March 7, 2011
"I would say that the story per se is usually left-wing, in both good and bad ways."
"It elevates the seen over the unseen, can easily portray a struggle for justice, focuses on the anecdote, and encourages us to judge social institutions by the intentions of the people who work in them, rather than looking at their deeper and longer-term outcomes."
ADDED: And this is why those lefty teachers are so keen on getting kids to read fiction stories and not nonfiction as they learn to read. (Remember the great children-reading-nonfiction blog vortex of 2007?)
ADDED: And this is why those lefty teachers are so keen on getting kids to read fiction stories and not nonfiction as they learn to read. (Remember the great children-reading-nonfiction blog vortex of 2007?)
"15 conspiracy movies that don’t fall apart at the end."
An excellent idea for a list, and the 15 choices seem pretty good (although I haven't seen them all).
"The leader of Senate Democrats hiding out in Illinois is seeking a face-to-face meeting with Gov. Scott Walker and the Senate GOP leader."
"Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) said in a letter sent out Monday that he wants to meet with Republicans 'near the Wisconsin-Illinois border to formally resume serious discussions' on Walker's budget repair bill."
Oh, come on! That's absurd. Walker is supposed to make a trip to the border, maybe stand toe-to-toe with Miller with the Wisconsin-Illinois border between the 2 men?! All in the name of "serious discussion"? You need to get serious!
I'd also like more inside reporting about those 14 Democratic senators. If only one of them goes back, the Republicans get their quorum and the whole enterprise collapses. How are they maintaining discipline? My state senator is Fred Risser, and that man is 83 years old. It bothers me to think of such an old man held hostage to politics in some motel in Illinois. Another of the 14 is Julie Lassa, who's 6 months pregnant and has 2 little kids back in Wisconsin. There must be a hard core within the 14 who are keeping the rest in line. What are they saying to Julie and Fred? Assuming they're not the hard core. Imagine being 6 months pregnant and not having your husband to comfort you, to know he's at home taking care of the children you miss? And what is it all for? Keeping the winners of the last election from voting! And in the end you'll have to go back. It's only a question of when.
What was their plan? They fled together, and perhaps at that point, all 14 thought it made sense to slow things down so that the protests could play out and Wisconsinites could give more thought to the GOP proposal. Lengthening the time line, they might argue, served a democracy interest. But what was the exit strategy? We've had the protest. The bill has been examined and discussed. What is democratic about preventing the vote now?
I suppose the "fleebaggers" would like to say that current public opinion polls ought to replace the results of the last election. Is that "what democracy looks like" in your version of American representative democracy? Only a Democrat with very short-term vision could say yes.
Oh, come on! That's absurd. Walker is supposed to make a trip to the border, maybe stand toe-to-toe with Miller with the Wisconsin-Illinois border between the 2 men?! All in the name of "serious discussion"? You need to get serious!
"I assure you that Democratic state senators, despite our differences and the vigorous debate we have had, remain ready and willing to find a reasonable compromise," Miller said in the letter.I cannot understand why the Democratic senators should get more because of the way they've behaved. What kind of an example will that set for the future? No one will accept the outcome of an election anymore. You don't like what happened? Run away, storm the statehouse, make a cacophony of drum-beating and chants for weeks on end until you get your way. One of the chants has been "This is what democracy looks like." Is that what we want democracy to look like in the future? No one ever accepts a loss? Instead of working toward the next election, you use any strategy you can think of to prevent the exercise of power by the representatives the people have chosen to run the government?
The Wall Street Journal spurred hopes of compromise Sunday with a story citing Miller and saying the Democrats would be back "soon." But that same night Democrats knocked that down, saying that they hoped to return soon but that there was still no development to make that happen.Something kept me from linking to that WSJ piece. That's another thing I'd like to avoid encouraging. Websites getting tons of traffic with premature news scoops. I'd like the WSJ to explain why it did that. It shouldn't want to look like a link whore.
I'd also like more inside reporting about those 14 Democratic senators. If only one of them goes back, the Republicans get their quorum and the whole enterprise collapses. How are they maintaining discipline? My state senator is Fred Risser, and that man is 83 years old. It bothers me to think of such an old man held hostage to politics in some motel in Illinois. Another of the 14 is Julie Lassa, who's 6 months pregnant and has 2 little kids back in Wisconsin. There must be a hard core within the 14 who are keeping the rest in line. What are they saying to Julie and Fred? Assuming they're not the hard core. Imagine being 6 months pregnant and not having your husband to comfort you, to know he's at home taking care of the children you miss? And what is it all for? Keeping the winners of the last election from voting! And in the end you'll have to go back. It's only a question of when.
What was their plan? They fled together, and perhaps at that point, all 14 thought it made sense to slow things down so that the protests could play out and Wisconsinites could give more thought to the GOP proposal. Lengthening the time line, they might argue, served a democracy interest. But what was the exit strategy? We've had the protest. The bill has been examined and discussed. What is democratic about preventing the vote now?
I suppose the "fleebaggers" would like to say that current public opinion polls ought to replace the results of the last election. Is that "what democracy looks like" in your version of American representative democracy? Only a Democrat with very short-term vision could say yes.
Sarah Palin gets in Kathy Griffin's 50-year-old face.
I'm sure Palin fans are delighted at the feisty smackdown. But there's no way that Kathy Griffin doesn't love it. So... everybody wins. I mean, these 2 women could be in collusion, the mutual benefits are so great.
As for the leave-my-kids-alone routine: Bristol Palin is 21 years old. Not only is she an adult, she's an adult who chose to go on a big network TV show, wear sexy costumes, and dance all over the stage week after week in an effort to get millions of people to call in votes for her so she could win a big prize. That's completely inviting mockery.
As for Willow Palin — she's only 16, but she was prominently featured on "Sarah Palin's Alaska." Her teen-girl petulance was served up — by her mother — for our amusement. You can't do that and also claim a special insulation for the children. I mean you can, if you want to play to your fans who love that Mama Grizzly stuff.
Now, Sarah Palin was confronted by the question about Griffin, so she didn't go out of her way to bash the has-been 50-year-old bully comedienne. What else could she have said? She didn't have to be so confrontational. She might have said comedy is comedy, and people love to have their fun or something bland like that. But then I wouldn't be writing about her, and you wouldn't be talking about her, and Kathy Griffin wouldn't be furiously working the statement into a new Palin-bashing....
As for the leave-my-kids-alone routine: Bristol Palin is 21 years old. Not only is she an adult, she's an adult who chose to go on a big network TV show, wear sexy costumes, and dance all over the stage week after week in an effort to get millions of people to call in votes for her so she could win a big prize. That's completely inviting mockery.
As for Willow Palin — she's only 16, but she was prominently featured on "Sarah Palin's Alaska." Her teen-girl petulance was served up — by her mother — for our amusement. You can't do that and also claim a special insulation for the children. I mean you can, if you want to play to your fans who love that Mama Grizzly stuff.
Now, Sarah Palin was confronted by the question about Griffin, so she didn't go out of her way to bash the has-been 50-year-old bully comedienne. What else could she have said? She didn't have to be so confrontational. She might have said comedy is comedy, and people love to have their fun or something bland like that. But then I wouldn't be writing about her, and you wouldn't be talking about her, and Kathy Griffin wouldn't be furiously working the statement into a new Palin-bashing....
Celebrities and rallies that we ignored here in Madison over the weekend.
The Daily Cardinal reports on weekend protest events that Meade The Press missed:
This is a problem with extending the protests. The crowd changes, new infusions of energy come from outsiders who see a ready-made platform to climb up on. These old-school, left-wing attacks on corporations have little to do with the distinct problems of jobs in the public sector — where, management is the government of the state and its citzens.
And that phrase "rally to usher in the fourth week" feels like an affront to the protesters who have kept up the energy continuously for 3 weeks. You've got something grassroots — or seemingly grassroots — happening, and then politico-celebs drop in to act as though they are the leadership.
Thousands of unions' rights supporters gathered at the King Street entrance to Capitol Saturday to listen to director Michael Moore speak, who accused corporate interests of manipulating the public.I wonder if the teachers and other Wisconsin union members who got the protest started 3 weeks ago appreciate having Michael Moore absorb their issue — maintaining the quality of professional public employment in Wisconsin — into his larger anti-capitalist agenda for America.
"[The Republicans] have expertly convinced many Americans to buy their version of the American dream," Moore said. "They have created a poison pill [of] mutually assured destruction."
This is a problem with extending the protests. The crowd changes, new infusions of energy come from outsiders who see a ready-made platform to climb up on. These old-school, left-wing attacks on corporations have little to do with the distinct problems of jobs in the public sector — where, management is the government of the state and its citzens.
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and other local political figures spoke at the rally to usher in the fourth week of protests.Baldwin's done the protests before, promenading around the Capitol with Jesse Jackson a couple weeks ago. She represents the Madison part of the state. But the protests are about Wisconsin politics. And they need to influence people around the entire state. Why are we getting Baldwin again — and not any of the other Wisconsin politicians? Can't we even get Feingold?
And that phrase "rally to usher in the fourth week" feels like an affront to the protesters who have kept up the energy continuously for 3 weeks. You've got something grassroots — or seemingly grassroots — happening, and then politico-celebs drop in to act as though they are the leadership.
As the protesters filled the Capitol Square through the weekend, Tea Party supporters had their own rally Sunday at the Alliant Energy Center. Several hundred Walker supporters attended while many anti-Walker critics demonstrated outside.
The rally, which was one of many organized by Americans for Prosperity, a Tea Party group largely funded by the Koch brothers, hosted Joe the Plumber and other popular conservative figures.I didn't even know about that event. And I'm paying way more attention than the average person. I guess we're paying attention in a different way — going to the Capitol and seeing what the people who go there are doing, rather than checking for celebrity appearances and events. If we'd have noticed, we'd have felt some pressure to show up. Fortunately, it escaped us and we didn't get sucked into the dreary convention hall.
March 6, 2011
A big mix of stuff from the protests today.
Meade shot, I edited:
0:00 — Meade acquires a flag
0:20 — "No snakes?... So service snakes are allowed?"
2:00 — The "Union/Power" chant ends and Meade starts the National Anthem
3:00 — Flash forward to a second Meade-led National Anthem that took place later in the day (with Meade appearing on screen)
3:15 — Back to the morning National Anthem
3:53 — A speaker wants to "Stop Scott Walker and his minions"
4:45 — A man in shorts holds a "yucky face" sign
5:04 — "They used duct tape"... "That was us."
5:38 — "Go Packers"
5:58 — Dog wearing a sign "I'm smarter than Scott Walker... and once I ran straight into a post"
6:17 — Meade encounters the one guy who might be with the Tea Party doing cleanup
6:48 — "I'll go see if I can shake things up"
6:50 — "Working people of the world revolt"
7:37 — "I just got drafted into the Army of Davids"
7:57 — The thing that Meade resents more than anything
9:21 — Meade disses MSM to a citizen of Wisconsin
10:43 — A child does what many children are doing when brought in by adults see the demonstration: gazes up into the dome
10:48 — George, the St. Bernard
11:13 — A protest song praising the fleebaggers for "sneaking 'cross the border." (Can you believe this guy is wearing a red sweatshirt with white letters that don't say "WISCONSIN" but "NEBRASKA"? Nebraska!)
