Tour

if i wrote my tour in setlist-speak, it would look something like this (actual shows in bold):

I: new york>buffalo, delaware park, albright-knox museum, niagara falls, ft. niagara state park, darien lake>syracuse
II: syracuse>hartford>albany
III: albany>saratoga, boat on the lake, house party, saratoga racetrack, SPAC
E: 5 am wake-up, amtrak to new york

show thoughts
darien: lovely day. great venue. weird crowd. allow me to explain. first of all, i had a great spot surrounded by some great people, including a group i had spotted at niagara falls earlier in the day. that was typical phish: random interactions with random people that somehow work out. but the other people...the rest of the crowd was so weird. no one could stay in their place. the ENTIRE show people were walking back and forth through my spot. never before in my show going life have i EVER experienced anything like this before. normally after two or three songs people will settle down into their spot and their will be minimal movement, but that was not the case in darien. totally weird. the show itself was good. my first dinner & movie. the gin was kind of a wasted gin (tough to say, i know)....it didn't really go anywhere. "how high the moon" was a very nice tribute to les paul. the second set rift was spot-on. good show.

hartford: musically, i think this was the best of the bunch i saw. had AMAZING seats dead center in the second to last row of the shed. plenty of room to dance, great neighbors, and met up with a great group of old-school friends. first set was great, of course highlighted by my first forbin>mockingbird (was slightly upset about no narration, but beggars can't be choosers!). the musical highlight for me, aside from the aforementioned forbin>mockingbird, was the DWD>reba jam. just sublime. a mid-set slave is always a good time and rare treat. and, of course the closing ghost>psycho killer (is this the first time that a song played on the pre-show PA has been played during the same show?)>catapult>icculus>YEM was AWESOME. this was classic phish at its best. the 4 guys on stage having a great time, not taking themselves too seriously, and playing some killer music. the entire show felt like a 2009 version of a 8/93 show. the stash in the first set was monumental and the ensuing craziness was quintessential phish.

SPAC: another great show, right up there with hartford. probably the most smoking CTB i have ever heard. and, again, the second set was outstanding. my first FULL harpua! the "i kissed a girl" was another moment of crazy, wacky, zany phish. it was one of those "champagne supernova/gettin' jiggy with it/shine" moments. just perfect. the new songs were excellent and highway to hell was a great way to close it out.

one more thought about the tour. this is the first time that i have ever thought phish sounded like the grateful dead. i heard a little of it during the june shows, but this leg really cemented it for me. there is just something more jerry-like about trey's playing, not in his tone per se, but in his phrasing and in some of the setlist construction. gordo also sounded a lot like phil this tour, with his bass really cutting through the mix. excellent sounds. the repeats were also a little odd, but you will never see me complain about 2 bowies, antelopes, and possums in 3 shows. i guess in their attempt to be unpredictable, they have decided to play songs in back-to-back shows or closer together than ever before.

fantastic weekend. boating on the lake and going to the racetrack were also great. great weekend, great weekend, great weekend.

Truckin, Up To Buffalo

this is what makes the road fun. All day in the car with generally decent weather. Even the bad weather was cool. Roll into buffalo with only a vague idea of where you want to go. Find the perfect spot using your jedi skills. Roll into the bar with a sick beer selection and watch the phillies. And we haven't even seen a single show yet.

They Just Don't Want to Listen

claire mccaskill seems like a very smart lady. she is clear in her explanations and very direct with her constituents. but the people in the room don't seem to want to listen. she explains that there is no government funding for abortions in the bill. they boo. she strikes down their argument that there should be no government interferance in health care by following their argument to its logical conclusion: if that is true then we must get rid of the VA and medicare. they boo. they have some nonsense argument about congress' special health plan...i'm not exactly sure what this argument is all about...the government negotiated a health care plan for federal employees just like any company would, so i don't really get their point of contention. regardless, they don't seem to care. no single payer plan...they can't get over it.

