Midnight Meme Of The Day!

by Noah

My! What an assortment of goons! So many of Trump's Pro-fa goons in one bigly photo collage! What more could a Republikook want? Autographs?

Tonight's meme is in honor of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band, the highly influential and ground-breaking album which was released this month in 1967 by The Beatles, much to the consternation of people just like those shown who had just spent the previous year publicly burning the legendary band's albums and inhaling the melting PVC. Talkin' 'bout you Kellyanne!

It figures that Cadet Bone Spurs would spell "Sargent" incorrectly on his album cover. After all, Traitor Don has so little familiarity with military things. But, I notice that he had no problem spelling "Corrupt" at all.

Barbara Lee, Lee Rogers Beatles Contest Ends Tomorrow

Tomorrow is the last day of our Beatles contest celebrating Barbara Lee's endorsement of Lee Rogers. The winner is going to get that very collectible, 32" x 24" iconic Beatles image up top. The portrait was shot by Robert Freeman, the band's favorite photographer, for the cover of With The Beatles. Freeman, who did 5 album covers for them starting in 1963, signed this one. Anyone who contributes-- any amount-- to Lee's campaign on this page will have an equal opportunity to "win" the thank you gift-- i.e, the Beatles photograph-- from Blue America. Tomorrow we'll randomly select one person to win.

Congresswoman Lee got to know Lee Rogers before she selected him as the first candidate she's decided to endorse for the 2014 cycle. "Lee, she told us, "is a young progressive who has seen firsthand how reckless economic doctrines have damaged the financial security of generations of Americans. In Congress, he will be an unwavering voice for individuals against the powerful political and monetary interests that want to continue to widen the gap between rich and poor… [He] believes that everyone deserves the chance to succeed, and he knows the value of hard work in making that happen. Thousands of immigrants in this country are working hard and making a better life for themselves and their families, and Lee believes they deserve an immigration system that gives them the chance to succeed… [He] wants to invest in science and technology, in infrastructure and education-- all of the things that will keep our country moving forward and ensure our children a bright and prosperous future."

Last week she concluded a letter to her own supporters, urging them to contribute to Lee's campaign, by telling that that he "is the kind of fighting Democrat I need working beside progressives like Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva, Alan Grayson and me in the House. I’m contributing to Lee. And, I hope you will too."

The Koch brothers are already in the race, pumping money into their shill candidate, corrupt conservative Tony Strickland, a carpetbagger from another district who hopes to use the Koch cash to buy himself a House seat in a district where even many Republicans don't like him and don't trust him. If you'd be willing to contribute to Lee Rogers' campaign you can do on the Beatles page here or on the regular Blue America ActBlue page here.

50 Years Ago Today: The Beatles

Noah wrote this piece for the 50th anniversary, on December 26, of Capitol Records' release of their first Beatles record. But of course the date most people remember is the Fab Foursome's tumultuous U.S. TV debut on The Ed Sullivan Show on February 9, 1964 -- by coincidence also a Sunday. It would seem a shame not to take advantage of that 50th anniversary to revisit this special reminiscence.


On December 26, 1963, hastily pushed up in response to public demand, Capitol Records released their first Beatles record, a single of "I Want to Hold Your Hand" backed with "I Saw Her Standing There." It wasn't the first Beatles release in the U.S., but it was the first by the group's official label (or any major one), and the first properly promoted and distributed. The rest, as they say, is history.

by Noah

As a youngster in the early 1960s, I had a portable radio. You’ve heard of "a boy and his dog" going everywhere together. Well, for me it was a boy and his radio. And it was always tuned to one of the three mainstream rock-and-roll radio stations we had in NYC in those days. Fifty years ago this week that radio never left my side, because I heard something new and exciting and I wanted to hear it every time it was played.

Radio wasn’t entirely segregated by a bunch of Clear Channel wingnuts in Texas in those days, either.



New York’s WMCA (the smallest of the three and the first to play The Beatles in New York City), WINS, and WABC played a real mix of music that kids of various backgrounds would like. If you didn't particularly favor a blatant corporately contrived, deliberately safe, teener pop song, chances were the next song would be more real and very much to your liking. You might hear an instrumental, followed by a soul song, followed by one of Phil Spector's genius "3-minute pop symphonies," as he called them, followed by some classic street-corner harmony group from either a white Italian neighborhood or a black neighborhood.

There'd be The Drifters, Elvis, Gene Pitney, Brenda Lee, a Buddy Holly already-then-"oldie," the Isley Brothers, even the stray Johnny Cash or more obscure country crossover hit, oddball comedic novelty hits too -- all mixed together in one enjoyable pastiche.

Not everything was ideal, to say the least, but we had diversity back then, if only on the radio (and on some sports teams). The term "niche marketing" was, thankfully, unknown. The mix of styles may have been scary to the conservatives of the day, but not to the kids. "Shout" by the Isley Brothers was a celebration, not a cause for fear. Even the small R&B stations at the upper end of the dial would play a record by a white artist if it was big enough and good enough: audio race-mixing, the stuff of conservative nightmares.

Believe it or not, however, there were many parts of this country in those days where the adult world had sought to ban rock-and-roll, and not just in the South. Conservatives saw the music as subversive. and to some extent they were right. Tough shit. Once an open-minded white kid heard James Brown, it was all over. The horse left the barn. Same thing with a black kid hearing Carl Perkins singing "Blue Suede Shoes."

The Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly types of the day were apoplectic. Even the old tradition of having the teenage audiences in concert auditoriums and gymnasiums divided by, ironically, a rope, with white kids on one side and "coloreds" on the other side was breaking down. While some white kids, egged on by their idiot parents, were protesting about their schools being integrated, the music scene was having a profound effect, and, of course, Washington was slow to notice.

THE BRITISH INVASION REVISITED

By 1963, something of immense importance was really brewing about 3500 miles east of New York. For years, white English kids had been seeking out American music of all kinds, particularly white rockabilly and black deep soul and blues. Sailors made a little money on the side by bringing back the American records to the U.K. port cities, especially Liverpool.

The English kids formed their own bands and played this music. Many of the original versions of such songs were not even heard on big-city stations like the New York ones I mentioned. They weren't even heard on most of the smaller stations. It never occurred to the U.K. kids that there was anything odd about performing this music themselves. Why should it? But it would have been more than a bit odd in most places in America. It would have scared the bejesus out of the so-called "grown-up" world.

During 1963, The Beatles were getting bigger and bigger in England, with a string of number-one hits and endless sold-out live shows in front of ecstatic audiences. In the U.S., we knew none of this. By then, The Beatles weren’t just covering American artists such as Arthur Alexander or The Shirelles, they were writing their own songs. That fact would have a tremendous impact on the American music industry. The Beatles showed that, if you could write good songs of your own, and be successful with them, you could cut out the Tin Pan Alley-style song-writing houses of the day. That was resented.

It was not all that The Beatles would change in mainstream pop music -- or the world, for that matter.

