Thursday Open Thread: My Blogging Hiatus

This past week has been the longest hiatus from blogging I've taken in 11 years. But, sometimes real life intervenes and puts blogging in its place, forcing us to remember that blogging is a hobby, not a business, and it's not the top priority. For me, this is one of those times.

Usually I can easily blog despite work commitments -- I just trade off watching TV at night. But this week (and next) my time is being consumed by matters I had no reason to anticipate and I have no time for blogging or TV. I just found out I have to move from my home -- in two weeks. [More...]

The last time I moved was in 2008. In 2006, the time before that, I wrote a short piece about it here. I have a terrific landlord who built the house I live in and several more in Denver. But the last half dozen homes he built, in varied parts of Denver, came up against the real estate crash, so instead of selling them as he intended, he rented them. He's been great with me, and my lease doesn't expire until Feb. 2014. Until this past weekend, I had no reason to believe anything was changing. He's always said I'm his best tenant ever. But he also got a shock last week when the bank holding his construction loan on the property told him no more extensions, he has to pay it off by January, or lose the home. Which means, he has to start selling it now.

That's the worst part of renting: You have a 2,3, or 5 year lease from a very solvent landlord, and in the middle of the term, he tells you he is so sorry, but he will lose the property unless he can sell in the next months. My last three moves have been caused by my various landlords' imminent need to sell the property or else face foreclosure.

My house is fairly big -- 3,000 sq. feet-- and it's filled with the possessions I've accumulated over the decades, and those of my parents (it took me four years to finally clear out their storage unit and I haven't gotten around to valuing or distributing the stuff yet.)

So, since Friday nite, I've been trying to find another place to live. I'll never get 3,000 sq ft again in this upturn market. The same rent I pay now will get 1/2 of that. My generous landlord has made it well worth my while to go nicely in the next two weeks. Which means I have to go through all the stuff here and decide what comes with me to the new place and what won't fit. At least 1500 square feet of my parents and my possessions can't make the cut. (I'm not a fan of storage units.)

There's also a lot of documents that have to be drafted, beginning with his generous proposal for me to leave now, months before my lease is up. Since I'm a lawyer and he's not, I have to draw up our contractual arrangement. And I have to find a new home, which usually is a three month undertaking, but this time, I have just a few weeks. So my days are now split between my day job and contacting realtors, hoping to find a suitable place.

For the past week, and probably next week, I will be consumed with looking at real estate ads for rentals (I have no interest in buying), visiting prospective homes/condos, crunching numbers and deciding where to move. Since I can't take a hiatus from work, every free waking hour is spent immersed in this project, leaving no time to blog.

After I find a place, I have to deal with the phone company and the cable company. I have to be home while a bunch of movers come to give me estimates, Some may be $2,500.00 for a mile move while others are $3,000 plus. And since I really would like to avoid having to rent a storage unit, I have to go through everything that's here and decide what to give to Good Will and leave for 1-800-Got Junk. I just don't have the time to spend to sell things on EBay.

Then there's Tax Day, which for me is October 15. Getting the numbers to the accountant is a huge undertaking that normally takes me a full week. I now have to do it before I move. I just can't see how I will have time to read news and blog during this period.

Moving also means buying new things, since no two houses are the same. So once I find a place, I will have to spend time shopping (another activity I'm not fond of) for things the new house will need to feel like home.

My plan for now is to forget about blogging until I'm moved, sometime in October, and just keep open threads up in the meantime. My next phase of blogging is likely to be when I've moved into my new home, wherever that may be.

My birthday is Saturday, and I think it will be one of those years where I just pretend it's not happening. I'm not going to ask for donations (even though they would be welcome) since I'm not providing anything in return right now.

Anyway, since I've never gone so many days in a row without blogging, I thought I'd let readers know the reason for my absence, and that it's temporary. Now you do.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome, including suggestions for making moving less stressful.

< Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread | Friday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Can you think of anyone (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Edger on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:48:20 AM EST
    who might be interested in buying a well maintained rental property that has a good current tenant who'd like to stay?

    Not sure why you don't want to own (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:26:47 PM EST
    Have you fully considered buying the house you're in now, yourself? Or maybe TL Kid would like to own a rental property.

    Arrgh. Good luck. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by scribe on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:35:20 AM EST
    I've been through the "having to move" and "having to clean out", when I left my previous home of almost 20 years.  I do not envy you one bit.  

    If it's any consolation, at least you can afford movers.  I had to do it without their assistance and didn't even bother asking friends to help - everyone's schedule is always full when it comes time to help someone moving.  I was trying to complete some projects at the time as well.  The last two days I worked a full day and then moved myself out 22 hours straight.  I'm forever grateful to a friend who loaned me some storage space in his business (in an old warehouse building) where I could store my stuff until I found a new place.

    All that said, given the time constraints you're facing I'd recommend you try to economize on the time you spend on moving by quickly selecting that which you absolutely need, segregating that, and then boxing the rest for storage.  I understand you don't like storage units, but two weeks is too short a time to be going through 3000 sf of stuff and all the rest you describe while working full-time.  You can always go through it later, one box at a time.

    Don't worry about us! (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by fiver on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:57:37 AM EST
    We'll be waiting! Hope everything works out for the best.

    Why Scandanavian Prisons are Superior (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Dadler on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:20:49 AM EST
    Enlightening. Which, sadly, isn't the forte of the U.S. when it comes to crime and punishment.

    LINK from The Atlantic.

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 139 (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Dadler on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:09:21 AM EST
    Corruption Science... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:19:06 AM EST
    talk about a growth sector.

    1 win away from a return trip to the North Queens NALC Softball championship, took down Game 1 of the Semis 9-4 last night.  Your boy went 2-3 with a run scored and started not one but two 1-6-3 double plays.  My ERA is nasty...making it rain with stupid backspin Coach D! ;)


    Is it slow pitch or high pitch? (none / 0) (#107)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:48 AM EST
    That sh*t where you have to pitch it at least ten feet in the air or whatever is tough.

    And if you're getting people out in regular slow pitch, damn, you must be a savant.

    Peace, my man.


    Regular slow pitch... (none / 0) (#108)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:14:28 PM EST
    the rule is 6-12' arc, below or above the ump calls "illegal" and it's a ball unless the batter swings.  But the umps aren't prone to calling the ones over 12' illegal, so I take liberties.

    We've got some dudes who flash real good leather, they make me look good.  And I'm like a cat on the mound;)


    Do the Mets know of your prowess? (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:24:49 PM EST
    Gotta take advantage (none / 0) (#117)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:08:19 PM EST
    In my experience, and I was a pretty decent rec league softball player, if the blue is gonna give you some leeway, you take until they tell you it's too far. Boy how I loved those games back in the day. With my bum leg and foot, for reasons relating specifically to the baseball/softball swing, it just don't work no more. Took my kid to the batting cages a few years back and collapsed like a ragdoll when I took my cut. Pitiful.

    The honky golf-swing, however, I'm good. Now I just have to bust out my sticks and stroke 'em.

    P.S.) I feel like watching BARFLY.


    Golf? (none / 0) (#123)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:04:24 PM EST
    Say it ain't so Joe! (j/k)

    I share George Carlin's opinion of golf...

    I've got just the place for low-cost housing. I have solved this problem. I know where we can build housing for the homeless: golf courses! It's perfect! Just what we need. Plenty of good land, in nice neighborhoods, land that is currently being wasted on a meaningless, mindless activity engaged in primarily by white, well-to-do male businessmen who use the game to get together to make deals to carve this country up a little finer amongst themselves. I am getting tired, really getting tired, of these golfing c*cks*ckers in their green pants, and their yellow pants, and their orange pants, and their precious little hats and their cute little golf carts! It is time to reclaim the golf courses from the wealthy and turn them over to the homeless! Golfing is a arrogant, elitist game which takes up entirely too much room in this country. Too much room' in this country!

    Wow, Jeralyn, That's so stressful. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:54:48 PM EST
    I can commiserate...two years ago my landlord's girlfriend moved to Seattle and insisted he buy her a big new house, something he could not afford to do in a DOWN market unless he sold both his house and my rental house. He loved having me as his tenant, and only raised rent on me once in six years. He gave me more time than you're getting to move, but my whole life was monopolized by searching. I didn't have to do taxes in the middle of it...I looked at 42 places in a six-week period and the prices in Seattle had become outrageous in the time I'd been getting my sweetheart deal from him. It sucked! Also had to deal with incompetent, creepy contractors tearing up the roof above my head and doing other work while I was still living in it.

    I'd reiterate scribe's last paragraph in his first comment. In lieu of that, get help from friends and the TL kid! My best friend packed up my whole kitchen for me. You have too much stuff to take care of to do it all alone. Separate out all the nostalgic stuff you'd never part with--family photos, heirlooms, etc.--but be merciless on everything else. If you haven't worn it it three years, get rid of it...I had consignment boxes for the upscale clothes, and lots of donate boxes for Goodwill for the rest. Same with cooking equipment...you don't need or even use all you have, so let a friend ebay some if it for you. Donate books to the library.

    Sounds like the biggest hurdle is dealing with all the documents, doing the taxes, and creating the contract btw you and the landlord. Maybe that's something you don't want others involved in. But even there, if there's something you can farm out to someone else, do.

    It seems it might be easier to buy the house from your landlord than to go through all this, but you obviously have your reasons for not wanting to do that, so take heart on one thing: the rental market is not as crazy/competitive in October as in August or September. You won't get the square footage you're used to, and you might not even get the neighborhood you want, but you know what your must-haves are.

    All I can do is wish you luck. You'll find something and get it done. And the day you arrive in your new place, you'll do like Scott did...collapse on the couch with a beer and the TV and declare victory!

