Month: January 2012

By Dennis Hartley














It gets better: Tomboy

“You’re different from (the other boys),” says Lisa (Jeanne Disson), sans any trace of irony in writer-director Celine Sciamma’s coming-of-age tale, Tomboy. She is talking to her new friend Michael, who recently moved into her neighborhood on the outskirts of Paris; the boy on whom she’s developing a crush. Indeed, there is something “different” about Michael. It’s a possibility that Lisa, with the insouciance of a starry-eyed pre-pubescent in the thrall of puppy love, would likely never ponder (hence an absence of irony). “Michael” is the self-anointed nom de plume of a girl…named Laure (Zoe Heran).
Laure lives with her loving parents (Sophie Cattani and Mathieu Demy) and precocious little sister, Jeanne (Malonn Levana). Mom is very pregnant and resting up these days, so we see Laure spending a lot of time with her dad, who is patiently teaching her how to drive in the film’s opening. Although dad is retaining control of the accelerator and brake (after all, Laure is only ten), we glean that she has a fearlessness and assured sense of “self” belying a ten year-old (and in a subtle way, challenging traditional societal expectations of gender behavior). This is especially apparent in a wonderfully observed scene where Laure (in her guise as Michael, who she hides from her family) watches the neighborhood boys playing soccer, carefully studying their body language and mannerisms. She is particularly bemused by their propensity for serial spitting, and taking pee breaks en masse (you know, typical males…spraying everywhere). Soon, “Michael” is on the field; shirtless, spitting and generally displaying appropriately surly behaviors. But for how long can Laure pull this off? It’s late summer, and a new school year looms; surely her parents won’t register her as Michael (and what about roll call, or gym class?).
Although it may appear on paper that this story holds all the dramatic tension of an Afterschool Special, it is precisely the lack of drama (or, as Jon Lovitz used to exclaim on SNL…”ACT-ing!”) that makes Tomboy one of the most naturalistic, sensitive and genuinely compassionate films I’ve seen about “gender confusion”. What’s most interesting here is that it is not the protagonist who is “confused”. Laure knows exactly who (she?) is; this is not so much about the actions of the main character as it is about the reactions of those around her (and perhaps the viewer as well). There is one thing the director seems to understand quite well, and that is that you can learn a lot about a society’s mores by watching its children at play; Sciamma devotes large chunks of screen time to simply allow us to observe kids doing, well, what kids do when they get together.
Tackling the subject of childhood sexuality is always a potential minefield for a filmmaker, which is probably why so few venture to go there (the last film I saw that handled it with such deftness was Miranda July’s Me and You and Everyone We Know ). Thanks to the combination of an unobtrusive (if leisurely) approach, even-handed direction, a perceptive screenplay (by the director), and extraordinary performances by the child actors (especially from Heran, who vibes like a Mini-Me Jean Seberg with her pixie hairdo) I was transported back to that all-too-fleeting “secret world” of childhood. It’s that singular time of life when worries are few and everything feels possible (before that mental baggage carousel backs up with too many overstuffed suitcases). And it’s a lovely ode to self-acceptance…which is a good thing. Any ten-year old can tell you that.
.

Elton Gallegly retiring

by David Atkins

My local 25-year Republican House incumbent Elton Gallegly (CA26) is retiring. Never heard of him? Not surprising. In his 25 years, he’s been one of the least accomplished representatives in Congress, earning almost his entire reputation on anti-immigrant rhetoric, which earned him a his recent appointment Chairman of the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.

He is retiring due to last year’s redistricting in California, which turned his ultra-safe seat into a Ventura County district with a 6% Democratic registration advantage. Gallegly has never had much of a work ethic, so it’s not surprising he’d rather ride into the sunset than face a tough re-election bid. It’s no lock for Dems, though–the new district barely voted for Meg Whitman over Jerry Brown in the last election. There are already five Democrats who have announced their intention to join the race, the biggest names among them being 1st District Supervisor Steve Bennett and Moorpark City Councilmember David Pollock. On the Republican side will likely be the execrable, virulently anti-tax and pro-polluter state senator Tony Strickland, with another Republican or two likely to join the field as well.