12:36 — Criticizing Walker because "he's not really one of us"
13:19 — Palm tree!
13:31 — "Stop the Imperial Walker"
13:14 — Drummer boy
0:00 — Meade acquires a flag
0:20 — "No snakes?... So service snakes are allowed?"
2:00 — The "Union/Power" chant ends and Meade starts the National Anthem
3:00 — Flash forward to a second Meade-led National Anthem that took place later in the day (with Meade appearing on screen)
3:15 — Back to the morning National Anthem
3:53 — A speaker wants to "Stop Scott Walker and his minions"
4:45 — A man in shorts holds a "yucky face" sign
5:04 — "They used duct tape"... "That was us."
5:38 — "Go Packers"
5:58 — Dog wearing a sign "I'm smarter than Scott Walker... and once I ran straight into a post"
6:17 — Meade encounters the one guy who might be with the Tea Party doing cleanup
6:48 — "I'll go see if I can shake things up"
6:50 — "Working people of the world revolt"
7:37 — "I just got drafted into the Army of Davids"
7:57 — The thing that Meade resents more than anything
9:21 — Meade disses MSM to a citizen of Wisconsin
10:43 — A child does what many children are doing when brought in by adults see the demonstration: gazes up into the dome
10:48 — George, the St. Bernard
11:13 — A protest song praising the fleebaggers for "sneaking 'cross the border." (Can you believe this guy is wearing a red sweatshirt with white letters that don't say "WISCONSIN" but "NEBRASKA"? Nebraska!)
12:36 — Criticizing Walker because "he's not really one of us"
13:19 — Palm tree!
13:31 — "Stop the Imperial Walker"
13:14 — Drummer boy
"I met only two people there this afternoon who I could possibly identify as Tea Party."
Writes Meade (a propos of "It's Time to Take Out the Trash Day").
One of the two, as it turned out, I misidentified - he is a Wisconsin public service employee - and the other refused to say whether he was or wasn't Tea Party.
So where were the Tea Party Take Out the Trashers? My theory now is that perhaps there were in fact tens of thousands of Tea Party people there today and they were all dressed in costume as Indians, hippies, teamsters, Chicagoans, communists, and Democrats.
Ann is editing this afternoon's raw video which includes a short clip of my encounter with the possible Tea Party dude who was picking up trash and didn't want to talk to me.
Why do Tea Party dudes hate me?
Meade encounters the cleaning crew scraping stickers off the marble at the Wisconsin Capitol.
The supervisor, noting that Meade is recording, tells the worker to "stand quiet" and tells Meade he may photograph all he wants. At 0:28, we see the razor blade scraper in the worker's hand, and hear the supervisor say "Don't use that on the marble."
At 0:58, the supervisor pushes Meade. At 2:20, the supervisor expresses the theory that Meade "want[s] a confrontation" then admits that he put his hands on Meade, which might have been "a sin." Meade says, "I'm not talking about a sin. I'm talking about a tort." The supervisor tells Meade to "go away."
At 3:00, we see the use of fingernails to scrape off the stickers that have been moistened with something from a spray bottle that is referred to as "fresh water" (at 5:06) but produces foam. [Instapundit calls this scandal in a squirtbottle "Watergate."]
At 4:00: A middle-aged woman says to the supervisor: "They're filming that really well and that's what everybody in America thinks this is about — how much work it is to clean up after us." With narrowed eyes, she looks at Meade and nods a few times. We then see another woman who is photographing Meade. He asks her if she's a protester, and she says, "I'm a citizen," and Meade says, "So am I," an answer she seems to find quite unsatisfying.
At 5:28, there's some camaraderie between Meade and the worker who's doing the cleaning, and we learn some details about the difficulty of removing different kinds of tape from the "polished marble." "Scotch Tape is the worst."
8:46: Meade asks, "So, is it just water?" and the supervisor intervenes. Meade inquires whether they are doing anything that they think they should hide. Supervisor: "This is something that he does every day." Worker: "Only not in such great multitude."
9:34: Meade asks, "When did they catch on to the idea that they should use blue painter's tape?" Worker: "I'm not sure." Supervisor: "Just don't give him any comments... probably not the press, because he's no credentials, but just another one of the bloggers."
"There are times when we’re were among family, we’re among Democrats where we want to talk about being Democrats," said Obama in Florida.
"But today I want to talk to you a little about being an American, I want to talk about those things that bring us together as opposed to the things that drive us apart."
Did Obama's own supporters ever take his Tucson speech seriously? And yet his opponents were supposed to moderate their politics at his behest.
He went on to say that he had just visited a high school with [former Florida Governor Jeb] Bush. The crowd booed and hissed.Booed and hissed? In Obama's face? Just as he's talking about the things that drive us together as opposed to the things that drive us apart?!
Did Obama's own supporters ever take his Tucson speech seriously? And yet his opponents were supposed to moderate their politics at his behest.
Insurance won't pay enough for psychiatrists to do old-style talk therapy.
Which makes life as a psychiatrist less rewarding, but really, why should people buying health insurance get stuck funding psychiatry sessions? If you want your talk therapy with a psychiatrist, you have to pay the premium for this luxury out of your own funds...
Competition from psychologists and social workers — who unlike psychiatrists do not attend medical school, so they can often afford to charge less — is the reason that talk therapy is priced at a lower rate. There is no evidence that psychiatrists provide higher quality talk therapy than psychologists or social workers.And is there a problem here? You got the fancy-schmancy credential so you could charge more, and now you find that you'll need to get rich clients who can pay for your services, or you're lured into the drug-prescribing racket which doesn't amuse you that much. Face the consequences of your own decision, your own flawed effort at winning in the marketplace. Or do I need to sit you down and prompt you for an hour until you see it that way?
Of course, there are thousands of psychiatrists who still offer talk therapy to all their patients, but they care mostly for the worried wealthy who pay in cash. In New York City, for instance, a select group of psychiatrists charge $600 or more per hour to treat investment bankers, and top child psychiatrists charge $2,000 and more for initial evaluations.
Dancing for Chevy Volt.
That's beyond bad. And it's not camp. It's just mind-crushing, government-made badness.
"It's not your Grandpa Jon's magazine anymore. It's slick, contemporary and feels like something out of the new millennium..."
"... sort of New York mag meets GQ, and pretty distinct from Time, with big photo spreads, graphics that pop and draw you into the page, lots of entry points into a story, infographics, sidebars, etc."
And look:
It's so new new new new that it's letting us know that Hillary Clinton is shattering glass ceilings everywhere! That's what I want to see on the cover of a supposedly brilliant reimagined old news magazine: the oldest feminist cliché in the world.
Plus, "150 Women Who Shake the World" and "Women Make Lousy Men." Well, apparently, it's all about stroking the vanity of women.
IN THE COMMENTS:PatHMV said...
Old Dad said:
T
And look:
It's so new new new new that it's letting us know that Hillary Clinton is shattering glass ceilings everywhere! That's what I want to see on the cover of a supposedly brilliant reimagined old news magazine: the oldest feminist cliché in the world.
Plus, "150 Women Who Shake the World" and "Women Make Lousy Men." Well, apparently, it's all about stroking the vanity of women.
IN THE COMMENTS:PatHMV said...
She's the THIRD female Secretary of State. Heck, we haven't had a white male Secretary of State since Warren Christopher stepped down in January 1997, 14 years ago. Not much new ground to break in this area.BJM said:
Uh-oh...looks like Brown just fired the first volly in the battle for the NYT's female/metrosexual readership.Ha ha. That's basically what I thought. The inside research must show that it's women reading stuff printed on paper. Especially older women who like reading about the triumphant struggles of older women. It's so dreary! I'm an older woman myself, and I have no interest in being patronized like that. Or in buying magazines or newspapers. I can't think of the last time I bought one. Over a year ago?
This could get ugly.
Popcorn anyone?
Old Dad said:
T
ina bought it for a buck. Leveraged it at 100%. She knows it's toilet paper. It's a classic quick flip con. Dress up the corpse and flip it for a $100 bucks to some gullible schmuck.Speaking of toilet paper, is "feels like something out of the new millennium" definitely a compliment?
What the hell is "It's Time to Take Out the Trash Day"?
Okay, this is a Facebook group setting up an event today at the Capitol, to go from 1 to 4 p.m.
Gateway Pundit reports it as:
And here's "Fox and Friends" referring to the person who put up the Facebook group. They don't name him. He's "the guest that we had on earlier" who is "affiliated with the Tea Party." The female Fox Friend frantically explains that, according to this guy, it doesn't have to cost what was estimated at $7.5 million to clean the Capitol because "we're going to bring a bucket and pail" and clean the building.
This is idiocy! The reason the estimate is so high is that this is extremely valuable old marble that needs to be cleaned according to the protocols of historical restoration. Don't come in here with buckets of water and scrub brushes or whatever you think will make you look good on camera. Don't you realize you could cause more damage? You can't have every well-meaning do-gooder slopping around in there with water! Even aside from the damage to the 100-year-old building, somebody could slip and fall on the water you get on the floor or the junk you put down where someone might walk. (Go to 2:00 in this video of mine to see how the protesters caused a big Democratic legislator to fall by leaving stuff on the ground. (Ironically, it was a pile of peace signs.))
Meaning well isn't enough. Remember the old Reagan quote: "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
I'm from the Tea Party and I'm here to help isn't exactly terrifying. But it doesn't make me feel great. The general rule is: Don't help unless you know what you are doing! The default position should be: Do nothing. First, do no harm. This is an essential conservative principle. It's especially obnoxious to help for the purpose of looking good — and making other people look bad.
I assume "take out the trash" is intended as a double entendre, and the person who named this group intended to call the protesters "trash." They are not trash. They are people you disagree with, who have chosen a means of expression that you disagree with.
Now, it's a great idea for Tea Party folk to come down to the Capitol to express themselves and to pick up any litter that they find around the place, inside and out. That doesn't take any special expertise. But if you believe the place is strewn with litter, you are just plain wrong. Meade and/or I have been down there every day for the 2+ weeks, and we're not seeing trash. I have been blogging about this for many days, after a picture of mine showing litter on one of the first days went viral on the internet. The protesters got the message and were extremely diligent picking up trash after that point. Not knowing that makes you look ignorant.
Preening about being better than they are, when you are that ignorant, is really embarrassing.
UPDATE: Meade was at the Capitol from about 1 to 3:30, and he says he didn't notice any Tea Party activity. Maybe they did good deeds in such an un-show-offy fashion that he couldn't see them. Don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing...
AND: Instapundit says: "It’s funny that cleaning is now transgressive."