    Anybody else getting... (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:09:15 PM EST
    a "Do you want to open or save analytics.js from a.sitemeter.com?" pop-up when loading a TL page?  Never seen that one before, sounds NSA-ish.

    I'm not getting that pop-up (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:17:33 PM EST
    but it took a number of tries before I could successfully post my first comment on this thread. (in Safari). Also, IE is, apparently, prone to major bug attacks right now, and Microsoft has not yet come up with all the fixes (surprise!) so if you're using that browser it could be very hinky.

    On the other hand, I suspect NSA involvement in every single thing I do online, whether there's evidence for that suspicion or not.


    On IE... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:21:39 PM EST
    just kidding about the NSA, they wouldn't announce their presence, though it is assumed.

    "analytics.js" just sounds creepy...I did not ask to be analyzed;)


    In ten years they'll consider you boring (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:47:03 PM EST
    and won't bother. Of course, by then, all our biometrics info will be catalogued in that building in Utah.  

    Spend all your free time gardening and they'll quit analyzing you! Speaking of which, now's the time to start planting those fall veges and greens, if you're still interested. Swiss chard, mustard greens, beets, broccoli, kale, pac choi, spinach, cauliflower, and cabbage can all go in. And don't forget about planting garlic!


    In the spring I hope... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:53:25 PM EST
    to start growing a little grub...fall is too busy with post office softball and rec-league football seasons coinciding, plus I'm in the market for extra work and/or a second job...but I'll be hitting you guys up for pointers come springtime, see if I can turn these blackthumbs green with the TL Gardening Society's gracious assistance.

    .js is Java, Probably a Script Error (none / 0) (#42)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:57:05 PM EST
    And while I have had any issues here, I have had a ton of Java errors lately.  I usually disable it until an update comes along, but I have no idea what the actual problem is.

    ... this would probably be a really good time for us to move our cache of heavy weaponry from that secret underground munitions bunker on Whidbey Isla-- D'OH!!! Me and my big mouth!



    YEs (none / 0) (#54)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:40:28 PM EST
    Glad you said something - I thought I was getting a virus from somewhere!

    Yeah, I'm getting it too (none / 0) (#74)
    by NYShooter on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:16:59 AM EST
    and, if you google for help on this annoyance you'll find thousands of others are complaining also. Then a Microsoft Tech comes on and gives an insufferably long explanation of why they added this nightmare into their browser, and an equally long explanation on how to get rid of it. Naturally, the next ten thousand posts respond by telling this guy he's full of crap, and nothing they try gets rid of this immovable pest.

    As of right now, I've tried everything, and nothing works.

    The only thing that helps a little bit is saying, "Have I told you how much I hate Bill Gates, and Micreosoft?" over and over again.


    Take a "rest break" to recharge, (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by christinep on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:12:35 PM EST
    with a piece of birthday cake or other short treat.

    BTW, there are some fine looking places -- smaller houses, condos in West Washington Park neighborhood and the area stretching east/southeast from Broadway these days-- that appear to be lease situations. I've noticed some condo/townhome growth in Highland Park and Sloan's Lake area too.  

    Much luck to you in your search, Jeralyn.

    Ready For Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CoralGables on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:09:33 PM EST
    Free great movie (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:07:55 PM EST
    ... than the trashy melodramas which air daily on cable TV's Lifetime Movie Network, it's the real-life trashy melodramas that are undoubtedly LMN's siren call. And when it comes to trashy public melodrama, there's no corruption quite like the corruption that can exist in small towns and suburbs.

    I think that's because when breaches of public trust occur in socially incestuous places where everyone seems to know somebody who knows someone who apparently knows somebody else who knows you, the tangled web that's been woven often proves much more intractable, petty, vicious and personal in nature than the abstract ethical contortions as practiced by our nation's big-city counterparts.

    But while the big-city incidents garner most of the headlines when such stories become public, with a few notable exceptions they tend to hold little marquee value as entertainment and subsequently flop at the box office. Meanwhile, America's small towns and suburbs have an entire cable television network recounting their tawdry tales on a daily basis, with legions of fans slavishly devoted to the cause.

    Which brings us to today's LMN screenplay-in-waiting, the sorry and sordid saga of "The Courthouse Gang," who lorded it over the good citizens of Mingo County, WV. Be appalled, be engrossed, and enjoy -- because it doesn't get more tawdry and trashy than this.


    Don't forget the multi-generational aspect (none / 0) (#138)
    by scribe on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:28:06 PM EST
    Some of the smaller towns and cities, the feuds, alliances, and general soap opera business goes on across generations.  Parsing it out can be a full-time job.

    In the small city where I used to live, several mayors went to federal prison over the years for typically epic and entertaining corrpution.  One, while in the FCI, his son became a councilman and later was challenging for mayor.  Heard in an argument over something small and stupid, a political rival telling the son "I hear you'll be bunking with your dad soon."


    Good luck (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:02:20 AM EST
    Wow - so much going on in such a short time.  I hope you can squeeze out a little joy on your birthday.

    Moving (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:37:51 AM EST
    is so stressful for me. I hope it's not as stressful for you. Good luck with everything!

    There can't possibly be enough hours (none / 0) (#3)
    by Anne on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:43:36 AM EST
    in the day for you to get all that done, and the worst of it is - at least it would be for me - making decisions I'd later regret about what I kept and what I got rid of.

    Yeah, on some level, it is just stuff, and most of us don't have any problem accumulating more of it, but there's something annoying about having to buy new things rather than pack and move the old things.

    And, having cleaned out the homes of three relatives, I know that it isn't the stuff you can see that takes so much time, it's the stuff you can't: the closets, the drawers, the seemingly endless amounts of things in cupboards and cabinets...I'm exhausted for you just thinking about it.

    I hope your search for a new home goes well, and that you land somewhere you can be comfortable and happy.

    Hang in there!

    Why not (none / 0) (#5)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:22:53 AM EST
    Buy the house?

    The last time we moved about killed us. Two weeks before the moving truck was due in our driveway my wife caught the flu, and about 3 days in I got it from her. She was sick for a good week then absolutely had to get back into work for some project and I was still sick the day the movers arrived. We had a lot of stuff that was not mover friendly that we had to move ourselves too.

    You got to do what you got to do though, best of luck with it.

    Sincerely hope (none / 0) (#7)
    by Nemi on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:35:52 AM EST
    that everything turns out for the best.

    Good wishes for your birthday and househunting as well as for moving!

    Oy (none / 0) (#9)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 08:03:34 AM EST
    I am in a very similar situation..  save the time crunch..   yikes..

    eBay Service (none / 0) (#10)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 09:04:51 AM EST
    When a friend of mine father died, he called three folks to help him, the junk folks like you have scheduled, goodwill, and a group that came and put everything not going to the others on eBay.

    They took everything to their location and emailed him the listings.  When it was done, they cut him a check.  There were several companies doing it here in Houston and while I can't remember what they charged him, it was heavy, I wanna say 35%.  But I believe that was dependent on how much was listed.

    He, like you, just didn't have the time to try and sell the stuff and a lot it just wasn't stuff to donate.  His dad was a professional photographer and donating it just didn't make sense.

    Last Time I Moved... (none / 0) (#11)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 09:18:57 AM EST
    ...my grand mother died a week before.

    I am an organized fool, but it was in January and I had to go to Wisconsin which meant finding my long ago, packed up real winter dress gear, going up there for a week and rescheduling the move.

    It totally sucked for more reasons than the move.  But when I got done and the movers left, I crashed on my couch with the TV working... the relief and gratification of getting through it all without completely losing it was one hell of a feeling.  

    Never want a repeat, but I gotta say getting through some of life's messes is damn good for the ego, especially after the fact.

    Good luck.


    Hang in there J... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 09:42:55 AM EST
    doesn't seem fair that a landlord can break a lease so easily...I'd imagine it wouldn't be so easy for a tenant.

    You've reminded me again how lucky I am with my rental arrangement...handshake lease with the sweetest little old lady whose house is paid for, not owned by a bankster.  The rent covers her taxes plus a supplemental income to stretch her social security.  Rent is cheap for the area, and we do all the upkeep and maintenance ourselves to keep it cheap.  She lets us have a dog and smoke in the house and never comes by...unheard of in this day and age!  Best landlord ever, and she loves us too. We are blessed.  

    As a guy who moved ten times... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 09:59:43 AM EST
    ...just in my first 17 years, and probably ten more times since then, I can sympathize. It just sucks. Although, sometimes, it is a great chance to work out a little minimalism and rid yourself of useless junk. Aside from that, barring a move to a MUCH nicer place (which has happened twice for me), it just sucks. My condolences.

    You've got us beat (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Zorba on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:33:46 AM EST
    I had thought that we moved a lot earlier in our marriage.  Six times in 14 years.  You win the "moving" trophy.    ;-)

    Marriage and divorce... (none / 0) (#120)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:31:46 PM EST
    ...and marriage and divorce, and marriage....in Los Angeles in the 70s and early 80s. Whatcha gonna do? ;-)

    Moved ten times in those 17 years... (none / 0) (#121)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:32:41 PM EST
    ...and never once left L.A. Country.

    Just dismal.


    L.A.. COUNTY!!! (none / 0) (#122)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:33:23 PM EST
    Not country. I want an edit button.

    Marissa Alexander Gets a New Trial (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:21:38 AM EST
    Well this is a bit of good news..

    20 Years for a Warning Shot? (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:37:06 AM EST
    That's nuts...even for Florida.

    Nutz (none / 0) (#50)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:02:45 PM EST
    alright, crazy mandatory sentence, but I don't believe a word of her story which is all the media chooses to carry.