Before The Beatles hit the American airwaves, there were only rare appearances by U.K. artists on the charts. The 1962 instrumental hit "Telstar" by The Tornados was one example. At the end of 1963, The Beatles were about to kick the wall down and lead what seemed to be a takeover of the U.S. airwaves and charts by British artists. It was called the British Invasion. It was a sea change, but, interestingly, it didn't quite happen as overnight as it seemed back then, and is usually thought to have been even now.

By December of 1963, The Beatles had had four huge hits in England. They were "Love Me Do," "Please Please Me," "From Me to You," and "She Loves You." Hindsight is 20/20, but, incredibly, Los Angeles-based Capitol Records, who had the release rights to all four records, opted not to release them here. The American music industry had a lot invested, monetarily and taste-wise, in safer home-grown talent. It's hard to imagine now, but in 1963 and 1964 The Beatles were a bit unsettling to many. It was as if something about John Lennon's eyes and Paul McCartney's cuteness subconsciously threatened them and their precious status quo. To some, the sheer energy, enthusiasm, and exuberance that leaped off The Beatles' records was off-putting; don't want to wake up the kiddies, you know.

The band that would not only change pop culture, but change fashion, change the music industry, throw off the oppression of the prevailing conservative Pleasantville mindset, and simply change how so many of us think about things would have to wait.

THE AMERICAN MUSIC INDUSTRY LIKED HAVING CONTROL

The industry would determine what we would hear. They would determine what was good. They would determine what was safe for a country that was paranoid about foreign influence. These were conservative times. When Elvis had scared America, the industry responded with safe, sanitized, manufactured teen idols. Still, there was a lot of good stuff that got through. The radio stations had to play something, and it couldn't all be adult-approved crap.

All was not lost, however. Those first four Beatles singles did get released here, on small labels. The first three were released by Chicago-based Vee Jay Records, a record company that mostly featured an astoundingly brilliant array of American R&B and jazz, but also had one of the biggest white groups of the time in The Four Seasons. Unfortunately, Vee Jay was hugely overextended, and, although they recognized the talent of The Beatles, they didn't have the financial resources to promote them. Even so, "From Me to You" actually did get significant radio play in the Los Angeles market. The folks at KRLA got it. They saw that the song wasn't all that different from an Everly Brothers song. It just had a third harmony vocal. What was not to like? "From Me to You" reached number 32 on their chart. Too bad Vee Jay couldn't react fast enough. It might have saved their company.

One station on the East Coast was also aware of The Beatles: WORC, in Worcester, Massachusetts. For the week of December 6, 1963, both sides of the "She Loves You" single -- on Philadelphia-based Swan Records -- made their Top 10, with the B-side, the inventive minor-key "I'll Get You" being their number 1, the first number-one record by The Beatles on any chart in America! "She Loves You" was number 9. It was a portent of things to come.

Interestingly, none other than Dick Clark called the shots at Swan. They were smart enough to put out the record and even had the rights to future releases, but when Clark asked his promo people what they thought, he was literally told, "They're just a bunch of long-haired kids. Forget them." That answer alone goes a long way toward explaining the state of the American music industry in 1963. They even had the evidence at WORC, which based its charts just on listener requests. They just couldn't grasp the meaning. If you think things have changed all that much in today's music industry, guess again. As Jim Morrison once said, "The men don't know, but the little girls, they understand."

I had seen a clip of The Beatles on the Jack Paar TV show.


(I know the clip has a glitch in the beginning, but it's too meaningful not to include, warts and all.)

Paar was somewhat amused and bewildered by what was happening in England, but he thought it was of interest, so he showed it. Before that there was the old and staid CBS News with an idiotic and contempt-filled but informative report by their London correspondent, Alexander Kendrick. Walter Cronkite ran the Kendrick piece on 11/21/63, the day before the JFK murder in Dallas. Mike Wallace ran it on the morning of 11/22/63. To his credit, Cronkite reran the piece on 12/10/63, correctly thinking that events had overshadowed the report and that Americans could use a bit of lighter news.



To this day I generally feel that the corporate news people shouldn't even bother when it comes to reporting on popular culture. They incessantly prove that they are doomed to never get it. They live and operate in a parallel universe. Paar, who was an entertainer and not a news guy, despite his snark is honest and knows that something is going on. Kendrick would fit in just fine on Fox and Friends or any of the other network morning-show atrocities. Call him the Steve Doocy or Ron Burgundy of his day.

"WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THIS MUSIC IN AMERICA?"

Ed Sullivan, on the other hand, ran his famous Sunday-night variety show not proclaiming to be an authority on art, but just knowing that if something was popular, it should be on his show. He considered that his job. So when he saw thousands of screaming kids as he walked through London's Heathrow Airport one day, he had the good sense to ask what was going on, and after meeting with Beatles manager Brian Epstein booked the band for three appearances starting on February 9, 1964. The Sullivan bookings convinced Capitol that maybe they had something. They scheduled The Beatles' fifth single, "I Want to Hold Your Hand," backed with "I Saw Her Standing There," for release on January 13th. They thought they were in control of the situation. They had no idea.

In Silver Spring, Maryland, a 15-year-old girl named Marsha Albert had seen the CBS report. She was so impressed by The Beatles that she wrote an impassioned letter to her favorite local station, WWDC. She asked, "Why can’t we have this music in America?" Why, indeed? Well, you see, Marsha, when corporate bozos put on their expensive suits and enter the hallowed halls of corporate bozoland, they lose all common sense. As Morrison said . . . .

Back in those days, however, radio stations were not only locally programmed, they actually did things like respond to the mail. There was even an FCC that felt that local radio stations should reflect the needs and wants of the local community. Not every station using the same format played exactly the same pre-approved songs from some right-wing turd in Texas. Not only that, but local DJs had at least a bit of freedom to decide if they wanted to play a record that they thought their listeners might like.

Enter WWDC disc jockey Carroll James. James had a stewardess friend who worked for BOAC, the predecessor to British Airways. He asked her to get some Beatles records for him. A few days later, she brought him an English pressing of "I Want to Hold Your Hand." He played it, and the request lines almost literally exploded. Other stations heard what was going on at WWDC and acted accordingly. No one had to get approval from some yahoo whose idea of a good time is lunch with Karl Rove. Capitol was forced to move up its release date to December 26th, 50 years ago today. Unlike Vee Jay and Swan, they had the wherewithal to properly promote the record and -- more importantly, in this case -- had enough pressing-plant capability and a large enough distribution arm set up to meet the demands of millions of U.S. kids who wanted what they wanted. By April, The Beatles would have the top five records in the country, a feat not matched before or since.

That’s the way it was, 50 years ago today.


By April 1964, The Beatles had the top five records in the U.S.

