kgblogz

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Friday, 27 January 2012 17:09

Crisis Averted? Obama Set to Use Coast Guard Against ILWU in Longview, WA

By:  wendy davis

you can read it read here.

(cross-posted at my.fdl.com)

(LOL! Prolly no one will be interested in reading this. /s)

Last modified on Friday, 27 January 2012 17:19

comments  

 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-27 22:22   (permalink)
Damn. I'm not exactly understanding what the coast guard would be doing? It's not like the labor movement tends to send out boarding parties and shit. It's not like CG helicopters are going to open fire on anyone ...

What, is it just a "hey, in case you were confused - I still say, fuck you." kind of thing?

Trumka continues to perform exactly up to specification I see. It will be a HUGE bonus for him if this thing really finally comes to a conclusion ... wonder if the corporate types are tossing him a bone? In many ways he *has* been one of the most pivotal people to enabling dismantling American labor for decades ... along with that Andy Stern guy. I'll bet the corps don't want to risk rocking the very favorable boat of Union status quo at this point.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 07:10   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Pretty Mavi Mamara imagery, no? Show of force, babee!
We're gonna fuck you up for exercising yer free speech rights!

Jayzus, that Stern expose is chilling. You'd hear scuttlebut and rumors, but that is wholesale scary biscuits. I swear I didn't even remember he'd retired. The UHW takeovers sounded like Cement Kimono kinda stuff.

Explain why it will be a bonus for Trumka if it's settled? The locals know how he's sold them out. Might be time for splinter unions like the health workers.

OT, but I'd written the piece with 'military' in the title, but the communications guy I talked to convinced me that Coast Guard isn't military, since it's domeststic and under DHS. Just looked it up, he's both wrong and right.

Kinda went fishing to see if he might hint at the source of the Obama threat; nah. Shouldda tried to sound more like a D-cup voice, mebbe. Off my game. O:-)

Just wondered over yonder what will happen if EGT beckons the first ship in before any contracts are signed?

But Obama sure is military-crazy. Christ. Must be more over-compensating stuff.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 11:08   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
As far as I'm concerned the Coast Guard is considered military - they have been deployed in both Iraq and Afghanistan as active units. This is in contrast to something like the FBI that operates under civilian law-enforcement powers when investigating terrorism - which also happens sometimes near active battlefields in conjunction with military/intelligence agencies.

My thinking on Trumka is that this specific conflict has gotten toxic for him. The arc is no different for these guys than any other local who have been abandoned to their own local protests while the wider Union sustains the all of a corporation's other operations. Rather than creating wider solidarity, consolidation of union power into the hands of a few mega-corp style operations ensures that every member org loses autonomy and the entire labor movement can be sidelined if a small group decides to sideline them (and the way labor law works ... I think it becomes illegal to take action if a Trumka or Stern moves to stymie the process).

That's the Trumka model ... it's been that way since he helped break the coal unions in KY and WV back in the 80s. He'd play a few optic stunts on the lines at a mine operation being protested ... but always made sure the Massey coal kept flowing by refusing to allow solidarity strikes in any other locations. That has been HUGE for the corporate union busters - being able to count on it has empowered them and is integral to the successful advance of their agenda.

Generally, that's totally accepted now. As long as stuff stays quiet (that is - more quiet than a violent cacophony)... the status quo isn't really even questioned anymore. Nobody calls a general strike. Hasn't happened for over a generation. Are you crazy?

The optics of a labor battle with the ostensible head of the Union sitting on his hands has already been pretty brutal. Look at those articles - they're calling Trumka out directly now. It's going to be pretty damn difficult to finesse three locals and OWS facing down a warship ... with zero support from national. OTOH, Trumka has a big problem keeping his seat at the table in an election year if he allows labor conflicts to spiral out of control to the point they become an election issue for Obama.

This conflict has the potential to make the profitable ambiguity unsustainable. The corporations profiting from the illusions have GOT to be pretty motivated to keep things rolling just as they are.

