I Won't See These Bands at Summerfest, but You Should...

Years ago I was a Summerfest regular, spending several days there each time the festival ran, usually as a reviewer for local publications, sometimes as a musician. Now I live in Minneapolis and we have a comparable festival experience called…
 
Well, no, we don’t. Nothing anything really close to it, actually. That’s OK, there are few festivals in the same league as SF. And there are many nice things about the Twin Cities that more than make up for our lack of a huge, multi-day music festival.
 
But I have been looking at the SF schedule and a few thoughts came to mind, so since I haven’t fired up the blog lately, I thought I’d plop them down here.
 
This won’t take long. The number of band names I don’t recognize at SF this year includes, well, most of them. And there are many good acts that I won’t mention simply because I assume you’ve heard of them and can make up your own mind about seeing them.
 
But there may be a few, including a few from the Twin Cities, that may slip under the radar, so here’s an attempt to illuminate them a bit.
 
Weds June 29,
6pm, Cascio Interstate Music Groove Stage with Onion/A.V. Milwaukee and 91.7 WMSE (why such a short name??)
Pictures of Then
This edgy guitar band from Minneapolis (with some nice synth and keyboard touches) is a bit of a buzz band around here.
 
5 pm, Rock Stage
The Friendly Lens
(See, is that so hard? “Rock Stage.” Simple, timely, classic. All that a music stage name should be, and more.)
I had the pleasure of seeing TFL at the Scott Weinberger benefit and they were quite rocking—and fun. Actually not too different from that first act but a little more compelling in my book.
 
Sunday July 3
4:30 pm
Cascio Interstate Music blah blah stage
Me and My Arrow
Besides getting points for the cool name (all hail Harry Nilsson), MaMA boasts one of those fascinating, complex lineups with string players and multiple singers and a big, big wall of sound. They’re bursting with energy live, capable of dramatic dynamic shifts, and they rock pretty convincingly. I like ‘em!
 
Thursday July 7
Cascio Inter-aaaaaaaaagh!
7:30 and 9 pm
The Melismatics and Mark Mallman
Melismatics are another classic Minneapolis band that started out on Ed Ackerson’s Susstones Records and have been bubbling under, as they say, ever since. Have to confess I’ve never seen them but they have a rep for great live shows.
Mallman is a piano-playing maniac who I’ve always thought is more a great showman than a great songwriter but honestly, his songwriting is nothing to sneeze at. I’d bet good money that this will be a memorable show. (Although I’m surprised he’s headlining—does Mallman have a big Mke following I don’t know about?)
 
Saturday July 9
Harley Davidson Roadhouse with Miller Genuine Draft
(Because if there are two things that go together, it’s drinking bad beer and going for a joyride on a motorcycle)
4 pm
Purgatory Hill
Neither a Mpls band nor a Milwaukee band, but features former Milwaukeean MelanieJane and cigarbox bluesman Pat MacDonald. Their take on the blues is fun and fascinating as they do more with two strings and tamborine than most full bands can do. Highly recommended. (also on the same stage that night: Fever Marllene and The Flaming Lips. Good lineup!)
 
 
Other bands to check out Testa Rosa, The Danglers, Paul Cebar (duh!), Ike Reilly Assassination, 5 Card Studs (at the Martini Lounge—perfect!), Juniper Tar, Kings Go Forth (duh!), Semi-Twang--if I forgot your band or your favorite band sorry, it’s all a blur after a while...Say hi to Lake Michigan for me!

Best Band Name: Screamin’ Cucumbers
Worst Band Name: Doctor Woo

Get the whole lineup:
www.summerfest.com

The Tea Party Management Style

I think the ongoing situation in Wisconsin is a good lesson on where extreme, partisan politics can take us.

As I wrote in an email not long ago (and I promise to stop quoting myself...soon):

"Walker has always been controversial. He was deeply unpopular with Democrats when he was County Exec in Milwaukee. He took a lot of fire. He didn't care.

"He doesn't care now. He's getting national attention, he's a hero to the Right. It really is excellent news for him, as far as I can see. And I don't see him as being in a position of weakness. The Dem Senators are not going to become Illinois residents; they have to come back at some point. And every day they're away, he can say Democrats are shirking their duties. "Not being on the job" is pretty much perfect for the Right's critique of the labor movement anyhow.