#

50 years ago today: The Beatles

On December 26, 1963, hastily pushed up in response to public demand, Capitol Records released their first Beatles record, a single of "I Want to Hold Your Hand" backed with "I Saw Her Standing There." It wasn't the first Beatles release in the U.S., but it was the first by the group's official label (or any major one), and the first properly promoted and distributed. The rest, as they say, is history.

by Noah

As a youngster in the early 1960s, I had a portable radio. You’ve heard of "a boy and his dog" going everywhere together. Well, for me it was a boy and his radio. And it was always tuned to one of the three mainstream rock-and-roll radio stations we had in NYC in those days. Fifty years ago this week that radio never left my side, because I heard something new and exciting and I wanted to hear it every time it was played.

Radio wasn’t entirely segregated by a bunch of Clear Channel wingnuts in Texas in those days, either.



New York’s WMCA (the smallest of the three and the first to play The Beatles in New York City), WINS, and WABC played a real mix of music that kids of various backgrounds would like. If you didn't particularly favor a blatant corporately contrived, deliberately safe, teener pop song, chances were the next song would be more real and very much to your liking. You might hear an instrumental, followed by a soul song, followed by one of Phil Spector's genius "3-minute pop symphonies," as he called them, followed by some classic street-corner harmony group from either a white Italian neighborhood or a black neighborhood.

There'd be The Drifters, Elvis, Gene Pitney, Brenda Lee, a Buddy Holly already-then-"oldie," the Isley Brothers, even the stray Johnny Cash or more obscure country crossover hit, oddball comedic novelty hits too -- all mixed together in one enjoyable pastiche.

Not everything was ideal, to say the least, but we had diversity back then, if only on the radio (and on some sports teams). The term "niche marketing" was, thankfully, unknown. The mix of styles may have been scary to the conservatives of the day, but not to the kids. "Shout" by the Isley Brothers was a celebration, not a cause for fear. Even the small R&B stations at the upper end of the dial would play a record by a white artist if it was big enough and good enough: audio race-mixing, the stuff of conservative nightmares.

Believe it or not, however, there were many parts of this country in those days where the adult world had sought to ban rock-and-roll, and not just in the South. Conservatives saw the music as subversive. and to some extent they were right. Tough shit. Once an open-minded white kid heard James Brown, it was all over. The horse left the barn. Same thing with a black kid hearing Carl Perkins singing "Blue Suede Shoes."

The Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly types of the day were apoplectic. Even the old tradition of having the teenage audiences in concert auditoriums and gymnasiums divided by, ironically, a rope, with white kids on one side and "coloreds" on the other side was breaking down. While some white kids, egged on by their idiot parents, were protesting about their schools being integrated, the music scene was having a profound effect, and, of course, Washington was slow to notice.

THE BRITISH INVASION REVISITED

By 1963, something of immense importance was really brewing about 3500 miles east of New York. For years, white English kids had been seeking out American music of all kinds, particularly white rockabilly and black deep soul and blues. Sailors made a little money on the side by bringing back the American records to the U.K. port cities, especially Liverpool.

The English kids formed their own bands and played this music. Many of the original versions of such songs were not even heard on big-city stations like the New York ones I mentioned. They weren't even heard on most of the smaller stations. It never occurred to the U.K. kids that there was anything odd about performing this music themselves. Why should it? But it would have been more than a bit odd in most places in America. It would have scared the bejesus out of the so-called "grown-up" world.

During 1963, The Beatles were getting bigger and bigger in England, with a string of number-one hits and endless sold-out live shows in front of ecstatic audiences. In the U.S., we knew none of this. By then, The Beatles weren’t just covering American artists such as Arthur Alexander or The Shirelles, they were writing their own songs. That fact would have a tremendous impact on the American music industry. The Beatles showed that, if you could write good songs of your own, and be successful with them, you could cut out the Tin Pan Alley-style song-writing houses of the day. That was resented.

It was not all that The Beatles would change in mainstream pop music -- or the world, for that matter.

Before The Beatles hit the American airwaves, there were only rare appearances by U.K. artists on the charts. The 1962 instrumental hit "Telstar" by The Tornados was one example. At the end of 1963, The Beatles were about to kick the wall down and lead what seemed to be a takeover of the U.S. airwaves and charts by British artists. It was called the British Invasion. It was a sea change, but, interestingly, it didn't quite happen as overnight as it seemed back then, and is usually thought to have been even now.

By December of 1963, The Beatles had had four huge hits in England. They were "Love Me Do," "Please Please Me," "From Me to You," and "She Loves You." Hindsight is 20/20, but, incredibly, Los Angeles-based Capitol Records, who had the release rights to all four records, opted not to release them here. The American music industry had a lot invested, monetarily and taste-wise, in safer home-grown talent. It's hard to imagine now, but in 1963 and 1964 The Beatles were a bit unsettling to many. It was as if something about John Lennon's eyes and Paul McCartney's cuteness subconsciously threatened them and their precious status quo. To some, the sheer energy, enthusiasm, and exuberance that leaped off The Beatles' records was off-putting; don't want to wake up the kiddies, you know.

The band that would not only change pop culture, but change fashion, change the music industry, throw off the oppression of the prevailing conservative Pleasantville mindset, and simply change how so many of us think about things would have to wait.

THE AMERICAN MUSIC INDUSTRY LIKED HAVING CONTROL

The industry would determine what we would hear. They would determine what was good. They would determine what was safe for a country that was paranoid about foreign influence. These were conservative times. When Elvis had scared America, the industry responded with safe, sanitized, manufactured teen idols. Still, there was a lot of good stuff that got through. The radio stations had to play something, and it couldn't all be adult-approved crap.

All was not lost, however. Those first four Beatles singles did get released here, on small labels. The first three were released by Chicago-based Vee Jay Records, a record company that mostly featured an astoundingly brilliant array of American R&B and jazz, but also had one of the biggest white groups of the time in The Four Seasons. Unfortunately, Vee Jay was hugely overextended, and, although they recognized the talent of The Beatles, they didn't have the financial resources to promote them. Even so, "From Me to You" actually did get significant radio play in the Los Angeles market. The folks at KRLA got it. They saw that the song wasn't all that different from an Everly Brothers song. It just had a third harmony vocal. What was not to like? "From Me to You" reached number 32 on their chart. Too bad Vee Jay couldn't react fast enough. It might have saved their company.

One station on the East Coast was also aware of The Beatles: WORC, in Worcester, Massachusetts. For the week of December 6, 1963, both sides of the "She Loves You" single -- on Philadelphia-based Swan Records -- made their Top 10, with the B-side, the inventive minor-key "I'll Get You" being their number 1, the first number-one record by The Beatles on any chart in America! "She Loves You" was number 9. It was a portent of things to come.

Interestingly, none other than Dick Clark called the shots at Swan. They were smart enough to put out the record and even had the rights to future releases, but when Clark asked his promo people what they thought, he was literally told, "They're just a bunch of long-haired kids. Forget them." That answer alone goes a long way toward explaining the state of the American music industry in 1963. They even had the evidence at WORC, which based its charts just on listener requests. They just couldn't grasp the meaning. If you think things have changed all that much in today's music industry, guess again. As Jim Morrison once said, "The men don't know, but the little girls, they understand."