WTF is wrong with these people? well, they just said it. they don't trust her. why don't they just vote for rush for president? that seems like who they believe. i just don't get it.

i can't wait until this bill passes and the mass euthonizing can start. that is the obama plan to electoral victory: (1) kill all the old people because they don't support him which would skew the demographics of the country younger and therefore make more of the population likely to vote for obama. (2) steal people's money out of their bank account which will make them poor and dependent on the government and therefore more likely to vote for obama.

and, yes, some fuckwad just gave mcckaskill the finger on national TV. way to go. grow up you fucking little baby. thats all these people are: spoiled little brats. they want it their way or they are going to take their ball and go home. i give mcckaskill tons of credit for the way she has handeled herself in front of these dipshits.

Outlaw ALL Supermax Prisions!

according to this fellow from the specter town hall "What about this Guantanamo closure? I don't want these criminals to come over here into our area and escape, and we find that a bunch of innocent people are murdered. And that's what's gonna happen (emphasis mine)."

if this is the case, then i want to take every criminal in the US, violent or non-violent, from bernie madoff on down to a street thug, and ship them off to exile on some island in the south pacific because i have zero faith in the ability of our prisons to hold anybody!

i remember the good old days when republicans went crazy over building prisons. it was their answer to everything, but, alas, those glory days are behind us. think about all the wasted money spent on building prisons that can't even hold a single prisoner from guantanamo.

The Republican Plan for Health Insurance Reform

What Is More Dangerous...

indefinite detention or universal health care?

i'm done with these people. i say "fuck 'em". you lost the fucking election, so don't go on with this whinny-ass, spoiled brat behavior. george w. bush took this country in some radical directions after an election that he barely (questionably) won, but you know what...HE WON THE FUCKING ELECTION! obama won with a significantly larger margin and larger mandate than bush and he is doing exactly what bush did: he is trying to enact the policies he ran on. what is the problem here? you don't agree, fine, but quit this bullshit and start acting like grownups.

maybe in 2012 obama can run on his true platform, "kill the seniors".

Will Robot Insurance Be Included in the Public Option?

since the congress has already made their anti-senior agenda clear, i ask you this, member of congress: will the new health care bill cancel my existing robot insurance?

WTF Is She Talking About?

palin claims that if obamacare passes "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

really? well, in honor of abraham lincoln, the de facto founder of the republican party, i hereby challenge you to a "spot resolution challenge". what is a "spot resolution challenge"? the "spot resolutions" were a series of bills authored by lincoln that challenged president polk to point to the spot on american soil where blood was spilled, the alleged justification for the mexican-american war (here is the wikipedia entry).

in my version of the challenge, i challenge the former governor to point to the spot in the president's health care bill where it specifically authors "death panels" and/or where it calls for eliminating health care for down syndrome babies. point to the spot. show me where because a) i don't think i support a bill that authorizes "death panels" but b) my BS meter got up when reading her claim. so, in fairness, point to the spot. my BS meter goes down and you win the day.

on a side note, it seems like the parents of down syndrome children would WANT some form of government health care that protects parents' ability to get the necessary medical coverage for their children without the fear of rising premiums or cancellation of coverage. but thats just me, you know, here in the land of reality.

It Sounds So Sweet Played in the Right Key

for the first time since coventry, phish busted out "the curtain with". i've seen a few "curtains" but never a "curtain with". its the "with" that makes "the curtain" so super-sweet. my favorite "with" is from 5/25/88. other songs i would desperately like to cross off my list:

• forbin>mockingbird
• harpua (full version, with narration)
  
• peaches en regalia (a cover song, i know, but its part of the rotation)
• landlady (stand alone, not part of PYITE)
• BBFCFM
• dinner & movie
• esther

Soylent Green is People!

sometimes i feel a little like charlton heston at the end of soylent green. watch the clip below. you could replace his words with "medicare is government run health insurance!"

It's Almost Too Easy

no comments. the video speaks for itself. and, yes, i am glad i didn't get a job with the apollo alliance. i wish i had all of these facts before i sent them my resume.