So the corporations have a choice. They could force a conflict in a minor port ... which was being used to set a wider union-busting precedent (with the battle waged away from places better suited to union strength) and risk upsetting their whole applecart. Obama appears ready to side with them on that to burnish his "not beholden to Union Thugs" meme ... so clearly the approach has some weight on that side.

Or they can cut a deal with a few workers and create a situation the union bosses can call a "win" and diffuse the whole conflict. Without the specific cause to rally around to organize a mass protest, combined with messaging narrative handed to their counterparts in corporate-union leadership, that seems to add up to a pretty big benefit for the corporate side at this point. I'm guessing the executives and bean-counters are doing a bit of election-year math and have decided they like the players currently in power. Their downside is that would leave them looking for another minor port through which to advance the precedent they're seeking - and knock them back about 18 months.

So, yeah. A local will know full-well they've pretty much been sold out. BUT. In the end, they'll have a contract - so it will be difficult for them to make the case to a wider audience. I think It's probably a situation of forestalling the inevitable; but cutting a deal here really sucks the air out of West Coast pro-union activism temporarily.

As a minor aside ... did you realize that Idaho has a deep-water shipping port in Lewiston?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-28 05:51   (permalink)
Trumka? But isn't he busy giving Dimon a footrub in Davos these days? Can't expect the poor guy to be everywhere...
/s

This would be a good time to make a stand, and put some pressure on the administration. It seems like they're feeling the heat coming from the left in these months before the election - lo and behold, they find they need the votes! It's get-what-you-can-before-November time...
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 07:31   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
I'm kinda torn about baby-step fixes, Obe. The crap like the new financial fraud commission that all the smart money says is just another con, nibbling around the edges.

And for the same reason I'm against Occupy making demands; it just opens the movement up to cooptation by some idiot pols who then can further marginalize it all, which is kinda what Obummer's trying to do: See what a populist I am? And how tough I am on Wall Street fraud? He and Holder never even heard of fraud for the first three years. Cripes.

And are pushing cheesy MERS settlements that will indemnify...fraud.

And the new, presumably bogus 'mortgage relief' seems like another chimera, good to fool the voters again. But again, the smart money says that if mortgage principals aren't vastly written down, there will never be a lost-decade turn-around. (I'd only included a primary home if I were Queen, and they keep telling me I'm not).

Re: Dimon. I stuck up a stupid diary over yonder for the best questions to ask the Prez in the post-*enhanced* SOTU viewing at WH.gov.

First entry was Alt ID: He went through a few questions he'd considered (verrrry serious and sober ones) then decided on:

"Mr. Prezenit, what does Jamie Dimon's fly look like?"
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-28 09:03   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
When you say 'baby-step fixes' I think Another Trope, and I almost have an aneurism. Ha.

I didn't have baby steps in mind. I just think its a propitious time for organizations like ILWU to go all out, like the internet activists that got SOPA killed, the environmentalists that got the pipeline killed, like Schniederman who got fifty new investigators and a national platform. None of those things are 'baby-steps' in the sense of leaving one open to co-opting, or involving concessions and compromise with the administration. They are outright wins. Small wins, and incomplete, but unadulterated ones, imho. (I know Yves Smith is unhappy with Schniederman's move, but she's probably wrong, for the same reasons she was wrong about Warren going to the consumer protections bureau).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 09:37   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
I was actually channeling Stilli, but they are soul-mates of a sort.

So you mean go all out for EFCA or creating a new union that is worker-centric?

Internet activistism seemed to work on SOPA.

This isn't the original piece i wrote up, but betcha dollars to donuts TransCanada will just start building the US side of it, then work out the rest post-election. Smart move, and the pipes all in stacks, 93% of the land purchased...and the shale/tar in the north is there. All of it will go to China, I guess, so domestic production needs are kinda silly on this one. (easier than digging out my diary, though the art was cool.)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-18/obama-administration-is-said-to-reject-transcanada-s-keystone-xl-pipeline.html

Schneiderman got 50 new investigators? Money to operate?

