As we got out onto the ground level of D.C. it seemed subdued at first. There weren’t that many people at the stop that Nirav and I got off at because we planned ahead to avoid an area we thought would be full of people. As we headed towards our gate (Purple), we saw a bus sitting in the middle of the exact intersection of where we were heading. Everyone in the crowd seemed quite confused and asked questions of each other. As a half hour or so passed, while we still didn’t move, people became a bit restless. Somehow people started to move foward, but we had no idea where they were headed because the bus was still in the intersection. As we approached the bus, a police officer explained that the bus was in the way and that they needed to get everyone out of the way so it could be removed. The problem was that people didn’t understand where to go because police just said to move away and even go around another corner – to a place that we all thought would not lead us to the Purple gate. So the crowd was confronted with believing the police officers and leaving their spot in the nonexistent line or trusting the cops and turning the corner in hopes that we would be closer to the gate. As the bus moved, and people still said to go the other way, Nirav and I walked around the corner to find another huge crowd…(to be continued)

I will update more on this story along with a tale about how we felt like we were in the movie Daylight (w/ Sly Stallone) because of an unbelievable situation at a Metro stop.

Also I will explain how the vendors in D.C. are unlike anything I have ever seen and how it is a stimulus package itself.

Pardon me while I go watch Kanye West and Kid Rock at the Youth Ball. Perhaps I will be on MTV with my mad dancing skills.

On the otherhand, I stopped by the office of the group that I worked with (Talk Radio News Service) when I went to the Democratic National Convention in August. My boss and friend, Dawn, explained a little bit about how things were going and what the new interns were working on. They were covering things like protests, rallies, and large events throughout the city. Unfortunately they missed the shoe throwing movement that happened at 11 a.m. which ended with only one person successfully getting a shoe over the White House fence, or so she told me.

It was strange to see the stark differences in the things that the media and the campaign are worrying about at this hectic time. Both a working towards an end goal but both in their own strange ways handle things very differently.  Nirav noticed this when we went to the TRNS office and I noticed it at the President Inauguration Commission (PIC) office.

The city right now is packed like sardines. Everywhere you walk there are people and everywhere you look there are more people/vendors. There is so much stuff that is being sold it is giving a stimulus package to D.C. as they work on reinvigorating the economy. The selling is like what I have seen in Denver and New York times 20.

I will add more later (plus some pictures) but we have to go back out on the town for the evening before the big day.

After the ceremony tomorrow we will have a few hours of down time, so perhaps we will try to see some of the parade. In the evening we will be attending the Youth Ball – which will feature Kid Rock and Common and covered by MTV. I am thinking maybe I can put on some of my amazing dance skills and make my smooth skills national.

The weather is not terrible here right now. There is no snow and it is about 30 degrees, a welcome departure from the freezing temperatures of Chicago. Along the way we hit a few patches of snow in Ohio but for the most part it smooth going all the way. The entire drive took about 12 hours.

Alexandria is sort of like any old suburb with chain stores, strip malls, and the like. As we arrived last night and headed to Arlington, Virginia to visit a few friends we saw the Pentagon on the side of the road. It was a surreal sight because I didn’t imagine it to be located close to hotels and apartments.

I will continue to post each night as I am here so stayed tuned for more adventures and misadventures in D.C.

Three goals for the trip – eat some Ben’s Chili (or Legal Seafood), visit the White House and the typical D.C. sites, and buy some really strange Obama gear.

The ad, endorsed by McCain, questions Obama’s loyalties to America due to his ties with Ayers, noting at the end, “Barack Obama, too risky for America.” This attempt to use Obama’s political ties to undermine his overall campaign is interesting because Obama is not the first, and certainly won’t be the last, politician to have questionable political affiliations.

If McCain wants to make the argument that the country must examine candidates’ political associations closely, it must be done on both sides. Sure, Obama has ties to controversial figures like Ayers, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko, but McCain has plenty of controversial associations as well.

The most obvious is McCain’s ties with the financial scandal known as the Keating Five. In 1989, Charles H. Keating Jr. was investigated for investment rule violations that totaled up to $650 million while he made nearly $1.3 million in contributions to five U.S. Senators, one of which was McCain. While McCain was cleared of any impropriety, it displays an example of poor judgment. This is one of the more widely known associations McCain has and one that Obama has called attention to in recent weeks with a 13-minute video explaining the history between McCain and Keating.

