In Canadian history, there have been eight minority governments. None has lasted more than a year and a half. Headlines: Martin warns of Charter danger under Tories; Cdns want new gov't, not new country: Harper; Copps supporters switch allegiance to NDP; Conservatives and Liberals virtually tied; Nader appeals to Cdns not to vote Conservative; Leaders return to health-care funding battle; Layton: Quebecers not interested in sovereignty; Leaders grappling with minority gov't questions; Duceppe campaigns at Fete nationale celebrations.
Send letters to the editor to email@example.com
|Saturday Edition Feature
1. Anna Somers Cocks's Argument
A ] Anna Somers Cocks should get out more
by Zeke from Zeke's Gallery 18.6.04
Newsgrist informed me
Somers Cocks wrote what is called an Argument for the Independent in the UK,
the lack of "political" Art nowadays.
Ummm, could I suggest that she get
the heck out of her white tower? There is a ton of it going on.
whole deck of
cards is founded on some cursory research about an auction organized by
Close to fund Kerry, some art that Langlands & Bell have done that
listed for the Turner Prize, some work by Sue Coe, the biennial at the
and Documenta. Getting out on the streets and checking things out, would
her in that there is political art being made now. It will appear in
worldwide, later, once the dust has settled.
As I mentioned yesterday, the politics
exhibiting Art are as political as any government. As she is based in
and last I heard Tony Blair was supporting Mr. Bush, I can't quite see
British Art that is overtly political and against them is going to be
rise to the surface, yet.
On a more specific point, in her
writes that the pictures of the destruction of the World Trade Center,
torture at Abu Ghraib, and the death of Nicholas Berg (she can't even
his name) are "pictures are masterpieces of horror, more famous now than
Mona Lisa, Sunflowers, Picasso's Guernica." Can you say
Somehow I don't think that a) the Mona Lisa or
qualify as masterpieces of horror, even though they are quite white
cube. And b)
if all of the current events she mentions are better than them, then
the pictures of My Lai? Rwanda, ten year's ago? Heck, the Johnstown Flood? And those are only the ones
immediately spring to mind for which I can easily find
I am most definitely NOT white cube, I have enough between my ears to
differentiate between contemporary things and stuff that will (and
does) last for a long time, last I heard, the Mona Lisa was a very old
Last I heard, Kerry had a good chance of defeating Bush. The old stuff
survives, tends to be called "Masterpieces" the stuff that fades away,
B ] One place Anna Somers Cocks might want to check out
I came across this article by Amei
today's New York Times, and as I mentioned yesterday that Ms.
Cocks (or is it
Ms. Somers Cocks?) was flat-out wrong about the lack of political art, I
I should point out some concrete examples.
The political artists who were celebrated in the 1980's,
Golub to Barbara Kruger, were enraged and on-message. Their spirit is
much alive in "Terrorvision," an exhibition on view at Exit Art
31, in which 59 international artists confront the politics and
terror, with images that range from photographs of blood-splattered
declassified film of nuclear weapons tests in the Nevada
From Exit Art's web site:
Terrorvision is a multidisciplinary arts project that
definitions of terror are shaped by individual and collective visions,
experiences, memories and histories. This exhibition explores how
spiritual and physical events influence our notions of terror and how
unforgettable moments - and the cultural and media artifacts that
them - have come to define our most extreme fears. This exhibition
explore how these definitions and relationships are transformed and
by geography, generation and personal experience. Terrorvision is
serve as a study of terror as depicted through the ingenuity and
of today's artists. 'Nuff said. As I find more, I
out. Also, as an aside, I sorta have this nagging suspicion that Exit
Art is a [gasp!] white cube!
2. Fahrenheit 9/11
A] By Way of Deception
by STUART KLAWANS, The Nation, June 17, 2004
Not the judgment of film critics but the passage of time will decide whether Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 can change the world. Change, of course, is the whole purpose. Whatever satisfaction Moore derives from his ever-mounting income and awards, he clearly will consider this picture a success
only if it helps drive George W. Bush from office. Voters will write the real review. I can merely fill time until November, with the thought that Fahrenheit 9/11 might be interesting as a movie after it has done its work as politics.
As with any good polemic--and this is an excellent one--you sit in the theater thinking of how someone else would respond, some imaginary "undecided" in a swing state, or perhaps your Uncle Max the Republican. You don't much monitor your own reactions. But then, as you leave the movie house, you might notice that the sidewalk chatter sounds oddly muffled, the traffic looks a little blurred, as you begin to realize that your attention has not come outside with you; it's still in the dark, struggling with the feelings that Fahrenheit 9/11 called up and didn't resolve. Are you outraged, heartbroken, vengeful, morose, gloating, thoughtful, electrified? Moore has elicited all of these emotions and then had the nerve--the filmmaker's nerve--to leave you to sort them out.
I think there are two bundles of messages in Fahrenheit 9/11, one political and one emotional--and while the first is about as ambiguous as a call to take up pitchforks and torches and storm the castle, the second is too complex to unsettle those in power. It works to unsettle you. It's what makes Fahrenheit 9/11 a real movie.
