1.  Why are shampoo and conditioner manufacturers suddenly using smaller and smaller type on their labels these days? Is it a generational barrier akin to the infamous near-ultrasonic "mosquito" ringtone? Yes, I have reading glasses. No, I don't wear them in the shower, when I need to read the bottles. (And which poltergeist has been swiping said glasses and weakening the prescription)?

2.  Why are restaurants so dark at night?  The better to confound us geezers with the small print on the menus (are they in cahoots with shampoo manufacturers)?  Nothing says "I'm still vital and relevant" like whipping a lighted magnifier out of my purse. (Say what you will, but you won't see ME squinting, nor hear me scream as I burn my fingers holding the little romantic-ambience tabletop candle just before it sets the menu on fire).  

3.  What is with that ambient dance music blasting in the least appropriate places?  How many people do you see dancing in painfully-trendy hair salons, boutiques or airport sushi bars? Why is the volume and monotony of the beat (on the 1 and 3, no less--torturing this poor former rock bassist whose heart beats on the 2 and the 4) directly proportional to the price of the food?  I was at Nobu in San Diego last month, and paid $10 per portion of sushi, $5 for wasabi (ok, it was real freshly ground wasabi and AWESOME) and wished I had a pusher nearby to sell me a couple of Oxycontin (for which I'd have paid $50) to dampen the headache caused by the relentless pounding jackhammer beats blasting over the sound system.

4. Why does Facebook cut you off at 5000 friends but let you have all the fans you want?  I hate rejecting people, and every time I have to direct a potential friend--who took the time and effort to seek me and my music out--to my fan page instead (where real interaction is impossible), I feel like a supercilious dance club bouncer banishing the not-so-thin-or-rich to the budget lounge where nobody important will see them.  Get rid of that stupid virtual velvet rope!

5. Why does every great lifesaving drug make women gain weight and men "fly at half-mast?" 

6. Why do the nicest lawns on the block always belong to the nastiest old curmudgeons? And why do said coots go ballistic over kids walking on their lawns but not over dogs leaving "souvenirs?" (For that matter, why do THEIR dogs leave souvenirs on MY lawn)?

7. Does anyone else think pointy, spiky hair looks ridiculous on anyone over 21? Or that guys with brush or flattop crew cuts look not sexy but like Marine drill sergeants? 

8. Maybe it's me, but I'd rather not see my waiter's or chef's "sleeve" tattoos while I'm eating. Yeah, I know on an intellectual level that the ink is below the skin's surface, but I still get this irrational suspicion that it's gonna rub off on my food, like the comics on Silly Putty.

9. Finally, why do cats get the most affectionate when you're wearing a contrasting color? Or when your nail polish is still wet? Or right after you've fallen asleep?  And why are they so adorable that I can't help but forgive them?

Good news:  OUR NEW CD IS HERE!!! See my News/Journal (or the Sandygram you may be receiving imminently) and www.andinaandrich for the details of how and where you can hear and buy it.  First official airplay will be this Tues. 6/29, on Lilli Kuzma's "Folk Festival" show on WDCB-FM 90.9/www.wdcb.org between 7-9 pm CDT (we're on at about 8). And the first CD release party we've scheduled will be in Madison, WI, on Thurs. Aug. 12 at the Brink Lounge on E. Washington St. just n. of downtown on the edge of the Willy St. Corridor.  (That is not to say that we won't have one earlier in Chicago, if we can get the right date and venue--we have a few in mind and will be contacting them ASAP). Details as they happen---keep abreast of them at www.andinaandrich.com, as well as on Facebook and MySpace.

Not-so-hot-news: those "notes" you hear "from my knees" are creaking & groaning. Last Mon. night, doing nothing out of the ordinary, I managed to blow out my right knee (doctors are unsure about whether I tore my lateral collateral ligament or my lateral meniscus).  I've been using a cane to get around rather gingerly and begun my weight loss regimen to reduce the load on my knees so I can eventually have them resurfaced/replaced. (Sometime this winter, between the Bar Show and Folk Alliance, I hope).  Meanwhile, no driving until I can move between the pedals without much pain and press them with the right degree of force without a second thought.  Thanks to the kindness of friends and family, though, that will NOT necessitate postponing or canceling gigs or shows--you won't get rid of me THAT easily.  (Although, Marla, I SWEAR I didn't do this just to get out of having to dance)!  I'll know more Wed. after I see my orthopedist for a followup (and perhaps seek a second opinion just for spits & giggles).  Only thing for sure is that the doctors are disinclined to reconstruct the ligament or even repair it or the meniscus arthroscopically, which is why there hasn't been an MRI yet and probably won't be one.

So that's why I haven't been ranting about politics & life here lately--I've been too busy researching knee stuff, thanking online get-well-wishers, making gig travel plans and CD launch strategies, and trying to learn to get up from chairs without grunting "OY!".....too loudly.