Gateway Pundit reports it as:
Wisconsin tea party members are planning a “It’s Time to Take out the Trash Day” at the Wisconsin State Capitol to clean up after the smelly slobs who defaced the capitol building during their two weeks of protesting and sleepovers. Wisconsin officials say the cleanup after the protests will cost the state tens of thousands of dollars.Do we know that "Wisconsin tea party members" set up that Facebook group? There's no official Tea Party organization here, with leaders who adopt policies and stage events. Any individual — for whatever reason — can take it upon himself to announce an event like this and promote it via websites like Gateway Pundit and Breitbart and Instapundit.
And here's "Fox and Friends" referring to the person who put up the Facebook group. They don't name him. He's "the guest that we had on earlier" who is "affiliated with the Tea Party." The female Fox Friend frantically explains that, according to this guy, it doesn't have to cost what was estimated at $7.5 million to clean the Capitol because "we're going to bring a bucket and pail" and clean the building.
This is idiocy! The reason the estimate is so high is that this is extremely valuable old marble that needs to be cleaned according to the protocols of historical restoration. Don't come in here with buckets of water and scrub brushes or whatever you think will make you look good on camera. Don't you realize you could cause more damage? You can't have every well-meaning do-gooder slopping around in there with water! Even aside from the damage to the 100-year-old building, somebody could slip and fall on the water you get on the floor or the junk you put down where someone might walk. (Go to 2:00 in this video of mine to see how the protesters caused a big Democratic legislator to fall by leaving stuff on the ground. (Ironically, it was a pile of peace signs.))
Meaning well isn't enough. Remember the old Reagan quote: "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
I'm from the Tea Party and I'm here to help isn't exactly terrifying. But it doesn't make me feel great. The general rule is: Don't help unless you know what you are doing! The default position should be: Do nothing. First, do no harm. This is an essential conservative principle. It's especially obnoxious to help for the purpose of looking good — and making other people look bad.
I assume "take out the trash" is intended as a double entendre, and the person who named this group intended to call the protesters "trash." They are not trash. They are people you disagree with, who have chosen a means of expression that you disagree with.
Now, it's a great idea for Tea Party folk to come down to the Capitol to express themselves and to pick up any litter that they find around the place, inside and out. That doesn't take any special expertise. But if you believe the place is strewn with litter, you are just plain wrong. Meade and/or I have been down there every day for the 2+ weeks, and we're not seeing trash. I have been blogging about this for many days, after a picture of mine showing litter on one of the first days went viral on the internet. The protesters got the message and were extremely diligent picking up trash after that point. Not knowing that makes you look ignorant.
Preening about being better than they are, when you are that ignorant, is really embarrassing.
UPDATE: Meade was at the Capitol from about 1 to 3:30, and he says he didn't notice any Tea Party activity. Maybe they did good deeds in such an un-show-offy fashion that he couldn't see them. Don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing...
AND: Instapundit says: "It’s funny that cleaning is now transgressive."
At the Protest Virus Café...
... I'm trying to claw my way out of the grip of whatever it is that infected me. Meade went out to keep his 9 a.m appointment with the rotunda — did you go in to meet him — but I slept on, sweating out the last of the fever. And now it's almost 11, and I'm finally up and drinking some coffee. Time for me to rummage around the internet and scatter some posts up here for you dear readers before Meade comes home with the footage for me to edit. I'm here
March 5, 2011
"Guides for Talking on the Telephone."
(Photographed on February 25th at the Wisconsin Capitol protest. Note the wrong kind of tape. And the presumption that people are complete idiots.)
Bitterly clinging to unions and — maybe — guns, but not to your dog.
At the Wisconsin Capitol protest today, Meade encounters a man who'd give up his dog, a woman who thinks the police have been "amazing," a woman who's upset about tape on a wooden door, and 2 women from Sheboygan who get Meade to admit he's not one of the protesters.
"On Wisconsin! On Wisconsin!/Champion of the Right!/'Forward!' our motto/God will give thee might!"
At the Capitol today, does anyone have a good voice? Can anyone get the national anthem started? And if everyone sings the national anthem, will anyone sing the state song?
There's some nice camaraderie in this video, a flashback to a slip-and-fall, and a discussion of the morality of capitalism. It begins with "Power to the Peaceful" and a man in the middle of leading a prayer for peace in all the countries in the world. He prayed for each, separately, by name, in alphabetical order, and — before that — for each of the states, by name, in alphabetical order. Edited down, appropriately, I hope, by me. Video by Meade.
(Presumably, now, anyone who ever wants to stand in the middle of the rotunda and lead a long prayer, will be completely free to do so.)
AND: The "he" that talked about commerce and morality was Gandhi.
There's some nice camaraderie in this video, a flashback to a slip-and-fall, and a discussion of the morality of capitalism. It begins with "Power to the Peaceful" and a man in the middle of leading a prayer for peace in all the countries in the world. He prayed for each, separately, by name, in alphabetical order, and — before that — for each of the states, by name, in alphabetical order. Edited down, appropriately, I hope, by me. Video by Meade.
(Presumably, now, anyone who ever wants to stand in the middle of the rotunda and lead a long prayer, will be completely free to do so.)
AND: The "he" that talked about commerce and morality was Gandhi.
Solidarity for a While.
2 men who had been at odds in an earlier video are now having a friendly chat, as 2 and then 3 women sing "Solidarity Forever," and then it's back to loud chant — "Si Se Puede."
To see the first exchange between these 2 men, look at 5:46 in the "Free-Speech Countervoice" video. The hardhat guy mocks the ponytail guy's hairstyle — in a really jackassy way. But look at them here. Suddenly, they are old friends. That's pretty cool. The difference in the face of the hardhat guy in the 2 videos is just amazing. The singing women are lovely too. The return to chanting? Ugh.
To see the first exchange between these 2 men, look at 5:46 in the "Free-Speech Countervoice" video. The hardhat guy mocks the ponytail guy's hairstyle — in a really jackassy way. But look at them here. Suddenly, they are old friends. That's pretty cool. The difference in the face of the hardhat guy in the 2 videos is just amazing. The singing women are lovely too. The return to chanting? Ugh.
In the Capitol this morning.
Photos by Meade. Looking up into the dome:
Looking down into the rotunda:
And off to the side in at the first floor level (one level up from the ground floor):
Way in the back there are some plastic toys on the floor. It seems to be some sort of grotesque play area.
Looking down into the rotunda:
And off to the side in at the first floor level (one level up from the ground floor):
Way in the back there are some plastic toys on the floor. It seems to be some sort of grotesque play area.
"And at the Capitol in Madison, Wis., where police on Thursday discovered 41 rounds of live ammunition, we pretty much attained the apogee of incivility..."
"It’s the sort of behavior that you’d think a civility institute would thrive on. Yet we haven’t heard a peep from the two ex-presidents and their Arizona initiative."
What "civility institute"? The National Institute for Civil Discourse, headed by ex-presidents Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush.
And remember when President Obama said: "At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."
Yeah, we paused for a moment. Back in January. But then February came and the Republicans made a show of wanting to use the power they'd won in the last election.
What "civility institute"? The National Institute for Civil Discourse, headed by ex-presidents Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush.
And remember when President Obama said: "At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."
Yeah, we paused for a moment. Back in January. But then February came and the Republicans made a show of wanting to use the power they'd won in the last election.
UW polisci prof Howard Schweber responds to my "Who started the restriction of access to the Wisconsin Capitol...?"
The full text of his email appears with the original post, here. You can read it there as a solid block of text without my bloggerly intrusions and elisions — which is what you're going to get here. Prof. Schweber writes:
I welcome Prof. Schweber's contribution of his own evidence, which is a report of what "smart organizers" said to him. If they were so smart, they were concerned about PR, so they have a motive to distort the story. I'll assume Schweber is making a reasonably accurate summary of their statements — even though he paraphrased my post inaccurately — but I still don't trust them. They are doing politics as they talk to him. And, actually, Schweber is doing politics too. But he's a political scientist. I would love to hear a politically scientific analysis of the statements they made to him. Anyway, in evidence terms, we are dealing with double hearsay.
I don't even know who these "protest leaders" are. Meade and I were told — by protest leaders? — that there was no "hierarchy." Can you name them? Will they go on record by name, with written statements naming the police officials that they worked with, explaining what the process was in arriving at the policy, a written copy of the policy, how that policy was conveyed to the citizen-enforcers, and who the citizen-enforcers were? I see that some press outlets are suing Gov. Walker to get access to his email under the state open records law. I should make an open records request to the police to get their email with the protest leaders.
Anyway, this is a question of proof, and now we have 2 sets of data. Protest leaders told Prof. Schweber that the "marshals" were enforcing police restrictions. The duct-tape-labeled "marshal" who tried to stop me would not respond to my pointed inquiries about his authority and my repeated question "Who are you?" He did not say, "I am working with the police, and the police set up this policy." I wanted to know! I would have reported whatever information he gave me at that point, but it was withheld.
Indeed, I — and Meade! — were quickly shooed through the door — in violation of the policy. They really didn't want to have to talk with me. I would have video-recorded the encounter with the "marshal," and we would now have an accurate report of his assertion about what the arrangement was between the private-citizen "marshal" and the Capitol police. (It would still be hearsay.) The evidence we got instead was the decision to send me and Meade through the door, and we now must use that action as basis for inferences.
The inference I made in my original post was that he had no authority, that private citizens were appropriating a police role toward the public. Based on Schweber's report, I'm entertaining the possibility that the inference is that they were working with the police in a way that they didn't want to talk about. As Schweber says:
ADDED: Prof. Schweber responds, via email, to this post:
1) Last Saturday protest leaders explained to me that the restrictions on entrances (only two open at opposite ends of the rotunda) had been set up by the police, and that the protest marshal's were voluntarily helping to enforce them to preserve good relations with the cooperation of the protesters themselves. This is what smart organizers do -- your claim that the restrictions "originated" with the protesters, as far as I know, is incorrect.I didn't "claim" anything. I described my experience, asked questions, suggested inferences from my evidence, and challenged people to bring in evidence that would prove me wrong. Good lord, my post ends with "PROVE ME WRONG" — and I almost never do all caps.
I welcome Prof. Schweber's contribution of his own evidence, which is a report of what "smart organizers" said to him. If they were so smart, they were concerned about PR, so they have a motive to distort the story. I'll assume Schweber is making a reasonably accurate summary of their statements — even though he paraphrased my post inaccurately — but I still don't trust them. They are doing politics as they talk to him. And, actually, Schweber is doing politics too. But he's a political scientist. I would love to hear a politically scientific analysis of the statements they made to him. Anyway, in evidence terms, we are dealing with double hearsay.
I don't even know who these "protest leaders" are. Meade and I were told — by protest leaders? — that there was no "hierarchy." Can you name them? Will they go on record by name, with written statements naming the police officials that they worked with, explaining what the process was in arriving at the policy, a written copy of the policy, how that policy was conveyed to the citizen-enforcers, and who the citizen-enforcers were? I see that some press outlets are suing Gov. Walker to get access to his email under the state open records law. I should make an open records request to the police to get their email with the protest leaders.
