Bubber Miley - St. James Infirmary

Sweet! 

I recently purchased a cd just to hear Bubber Miley playing trumpet on this song, St. James Infirmary. Oh how I wish Bubber hadn't died so young. I could listen to his playing 24/7. My thanks to the Internet Archive for posting this on their site.

This one's for you Dad. Happy Birthday!

Wikileaks Helping Us Set Brushfires of Freedom In The Minds of Citizens

"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." — Samuel Adams

President Obama on the Wrong Track

Why is it so hard for President Obama and his staff to understand why so many Democrats stayed home on election day? We we're willing to support Obama change the system in Washington and instead we got a bait and switch presidency. We were played and they wonder why we are angry. They better figure out how to turn this White House around or this is going to be a one term presidency. And NO President Obama the answer isn't to move even further to the right to appease the Republicans. Anyone that tells you that should be fired on the spot.

Maybe you should watch this great discussion with Dylan Ratigan, Cenk Uygur and Glenn Greenwald to get a clue.

Clueless Establishment Media

Magic Lantern Slide of Dog Jumping Through a Hoop

 (National Media Museum 1830)

First we had CBS's Bob Schieffer who got all bent out of shape about the "Party crashers" at the White House. He was so offended by the Salahi's party crashing that he wanted them prosecuted. This coming from a man who never once called for investigations, much less prosecutions for anyone in the Bush administration for the hideous state sponsored torture that was done in all of our names.

Then we had CBS's Lara Logan who wanted the Rolling Stone reporter, Michael Hasting's story investigated because she felt what he wrote just couldn't be true because she knew the real General McCrystal and he just wouldn't have done what Mr. Hastings attributed to him.

Now we have ABC's Diane Sawyer, who after watching a report about the leaked Wikileak documents that detailed what Glenn Greenwald described as "..mass torture, abuse, government deceit and reckless civilian deaths in Iraq" and all Diane could think to ask was whether Wikileaks would be prosecuted for revealing the information. What? That's it. That's all you want to know, Diane?

And our establishment media personalities actually wonder why we speak of them with such utter contempt. They are so out of touch with reality that it's just breathtaking.

Puttin On The Ritz

In my opinion this is the best version ever of the song Puttin' on the Ritz. It's performed by Leo Reisman and his Orchestra in 1930. If I'm not mistaken the fantastic trumpet player on this recording is none other than Bubber Miley, who played with the Duke Ellington Orchestra.

Way to go, Bubber!

Will We Ever Know The Truth About What Happened to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui?

Will we ever find out the whole story about what happened to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui and her children? Was she held in Bagram or some other prison? Was she tortured, as she claims? I know one thing...the photos of her before her disappearance in 2003 and the photo of her when she was arrested by the U.S. show a dramatic difference in her appearance. The photo when she resurfaced looked nothing like the vibrant woman captured in the earlier photos. The difference clearly seen in the photos leads me to believe that wherever she was during the "missing years" that she must have gone through hell because hell is clearly etched upon her face.

With this weeks sentencing of Dr. Siddiqui we now know that the future for Dr. Siddiqui is to spend 86 years of her life in prison (a life sentence). But knowing her future is not enough for me, I want to know the full truth about her past. I want her claims about torture to be thoroughly investigated and not just covered up using the ubiquitous "state secret" mantra.

For those of you who know little about Dr. Siddiqui I am posting links to two good pieces that I found on the net.

This video is from the website RT that was done after her sentencing.

Here is a piece from 2006 from Boston Magazine about Siddiqui that provided much more information than what most of us have seen in the MSM reports about her. In other words it was not written merely from the government's perspective.

If anyone has any other links that might help shed light on this case I hope you will post them here.

Prop 8 Ban on Gay Marriage Struck Down

Read the daily transcripts posted at the American Foundation For Equal Rights website. Pay particular attention to Day 10, 11 & 12 to read the marvelous David Boies cross examinations.

Don't Be Fooled - Top 5 Social Security Myths

Don't Be Fooled

Top 5 Social Security Myths

Myth #1: Social Security is going broke.

Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever. After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits—and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers' retirement decades ago. Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

Myth #2: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.

Reality: This is a red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than they did 70 years ago. What's more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly—since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half. But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut.

Myth #3: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security.

Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come. Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income. But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

Myth #4: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs

Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't full of IOUs, it's full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market—which would have been disastrous—but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.

Myth #5: Social Security adds to the deficit

Reality: It's not just wrong—it's impossible! By law, Social Security's funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit. Defeating these myths is a powerful step to stopping Social Security cuts. Share this list with your network.

I Agree With Napolitano - Bush and Cheney Should Be Indicted

So when is our Justice Department going to do it's job? This is not a right vs. left issue. Judge Napolitano can hardly be described as liberal. This is a law and order issue and always has been.

Gossip and Insinuations Passing for News on CBS

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Watch this interview with CBS News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, Lara Logan. Pay particular attention to the end of the video where she insinuates that the reporter for Rolling Stone, who wrote the article that's gotten General McChrystal into hot water, may have violated the "trust" of McChrystal and his aides. She offers no evidence of this other than to claim that people who know McChrystal are stunned by this lapse of judgement because it's so unlike him and so uncharacteristic of him to be so undisciplined. She goes on to say that "a lot of people" are asking - "how did this reporter get inside the inner circle of trust and did he violate the trust?" She ends the piece by saying that it just doesn't add up - it's completely inconsistent with everything that people know about General McCrystal and it raises some very interesting questions that haven't been addressed yet. I agree. I have a few questions of my own.

What kind of reporting is this? Who are these people who she says are "a lot of people" questioning the reporter from Rolling Stone? Why is she allowed to take a potshot at the reporter who did this story about McChrystal without offering one shred of evidence that he did anything wrong? Why is CBS allowing their Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent to use anonymous sources described as "a lot of people say" to impugn the integrity of this Rolling Stone reporter ?

I sure hope we get an explanation for this strange interview on tomorrow's CBS Morning show. I also hope that CBS has the decency to invite the Rolling Stone reporter, Michael Hastings, onto their show so that he can respond to Ms Logan's insinuation that he might have done something wrong.

If Mr. Hastings did something wrong then Ms. Logan should prove it and not just take cheap shots at Hastings without offering any evidence that he did anything wrong.

Here is a link to the Michael Hastings Rolling Stone piece entitled The Runaway General.

Update: Jason Linkins has a great piece up at Huffington Post that may give us a clue about the identity of all of the people Lara Logan said were questioning Michael Hastings reporting.

Update: I found this information in a blog post by emptywheel that was done yesterday. Evidently General McCrystal didn't have the same questions about the Michael Hastings story that Lara Logan and all of those people she mentioned in her interview had.

Rolling Stone’s executive editor on Tuesday said that Gen. Stanley McChrystal did not raise any objections to a new article that repeatedly quotes him criticizing the administration.Eric Bates, the magazine’s editor, said during an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that McChrystal saw the piece prior to its publication as part of Rolling Stone’s standard fact-checking process – and that the general did not object to or dispute any of the reporting.Asked if McChrystal pushed back on the story, Bates responded: “No, absolutely not

**More people commenting on Lara Logan's style of "journalism."

Glenn Greenwald

The two poles of journalism

and Matt Taibbi.

Lara Logan, You Suck