    This is not, as if any are, a good case to look at through the headlines or superficially.

    Here is a good link to a bunch of docs


    Give the American terrorist weapons (none / 0) (#16)
    by Visteo1 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:36:03 AM EST
    or lock him up?

    The CIA wanted to arm him and the FBI wanted him locked up.  How messed-up is that?

    Hope everything works out for your benefit, Jeralyn!  Praying it does.

    Rouhani... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:44:01 AM EST
    calls for Israel to officially come clean on one of the world's worst kept secrets.

    From the Aricle... (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:51:09 PM EST
    This is what drives me nutz about Kerry and inane statements:
    Asked what the Iranians needed to do to prove they are serious, Kerry replied: "I'll let you know after they've been serious."

    WTF does that mean, but more importantly how is that helping ?  It's not just Iran, he was saying equally stupid stuff with the Syrian conflict.

    Sure. He could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week. Turn it over, all of it, without delay, and allow a full and total accounting for that. But he isn't about to do it, and it can't be done, obviously.
    "Time is short. Let's not spend time debating what we already know,"
    "This isn't complicated, when we said we know what is true, we meant it,"
    We really don't have time today to pretend that anyone can have their own set of facts, approaching the issue of chemical weapons in Syria.

    The above 3 quotes made before the UN report was available.


    Kerry is over-compensating (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:00:06 PM EST
    in his role as SOS. I don't know what has happened to him, but it's irritating and not too helpful. And, I'm sorry, but his post-surgery, post-botox face just looks bizarre.

    Maybe Kerry watched that episode of (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Anne on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:08:57 PM EST
    Seinfeld, where George decided to do the opposite of whatever he normally would have done...

    But if he keeps this up, he's going to be known for putting the "dip" in "diplomacy."

    And the face...yeesh.


    Hard (none / 0) (#51)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:05:52 PM EST
    to imagine, but HRC did a much better job than Kerry. Spooky to think what he might have done as president.

    ... than the over-privileged and incompetent jackwagon who won that election, and then only ten months later watched the city of New Orleans drown while telling his equally hapless FEMA director that he was "doin' a heckuva job."

    Hands down, George W. Bush was absolutely the worst president I hope my children will ever see in their lifetimes. And for those of us who lived through the Nixon era and Watergate, that's saying something.


    Why (1.50 / 4) (#151)
    by Mikado Cat on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:31:51 AM EST
    blame Bush for what was obviously a major failure of the state and local officials, or it that they aren't the right political party to blame?

    Bush (5.00 / 4) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:47:34 AM EST
    has the entire power of the federal government at his disposal yet decided to sit around with his thumb up his butt. So according to you Obama should have done nothing about Hurricane Sandy?

    GA, actually Bush tried to (2.00 / 3) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:00:36 PM EST
    take over the Louisiana National Guard but the Guv wouldn't agree to it.

    And do you remember all those buses.....underwater and unused????

    That was the "Hiz Honnor"

    And then we have the myths...

    MYTH:"The aftermath of Katrina will go down as one of the worst abandonments of Americans on American soil ever in U.S. history."--Aaron Broussard, president, Jefferson Parish, La., Meet the Press, NBC, Sept. 4, 2005

     REALITY: Bumbling by top disaster-management officials fueled a perception of general inaction, one that was compounded by impassioned news anchors. In fact, the response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest--and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm's landfall.

    Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day--some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.

    These units had help from local, state and national responders, including five helicopters from the Navy ship Bataan and choppers from the Air Force and police. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries dispatched 250 agents in boats. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), state police and sheriffs' departments launched rescue flotillas. By Wednesday morning, volunteers and national teams joined the effort, including eight units from California's Swift Water Rescue. By Sept. 8, the waterborne operation had rescued 20,000.



    Bush DID NOT (5.00 / 3) (#173)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 04:46:42 PM EST
    NEED the LA National Guard. He had the ENTIRE US GOVERNMENT at his disposal. Don't you get it? None of this makes an iota of difference other than more apologia for Bush sitting around with his thumb up his butt. Bush let pumps from other countries that could have helped SIT ON THE DOCKS. He had a horse lawyer overseeing a massive hurricane. This is all just standard GOP apologia and the bus thing was a hoax. There was no way the buses could have been used IIRC. But hey don't let me get in the way of you making more excuses for that disaster George W. Bush.

    And the US NAVY and US COAST (1.00 / 1) (#177)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:23:52 PM EST
    Guard was on the scene as the hurricane moved on.

    Why didn't Bush issue the orders? Well, here's the thing: he did.

    Katrina hit the coast on August 29th. On August 30th, the "Pentagon announced it will send five ships, though four are several days away". The other was the USS Bataan, which was following behind the storm. On the morning of August 31, the USS Bataan was flying missions into Louisiana, as "four MH-53 Sea Stallion and two HH-60 Seahawk helicopters from USS Bataan were flying medical-evacuation and search-and-rescue missions in Louisiana, and Bataan's hospital was preparing for possible use for medical support".


    Want more?

    "Here's another one: Do you remember the dramatic TV footage of National Guard helicopters landing at the Superdome as soon as Katrina passed, dropping off tens of thousands saved from certain death? The corpsmen running with stretchers, in an echo of M*A*S*H, carrying the survivors to ambulances and the medical center? About how the operation, which also included the Coast Guard, regular military units, and local first responders, continued for more than a week?

    Me neither. Except that it did happen, and got at best an occasional, parenthetical mention in the national media. The National Guard had its headquarters for Katrina, not just a few peacekeeping troops, in what the media portrayed as the pit of Hell. Hell was one of the safest places to be in New Orleans, smelly as it was. The situation was always under control, not surprisingly because the people in control were always there.

    From the Dome, the Louisiana Guard's main command ran at least 2,500 troops who rode out the storm inside the city, a dozen emergency shelters, 200-plus boats, dozens of high-water vehicles, 150 helicopters, and a triage and medical center that handled up to 5,000 patients (and delivered 7 babies). The Guard command headquarters also coordinated efforts of the police, firefighters and scores of volunteers after the storm knocked out local radio, as well as other regular military and other state Guard units.



    To paraphrase Barbara Bush during Katrina: (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:35:17 PM EST
    Your right-wing sources don't seem to be working out very well for you.

    huh??? (none / 0) (#188)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:32:28 PM EST
    I just gave you proof that the government was there, on scene ASAP.

    Or do you think Carl Rove could have calmed the sea??



    Yes, (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 06:51:37 AM EST
    he did all this AFTER the fact of people and reporters screaming at the top of their lungs talking about all the people that were dying. It was how many days before Bush decided to do something? Three, four, a week?
    You know, his father did the same thing with Hurricane Andrew that struck Miami but I don't remember people making excuses for the father like they have the son. I have never seen anything like the apologia for George W. But hey, if you want to waste your breathe apologizing for that disaster go ahead.  I actually hope Republicans continue to make excuses for him.

    So in one post ... (none / 0) (#198)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 10:17:43 AM EST
    ... you blame state officials for the Katrina response because the governor didn't hand over control of the Louisiana Guard to the feds, and in the very next post, you quote an article praising the effective and heroic response of the Coast Guard and the Louisiana National Guard.

    ... and you're not even trying to be funny.


    I remember them (none / 0) (#197)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 10:12:47 AM EST
    And do you remember all those buses.....underwater and unused????

    That was the "Hiz Honnor"

    Oh, wait ... nevermind.  That's simply another winger falsehood being repeated by Jim.

    ABC's Stephanopoulos repeated school bus falsehood spread by Pruden, Hannity, and Gingrich


    Why just troll ... (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 10:08:23 AM EST
    Why blame Bush for what was obviously a major failure of the state and local officials, or it that they aren't the right political party to blame?

    ... when you can super-troll with ridiculous comments such as these?


    Why blame Bush? (2.00 / 2) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:03:23 PM EST
    Because it is what the far Left does.

    That way they don't have to talk about the failures of Obama.


    It isn't just (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 04:49:33 PM EST
    the far left that detests Bush. The majority of the people in the country do but only the GOP thinks it's the "far left" because 80% of the country is the "far left" when you so far on the right you're going off a cliff.

    Oh please (1.00 / 2) (#178)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:29:31 PM EST
    Why don't you tell Obama to put on his big boy pajamas and start taking responsibility for his failures???

    Want an example???

    Obamacare... remember this?? Everyone would pay less...

    Well, I just got a look at my healthcare supplemental insurance premiums and it has TRIPLED. And I am sure my Medicare premium will also get zapped.

    Obama is the worst liar as a President and that includes Nixon.


    You see (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 06:45:31 AM EST
    your post is why most people laugh at conservatives. You lecture about "taking responsibility" but take NONE for yourself, never made Bush take any responsibilities for his yet you think Obama should for his. The conservative mantra is "responsibility for thee but not for me"

    Jim, according to the Kaiser foundation the largest jump in premiums occurred in 2002 and it was 15%. Skyrocketing premiums started under George W. Bush and it has continued. The problem is the insurance companies business model and Obamacare does nothing about that. But all you seem to get out of conservatives is screaming about the problem but no solutions. And the irony is Obamacare is a perfect example of why conservative policies do not work.


    C'mon Jim. (none / 0) (#190)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:56:54 PM EST
    obama is a far, far, far better liar than bush could ever hope to be. bush was a rank amateur compared to obama. No comparison. Not even close.

    bush could never have convinced democrats to cheer all the bs and lies obama so effortlessly can. He couldn't even convince any conservatives who had any brains that he made any sense.

