Everything I've Got Belongs to You

Seen at the Roseville Jazz Fest, performed by Avalon Swing...Here's where they learned the song:

from Blossom Dearie... 

Lyrics:

I have eyes for you to give you dirty looks,
I have words that do not come from children's books,
There's a trick with a knife I'm learnin' to do,
But everything I've got belongs to you!

I've a powerful anesthesia in my fist
And the perfect wrist to give your neck a twist!
Hammer lock holds, I've mastered a few,
But everything I've got belongs to you!

Share for share, share alike,
You get struck each time I strike!
Me for you, you for me,
I'll give you plenty of nothin'!

I'm not yours for better, but for worse,
And I've learned to give the well-known witch's curse!
I've a terrible tongue and a temper for two,
But everything I've got belongs to you!

Then at night we'll sleep and sleep,
Sleep and sleep and sleep and sleep,
And sleep and sleep,
I'll give you plenty of nothin'!

I'm not yours for better, but for worse,
And I've learned to give the well-known witch's curse!
I've a terrible tongue and a temper for two,
But everything I've got,
Oooh-ooh it's not a lot!
But everything I've got belongs to you!

Songwriters: Lorenz Hart / Richard Rodgers

Muslim American pioneers... and Rahm Emmanuel's fraud

Muslims Lived in American Before Protestantism Existed

Excerpt:

If the West means, in part, the Western hemisphere or North America, Muslims have been part of its societies from the very beginning. Conflicts over what the American nation is and who belongs to it are perennial. Answers remain open to a range of possibilities and are vitally important. Historically, Muslims are Americans, as originally American as Anglo-Protestants. In many ways, America’s early Muslims are exemplars of the best practices and ideals of American religion. Any statement or suggestion to the contrary, no matter how well-meaning, derives from either intended or inherited chauvinism.

The Definitive Guide for Cable Hosts, Bookers, and Editors to the Fraud and Failure that was Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel

Excerpt:

A national audience deserves to know what those of us in Chicago have already figured out: Emanuel’s mayoral administration is littered with failures and false claims, and the recent elections in Chicago represents a complete repudiation of the Emanuel years. The new mayor, Lori Lightfoot, was one of Emanuel’s foremost critics on police reform. Alderman Patrick O’Connor, Emanuel’s City Council floor leader, a 40-year incumbent, was one of several top mayoral allies who were defeated — in O’Connor’s case, by a young Latino Democratic socialist. Meanwhile, Emanuel’s finance committee chair is now facing federal corruption charges, and his zoning committee chair disappeared in December when word leaked that he wore a wire for the feds after coming under investigation himself.

And on a significant range of issues, Chicagoans are turning away from Emanuel’s initiatives.

Anti-War Links

How Many Damn F*cking Times Do I Have to Explain This? - Arthur Silber on U.S. belligerence and narcissism.

Excerpt: Intelligence is completely irrelevant to major policy decisions. Such decisions are matters of judgment,and knowledgeable, ordinary citizens are just as capable of making these determinations as political leaders allegedly in possession of "secret information." Such "secret information" is almost always wrong -- and major decisions, including those pertaining to war and peace, are made entirely apart from such information in any case.

The second you start arguing about intelligence, you've given the game away once again. This is a game the government and the proponents of war will always win. By now, we all surely know that if they want the intelligence to show that Country X is a "grave" and "growing" threat, they will find it or manufacture it. So once you're debating what the intelligence shows or fails to show, the debate is over. The war will inevitably begin.

The Liberal Embrace of War - Matt Taibbi on U.S. belligerence and narcissism when it comes to Venezuela. 

Excerpt:  The American commercial news landscape, in schism on domestic issues, is in lockstep here. Every article is seen from one angle: Venezuelans under the heel of a dictator who caused the crisis, with the only hope a “humanitarian” intervention by the United States.

There is no other perspective. Media watchdog FAIR just released results of a study of three months of American opinion pieces. Out of 76 editorials in the New York Times, Washington Post, the “big three Sunday morning talk shows” or PBS News Hour, zero came out against the removal of Maduro. They wrote:

“Corporate news coverage of Venezuela can only be described as a full-scale marketing campaign for regime change.”

Allowable opinion on Venezuela ranges from support for military invasion to the extreme pacifist end of the spectrum, as expressed in a February op-ed by Dr. Francisco Rodriguez and Jeffrey Sachs called “An Urgent Call for Compromise in Venezuela”:

“We strongly urge… a peaceful and negotiated transition of power rather than a winner-take-all game of chicken…”

So we should either remove Maduro by force, or he should leave peaceably, via negotiation. These are the options.

After the disaster of Vietnam eons ago, American thought leaders became convinced we “lost” in Indochina because of — get this — bad PR.

The real lesson in Vietnam should have been that people would pay any price to overthrow a hated occupying force. American think-tankers and analysts however somehow became convinced (andamazingly still are) that the problem was Walter Cronkite and the networks giving up on the war effort.


And if you think foreigners are the only ones being attacked:

The Real Mueller-Gate Scandal - Craig Murray

Excerpt: Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney, a retired technical director at the National Security Agency, the $14 billion a year U.S. surveillance organization. He did not interview Julian Assange, publisher of WikiLeaks. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.

There has never been, by any U.S. law enforcement or security service body, a forensic examination of the DNC servers, despite the fact that the claim those servers were hacked is the very heart of the entire investigation. Instead, the security services simply accepted the “evidence” provided by the DNC’s own IT security consultants, Crowdstrike, a company which is politically aligned to the Clintons.

That is precisely the equivalent of the police receiving a phone call saying:

“Hello? My husband has just been murdered. He had a knife in his back with the initials of the Russian man who lives next door engraved on it in Cyrillic script. I have employed a private detective who will send you photos of the body and the knife. No, you don’t need to see either of them.”

John Oliver explains the Green New Deal + fee & dividend

Vox Interview about the Green New Deal

Here... is the Green New Weeds audio.

David Roberts joins Ezra and Jane to explain the policy and politics of the Green New Deal. Plus: Which candidate has the better climate plan, Beto O’Rourke or Jay Inslee?

Related reading:The Green New Deal, explained
David Roberts on what’s in the Green New Deal
The Green New Deal critics
The case against incremental climate policy
Gov. Jay Inslee’s climate policy