It was Stoller and a few others I'd read on the Schneiderman commission. I'd have preferred appointing Bill Black as a special prosecutor; prolly Eliot Spitzer wouldn't have been easy to sell...

So, I dunno; maybe I'm just too cynical to be rational.

http://4closurefraud.org/2012/01/20/reuters-insight-top-justice-officials-eric-holder-and-lanny-breuer-connected-to-banks-freddie-fannie-and-mers/
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-28 10:02   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Sure, they'll try to pass some other version of SOPA, Transcanada will try some shit on the pipeline, the DOJ will try to block Schniederman and the others trying to investigate. But that is how these battles work. You win one, then fight the next one. Any movement on internet freedoms had to start with blocking SOPA, ditto with the pipeline. On the fraud investigations, it's of course a bit more complicated, positive moves could happen in different ways on different fronts. But putting Schniederman, a hardass progressive who can't be bought because he has no national ambitions, and who doesn't seem to have Spitzeresque weaknesses (knock on wood) as co-chair and giving him resources, and handing him a structure for interstate cooperation on the investigations can't hurt. I can't see anything there that hobbles his NY investigations at all. Maybe it would have been oh-so-wonderful to have

  • a hard-as-nails special prosecutor - like ... um ... Schniederman -

  • with subpoena powers - like ... um Schniederman already has -

  • who doesn't have to answer to the DOJ bigwigs - like ... um Schniederman still doesn't -

to really stick it to wall street.

But I can't see the advantage.
;0)

Imho, there is no point in bitching over the fact that the enemy hasn't just rolled over and died spontaneously, for crying out loud. On these points at least - as with the ILWU apparently - things are getting a nudge in the right direction. There is a fine line between healthy cynicism and outright defeatism. And we all need to be careful not to fall into the latter position, right?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 10:30   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
Yes, dad. ;o) So sorry.

The pipeline I meant was just a nod-to-progressives ploy. I will still reserve the right to keep that much cynicism.

And...I think there is no one rooting the ILWU and potential victory more than I am, unless I don't get your drift. AND the fact that this union has embraced Occupy, etc. none of which I think has much to do with electoral politics at this point.

Why doesn't Schneiderman have to answer to the DoJ? I must be sincerely clueless, if not.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 10:38   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
I dunno; DD has this up, says Schneiderman indicated 'hundreds' of investigators, Holder named 55; but he points out that the IRS can and will be involved. So...okay; we'll hope something good comes out of it.

I did just read a long piece,this week, maybe at the Economic Populist, doing the math on all the potential lost revenue due to downsizing the investigators and accountants at the IRS by some silly percentage. Way to save money, dudes! :P

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/01/28/schneidermans-rmbs-working-group-resources-jurisdiction-and-will/
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-28 10:41   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
The federal investigations don't supercede his state-level investigations, as far as I can see. So if they block some move on the federal level, like a specific prosecution effort, he can always go ahead with it as NY AG. The DOJ can't do anything about that. And he will have access to the feds' evidence. I can't see any downside...
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 11:23   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
Yeah. Between him, Biden and California/Nevada all deciding to go hardline ... they've pretty much got the DoJ by the short and curlies. Those are pretty much the jurisdictions where the bulk of the frauds were constructed ... and the jurisdictions where a huge percentage of the frauds were implemented.

Can you imagine if somewhere like Florida decided to go along with Obama's settlement and walked away ... and then the other State AGs manage to accomplish really meaningful accountability and injunctive relief for their citizens? I don't see how the DoJ is going to pull any of this off ... it seems a pipe dream at this point without those four.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 15:35   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
Hope you're right; Holder's words DD quoted were far less than fired-up: it's so hard to prove fraud, let's use civil statutes to get some $$ remuneration, which has been the wrong-headed deal-making approach so far.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 17:39   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
The saving grace here is state's rights and the ability for states to enforce laws on their books - even if the administration refuses to enforce the statutes at the federal level.