    On the other hand most wingnuts love obama. They get what they want from him, things like murdering innocent children and old American cancer patients and such, backing aipac and netanyahoo murdering Palestinians, they'll very likely get a war with Iran out of him or at least out of hillary if he drags his feet too long, and his backing of keystone is guaranteed to poison the environment enough to be considered chemical warfare on American babies, just to put the icing on the cake.

    The man's a dream prez, Jim. OMG, he's like sooo totally awesome I just don't understand what you could possibly hold agin 'im.


    You guys are so afraid of (5.00 / 2) (#184)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 09:09:44 PM EST
    talking about Bush that you formed another party
    so you could pretend you never voted him in in the first place..

    Bush is so radioactive even among wingers that they were afraid to mention his name at the GOP convention.


    jondee, I hate to tell you this (2.00 / 1) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:34:49 PM EST
    but Bush has been gone for over 4 years and your Dear Leader is in charge.

    So quit whining and just admit that he's the boss and has been a complete failure.


    I think I'll organize an Ovaltine Party (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 06:35:49 AM EST
    and pretend I never voted for him in the first place. Isn't that what you'd do?,

    Wow (none / 0) (#185)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 09:13:59 PM EST
    worse than Nixon. It must be because he hangs out with Bill Ayers and the New Black Panthers and the Hollywood liberal elites.

    THAT'S..... (none / 0) (#75)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:20:19 AM EST
    what it is, Botox.  That's why he looks so weird. And I thought that he was waxed up, or plasticized, or turning lizard.  Or something.

    Botox ?! That explains it !!! (none / 0) (#172)
    by gbrbsb on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 03:23:37 PM EST
    What Kerry Said Worked (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:05:31 PM EST
    Or what he said sure did not have any negative effects, except on the predictable crowd:  GOP and the haters..

    It Worked... (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:19:04 PM EST
    ...to take us back from the escalation his and Obama's words had taken to.  His inciting and threatening language put us in position we should have never been in to begin with.

    It worked because of pure dumb luck that Putin decided to take Kerry's rhetorical BS at face value.  Kerry was in no way serious about a peaceful solution, he declared there were no other options beyond a military strike.  Right until he gaffed...

    So I am either on your side or a hater, because I don't fall in the GOP section of your ridiculous comment.


    Hmmmm (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:35:25 PM EST
    My Ridiculous comment?

    hahahaha, and you are giving advice to Kerry?

    Diplomacy does not seem to be an art you have mastered.


    OMG... (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:52:00 PM EST
    ...that was seriously funny, the person who annoys just about everyone who comments, on a daily basis, is going to comment on diplomacy.

    That's like GWB commenting on the importance of attending class.


    Wrong (none / 0) (#46)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:21:08 PM EST
    I am not giving you or Kerry advice on diplomacy. Just noticing that Kerry's approach worked and yours seems lacking....

    so not sure you are the best one to be deciding how the SOS should be working their diplomacy.

    I have little or no skills at diplomacy, and unlike you, I am not representing myself as an expert.


    My sentiments as well, squeaky (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by christinep on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:00:38 PM EST
    His diplomatic approach -- what seems to be a judicious mix of carrot & stick -- seems to be working.  For those who somehow expect "diplomacy" to be all in the open in speeches and blogs and comments to reporters, a review of diplomatic breakthroughs (and the rocky pathways leading thereto) should be re-reviewed.  

    As of today, we are actually seeing a resolution on the Syrian situation coming together in the Security Council ... what would have been thought incredible in years past might now be happening. We'll see soon enough.  And, looking at the diplomatic currents around Iran, that may well produce some positive steps that no one predicted (publicly, at least) for years. We'll see there too.  Of course, if good results: Predictably, some will be certain it was the result of some extra-planetary or outside force or the all-purpose "luck" or "coincidence."  Usually, tho, if a breakthrough occurs in protracted, difficult international situations, the good result stems directly from protracted, unglamorous, sweaty behind-the-scenes diplomatic work on all sides.
    The process probably reflects the "99% perspiration, 1% inspiration" adage.


    The scary part is... (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:14:19 PM EST
    in our "political reality", this is as probably as good as US foreign policy and diplomacy gets.  If we had a Pres. McCain or Pres. Romney right now, the bombs would already be raining on Syria and Iran, and who knows maybe WWIII.  God save us from our governments.

    Seriously (none / 0) (#65)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:44:38 PM EST
    You think the almost total mess of Jimmy Carter proportions in the middle east is "going well"?

    If Putin hadn't stepped in Obama would be bombing now, not just arming Al Qaeda to prolong the Syrian civil war.


    Uh-oh. The RW troll doesn't like Jimmy Carter. (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 07:55:32 PM EST
    Okay, I'll bite. (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:04:28 PM EST
    And what didn't you like about President Carter's Middle East efforts? Perhaps it's that peace treaty between Egypt and Israel he negotiated personally, which after all has only been in effect for 34 years.

    Probably the famous handshake. (none / 0) (#71)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:01:04 PM EST
    Actually Carter midwifed (none / 0) (#73)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:59:39 PM EST
    the present terrorist movements when he withdrew support from the Shah and let Iran fall into the hands of the radicals.

    Carter cut-off (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:28:41 AM EST
    aid to the Guatemalan military for human rights abuses.  Reagan reinstated it.  A horrible genocide resulted and in 1982 over 100,000 Ixil Maya were running for the border to escape the military.

    Carter brokered the Camp David accords, which has created a peace between Israel and Egypt that has lasted decades.

    Reagan facilitated genocide.   Great record, that.


    So you agree with me that (1.67 / 3) (#111)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:48:10 PM EST
    Carter midwifed the terrorist movement...

    Thank you.


    Huh? (none / 0) (#112)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:53:37 PM EST
    I really do not follow.....

    Well, you didn't disagree (none / 0) (#168)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:10:56 PM EST
    Just tried to change the subject.

    So brokering a peace accord (none / 0) (#114)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    ... and refusing to provide military aid to a military junta that is systematically murdering tens of thousands of people is "midwifing a terrorist movement" in Wingerworld, huh, Jim?



    I love it.. (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:10:51 AM EST
    more utterly meaningless AM talk radio bs from Jim

    You're suggesting that a popular revolution in a country twice the size of Vietnam, with rugged, mountainous terrain could've been thwarted by what? Surgical airstrikes? Because you know no one here would give one ounce of support to the idea of an invasion and longterm occupation..,


    Well, losers often spend a lot of time (5.00 / 3) (#176)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:20:46 PM EST
    trying to rewrite history. Not that it ever works.

    Uh Jondee.... there was no (2.00 / 4) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:09:43 PM EST
    "popular revolution" until the Shah lost the support of Jimmy Carter's Dept of State and the radicals flew back in and took over.

    Thinking about that makes me think about Egypt and Obama's "Arab Spring." Except there was no military strong enough to take Iran back.


    So training (none / 0) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 03:26:49 PM EST
    Osama had nothing to do with the current terrorist movement? LOL.

    JC second worst in modern history. (none / 0) (#80)
    by Mikado Cat on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:13:29 AM EST
    Its mostly the nice old man he put in charge of Iran and created essentially the mess.

    I don't know... (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:36:05 AM EST
    The rise of the old man was an almost inevitable result of propping up the Shah...where we f8cked up was back in 1953 with the CIA/British Intelligence backed coup, at the behest of British Petroleum.

    If not for that interference in Iranian affairs, who knows what Iran would look like today.


    The Dulles boys (none / 0) (#89)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:30:44 AM EST
    also had the CIA topple the democratically elected Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954--after Dean Acheson under Truman had stopped a similar CIA operation in 1952.

    The United States.... (none / 0) (#96)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:05:07 AM EST
    Central Intelligence Agency.  Fighting Democracy Since 1947.

    It depends on who the President is (none / 0) (#97)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:15:35 AM EST
    Acheson put the kibosh on the first CIA scheme to overthrow Guatemala's democracy.

    Under Ike, the Dulles boys got free reign....

    Kissinger and Nixon ousted Allende in Chile....

    LBJ supported dictators but did not overrun democracies...

    The Democratic policy with respect to Communism was containment.  The Republicans wanted to go to war and had no trouble getting rid of liberal democracies....



    I'd call the distinctions you mention... (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:21:11 AM EST
    bad and worse.  

    I know I'm a naive idealist and all, but if the people of Vietnam or Iran or Nicaragua or Timbuktu want to be socialists or communists or something in between, that's their business, their right to self-determine their style of government...not ours.  

    I'm pretty sure we would not appreciate a foreign intelligence service f8cking with our right to self-determination...it's just wrong.


    I am not following you (none / 0) (#113)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:58:57 PM EST

    Iran and Nicaragua were bugaboos of Ike and Reagan.....Carter inherited the Shah.

    Vietnam was LBJ's mess.

    But use of the CIA to overthrow democracies was a Republican specialty....I don't think anyone would say Diem was democratically elected.



    All I'm saying is... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:06:12 PM EST
    it is not our place to order the CIA to overthrow, interfere, contain, or otherwise influence any other countries choice of government system or leadership. That's how we get in trouble with blowback...not to mention it is morally wrong.



    The Truman/Acheson (none / 0) (#119)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:19:33 PM EST
    doctrine of containment was largely a good idea.....its implementation was at times messed up....with the cases you cite....

    Why was it a good idea? (none / 0) (#125)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:08:35 PM EST
    If communism is as horrible as we were taught it is, and I myself am no fan (too authoritarian & inevitably corrupt), why was it so important to "contain"?  It contains itself by it's inherent major flaws...no?

    That being said, if the people of a nation want communism, that's their right...it's their nation.  Who the f8ck are we to say no?


