The co-hosts of the fundraiser were Montana Attorney General Steve (I’m running for Governor) Bullock and Secretary of State Linda McCulloch. In who’s who in Montana – Bullock is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (Attorney General) and McCulloch is the top elections official (Secretary of State).

They might also be the next ticket for Governor and Lieutenant Governor for the Democrats in Montana.

The Montana GOP is worried that their big gun, Roy Brown, might lose the race against Van Dyk. Brown was crushed by Schweitzer in the last Governor’s race. I’m really no fan of either person, so if I were a resident of that senate district, I’d probably leave my ballot blank.

Second, I had to chuckle at the Associated Press calling the house that the governor of Montana is living in a “mansion.” The current Montana Governor’s “mansion” kind of reminds me of a nice rest area along an interstate – something we might see on I-80 in Iowa.

The GOP fired off a press release saying how terrible it was for the Van Dyk to be a part of a fundraiser at the Governor’s residence because it violated state ethics law. Shame shame.

They must have forgotten that Republican Marc Racicot did the same thing. So, the Democrats used it as a basis to say it was OK…because it had been done before.

Maybe we should sit both parties down in the corner and say, “If Billy jumped off the cliff, does it make it OK for YOU to jump off the cliff?”

Of course, the Democrats did not like it when the Republicans did it. The GOP said the law had been “tightened” since the Racicot fundraiser.

So now we’re tied at one apiece…but it helped us see how small-minded both major political parties are in Montana and why most of us don’t belong.

Here’s a great idea: Just pass a freaking bill into law that says no political fundraisers can be held at the Governor’s state-owned residence. It’s that simple. It would then be black and white.

Poor Montana Cowgirl has made enough liberals upset that her blog was featured on a Billings Gazette headline this morning.  I find it odd that it was never a story until it bothered other liberals.  Cowgirl’s entire blog is devoted to lying about and mocking conservatives.

The rude anonymous blogger has apparently posted information using the state Capitol computer system according to the Gazette story.  Considering her love of all things Schweitzer and to a lesser extent Bullock, I’m pretty sure there is a scandal lurking within this story.  How much is our state paying Montana Cowgirl to be the governor’s personal cheerleader?  It makes sense to vote against corruption…. I suggest that Cowgirl’s sleazy tactics be rewarded with votes for the opponents of her pet candidates.

Check out the story on the Flint Report.

Vote Roy Brown SD25, James Knox HD47

Values, Energy & Growth PAC, the shadowy new Montana PAC responsible for the ridiculous mailers packed with lies about Roy Brown (which interestingly used the same photos of Brown as Kendall Van Dyk’s campaign) is now weighing in on the Knox/Ellis race in HD 48 in Billings.   The new mailer encourages citizens to call in bogus “privacy invasion” claims to the already busy authorities.  While Billings police are investigating homicides, they will be interrupted to look into absurd claims that James Knox’s signs are spying on private citizens.  It appears that those responsible for stealing Knox’s signs don’t appreciate the cameras and GPS units attached to random campaign signs.

Christopher Cady of Bozeman is the group’s treasurer.  I encourage all concerned citizens to contact him immediately or better yet, contact the Montana state Commissioner of Political Practices to report these illegal mailers. The candidates benefiting from the Veg PAC’s propaganda owe Montanans an explanation.  Call out this well-funded organization, denounce their tactics.  Mud-slinging isn’t welcome in Montana.  If a candidate cannot win on merit, perhaps they shouldn’t run and if Van Dyk and Ellis remain silent, we can only believe they condone or endorse these attacks.

Deplorable posts by two Montana bloggers share the dishonor of fail of the week.

Montana Cowgirl wins the Fail of the Week prize again for her post comparing the masculinity of long-married with children Senator Roy Brown with that of Kendall Van Dyk, the Montana house representative who has never been seen in the company of any female not related to him.  Cowgirl found it “faggy” that Roy Brown wore argyle as carried his laptop in a bag while working while Kendall Van Dyk apparently only wears camouflage or hip-waders and carries very manly weapons.  Even Cowgirl’s fans found her post to be petty and insulting to the gay community.

Emma Ingalls

October 15, 2010 at 8:08 pm· Reply

This is so petty, immature, and stupid… I hope you pack tissues on election day cowgirl! You might want the big box.

queery

October 16, 2010 at 12:54 am· Reply

You’re missing the point. It isn’t about making fun of a candidate that happens to be a Republican, or payback for what happened to Nancy Keenan, or giving them a taste of their own medicine… this is gay baiting. This is making fun of gays for political points. This is crapping on a huge segment of Democratic base. Bigger picture, folks!

Moorcat

October 16, 2010 at 3:46 am· Reply

After the many pixels spent talking about feminist views and not judging people by their appearence/gender on this blog, I was wondering when someone was going to speak up. Does it make one a “Man” to go out and shoot furry things (even if you use a bow)? Does it make one not a man if you carry a laptop case over your shoulder? I guess I just don’t get it. There is no question that I am a man but I haven’t hunted in over two decades. I can put 24 arrows in a 3″ circle at 40 yards with a 60 lb horsebow but am I not a man if I don’t do that to an elk? You are guilty of what you have accused your opponents of doing. That is disgusting and somewhat disappointing.

Cowgirl then resorted to adding the following comment which displays her complete lack of integrity as it is simply a LIE.