I have a lot on my mind (and weighing heavily on my heart) about what's been going on in the nation since Deepwater Horizon B-Peed all over the Gulf and coast.  Cognitive dissonance has been causing me to ruminate, rationalize, reason and possibly revise many of my previous opinions (but don't worry, I won't be revising them enough to advocate a new-broom-sweeping-clean.....except at Energy, Finance and those seats in the Senate and Congress currently occupied by opponents of progress, compassion and courage).  If anything, I have become more convinced than ever that we need to stop ALL further drilling and oli & gas exploration (we have thousands of wells drilled, capped, and ready to tap as long as they're tapped safely...and thousands of jobs there in no danger of disappearing).  It's not enough to become independent from foreign oil......it's time to kick the habit, PERIOD.  

Once again, I have a pocketful of rants (not to be confused with a boxful of letters, which belongs to Jeff Tweedy). I've been spending an inordinate (some may say frighteningly obsessive) amount of time over on Facebook, managing friend and group requests and invitations, juggling chats, updating status/gig dates/new songs, and too often stumbling down into the rabbit hole of very long political discussion threads. Today I found myself in such a thread; what made it different was that I was the only person posting to that thread who wasn't several steps to the right of Newt Gingrich.  In fact, one poster lists himself on his profile page as "right-wing extremist;" honesty and accuracy is particularly refreshing these days.

The thread started off with the usual black-helicopter/tinfoil-hat stuff about FEMA concentration camps. (Back during the Bush administration, some on the left were sure they were being built to round up dissidents, immigrants, and ethnic minorities; as soon as Obama was inaugurated, the right-wing hinted that the "camps" were going to be used against anyone who opposed the "liberal agenda").  Both ends of the continuum were certain that they were in danger of being interned therein by whichever opposition party was running FEMA at the time;  actually, the installations were for the contingency that a natural or man-made catastrophe might render thousands otherwise homeless and not relocatable to existing housing or trailers away from the affected area. Period. Neither internment camps nor gulags. Sorry to disappoint conspiracy theorists on both sides.

I posited the above response and was immediately guided to "the truth" expressed in a YouTube video by--ahem--Ollie North. Was it a dry, unedited Q&A on the subject, contemporaneously with all the paranoia, between a Congressman & Col. North? It's YouTube--what the heck do you think?  (Edited to a fare-thee-well, and clumsily at that). Apparently, though, when I pointed out that YouTube is no more reliable a source than a supermarket check-writing card is a valid ID (nor a driver's license proof of citizenship), and jokingly remarked that they probably wouldn't check out the video's veracity on Snopes.com because they believe Snopes is run by communists, guess what? In all seriousness, I was told, "Snopes IS run by communists--it's owned by a flaming left-winger who is in the tank for Obama." (Have you ever heard a liberal utter the phrase "in the tank" to refer to anything but gasoline or tropical fish)? Another poster challenged my own ideological self-description as a "pragmatic liberal" as an oxymoron; yet another was polite and open-minded enough to ask "WTF is a pragmatic liberal?"

Oh, my, where do I begin? I've been asked by younger friends who weren't around (or who were too young to remember) when the Iron Curtain was up what "communism" and "socialism" are and whether we have "socialism" in America today. In all earnestness, I was told that they'd "heard" and "read"  that the current administration is "socialist" because "Democrats hate capitalism." When I asked where they were getting this (mis)information, I was told variously, "FOX," "people on TV" and "in the papers." Oh, boy, where do I begin INDEED?

Time for a little poli sci and Econ 101 lesson:

1.  "Republican" was not always synonymous with "Conservative." A long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away Democrats had among their ranks centrists and moderates in addition to liberals and radicals; and Republicans were sometimes moderate or even proudly self-described liberals. A "conservative" was defined as someone who was skeptical of but not utterly opposed to change or progress, and wanted to move as slowly and carefully as possible. The role of government in this, and the desired "size" of government, was irrelevant--and actually a modern conceit. Today, the best example of that pure conservative would be columnist David Brooks, whom modern "conservatives" vilify as "moderate." (His further-right colleague, Ross Douthat, would pass the GOP litmus test today; Douthat's predecessor Bill Kristol was eased out after idolizing Sarah Palin to an embarrassingly creepy personal degree). Back then Eisenhower was a moderate and Barry Goldwater was a conservative (though he was further to the right than most conservatives and was considered an extreme reactionary by many). Richard Nixon was a conservative. Ronald Reagan called himself a conservative but was to the right of Goldwater.  Today, they'd all be considered "moderates" by those in charge of the GOP--even Reagan, their iconic hero, would fail the official party's litmus test.  Let's clear something up: someone who wants to move back right-ward to the way things used to be is not a "conservative:" (s)he is a reactionary. Or even, as that candid Facebook poster described himself, a "right-wing extremist."  Sarah Palin is not a conservative, nor are the likes of Michele Bachmann, Rand Paul, Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck: they are reactionary-to-extremist.

Then there are (or, let's hope, only "were") Fascists and Nazis. These are two terms I hear bandied about distressingly often (and highly inaccurately at that) by both ends of the political continuum.  "Fascist" was a favorite epithet mis-wielded by left-wingers of my generation in our youth (guilty as charged) to refer to anyone who was in favor of the Vietnam War (for any reason) or to the right of center.  Fascism is, in fact, a relationship between government and business/industry so symbiotic that business pretty much runs government, as it did in Mussolini's Italy.  (Ironically, Eisenhower's warning against a military-industrial complex was a Republican emphatically going on the record against Fascism.  Cheney-era Haliburton, on the other hand......).