    The problem (none / 0) (#135)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 03:58:38 PM EST
    is that Mao and Stalin were not in power via a democratic vote.  The people in those countries did not "want" communism. They were not proposing an expansion of communism via elections.

    The people of Cuba never elected Fidel or his henchmen.

    The closest any country got to voting for "communism" may have been Allende's Chile, but that was more of a European style socialism.

    Daniel Ortega did honor elections, and for that reason, Reagan's obsession with the Contras was wrong.


    A country claiming the right (5.00 / 2) (#159)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:43:30 AM EST
    to "contain" should be able to wield some moral authority. Where's the moral authority in allowing United Fruit, ITT, and Pepsi Cola dictate who's a "communist" and who isn't?

    It might be convenient for some if the rest of the world was that stupid, but they weren't and aren't.


    United Fruit (none / 0) (#170)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:36:03 PM EST
    Arbenz was not a communist.  There were some 5 odd members of the Guatemalan Legislature who were.  

    The Guatemalan Communist party, such as it was, received very little support from the Soviets.  They received copies of Pravda in Russian, and that was it.

    That was my point about toppling Democracies....I also see, however, the problems posed by the Soviets....

    There is no doubt about Fidel and the Soviets who controlled Eastern Europe....Or Mao....


    The Soviet threat was vastly (none / 0) (#181)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:13:03 PM EST
    exaggerated, imo.

    How could a barely fully industrialized nation that the Nazis rode roughshod over have had it's nefarious tentacles in every crannie of the civilised world in such a relatively short time?


    Well, those same Soviets (none / 0) (#182)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:34:09 PM EST
    lost 20 million people during World War II and still turned back the German army and looked not so weak when they leveled Berlin.

    During the height of the Cold War, it was U.S. doctrine to support West Berlin with a threat of nuclear strike in the event of a Soviet invasion.  The U.S. was overmatched in terms of conventional forces--numbers of tanks, troops, pieces of artillery.   Our troops there were instructed to fire and retreat, fire and retreat in the event of a Soviet invasion--until we nuked the Soviets....

    JFK always thought that any World War with the Soviets would begin with West Berlin, and he feared if the Soviet Missiles stayed in Cuba, the Soviets would take West Berlin and then dare us to use nukes--when they would have them on our doorstep.  The Cuban Missile Crisis was in many ways about Berlin.

    But, yes, I do agree we vastly overestimated the Soviets....They were imploding....All we had to do was outwait them.  


    I've thought for awhile now (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:54:57 PM EST
    that most of the lurid rhetoric about the spread of communism was a way of attacking and weakening organized labor here in the U.S -- as conspiratorial as that may sound..
    A lot of people aren't aware of all the obsessing and fretting about "reds" that went on in this country before the Cold War; usually revolving around the conflicts between organized labor and capital..

    The Red Scare (none / 0) (#186)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:03:18 PM EST
    was a way to get elected--if you had a dog named Checkers.

    U.S. Labor had expelled the Communists very early on, in ways that were at times less than democratic.

    The New Deal got it right....imo.  The creation of the SEC, and other things, saved capitalism.....The government would not prohibit you from being a fool and investing in stupid schemes, so long as the schemers made full disclosure of the scheme.   William O. Douglas was one of the architects...


    Douglas--maybe not (none / 0) (#187)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:09:51 PM EST
    And Poland, then Czechoslovakia, Hungary (none / 0) (#139)
    by christinep on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:36:41 PM EST
    not to mention a number of the Soviet satellites.  Wanting a form of government that was bloodily imposed?  

    Some historical review would do well in certain quarters ....


    We didn't bloodily impose... (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by kdog on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 11:36:25 AM EST
    on North Korea?  North Vietnam?  And that's just two overt impositions, never mind all the covert coups and propping up dictators and the School of the Americas.

    Kinda hard to say what the people really wanted with the two big swinging nuclear d*cks imposing left and right, treating the world like their chess board.

    Sh*t I'm not the only one less than pleased with our current "best democracy money can buy" right now, that doesn't mean I/We want anybody imposing...it's our mess to sort out.  


    Sout Korea is a (none / 0) (#171)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:43:12 PM EST
    democracy and the UN supported the military intervention to support South Korea after it was invaded by the North Koreans.....That was not the case for Vietnam.

    The U.S. made mistakes in the Korean War by pushing right up the Chinese border....We should have stopped at the DMZ.


    "Who the f*ck are we to say no?" (none / 0) (#145)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:30:56 PM EST
    In the immortal words of Col. Kilgore, "Charlie don't surf."

    Some folks here (5.00 / 4) (#162)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 09:19:49 AM EST
    desperatly need to go back and read what two-time medal of honor recipient Gen Smedley Butler had to say about the U.S "light bringer to the world" myth..

    And btw, a true democracy has class-interest checks and balances. As of now, the U.S doesn't have that. And this isn't a democracy.


    Allow me to assist... (5.00 / 4) (#164)
    by kdog on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 11:49:13 AM EST
    I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

    You could say we gave the former USSR the bloody playbook.


    Just a reality check (none / 0) (#169)
    by christinep on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:51:06 PM EST
    Curious to know what large countries have found their way to the kind of democracy to which you (and all of us) aspire?  

    BTW, I most certainly think we have a lot of work to do attaining that level of representative government.  But, I also tend to take it step by step; and, I also tend to tune out the persistent "we're so bad, we're so evil, we're so wrong" mantra some detractors use. Why? Because the whirring mantra accomplishes nothing but venting.  Let's talk specifics ... the specifics of what, when, how, who (the specifics.)


    The major (none / 0) (#152)
    by Mikado Cat on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:52:08 AM EST
    problem for communism is how much better life is for  people everywhere else. There are reasons they shot people for trying to escape, and many of them are the same reasons communist countries try to spread influence to other places.

    (take the following with a grain of salt, I only have superficial knowledge and may be confusing movies for reality)

    We had a choice in Vietnam of directly confronting the communist countries that were pouring in money and weapons, or doing the same ourselves with the opposition, or ignoring it, which I don't any considered.

    Carter abruptly pulled the plug on the Shah, so that many had to flee the country, and people still hated the US enough to hold our embassy hostage. If we had done something slower, hard to say, the Shah might have found a new patron and stayed in power with unknown results.

    Cuba and North Korea are good examples of democracy not likely to rise from within. Assad shows no signs of losing power without continued external pressure. Maybe no such thing as civil war anymore.


    Hey (none / 0) (#158)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:18:07 AM EST
    give some credit to the head of United Fruit who went to Washington aggrieved over the "communist takeover" in Guatamala and began calling in favors and spreading grease around until he got the responce he wanted.

    Oh, please! (5.00 / 2) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:43:01 PM EST
    The Shah of Iran was one of the most bloody and corrupt absolute rulers in the second half of the 20th century, and when his subjects had finally had enough of his crap, they rose up in rebellion and drove him out. His fall from power in 1978 was inevitable, and he was already in serious trouble well before President Carter first took office in January 1977.

    Pick up and read a history book sometime, why don'tcha?


    The Shaw was definitely a bad guy... (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by fishcamp on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:57:58 AM EST
    and he was a bad skier too.  For several years in the 60's while ski racing and later filming in St. Moritz, Switzerland I skied with him.  He took a liking to Spider Sabich and me and invited us to his lavish mansion to shoot guns and smoke the hookah in his downstairs club/shooting range.  Never did smoke his stuff but did shoot a lot of strange guns with him.    Our ski team coach banned us from going to his house but later ABC Sports wanted me to film the situation.  Needless to say the Shaw's people didn't allow any cameras in the house.   Strange Swiss memories.

    Really? (none / 0) (#84)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:44:47 AM EST
    JC second worst in modern history.

    Who's the worst?


    As if that question even needed to be asked! (none / 0) (#86)
    by Angel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:08:05 AM EST
    Well, you never know ... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:03:06 PM EST
    ... with the Wingers.  :)

    Honestly, it would be nice to get an answer and some reasons why, but those reasons would no doubt have as much basis in reality as most of his other claims, so ...


    You really, really, really... (none / 0) (#19)
    by unitron on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:56:54 AM EST
    ...should seriously consider buying the house you're in now instead of moving.

    Form a corporation, let it buy the house, and rent it to yourself if you have "homeownershipphobia".

    But then you own the corporation... (none / 0) (#23)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:47:34 AM EST
    and if corporations are people, isn't that slavery?

    If you really think about we're all renters, being mortal and all.  

    That concludes today's "Not So Deep Thoughts" by Jack Handey;)


    Corporations (none / 0) (#52)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:07:58 PM EST
    have no souls, so that makes it ok.

    Ain't that the truth! ;) (none / 0) (#91)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:38:59 AM EST
    But it's pretty f8ckin' far from ok.

    I wish I could help... (none / 0) (#24)
    by DebFrmHell on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:53:16 AM EST
    I am a great packer!  Do what you need to do.  We will all be here for your return.  Like some of the others, I wish you could buy your home.  Maybe the Landlord can get to bank to do a "short sell" to you.  Or you take over his note...

    Wishing you all the best.

    Stop!...Thief! (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:30:09 PM EST
    Friendly neighborhood grocers in Fraser, MI robbed of 35k.

    Perpetrators are known but it'll be a long fight in court before they see dollar 1 back, we know the drill all too well around here.

    They Should File a Claim With the FDIC... (none / 0) (#43)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:06:43 PM EST
    ...which is insurance for you deposits from unscrupulous folks.  

    I like how you think... (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:09:20 PM EST
    but I'm sure the last thing these poor crime victims need is another run around...the FDIC would never pay up.