I had seen a clip of The Beatles on the Jack Paar TV show.


(I know the clip has a glitch in the beginning, but it's too meaningful not to include, warts and all.)

Paar was somewhat amused and bewildered by what was happening in England, but he thought it was of interest, so he showed it. Before that there was the old and staid CBS News with an idiotic and contempt-filled but informative report by their London correspondent, Alexander Kendrick. Walter Cronkite ran the Kendrick piece on 11/21/63, the day before the JFK murder in Dallas. Mike Wallace ran it on the morning of 11/22/63. To his credit, Cronkite reran the piece on 12/10/63, correctly thinking that events had overshadowed the report and that Americans could use a bit of lighter news.



To this day I generally feel that the corporate news people shouldn't even bother when it comes to reporting on popular culture. They incessantly prove that they are doomed to never get it. They live and operate in a parallel universe. Paar, who was an entertainer and not a news guy, despite his snark is honest and knows that something is going on. Kendrick would fit in just fine on Fox and Friends or any of the other network morning-show atrocities. Call him the Steve Doocy or Ron Burgundy of his day.

"WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THIS MUSIC IN AMERICA?"

Ed Sullivan, on the other hand, ran his famous Sunday-night variety show not proclaiming to be an authority on art, but just knowing that if something was popular, it should be on his show. He considered that his job. So when he saw thousands of screaming kids as he walked through London's Heathrow Airport one day, he had the good sense to ask what was going on, and after meeting with Beatles manager Brian Epstein booked the band for three appearances starting on February 9, 1964. The Sullivan bookings convinced Capitol that maybe they had something. They scheduled The Beatles' fifth single, "I Want to Hold Your Hand," backed with "I Saw Her Standing There," for release on January 13th. They thought they were in control of the situation. They had no idea.

In Silver Spring, Maryland, a 15-year-old girl named Marsha Albert had seen the CBS report. She was so impressed by The Beatles that she wrote an impassioned letter to her favorite local station, WWDC. She asked, "Why can’t we have this music in America?" Why, indeed? Well, you see, Marsha, when corporate bozos put on their expensive suits and enter the hallowed halls of corporate bozoland, they lose all common sense. As Morrison said . . . .

Back in those days, however, radio stations were not only locally programmed, they actually did things like respond to the mail. There was even an FCC that felt that local radio stations should reflect the needs and wants of the local community. Not every station using the same format played exactly the same pre-approved songs from some right-wing turd in Texas. Not only that, but local DJs had at least a bit of freedom to decide if they wanted to play a record that they thought their listeners might like.

Enter WWDC disc jockey Carroll James. James had a stewardess friend who worked for BOAC, the predecessor to British Airways. He asked her to get some Beatles records for him. A few days later, she brought him an English pressing of "I Want to Hold Your Hand." He played it, and the request lines almost literally exploded. Other stations heard what was going on at WWDC and acted accordingly. No one had to get approval from some yahoo whose idea of a good time is lunch with Karl Rove. Capitol was forced to move up its release date to December 26th, 50 years ago today. Unlike Vee Jay and Swan, they had the wherewithal to properly promote the record and -- more importantly, in this case -- had enough pressing-plant capability and a large enough distribution arm set up to meet the demands of millions of U.S. kids who wanted what they wanted. By April, The Beatles would have the top five records in the country, a feat not matched before or since.

That’s the way it was, 50 years ago today.


By April 1964, The Beatles had the top five records in the U.S.

#

John Waltz-- Not The Kind of Democrat Who Embraces The Status Quo

Occupy The DCCC

On Wednesday the DCCC invited dozens of candidates from across the country to a big powwow in DC. As we saw last week, the DCCC is pimping the anti-Choice, anti-gay, anti-progressive Blue Dog Caucus, along with normal Democratic groups, to the new recruits. But they didn't invite all candidates. They've been scurrying around like nasty little sorority girls telling Democratic donors that Michigan blue collar progressive John Waltz isn't running. That's obviously untrue but even after they were corrected, they still didn't invite him to their shindig. He's the only Blue America candidate not invited. I dedicated some resources to finding out why. And, sure enough, "ex"-Blue Dog Steve Israel or one of his cronies, who just never feel comfortable with blue collar candidates, found a less progressive person to try to shove on the ballot, Mike O'Brien.

Maybe Israel doesn't feel comfortable with Waltz's involvement with OccupyWallStreet. Israel's power flows from his ability to aggregate dirty cash from Wall Street, K Street and the institutions of the 1%. He probably doesn't feel especially comfortable when Democrats say things like what Waltz told us last week:

"What started out with a handful of folks on a windy day in Kalamazoo ended up growing into a protest with over 200 people as part of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Talking to several folks I could tell that they were frustrated that the top one percent of this nation is being coddled while the rest of us are getting trampled on. I heard concerns that ranged from economics to education and they were focused on making a difference.

"It was an honor to take part in this day of action in Kalamazoo. While we marched the streets with the sound of chants and drums there were several folks who were honking in support. It appears that the sleeping masses have awoken and there is a sea change coming. Question is whether this can be sustained and the answer I heard was a resounding yes."

I called Waltz and asked him if he knew anything about the DCCC trying to bum-rush his race with a business-oriented candidate. He didn't but he told me that "[t]his news does not come as a surprise to me. I am not the type of guy who will go along to get along and follow the status quo. Folks in Michigan's Sixth and across this nation are tired of establishment candidates who are not willing to step on a few toes to get things done. As one of the ninety-nine per centers I know exactly what folks are going through, which is why I will not be serving corporations, organizations, or my party. I will only serve and be held accountable to my constituents. I am sure this attitude does not fit well in the establishment's agenda, but I am proud to be a fighter."

The other day Digby wrote about how OccupyWallStreet was able to fend off demands from very factions-- some just naive, some apparently hoping for a violent revolution-- that the movement completely reject the American political system. What's the alternative to democracy, even one as flawed as our own-- and please remember who has the guns... and the stomach to use them. And now there's a website dedicated to criticizing OccupyWallStreet from... I guess the left.

Our political system is rigged and it is working very well for the moneyed interests who rigged it. As such, our ability as citizens to influence core policy is very limited. Their power structure is well insulated. Paradoxically, though, for it to continue its smooth run, it is instrumental that the educated classes entertain illusions of influence. Elections serve that purpose, and when those cease to produce the desired result, or promises are broken, the disappointed can replenish their optimism in protest movements that are eventually co-opted by their proximate establishment party. Accordingly, OWS currently doesn’t pose much of a threat to the corporate-government consortium. This, ironically, has much to do with the protesters belief in their own ability to influence and reform the system.

Sure... but John Waltz isn't Steny Hoyer or Debbie Wasserman Schultz or Steve Israel. Anyone know if kids these days still listen to old Beatles songs?

