So, the president grew a pair of balls, briefly...

So what? Granted, he has more balls than the last president who couldn't deal with an "unfriendly" audience that wasn't hand-picked, but does this make him a "good guy" now when we all know he's not going to do the right thing for the common good unless we nearly break his arm off? Where's the will? None of this talk at the GOP's retreat signals a real change, just one in image. Results are what count. Without a public option with real muscle, he can forget it. Without an ending of two worthless wars, he can forget it. Without closing Guantanamo, he can forget it. Without creating an independent commission to charge the last administration with a gauntlet of crimes, forget it, he's the same as the last brew, so are his advisers, and Congress needs to be flushed.

Campaign manager David Plouffe and the Obama administration aren't inspired by genius

Washington D.C.--The Obama administration's David Plouffe has written a recent opinion piece in the Washington Post (the January 24, "November doesn't need to be a nightmare for Democrats") that should ring familiar since the public wrote it first: the Democrats need to deliver on the promises of the 2008 campaign of Barack Obama, that of genuine progressive reform, real change. Most Americans know such promises coming from either party aren't going to happen without incredible demands or from the fact that events have left the political and economic establishment with few options.

"Progress" has never been a gift, yet Plouffe's read his Machiavelli and understands that you have to throw the mob something:

...After two election cycles in which Democrats won most of the close races and almost all of the big ones, Democrats have much more fragile turf to defend this year than usual. Add to that a historic economic crisis, stubborn unemployment and the pain that both have inflicted on millions of Americans, and you have a recipe for a white-knuckled ride for many of our candidates.

But not if Democrats do what the American people sent them to Washington to do. ...

It all sounds good, but which Obama are we going to get, and which Democrats? What amount of arm-twisting is the current administration willing to do? Even LBJ, once called "the King of the Senate," understood the power of the presidency, and he flexed it. It's sad to admit it, but in some respects, the 2008 McCain campaign (and Obama's other running-mates and opponents) were correct that the president isn't experienced enough with the ins-and-outs of the legislative process and what it takes to get things done. His rather feeble and continuing outreach to the GOP incumbency is one obvious indicator of this.

The public wants leadership. The public wants someone who's really on their side.

The President's ongoing desire for bipartisanship masks what should be clear to all: he's to-the-right of Ronald Reagan and Richard M. Nixon, just not to the extremists in the House and the Senate. His recent talk of freezing social spending in the midst of an almost unprecedented economic crisis has been roundly criticized by eminent economists who have all-but-given-up on him, it being just another capitulation to the minority party, a curious stance if ever there was one. Ploufee understands this perception--an accurate one--when he writes these agenda headers:

...--Pass a meaningful health insurance reform package without delay...

--We need to show that we not just are focused on jobs but also create them. ...

-- Make sure voters understand what the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did for the economy. ...

-- Don't accept any lectures on spending. ...

-- "Change" is not just about policies. ...

-- Run great campaigns. ...

-- No bed-wetting. ...

This all sounds good, as most campaign rhetoric does, but what about the reality? Is it really a matter of perception? It is, but not the way that Plouffe paints it.

First, "Pass a meaningful health insurance reform package without delay": Plouffe is more than a little dishonest here, which is to be expected from a mainstream campaign manager. When the truth isn't on your side, divert. The Democratic Party and the Obama administration specifically and willfully dropped the ball on socialized medicine and capitulated to big medicine, pharma, and the health insurance lobby. How they're going to reverse this past behavior is a great question, but the Senate version of the health care reform bill is slanted to reward insurance companies with billions of dollars and a captive consumer base. Presidential adviser Rahm Emanuel has been instrumental in some of these problems, but so have "blue dog" Democratic incumbents in Congress. Nonetheless, the White House shares the greatest blame here. The GOP's role goes without saying, it's not progressive or constructive.

Second, "We need to show that we not just are focused on jobs but also create them": This is where the Obama administration has--once again--not done even remotely enough. International, world class economists have chided the president and Congress for the smallness of the initial $700 Billion stimulus program, an "impetus" that isn't especially higher than the appropriations for the needless wars in the Middle East which are being fought for petroleum corporations and aren't in the interest of the public, let alone promote a safer world or our national security. Don't expect the Obama administration or Congress to be receptive to demands over this. Public works projects only go so far, and we've had a scanty investment considering the desperate need to repair our national infrastructure, including real world (meaning adequate) investments in high tech and green infrastructure and mass transportation. However, I hear the military is now hiring, but hurry, their quotas are nearly met now.

At the rate jobs are vanishing, they're not even remotely doing enough.

Third, "Make sure voters understand what the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did for the economy": This is Plouffe being redundant. Yes, we probably averted another Great Depression...for now. Without real reform in the financial sectors--which the Obama administration is fighting--we're likely to have one anyway, or very likely so, according to academic economists.