Holder's worthless. If it were simply in his hands ... we'd be totally screwed without a doubt. In fact, he has been trying to strong-arm the states.

The current situation seems to be that the banks won't give Obama a deal unless Obama can get the states to agree to blanket indemnity for an entire class of potential wrongdoing ... before even conducting an investigation into what exactly was done. As long as NY, DE, CA and NV insist on the ability to investigate and bring charges, the administration's deal doesn't protect the banks much at all.

Things have shifted so that the local political calculus ends up being "fuck Obama ... we've got our own careers to think about."

One of the few bright spots in the current political dynamic.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-28 18:45   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Yes, I was thinking along the lines of KGB. Holder is fighting the state AGs all the way. And I'm reading the setting up of the task-force as a concession made to Schniederman - basically him saying, I won't be on board unless so-and-so, and stating his conditions.

I do think it will be a very bad sign if the banks get even a limited settlement just on robosigning. If they are going to get the big boys for conspiracy to commit fraud, the AGs need to flip insiders, and they can only do that if they can crank up the heat on the mid-level execs. So even immunity limited to low-level stuff like robo-signing is a problem. I guess we'll see how it plays out from here...
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 19:02   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
I'm glad to hear that you both think Schneiderman, et.al., can do all this rather independently of Holder's DoJ. Hope if it comes to it, the states can fund and equip the investigators.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 18:59   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Run the meaning of this verbiage by me?

'...the banks won't give Obama a deal...' Isn't one of the key problems that he thinks they need to make him a deal?

Shoot; my attention's so split. RL, commenting, and watching OO ustream video.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 06:37   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Obey, Kgb; you seem to be saying that potential deals like this may not impact the fact that those five AGs can still bust fraudsters? I'm having a bit of trouble finding the meaning in this, especially the narrow parsing of a few phrases:

“I don't think this will impact our negotiations,” said Geoff Greenwood, spokesman for Iowa’s Miller. “While we would release servicing claims and origination claims against these five companies [the nation’s five largest banks], we are not releasing other aspects of the mortgage mess, including securitization. We are not granting criminal immunity. And this case doesn't involve other companies that originated fraudulent loans. So there are many other pieces of the puzzle, and this announcement will enable states and our federal partners to continue to work together to address those other pieces.”

Some even say the announcement of the task force could actually help the AG/bank settlement.

“We believe this will reignite concerns related to the securitization of private-label securities,” wrote Ed Mills of FBR. “Creating this unit could give political cover to AGs who have been concerned that a robo-signing settlement would hinder further investigations into securitization.”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46133634
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-29 07:30   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
No, there are two federal efforts - the investigations and the negotiations. If the feds cut a deal with the banks giving immunity on servicing and origination-related fraud, AND the AGs sign on to that deal, then that's the end of the investigations related to such fraud as well. And it would be a huge win for the banks if that happened. But the NY, Delaware, Nevada and California AGs would have to sign on, which doesn't look likely. Especially as Schniederman has set up an alliance with FHFA suing the banks for origination-related fraud. Unless he is a complete sell-out he is holding too many of the cards to cave at this point.

You have to love Miller's Chutzpah tho - "we're only trying to let off the big Wall Street banks, but we will still go after the little fish!" Yeah, fighting words from our law enforcement heroes!!

Of course a deal on origination and servicing will hinder prosecution on securitization. The suspected securitization crime - that they were securitizing junk - can only be proven if they can show that these mortgages were junk BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY WERE ORIGINATED. So if you can't investigate the latter properly, the securitization fraud gets all too easy to cover up.

What I had in mind yesterday was that Schniederman and the others should go along with the federal INVESTIGATIONS (now spearheaded by Schniederman) and block the federal NEGOTIATIONS (led by Millier).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-29 12:11   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
I didn't realize Schniederman was spearheading the Federal investigations. That's pretty good news.

