huckabee, Obama/Winfrey, Hillary/Gore, Giuliani/Ron Paul
and McCain/Kucinich.
* * *
Incidentally, it's a bit of a thrill that Led Zeppelin chose to
start its reunion show at O2 with newsreel footage that mentioned
the one Zep show I actually happened to attend as teenager
(see previous Digression).
But I digress. Paul
[photo of Robertson from unknown photographer; pic of Sharpton from Guardian.co.uk; photo of Obama from msnbc.com; pic of Bloomberg from abcnews.com.]_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 10, 2007
Led Zeppelin reunites tonight in the U.K. for a one-off
gig, featuring the three surviving members plus Jason Bonham,
son of the late John Bonham, on drums.
I was lucky enough to have seen Zeppelin live in its prime,
when I was 15 years old, and to have caught a Zep concert that
actually made pop culture history.
The show was Zeppelin's 1973 record-breaking concert at
Tampa Stadium in Tampa, Florida, and its main
claim to fame is that it attracted more
paying fans than had ever attended a show by a single act in
the U.S., surpassing the previous record set by the Beatles at
Shea Stadium in 1965. (Zeppelin drew 56,800 fans, the Beatles
55,000. For the record, there were other bands on the bill at Shea,
though it was effectively a solo show.)
In rock culture lore, Tampa Stadium is where Led Zeppelin
officially dethroned the Beatles in the concert world,
and it happened on May 5, 1973.
To this day, on and off the web, some rock fans in the
region still talk glowingly about the concert as if it
were the Woodstock festival or the Monterey Pop fest.
Was Tampa Stadium a great Zeppelin performance? Some
of it was. Guitarist Jimmy Page was in rare form and the rest of
the band sounded excited about having broken the Beatles's
record. But Robert Plant was hoarse, a fairly substantial
drawback.
I attended as a 15-year-old high school student,
arriving at the Stadium with a friend well before the
Saturday night concert began. After presenting our five-dollar
advance tickets (six on the day of the show), we took a
place on the field, around a third of the way to the stage.
The springtime atmosphere was mostly festive as the speakers
blasted such music as the Allman Brothers Band's "Revival"
(with its lyrics, "People can you feel it/love is everywhere").
But the crowd was occasionally rowdy, too, throwing bottles at
police officers at one point.
Zeppelin took the stage after 8pm, with the introduction:
"Ladies and gentlemen, what more can I say? Led Zeppelin!"
Fans screamed as if they were on fire.
Plant stepped to the mike. "Looks like we've done something
nobody's done before," he said, referring to the box office record.
"And that's fantastic," he added, according to my bootleg
tape of the show.
Page struck a practice chord. John Bonham played a drum
roll. Feedback filled the air. Then Bonham pounded
out the intro to "Rock and Roll."
As Plant started singing, it became obvious he was straining to
hit the high notes (due to some sort of cold), which was disappointing.
But Page more than made up for it, fluidly riffing through
a stunning twenty-minute opener that included "Celebration Day,"
"Black Dog," "Over the Hills and Far Away" and "Misty Mountain Hop"
in quick succession.
Just before "Misty Mountain," Plant chatted to the crowd
again.
"Anyone make the Orlando gig we did last time?," he asked.
Fans cheered.
"This is the second gig we've done since we've been back to
the States and uh..." Plant seemed speechless for a moment.
"And I can't believe it!"
But the lovey-dovey mood evaporated a bit after "Since
I've Been Loving You," when front row fans began getting out of
control, pushing against barriers and forcing Plant to play
security guard.
"Listen, listen," Plant said to the unruly crowd, according
to my tape. "May I ask you, as we've achieved something
between us that's never been done before, if we could just
cool it on these barriers here because otherwise there're
gonna be a lot of people who might get [hurt],"
Plant told the crowd. "So if you have respect for the person
who's standing next to you, which is really what it's all
about, then possibly we can act more gently."
"We don't want problems, do we?," Plant asked. The crowd
cheered.
Several songs later, after "The Rain Song," it became clear
the crowd was now getting seriously out of control. Plant got
testy.
"We want this to be a really joyous occasion," he says. "And
I'm going to tell you this, because three people have been
taken to the hospital, and if you keep pushing on that barrier,
there're going to be stacks and stacks of people going. So for
goodness sakes...can we move back just a little bit because it's
the only way. If you can't do that, then you can't really live
with your brother. Just for this evening anyway."
"Can you cooperate?!," asked Plant, a bit exasperated. There
was tepid applause. "It's a shame to talk about things like
cooperation when there're so many of us. Anyway you people sitting
up the sides are doing a great job. [fans cheer] But these poor
people are being pushed by somebody. So cool it. That's not very
nice."
Plant also took the opportunity to publicly diss Miami. For some
unknown reason, the band was apparently still sore about a 1970
gig in Miami Beach that stands as the last time Zep played in
that area.
"We played the Convention Center in Miami, which was really
bad," said Plant to the crowd, just before
introducing "Dazed and Confused." "The gig was good, but
there were some men walking around all the time making
such a silly scene." He didn't elaborate.
The crowd problems seemed to dissipate after a few more songs.
By the time the group roared into "Whole Lotta Love," near the
end of the almost three-hour set, Plant shouted, "We've got 57,000
people here and we're gonna boogie!,” segueing into “Let That
Boy Boogie Woogie.” The crowd went nuts, acting like
Beatlemaniacs at Shea.
Unfortunately, I had to be home by around 11pm,
which meant missing encores "The Ocean" and "Communication
Breakdown."
The highlight of the night, judging from a tape of the show and
from memory, was "Over the Hills and Far Away," if only because
of Page's incendiary solo, which was quite unlike his solos in
other live versions of the song. Also notable were extended
instrumental segments during “No Quarter” (courtesy
bassist/keyboardist John Paul Jones) and “Dazed and Confused,”
a rousing “The Song Remains the Same,” and a predictable but
engaging “Stairway to Heaven.”
No doubt, some of the same songs will turn up on tonight's
reunion gig setlist. Here's hoping the band decides
to do a full-scale tour in 2008, 'cause it's been a long time.
* * * *
Yet Another Tragedy Caused By Gun PermissivenessAlmost no news organization is reporting the Colorado
shootings this way: "In the wake of the Omaha
shootings...."
Yet every news organizaton should be mentioning Omaha
in its stories about Colorado. Context is Journalism 101.