    The FDIC... (none / 0) (#45)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:15:12 PM EST
    ...I believe is an 3rd party insurance company and whatever their decision, it would be at least be thoroughly investigated with a report of their findings.  IMO, they would be easier to sue then the actual Fed should they deny the claim.

    3rd Party created by Congress... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:25:26 PM EST
    not sure how autonomous they are, but they wouldn't be autonomous for long if they jammed up the asset forfeiture racket.

    I've shopped at that market! (none / 0) (#55)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:44:32 PM EST
    Might wanna... (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:37:31 AM EST
    keep that on the down low kid, you may have just admitted to being an accessory to non-crime.  

    I'd hate to see my pal jb's bank account be the next to get jacked!


    Ha Ha! (none / 0) (#126)
    by jbindc on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:20:14 PM EST
    If they jack my account right now, they might get themselves a whole 20 miles away or so.  :)

    LOL... (none / 0) (#128)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:36:05 PM EST
    You're right...master thieves don't waste their time with small-time jobs, they like big scores.  You just better watch your statement, there's no job too small for banksters, they make it up in volume.

    I remember moving as a total drag, ... (none / 0) (#48)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:48:03 PM EST
    ... even though we haven't moved since Elder Daughter was three years old. At that time, we had a landlord who passed away and his children decided to sell the house.

    We only moved two blocks away in the same valley, but whether you move two blocks or two hundred miles away, you still have to pack everything up in boxes and then unpack it all when you get to your new place. The only advantage we had was that we didn't have to pack up our clothes, but could just transfer everything from one closet in our former house to another in our new home.

    In our case, we decided at that time to buy rather than rent, and we haven't regretted it at all -- especially given the way housing prices skyrocketed in the islands in the two decades since, and then managed to retain 90-95% of their value despite the bursting of the real estate bubble elsewhere.

    Although I have absolutely no idea what your present financial situation is like, Jeralyn, I would echo DebFrmHell's suggestion above that you should at least explore the possibility of purchasing your present abode from your landlord, and see if the bank holding his note would entertain an offer from you for a short sale.

    Given the pressing professional demands on your time and the immediate need to settle the fate of many of your possessions, the idea of owning your own home rather than renting may be a lot more affordable, cost effective and financially savvy over the long term than you might presently realize. And if that bank's at all amenable to a short sale, that might even work to your further advantage should that institution be looking for the easy out here.

    In light of the financial maelstrom that enveloped the real estate market in places like Colorado, I'd say the odds are actually pretty good that the bank's primary desire may well be to simply recover their principle ASAP and move on, rather than enter into foreclosure proceedings and then attempt to sell the property on the open market once they finally gain possession nine months or so from now. After all, most banks aren't in the real estate business.

    I understand your trepidations about purchasing a home if you've never owned before, because let's face it, buying a house is often the largest investment of capital that most people will make in their own lifetimes. But to echo Tom Cruise in the 1983 film Risky Business, sometimes you just have to say, "Oh, what the phuque! Why not?" and just go for it.

    Think of it this way, J -- this would really be an investment in your own self. And if you're at all as confident in yourself and your abilities as I believe you are, then I've no doubt whatsoever that such an aforementioned "Oh, what the phuque! Why not?" decision on your part would pay off big time for you.

    Truthfully, this is still a great time to enter into what remains a buyer's market, but as you've noticed with escalating rents in the Denver area, the present window of opportunity won't stay open forever. Current mortgage rates are certainly enticing enough, and I'm sure you could work with a licensed broker and knowledgeable financial planner to ensure that such a large capital purchase wouldn't tie up all your cash reserves.

    Anyway, I hope we've given you some serious food for thought. Regardless, it goes without saying that you always have our best wishes, whatever you decide to do.


    shocked that you do not own your own place.

    Own nothing, owe nothing, be beholden (none / 0) (#58)
    by scribe on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:37:43 PM EST
    to no one, pay everything by cash, check or money order.  Tell 'em you don't believe in credit cards and abhor debt.

    Drives 'em nuts.


    You're channeling kdog... (5.00 / 4) (#59)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:55:21 PM EST
    My man! ;) (none / 0) (#85)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:50:34 AM EST
    I don't know if it drives 'em nuts, but it definitely makes 'em look at you like you have 3 heads.

    Man I never understand why all my money
    Goes down to the man at the bank
    And all he does is sit and think
    About the money that I'm gonna make

    - Ryan Bingham



    It does. (none / 0) (#109)
    by scribe on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:24:43 PM EST
    You should take the time to take a good look at their expressions when you tell them "no credit card ... don't believe in them."

    Exasperation is only the beginning.


    Are you talking about your clients? (none / 0) (#118)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 01:13:42 PM EST
    Then I could see them going nuts...I thought we were talking about vendors and banksters and such.

    Not clients. (none / 0) (#137)
    by scribe on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:23:46 PM EST
    Just people I'm buying stuff from.

    I never took credit cards from clients - never even offered to do that.  I can't see (A) tacking 3 percent or whatever it is onto my bill to cover the credit card company charges and (B) telling a credit card company (and, by extension, the world, including the government) how much my clients might pay for my services.  The latter seems to me to encroach upon, if not violate, my duty of confidentiality.


    Initial meeting between Kerry and Zarif goes great (none / 0) (#56)
    by CoralGables on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:46:45 PM EST
    Iran to meet again with the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany for nuclear talks October 15 & 16 in Geneva, Switzerland.

    Listen... (none / 0) (#57)
    by Edger on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:46:45 PM EST
    "I propose as a starting step... I invite all states... to undertake a new effort to guide the world in this direction ... we should start thinking about a coalition for peace all across the globe instead of the ineffective coalitions for war."
    So the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, has just invited the whole planet to join the WAVE. How come no "coalition of the willing" leader ever thought about that?

    The Crazy.... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Edger on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 08:16:18 PM EST
    They are crazy. They keep attacking their neighbors like they attacked Russia just the other day. In 1826. After Russia attacked them.

    They're nuts. They'll be especially scary if they manage to build a nuclear bOMG, since NetanYahoo only has a couple or three hundred and the US only has a few tens of thousands.

    And since they are suicidal they'll probably use it right away to attack somebody, just like North Korea did the day after they built one. I mean, ummm, oh, never mind.

    Look, if they aren't stopped now by destroying their economy and starving millions of them to death like Poppy Bush and Clinton did to Iraq they might start supplying oppressive dictatorships with terror weapons and murdering millions of people all over the mideast and around the world and acting like the US Government does, for gawdsakes.


    Having a Nuke... (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:00:08 AM EST
    ...and being able to deploy it are worlds apart, yet you would never know it, apparently once they have it, not one square inch of the Earth is safe.

    I ran across this the other day, which IMO is the number one reason we don't have to worry about N Korea nuclear capabilities.  Ditto for Iran, they pose a zero threat to us, but since Israel has basically become an American territory in the Middle East, by extension, they pose a real threat to our territory.

    I wonder how the the folks who are adamant about Iran not arming themselves, reconcile that with the reverse philosophy of wanting individuals to arm themselves.  Thought more arms made things safer, but apparently that isn't always true, sometimes more arms is a really bad idea, or so they tell us about Iran.

    Fear not, companies that make the delivery systems for nukes are investing heavily in campaigns and maybe one day they will have they very own NRA type lobbying group to ensure that any country who wants to exercise their god(whatever god that might be) given right to own a nuclear weapon, isn't denied by those special interest pro-nuclear weapon control activists.  After all, nukes don't kill people, they are inanimate objects.


    How (none / 0) (#153)
    by Mikado Cat on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:08:07 AM EST
    deterrence works is that you need somebody in charge of the button that doesn't want to die. If you don't have that, you have no deterrence.

    North Korea might send a million of its people to certain death, but refrain from doing anything that risks a hair on the behind of the dear leader.

    Most likely delivery mechanism for an Iranian nuke is a minivan with diplomatic plates.

    I don't think Israel would be the target, too many issues, so I do wonder what might be there intent.


    Art vs. commerce (none / 0) (#60)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 06:58:03 PM EST
    Or rather, creativity vs. selling yourself. As someone who's been both creative artist and business entrepreneur, I really relate to this (and come out on the side of the quiet artists).

    Well (none / 0) (#68)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 08:59:35 PM EST
    I would say that music should be performed. The idea that you can no longer make your money from recordings is a blessing in disguise.

    Music should exist in time not space. That is where the magic happens.

    So many musicians envy the writer, visual artist who has a commodity to sell ( the truth is very few, relatively speaking can live off their art).  But music is supreme, live music... recordings not so much..  

    In any case things change and with the internet, a musician can make boatloads, if they get it right..  but as always most who persevere have only the love of what they do, and live a life of relative poverty, monetarily speaking.


    Yes... (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:42:21 AM EST
    Of course music should be performed.
    Hearing a live performance is very exciting and inspiring.
    Giving a live performance is what a Jazz musician lives for.

    But the problem is getting the opportunity to do it.
    That costs money - unless one is to take to the park, the subway or a street corner.

    One thing I think you are missing is the value of recordings.
    Particularly in Jazz. There is no other means of preserving the performances of the great artists who have preceded us. If I didn't have recordings of Charlie Parker, I wouldn't know anything at all.

    What I can certainly agree with it what you say about the need for musicians to persevere with their art regardless of the possibilities or non-possibilities of monetary compensation. One has to do it because one cannot help but do it. As we know, Van Gogh didn't manage to sell anything.

    Most of the artists I know support themselves by other means.
    One is a baggage handler in a hotel. Others teach. Others, like the baggage handler, make their livings in totally unrelated professions.

    To me, not having to use your art to make money is the way to preserve ones sanity. Art and commerce have never blended well. Great art that is.