Hell, maybe Obama's feeling pressed enough that he'll allow something significant to occur in relation to the banks. I think a big reason why they were trying to get the deal done so quickly was to allow the *details* to fade before the election so it could become a case of "holding the banks accountable" in the bizarre world that is Washington messaging ... while also keeping Obama's new Wall Street friends oh-so-very happy.

I think actually trying to make that sausage under the scrutiny of an angry electorate in the midst of a presidential campaign is a much more dicey proposition.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 13:10   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
I might say that you needn't treat me like a total idiot, Pug, but then you may have concluded just such in my comments on this subject. If so, I guess I'll have to live with it, and find some self-esteem somewhere else, like in...well, ya know...FEMEN diaries er somethin'.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Obey or not obey 2012-01-29 13:36   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
what? I didn't mean no disrespect ma'am!

You asked a question, and I tried to answer it. Now, I'm kinda slow and all, but ... are you saying my answer is stupid? Because I thought loooong and hard for that one!!

but, yeah, keep the FEMEN diaries coming!
;0)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 11:14   (permalink)
Replying to: Obey or not obey
Quote:
It's get-what-you-can-before-November time...


Exactly right.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 12:03   (permalink)
I'll say: y'all are smarter than I be, so i'll accept your takes, but i'm gonna go to town to try some Occupyin'. Only 36 degrees, so dunno how long I'll last, and those cranberry legwarmers are really gonna muck up mon ensemble and all, but...so it goes. ;o)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 12:49   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Stay warm!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 15:31   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
We froze. ;o) Blue hands, northwest wind, not so much support today. The lack of mojo might either have been: I forgot to blast Uprising while we got ready to go, or I didn't curl the ends of my hair, so...not enough beauty to dazzle em with.

Had two different men stop to kick around the meaning of Occupy, though. That was pretty nice. Got a call when we got home from a guy asking WTH happened to us; he'd bought some goodies at the little bakery for us. How sweet, eh? (pun intended)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 16:38   (permalink)
Update from ILUW Local 21:
Quote:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 27, 2012
CONTACT: Jennifer Sargent, 503-703-2933



LONGVIEW, WA (January 27, 2012) — Today, the Port of Longview approved a settlement agreement with EGT and the ILWU settling unresolved legal issues between the parties. The Port also approved an amendment to its lease with EGT agreeing that EGT is no longer bound by the Port’s Working Agreement with ILWU Local 21. In exchange, EGT agreed that the ILWU/PMA Joint Dispatch Hall (Local 21) shall provide the labor for EGT’s facility at the Port of Longview, and agreed to a union card check procedure. If a majority of workers indicate their preference to be represented by ILWU Local 21 at the EGT facility, EGT and ILWU Local 21 expect to negotiate the details of a labor agreement for all landside and shipside operations.

ILWU Coast Committeeman Leal Sundet said, “In a unanimous vote on Tuesday, January 24, 2012, ILWU Local 21’s rank and file approved the legal settlement agreement and the steps forward. Today’s developments are a positive signal that the relationship between ILWU Local 21 and EGT is moving in the right direction.”
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 17:47   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
I saw that over on their site. Not particularly surprised - as I noted above. I suppose it's a good thing all things considered.

I think the ability to count on OWS supporters providing troops to augment (and engage in) mass action had a lot to do with pressure existing to get this done. I totally like how OWS has kind of taken on a branding of nondescript (and therefor limitless) potency - much like Anon.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 18:29   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
It upped Occupy's brand credibility, as did, IMO, some of union locals joining Occupy in NYC up OWS's brand. Pretty damned cool.

Can you say what the card check procedure sweetener might gain them in the near future? Or is the point that they're looking toward building membership for future contracts? There's no mention of the contract's duration. Are they usually one year?

Cripes; sorry. I missed that long one. It's what from receiving email notifications thru MSN, then coming here with Firefox. Stuff gets lost now and again.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 18:37   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Oh, well, fuck. Just checked in with OO; my friend hotflashcarol was pretty flipped that OO's 'Move-in.org were going to take over an empty hotel, and had threatened police that if they tried to prevent them, that they'd 'close down the airport'. Brilliant, just brilliant. She intimated that this might be the final straw with her and OO.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/28/occupy-oakland-police-tea_n_1239232.html

Gosztola has video, and sees it differently. Wonder if the truth is out there somewhere. Carol seemed to think some of them live for confrontation.

