It seems to me that it's GftNC's personal filter for whom to bother discussing politics with.
Yes, exactly. I did say "valuable additions to ObWi". The question is whether they'll listen to reason.
Personally I believe that anyone who still thinks Trump won in 2020 has shown themselves incapable of listening to reason.
I had a lot to say about the transgender issue and found myself very aligned with GftNC's point of view...
I mostly agree with GftNC's viewpoint, but didn't find time to write a carefully phrased comment when the question was live.
If this is a suggestion that we should have political shibboleths for commentators, I'm against it.
It seems to me that it's GftNC's personal filter for whom to bother discussing politics with.
Every bit of time we spend doing something is time we are not spending doing something else. Our time is limited. Spend it wisely.
It kind of reminds me of a friend's suggestion that I read Project 2025 after I mentioned that tRump was full of sh*t when he said he didn't know anything about it, even though there was a long list of major contributors to it in high-level positions in his administration.
Whether I read it had nothing to do with the point I was making, and I had better things to do with my time than read that crap.
The same goes for arguing with deluded people.
If this is a suggestion that we should have political shibboleths for commentators, I'm against it.
I don't mind discussing whether Trump lost the 2020 election - he plainly did, but I see no harm in demonstrating the fact in response to an honest enquiry.
I like GftNC's idea of checking that someone is connected to the real world. Just two details:
-- while most of us are in the US, and therefore closely attuned to events here, not everyone is. In addition to the several folks in the UK (and lj domiciled in Japan) I seem to recall that Lurker is in Finland. There might well be others, either currently or in the future. Do we need a question or two for reality checks of those elsewhere?
-- Just for equity, we probably ought to have a question or two that would reality check those on the left. (Maybe acknowledgement that such a category exists...? ;-)
PS to my 09.50:
For the avoidance of doubt, my first 2 questions, in my opinion, establish mainly whether the person responding is living in the real world. The 3rd establishes their approach to the integrity of the legal system.
I should say I know nothing of Hüseyin Doğru— never heard of him before. But the general topic I agree with—ostensibly democratic governments have a new tool for repression.
Normally Christian fundamentalists would be screaming about this— it fits in perfectly with their fears about the mark of the beast. Maybe some are. But since their guy is in power in the US I suppose their concern will be postponed.
bc's reasonable comments tactfully omit that one of the (main?) people who gave them a hard time was me (there may well have been others, but naturally I remember my own attempts more clearly).
The first instance I remember (seven years ago) was the Kavanaugh hearings. bc said that Kavanaugh had refuted Christine Blasey-Ford's version of events. In that halcyon and far off time, I still believed that "refute" meant (as it always had) "disprove by evidence or logic", rather than "deny", so since bc had (I think) told us that s/he was a lawyer, I reminded them that it is the duty of an officer of the court to protect the integrity of the court and uphold the integrity of the legal system. bc then disappeared for quite a while, possibly (as s/he says) because they were busy. This was of course before we all learned how deeply flawed the FBI's investigations into Kavanaugh was, along with the evidence of other complainants.
The second time (or I may have the order confused) was when bc referred to Sztrok and Page as "the lovers", a description I had only ever heard Trump use about them. Perhaps unfairly, I took this as confirmation that bc was not just conservative, but at least Trump tolerant, or Trump adjacent. Perhaps I was wrong.
On the gender issue, unfortunately GC feminists have had to get used to being cast in the same team as people with whom they have no other beliefs in common and whose other beliefs they utterly reject, but who sincerely or performatively profess to believe many of the same things on the GC issue.
So, on the question of which kind of conservatives would be valuable additions to ObWi, my own opinion would be any who can answer in the affirmative the following questions:
Do you believe that Trump lost the 2020 election?
Do you believe that Trump's actions on and around January 6th were a) morally wrong, b) potentially criminal and c) insurrectionary?
Do you approve of Trump going after the law firms which in the past represented his opponents (for various values of "opponents")?
Others may think this a grotesquely inappropriate approach to the problem. But it is mine. Obviously, and luckily, I don't make the rules!
