.
This week – two days ago – marks the centennial of a milestone in modern classical music: the Paris premiere of Igor Stravinsky’s controversial ballet Le Sacre Du Printemps, or Rite of Spring. The combination of barbaric but unpredictable rhythms, discordant harmonies, and primeval melodies – not to mention choreographer Nijinsky’s shocking portrayal of a prehistoric pagan Russian Spring festivity including girls dancing themselves to death – was all too much for the sensitive Frenchies, who took to pummeling each other in the seats and aisles (half of them wanting to hear the music, the other half wanting to drown it out.)
Ever since that fateful May 29, 1913 premiere, the Rite of Spring just sounds better and better, and has inspired countless of us composers to go batshit crazy. Go ahead, crank it up this weekend – it’s better than any rock and roll. And then let us all know what’s on your mind!
PS – Even the first few seconds was bizarre and shocking to contemporary audiences, with a difficult but expressive bassoon solo way up higher than any bassoon had ever been heard to play before. Fun fact – you can sing along: “I’m…. not an English horn; what am I DOING up here? I’m not an English horn…”
Is this the weekend open thread?
This — THIS! — is your Weekend Open Thread. Talk about the Rite of Spring, or anything else you’d like to, within broad bounds of decency and decorum.
Dearthwatch (a little belated this week.)
Not a whole lot happening this week. The most notable thing, I suppose, is that this is the first week since we began that Voice of OC hasn’t improved its standing. Neither did most others, except for the coastal print papers. Has the Voice reached a plateau? Possibly. Not likely, though.
Because this is such a boring week, we’ll answer a question or two about how other sites are doing. Matt Cunningham’s blog on Anaheim, for example? #4,734,020. (Note for comparison’s sake that RedCounty, which is no longer publishing, is at #3,674,370 and FFFF, which is also no longer publishing, is at 2,567,272. Tiny but valiant A Bubbling Cauldron is doing better, at #3,865,665. So if you’re exercising yourself over what’s in the latest CunningBlog, the question for you is: why? You’re one of very few people reading it.
Could you post a GGW at spring break video here?
Here’s one for ya Diamond: “California senators vote to strip Boy Scouts of tax-exempt status”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/31/california-senators-vote-strip-boy-scouts-tax-exem/
This bill, if enacted into law, will be found to be unconstitutional. This tax infringes on Freedom of Association in that it is discriminatory against the BSA right to Freedom of Association.
You really believe that a group has a constitutional right to tax-exempt status? Tell me more about this fascinating theory!
(Note: there is a reasonable next step you could take in such an analysis — but it still leads you off of a cliff.
Never said that there was a right for any group to have tax exempt status. However, every group has a right to not be discriminated against for their beliefs.
Well Mr. D …….. waiting here ……
Waiting to me to get back from my daughter’s graduation ceremony, you mean? It was good.
“[E]very group has a right to not be discriminated against for their beliefs.” Where do you get that idea? You don’t believe that yourself. (Communists?)
Also, where do you get the idea that an act of discrimination is a mere “belief”? I don’t much care what they believe; I care what they do.
It would be unconstitutional to discriminate against communists for their beliefs. I support the right of you and every other communist to believe in wealth redistribution.
Tell me, how long have you (as a fascist, or at least as a “fascist” in the sense that you call me a “communist”) been protesting on the basis of governmental discrimination against communists?
Anyway, you’ve already given the game away: BSA isn’t facing a removal of tax advantages based on its beliefs, but on the basis of its actions.
Skallywag, how about homosexuals and lesbians? Is it unconstitutional to discriminate against those groups?
was lunching at my local bistro today, reading this weeks edition of the OC Weekly. the cover story was about the fact that there are no blacks in orange county, well, i would have to disagree. in fact there is a black family living just down the street from me. granted, it is a somewhat stereotypical family with a couple of kids and a father allegedly disabled and unable to work. but yet, they somehow have the means and ability somehow to lunch at the tea room at neiman’s, shop at bristol farms and drive a very expensive car. and, come to think of it, there was another black family that lived around here, but i think the guy lost his job.
I’m not sure of the reference. Is this plot from an Eddie Murphy movie or from a Will Smith movie? (I’d ask if it was from a Tyler Perry movie, but I’d expect you to think that I was making up that name.)
its a true story playing out right now in our beloved orange county
Like the Reagan “welfare queens” driving Cadillac Coupe Devilles ?