This Is Why You Can't Negotiate With the GOP

one of the main problems with the current GOP is their unwillingness to compromise or discuss anything in a sane, rational manner or to be a good-faith partner (see this great article by ezra klein about why the "west wing" was bad for democrats, re: judging the intentions of GOP). i have always thought their inability to compromise is squarely rooted in their christian fundamentalist ideology. when dealing with fundamentalists of any religion, whether it be jewish, christian, or muslim, it is always "my god vs. your god and since your god is inferior because my god is the only true god despite what you say, you are always wrong". that is why god v. god never works...each side is convinced that they are right because their god is the real god and your god is a false idol. you can't make any progress.

that is what i was thinking when reading this politico article about how congresscritters can't hold town-hall meetings anymore because members of the audience are being too disruptive. like this story from rep. tim bishop (D-NY):

“I had felt they would be pointless,” Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) told POLITICO, referring to his recent decision to temporarily suspend the events in his Long Island district. “There is no point in meeting with my constituents and [to] listen to them and have them listen to you if what is basically an unruly mob prevents you from having an intelligent conversation.”

In Bishop’s case, his decision came on the heels of a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.

Within an hour of the disruption, police were called in to escort the 59-year-old Democrat — who has held more than 100 town hall meetings since he was elected in 2002 — to his car safely.

or this genius who engaged rep. bob inglis (R-SC):

At a recent town hall meeting, a man stood up and told Representative Bob Inglis to “keep your government hands off my Medicare.” The congressman, a Republican from South Carolina, tried to explain that Medicare is already a government program — but the voter, Mr. Inglis said, “wasn’t having any of it.” (note: he also violated my medicare rule).

or the infamous mike castle (R-DE)-birther incident.

this is the problem with the GOP and their fundamentalist ideology. you can't work or compromise with them because they are always right.

Is This Guy F**king Crazy?

ladies and gentleman, please meet paul campos. mr. campos is the author of a book called "the obesity myth", which from what i can tell, makes the argument that obesity is not a public health issue at all. that thesis is so outrageous on its face that it actually makes the birthers look sane (only in comparison...the birthers are still batshit crazy).

based on the quick and dirty from amazon, there is one argument that i do agree with that BMI is a horrible statistic. there is nothing wrong with calculating BMI, per se, i just think the formula is off. my BMI is on the high end of where it should be, and i am tipping the scales a little bit higher than i would like to right now, but in no way am i in danger of being obese. based on the current BMI formula, i bet 90% of professional athletes would be considered overweight or obese, but guys who play in the NBA who are 6'3", 205 lbs (my height/weight) are not overweight: they are solid rock.

but back to the point. this moron campos did an interview with megan mcardle of the atlantic about the obesity myth. in the interview he said "The correlations between higher weight and greater health risk are weak except at statistical extremes. The extent to which those correlations are causal is poorly established. There is literally not a shred of evidence that turning fat people into thin people improves their health. And the reason there's no evidence is that there's no way to do it." is he fucking kidding me? there is no evidence that being fat is bad for your health? really?

reading further down the interview it seems that his main argument is slightly off-base. his argument is with the BMI, which as i said before, i agree that the BMI is meaningless, not because the BMI itself isn't a useful statistic its just that the formula used to calculate the BMI seems off.

campos just seems like another one of these right-wing assholes (without actually knowing his ideology) who doesn't think that governmental policy can change behavior and influence outcomes. megan poses a simple question:

What should we do instead if we want to reduce health care costs? Here are some proposed ideas I've heard:

• Taxes on soda
• New urbanism (make people walk more)
• Bring back physical education in schools
• Make gym memberships tax deductible
• Menu labelling.
  

Will any of these make us healthier, if not thinner? And if not, what will?

campos answered:

Some of those ideas may have merit independent of whether they'll make people thinner (they won't). It's good to encourage physical activity, but NOT if the purpose of encouraging it is to try to make people thinner. Then it's counter-productive. People will be healthier if they're more active and don't smoke and if they avoid eating disordered behavior (like dieting in particular).