My long experience of writing to MPs is that, since word processors came into common use forty-odd years ago, one usually receives in reply a letter relevant to the general subject but not actually addressing one's points. Schumer's reply seems to be of that kind.
It became all the harder to comment when there were several comments aimed at me that I wasn't completely responding to some of the counterpoint.
I feel you. I only participate in the comments of this blog because in other blogs, there is an often an assumption that everyone is in the same room/time zone and people push the advantage without thinking of that. The way I write comments grows out of that, trying to put down enough for people to chew on, but also trying to slow down the pace of the conversation, at least where I am wading in and why I often suggest that piling on is not really so good.
A bit of unsolicited advice, it's always possible to say something like 'let me put a pin in that, and give me a day or two to reply. Some people may just ignore that and try to get in their licks, but most of the people here would understand that (and would probably think less of the people not accepting that)
Just my two bits on the ObWi diversity question:
The recognition of how one-sided it has become is refreshing. The introspection even more.
For myself, there is are a few barriers to entry on commenting if you are a conservative. You know you your comments will often draw "hostile fire" rather than curiosity. And you are surrounded. It's not just from one direction. Expect to carry a heavy load if you are going to have a complete conversation because you are responding to many people when the opposite is not true. I have a full-time job, I'm married and a kid still at home. And I'm in my late 50's (as CharlesWT likely knows). As much as I (usually) like the conversation, I don't always have the time to read AND comment.
It became all the harder to comment when there were several comments aimed at me that I wasn't completely responding to some of the counterpoint. That was in fact true, due to time. Recently, frex, Donald responded to me with some really good points, noting that my comment appeared to only blame Hamas and not Israel. His comments merited a response. If I only had the time. (Sorry, Donald). And I had a lot to say about the transgender issue and found myself very aligned with GftNC's point of view and would have wanted to wade in, but by the time I could particiapte the conversation had moved on. In the past, some have assumed I had nothing to say and said as much when that simply wasn't true.
So I just read and pop up from time-to-time.
It was easier under the Hilzoy era when I first was drawn here. Hilzoy had a way of interacting that I consider model. She was curious, respectful, and stepped in and politely (and sometimes firmly) called commenters out on both sides. Russell is a lot like Hilzoy; others too. Many not. And that era had several conservatives of many different stripes. While we were in the minority, it was a strong minority.
Lastly, in order to attract conservatives, IMHO, you have to at least want to hear another point of view. That's why I am here. That's why I turn on Urban View and Progressive Talk Radio from time-to-time when I'm on long drives. A recent opinion was voiced that conservatives left ObWi because they couldn't justify their positions and noted that the group here is smart, well-informed and articulate, implying that the conservatives were not. That doesn't help. However, I agree with the assessment of the characteristics of my left-leaning, liberal friends here on Obwi. You are a smart, well-informed and articulate bunch. Overall, I very much enjoy our discussions and hearing your points of view.
Nous—
That’s probably right. I hadn’t even considered LLM’s but maybe.
My theory is that there is a standard form letter for people asking for pressure for a ceasefire, using our aid as leverage. Maybe a different letter for people who support Israel’s position. I hadn’t thought of them using AI, but that just shows I am still stuck in 2023 or so in my thinking.
Supposedly it is more effective to call them in the phone but I have done that and get nervous.
On the solution, I can’t imagine it. People argue about a 1ss vs a 2ss, but it is really hard to picture the two sides in the same country and also really hard to imagine the settlers leaving or agreeing to live under Palestinian rule. No acceptable solution seems realistic for now. Just stopping the slaughter and getting surviving hostages back is about the limit of my imagination here.
My question for Schumer is my now-standard question for anyone advocating for a two-state solution: precisely where to you think the second state will be? And who is going to evict the current owners?
I know this is a peculiar thing to note, but as minutiae I believe Russell mistyped a former commenter’s name as “BrickOverBill”, r instead of n, which presumably would have made it past the filter. We’ll see if this comment appears.
So Schumer or whoever wrote this can’t really be that stupid. And from reading my email he or the actual writer knew I would think any of that was true. We need a better class of liar in DC. Or maybe even honest people.
