(The Ganjas - word is getting out)

In case you weren't feeling like going the mellow route tonight (i.e. if the Mid-Week Concert just wasn't making it for you right now) I thought I would toss in a new track from a band I've posted here before. The Ganjas are Chilean and have been gaining momentum since I last posted them. They've been playing all over, not only South America but heading into Europe and playing a few gigs in the states, most notably SXSW earlier this year.

This track, a new one is from their MySpace page which also features a few other new tracks is Motoqueiro.

They've been getting a lot of good word of mouth going lately. And you heard them here first.

(Felix Ayo and friends)

From Seville Spain tonight. From the 2009 International Festival of Chamber Music, a program of Beethoven, Turina and Brahms recorded live by Radio Nacional Espana on September 11, 2009. The program is listed below:

Festival Internacional de Música de Cámara
Joaquín Turina
Concierto “Sonidos de la Noche”. Celebrado el 11 de
septiembre de 2009 en la Fundación Cajasol de
Sevilla.
BEETHOVEN: Cuarteto con piano en Mi bemol mayor,
Op. 16. F. Ayo (vl.), W. Coleman (vla.), I. F. Martínez
(vc.), D. del Pino (p.). TURINA: El Poema de una
sanluqueña, Op. 28. E. Hoppe (vl.), D. del Pino (p.).
BRAHMS: Quinteto para piano y cuerda en Fa menor,
Op. 34. F. Ayo (vl.), S. Gonley (vl.), W. Coleman (vla.),
T. Tsutsumi (vc.), B. Palko (p.).

As always, the concert is broken up into two parts - Part 1 (above) features the Beethoven and Turina and Part 2 (below) features the Brahms.

Announcements are in Spanish and the music is guaranteed to take it all down a few notches.

Enjoy.

Shorter New Yorker Magazine Huckadoodle profile: He washes away the Palin in three primaries.

Open Thread below....

In my mind I'm sitting on a beach somewhere in the Caribbean, my phone and computer at the bottom of the ocean, this song playing in the background. Happy hump day!

(Another in a series of painfully bad ideas)

In 1965 the "official" shooting war was less than a year old and already a growing number of people were starting to question what we were doing in Vietnam in the first place. The logic behind waging a war where there seemed to be no clear solution, other than hearing the fear card played over and over that it was part of the "domino theory" of Communist domination over the far east, that India could fall under the influence of the Kremlin and that, if India went, would Japan be far behind were the constant warnings being trotted out in order to justify escalation.

1965 was a pivotal year for the war in Vietnam because it signified a point where America would either be bogged down in a protracted war and propping up a corrupt and ineffective government or it would go in, makes it point and leave.

Unfortunately it was a situation that had a long history and one which wasn't going to be settled anywhere near 1965.

There is an eerie similarity to our current state of affairs in Iraq and Afghanistan and those in Vietnam. In 1965 the fear card was Communism and in 2002 the fear card was Terrorism. Both are situations we've found ourselves in where there was no easy way to extricate ourselves - a hopeless tumor that hemorrhages lives.

In late June 1965, ABC Radio aired a special "Dialogue And Decision". Hosted by a young Ted Koppel, the program tries to give some background (and try to make sense) out of a war that was quickly spiraling out of control with seemingly no solution at hand.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Yesterday's media heroine has to be Patricia Murphy of Politics Daily, who yesterday on Fox managed to make Sean Hannity look like buffoon and a tool. Of course, Hannity does this to himself every day, but Murphy gave it a little extra edge.

First, she flatly knocked down Hannity's little right-wing talking point about Elena Kagan purportedly "kicked the military off campus" at Harvard (she of course did did no such thing).

But the most delicious moment was this one:

Murphy: Let's be really, really honest here. There are members of the Tea Party -- it's a tiny, tiny minority -- members of the Tea Party, and I've seen them, who compare President Obama to Hitler. I've been there and seen it, I've been on this show --

Hannity: I've not seen it.

Murphy: He's been compared to the Khmer Rouge, and to Nazism, while I've been here, this is just common cultural --

Hannity: Whom compared him to that?

Murphy: Tucker Carlson! When I was sitting right here, on this show!

Hannity: [red-faced] Did you disagree with him?