"[recent actions] just confirm what the Rs have been saying. They have the votes. They will stick together. They've seen it work in DC, they're going to stick together in Madison. I would love to see some of them peel off, but don't see any signs it will happen."

As it turns out, one R Senator did peel off. But the hardcore partisan actions of Walker and crew did get them what they wanted. Whether that will have consequences down the road is another question.

My take: being governor is different than being county exec. The latter job is low profile, the public pays little attention to it. That has changed dramatically now that Walker has taken his damnthetorpedoes approach to Madison.

In any case, expect more of the same. This guy is no Barack Obama, he's not going to have beer summits or health care roundtables. He's not going to reach out to the other side, unless it's to smack them upside the head. Compromise is not his style. Some people will dig that. Some won't. We'll have to see how the people of Wisconsin take to the Tea Party style of management.

Blast from the past...

"Progressives will mourn the loss of Feingold, but Scott Walker’s win is a real nightmare for the people of Wisconsin. He is a true believer in downsizing government to the point where it basically ceases to function, as he has proven in his role as county executive for Milwaukee County. Expect Wisconsin’s next governor to be extremely partisan in fighting against health care reform, nixing mass transit projects, slashing education, etc. As George Bush so ably did, Walker believes government can do no good and is dead set on proving it."

Mod Lang, Nov. 1, 2010.

Bill talks about education

Jim commented earlier on my brief education post and raised a good point. And tho I'm not into the demonizing of unions, I do think trying to improve and protect our education system is something we should all be working on.

A Man Hears What He Wants to Hear

David Roberts does an admirable job of discussing how the whole "Climategate" mess was handled in the media.

"It's a numbingly familiar pattern in media coverage. The conservative movement that's been attacking climate science for 20 years has a storied history of demonstrable fabrications, distortions, personal attacks, and nothingburger faux-scandals -- not only on climate science, but going back to asbestos, ozone, leaded gasoline, tobacco, you name it. They don't follow the rigorous standards of professional science; they follow no intellectual or ethical standards whatsoever. Yet no matter how long their record of viciousness and farce, every time the skeptic blogosphere coughs up a new "ZOMG!" it's as though we start from zero again, like no one has a memory longer than five minutes.

"Here's the basic question: At this point, given their respective accomplishments and standards, wouldn't it make sense to give scientists the strong benefit of the doubt when they are attacked by ideologues with a history of dishonesty and error? Shouldn't the threshold for what counts as a "scandal" have been nudged a bit higher?"

Gov't Spending Equals American Jobs, pt. 2

A blogger at Moody's Analytics notes that if Congressional Republicans get the cuts they want, out economy will suffer a grevious hit. Their proposal, he writes, "would reduce 2011 real GDP growth by 0.5% and 2012 growth by 0.2 percentage points This would mean some 400,000 fewer jobs created by the end of 2011 and 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of 2012."

Talking Points Memo also notes that an ABC News report last week predicted that the Republican approach would cut economic growth by 2 percent of GDP--an even more dire analysis than Moody's.

I keep hearing from my conservative friends that if we raise taxes, it will hurt job creation. But that's really a hypothetical. Job creation is driven by many things, and maybe taxes play a role, but demand, business climate, workforce conditions, all of those play a role as well. Cutting government spending will destroy jobs that families are depending on Right Now. Real jobs, not possible jobs. With cutting government spending, you are certain to do one of several things: cancel someone's health insurance, reduce someone's services, cut someone's job. These are not good outcomes.

Government Spending Equals American Jobs

The ongoing protests in Madison have me thinking about what government spends money on. And in many cases, it's employing people like teachers, policemen, firemen, social workers, etc.

So what happens when we cut government spending?

The math isn't difficult.

More people on unemployment (and more government spending). Fewer taxes collected. Less money going into the retail sector. Purchasing decisions (new house, new car, new teeth) delayed or canceled.

That's good for our economy how?

I understand the argument that government is spending too much, and I'm sure there are cases where it's true. But too often this argument is framed this way: "We have to cut government spending so we can create jobs!" But that's not what happens at all. You may be saving the taxpayer some dollars. But what you're also doing is cutting jobs, and there's no reason whatsoever to think that the private sector will pick up the slack.

