I’ve been thinking, again, about the troubling, persistent problem of race and gender prejudice in art, literature and life. It arose, for me, in the context of a novel by mid-Victorian Anthony Trollope, whose dark comedy of greed and corruption –“The Way We Live Now” (For Trollopians manqués click here for a Project Guttenberg etext; if you don’t know about Project Guttenberg click there anyway and find out) I am now reading.

Okay, here I am plugging the efforts of a relative. Okay, a distant relative. Really distant. My great-grandfather was the brother of the great-grandfather of a man named Henry Garfinkel, better known to the world as Henry Rollins, one time lead singer of Black Flag. Yes, THAT Henry Rollins. But even if Henry Rollins wasn't a distant cousin of mine, I'd eagerly plug his show. My wife and I caught about a half dozen episodes of the Henry Rollins Show on IFC last year and we loved it. RABIDLY biting satire combined with some pretty interesting interviews and some musical guests who ranged from a bit too avant guarde for my tastes to damned good rock. Of course my favorite musical guest was his last episode of the season where his own Henry Rollins Band was the musical "guest."

Henry Rollins isn't just a punker. He is a very angry, pretty smart man. He sometimes seems a little out of his league when he is interviewing people, but this is scarcely noticeable most of the time. His monologues can be mesmerizing, like with his shaggy dog story of his trip on the Trans-Siberian Railway with intestinal disorders and axe-wielding train attendents. His bitter hatred of Bush would be dear to the hearts of many here, though those who want to see all of us get along happily and merrily petting eachother's puppies despite the disgusting and disturbing Republican attempts to demolish our democracy in a frenzy of pseudo-patriotic war-profiteering over the bodies of our dead soldiers may be disappointed by the harsh, ass-kicking sarcasm of Henry Rollins' wit. But for those who are horrified and even a bit terrified by the direct assault the Halliburton Republicans are making on our democracy will LOVE Henry Rollins' commentary.

From the New York Times:

Lawyers for the city, responding to a request to unseal records of police surveillance leading up to the 2004 Republican convention in New York, say that the documents should remain secret because the news media will “fixate upon and sensationalize them,” hurting the city’s ability to defend itself in lawsuits over mass arrests.

Yeah, well; the City could have considered that before spying on a Martin Luther King Rally endorsed by sitting members of the City Council. One would think this would have been obvious at the time.

It gets better.

There's a big story in The New York Times today, confirming what many people involved have long suspected: the NYPD's intelligence unit infiltrated and subsequently filed reports on various Progressive left political groups in New York City that were engaged with the 2004 Republican National Convention under the pretext of stopping criminal activity in opposition to that event. This also provides a case study into government dysfunction in New York on several levels.

But potential troublemakers were hardly the only ones to end up in the files. In hundreds of reports stamped “N.Y.P.D. Secret,” the Intelligence Division chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law, the records show.

These included members of street theater companies, church groups and antiwar organizations, as well as environmentalists and people opposed to the death penalty, globalization and other government policies. Three New York City elected officials were cited in the reports.

In at least some cases, intelligence on what appeared to be lawful activity was shared with police departments in other cities. A police report on an organization of artists called Bands Against Bush noted that the group was planning concerts on Oct. 11, 2003, in New York, Washington, Seattle, San Francisco and Boston. Between musical sets, the report said, there would be political speeches and videos.

“Activists are showing a well-organized network made up of anti-Bush sentiment; the mixing of music and political rhetoric indicates sophisticated organizing skills with a specific agenda,” said the report, dated Oct. 9, 2003. “Police departments in above listed areas have been contacted regarding this event.”

Why is Alberto Gonzales still the Attorney General?

Two weeks ago, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Gonzales said, “there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.” His reasoning, or rationalization, behind this extraordinary statement is that the Constitution merely prohibits suspension of the right, except under special circumstances, but the Constitution doesn’t explicitly state that the right exists.

Well!

The Constitution merely states that “Congress shall make no law” prohibiting the free exercise of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press (Amendment I). Under the “Gonzales doctrine,” this means that there is no inherent freedom of religion, speech, or the press.

The Constitution merely states that, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” (Amendment VI).

My wife and I, thanks to a cancelled political meeting and an already arranged babysitter, recently had a chance to be by ourselves without kids for a couple of hours. This is so rare these days!

We were discussing my article on European headscarf bans and started discussing xenophobe Republican Virgil Goode's fear of incoming Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison's wanting to swear his oath of office on a Q'ran. Honestly, I think Ellison's use of a Q'ran once owned by Thomas Jefferson is about the most American of acts one can imagine, embracing both our tradition and our diversity. But Virgil Goode seems terrified of Muslims.

My wife then shifted the discussion to just what would WE swear our oath of office on. She suggested Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. For me it would have to be something more appropriate. I guess if it was school board, I'd swear on my copy of Darwin's Voyage of the Beagle. If it was another position I'd probably choose the appropriate doncument like the city charter for City Council or state or Federal constitution for those governing bodies.

I can't remember if those were the exact words of the guy, but this was said to me at Wednesday's Blogging and Politics event and, well, I am still shocked at the comment.

Why? Because he said it after I commented "when was the the last time you saw a Puerto Rican black woman being part of the political discourse?"

This guy for some reason found it necessary to call me a shrill because I am a Puerto Rican black woman being part of the political discourse. That somehow, the only way a Puerto Rican black woman can only be part of the process if she is shrill or offensive or part of an echo chamber. That somehow there is no merit to what I as a publisher am trying to accomplish with my blogs because of the kind of mentality that will rationalize, "if no Puerto Rican black woman made it before, then there's a reason for why you shouldn't be here now".

I was shocked and I am still shocked that this guy said what he said.

BTW : If you were there, please feel free to correct me in the wording of this asshole

Before getting into the details, here's the dictionary definition of terrorism:

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
- ter·ror·ist /-&r-ist/ adjective or noun
- ter·ror·is·tic /"ter-&r-'is-tik/ adjective

The New York Times reports that the office of a New Jersey State Senator was shut down after about 60+ callers made assorted threats of violence, including death threats, against the Senator. The threats were made by talk-radio listeners standing up for the inalienable right to have a heart attack.

Angry telephone calls over her proposal to ban restaurants from using a type of cooking oil blamed for increasing people’s cholesterol levels prompted a New Jersey state senator to close her office early on Friday.[...]

Many calls were threatening, Senator Karcher said.

“They said that I should be pushed off a bridge, that I should be stabbed, that I am a Communist and several other things,” Ms. Karcher said.

If you click around this page, you'll very likely see a little banner titled "What is the future of the Internet?".

This is a bit of crass dishonesty on the part of big telco. For more info on net neutrality and why it matters, check out SavetheInternet.com.

In any event, Hillary Clinton has now added her voice to the forces of good. This is from an email she sent out this morning:

Via MyDD: The House Judiciary Committee just passed HR 5417, the Conyers-Sensenbrenner bill on Net Neutrality. The bill now advances to the floor of the House. Give a big hand to our New York Democrats Weiner and Nadler, both of whom supported the bill.