There are, however, plenty of other associations that have yet to be fully explored by Obama or the mainstream media.

One such association is McCain’s ties with G. Gordon Liddy, one of the two masterminds behind the 1972 Watergate scandal. McCain, who has embraced Liddy over the years, appeared on his radio show last November, greeting Liddy as “an old friend.” McCain said that he was proud of Liddy, saying, “congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.” While those exact principles and philosophies may be unclear, his actions landed him four-and-a-half years in prison for his involvement in Watergate.

McCain has not only appeared on Liddy’s radio show but used his home as the site of a 1998 fundraiser. Throughout the years, McCain received $5,000 in contributions from Liddy, including $1,000 this year alone (“With Friends Like These,” Chicago Tribune, May 8). This exceeds the $200 contribution Ayers gave to Obama in 2001 by far.

While Barack Obama has ties to Rev. Wright, John McCain also has ties with controversial pastors, namely Pastor John Hagee and Rev. Rod Parsley. Parsley has called for his audience to destroy Islam, saying that it is the “greatest religious enemy to our civilization.” Hagee called for an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church, calling it “The Great Whore” and a “false cult system.” McCain sought out the endorsement of both pastors, but has since rejected them due to their controversial remarks.

Within his own campaign, McCain has made some interesting choices regarding with whom to associate himself. There is Freddie Mac lobbyist Mark Buse, who is now McCain’s Chief of Staff; Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager who was the president of an advocacy group that defended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from stricter regulation requirements; and Charlie Black, McCain’s top political advisor, who said in June that a terrorist attack in the US would be a big advantage for McCain. Black also worked as lobbyist for Occidental Petroleum, a group that gained infamy in 1998 when its security company was involved with the killing of 17 Columbian civilians.

But perhaps the most overlooked aspect of John McCain is his association with the International Republican Institute (IRI). According to the IRI’s website, it is a group that claims to “advance freedom worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, good governance and the rule of law” (iri.org).

The group, which has been viewed by many as an attempt to advance a neo-conservative foreign policy agenda around the world, has been involved in the overthrow of democratically elected leaders in countries such as Haiti in 2004, Venezuela in 2002 and Georgia in 2003.

McCain is currently the acting chairman of the IRI, and has been since 1993. The cabinet of the IRI has notable figures, including Paul Bremer, who served as the Ambassador of Iraq in 2003, when he disbanded the Iraqi army by sacking 400,000 Iraqi soldiers.

The whole Obama-Ayers storm has been fueled by the McCain campaign, angry Republicans and the mainstream media as a way of distracting people from discussing real issues. This should not be tolerated by Americans in this important election.

If McCain wants to look at Obama’s past and judge him based on his political associations, McCain must be open to do it with his own past. The mainstream media must delve into these associations if McCain continues to make assertions about Obama’s questionable political relationships.

While I don’t agree that political associations are how we should measure the potential of a candidate, the logic asserted by McCain should be followed in order to examine him as well.

With the final presidential debate over and done with, the election for the next president of the United States has dwindled down to a matter of days. The American public’s attention towards each of these candidates will certainly intensify in these important days leading up to the election.

Looking back, it is hard to believe that the campaigns of Barack Obama and John McCain began way back in February and March 2007, respectively. Along the way there have been key moments which will be closely studied in the coming months and years.

From the beginning of the primaries there were surprises from both parties. The candidacies of the leading Democratic candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, made history from the very beginning. Obama’s surprise defeat of Clinton in the Iowa caucuses and highly contested finish the Democratic Party’s nomination were some of the more memorable moments for the Democrats.

The Republicans had their share of historic moments and surprises as well. Mike Huckabee’s shocking win in the Iowa primaries set the tone. This was followed by Rudy Giuliani’s risky strategy of focusing on winning Florida.

One of the most historic moments was Super Duper Tuesday when the largest number of states ever to hold a caucus or a primary simultaneously took place on the same day.

But there have been electrifying moments in the past three months alone that one could have never been anticipated at the beginning of Obama’s or McCain’s campaigns.

Barack Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention set the record for the most watched convention speech of all time, with 38.4 million viewers. That was until John McCain made his speech one week later, drawing 38.9 million viewers. In between both, Sarah Palin made her speech with 37 million people tuned in.

57 million people watched the first presidential debate while the second debate between Obama and McCain had 63 million viewers.

The vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin drew 69.9 million viewers, making it the most watched debate since 1992’s presidential debate between Bill Clinton, Ross Perot, and George Bush.

There has been an increase of interest in this election due to a variety of factors. Exciting candidates, lack of an incumbent, and the desire for change are among the top reasons. With the record numbers that turned out in the primaries and caucuses along with the record breaking television ratings of the conventions and the debates, voter turnout on Election Day will likely break records. According to experts 125 – 200 million people are expected to vote this fall.

One of the biggest factors in the anticipated voter turnout increase will be the youth vote. Making up nearly one-fifth of the electorate, voters under 30 will be under close scrutiny on whether they show up to the polls on November 4. With the viral use of the internet and technology, largely due to the candidacy of Barack Obama, youth voters have related to this year’s election more than in previous years. Although only 47 percent of 18-to-24-year-olds cast a vote in 2004, as opposed to 66 percent of those 25 and older, a substantial increase in youth voter turnout will signify yet another historical landmark that will be studied years after this election concludes.

These are all good signs that reveal that people are interested and engaged in this important political process. But it is extremely important that no matter what the outcome of the election is, youth voters must stay engaged in the political process, not only for the betterment of themselves, but for the country at large.

Last week, My Bloody Valentine, late 80s/early 90s noise-pop-rock aficionados, came to the Aragon Ballroom as part of their first US tour in 16 years. Unfortunately, MBV has not aged like a fine wine, but rather an aged cola. Flat, tasteless, and seemingly outdated, MBV “performed” songs in front of an audience largely consisting of nostalgic old fogies who remember them from their first go round and a multitude of indie rock/shoegaze/heroin rockers.

Despite reuniting and saying that they were finishing up a new album that was being worked on in 1996, MBV stuck to what they knew best. While the band seemed to stick to its usual routine of ignoring the crowd and staring off into space or their shoes (hence shoegaze), their setlist seemed as if it could have come from the inside of a dusty guitar case from their last tour. MBV only played songs from previous releases, including the renowned Loveless (1991), Isn’t Anything (1988), and their 1988 EP You Made Me Realise.

For the majority of the show, the audience seemed to collectively sway their heads to the rock, noise, and reverb of the music. MBV braintrust Kevin Shields occasionally struck his strings so hard that it pierced the ears of the audience, despite the free earplugs that were dispensed before the performance.

With layers upon layers of reverb and delay mounting on top of guitar loops, MBV blew through each song, stopping only for the occasional guitar tuning. This, matched with the inescapably powerful lights that the band brought with them, forced the audience into a submissive role. MBV performed song after song, recognizing the audience briefly only before what ended up being the longest and last “song” of the evening. Seemingly reminiscent of what a teenager might do when they join their first rock band, MBV ended their set with “You Made Me Realise.” Enveloping themselves and the audience into a noise/feedback/ear-piercing and excruciatingly long twenty-five minute “jam”, the band went supersonic, and not in a good way. Combined with lights that could make a dog go blind, MBV tested their guitars and amps to their limits, as well as the audience. This may have been the point, however, as they seemed to care less about the how it was perceived from the audience viewpoint than most other bands would even attempt.

For the most part, the unusually compliant audience at the Aragon stuck around for the entirety of the “jam” only to be rewarded with less than two minutes of a coherent and listenable song. By this point it didn’t matter what the band played because the audience was damned near deaf. Naturally, the supple listeners applauded once the music stopped and the ear buzzing began, showing their appreciation to a band that had nearly stripped them of their hearing and their dignity.

Although some people don’t mind listening to feedback and walls of sound, the audience seemed as if anything that MBV would have crapped out, they would have gladly shoveled up and smiled.

Perhaps the audience felt this way because they realize the relevance and importance of My Bloody Valentine in the history of rock and roll. Undoubtedly they deserve much credit for breaking boundaries and limitations and have paved the way for many bands today. Unfortunately, fans of MBV may be better listening to the albums and longing for yesteryear rather than attending a live performance where you may go deaf and wish for yesterday’s audible capabilities.

]]> http://jebert.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/my-bloody-earser-valentine/feed/ 0 jebert http://jebert.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/future-of-illinois-looks-bleak-according-to-former-governor/ http://jebert.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/future-of-illinois-looks-bleak-according-to-former-governor/#comments Tue, 30 Sep 2008 03:01:13 +0000 jebert http://jebert.wordpress.com/?p=112 ]]>

Former Gov. Jim Edgar spoke at UIC last week

Published in the Chicago Flame (9/29/08)

“The future for the state of Illinois is not real bright,” said former Governor Jim Edgar, who spoke last week at UIC as part of The Future of Chicago Lecture Series.

