http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html Jean Synodinos: Randomness Jannis' PHPRss class - http://www.jannis.to/ Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:56:45 -0700 http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#23
Vic was more than a friend to me, and more than a friend to dozens (hundreds) of independent musicians, mostly from the folk world. He was a benevolent patriarch I suppose, since an entire musical subculture from coast-to-coast saw him as the kindest of father figures in our own little way.

He was a genuine patron to those of us who created art in his preferred medium. He supported talent and grit and perserverance and good people. Needed help to fix your car to get to a gig? Cover your touring costs? Get a laptop to do business? Vic supported dozens of us, if not more, through our leanest times. I'd bet he and Reba's names are thanked more times in the liner notes of more indie artist CDs than just about any other names in the world.

My parents aside, Vic was my first benefactor. We met at the Kerrville Folk Festival in 1995, my virgin trip to Texas. We kept in touch, because he and Reba have always been fine correspondents that way.

A few years later, having relocated to Austin to become good at this thing I do, Vic heard fear in my voice; he heard the same fear he’s heard from hundreds of us — that there was no money to support our habit for music. And he sent me a check which I happily cashed—but not without first making a copy of it and framing it.

In the years since, Vic provided contacts for me, booked me actual real-live gigs back east, got me on back on stage at Kerrville in 2004, and housed and fed me when I traveled their way. And I was not alone. We had dinner just about every year when he and Reba came to Austin. Dinner was always at Roy’s downtown. I think it’s Reba’s favorite.

We musicians have these lists of fans (some casual, some rabid), but I’d venture to guess that the most memorable of all is Our First True Fan—that first person who believes in us and what we do with sheer force of will before anyone else ever does. Vic was that guy.

I’m thinking a lot about Reba this week, too. About the depth of their love, illustrated by generosity towards each other and the world, made more challenging by the Parkinson’s that consumed Vic’s body a bit more each year. I’m imagining what it’s like to lose your dearest friend, your partner of so many years, your constant companion. So I’m thinking of Reba, thinking of my mother, too, and thinking how much I love my husband.

But mostly, I’m thinking of Vic, and raising my glass to a truly one-in-a-million soul.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#23 Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0800 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#22 Or... We Got a Piano and it Rocks.

A few weeks ago, we were watching TV at night and Charles said, apropos of nothing in particular, "Wouldn't it be great if we had a piano?"

Yes, I said, it would.

We jumped into conversation: wouldn't it be fun? How could we afford it? Where the hell would we put it in our tiny, tiny home? Wasn't this crazy? Wasn't this the sanest thought either one of us had had in awhile? Can we afford it? Can we afford not to?

These are incredibly tough times for millions of Americans. This past week's labor report was not only the worst in 30 years, but when we factor in those unemployed Americans who have become too discouraged to continue seeking work, or those who have taken part-time work because they could not find a full-time job, the unemployment rate is hovering around 12%.

Twelve percent.

I'm trying to visualize it this way: how many people who would likely be in the current eligible workforce live on your block? There are about three dozen homes on our block. I figure that all of them have at least one person for who expects to work. I figure about half those homes choose to have a second person out there working, too. So we're talking about 54 people who want to be gainfully employed, using their skills, making some money. Which means that if my block follows the national average, at least six souls are out of work and at least four households are affected.

But... Our block probably isn't representative of the national average. We live in Austin, TX. Earlier this year, Forbes listed Austin as one of the nation's Top 10 Most Recession-Proof Cities. Our unemployment rate hovers around 4%, I believe. I mentioned this to my mom on the phone yesterday, and I swear I heard an audible sigh of relief from her.

And... We're doing just fine with the income thing. Charles plays plenty of gigs. I've got a great day job that covers more than the basics, and this year I'm amazed to realize I'll have made more as a musician than any year before. Charles actually has a theory that musicians do better during times of recession. I'm still wrapping my head around it, but I'm also taking him on faith cause he's really rarely wrong when he opines about such stuff.

Plus... Our family and friends are hanging in there. Some are more scared than others, and they've got reason to be based on their industry and geography. But so far, our families are heading into the holidays okay.

So there are three things to be enormously grateful for.

Back to the piano.

We didn't speak about the idea much for a couple of weeks, but I couldn't get it out of my head. We have a couple of small and occasionally troubled keyboards here at home. I occasionally use one to compose if I'm feeling stuck on the guitar. But a piano is different. A piano is substantive. A piano adds depth and gravitas to any note that's played. A piano literally charges a room with vibration and raises the energy in it for the better.