But lots of tv news correspondents are saying, "Omaha?
What's Omaha? Ohhh that!! That was soooo 72 hours ago!"
So let's see: Omaha has been completely wiped from memory
now that there's this new shooting spree in Colorado.
And lemme guess the reason why certain tv newsers aren't
mentioning Omaha in stories about Colorado; they're
probably saying something like, "The shooter in the last
one used an AK-47 and the shooter this time used an AK-46,
which, of course, is a vast difference."
They fail to see that the common denominator is bullets.
Both shooters used bullets. If they hadn't, nobody'd be
dead today.
Now let's take a look at the real reason Omaha isn't
being brought up in stories about Colorado: it's
called the NRA. The NRA is so well-organized, so
lawyered up, with so many true believers who know
how to threaten you without threatening you, that
some news orgs take the path of least resistance
and leave out references to Omaha in stories about
Colorado, just as they left out references to Virginia Tech
in stories about Omaha, just as they'll leave out references
to Colorado in stories about the next shooting (and, by the way,
just as they left out references to Tawana Brawley in stories
about Crystal Mangum).
At some news organizations, they report the truth without fear
or favor -- unless the truth is too unpopular.
* * *
Looks like NBC's long-shot gamble on "Friday Night
Lights" might actually be paying off. After
a season-plus of basement ratings, the critically acclaimed
series -- which is arguably almost as brilliant
as "The Sopranos" in its way -- was tied last week
for the number one spot in its time period among
viewers 18-49, the main demo advertisers
care about, though it was #3 overall for its time
period. Now the question is whether its momentum
will be slowed by the writers' strike.
But I digress. Paul
____________________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 9, 2007
Advice for the Six Major Presidential Candidateswhen she was fabHillary ClintonHillary is losing altitude because she appears to
be overscripted, overhandled, overcoached,
overadvised -- and voters can see through it.
The latest example is her response to the hostage
ordeal at her HQ in New Hampshire. To me, she seemed,
above all, privately pleased that she was being given
an opportunity to look like she was in control in a crisis.
But I bet in reality she was handling the ordeal even
better than she was at that appearance; my guess is
she was behind the scenes making calls and intelligently
assessing the situation -- but that was all off-camera.
So her staged reaction seemed less flattering to her than the
way her actions probably unfolded off-camera in real time.
What I'm trying to say is that the real Hillary would
probably be more compelling to voters than the scripted
public one.
Maybe she should try to tap into the identity she
developed at Wellesley College, when she went from
caterpillar to butterfly and gave the commencement
address and wrote a ballsy senior thesis and had an
attracive style, before she married The Viking, as she
has affectionately called him.
Also, it does take a village, but -- much more important -- it
takes villagers. At this point, Hillary has the village, but
Obama seems to have a lot of the villagers.
* * *
not asking permission to take out bin LadenBarack ObamaI've said it before and will say it again: the level
of enthusiasm for Obama is an extraordinary political
phenomenon -- it's like nothing I've ever seen before in politics
(in fact, it's more like rock star adulation).
I've already written about seeing him speak (see previous
Digressions), so I won't go into that again. But I will
say that just yesterday, I walked by shops in downtown Oakland,
Calif., and there were Obama placards in barber shop
windows and Obama bumper stickers on cars. To date, I
have seen exactly one Hillary '08 bumper sticker in
the Bay Area, a blue thing on a car that looked like some
sort of government vehicle.
My advice to Obama is: keep it up with regard to your
hard position on finding bin Laden -- it's not only the
correct policy, but it will play beautifully against
the Republican candidate in November, if you're nominated.
I think voters are now picturing each candidate in the
Oval Office and one of the things they're picturing is
this: If a President Obama received a PDB titled "Bin
Laden's Whereabouts in Waziristan Pinned Down," would
you believe for one moment that President Barack wouldn't
immediately swing into action, marshaling the support of
Musharraf and others for a lightning strike in the
northwest territories?
And voters are also picturing the alternative: a President
Hillary who would receive such an PDB and might get
over-advised, too cautious, afraid of spending
political capital, become over-concerned about how it
would look politically if we bombed Wazirstan, analyzing
it into fine dust until the moment was lost.
In other words, the way they run their campaigns is the
way they would likely run their presidencies.
* * *
he should schedule his withdrawal speech after McCain's next month
John EdwardsWhen Edwards first appeared on the scene in the primaries
in '04, he was electric, like a high voltage wire whipping
in a wind storm, like a brand new rock star.
Problem is, he began repeating his same speech at virtually
every stop -- the Two Americas thing -- and voters began
to sense a disingenuousness, a sort of pre-fab presentation.
It was like Steve Forbes's "hope, growth and opportunity"
bit -- at first it seemed somewhat fresh, and then it became
just so much cynical grandstanding. And after being
relegated to the second spot on the '04 ticket, and sort
of being spanked by Cheney at that one debate,
he lost his luster a bit. So when he came back for
seconds in early '07, he had the stigma of a loser,
and the freshness was way gone. (A sidenote: you know who
should probably run for office? Edwards' advisor Kate
Michelman, whose speech earlier this year in Berkeley
shows she has an engaging charisma.)
My only advice for Edwards is (hate to say it): start
writing your withdrawal speech, which you might have
to give a few weeks from now. Schedule it
after McCain's, and the press won't cover it as much.
* * *
Jesus was born in Provo, and Iran has nukesMitt RomneyRomney is like those pre-Beatles relics of the
1960s who used to organize so-called decency rallies,
appear with Anita Bryant, and act aghast over the
onstage antics of Jim Morrison.
His persona would've played nationwide even 15 years
ago, back before the dot-com revolution when old
guys in polyester suits still ran old-boy old-line
companies, and ex-hippies of the Baby Boom generation were
their subordinates. Today, however, the ex-hippies
arethe entrenched power, and Romney seems, well, square and
antiquated even by the standards of 20-years ago.
And frankly, his dreadful religion speech, in which he
insulted non-theists while asking for respect for his
own belief system, looked more like a withdrawal or
resignation speech. (In fact, if you watch his appearance
with the sound down, it looks like he's resigning from something.)