Nazis were the monstrous National Socialist ("Socialist" being wildly inaccurately usurped and misused) Party of Adolf Hitler--somewhere to the right of "right-wing extremist" and utterly indefensible.  That the radically right-wing Tea Party movement (and lately, even former conservative and now reactionary Newt Gingrich) have conflated Obama and the grassroots liberal movement with the rise of Naziism (and portraying Obama as Hitler) i is not only reprehensible but wildly, willfully and proudly ignorant.  (If anything, it's the anti-black, anti-anything-but-Christian faction of the Tea Party movement that fits that unenviable description, bearing a frightening resemblance to the Germans of the 1920s and 1930s who were eager to find a scapegoat for their economic powerlessness and thus embraced Hitler.  Note to Tea Partiers: if you don't own any history books or know how to look AN ACTUAL encyclopedia up on your computers, there's doubtless a library within five miles of you: use it). 

2. Moving on (pun intended), let's address the left half of the continuum.  Back in those days when dinosaurs ruled the earth, there were no (well-known) conservative Democrats. Conservatives voted almost exclusively Republican. But the Democratic Party otherwise resembled today's version in that it contained middle-of-the-road moderates as well as liberals. Radicals and left-wing extremists of that era wouldn't have been caught dead wearing a Democratic campaign button--they had their own splinter parties (Socialist, Communist) or (for the most ideologically pure) were at least "independent" (and then there were anarchists, who by definition found affiliation to be anathema).  Democrats then and now included and include within their rank and file many capitalists.

a) Capitalists were and are those who believe we ought to have a private sector (regardless of how much power or responsibility they think government should have).  If you have a small business, you're a capitalist (unless you're running it purely as a collective or co-op).  There's benign capitalism and then there's robber-baron-era-aspirant purely laissez-faire "crony capitalism," as decried by Michael Moore and embodied by the financial sector run amok circa the last half of the Bush presidency--to paraphrase Jerry Della Femina's wonderful book about advertising--"those wonderful folks who brought you (economic) Pearl Harbor."   

b) Socialists believe that there should be no private enterprise and that the government should run all industry and provide all necessary services.  Communism is a more radical form of socialism that favors not only government-run industry but discourages (if not outrightly bans) the concept of private property.  In its heyday, it was so draconian in its austerity that it took a totalitarian government to make it work--which totalitarianism was its eventual undoing when its citizens got fed up with it. (That and the fact that, to quote A. Whitney Brown, "there's no money in it").  China is communist. Cuba is communist. Since the Iron Curtain fell, that's pretty much the extent of any official government-sponsored communism today. Note to reactionaries and right-wing extremists:  "liberal" is not synonymous with "communist" nor even "socialist."  If Snopes is even "owned by a flaming left-winger 'totally in the tank' for Obama," and I know of nothing that proves that, it is not "run by Communists," as that would be an oxymoron--nothing owned by a private entity could, by definition, be run by communists.

c) "Liberal" is a bit tougher to define, because there used to be Republicans (as in the party of Lincoln) who proudly described themselves as liberals, back before it became a one-way ticket to oblivion for a Republican to even be a moderate or centrist.  (New York State has a Liberal party--and in 1969 Mayor John Lindsay, a Republican who lost his primary challenge to a conservative, ran in the general election as a Liberal and won reelection.  After leaving office, he became a Democrat).  "Liberals" can be defined more easily these days by what we are not: neither radicals nor centrists but somewhere in between on the left side of the fence. We believe in civil liberties and civil rights, are skeptical of war as a solution except as a last resort, believe in conservation of our environment for future generations (a position first championed by Republican Teddy Roosevelt), do not view taxes as instruments of the Devil; and though we believe that individuals should ideally look after each other, recognize that the private sector is not necessarily always effective in meeting basic human needs and that the government can and should provide these services for those who can't afford similar adequate private services. 

A "pragmatic liberal" is my own term.  It means that while I am a liberal, I am not an automatic knee-jerk supporter of all liberal leaders or ideas if I feel that doing so would lead to stalemate (or worse, a distasteful reactionary victory); I believe in meaningful and fair compromise.  I have often warned unreasonably doctrinaire liberals (cough--Kucinich supporters--cough--Naderites) that holding out for Mr. Right always gets you Mr. Right-Wing; and I've been distressingly accurate in that prediction.

3. What is a Libertarian?  If you listened to Bill Maher last week, you heard him say he was accused of being a Libertarian just because he favored legalizing pot.  A week earlier, for the "Overtime" online Q&A session after "Real Time," I sent in a question positing that a Libertarian was really just a Republican who wants to smoke weed while driving 100 mph in as big a car as he wants anywhere he wants.  Not sayin', but I'm just sayin'...

There. It's 3 a.m., and instead of spending the last two hours obsessively on Facebook, I've spent it obsessively blogging. I may be salvageable yet......

Well, whaddaya know--I just got in a political rant anyway. Now for the promised non-political (but equally furious) one.