But Americans are actually very healthy and getting healthier all the time, despite the massive inefficiencies and dysfunctions of our health care system.

how can one argue that new urbanism, which encourages daily walking, won't make people thinner, which on the balance will make people healthier? same for bringing back phys ed. and menu labeling helps people make smart choices about what to eat. new york's experiment in menu labeling i think is great. i love having nutritional info in front of me when eating out (although, i have to say that i rarely go into chain restaurants which are the only ones required to post this info, so its impact on me is slightly limited). and a soda tax? i'm all for it. we tax the shit out of beer and cigarettes, so why not soda? soda leads to unhealthy outcomes and therefore its true cost to society goes unrealized. people complain that this is government interfering in daily choice. this is untrue. it is more accurate pricing of a good. soda is negatively impacting society, like carbon, and needs to be priced. look at what increasing cigarette taxes has done. almost no other crop, save for maybe cotton and cord, has had the impact on our history that tobacco has had, but yet it is not a right to be able to smoke tobacco (full disclosure: i am not arguing that tobacco should be banned. adults can make their own decisions. it just has to be accurately price to reflect its true cost on society). drinking soda is the same...its not a right, its a privilege.

but to claim that we do not have an obesity problem in this country is nonsense. obesity leads to a whole host of health issues from diabetes to heart disease and those people are driving up health care costs. i want to scream when i see fat-ass little kids drinking soda, eating chips and other crap who obviously have never exercised in their life. they are the people who are going to have serious health problems when they grow up. no one can argue otherwise. if your issue is with the BMI, fine. but dont confuse the point: obesity is bad for you. we need to find a new statistic, whether it is a new BMI or otherwise, to accurately measure this so we can predict its impact on health and costs in the health care system.

More Thoughts on Digital Pricing

just for the record, i am not alone in my thoughts on the ridiculous pricing of some elements of cell phone plans. case in point, this piece from the new york times (and check this out on the true price of sending an SMS):

TEXT-MESSAGING FEES Why has the price of a text message gone to 20 cents, from 10, in two years? There was no big technology shift. There was no spike in the cost of electrons.

And speaking of anticompetitive: Isn’t it a little fishy that all four big United States carriers raised their text-message fees at essentially the same time?

Furthermore, why do text messages get special premium treatment at all? Why are e-mail messages (which require much more data) included with basic Internet service, but text messages require either a per-message fee or a separate package?

The carriers can’t possibly argue that transmitting text-message data costs them that much money. One blogger (http://bit.ly/gHkES) calculated that the data in a text message costs you about 61 million times as much as the same message sent by e-mail.

Give or take.

the rest is worth a read as well. the article also touches on another personal crusade of mine, those annoying messages when you leave a voicemail, instructing you to press 5 to leave a numeric page or to hang up when you are done. i have always thought those messages were scams to increase the amount of time you spend on the line in the hopes that you will increase you minutes used, hopefully to the point where you go over your usage and have to pay extra money. clever. but there is something that can be done with the new campaign "take back the beep".

send a complaint to your carrier. lets see if we can't stop this farce.

Mike Pence (R-IN), You Have Violated the Medicare Rule

i will not tolerate people badmouthing the public option while simultaneously defending medicare.

2 Quick Thoughts

just saw a CNN piece about drought in texas (here is a WSJ article on the same subject). how long before secessionist governor rick perry begs the federal government for disaster relief?

thanks to TPM there is a great story about the latest GOP lie on health care that obama is going to promote euthanasia. this can mean only one thing: obama is preparing to institute a soylent green tax.

No More Seniors on Medicare Complaining About Health Care

if i hear one more damn senior (apologies to seniors, including my grandparents) complaining about the cost of health care, what operations they can or cannot receive (some lady asked about hip and knee replacements to give you an idea of where she was coming from), and what reform should look like, while at the same time receiving medicare i don't know what am going to.

please. just stop. now. if you have private health care, fine, you can speak. but no one, i mean no one, on medicare should have the audacity to question a public option on health care.

medicare was created to take care of you and to ease the burden on families and society. now, can i have a turn? am i somehow less deserving?

