A Different Environment

Now it's time to go to the woods for a few days...

The Flaming Lips at Red Rocks

I've always had a soft spot for The Flaming Lips. They hail from Oklahoma City (my hometown), and I'm just a couple of years older than lead Lip Wayne Coyne. While I was growing up on the west side suburbs, Wayne and his family were living around the NW 10th and Pennslyvania area of OKC. And while I was learning to play guitar around the age of 13, just a couple of years later, Wayne and his brothers were doing the same thing.

But, unlike nearly all the wanna-be musicians I knew (including me), Wayne stuck to his dream of becoming a rock star. It took him a while - something like fifteen years of hard work, no money, keeping that assistant manager's job at Long John Silver's for a long time - but the release of "The Soft Bulletin" and "Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots" turned The Flaming Lips into bona-fide international rock stars.

Their sound is a cool mashup of bubblegum, heavy metal, electro-pop, sixties outer space soundtracks and lounge-core crooning. But the songs are incisive, artful, painfully honest and laugh-out-loud funny - usually all in the same tune. Lead singer Wayne Coyne's wavering relationship to the melodies anchors the band's futuristic, often pounding sound with a coy, frail humanity.

(Fight Test, All We Have Is Now, Race For The Prize, A Spoonful Weighs A Ton, Do You Realize? - all great songs that belong in some sort of songwriter's hall of fame!)

Sunday's show at the legendary Red Rocks Ampitheater was a tightly focused sensory onslaught that touched on all the Lips' musical strengths, from clanging pop metal to spacey instrumentals to unabashedly heartfelt sing-alongs. Accompanying the music was their trademark stage/light show, complete with tons of confetti, bullhorns spewing smoke, giant balloons, the human hamster ball and the usual brace of completely amateur, crazily costumed stage dancers.

You can check out multiple videos shot from the audience on You Tube. But better yet, take in a show - there is nothing out there like a Flaming Lips concert.

(I took some photos - a few of them are at the top - but gave up after a while and just enjoyed the circus! A more in depth review from yours truly is available here: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll)

Honduran Political Song For Michael Jackson To Sing

The old Minutemen punk-rock classic "Political Song For Michael Jackson To Sing" will have to be revised - here's a geo-political question to ask while the late Mr. Jackson is getting buried next week: what ever happened in that Honduras coup? Remember? The story that got buried in the USA when MJ conveniently died?

New articles in the last week take interesting views. The Associated Press issued a story on leftist/progressive leaders in Latin America going on heightened alert following the seemingly-successful ouster of the democratically elected Honduran president Manuel Zelaya. And the USA - the biggest military, trade and aid player in Latin America - is never mentioned. Hmmm....

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/19/ap/latinamerica/main5252359.shtml

And here is an opinion piece from The Guardian UK on the Honduran overthrow - and how the US government's relative inaction amounts to an approval of the military takeover. From the article:

" A clue...given by the (US) state department's Phillip Crowley, who explained that the coup should be a "lesson" to Zelaya for regarding revolutionary Venezuela as a model for the region."

So the Administration likes democracy as long as it's following the right guidelines - and if not, we'll take the generals supported by the rich men, thanks!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/12/honduras-coup-democracy-barack-obama

Given the very recent revelation (through declassified documents) of President Nixon working with the military dictators of Brazil to assist the overthrow of the elected Chilean government in 1972, and remembering the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s (which saw Honduras emerge as the pre-eminent US military home base in Latin America), the current Honduran situation should not be a surprise.

The King of Pop once sang that it doesn't matter if you're black or white. For the new Political Song For Michael Jackson To Sing, let's change that to: doesn't matter if you're a Republican government or a Democratic one - when it comes to Latin America, Uncle Sam prefers ultra-conservative military regimes to wayward, progressive elected ones.

(See D. Boon and Minutemen perform "Political Song For Michael Jackson To Sing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2-CgCyh5YM)

Kucinich: Insurance Care!

You've gotta be a tough traveler to hang with these guys - they go down the bumpiest roads.


Representative Dennis Kucinich, one of just a handful of heroes in Congress, on "Health Care Wanted: Dead Or Alive." Cogent, honest analysis and a call for single payer/Medicare-for-all health care.