Streams Of Consciousness

Since my John Wayne random quote went over so well last night, I found another one-- from the same 1971 Playboy interview-- for tonight. Looks like African-Americans weren't the only ethnic group the right-wing icon had some antipathy for. Even off camera he didn't cotton to Native Americans much-- or at least didn't seem to be able to walk a mile in their shoes:

"I don't feel we did wrong in taking this country away from the Indians. There were great numbers of people who needed new land and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves."

Which circle of hell is that again? The fourth is for avarice. Of course, the seventh (for violence), eighth (for fraud) and ninth (for treachery) are far worse places to spend eternity, according to Dante... but what does he know?

Miss McConnell, Caught In A Deadly Obama/DeMint Pincer, Raises His White Boxers On A Stick And Surrenders On Earmarks

Jerry Lewis (R-CA) must be flipping out but it looks like earmarks will be going the way of the dodo bird. McConnell, a major earmarker from way back, could no longer take the intense pressure from both Obama and DeMint, DeMint backed by whatever power the teabaggers are reckoned to have.

In a floor speech, McConnell said: "There is simply no doubt that the abuse of this practice has caused Americans to view it as a symbol of the waste and out-of-control spending that every Republican in Washington is determined to fight.

"And unless people like me show the American people that we’re willing to follow through on small or even symbolic things, we risk losing them on our broader efforts to cut spending and rein in government," McConnell said. 

McConnell has been a staunch defender of earmarks, arguing that banning them simply cedes spending authority to the executive branch.

He acknowledged in a floor speech Monday that he was “not wild” about the ban, but said the “only way” to turn the corner on spending would be to make “difficult decisions.”

McConnell refused to apologize for his own earmarks. "Make no mistake, I know the good that has come from the projects I have helped support throughout my state," he said. 

“I’m not wild about turning over more spending authority to the executive branch," McConnell added. 

The Senate GOP conference is expected to hold a vote Tuesday on DeMint's voluntary ban.

Maybe This Is A Big Deal For The Kids

Today the Wall Street Journal reported that Steve Jobs is nearing the end of his long and winding pursuit of the Beatles catalog. Apple is about to announce that iTunes will finally be selling Beatles music.

Even as recorded-music sales have plummeted, the Beatles have remained one of the most reliable franchises in the business. In 2009, 39 years after breaking up, they sold the third-highest number of albums of any act in the U.S., according to Nielsen SoundScan, with 3.3 million copies sold.

In the past decade, the Beatles sold the second-highest number of albums of any artist (trailing Eminem by 2 million units), and the second-highest number of albums since SoundScan launched in 1991 (Garth Brooks has sold more), according to SoundScan.

The only significant holdouts left not selling through iTunes are Metallica, Led Zeppelin, Radiohead, and Tool.

I Found A Mistake In Markos' New Book

I'm loving American Taliban and I ration a few pages a day so I can stretch it out. And today I found a mistake. Markos was expanding on the assertion that "The American Taliban's longstanding attitude is that women who wear revealing clothes or unmarried women who have sex deserve the consequences of sexual assault, rape, sexually transmitted diseases, AIDS, etc." That's all perfectly true and well reflected in the attitude towards women in both Afghanistan and Alabama. But then Markos let his guard down for a moment to make a point:

Unlike Muslim extremists who want to stone or give public lashings to women who sexually misbehave, our American fundamentalists simply want to let them die.

This is partially true of the American Taliban-- but not for the hardest of the hard core. Take newly elected Florida psychopath Daniel Webster. This fringe maniac is a devout follower of cult fanatic Bill Gothard whose crackpot "religion" specifically does call for stoning-- and stoning to death-- women who misbehave. Let me throw in some B.E. Wilson:

As I've detailed in a recent Alternet story, Daniel Webster's intimate, over three decade long involvement with evangelist Bill Gothard appears similar to a classic guru-disciple or mentor-pupil relationship and has included speaking multiple times at Gothard's conferences, traveling with Gothard to Korea in 1996, using Bill Gothard's material to homeschool his six children, making an instructional video for Gothard's Institute For Basic Life Principles, and, when Webster became speaker of the Florida legislature in 1996, hiring four of Gothard's IBLP employees as high-level Florida State House staffers.

As I describe in my Alternet story, Alan Grayson's GOP Opponent Directly Tied to Christian Group That Wants Permanent Subordination of Women, according to the Vice President of the Chalcedon Institute, before the institute's founder, father of Christian Reconstructionism R.J. Rushdoony, died, Rushdoony nearly struck a deal with Gothard that would have allowed him to distribute Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law book, a template for implementing Biblical law in government.

Rushdoony was a virulently racist Holocaust denier who believed in Geocentrism, the proposition that the Sun, and all the heavens, rotate around the Earth, which is the center of creation.

Although the deal fell through because the two men held clashing positions about divorce (Gothard wanted to ban it altogether) they otherwise were in agreement including, apparently, on R.J. Rushdoony's vision of instituting stoning as a form of capital punishment for murder, adultery, homosexuality, idolatry, apostasy, and witchcraft.  
 
Asked about his 1996 trip to Korea with Bill Gothard, Daniel Webster told the Florida Gainesville Sun, for an August 5th, 1996 story, "I respect (Gothard) as much as anybody. I wouldn't have gone [with Gothard to Korea] but he wanted me there."

Interviewed for a February 16, 1997 story from the Florida newspaper the St. Petersburg Times, Webster stated, on Gothard, "I enjoy the advice he's given. I think it's been a major part of my life. I'm not ashamed of that. What he has said I believe to be the truth."

You see why the new congressman from Orlando is called "Taliban Dan?"

And Ole Steny...


He wasn't just the go-to-guy for the Blue Dogs, particularly the Blue Dogs who voted more frequently with the Republicans than with their own party. Now we find out, courtesy of another member of the Wall Street fraternity, that Steny is the Republicans' favorite Democrat too-- and not just because he and Boehner would rather be golfing. "Steny," says Ryan, "talks to us." Yeah, I bet he does.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee, suggested Republicans get along best with Hoyer, the second-ranking House Democrat who will stay in the No. 2 position in the next Congress.

"I get along pretty well with Steny. He's the only one we really talk to," Ryan said Monday morning on CNBC. "I don't know Nancy Pelosi. I had a 30-second conversation with her about six years ago, and that's about it."

...The Maryland Democrat is seen as an emissary to centrist Democrats in the House. And the incoming Republican majority, Ryan suggested, might see Hoyer as a better option for outreach compared to Pelosi, who will stay on as Democratic leader.

Does The Pope Get Down With The Beatles?

- by Noah

Yesterday, I came across an article from the Calgary Herald headlined “Pope Finally Forgives Beatles For Past Excesses.”  Wow, I thought. That’ll really make a difference in the lives (and afterlives) of everybody! Thank you soooo much!