Murphy: I did disagree with him.

Of course, if you go back and look at that clip now, it's worth noting that Hannity did not.

(Kwame Nkrumah - driving force for African unity)

In what started as an uptick from the end of World War 2 in 1945 became a full blown avalanche by the 1960's. African Independence was a major issue confronting many European countries, former colonial powers prior to the War. In 1960 alone over 15 former colonies became independent African nations, gaining seats in the United Nations for the first time. One of the more vocal proponents of the African Independence movement was Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah. In the midst of a civil war that broke out in the newly Independent nation of The Congo (Independent as of June 30th 1960), Nkrumah spoke out in support of a hands-off policy, fearing the former colonial powers would seize an opportunity to regain control. Soviet Premier Nikita Khruschev joined in with calls to oust the U.S. from the UN and unseat Dag Hammerskjold as Secretary General.

All in all, nobody took 1960 lying down.

[H/t Heather]

In the wake of the General McChrystal firing because of the article titled: Runaway General, Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings is being berated for the fact that he was "hanging around" the general and his staff and therefore somehow must have hypnotized his crew into expressing thoughts and feelings that were classified. (Kind of like the Svengali-like powers only Russian spies in espionage novels by Robert Ludlum could possess.)

And after they were duped by his super powers of persuasion by the great 'hang out,' he was somehow able to put together the type of long form journalism that has been sorely lacking in the traditional media of today. You would think he would be celebrated by the mainstream press for getting a tremendous scoop by doing real investigative journalism, but instead he's being vilified. Are they just jealous, or do they feel their access is now threatened too? The type of access that allows them to print almost propaganda type press released, but gets them invited to cocktail parties.

I didn't realize Michael Hastings 'hang out' interview technique was so easy to do. Find a destination that is remote enough because let's face it, McChrystal was the general in charge of the entire Afghanistan war. It's not like he's hanging around a Jack In The Box, sucking down a a few tacos. Buy a couple of guys a drink at an Irish pub in France and suddenly they open up and tell what they think of Vice President Biden. That was very slimy of Michael Hastings, we now learn.

Here's Howard Kurtz:

KURTZ: And he got fired rather quickly by President Obama. Do you think that McChrystal and his top aides got so used to your hanging around that they let their guard down?

Yeah, the elite team that McChrystal assembled was easily distracted by the constant appearance of Hastings, so they let their guard down. And these are the men running a war. Don't you feel confident now that it will end soon?

Hastings' response:

HASTINGS: No. I don't think that was the case, because some of the most talked-about parts of the piece happened within the first 24 hours that I was with his team.

One of the most -- I guess people have called it inflammatory passages is when I quote a top adviser saying, "Biden -- did you say 'bite me'?" That was the second morning I was with them in Paris covering an on-the-record meeting that they were having to prepare for a speech later on.

I mean, in fly-on-the-wall journalism, you're there to capture exactly those kinds of moments.

But you were hanging around, Michael. Dammit, you unprofessional hack.

KURTZ: But when you are there --

HASTINGS: That what makes fly-on-the-wall journalism so wonderful to read.

KURTZ: When you are there that much, you don't think it's likely that McChrystal and his team assume that some of their joking, that some of their banter would be treated by you as off the record?

... You got some criticism for quoting one comment by one aide while he was getting drunk, or "hammered" is the way you put it. Any second thoughts about that?

HASTINGS: Which quote are you referring to?

KURTZ: I don't have the piece in front of me, but certainly it's been widely commented upon that there was some drinking going on.

Michael, I have a big show on CNN and I ask the questions because I'm the media critic even if I don't know what I'm asking about, OK? You fill in the blanks. And really, these people were getting shitfaced. Isn't that a bad time to ask them questions?

HASTINGS: Yes. There was drinking going on.

But the only quote from that scene, if I remember, were two of the top senior military officials singing a song that they called "The Afghanistan Song." So I quoted the refrain which was, "Afghanistan!" "Afghanistan!"

And then I quoted General McChrystal observing his men, and saying, "I'd die for these men, and they'd die for me." I don't see what's so controversial about those quotes.

Bam. Take that beeatch!

KURTZ: You certainly did illuminate the human side of war. Michael Hastings, thank you very much for joining us from Afghanistan.