I am convinced that electrical and electronic devices (nationwide) have decided to go on strike against us, their humans.  I have no idea what they're demanding--more competent and careful users? Cheaper power? Better quality batteries (put down those 48-packs of Kirkland AAs and back slowly away toward the Duracell Ultras...)?  Compulsory surge protectors for all? Who the heck knows?

But friends, mark my words--they've begun to revolt. We've had the cable guys out three times (after having had appointments blown off), contacted TiVo countless times, and the channel guide still doesn't come up (so Gordy has to sneak upstairs and commandeer my satellite DVR).  You see, the new TiVos don't work with DirecTV, DirecTV doesn't work in storms, antennae don't work in high winds (and this is Chicago).  And this house has two men addicted to sports and the necessity of being able to program Slovenian women's curling at 4 am, and two similarly addicted to The Tudors and other stuff we can get only on satellite.

Yeah, if we watch that much TV, we have too much time on our hands. But wait--there's more. First, I boot up my 2-yr-old MacBook (still under warranty) and find two vertical green lines on the screen that never were there before; it works but I'd like to wipe the hard drive for use as a recording machine, yet every time I erase files MobileMe helpfully re-syncs them. (I'm using the MacBookPro we bought last year for both Bob & me to use, but he is still afraid of Macs).  At the same time, the brand-new second-generation MacBook I bought Gordy two months ago suddenly developed a weird sort of "num lock" that will not allow letter input except from an external keyboard.  We went into System Preferences and to every forum we could find, and could do nothing but appropriate an unused USB keyboard. So it was off to the Apple Store.  Lo and behold, the Genius Bar's verdict was the same:"we have no idea what the heck's going wrong but your machine looks like it's been dropped and your son's has this little brown spot which means he must have spilled coffee" (though said spot's inches from any aperture or crevice) and "That's abuse, not ordinary wear and tear." So we're out not just the cost of Apple Care but would have to face a $700 screen replacement for me and $800 keyboard & circuitry replacement for Gordy.  I sighed, bought him a wireless keyboard & mouse that'll fit into his backpack, and an LCD monitor to hook up to my old MacBook (which I finally learned how, after an hour chatting with someone in Bangalore, to turn off MobileMe sync on just that machine).

Ah, but wait. There's more. You will remember that three years ago, after Bob couldn't find exit signs off the Tollway for Oakbrook and gave up and drove home (skipping a killer free steak dinner), I bought him a GPS unit. I programmed it and set up the live traffic subscription, and offered to hook it up to his car. He kept demurring. (Turns out a cataract was what kept him from finding the road signs). Now, he has decided he wants to use the GPS. But he lost all the adaptors and mounts and traffic-receiver power cable.  All I could do was jury-rig a USB/mini-USB cable, register it and update all the maps (despite it being a now-discontinued model), and charge it up. It'll navigate only on battery power--plug it into a power source and all it'll do is recharge. So it was off to the Best Buy. (Beginning to sense a pattern here)?  Go to the GPS dept. and find a whole host of accessories....none of which will fit the old-style shorter data port and flip-up antenna.  I try eBay and Amazon and find only used and suspiciously off-brand stuff.  So.......sigh......hadda buy a new (albeit cheaper than the ersatz accessories) GPS with the bells and whistles. And three guesses who has to set it up and install it? (Doctors don't do anything more technological than press a remote control button once they go off-duty).

Then Gordy announced, "Ma, I need a new phone." Not so awful--the thing's way past contract and the new ones he could get are smarter and many are free. But what happened? Um, it fell in his Dr. Pepper. (Don't ask--beats falling in puddles, toilets, or being fallen upon, all fates that have befallen the phones of the men in my home). So I ask him if he wants a Pre, Pixi, Blackberry, or Android phone. "Nope, Ma, you know I can't have good things." (My heart broke upon hearing that). So we made an appointment to go get one of the few "stupid phones" still on the market; but by morning it had dried and was working fine again. (And he can text faster and more grammatically on a phone keypad than I can on a QWERTY keyboard).  Of course, the MacBook's keyboard hasn't taken its cue from that banged-up, abused, three-year-old Samsung "dumb phone."

Then I tried to organize my Facebook friends by location and category so that I don't invite club owners in Scotland to a house concert in Wisconsin.  But Facebook keeps choking on that and either tells me I "have no lists" or mysteriously denies me access to my friends list but lets me into my Wall and Profile.  I want to link my friends page to Twitter, but somehow only my fan pages are eligible. Hmmm......2200 friends vs. 260 fans vs. 20 Twitter followers...something needs to be done. Only Twitter won't recognize my login info to put the widget on my friend page.....but it will when I tweet.

But it's not just this house. My singing partner Steve's car CD player suddenly rejects discs that play fine on mine or on our computers. My assistant Carrie's home computer died and her DSL was slower than a Chicago road crew on coffee break. So her sole means of digital communication is her BlackBerry.  My coffee-roasting buddy Brett in Iowa had his $1000 espresso machine's solid brass boiler crack on him. Half the tablet PC's Bob and his colleagues were issued to comply with new electronic recordkeeping rules either are touch-insensitive or are Dragon-Unnaturally-Speaking (or maybe they understand only input in "Dragon" rather than English, Hindi, Urdu, Spanish or Lithuanian). Friends are reporting leaky roofs, rotting pipes, sputtering amps, you name it.