Anyway, this is a question of proof, and now we have 2 sets of data. Protest leaders told Prof. Schweber that the "marshals" were enforcing police restrictions. The duct-tape-labeled "marshal" who tried to stop me would not respond to my pointed inquiries about his authority and my repeated question "Who are you?" He did not say, "I am working with the police, and the police set up this policy." I wanted to know! I would have reported whatever information he gave me at that point, but it was withheld.
Indeed, I — and Meade! — were quickly shooed through the door — in violation of the policy. They really didn't want to have to talk with me. I would have video-recorded the encounter with the "marshal," and we would now have an accurate report of his assertion about what the arrangement was between the private-citizen "marshal" and the Capitol police. (It would still be hearsay.) The evidence we got instead was the decision to send me and Meade through the door, and we now must use that action as basis for inferences.
The inference I made in my original post was that he had no authority, that private citizens were appropriating a police role toward the public. Based on Schweber's report, I'm entertaining the possibility that the inference is that they were working with the police in a way that they didn't want to talk about. As Schweber says:
You may have a good argument to the effect that private citizens should not assist the police in enforcing lawful orders--although that's a pretty longstanding tradition.Really? I'd have to do some research into the nature of that tradition. Private citizens, after secretly consulting with the police to find a way to make their protest demonstration work well, can acquire the power to restrict access to an important public building — the most important building in the state, housing all 3 branches of state government — not just for members of their own group but for anyone else who attempts to enter, and they do not even need to explain to those citizens that they have been given the authority of the police? Citations, please.
And of course, if there were evidence that pro-Walker protesters were being treated differently than pro-union protesters that would be a different story, but I haven't heard anything to that effect.The "marshal" told me that only a certain type of person was allowed to go right in and on his own determined that I was the sort of person who had to go wait in a long line — with the protesters who shared his agenda of making the event look orderly and pleasant. But I wasn't one of them, and I deeply resented being told, by a private citizen, that I belonged with them and not with the privileged people who got through that door. Please note that I did not say "Don't you know who I am?!" I said "Who are you?" And he would not answer. That's what got me through the door. You might think I was delighted that I sneaked in ahead of the line. I did not. I stood there, livid, and yelled "How dare he!" about 10 times before Meade calmed me down.
The restrictions to which the judge's order referred were not about closing doors and making people stand in line.Of course they weren't! The protesters were in league with the police about that. But the higher level principle of law is the same. The judge's decision rested on Article 1, § 4 — "The right of the people peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, shall never be abridged." If that is interpreted to include access to the Capitol building, then it's not limited to the precise fact pattern that the unions' lawyers chose to raise. There's no restricted access to constitutional rights!
As I understand it, starting this past weekend Capitol police would only allow individuals into the building if the were invited by a member of a legislative staff who came to the door to escort them, and each legislator's office was limited to 8 visitors. In addition, the police would let in precisely the number of persons that equally the number of chairs in a scheduled committee meeting.First, I don't think that was what was going on last Saturday. Second, if the marshal had explained that to me, I would have taken it into account. He refused to answer my questions.
In addition, police told reporters that they would allow one person in for every protester inside who left. Those actions were what prompted the motion for an injunction -- not the selective blocking of entrances and requirement that people stand in line....Right. They restricted access. And they litigated about the aspect of restricted access that they didn't like. I'm objecting to a different aspect of restricted access. I didn't litigate, but the rule of law operates at a higher level of generality than whatever happened in that particular case. Now, maybe the restriction inflicted on me can be distinguished in some significant way so that my claim of right would fail, but that has not been litigated, and I am standing on my legal argument premised on the case.
... I don't care whether one agrees with the protests or not, it is no more truthful to describe the organizers as authoritarians limiting their own supporters free speech rights than it is to characterize them as union thugs.I didn't do either of those things. I said they limited the rights of citizens who were not part of the protest. They took over the Capitol and barked orders at regular citizens. And you seem to think it doesn't matter because they shared an interest with the police in making the demonstration look good.
In other words, this ain't the 60's. No one is throwing bombs or even rocks. These are middle class protesters assembling to make a political staement, not agitators looking for a confrontation.What?! What does that have to do with me? I do understand that they cared about the optics and they wanted to be admired by the citizens of Wisconsin who'd have turned against them if they were too ugly or disorderly. You seem to be saying that I need to fall in line with the protest leaders to help the protest look good. No! I want to be a free citizen, independent of those people. They can do what they want within their own group, and of course, the decision to maintain order was a good one for them. But they can't absorb me into their agenda — even if I agreed with them. (In fact, plenty of the protesters were disorderly and ugly, like the lug who assaulted Meade, and the "superman" who yelled to drown out a reasonable conversation between 2 men.)
And they are Wisconsinites: they stand in line, they cooperate, they like to keep things peaceful and benign. They're just like that.Again. There was a line for some people and access for others. Is it a Wisconsin thing to accept assignment to second-class citizenry? Anyway, meekness is fine for the meek, but I prefer diversity of expression. I can understand leaders of a demonstration enforcing one style of behavior for the good of the collective, but it's for individuals to decide whether they want to belong to that collective. In America. Which includes Wisconsin. And I was not one of them.
It is quite true that the protesters are not free speech absolutists or insisting on exercising their rights to the fullest possible extent -- but that's because that's not what they are protesting about (this is also not the Berkeley Free Speech movement.)...They don't set the agenda for me. I'll be my own free-speech movement. Eh. It's not a movement. It's just freedom. I want it.
ADDED: Prof. Schweber responds, via email, to this post:
March 4, 2011
The Wisconsin Capitol closes at 6 — no more sleepovers.
With the slumber party over, there's some dancing on the Capitol steps. Meade gets inside just a few minutes before 6 to check out the compliance level. He runs into the woman who appears at 3:13 in the "free-speech countervoice" video to suggest that our free-speech hero move his conversation out of the center of the rotunda.
Mickey Kaus has a problem with indicting John Edwards.
He writes:
Apparently the prosecutors’ idea is that if Edwards used money from “Bunny” Mellon and others to keep his mistress stashed away and quiet, this was really a campaign expense and should have been paid for out of campaign funds. But suppose Edwards had paid for it with campaign funds. Don’t you think prosecutors would now be thinking of indicting him for an improper use of campaign funds? (You can’t pay for most meals using campaign funds. You can’t buy mittens with campaign funds. Are mistresses going to OK?)
A Free-Speech Countervoice Takes the Center of the Wisconsin Capitol Rotunda.
Today, Meade went back to the Capitol rotunda to see what things were like after the overnight-sleeping protesters had been cleared out pursuant to a state court order. It was easy to get into the building, and lots of protesters were back, chanting their usual chants. But one man — who did not agree with the protesters — decided he would occupy the central spot. To the consternation of the others, he invited people to come talk to him one-on-one.
There's reasonable dialogue along with unreasonable efforts to drown out that dialogue. A polite organizer asks the man to move out of the center of the rotunda, and he refuses. There's an almost perfectly beautiful interlude when everyone sings the national anthem. Nervous women air the notion that the man — and Meade — are Walker plants. The woman accusing Meade sticks her finger right into the camera lens. And then, somehow, Meade becomes human to her, and, as 2 young girls spot a friend on the balcony and run off, we have the feeling that maybe everything's going to be all right.
I started to imagine Wisconsinites coming back to the building every day, talking about everything, on and on, indefinitely into the future. That man who decided to hold dialogues in the center of the rotunda is a courageous man. But it isn't that hard to be as courageous as he was. In the long run, it's easier to do that than to spend your life intimidated and repressed. That man was showing us how to be free. He was there today, but you — and you and you! — could be there tomorrow, standing your ground, inviting people to talk to you, listening and going back and forth, for the sheer demonstration of the power of human dialogue and the preservation of freedom.
And you could start singing the National Anthem. If you go in, with no idea other than to sing the National Anthem, there's a good chance everyone will stop what they are yelling and chanting and sing along with you, because nobody wants to be seen not singing along with the National Anthem. Oh, except that one girl. But let's be charitable. She has a whole life inside her, and we don't know what it is.
There's reasonable dialogue along with unreasonable efforts to drown out that dialogue. A polite organizer asks the man to move out of the center of the rotunda, and he refuses. There's an almost perfectly beautiful interlude when everyone sings the national anthem. Nervous women air the notion that the man — and Meade — are Walker plants. The woman accusing Meade sticks her finger right into the camera lens. And then, somehow, Meade becomes human to her, and, as 2 young girls spot a friend on the balcony and run off, we have the feeling that maybe everything's going to be all right.
I started to imagine Wisconsinites coming back to the building every day, talking about everything, on and on, indefinitely into the future. That man who decided to hold dialogues in the center of the rotunda is a courageous man. But it isn't that hard to be as courageous as he was. In the long run, it's easier to do that than to spend your life intimidated and repressed. That man was showing us how to be free. He was there today, but you — and you and you! — could be there tomorrow, standing your ground, inviting people to talk to you, listening and going back and forth, for the sheer demonstration of the power of human dialogue and the preservation of freedom.
And you could start singing the National Anthem. If you go in, with no idea other than to sing the National Anthem, there's a good chance everyone will stop what they are yelling and chanting and sing along with you, because nobody wants to be seen not singing along with the National Anthem. Oh, except that one girl. But let's be charitable. She has a whole life inside her, and we don't know what it is.
"Does the Wisconsin Senate have the power to compel absent Democratic senators to return to the senate floor if they re-enter the state of Wisconsin? Yes."
Says Jim Lindgren:
I would hope that those who rely on the arrest clause of the state constitution would deal with the fact that the privilege against arrest applies “in all cases.” These commentators might try to argue that the drafters of the Wisconsin — and by implication, US – Constitutions meant “in all instances” when they wrote “in all cases.”That interpretation would conflict with the compulsory attendance provision (Article IV, §7) of the constitution, Lindgren says:
As implausible as this interpretation would be in the abstract, in context it would not pass the laugh test. After all, the phrase reads: “in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace.” In context, the framers’ language clearly meant court cases....
Reading the two constitutional sections together, the courts can’t meddle in legislative affairs by arresting legislators in a civil court case, but each house of the legislature “may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide.”
"Kafka 'Before the Law' has a door and a doorkeeper refusing admittance. Moral: Don't believe doorkeepers."
Says rhhardin in the comments to my post about resisting the doorkeepers.
Before the law sits a gatekeeper. To this gatekeeper comes a man from the country who asks to gain entry into the law. But the gatekeeper says that he cannot grant him entry at the moment. The man thinks about it and then asks if he will be allowed to come in sometime later on. “It is possible,” says the gatekeeper, “but not now.”....Go read it. It's only one paragraph.
Why did the Capitol police wrestle state Representative Nick Milroy (D) to the ground?
Interesting, but missing context. I don't know what to make of it at this point.
Who started the restriction of access to the Wisconsin Capitol, which the state court judge has ruled unconstitutional?
If you were critical of Meade and me for refusing to wait in line and insisting on walking right into the Capitol building, then you need to read the judge's order, which says that the restriction of access "violates the State Constitution."
Instead of meekly following instructions — which, oddly enough, the anti-Walker protesters did — we felt immediate outrage and expressed it. If you are one of the many people who criticized me and Meade for selfishly jumping ahead of a line, it's time for an apology.