Now let's hear from fellow Beltway Villager CBS Lara Logan who has been pretty damn good covering Iraq.

LOGAN: Well, it really depends on the circumstances. It's hard to know -- Michael Hastings, if you believe him, says that there were no ground rules laid out. And, I mean, that just doesn't really make a lot of sense to me, because if you look at the people around General McChrystal, if you look at his history, he was the Joint Special Operations commander. He has a history of not interacting with the media at all.

And his chief of intelligence, Mike Flynn, is the same. I mean, I know these people. They never let their guard down like that.

To me, something doesn't add up here. I just -- I don't believe it.

Interpretation: "F--k him, Howard, he beat me to the scoop so he must be full of shit."

Or maybe it was because he took the time out after meeting the general earlier and went by himself to seek out General McChrystal and his staff and ask to do a real article instead of using the all powerful EMAIL. Why travel to a hell hole like Kabul when you can email the general a few basic questions and wait for his reply in the comfort of your own home or office in D.C. or New York?

And then these people wonder why the public has such a dim view of their credibility.

Brilliant. From The Daily Show:

"Fox &Friends" deems it inappropriate for the Obama administration to mention Bush when talking about the wars, economy or oil spill.

...So everything bad that happened during the Bush administration, was Bill Clinton's fault and now, everything bad during the Obama administration, is Bill Clinton's fault.

Boy, the Tea Partiers sure threw Harry Reid a gift by making Sharron Angle the GOP nominee in his Senate race this fall. Indeed, though Angle has been mostly sequestered since winning the nomination, she's proving to be one of those gifts that keeps on giving.

She finally emerged from her Cave of Media Silence and went on TV in Vegas, interviewed by Jon Ralston in his excellent "Face to Face" program. And it wasn't pretty:

Only once did she flatly admit her pre-primary language was too strong, when asked to explain her comments that the citizenry will resort to “Second Amendment remedies” — referring to the right to bear arms — if conservatives didn’t win this election.

“I admit it was a little strong to say,” she said. “That’s why I changed my rhetoric to ‘defeat Harry Reid.’ ”

... She said the separation of church and state is a doctrine meant to “protect the church” and that elected officials should “bring our values to the political system.” She sidestepped her comments from the 1990s that the separation of church and state is an “unconstitutional doctrine.”

Actually, what she said was this:

Ralston: The separation of church and state arises out of the Constitution.

Angle: No, it doesn't, John.

Ralston: Oh it doesn't? Oh, the Founding Fathers didn't believe in the separation of church and state, the Establishment Clause, the First Amendment?

Angle: Actually, Thomas Jefferson has been misquoted, like I've been misquoted out of context. Thomas Jefferson was actually addressing a church and telling them through his address that there had been a wall of separation put up between the church and the state precisely to protect the church.

Ralston: So there should be no separation.

Angle: To protect the church from being taken over by a state religion. And that's what they meant by that.

This is just plain weird. In the space of mere seconds, Angle shifts from denying that the Constitution enumerates the separation of church and state to describing how it works. And yes, it is intended to protect religious freedom -- which is precisely why the separation is so absolute. After all, a "state religion" is enforced precisely by people who use the power of state to enforce their religious beliefs.

Which is also what Angle does when explaining her position on abortion:

When Ralston challenged her comments to a Reno conservative talk show host that abortion should not be available even in the case of rape or incest, Angle said she values life.

“You want government to go and tell a 13-year-old child who’s been raped by her father she has to have that baby?” Ralston asked.

“I didn’t say that,” she said. “I always say that I value life.”

She went further to say she believes government should stay out of the issue of abortion, but it decided to insert its control after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

“The government decided to get involved in this, not me,” she said. “I’m just defending my position.”

To say that this is incoherent is gross understatement. Angle is a perfect example of how the Republican Right in this country has gone over the cliff: there is nothing coherent or rational about her positions, except that they are those of a typical right-wing extremist.

I'm sure wondering how all those smug conservatives like Sean Hannity and Dick Morris who were reading Harry Reid's poll numbers a few months back and boldly predicting he would be gone as Majority Leader come November are feeling these days.

They can thank their beloved Tea Party movement, if they like.