    Commercial art can do well - because it is calculated to appeal to a specific market whose demands and tastes commercial art is shaped to satisfy. That's where the "boatloads" of money can come in.

    But for the artist doing something personal and truthful to their own soul, doing ones art must be its own reward. The other benefit is that doing it for the love of doing it allows one to share with and identify with like-minded artists - both present and past.


    Value of Recordings (none / 0) (#103)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:21:35 AM EST
    Well if there was not so much value put on listening over and over to the same recording of Charlie Parker, maybe people would spend their time listening to and supporting live music by living musicians.

    And yes I agree with most of what you have said...  and I know many really good artists who make money from their art and many who are equally as good who make their money elsewhere. It has to do with personality and some luck..   Sometimes success in the art market place can be crushing for young artists though..  it is tricky business.  

    this rings particularly true for me:

    But for the artist doing something personal and truthful to their own soul, doing ones art must be its own reward. The other benefit is that doing it for the love of doing it allows one to share with and identify with like-minded artists - both present and past.

    Live music... (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:54:53 AM EST
    is a tremendous part of my life, my favorite art appreciation activity.  I totally agree that music is best experienced when performed live...recordings can't hold a candle.

    But I wouldn't poo-poo recordings, as they are immortal, unlike the musicians that create them.  Music lovers can't see a show everytime they want the joy that music provides.  Nor can they see musicians of the past live...thank god we have recordings of Charlie Parker, Jimi Hendrix, etc.  Recordings ain't just about making money, they are historical records and historical treasures.  

    Of course any true artist makes art for art's sake...it's just a shame that it is so hard for artists to make a living at it so they don't have to have day jobs.  

    If I had my way I'd give the NEA the entire DEA budget to sponsor artists....what a wonderful society that could be.


    This (none / 0) (#127)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:34:37 PM EST
    Well if there was not so much value put on listening over and over to the same recording of Charlie Parker, maybe people would spend their time listening to and supporting live music by living musicians.

    is simply not true.

    People don't listen to Charlie Parker as an alternative to going out and listening to someone live. In fact, the greatness of his music can inspire people to go out and try to find people trying to produce music of that quality live.

    But you know, there is also the unfortunate fact that a lot of what is available for people to hear is nowhere near the pure esthetic quality of the music of a Charlie Parker. His was music for music's sake. No agenda. No political messages. Just music.
    That's hard to find these days imo.


    Well said.... (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:47:23 PM EST
    In fact, the greatness of his music can inspire people to go out and try to find people trying to produce music of that quality live.

    Youtube and the like does wonders for gate receipts imo...maybe musicians need to look at their recordings as advertising for the live show.  I know it works for me...I'll hear a song on satellite or on youtube that grabs me, and the first thing I do is see when they're coming to town to go see them live.

    But I must disagree about a shortage of quality music...I think there's more quality sh*t out there than ever before...the decline of the traditional music business model has actually helped musicians who wouldn't have gotten the time of day from a record company or FM station in the past. Thanks to the internet and satellite radio, it's easier to find them instead of having to stumble upon them at your local live music venues.


    I totally (none / 0) (#134)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 03:45:14 PM EST
    agree with you about youtube and the internet.

    But experiencing music these days without hearing the ding of the cash register in the background is a very rare one for me.

    It's not the absence of quality music that disturbs me, it is that the idea of creating music without an agenda - without a message - without a social commentary - has been, shall we say, been put on the back burner.

    If you have artists who you feel are going for it, please let me know because I genuinely would like to hear it.


    Not True? (none / 0) (#131)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 03:07:54 PM EST
    More like a truism.

     If there were no recordings people would go in droves to hear live music. Many rarely see a live concert but listen to recordings all the time. For those, were live music the only option they would be out every night listening or playing themselves.


    If there (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 03:36:11 PM EST
    were no recordings, a lot of people would not be aware of the existence of artists that they wish to hear. Eminem couldn't sell out concerts if it were not for the fact that he had an established fan base developed from the ready availability of his recordings and videos.

    It's a bit like painting.
    If the painting were not available for viewing on a permanent basis, so many generations of painters would have relatively little to inspire them. The art would die.

    Similarly, the recordings of the greatest artists inspire other artists to create. That's how the art form develops. One generation inspires the next. And the greatest keep inspiring increasing numbers of generations.

    I know for a fact that Jazz evolved thanks in no small part to the dissemination of recordings. And that was at a time when live music was everywhere. Musicians in one part of the country could hear what other musicians were doing. The recordings of Louis Armstrong went around the world and inspired musicians of every race and every nationality. Lester Young heard recordings of Frankie Trumbauer and it turned his life around. Charlie Parker heard recordings of Lester Young and it turned his life around. Charlie Parker's recordings turn everybody around.
    And they went to hear him. Traveling across country to do so in many cases.

    The sense in which I could agree with you is that owners of restaurants and the like would rather pay little or nothing for Muzak or have a CD playing than pay for live musicians.
    In that way, I can see what you're saying.
    In reality, nightclubs featuring all kinds of entertainment died because of television.
    Or so they say.
    If there were restaurants with live musicians, I would patronize them. If there were nightclubs such as those depicted in films of the 30s and 40s, I would be there in the audience.
    If vaudeville was happening, I would be there in the audience.

    But I'm glad there are films to show me what there once was.
    And I'm glad that there are recordings to show me the heights that musicians can reach and move me.

    Listening to live music turned my life around.
    Don't get me wrong.
    But don't try to take my records from me.
    I love those artists and their work with a passion that is continuously inspiring to me.


    Yet (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:21:14 PM EST
    another thought:

    Recordings and the experience of listening to live music are complementary yet different experiences.

    Recording music is an art in itself.
    It is music in a frame.

    Live music also sounds different than recorded music.
    There is absolutely no way, in my opinion, that live music can be captured on a recording. There is a dimension that cannot be captured. It is like looking at the sky with its clouds and enormous majesty and comparing it with a photo or a painting of the same subject. But that is not to say that a photo or painting of the sky cannot be overwhelmingly beautiful. It includes the soul of the artist.

    Yet another another thought:
    Clubs and concerts are very expensive for the most part.
    25 bucks to 100s for a seat - or the privilege of standing in an enormous auditorium or an uncomfortable nightclub.

    In days gone by, every corner restaurant had live music. A violin.
    A pianist; Or a small combo. And you could go to a bar and hear musicians jamming until all hours of the night and into the morning.  And that co-existed with the availability of records.
    So something else is at work.


    Bad Analogy Imo (none / 0) (#142)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 05:12:21 PM EST
    It is like looking at the sky with its clouds and enormous majesty and comparing it with a photo or a painting of the same subject. But that is not to say that a photo or painting of the sky cannot be overwhelmingly beautiful. It includes the soul of the artist.

    Performing music is art, artifice, not mature. Comparing the sky and a painting of the sky are not analogous to listening to live music or a recording.

    Performance is human expression, the sky and clouds something else entirely.  Performance can emulate nature, that is for sure but it is not nature, it is art.


    Human (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 05:42:39 PM EST
    expression, when it flows from the soul and not the ego, is completely analogous to the awesome majesty of nature.

    Expression that flows from the soul is an expression of nature.
    The fact that it is being expressed by a human being makes it no less a product of nature. That's why, imo, a work of art can seem so logical even though it seems to come from something that is completely intuitive.

    For example; Van Gogh's paintings - of his room - of a house and the sky. It makes sense, even though it makes no sense.

    Much like nature. It has its own logic. If you look at the photos coming back from distant planets, it is truly another world. There are lines and markings and mountains and valleys and craters that don't look like anything I have ever seen - yet they make sense. There is a logical perfection in every line. It is natural.

    And I feel that great music is no less natural.
    It makes sense even though it makes no sense.
    You can understand what the artist or the musician is saying even if you don't understand what the artist or musician is saying.

    Art is not artifice.
    It is a very deep expression of reality.


    I saw an original of VG's Bedroom at Arles, (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by shoephone on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 06:46:06 PM EST
    as well as a number of his other works, in a museum near the Petit Palais about 15 years ago. Small exhibit, "Van Gogh and Gaugin," with a wonderful array of interesting known and not-so-well-known works, including sketches under glass. Just me and two other patrons the evening the exhibit closed. I've never been that close to his paintings (one foot away) and it was a thoroughly mesmerizing and unforgettable experience.

    I (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:24:13 AM EST
    had a similar experience some time ago - being a foot away - and looking at the brush strokes - wondering how you could feel and see the individual stroke - the feeling that went into each one - and how they could all combine to reveal the image in the painting.

    And - it did go through my head at the time - wow - I'm that close to the painting. It was like I was in his studio - or seeing exactly what he had seen as he was painting.

    As you said, unforgettable.


    OK (none / 0) (#147)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:01:03 PM EST
    You have your own definition of art being the same as nature.

    It is diametrically opposed to nature, in my book.


    If (none / 0) (#148)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:20:07 AM EST
    you are moved by some art, and not by other art, to what would you ascribe the difference?

    A Variety or Reasons (none / 0) (#155)
    by squeaky on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:41:05 AM EST
    A few examples off the top of my head:

    The work was made by an artist that had no talent.

    The work is out of my reach, and I can not identify with it.

    The work does not fit into my sense of taste.

    The work made by a talented artist missed the mark.


    Basically, (none / 0) (#160)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 08:55:03 AM EST
    you just told me what doesn't get to you and why.

    But - is the opposite true?

    What is "the mark" - how do you experience it?


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by squeaky on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 09:14:24 AM EST
    THat is the most pertinent part of the equation.

    If art were nature, any living creature, or even the inanimate among us could produce art.