Assuming that anyone actually read it in any detail and stopped to consider what you were saying. I always assume that emails to representatives go to interns, who are mostly just skimming them for keywords and sending out form responses that are 80% LLM content. These letters aren't so much responses, from what I can tell, as position statements meant to address keywords in your email. They are meant to clarify the representatives position. In this case his position is the equivalent of hope and prayers.
But hey...your email probably did go into the tally on the side of Gaza that he uses to determine how much concern he has to express while refusing to intervene, and how much he has to worry next time he's up for re-election.
I'm starting to think that in the post-Citizens-United era the only way to actually get long time Dems to listen may be to organize (union, interest group, something) and throw support behind Democratic Socialists in primaries until we've picked off the ones with deep donor support.
Their worry with Mamdani shows that this is what they are running most scared from.
On his list of Israeli goals, numbers three and four are fantasy. In theory those are American goals but for Americans the first one was and is the one that mattered more than all others. By far. Keeping civilian deaths low would be nice, but not that important. For Netanyahu, staying out of jail and in power was the number one goal. For some others, the goal is ethnic cleansing.
So Schumer or whoever wrote this can’t really be that stupid. And from reading my email he or the actual writer knew I would think any of that was true. We need a better class of liar in DC. Or maybe even honest people.
The summary of HR 815 regarding Gaza is misleading, But too tired to rant.
On a positive note, I watched the hour long discussion with Brad Lander that Peter Beinart had on July 4. Lander was really impressive, a politician I could support with enthusiasm. Though I like Mamdani a lot, if I were a NYC voter I probably would have put Lander as 1 and Mamdani as 2 based on Lander’s experience. ( On Palestine Landervis a liberal Zionist unlike Mamdani, but Landercreally would be willing to pressure Israel, which is what I care about there. But I am mostly talking about his qualifications for being Mayor and all his other positions, very liberal, maybe a bit closer to achievable than what Mamdani wants. )
And he had a funny anecdote on his arrest. The two guys didn’t really like doing it. One was a Pakistani Muslim and said he would rank Lander and Mamdani as his top choices. The other said his wife wanted him to quit his ICE job because of what they were doing but he didn’t feel he could because he had a mortgage. Lander said it was funny but of course said it was also terrible.
No point linking— I think you have to subscribe to Beinart’s Substack.
Busy yesterday and today see stuff about alien space bats. Huh.
Anyway, thought I would post a reply I got from Schumer’s back in May after I wrote Schumer’s, Gillibrand and Latimer ( my House rep) a ( polite) several paragraph long email asking them to push for a ceasefire. Gillibrand and Latimer didn’t respond. No surprise in the last case and Gillibrand prob thought I was a global jihadist or something. So I gave the Schumer office some credit for a polite response. The response, however, was nonsense. Here it is —
————
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding U.S. aid to Israel and your request for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. I share your concerns about the security and well-being of innocent Palestinians.
I've always said that Israel has 4 goals: Radically reduce Hamas' threat, free the hostages, minimize the loss of innocent Palestinian lives and maximize the amount of humanitarian aid to innocent civilians in Gaza.
Like you, I am deeply troubled by the suffering of those who have been caught in the cross fire of this conflict. My heart breaks at the loss of so many civilian lives in Gaza. I am anguished that the Israeli war campaign has killed so many innocent Palestinians. I know that my fellow Jewish Americans feel this same anguish when they see the images of dead and starving children and destroyed homes.
I agree that the current political situation has created horrible living conditions for many Palestinians living in Gaza. That is why I have been supportive of opening up additional humanitarian aid routes to Gaza and increasing U.S. humanitarian aid contributions. Just recently Congress passed H.R. 815, the Emergency National Security Supplemental aid package that includes $9.3 billion dedicated for humanitarian aid, including for innocent civilians in Gaza.
I will continue to support a strong peace process through direct negotiations and look forward to the day when the Israeli and Palestinian governments can work together to achieve a two-state solution. I am committed to doing all that I can to encourage a productive and meaningful dialogue between the two parties.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch with your thoughts and opinions.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Schumer
United States Senator
I have to admit that I only remember Paul McCartney secretly rerecording Ringo's drum track in the studio at night - is that true? And stills from the film were Ringo plays a caveman or something. But he seems to be a nice guy.