Right now many states are facing big deficits. A good number of these states, like Wisconsin, have Republican governors. So raising taxes is out. Cutting spending is in. And that means job losses, less revenue, and so on. It does not sound like a formula for economic recovery to me.

What If…?

I’d like to conduct a mental exercise. Let’s pretend the United States had a democratically-elected president back in 2000.

If that had happened, I think today’s headlines would not just be about Egypt and Libya and Bahrain. I think today, or maybe tomorrow or next week, we would be hearing about the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, as Iraq joins the irresistible lurch toward democracy in the Middle East.

Those who sought to justify the war in Iraq trotted out one reason after another. The terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 didn’t come from Iraq, so we heard about weapons of mass destruction. The weapons of mass destruction turned out not to exist, so we heard about democracy and the need to rid the world of this evil dictator.

But as it turns out, time might have done the trick, much more neatly and legitimately. It doesn’t take much imagination to think about a unified Iraq, whose citizens suddenly find themselves with fewer reasons to fight, now that they have worked together to rid themselves of a tyrant.

And think what could have been saved. Thousands of American lives. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives—to say nothing of the refugee problem that afflicts Iraq's neighbors. Trillions of dollars that we still haven’t figured out a way to replace. The reputation of this country as a champion of democracy.

Maybe, right? Maybe it would’ve worked out that way. All we know now, as we stand on the sidelines, is that our slipshod, democracy-at-the-barrel-of-gun solution in Iraq now looks shaky, out-of-touch, and overly expensive. Maybe it will work out. Maybe.

Compare and Contrast

Two neighboring states have elected starkly different governors with starkly different ideas of how to solve their financial crises.

In Wisconsin, Scott Walker is charging ahead with tax cuts, evisceration of public unions, and a government-is-the-problem vision that is as pure, and as radical, as any state executive has articulated in modern times.

Facing a deficit twice as large, Minnesota governor Mark Dayton is similarly taking a blowtorch to government spending, but he is almost unique among governors in asking that the rich also pay a hefty price tag to address financial problems that have been ignored for too long.

Walker’s agenda will almost certainly pass in some form. It’s hard to see how Dayton’s tax increases will get by the new Republican majorities in the Minnesota Legislature.

It’s too bad. We might’ve had a chance to see how two opposite approaches would play out. Would wealthy business owners have stampeded out of Minnesota for the greener pastures of Wisconsin, taking their jobs with them? Would Walker’s gutting of schools and presumably health care programs (if you want to address spending you gotta go there eventually) have made Wisconsin an undesirable destination for employers?

It’s too early to tell how it will all play out. But the two men could hardly be further apart in their ideas about what their states should look like.

A random thought

(That I’ve shared elsewhere…)

As a parent, there is one thing I’m quite sure of.

Public school teachers deserve more compensation, not less.

Meet the New Congress

Heard a really remarkable interview on MPR today. It was with a Congressman from Florida who chairs a transportation committee, John Mica. In the short interview, Mica, who came across as a reasonable and likable guy, really did a remarkable job of downplaying the entire tea party movement.

First, he backpedaled on earmarks, saying that earmarks were necessary to keep the President from just doing whatever he wanted. Fair enough, but pretty different from what the R's were saying the last couple of months.

Then he said about the health care reform repeal, and I'm trying to not paraphrase too much: A) I'm going to vote for it, B) it's not going to pass (presumably he meant it would fail in the Senate,) and C) I don't really want to repeal health care reform anyhow.

He then went on to throw up a smokescreen of false and misleading points about the new health care law, for instance saying that it's wrong to mandate health insurance coverage when people can't afford it (the reform law specifically addresses that issue to make it affordable through subsidies), and saying it's too expensive (when in fact repealing the health care reform law will add $100 billion to the deficit).

By this point, I've come to expect R's to peddle in misinformation, tho it was disappointing to hear it from a guy who seemed reasonable otherwise. But it was really incredible to hear the mental gymnastics required to say, "I'm going to vote for something I don't agree with because I know it will eventually fail."

I may disagree with him on the larger points, but on this, I hope he's not wrong.