It seems that for over 40 years, the Vatican has not turned the other cheek but held a grudge for the Beatles dope smoking, sexually promiscuous, and long hair growing lifestyle. The Vatican has even claimed something about “Satanic messages.” “Satanic messages?” The Beatles? Beats me. But, of course, the centerpiece de resistance of the Vatican (Vatanic?) 40 year snit fit has always been John Lennon’s infamous 1966 “We’re bigger than Jesus” quote; never mind that at the time, he was probably right, never mind that he didn’t say it in a boastful manner and there was more than a bit of incredulity in his voice as he uttered the damning words. The result was the Bible Belt burning of Beatles records and Lennon’s books, and an over the top reaction from the Catholic Church that made the church sound like they were needlessly insecure about their position in the great world order of things. The exact quote was:

“Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue about that; I’m right and I’ll be proved right. We’re more popular than Jesus now; I don’t know which will go first, rock ‘n’ roll or Christianity.”

Fair enough: there’s no telling which will go first in the long flow of time. Religions and musical styles have always come and gone in the long course of history. Usually, they are just absorbed into the next thing that comes along, not unlike Christians adopting the symbol of the Christmas tree from the European pagans in order to help spread their word. Even two years ago, the church forgave Lennon, saying his remark had only been “the boasting of an English working-class lad struggling to cope with unexpected success.” Well, no one could have predicted success on the scale of what the Beatles achieved. It’s well known that Lennon had a hard time with it and, as talented as he was, became increasingly incredulous over it. Listen to his songs “I’m A Loser”, “Help”, “I Found Out” or even “God” now. The man seemed to have some sort of love/hate thing going on with religion anyway. Hindsight is more than 20/20.
 
So, here we are in 2010 and the Vatican is dismissing perceived moral outrages that they’ve directed to the Beatles for all of these years. They offer “complete absolution.” Yeah? Well, who the hell are you? A bunch of old guys in funny clothes who, like some politicians we could name, claim to speak for a god that would, if even half of the allegations about you were true would have nothing to do with you?

The Pope? Mr. Hitler Youth himself? The Vatican? The team that not only remained silent at best during World War Two but even helped usher nazi war criminals over to a new life in South America? Rampant pedophilia? Priests likening those who make charges to anti-semites? Hell, Mr. Popo, you’re damn lucky some old testament god hasn’t hurled a few megawatt lightning bolts at you or turned you into a pillar of petrified dogshit to be sniffed and urinated upon by centuries and centuries of happy puppies! Who the hell are you to forgive ANYONE? Mr. Popo, you are truly the emperor without clothes. As Ringo said yesterday:

“I think the Vatican has more to talk about than The Beatles.”

Well said, Ringo. As usual, you are a man of few but very succinct words.
 
So what’s this forgiving The Beatles all about? What happened? Why now? Could this all be just a little diversion thrown out there when you’re getting some mighty bad press? I hardly think it will change The Beatle’s lives, including the two that are gone. Is John’s soul happily rejoicing over the proclamation today? Hey, if you’re the Pope and if things are bad and you’re worried about being pelted with the finest rotten Italian tomatoes the next time you venture out. If you’re El Popo, why not take it even further, saying you’ve always loved The Beatles. Some of your people have said as much this week, but it was just that damn sex and drugs and rock ‘n’ roll stuff. It was so bothersome. Hmmm, maybe it’s all the sin of envy, eh? C’mon, Ratboy. Come out of the closet and admit… that you’ve always been a Beatles fan, ever since their Hamburg days! Maybe you even knew their manager, eh? Knew him well, did ya? What better time than now? You need to create a little more diversion. Align yourself with The Beatles! There’s nothing like choosing to align yourself with a winner that millions adore the world over when the chips are down. Is that what this is all about? It’s like saying you love a nice spring day or “I like winning the lottery.” What’s not to like? Is this a case of “See, I’m not so bad. I’m so much just like you. Love me. PLEASE LOVE me!”
 
This afternoon, I received a vision from God. The Pope was whizzing around the seven hills of Rome in an Italian sports car. I think it was a 1966 Ferrari. He was smoking a bone and noshing on an over-sized bratwurst with some sauerkraut while listening to an 8-track of “Abbey Road,” or was it the Lennon produced David Peel and The Lower East Side album entitled “The Pope Smokes Dope.” That wild hat stayed on the whole time. The Jesus on the dash just smiled and bobbed to the sounds.

Will Obama Sleep Through His Remaining Three Years?

I don't know much about Martha Coakley. I doubt she's any more crappy than the rest of our nation's embarrassingly horrible political class-- although she did seem to want to break the world-record for conceding defeat last night. (Boneheaded? Sure, though not nearly as boneheaded as Virginia ConservaDem Jim Webb's declaration that there should be no votes in the Senate until Brown is seated, a bizarre approach considering that the other 99 senators were also elected by citizens of this country.) I don't want to blame Coakley for what happened, although I'm sure 52-47% vote could have been turned around with a better candidate. I thought Rep. Mike Capuano was a way better candidate, but Democrats in Massachusetts lightly attended primary picked Coakley and she... promptly went on a vacation and gave the Republicans all the time they needed to define Scott Brown and to define her. And that was that.

The media had their narrative in the can and ready to break out: "Democrats are too liberal." And you get a couple of bad faith reactionaries like Evan Bayh and Holy Joe Lieberman to repeat it on TV a couple of times and a chorus of other Republican-like Democrats to do the same and the Village will have it playing from every jukebox in the joint.

I know this sounds crass and worse but Obama's place in the history books is already assured. Aside from having been elected president-- almost always a big deal-- he's the first Black president. The "Hope and Change" thing was like a slogan, not a program and by the time he announced appointments like Rahm Emanuel and Lawrence Summers and his appendage Tim G, only the hopelessly naive could still persuade themselves that there was any hope for change. I hate to say "I told you so"-- worse is telling myself I told me so-- but Obama's Senate voting record (kind of an unattractive cross between his ConservaDem colleagues Joe Lieberman and Max Baucus) predicted it all. Agent of change? Well... symbolic change. And that's a biggie. But beyond that? Don't count on it. If you see Rahm move off to his destiny as heir to the legacy of Richard J. Daley, the next Capo di tutti capi of the Chicago Democratic Machine, maybe Obama is deciding to reach for the sky. But that's really unlikely. Turning the health care travesty into a straight-out expansion of Medicare-- the nightmare of the predatory, bribe-dispensing Insurance Industry and Medical-Industrial Complex-- is as unlikely as Obama actually turning on his-- and the political class'-- financiers on Wall Street or ending Bush's War, now his own, against Afghanistan. Last night Andy Stern, president of the SEIU said, "The reason Ted Kennedy's seat is no longer controlled by a Democrat is clear: Washington's inability to deliver the change voters demanded in November 2008. Make no mistake, political paralysis resulted in electoral failure."