Now, to be fair, some of my best friends are IT professionals. (Betcha thought I was gonna say "machines." I have a much healthier social life than that).   Is there something you guys know that we mortals don't? And does anyone know who the Electrical Devices' Union's shop stewards are so I can negotiate. (My buddies in Local 1000 and 10-208 of the AFM know how much I abhor being "management"). 

Or do these devices feel that Congress has neglected them in favor of human constituents?

Anyway, it's past three a.m., I have a full day and you honestly don't want me setting up ANYTHING electronic right around now.

Today I got a letter from the Census Department.  Now, as a good citizen, I've seen those cheery TV spots reminding us to respond to the 2010 Census.  OK; though ads don't come cheaply (even if airtime is granted to Uncle Sam for free PSAs, someone's taxes are paying those actors, techs, and writers as well as the costs of even digitally transmitting the ads to stations and networks), there are those recalcitrant "privatarians" who need to be enlightened as to the consequences to them and their communities of an undercount.  Fair enough.  So today, sharpened #2 pencil in hand, I eagerly slit open the envelope (which informed me inside the space where the stamp normally goes that first-class mail postage and fees were paid) in anticipation of doing my duty to my country, state, Congressional and school district.

It was a one-pager.  Was it telling me perhaps of a url where I could save a few trees and tax dollars and be counted online? I wish.  Here's what it said:  

"In one week your Census Form will arrive." Plus an exhortation to answer it when it does, an explanation of why I should do so, and one-line message, printed in six languages, giving the url for help in filling out the form. (Mind you, all the important and explanatory stuff was only in English).

WTF???  What did this cost us? Let me count the ways:  first-class postage and fees, even if bulk permit (and no, not even the free Congressional "franking" privilege); sorting, paper, ink, printing, translation, collating, stuffing, and the time of some creative talent who had to have written the thing (if not outsourced, civil-service workers' time that could have been spent on more meaningful work for which we're already paying), and the time it took already overwhelmed Postal Service workers to resort, bundle and deliver it.  C'mon, at least the in-person census takers will be doing much-needed temp work that will pump some salaries into the economy--couldn't you have paid some unemployed people to slip this missive through mail slots along with the lawn-service ads and takeout pizza menus?

I wonder how many more school supplies, free lunches for poor kids or transit or road improvements and repairs this expense could have bought!

I was distressed to read the comments posted on that group's page  (including that of its founder) were directed against anti-war protestors, and was horrified by some of the epithets directed at them ("commie"--misspelled--was among the mildest).  I very nearly quit the group, but after some thought, here's what I posted:

I hate war. I detest our being in Iraq & Afghanistan. I detest those who lied to Congress in order to start those wars in the first place. But those kids coming home in boxes when they were told they'd be learning trades and supporting families? Whether or not one thinks they gave their lives for our country, their lives were taken needlessly. Funerals of any kind--military or civilian--are to mourn and respect the dead and bereaved. There are other times and places for protest. And those who use military funerals to protest gays or abortion or Obama? They give the scum of the earth a bad name.

And THAT is why I will not quit that group--and intend to speak my mind every time I see a hate-filled and ignorant post on there.  Civility is a lost art--heck, a lost trait--and must be restored. It's a dirty (and misunderstood) job, but somebody has to do it!

Wow.  Literacy tests? Does the man even remember the days of Bull Connor and rubber bullets and arcane Constitutional questions being administered ad hoc against black would-be voters in the South as recently as 1965? (Or, more ominously, are he and his followers actually nostalgic for those days)?  Two points must be made:

1.   The civics literacy tests of 1965 had questions so arcane that not only would they preclude today's minority group voters but practically 100% of Tea Party adherents.......as well as most of today's incumbents, wannabe challengers, and their teachers and professors alike.

2. Not being able to say "vote" in English?  Surprise--most newly naturalized American citizens originally from even non-English-speaking countries have, in order to raise their hands and take that sacred vote, had to take and pass civics exams tougher than most native-born Anglophile Gen-X'ers, Y'ers and many Baby Boomers and Greatest Generationals ever faced in high school or even college.  Tancredo may well have brought a Cub Scout pen knife to a 9mm gunfight.

But let's not kid ourselves--"literacy tests" are, as the brave and outspoken Meghan McCain (whom I hope is to her generation of Republicans as Margaret Chase Smith and Jacob Javits were to mine and my parents') is unafraid to point out,  blatant codespeak for racism.  Leave it to someone who wasn't even a glimmer in her parents' eyes when Joe McCarthy and Lester Maddox were fulminating, to know her history lessons and be unafraid to use them with deadeye accuracy. (And while you're at it, Ms. McCain, could you possibly invite Elisabeth Hasselbeck into your study group? I'm afraid Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin are beyond hope and repair).