California recently moved to a top-two primary system, which means that the general election could be between any two candidates regardless of political party. It will be one of the most watched and hotly contested House races of the 2012 cycle, with significant consequences for immigration and tax policy in the U.S.

Tony Strickland and his wife Audra have taken some hits to their reputations over the last few years, but they’re still formidable opponents. If Tony wins, he will quickly become one of the loudest and most detestable voices for the GOP’s Objectivist agenda. Supervisor Bennett, by contrast, has done amazing work locally to increase access to education and healthcare, developed and passed some of the strongest anti-sprawl legislation in the country, and stringent campaign finance reform laws.

It will be a classic clash of values and priorities, and I look forward to being right in the middle of the fight.

.

Dispatch from torture nation: execution by pepper spray

by digby

No this isn’t a story from North Korea or Pinochet’s Chile. I swear:

It has been two and half years since 62-year old Nick Christie was tortured and pepper-sprayed to death by police at the Lee County Jail. Although the medical examiner ruled his death a homicide, the law enforcement officers who kept him strapped naked to a chair and then pepper sprayed him until he died have not been charged in his death.

On January 20, 2010, the Injury Board’s National News Desk reported that Nick Christie’s wife, Joyce Christie, and her son, were planning to file a federal lawsuit because the police violated her husband’s constitutional rights. The article describes what allegedly happened when Christie was arrested for trespassing:

Christie, 62, was arrested last March after traveling from Ohio to Fort Myers while suffering, what his widow describes as a mental breakdown. Arrested twice for disorderly conduct and trespassing, Nick Christie was pepper sprayed ten times over the course of his 43-hour custody.

Suffering from emphysema, COPD, back and heart problems, the jail staff said his medical files were not available or immediately sought at the time of his arrest. But DiCello says Christie gave his medical history and list of medications to the jail days earlier during his first encounter with law enforcement.

His medication list was found in the back pocket of his pants when Christie’s personal effects were returned to his widow.

Sometime between the time he was arrested on March 27, 2009 around 2:00 p.m., and March 31 at1:23 p.m. when he was pronounced dead, Christie had been sprayed with ten blasts of pepper spray, also known as OC (Oleo-resin Capsicum), which is a derivative of cayenne pepper.

The officers involved in the incident say that Christie was “combative, despite the fact he was restrained in a chair so he allegedly wouldn’t spit at his jailers.” However, other inmates on the cell block tell a different story. They say that there was excessive use of pepper spray, his whole head was turning purple, he was gasping for air and was telling the officers that he couldn’t breathe and that he had a heart condition. (source: Injury Board)

According to the medical examiner, the death was a homicide caused by the stress that the restraints and repeated use of pepper spray placed on his heart. However, the State Attorney’s office decided there was no wrongdoing, therefore the officers involved in the incident were never charged in the homicide.

Clearly they tortured the man to death. I just don’t see any other way of looking at this.

But we don’t have a problem with that in our country, particularly when the victims refuse to “stop resisting” the robotic mantra used by cops all over the country to excuse beating, spraying with chemicals and electrocuting citizens. The mentally ill, foreigners and inebriated have a particularly hard time since they can’t immediately absorb their “orders” to immediately comply from the police. Doing it when they are already in custody is unfortunately not all that unprecedented.

Every American had better hope they never get sick, particularly both mentally and physically, and find themselves in the hands of the authorities. There’s a chance they won’t come out of it alive. I’d prefer they just shoot me down immediately rather than pepper spray me to death. But that’s just me.

BTW: Here are the OSHA guidelines for pepper spray:

Emergency First Aid Procedures Inhalation: Remove to fresh air. If Breathing is difficult, give oxygen / seek medical attention.

Eye Contact:Remove contact lenses. Rinse thoroughly with cool water. If irritation persists, seek medical attention

Skin Contact: Wash exposed area with mild soap & water. If irritation persists or worsen, seek medical attention.

Ingestion: Give cool water. If condition persists or worsens, seek medical attention.

That’s assuming a healthy worker, not under stress or in restraints.

Update: And then there’s “hazing”

.