The other player that comes to mind for me right away with this trait is John Paul Jones.
Jones was the glue in Zep. And a brilliant player, definitely the undersung member in that band. Check it, the bass in this is just a perfect counterpoint to everything else that is going on. Funky, solid, he ties the different sections of the tune together and keeps in moving forward.
And if it's a Zep tune and it isn't a guitar or drums or voice, it's JPJ playing it.
Re: Ringo, you can always tell a young green drummer who doesn't understand how making music with other people works yet, because they don't like Ringo.
The people who downplay Ringo's drumming are the same people who go on about how Jimmy Page was a sloppy, overrated guitarist, and probably the same people that complain about what a terrible word "moist" is...mostly because that seems to be the sort of thing that other edgy people are saying and getting praise for saying. They've never actually sat down to really listen to the songs in any detail or approach them with an open mind.
Ringo had a feel and sensibility all his own, and knew how to leave space in the song for the other players' genius to show through. That's a rare thing. The other player that comes to mind for me right away with this trait is John Paul Jones.
I don't believe that Ringo and JPJ have ever collaborated on anything, but then I don't know that it would work, either. They might end up being too mannered and respectful with each other.
A personal hero, on a few levels.
A friend once remarked that the only measure of a drummer's contribution to music was their technical virtuosity. "Yeah?" I asked him. "How many more great songs might have been produced if Ginger Baker were as good at keeping a band full of huge egos together as Ringo was?"
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “An open thread on July 4th”
Keyword 'elections'
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-irs-says-churches-can-now-endorse-political-candidates-pulpit-rcna217495
The headline leaves out the even more scandalous part: ONLY churches, not other tax exempt entities. Those still have to obey the rule of either partisan or tax exempt but not both at the same time.
"
It seems to me that it's GftNC's personal filter for whom to bother discussing politics with.
Yes, exactly. I did say "valuable additions to ObWi".
The question is whether they'll listen to reason.
Personally I believe that anyone who still thinks Trump won in 2020 has shown themselves incapable of listening to reason.
"
I had a lot to say about the transgender issue and found myself very aligned with GftNC's point of view...
I mostly agree with GftNC's viewpoint, but didn't find time to write a carefully phrased comment when the question was live.
"
Everyone's wrong about something, possibly including me. The question is whether they'll listen to reason.
"
If this is a suggestion that we should have political shibboleths for commentators, I'm against it.
It seems to me that it's GftNC's personal filter for whom to bother discussing politics with.
Every bit of time we spend doing something is time we are not spending doing something else. Our time is limited. Spend it wisely.
It kind of reminds me of a friend's suggestion that I read Project 2025 after I mentioned that tRump was full of sh*t when he said he didn't know anything about it, even though there was a long list of major contributors to it in high-level positions in his administration.
Whether I read it had nothing to do with the point I was making, and I had better things to do with my time than read that crap.
The same goes for arguing with deluded people.
"
If this is a suggestion that we should have political shibboleths for commentators, I'm against it.
I don't mind discussing whether Trump lost the 2020 election - he plainly did, but I see no harm in demonstrating the fact in response to an honest enquiry.
"
I like GftNC's idea of checking that someone is connected to the real world. Just two details:
-- while most of us are in the US, and therefore closely attuned to events here, not everyone is. In addition to the several folks in the UK (and lj domiciled in Japan) I seem to recall that Lurker is in Finland. There might well be others, either currently or in the future. Do we need a question or two for reality checks of those elsewhere?
-- Just for equity, we probably ought to have a question or two that would reality check those on the left. (Maybe acknowledgement that such a category exists...? ;-)
"
PS to my 09.50:
For the avoidance of doubt, my first 2 questions, in my opinion, establish mainly whether the person responding is living in the real world. The 3rd establishes their approach to the integrity of the legal system.
"
I should say I know nothing of Hüseyin Doğru— never heard of him before. But the general topic I agree with—ostensibly democratic governments have a new tool for repression.