* * *
the Earth was created 350 years agoMike HuckabeeI don't think I agree with Mike Huckabee on any issue, but
he's undeniably likable -- and his affection for Keith Richards
shows that he may be more open-minded than he seems. But his
views on evolution are, let's face it, straight from a Taliban
cave. You have to hope this guy knows better but is pandering
to those who don't. Or maybe not. Perhaps he's one of
the many who has no regard for evidence-based belief.
If he's nominated, he may be a Republican McGovern. Only
thing is, the Democrats may also nominate a
McGovern -- Obama -- so it would be a battle of the factions.
* * *
looking too long in the rear-view mirrorRudy GiulianiHearing Giuliani on Russert this morning talking about
how he once shut down traffic around the Stock Exchange
when he was mayor, or something like that, I was reminded
that he's truly a small screen guy, not a big picture policy
maker. His focus is always on operations, tactics, details,
rather than on strategy, overall planning, policy, and that
is why people are sensing he's not really presidential.
And notice that his emphasis is always on 9/11 but
not on finding ways to stop bin Laden from attacking again.
If there were a terrorist attack and my building was on
fire, and Giuliani was my neighbor, he'd be the one I'd
follow to safety, no doubt about it. But I would not
vote to have him deal with the terrorists responsible
for the attack, because he tends to act too viscerally;
he almost has the mindset of a security guard sometimes
(remember when he personally ejected Arafat from Lincoln
Center in the Nineties?).
But I digress. Paul
[photo of Hillary by unknown photographer; Obama from abc.com; Edwards from photobucket.com; Huckabee from wired.com; Romney from ccinsider.com; Giuliani from latimes.com.]________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 8, 2007
satireThe Beatnik versus the Class Clown in 2008? High school yearbook
photos of Obama (l) and Huckabee (r)?The rising stars this month among the presidential candidates
are Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee, and that means we may have
a clear, stark choice at the polls this November between two
American archetypes: the class clown and the beatnik.
And it also appears as if both of them attended C. Estes
Kefauver High School in the Sixties, according to my
research of the National Lampoon's "1964 High School
Yearbook Parody." Could the yearbook photo (above) on the
left be Obama (Swisher) and the one on the right Huckabee
(Weisenheimer)? Check out the resemblance.
And also -- who knew Dennis Kucinich (below) also attended
Kefauver High?
Kucinich in high school?And could this former Kefauver student (below) actually be the
brilliant singer Amy Winehouse, circa several years ago?
Amy Winehouse at Kefauver High?But I digress. Paul
[all three clippings above from "The Original National Lampoon 1964 High School Yearbook Parody," 1974 edition.]
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 7, 2007
Mitt Romney gave an awful speech yesterday, showing
a disrespect for and implied bigotry toward nontheists,
while saying, essentially, that he's not going to open
up his Mormon beliefs to public scrutiny because
he knows full well that such far-out and strange notions
couldn't possibly stand up to scrutiny.
Well, Mr. Romney, you still have to answer to Ali G.
Here's an excerpt from Season 2 of "Da Ali G Show"
(wouldn't it be great if the next presidential debate
were hosted by Ali G?):
ALI G: HOW COME IN SOME RELIGIONS IT'S OK TO HAVE
MORE THAN ONE WIFE, LIKE THE MORONS? AUTHOR JOHN GRAY: It's the Mormons or the Muslims. In both those
religions it's ok to have more than one wife.
[
Editor's note: for the record, Mormons no longer practice
polygamy, though they still hold other beliefs that are
shockingly bizarre.]* * *
Oooops! I forgot! Gays, guns and god are forbidden
topics during a presidential election year, which is
why you're hearing absolutely n-o-t-h-i-n-g about gun
control in the wake of the Omaha slayings.
So I now have a new personal policy. From here in, I'll
not extend sympathies to victims of gun violence who
weren't in favor of stricter gun regulations before being
shot. Because everybody, by now, can see plainly and in full
light that gun permissiveness is precisely the cause of all
these mass killings.
After every one of these slaughters, gun fanatics always
say the same thing, and that is: "If a nearby bystander
had been armed, the gunman could have been taken out."
OK, fine. let's put that theory to the test. Name one
major mass shooting incident -- Columbine, Virginia
Tech, etc. -- where an armed bystander (not a cop or
guard) saved the day by shooting the gunman. Name one.
The reason you can't name one is because there isn't
one, and the reason there isn't one is because in a
random shooting 1) victims are taken by surprise,
and 2) it's all over within minutes, before anyone
else can lock and load, and 3) the gunman typically
ends the rampage by killing himself.
Even in robberies that unfold over a longer period of
time, there is still massive and unpredictable risk
when an armed bystander intervenes (it often ends up
more like the robbery sequence (in the pastry shop)
in the movie "Boogie Nights" than like a Charles
Bronson flick).
Look, I was robbed at gunpoint a couple years ago,
and I must confess that I would've been extremely
pleased if some armed onlooker had shot the gunman
dead in the head on the spot; but I also know that
that same hypothetical good Samaritan might have missed
him and hit me instead.
But I digress. Paul
______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 6, 2007
You always hear the same litany of cliches every
time there's some random shooting, whether at Virginia
Tech or at this mall or at that school. If the shooter
was a teenager or a young person, he or she is invariably
described as a loner, disaffected, alienated, etc. (which
pretty much describes most teenagers at one time or another,
by the way).
Never mind that even Lee Harvey Oswald, the archetype of
this cliche, was far from a loner: he had a wife, in-laws,
a steady job at the Depository with co-workers, and political
activist friends.
And the Columbine shooters were part of what was virtually
a high school fraternity.
No, we use the cliche "loner" because, after the fact, after
some nutcase does something criminal, suddenly nobody knows
him or her, and everybody pretends that the person was some
sort of complete stranger.
The most salient and telling and important detail about these
shooters is this: each one had a gun.
A gun. If that sicko in Nebraska hadn't had a rifle yesterday,
none of those people at the mall would be dead today. If he
had had only his fists to express his misguided
rage, maybe one person would have had a black eye before
he was restrained by a security guard. If he had had only a
knife, he might have injured only one person before someone
heroically restrained him.
How many of these shootings do we have to have
before people realize that we need vastly tighter
gun control and the banning of some weapons in this
country?
Every time something like this happens, gun nuts blow all
the smoke they can to obscure the fact that guns were
primarily responsible for the tragedy. And
everybody seems to forget the eight or 12 mass
murders that preceded this one in the past few years alone,
Virginia Tech among them.