Jingo Tells

by digby

There have been a lot of creepy ads already this season. But this one takes the cake:

This isn’t an official ad of the Paul campaign and they have vigorously condemned it. Nobody seems to know who made it, but suffice to say whoever it is is a jingoistic jerk.

The whole thing gives me the creeps.

.

The great uniter

by digby

This is the man the Villagers extol as a man who brought the country together:

Update: And here’s the Great Communicator as president. The man everyone remembers as being able to talk to ordinary Americans like no other, before or since:

Pretty impressive huh?

h/t to GS
.

The disempowerment of Michelle Obama

by David Atkins

The recently released excerpts from Jodi Kantor’s upcoming book on the Obamas is at once a fascinating and depressing read.

In Kantor’s telling, Michelle Obama has been a consistent and vocal critic of the drifting, cautious, risk-averse approach of the White House, leading to frequent conflict with Gibbs, Emanuel and other advisers:

Michelle Obama was privately fuming, not only at the president’s team, but also at her husband.

In the days after the Democrats lost Edward Kennedy’s Senate seat in January 2010, Barack Obama was even-keeled as usual in meetings, refusing to dwell on the failure or lash out at his staff. The first lady, however, could not fathom how the White House had allowed the crucial seat, needed to help pass the president’s health care legislation and the rest of his agenda, to slip away, several current and former aides said.

To her, the loss was more evidence of what she had been saying for a long time: Mr. Obama’s advisers were too insular and not strategic enough. She cherished the idea of her husband as a transformational figure, but thanks in part to the health care deals the administration had cut, many voters were beginning to view him as an ordinary politician.

The first lady never confronted the advisers directly — that was not her way — but they found out about her displeasure from the president. “She feels as if our rudder isn’t set right,” Mr. Obama confided, according to aides.

Rahm Emanuel, then chief of staff, repeated the first lady’s criticisms to colleagues with indignation, according to three of them. Mr. Emanuel, in a brief interview, denied that he had grown frustrated with Mrs. Obama, but other advisers described a grim situation: a president whose agenda had hit the rocks, a first lady who disapproved of the turn the White House had taken, and a chief of staff who chafed against her influence….

Like many of the president’s supporters, Mrs. Obama was anxious about the gap between her vision of her husband’s presidency and the reality of what he could deliver. Her strains with the advisers were part of a continuing debate over what sort of president Mr. Obama should be, with Mrs. Obama reinforcing his instincts for ambitious but unpopular initiatives like the overhaul of health care and immigration laws, casting herself as a foil to aides more intent on preserving Congressional seats and poll numbers.

Yes, except the part where those exceedingly cautious poll watchers got everything they wanted, and ended up leading Congressional Democrats to an historic defeat in 2010. If her husband had listened to his Michelle more, things might have taken a different trajectory.

But as things stand, she appears to have been neutered, left to be a cheerleader for austerity and whatever else the “wise” poobahs decide must be done to win the mythical “centrist” voter:

“To me, she seems more content than I’ve seen her throughout this process since he’s been running for president, which is a very good thing,” Mr. Axelrod said.

The worse things got for her husband in 2011, the more she rallied to his side, buoying him personally and politically. In August, after the debt ceiling negotiations in Washington reached their painful conclusion, Mrs. Obama gave a party for his 50th birthday, warning guests not to leave early and delivering a stemwinder of a toast in praise of her husband.

As the sun faded, the 150 guests — friends, celebrities, officials — sat on the South Lawn, listening to the first lady describe her version of Barack Obama: a tireless, upright leader who rose above Washington games, killed the world’s most wanted terrorist and still managed to coach his daughter Sasha’s basketball team. The president, looking embarrassed, tried to cut her off, several guests said, but she told him he had to sit and listen.

She also thanked him for putting up with how hard she had been on him. At that line, a few of the advisers glanced at each other in recognition.

Oh good. Now that Michelle is toeing the Axelrod line, everything is just peachy, because the last thing this Administration needs is progressive self-critique.

When push comes to shove, it may well be the biggest thing wrong with the Obama Administration is that the wrong Obama is in charge.

.

“Put the load right on me”

by digby

Mavis Staples, Nick Lowe and Wilco rehearse “The Weight.”