Cowgirl

October 16, 2010 at 9:45 am· Reply

Roy is a wealthy out-of-state oil executive, who who spends his time in the legislature trying to help out of state oil companies get tax breaks, even when they are making more money than any industry in the history of mankind. And he tries to syphon hunting license money to cover for the resulting deficit, even when those funds are supposed to go toward protecting hunting land. Has nothing to do with sexuality, sorry to say.

My personal favorite comment, however was this one found in her subsequent post addressing the fury caused by the initial photo comparison of Kendall and Roy.

Montana Left

October 17, 2010 at 12:03 pm· Reply

The irony to all of this stuff is that Kendall seems more likely to be involved in a “bromance” than Roy. I can’t see Roy in a bromance.

The obvious conclusion from this post is that Montana Cowgirl isn’t quite comfortable with her sexuality.  Her “anonymity” prevents me from further expounding, but eventually it will be evident to all what I’m talking about.

I must admit it was enjoyable for me to witness the backlash against Cowgirl this week as well as that of our other Fail of the Week winner, Matt Singer from Left in the West for his post condemning Aaron Flint  (Northern Broadcasting Voices of Montana, The Flint Report) for his original post here.  Singer criticized Flint for his apparent failure to denounce the Poplar principal who gave a pep talk to failing students after a school assembly.   Left in the West fans weren’t sold on Singer’s assessment of the situation in Poplar and many called him out on the real story, which was a small Montana middle school (approximately 140 students) had 5 suicides last year in addition to another 20 attempts.  The principal being criticized for her pep talk is a FIRST-year principal.  Perhaps she figured whatever tactics in use last year weren’t working and she tried something different.  The comments on both Flint and Singer’s posts largely supported Flint who also weighed in with thoughtful commentary and a few pointed youtube clips from the movie “Lean on Me”.   Some of the interesting comments on both posts:

Pete Talbot

Tuesday, October 12, 2010 5:29 PM

You get an F for thoughtfulness. I imagine you didn’t go to a Poplar middle school, where five kids committed suicide last year and twenty attempted it, so your comment is irrelevant and reckless.

Shaming kids who already suffer in a cycle of poverty and desperation? God you’re a bonehead.

Huh? (0.00 / 0)

I  SERIOUSLY doubt that we can actually know what happened from a Fibune article.  Might I remind you that this woman has dedicated a mere FIFTEEN YEARS of her life to educating these kids.  I’ll withold judgement until and at such a time as real malfeasance can be proven.  Until then, I’m just not buying it.  Flint could very well be right.  A scandal, no matter whether it’s real  or not, is enlarged simply for its entertainment value in the outback of Montana.  Hey, a good scandal plays well out there.  But again, I doubt the “facts” of the Fibune.  It was a poorly written piece of sh*t article to begin with that seemed to actually start the scandal rolling.  Now, I’m not saying that I couldn’t be wrong, but using the Fibune article as the sole reference point, I doubt that I am. 

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Tue Oct 12, 2010 at 22:42:25 PM CDT

The real story, Larry (0.00 / 0)

isn’t the principal’s tactics — I agree, there’s a lot of “he said, she said” being bandied about in the Trib piece.The real story is that five KIDS have committed suicide and twenty have attempted suicide WITHIN THE LAST YEAR.  In a town of less than 1000.This is the real travesty. Although if there is some truth to the principal’s actions, it seems to be a pretty poor way to motivate kids. 

---

by: pete talbot @ Wed Oct 13, 2010 at 10:22:34 AM CDT

 

Given that these parts of the GFT story weren’t highlighted in the original post(0.00 / 0)

 

 

…I have to agree with Larry and Aaron Flint. Like everyone else, I certainly don’t know all the facts about the allegations surrounding the school assembly, what was said or how it was done. On the face of it, if Principal Black’s account is correct, a principal giving a group of kids a private peep-talk about getting their grades up certainly does not a public-shaming make.

---

by: Matthew Koehler @ Wed Oct 13, 2010 at 12:08:59 PM CDT

 

Montana Democrats to Vote Against “Big Government” Van Dyk

Although it is a key Montana race, I hate to continue to write about the Kendall Van Dyk campaign’s hypocrisy and mud-slinging.  The Montana Cowgirl blog’s posts here and here today combined with breaking news that Democrats are tiring of their candidate have, however; warranted another post.

According to sources within the Montana left, Democratic leaders are panicking over a trend they have noticed in Billings voters.  Apparently democrats in SD25 are seriously favoring conservative businessman Roy Brown over radical environmentalist community organizer, Kendall Van Dyk. Whether these voters fear big government,  are tired of the deceptive ads by Van Dyk and his minions, or they simply realize the importance of this election, voters from all ends of the political spectrum are showing support for Republican incumbent senator Roy Brown.

Rumors swirling about Brown’s covert veganism have likely contributed to this trend (the PETA crowd surely approves) but many voters are simply saying that they simply cannot elect someone with a one-issue advocacy history. Thanks in part to Van Dyk, Montana stream access laws have been clarified, but he has accomplished little else in his time in the House. His reputation for ego-driven tirades and failure to be a team player is obviously a contributing factor in this important election.