My sympathies to those affected by this tragedy.
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 6, 2007
Welcome to the Theistic States of America !President Huckabee proposes a couple minor changes to the flag (above).It seems as if the same people who object to perceived
slights against Muslims or Jews or Christians couldn't
care less about the fact that "under god" in the
Pledge of Allegiance deeply offends the nontheistic.
Those who walk on eggshells because of Muslim
touchiness about their religion, who see
anti-Semitism under every stone, who bend over
backwards to make aspects of Mormonism appear
less nutty than they are: such people also
show complete insensitivity about imposing theism
in a setting that should be free of religion.
In this era, it seems that every burqa in America
has been given federal landmark status and far-out
notions of fundamentalist Christians are considered
off-limits to satirists, yet the children of non-theists
are virtually forced to engage in religious chants -- and nobody
seems to bring up issues of tolerance and sensitivity as it
relates to them.
It's an outrage, which is why there is now a case pending
before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals about removing
"under god" from the Pledge of Allegiance (or, more accurately,
restoring the Pledge to its original text).
Try to imagine what it feels like to be a public school kid
who thinks theistic beliefs are wacko yet is virtually forced
to join in a daily pledge that includes, effectively, a group
religious chant -- a group religious chant in a school that
is funded by taxpayers who are nontheists, Hindus, Christians,
etc. ("Group religious chant," by the way, is what "under god"
in the Pledge is. And the chant is essentially compulsory
because it's implicitly coercive in a school environment.)
By contrast, putting "in god we trust" on coins or buildings
is not really objectionable, because it's a passive part of the
landscape. And regarding Christmas, I and my Jewish and
nontheist friends celebrate a secular version of Christmas
every year. But all that is very different than forcing a
kid in public school to chant the word "god" with his classmates.
Nowadays, apparently, you have to throw a violent temper
tantrum and riot in order to have your philosophical world
view respected. I'm probably more offended by "under god"
in the Pledge than many Muslims are by the Mohammed
cartoons --- but I'm just nicer and more non-violent
about it, hence some feel they can run over my sensibilities
with impunity.
So when I'm irreverent in my writings toward various
religions, I'm merely taking my cue from how I've been
treated all my life.
To those who defend "under god" in the Pledge by saying
that it has no significant religious meaning, I respond
with: if it has no significant religious meaning, then
why include it? If the two words mean nothing to the
faithful but insult me, then why include them? If
those two words have no significant religious meaning, then
why not replace the words "under God" with, say, "under Allah"?
Why not? It's just two insignificant words. How would you
feel about that if you were a non-Muslim?
The obvious reason is that having public school kids
chant "under Allah" in the Pledge would violate the
beliefs of non-Muslims, just as "under god" violates my
own private beliefs. So why not take out those two words
if they insult people who don't buy the theistic fantasy?
We're talking about public schools, after all, in a
secular society.
As I said, the same people who twist themselves into
pretzels to understand the illogic of the Teddy Bear
Islamists or of the Mormons seem to care not one whit when
it comes to respecting the sensibilities of the nontheistic.
Meanwhile, I listen to presidential candidates spew cockamamie
religious theories -- I think one candidate believes the Earth
was formed 350 years ago, another one thinks Jesus was born in
Park City during the Ghost Dance of 1872, or something like
that -- and much of the press just nods like a bobblehead
doll and fails to ask the obvious hard questions: will your
policy decisions as president be based on the same non-rationality
evident in your religion? Will your decisions be faith-based?
Would you demand a higher standard of evidence and proof
when determining whether we should wage war than you demand
in gauging the truth of the claims in the Bible?
No, those questions are verboten. And any kid who refuses to
chant about god in school becomes a pariah. Forget about reforming
Islam -- America is the nation that needs an Ataturk.
But I digress. Paul
[flag montage by Paul Iorio.]___________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 3, 2007
The Fate of the Earth(above) the reason human beings will one day become extinct.The funniest movie ever made, Stanley Kubrick's
"Dr. Strangelove," is also one of the scariest
pictures ever made -- and it doesn't include a
single joke. But every time I see it, and I'm
sort of embarrassed to admit how many times
I've seen it, I laugh and laugh.
Kubrick began shooting his comedy about nuclear
annihilation 45 years ago last October, back when
it looked like much of the human race was poised
to die an awful radioactive death. And through
the Sixties and Seventies, everyone had a healthy fear
of the Bomb, though in the cushy, Seinfeld Nineties --
during that cozy period between the end of the
Cold War and the attacks of 9/11 ("Peace Breaks Out"
was a memorable newspaper headline of the era) --
we stopped being so afraid of nukes.
Experts diagnosed the proliferation problem many
decades ago, but it has only gotten worse over the
years. As the number of nations with nukes
has mushroomed, we seem to have become less, not more,
concerned about it. We hear more talk about global
warming nowadays than about nuclear winter, which
(if the latter ever arrives) will make even the
most extreme predictions of climate change seem
quaint and moot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a gigantic admirer of Al Gore's
campaign to fight global warming, but when the story of
the end of the human race finally unfolds, the villain will
probably ultimately be radioactivity, not fluorocarbons, and
the truly prescient work will be Jonathan Schell's "The Fate
of the Earth," not "An Inconvenient Truth."
And it might not be the communists or the jihadists
who do us in, but rather some obscure dictator who has had,
say, an undiagnosed stroke that has made him or her clinically
paranoid.
When we sit there in the year 2022, watching tv meteorologists
tell us where the radiation cloud is headed today, trying to escape
on frozen highways to dodge a high pressure system that
will keep a dome of radiation over the area for a week or
two, we'll be saying to ourselves, "We saw this coming,
yet it still happened." It's like a car skidding on ice
and heading for a wall; you can slam on the brakes all you
want, but inevitably there's going to be a bad collision.
Perhaps there is no solution to nuclear proliferation (just
as there's no cure for most metastasized forms of cancer)
and the spread of nukes will continue unless, as Schell
wrote, we are willing to destroy all nuclear weapons along
with the means to produce them, which would also mean
reducing ourselves to a 19th century level of
technological advancement -- and that would be
impossible in any event, because the knowledge to create
a nuke would still exist.
