Cycho Librarian

My uncle was in college in the late 60's, and did the whole college-protest thing. He had a VW microbus and was in a rock band that actually pressed a 45. I've still got a copy around here somewhere. When I was in college in the early 90's and there was something of a garage-band revival going on I played it for my cohorts at the college radio station, and the music director liked the cut so much that we actually put it on rotation and got it charted in our listing with CMJ . Sadly, we're once again stuck in a nowhere war that no one seems to know how to stop. So it's time to bring back the protest song. My uncle rewrote the lyrics to that A-side cut, and my cousin who's in video production put together a video for it. The cool part to me is that since the song is so clearly 60's in style this sounds like an old-school protest song. So, props to Chris and Mark, and I hope the rest of you enjoy it.

I would not describe myself as a Black Sabbath fan. I definitely don't fit the profile of your average Ozzfest attendee. And frankly I have very little patience for that demographic. I just don't think that they appreciate music. Yes, I am a snob. But even though I'm not a fan, I do enjoy a lot of the music that Black Sabbath put out in the 70's. You have to admire rock music that can be transcribed for marching band and still sound cool. But seriously, it's remarkable how many of their songs like "War Pigs" have entered our cultural consciousness, and their staying power is phenomenal. The fact that a several current bands have covered the song is a testament to that. One of my personal favorites is the Dresden Dolls' version, which I think they only do live. You gotta love a "Brechtian punk cabaret" duo covering a song like that on keyboard and drums. This morning on the drive in I was listening to Cake's cover of " War Pig...

"There's a good reason they're called al-Qaeda in Iraq, because they are al-Qaeda in Iraq," Hmm. That certainly may be the case right now Shrub, but don't you think you're missing the larger picture here? Have you paused to ask yourself why they are called al-Qaeda in Iraq? After all, the choice of name was really always up to them. It is now known with as much certainty as one can have in matters of international espionage that there was no al-Qaeda presence in Iraq prior to the United States' invasion. And with good reason: Saddam Hussein saw them as a threat to his absolute power in the country. Additionally, Hussein would never have wanted the sort of Theocracy that al-Qaeda was promoting. So we move in and remove the only source of stability (evil though it may have been) in a sharply ethnically divided area. In the subsequent power vacuum, naturally many different forces were going to try to seize power. Equally naturally, those forces would r...

Yep, that's right. As of Tuesday we will have officially entered year five of the war in Iraq. Just as a friendly reminder, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor took place December 7, 1941, and Emperor Hirohito accepted the Allies' terms for surrender on August 15, 1945. In other words, our involvement in World War II didn't even last this long. Today we hear news that another 7 servicemen died this weekend in Iraq. This seems to be roughly commensurate with the loss rates we've experienced throughout the war. Yes, it's piddly compared to WW2, but it certainly seems that there's a difference between battling a self-declared Empire that has set its sights on taking over the civilized world, and... well, what? Removing non-existent weapons of mass destruction from a petty dictator? Stabilizing an inherently unstable part of the world? Making money for multi-national military/industrial complexes? That of course brings us to Halliburton's decision this w...

The administration's "New Plan for Iraq" is becoming much clearer now, and it's worse than any of us could have thought. When I first started hearing about "surging" the troop level last month, I thought it sounded idiotic enough on it's own. I mean, what possible good could another 15,000 troops do that the forces already there haven't been able to accomplish in 3 years, other than provide more targets for "insurgents" that we can't seem to find or stop anyway? But this morning I hear that they're changing the mission from assisting the Iraqi forces to "securing the population." Doesn't that just send chills down your spine? Ring any bells of "Advisers" in Vietnam? Apparently, despite repeated claims that we won't get involved in a civil war in a foreign country, and despite the smackdown delivered by the American people to the administration in November, the solution that they've come up with isn...