I have carted around all of the piano music I collected from my lessons as a girl, carted them between 17 residences in 6 states as part of my most important personal possessions. About two weeks ago, I pulled them out of a box and picked through a few melodies on the keyboard in my office.

It was incredibly unsatisfying. It was bad sex. It was an annoying telemarketer on the phone. It was a Twinkie--no, worse than a Twinkie--it was a Little Debbie.

And that night I went on to Craig's List and found a piano.

Truthfully, there were about 40 pianos posted--which suggested to us that maybe people really are starting to feel the recession in this town--but there was only one posting that caught my eye: an upright Baldwin from the 1950s. Price: $300. Location: South Austin.

Funny how the impossible idea is made easy the second we decide it's not only possible, but inevitable.

Fourteen hours after finding the ad, I bought the piano. Two days later, the day after Thanksgiving, our piano arrived. We found the cash, we found the mover, we found the perfect place for it.

We've spent a lot of time and energy and money in the past year improving the house--floors, walls, rooms, appliances, textiles, furniture--but this piano has turned our kind, small house into a home. I said this to Charles a few nights ago; I think he thought I was being weird.

He touches the keys and finds improvised melodies and harmonies with an immediacy that makes me giddy and astonished. Conversely, I open the yellowed collection of Chopin waltzes, preludes and mazurkas and happily labor for hours at a time over re-learning to read two clefs simultaneously. This, it strikes me, is in line with our preferred styles of creativity (my own "theory," must blog about it another night!), and it's thoroughly right.

Charles dug up some old sheet music for Vince Guaraldi's "Christmastime is Here" which has these bad-to-the-bone suspended chords. The guy clearly had HUGE HANDS with an incredible reach, and I'm having to modify some of those voicings, but what the hell.

Christmastime is here.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#22 Sun, 07 Dec 2008 00:00:00 -0800 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#21
Here are a few thoughts about the last two years. Along the way, I participated, for the first time in the Texas Two-Step; in addition to casting a vote on primary day, voters can return in the evening to participate in a caucus, from which delegates to the county conventions are chosen.

From this simple participation, I was most honored to be chosen to represent my district at the county convention, and then the state convention.

I was thinking about the primary race last night. While I’ve never wavered in my support for Obama, I know that Senator Hillary Clinton was an able and certainly worthy opponent. That race was a passionate one. It wove its way in to the fabric of Dem families nationwide, including mine.

Many months ago, I wrote the text below to my niece, Emily, who was getting ready to cast her very first ballot as a young woman in Pennsylvania. How she voted is nobody’s business; that she voted at her first opportunity makes me prouder than I can say, and I can only imagine how proud her parents are of her. Some of my arguments to her seem old, old, old, but they remind me of how terrifically important this entire process has been—and how all of us knew it from the outset.




I argued, for instance, that Senator Clinton could not win a general election. Given our current economic crisis, hard to imagine any Republican winning today's general (knock on wood). But at the time she and Bill were running the kind of "old machine politics" that, frankly, most of us in this country have had-it-up-to-here-with. So maybe I was wrong, maybe not. It's all speculation anyway.




But the big reason I've looked forward to this day is that I get to vote my hopes far more than my fears. And from the looks of things on CNN and MSNBC, I may not be alone. Other countries have rightly been aghast at our historically low voter participation. Happily, the sea’s changing today.

Yes, we can.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#21 Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:00:00 -0800 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#20 Answer: What makes for an interesting August?


A political convention. As a lifelong political junkie, I drool over conventions like a kid drools over Christmas. We talked politics at the dinner table growing up. I hail from a family of Democrats in a thoroughly red county in Pennsylvania. My parents were bold that way.

My first crush was on Garrick Utley, the NBC floor correspondent for the 1972 conventions. I remember when the news broke that year about Thomas Eagleton — George McGovern’s first pick for Veep. I remember going to bed that night thinking how awful it was that anyone would be treated as poorly as he’d just been. I remember thinking Nixon was about to be re-elected.

Flash forward: am giving a thumbs-up to Joe Biden as Obama’s Veep pick. A politically savvy choice, creating a pretty well-rounded ticket. Looking forward to seeing Joe debate McCain’s choice (Romney?). Still wondering why so many Clinton supporters are behaving with such apparent petulance. Also wondering why Bill Clinton doing the same. Good grief. I know that politics is personal; I know that my preferred candidate is about to be nominated. But I’m quite sure I’d have gotten over my disappointment had it been the other way around. Can we all kindly look past our 18 inches of personal space on this one, kids? Anyway, am looking forward to both conventions...