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/01/28/tear-gas-flash-grenades-rubber-bullets-fired-at-occupy-oakland-protesters/
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 19:58   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
I'm afraid I don't have the background to understand that completely ... what's the move-in.org? I don't think Gosztola sees it "differently" so much as he reports the action much more fully.

Regardless other issues - the police brutality stuff is chilling. And it's long-term systemic too. I imagine some folks are confrontational because from what I've heard, folks there have been beaten down just like this - but with nobody bothering to even notice - some of 'em their whole lives.

Violence breeds violence ... think that's why the black block and anarchists are so big there. I get the impression it's kind of a melting pot of disenfranchised demographics (or at least it used to be); land of the "white ghettos" Rancid sings about.

(Related: Rancid and the Bay Area ... love the punker kid.)

Thinking about it, that's a place that eventually might see full-on riots if something doesn't give ... I think OWS is tapped into even deeper grievance there than in most places; or maybe vice-versa ... things have been simmering for quite some time beyond just the high-profile BART thing, and then shutting down cell phones ... Oakland's one area primed to have serious trouble.

General observations on a city I've spent very little time in personally aside, tactically speaking, it kind of seems like telling the authorities the plan in advance and daring them to stop you is not the brightest occupy strategy. It seems the opposite of how they were successful in places like Egypt - where it worked specifically because the authorities were caught off-guard and never quite knew where/when to do a crack-down until it was too late to stop something ... the difference between allowing them act vs. forcing them to react.

Wouldn't a better idea be to quietly fill an empty, unproductive building .... maybe get some stuff going that demonstrate an obviously constructive and beneficial use. Then protest like hell when the authorities come to shut it down ... for the sole purpose of ensuring that a building stands useless.

I'd say the way they went about it could be described as seeking the immediately direct confrontation vs trying to achieve the goal of successfully occupying something. I'd be arguing against approaches like that in the future if I were a participant, that's for damn sure.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 20:14   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
And totally unrelated ... in return for Rasputina ....

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 20:25   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Yikes! Was that only four minutes???? :D
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 20:44   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-28 22:13   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Something unique like that should be shared. Ever heard this one?



I was really looking for something else; had never heard it before.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 15:16   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Jayzus; thank you. I'll hunt for more Govt. Mule. That was one of the best new things I've heard in awhile; what pathos and poetry...dude has it right, too: we don't need no miracles, just...ourselves. Damn; that might be an anchor for that 'we need to remember community' diary I'd mentioned trying to write, sorta inspired by musing about how many families had to have the backs of strikers at the turn of the century.

I'll hunt for more, and maybe a better recording of this one.

Fabulous Thunderbirds: anchored by Jimmy Vaughan, Stevie Ray's kid brother. I love em to death. Almost think they recorded some stuff with Lou Ann Barton, another goddess of blues singing, IMO, and: a white girl!!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Lazy KGB 2012-01-29 19:38   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Yeah. Love the Thunderbirds too. Was listening to their greatest hits CD just last week ... some update or another caused my media player to slurp the damn thing onto my harddrive. :o

Warren Haynes is really great (used to play with the Allman Brothers). I've been groovin on Gov. Mule again for the last couple months. They've got a ton of good stuff. Love this one too.



(There used to be an awesome video of this performance out there ... it got removed - fucking fascists ... this one is just the audio).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 20:53   (permalink)
Replying to: Lazy KGB
Intense. Such controlled power; good grief. And their harmonies are so out-of-the-ordinary, but they work so well.
Kinda like the Bangles do covering 'Hazy Shade of Winter'; I can't keep my ears from tryin' to hear what they hear...our how they manage to create that same sound blend.