I read the same article. The article states that there are less than 5% Blacks in OC and that is a problem because kids who grow up without cultural diversity, like living next door or going to school to a Black person. The condo complex where I live has changed drastically in the last 3 years since I arrived. We have many more Asians, 3 Black couples, a few Muslims, and kids running around everywhere. What I find more interesting is that families are squeezing themselves into 1 bedroom condos with 2 kids.
OCW goes on to say that a Black student attending UC Irvine is continually harassed. I don’t study trends about which cultural groups like to live where, but I do know that it costs a ridiculous amount of money for anyone to live anywhere in the OC.
A black friend of mine who lives in the South was recently telling me he’s glad to be out of here. Why? We’re maxxed out financially. Could it be that a lot of blacks realize this and are headed other places?
The context makes that “less than 5%” figure much worse, Inge. Of the 25 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., only two have less than 5% of their population being African Americans. The second-lowest is Portland at 2.9%. The lowest is OC — at 2.1%.
When we’re that out of step, you really do have to wonder why that is. Critics of police practices, among other factors, certainly have their opinions.
The “Rite of Spring” looks like the crowd at the fire rings at Aliso Creek on the last full moon.
They were all possessed, I tell ‘ya. Bangin’ their bongos and just carrying on.
The fire rings did make the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/31/us/pollution-concerns-could-douse-california-beach-fires.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
This video just came in…covering the March Against Monsanto – Laguna Beach. I think it is well done and quite informative…
http://vimeo.com/67171603
Great link!
Thanks Inge.
Yes! Also Russian.
I’m surprised that they got permission to film there.
(Vern: don’t worry, this is just crab bait.)
you all missed the point, the black guy in my neighborhood is kobe, which goes to the earlier point that it is not about race but about economics
So your point is that economics is about race?
no, the point is that economics transcends race. regardless of whether you are back, white, brown or yellow, if you have the bank, you get to enjoy the perks
That’s rich.
It depends which cop stops you when — and under what circumstances.
yes, we are
And white?
My point, exactly.
anon: “Skallywag, how about homosexuals and lesbians? Is it unconstitutional to discriminate against those groups?”
It is unconstitutional for the government to penalize them on the same tax penalty basis that the BSA are being discrimated.
Ahhh, but in other areas they can be, according to the Constitution, discriminated against?
If you consider the Freedom of Association to be discrimination (I don’t) then your statement would be accurate.
That last sentence is correct, in that I know of no accusation that GLBT groups refuse to allow any particular demographic groups to participate in their tax-exempt activities. If GLAAD or Lambda Legal or another GLBT group refuses to let Blacks or Hindus join its ranks, then it would and should lose its tax exemption. (This presumes that it has one to begin with.) But they don’t.
“If GLAAD or Lambda Legal or another GLBT group refuses to let Blacks or Hindus join its ranks, then it would and should lose its tax exemption.”
That is not true Mr. D – Freedom of Association still applies – as long as those groups do not engage in public commercial activity.
Below a certain membership size, they can still discriminate by race, gender, religion, etc. So yeah, they can do it. But can you give a single example of a group that does so and still gets a tax exemption? That would be government funding of discrimination.
Yeah … the Westboro Baptist Church
How do they discriminate on a demographic basis in church membership? (I’ll just presume that you do know that they receive a tax exemption, which I have to wonder about.) In any event, churches are a different category than organizations like BSA. If BSA were a church, it could not do much of what it does.
Membership size has nothing to do with it – you pulled that one out of your rabbit hole .. I mean hat.
How much you wanna bet, cowboy?
I’ll go easy on you: it has to do with the whether an organization can invoke the “private club” exception to public accommodation law, which in some cases can be related to tax consequences.
Mr. D – You say that it is permissible for the government to discriminate against the BSA based on their actions. I say that is an infringement of their Freedom of Association – I guess we will let the Supreme Court decide – if it gets that far.
The slam-dunk prosecution of NBPP thugs was dropped by Holder’s Justice Department. When asked why, Holder, on March 1, 2011, testified before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies that the “decisions made in the New Black Panther Party case were made by career attorneys in the department.”
