Saturday, June 21, 2008

Andrew the Political Junkie Weighs in on the Democratic Veepstakes

Hi Blog Pals,
Time to weigh in on the Democratic Veepstakes. Rumors are swirling as Senator Barack Obama considers possible running mates. Which ones would strengthen his ticket? Which ones would hurt him? Bloggers from Coast to Coast are voicing thoughts on the matter, so I figure it's time for yours truly to throw in his 2 cents. Without any further delay...

1. Senator Hillary Clinton: For many Democrats, Hillary is the obvious first choice. Clinton and Obama are campaigning together a lot these days, trying to bury the hatchet and put behind them the brutal Democratic primaries. Strengths: Clinton brings so many things to the campaign, as I pointed out in a previous entry. She comes with a large base of support, an army of professional strategists, the respect of many Democrats and Republicans, and the reputation of tough fighter. Weaknesses: Bill "Old Bubba" Clinton hogged the spotlight too often in the primaries. Plus, Senator Clinton is a polarizing figure. Die-hard conservatives will try to marginalize her as a northeastern liberal, which she clearly is not. Her naked (or, at the very least, mostly unclothed) ambitions often get the best of her.

2. The Beltway Boys: Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Sam Nunn (not to be confused with Manny, Moe and Jack -- or Moe, Larry and Curly): This trio of Democratic Senators -- Biden (from Delaware), Dodd (from Connecticut) and Nunn (from Georgia) -- are all under consideration as possible veeps. Strengths: These guys know how to get things done in Washington. Biden would bring charisma, Dodd a humble dignity, and Nunn a conservative counterbalance. Weaknesses: Outside of their home states and the nation's capital, none of these SixtySomethings are especially famous. Can we somehow blend the three together? Of course, I'm not sure how a three-headed Veep would go over with the American public.

3. Wesley Clark: This former NATO commander and retired general is a serious contender for the veep spot. Strengths: He brings the presence of a balanced advocate of strong national security to the table. Plus he's bright, articulate, handsome and strikingly progressive for someone with his background. He'd help Obama win over independent and moderate Republican voters. Weaknesses: Ran a pretty half-assed campaign in 2004. Some Veep watchers fear that he might not motivate Democratic Party activists, but maybe that isn't such a bad thing. (For the record: I disagree -- I think Clark would actually motivate the activists...)

4. The Governors (Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania, Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Ted Strickland of Ohio) : All Democratic governors, all highly regarded in their own states. Strengths: All of them will bring impressive political records. They have strong experience as governors and in their previous political careers. These are governors who are accustomed to working across party lines to get things done. Weaknesses: Same as the Beltway Boys: On the national stage, they are not as well known. Of the five, I think Richardson -- a former UN ambassador and energy secretary -- is the most promising.

5. Jim Webb: Virginia senator, former Secretary of the Navy and author of seven novels, Webb is Democratic superstar. Strengths: A blunt-talking moderate and heavily decorated Vietnam veteran, Webb will win over a lot of support from centrists, moderates, independents and Republican crossovers. He is also a renaissance man: a writer, filmmaker and producer. His credentials are more or less spotless. He is also a populist who worries about the fate of ordinary Americans in the age of globalization. He would win over a lot of the same voters that Clinton would attract. And he is solidly against the Iraq War. Weaknesses: He hasn't been a senator very long -- two years this November. His lack of experience in politics at the national level in recent years leaves the ticket vulnerable. If Webb is chosen as Obama's Veep, expect more Republican charges of "inexperience."

6. Chuck Hagel: The Nebraska Republican senator has indicated that he'll give serious consideration to a request from Obama to come on board as his running mate (in the event that Obama asks...). Strengths: Choosing Hagel -- a moderate, anti-Iraq War Republican from the heartland -- will show that Obama truly is committed to a new form of bipartisan politics. To select a Veep from a different party would be a startling move. Moreover, Obama and Hagel are in complete agreement on the Iraq War. Obama needs Republican support to end the catastrophe that is the war in Iraq. Weaknesses: He's pretty conservative on a lot of issues other than the Iraq War. As Mike Madden noted in Salon: "Hagel may be a more attractive candidate in theory than in reality. The buzz about him seems to overlook the fact that he is, despite how much he may like to criticize his own party, a conservative Republican, especially on issues that don’t involve foreign affairs. Politics, the saying goes, stops at the water’s edge. So might the Obama-Hagel ticket."