The former Republican Governor explained that the next governor of Illinois will face serious challenges, due to the inabilities of the current administration.

Edgar outlined the three most pressing challenges that the next governor will be faced with. The first he said, was the financial constraints that the state in currently in. “Illinois is so far in debt,” Edgar said, “that it will take some massive cuts and substantial tax increases [to get out of debt].”

The second challenge that the next governor will face, according to Edgar, is in regards to the people working within the government itself. Edgar explained that while he was governor he had a lot of good non-elected officials working in the bureaucracy of government. He said that since he left office, many of these “good people” left the bureaucracy, preventing much from getting done.

Edgar explained the third challenge, saying, “The next governor must get the public to trust the state government again.” He warned that this will be difficult because the electorate may not be happy with a number of things the future governor will be forced to do. Among those issues, Edgar said, may be a rise in taxes.

Among the challenges that the future governor of Illinois will face, Edgar also discussed the importance of higher education, the issue of bi-partisanship in politics at the local level, and the proposed constitutional convention that Illinois voters will be faced with this November.

Although Edgar was opposed to the 1970 constitutional convention, he said that it warranted an properly updated document from the previously written 1870 constitution. While he cited his involvement in the previous constitutional convention, Edgar said he was opposed to the idea of having another one this year. “I think the current constitution is working well,” Edgar said. “The problem is in who you elect,” he added.

Expressing his concern that opening the constitution up for review could result in several problems, Edgar said, “I don’t want the extreme right or the extreme left rewriting my constitution.” He also said that there are too many uncertainties that come with a constitutional convention. Edgar concluded, “I don’t think we can afford that uncertainty in Illinois.”

The lecture series is part of the undergraduate political science course entitled Chicago’s Future. It is a course led by Professor Dick Simpson that brings former government officials to UIC to discuss the future of the state. Future speakers include James Laski, a former City Clerk who was recently released from prison, and Mike Quigley, the acting Cook County Board Commissioner. These one-hour lectures, which are open to the public, will take place in the Behavioral Science Building, located at 1007 W. Harrison, on October 1st and October 8th in lecture center 140.

I must preface this article by saying that I live in a major metropolitan city with two professional teams on the verge of heading to the playoffs and I hate one and feel indifferent to the other. I am a fan of one of these team’s rivals which often results in me getting perturbed looks and jabs. Aside from maybe rooting for a team because they have cute or likable players (i.e. many Yankees “fans” rooting for the team because of how nice Derek Jeter is or how hot A-Rod looks in his uniform), the proximity effect is just about the laziest reason to root for a particular team.

It suggests that when you move you must become a fan of a different and possibly competing team. This can become a problem if you happen to live in a state with more than one professional sports team. I decided to look at how professional sports teams are distributed in the United States between the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, Major League Baseball, and the National Hockey League in order to better understand the fan that follows the proximity effect.

Here are my findings:

The state of California has 15 professional sports teams that reside in its borders. This means that the roughly 36 million citizens (of course not all of these are sports fans) that live in the state must narrow their decision down between 7 major cities. If you are citizen of northern California, near the border of Oregon, your choice of teams would be drastically reduced.

California takes the cake as the state with the most teams, second to New York, Florida, and Texas, respectively. Now of course this makes sense when you consider the populations of all these states. California is the most populous state in the U.S., followed by Texas, New York, and Florida. A possible explanation as to why Texas does not have more sports teams than Florida or New York may be due to the sheer magnitude of the state.

Sporting events in large metropolitan areas are generally a safe bet for owners and investors because they have the opportunity to reach a wide variety of people. This may explain why there are currently no professional sports teams in the following states: Nevada, Montana, Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Iowa, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut.

Conclusion:

The entire problem with the proximity fan is just this: What happens if you live in one of the above states? Do you not have the “right” to root for a sports team at all? If you happen to choose a team that is halfway across the country for reasons beyond team cuteness and physical location, I would say that you have every right to do so. In fact, I would give you more respect than I would these proximity fans.