Billings Gazette readers commenting online have mentioned with increasing frequency that although they are Democrats or they voted for Kendall Van Dyk in his last House election, they’ll be voting this time for Roy Brown. Roy’s accessibility has been lauded while Van Dyk  frequently resorts to using uninformed youngsters carrying Droids to canvas neighborhoods in SD25. Roy has consistently campaigned with dignity, always on a platform of why he deserves your vote as opposed to why his opponent does not. His honorable tactics have been rewarded with attack ads filled with lies and distortions about his career and lifestyle. Although collaboration would be illegal, it seems like quite a coincidence that mailers sent by Values, Energy, & Growth PAC use the very same photo of Roy Brown in a long black coat and a red scarf as those sent by Van Dyk.   Montanans, Democrats and Republicans alike want candidates to know that we are tired of malicious campaigns.

Montana’s economy has been struggling to keep up with the spending of the democrats in power and Montanans from the left and right of the political spectrum are realizing that we can’t spend our way out of this recession. The reality for most Americans is that our federal taxes are going to be skyrocketing. With Montana’s projected state budget shortfall of nearly a half BILLION dollars, increases on state taxes are almost certain. Van Dyk hasn’t ever met a tax hike he didn’t like while Roy Brown was listed by Legistats as the third most fiscally conservative member of our state’s senate.

Maybe voters have decided that voting for local and state legislators who support Obama’s destruction of our nation is a bad move….but whatever the reason, Billings voters will be sending clear messages to the big Montana government on November 2nd, 2010.  Gutter politics should not be rewarded.  Ask Kendall Van Dyk to stop being the political playground bully and to keep his campaign clean.

According to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, Montana is home to 2 out of 20 key legislative races in the nation.  The DLCC announced its “Essential Races” Program in late September along with a list containing the first of the races they felt were most important throughout the nation.   Out of the more than 6000 races nationwide this November 2nd, Democrats will have eventually have chosen a total of 50 critical races that they plan to augment by grassroots initiative.

Democrats Augmenting Races With Grassroots Initiative

HD 100 (Willis Curdy (D) and Champ Edmunds (R)- while widely endorsed by the ultra-liberals in Missoula County, Curdy hasn’t made his stances clear.  He refused to respond to the non-partisan Project Vote Smart Political Courage Test and his website lists only vague information in broad categories.  For instance, he believes we need high-paying jobs, good education, and protection from property tax increases.   The National Rifle Association Victory Fund graded Mr. Curdy a “C-“.

Republican Champ Edmunds, if elected, plans to enact ”a moratorium on frivolous lawsuits put forth by radical environmental groups that stop progress and kill jobs”.  His website lists specific plans to combat the challenges our state faces today.  He scored a 100% on Project Vote Smart’s Political Courage Test- his views on issues can be found here.

As for the other race targeted, Montana Senate District 25 (Roy Brown v Kendall Van Dyk) we’ve covered it thoroughly in prior posts here and here.  We simply wanted to explain why it was so important to us…. the democrats believe it is a critical race and we agree with them.

While we are all accustomed to receiving campaign literature, the amount, frequency and content targeting incumbent Montana state senator Roy Brown (SD 25) by either his opponent or  those working on his behalf  are not only excessive, but bordering on libelous.

Many Montana Democrats campaign on their “environmentally conscious” platforms,  so one would expect them to practice what they preach.  Perhaps they should consider an all email campaign to protect our forests.  Since absentee ballots were sent out early this week, voters in MT SD25 have received an astronomical number of expensive 2 sided, full color pro-Kendall Van Dyk mailers.  Some households have reported receiving twenty or more of them since Tuesday.

All Montanans care about maintaining the beauty and future of our great state.  To criticize a candidate as ecologically irresponsible while Van Dyk himself condones and supports forest devastation is rather hypocritical.  How many other issues does Van Dyk  promote while his lifestyle indicates otherwise?

The hypocrisy of not only the mailer content but the premise of mailers themselves is an issue that needs to be addressed.  Campaigning as an environmentally conscious candidate while ridiculously portraying your opponent as a tyrannical oil baron is duplicitous- especially when the eco-friendly candidate is partaking in the earth-raping deforestation by mailing large postcards in bulk.

These mailers, varying in size from large to gargantuan have no mention of the use of recycled paper or soy ink.  None of them display any indication of  biodegradability or if perhaps the liberal candidate has chosen to offset  contributions to our environmental demise by planting trees.

Our candidates for elected office strive to shine as heroes in one aspect of their lives and/or careers. When environmentalism is that aspect,  one expects to see that candidate promoting it in not only words, but actions.

An former boss once told me that the secret to his success was to determine what issues and characteristics were important to his employers and to then make those things important to him.  WE employ elected officials, isn’t it time our needs are important to them? Masquerading as ”green” and condemning your opponent for being pro-energy is diabolical unless those values are also actions.  It is time that we hold our candidates to their campaign promises and start asking the tough questions.  We may or may not approve of Roy Brown’s stances on the issues, but we can all admit that they are consistent with his lifestyle.

Note : all red text below was added by ME to point out the distortions and lies.  Please click on image to expand to full-size.

I'd take "Big Oil" Roy Brown over Kendall "TAX HIKE" Van Dyk any day.

The left loses more credibility each day.

