d_rawk

A Look at Alito's Legal Career

So far, it seems to me that Bush has done as well as he could here. He wanted to avoid a fight with the Democrats with his appointment of Miers, but ended up in a fight with the Republicans instead - including some of his previous unconditional supporters like Canada's own David Frum.

Now he's bound to get a fight with the Dems, but I'd be surprised if this appointment doesn't make it through. The right-wing is happy, the centre won't find a whole lot to be upset about, and the left knows that it could have been a lot worse if Bush wasn't fighting so many other battles on so many other fronts right now and had the energy or resources to devote to a more protracted fight for a more controversial nominee.

This is very quickly going to become about abortion, no doubt. But Alito's record on abortion has been relatively nuanced, as far as American politics go.

He's certainly more conservative than Miers, but seems - so far! - less insane than say Scalia. It would've been nice to see another O'Connor on the bench, but sadly, there is just no way.

Miers was forced out by the republicans -- the dems were ho-hum on this appointment (actually, I suspect that they were secretly ecstatic, but trying desperately not to let on), but the republicans were out-of-their-minds-insane-frothing-at-the-mouth-ready-to-murder-the-first-person-they-saw mad about it. It isn't the good guys gaining the upper hand, it's the "conservative republican base" demanding someone who is guaranteed to be more sympathetic with their views and willing to take those views to the bench. Bush has a lot of pie on his face right now, and whoever he selects to take her place is going to have to be much scarier to anyone moderate or to the left of moderate.

I'm not sure that Miers was a yahoo. We can't know, because she has no real public record on matters of adjudication or matters constitutional (which is precisely the source of the debate surrounding the need for a release of internal executive documentation and the general dissatisfaction of senators of all stripes about having to make an assessment without any material upon which to base such an assessment). Whoever takes her spot will most certainly be a yahoo, because it was the very fact that we couldn't guarantee that she was a yahoo that lead to the need for her to withdraw.

This thread is already good and dead, but just saw Steve's post and thought it would be rude not to reply.

Steve: I hear ya. I've been there too, and part of getting older and wiser was realizing that I'm a neighbour, too. I do this ego/conceited/self-love routine, and its source and its value is that it compensates for - and balances against - the fact that I'm prone to think that other people's needs are fundamentally more legitimate or important than my own (which seems noble at the surface level, but in the end does *nobody* any good ... as for you, it was a 'hard way' lesson for me to learn)

Sunshine: I hear ya. Ties in quite nicely with Steve's post, as a matter of fact.

I missed Del's bday?

Happy birthday, fucker!

A possible bright spot in all this:

seems Rwandan coffee is being grown and sold through local co-ops

The upshot of the article is that Rwandan coffee has been successfully targeted towards 'up-scale' markets (which explains SC's interest, since they've never given a damn about human factors in the past), and the extra money that can be charged for the 'up-scale' product is enough to sustain the higher than subsistance income of the co-operative's members.

I'm hesistant, though: it has a touch of fadism to it, and when the Rwandan coffee fad dies out, so too, presumably, will the dollars. And SC and such won't have made any move towards ethical purchasing/fair trade in the process.

But I buy more coffee from Timmy Ho's than than I do from any other establishment, so I'm not exactly doing well on this front myself. :blush:

You're awesome, Polkaroo. The response you got from D'allaire's secretary is telling and chilling.

I wouldn't be surprised if SC had never even thought about fair trade, but yet genuinely think they are doing some good through this in some smug neo-liberal fantasy they are living in.

Hmm. I think the Heilein quote went off the rails because of the million differing ideas of what happiness is. The point I took from it was that love was recognizing that someone else's reality might in fact be as relevant, valid, and worthy of consideration as your own.

This is the kernel of wisdom behind "love your neighbour as yourself" type thoughts. Damn it, I recently saw a comprehensive list of how that sentiment is worded across the various religious/spiritual traditions, with direct references to the texts - but don't remember where I saw it.

As bradm said, it isn't restricted to romantic love.

Also: definitions of (pathological) co-dependency that come out of a (quite possibly pathological itself) culture that promotes "every man for himself" self-achievement-at-the-cost-of-all-others may or may not be worth a damn. I'm inclined to think "may not". I run into a lot of hungry people downtown. *shrug*

Extra Also: you don't think we're all co-dependent?

Absolutely, party concerns factor into the way people vote, and people may choose (and often *do* choose) a candidate based on that candidate's party affiliation. But these are kids who know nothing of how the election process functions, and probably are already walking around with the misconception that you get presented with a ballot that looks something like:

check one box below

[ ] Liberal Party

[ ] Conservatice Party of Canada

[ ] NDP

etc.., and many of whom are probably also under the impression that we vote for our PM directly in the way that the Americans directly elect their President.

Essentially, even in their mock election, they are going to be 'voting' based on how they feel about the various parties, because the 'candidates' are fictional and essentially only made up names. But it would be big disservice, I think, to furthur entrench the misconception that they are probably already operating under that when they do this for real, they are going to be presented with nothing but a list of party names.

As to why people pick the representatives they pick, I think Hux is totally right. That's the way I do it, too.

As for the 'merit' of strategic voting, I'm biting my tongue to avert a fight.

when the rhythm calls

the government falls

here come the cops

from Tokyo to Soweto

viva la musica pop

we are black & white

and we dance all night

down at the hop

and the letters were tall

on the Berlin Wall:

"viva la musica pop"

so if you're feeling low,

stuck in some bardo,

I, even I, know the solution ...

love, music, wine and revolution!

love, love, love

music, wine and revolution

this too shall pass

so raise your glass

to change and chance

and freedom is

the only law

shall we dance...