Fourth, "Don't accept any lectures on spending": This is true, except that much of the self-inflicted damage has been done. This would allow the Democrats more leverage in fixing the economy and getting us out of the mess we're in, but that doesn't translate into the will to do it, or even the ability, when you've already compromised yourselves on several fronts and handed the opposition all their talking points. The public kept telling the Obama administration this again and again over the last year and they wouldn't listen. That's called a leadership vacuum.

Fifth, "'Change' is not just about policies": Well, duh, but please explain why passing reasonable health care reform (meaning having a system like Canada's, the UK's, or France's) has been so hard then? We can talk about campaign reform and ethics reforms all we want, but my experience--and it's direct--is that Democrats aren't especially interested in it anymore than Republicans are, they just talk a better talk. The Democratic record for ethics enforcement is monaural and poor.

Sixth, "Run great campaigns": Considering the number of Obama/DNC supporters and volunteers that I know and know of who are angry over the last year and who feel used, this shit's not going to cut it, not even remotely. So what? More "appearances are everything" thinking.

Seventh, "No bed-wetting": This is just more hyperbole, more rhetoric. Right, stick to the script, grow a pair. Too late? Probably...

About all I was convinced of from Plouffe's opinion piece is that he understands a groundswell is coming if Democratic incumbents don't start delivering on a bare-minimum of their promises, that they must at least appear to show leadership qualities where they have shown almost none at all, instead bending over backwards for corporate interests and Wall Street. They've known for over a year that the public has wanted more and substantial action from them to fix the mess of the last administration and beyond, but they've refused to and won't listen to the public, the majority. Now, they claim, they want to listen, but only when it appears that they're going to lose their majority. How is this going to translate into leadership? Plouffe offers no answers.

From this, it seems obvious to this writer that they've learned nothing at all and will continue down the same path regardless. Americans might consider breaking their two-party addiction, and quick. Rhetoric isn't going to cut it anymore, results will. While the vote in Massachusetts for Scott Brown to fill the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat is being called a "referendum," there's another side to it: people simply wanted change, any change, and "renegade" candidates without an obvious connection to the political establishment have a real opening. To some extent, the outcome there was more about moving on from the Kennedy dynasty and the generalizations about its significance have been overstated, first by Republicans, then by just about everyone else (except me, it seems).

Voters in Massachusetts may have been voting against their interests (though it should be remembered that Brown was only elected to finish Kennedy's term), but the message that they want new faces in office is crystal clear. Democrats got complacent and arrogant, but the backlash in Massachusetts was a longtime coming. Simply running a "good campaign" and shaping perceptions does not a leader make. What's needed is a real opposition party that's actually different from the GOP and has the common good in mind. Best of luck with that one.

"November doesn't need to be a nightmare for Democrats," The Washington Post, 01.24.2010: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/22/AR2010012204216.html

On this date: CNN's Rick Sanchez is spot-on truthful, unbiased, and accurate!

CNNiverse--Yes, on this day, this wonderous day, CNN talking neck Rick Sanchez stated emphatically: "I'm a pseudo-intellectual." The waters parted. The clouds lifted. The birds sang from the highest trees and the prophets-in-hiding cried out from the mountaintops that truth had been spoken. Then things went back to normal with the usual leading questions and ignoring all the elephants in the room...

Who got to Haiti first?

Port-au-Prince, Haiti--Who got there first? The Cubans, many-of-whom were already there in their usual form: as doctors. Why were they already there? Because the developed world is on their neck in Haiti and the place has been mismanaged before the earthquake and since the time of Columbus when the island of Hispaniola was first conquered and settled, primarily for exploitation. Cuba is part of this same legacy of colonialism and understands its effects, say what you will about the regime there. Hispaniola has been a hellhole for centuries, ever since the first white men planted their flags on its shores. The abuse is ongoing.

That's the part that never changes in poor Haiti, that first black republic, something they've been punished for ever since. Don't let anyone fool you on this central point: Haiti was a disaster before the earthquakes, a prototypical example of where the rest of us might be headed, including the centuries of ecological devastation spurred-on by the desire to exploit, to profit, from the misery of enslaved others. What the world should be doing is pledging to rebuild Haiti and its economy and to leave the place alone. We know that's not going to happen anytime soon.

But make no mistake: The Cubans made it to the Haitian-side of Hispaniola first, and not simply thanks to proximity. Will we have a rerun of Katrina? We already have, and under a black president. It took American forces three days to reach Haiti in significant numbers, just more abuse and negligence, the depriving of people of basic human rights.

Who's in Haiti right now? From a private security source (update)...