A small (?) war. The war between Russia and Georgia reminds a number of Americans that political and military differences are not limited to the Middle East. I thought it ironic that a good chunk of Georgia’s military (2000 troops) was fighting alongside our troops as the 3rd (2nd?) largest member of the famed “Coalition of the Willing.” We can all pray that the cease-fire holds and peace reigns over that oil pipeline (yes”¦ oil rearing it’s slimy head again). If nothing else, President Mikheil Saakashvili and his country have the world’s attention and are garnering support for the rebuilding of Georgia. And we've looked into the soul of Putin and found... a politician.

The 29th Olympic Games. Yeah, it’s a spectacle, and China did an outrageous and spectacular job with those opening and closing ceremonies. The only low point in last night’s closing ceremony was actually the nod to the 2012 London games featuring Jimmy Page. Is London considering a rock ”˜n roll theme for their games? Based on last night’s performance, it ain’t gonna fly. London, here’s a piece of advice: While I’d hate to be in your shoes and have to follow Beijing, I’d suggest placing a call today to the artistic directors of Circque du Soleil. It’s probably your best chance”¦

We were serious couch potatoes and watched a lot of Olympic events, awed by the capacity of the human body. Yeah, as soon as the weather cool’s down a bit, I’ll be exercising again. Yeah.

My only sadness in thinking about the Olympics is in realizing that only about 1/5 of those viewers will tune into either upcoming political convention. That’s actually a national tragedy, imho.

Lots of gigs. A month with eight live shows is a month well lived. Thanks to everyone who came out.

Podcasters. I just discovered the Podsafe Music Network this month. I love podcasts and haven’t been able to stomach much commercial radio since I got my first iPod in June 2006. Last year’s legislation requiring podcasters and internet radio stations to pay royalties to the Performing Rights Organizations (BMI, ASCAP, SESAC) made the lights go dim. But now the PSMN has provides this extraordinary portal for podcasters and artists to meet. I created a page and loaded songs about a week ago. In the next month, I’ll do a little outreach to some podcasters”¦ but in the mean time, I want to give a major shoutout to the few that’ve already started playing some cuts: Suffolk and Cool, DALECAST and Your Lonely Fella. Thanks, friends!

Season Five of “The Wire” on DVD. We watched 9 episodes this weekend. Things are looking bleak for just about everyone but the politicos and lawyers. I will be so sad when the last credits roll on this amazing series.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#20 Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#19 balance, schmalance.

At some point along the way, we all suspect we need a little balance in our lives. During our crazier times, we may even have a handful of beloved family and friends urge that we strive for a little more of it. This can happen whether we’re overachieving, first-born Type A freakazoids or carefree n’er-do-well slackers; either extreme can provoke some well-meaning soul to suggest a little balance might help us find nirvana. We are told that balance equals health. Get yourself some of that "healthy balance."

What they’re really saying to the Type A’s is, "Slow down or you’ll kill yourself and take a few of us with you." What they’re really saying to the slackers is, "Get yourself a job, man, cause we all need to Do Our Part." Passive aggressive advice, frequently disguised as concern. Culturally, we kind of have a habit of doing that as a rule, unfortunately. But I also digress...

So what happens when, all by our lonesome, we come to the conclusion that we need to achieve this thing called balance?

Two Problems with the Pursuit of Balance As We Know It

Problem 1: Doing vs. Being.
The problem with trying to achieve balance is that we’re talking about achieving a state of being by perpetrating some deliberate doing. Need balance? Just read the books. Watch the programming. Seek the Wisdom. Follow the instructions. Just do it.

This studious pursuit frequently results in the construction of a number of meaningful to-do lists which presumably include plenty of personal down-time “balanced” with high-octane action.

Everything is goal oriented, too. We “balance” any number of goals in order to improve our finances, our bodies, our minds, our careers, our marriage, our children, our homes. In fact, we are told by the Occidental Gurus of Balance that the more varied and numbered our goals at any given time, the more we should trust that we are appropriately balancing our lives. All through doing. Not being.

But balance is a lot like porn. We should know balance when we feel it, like we know porn when we see it. And it’s been quite a long time since we in the West have trusted our gut. I think I’ll schedule some time into my balanced day for meditation to ponder that one.

Problem 2: Time Frames
So. Now our days are scheduled to the quarter-of-an-hour in an absurd attempt to balance work against play, physical against intellectual, chore against hobby—all within the time span of approximately 16 waking hours (assuming we’ve scheduled ourselves for a balanced 8 hours of sleep each night).