Cronkite Remembers

this weekend discovery aired a series called "cronkie remembers" which featured walter cronkite reminiscing about his long and storied career.

watching it, i couldn't help be amazed about his career. my grandmother is 93 years old. she has lived through almost every major historical event of the 20th century. she has amazing memories of the events that transpired over the course of her life, but what is so amazing about cronkie is that not only did he live through the same events as my grandmother, he WAS those events. he covered it all.

he did early radio, broadcasting sports games via ticker tape and morris code. he covered eurpoe in the run up to WWII. he covered WWII and the aftermath. he lived in moscow at the beginning of the cold war. he covered the cold war and the korean war. he was a pioneer in early television and helped shape the medium of TV news into what it is today. the list goes on and on.

its really amazing to hear this man, in his own words, about the events that transpired throughout his life. he is no doubt history's greatest historian, and has provided mankind with a tremendous record through which we can study ourselves and our civilization.

Does John Yoo Believe In Any Laws?

another WTF article from the new york times today. it appears that our favorite lawyer, john yoo, did not feel that the posse comitatus act prohibited the president from using the US military in a domestic law enforcement action. really? well, i ain't no fancy big-city lawyer, and i don't teach law at berkeley, and i certainly don't write op-eds for newspapers (BTW, i am still not reading the inquirer), but the language of the posse comitatus act seems pretty clear, no (from wikipedia)?

The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:

18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):

10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel

The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

like i said, i am not the 21st century's greatest legal mind (that title belongs to jefferson beauregard sessions, III) but i don't think this language could be any clearer. you need direct authorization by congress, not some blanket coverage that yoo feels was granted to the president in the legislation passed after 9/11, in order to deploy the armed services domestically. this is one of the rare instances where cooler heads, led by bush, prevailed. can you imagine that? this issue was so clear-cut that even bush knew it wasn't right. god help us all.

another interesting tidbit from the wikipedia article. apparently as part of the FY2007 defense authorization act, language was inserted to change the posse comitatus act as follows "The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.^[3]"

this language is so broadly written that it almost gives the president carte blanche to use the military in whatever capacity he wants domestically, all without congressional oversight. fortunately, this passage was repealed in 2008.

john yoo should be disbarred, and in my mind, imprisoned for his failure to protect and defend the constitution of the united state and his general disregard for the rule of law.

My New PAC: Common Sense PAC

its very simple: i will support candidates who exhibit otherworldly common sense, or in the case of congress (or any other legislative body, for that matter) just average common sense.

i just saw a story on CNN about how historic reenactors on an historic canal in lehigh, pa. the canal offers historic barge trips via mule-drawn boats. unfortunately for the reenactors, and the mules that pull the boats, must get federal background checks, per homeland security regulations. seriously. the lehigh canal, with its mule drawn barges, is a HUGE potential target, and checking the background of the reenactors who guide the mules is clearly necessary and cost the park $1200 to get the check complete.

republican rep. charlie dent of PA recently spoke with DHS secretary napolitano to get this cleared up, but so far no action has been taken. clearly the law, as written, is just a little too broad and needs to be fixed. so, congrats, rep. dent. this is probably the first common sense move you have made in your entire congressional career.

the next person i will support with common sense PAC is ANYONE who challenges new york state senator pedro espada, jr, who represents the bronx but lives in westchester. espada is one of the geniuses behind the new york state senate shutdown earlier this month and has an incredible knack for graft. it is just common sense to run someone against espada. if no one will sign up for the job, i'll do it. senator nutbag. has a nice ring to it, no?

here are my qualifications to take on espada:

• while i don't live in the bronx (neither does espada) at least i live in new york city (he lives in westchester)
• i am not an asshole. espada clearly is. check out these youtube videos where he is outraged - outraged! - that a reporter would ask him legitimate questions about his residence and graft. the nerve of that reporter!

so, thats pretty much it. vote nutbag! i live in a more geographically alligned municipality than espada, and i am not an asshole, unlike espada.

winning campaign slogan, no?