OPERATION UNIFIED RESPONSE (+ 20,000 U.S. FORCES):

US SOUTHERN COMMAND [http://www.southcom.mil]
GEN Fraser (Commander)///LT GEN Keen (Dep. Commander)

US NAVY CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (USS VINSON AIRCRAFT CARRIER)
US NAVY EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP (USS BATAAN AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP)
US NAVY EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP (USS NASSAU AMPHIBOUS ASSAULT SHIP)
US NAVY HOSPITAL SHIP (USNS COMFORT)

US MARINE CORPS 22ND MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT (MEU)
US MARINE CORPS 24TH MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT (MEU)

US COAST GUARD CUTTER (USCGC VALIANT)
US COAST GUARD CUTTER (USCGC MOHAWK)
US COAST GUARD CUTTER (USCGC TOMAHAW)
US COAST GUARD CUTTER (USCGC FORWARD)
US COAST GUARD TENDER (USCGC OAK)

US AIR FORCE [Toussaint Louverture International Airport (PAP)]

US ARMY 82ND AIRBORNE DIVISION///2ND BRIGADE COMBAT TEAM

======================================================================

EUROPEAN UNION (NATO):

MARINE MILITARE ITALIA AIRCRAFT CARRIER (MMI CAVOUR)[En-route]

FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (SIROCO)
FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE BATRAL (FRANCIS GARNIER)

CANADIAN NAVY DESTROYER (HMCS ATHABASKAN)
CANADIAN NAVY FRIGATE (HMCS HALIFAX)

UNITED KINGDOM NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (HMS RFA LARGS BAY)[En-route]

[http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/royal-fleet-auxiliary/rfa-flotilla/bay-class-landing-ships/rfa-largs-bay/]

ROYAL NETHERLANDS NAVY SPECIAL MISSON SHIP (HNLMS PELIKAAN)

NAVAL ARMADA DE SPAIN DOCK LANDING SHIP (SNS CASTILLE)[En-route]
NAVAL ARMADA DE SPAIN AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (GALICIA)

====================================================================
UNITED NATIONS STABILIZATION MISSION IN HAITI (MINUSTAH) [http://minustah.org/]
====================================================================

CENTRAL/SOUTH AMERICA:

NAVAL ARMADA DE MEXICO AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (ARM PAPALOAPAN)
NAVAL ARMADA DE MEXICO HOSPITAL SHIP (ARM HUASTECO)

NAVAL ARMADA DE VENEZUELA SHIP (NAME)
NAVAL ARMADA DE VENEZUELA SHIP (NAME)

BRAZILIAN NAVY SHIP (NAME)

===================================================================

U.S. OPERATION UNIFIED RESPONSE (NAVY continued)

US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYER (USS HIGGINS)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE CRUISER (USS BUNKER HILL)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE CRUISER (USS NORMANDY)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE FRIGATE (USS UNDERWOOD)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS MESA VERDE)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS ASHLAND)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS FORT MCHENRY)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS CARTER HALL)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS GUNSTON HALL)
US NAVY SPECIAL MISSION SHIP (USNS HENSON)
US NAVY SPECIAL MISSION SHIP (USNS SUMNER)
US NAVY SEALIFT SHIP (USNS SACAGAWEA)
US NAVY PREPOSITIONING SHIP (USNS LUMMUS)
US NAVY AUXILLARY SHIP (USNS BIG HORN)
US NAVY SALVAGE SHIP (USNS GRASP)

==================================================================

82ND AIR DIV Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) (http://www.bragg.army.mil/82dv/):
1st BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)
2nd BCT (GLOBAL RESPONSE FORCE)(1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th BATTALIONS)(HAITI)
3rd BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)
4th BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)

Corps
Division (4 x Brigades): 15000 soldiers
Brigade (4 x Battalions): 5000 soldiers
Battalion (4 x Companys): 1000 soldiers
Company (4 x Platoons): 200 soldiers
Platoon: 40 soldiers

A healthy reminder: David Corn's 9/11 truth article from March 2002 and some personal observations

WWW--This is an oldie but a goodie and is still sadly relevant. Corn had this op ed out in the March 2002 issue of the Nation, the publication he still edits from Washington.

Corn wrote presciently at the time:

There are always national security misdeeds to be mad about. They may not be as cinematic in nature as a plot in which shady, unidentified U.S. officials scheme to blow up the World Trade Towers to gain control of an oil pipeline in Central Asia. But dozens of dead Hondurans or twenty or so Afghans wrongly killed ought to provoke anger and protest. In fact, out-there conspiracy theorizing serves the interests of the powers-that-be by making their real transgressions seem tame in comparison. (What's a few dead in Central America, compared to thousands in New York City? Why worry about Negroponte, when unidentified U.S. officials are slaughtering American civilians to trigger war?)