We rise every morning and commit ourselves to the impossibly stressful task of achieving another days’ worth of balance. We stress over the probability that we will fail miserably. And we add to that stress by reminding ourselves of those long-term goals, so we recommit doubly and more, until we fall down again, again, again—and finally stay down.

The problem, I believe, is that we seek to find balance in the dreaded 24-hour day.

A few years’ ago, I recall hearing Teri Gross of Fresh Air interview the actor Annette Benning. Ms. Gross asked Ms. Benning how she balanced her life. As wife to Warren Beatty, as mother to their children, as Oscar-worthy star—how on earthy did she do it all? Ms. Benning’s answer really was a bit of fresh air, and here it is, paraphrased.

She pretty much rejected the notion of daily and regular balance as we understand it. I think she said that balance was “overrated.” She preferred to immerse herself thoroughly in one area of her life at a time, thank you very much, and live it quite fully until it became time to move on to the next thing. When working on a film, the role was her priority and received her focused devotion. In between films, her children and husband were first and foremost. She acknowledged loving every aspect of her life, but also acknowledged that attempting to balance them simultaneously would probably result in doing nothing particularly well or passionately.

Finally, an answer that made complete sense to my gut.

I recently raised this notion to a new friend, a great bass player here in Austin, right before a show we did together a few weeks ago. Michael strikes me as a pretty balanced guy, and I mentioned my distaste for our general notions of balance and Ms. Benning’s wisdom.

Michael most rightly observed that those general notions about balance were all connected to the 24-day, and all Ms. Benning had done was extended the length of one day into several months at a time.

My husband, Charles, was in on the conversation, too, and one of them (can’t recall which), invoked the metaphor of the sound wave. The 24 hour day is a high frequency wave — you can fit a bunch of ”˜em on the page jumping up and down. It's very active. It looks like the kind of amusement park ride that’s bound to end in disaster. But take that wave and stretch it out into a nice, calm, low-frequency wave, and you’ve got a much more sustainable experience.

I swear to God, the image alone makes me feel calmer. So thanks to Michael and Charles for the visual metaphor and great discussion. I’ll remember it as much as I remember the Fresh Air interview.

More on this topic at some point, I think, since I ponder it regularly. I am open to any and all wisdom as I seek that low-frequency vision of balance, but I plan to trust my gut on this one.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#19 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#18 Shut Up and Dance, at http://jeansynodinos.blogspot.com/. I'll cross-post to this site whenever it's a natural fit, more often than not I suspect. We all need hobbies, don't we?]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#18 Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#16
Count me among the last group. And here’s where I’m truly baffled by many of the other responses I’ve heard.

I’ve heard a number of pundits — from the left and the right — say that Obama can no longer possibly hold the mantle of a "unity candidate" without having renounced his pastor. I confess that I am shocked by what I perceive as a complete misunderstanding of his speech and his actions, especially since we presumably live in such a deeply Christian nation. (In full disclosure, I’m not a Christian, nor do I affiliate with any specific faith. I was raised in the Greek Orthodox church, however, and come at this with full appreciation of my understanding of Christian values, as well my knowledge that the majority of voters in our country self-identify as Christians.)

So based on my understanding of Christianity, Obama’s speech was the epitome of Christian values and wholly unifying in its primary message.

Is not a core principle of Christianity to “love the sinner — not the sin?” Isn’t that how he was eloquently describing all of us, explaining how he could no more discard his preacher than he could his black community or his white grandmother? He does not love their sins; he loves them as people.

He is bringing us to the correct question: How on earth can we possibly unify as a nation if we do not embrace everyone — both the angry old black man and the fear-based old white woman? Had he denounced either one of them, he would have betrayed the very quality of unity to which he has spoken. It strikes me that it would have been the equivalent of Peter’s denial of Christ.

So I’m baffled by those responses. Obama’s speech, for all its intellect, was far more Christian in its humility, far-sightedness and potential for change than any speech I’ve ever heard a politician make.

Which is why it was also so politically risky.

Politics—feeding frenzy that it is, now—demands its candidates and elected officials to give the public and pundits what it “wants to hear” in easily-digested sound bytes. The rhetoric of politics has become fear-based in recent years, and it’s the presumed duty of candidates to calm our fears—fast, too. Politicians are no longer permitted to speak at length about complex issues in adult language. Oratory has been overturned for the focus-group-tested turn of phrase.

Which is why his campaign both works and fails. It’s manna to the minds and hearts of many Americans who have thoroughly had it with the politics of the last 40 years, and it terrifies those who are not ready to be challenged by it.

Had Senator Obama thoroughly rejected his preacher as so many have—and still—call for, I would have determined it an act of hypocrisy, and my disappointment would have been enormous.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#16 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#15
I’ve been hooked ever since.