A PAC is a political committee organized for the purpose of raising and spending money to elect and defeat candidates.   Unfortunately, some  don’t register their organizations with the FEC or the state and many that do register, don’t disclose their involvements.  Just who is the group “Values Energy & Growth PAC“? Registered to a Bozeman Post Office Box, Christopher Cady of Bozeman is listed as the  caliginous group’s treasurer.  Other than that,  little is known about this group.  A Google search of the group’s name returns nothing of value and searching the Federal Elections Commission website also turns up nothing. Update: The group abbreviated as “VegPAC” (how appropriate) filed a C2 in Montana on September 30,2010.  Although it provides little additional information, the filing claims intent to “support and/or oppose legislative candidates”.

Numerous 2010 Montana primary elections were potentially  influenced by last-minute attack ads and mailers from difficult-to-track  shadowy groups.  In one such race, Montana HD 57 , Debra Bonogofsky was defeated by Dan Kennedy after voters received a mailer criticizing Bonogofsky’s failure to return the group’s survey.  Bonogofsky is, according to Republican party insiders, a RINO (Republican In Name Only) and is listed as such on rinopoacher.com.  Although she was one of only two Republicans in Montana to receive the endorsement of the radical environmentalist group Montana Conservation Voters (who has endorsed Kendall Van Dyk in the SD 25 race) in June’s primaries, she denies that she is a RINO and isn’t willing to surrender without a fight.  After considering an illegal party change  (Democrats entertained the idea of her running in the general election as their candidate, which says much about her “conservatism”), Debra instead launched a write-in campaign.  It will remain to be seen if voters will regard Debra’s persistence as that of a sore loser-it is easier to blame special interest groups for a defeat than to look within.

If you have questions today as you are voting from the comfort of your own home, don’t hesitate to research further. Ask questions.  Know your candidates. If you aren’t familiar, information is available on the voting record, issue positions, and group ratings for most candidates at Project Vote Smart.  This year, absentee voters can also check the secretary of state’s website to make sure their ballots are received by the county.

We’ll deal with pot first, which is being assaulted by Republicans and the media. 2008 Republican gubernatorial candidate Roy Brown had this to say about current Montana medical marijuana laws:

“… and when their peers in junior high have (medical marijuana) cards, it just sends the absolutely wrong message.”

Show me one junior high kid who has an authentic medical marijuana card, Roy. But fear speaks louder than facts at the Republican convention in Billings, and Brown wants Montana voters to repeal the law that they passed by 60% in 2004. The final language adopted in the platform came from Victor Republican Jim Shockley, which urged that the law be repealed or amended.

At least Gov. Schweitzer, the guy who beat Brown for governor, did a little research before opening his mouth. While touring a marijuana caregiver’s facility in Missoula, he said that although the law needed some revision, he didn’t like the idea of taking the herb away from those in need.

Our hometown daily, however, feels differently. Sunday’s rabid Missoulian editorial took a page right out of the Republican play book of fear with peripheral horror stories and this rejoinder:

Until the state can straighten out the rampant problems with the Medical Marijuana Act, Missoula should order existing dispensaries to cease doing business and impose an immediate moratorium on new shops.

I can agree that the law needs some tweaking and a moratorium on new shops could be in order, but existing dispensaries should cease doing business? Missoulian editorials of late rarely take this strong a stand — not on the economy or health care or war or climate change — just on pot.

On to wolves.

Photo: Kurt Wilson/Missoulian

Wolves aren’t endangered, kids in camo and their folks told District Judge Don Molloy. Elk and other ungulates are the ones in danger from wolves, said the sign carriers in front of the Missoula Federal Courthouse.

At issue is the re-listing of wolves as an endangered species, being heard in Federal District Court.

A host of other factors like loss of access, private hunts and game farms are affecting hunters. Include climate change and habitat loss and other threats besides wolves, and the reduction in wildlife numbers becomes a more complicated debate.

But you don’t usually see this crowd at wilderness hearings, environmental rallies or public access meetings. No, it’s the federal government these folks are mad at, as usual. They’re the Tea Party of the hunting crowd.

At the moment, confirmed artists and groups include Fernando Ferrer, Roy Brown, Bomburayo with Patrio Ritmo, Bomba Urbana, Zoraida Santiago, Intifada, Mijo de la Palma, the University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez Chorale [Coro del RUM], Teatro Zurdo, Bossa Trova, Sigma (¡Qué vivan los estudiantes!/Long Live the Students!), Industria Satélite, Episódico, Sound System/Desde el Campo, Sound Jazz, Crane the Crisis, Movimiento Campesino, Los Petardos!, and visual arts students from the UPR. More performers are joining the concert as I write.

This event will also transmit information from the National Negotiating Committee and views from the 11 campuses of the University of Puerto Rico system. The concert will be the culminating event after a series of activities that began at 6:15 this morning with a demonstration of the Association of RUM Professors (APPRUM) and will be followed by other protest events throughout the day gathering professors, students, workers, and the public.

For more information, see www.ustream.tv/channel/resistenciacolegial

Photo of Roy Brown from http://www.cancioneros.com/ct.php?NM=49

Silvio Rodríguez on touring the United States: “It’s not only breaking the blockade that has motivated me…”

Interview with Silvio Rodríguez by Rosa Miriam Elizalde - Español

Translation: Machetera

Silvio Rodríguez will soon be touring Puerto Rico and the United States.  It’s not the first time that he’ll have visited both countries – refusing to view Puerto Rican territory as a North American estate – but this time the first hints about of the trip were muted until the Daily News in New York unearthed the news: the trova singer will perform in Carnegie Hall on June 4^th.