Perhaps there's a Pentagon or CIA office that churns out this material. Its mission: distract people from the real wrongdoing. Now there's a conspiracy theory worth exploring. Doesn't it make sense? Doesn't it all fit together? I challenge anyone to disprove it. ("When 9/11 conspiracy theories go bad," The Nation, 03.02.2002)

Good luck proving him wrong! You know, I had a kind of lame experience during the DC Madam scandal with Corn, but I don't fault him these days (at the time, it was quite the opposite). He asked me about the presence of Ronald Roughead in the late madam's records and why it was relevant. He was skeptical, and that's fine, as he should have been. I remarked that it was relevant since Roughead was violating the terms of his security clearance at the time he made the calls in late 2005. Such an activity is forbidden. Corn never replied back. Palfrey had hooked-me-up with him, lamely, and without any good context. She would continue to do such things as time bore on.

A ll that said, he wasn't willing to move forward on it, and who can blame him when you look at Palfrey's behavior during all of that saga towards the press? She jerked everyone around and tried to use jornalists and bloggers to do the investigating for her, to exonerate her. That's fine, but you don't send people down blind alleys, you have something relevant to tell them. That's not to excuse their laziness and jadedness in the mainstream media, but Corn, as an editor, had to prioritize where to put his limited resources to investigate a story. The Nation--in case you didn't notice--isn't made of money. Yes, he'd found Roughead in the phone records but probably knew he and his staff could investigate the whole mess for years without that many real breakthroughs, and besides, people like me can grind away at finding the primary historical documents that they and others can examine in the aftermath (or vice versa). Surely, he had to know that Roughead was the brother of CNO Gary Roughead! No, it wasn't simply about "big names," there were other issues at play.

What do I think the significance of SAIC's Ronald Roughead was, his being in the DC Madam's phone records, a former Defense Attache, former director of the Iraqi Media Network, an investigator at the Kenya Embassy bombing, and likely an employee of defense/intelligence contractor SAIC? I can't draw any final conclusions, but it's pointing towards illegal lobbying practices, not that he would be a final indicator or it. His very presence is the answer. Corn hasn't had access to the defense materials I and others have, but he surely knew that it would practically take a congressional inquiry to get to the bottom of what appeared to be evidence of corruption beyond the mere issues of government and elected officials frequenting hookers.

In short, he asked me the wrong question, but not out of malice or apathy when he mistakenly focused on one man. The patterns are what count in this story, but again, he hasn't seen everything I have. A lot of people have dismissed this 2002 article as being jaded, but it's not, he's right. People have been wasting an incredible amount of time and energy chasing ghosts. I have done my share of this, but that's part of these times and part of investigating events like the DC Madam story where there have been a number of blind alleys. Even the House Judiciary Committee was interested in investigating whether Palfrey's 6th Amendment rights were being violated during the proceedings; but as happened again and again, they got cold-feet and gave no answers as to why.

It's almost hopelessly complicated and obscured, but there were a few peeks behind the curtain that were more than tantalizing and even a little revealing, about how business is done in Washington D.C. But a conspiracy? All I saw was incredible incompetence from the prosecution and the Court, and even from the investigators that likely created the whole mess to begin with.

"When 9/11 conspiracy theories go bad," The Nation, 03.02.2002http://www.alternet.org/story/12536

Who's in Haiti right now? From a private security source...

Haiti--I recently received some of this via my email account from an old source. Most of it is probably already online, but it's a good condensation. Also, private security are streaming into Haiti as expected (see link).

Part I:

EUROPEAN UNION (NATO):

MARINE MILITARE ITALIA AIRCRAFT CARRIER (MMI CAVOUR)[En-route]

FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (SIROCO)
FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE BATRAL (FRANCIS GARNIER)

CANADIAN NAVY DESTROYER (HMCS ATHABASKAN)
CANADIAN NAVY FRIGATE (HMCS HALIFAX)

ROYAL NETHERLANDS NAVY SPECIAL MISSON SHIP (HNLMS PELIKAAN)

NAVAL ARMADA DE SPAIN DOCK LANDING SHIP (SNS CASTILLE)[En-route]

(NEW ITALIAN AIRCRAFT CARRIER COMMISSIONED 2008///OPERATIONAL 2009)

[http://www.marina.difesa.it/programmi/portaerei.asp]

Part II:

OPERATION UNIFIED RESPONSE

Commander, LT GEN Keen (US SOUTHERN COMMAND, MIAMI - http://www.southcom.mil)

US COAST GUARD CUTTER USCGC VALIANT
US COAST GUARD CUTTER USCGC MOHAWK
US COAST GUARD CUTTER USCGC TOMAHAW
US COAST GUARD CUTTER USCGC FORWARD