We need a different kind of Tea Party movement: one who knows of what it speaks and is willing to go out and learn what it doesn't know, is familiar with the definitions of realism and pragmatism, has its bullshit detectors indiscriminately set on "sensitive" rather than on "bypass" for people who appeal to them viscerally and "overdrive" for those who set off the prejudices their pundits, pastors and parents have instilled in them, and who do not believe that "bipartisan" does not mean "give us what we want or we'll hold our breaths and turn blue and them blame you just before we die."  And who can make a really good pot of tea....or coffee...or cocoa and share it and the recipe.  

As Fareed Zakaria and John Meacham (not exactly wild-eyed liberals) put it last week, if Obama wakes up and realizes independents elected him to be President and not the Democrats' Prime Minister, he may catch this new movement's ear, tell the recalcitrant hypocrites to go drink their Nestea and instant coffee, and engage those who really want to talk, listen, and meaningfully negotiate.

Now to find entities willing to fund them.......hey, MoveOn, the few brave RINOs (with money) remaining, and truly centrist counterparts, how about it?   

Or we could just sit back and hope the Tea Party Nation and Tea Party Patriots eat each others' young (good grief, they're even dissing Ron Paul as "too Establishment"), the GOP fall all over itself courting them and get rewarded by being riven in two and thus become divided and conquered......or they could backfire and coalesce, in which case we've got our work more than cut out for us.

Tea Partiers interviewed outside today's convention--none of them alive during or before WW II--say Obama & the Dems "remind them of what happened with Hitler." To them, I say pick up a history book or talk to someone who was around back then. Hitler rose to power on the strength of a disgruntled populist Germany "tea-party" (kaffeeklatsch?) movement eerily similar to this one. The people were angry and fearful over the loss of jobs and eager to blame a scapegoat.  Hitler came along, claimed to be "just like them," and offered up the Jews, Gypsies and gays--groups distinctly in the minority of the population--as that scapegoat.  He (and in Italy, Mussolini) rose easily to power on those waves of fear and anger. But rather than work for the angry & fearful people, or do anything to rein in the abuses by or even regulate the industries that caused the devastating conditions that in turn caused the fear and anger, they let business and industry control the government.  THAT was "fascism" and "Nazism" (a contraction of "National" and "Socialist" that was the polar opposite of "socialism").  We all know what happened next, at least those of us who didn't sleep through history class, or lived through or have spoken to those who actually lived through those times. The Tea Partiers obviously forgot or never learned the facts. 

They need someone to blame because their world has turned upside down:  high unemployment, plunging savings and home values, dried-up and ever more expensive credit, and an unfamiliar face in the White House.  They feel America has passed them by, and they blame everything that is different and unfamiliar to them. (And for many, a nonwhite President with a non-Anglo-Saxon or non-Celtic name is extremely unfamiliar to most of them and thus scares them the most).  They embrace the enemy they know because they know it and have lived through what it wrought; they reject the friend they don't because they are afraid of it....and the enemy they know is encouraging them not to learn the facts because the facts would make the unfamiliar reassuring and comforting.......and would expose that enemy for the enemy it is and defeat it.

The truth is that Obama and the Democrats in Congress (except for those Republicans in Democrats' clothing) are NOT Hitler and Nazis.  Are Obama and liberals "socialists" either? Wrong again.  A real socialist regime would take over--not just regulate--EVERY shred of private enterprise, not just order health insurers and bankers to stop playing dirty; it would ride Obama and both parties (Democrats AND Republicans) out of town on a rail. Socialists and fascists do share one trait:  to deprive individuals of liberty.  Socialists would take that liberty from everyone and give it to government. Fascists would take that liberty and give it to business, which would become the government.

So let's see: who wants to make sure that our credit becomes more easily available to responsible people and costs us less? Not the conservatives. Who wants to make it easier to get health insurance and make sure that we don't lose it when we get sick enough to use it? Not the conservatives.  Who wants to cut our taxes and those of small businesses, and make big business and the ultra-rich pay their fair share? Not the conservatives. Who wants to put Americans back to work? Not the conservatives--they want to cut taxes and regulations on the wealthiest businesses and financial industry even further, and NONE of those savings would create jobs or bring lost jobs back.  

 Glad that Grandma is getting free medical care (or you are if you're over 65)? Thank a liberal.  Glad if you have a pension or at least Social Security? Thank a liberal. Glad that you can't be forced to work for an unlivable pittance, and that nobody can order you to work without an evening or weekend off? Thank a liberal. Glad that you have the freedom to worship or not worship as you choose, without the government endorsing the religion you don't embrace? Thank a liberal.  Glad that when you suffer physical harm because of a defective product, unsafe workplace, or negligent doctor or hospital you can sue to be fairly compensated? Thank a liberal. Glad if you can safely breathe your air, drink your local water, work in a safe workplace, ride in safe cars that won't drain your budget dry, and can provide your kids with safe clothes and toys? Thank a liberal.  Glad that you can choose to send your kids to school without paying tuition? Thank a liberal.  Glad that the government can't control what you read or watch or what you do in the privacy of your bedroom (including deciding to use contraception)? Thank a liberal.  

On behalf of my fellow liberals (especially those in government who ensured you and all of us these freedoms and benefits), thank you. We'll address the myth of "the evils of taxation" in another column.