My Prediction: If I were a betting man, I'd say Jim Webb will be the next vice president, with Hillary Clinton a close second. Stay tuned, Blog Pals...

Thursday, June 19, 2008

The Rosenberg Execution: 55 Years Later...

The execution of alleged husband-and-wife atomic spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (right) 55 years ago (June 19, 1953) remains a source of controversy, even after the end of the Cold War. To conservatives and Cold War liberals (and a sizable segment of the American public), they were vile Red spies who compromised the security of the United States in the worst way imaginable. By contrast, leftists, communists, progressives and nonconformists championed the cause of freeing the Rosenbergs. And then there were a number of people who stayed out of the polarized debate. Over the years, there have been countless books about the Rosenbergs, from Walter and Miriam Schneir's sympathetic account Invitation to an Inquest (1965) to Ron Radosh and Joyce Milton's The Rosenberg File (1983), which concluded that Julius was guilty and Ethel was complicit in his actions. E.L. Doctorow's 1971 novel The Book of Daniel explored the case and the lives of the Rosenberg's sons from a fictional perspective. A gripping recent contribution was Sam Roberts' The Brother: The Untold Story of the Rosenberg Case (2003). Published on the 50th anniversary of the execution, Roberts dropped the bombshell that David Greenglass, brother of Ethel Rosenberg and the man whose testimony carried so much weight in sending the couple to the electric chair, perjured himself on the witness stand (a fact that Greenglass openly admitted to Roberts during interviews for the book). The Brother is haunting, sad and painful to read.

A heartbreaking documentary (and, in my view, the best account of the Rosenbergs) was Ivy Meeropol's stunning 2004 film Heir to an Execution. If you haven't seen it yet, do yourself a favor: track it down and watch it right away. The film packs a punch as it shows how four generations of Rosenbergs (Ivy is the granddaughter of Julius and Ethel and the daughter of their son Michael) coped with the execution of Julius and Ethel. By the time the credits on the film came up, I found myself emotionally drained after journeying with Ivy on this deeply personal tour of the past. And Ivy Meeropol is incredibly honest about the recent revelations in the declassified Venona Papers (secret Soviet messages intercepted by American and British intelligence in the 1940s) that point to Julius Rosenberg's involvement in atomic espionage.

There is still a great deal of emotion involved in the ongoing debates over the Rosenbergs. Many conservatives still defend the execution as justified and necessary (in particular, David Horowitz's FrontPage Magazine routinely condemns the couple and supports their grim fate). To the left, the Rosenbergs remain martyrs, although a growing number of people who are sympathetic to the Rosenbergs and condemn their execution are starting to believe that Julius, indeed, was involved in some sort of espionage activity (for years, it was virtually verboten within the left to even wonder whether Julius was guilty). But there is also a sense among leftists that the punishment did not fit the crime, and the Rosenbergs were executed chiefly because, unlike David Greenglass, they refused to cooperate with the anticommunist inquisition.

For the past several decades, the Rosenberg's sons, Robert and Michael Meeropol (who took the surname of their adoptive parents) have kept the memory of their parents alive by speaking out against their execution as an unjust act. Watching Heir to an Execution reminds us of what a dark and painful moment this was in American history. Ivy Meeropol's masterpiece ought to be required viewing, especially for those who still laud the violent electrocution of the Rosenbergs over a half century ago. Even if Julius was guilty of participating in an atomic espionage ring, neither one of them deserved to meet such a barbaric end.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

McCain, Obama and Women

Senator John McCain is working hard to portray himself as the candidate best suited to support women and women's causes. He has been crisscrossing the country trying to win over Senator Hillary Clinton's supporters. Most of them are solidly behind Senator Barack Obama, but some of them have gone over to the McCain camp. Maxine Schwartz, 39, of Westfield, New Jersey, told National Public Radio that she went from being a Clinton to a McCain backer because she thinks McCain is a stronger supporter of Israel: "Israel's security is an issue is for me. Either president will secure the United States, but as far as being an ally and friend of Israel, I think McCain is the right person, not Obama."