This is an Obama household. While never a knee-jerk reaction to support his candidacy, sometimes I wonder if it wasn’t inevitable after being so radically moved by his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

The rest of the women in my family don’t appear so certain, though they’re all sure where I stand. I’m pretty sure mom and my aunt are going for Hillary, though conversations with mom have had a sort of “don’t ask, don’t tell” quality to them. I’ve had the pleasure of some great email correspondence with my sister and my niece (who is thrilled to be voting in her first election this year). No matter how these women vote in the upcoming Pennsylvania primary, I’m glad to come from generations of committed Democrats who have always reveled in our collective right to vote.

Those emails with my sister and niece generated the following list of Top 10 Reasons to vote for Senator Obama. Here they are, just as I wrote to my amazing niece this week. Other than the first one, they were written in no particular order:

1. I've decided to vote my hopes and not my fears. This was my original reason, and can probably be traced back to the remarkable speech he delivered at the Democratic Convention in 2004 (find it on YouTube—it’s beautiful!). I’ve waited my entire life for a candidate to inspire people to action—I’ve never seen anything like this before. It’s more than special, it’s potentially transformative. Obama calls people to action. In the same way that Kennedy said "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," Obama reminds us that "we are the change we've been waiting for." I believe that's the only way we'll truly get out of the mess that this country is in. On the other hand, Hillary's message has been "let me lead" (until, of course, she co-opted his “Yes We Can” to “Yes We Will”). To me, there's a world of difference.

2. Hillary and her husband are deeply polarizing political figures, and I don’t believe she can win a general election. That’s why hard core right wing talk show hosts are aching to see her get the nomination. Need proof? Here’s what happened in Ohio and Texas (and I understand it’s happening in Pennsylvania right now). Right wing talk radio convinced a number of their listeners to switch parties and vote for Hillary in the primary. CNN reported that more than 113,000 Republicans did just that in Texas, perhaps giving her the edge in the popular vote (though there’s not enough evidence to suggest it was due to the right wing radio hosts alone). Apparently, the tactic might have had greater impact in the Ohio vote: (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_10_percent_of_hillarys_votes_come.html)

3. His candidacy has proven good for our democracy. After two generations of dwindling numbers at the polls, Obama’s candidacy is bringing record numbers of people -- and youth in particular -- into the process. It used to be cool to be disaffected and not vote. The opposite is true now. And I fear that if Hillary gets the nomination (especially if it comes through Super Delegates), all those once-disaffected voters will disappear back into the woodwork come general election time.

4. Dynasties are bad for democracy, and I’m fairly sure our Founding Fathers would agree — since it’s pretty much one of the core concepts they were leaving behind in England. You and your sister have never known anyone other than a Bush or Clinton in the White House. That's messed up. Elect Hillary, and you could be in your mid-20s before that changes (unless Jeb Bush got elected then...). That's REALLY messed up. That's England during the House of York and the House of Lancaster. That's not the U.S. Moreover, Bill Clinton has shown himself to be an uncontrollable, narcissistic guy who is more than a little likely to throw his weight around and make this a "dual presidency" (also, not exactly in the Constitution). In fact, I'd bet my whole life savings on it. I know he was a good president in many, many ways, but his time is over, and the fact that they had to muzzle him on the campaign trail after South Carolina won’t mean a thing after she takes the oath of office. I believe that the Constitution was a brilliant piece of work, as were the men who crafted it. I believe they’d be horrified by the concept of these two dynasties holding the most important office for a potential 28 years (36 if we get Jeb”¦ I’m joking a little there).

5. The Clintons have been the first and most aggressive mudslingers in this campaign. If you’ve watched CNN or MSNBC or PBS or Fox or network news, you’ve certainly heard about their “kitchen sink strategy.” Two examples:

o Bill Clinton threw down the race card and behaved very, very poorly as a human being on the campaign prior to the South Carolina primary (which is when I made my final decision not to vote for Hillary). See the muzzle thing above.

o Florida and Michigan primaries. All Dem candidates agreed not to campaign in either state because both states broke party rules and held their primaries early. Per party instruction, each state understood that their delegates would not be able to be seated at the convention. In Michigan , where it was possible, all candidates except Hillary removed their names from the ballot (and she STILL didn’t get a majority of the vote). Only Hillary campaigned in those states, even though she was quoted as saying about Michigan that it “didn’t count for anything.” Now, she presses to change the rules under the guise of acting on behalf of the voters? Please. Let’s call this one what it is: bullshit.

o Even after the polarizing issues Obama has confronted recently, Hillary rates much lower in polls around the issue of trustworthiness. Check it out here: (http://www.gallup.com/poll/105097/Perceived-Honesty-Gap-Clinton-Versus-Obama-McCain.aspx)


6. VERY important: We should watch the flow of money in this campaign. Hillary has taken money from every political action committee under the sun -- including pharmaceutical companies, the insurance industry, and military contractors. That money never comes without strings attached. Obama hasn't taken any PAC money, and while I'm not naive enough to believe he isn't a political creature at heart, I can trust, from the start that he's a whole lot less beholden to "special interests." See that Gallup poll around trustworthiness, above.