"The Administration plan requires that everyone must have health insurance, so it is delivering tens of millions of new "customers" to the insurance companies. Health care? Not really. Insurance care! Absolutely. Cost controls? No chance."


Essential reading at: http://kucinich.us/index.php

Pocketful Of Miracles?

I've lately been engaged in an energetic and interesting email dialogue with several friends, acquaintances and others concerning aspects of the health care "reform" proposals and debate. In the course of the discussion, other topics surfaced, including civil rights loss / domestic surveillance and the Obama administration.

One correspondent - a person with strong progressive leanings - penned a post reminding everyone that President Obama is "human" and not the "second coming," both very worthwhile points. The writer touched on the many challenging issues the current administration inherited from the Bush regime. Then things got interesting.

It was asserted that Congress should not take up time with "witch hunts" and chasing down potential/former torturers in the government employ. Keeping info on those potential perps and accomplices still around in Washington is valuable, and Obama can use it to help "sell" health care "reform." Revealing the President's file cabinet full of undisclosed and damaging info on his Republican opponents will convince (strong-arm) them into finally capitulating on health care. And then the writer said: "I think he has a bunch of stuff in his pocket that one after another will come out to show the opposition it will be worse to fight him on the straightforward stuff."

A pocketful of miracles? The post got me thinking, and that's why we started a blog...to think kind of out loud. Here's my response:

Yes, the President is human. You are absolutely correct that he is not the “second coming” and that is an important thing for his supporters to recognize.

Mr. Obama was also a well-marketed product. And despite the 2008 advertising claims about “change,” he has continued the major programs of the Bush Administration – the ones that account for the majority of the federal budget. War and military expansion, continued domestic surveillance practices and covert international prisons are the highlights there. Yes, he inherited some issues, but is this continuation of many of the policies of 2003 – 2008 even disputable? What is the difference between Bush and Obama on these counts?
(see details: http://songofhiram.blogspot.com/2009/08/just-few-billion-every-year-once.html)

A couple of your comments got me thinking. I’m not sure I understand “witch hunts.” If laws were broken in the Bush White House concerning surveillance and torture – and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that is the case – what does it say about our “nation of laws” that the next President wants to sweep it under the rug? The executive branch is charged with enforcing the law – what’s more important than enforcing the laws pertaining to national government?

The vision of a carrot and stick - secret files that might be used to influence/threaten legislators – is a Cheney strategy, although it is a time-honored political tactic. And not a pretty one, as it plays on people’s fears, secretive nature and back-room thumbscrews. Come to think of it, those are classic empire-building tools.

Finally, surmising that the President has a “bunch of stuff in his pocket” that is going to reveal his true liberal/progressive nature is what another writer called “faith-based” thinking, and belies your earlier observation on his humanity. The Obama administration has already taken on all the “straightforward stuff”, the big-ticket budget items – see above – and now they offer the last agenda item, a flimsy health care reform (complete with privately negotiated deals with pharma/insurance companies: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insure.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss ).

So what’s left? Will his administration suddenly – we don’t know the time – reverse course on Afghanistan, secrecy protocols, investigations and the rest? Mr. Obama is okay continuing and increasing the killing in the Middle East while waiting to play his trump cards at home?

Believe your eyes. What is happening in all these arenas – including ignoring Medicare-for-all - is approved by the President. This is who he is.

I am glad you are in favor of many progressive changes proposed for the USA, and I know you speak out for them. For me, it’s important to recognize this Administration for its acts, not its campaign rhetoric or its marketing genius or its potential for magic tricks. By their actions, I’m having a hard time distinguishing Mr. Obama and most Democrats from George Bush and the Republicans.

It's Time To Take A Deep Breath...

...and just smell the flowers...

The President Takes On Congressional Liberals

In 2003, Mr. Obama proclaimed that a single payer health care system was the best option for America. In 2009, he declares that even a watered-down "public option" government program is just a "sliver" in the overall health care reform effort. And progressives don't like the about face.

What happened to change his mind so drastically in six years? No country on the planet that ever installed a single-payer system has ever dismantled it, and no country on the planet has ever adopted the "uniquely American" health care model, so it couldn't be that.