US ARMY 82ND AIRBORNE DIVISION (2ND BCT) 1ST BATTALION (Haiti) [Presidential Palace/General Hospital/Other]
US ARMY 82ND AIRBORNE DIVISION (2ND BCT) 2ND/3RD/4TH BATTALIONS (En-route to Haiti)

US MARINE CORPS 22nd MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT (MEU) [Port au Prince Seaport/Other]

US AIR FORCE [Toussaint Louverture International Airport (PAP)]

US NAVY CARRIER STRIKE GROUP CSG (USS VINSON AIRCRAFT CARRIER)
US NAVY EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP ESG (USS BATAAN AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP)
US NAVY HOSPITAL SHIP (USS COMFORT)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYER (USS HIGGINS)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE CRUISER (USS NORMANDY)
US NAVY GUIDED MISSILE FRIGATE (USS UNDERWOOD)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS FORT MCHENRY)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS CARTER HALL)
US NAVY DOCK LANDING SHIP (USS GUNSTON HALL)
US NAVY SALVAGE SHIP (USNS GRASP)

==========================

=============================

OFFICIAL MILITARY DEPLOYMENTS (unit rescue teams of various nations not listed)

UNITED NATIONS STABILIZATION MISSION IN HAITI (MINUSTAH)

FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (SIROCO)
FRENCH MARINE NATIONALE BATRAL (FRANCIS GARNIER)

CANADIAN NAVY DESTROYER (HMCS ATHABASKAN)
CANADIAN NAVY FRIGATE (HMCS HALIFAX)

NAVAL ARMADA DE MEXICO AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP (ARM PAPALOAPAN)
NAVAL ARMADA DE MEXICO HOSPITAL SHIP (ARM HUASTECO)

NAVAL ARMADA DE VENEZUELA (UKNOWN NAME)
NAVAL ARMADA DE VENEZUELA (UKNOWN NAME)

============================================================

82nd AIR DIV Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) (http://www.bragg.army.mil/82dv/):
1st BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)
2nd BCT (GLOBAL RESPONSE FORCE)(1st Battalion in Haiti. 2nd, 3rd & 4th Battalions en-route to Haiti)
3rd BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)
4th BCT (IRAQ/AFGHAN)

Corps
Division (4 x Brigades): 15000 soldiers
Brigade (4 x Battalions): 5000 soldiers
Battalion (4 x Companys): 1000 soldiers
Company (4 x Platoons): 200 soldiers
Platoon: 40 soldiers

After the failure of Katrina, you'd want to call it " OPERATION UNIFIED RESPONSE" too. What I'd like to know is why Doctors Without Borders' planes are being turned away at the Port Au Prince airport, not being allowed to land. At least that's the word going around now.

The jobs they promised us! http://www.haiti-security.com/Employment_-_Guards.html

Has the Poe Toaster called it quits?

Baltimore, Maryland--I think the Poe Toaster--whoever they were over the years--made the right choice in calling it quits. Why? It keeps the memory and the mystery intact and ends things on a good foot. There was good reason to. With the problems of nitwits trying to unmask the shadowy figure who each year made a toast of cognac to Poe, his aunt, and his wife, and left roses to their memory, or senile old men claiming they were that person, it was time to close the curtain. Why make any changes with a legend? Why let someone finally ruin it?

Just three years ago, a self-proclaimed "Poe scholar" named Sam Popora claimed that he was the Poe Toaster stating that he began in 1967, but forgetting that back issues of Baltimore papers record it as having begun around 1949. That's an incredibly bad lie, yet the press swallowed it, sending-out dozens of journalists and video crews to speak with him. A brief search of the Internet would have told them all they needed to know, that Popora was full of shit! Hit on the Poe-labels for more, I was thanked by the director of the Poe house at the time in my comments section during the Popora mishap.

The mystery is very much intact and I hope that the individual who began this journey in 1949 and his family take the facts to the grave. One of the points to life is that there should be mystery to it or it's boring. We need these symbols to feed our souls. Our souls will remain fed on this count, at least for the foreseeable future. I don't expect everyone who reads this to understand why all of this is important, but let sleeping dogs lie, and let the dead finally have their rest.

Mr. Poe's life was a troubled one, and fighting over his remains and trying to attach oneself to his legacy as his literary executors in the 19th century did; Popora in this one attempted to do and also failed; as well as Philadelphia and Boston have during this decade; is undignified. The great American writer is never leaving his resting place in Baltimore, it's never going to happen. Poe died in that city and belongs buried there. Richmond--perhaps--has some claim to him, but Poe lived in Baltimore and has been interred there for well over a century without contest. He is our national treasure, and the man who introduced many of us to mystery. Fitting then that this mystery related to him should remain one, hopefully for all time.