For clarity's sake, then, let's start with the politics: the film's bill of particulars against Bush, and also against the Democratic leadership, which in Moore's view has colluded most shamefully in the misrule the world now suffers. The prologue to Fahrenheit 9/11 revisits Bush's rise to power in late 2000, paying particular attention to the hunched posture of the Democrats who let him step on their backs. Here are Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle, counseling "acceptance" of the non-election; and here is Al Gore, mildly officiating over the Senate session that legitimized the theft of his presidency. For the first time in Fahrenheit 9/11, but certainly not the last, Moore tells his story through borrowed but decidedly nonstock footage, which you most likely have not seen before--in this case, a scene of members of the House, all of them African-American, coming forward to contest the election, while Gore calmly rules their objections inadmissible because no senator, not one, would satisfy Congressional rules by signing on to them.
Moore's antagonists, being Republican, won't go so easy on him. Their attacks will no doubt include the charge that his film is Democratic Party propaganda. You should understand from the preceding the flimsiness of this accusation--although it's true that Moore spares us the sight of one notable Democrat, John Kerry, voting to authorize Bush to start a war on his own say-so, at any time that suited him.
But enough of Democratic malfeasance. Who is this Sage of Crawford, that he may choose for us between life and death? Moore answers, in part, with more footage you probably haven't seen until now: a substantial portion of videotape from the morning of September 11, 2001, when Bush and his handlers staged a photo opportunity at an elementary school in Florida. After an aide whispered to him that a second airplane had struck the World Trade Center, Bush sat in place for seven minutes, pretending to read a book titled My Pet Goat. Have you ever before had a chance to study his face on that morning? Has anything other than this movie made you feel the unendurable length of his inaction? What do you suppose he was thinking for all that time, as he stared into space? Moore himself asks that last question on the soundtrack, as a way of opening a biographical digression about Bush, his family and their business interests. This section of the film will particularly incense Moore's attackers, who will pronounce on him the dependable slur of "conspiracy theorist." So, to digress on my own:
Moore alleges no conspiracies. He merely says that Bush has motives beyond those he's willing to state. To make this case, Moore begins by showing that the Bush family in general, and George W. in particular, have received lavish support over the years from the Saudi elite, including the bin Ladens, and have offered valuable help in turn. Unlike the actualities footage that Moore uses in the film, these facts are by now widely known--although it was news to me that Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador, dined with Bush at the White House on September 13, 2001. In speculating about this dinner, and about the subsequent airlifting out of the United States of more than a hundred Saudis when everyone else was grounded, Moore goes only so far as to say that the overwhelmingly Saudi makeup of the September 11 attack teams could have proved embarrassing to Bush. He would not have wanted journalists just then to begin looking into his personal ties to Saudi interests, or to ask whether any useful information had emerged from the two dozen bin Ladens who had been in the country, and whom he soon spirited away without the indignity of questioning.
Nothing conspiratorial about that. The worst you can reasonably say of this section of the film is that it gives Moore the opportunity for one of his man-on-the-street pranks. He films himself and Craig Unger (author of the book House of Bush, House of Saud) in front of the Watergate complex in Washington, directly across the street from the Saudi Embassy: a choice of location that insures interruption. Sure enough, onto the scene drive carloads of Secret Service agents, who just want to ask, politely, why a film crew is working on this spot. The agents move off readily enough when given the answer, although one of them seems abashed when Moore blandly delivers his punch line: "I didn't realize the Secret Service guards foreign embassies."
In fact, reasonable people may find this to be the best part of the section.
You may have heard, by the way, that Moore is less of a presence in Fahrenheit 9/11 than he was in his previous pictures. Actually, he's always with you, in voiceover; but he does perform for the camera less than usual. At times, his stunts serve to drive home a point, as when he accosts members of Congress on the street and offers them recruiting brochures, in case they want to enlist their children in the military. At other times, his antics are pure comic relief. (After complaining that the House passed the USA Patriot Act sight unseen, Moore corrects the situation by reading the bill aloud to Congress, circling the Capitol in an ice-cream truck and reciting the provisions over a loudspeaker.) Either way, though, Moore makes sparing use of this sort of material in advancing his main charges against Bush.
The first principal accusation is that Bush had gotten along just fine with the Taliban before September 11 (which is demonstrable) and didn't much care about fighting them afterward (which is unproved but plausible). Bush invaded Afghanistan, Moore claims, because he had to be seen to do something, because the war helpfully diverted attention from the Saudis and because those closest to him would gain lucrative contracts for a natural-gas pipeline. Moore's second accusation is that Bush undertook the war in Iraq for even shadier purposes. As Nation readers knew, and as others have since caught on, Bush attacked without even the excuse he'd had in Afghanistan of pursuing bin Laden. There were no terrorists in Iraq to destroy, no military threats to counter--and unless you define "democracy" as the creation of profit-making opportunities for Halliburton, no process of democratization to pursue.