What changed Mr. Obama's stand?

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-picks-public-option-fight-with-liberals-2009-08-16.html

Who Will Congress Listen To On Health Care Reform?

So who will Congress listen to when it comes to health care reform? The millions of Americans who want to talk about Medicare-For-All, or the combined lobbyists representing the pharmaceutical/health insurance/hospital corporations?

Average citizens can pick up a phone, write a letter or email, or attend a town hall meeting. The health care industries have spent nearly half-a-billion dollars in the first six months of 2009 to impress their views on Congress.

"That’s six lobbyists for each of the 535 members of the House and Senate, according to Senate records, and three times the number of people registered to lobby on defense. More than 1,500 organizations have health-care lobbyists, and about three more are signing up each day. Every one of the 10 biggest lobbying firms by revenue is involved in an effort that could affect 17 percent of the U.S. economy.

These groups spent $263.4 million on lobbying during the first six months of 2009, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group, more than any other industry. They spent $241.4 million during the same period of 2008. Drugmakers alone spent $134.5 million, 64 percent more than the next biggest spenders, oil and gas companies."


Who does it look like our legislators are paying closer attention to - citizens or corporations? What's your take?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aqMce51JoZWw

Letter to the Senators/Representative

Text of a letter I sent today to my Congressional representatives regarding health care reform. Phone calls are good, too.

SUBJECT: "Respect For Life"

Senator Udall/Bennett/Rep. Perlmutter:

The public "debate" concerning health care reform, the words of the president and the reporting by the media must baffle the rest of the planet. Most countries did the right thing for their citizens decades ago.

There is only one true health care reform bill on the Senate/House docket today: The American Health Security Act of 2009/H.R. 676. Let's cut out the insurance companies and offer every American basic health care. Let's set up a system modeled on the way civilized governments around the planet administer this public service.

I know that's a lot to ask of the Congress, whose values reflect some core American beliefs: creating an economic/military global empire is good, having the biggest and most weapons is good, selling weapons to others is good, and charging people to make a profit on their health issues is good.

Looks like the connecting thread there is "no respect for life."

The Congress and President Obama have an opportunity to craft, sell and implement a true reform that would speak to the much more Christian ideal of "love thy neighbor" and being a good "brother's keeper": government-run, non-profit health care for every American.

Just who do you and your colleagues work for? Millions of American citizens in favor of Medicare-for-all, or an insurance industry who contributes millions to political campaigns and lobbying? Who do you work for, Mr. Udall/Bennett/Perlmutter?

K. Dennis
Arvada, CO

Kucinich Predicts Retreat On Health Care Reform

http://www.wcpn.org/WCPN/news/27450

Nader Was Right

"We owe Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and the Green Party an apology. They were right. If a few million of us had had the temerity to stand behind our ideals rather than our illusions and the empty slogans peddled by the Obama campaign, we would have a platform. We forgot that social reform never comes from accommodating the power structure but from frightening it. "

I voted for Mr. Nader for President in 2008 and 2004, and had the privilege of hearing him speak twice. The second time, in October 2008 with the Obama campaign in the driver's seat, his talk included some of the topics he touches on in this interview.

Chris Hedges interviews Mr. Nader on why the Progessive/Liberal movement cannot count on the Democratic Party - their chance to exercise influence was lost when they rapturously embraced Obama with no questions asked:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090810_nader_was_right_liberals_are_going_nowhere_with_obama/

Maybe The President Should Stick To The Teleprompter

From some clips we've seen on the news, on other blogs and web sites, etc, it's apparent that the President got some folks riled, some disturbed, and others scratching their collective heads at the conclusion of his recent "town hall" meeting.

One writer surmised that the President should stick to the scripts, and pondered the fact that just five years ago, Mr. Obama was a part-time legislator in the Illinois State House.

Here's a press release from a surgeon's group seeking to correct some of the President's statements (mis-statements?) on health care:
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-12-2009/0005076714&EDATE

When I Find Myself In Times Of Trouble...

When I find myself in times of trouble - I stop and reflect.

In this situation, what would Godzilla do?

