Just wanted to let any of you in the VT area know about my Jazzfest gig at Nectar's in Burlington, on June 5th at 5pm. It's "The Know Show with Jon Goneau", two hours of classic boogaloo funk n' jazz (also known as 'soul jazz', the late 1960's stuff made popular by Prestige Records, Idris Muhammad, Melvin Sparks, Gene Ammons, Grant Green, and others). Jon is a great keyboardist who was the the co-founder with me of the late great Leon Tubbs band. We had a good run in VT a few years ago, including opening up for guitar legend John Scofield at the Flynn Theater for the 2002 Discover Jazz Fest. He'll be playing Hammond organ on this one. Jenni will be playing drums, and former DownBoi saxman Bannon Williamson will also be joining us. It's free, it's early, and it gives you lots of time to check out all of the other great music going on that night. Hope to see you there. And there's also the opportunity to eat lots of greasy fries with gravy.
Info on the Burlington Discover Jazz Festival.
and Nectar's.
FIVE BEFORE CHAOS HAS OFFICIALLY MOVED TO A BIGGER AND BETTER PLACE! PLEASE CLICK THE ABOVE BANNER TO GET THERE, AND DON'T FORGET TO BOOKMARK THE NEW LOCATION. THANKS FOR STOPPING BY!Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Shameless plug.
Props to NTodd..now give the boy a hit...
Helping out a fellow VT blogger... pay a visit to NTodd over at Dohiyi Mir. He's trying to reach his goal of 419,067 hits by his third anniversary online (yeah, I don't know where he came up with that number either). I can relate because I remember how I wanted to have 1,000 hits before my 3rd month online, which I easily made thanks to that Buzzflash link a while back. So show him some love, and enjoy his great blog while yer there, too.
The immigration thing...
After writing my post about the manufactured 'crisis' of illegal immigration, it has been pointed out to me that living in VT, one of the whitest states of the Union, that I might not be so aware of the situation as if I lived in Florida or southern California. I'll concede that point, but I still firmly believe that much of this is horseshit concocted by the GOP to throw some more read meat to the racist, knuckle-dragging base, now that gay-bashing doesn't have as much effect as it did a few years ago. And they're running scared in this next election, as they should.
So what's the deal with Chavez?
Ok, so this Hugo Chavez thing is really sticking in my craw, mostly because of the amount of people I know who think this guy is the best thing since sliced bread. I know you've heard me rant about it many times before, but I'm quite disgusted by the fact that many of us on the American Left are so easily enamored with murderous anti-capitalist Latin American dictators, mainly because, I believe, an astounding lack of any true revolutionaries that make an impact here at home.
Now, this is tricky. Although my knowledge of it is limited (but still growing), I support the principles of the Bolivarian revolution that is underway in South America, namely the idea of the region forging ahead with its own destiny and giving the big f-you to western imperialism. I believe that the natural resources should be used to primarily benefit the citizens of the country, not the big extraction companies. But, here's the tricky part... lip service. As you well know, many of the ideas of Marxism look good on paper... namely that of a more egalitarian society, etc., yet so few of them ever seem to come out that way, due to both human nature and wanton abuses of power. Sadly, what is going on in Venezuala seems to show those problems.
It is really hard to get good, truthful information regarding this. There is so much propaganda and bullshit coming from both sides, it's really hard to make heads or tales of much of it. I've been doing some digging around, and over the next week, am hoping to shed some light on this. I was originally going to do it all in one post, but to do it justice, I think it needs to be spread out over several to give it the clarity it deserves. I'd like to touch upon several things, in particular the U.S. take on things, and the alleged human rights abuses, which from my preliminary research, seem to actually have some truth to them. Stay tuned.
Friday, May 26, 2006
Dumb All Over
Quick blurb over at Americablog on a Krugman article behind the Times Select wall... (if the actual article pops up shortly, I'll link to it)
"Since 2000, we've seen what happens when people who aren't interested in the facts, who believe what they want to believe, sit in the White House. Osama bin Laden is still at large, Iraq is a mess, New Orleans is a wreck. And, of course, we've done nothing about global warming.