(so if you're feeling low

stuck in some bardo

I, even I, know the solution -

love, music, wine ... and revolution!)

It makes you blind, it does you in

It makes you think you're pretty tough

It makes you prone to crime and sin

It makes you say things off the cuff

It's very small and made of glass

and grossly over-advertised

It turns a genius into an ass

and makes a fool think he is wise

It could make you regret your birth

or turn cartwheels in your best suit

It costs a lot more than it's worth

and yet there is no substitute

They keep it on a higher shelf

the older the more pure it grows

It has no colour in itself

but it can make you see rainbows

You can find it on the Bowery

or you can find it at Elaine's

It makes your words more flowery

It makes the sun shine, makes it rain

You just get out what they put in

and they never put in enough

Love is like a bottle of gin

but a bottle of gin is not like love

[edjt:] quick reading led to a not-worthwhile response. The ultimate point is a celebration of bradm's wisdom.

(anybody remember The Magnetic Fields 3-CD release called '69 Love Songs'? This thread has inspired me to dig that old gem back up and take a listen ...)

Then this is where Dr. Evil Mouse's advice is more apt than my own by at least half - forego the word and talk about what you might actually mean by it instead.

The Love Pump

[dear=abbey]

People stay in relationships for all sorts of bizarre and not so bizarre reasons, only one of which is love.

If it's important for you to say it ... say it.

If it's important for you to find out ... find out.

[/dear]

It would have been perfect if you had signed off with something vaguely clever and alliterative, like:

- hopeful but hesitant in the hammer

Also: my advice is worth nothing.

But seriously, good luck with this. Assuming you're female and that your partner is male -- sometimes boys just suck at this sort of thing. But you've been together a year, seems you feel it, so why avoid it? If you stubbed your toe, you wouldn't hesitate to say "ow, that fucking hurt", right? So why hesitate to say "I'm fucking in love"?. It is what it is.

Good eye . Not first post, but first thread that I took an active part in. I recognize that the distinction is arbitrary and may only exist in my head. My first post proper was an incitement to maxwebster to make the long trip out to Ottawa ... for a show you may remember.

(I have the same 'first time' vs. 'first time proper' issues surrounding losing my virginity. Hmm. Anyone else feel a little awkward right now?)

vibe-ing.

(yes, keep us up to date).

why does anyone like or dislike anything?

patchouli.

Actually, the term (along with "beatnik") was coined by a journalist in San Francisco, as detailed at

Cool link, thanx. Wikipedia rocks.

Of course, first publication doesn't necessarily indicate first use. I suspect StoneMtn is correct in terms of the etymology stemming from the beat use of 'hip' and 'hipster', but the Wikipedia reference also mentions that. And while 'beatnik' almost assuredly came from outside sources, Kerouac had already been referring to his generation as the "beat generation" for some time (although, as often pointed out, probably meaning both 'beat' as down-and-out as well as 'beat' in terms of beatific). Ah, the beatnik entry on Wikipedia talks about this too ... cool. And mentions the original use by Herbet Huncke, which I hadn't realized.

(d_rawk suddenly waxes nostalgic for his first jambands.ca thread)

patchouli.

Remember earlier this week I listed 5 things that I wanted to do but haven't done yet? #3 on my list was tell my boss to f-off.

I hadn't read this. That's funny.

Well I walk into work yesterday and he's been fired.

WAH??

As if that wasn't the best news I had ever heard, today I walk into work and was offered his position

Congrats! That's awesome!

CJ - I hear ya. As much as the PRMC was the favourite verbal-flogging target so many years ago, there is some real value in 'stickering' products. Parents can't be expected to be 'up' on everything new coming down the pike, and it helps to have some guide posts. I'm also not adverse to restricting sales of potentially damaging goods to minors. But that is a far cry from human rights claims. Good for Ms. Smith for raising the issue - I hope she continues to get coverage. But I'm afraid of the implications should she succeed, which I fear would go well beyond what she is intending.

I do wish more of those making hiphop records would recognize what a powerful political tool they have, and the tremendous amount of change they could be promoting while they have the youths' ears. The 'bling' and mutual self-loathing is certainly self-defeating for urban black youth. But the Much Musics and radio stations don't seem willing to give voice to the progessive, political, socially aware music being made in this category. I suppose if you are a white, well-off middle manager, content that actually advocates awareness and change sounds a lot more threatening than content that talks about guns, sluts, and cash.

Let the little fuckers kill themselves, as long as they buy a record or two before they hit the ground. Right?

No, I think you're right. SS is engineered to aggravate, agitate, stir shit up, cause a fuss. That is part of the charm. And is also part of the side message of "don't take this shit too seriously, folks".

Like PP said, Marshall Mathers is smart, funny ... and talented.

I'm totally uncomfortable with this. What about gangsta movies? What about disturbing content (real or fictional) of any sort in any medium?

Yuck.

Incidentally, I heart Eminem.

"It's not a strike!" (d_rawk is momentarily possessed by a locked-out picketer ... but really ... it's not a strike.) Luckily it seems to be over now, anyways.

I've been waffling on whether I should retract my position stated above. I started to, and then changed my mind again. *sigh*. I'd really like to come out swinging against ID, but I just don't see how, in good conscience, that I can.

Not about any one musician, but this book is awesome:

That Miles autobiography looks really good ...