The Daily News called Silvio a “Cuban music legend,” emphasizing that only living legends perform at Carnegie Hall.  And it’s no exaggeration.  Benny Goodman, Judy Garland, Shirley Bassey, James Gang, Nina Simone, Stevie Ray Vaughan…the Beatles in 1964…all have performed there.  When the U.S. music industry closed ranks under McCarthyism, the legendary band The Weavers, with whom Pete Seeger sang, found itself forced to break up in 1952.  The musicians from The Weavers reunited again at Carnegie Hall in 1955 and in 1980 they repeated the performance in the same theatre, something which served as the subject of the famous prizewinning documentary “Wasn’t that a time.”

With the tour to Carnegie Hall and Puerto Rico confirmed, his excellent performance in Segunda Cita (Second Date) and the fact that we haven’t seen him in concert for some time, it’s a scoop that summons the inevitable desire to ask questions: “I’ll answer them with pleasure, have at it.  Don’t delay,” Silvio answered via email.  The answers arrived a few hours later.

What is the program, who will accompany you and what repertory will you present?  Will it be Segunda Cita?

My compañeros from more than five years will accompany me: the trio  from Trovarroco, the drummer and percussionist Oliver Valdés, and Niurka González on flute and clarinet.  There will be moments in which I’ll also perform solo on guitar.  Out of necessity I’ll have to reprise all my eras because it’s been 13 years since I’ve been to Puerto Rico and 30 since I’ve been in the United States.  I decided to include three pieces from Segunda Cita: Sea señora, [Be a Woman] Carta a Violeta Parra [Letter to Violeta Parra] and Demasiado [Too Much]. The sound and production crew that always accompany me at my concerts will also go with us.  We’re rehearsing while we wait for the visa.

During your 1978 U.S. tour you wrote two songs, “Leyenda” [Legend] dedicated to the Antonio Maceo Brigade and “Tu imagen,” [Your Image] an evocation of absent love that all Silvio fans know by heart.  Why these songs there and not somewhere else?

The Antonio Maceo Brigade, made up of young emigrant Cubans, some of whom were victims of Operation Peter Pan, and the Venceremos Brigade made up of U.S. citizens, were responsible for that first visit of mine.  My closeness with the young really enthusiastic Cubans brought forth “Leyenda.”  It was the summer of 1978 in New York.  I spent those days in an apartment building on New York’s East Side, where my sister Maria lived, who at the time was married to our ambassador to the U.N., Raúl Roa Kourí.  Looking out of those windows onto the Hudson River I composed the two songs.  “Tu imagen” appeared one morning upon awakening, and it refers to the impossible history of those New York days.

What memories do you have of the trip you made with Pablo Milanés to that country in 1980?  Did you ever imagine that it would be three decades before  your return?

It was February and it was said at the time that it hadn’t snowed so much for fifty years.  I thought then that the same thing happens in cold countries as in hot ones: in Cuba you often hear that it has never been so hot since such and such a year.  But for sure, the night that we were going to sing at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) the snow set us back two hours.  At the University of Massachusetts where we were sharing the program with Duke Ellington’s band, it was dreadfully cold.  Same thing in Poughkeepsie, Pete Seeger’s hometown.  I remember too that we visited Orlando Letelier’s widow and children.  We also became acquainted with the children of the Rosenbergs, who continued to defend their parents’ dignity.  The open-air museum in Washington is marvelous.  And in New York, the Metropolitan and of course MOMA, where we saw Picasso’s Guernica and Lam’s La Jungla.  And just to make you laugh, Christopher Reeve in Superman which had just premiered; I saw it with a bag of popcorn in one hand and a Coca-Cola in the other.  Since I went twice nearly back to back to the United States (during the Carter years) I never imagined that the future would be so difficult.  And also considering that I was a lot more politically pointed then than now.

According to Joseba Sanz’s book*, the New York press picked up on your remarks regarding the reasons that brought you to the United States in 1978.  “We helped to break the blockade, not just economic and commercial, but cultural, imposed by Washington on Cuba.”  What would you say today, 32 years later, to the same question that provoked this response?

Now as much as then, it’s not only been breaking the blockade that has motivated me.  The United States is one of the most mythologized countries in the world, and what’s worse, we’re only 120 kilometers away and as we know, it’s ever-present in our lives.  All that makes it plenty interesting, and I’m nothing more than a simple mortal.  On the other hand, more and more people believe that the blockade ought to end and everyone pushes a little where they can, from wherever they are.  It’s a push that happens from very diverse points of view but undoubtedly there’s a place where the underpinnings of political positions coincide.  I believe that the end of the blockade will mean well-being not only for Cubans but for the world, because the blockade continues to be one of the most inexplicable aggressions dragging on from the history of the last century.  And of course, I believe that U.S. leaders themselves will feel quite a bit of relief when at last they can rid themselves of this zone of their own intolerance.

There’s a well-known legend in New York that goes: “Whoever sings in Carnegie Hall stands in History, anchored by excellence.”  But this also reminds me of the phrase by Mario Benedetti: “Silvio was never a myth; he doesn’t travel with a pedestal on his back.”  How will you present yourself on that stage?