The first time I heard that song was at the third “Day On The Green” concert with Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young and The Band. It was pretty great. And I saw Nick Lowe many, many times a long time ago. We’re all old now, but it’s true what they say about age being a state of mind because I feel the same way hearing that song as I did then. And Mavis Staples still sings like a naughty angel — at 73. So there.

.

Proving once again that conservatives aren’t funny

by digby

Some things are better left to the professionals:

*sigh*

.

Mortifications for the 99%

by digby

It looks like Santorum doesn’t want to be president after all. He wants to be Flagellant in Chief:

Risking the wrath of older voters, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum is calling for immediate cuts to Social Security benefits and says the country can’t wait to phase in reductions as most of his rivals have advocated.
“We can’t wait 10 years,” even though “everybody wants to,” Santorum told a crowd while campaigning in New Hampshire Friday, breaking with opponents who say immediate cuts would be too big a shock to current and soon-to-be retirees.
[…]
He made a similar pitch last week in Fort Dodge, Iowa, when he was getting little attention in the GOP race — and before he came from the back of the pack to nearly win the Iowa caucuses.

At that event, Santorum said: “the Democratic National Committee is going to say, ‘Ah,… he’s for changing benefits now.’ Yes, I am. Yes, I am.”
“We need to change benefits for everybody now,” Santorum said at the time. “Is everybody going to take a little bit of a hit? No, but a lot of people will.”
[…]

In a brief interview Friday as he plowed his way through a crowd after the Keene event, he was asked if the nation should make the changes now.

“I think we should, yeah,” Santorum said. “Obviously we’re going to have to go through a debate next year and figure out ways in which to make the revenues meet the expenditures.”

He tells voters he would rule out higher taxes or more deficit spending to help the Social Security program. That leaves benefit cuts as the only way to match revenues and costs, he notes.

Right. The fact that social security isn’t contributing to the deficit is irrelevant and it would be against God’s will and the Constitution to raise taxes on the gluttonous 1% and ask them to pay more to pay the actual deficit. It has been decreed that the old the sick and the young who cannot work must pay for the sins of the Masters of the Universe.

It’s rumored that Santorum is associated, if not a member, of this group. It’s all about making people punish themselves.

Update: great piece by Sarah Posner on the problems the religious right is having coalescing around an alternative:

I were the betting sort, I’d wager that no concrete endorsement will come out of this, and there will be regrets afterwards. Those regrets were assuaged in 2008 with the selection of Sarah Palin. If Romney ends up being the nominee, which he in all likelihood will, the pressure will be on to come up with a similarly thrilling (for the religious right) running mate.

I think they’ll want a Southerner too so I’d bet on Perry.

.

Profiles in courage, pro-labor edition

by David Atkins

I know it’s become popular to trash elected Democrats, but what Indiana Democrats are doing is a profile in political courage:

Thirty-seven Indiana Democrats are on their third day of denying Republicans the 67-member quorum necessary to proceed with union-busting “right to work” legislation in the Indiana House of Representatives. The Democrats continue to not show up to the chamber despite now facing fines of $1,000 a day.

Why do Democrats continue to hold out, despite facing very real financial threats to themselves and their families, and despite Republicans holding a 60-40 majority in the House of Representatives? Because Democrats and unions are within striking distance of stopping the bill.

A source close to the process has told Daily Kos that Indiana Democrats are “very close to having the votes to defeat the bill on the floor.” A total of 51 votes is needed to defeat the bill, and while Democrats are united in opposition, Republicans are divided.

This information is based on an anonymous source, so obviously take it with a grain of salt. Still, there is an intuitive logic backing it up. With multiple members of the Democratic caucus actually facing the possibility of losing their homes over this, at this point they would not be staying out of the chamber if the fight was hopeless.

The single biggest difference between social democracies abroad and our democracy is the relative weakness in of labor unions in America. The decline of middle-class wages vis-a-vis productivity and rise in the incomes of the 1% tracks closely with the decline of American labor.

Determination to stand with the interests of labor is a big part of what it will take to bring America back toward a more progressive, fairer and more stable economy. Democrats in Indiana are showing that determination, as Dems opposing the odious Scott Walker have done and are still doing in Wisconsin.

.