Israel's security may not be the top issue on the minds of most ordinary American women, but Schwartz is certainly not alone in switching her support from Clinton to McCain. A minority of Clinton's supporters are still stinging from her defeat in the primaries earlier this month. McCain is doing his best to win them over with statements like this one: "Every place I go, I'm told Sen. Clinton inspired millions of young women in this country — and not necessarily young women — inspired a whole generation of young Americans in this country. So I admire and respect her."

Polls show that Obama has stronger support among women than McCain. But a Chicago Tribune report today (June 18) indicated that McCain's aggressive recruiting efforts are making a dent in America's suburbs, where support for him is on the rise with women. So while Obama maintains an edge over McCain, he should not (and most likely will not) take it for granted.

The same Chicago Tribune article said that Clinton voters support Obama over McCain by a 3-1 margin. It quoted former Clinton supporter Lorraine Marino on Obama: "He manages to be strong and clear, but he pulls that off while being inclusive and listening to opposing views. I admire how he approaches problem-solving."

Like McCain, Senator Obama has been stepping up his appeals to women voters. He is taking the issue seriously. He also effectively countered McCain's drive when he noted, "I think John McCain is going to have trouble making the case, when on almost every single issue that's important to women, he's been on the wrong side. You know, he is in favor of judges who would overturn Roe v Wade. He has opposed equal pay. He has opposed the CHIP (health care) program that would make children insured. He has opposed efforts to protect women against some of the discrimination that they experience in the workplace. You know, that's not going to be a track record that I think is going to be very appealing to women."

But Obama needs to tell American women something that McCain is not saying. He has to reassure them that they are not simply the "issue of the day." So far, all indicators appear promising for Obama. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last week showed that women favor Obama over McCain by 52 per cent to 33 per cent. My question is: Can we have the election tomorrow? And can we ban men from voting? Women had to wait an awfully long time to vote in America. Universal woman suffrage was not in place until 1920. I say it's time for a little payback.

UPDATE: Obama Sock Puppet Controversy Continues!!!

Well, Blog Pals, looks like old Andrew jumped the gun (for the umpteenth time). You may recall my Obama Sock Puppet post from the other day (see below) about David and Elizabeth Lawson of West Jordan, Utah, and the uproar they caused with their monkey puppet of Senator Barack Obama. A headline in yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune said it all: "Creators of The Sock Obama seek new company to produce doll." So it looks like Sock Obama is back. Apparently, the Lawsons are selling him on a new Website called Sock Politicians (click here to see it). Turns out they're also selling a Sock McCain (pictured here). It's hard to say why the Lawsons had a change of heart. In a really, really weird statement, the Lawsons said, "In the good ol' fashion spirit of entrepreneurialism, free enterprise has been censored, and TheSockObama politically plush toy has been discriminated against in the marketplace of the United States of America." Huh??? The statement gets even more bizarre: "Last we heard, a posse of bloggers from back East are on their way over to conduct - how did they phrase it? - a good ol' fashioned KKK house burning party at David and Elizabeth's. Kinda exciting stuff, but this in America?"

What the hell? They lost me at "
good ol' fashion spirit of entrepreneurialism."

Not surprisingly, members of the Salt Lake City branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) are fuming. Charles Henderson, an African American Democratic candidate for the Utah House of Representatives from the town of Kearns, posed the question, "
After you've been told it's not acceptable, why do you pursue this unless it's motivated by financial gain, notoriety or some other more malicious path that you're trying to take?"

Maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to give the Lawsons the benefit of the doubt. And maybe, just maybe, the Lawsons were inspired by those Bloggers who insisted that Sock Obama will one day be a collector's item. Who knows? Interestingly, for you Canadian readers, there is a Canadian angle to the story. Originally, before the outcry erupted, the Lawsons had worked out a deal with Brinkley Custom Toys of Hamilton, Ontario, to manufacture Sock Obama. The folks at Brinkley got cold feet when the poop hit the fan.

Stay tuned, Blog pals. I think Sock Obama just got his second wind.


Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Attack Ad Pioneer Dies at 88


On June 15, Tony Schwartz -- the media consultant responsible for the famous "Daisy ad" (above) in the 1964 presidential campaign -- died at age 88. Schwartz was a pioneer. His famous ad, in the words of political reporter Dick Polman, was "the first TV attack ad in American political history, and thus blazed a trail for all the negative craftsmen who have flourished ever since." President Lyndon Johnson's campaign hired Schwartz to create the advertisement, a 60-second spot that showed a freckle-faced little girl in a meadow, picking the petals off of a daisy, with blue skies and birds chirping all around her. Suddenly, a ringing voice (with a southern drawl) on a loudspeaker begins counting down from 10. The camera zooms in on the girl's eye and . . . BOOM! A mushroom cloud fills the television screen. Then LBJ's voice comes on and says, "These are the stakes! To make a world in which all of God's children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die." It closes with an announcer saying, "Vote for President Johnson on November 3. The stakes are too high for you to stay home."

The ad aired once (September 7). LBJ's campaign pulled it from the airwaves after facing a firestorm of criticism. But the damage was done. The impact was profound. And for the past 44 years, the advertisement has been studied as a key early attack ad. The ad didn't mention Senator Barry Goldwater (right), LBJ's Republican opponent, but viewers understood the ad's implication: If Goldwater wins, a global nuclear war is inevitable.

And what of its creator, Tony Schwartz? According to a fascinating Washington Post obituary on him, he was a reclusive man who suffered from agoraphobia and absolutely loathed going outside. In addition to the "Daisy ad," he is famous for his use of different sounds in advertising, including nature (hence, the chirping birds in the "Daisy ad"), children's voices and devices such as cash registers and foghorns. At the time of his "Daisy ad," he was with the Doyle Dane Bernbach agency. Since then, he has had several teaching gigs and written two books.

The "Daisy ad" was really his 15 minutes of fame, though. As Dick Polman noted, Schwartz created the attack ad prototype. It was only a short matter of time before Republicans, too, mastered the art and put such ads to even more effective use than their Democratic foes. Up until his death on June 15, Schwartz was proud of his 60-second masterpiece. Indeed, the world of politics would never be the same after his Frankenstein's monster was unleashed on America's airwaves.

Monday, June 16, 2008

How a Little Puppet Might Help America Come to Terms With its Past

Just in case you missed the uproar: A small company based in West Jordan, Utah, recently announced its newest addition: A stuffed monkey sock puppet that is supposed to be Senator Barack Obama. As the advertisement proclaimed: "TheSockObama™ is made with high quality knit materials to capture the nostalgic look of the Sock Monkey that we all know and love. Staying true to his root, he is hand stuffed with just enough filling to give him a firm, but huggable feel. The removable suit jacket offers two looks for this future President - All Business or Hands On."

The Sock Obama (pictured above), as it is called, caused such an uproar on the Internet (especially in the Blogosphere) that the company immediately halted sales of the puppet and issued an apology on its Website: "AN APOLOGY: We are very apologetic to all who were upset by our toy idea. We will not be proceeding with the manufacturing of this toy. Thank you."

The controversy over the puppet illustrated the clear dividing line between anti-racist progressive Bloggers who cried foul and conservative, anti-political correctness Bloggers who accused the former group of being intolerant and excessive.

Not surprisingly, the two sides aren't listening to each other. It's what happens in so many debates these days: Emotions run high. Opponents talk around one another instead of to each other. It's as if they know they can't win their foes over, so they preach to the choir and -- maybe in a best case scenario -- hope to reach out to a few undecideds out there.