But can the sort of person who would act on global warming get elected? Are we — by which I mean both the public and the press — ready for political leaders who don't pander, who are willing to talk about complicated issues and call for responsible policies? That's a test of national character. I wonder whether we'll pass."I don't know how many times I've asked myself this question. I remember back in 2000 reading some article about G.W. being the candidate 'people would most likely want to drink a beer with' or 'snort a line with' (just kidding on that second part-or am I?). I seem to remember the same article alluding to the idea that 'Al Gore was just too smart to be president.' Whoa. Arguably the most important job on the planet, and Gore was 'too smart' for it? Only in America is intelligence viewed as a liability, I guess.
Now, Gore made a lot of mistakes, independent of the constant lashings of half-truths from the MSM (while Dubya got a pass). I remember watching the first debate, and in with all the condescending demeanor, there were words he was using that I didn't know the meaning of, and I like to think of myself as having a pretty good vocabulary. I was thinking, 'Jeez, this is playing real well in Peoria.' So, yes, he could have done things differently. But nevertheless, there is a really rather large streak of anti-intellectualism in this country. How else do you explain Bush's acceptance early on? We have large segments of the population that view the scientific method as just another 'religion', easily dismissed.
If a candidate cut through the bullshit (and I mean REALLY cut throught the bullshit, not in the John McCain kinda way), and was able to talk about substantive issues in a way that was intelligent, yet didn't bore us to death, would it fly? Or is that just expecting too much from this country at this point in time?
Monday, May 22, 2006
Never thought of that one before...
Like many bloggers, I'm always checking my sitemeter stats to see who's here, and how they got here. Every now and then they get here by way of a Google search. This one takes the cake.... 'Asian tradition + marriage + eating poop.'
Yep, somehow that brought them here. Go figure.
Friday, May 19, 2006
Real crisis or just a diversion?
Ever have one of those days where you're thinking about something, and lo and behold, it's the topic of the editorial in your local paper? This happened to me a few days ago. I was thinking about how, seemingly out of nowhere, this country now has an illegal immigration 'crisis'. Now, those of you who know me know I'm a news junkie; it's not uncommon for me to spend several hours a day reading news from many sources. A few months ago, I'll be damned if I could find any major goods about out current immigration 'problem'. Then, whammo, it' s the issue du jour. So I was looking in our local paper, the Barre-Montpelier Times Argus, and read this, called 'Sending in the Guard.' I love our paper's editorial board, unabashedly anti-Bush, appropriate if you consider the political makeup of VT (often called the most liberal state in the union-yay!) The article mainy tackles the latest hairbrained idea of our Commander-in-thief of having the National Guard patrol our southern border (what about the Canadians? Isn't anyone afraid of Canadians? Next thing you know they'll be selling poutine at McDonald's - sheesh.)
"...reliance on the military is Bush's default mode when confronting a difficult problem. Sending troops off to Baghdad or Brownsville gives Bush the aura of command. The trouble is that the military is not the answer to every problem, and certainly the issue of illegal immigration is far beyond the power of a few Guard soldiers in Jeeps to resolve.
The first step is to identify the problem. A crisis mentality has gripped Congress on the issue of immigration, mainly because of the draconian anti-immigrant legislation originating in the House. But what is the crisis? There is no crisis of employment; unemployment at present is low. There is an increasing number of people in the country illegally, which challenges our policies and our law. But why is the presence of immigrants a crisis except to the immigrants themselves, who face a crisis of survival?"
This country seems to go through periods of demonizing the 'other', a period of irrational xenophobia. Seems like we're going through one now. Over at Alternet, Robert Scheer's 'Our Fake Immigration Crisis':
Now call me a cynical bastard, but I think it's mostly due to the Repugnicans being scared shitless about major losses in November, and this is nothing more than red meat for the knuckle-dragging GOP base. Also, they've kind of beat the gay marriage thing to death, and some polls are even finding people slightly more accepting of it than a few years ago. Who knows if it will backfire? It can definitely put a rift between the corporatist base (who benefits from all the cheap labor) and the social conservative/xenophobe types, the latter of which are starting to realize that they have been played for fools by the GOP anyways. I suspect this , as most of their other bad ideas, will ultimately backfire. It's sooooo much fun watching the GOP metdown. Gloat, gloat, gloat... after all the bullshit they've put this country through, we deserve to."There is no immigration crisis -- other than the one created by a small but vocal stripe of opportunist politicians, media demagogues and freelance xenophobes. So it has always been throughout the history of this country when anti-immigrant hysteria periodically reigns during low ebbs in our national sense of security and vision.