Let me remind you what happened. I started it. On Saturday, February 26th, the day with the largest crowd, there were "'about 70,000 people' at the Capitol, but they were mainly outside":
The Washington Post reports on the ousting of the overnight-sleeping protesters:
Now the police WERE there the next day, when Meade arrived at the same door (the King Street door). Inspired by my resistance the previous day, Meade insisted on walking right in. When he got home, he said to me "I almost got myself arrested." He caught it on video, which is embedded in the post "Meade is New Media." He confronted the police, demanding to know by what authority they were telling him that he could not walk right into the Capitol.
When Meade moved to push through the door, one of them accused him of pushing a police officer. I believe that was an attempt to intimidate him into going over and waiting in the access-restricting line. The implication was that they could arrest him if they want, so he'd better get super-compliant right now. A protester who assumes Meade is a typical protester tells Meade that the police are "on our side." That is, the protesters seem to be colluding with the police in the access restriction, which seems to be why they are waiting in line. But Meade isn't with them, and he's not interested in facilitating the collusion. He's on his own.
Here's the video Meade took on February 28, 2011. Listen at 1:03 for Meade's mocking: "Ah, here are the sheep, obeying orders from the police." At 2:55, he's confronting the police about their system. At 3:34, he encounters a legal observer and questions him about whether the exclusion from the building violates constitutional rights.
In short, Meade and I recognized the access restriction as, initially, a private wrong, committed by the private-citizen protesters, and, the next day, a violation of rights by the police. When the police took over the access-restriction policy, the protesters continued to support it, because — I assume — it served their interests. One of the protesters urgently attempted to clue Meade in that the police were on the protesters' side and that he should meekly submit to the line ritual for the good of the collective.
This is what it looks like to me, having experienced it directly and through Meade. If you don't accept my characterization, PROVE ME WRONG.
ADDED: UW polisci prof Howard Schweber emails a response to this post (and gives me permission to publish it here):
Instead of meekly following instructions — which, oddly enough, the anti-Walker protesters did — we felt immediate outrage and expressed it. If you are one of the many people who criticized me and Meade for selfishly jumping ahead of a line, it's time for an apology.
Let me remind you what happened. I started it. On Saturday, February 26th, the day with the largest crowd, there were "'about 70,000 people' at the Capitol, but they were mainly outside":
I walked right up to the nearest door, and a "volunteer" in an orange vest told me to go wait in a line to go in some other door. This door was for... I didn't quite catch who the special people were who got to go right in the door I'd walked up to, but I said, "This is a public building. You're saying there are 2 kinds of people — ones that get right in and ones that go wait in line? Who are you?" He was obviously not a uniformed city official. I was all "Who are you?" and "How dare you!" and, after a few seconds, I (and Meade) got right through that door.I couldn't tell if the protesters had set up the blockage themselves or if they had somehow colluded with the police, but I was truly outraged that private citizens were assuming the authority to restrict access to the public building.
Once in, I said "How dare they!" about 10 times. Sorry, Meade didn't video that. You've never seen video [of me] as emotional as I was right then. I got outraged for myself and for all the people that were out there waiting in that line. I was outraged about them for 2 reasons: 1. Because they were treated as second-class citizens who had to enter through the subordinate door, and 2. Because they meekly accepted their subordination.
The Washington Post reports on the ousting of the overnight-sleeping protesters:
The protesters demanded to see a written copy of the order before they would go. University of Wisconsin-Madison Police Chief Susan Riseling read the order to the crowd, eliciting cheers when she read the judge's determination that the state had unconstitutionally restricted access to the building.From my observations, it seems that THE PROTESTERS THEMSELVES were doing the initial blocking of the door, without the police, so I'm irked by this righteous exulting. On February 26, a guy wearing an orange vest with the word "Marshall" sharpied on duct tape tried to keep me and Meade out. There were no police there at all. I call bullshit on Lautenschlager's "we won." Read the facts I observed directly and rebut the inference that the protesters initiated the access restriction.
"We won this battle," said former Attorney General Peggy Lautenschlager, who represented unions that had challenged the state's decision to limit building access. But she also told the demonstrators they needed to leave.
Now the police WERE there the next day, when Meade arrived at the same door (the King Street door). Inspired by my resistance the previous day, Meade insisted on walking right in. When he got home, he said to me "I almost got myself arrested." He caught it on video, which is embedded in the post "Meade is New Media." He confronted the police, demanding to know by what authority they were telling him that he could not walk right into the Capitol.
When Meade moved to push through the door, one of them accused him of pushing a police officer. I believe that was an attempt to intimidate him into going over and waiting in the access-restricting line. The implication was that they could arrest him if they want, so he'd better get super-compliant right now. A protester who assumes Meade is a typical protester tells Meade that the police are "on our side." That is, the protesters seem to be colluding with the police in the access restriction, which seems to be why they are waiting in line. But Meade isn't with them, and he's not interested in facilitating the collusion. He's on his own.
Here's the video Meade took on February 28, 2011. Listen at 1:03 for Meade's mocking: "Ah, here are the sheep, obeying orders from the police." At 2:55, he's confronting the police about their system. At 3:34, he encounters a legal observer and questions him about whether the exclusion from the building violates constitutional rights.
In short, Meade and I recognized the access restriction as, initially, a private wrong, committed by the private-citizen protesters, and, the next day, a violation of rights by the police. When the police took over the access-restriction policy, the protesters continued to support it, because — I assume — it served their interests. One of the protesters urgently attempted to clue Meade in that the police were on the protesters' side and that he should meekly submit to the line ritual for the good of the collective.
This is what it looks like to me, having experienced it directly and through Meade. If you don't accept my characterization, PROVE ME WRONG.
ADDED: UW polisci prof Howard Schweber emails a response to this post (and gives me permission to publish it here):
Anne,
I have to object. First, the requirements of using only certain doors and standing in line were not created by the protesters, and your "reporting" gives absolutely no evidence to suggest that they were. Second, your "calling bullshit" is about something else entirely.
A strange dancing woman lures New Media Meade over to a funeral procession.
It was another protest march, last night. Something — the state of Wisconsin? — is deemed to have symbolically died. Watch for the street-theater-style cardboard coffins.
Meade catches up to a bunch of MSM photographers who are set up in mid-street. They scurry off to the sides when the crowd reaches them. Unbound by the strictures of MSM photojournalism, Meade moves forward into the crowd and continues recording as the faces stream by and walks though until he emerges at the end.
I'm not there, because I'm with my law school class, talking about the Commerce Clause. Meade needs to get back to the car so he can come by to pick me up, but he stops for a moment to hang out with a Brittany Spaniel. That's not the first dog in the video. Back in the march segment of the video, there's at least a poodle and a Great Dane.
Meade catches up to a bunch of MSM photographers who are set up in mid-street. They scurry off to the sides when the crowd reaches them. Unbound by the strictures of MSM photojournalism, Meade moves forward into the crowd and continues recording as the faces stream by and walks though until he emerges at the end.
I'm not there, because I'm with my law school class, talking about the Commerce Clause. Meade needs to get back to the car so he can come by to pick me up, but he stops for a moment to hang out with a Brittany Spaniel. That's not the first dog in the video. Back in the march segment of the video, there's at least a poodle and a Great Dane.
March 3, 2011
Inside the Wisconsin Capitol at about 5 p.m. this evening...
Not long before the crowd of 100 protesters stormed the building (or was let in by the police), Meade got through the line and into the building. I've edited the video he shot, which shows the conditions of the hallways and even a men's room — and everything looks quite clean and undamaged. In the rotunda, the protesters have formed a circle and are discussing what they will do — and it seems they are aware that they are about to receive the judicial order to leave. Should they stay?
100 protesters storm the Wisconsin Capital.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:
The protesters have been stopped by [a] phalanx of police on the ground floor of the west wing and prevented from reaching the rotunda and joining the separate group of protesters who have been spending the night in the Capitol.Meanwhile, a Dane County judge is planning to order everyone cleared out of the Capitol:
Both groups of demonstrators are chanting slogans over the police such as “This is what democracy looks like,” “Shame!” and “We want Walker!” Others are making a peace sign with their fingers.
[Dane County Circuit Court Judge John] Albert indicated he would address the issue of overnight campers....
An estimated 100 people, according to police officials, fall under the category of protesters who have camped overnight in the rotunda and have resisted efforts to leave.
Albert's order is expected within hours and presumably would be implemented as soon as possible. A letter about Albert's order is expected to be handed to each protester. The letter would explain in detail why the protesters have to leave.
When did Qaddafi ever have legitimacy?
Obama says: "Colonel Qaddafi needs to step down from power... You've seen with great clarity that he has lost legitimacy with his people."
Note the implicit statement that the dictator once had legitimacy. Why would Obama think that?
Note the implicit statement that the dictator once had legitimacy. Why would Obama think that?
What are the top 3 emotions you're feeling in this protest?
Meade shot this on March 1st. I edited.
What emotions propel people into protest? Do they get them stoked or satisfied? I wonder. I like this clip for 2 reasons: 1. the student is so nice, and 2. the respondents (Walker supporters) aren't too ready to speak in terms of emotion. The first answer given is "respect" and the second is "pride." Only the third — "sadness" — is really an emotion. I've observed over the years that a lot of people don't like to think about their political ideas as emotionally motivated.
"Excuse me, but I'm looking for Hate."
Looking for Hate Man...
"Oh, Hate? He's sleeping right now," he said, pointing to a lump underneath a blue tarp. "Hey, Hate!" the man yelled. "Hate!"Via Metafilter, which also links to this collection of articles he wrote back in the 1960s when he was a reporter for the New York Times. Imagine leaving the conventional life and going the way of a colorful street character. What would you be... if not Hate Man... who?
The tarp twitched, then stopped.
"Hate! Wake up, man! Someone's here to see you!"...
"Hi, Hate," the reporter said. "Um, fuck you."
"Hi, fuck you, too. I hate you," he responded, without hesitation or an ounce of vitriol....
"Hell, these leftist protesters, leave Kotex! Used Kotex, everything is littering the sidewalks and the streets. It doesn't matter. It's the height of pigsty-ism."
Rush Limbaugh went over the top yesterday imagining what's going on here in Madison, Wisconsin.
[U]nion thugs join together in creating a pigsty -- and we know that they create pigsties, especially compared to Tea Party rallies. You look at any public grounds where these people have been: The trash is littered everywhere, trash cans are overturned, beer cans, bong pipes. Hell, it's all over there. The Tea Party people, you don't find anything. Not even a discarded tissue....