The makers of Sock Obama -- a couple named David and Elizabeth Lawson -- seemed genuinely shocked that their toy provoked such an intense reaction. They issued an apology in which they claimed they meant for the toy to be an affectionate celebration of Obama (indeed, they seem to think he's going to be the next president of the United States). Their response to the uproar has made some observers scratch their heads and wonder if these people are really racist or just plain naive. As the apologetic couple wrote, "It is not, nor has it ever been our objective to hurt, dismay or anger anyone. We guess there is an element of naivete on our part. We simply made a casual and affectionate observation one night, and a charming association between a candidate and a toy we had when we were little. We wonder now if this might be a great opportunity to take this moment to really try and transcend still existing racial biases."

It's an eloquent apology, hardly the words of hardened racists. Part of the problem is that America finally has an African American presidential candidate for a major party, but millions of people across the country are going out of their way to avoid a meaningful dialogue about racial issues and race relations. Then something like Sock Obama appears and becomes the spark that ignites the tinderbox. You hear charges of racism and counter-charges of excessive political correctness. And all of it happens in an ahistorical void.

What gets lost is the long and bitter history of racism and the repression of African Americans. Don't think for a minute that we have somehow escaped the shadow of that tragic legacy. Depictions of African Americans as monkey-like creatures (like the one on the right) have been around as long as black people have lived on American soil. And they have served a very deliberate function: To dehumanize African Americans so that when they are subjugated, their oppressors don't feel any anguish or guilt over their actions.

I have no doubt that the Lawsons are sincere in their apology. And I think Sock Obama is the product of a lack of awareness of this tragic history. Had the Lawsons been fully aware of it, and had they been able to internalize it at a deeper level, they wouldn't have made Sock Obama in the first place.

The first step is to educate ourselves. If you get a chance, visit a Website like Without Sanctuary or The Jim Crow Museum and you'll come face to face with the tragedy of American racism in all of its shame and sadness.

Regrettably, public debates and dialogue in post-9/11 America have become too emotional, too heated. There is too much screaming, too little listening, too little genuine compassion. Instead of condemning the Lawsons, who have shown remorse for their actions and taken concrete steps to correct the problem, it is crucial to draw attention to the long history of racism in America. It is not enough that the country finally has a black presidential candidate. Building bridges between different races, ethnic groups, religions, and nations means understanding and coming to terms with history -- the noble as well as the tragic.

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Let the Boxing Match Begin!

DING DING DING! LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WELCOME TO CAMPAIGN TRAIL BOXING! In this corner, weighing in with all the baggage from two disastrous terms of Dubya in the White House, from Arizona, it's John "the Marauder" McCain! (Cheers from the right side of the stadium.) In this corner, weighing in with Republican smear accusations of being a "tax-and-spend liberal," from Illinois, it's Barack "the Gentleman" Obama! (Cheers from the left side of the stadium.)

REF (to the two fighters): Now men, I want a clean fight. No hitting below the belt. No stompin' on each other's feet. No blows to the back. Now, go back to your corners and let the fight begin. DING DING DING!

Announcer: The audience goes nuts! Both candidates step out of the corners sparring.

RIGHT JAB FROM MCCAIN: "There will be change in Washington. The question is what kind of change? Will we enact the single largest tax increase since the Second World War, as my opponent proposes?" (Speaking to small business owners in Washington, Tuesday, June 10, 2008.)

Announcer: Ouch! That stings!

LEFT JAB FROM OBAMA: "I've said that McCain is running to serve out a third Bush term. But the truth is, when it comes to taxes, that's not being fair to George Bush. McCain wants to add $300 billion more in tax breaks and loopholes for big corporations and the wealthy and he hasn't even explained how to pay for it." (Speaking at a campaign stop in St. Louis, Tuesday, June 10, 2008.)

Announcer: That caught McCain off guard! The Marauder is dazed, but not down. He's leaps in on Obama.

LEFT HOOK FROM MCCAIN: "Under Sen. Obama's tax plan, Americans of every background would see their taxes rise -- seniors, parents, small-business owners and just about everyone who has even a modest investment in the market."

Announcer: It stings, but I've seen worse. Obama collects himself and moves in for a deadly hook.