Some tea partiers voted for Obama because they thought he "promised" "change" and "the end of partisanship" and now blame him for not providing it fast enough--even though conservatives used every Congressional trick in the book (which tricks can't be changed without hugely bipartisan consent) to prevent him from achieving it. Others, mostly the afraid-of-change, think too much "change" has come too fast: huge deficits, unemployment, etc., even though all of that "change" was wrought by conservative governments.

Yet the "tea partiers" (conservatives, Libertarians and independents alike) swallow whole abstract catchphrases like "big" or "small" government," "death panels," "healthcare rationing," "Islamo-fascism," "war on terror," "soft on terror," "tort reform" and "lawsuit abuse" that the conservatives who actually started the tea party organizations, planted the supposed "grass" seeds, and watered the fields with fearmongering, lies, and encouragement (and even exaltation) of ignorance, spout all over the airwaves and internet. 

To the tea party movement, do you REALLY believe these guys will give you back your jobs, savings, homes, freedoms and safety (from domestic hazards and international enemies)?  If so, look into who they are, what they stand to gain at your expense (or lose from the real reform and benefits YOU'D enjoy). Listen to actual reporters (not FOX, not MSNBC primetime show hosts), read real NEWSpapers and magazines (not the Wall St. Journal or fancy slick blog sites on either side), and talk to and with those who are actually IN office, not just the wannabes. Incumbents want to keep their jobs (and wannabes to win them), and those jobs depend on YOU.  If getting your vote depends on giving you what you REALLY want (not what catchy shorthand sound bites are designed to do: strike your gut and not your mind, and keep you from having to think), they will LISTEN and DIALOGUE with you. Ask them what they've done, what they propose to do and why, and don't settle for slick pat answers that assume you're stupid and depend upon you not to ask for an explanation. You're not. (But there are those who rely upon you to behave and talk as if you are, and they put together that big bash going on in Nashville).  

If after doing all that you still want to cast your lot with the most reactionary of conservatives, who call themselves "populists" when they really wouldn't sit next to you on a bus or plane, who drive a truck for show but a luxury car when nobody's looking, who eat burgers and brats and drink beer only because you do, and who bowl and hunt and fish for the camera but really do their hunting and fishing at free banquets (at which they get paid to speak) and three-martini lunches, then good luck and God help us all.

Be careful what you wish for. Like the angry and fearful people of 1920s and 1930s Germany, you just may get it.  And you won't be able to change your minds and give it back for at least 4-6 years (if that quickly).

Be careful what you wish for!

Today, Daily Kos (which I admit is a liberal blog) published the results of a poll of voters who claimed to be mainstream Republicans, which poll was conducted by a nonpartisan organization.  The results were striking (oh, that poleaxe again) and dispiriting for anyone who believes us to be a literate and evolved nation.  Fully 63% of Republicans polled defined Obama as a "socialist" (without demonstrating they know the definition of "socialist"). 42% believe he was born outside the U.S. 31% believe that he is "a racist who hates white people" (such as his mom and grandma?). 21% believe he "wants the terrorists to win."  And a near-majority believe he should be impeached....after one year.....for what, other than not being able to immediately extinguish the flaming bag of dog poop of an economy and deficit Bush & Cheney planted on the White House doorstep before Inauguration Day?  Nearly as dispiriting is that more Republicans answered "not sure" than disagreed with the foregoing statements.  

So, at the risk of losing a few fans, here goes:

You who answered "yes" to the foregoing questions are either crazy or stupid or intellectually lazy.....or any or all of the above. What planet do you live on? I am hoping that this poll isn't really representative of Republicans, as I have several friends who so identify (and used to have a few relatives who did too, before they died off).   And shame on you who answered "don't know." You owe it to this country to learn enough from a wide variety of sources to be able to develop an informed opinion and intelligently explain it.  

Now, I keep hearing pundits of all ideologies explain that Republican voters' affinity for snappy catchphrases and shibboleths and their bizarre aversion (bordering on allergy) to being willing to even listen to facts and reason is due to their despair and anger over the economy and fear of the unfamiliar.  To that, I answer that despair and anger are no excuse for shutting one's ears; and that all it takes to defuse the unfamiliar is to render it familiar, by LEARNING. By "learning" I don't mean by going back to school or hanging out with intellectuals or listening only to MSNBC. I mean by doing it the old-fashioned way:  self-education.  Read newspapers and magazines, even those whose ideologies you loathe. Same with TV and radio news. Recognize the difference between a reporter and a pundit (hint:  the latter is almost never impartial, because there's no fame or money in impartiality).   If you are unemployed and pounding the pavement or following online job listing sites, spend a few minutes each day to pick up some newspapers and newsmagazines (or read them for free at the library, or surf over to the online versions of a mainstream news source and one each on either side of the spectrum. Pick up a phone or e-mail your Congressperson, state legislator, town councilperson, mayor's office, etc. and ASK them where they stand on issues about which you care and why they feel that way.  You'd be surprised how often in an election year you may hear back from the actual officeholder, not just an aide or volunteer. Pick up a regular dictionary and learn the definitions of "socialism" and "fascism," and then use them knowledgeably instead of just parroting them. 