There is also a third principal point, most devastating of all. But before I go into that, let me digress once more, to sum up the impressively varied materials that Moore assembles to make these arguments.
The film contains, as I've said, a few of Moore's little skits, along with a lot of borrowed actualities footage, which is usually surprising and sometimes shocking. (How many shots have you seen of daily life in Baghdad immediately before the war? How many dead and wounded Iraqi civilians have you looked at close up?) In addition, you find pop-culture images, which Moore takes over for purposes of sarcasm or parody (as when he remakes the TV western Bonanza as the Bush adventure Afghanistan); talking-head interviews with expert commentators (such as former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke, former FBI agent Jack Cloogan and Senator Byron Dorgan); a range of texts and graphics; patches of direct cinema (for example, an excursion to a shopping mall in Flint, Michigan, with a couple of Marine recruiters); and, most critical of all, filmed encounters with ordinary citizens, who pretty much have the frame to themselves while Moore stays quietly out of the way.
The most important of these citizens, the one who takes over the final portion of the movie, is Lila Lipscomb of Flint, mother of Sgt. Michael Pedersen, who served in a helicopter unit in Iraq and was killed in action sometime after "the completion of major combat operations." Lipscomb is a pleasantly robust woman of modest means, patriotic and Christian in convictions, guileless in manner, whose role in the polemic is simple: She is meant to embody disillusionment. Having once despised all protesters against war, feeling that they were slapping our soldiers in the face, she now grieves over a dead son, whose final letter home said of Bush, "He got us out here for nothing." In a succession of artfully spaced scenes, which constitute the film's third damning charge against Bush, Lipscomb speaks of the meager possibilities open to most young people in Flint; she recalls having encouraged her own children to enter the military, believing it to be a good thing to do and a good opportunity; and at the end, bereft, with Moore trailing behind, she visits the White House (or as close to it as you can get these days) and says she is glad to be there, since it gives her a place to put her anger.
Lipscomb makes a very efficient witness--but she is an intractably complex movie character. She just doesn't fit Moore's scheme. He generally relies on economics to explain the behavior of the elite and psychology to account for the rest of us. (As you may recall from Bowling for Columbine, he is very interested in the way politicians and the communications media use fear to grab attention and elicit compliance.) But when it comes to Lipscomb, Moore (to his great credit) forgets about his standard categories. For perhaps the first time in his career, he shows someone as a fully rounded personality, animated by beliefs and loyalties that he does not necessarily share but must respect; and so he allows her emotions to overwhelm his cleverness.
This is the point at which Fahrenheit 9/11 may overwhelm you, too. Perhaps it will seem trivial to a pollster, counting and recounting those swing votes, that this campaign tool should also qualify as a work of art; but I can't believe the effect will be lost on moviegoers.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is Michael Moore's most urgent diatribe and also his best, most moving film.
Extremely Short Take: Had Moore's film not shouldered everything aside, I would have devoted several paragraphs of this column to praising The Corporation, a new documentary by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott and Joel Bakan. A study of the business corporation as the dominant institution of the past century and a half--and an analysis of the built-in qualities that make this "fictitious person" a psychopath--The Corporation recently opened in San Francisco and is now about to begin a New York City run at Film Forum (June 30). I think you'll find the film smart, playful, rapid and almost too richly informative. A nationwide release begins soon--a very successful one, I hope.
B] 'Fahrenheit 9/11': Will it change any voter's mind?
By Martin Kasindorf and Judy Keen, USA TODAY
In his most optimistic moments, documentary filmmaker Michael Moore dares to hope that his Fahrenheit 9/11 will influence the November presidential election as strongly as Ralph Nader's 1965 book Unsafe at Any Speed moved the nation on automotive safety.
"This may be the first time a film has this kind of impact," Moore says in an interview with USA TODAY.
For months, from Hollywood to the White House, storms as well as speculation have surrounded Fahrenheit 9/11, the 116-minute assault by the outspokenly liberal Moore on President Bush and the war in Iraq. The $6 million movie opened in New York City on Wednesday and opens in 868 theaters nationwide today.
Moore hasn't shied from controversy in previous documentaries and in books such as Stupid White Men. With Fahrenheit 9/11, he breaks new ground in take-no-prisoners innuendo. He has not endorsed Democrat John Kerry, but he makes no secret of partisan motivations. "I would like to see Mr. Bush removed from the White House," he said Sunday on ABC's This Week With George Stephanopoulos.
In Moore's voice-over narration about Bush's three-year record, the president is depicted as clueless and deceitful. He is so in thrall to Bush family business ties with the clan of Osama Bin Laden and other wealthy Saudis that he misdirects American reprisals for the 2001 terror attacks from Saudi financiers of terrorism to Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Hoarding military resources for a long-intended war with Iraq, he botches the Afghanistan hunt for bin Laden. He has lost the confidence of U.S. troops.