    Humans make art. It can, and often is inspired by nature (the sublime for instance). Many artists have steadfastly rejected nature as a model as well (Mondrian for example).

    Much bad art or art that I do not like is still art.  

    What makes the mark for me is when an art experience combines mental, emotional, and spiritual parts (more too I am sure), to draw me in and pay attention. It is like finding bread crumbs that appear to be leading somewhere, but there is no way of possibly finding the place where the breadcrumbs lead, and yet I continue to follow them.


    Well (none / 0) (#140)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:44:46 PM EST
    A lot of people are not aware of artists that they may want to hear, or see, with or without recordings.

    And, it is silly to argue because recording is the main vehicle for music dissemination today and that is not going to change, imo.

    But there was a time when there were no recordings, and musical life was rich, full and ubiquitous. Certainly performance practice was much more developed and varied than it is now. Performers took risks because music was ephemeral. Now performers are recorded and take few risks because there is a record of what they did. The standard is perfection, studio perfection, and so the goal is to get it to sound as good as the record.

    But we are where we are today, and there is no avoiding recording. Just good to keep in mind that recording is not music but a weak shadow of music.  


    One of my favorite "recordings" (none / 0) (#141)
    by christinep on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:57:20 PM EST
    predated digital ... before the hype and sell about the "purity" of sound absent any interference, human or otherwise.  Well, every few years, I listen to that old 33 1/3 Bach's Orchestral Suites where the touchingly human sound of Pablo Casals coughing mid-performance is there for all to hear. That is my kind of purity.

    Come to think of it, there is that well-known & memorable Harry Belafonte recording at Carnegie Hall in the '60s during which his side commentary, expressions, and audience interaction permeate and define "Mathilda."


    As a longtime composer and musical performer, (none / 0) (#77)
    by shoephone on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:20:37 AM EST
    all I can say is that your views do not reflect the reality of what it is to be a working musician. I have no idea where you get the idea a musician can make "boatloads" but that's extremely rare, particularly for those of us not playing pop. By the way, do you know anything about the expense and exhaustion of touring? Apparently not. And you missed the entire point of the article, which is that most artists are not wired to do marketing, promotion, and sales. And shouldn't have to.

    I really (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:29:59 AM EST
    identify with you shoephone - about not being wired for marketing, promotion, sales and the rest. I absolutely hate it. I don't like to have to do anything but show up and play.

    Creative expression vs. sales/promotion (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:15:53 PM EST
    It's hard, lentinel. They are two completely different skills. And setting aside the work of selling recordings, dealing with club owners takes extraordinary patience and a thick skin.

    The halls of history are littered with writers, painters, and musicians who never really achieved success in their lifetimes, even those who had patrons.

    When I saw those paintings up close for the first time it brought tears to my eyes. The bulk of the exhibit was from the collection of Dr. Paul Gachet, who took care of Vincent at the end.


    In the words of the Immortal Bard: (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 07:49:31 AM EST
    "I am an artist and should be exempt from shit."

    Actually, I think PJ Harvey said it, but you get the idea..


    OK (none / 0) (#101)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:14:46 AM EST
    So you are commercial musician, as was Ms Simone. I am not, but I work at my music every day for 4-6 hours or more and other arts the rest of my time.   I am a musician and a visual artist and also spend time with other creative practices. Art is reflected in almost every aspect of my life. I am rich because of that. Making money from art is not ever going to be the deciding factor of my continuing to make art and music. It is a life long struggle to get to something, and that something is not money.
    Not that I would be happy to receive cash for my efforts, just that it is nothing to do with my practice.

    The point of the article, or at least the one that resonated with me, is that Ms Simone stopped making music because she could not make money from it anymore. Financial success through recording was apparently her goal, and she did not like that life. And her talent moved with the cash, to writing. That is lucky for her. If she were not concerned about making money from recording, maybe she would still be making music, who knows.

    Recording is a way for people to make money, but it is not music. Music is in the moment, and never the same twice. It is a transference of live energy between people, and when it is good there is nothing like it. It is one of the highest forms of art, imo. Recordings have conditioned the masses to think that a record is  music. And more than not, these days, live music by a recording artist sounds just as dead as the record because that is the goal, to make a live performance sound just like the record, not the other way around.

    Sad state. But the true artist be they rich or poor, does not stop because they are nor selling records or paintings. Because making art is a life, that can not be any other way. It is not a path for the faint of heart or uncommitted.


    I read that opinion piece this morning. (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:57:27 PM EST
    Yesterday a guy came over to install Sonus and set up Pandora, which I have avoided using til now my pandora Radio "Gerald Finley Radio" is streaming very beautiful music by wonderful singers. But here's the thing. Are these artists receiving any financial benefit from this streaming of their recordings?  

    Some songwriters don't seem to think so. (none / 0) (#72)
    by EL seattle on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:44:26 PM EST
    Jimmy Webb seems to be the latest artist who's criticizing Pandora's behavior towards songwriters.  I think there are also more than a few performers who aren't too happy with Pandora either.  

    I met Tim Westergren a few years back (none / 0) (#78)
    by shoephone on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 02:32:50 AM EST
    when he came to do a pow-wow session in Seattle. (This was when Pandora had just started, and he was trying to drum up business.) I also had some email communications with him after that, and he does not listen to his customers very well, and basically, does what he wants for the money. I hear he has since sold his stake in the company, is this true? In any case, I'd be interested to know why Spotify is able to pay a higher rate of royalties to musicians than Pandora.

    Tim is still making some money off the deal. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by EL seattle on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:39:12 AM EST
    According to this post, anyway.

    And of course, on September 3, Tim Westergren, the "musician's friend," made his usual monthly walking around money: $1,584,494.


    Music business (none / 0) (#81)
    by Mikado Cat on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:24:42 AM EST
    is weird. Its only about half business, but that portion is fairly ruthless. OTOH what musician makes music for the money?

    I think we are seeing something of a shift, and I can't say for sure how it will go in detail, but smaller artists are finding ways to get paid something, which is good.

    What is the best news is that its getting cheaper and cheaper to make really high quality recordings, so more and more have the opportunity for mass exposure without the middle man of traditional music industry acting as a toll gate.


    Have a nice birthday... (none / 0) (#76)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 12:24:01 AM EST
    despite everything else.

    So (none / 0) (#87)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:13:38 AM EST
    sorry you have to go through that moving scene.
    That is stressful enough - in addition to having to find another home - in addition to all the other pressing matters you mentioned.

    Sending you the best possible karma.

    And best possible wishes for your birthday.

    kdog (none / 0) (#90)
    by CoralGables on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:34:12 AM EST
    Like you I'm no Yankee fan, but 48,675 for a meaningless game for the pinstripes on a Thursday night in the Bronx to see the last appearance for 42 at the stadium made for one of the best sendoffs ever.

    Indeed... (none / 0) (#94)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 09:45:26 AM EST
    Hate the evil empire, not the player...a most fitting send off for one of the all-time greats.

    Anyone Know Why... (none / 0) (#99)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:21:11 AM EST
    ...these folks didn't step in to help a cop taking a beating ?

    I know.

    The New $100 Bill (none / 0) (#100)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:35:33 AM EST
    Very stonerific (none / 0) (#102)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:15:08 AM EST
    Lotta cool sh*t to stare at when bollocksed.

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 140 (none / 0) (#104)
    by Dadler on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:21:55 AM EST
    What fills the noggin of Ted Cruz. Hint: it ain't civics lessons. (link)

    Volume 139
    Volume 138

    TGIF, my friends. Lovely day here on the northern San Francisco peninsula. May yours be the same. Peace.

    Farked. (none / 0) (#105)
    by Edger on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 11:43:27 AM EST
    College Protests Against Absence of War Led by Professors
    Come gather round people wherever you roam.  And admit that the bullsh*t around you has grown.

    Students used to get out of tests and assignments by explaining to sympathetic professors that they had been busy protesting the war on Vietnam.  The times they are a changin.

    Today college professors lead teach-ins to protest the absence of an all-out U.S. war on Syria.  Back then, the public and the government trailed behind the activists.  Now the public has grown enlightened, and in a significant but limited way won over the government, blocking the missile strikes, but it's not just the U.S. President who looks mad enough to spit over the casus belli interruptus.  Professors are pissed.

    The University of Virginia's law school has another law school next door belonging to the U.S. Army.  The University has built a research "park" next door to the Army's "Ground Intelligence Center."  State funds are drying up, and the Pentagon's tap has been left all the way open.  This Central Virginian military industrial academic complex is where Washington finally had to turn to find anyone willing to pretend the famous aluminum tubes in Iraq might be for scary, scary nukes. In defense of that record, this week is Iraq War Beautification Week at the University of Virginia's Miller Center, always a gung-ho proponent of militarism.

    Practice standing on your head, maybe?

    Happy Birthday Jeralyn (It's the 28th, right?) (none / 0) (#180)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:44:15 PM EST
    Even though you are experiencing en extraordinary amount of stress and nonsense right now...hopefully the TL kid will take you out to dinner for cocktails, and steak grilled to perfection!

    Best of luck (none / 0) (#191)
    by Lora on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:56:17 PM EST
    When your life turns upside down, hang on and slog through and hope for better days soon.  Sounds like you're doing all that and then some.  All the best wishes as you go through the changes that are happening for you.

    (I second scribe's thoughts about storage.  You might give storage units a second thought, at least on a temporary basis to buy you a little time.)

    thanks everyone (none / 0) (#192)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 07:57:51 PM EST
    I appreciate all the suggestions and birthday wishes. I'll update on my progress after Breaking Bad, since I'm taking tonight off to watch TV.