Al Haig for adult diapers...

Al Haig: "I'm in control now."

Whatever happened to the former DC Madam escort who contacted Ken Silverstein over Shirlington Limo and Hookergate?

Washington D.C.--Inquiring minds want to know! I don't think Mr. Silverstein or Harper's were lying when he posted in early May 2007 that an intern lost the phone number of this woman-in-question, but surely they could have checked their own phone bills for the call that day? Perhaps it all got lost in the shuffle? That's the most likely reason, and considering the level of intimidation the government's investigators and prosecutors were putting out with former escorts of Pamela Martin & Associates, she probably got cold-feet and went into hiding.

She should know that I have her name and the names of virtually every escort that ever worked for the late Ms. Palfrey.

I want to talk to you--any of you--who worked for Jeane at one time. I will not divulge your identities without your express permission, my word is my bond. But this is a missing piece-of-the-puzzle here, this Shirlington lead, because it probably exposes illegal lobbying practices in the nation's capital and might even bring Palfrey a little justice, some vindication.

Give it some thought.

"Red Lights on Capitol Hill?", Harper's Magazine, 04.27.2006: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/04/sb-red-lights-on-capitol-hill

"Missed Connection," Harper's, 05.09.2007:http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/05/hbc-90000031

Sourcewatch's page on Shirlington Limo and Transportation, Inc: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shirlington_Limousine_and_Transportation,_Inc.

Is Facebook censoring Cindy Sheehan and putting out misinformation over her upcoming CIA protest at Langley?

WWW--Either Facebook is messing-up big time (usually the case), or they're lying and telling people on their service (used on communications airspace owned by the public) that the upcoming protest by Cindy Sheehan and other activists at CIA HQ in Langley, Virginia is canceled. According to a journalist I just communicated with, it is not.

Sheehan and her people had a Facebook page up announcing the visit with a link to Googlemaps for directions (possibly from former VP Dick Cheney's property). Journalists who are attending have told me that they expect arrests even though the event itself is completely legal. We'll see, but I think the time to call the lawyers is at hand.

If Facebook has done what I think they've done, it's going to be a PR problem for them to put it mildly.

Facebook's "Event Cancelled" notice as of this evening: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=195727044034

The event route from Cheney's home to the CIA: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=115218600321747535998.00047c286d22dfd43cfae&ll=38.94757

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (2009) review

Hermeneutics n,-The study of hidden meanings in sacred texts.

For fans of Monty Python's Terry Gilliam, this is a triumphant return to his more fantastical side, but also a sad look back on the last few hundred years of post-Enlightenment disenchantment, war, and the death of nature, therefore, of magic. We have lost a sense of the enchanted, and that loss is seen in our most daemonic and destructive behaviors over the last few hundred years. The repressed always return one day, and the toll has been profound. While the Enlightenment brought with it classical Liberalism, democracy, and the expansion of the rights of the average person (along with more material comfort), the price has been a high one: for the most part, we have forgotten how to imagine and to dream and have lost our symbols and meaning. We have lost ourselves.

This loss of meaning is a recurrent theme in Gilliam's body of work since his first movie, Time Bandits (1981), and has carried through in some form or another in practically every one since, even in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1997), yet another quest for "the dream." In that case it was the "American dream," which the characters never really find. Modernity doesn't tend to deliver on dreams but does its best to repress and eradicate them, while at the same time dazzling us with illusion devoid of meaning.

The modern world has liberated us from discomfort to a great extent, but it has also robbed us of the symbols, the archetypes, and the stories that feed the human soul. People used to dream and imagine things we no longer can as a culture, at least in a general sense, and it's beyond tragic. Now, it's down to artists like Gilliam and he himself is part of a "dying breed" of maverick filmmakers. It has also robbed us of the "quiet times" of contemplation that greeted our peasant ancestors with the harvesting and the turning of the seasons; Blake's "Satanic mills" came, the human mind fragmented, and nothing has been quite the same since. Gilliam has been acutely aware of this problem for some time and shares this feeling with director/storytellers like Werner Herzog who has stated emphatically that life cannot go on for much longer without these meanings, these symbolical signposts that are supposed to punctuate our lives. It should be said again and again: human beings were meant to dream and to yearn for a better world. The fact that we do--and the "whys"--is one of the great mysteries of this life.