7. Transparency in government. Obama is asserting a belief that citizens have a right to know what's going on with the government -- no more deals made behind closed doors. No more secret testimonies. This has become an issue over their discussion of health care reform, in particular. He wants hearings with insurance companies to be aired on C-SPAN. Hillary won't make that pledge; and, of course she won't -- they've funded her campaign. And have you wondered why the Clintons haven’t released their tax return (and say they won’t until AFTER the PA primary)? I’m not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I’m gonna bet it’s got something to do with how Bill Clinton’s foundation is getting funded by some less-than-scrupulous overseas investors looking to make profits in, of all places, Africa and Dubai. I may not be totally on the mark here, but I’ll be when we see it, it won’t be too far off the mark (the NY Times has been investigating this for a while now”¦ we shall see). BTW, they also won’t release a list of donors to the Clinton library, or her list of congressional earmarks for her home state. Who the hell is getting all that earmark money? What favors will have to be returned there?

8. Hillary’s exaggerated a number of claims about her “vetted experience”—and perhaps have lied about others—which became clearer this week after the National Archives released 11,000 pages of her calendar. Here are a few examples:

o NAFTA: Don’t believe the hype that she was opposed to it from the start. Her newly-released calendar indicates she appeared publicly on behalf of the administration to plead its case at least four times. I personally think it’s galling that she’s lied about this to Ohioans and is now going to try to do it again in Pennsylvania — two of the states hit hardest by this dismal failure of a policy.

o FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act). She’s claimed on the campaign trail to have been a leading force behind this legislation, but you sure don’t see anything on her calendar to suggest she was taking all those meetings. There’s also major debate as to her actual role in promoting the SCHIP program which provides critical health insurance coverage to children of the working poor who make too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance. In the years I worked at the Children’s Hospital Association of Texas, CHIP was a pretty hot topic, and I don’t ever recall her name once being mentioned in connection to this legislation.

o She wants us to believe she has the same level of foreign policy experience as, say, John McCain, right? OK, she certainly does have more experience than Obama, but she has also seriously inflated the role she played in all those trips to other countries as First Lady, based on her calendar. Additionally, I’m stunned that no one on TV has pointed out the obvious problem with this “experience” argument, which is this: She wants us to acknowledge that Bill was a foreign policy whiz (and he was pretty good) — but Bill have even less experience than Obama when he took the oath of office! For an analysis of her foreign policy claims, visit the nonpartisan Annenberg Center ’s FactCheck.org here: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/hillarys_adventures_abroad.html

o Hillary is forever mentioning her “35 years of public service,” but how about noting that 15 of those years was as a corporate lawyer with the Rose Law Firm, during which time she served on corporate boards that included, among others, WalMart. WALMART !! She also speaks with affection of her first job working at the Children’s Defense Fund — which is great — but you probably didn’t realize that she held the job for less than a year. It was also the only job she ever held in the non-profit sector, so it personally strikes me that her claims here are fairly exaggerated.

9. When I was still on the fence and undecided, I decided to check myself to see if I was leaning one way or the other because of sex or race. So I pretended they were both white guys. On policy issues, they're pretty much a draw. Their core beliefs on how to deal with health care, the war, etc., are actually quite comparable. But here we have two ground-breaking candidacies in terms of gender and race. So I looked at it this way: If Hillary was a white guy, I'd be listening to a fairly caustic and uninspiring candidate who talks to me like every other politician has ever talked to me (which is to say, doling out whatever she thinks I want to hear). If Obama was a white guy, he’d still be inspiring — he talks to us like we are actually adults. Imagine that. And it feels fundamentally wrong to vote for Hillary just because she's a woman, if I don't believe she's the best leader. I was on the fence with this one, but I'm not any more.