The first time I was in New York, I passed in front of Carnegie Hall.  There was a young flautist sitting on the front steps with a small music stand, playing what seemed to me like music from Mozart.  There was such a delicacy in the execution and sound that I thought, “This ought to be played inside there.”  Maybe he chose that spot so that pedestrians would think that, but nevertheless he was good.  For more than 30 years, at times, I’ve wondered what became of that boy.  I hope he made it, I hope that all of us achieve what we deserve, by which I don’t mean to say that only prizewinners are worthy.  Whatever I am, on any stage you’ll see me busy with the same things: working so that we musicians hear each other well in order to be able to communicate well together, and so that the public hears what we hope they’ll hear.

You’ll find yourself in a United States shaken by Arizona’s Anti-Immigrant Law, by the pathetic Tea Party brotherhood, by a pretend bomb defused last week in Manhattan, by a Wall Street so weak that it practically collapsed this Thursday over a simple spelling error.  Aside from Lennon, how much of the utopia is definitively broken in that country and how much of its imagination?

What’s happening in Arizona has awakened universal revulsion, and for good reason.  Putting any kind of bomb in New York seems to me to be unacceptable savagery, just as I think of bombs in Baghdad, Moscow or in Havana. Certainly capitalism seems to be shuddering although those who know about economics like to say that it’ll still recover.  I don’t know if I’m saying something barbaric, but it seems that the non plus ultra of capitalism, stock market speculation, tends to develop into a kind of self-destructive cancer.  There is a Catalan economist, Santiago Niño-Becerra, who says that the system is worn out and without a doubt is going down.

Have you considered performing in Florida?  Would you accept an invitation to perform in Miami?

We might actually perform somewhere in Florida, although we’ve not planned on Miami.  I know that the majority of the Cubans who live there are not as they are portrayed in their media and I’m so sorry about that.

This tour will start in Puerto Rico, once again with Roy Brown?

Well, if Roy or another compañero wants to perform, as far as I’m concerned, they’re welcome.  Until now we’re prepared to fully produce the concerts but it’s not unthinkable that we’d add other voices.  For example, if we end up somewhere in Florida, I’d invite my old trova compañero Carlos Gómez, who lives and sings there.

You said that when you thought of Puerto Rico, you didn’t see an island, but something else.  What exactly?

I don’t remember that.  What I said recently is that in my letters I have Puerto Rico among the Latin American countries and the United States in its own place.

Among your unedited songs from the 1960’s which you published in Cancionero (2008), there’s an anguished secret contained within “Defensa del trovador” [A Troubadour’s Defense]: “…singing is difficult/because the truth must be wanted/much more than the song itself.”  Is it still difficult for Silvio Rodríguez to sing?

To begin with, singing is difficult because it means to do something that I consider exceptional, at least in my case.  The secret that you mention shows that early on I’d understood that I didn’t sing just for the sound of it but in order to say something.  Obviously that assumption has a cost.  The anguish comes because it suggests that there are consequences for singing that which may not be pleasing to hear.  This is a song that I wrote when I was 22.  I won’t say that the trova I’ve done since then has been epic, but it has been risky.  Much more risky than that which any sixty-year old could manage with any success.  Those who find it difficult to sing today are guys like Los Aldeanos and Silvito el libre. Probably they need to go deeper in certain respects, but it seems essential to me to start by defending their right to express themselves.  That’s precisely because I identify with the Silvio of the ‘60’s.

*Joseba Sanz: Silvio: Memoria trovada de una Revolución (1991)

Machetera is a member of Tlaxcala, the international network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the author and translator are cited.

UPDATE: Register-Star’s Olsen attended meeting and says, “the Board of Supervisors’ Space Utilization Subcommittee Thursday evening… voted unanimously to, ‘limit site selection to only within the city of Hudson without documenting the need for DSS to remain within the city limits.’”

Prominent intellectuals and artists have responded to what they see as a media campaign, manipulation, and distortion of events recently unleashed against Cuba; they are calling for respect for the island’s sovereignty and object to interference of European MPs. A total of 197 representatives from 20 countries in Asia and the Pacific declared themselves “In defense of Cuba” in a solidarity meeting that took place in Vientiane, the Laotian capital. Among those attending were ministers and parliamentarians from 10 countries. Here are excerpts with a link to the full article below:

The most recent additions to the statement “In defense of Cuba,” an initiative from the Mexican chapter of the network “In Defense of Humanity,” include Brazilian Oscar Niemeyer, a leading figure in global architecture of the last century; Nicaraguan diplomat and priest Miguel D’ Escoto, former president of the UN General Assembly; Hungarian philosopher Istvan Meszaros; Puerto Rican independence advocate Rafael Cancel Miranda; and Spanish novelist Juan Madrid.

A group of well-known musicians who have defined generations with their songs also agree with the description of European interference “not only as an act of interference, which we condemn in virtue of our commitment to the principles of non-intervention and self-determination,” but also as the imposition of “a sole model of democracy that, incidentally, is revealing itself to be increasingly insufficient and questionable.” They include Uruguayan Daniel Viglietti, Dominican, Nicaraguan Luis Enrique Mejía Godoy, Puerto Ricans Roy Brown and Danny Rivera, Argentines Víctor Heredia and Raly Barrionuevo, and Paraguyan Ricardo Flecha.

Lucid and honest voices from the United States—the political analyst Michael Parenti, filmmaker Saul Landau, anthropologist James Early, Italian-American essayist Piero Gleijeses, and actor Danny Glover—all signed the statement which states that “the economic and media harassment to which Cuba is being subjected constitutes an attack on the human and political rights of a nation that decided to take a different road.”