These are incendiary assertions. Some will believe them. Others will find them nakedly partisan.
White House communications director Dan Bartlett called the film's premise of softened U.S. responses to al-Qaeda because of Bush family interests "outrageously false." Former president George H.W. Bush labeled Moore a "slimeball" and the film "a vicious personal attack on my son."
Some political analysts say Moore won't make many converts. Moore "communicates to that far-left sliver that would never vote for Bush, even if there was an election on the moon," says Scott Reed, a Republican strategist who managed Bob Dole's 1996 campaign.
The film "will turn Bush-haters into bigger Bush-haters," says Jack Pitney, a professor of government at California's Claremont McKenna College. "But swing voters may not even be interested in this subject, and Republicans don't want to turn any money over to Michael Moore."
Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist, says the savage portrayal of Bush "could convince some Naderites" of the need to vote for Kerry. Moore, who backed Nader's independent candidacy in 2000, says that's one goal. "I hope to have a significant impact on the 4-6% who now say they're going to vote for Ralph," he says.
Even just galvanizing the faithful would spell success to Moore: "Is this a movie for the choir? I don't run away from that. The choir needs a wake-up call. A large part of the choir isn't energized by John Kerry and is not voting. The White House needs ... those people to become cynical and sit on the sidelines."
The potential power of screen images to change minds explains why Fahrenheit 9/11 has sparked so much conflict, prompting publicity that delights its marketers. Recapping the furor:
It was disclosed in May that Walt Disney CEO Michael Eisner had barred Disney's Miramax Pictures subsidiary from distributing the picture. Miramax co-chairmen Harvey and Bob Weinstein then paid Moore $6 million and scrambled for new distributors. Moore's agent said Disney feared losing tax breaks for its tourist attractions in Florida, where Bush's brother, Jeb Bush, is governor. Disney denied it, saying the film was too partisan.
o Move America Forward, a Republican group based in Sacramento, is barraging theater owners with e-mail urging them not to show the film. Sal Russo, a Republican consultant advising the group, says it is a "bad product."
Reacting, the liberal group MoveOn PAC secured Internet pledges from more than 100,000 members to see the movie this weekend. "It's un-American to say to people, 'You don't even have the right to see this movie and make up your own mind,' " MoveOn PAC field director Adam Ruben says.
Citizens United, a conservative advocacy group, filed a complaint Thursday with the Federal Election Commission, alleging that broadcast ads for the film are about to violate federal laws because they amount to attacks on Bush paid for by corporate funds.
And an FEC decision Thursday on another case could force Moore to remove images of Bush from any broadcast ads after July 30, which is 30 days before the GOP convention, to avoid violating election law.
Since Bartlett's comment in May, the White House and the Bush re-election campaign have gone mostly silent. "We don't respond to all of Sen. Kerry's surrogates," said Ken Mehlman, Bush's campaign manager, on Thursday when asked about the film.
Moore says only two theater chains are balking at showing the film. On one level, he's already having his biggest success; his Oscar-winning 2002 documentary Bowling for Columbine ran on only 243 screens at its peak, less than a third of what he's getting for Fahrenheit 9/11.
For every Republican trashing Fahrenheit 9/11 as leftist propaganda, there's a reviewer lauding it as a powerful, moving and frequently humorous work of art. Roger Friedman, entertainment columnist for Fox News Channel's Web site, said that Moore has crafted "a tribute to patriotism" that "members of all political parties should see without fail."
At the Cannes Film Festival last month, a nine-member jury that included four Americans gave Moore the Palme d'Or grand prize.
What should encourage Moore is the box-office performance of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. Protests that the film was anti-Semitic sparked so much publicity that it has earned $370 million in North America.
Moore says that some will check out his film "for the same reason I went to see The Passion of the Christ - you don't want to be left out of the dinner conversation."
An imperfect precedent for the current controversy is the 1934 campaign for governor of California. MGM mogul Louis B. Mayer, scared of Democratic nominee Upton Sinclair's socialist platform, filled screens with fake voter interviews. Men with Russian accents said they would vote for Sinclair, while sweet old ladies backed lackluster Republican Gov. Frank Merriam. Now, that was partisan propaganda. Sinclair lost.
The footage in Moore's film includes gory war scenes in Iraq, shots of U.S. soldiers abusing Iraqi detainees and poignant close-ups of a grief-stricken Flint, Mich., woman, Lila Lipscomb, who lost her son, Army Sgt. Michael Pedersen, in a helicopter crash in Iraq.
But some critics say the footage is misleading. Such criticism focuses on a segment in which Moore suggests that 24 bin Laden family members and 118 other Saudis were improperly allowed to leave the USA by air soon after the 9/11 attacks. Critics say the film implies that the Saudis left while civil aviation was still grounded. In fact, commercial flying had resumed, and the FBI had screened many of the Saudis.
Joanne Doroshow, an associate producer of the film, says the sequence is "somewhat confusing, admittedly."