10. Having said that... they DO differ on their take on diplomacy in foreign policy, and I think this is critical to our rebuilding our image across the globe. He's willing to talk to our enemies, right off the bat. She's indicated that she believes a president should only let our emissaries (like Sec. of State) talk to hostile governments "at least for the first year" (how arbitrary!). To me, Hillary's perspective is more of the same grand-standing bellicose U.S. behavior that got us into this mess in the first place. She's a war hawk -- as much as McCain from her voting record -- and I want a president who is more committed to diplomacy and peace. Both of them promise to get us out of Iraq in similar ways and turn appropriate attention to the front in Afghanistan, but when it comes to dealing with North Korea or Iran, I strongly prefer Obama's policy. Personally, I'm also not happy about the fact that when she cast her vote to authorize war in Iraq she voted against the Levin Amendment which would have required the President to try more diplomacy -- and report back to Congress on the results -- before force could be authorized. You’ve probably heard her say on the campaign trail that she cast her vote for the “Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq Resolution of 2002” because she thought Bush would try more diplomacy first, right? Well, please know that on the floor of the Senate, when she cast that vote, she said she was casting a vote “that might lead to war” and doing it “with conviction.”

There it is. One through ten. The way I see it, anybody who wants to be president has got to have an ego the size of Montana . I also know that no one gets into a campaign to lose, and politicians of all political stripes will do and say a lot of things to get themselves elected. But when I look at the totality of the candidates, I continue to believe that Barack Obama has far greater leadership potential for us right now, and Hillary Clinton is far more untrustworthy and polarizing.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#15 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#14
Sure, we all see that the world is clearly hanging at some odd angle these days, no? The weather here in central Texas early this summer was so uncharacteristically wet that native plants died, and we Austinites experienced a bizarre Seattle-like depression.

Man-made constructs (like government and politics--my personal obsession) went equally askew. The guy we're supposed to trust more than any other in our government (talking about you, Mr. Attorney General), proved to be as bad a liar as an average 6-year old kid... Our President commuted the sentence of a man convicted of obstruction of justice in a case involving national security... Our Vice President claimed he is neither executive nor legislator, and, apparently is a new branch of government altogether.

OK. So maybe we could collectively cling to sports -- our Great American Pasttimes -- for comfort? But lo... foiled there as well. Barry Bonds can hit 'em, but can't seem to do it without steroids (and lyin' like a cheatin' husband). An NBA ref is found to be fixing pro ball games.

But the one that brings me to my knees, the story prompts more than head-shaking and finger-pointing in the general direction of the television, is the tale of Michael Vick, NFL pro who has just pleaded guilty to torturing and killing dogs in the ongoing dog-fighting games he ran.

And this is where I finally -- finally -- think I understand Tony Soprano: The Man Who'd Kill His Best Friend But (Literally) Wouldn't Hurt a Fly.

Children and animals. Animals and children. Stories come to light about the respective torture and murder of these innocents. Our souls are crushed by attempts to fathom it all, but then there's this burning inside. At least, inside me and Tony. I confess to feelings that amount to more than grief -- they wish for some sort of vengeful and painful justice.

I barely know what to do with a level of grief for victims and perpetrators I do not know.

Not having been blessed with children of my own, I am still a proud stepmom (Hi, Willow) and aunt (Hi, Molly & Emily), and if it came to it, I know I’d instinctively insinuate my body in between any of them and the threat of violence in a nanosecond. I’m similarly committed to the dogs with whom I’ve shared a home. See my blog posting on old Cindy’s passing in early 2006. Young schnauzer mix Freida has been with us for just over a year. There was Candy, the beagle from my youth. I don’t know what it says about a person that some of their most precious and profound relationships are formed with dogs, and I’m not sure I care. If Michael Vick came anywhere near these kind creatures, I’d kick him in the balls. To start. And I’ve never done that to anyone before.

I am thoroughly challenged by the intensity of my (primal? unevloved?) response to Mr. Vick’s actions. And while I wish he were a different kind of man, it makes me also wish I was a different kind of woman — one a little less like Tony Soprano. Remember his response to the ducks in his pool? Remember when he learned that his nephew sat on and killed little dog Cosette on a heroin high? Remember Ralph's demise after the death of Pie-O-My?

I'm sharing some of these primitive instincts. Protection of the innocent is one thing. Vengeful instinct is another, yes it is.

What’s a girl to to? I'll think I’ll start by taking a look at my addiction to the news; as a junkie for the stuff I know that my TV is feeding the beast inside. Still, I know that turning off the news does not make the news disappear”¦

I'll keeping loving on my husband and dog and friends and family, because I'm lucky and pretty blessed to have all these incredibly cool critters in my life.