The script is as old as the Mayflower: A false alarm is sounded that the values, wages and safety of the current roster of credentialed Americans are jeopardized by the "flood" or "tidal wave" or "river" sneaking across our porous borders -- be they Irish, Chinese, Jewish, Russian, Mexican or even the freed slaves seeking to earn an honest living in Northern cities after the Civil War. Any and all manner of societal problems are to be laid on these scapegoats, and the same simplistic solution offered: Find and deport them, and don't let any more in."
Now, I also wanna make clear, I'm not one of those that feels like we should turn a blind eye to illegal immigration. It's a very complex issue, and any solution needs to balance a measure of compassion with the rule of law. These are real human being we're talking about here, folks, with families and real uncertainties, and deal with things that most of us will never have to deal with, nor could we possibly relate to. And therein lies the problem.. acheiving the balance. How do we cut back (I say cut back because we'll never be able to stop it completely, even with a huge stupid fence) the numbers of illegal immigrants, without completely devastating the lives of the ones already here?
Now, if the GOP can just tie in gay marriage to illegal immigration,Feel free to take a crack at your own caption for the above picture, and if you see it
soon in some GOP campaign literature, you heard it here first!
Thursday, May 18, 2006
If spaghetti westerns were made by Chef Boy-ar-dee...
Just a quick blurb on another spaghetti western... one that if you are just getting into the genre, you should avoid: Gianfranco Parolini's 'Sabata.' The film stars Lee Van Cleef, the hawklike-looking dude from Sergio Leone's 'For A Few Dollars More' and 'The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly'.
Now, think of all the great things in a Leone film... dramatic cinematography, strong character development, great storylines with complex subtexts, etc. Now hold that thought and savor it, because you'll find none of that in this movie. It plays like a bad early 60's American western.
The story involves a gunfighter named Sabata, played by Van Cleef, who foils a large bank robbery, secretly set up by the wealthy pillars of the community. He teams up with some hipster dude named Banjo, a guy who has a gun built into the neck of his banjo and looks and talks like he could've stepped out of any U.S. tv show from 1967 playing 'the hippie', and some mute acrobatic guy, and they take on the baddies. One of the lead villans is a strange androgynous character who overacts at every available opportunity.
Now, I must be honest.. I didn't even finish watching this movie. I was so terminally bored with it, I only made it about 3/4 of the way through. I picked it up because I think Lee Van Cleef is an amazing screen prescence, and I've seen him good in other non-Leone spaghettis, such as 'Death Rides a Horse'. Even his steely-eyed persona doesn't save this film, it lacks all of the intensity that he brought to his roles in the two Leone films. I could care less about what happened to any of the characters in the film, or how it even ended.
Searching around on the net, this film doesn't get much critical acclaim but gets some pretty ok reviews, nonetheless. There were even two sequels to it, which I'm not going to bother with.
Some more Italian western reviews coming up when I get a chance:
My Name is Nobody
Keoma
Mannaja: A Man Called Blade
They Call Me Trinity
Friday, May 12, 2006
Two thumbs up!
And the gifts keep on giving... Harris poll has Bush down to 29% and that's from before we found out about the telecom giving phone recs to the gov't, as Bush stumbles and lies... Whispers that Rove might be indicted today... Will the fun ever stop?
The thing that strikes me is how NOTHING has gone right in the past few months for them, it's almost like they are screwing up on purpose. Every day, reading the news makes me smile. There doesn't even seem to be an attempt at fixing things, of giving the illusion, at least, of trying to change course. It's going to be funny if when he gets down to 20% or below and the MSM still tries to pass off impeachment as some radical notion. Hell, let's impeach the Washington Post, while we're at it. They're just as guilty.
Monday, May 8, 2006
Fiction
Have to get a laugh from this...
Apparently a cardinal from the Vatican is now urging 'legal action' against the bestselling book 'The DaVinci Code', a novel that purports that Jesus married and had descendants. The movie is coming out shortly. The cardinal, although not describing what exactly legal action should be taken (howzabout '2000-Year Old Man Sues Author'), but he's not happy. Words form cardinal Francis Arinze:
So, basically sue someone becuse you're not respecting their particular irrational belief system.. and people say us liberals are whiners? Sheesh."Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical. So it is not I who will tell all Christians what to do but some know legal means which can be taken in order to get the other person to respect the rights of others," Arinze said.
"This is one of the fundamental human rights: that we should be respected, our religious beliefs respected, and our founder Jesus Christ respected," he said, without elaborating on what legal means he had in mind."