Bracing for Republican onslaughts, Moore created a campaign-style "war room" for instant counterattacks. As spokesmen, he hired Chris Lehane and Mark Fabiani, who had done such work for President Clinton and Vice President Gore.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is about much more than beating Bush, Moore says. "The issues in this film are going to be with us next year," he says. "We're still going to have war in Iraq. We're still going to have al-Qaeda, no matter who is in the White House. If I can contribute to re-energizing those who have given up, then I'd feel that we will have done a good thing."
1. FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum" posts and comments on (Barf Alert!):
Weepy Reagan Tribute-Free Zone
by Neil Steinberg, Chicago Sun-Times , June 8, 2004
"That's it. While I'm sorry Reagan is dead -- though at 93, we saw that coming, didn't we? -- I'm going nuts with the tributes. It's as if he was a 16-year-old couple who drove into a tree, with the candles and the floral tributes and such.
We've become a culture of babies, where every death is Princess Diana's. It's enough to sour you on the departed. Over the years, I nudged closer to a grudging respect for Reagan, but this overkill is sending me back toward being the person who had a "REAGAN SUCKS'' button on his bulletin board. I've been having these wicked 1980s flashbacks. About the 25th time I saw "Ronald Wilson Reagan'' in another somber tribute, I found myself thinking "Ronald Wilson Reagan ... each name has six letters ... 6-6-6 ... the Mark of the Beast.'' That thought is 20 years old; we used to think stuff like that. It was a wild exaggeration, of course, to view Reagan as the Master of Evil. But this adoration fest is a wild exaggeration, too"
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: ANOTHERIDIOT; NEILSTEINBERG; PETTY; PETTYDEMS
Neil Steinberg, liberal columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times is not only without ethics or compassion but describes himself as "left of liberal."
Steinberg is part of the liberal crowd that cannot stand to see the admiration and respect that the majority of the citizens have for Ronald Reagan.
Steinberg is disgusting in his bashing of Ronald Reagan.
1 posted on 06/10/2004 5:53:20 AM PDT by KeyLargo
Libs are starting to crack.
Envy makes people do incredible things. Steinberg knows that HE will never be mourned by millions. What a small, small man, to write such a thing at such a time.
" where every death is Princess Diana's."
Idiot can't reconcile his hatred of Reagan to compare that sappy overblown coverage of a clothes horse to the respect and dignity due one of our greatest presidents.
Neil Steinberg sucks!
Ronald Reagan proved that there are some decent liberals worth trying to salvage -- and he salvaged some of them and turned them into conservatives. But, sadly, there are some like this jerk who will never get it. He'd have to have a decent heart in the first place.
Be honest, Neil. You hate Reagan for what he did. Reagan took away your Shadowy-City-in-the-Fog, the dream of a greater Socialist Utopia. By shattering the Evil Empire, Reagan broke the hearts of liberals and leftists everywhere. That's what's got you down, Neil. Admit it. Be a man, not some slime lying on the sidewalk.
I'm going nuts with the tributes
Hey, Neil..baby. Are ya go'n nuts with the Abu Ghrab over kill, too, or just this?
We've become a culture of babies, where every death is Princess Diana's.
True, the greatest American president is no British ex-princess...
Thank you Ronald W. Reagan.
Even in death you drive the amoral, socialist, liberal slime toward the cliffs of doom.
He's stealing from himself. Under the pseudonym "Ed Gold," Steinberg wrote some very entertaining columns bashing one-time syndidated columnist Bob Greene. As time went on, Bob Greene became a joke of a columnists, until he was canned in a sex scandal.
Back to Neil. As "Ed Gold" writing in the free weekly The Chicago Reader, in his final column of the "Bob Watch," he wrote the same thing about Greene. Robert (six letters) the middle name (I think it was Edward---again, six letters,), Greene. Six letters.
One of Steinberg's criticisms of Bob Greene was that he was recycling his old columns.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Yep, wondered how long it would take.
This is about the third article I've read this AM along the same lines.
Funny part is, since the public affection for Reagan is so obvious, the Dems are between a rock and a hard place.
They feel like they have to say "nice things", but in reality, they thought of Reagan just about how they think of Bush. But I think the Dems are trying to use their "affection" for Reagan against Bush.
I, personally, would rather see the Dem politicians being honest, because I get the feeling they're trying to be dishonest about how they felt about Reagan, in order to shed a negative image on Bush.
In other words, what they say to the press seems like, "Yeah, Reagan, he was a great man. There was a leader we could get along with. Unlike Bush, who is a loner and we can't get along with him or his ways."
Reagan proved them wrong, he proved ME wrong, which is what got me to actually CONSIDER a point of view other than the Liberal one which I had bought sink, line, and hooker.
I thought he was going to kill us all, kill old people and children, lock up us minorities, yadda friggin yadda.
Heck, instead, all he did was save this Country, and the world as a bonus.
Ouch baby, very ouch, to the liberals.
This Steinberg dolt is nothing more than a pimple on Reagan's arse...let him whine, Americans know better!!