So the human race has a chronic and probably fatal disease,
and as with any chronic illness, we can manage but not cure
it. Realistic hope lies in surviving not forever but
for as long as we can stave off what is probably
inevitable. Perhaps our next president will consider
creating a new cabinet-level position -- the Deptartment
of Nuclear Weapons Control -- to try to manage, in a
more focused fashion, the central crisis of our time.
For now, we might as well have a good laugh, courtesy
of "Strangelove," about our probable impending doom,
because there will come a time -- say, after
the gamma burns -- when laughter will be very
hard to come by.
* * *
In Berkeley, It's a Two-Man Race: Ron Paul v. Barack ObamaWhat many pundits are failing to note in noting
the rise of Mike Huckabee in the Iowa polls is that
Huckabee is virtually a favorite son (Iowa borders Arkansas),
and favorite sons (like Harkin in Iowa or Tsongas in
New Hampshire) have often outpolled the eventual nominee
in their home regions.
On the Democratic side, the inevitability of Hillary's
nomination seems slightly less inevitable lately. I've
believed that Barack Obama would make a strong showing
since hearing him speak in Oakland last March 17 (see
Daily Digression, March 18, 2007). I mean, when a guy on a
crutch stands for around two hours in line to see him,
when a woman with an oxygen tank stands and
waits to catch a glimpse of his passing limo, you
know you're dealing with an extraordinarily
intense level of political enthusiasm for a
candidate.
I used to think Obama was unelectable, mostly
because of his liberalism, but now I'm thinking...who
do the Republicans have to run against him?
The GOP doesn't have a formidable candidate. Obama could
conceivably win against a weak GOP candidate, particularly
in an election year that may also become a recession
year -- and there's nothing like a downturn
in the economy to feed the public's appetite
for dramatic change, which is Obama's calling card.
Meanwhile, John Edwards is looking increasingly
like Dick Gephardt circa 2004 -- a candidate
past his expiration date for freshness -- and my
guess is he'll be withdrawing next month,
probably along with John McCain and Fred Thompson
and a couple others who will likely
exit presidential politics for good.
In these weeks before the California primary, which
could be crucial, I've documented the political mood in
perennially activist Berkeley, Calif., by taking some
some photos of bumper stickers and placards
over the past couple weeks, and here they are:
there are lots of Obama stickers in Berkeley, but very few Hillary ones. Who woulda thunk it? A GOP Texan is actually popular in Berkeley!The only Edwards stickers I've seen are Kerry/Edwards '04 leftovers. fueling voter anger. Will 2008 be a recession year? The tree-sitters in Berkeley, who celebrated their 1st anniversary in the oaks yesterday, have evidently expanded their agenda. as their sign shows. But I digress. Paul
___________________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for December 1, 2007
The Teddy Bear Islamistsjihadists riot over the darndest things! ("and if I ever have a teddy bear, I think I'm gonna name him Bill! George! anything but Mohammed!") There's not an easy solution to the culture clashes now
going on in the Benelux nations and in France. Starting
with the unforgivable assassination of film maker Theo
van Gogh by Mohammed Bouyeri in '04 to the Islamic violence
against European cartoonists in '05 to the current riots in
France, the most liberal parts of western Europe are seeing
the weeds strangle the flowers in the garden.
The problem boils down to this: Muslim miitant immigrants are
very unlike immigrant groups of the past in that they want
to destroy the liberal framework that allows them to thrive in
their new homes.
The Muslim extremist immigrants in Amsterdam and Stockholm
are permitted to pray as they choose and speak as they wish,
yet these newcomers are fundamentally hostile to free speech
and freedom of religion.
Yes, we must let a thousand flowers bloom, but we should
never allow weeds that strangle the flowers to grow in
the garden.
Elsewhere, Muslim fundamentalists continue to show a shocking
intolerance for even the most innocuous free expression.
The latest case involves schoolteacher Gillian Gibbons who
is being jailed in Sudan for letting her students name a teddy bear
Mohammed.
First, don't give me any cultural relativism crap, because it
doesn't apply in this case (common sense does), and we shouldn't
be making excuses for fanatics who act his way. Anyone who would
punish someone for allowing her students to name a teddy bear
Mohammed is backward. Period.
Judge Mohammed Youssef of the Kartoum North Criminal Court is
simply a reactionary -- and even more backward than Sonny Perude
and his holy raindancers.
I lived abroad for extended periods when I was a kid, so
I understand reflexively that every nation has both its
throwbacks and its progressives and its moderates and, frankly,
the same poltiical grid we have here, more or less.
There are red states and blue states (or provinces) in Nigeria
and in France and in Japan and in Sudan. And my early experience
helps me to see through an accent or a turban in order to
recognize someone as the David Duke of the Ukraine or the
Eugene McCarthy of Pakistan.
I find that it's always the most provincial Americans -- who
never traveled outside the U.S. in their youths and
were raised by redneck parents -- who now tend to overcorrect
for their own provinciality by trying too hard to see a logic
that isn't there in the jihadist argument. The Teddy Bear Islamists are not speaking from logic or
reason but from an early religious indoctrination that
they are not able to overcome in adulthood.
If the Third Reich taught us anything, it's that an entire
culture of millions of people can all be very wrong, can
all suffer from a collective mental illness, can all have
no reasonable side to their side of the story.
There are those who only half-heartedly defend Gibbons by
saying, "She didn't mean to blaspheme," as if her punishment
would be somehow justifiable if she had
intended some
religious irreverence.
Whether she intended or didn't intend to disrespect Islam
(and she obviously didn't), she doesn't belong in jail.
Religious free expression -- whether in favor of a
religion or in opposition to it or in satirizing it -- should
not be penalized anywhere, and all laws forbidding blasphemy
should be scrapped as antiques from a less enlightened era.
Of course, the fanatics have every right to be offended
by whatever offends them but have absolutely no right to
get violent about it and should work on developing
alternate ways to express their anger instead of reaching
for the violence option every time someone tells a religious
joke they don't like. And they should
learn to be tolerant and to appreciate (or at least not
kill) the diversity of a thousand flowers blooming.
But I digress. Paul
[photo of teddy bear from bearsonboard.org.]