Holder lied, for the decisions were made by political appointees. J. Christian Adams, a former career DOJ attorney in the Voting Rights Section, testified before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that it was Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama political appointee, who overruled a unanimous recommendation for prosecution by Adams and his associates.
Hotair.com
So I have to pile J. Christian Adams’s credibility on top of Hotair.com’s credibility on top of your credibility in order to believe that this was a politically thrwarted “slam-dunk prosecution.” I doubt that I could make it past a single obstacle. I also doubt that Obama has any particular fondness for the New Black Panther Party, to the extent that it’s not a group made up and/or promoted for show, like the one in Network. But enjoy your trip down yet another rabbit hole; we’ll add it to the ones on which we keep score.
(How many visits did Obama’s IRS Commissioner make to the White House again?)
Talking about ” every group has a right to not be discriminated against for their beliefs.”, some progress has been made, as this cherished concept has had a troubled history even in our foreign policies. From Fox News:
“SANTIAGO, Chile – Forty years after the death of Chilean poet Pablo Neruda, a judge has issued an order for police to make a portrait of and find the man who prosecutors allege may have poisoned him.
Contreras said Dr. Sergio Draper, who originally testified that he was with Neruda at the time of his death on Sept. 23, 1973, is now saying there was another doctor named “Price” with the poet.
But Price did not appear in any of the hospital’s records as a treating doctor and Draper said he never saw him again after the day he left him with Neruda. Moreover Price’s description of a blond, blue eyed, tall man, matches Michael Townley, the CIA double agent who worked with Chilean secret police under Pinochet.
Townley was taken into the U.S. witness protection program after acknowledging having killed prominent Pinochet critics in Washington and Buenos Aires.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/06/02/chile-judge-orders-hunt-for-alleged-killer-in-poet-173-death/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2V4m73D00
Awful, if true. Beyond awful.
*When is the annual San Juan Capistrano…..mooning of Amtrack? Did they shut that
down totally?
Mugs Away Saloon in Laguna Niguel on July 13th, all day.
Bottoms up !
I would like to take part but will I be held accountable if the train derails because the guy driving get distracted viewing my fine German stock???
BREAKING NEWS!!! The fight to label gmos just got passed in Connecticut legislature!
http://gmofreect.org/breaking-news-senate-amends-and-passes-a-strong-gmo-labeling-bill/#MonsantoagainstMonsanto
Presidential aides are privately admitting to a growing frustration inside the White House with Attorney General Eric Holder’s political ineptness in the press leak investigations and are hoping the embattled appointee will resign from office.
The New York Times –
Skallywags across the country are publicly admitting to an ongoing frustration with the reality of a black man in the White House, and with his black AG’s political ineptness and the leaky boat that they are navigating.
The skallys have never seen anything like this, and they are horrified.
Stay tuned for more.
*Yeah…our good friend Darrell Issa couldn’t even spell Benghazi……”Now he is one!” Notice how Fox News and Rosen….have suddenly “dummied up”? And we can’t wait to see Danny….today in front of the IRS Inquisition…….the Santa Hermandad…..is back in business…..and we can’t to see those RINO’s beat up the new IRS Chief…..”You….CPA…..awful person….you!” “Liar!” “Despicable Suckatash!”……”Blah….stick our your tongue and say Ah……again….again…again…again…..again…. See, he sticks out his tongue just as my collegue pointed out……!!!
You know, I’m trying to train for this year’s “Write Like a Winship” contest, but I just can’t seem to do it. They’re too good for me.
Uh, let me sneak in here and say thanks for the props. It’s been a LONG time since anyone described my efforts as either “tiny” or “valient”. 😉 Anybody know where I can find a ‘We’re #3,865,665″ foam finger? Thanks, again…
Your blog is valiant, Geoff! “Tiny” may be an overstatement (or would it be an understatement?), but its influence exceeds its size.
Anyway, A Bubbling Cauldron is being used here to make fun of Matt Cunningham’s blog, so it’s all in a good cause! And it’s free advertising!
You’re now up to #3,588,282. It’s the Orange Juice bump!
It is a known fact that the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution was passed in order to keep a black man from a third presidential term.
“Known fact” — I do not think that that term means what you think it does.
Okay – it’s a fucking fact.
When was the 22nd Amendment passed again? Which Black man were they worried about at the time?
Stop doubling down on loony. I know it’s a joke the first time; the second time it’s just disturbing.