I remember my grandmother crying because Reagan won. She'd been caught in the mindset so common here in Kentucky...."I'll vote Democrat because I always have, my daddy did, and his daddy did..."
Because of the way she acted about the election of Reagan, even at my young age I began to watch his actions....and he became one of my all time heroes.
I spent 20 years in the Navy, and I saw the effect that President Reagan's defense policies had on the pride and morale of myself and my fellow sailors. He totally destroyed the "we lost Vietnam" mentality and restored honor to America's mighty military.
I've been having these wicked 1980s flashbacks.
I've heard LSD will do that to a person.
Isn't great that no matter how many times these mutts get another chance to "get it", they close their eyes and tell us we can't see straight?
Long may the evil donkey and his little helpers in the ratmedia be self blinded!
These same people had no problem at all with weeks of over-coverge and adoration of JFK Jr., who died at 40 with no other accomplishment than being the handsome son of a Prez who served only 1,000 days. And the amazing year of non-stop tributes to Diana, lovely and young at death but certainly not a world leader beyond her token charities. I was ready to scream at the sainthood they attributed to both of these people, but liberals seemed to enjoy every moment. Now with true greatness and leadership and longevity being honored, they want it all over in a day or two, max.
Exactly. And why is the media whining about having to do all the coverage? They're peeved because they don't get to do their usual overkill on their favorite subjects, like All-Abu-All-the-Time, or their minute-by-minute updates on the Scott Peterson trial. What a joke it is that the media complains about too much Reagan coverage, when they have made Laci Peterson's death such a big story.
Cuban Coffee Recipe
Unscrew the espresso maker and remove the metal filter cup from the bottom half. Pour ice cold water into the bottom of the espresso maker up to the bolt located on the inside.
Put the metal filter cup back into the bottom half and tamp very tightly with coffee grounds, leveled off at the top. Screw the espresso maker together and place on a hot burner (high heat).
In a metal cup, place about one teaspoon of sugar for each serving.
As the coffee begins to percolate, pour enough to moisten the sugar into the metal cup. Vigorously mix the moistened sugar and coffee until it becomes a paste.
Take the espresso maker off of the heat once the top portion is about 3/4 of the way full. This will prevent it from burning and/or overflowing onto your stove. Once the coffee is done, pour it slowly into the metal cup while gently mixing it with the sugar paste. If done properly, the sugar paste will create a "foam" once it is mixed with the rest of the coffee. Serve in demitasse cups.
Ten Ten / Con Con
1. The Economist, June 10, excerpt
…"Mr Harper's biggest weakness may be his unconvincing economic arithmetic. Perhaps he thinks so too: he released his party's programme at lunchtime on Saturday June 5th, which ensured it got little immediate attention. It calls for big rises in military spending, and even more generous transfers to the provinces for health care than the Liberals offer. In all, Mr Harper would spend an extra C$58 billion ($42 billion) over five years, against the Liberal's promised C$27 billion. Yet Mr Harper says he would also cut taxes. His programme assumes federal fiscal surpluses of double the amount calculated by Mr Martin, a prudent finance minister who promises not to allow Canada to slip back into deficit financing."
2. Our Public Airwaves
A new vision for Canadian broadcasting
TO: Supporters of the CBC and Canadian Programming
FROM: Arthur Lewis
SUBJECT: Ten days left to act
Dear friends and supporters,
The CBC is seriously threatened and we have to act before it's too late.
The Conservatives appear poised to form the next government, but few Canadians are aware of Conservative plans for CBC. Stephen Harper has said on two occasions during the election that a Conservative government will commercialize parts of the CBC including the English TV network and Radio Two.
It's not too late to head that off. Regardless of which party wins, we have to send a message that we want a strong er CBC, not a more commercial one. Please visit our campaign website at: www.SupportCBC.ca It is imperative to send that message right away to all of the major party leaders and you can do that in one simple step on our website.
In light of the threat from the Conservatives, we also implore you to forward this message to your personal e-mail list. Please encourage everyone you know to join you in this campaign in support of a stronger CBC.
We believe that when Mr. Harper says commercialize, he really means privatize. At the very least it means the Conservatives want to cut public funding for CBC instead of increasing it as called for by the recent report of the all-party Heritage Committee. Instead of providing Canadians with more Canadian programming, the Conservatives want to turn the CBC into another commercial network that sells us to advertisers rather than serving us as citizens.
If you think this message is overly alarmist, I invite you to review Mr. Harper's exact words as well as the positions of the other major parties on our campaign website.
When the candidates come knocking for your vote, tell them you want a stronger CBC. And if you attend an election meeting, please challenge the Conservative candidate on this issue. We must make our voices heard before it's too late!
You can start by visiting our website at www.SupportCBC.ca and s ending a message.
Thanks again for your support.