COUNTER HOOK FROM OBAMA: "The way that he's characterizing what I'm prescribing is just wrong. My tax reform plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of workers."

Announcer: Oh man! Didn't even connect! Didn't even bruise McCain! What was he thinking? McCain darts to the center of the ring, fists of fury swinging....

RIGHT UPPERCUT FROM MCCAIN: "I think there are a lot of Senator Clinton’s supporters who will support me because of their belief that Senator Obama does not have the experience or the knowledge or the judgment to address this nation’s national security challenges given we are in two wars." (Speaking in Louisiana, Wednesday, June 11, 2008.)

Announcer: Whoa, that's gotta hurt! Obama clearly didn't see that one coming. The "lack of experience" uppercut nails Obama every time. He's gotta think of an effective move to counter it, folks!

LEFT HOOK FROM OBAMA: "'My opponent in this general election, John McCain – his idea of Social Security amounts to four more years of what was attempted and failed under George W. Bush,' Mr. Obama said, referring to Mr. McCain’s previous support of private accounts within Social Security. 'Yesterday, he tried to deny that he ever took that position, which leads us to wonder if he had a change of heart or a change of politics.'" (From the New York Times, June 13, 2008.)

Announcer: I've seen better. Let's just say: The damage isn't permanent. Now McCain -- the Arizona Marauder -- moves in with a fierce uppercut.

UPPERCUT FROM MCCAIN (IN RESPONSE TO OBAMA'S CLAIM THAT MCCAIN IS RUNNING FOR BUSH'S THIRD TERM): McCain says Obama is running for "Jimmy Carter's second term."

Announcer: The damage is minimal, folks, because most of the people in the arena suffer from historical amnesia and don't know what the hell McCain is talking about. Jimmy Carter? Who's that mofo? Wasn't that the cat who got KO'ed in the fourth round by Larry Holmes at Caesars Palace back in '80?

DING DING DING! End of Round One.

Announcer: So far, it has been a clean fight -- nothing below the belt. Stay tuned, boxing fans! This is just getting good!

Saturday, June 14, 2008

From the Nixon Files: Richard Nixon, Champion of Racial Equality

From the Nixon White House Tapes (May 13, 1971): Richard Nixon discussing welfare and racial issues with John Ehrlichman and H.R. Haldeman.

NIXON: I have the greatest affection for them [blacks], but I know they're not going to make it for 500 years. They aren't. You know it, too. The Mexicans are a different cup of tea. They have a heritage. At the present time they steal, they're dishonest, but they do have some concept of family life. They don't live like a bunch of dogs, which the Negroes do live like.

EHRLICHMAN: The Mexican American is not as good as the Mexican. You go down to Mexico--they're clean, they're honest, they're moral.

NIXON: Mexico is a much more moral country.

EHRLICHMAN: Monterrey, Cuernavaca. Go into slum areas, and by God they come out with clean shirts on a Sunday morning.

NIXON: The church. You find a helluva lot less marijuana use in Mexico than the United States.

Above: Nixon trying his hand at badminton.

From the Nixon White House Tapes (July 11, 1971): Richard Nixon discussing race issues with Assistant to the President Donald Rumsfeld.

NIXON: The second point is that coming out--coming back and saying that black Americans aren't as good as black Africans--most of them , basically, are just out of the trees. Now, let's face it, they are.

Friday, June 13, 2008

Happy 50th Birthday, Jello!