I'll go pick up the guitar and get to work on writing the next songs, go out and hear some great music, and play as many gigs as I can because that's some powerful medicine, and it always works.

And I'll get on my knees and do all I can to muster some Universal Love Energy for the rest of the world. I’ll include Mr. Vick and wish for his peace instead of his pain. And I’ll keep at it until I can be sincere, cause there’s no way this is going to come easily.

But otherwise, I’m pretty stumped. Any thoughts out there? I don't wanna feel like Tony Soprano any more.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#14 Fri, 24 Aug 2007 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#13
Yep. The birth of a nation. The overthrow of tyranny. Liberty for all.

Yep.

Let's yak about the latest chapter in our current administration's tyrannical choke hold on the People with a capital "P". Let's yak about the President's commutation of the sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby earlier this week.

Here's what we can factually say about the event:

1) President Bush has always maintained the position that he is vehemently opposed to commutations and pardons unless evidence comes to light suggesting a trial was somehow unfair. It's in his autobiography. It's also evidenced by his very short list of commutations/pardons, both as President and Governor of Texas.

2) He "respects" the jury's verdict but believes the sentence too harsh. This flies in the face of #1 above. Recall also that more executions were conducted under his tenure as governor than any other governor in something like 60 years.

3) The sentence was, by Federal law, absolutely within the guidelines.

4) Both the judge and special prosecutor involved in the case were Bush appointees -- both law-and-order kinda guys.

Now, here are some assumptions we can extrapolate from the verdict:

1) Bush felt enormous pressure from the neocon base and decided to throw them a bone. (O.K., but I think it's more to it than that.)

2) With poll numbers at Nixonian levels, Bush decided he had nothing to lose by commuting the sentence of a loyal servant. (O.K., he does seem to value loyalty, but it's still not enough...)

3) (Representing my personal take on things), "Bushney" wasn't about to let "loaded gun" Libby spend an hour in jail.

Supporting this extrapolation?

a) An analysis of Scooter's defense shows that he essentially threw himself on the sword for this administration. Recall that the defense initially planned to call the Veep to the stand and then changed its mind, putting the defendant in the middle of the beltway and letting a Mack truck's worth of evidence plow through him. Mr. Libby's decision to "take one for the team" suggests that "the team" promised him there'd be no jail time in exchange for his silence.

b) I've read that Scooter's marriage to Harriet Grant is one of those inside-the-beltway miracles, matching a high-powered neocon with an equally high-powered liberal attorney. Another James Carville/Mary Matalin pairing. I would bet that the lioness (Ms. Grant) made it abundantly clear that if her husband spent a second in jail she would take down the guys at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This is a personal hunch, but my guess is that Bush betrayed his "moral stand" on commutations in order to keep the lady from talking. She doesn't actually believe in the kool-aid. But she does believe in her family. I really get that.

No matter. At the end of the day (Independence Day), it's worth noting that there are, in fact, far-reaching consequences to this commutation.

For instance, we've just witnessed the birth of a new argument for relaxed sentencing. Defense attorneys, pleading on behalf of their convicted clients, will now be able to effectively argue that if Libby didn't do jail time for what a crime against national security, that their client certainly doesn't deserve it, either. Don't think it'll happen? You just watch.

Most importantly, the President has sent a global message that no one in his administration will have to be held accountable for illegal actions, as long as they remain loyal. All loyal foxes may continue to run the hen house without fear.

Again, friends, we gotta remain vigilant and insist to our elected officials in Congress that this administration be held accountable for its actions. Do we need to review the reasons why? (Lord, what a lengthy list.) Maybe. Regularly.

But today, let's just recall that it's Independence Day, the day upon which we recognize the decision to overthrow tyranny and craft a government based on incredibly well-conceived checks and balances, in which no man or woman is above the rule of law.

Last night, Keith Olbermann (MSNBC) equated the commuting of Libby's sentence to Nixon's firing of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox -- the watershed moment that defines the point of absolutely no return, eventually leading to Nixon's resignation. Olbermann called for Bush to do the same (nice try, Keith).

We shall see... Personally, I thought the administration's most absurd moment came last week w/ Cheney's declaration that he is neither executive nor legislator -- neither fish nor foul.

In truth, though, this administration continues, week after week, to top itself (or bottom itself--is that possible?) with new ways to flaunt its disregard for the Constitution--and The People.

So keep it up, kids! Set off some metaphorical fireworks of your own today. We've only got one country. I don't know about you, but I WANT IT BACK.]]> http://jeansynodinos.com/news.html#13 Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0700 smart-sexy acoustic soul for the big kids in the room - Jean Synodinos - Randomness