Growing the Empire

The American empire continues to expand. Here's The Washington Post report on the dollar costs of our adventures in creating allies, or "nation-building" in Afghanistan: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/08/AR2009080802283.html?hpid=topnews

Mr. Obama's candidacy was generally regarded as the "stop the wars/peace" faction. Yet his expansion plans for the attempt to finally subjugate Afghanistan were plainly spelled out in his website campaign site/platform. In the times I saw him on television during 2008, he always confirmed that stance. The majority of American voters elected the "peace" president: who promised more killing, more long term deployments, more dollars for weapons.

Some congressman fret that Afghanistan has proven chronically unmanageable and a sinkhole for other "liberators" in the past century. But most of Congress have enthusiastically voted for ever-expanding military budgets and seem prepared to run this foreign government overhaul like a business - but with an improved model.

Private contractors are getting hired, although there is one "help wanted" ad according to The Post. The government is looking for a company "to bring together Afghan economic, social, legal and political groups to help build the country's infrastructure." The kind of stuff State Departments used to do. Yes, capitalism is alive and well - but it still needs the government to supply the troops riding patrols, engaging in remote firefights, getting blown up by mines, dying.

Afghanistan must be crossed by oil/gas pipelines. And those pipelines belong to companies who are not interested in a future where an unfriendly government could nationalize the business. So if it takes decades to guarantee business safety, so be it. At least - until the subjugation of Afghanistan is complete - there will be lots of friendly guns around.

The Great American Health Care Insurance Debate - Four Questions

The country is currently involved in the Great American Health Care Insurance Debate (or should that be "Uniquely American"?). And it's a good thing - finally, folks are getting upset enough to yell at their congressional representatives, which is always a good thing. There's plenty to talk about.

But the debate revolves around the wrong approach to health care reform. The talks I've heard are about creating more insurance profits, via required enrollments and a new, government-run insurance company. What does that have to do with improving health care quality or expanding the access to everyone?

The only bill before Congress that makes sense to me is H.R. 676, which calls for government-run health care. No more insurance bureaucracies. There are plenty of international models to choose from that seem to work. Ongoing international health emergencies and declining quality of health resulting from the decades-old single-payer/government-run approach in these nations does not exist.

Yet H.R. 676, creating a government-administered single-payer system, is being ignored and/or pooh-poohed by the Democratic Party, the Obama Administration, and most of the mainstream media.

My view: it is unethical to turn the citizen's health options and choices into a profit center for a few major corporations. The welfare of the citizens is the welfare of the nation. What does it say about our "uniquely American" values that we are willing to allow life-altering health decisions to be determined, in large part, by the amount of dollars we can afford for insurance?

If you don't have enough money, you can always die? The Great American Health Care Insurance Debate is about preserving a business whose profits rely on providing the least amount of services for the most amount of money it can charge.

Surely it's just a matter of education. Unfortunately, in the Great American Health Care Insurance Debate, the facts and results of years of international single-payer style programs around the world seem to count for nothing. No need to look past our own borders - we've got a good system, it just needs refinement! The reality that the USA is about the only nation on the planet driving its citizens into health-care related bankruptcies is a concept other countries cannot understand. That's how advanced our system really is - no one else uses it because it baffles them.

Since actual performance data is disregarded, that means citizens must get their info from other sources - like politicians and activist groups (forget using television news-tainment - the major health care players all buy ads there). But there's the rub.

The health care industry is spending hundreds of millions in direct congressional lobbying right now. Who do you think is getting heard by the Congress, the many voters or the few people with millions in political contributions? And many of the netroots groups that have sprung up to decry any reform have confirmed links to insurance/hospital companies. Seems like a one-sided information stream.

Industry-sponsored groups are not unethical; but some of these activists for the status quo are urging followers to practice locally what the television and talk radio spheres have engaged in for years: (sing like Groucho Marx) "Whatever you're for, I'm against it!" Simple, and simple-minded, naysaying as its being practiced can effectively curtail discussion and learning.

Aiding and abetting this purposeful obfuscation are our elected legislators. There seems to be little effort to jointly craft health care reforms that would help all citizens. There seems to be maximum efforts expended to use this major initiative as:
- A political club to swing at the opponent - both Republicans and Democrats alike. It's the latest skirmish line in the ongoing battle: one wing holds the power while the other wing fights to get it back. Keep saying outrageous things, it's part of the strategy!
- A diversion to keep the discussion away from the single-payer model used by most of the rest of the planet. Keep those massive political contributions from that sector rolling in!