Normally Christian fundamentalists would be screaming about this— it fits in perfectly with their fears about the mark of the beast. Maybe some are. But since their guy is in power in the US I suppose their concern will be postponed.
"
bc's reasonable comments tactfully omit that one of the (main?) people who gave them a hard time was me (there may well have been others, but naturally I remember my own attempts more clearly).
The first instance I remember (seven years ago) was the Kavanaugh hearings. bc said that Kavanaugh had refuted Christine Blasey-Ford's version of events. In that halcyon and far off time, I still believed that "refute" meant (as it always had) "disprove by evidence or logic", rather than "deny", so since bc had (I think) told us that s/he was a lawyer, I reminded them that it is the duty of an officer of the court to protect the integrity of the court and uphold the integrity of the legal system. bc then disappeared for quite a while, possibly (as s/he says) because they were busy. This was of course before we all learned how deeply flawed the FBI's investigations into Kavanaugh was, along with the evidence of other complainants.
The second time (or I may have the order confused) was when bc referred to Sztrok and Page as "the lovers", a description I had only ever heard Trump use about them. Perhaps unfairly, I took this as confirmation that bc was not just conservative, but at least Trump tolerant, or Trump adjacent. Perhaps I was wrong.
On the gender issue, unfortunately GC feminists have had to get used to being cast in the same team as people with whom they have no other beliefs in common and whose other beliefs they utterly reject, but who sincerely or performatively profess to believe many of the same things on the GC issue.
So, on the question of which kind of conservatives would be valuable additions to ObWi, my own opinion would be any who can answer in the affirmative the following questions:
Do you believe that Trump lost the 2020 election?
Do you believe that Trump's actions on and around January 6th were a) morally wrong, b) potentially criminal and c) insurrectionary?
Do you approve of Trump going after the law firms which in the past represented his opponents (for various values of "opponents")?
Others may think this a grotesquely inappropriate approach to the problem. But it is mine. Obviously, and luckily, I don't make the rules!
"
Another topic. I know Ian Welsh is not a favorite here. I sometimes think he goes too far or is wrong. . But this piece about the authoritarian use of a cashless economy seems correct to me.
https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-end-of-cash-the-rise-of-the-non-person/
"
My long experience of writing to MPs is that, since word processors came into common use forty-odd years ago, one usually receives in reply a letter relevant to the general subject but not actually addressing one's points. Schumer's reply seems to be of that kind.
"
It became all the harder to comment when there were several comments aimed at me that I wasn't completely responding to some of the counterpoint.
I feel you. I only participate in the comments of this blog because in other blogs, there is an often an assumption that everyone is in the same room/time zone and people push the advantage without thinking of that. The way I write comments grows out of that, trying to put down enough for people to chew on, but also trying to slow down the pace of the conversation, at least where I am wading in and why I often suggest that piling on is not really so good.
A bit of unsolicited advice, it's always possible to say something like 'let me put a pin in that, and give me a day or two to reply. Some people may just ignore that and try to get in their licks, but most of the people here would understand that (and would probably think less of the people not accepting that)
"
Just my two bits on the ObWi diversity question:
The recognition of how one-sided it has become is refreshing. The introspection even more.
For myself, there is are a few barriers to entry on commenting if you are a conservative. You know you your comments will often draw "hostile fire" rather than curiosity. And you are surrounded. It's not just from one direction. Expect to carry a heavy load if you are going to have a complete conversation because you are responding to many people when the opposite is not true. I have a full-time job, I'm married and a kid still at home. And I'm in my late 50's (as CharlesWT likely knows). As much as I (usually) like the conversation, I don't always have the time to read AND comment.
It became all the harder to comment when there were several comments aimed at me that I wasn't completely responding to some of the counterpoint. That was in fact true, due to time. Recently, frex, Donald responded to me with some really good points, noting that my comment appeared to only blame Hamas and not Israel. His comments merited a response. If I only had the time. (Sorry, Donald). And I had a lot to say about the transgender issue and found myself very aligned with GftNC's point of view and would have wanted to wade in, but by the time I could particiapte the conversation had moved on. In the past, some have assumed I had nothing to say and said as much when that simply wasn't true.