________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 19, 2007
If I Were Running All Television News, Here's What I'd DoCreate a prime-time show called "Conversations with Katie Couric."GIVE KATIE COURIC HER OWN SHOW: CBS has
miscast Katie, which is easy to do because she is a bit
too hard for "Today" but not quite hard enough
for "The CBS Evening News." And that's why CBS
should take her off the "Evening News" and create
a prime time (10pm) show for her, modeled
loosely on Murrow's "Person to Person," where
her gift for gab can flourish. Call it "Conversations
with Katie Couric," a weekly interview-centered
series with Couric doing the "get" interview of each
week; the first half would begin with five minutes of
breaking or headline news and then move into newsy
interviews, while the second half would feature Q&As
with entertainment figures, who would also perform at
the end of each show.
* * *
CBS's Matt Lauer?MATT LAUER TO "60 MINUTES": Lauer's interviewing
has become much sharper after all these years -- to the
point where he now sounds like he'd fit right in at
"60 Minutes." It's time for him to take the next
step up.
* * *
International velvet -- but with a tough Q&A style. KATTY KAY TO "SIXTY MINUTES," TOO?: Don't let the
velvet manner fool you -- she's a surprisingly tough interviewer
and would also be a strong addition to "60 Minutes," though
she's not quite at the Lesley Stahl level (who is?).
* * *
"Am I the only one who notices that people eventually retire?!"REPLACE ANDY ROONEY WITH MAUREEN DOWD: Who will replace Rooney, who has served long and
humorously for his network, when he leaves? Could
Maureen Dowd be persuaded to contribute a weekly endnote?
* * *
Lots of guys see her and lose control of at least two glands. ERIN BURNETT, "TODAY" HOST?: I'm suspicious of anyone who
gets a seal of approval from the odious Rush Limbaugh, but
there's no denying that lots of men lose control of their salivary
(and other) glands when they see Burnett. Plus she has
this rare ability to say memorable things about very
dry topics (there has never been a housing recession that
hasn't precipitated a general recession, for instance).
And she's postively carbonated. If I ran NBC News, I'd make
her a co-anchor of "Today" immediately.
* * *
A natural at being in charge."WASHINGTON WEEK" SUGGESTIONS: Gwen Ifill,
who should probably be credited with the fall of Trent Lott
(remember her show on the Friday before the Lott storm?), runs
a usually terrific program. But there should be more David Sanger,
Linda Greenhouse, Martha Raddatz (she gets better each time
out), Janine Zacharia (hey, a reporter who's actually not
afraid to be inspired!), Janet Hook, E.J. Dionne. Less Michael
Duffy, less Joan Biskupic, far less Gebe Martinez,
* * *
An appearance on Leno might even it up with Williams. BEST NIGHTLY NEWS ANCHOR: Charles Gibson remains
the best of the anchors by many measures but Brian Williams
is close behind. Funny thing is, Williams's surprisingly
humorous SNL turn has actually made Gibson appear a bit
over-serious by contrast. Can a Gibson appearance on Leno or
Letterman be far away?
* * *
Astonishingly awful.FIRE NANCY GRACE: Shrill and wrong-headed, Nancy
Grace shouldn't work another day in journalism until she admits
her failings in the biased coverage of the Duke Three case.
(Shouldn't there be a penalty for being wrong and a reward
for being right in tv journalism?)
* * *
Amazing grace.CAROLYN JOHNSON TO ABC: Still mostly unknown to
national audiences, this local anchor at the ABC affiliate here in
the Bay Area is brainy and refined and pretty. If I were
running ABC News, I'd bring her to the network by (initially)
having her do some on-air health and science
reports for "World News." (Her colleague, Dan Ashley, is
also impressive.)
* * *
KPIX's coverage of the Jill Carroll hostage crisis.AND FINALLY, LOCALLY: FIX PIX Though there's
a lot of talent at KPIX, the CBS affiliate in San Francisco,
the news division is almost comically error prone
(see photo).
And it also has a morning anchor who pronounces "fiscal"
physical. Improvement required.
But I digress. Paul
[photo credits: Couric pic from Glamour.com; Lauer from hbbc.com; kay from casieonline.com; Rooney from xyhd.tv; Burnett from imageshack.com; Ifill from forum2006.nd.edu; Gibson from nymag.com; Grace from cbc.ca; Johnson by Paul Iorio; KPIX by Paul Iorio.]___________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 15, 2007
If the 2008 presidential race were determined by a
tally of bumper stickers, Barack Obama would become
the Democratic nominee and Ron Paul would be the GOP
candidate -- at least in the San Francisco Bay Area!
Hillary bumper stickers are around but not very numerous,
Edwards stickers exist mostly in the form of leftover
Kerry/Edwards '04 stickers (and there is a surprising number
of 'em still around), and the Kucinich-bumper-sticker-epidemic
of early '07 has sort of faded like UFOs in the mist (to mix
a metaphor). But "Obama '08" can be seen on a lot of fenders in
the area.
Lately, both in San Francisco and Berkeley, Ron Paul
stickers and posters have been cropping up; I saw one
sticker on the UC Berkeley campus the other week and
a poster in the window of an apartment in north
San Francisco the other day.
Which leads to an intriguing question: suppose (and
this is very unlikely, admittedly) the nominees are
Hillary and Ron Paul (who wins in some populist Internet
uprising)? There would then be a Republican candidate
to the left of the Democratic nominee on the war, causing
traditional Dems to vote Paul and trad Republicans to
vote Hillary.
To complicate matters, I saw a chilling bumper sticker
for sale on a stand on Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley the
other day, and it read: "Nader '08." Of course,
in the above scenario, Nader would be in the bizarre
position of siphoning votes from the Republican candidate
this time. Go figure.
* * *
Now that Marvel Comics has put some of its superhero
comics online, can we expect some of the indies
to follow suit?
Specifically, wouldn't it be nice to have cyber-access to
Daniel Clowes's "Ghost World"?
Flipping through one of the few "Ghost World"s included
in Clowes's "Eightball" series in the 1990s, I was
reminded of the great powder blue twilight look of the
thing (the movie adaptation was amazing, but I keep
wondering whether it could have been filmed in blue/black
and white like the strip).
Anyway, for those who want to see "Ghost World" online,
here's a taste: the first page of the episode included in
"Eightball" #16:
But I digress. Paul
_________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 14, 2007
Isn't it interesting that Sonny Perdue waited
until the AccuWeather Five Day Forecast was
solid before doing his kooky pray-for-rain
thing on the Georgia state Capitol steps? As
the Church Lady might put it, "How convenient."
Days before the pray-in, meteorologists were
predicting thunderstorms by Thursday in the
Atlanta area.