Now, the part I find funny, if you dig around on the net, say Google 'DaVinci Code inconsistencies', is how many people take offense to this work of fiction because it conflicts with their own revered work of fiction. They point to some of the Gnostic gospels that the novel draws from and other Biblical passages, which according to those in the know, were inaccurate, and therefore not included in the final New Testament. The super-secret Catholic group 'Opus Dei', which is not portrayed in the kindest light in the novel, wants a disclaimer of sorts put in front of the movie regarding its fictional and supposedly inaccurate portrayal.
I have to laugh, every time some movie or song (remember Madonna?) comes out that the Catholic Church disapproves of, they piss and moan, as if the Church can be brought down by a pop star or movie. Granted, the days of when the Church controlled every single aspect of life are thankfully far behind us, but gee, they sure are feeling a bit insecure. I can't really express my bewilderment at the irony and madness here, so I'll leave it at that.
Thursday, May 4, 2006
Whose oil? Part 2
(You can read 'Whose Oil? part one" here...)
First, it was Venezuela.. . Now it's Bolivia. Something is definitely happening with this new leftist movement happening in South America, and the global capitalist fatcats aren't pleased.
The recently elected president, Evo Morales, is nationalizing the nations petroleum and natural gas supplies. A recent bold move is calling for the payment of 40 million dollars in back taxes from the oil corporations. From the South American Merco Press news agency:
"Bolivia is claiming 40 million US dollars in back taxes from oil corporations, a sum which could jump to 200 million US dollars if fines and administrative costs are included, said Wednesday an official source from the Bolivian government...On May 1st, Morales ordered the army to take control of the nation's oil fields. The Bolivian laws clearly state that the nation owns the gas and oil, and basically Morales is having it so the majority of the profit goes to Bolivians, not the oil companies. It's funny, though how the American press treats this as some kind of immoral concept. In taking on a recent Wall Street Journal hit piece on Morales, Op-Ed News' Stephen Lendman, in his "Evo Morales Now Joins Hugo Chavez as a US Target", states it quite clearly:Meantime a government spokesman advanced that “very soon” President Evo Morales will reveal a national development plan with the purpose of dismantling “colonialism and neo-liberalism” which will include nationalization of hydrocarbons and a “drastic” reform of the mining regime.
Planning minister Carlos Villegas said that “on the one hand we want to dismantle all the structure mounted since the arrival of the Spaniards in Bolivia (five centuries ago) and which consolidated in the republic, a true expression of colonialism. Furthermore we want to dismantle the neo liberal (economic) architecture built over the last twenty years”.
"Evo Morales has made it clear that foreign investors will not lose the rights to their investments. What they will lose once Morales' plan is implemented (he's giving them six months to comply) is their unfair share of the profits and benefits they never had a right to have in the first place. Under the Morales plan, a new contract will be made between the government and foreign investors guaranteeing that the people of Bolivia will receive the majority of benefits from its own resources while at the same time foreign investors will receive their fare share but no more than that. It also means the government alone now will decide the terms of revenue sharing and tax obligations due rather than Big Oil dictating them with the long shadow of the US looming in the background, which is still the case, of course."
Radical, yes. Unreasonable, not at all, unless you're the one making all of the money at the expense of the Bolivians. It just challenges the status quo. What is the bigger picture here? A candidate for the upcoming Peruvian election, Ollanta Humala, has said that he will do the same. And Morales has also indicated he eventually plans to nationalize the mines and forest resources, too. With two, and potentially three nations going this way, can a U.S. covert intervention be far behind? Yes, it's been done before, but it's a different world now, and with three major nations going that way, how reallistic or feasible is that? I'm wondering if we're really seeing the beginning of a HUGE paradigm shift here, one that could very well have a positive domino effect of other nations recaliming their sovereignty over thier resources.
Now, I do feel that if the big multinational corporations have invested time and money into their operations, they are entitled to some sort of compensation for their investments. Bolivia is using the number of 18 percent, not the windfall they recieved before. And I am not turning a blind eye to the possiblilty of human rights violations, corruption, or any of the other things this area has historically struggled with. I'm not some typical leftie forever captivated by revolutionaries of all sorts. I am just focusing on the nationalization concept here. I can't help but to be very inspired by this.