… or maybe it was the 2nd Amendment … (it had 1 or 2 twos in it anyway) .. something about keeping the black man down, or a black man down, or something like that .. I know that much for sure. And it happened some time ago like 220 years ago or maybe 60 years ago …. somewhere between those …
A tea party witness from Alabama launched into emotional testimony during her opening statement before the House Ways and Means Committee Tuesday as she described her group’s political abuse at the hands of the Internal Revenue Service.
Wetumpka Tea Party President Becky Gerritson said: “We peacefully assemble. We petition our government. We exercise the right to free speech. And we don’t understand why the government tried to stop us,” .
“I’m not here as a serf or a vassal,” she went on, beginning to choke up. “I’m not begging my lords for mercy. I’m a born-free American woman, wife, mother and citizen.”
http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/04/tea-party-witness-chokes-up-im-not-begging-my-lords-for-mercy-im-a-born-free-american-woman-video/#ixzz2VGmS45bv
Tea Party Checklist:
(1) Emotional appeal, especially to those ignorant of federal tax law?
Yes — and oh yeah, definitely.
(2) Apparent understanding that a 501(c)(4) “social welfare” tax exemption is for groups that are not involved in politics?
None..
(3) Understanding that not giving a tax exemption to a group that falsely contends to be a 501(c)(4) social welfare is not “the government [trying] to stop”: them?
Specifically denied.
(4) Evidence presented that group should qualify as a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization in the first place?
Testimony presented is, if anything to the contrary.
Thanks for posting this, skally!
Wrong Diamond!! – 501c4’s ARE permitted to participate in politics. You are 100% WRONG about that.
I should have said “not primarily” or “not substantially.” I forget which it is without looking it up. Do you know offhand?
501(c)(4) organizations may inform the public on controversial subjects and attempt to influence legislation relevant to its program and, unlike 501(c)(3) organizations, they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as its primary activity is the promotion of social welfare.
I expect that legislation to come forward that will redefine that very vague “primary activity” clause.
Anyway, so Skally, do you think that a 501c4 who is shown to have engaged in 51% political activity should lose their tax exempt status? Do you think that the IRS has a legitimate role in periodic monitoring such groups to insure that they are not abusing their tax exempt status?
Ok, so it’s “not primarily,” as promotion of social welfare must be “primary.”
If you want to say that getting people to vote Republican or Tea Party faction is “social welfare” activity, you make a mockery of the code. That may be fine with you, but you’re actually not supposed to construe a regulation so as to defeat its clear intended purpose.
I’d need to do more research on this than I’m gonna to have the sort of fight I’d enjoy. Paste in the actual literal text of the section, would you?
I don’t think Skally, upon reflection, would be fine with these groups “primarily” engaged in voter registration and partisan political activities.
After all, some of these groups are “libs.”
Apparently dem criminality is mounting – multiple Capitol sources that the FBI has raided the Capitol office of Senator Ron Calderon’s (D-Montebello). The Capitol is abuzz right now that the investigation includes other members, although the subject is unclear.
Calderon is in the Correa wing of the party, so one might say “DINO” rather than “Dem.” I’m not going to presume his guilt based on a raid. If he warrants punishment, so be it — and more’s the pity for all of the other Calderons.
Greg Diamond is right. Calderon has neither been charged, let alone convicted with anything. But just like Don Peralta and Bill Lockyear before him Calderon is surrounded by desperate (even more so under term limits) upward mobile politicians, so concerned with THEMSELVES, less concerned with law and order that they simply look the other way.
Calderon’s actions, which may or may not result in an indictment (methinks it will and methinks Greg and other Dem’s KNOW this and thus the distancing) are not unique in Sacramento. As widely reported, few bills are drafted by the elected members, even fewer by the staffs. This is a state for sale.
Luckily for us (maybe) the unions have beat business no matter what the cost. But in the end, the non-public employee union member or the RICH clearly at a distinct disadvantage.
The state is for sale if you have the $$$
I suspect, after my third reading, that this makes no sense syntactically and probably not substantively either. Want to take another crack at expressing your thought?
I don’t need to distance myself from Calderon’s faction of the party. I’m in the “people with their hands out will ultimately embarrass us” faction — not to prejudge this particular case, of course. Now, off to look up “Central Basin.”
nameless is pretty much senseless – except for his last sentence, which is right on the mark. This state is for $ale.