In closing, I hope you root for your team(s) not because you live near them. Perhaps you have ties to your team because of family, place of business, or you just happen to like a successful organization (there are a host of other valid reasons). I just can’t stand the “But you’re from (insert city), how can you not like the (insert nearest sports team)” argument. I also must confess that I happen to live in Chicago during the Cubs and White Sox respective playoff runs and I reserve every right to root for their utter failure.

At least five college football games have been forced to make adjustments to their plans. Three high school football games have been affected by the hurricane, with one canceling the game altogether. And the three game series that the Houston Astros had been scheduled to play against the Chicago Cubs is threatening to be postponed. This is a terrible thing for both teams, since they’re both in the hunt for October baseball. The management for both the Cubs and the Astros has been discussing playing the games in an alternate location, but thus far, neither side has been willing to compromise on selecting one

Last month Hurricane Gustav hit Louisiana so badly that Louisiana State University (LSU) was forced to postpone their football game against the Troy Trojans until November.

Of course the sporting world wasn’t the only one affected by the presence of these powerful forces of Mother Nature. The Republican National Convention was even forced to cancel some of its festivities due to concerns over Hurricane Gustav. The strange part is what the Republicans were saying. Presidential candidate John McCain said that it was a time to “take off our Republican hats and put on our American hats.”

This incited a lot of anger from many people on the left, due to the fact McCain explicitly stated that we needed to be Americans (not simply Republicans) for one specific moment due to the presence of the hurricane. But I think he comment is interesting to think about.

We recently just passed the anniversary of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, in which people from around the nation mourned. When people discuss September 11th, they often reflect on the time immediately after the attacks and the feeling of a sort of national unity at that moment.

The interesting part about all this is that it seems people only feel that they need to be united during times of crisis. When your life isn’t threatened by impending doom we’re ok with arguing over arbitrary things such as home-field advantage, party affiliation or personal preferences. But when doom lurks, we all the sudden remember that we’re all fellow human beings that need to be equally treated and respected.

This is something that I hope we can all remember in the wake of the anniversary of September 11th, Hurricanes Gustav, Katrina, and soon to be Ike. Because if we don’t remember to look at each in this manner, the brief moments of unity that we may have in the wake of natural and human disaster will be for nothing.

The Democratic and Republican national conventions have now officially concluded after months of preparation and anticipation. Delegates were counted, vice-presidential candidates picked, and speeches supporting each party’s respective candidate were made to enthusiastic audiences. Often times when you are sitting in the audience or simply watching someone speak, you don’t necessarily think beyond the words that they are saying; but every now and then, a speaker will really grab your attention. This was the type of moment that I had when Barack Obama spoke at Invesco Field in Denver, Colorado on August 28.

When Obama spoke, his message was received by thousands of people with open ears and open hearts. People waved flags, banners, and arms in the air in celebration of a party and a message that they had longed to hear. Being among the audience and witness such an emotionally charged moment made it hard not to buy into the message of hope, change, and unity that the Democrats had spent a week discussing throughout the convention. While I was in the crowd, I felt as if I was connected with 76,000 of my closest friends.

This was truly the feeling of being a part of history that I wanted when I decided to attend the Democratic National Convention.

But something kept happening to me during the two weeks in Denver that struck me as odd. I was surrounded by people that loved the Democrats, loved Barack Obama and loved their country, but throughout my conversations with them, I noticed something. Most, if not all of the people I had talked to said that Obama would win the election. I kept posing the question, “But what if he doesn’t?”

This question was not greeted easily by anyone because none of these Democrats wanted to think of a situation in which Obama was not the sitting president next January. When they finally answered I received one of two responses. They said either “I will move to Canada” or “I will quit.” The latter of the two responses always struck me as the odder of the two answers, mostly because I thought the people around me were political junkies for life. To hear a response such as “I will quit politics if this person or this party does not win” made me realize that perhaps many of these people were in it for the wrong reasons.

I would like to think that I will be interested in politics no matter who is elected, because no matter what, there is still a job to do. Even if a president is elected that the general public will like, tough questions must still be asked of that president. Many supporters of Barack Obama have false hopes and expectations because it is their hearts that are leading them to support Obama. With a message of hope and change so entrenched in his campaign, it is hard not to let this happen.

As I walked away from the convention I realized that more people need to vote using their heads, not their hearts. My experience in Denver made me realize the potential that a candidate such as Barack Obama has, but it takes more than potential to be a good president. While I am sure many people will be jealous that I attended such an historic convention, I urge those that wished they were there to vote with their heads, and not just with their hearts.