Without giving too much away, Dr. Parnassus (taken from the name of the mount from which the Greek Oracle of Delphi spake) is a centuries-old Magus and Secret Chief whose last days have finally come, and the Devil had come to get what's due to him--literally. Like the suppressed inner tradition of the West, Parnassus has been with us for thousands of years, fighting the darkness, the ignorance, lack, and yes, the Devil himself ("Mr. Nick," an appropriately dapper1920s-festooned pimp in the great Tom Waits). Like the songs of the Troubadours (their Cathar verses preserved by Dante), and the hidden symbology of the Tarot, the subterranean transmission of esoteric knowledge has been embodied in Parnassus, a sage and a prophet with a mission to save souls throughout the millennia from crass materialism and jaded cynicism. He is a bringer of light in the best sense, just like a filmmaker is in his own way if he's doing the medium any justice. From Georges Méliès to Terry Gilliam, cinema has always been about magic--the trick that reveals a truth and nourishes the soul of mankind, that special place where imagination is supposed to rein.

There are more than a few jabs at the Vatican in the film, and Gilliam is definitely coming from an anti-clerical position. In one scene, the good doctor shows another character a scrapbook of his battles with Old Nick through the ages in works of art: one shows Parnassus as a Christ-like redeemer and illuminator preaching to the masses, while another is an "illuminated" page showing Waits' Devil character leading a procession of priests carrying an open-Bible. The message there is very, very clear, and the Devil's always in the details--the fine print--if you look closely and "see with eyes that see, and hear with ears that hear." Filmmakers know that bringing dreams to life has nearly always been a Faustian bargain, and the myth of Simon Magus and Faust is where this tale originates from; indeed, Faust originates from the story of Simon Magus, an early Gnostic thinker and "redeemer" who cast a few illusions and spells in his time. One could argue reasonably that Gilliam is telling us, "This is what the inner traditions have been reduced to--a rickety form of show business--but that's OK, we still need them and the eternal symbols. So be it." For this reason and others, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus is also autobiographical.

The illuminated procession is not the only example of anti-clericalism within the plot and its imagery: Gilliam and his co-writer Charles McKeown (one of his co-writers on Brazil) have based the Tony/Heath Ledger character partly on the murdered Vatican banker, Roberto Calvi! How do I know? The bricks in the pockets and the role of organized crime in the plotline for one. To make a very complicated and long story short and comprehensible, Tony is a man that Parnassus's daughter and his helper Anton ( the other side of the coin since they share the same name) find hanging from a bridge the moment the good doctor is reading from his Tarot and pulls the hanged man card from the deck. Anton plays the god Mercury on the Parnassus stage, the god of commerce, trade, and profit, but really the god Hermes in Roman clothing. What better analogy of the movie industry could one have, that uneasy combination of vision and commerce? Hermes was the bringer of dreams, of knowledge, the guide to the underworld, a trickster, and messenger between the deathless gods and the human race. That is Anton.

Tony is a lost soul who has allegedly forgotten who he is--which is true and false--but true enough as he's lost his identity in the modern world and is as adrift as Parnassus and his struggling theater company that grants the deepest fantasies of the chosen (those they think have good hearts and who are genuine). On the other side of their mirrored-gateway into imagination, they offer one's greatest dreams, but as a test of one's true self. Mr. Nick is always waiting inside to tempt the dreamers towards their destruction, and time's running out for Parnassus who has made a series of bets with the Dark Lord with his sixteen year old daughter as the prize. In a sense, then, his daughter Valentina (played by the luminous Lily Cole) is Parnassus's final chance at redemption and mortality; he's tired of living and wants to be a normal man. He isn't alone in the traveling cosmological theater troupe: Tony is Valentina's temptation, her desire for a normal life.

Sadly, like many of the cynical and lost today, Tony has an agenda of his own and is a betrayer. This adds a measure of sorrow to the film because of the fate of Ledger, but it also lends the film a poetic quality that otherwise might not have been as powerful. This is a film no-less about the inner traditions than it is about the wrecked spiritual and natural landscape of our era, so it's not exactly going to be one of Gilliam's more uplifting tales, but since when have we come to his films for that? Christopher Plummer has probably never been so great in cinema, and were this his final role, few actors could be so proud of their work. Gilliam is a mirror, as most good artists are, of his time, and our time. Dream your dreams, because without them, there is no human race and no future. Make your dreams a reality, but be sure that those dreams are worthy of dreaming and bringing into fruition in this very material world.

Product review: "Throwback" Pepsi™

How long ago was it since I had a real Pepsi ™ or a real Coke ™, or any other kind of soft drink for that matter? It must have been the early 1980s, but no later than 1986. When did the onslaught of HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup) begin? Under Reagan ™, when else would it have begun? Well, OK, as usual, it's not as simple as that. It took successive administrations of Republicans.