Apparently it's a lot to ask Americans to take the time to reflect on the right thing to do, engage in research, and have rational discussions with their friends, relatives, legislators about real health care reform. There are no role models here. Our politicians don't do it, the majority of radio and television talking heads don't do it, and apparently some activists instruct their adherents not to do it.

That's a reality that must change if meaningful and effective reform is to occur. I'm glad folks are talking; now let's talk about facts.

These are the questions I keep asking, but I haven't gotten any answers:

Why is the current talk focused on creating more insurance entities and not improving the quality of health care and providing access to all?

Why is the health-care model used in other industrialized countries around the planet purposely ignored/denigrated by the government and the mainstream media?

Why would we continue to preserve the health insurance business, whose profit is determined by rationing life-impacting health services and charging financially back-breaking rates when it can?

Why are we afraid of trading in a broken system for one that provides betterment for all citizens in this most important of all issues, the physical health of the United States?

The Newest Book from Mark Twain

Yes, he's been dead since 1910, but that has not stopped the premiere American man of letters, Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain, from issuing a new book of short pieces: "Who Is Mark Twain?" If you like comedy, you've got to check this book out!

Collected from Twain's "stacks of literary remains", the book contains previously unpublished writings - some finished, some unfinished, all worthwhile. Allow me to quote some lines that made me laugh out loud and/or nod approvingly:

From "Happy Memories of the Dental Chair" - describing a recommended dentist: "...he had the calm, possessed, surgical look of a man who could endure pain in another person."

From "The Privilege of the Grave": "As an active privilege it (free speech) ranks with the privilege of committing murder: we may exercise it if we are willing to take the consequences."

From "Frank Fuller and My First New York Lecture" - after listing a number of dignitaries and celebrities who could not attend his first lecture, including General Ulysses Grant, Horace Greeley, Admiral Farragut, the Prince of Wales, the mayor of Buffalo: "Boss Tweed...a number of men from Sing Sing...these came. I do not know their names, but they were all public men and served the state."

From "Conversations With Satan" - Twain meets the Devil in Vienna, and offers him some choice pipe tobacco: "He liked it...he sent up a cloud of fragrant smoke, and said admiringly 'It is good; very, very good; burns freely and smells like a heretic."

Highly recommended.

Two Torturous Tales

Investigating and analyzing the role of torture as a legitimate tool of a democratic society has taken different paths in the USA and the UK - apparently the Bush and Blair governments collaborated on many aspects of the practice on many occasions since 2003.

In the USA, the President has openly admitted that some malicious "enhanced interrogation techniques" were utilized, but all that is history now. The President said "stop that!", so of course torture has ceased. In accordance with his forward looking attitude, Mr. Obama's government has decided not go mucking around in the past to discover who ordered what and when. And for good measure, the government pardoned all CIA involvement even before it was fully identified and proven. Shades of Gerald Ford.

In the UK, the government is pretty steadfastly denying any complicity in "war on terror" torture. Well, maybe some renditioned detainees were flown over the country, and perhaps a couple of British citizens were arrested and taken to a third country to be interrogated. But that's all really, you can trust us. Fortunately, intelligence and war investigation committees in Parliament keep releasing reports detailing the obstruction and refusal to answer questions on the part of the government, and the papers keep reporting it. Sooner or later, the British government will have to answer to the people's representatives in Parliament.

If only the US Congress had the guts to ask the same questions, and many more. Mr. Obama does not seem to realize that he would be hailed as a hero if he would push to expose the past, identify the transgressors and make the future honorable. So far, the President is no hero. The sad truth is the occupations and wars in Iraq & Afghanistan are major, major money makers for many corporations, companies who have most of Congress bought and paid for. Same as it ever was? Keep looking forward!

Here's a story on the latest Parliament committee report on the UK government's role in illegal extraditions, renditions, and torture.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5726A620090803

Purloining the People's Property

Ralph Nader August 4, 2009 Purloining the People's Property

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article23192.htm