a few words on the change guy, lucy p, and michael b

remember the change guy? well, he talks when he wants to, and when he doesn't, he reminds us that we only have one president at a time. he tells us that "it is important to speak with a unified voice, especially on issues of foreign policy." in fact, it is around issues of foreign policy where a diversity of voices is most needed. america's bipartisan foreign policy means a government in which both parties support militarism and war. this is a telling remark from the big o, who ran as the change candidate and now tells us we need to speak in a unified voice. in other words, bullshit as usual.

isn't it interesting that israel bombed gaza on the day obama was elected, and then started bombing again shortly before he will take power? it kind of lets him know that israel will keep on doing what israel does, and the o man better be down with it. judging by his remarks, israel has nothing to fear.

went to lucy parson's today to catch a film on venezuela. of course, the movie didn't play. why is it the good guys have the shitty equipment? furthermore, there was a guy walking around in the store without shoes, and a second guy was constantly scratching himself. it smelled as if it had been bombed. i waited around for a half hour, hoping they would get the film to work. i browsed through books that i can find nowhere else. titles such as "no surrender" by dave gilbert abound here at lucy's, and in boston, only at lucy's. and then, i found the pearl of them all. it was a cd of the music of one michael borkson, a local activist. they were asking 5 bucks for it, but the laugh i got from seeing it on the shelf was worth at least 10. in a fit of realous jage, i almost took a shot in the dark and grabbed it, but sanity prevailed. i honestly wonder if the gem will ever be purchased. for now, i am left with the memory of borkson crooning "i declare, the war is over." yes, but the melody lingers on.

now we just need richard to not hugus so much. to be frank, if he was a nizer man, i wouldn't mind him so much. as it is, i hope he moves to virginia. the thing is, he never got to the root of the problem. he would often only nick the surface with his analysis, and while i suppose that's fine, berg, such a state of affairs usually makes me sing the stone butch blues, as i sit in cambridge like an average jim, watching the college girls from leslie.

that senator from illinois who they are going after? well, it turns out that he was leaning toward appointing someone to the senate who was pro-labor. he had met with stern from the seiu to discuss this very matter. also, the day before the news broke that he was trying to sell the seat, he had made statements in support of the striking workers in chicago, and had also threatened to cut off relations between bank of america and the state of illinois. obama himself had spoken in support of the workers. i wonder at the timing of this man being taken down. it may well be a blow against labor and a warning to obama to butt out of struggles between labor and corporations. the fact is, corruption is endemic to the american political process. of that, there can be no doubt. the question then becomes whose corruption is being exposed, who is being spied on, and who is being targeted by the power structure. surely, it will be men and women who are fighting, in some degree, for the rights of the oppressed. in short, the wildly corrupt will continue to expose the corruption of the comparatively decent in order to maintain the status quo. as always, the big criminals are running the show, as the little criminals get exposed and sent off to jail.

and we call it democracy.