What a hassle that would be for Obama to try to deliver! And who knows if he could accomplish anything! Doing nothing much... well, like I said, his place in history is set. Last night Peter Daou, a longtime respected blogger and former Hillary Clinton advisor, pointed out on HuffPo that liberal bloggers had indeed told Obama so. He points out that Obama "hasn't been true enough to fundamental Democratic principles, has embraced some of Bush's worst excesses on civil liberties, and has ditched popular ideas (like the public option) in favor of watered down centrist policies, thus looking weak and ineffectual."

[W]hen you fail to govern based on a morally sound, well-articulated, solidly-grounded set of ideals, you look weak. All the legislative wins in the world won't change that. People gravitate to people who exude moral authority. The vast majority of voters lack the detailed policy knowledge that would enable them to make an accurate assessment of policy differences, but they do have a visceral sense of when a candidate or an elected official believes in something and fights for it. It's why campaigns are laden with moral arguments; politicians ask to be elected because they'll "do the right thing." The right thing in the current administration's case was to be the anti-Bush, nothing more, nothing less. The ethical antidote to a radical administration. It was both politically smart and morally right. And it worked wonders for Democrats as the entire subtext of the 2008 campaign.

The problem was that immediately after the election, like one nano-second after, Obama and his centrist, defensive team Democrats began "undermining themselves with faux-bipartisanship and tepid policies."



Is there a message here? Sure-- Better Democrats, that's the message Democrats, the Village and the whole political class will understand... if we can deliver it. Wanna help? Hit that link on "Better Democrats."

"America -- land of the free and the armed and the crazy"

by Ken

When I came across this December 1980 entry in Michael Palin's newly published Diaries 1980-1988: Halfway to Hollywood and realized I had to share it, for a moment I was disappointed that we'd missed the anniversary by just a week-and-a-bit. Then I was relieved; it's not an occasion I would want to feel as if we were "celebrating."

As the entry begins, Michael is on the railway platform near his home in northwest London, waiting for a train that will eventually take him to Southwold on the Suffolk coast, where his mother lives. He runs into a schoolmate of his 11-year-old son Tom, who delivers news that alters his world.

Tuesday, December 9th, Southwold

At Gospel Oak station by a quarter to nine to combine a visit to Southwold with my first opportunity to thoroughly revise the Time Bandits for publication at Easter. [Michael had co-written the Time Bandits screenplay with the director, fellow Python Terry Gilliam, and also appeared in the film, which had been shot but was then still in postproduction.]

It's a dull and nondescript morning -- the shabby, greying clouds have warmed the place up a bit, but that's all. I reach the station in good time. Holly Jones is waiting for her train to school, having just missed the one in front with all her friends on. It's she who tells me that over in New York John Lennon has been shot dead.

A plunge into unreality, or at least into the area of where comprehension slips and the world seems an orderless swirl of disconnected, arbitrary events. How does such a thing happen? How do I, on this grubby station platform in north-west London, begin to comprehend the killing of one of the Beatles? The Rolling Stones were always on the knife-edge of life and death and sudden tragedy was part of their lives, but the Beatles seemed the mortal immortals, the legend that would live and grow old with us. But now, this ordinary December morning, I learn from a schoolgirl that one of my heroes has been shot dead.

My feelings are of indefinable but deeply-felt anger at America. This is, after all, the sort of random slaying of a charismatic, much-loved figure in which America has specialised in the last two decades.

Once I get to Southwold I ring George.* And leave a message, because he's not answering.

I work through for a five-hour stretch and we have a drink together by the fire and watch tributes to John Lennon, clumsily put together by newsroom staff who know a good story better than they know good music. And Paul McCartney just says 'It's a drag' and, creditably I think, refuses to emote for the cameras.

What a black day for music. The killer was apparently a fan. The dark side of Beatlemania. The curse that stalks all modern heroes, but is almost unchecked in America -- land of the free and the armed and the crazy.

*George Harrison was a passionate Monty Python fan, and from the group's inception had been eager to find ways to work with them. Unlike your average show-biz phony, he followed through, devoting both time and money to Python-related projects, eventually serving as an executive producer on a number of movies by Pythons jointly and separately. Michael P developed a cordial relationship with him, and paints an affectionate portrait in the first volume of his diaries, Diaries 1969-1979: The Python Years.




FAN-WORSHIP POSTSCRIPT

By odd chance, a week-and-change later Michael -- in agony with a foot problem that seems to become more painful after each treatment -- hobbles with his wife (who "has looked in her books and is bandying words like 'toxaemia' around") to an opening-night showing of Woody Allen's Stardust Memories, which is steeped in its creator's discomfort with his too-admiring fans.

The cinema is full and I like the film very much indeed. But I can see that my appreciation of some of the scenes depicting horrific excesses of fan worship comes from having experienced this sort of thing and viewed from the other side, this could be seen as Allen kicking his fans in the teeth.

Though my foot still throbs angrily, I feel the worst is over. I have been cured by a Woody Allen movie!

#

Happy Teabagger Protest Day!

Toiling diligently against the interests of working families

Today is tax day and many Republican extremists and their rightist allies are celebrating with teabag parties denigrating the country in an orgy of selfishness. The DCCC is marking the day by reminding voters in selected districts that their congressional representative opposed President Obama's tax cuts for working families and his economic recovery package. The DCCC is reminding voters that "Representative Young [and that goes for either Don in Alaska or Bill in Florida] just said no to the largest middle class tax cut in history that immediately puts money back in their pockets and helps families afford college tuition for their kids."

Explaining the radio ads they are running in several Republican-held districts, Jennifer Crider, the DCCC Communications Director tied it to today's events. “This year on Tax Day, Michigan’s middle class families can thank Representative Thaddeus McCotter for voting against middle class tax cuts that put money back in their pockets to help them make ends meet during this economic crisis. Times are tough, middle class families who are worried about keeping their jobs and paying for their kids’ college education want action in the form of middle class tax cuts and economic recovery, not Representative McCotter’s 'just say no' obstruction.” Listen to the ad running in Wayne and Oakland Counties today:



The ads in Livonia and Detroit radio can almost be heard in South Bend and Elkhart, Indiana; but they can't. The DCCC would have to change the name "McCotter" and run them on stations in those two hard-pressed cities to let the voters know that the congressman from that district, who has opposed President Obama nearly as much as McCotter-- and who has voted against some of the same bills the DCCC is complaining that McCotter obstructed-- also deserves to be defeated in 2010. But they won't do that because the congressman from Indiana's second district is Joe Donnelly, a quasi-Democrat. Aside from neo-Confederate kook Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Donnelly has spent more time crossing the aisle to vote with the Republicans against Obama than any other Democrat. Odd in a district where McCain could only muster 45% of the vote. At least Childers can point out that Obama only drew 38% in his district and that supporting his policies could be very dangerous politically. Donnelly's constituents, on the other hand, voted for the very tax cuts and agenda for change that Obama proposed and Donnelly opposed. Joe Donnelly doesn't deserve to serve another term in Congress-- especially not as a Democrat-- any more than Thaddeus McCotter does.