Meanwhile… Americans would like to know when real jobs are returning???? AND…why wasn’t there a serious outcry over the bank scandals a couple of years ago?????
anon says: “Do you think that the IRS has a legitimate role in periodic monitoring such groups to insure that they are not abusing their tax exempt status?”
I don’t trust the IRS or any government bureaucracy. I think that this country is devolving into an us vs. them mentality – government vs. the people.
I think that the anonymity that 501c4’s provide is a useful to prevent government snoops – in any department – from prying into our political affiliation and using information against us – the people.
Ahhh, so you’re OK with 501c4’s breaking the law?
The government can’t be trusted, but everyone else can, right? I mean, are you serious? Nobody outside of the government would ever abuse something like their government-granted tax exempt status?
What sort of alternate reality are you living in?
Verizon providing all call records, 10’s of millions, to NSA under secret court order – Washington Post
See that? All … as in every fucking telephone call and text message.
Funny, conservatives weren’t too busted up about WARRANTLESS wiretapping under the Bush administration and the privacy concerns THAT episode brought up.
I’m certainly not in favor of these kinds of invasions of privacy. But laws passed in the wake of 9/11 opened this pandora’s box. It’s laughable to see conservatives bitch about it now.
Where were you all in 2006?
“This is an abuse of the Patriot Act on a massive scale,” said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. “Since the law requires that the telephone records sought be relevant to an investigation, it appears that the FBI and the NSA may have launched the broadest investigation in history because everyone’s telephone calls seem to be relevant to it.”
It’s got a judge’s order attached to it. We don’t know why, do we?
Again, conservatives have largely turned a blind eye to increased government secrecy and the erosion of civil liberties in the wake of 9/11.
Where were you all in 2006?
They’ll probably be looking for calls to a number of specific targets. They’re just going to sift through the entire universe of calls to find them. So, yes, everyone’s envelope information will be considered “relevant” in the sense that every single speck of dirt in the river is relevant to panning for gold. It’s just that with computerization, one can quickly check all such specks.
The USA PATRIOT Act, like the AUMF, was stunningly broad. That’s why many of us opposed both — for which people like you called us commies and terrorist-sympathizers. Welcome, belatedly, to reality — hope you stay here if and when another Republican is even elected President.
Skally, it’s people like THIS that you should be really concerned about;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/06/lindsey-graham-nsa_n_3396223.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
As Glenn Greenwald’s exclusive reports, it’s two of the more left-leaning Democrats in the Senate who have been warning about activities like this;
“The court order appears to explain the numerous cryptic public warnings by two US senators, Ron Wyden and Mark Udall, about the scope of the Obama administration’s surveillance activities.
For roughly two years, the two Democrats have been stridently advising the public that the US government is relying on “secret legal interpretations” to claim surveillance powers so broad that the American public would be “stunned” to learn of the kind of domestic spying being conducted.
Because those activities are classified, the senators, both members of the Senate intelligence committee, have been prevented from specifying which domestic surveillance programs they find so alarming. But the information they have been able to disclose in their public warnings perfectly tracks both the specific law cited by the April 25 court order as well as the vast scope of record-gathering it authorized.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order
Here’s a question for ya Skally;
Do you think it was proper for someone to leak the details of this particular national security program?
“IT’S A TRAP!”
“It’s a trap!”
Indeed. Because Skally is so good at flying off the handle before he thinks through the ramifications of what he says. You know, more important to try and make the Obama Administration look bad than to be objective or consistent.
Al Gore – “In digital era, privacy must be a priority. Is it just me, or is secret blanket surveillance obscenely outrageous?” http://ow.ly/lKS13
The Times sounded like the Tea Party in its criticism – “Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.”
“To casually permit this surveillance — with the American public having no idea that the executive branch is now exercising this power — fundamentally shifts power between the individual and the state, and repudiates constitutional principles governing search, seizure and privacy.”
Sounded like the Tea Party? Sounds more like the Times, and the Daily Kos, and Glenn Greenwald, back in 2006 or 2004. And ever since. I say, WELCOME the Tea Party to this struggle! Where’ve they been?
Where’s the Tea Party been(?) you say.
Answer: Stifled, held down, muffled and mugged by the feds.