So now it's inevitable that some cornball tv news
anchor will get on the air on Thursday and say, "And
finally on this broadcast: today it rained in
the Atlanta metro area. In fact, it was a soaker,
just what the parched peach state needed. And this
comes merely two days after the governor of Georgia
prayed for rain on the steps of the state
Capitol. [
Reganesque pause]Could
it be that someone up there likes him?"
Meanwhile, here are some other things Perdue might do to
create a rainstorm:
1. Avoid stepping on cracks in the sidewalk
2. Sacrifice a lamb and a goat, and co-mingle their blood with
parsley on top
For now, Perdue's imitation of the Taliban, which also believes
god and government should be one, will have to suffice.
But I digress. Paul
_____________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 12, 2007
First-hand report on the oil spill in San Francisco Bay"Just come on down to the shoreline/Where the water used to be." -- Steve Forbert Above: San Francisco Bay, yesterday afternoon. (photo by Paul Iorio)Yesterday afternoon I took an eight-mile hike
through San Francisco, mostly to see and
photograph the damage from the oil spill that
happened near the Bay Bridge last Wednesday.
Walking along the north shore, I saw some places
that were devastated by the slick and others that appeared
to be untouched, though a lot of the shoreline was
cordoned off with ribbons -- and "Danger" signs were
ubiquitous.
The worst I saw was just west of Fisherman's
Wharf, around what is called Aquatic Park, where
gooey black oil was coating some rocks (but not
others) as if someone had splattered black paint
on them. I saw several Gulls with oil on them, but
none completely covered with it; one had oil on the
left side of its neck and on the bottoms
of its feet
(see photo), the latter being
the most common condition among affected birds.
The contaminated Gulls and ducks appeared to be
notably less energetic and vibrant than the other
birds around them.
Bird stained by oil on the left side of its neck (and on its feet), on the north shoreline of San Francisco, November 11, 2007. (Photo by Paul Iorio)Elsewhere, I didn't see any boats in the Marina
blackened (unlike the ones that were reportedly
damaged in Sausalito) and didn't see much spillage
along some of the shore north of Crissy Field to
the Golden Gate Bridge area.
All told, the real horror is that one of the
greatest bays on the planet could have been
thoroughly ruined for many years if the
Cosco Busan's fuel tank had had an even slightly
larger rupture. One way to try to stop oil spills
in the future might be to drastically increase the
fines against companies involved, so that they
have an extreme financial incentive to make sure
they don't put a drunk in the captain's seat or sail
a ship that is even slightly faulty.
For now, the Coast Guard might do well to post new
signs that quote the old song by Steve Forbert:
"Oil, oil/Don't buy it at the station/You can
have it now for free/Just come on down to the
shoreline/Where the water used to be."
But I digress. Paul
Oil on the rocks near San Francisco's Aquatic Park, November 11, 2007. (photo by Paul Iorio.)_______________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 11, 2007
Remembering Norman MailerMy only first-hand encounter with Norman Mailer was
a distant one and happened in February 1989 in Manhattan,
at a PEN reading in support of Salman Rushdie, freshly
marked for death by the Ayatollah Khomeini. Mailer
spoke and also read from "The Satanic Verses," and
the event was interrupted by a bomb scare of some
sort -- though he was completely undaunted by that
fact and even a bit fired up by it.
From the podium, Mailer noted that telephoned bomb
threats only cost a quarter to make -- and then he
challenged the religious right of Islam: "Blow out your
farts," he roared, quoting Jean Genet.
It was a memorable moment -- virtually everyone in the audience
was emboldened by Mailer at a time when we needed to
be emboldened.
Sure, he had his personal flaws. He really couldn't be credibly
accused of modesty (one of his books was even titled
"Advertisements for Myself"), but then modesty is an overrated
virtue, much easier to achieve once you've already received
your due (hey, Muhammad Ali, who Mailer vividly wrote about,
made pure poetry out of immodesty).
Truthfulness is more important. So is insight. And his very
best work had plenty of both -- and the power to make readers
see the world in brand new ways.
But I digress. Paul
[photo of Mailer from ViewImages.com; photographer unknown.]______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 9, 2007
Since I've been focusing on the 1960s in the last
couple columns, here are two more Sixties-related
DVDs of note:
"It's all the same street," sings the Grateful Dead's
Bob Weir on a DVD called "Rock & Roll Goldmine." The
familiar lyric, of course, is from the Dead's "Truckin',"
which they perform live at an unidentified concert. But
the reason for watching is there's a wonderfully
spontaneous moment when Weir completely blanks out
as the song begins, missing the first verse and catching up
only during the "same street" line. It's revealing to see the
good-natured way both Jerry Garcia and Weir react to the
miscue -- and it's a nice live version of the song.
Also, now that the 25th anniversary of Michael Jackson's
"Thriller" is being celebrated, perhaps it's time for a
fresh re-evaluation of Jackson. A good place to start
is the footage of the Jackson Five's first performance,
in 1969, on "The Ed Sullivan Show" (available on disc three
of Sullivan's "Rock 'n' Roll Classics" series).
Sullivan is not just enthusiastic but in genuine awe
after watching 10-year-old Michael Jackson and his
brothers light up the place with "I Wonder Who's Loving
Her Now." And he applauds Diana Ross, who's in the audience,
for her gargantuan A&R find.
"The little fella in front is incredible," says Sullivan,
seeming almost dazed by the band.
Michael Jackson's performance was both dazzling and sad;
dazzling because you could see what an epochal talent
Jackson was; but sad because...well, he looked and acted
more like a pressured adult than he does today. At age 10,
he acted like a 40-year-old, and at age 40, he acted like a
10-year-old.
The expression on his face tells us everything we need
to know about the very adult pressures he was being saddled
with as a kid (show biz deadlines, contracts, complex cues,
etc.). Sure, we all danced to the sounds of Michael Jackson's
lost childhood -- sounded great, didn't it? -- but
many of us now have no sympathy for the freakish adult that
loss has produced.
But I digress. Paul
_______________________________________________
THE DAILY DIGRESSION
for November 8, 2007
Brokaw's "Boom!" and My Own Subjective Remembrances of the 1960sthe suburban kids of WWII vets came of age in the
1960s and looked something like this.