So I just read and pop up from time-to-time.
It was easier under the Hilzoy era when I first was drawn here. Hilzoy had a way of interacting that I consider model. She was curious, respectful, and stepped in and politely (and sometimes firmly) called commenters out on both sides. Russell is a lot like Hilzoy; others too. Many not. And that era had several conservatives of many different stripes. While we were in the minority, it was a strong minority.
Lastly, in order to attract conservatives, IMHO, you have to at least want to hear another point of view. That's why I am here. That's why I turn on Urban View and Progressive Talk Radio from time-to-time when I'm on long drives. A recent opinion was voiced that conservatives left ObWi because they couldn't justify their positions and noted that the group here is smart, well-informed and articulate, implying that the conservatives were not. That doesn't help. However, I agree with the assessment of the characteristics of my left-leaning, liberal friends here on Obwi. You are a smart, well-informed and articulate bunch. Overall, I very much enjoy our discussions and hearing your points of view.
"
Nous—
That’s probably right. I hadn’t even considered LLM’s but maybe.
My theory is that there is a standard form letter for people asking for pressure for a ceasefire, using our aid as leverage. Maybe a different letter for people who support Israel’s position. I hadn’t thought of them using AI, but that just shows I am still stuck in 2023 or so in my thinking.
Supposedly it is more effective to call them in the phone but I have done that and get nervous.
On the solution, I can’t imagine it. People argue about a 1ss vs a 2ss, but it is really hard to picture the two sides in the same country and also really hard to imagine the settlers leaving or agreeing to live under Palestinian rule. No acceptable solution seems realistic for now. Just stopping the slaughter and getting surviving hostages back is about the limit of my imagination here.
"
My question for Schumer is my now-standard question for anyone advocating for a two-state solution: precisely where to you think the second state will be? And who is going to evict the current owners?
"
I know this is a peculiar thing to note, but as minutiae I believe Russell mistyped a former commenter’s name as “BrickOverBill”, r instead of n, which presumably would have made it past the filter. We’ll see if this comment appears.
"
So Schumer or whoever wrote this can’t really be that stupid. And from reading my email he or the actual writer knew I would think any of that was true. We need a better class of liar in DC. Or maybe even honest people.
Assuming that anyone actually read it in any detail and stopped to consider what you were saying. I always assume that emails to representatives go to interns, who are mostly just skimming them for keywords and sending out form responses that are 80% LLM content. These letters aren't so much responses, from what I can tell, as position statements meant to address keywords in your email. They are meant to clarify the representatives position. In this case his position is the equivalent of hope and prayers.
But hey...your email probably did go into the tally on the side of Gaza that he uses to determine how much concern he has to express while refusing to intervene, and how much he has to worry next time he's up for re-election.
I'm starting to think that in the post-Citizens-United era the only way to actually get long time Dems to listen may be to organize (union, interest group, something) and throw support behind Democratic Socialists in primaries until we've picked off the ones with deep donor support.
Their worry with Mamdani shows that this is what they are running most scared from.
"
Busy yesterday and today see stuff about alien space bats. Huh.
(Wo)man shall not live by misery alone.
"
On his list of Israeli goals, numbers three and four are fantasy. In theory those are American goals but for Americans the first one was and is the one that mattered more than all others. By far. Keeping civilian deaths low would be nice, but not that important. For Netanyahu, staying out of jail and in power was the number one goal. For some others, the goal is ethnic cleansing.
So Schumer or whoever wrote this can’t really be that stupid. And from reading my email he or the actual writer knew I would think any of that was true. We need a better class of liar in DC. Or maybe even honest people.
The summary of HR 815 regarding Gaza is misleading, But too tired to rant.