Anyway; these are a really nice gift, kgb. And...I found a use already for his 'we don't need a miracle; what we need is *us* on a thread tonight. I was glad to have it, and I hope the guy *hears* it.

I ran into this awhile back, and it fascinated me; I mean: the Bangles? But i love it.

And I get that the Cramps would be pretty freaky live; I kinda liked some of the ones filmed from overhead. ;o)
Poison Ivy and Lux were married fro 37 years! Whoosh!

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-29 21:11   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Crazy.

Is that from a movie? Looked like Morton Downy Jr. there.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 21:20   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
I have no idea. ;o)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-29 21:17   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Speaking of intense ... Etta James was a bad-ass performer.



(It's better big)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 21:30   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Bad ass! Katie, too, and sleep well. I'm off. ;o)

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 20:18   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
"I'd say the way they went about it could be described as seeking the immediately direct confrontation vs trying to achieve the goal of successfully occupying something. I'd be arguing against approaches like that in the future if I were a participant, that's for damn sure."

Yes. I've been emailing with carol; she was there until 4, and had been concerned all week about the unnecessarily provocative action.

During our email conversations, she had posted, saying she'd been there; the conversation went on around her as though she were invisible. Tarheel dem was engaged in an intellectualization of the 'empty public bldg/used for the public good, etc.

She ramped it up and said of move-in.org's emails though she may not have first thought it noble:

Quote:
"IMHO, this was a noble idea that lacked proper planning. Many of us were hoping it wasn’t going to be Kaiser Auditorium, which is in the midst of a massive construction site and surrounded by a chainlink fence. I think we need a lot more discipline to pull off such an action and hopefully we learned some lessons today. Which is not to say that OPD didn’t overreact; they always do. The Occupy Oakland Move-In group released a really stupid and provocative Open Letter to Mayor Quan, OPD and the City of Oakland a couple of days ago that said we “would make their lives miserable” if they interfered with our building takeover. It contained ridiculous threats like OO would blockade the airport. A lot of us were dismayed because the letter was so juvenile and took away from what could have been a serious message about unused buildings, homelessness, etc. That provocation pretty much guaranteed the response you are seeing from OPD tonight."

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-28 20:28   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Carol calls a lot of the most actively obnoxious, sexist, la la la...anarchists 'trustafarians', maybe for obvious reasons.

My guess is that she believes they are acting out; who knows? Your boy? Mebbe I'm too old, or jealous of his energy. |8)|

Though stevie just played an hour of tab benoit on the teevee; can't say i liked it much, either.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-29 12:18   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Some parents somewhere drove that poor kid like 200 miles to make him do his little thrasher dance at everywhere they could find that was mentioned in a Rancid song {update: that is to say, every rancid song} ... in a single day. That's pretty awesome.

(They even managed to get him with the 43 bus rolling in the background - serious bonus for nailing a moving target.)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 13:12   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
I admit I did keep seeing him for awhile before bed, gettin' all jiggy. ;o)

Oh, crap; I never saw the other video. This stuff gets confusing. I'll watch later, maybe after some sleep.

'...the 43 bus'... Damn; that's sick, man. I l loved it.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] kgb999 2012-01-29 13:48   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Oh ... that one was for *before* sleep ... super mellow (pretty bad-ass too, IMO).

If it's *after* sleep ...



... that's time for a *wake up* ... onward to MANCOS!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] wendy davis 2012-01-29 15:32   (permalink)
Replying to: kgb999
Well, all of Mancos seems to have been wakened by that one, dear. It slowed me down a little, having had to recover from the epileptic seizure it caused in me, but...like after taking your finger out of an electrical socket, it feels good...when it quits. |8)|

Hope ya like this one.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0
[-] Lazy KGB 2012-01-29 19:51   (permalink)
Replying to: wendy davis
Awesome. I've never heard any stuff with her before.

Whenver I think of Jimmy Vaughan, I always think of this one.



Really miss Stevie Ray. And also too ... Dimebag (I'll spare ya! :-)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

English

Latest Comments