(photo by Paul Iorio)Now that Tom Brokaw is making the rounds and talking up
his new book, "Boom!," about the 1960s, here are a few of my own
subjective remembrances of the Sixties.
First, there was a huge difference between the older
baby boomers, born around 1940 like Brokaw (the
Elvis-to-Beatles generation) and the younger ones,
born around 1957, as I was (the Beatles-to-Led Zeppelin
generation).
When Brokaw was eight years old, Perry Como and
Peggy Lee were duking it out for dominance on the
music charts.
When I was eight years old, everyone was talking
about the rivalry between the Beatles and the Stones.
And the next year, kids my age were wondering
whether the Monkees would eclipse the Beatles.
Yes, there was a moment, just a moment, if you
were between eight and twelve years old in the fall
of 1966 (Brokaw was 26), just after the Beatles had
played their last-ever live gig but before the release
of "Strawberry Fields Forever," when it looked like
the Monkees, with the one-two punch of "Clarksville"
and "I'm a Believer," might actually overtake the
Beatles (that was the-talk-of-the-recess-yard when I
was in the 4th grade and still carrying around my
Monkees lunchbox -- talk that was poo-pooed by my hip
babysitter, who knew better and would always remove my
Herman's Hermits and Monkees and Beatles 45s from
the turntable and put on full-length LPs by the
Mamas and the Papas, the Beatles, the Supremes, the
Beatles, the Lovin' Spoonful, the Beatles, etc.).
I sometimes think the Sixties actually began when Khrushchev
made his famous space-age "flying" gesture with his hands
during the Kitchen Debate with Nixon in 1959 -- a sign
that neo-psychedelic perception had already
started to permeate the mainstream.
It's hard to say when the 1970s began, but I do know the
1960s ended for good when the Ramones released their
anti-hippie debut in 1976 (see photo below).
The last vestiges of the 1960s were blown away for good in 1976,
with the release of The Ramones's debut. (photo by Roberta Bayley)And, yes, it's true the '68 presidential election wasn't the
squeaker it has been made out to be (as I noted in The Daily
Digression of September 30, 2007, posted below, the combined
right wing vote -- Nixon's total plus Wallace's -- equalled
almost 60%). But that doesn't really say anything about
the conservatism of the era, because a big percentage of
anti-war Democrats -- put off by the party's unfair treatment
of Eugene McCarthy, depressed by the assassination of Robert
Kennedy and unenthusiastic about Hubert Humphrey, who they
considered a puppet of LBJ -- didn't vote.
My own remembrance of 1968: I was in the 6th grade and
unusually politically active for my age. (Below is my
6th grade class notebook cover, on which I wrote
"Julian Bond" for president. Bond had recently given
an impressive speech at the Democratic National Convention.)
Every weekend for a time in 1968, I'd write a new political
speech -- on the Abe Fortas controversy or on the ABM treaty or
on the latest bombing in Vietnam -- and deliver it on a garbage
can in the backyard of our suburban house; and my audience
was always exactly one person: my younger sister, who
would sit quietly and listen as brother Paul gave his speech.
I was for Julian Bond for President in the 6th grade. Taking my cue from the college protesters of the
day, I initiated and organized a cafeteria boycott in
the 6th grade to protest a new rule that said students
were not allowed to go to the bathroom without
being accompanied by someone else (in
order to prevent graffiti).
The night before the boycott, I phoned almost everybody in
the sixth grade class at Riverhills Elementary School
in Temple Terrace, Florida, and asked them to bring
their own lunches and to boycott the school's cafeteria
food that week. Then I enlisted my younger sister
and had her call her own friends in the 4th grade
to ask them to join in, too.
Much to my surprise, my boycott was a massive success.
Nearly everybody brought their own lunches that week,
and the school had mountains of uneaten beans and rice
and Salisbury Steaks left over at the end of each day.
School officials were pissed. When they found out
I was the person behind the cafeteria boycott, I was
called in by the principal, who sounded like a George
Wallace supporter as she gave me a stern lecture
condemning the rebelliousness of Today's Youth.
I was eleven years old and was already seeing the
downside of being the Mark Rudd/Abbie Hoffman of
Riverhills Elementary!
The next year, I attended a progressive private
school where I was happy to have been given an outlet
for my political ideas: a newspaper called The Weekly
Wong. My first articles for the paper, in 1969, were
an anti-Nixon satire called "I Dreamed I Was Richard
Nixon" and an anti-war editorial (both are
posted below).
Satirizing Nixon, when I was 12 (aw, c'mon -- what d'ya expect? I was barely out of elementary school!!).Opposing the Vietnam War, at age 12.By 1969, when I was 12, I had already gone beyond student
politics to community activism, and some of it was even
covered by the main newspaper of my hometown at the time, The
Tampa Tribune (there was an article in the Tribune in '69
about my anti-war fundraising and another article in '73 or '74
quoting me about an Impeach Nixon rally I had helped to organize).
But my political outbursts had actually started
much earlier, at age seven, in 1964, when I wrote this
scathing "editorial" about the presidential race
(no, I wasn't a Goldwater Girl!):
scathing editorial I wrote at age 7.And this one:
an endorsement, at age 7.[Incidentally, my political activism happened almost exclusively
between the ages of 10 and 17; since age 18, I've not been
politically active. (I've taken a different direction and gone on to
write and report for almost all the major newspapers in the U.S. and for
several magazines.) Interesting that I was extremely involved in
politics in childhood but am not today, in contrast to my sister, who
was not very active in politics in childhood but is extremely involved
in it today.]On a day-to-day level, what did the 1960s really look and feel
like in America? To be honest: like the suburban landscape
portrayed in the first part of the movie "Apollo 13," which
inadvertently captures the co-existence of both the Silent
Majority and the Baby Boomers. (And, yes, the break-up of
the Beatles was truly that traumatic if you were of a
certain age!) Now that I think of it, even more accurate
was the Sixties suburbia of Oliver Stone's "Born on the 4th
of July."
Sixties movies (and feminism) arguably began right here,
with Michelangelo Antonioni's "L'Avventura,"
which resonates even today (David Chase's
open-ended "Sopranos" finale echoes the ending
of the film). But I digress. Paul
__________________
ALL DAILY DIGRESSIONS PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 6, 2007, ARE AVAILABLE AT
WWW.DAILYDIGRESSIONARCHIVE.BLOGSPOT.COM.