On a positive note, I watched the hour long discussion with Brad Lander that Peter Beinart had on July 4. Lander was really impressive, a politician I could support with enthusiasm. Though I like Mamdani a lot, if I were a NYC voter I probably would have put Lander as 1 and Mamdani as 2 based on Lander’s experience. ( On Palestine Landervis a liberal Zionist unlike Mamdani, but Landercreally would be willing to pressure Israel, which is what I care about there. But I am mostly talking about his qualifications for being Mayor and all his other positions, very liberal, maybe a bit closer to achievable than what Mamdani wants. )
And he had a funny anecdote on his arrest. The two guys didn’t really like doing it. One was a Pakistani Muslim and said he would rank Lander and Mamdani as his top choices. The other said his wife wanted him to quit his ICE job because of what they were doing but he didn’t feel he could because he had a mortgage. Lander said it was funny but of course said it was also terrible.
No point linking— I think you have to subscribe to Beinart’s Substack.
"
Busy yesterday and today see stuff about alien space bats. Huh.
Anyway, thought I would post a reply I got from Schumer’s back in May after I wrote Schumer’s, Gillibrand and Latimer ( my House rep) a ( polite) several paragraph long email asking them to push for a ceasefire. Gillibrand and Latimer didn’t respond. No surprise in the last case and Gillibrand prob thought I was a global jihadist or something. So I gave the Schumer office some credit for a polite response. The response, however, was nonsense. Here it is —
————
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding U.S. aid to Israel and your request for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. I share your concerns about the security and well-being of innocent Palestinians.
I've always said that Israel has 4 goals: Radically reduce Hamas' threat, free the hostages, minimize the loss of innocent Palestinian lives and maximize the amount of humanitarian aid to innocent civilians in Gaza.
Like you, I am deeply troubled by the suffering of those who have been caught in the cross fire of this conflict. My heart breaks at the loss of so many civilian lives in Gaza. I am anguished that the Israeli war campaign has killed so many innocent Palestinians. I know that my fellow Jewish Americans feel this same anguish when they see the images of dead and starving children and destroyed homes.
I agree that the current political situation has created horrible living conditions for many Palestinians living in Gaza. That is why I have been supportive of opening up additional humanitarian aid routes to Gaza and increasing U.S. humanitarian aid contributions. Just recently Congress passed H.R. 815, the Emergency National Security Supplemental aid package that includes $9.3 billion dedicated for humanitarian aid, including for innocent civilians in Gaza.
I will continue to support a strong peace process through direct negotiations and look forward to the day when the Israeli and Palestinian governments can work together to achieve a two-state solution. I am committed to doing all that I can to encourage a productive and meaningful dialogue between the two parties.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch with your thoughts and opinions.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Schumer
United States Senator
"
I have to admit that I only remember Paul McCartney secretly rerecording Ringo's drum track in the studio at night - is that true? And stills from the film were Ringo plays a caveman or something. But he seems to be a nice guy.
"
The other player that comes to mind for me right away with this trait is John Paul Jones.
Jones was the glue in Zep. And a brilliant player, definitely the undersung member in that band.
Check it, the bass in this is just a perfect counterpoint to everything else that is going on. Funky, solid, he ties the different sections of the tune together and keeps in moving forward.
And if it's a Zep tune and it isn't a guitar or drums or voice, it's JPJ playing it.
Re: Ringo, you can always tell a young green drummer who doesn't understand how making music with other people works yet, because they don't like Ringo.
"
The people who downplay Ringo's drumming are the same people who go on about how Jimmy Page was a sloppy, overrated guitarist, and probably the same people that complain about what a terrible word "moist" is...mostly because that seems to be the sort of thing that other edgy people are saying and getting praise for saying. They've never actually sat down to really listen to the songs in any detail or approach them with an open mind.
Ringo had a feel and sensibility all his own, and knew how to leave space in the song for the other players' genius to show through. That's a rare thing. The other player that comes to mind for me right away with this trait is John Paul Jones.
I don't believe that Ringo and JPJ have ever collaborated on anything, but then I don't know that it would work, either. They might end up being too mannered and respectful with each other.
"
A personal hero, on a few levels.
A friend once remarked that the only measure of a drummer's contribution to music was their technical virtuosity. "Yeah?" I asked him. "How many more great songs might have been produced if Ginger Baker were as good at keeping a band full of huge egos together as Ringo was?"
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.