Yesterday George Harrison was posthumously given a star on Hollywood Blvd-- actually around the corner on Vine in front of the old Capitol Records tower. Here's a little clip I put together of the tongue-in-cheek song he wrote to kick off the 1966 album Revolver by The Beatles, dedicated to the 176 Republicans and 20 Democrats who voted against President Obama's middle class tax cut on April 2, especially Thaddeus McCotter and Joe Donnelly, and to the 750 teabagger parties being thrown to protest a slight rise in the tax rate for millionaires to help finance a decrease in taxes on the middle class. Some of the very worst shills for the richest families in America, like John Boehner (R-OH) and Paul Ryan (R-WI) will be speaking at some of these rallies although they voted against President Obama's tax cuts. Most members of the Republican Party Establishment, however, are avoiding the teabaggers. Mitt Romney is hiding under his bed of course-- way too close to Bastille Day for him-- and Governors Palin, Huntsman and Barbour are all staying away-- as are Eric Cantor and Miss McConnell.

The conservative grass roots are into them-- thanks in part to Fox and [hate] talk radio-- but the enthusiasm has not spread throughout the party to the point that these events are command performances for Republican officials.

The concern, it would seem: being associated with a flop or an event that one cannot control and may feature language not entirely keeping with mainstream political discourse.

Teabagger Tax Day from Howie Klein on Vimeo.


Unlike the crazy, violence-spewing Republicans being herded little sheep into their teabag parties, President Obama is marking tax day by underscoring his administration's commitment to restoring the kind of fairness to the tax code-- providing relief to ordinary working families-- that was wrecked by decades of Republican ideological dominace in DC.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is based on the simple premise: what is good for working families is good for the economy and what is good for the economy is good for working families. Specifically, cutting taxes for working families helps to create jobs because these families are the most likely to spend the money. And staving off a deep recession disproportionately helps working families that would have been most likely to get hurt by the recession. Here are some of the highlights of the plan:
 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: A Plan to Create Jobs and Help Families
 
*     95% of all working families  will receive a tax cut
 
*     70% of the tax benefits goes to the middle 60% of American workers
 
*     2 million families will be lifted out of poverty by the tax cuts in the Recovery Act
 
*     More than $150 billion in tax cuts will help low-income and vulnerable households during the economic recovery
 
*     About 1 Million jobs will be created or saved by these tax cuts alone
 
*     Already, over $3 billion of tax credits have been paid out to first-time homebuyers. 

SO WHAT'S THIS WRITERS' STRIKE ALL ABOUT?

Last night a new cleaned-up, DVD version of The Beatles' Help! was screened for a select audience of Hollywood movers and shakers. At the last minute, a call went out from Olivia Harrison's office explaining that in deference to the striking workers and their families the screening was being moved from Paramount Studios, which is being picketed, to a private venue.

Olivia Harrison and the Beatles camp understands the significance of this strike. It isn't hard to understand. The have a website and a really good video that will make you a strike expert in 2 minutes. Give it a look:

If you've ever wondered how music works its magic on us, an expert on the subject undertakes to explain why most everybody loves the Beatles

"Today the Beatles catalogue is cross-culturally loved--the product of a six-year burst of creativity unparalleled in modern music. . . .

"On the bus to my office, the radio played 'And I Love Her' and a Portuguese immigrant my grandmother's age sang along. . . .

"One hundred years from now Beatles songs may be so well known that every child will learn them as nursery rhymes, and most people will have forgotten who wrote them. They will have become sufficiently entrenched in popular culture that it will seem as if they've always existed, like 'Oh Susannah', 'This Land Is Your Land', and 'Frere Jacques'."
--Daniel J. Levitin (author of This Is Your Brain on Music), in "Beatles on your brain," in The Guardian (June 2)

I can tell you to the year how long I've known Howie: since 1961, the year my family moved to Brooklyn and the year he and I entered James Madison High School. One of the curious features of our relationship is that, while music has been at the center of both our lives, our musical tastes couldn't be more different--he's all rock and I'm all classical. Even so, though, it's been a bond of sorts, and it was only natural that when he was in New York awhile back, he mentioned a book by a McGill University colleague-friend of his (one thing you learn about Howie is that he knows everybody) which has--apparently to the surprise of the author and publisher--turned into something of a runaway hit.

The book is called This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession, and as Howie told me what he knew about it, I began to suspect that his friend Dan Levitin--who rather uniquely is trained as both a musician and a neuroscientist--has been researching a subject I've grown more and more curious about over the decades: how music works on us. Dan has actually figured out how to research the subject scientifically in his lab at McGill, drawing on his dual background in music and psychology. (Before he drifted into scientific research, he did some serious pop record producing.)

Howie even wangled me a precious author's copy from the author (moral: knowing people who know people can be lucky), and I've fiddled with it a bit, but I haven't had a chance to attack it with the attention it deserves, which I look forward to doing as soon as I can get my head clear enough. Alas, the daily assault of the real world leaves me fantasizing about reading a book purely for stimulation and pleasure the way God meant for us to fantasize about having lurid sex.

Now I've gotten a foretaste from a piece Dan has written for The Guardian on the occasion of the Sgt Pepper 40th anniversary, and I suppose with a view to the forthcoming British publication of This Is Your Brain on Music. In the piece, he backs up his love for the Beatles' music with some of what he's learned in his research.

He has no doubt about the quality or longevity of that music:

The Beatles incorporated classical elements into rock music so seamlessly that it is easy to forget that string quartets and Bach-like countermelodies and bass lines (not to mention plagal cadences) did not always populate pop music. Music changed more between 1963 and 1969 than it has in the 37 years since, with the Beatles among the architects of that change. Paul McCartney may be the closest thing our generation has produced to Schubert--a master of melody, writing songs that seem to have been there all along.

If you too have ever wondered about how music--of all kinds--operates on us, let Dan explain.

Why can we listen to certain songs across a lifetime and still find pleasure in them? Great songs activate deep-rooted neural networks in our brains that encode the rules and syntax of our culture's music. Through a lifetime of listening, we have learned what is essentially a complex calculation of statistical probabilities of what chord is likely to follow what, and how melodies are formed. Skilful composers play with these expectations, meeting and violating them in interesting ways. In my laboratory we've found that listening to a familiar song that you like activates the same parts of the brain as sex or opiates do. But there is no one song that does this for everyone; musical taste is both variable and subjective.

From the dual vantage point of the brain researcher and the musician-slash-music professor, Dan concludes:

To a neuroscientist, the Beatles' longevity can be explained by the fact that their music creates subtle and rewarding schematic violations of popular musical forms, causing a symphony of neural firings from the cerebellum to the prefrontal cortex. To a musician, each listening showcases subtle nuances not heard before, details of arrangement and intricacy that slowly reveal themselves across hundreds or thousands of listenings. I have to admit, they're getting better all the time.

UPDATE: STERLING

Actually, I meant Stirling, Stirling Newberry of The Agonist. He's written a fascinating, totally killer review of Dan's book.