Our Public Airwaves
P.O. Box 4400, Station E
Ottawa, ON K1S 5B4
Tel.: 613 237-3555
Fax: 613 237-0003
3. Canadian Women against Stephen Harper
Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians, and Elizabeth May of the Sierra
Club, are circulating the letter below regarding Stephen Harper and his
policies. We need signatures from Canadian women. Due to the shortage of
time to act before the election, we are hoping to get as many names signed
on as possible - to maximize the impact when the letter is released to the
media. Because of the focus on the election, we should be able to get good
media coverage this time!
Please, if you can, circulate this letter as far and wide as possible. We
need the full name and title/credentials (if applicable) for the
Many thanks for any assistance you can provide with this important
WHY CANADIANS MUST REJECT HARPER:
CANADIAN WOMEN SPEAK OUT
On June 28, 2004, Canadians face a starker choice than in any election in
our lifetimes. Dissatisfaction with the years of Liberal government is
driving voters toward the "Conservative Party" and its new and telegenic
leader, Stephen Harper. With only weeks to go until election day, we fear
many members of the public will not have time to adequately assess the
sharp and clear differences between the major parties.
In fact, the "Conservative Party" is not a known and trusted alternative.
The Right Honourable Joe Clark, former Prime Minister and a life-long
member of the Progressive Conservative Party, made this clear when he
urged the Canadian public to choose Paul Martin over Harper. The Harper
agenda scares him. Many leading former Progressive Conservatives feel the
The party Harper leads has little in common with the former Progressive
Conservative Party. But there is a way that Canadians can learn more about
Harper's mysterious party: We can look South, to George Bush and the U.S.
Like the Bush Republicans, the Harper Conservatives would take Canada into
Bush and Harper favour Canadian involvement in the illegal U.S. attack on
Bush and Harper would take Canada to deficits in order to pour billions
into the military. Bush has already taken the U.S. into trillions of
dollars of debt to fund militarism.
Bush and Harper deny the reality of climate change and the threat to the
whole planet, and especially Canada, from our continued reliance on fossil
Bush and Harper reject the Kyoto Protocol. Harper has said he would not
implement this international treaty which Canada has already ratified.
Bush and Harper would change the protection of human rights enshrined in
our respective Bill of Rights and Charter of Rights. Harper has said he
would use the notwithstanding clause to prevent the equal application of
the marriage laws as they effect single-sex couples.
Bush and Harper would challenge a woman's right to choose. Harper has
said he would allow the issue of access to legal abortions to be re-opened
through an open vote in the House of Commons.
Bush was responsible for more executions than any other U.S. Governor of
recent times. Harper has suggested the prohibition of capital punishment
would be re-opened in Canada.
We must not sleep walk into electing a Canadian version of George W. Bush.
Challenge Stephen Harper on these positions.
Harper tells Canadians we should "Demand Better." First, Canadians must
"Demand the truth" about the new Canadian Republican Party, masquerading
as the Conservative Party of Canada.
We do not have much time.
If you would like to add your name as a signatory of this letter, please contact Jillian Skeet by email firstname.lastname@example.org or by phone: 604-324-1135.
1. Here is a list from a book I'm reading called
Yodel-Ay-Ee-Oooo: The Secret History Of Yodeling Around The World"
By Bart Plantenga.
I thought it was great. Best part of the book so far.
The Who's Who Of Yodelers
The Queen Of Yodeling is Mary Schneider
The Yodeling Queen is Janet McBride
The Yodeler King is Franzl Lang
The Jodlerkonig is Peter Hinnen
The King of the Yodelers is Kenny Roberts
Hawaii's Falsetto King is George Kainapau
Queen of The Yodelers is Rosalie Allen
The Epiglottis Goddess is Terri Taylor
The King of the Cowboys is Roy Rogers
The King Of Country Music is Roy Acuff
The Price of the Yodelers is Ward L. Burton
The Father of Bluegrass is Bill Monroe
America's Blue Yodeler is Jimmie Rodgers
The Yodeling Ranger is also Jimmie Rodgers
The Singing Messenger Boy is Bill Bruner
The Ramblin' Yodeler is Bill Haley
The Yodeling Jackeroo is Buddy Williams
The Famous Yodeling Blues Singer is Emmett Miller
The Caruso of the Mountains is Riley Puckett
The Caruso of the Mountains is also Sepp Viellechner
The Pavarotti of the Plains is Don Walser
Yodeling Slim Dallas is Dallas "Nevada Slim" Turner
The Original Texas Ranger is Tex Owens
The Oklahoma Yodeling Cowboy is Gene Autry
The Original Singin' Cowboy is Jules Verne Allen
The Cowboy Yodeler is Wylie Gustafson
The Singing Ranger is Hank Snow
The Alabama Yodeler is Monroe Tabor
The Tennessee Plowboy is Eddy Arnold