This is going to be the hard part:  take a good long hard look at your own financial and health situation and those of your state and town, go back to those news sources, and trace the timeline of exactly what happened, when it happened and whodunit.  For this, you're going to have to go back to the 1980s to get an understanding of it. (That's where those history books come in).  For whom do or did you work? If you no longer work for them, what happened at that company to make you lose that job? If you've lost your home, have an unfair mortgage, have seen interest rates on your savings plunge while those on your loans and credit cards have soared, find out what the companies and banks in question did and who in government enabled them to do it (Hint: "taxes" and "regulations" are going to be the opposite of the true answers).  Who in government cut taxes of institutions that kept on doing you harm? Who eased the regulations that allowed them to gamble with "other people's money" when you'd have to use your own funds to play the lottery or visit a casino?  You will find it's the very people and institutions who have screwed you over and want to keep taking more and more and more of your money and spending it on themselves.  Did you vote for them, or are you still voting for them because they "share your values?" Guess what--they don't. They never did. They just said what you wanted to hear because they want your vote and ultimately your money. (Again, NOT "taxes." I mean your actual money in their actual pockets).  Even if they agree with your moral values, they lack either the power or the inclination to make them the law of the land.  They're either laughing behind your back at your gullibility or just taking advantage of your anger---anger THEY caused you to have and continue to fan--taking your money and doing what they please.

Don't tell me you don't have the time to learn the facts, or that they share your moral or religious values, as your reason for accepting their loaded and biased shorthand as gospel. I have friends who rise before dawn to tend several hundred acres of corn and beans and dairy cows, then run their own shops and other small businesses, and who are some of the most securely devout and committed Christians I know, who love God with all their hearts and souls.  They raised up children to be good and moral and self-reliant.....and as open-minded as they are.  They live in the most conservative of counties, yet they somehow find the time to learn and sort out the facts and see through the bullhockey--and despite not being wealthy, they believe that to abandon those in need is itself a sin.  They've bothered to learn about other countries AND about our own.  Unlike 1 in 4 Americans, they actually KNOW what a supermajority and a filibuster are, why it takes 60 votes to shut down a filibuster, and why nothing can get passed by the Senate without that "cloture" vote letting a bill or nominess actually get to an up-or-down vote. They know the near-impossibility these days of changing a Senate rule, and that just because something is not mentioned in the Constitution doesn't mean it's illegal or unconstitutional. They've opened their minds.......and thus, their hearts will never close.

I've heard that in light of the coming midterm elections, and the roll Obama is on after the State of the Union address and his Q&A sessions in small towns this week, the GOP publicity machine has kicked into high gear. They've hired conservative pollster and focus-group maven Frank Luntz to spin the proposed bill to regulate bank, derivatives and credit abuses as that most magical of idiot catchphrases, "Government Control."  Yup. You read that correctly.  They are going to try and convince their base--and those impatient with or frightened by the pace of "change"--that laws designed to ease consumer and small-business credit and prevent another mortgage/derivatives bubble from engendering another Wall St. blackmailing round of "too big to fail"--are actually FAVORS to Wall St. at the same time they are unfair deprivations of corporations' liberty! Neat trick, especially considering Luntz' most lucrative clients are all of those megabanks (AIG, Goldmine Sacks--uh, Goldman Sacks, ML/B of A, etc.) who necessitated the first bailout.  Also, that abolishing "don't ask, don't tell" is the "government controlling the military" (say WHAT????).  And you know what?  They will succeed in bamboozling the gullible.

Why? I've figured it out. It's so simple that it's practically a "V-8 moment." Obama got elected because the economy was a mess, unemployment huge, and the mega-banks had backed the whole country into a corner. All of that--including the bailout--happened on Bush's watch.  Obama ran in favor of change. (Mind you, he never guaranteed it or promised he'd achieve it, only that we needed it and he favored it). The situation sucked, so change was a good idea and he won.  Only the GOP never got the memo--it concentrated on placating the birther loonies who never even bothered to vote, so it dedicated itself to blocking change at every turn lest Obama actually succeed.  It enlisted its corporate allies to create and bankroll a phony "tea party patriot"movement to draw the fringe back into the electorate.

Fast forward a year--things still suck big-time (in large part because the GOP is ensuring they do).  But because Obama and the Democrats are in "power" (again, with that pesky filibuster stuff rendering that a misnomer), and he didn't "change" the bad stuff fast enough and is scaring the loonies by proposing to bring some other changes (good for the people, bad for Wall St.,accomplished by government,  therefore it must be "socialist"), the short-attention-span-catchphrase-addicted electorate assumes that everything bad is now Obama's fault (because he didn't make it go away) and that he must also want to do away with whatever remains that's good.  From there, it's only a short step (off the cliff of sanity) to "terrorist," "foreigner" and "socialist."  You see, it's more convenient that way.

Facts are so complicated and inconvenient. Learning is messy, hard work. Ignorance is bliss. 'Tis a gift to be simple(-minded), 'tis a gift to be free (of the responsibilities of citizenship). The Shakers are doubtless rolling in their graves.