Bolivian filmmaker Jorge Sanjinés, his Mexican colleague Jorge Fons, Argentine novelist Vicente Battista, and Spanish dramatist Jaime Losada share the same conviction.

For full article, see http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2010/marzo/vier26/Prominent-intellectuals-and-artists-in-defense-of-Cuba.html

Photos: Oscar Niemeyer, Daniel Viglietti, and Roy Brown.

By Joel Francis
The Daily Record

Jon Fox Hartley is the author of the book “King of the Queen City” about King Records in Cincinnati. From 1943 to 1968, King was the home of James Brown, Freddie King, Grandpa Jones and countless other musicians. While other independent labels of the time concentrated on one type of music, King founder Syd Nathan wanted to produce “music for the little man” in all genres.

Fox , a native of Dayton, Ohio who now lives in California, recently took the time to speak with The Daily Record over the phone.

In the book, you make the case for several forgotten artists, such as Henry Glover, Wynonie Harris, Roy Brown and the Dominoes. These pioneers made important contributions to music, but have been ignored by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Why do you think they have been overlooked and haven’t received the recognition they deserve?

I think the first reason is that they’re all dead and have been for several years. Because of that, there’s no one to go to award shows and remind people they haven’t been elected. Also, because of the haphazard status of King reissues, records on King weren’t as available and presented as well as those on other labels. Finally, while all of these artists had pop success, they weren’t pop artist with large audiences. They were niche artists.

I would think that Wynonie Harris has a pretty good shot at getting in (the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame). Henry Glover’s daughter has talked to me about putting together some kind of campaign to get Henry into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Country Music Hall of Fame.

Jon Hartley Fox

In the book you also make the case for “Good Rockin’ Tonight” as the first rock and roll song. Why do you believe “Good Rockin’” that title over “Rocket 88”? How does acknowledging “Good Rockin’,” which was recorded in 1948, change our perspective of the landscape of early rock and roll?

It’s funny, because I made this argument in the book but hadn’t thought I’d have to explain or defend it. Right before the book came out, my wife says “You know you’re going to have to talk about that.” And she was right, because everyone has asked.

It’s a backwards process. You start with a song acknowledged as rock and roll, like “Rocket 88.” Then you break down the attributes that make it rock as opposed to jump blues or country. There’s a certain beat, a certain attitude and the subject matter of the lyrics aimed at kids. There’s also the aggressive, hyper-charged vocals.  Once you have those attributes of what makes a song rock and roll, you can apply them to other songs and see if they measure up.

For me, “Good Rockin’ Tonight” makes a strong case. It was the first post-war song to use “rockin’” in the sense of having a good time. “We’re going to party tonight.” It was also one of the first songs to be bought and listened to by white teenagers. The trend crested in the ‘50s, but as early as late ‘40s, white kids were buying these songs and listening to them on the radio.

If you take “Good Rockin’ Tonight” as the first rock and roll song over something by Bill Haley and the Comets or Elvis Presley or Jackie Brenston, it changes our understanding that rock and roll was something brand new that popped on the scene fully formed. It coincides with the evolution of a lot of things reflected in the music people in the upper South and Midwest heard on radio stations out of Memphis and Nashville. You’d hear country, gospel, jump blues, R&B and country boogie on those stations. Then you realize everything that went into rock and roll wasn’t a market creation so much as young people coming of age hearing the music of the ‘40s and synthesizing them.

Describe King founder Syd Nathan. What kind of a person was he? How did he live? How did his personality compare to other independent label owners of the time like, say, Leonard Chess or Berry Gordy?

When I talked to people about Syd Nathan, the word that invariably came up was “character,” as in He was a real character. He was kind of like someone out of a short story. He was tight with a penny, but generous sometimes. He was ahead of the race line culturally and politically, but could tell the crudest racist joke. He was a fun guy but abusive and could push people to the brink of mayhem.

A lot of people got mad at Syd Nathan, but few stayed mad at him. He was gregarious and loved to be surrounded by people. He was the guy holding court in the corner booth at the bar.

In talking to people who worked for and knew Syd Nathan, everyone respected him. Everyone had Syd stories. It is rare to find anybody who will badmouth Syd Nathan these days. I think that’s partly out of nostalgia, but I also think on a day-to-day basis he was probably a real good guy.

There are several stories about Syd’s anger, but I think he used those temper tantrums in the studio to get results out of people. He was trying to get the artist fired up. If he thought there was a spark missing from the performance, he would pick a fight to get the artist fired up. I think these fights were calculated, because Syd never held a grudge and no one stayed mad.

Compared to Leonard Chess or Berry Gordy, Syd Nathan was certainly more expansive musically than either man. He didn’t want to limit himself to one style of music; he wanted to try it all.

I really don’t know this for sure, but I think Syd was probably a little more progressive on race matters than Leonard Chess. I often thought of this while researching the book. At King, Henry Glover would write songs, play on sessions and produce. He was a highly valued vice president of the company. At Chess, Willie Dixon filled many of the same roles, but his day job was as a janitor at Chess.

I had long heard a rumor that during World War II Nathan had 30 or 40 Japanese-Americans working for him. I thought that was unusual because on the West Coast these people were being sent to internment camps.