The Texas Troubadour is Ernest Tubb
The Yodeling Minstrel is Al Tint
The World Champion Yodeler is Kenny Roberts
The World's Champion Yodeler is Yodelin' Slim Clark
The Yodel Champion is Paul Gerber
The National Champion Girl Yodeler is May Miccolis
Iowa's Yodeling Cowboy is Jerry Smith
The Texas Drifter is Goebel Reeves
The Yodeling Wrangler is also Goebel Reeves
The Official Cowboy Band For Texas is The Spirit of Texas
Canada's Champion Female Yodeler is Shirley Field
The Gospel Yodeler is Buzz Goertzen
T he World Class Yodeler is Margo Smith
The Yodeling Ranger is Donn Reynolds
The Canadian Yodeling Cowboy is also Donn Reynolds
The Golden-Throated Cowboy is Eddie Dean
The Orange Yodeler is Michael Dautry
The Cowboy From Vienna Werner Zotter
The Neanderthal Yodeler is Michael Welch
The Highest Yodeler in the World is Elton Britt
The Yodeling Cowboy is also Elton Britt
The Swiss Cowboy is Kerry Christensen
The Victor Borge of Yodeling is also Kerry Christensen
The Yodeling Cowboy is Sourdough Slim
The Conquering Lion is Thomas Mapfumo
Hawaii's Songbird is Lena Machado
The Swiss Miss Yodeler is Ethel Delaney
The Perma quid Cowboy is Rusty Rogers
The Original Singing Cowboy is Carl T. Sprague
The Yodeling Cowboy From Chesterfield is Harry Torrani
The Lonesome Cowboy is John I. White
Montana's Yodeling Cowgirl is Patsy Montana
The Yodeling Cowgirl is Lee Jones
The Yodeling Bushman is Gordon Parsons
America's Only Colored lady Yodeler is Beulah Henderson
The Well-Known Yodeler of the Police Petrol Company is Eddie Giguere
The Fastest Yodeler in Western Music is Curly West
The Tennessee Yodeler is Margo Smith
The Dixie Yodeler is Zeke Clements
The Canadian Sweethearts are Lucille Star and Bob Reagan
The Yodeling Cowboy is Yodeling Alberta Slim
The Wandering Cowboy is Buddy Bishop
Australia's Yodeling Sweetheart is Shirley Thoms
The Disney Land Yodeler is Fred Burri
The Voice of Variety is Ron Ronalde
The Yodeling Cowgirl is June Holm
The Yodeling Boundary Rider is Tex Morton
The Cowboy Troubadour is Tim McNamara
The International Champion Swiss Yodeler is Robbie Schneider
The Singing Puzzle is Harry Torrani
The Yodeler with the Velvet Voice is Alfons Zitz
The Kansas City Butter-Ball is Lottie Kimbrough
The Jimmy Rodgers of Sierra Leone is S.E. Rogie
And last but not least:
The Yodeling Wood Carver is Adi
3. Franke Boutique, Toronto
Queen Street is a buzz neighborhood that people wear like a designer handbag for cultural cool cache. In recent times the neighborhood has lived up to its reputation with a plethora of galleries, specialty shops and fashion ateliers popping up like dandy lions. Sorting through the weeds can be a daunting task at the best of times. During the recent L'Oreal Paris sponsored Toronto Fashion Week a rare orchid bloomed in the chilly Canadian Spring. Designer Kendra of Franke Boutique wowed with laser precise spring collection. Her vision bucks the usual drab stereotype of functional greys and Toronto neutrals. Her collection was one of luxury and color wonderful.
The Collection was presented in the front of her boutique circumventing the staid runway format in favor of a more theatre based proposition. Models emerged from her Touch Beauty Bungalow (A full service day spa attached to her showroom) clad in their unmentionables ready for a dress-up party. Onlookers from the street were invited to feast on the visual orgy of chiffon fabric and aqua-fantastic color scheme. The girls pranced around trying on carefully placed pieces from the collection allowing the audience a real sense of the frock's movement and context. Think Paris Hilton and friends having a fantasy slumber party at Queen and Ossington.
One has to wonder if the west-coast starlet drama of her flowing floral print gowns and saucy pastel-chiffon skirts will translate in the Canadian market. This is probably a moot consideration as I am sure the pieces will garner an International client list.
The audio element was as clever as the visual presentation. Parisian café music accompanied the girls fitting session followed by a jolt of hardcore hip-hop all blaring out of crude ghetto blaster. This roughness complimented the flirty soirée perfectly. The message is clear, feel free to play debutant this season. Intelligence and beauty are not exclusive and nobody knows that better the Kendra of Franke Boutique.
Inquiries about product availability can be sent to Iamfranke@hotmail.com
Or call direct at: 416-588 8514
Instant Coffee Saturday Edition is our email/online zine, sent out every month or two. Saturday Edition compliments Instant Coffee's email list service, which has been promoting local, national and international events to a targeted audience since 2000.
Instant Coffee Saturday Edition takes submissions; graphics, articles, reviews, links; about music, video/film, art exhibitions, architecture, design and all else worth knowing; ... self indulgence welcome in the Sanka section. Send submissions to email@example.com
Instant Coffee poli tickle