There is something major happening in South America, and I hope that the U.S. doesn't screw it up. It's going to be difficult to demonize these people, especially with the fact that our current government has almost no credibility anymore on the world stage, and very little left at home. Plus, we do have real enemies out there. Is it a matter of time before the U.S. tries to cook up 'Al-Quaeda in Bolivia' or something like that?
A Bolivian perspective:
That's from Oscar Olivera's "Recovering Bolivia's Oil and Gas", over at Counterpunch, worth a read. When we talk of globalization, too often I see that as the multinats claim to 'resources without borders'. Hopefully the tide is turning."The sheer value of the oil and gas is important to the future of the Bolivian economy. The 52.3 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves in Bolivia-reserves presently in the hands of foreign capitalists-are minimally worth $120 billion.1 This means that financial resources exist in Bolivia for improving the living conditions of the whole population. The resources exist for job creation, better salaries, and expanding free services.
One hundred twenty billion dollars is an extraordinary amount of money. Such funds can enable the creation of a new productive base that could halt the country's decline and rescue it from industrial and commercial insignificance. The resources exist to modify the structure of national production by broadening its industrial base, improving the transportation system, and diversifying the economy. Better yet, it could build the economy without the foreign loans or favors that always end up submerging us in greater dependency.
But as long as this wealth belongs to foreign businessmen who have appropriated resources that belong to others, these dreams remain unfulfilled. Foreign capitalists are getting rich, and intend to go on getting rich, from these resources. They restrict the possibilities that this wealth, which should belong to us, might be used to benefit the lives of all Bolivians. The capitalists, whether local or foreign, puts profits and her or his own personal benefit above the collective and national interest. The transfer of wealth to private and foreign hands is the fate that has befallen the collective national patrimony."
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
Chick Corea
Jeez, I don't post for a few days and it starts to feel like an eternity. Had a good weekend and went down to CT to visit some friends and saw the Chick Corea Trio at WestConn. Chick, as you probably know, is the legendary pianist who first honed his chops with Stan Getz and later in Miles Davis' electric 'Bitches Brew' band. He then went on to form Return to Forever with sax/flautist Joe Farrell, uber-bassist Stanley Clarke, drummer Airto Moriera, and vocalist Flora Purim. This particular lineup is one of Jenni's all time favorites, an airy Latin-tinged outfit that gave us classics such as '500 Miles High' and the now-standard-yet-really-hard-to-play 'Spain'. RTF eventually went through some lineup changes and morphed in to a somewhat over-the-top fusion band. Chick went on to do many other diverse projects, such as his Elektrik and Akoustic Bands, duets with Gary Burton, and many other noteworthy things.
This particular concert featured the legendary bassist Eddie Gomez (of Bill Evans fame) and Airto on drums. I wasn't sitting there taking notes, but just a few highlights-
They all really looked like they were enjoying the hell out of themselves, whether it be in a ballad, a free improv, whatever. Airto is quite the character on stage, in between all the incredible playing, he's quite the jokester...and when he really gets into his playing, you can really sense it is quite the transcendant experience for him. Gomez was unbelievable, as were his many solos. And, although I've been listening to Chick for quite some time, seeing him and hearing him live really brought his unique style into focus for me. The other great thing about the show was the diversity. There were three classic RTF tunes played, slightly reworked and fresh sounding. There were also a few Bill Evans tunes, Jobim's 'Desifinado', a few other Chick tunes, and some free-form stuff that managed to stay interesting. He also encored with his impression of Thelonius Monk's interpretation of a tune that I can't remember the name of. The highlight was the RTF classic, 'You're Everything'. Airto was incredible. All in all, a good show, something I don't seem to see too often anymore. No cheese or wank factor, either.
I also want to recommend Chick's new album, 'The Ultimate Adventure'. Inspired by a sci-fi novel from the immortal cult-leader and hack-sci-fi author L. Ron Hubbard (sigh-Chick is a long-time Scientologist, but thankfully you can't tell from the music), it reminds me of th
e kind of classic fusion records you would've heard around 1973. It's quite diverse, there's some stuff that sounds a lot like early RTF, some hard jamming fusion, and some heavy middle-eastern percussion grooves. Plus it has Airto, Steve Gadd, Vinnie Colaiuta, Hubert Laws, Jorge Pardo and a host of other incredible musicians. And an almost non-existent cheese factor, and little, if any, wankery. Worth picking up.
Tomorrow - "Whose Oil? Part 2".