The Democrats and the media want you to think it's just a bunch of average, hardworking out of working, valiant teachers, firefighters and so forth, and it's a bunch of slobs. Maggot-infested, dope-smoking, damn it, hell, longhaired, the whole nine yards. You got longhaired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking FM rock 'n' roller types, exactly who they are. Bong pipes, you name it.Now, that's just ridiculous. I've lived in Madison, Wisconsin for 25 years — and I've gone over to the protests nearly every day — and I've never seen a used Kotex anywhere. I put up a post showing trash on one of the first days of protest, but ever since then, I've been impressed that they are picking up trash. They care about the impression they leave and are making a big effort about that. They are putting up signs, taping them up and sticking them in little snowmen outdoors. And there are piles of belongings, such as bedding that are piled up in a way that isn't aesthetically pleasing. But that's not trash. And I haven't seen any beer drinking or beer cans or pot smoking or pot paraphernalia anywhere. The last time I was in the building, I didn't think it smelled, but Meade was there more recently (for the Governor's Budget Address), and he says it smelled. People are living in there, the human body is what it is.
"Please pardon this brief departure from my normal folderol, but every so often..."
"... a member of the chattering class issues a nugget of stupidity so egregious that no amount of mockery will suffice. Particularly when the issuer of said stupidity holds a Nobel Prize."
The Nobel Prize reference is to Paul Krugman. If you want something about the Obama Nobel Prize, there's this:
The Nobel Prize reference is to Paul Krugman. If you want something about the Obama Nobel Prize, there's this:
Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. A lot of his critics didn't think he deserved to win the Nobel Peace Prize, but he's got a shot now at showing the world he does deserve it by what he could be doing in the Middle East and North Africa. Is he on a track to winning the Nobel Peace Prize again...? What do you think?
Again? These guys are taking bets on whether Obama is gearing up to win the Nobel Peace Prize again? I mean you can arguably say that the world's imploding because of Obama. The stabilizing force of the world has always been the United States of America, but nobody fears us. There's no respect or fear of the United States, and he doesn't project any abject respect and love for this country. These guys are speculating on whether he's qualified to win a second one?
"Walker proposed ending state-mandated community recycling, which was signed into law by Gov. Tommy Thompson in 1990, as well as elimination of the grants that help local governments pay for recycling."
Good! Right? If recycling is worth doing, it should be paying for itself without a state government subsidy, or, if not, let local communities decide if they want to cough up the money to do it anyway. It's time for decentralization, efficiency, realism... not fluffy-headed idealism. Saving money is the morality we need, not posing as good people by doing something if it actually makes no sense. I'm for pragmatism, not narcissism.
[George Dreckmann, Madison's recycling coordinator,] said it costs nearly $6 million to run the city's recycling programs and Madison receives about $1.1 million from a state recycling grant. He sees few other ways to replace the money other than cutting back the recycling program. One possibility, he said, might be to no longer recycle glass, which is expensive to process.Exactly. Do that. Why should the state waste money incentivizing something that shouldn't be done? Why should Madison folk get to stoke their feeling of self-goodness with money from non-Madison Wisconsin?
"More than 100 Northwestern University students watched as a naked 25-year-old woman was penetrated..."
"... by a sex toy wielded by her fiancee during an after-class session of the school’s popular 'Human Sexuality' class. The woman said she showed up at the Feb. 21 lecture in the Ryan Family Auditorium in Evanston expecting just to answer questions, but was game to demonstrate. The course’s professor on Wednesday acknowledged some initial hesitation, but said student feedback was 'uniformly positive.'"
And now? Still uniformly positive?
And now? Still uniformly positive?
“One of the students asked what my specific fetish was and mine is being in front of people, having the attention and being used,” [said the woman]. “The students seemed really intrigued.”Being used, eh? Who feels used now?
[Prof. John Michael] Bailey said in his statement Wednesday that during the Feb. 21 after-class lecture, “I was not in a mood to surrender to sex negativity and fear.”
“Do I have any regrets?” he wrote on Wednesday. “It is mostly too early to say. I certainly have no regrets concerning Northwestern students, who have demonstrated that they are open-minded grown ups rather than fragile children.”
"Chicago is up in the house!"/"He's never nipped at anybody but he barks and growls"/"I wanna be your dog"...
... "Everyone left is from Chicago"/"It's the love-in of a lifetime"/"People are going to be really embarrassed some day to look back and realize that they had joined in on something that was really a mistake and they chose the wrong side and that they joined it with such fervor"/"Did you ever do that when you were young?"
All this video was recorded yesterday... except the flashback. (That was originally blogged on February 17th.)
And here's the NYT article on "self-compassion" that I talk about in the car.
All this video was recorded yesterday... except the flashback. (That was originally blogged on February 17th.)
And here's the NYT article on "self-compassion" that I talk about in the car.
"On Tuesday, several dozen protesters slept outside the Capitol in a camp they've dubbed 'Walkerville.'"
Ha. As if Walker has caused homelessness. (The coinage presumably alludes to "Hooverville.")
This protest is NOT about poor people. It's about people with good jobs, wanting to preserve the high quality of what they've been able to acquire for themselves. Now, I do think those who are sleeping on the floor of the Capitol rotunda and outside on the frozen ground are young people who don't themselves have good jobs. It's interesting what these kids are putting themselves through for others, who are, presumably, better off than they are. I took this picture, yesterday, of the outdoor sleeping setup:
It had gone down to 11° the night before. Note the underlayer of Ian's Pizza boxes. There is a lot of free food. Ian's, by the way, is doing some kickass branding (without losing any money):
This protest is NOT about poor people. It's about people with good jobs, wanting to preserve the high quality of what they've been able to acquire for themselves. Now, I do think those who are sleeping on the floor of the Capitol rotunda and outside on the frozen ground are young people who don't themselves have good jobs. It's interesting what these kids are putting themselves through for others, who are, presumably, better off than they are. I took this picture, yesterday, of the outdoor sleeping setup:
It had gone down to 11° the night before. Note the underlayer of Ian's Pizza boxes. There is a lot of free food. Ian's, by the way, is doing some kickass branding (without losing any money):
On Monday afternoon, [store manager Staci] Fritz guesstimated that Ian's had delivered upwards of 35,000 slices of pizzas in the last week, all paid for by donations...Keeping it honest... which is good for branding too, of course. They're not just raking in donations without accounting for it all with free pizza delivered to protesters.
Fritz says that while Ian's is still making deliveries and taking donations, it has been very careful to cut off the amount of money it takes in one day. "What if somebody gives a load of money and then suddenly this whole thing is over and we can't deliver anymore? We can't let anyone pay for what we can't promise to deliver."
Madison has a long tradition of its bars and restaurants being sucked into the fervent political activity of the times, such as the Nitty Gritty restaurant and bar's role as the meeting place for the activists who bombed the university's Sterling Hall in 1970.Well, hell... why bring that up? Things have been really peaceful, by and large — to an amazing degree, considering the difficulty of keeping a large, diverse crowd energized enough to look like a good demonstration without tipping any individual over the edge into something ugly, even as the days wear on and on.
"At this point, I'm not sure why I'd reach out to them again."
Says Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald — after driving to Kenosha to meet with 2 of the self-exiled Democratic senators.
"It was clear about halfway through the conversation that the items that they brought up were items that could never make it into the state budget...."
"All right. You can stop right there. I don't want to ever stay in a hotel room ever again."
Says Meade after I start to read items from this list on how to prevent bedbug infestations:
- Never put clothes in hotel drawers or on a hotel floor.
- Travel with resealable bags large enough to hold clothes....
- Check your laptop. The bedbugs are attracted to the heat and body oils on the computer....
- Inspect hotel room mattresses, bedding, furniture and closet hangers for signs of infestation....
- Use dissolvable laundry bags when travelling. The bags can go straight from your suitcase to the washing machine....
- If in doubt, don't bring belongings in the house....
- Periodically inspect cribs, mattresses, box spring, head and foot boards and under the bed for signs of bedbugs....
- Check the alarm clock on your nightstand, along with electrical outlets.
"When I arrived back in 2001 I found 10,000 lawyers in the Department of Defense."
Says Donald Rumsfeld:
They're there at every level. We live in an enormously litigious society and the Congress contributes to that. As a result, there's practically no step that's made by anyone in the Pentagon and in the Department of Defense where they do not take into account the legal implications and consult lawyers about it....
There's a pattern in the department, at the top level, the chairman and the chief and the Joint Chiefs will recommend some rules of engagement for a certain circumstance. It will then be sent down the chain of command and it will get to the next command level, maybe the Combatant Commander, and the Combatant Commander will look at it, and then he will not want to violate it. So he might take a little tuck in it. And then it goes down to the next level. And it's got now it's in a country commander. And he looks at it and he doesn't want to break the rule so he takes a little tuck in it. You end up with four or five layers down there taking tucks and you end up with some rules of engagement that don't look like what the chairman of the Joint Chiefs or the Joint Chiefs of Staff or even the Combatant Commander intended. Now why is that? Well, it's fear. It's because of our litigious society. It's because of Congress overseeing things and having hearings.
March 2, 2011
Meade takes protest signs down from the Civil War monument at the Wisconsin Capitol.
New Media Meade, the protector of war monuments, takes signs down from the statue of Hans Christian Heg, who died at Chickamauga. Do you think it's cool to have a sign that reads "I fought for the Union/You should too" tied to his foot? We didn't.
2 protesters emerge from the Capitol — in high spirits — and talk about the conditions inside.
When people leave, others from a line go in to replace them, so the number inside remains the same. One of the young men says he hadn't seen the light of day in 72 hours. They seem to be okay about sleeping on the stone floor, and they report that it's been kind of fun — that they even had a sack race last night (using sleeping bags).
"There's six, seven, eight, nine of them that are starting to say, ‘Listen, we're starting to look like we're out of touch with what's going on in Madison, and it's time to get back.'"
"I think some of them feel like they're boxed in and they can't come back to the Capitol right now."
Said Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald about the "Wisconsin 14."
Did the absconding senators themselves adopt the label "Wisconsin 14"? To my ear, it suggests yippies or lawless revolutionaries. Is that the image they want?
Said Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald about the "Wisconsin 14."
Did the absconding senators themselves adopt the label "Wisconsin 14"? To my ear, it suggests yippies or lawless revolutionaries. Is that the image they want?
The Westboro Baptist Church wins in the Supreme Court in the case about protesting at a soldier's funeral.
"The First Amendment shields Westboro from tort liability for its picketing in this case."
Chief Justice Roberts writes the opinion, with only Justice Alito dissenting. Justice Breyer has a concurring opinion. From the Roberts opinion:
AND: Alito, the lone dissenter, stresses the value of the tort called "intentional infliction of emotional distress":
Chief Justice Roberts writes the opinion, with only Justice Alito dissenting. Justice Breyer has a concurring opinion. From the Roberts opinion:
The picketing was conducted under police supervision some 1,000 feet from the church, out of the sight of those at the church. The protest was not unruly; there was no shouting, profanity, or violence....Clearly, this is the right outcome.
Given that Westboro’s speech was at a public place on a matter of public concern, that speech is entitled to “special protection” under the First Amendment. Such speech cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt. “If there is a bedrock principle underly- ing the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Texas v. Johnson, 491 U. S. 397, 414 (1989). Indeed, “the point of all speech protection . . . is to shield just those choices of content that in someone’s eyes are misguided, or even hurtful.” Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., 515 U. S. 557, 574 (1995)....
Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and—as it did here— inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker. As a Nation we have chosen a different course—to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate. That choice requires that we shield West- boro from tort liability for its picketing in this case.
AND: Alito, the lone dissenter, stresses the value of the tort called "intentional infliction of emotional distress":
Respondents’ outrageous conduct caused petitioner great injury, and the Court now compounds that injury by depriving petitioner of a judgment that acknowledges the wrong he suffered.Breyer's short concurrence makes the point that the decision is limited to in-person picketing about matters of "public concern." In adding that the Court "does not examine in depth the effect of television broadcasting" and "internet postings," I get the sense that he's looking ahead to cases about bullying.
In order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated, it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like petitioner.
The Wisconsin protesters are losing their grip on reality.
The point of that last post — "I have professors that received doctorates..." — is that as the protest drags on and protesters are sleep-deprived and frustrated and tired of nothing happening but standing around chanting and listening to drum-beating for hours on end, logic and proportion is flopping away. There was some serious aggression yesterday.
You saw Meade's video where 2 over-aggressive protesters interrogated a couple of nice ladies who drove into Madison just to stand quietly, in the sea of Walker-haters, and hold their pro-Walker signs. In the video, you can hear that the 2 protesters are not making that much sense, and when Meade tries to mediate — meadeate — for them, other protesters in the area close in on Meade.
There's very tense confrontation, and it flips into paranoia and incoherence. At 4:35, you hear a woman say, "Are you a plant?" At 4:57: "I think we know you're a Walker plant?" At 5:00: "You [are a Walker plant] on this gathering and we can tell." At 5:17, a large man barges into Meade and grabs the Flip camera, and actually gets it out of Meade's hand. No one in the crowd does anything to help Meade in this assault, and Meade grabs the man's arm and wrests the camera out of his hand. This man says "Get your hands off me," as if he's a victim. After he assaulted Meade, he acts like he's the peacemaker and says — referring to Meade and the 2 pro-Walker women — "They are fools and idiots and just ignore them." He continues to bump his large body into Meade as he's saying that. A woman says, "These are Walker plants."
I see some people descending into irrationality — beginning to form a cultish mentality that demonizes outsiders. Meade was at a demonstration, photographing it. A demonstration is — to a clear-thinking person — a collection of people asking to be seen, wanting to be photographed. Yet when they perceive that Meade isn't one of them they flip — it's a Flip camera — into fear. Meade had been trying to talk to them rationally about why the pro-Walker woman might not want to debate her ideas in that setting, and instead of seeing Meade as a citizen who's finding out what's going on and helping 2 women who are surrounded and outnumbered, they spread their "plant" theory. And it's not just a theory. They know he's a plant.
But he's not a plant. He's a human being. An individual human being. And so are all the protesters, but I fear they are losing their grip on that reality.
You saw Meade's video where 2 over-aggressive protesters interrogated a couple of nice ladies who drove into Madison just to stand quietly, in the sea of Walker-haters, and hold their pro-Walker signs. In the video, you can hear that the 2 protesters are not making that much sense, and when Meade tries to mediate — meadeate — for them, other protesters in the area close in on Meade.
There's very tense confrontation, and it flips into paranoia and incoherence. At 4:35, you hear a woman say, "Are you a plant?" At 4:57: "I think we know you're a Walker plant?" At 5:00: "You [are a Walker plant] on this gathering and we can tell." At 5:17, a large man barges into Meade and grabs the Flip camera, and actually gets it out of Meade's hand. No one in the crowd does anything to help Meade in this assault, and Meade grabs the man's arm and wrests the camera out of his hand. This man says "Get your hands off me," as if he's a victim. After he assaulted Meade, he acts like he's the peacemaker and says — referring to Meade and the 2 pro-Walker women — "They are fools and idiots and just ignore them." He continues to bump his large body into Meade as he's saying that. A woman says, "These are Walker plants."
I see some people descending into irrationality — beginning to form a cultish mentality that demonizes outsiders. Meade was at a demonstration, photographing it. A demonstration is — to a clear-thinking person — a collection of people asking to be seen, wanting to be photographed. Yet when they perceive that Meade isn't one of them they flip — it's a Flip camera — into fear. Meade had been trying to talk to them rationally about why the pro-Walker woman might not want to debate her ideas in that setting, and instead of seeing Meade as a citizen who's finding out what's going on and helping 2 women who are surrounded and outnumbered, they spread their "plant" theory. And it's not just a theory. They know he's a plant.
But he's not a plant. He's a human being. An individual human being. And so are all the protesters, but I fear they are losing their grip on that reality.
"I have professors that received doctorates from Berkeley. They can't afford to lose their collective bargaining."
Statement from a hardcore protester who's been sleeping on the marble floor of the Wisconsin Capitol for 10 days.
When you're drafted into the "Army of Davids" — and the conflict has become a quagmire.
Thanks to Instapundit for all the links to my — and Meade's — coverage of the Wisconsin protests. Like this one this morning:
And now we're into the third week of it. It's become a quagmire. I believe myself that... this protest is lost and it is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme aggression in Madison yesterday....
WISCONSIN: “After a short interchange, a bunch of anti-Walkerites converge on Meade. One man grabs his camera. Another blows a whistle close to his face.” The New Civility in action: Shut the f*ck up if you don’t support the unions!I know Meade and I exemplify Glenn's concept of "An Army of Davids," but we kind of got drafted. Here we are in Madison, Wisconsin and something big happens. We have to cover it. Or we'd have to justify dodging the draft into the army of Davids. And now that we're in, people are looking to us to be the rough men who stand ready to do journalism on their behalf so they can read peaceably on their laptops at night.
Plus, from the comments: “I don’t want to hear one more word about Tea Parties that create an atmosphere of violence.”
And now we're into the third week of it. It's become a quagmire. I believe myself that... this protest is lost and it is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme aggression in Madison yesterday....
"You are a person against all of us. The whole nation is looking at you." — says an old woman with a "Solidarity" sign who gets right up in Meade's face...
... when Meade asks her why he should "be ashamed" of himself. That's at the end of this uncut 7 1/2-minute video, shot outside the Capitol this afternoon.
In the beginning, a man demands that a woman explain her sign, which reads "Public workers don't need collective bargaining." She's double-teamed by the man's wife, who finds it "odd" and "socially irresponsible" that a person would have a sign yet choose not to lay out her argument for discussion and dialogue. When the man says that she has a choice but other people don't, Meade begins questioning him. After a short interchange, a bunch of anti-Walkerites converge on Meade. One man grabs his camera. Another blows a whistle close to his face.
It's pretty gooba gabba.
AND: Wisconsin senator mobbed.
In the beginning, a man demands that a woman explain her sign, which reads "Public workers don't need collective bargaining." She's double-teamed by the man's wife, who finds it "odd" and "socially irresponsible" that a person would have a sign yet choose not to lay out her argument for discussion and dialogue. When the man says that she has a choice but other people don't, Meade begins questioning him. After a short interchange, a bunch of anti-Walkerites converge on Meade. One man grabs his camera. Another blows a whistle close to his face.
It's pretty gooba gabba.
AND: Wisconsin senator mobbed.
March 1, 2011
Meade takes the fisheye to the protest today...
"Who will want to risk their life for no pay?"
"Officers, you have a choice/Disobey illegal orders":
Teachers Assistants Association:
Confrontation of pro- and anti-Walker folk:
An "I support Scott" guy with an antagonist coming up behind him:
Solidarity:
"Officers, you have a choice/Disobey illegal orders":
Teachers Assistants Association:
Confrontation of pro- and anti-Walker folk:
An "I support Scott" guy with an antagonist coming up behind him:
Solidarity:
Meade got into the Capitol for the Governor's speech and, afterward, shot this video...
... which I edited:
0:00 — in the Assembly chamber
0:37 — in the rotunda, a Democratic legislator slips on a pile of peace signs
1:14 — a woman has a dog in the Capitol, and the vibration is freaking her out
2:12 — our Assemblyman Brett Hulsey calls it the "Budget Despair Bill"
2:35 — "Oh, oh, freedom..."
3:16 — "Which door do I go out if I don't want to be replaced?"
4:06 — "Is there a door I can go out where someone else won't come in because I went out?"
4:35 — boombox duct taped to a stand made of cross-country skis
5:06 — Meade inquires about a child labeled "planted troublemaker"
5:21 — folkie guy plays "When the Ship Comes In"
6:26 — the folkie switches to rap
7:50 — "I'll be growin' food with all my friends and we'll be livin' on a big farm somewhere."
0:00 — in the Assembly chamber
0:37 — in the rotunda, a Democratic legislator slips on a pile of peace signs
1:14 — a woman has a dog in the Capitol, and the vibration is freaking her out
2:12 — our Assemblyman Brett Hulsey calls it the "Budget Despair Bill"
2:35 — "Oh, oh, freedom..."
3:16 — "Which door do I go out if I don't want to be replaced?"
4:06 — "Is there a door I can go out where someone else won't come in because I went out?"
4:35 — boombox duct taped to a stand made of cross-country skis
5:06 — Meade inquires about a child labeled "planted troublemaker"
5:21 — folkie guy plays "When the Ship Comes In"
6:26 — the folkie switches to rap
7:50 — "I'll be growin' food with all my friends and we'll be livin' on a big farm somewhere."
There are young people in the Wisconsin Capitol who have been there, sleep deprived, for 15 days and are truly suffering.
I just watched video Meade brought home, and I am not going to put it on line. But I can tell you, there is at least one person there who has lost his mind from (apparently) sleep deprivation.
Someone needs to go around to everyone who is still there and check them for mental stability. Somebody needs to find the people who need to leave and don't know how to leave. If you are encouraging people to stay, to hang on and remain tough, you need to know that there are some truly sad people there who need to be told that they've done enough and must leave now.
Please, for the love of God, go around to the human beings who are there and talk to them individually. I know you believe in your cause, but there is at least one person among you who needs love and needs to be saved!
Someone needs to go around to everyone who is still there and check them for mental stability. Somebody needs to find the people who need to leave and don't know how to leave. If you are encouraging people to stay, to hang on and remain tough, you need to know that there are some truly sad people there who need to be told that they've done enough and must leave now.
Please, for the love of God, go around to the human beings who are there and talk to them individually. I know you believe in your cause, but there is at least one person among you who needs love and needs to be saved!
"Let your mother know how much she means to you, in the form of a haiku."
The last item on a questionnaire, which... ... ... I don't care how compliant you've been up to that point, filling out the answers, you need to just say no. Shut up questionnaire!
"This afternoon, at the Wisconsin State Capitol, I witnessed what at times appeared to be the greatest governor in the history of this or any other state..."
"... showered with affection as he announced a bold new plan to rescue Wisconsin from the brink of otherwise certain economic ruin."
Writes Bill Lueders — who is not a Walker fan — in the Isthmus:
Here's the transcript of the speech. Meade describes the big standing ovation when the Governor said:
Writes Bill Lueders — who is not a Walker fan — in the Isthmus:
He was feted with more than a full minute of thunderous ovation, with whistles and hooting and cheers, as he entered, and again at the end of his 30-minute address. He received long rounds of applause and a few standing Os while he spoke. The balconies seemed to be filled almost entirely with people who love him, and who applauded him at every turn.Meade was there, and he confirms that. (And, by the way, we have some hot video that I'm working on processing right now.)