For close to an entire generation American soft drinks, and many other beverages, have had this garbage pumped into it, contributing to making many in that generation sick and obese. The soft drink corporations wanted to sell us more of their fizzy-liquids and there were incentives all over the place for corn farmers to implement corn syrup production for use as an all-purpose sweetener (of bottom lines). Note the next time trade agreements between the United States and other nations occur. The recriminations over subsidized American agricultural commodities are sound.

So began one part of this trend so that King corn could thrive at the taxpayer's expense:

Previously neglected because of low yields and bad coloring, HFCS became an industrial reality in the 1960s, when a xylose isomerase enzyme was successfully used to convert glucose into fructose at levels of 42% fructose and higher (Landis 86). That breakthrough, in conjunction with the fact that corn is both planted on nearly 80 million acres (Baker) and is subsidized in the USA (Hopkins), led to a huge gain in HFCS’s popularity because HFSC soon became cheaper than actual sugar. In fact, the “use of HFCS grew rapidly, from less than three million short tons in 1980 to almost 8 million short tons in 1995” (Forristal). Furthermore, “during the late 1990s, [the] use of sugar actually declined as it was eclipsed by HFCS… [And] today Americans consume more HFCS than sugar” (Forristal). ("HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP: HISTORY, SPREAD, and CONSUMPTION," Cosmos Cluster 7, 25 July, 2009, UC Davis.edu, P.2)

The links to adult and even child diabetes and obesity are gradually coming in from academic studies and are sure to continue coming in; but just take a look around the social landscape. We've gotten fatter. The worst part of all of this is the sheer number of sources that Americans get HFCS from, but one of the most jam-packed ones is from soft drinks. The average American gets 200 calories-per-day from HFCS. No one ever accused Ronald Reagan's administration--or subsequent ones--correctly that they were against subsidies for large-scale farmers and agribusiness. Reagan was all for it. So was most of Congress during the 1980s, and selling to grain to the former Soviet Union didn't bother them either. Pork? Don't get me started.

Just a few years ago I was shopping at a local supermarket chain and lo-and-behold, in the Mexican foods section was a real find--Mexican Cokes. Who cares, right? Me! Other shoppers, other households, who remembered what soft drinks used to taste like previous to the 1980s! The truth is, the problems really began--as they often did--under Richard Nixon:

In 1973, Earl "Rusty" Butz, President Nixon's USDA chief, did away with the agricultural price supports introduced by the Roosevelt administration. These supports were intended to protect farmers' finances by limiting supply when bumper crops would have otherwise flooded the market and to avoid squeezing consumers by releasing the warehoused grain when crop yields were low and prices would naturally spike. Butz ginned up political support for the administration by encouraging farmers to plant "fencerow to fencerow" while the government provided them with subsidies to cover the difference between market prices and production costs.
Of course, growing "fencerow to fencerow" did exactly what one would expect: production exceeded demand, and prices took a dive. This didn't sit too well with Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), the nation's largest corn refiner.

Now, there's only so much corn one person can eat. ADM suddenly needed to figure out how to somehow stimulate sales of all that excess food. ("America's Crazed Corn Habit," Mises Institute, 12.22.2009)

Thanks again Dick! Indeed, we are "all Keynesians now," and so was Reagan! I could have told you that, and I'm not even remotely an economist.

The best part about those Mexican Cokes™ was that they were in glass-bottles, so icing them up wasn't going to be a problem, that taste was coming, and those coveted bottles didn't disappoint at all. Why? Because Mexico doesn't have the kinds of crop subsidies we do on corn, they don't put HFCS in everything for that and a variety of other reasons, they got it right. I bought-up as many of them as I could that summer, it was a real treat, and it ended quickly. The local bottler had them pulled, they're gone.

But how did throwback Pepsi™ taste to these buds? Coupled with the vintage packaging, it was like being rocketed back to better times--or at least better than now, the 1970s. I was literally taken aback at how familiar it tasted, I hadn't forgotten after decades of HFCS film on the surface of every soft drink (and the roof of my mouth), even in fruit juices! Childhood memories and images flooded into my brain after that first sip. It was truly refreshing in the best sense of the word. I could recall some blistering summer days that were punctuated with a Pepsi™ or a Coke™, and they tasted so much better back then because they were made with cane sugar rather than HFCS.

I didn't notice as much of a change with their throwback Mountain Dew™ (before there was meth...), but the Pepsi was perfect, and the throwback packaging really takes me back to another America. Not necessarily a better one, but one before the fall of America to Reaganism and a slimmer public! Oh yeah, and early in 2009 it was found that mercury is often found in trace amounts in HFCS.

http://www.pepsithrowbackhub.com/

Biased, but in a reasoned sense (better to err on the side that HFCS's bad): http://www.highfructosecornsyrup.org/

"America's Crazed Corn Habit," Mises Institute, 12.22.2009: http://mises.org/daily/3934