Well I asked somebody who knew Syd at a book signing. He told me Syd was working with a religious political action group trying to relocate people about to be interred. Syd accepted about 30 to 40 families. They were American citizens, but if they’d stayed at home they would have been locked up. Syd moved them all to Cincinnati where they lived in an apartment complex on the bus line so they could come in to King and work each day.

Most labels find one niche and exploit it. Why do you think King was so successful in so many varied genres?

I think they were successful because they wanted to be and weren’t afraid to try. Syd realized he could make more money if he didn’t specialize in one kind of music, but did a lot of different things. Before the days of record stores, only two or three shops in a town would sell records back in the corner. They’d sell what they got from wherever. Syd saw that specializing was leaving money on the table so if they wanted gospel, he had gospel records for them. Same thing for blues, country, R&B, whatever.

Syd also realized that the song sold the record more than the style or performer. If he thought a song was good, he’d record it in several different styles. Once in a while he was right, and the same song was a hit on the country and R&B charts by different performers.

Once the major labels smelled money and figured out what King and other independent labels were doing they would swoop in and take it away. Syd knew the more diverse he could make King the more control he would have and the more success was guaranteed.

One often hears of a hit record ruining a company, like the Beatles and Vee-Jay. How was King able to sustain the massive popularity of James Brown? Did Brown’s success come at the price of other artists on the label?

To answer the last part first, yeah, Brown sometimes hurt other artists. Freddie King was very vocal about why he left King. One of his reasons was that all the promotional muscle and ad money went to James Brown. There were certainly others who felt his success came at their expense.

King built a huge infrastructure in the ‘40s and ‘50s. They had their own pressing plant and printing facilities to make covers; the studio was in house. The infrastructure took a certain amount of volume to make it profitable.

Right about the time they got it perfected in the mid-‘50s, business started to fall off. But just as the market started to decrease, along comes James Brown. Here was an infrastructure dedicated to James Brown, because frankly there weren’t many other artists left.

Had James’ success hit at a busier time, he might have swamped them. Other labels might not have been able to keep up with demand or gotten paid. That wasn’t a factor at King because they controlled their pressing. If they needed 100,000 James Brown records shipped out, they could get it done. They didn’t have to stand in line like other labels did.

In one of the last chapters you discuss the difficulties King supporters have faced in trying to get the label complex the landmark recognition it deserves. Other than the unveiling of a plaque in 2008, why has King yet to be recognized by the city of Cincinnati?

Again, I think this is in part because the principals are all dead or moved away a long time ago. There’s no real physical presence. The ice house complex (the former King building) is an ugly building in an industrial facility in a funky part of town. With the label’s move to Nashville in the ‘70s, there’s nothing to memorialize. About the only thing to do is put something on the building, and now they’ve got that done.

People have been trying for years to get something done with the old facility. A group at Xavier University in Cincinnati is the latest to try. They want to build a King museum with a recording studio and training facility for youth. We’ll see how this goes. It seems something like this gets proposed every 10 years.

The important thing about King is the spirit of it and I don’t know how to memorialize that. King was never about the facility, it was the spirit and idea of making records.

Keep reading:

Review – “King of the Queen City”

Talking Motown with Bill Dahl

Key King Artists

The True Story of Cadillac Records

The letter commends the president for his efforts at bipartisanship but also says “we think you’re missing a critical element in this discussion—the ideas of thousands of state legislators.” The letter was signed by Montana Representatives: Cary Smith, Krayton Kern, Tom McGillvray, Ken Peterson, Wendy Warburton and Montana Senators: Roy Brown, Jim Schockley, and Bruce Tutvedt

CLICK HERE to view the letter

On Saturday Senator Roy Brown announced his re-election bid for Senate District 25 in Billings.  Learn more about Roy and his campaign at his website www.roybrownforsenate.com

Roy’s announcement in the news:

Brown announces state Senate re-election bid

Video: Brown announces state Senate re-election bid

Brown announces re-election bid for State Senate

Brown Announce

Playing Fallout 3 almost constantly for the last few days has got the Galaxy News Radio songs stuck in my head, even the ones I didn’t like at first. One stand out track has to be Butcher Pete (Part 1) by Roy Brown. More than a slight hint at a euphemism in there that if you don’t get you really need someone to go V.A.T.S. on your ass.

Hey everybody, did the news get around
About a guy named Butcher Pete
Oh, Pete just flew into this town
And he’s choppin’ up all the women’s meat

[Chorus]

He keeps hackin’ and wackin’ and smackin’
He keeps hackin’ and wackin’ and smackin’
He keeps hackin’ and wackin’ and smackin’
He just hacks, wacks, choppin’ that meat

Butcher Pete’s got a long sharp knife
He starts choppin’ and don’t know when to stop
All you fellas gotta watch your wives
‘Cause Pete don’t care whose meat he chops

[Chorus]

Ever since Pete flew into town
He’s been havin’ a ball
Just cuttin’ and choppin’ for miles around
Single women, married women, old maids and all

[Chorus]

Wakes up in the morning, half past five
Chops from sunrise to sunset
I don’t see how he stays alive
Meat’s gonna be the death of ole Pete yet

[Chorus]

The police put Pete in jail
Yes, he finally met his fate
But when they came to pay his bail
They found him choppin’ on his cell mate

[Chorus]

That Butcher Pete is a crazy man
Tries to chop down the wind and the rain
Just hacks on anything he can get
Say, turn this record over, you ain’t heard nothing yet