Here's the transcript of the speech. Meade describes the big standing ovation when the Governor said:
We must work together to bring our spending in line with reality. We were elected — not to make the easy decisions to benefit ourselves — but to make the difficult ones that will benefit our children and grandchildren.Meade says he joined the standing ovation at this point, and that Scott Walker looked at him and gave him: 1. a smile, 2. a nod, and 3. a wink. Meade was quite pleased about that!
We need a commitment to the future so our children don't face even more dire consequences than what we face today.
"Yesterday, Larry Meade, human hot air machine and husband of UW-Madison law professor and pundit Ann Althouse (the Midwest's Michelle Malkin)..."
"... posted a video in which he accused the police department of a conspiracy and lambasted the current media organization landscape. In the video (which, in bizarro world, is shown every hour on Fox News), Meade gets in the face of the police and demands entry, claiming he isn't media: 'I'm private media.'"
Writes The Awl. I think he said "new media." And no one calls him "Larry." You'd get a better response with "Lore." Which I don't call him either. Frankly, I'm not sure what to call him. Except "Meade" — "New Media Meade."
ADDED: Here's the video referred to above. And in the comments, JAL says, "Woo hoo! Reminds me of a book some guy from Knoxville wrote ... uummm ... It had a militaristic tone to it ... (you know those "conservative" right wing blogger gun nuts ...) ... uhmmm ... An Army of Meades!" Oh, yes. They'd look like this. You know they came from a place called Media.
Writes The Awl. I think he said "new media." And no one calls him "Larry." You'd get a better response with "Lore." Which I don't call him either. Frankly, I'm not sure what to call him. Except "Meade" — "New Media Meade."
The irony of denying Althouse's husband access to the capitol without official media credentials is that the credentialed media has done a pathetic job of covering the events. Outside Wisconsin's own official news organs, the nationals' approach to covering the protests borders on malpractice. When Paul Krugman is bothered to get into the Times CMS to post "a blog" comparing the job you've done in Wisconsin to the one you did in the buildup to the Iraq War, well, you've done a pretty bad job.But, hey, guess what? Governor Scott Walker is about to give his budget address, and Meade is there, seated in the chamber as I write this. I could have been there too, but I've got a class at 4:30, and we need to talk about the Commerce Clause.
If the events in Wisconsin prove one thing, it is that the mainstream media has become journalistically irrelevant when it comes to national issues and coverage. Broadcast media is incapable of explaining anything outside a macropatriotic framework and has proven allergic to anything that puts off even the slightest whiff of the class warfare that scares away big-market advertorial. Meanwhile, the other side is cable news' partisan echo chamber of regurgitated self-assurance, where no blow is too low and no fact needs sourcing before being leveraged to make a prearranged point.
ADDED: Here's the video referred to above. And in the comments, JAL says, "Woo hoo! Reminds me of a book some guy from Knoxville wrote ... uummm ... It had a militaristic tone to it ... (you know those "conservative" right wing blogger gun nuts ...) ... uhmmm ... An Army of Meades!" Oh, yes. They'd look like this. You know they came from a place called Media.
What are the 200 best #1 songs — going all the way back to 1955?
List-a-Beefy has figured it out and has been posting one song per day, with fascinating/trivial details, since the middle of last week. The person compiling this list has a mind-boggling fixation on the details of the Billboard charts, and this is not just thrown together, believe me. Understand the task: You have a huge group of songs when you look at 52 weeks from 55 years, but you are limited to the songs that made #1. You have to compare songs from vastly different eras. He's got Dean Martin, "Memories Are Made of This" at #199, and "TiK ToK" by Ke$ha at #198.
I mean, if I tried to do this, at least half of it would come from the 60s and there'd be whole years where I feel no emotional attachment to anything. List-a-Beefy is not like that. List-a-Beefy knows what he's doing. And he puts things into a historical framework. For example, when "It's My Party" — #196 — was #1 for 2 weeks in June 1963, replacing Jimmy Soul's "If You Wanna Be Happy," later to be shunted out, in turn by "Sukiyaki," by Kyu Sakamoto, Israel executed Adolf Eichmann. Think about it. I'm inclined to practice my skill at mnemonics with those sets of facts: There's Jimmy Soul, happily scarfing down sukiyaki at a party, while Lesley Gore is crying... over the death of — sorry, Lesley, this is mnemonics — Adolf Eichmann, whose soul drifts by...
I mean, if I tried to do this, at least half of it would come from the 60s and there'd be whole years where I feel no emotional attachment to anything. List-a-Beefy is not like that. List-a-Beefy knows what he's doing. And he puts things into a historical framework. For example, when "It's My Party" — #196 — was #1 for 2 weeks in June 1963, replacing Jimmy Soul's "If You Wanna Be Happy," later to be shunted out, in turn by "Sukiyaki," by Kyu Sakamoto, Israel executed Adolf Eichmann. Think about it. I'm inclined to practice my skill at mnemonics with those sets of facts: There's Jimmy Soul, happily scarfing down sukiyaki at a party, while Lesley Gore is crying... over the death of — sorry, Lesley, this is mnemonics — Adolf Eichmann, whose soul drifts by...
Chief Justice Roberts teaches a language lesson: "The noun 'crab' refers variously to a crustacean and a type of apple, while the related adjective 'crabbed' can refer to handwriting that is 'difficult to read'..."
"... 'corny' can mean 'using familiar and stereotyped formulas believed to appeal to the unsophisticated,' which has little to do with 'corn,' ('the seeds of any of the cereal grasses used for food'); and while 'crank' is “a part of an axis bent at right angles,' 'cranky' can mean 'given to fretful fussiness."
And the point is, a corporation may be a "person" within the meaning of the Freedom of Information statute, but that doesn't mean it's gets in on the "personal" privacy referred to elsewhere in the statute.
IN THE COMMENTS: rhhardin said:
And the point is, a corporation may be a "person" within the meaning of the Freedom of Information statute, but that doesn't mean it's gets in on the "personal" privacy referred to elsewhere in the statute.
[I]n ordinary usage, a noun and its adjective form may have meanings as disparate as any two unrelated words. ...Crisply explained!
"Person" is a defined term in the statute; “personal” is not. When a statute does not define a term, we typically “give the phrase its ordinary meaning.”... “Personal” ordinarily refers to individuals. We do not usually speak of personal characteristics, personal effects, personal correspondence, personal influence, or personal tragedy as referring to corporations or other artificial entities. This is not to say that corporations do not have correspondence, influence, or tragedies of their own, only that we do not use the word “personal” to describe them.
Certainly, if the chief executive officer of a corporation approached the chief financial officer and said, "I have something personal to tell you," we would not assume the CEO was about to discuss company business. Responding to a request for information, an individual might say, "that’s personal." A company spokesman, when asked for information about the company, would not.
IN THE COMMENTS: rhhardin said:
While he's got the FCC's attention, mention that the "fucking" in "fucking brilliant" is not an adjective.Ha! He's referring to this FCC opinion:
The complainants allege that the licensees named in their respective complaints aired the “Golden Globe Awards” program, during which the performer Bono uttered the phrase “this is really, really, fucking brilliant,” or “this is fucking great.”..."Fucking" can be an adjective, as in "You're a fucking crank," "Watch out for the fucking crab," or "I can't believe you're serving fucking corn again," but in the Bono boast, it's a fucking adverb.
The word “fucking” may be crude and offensive, but, in the context presented here, did not describe sexual or excretory organs or activities. Rather, the performer used the word “fucking” as an adjective or expletive to emphasize an exclamation. Indeed, in similar circumstances, we have found that offensive language used as an insult rather than as a description of sexual or excretory activity or organs is not within the scope of the Commission’s prohibition of indecent program content.
Lighten up, it's just fashion.
Until it's not.
And here's the "I love Hitler" video that just couldn't be brushed away as drunken smack-talking.
And here's the "I love Hitler" video that just couldn't be brushed away as drunken smack-talking.
"Rep. Holt beats Watson the super-computer at 'Jeopardy!'"
He's a Democrat — even though his first name is Rush — but he's not your run-of-the-mill Democrat: "He's a five-time "Jeopardy!" champion and a nuclear physicist..."
Congrats to Rush Holt! Or do you think the MSM is in the tank for the Dems and rigged this somehow?
Congrats to Rush Holt! Or do you think the MSM is in the tank for the Dems and rigged this somehow?
"Unlike probably everyone else watching Charlie Sheen these days, we think this 'train wreck' (as some are calling it) is probably the best we've seen him..."
"... and (having mutual friends) we applaud him mightily for it. He looks and sounds more like his father than ever. His nothing-can-take-me-down attitude, in the face of this wimpy, middle class, wet rag nanny state finger-wagging opinion is winning. This is a man, owning his actions and insisting everyone else come clean and take responsibility for theirs as well.... [A]ll too often, we see too many powerful beta males in this country... We've become a cautious, conformist, inoffensive, non-risk taking, arrogant, lying bunch of NewAge pussies who think if any woman... says she or others don't approve, then some form of public contrition and apology is called for. Well, screw that. Neither she, or the public, are Charlie Sheen's mother and even if his parents disapprove, he's a grown-assed man who refuses to be a part of whatever milquetoast existence the rest of you think is good for gaining social approval from a worthless feminized culture-killing clique. He didn't ask for it, doesn't need it, and isn't angling for it. He's a man. He's rich. And he's free."
That's Crack Emcee, taking a macho look at Charlie Sheen.
It's funny, I was just saying to Meade that people don't rant against "conformity" anymore — not like they did in the 50s and 60s. What got me going wasn't Charlie Sheen. It was my Bloggingheads with Timothy Noah, which, for various reasons, made me think about the way liberals, including liberal media folk, talk to each other and feel emotional rewards for saying what they all say back and forth to each other. They become so immersed in this feeling of belonging that they don't even hear the things that are not the things that they've been saying back and forth to each other. And my question is: Why does that feel so good? Why doesn't that immersion feel like drowning? Why don't you want to surface into the air and be free — to think about everything, from any perspective, and to find out for yourself what is true and what is good? You are a human individual: Don't you want that?
That's Crack Emcee, taking a macho look at Charlie Sheen.
It's funny, I was just saying to Meade that people don't rant against "conformity" anymore — not like they did in the 50s and 60s. What got me going wasn't Charlie Sheen. It was my Bloggingheads with Timothy Noah, which, for various reasons, made me think about the way liberals, including liberal media folk, talk to each other and feel emotional rewards for saying what they all say back and forth to each other. They become so immersed in this feeling of belonging that they don't even hear the things that are not the things that they've been saying back and forth to each other. And my question is: Why does that feel so good? Why doesn't that immersion feel like drowning? Why don't you want to surface into the air and be free — to think about everything, from any perspective, and to find out for yourself what is true and what is good? You are a human individual: Don't you want that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