Happy 50th Birthday, Jello! No, I'm not talking about the delightful Kraft Foods' gelatin dessert. I'm talking about Jello Biafra, former lead singer of the Dead Kennedys. For the past thirty years, Jello has been a great innovator: a singer, a songwriter, a spoken-word orator, co-founder and head of Alternative Tentacles Records, and frequent collaborator with the band The Melvins. Jello (real name Eric Boucher) was born June 17, 1958, in Boulder, Colorado, and grew up in middle-class suburbia. As a teenager, he saw the Ramones in concert in Denver and the concert changed him. He formed his own punk band, the legendary Dead Kennedys (DK's). I have fond memories of seeing the DK's play at the Indian Walk-In Center in Salt Lake City back in the 1980s. They blew my mind! Jello sang all the DK's classics -- "Holiday in Cambodia," "Moral Majority," "Nazi Punks, Fuck Off" and "Too Drunk to Fuck" -- and they left the audience absolutely ecstatic. Most of us were confused, young kids growing up in suburbia, right smack in the middle of Reagan's America. We were angry. We were full of rage and teen angst. We slam danced, ramming into each other, butting heads, pushing one another while the DK's performed full throttle. A few years later, I interviewed Jello while the band was on trial in 1986 for violating the California Penal Code. Inside of the Dead Kennedys' album Frankenchrist was a poster by artist H.R. Giger called "Work 219: Landscape XX" or "Penis Landscape" for short. It was a surreal painting showing numerous penises entering numerous vaginas. It was deemed obscene and the DK's were put on trial. The trial ended in a hung jury, and Frankenchrist was banned from a number of record stores for being "unwholesome." During my interview with Jello, I found him to be blunt and full of irony and great wit and passion. He was also friendly and loaded with energy -- good, positive energy.

In the years since then, Jello (right) has been a fearless voice of dissent. His "spoken word" performances are incredibly insightful and he just keeps getting angrier and edgier with age. His anarchism and righteous rage are admirable. Even more laudable is his sense of humor, which is still evident in all his work. Next week, Jello will be performing a 50th Birthday concert in the Bay Area, and his fans are really looking forward. Recently, Jello told the San Jose Mercury about his inspiration: "When I saw Iggy Pop and the Stooges on Iggy's 60th birthday, they were so awesome. I made a vow to myself that I better do something on my birthday. If it's just a tenth as good as Iggy, I'll feel triumphant."

Something tells me Iggy would be proud.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Dispatches from the Teddy Bear Front

Priced to Clear: This just in, Blog Pals: The Vermont Teddy Bear Company (based in Shelburne, Vermont), which makes Teddy Bears that resemble presidential candidates, is knocking down the price of the Hillary Clinton Teddy Bear (right) from $99.95 to $74.95 because Senator Clinton dropped out of the race. Said Vermont Teddy Bear spokeswoman Meg Terrien: "She's no longer part of that trio of candidates, so we put her on sale." According to the Associated Press story (June 11), The Clinton Bear "comes wearing her signature yellow blazer, black slacks, string of pearls and blue 'Hillary for President' button. It's 'a fun solution to finding the perfect gift for any Hillary supporter,' according to the Vermont Teddy Bear Company Website." No word on what the company plans to do with its discontinued John Kerry, Bob Dole and Mike Dukakis bears.

Frontiers of Free Enterprise: A Japanese robotics company called iXs Research Corporation has created a cute, cuddly Teddy Bear with a built-in GPS system (right) that sits on the dashboard of your car and provides you with directions. As Motor Trend magazine points out, "The teddy bear...has six joints in his arms and neck he uses to motion while giving directions." The bear also critiques your driving style (if you hit the brakes too hard, it says, "Be careful, please!"). BUT WAIT -- THERE'S MORE! The high-tech online magazine Gear Live adds, "The teddy also has an alcohol detection sensor in its neck and will admonish you if it smells that last margarita with 'You haven't been drinking, have you?'"

The Teddy Bear That Ate Wichita: Dana Warren of Wichita, Kansas, wants to get into the Guinness Book of World Records for the category of "World's Tallest Teddy Bear." She spent days unloading two semi trucks full of stuffing, then inserted it inside a 55 and a half foot tall Teddy Bear. The bear weights a whopping 3,000 pounds and requires 500 yards of material. Warren cut the fabric in her house, assembled the bear with her sewing machine, and stuffed it in her driveway. Warren first set the Giant Teddy Bear record in 2001 when she built a 51-foot high stuffed bear. Sadly, not too long after that, a competitor built a bigger, longer Teddy Bear, leaving Warren with a non-record setting giant bear. So this time, it's personal.