Tag Archives: word

Kool A.D.’s Bizarre Pop-Culture Carnival

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A lot of musicians can’t run fast enough from their first big hit. Led Zeppelin wouldn’t play “Stairway to Heaven.” Madonna hates “Like a Virgin.” And if you ask Radiohead to play “Creep,” Thom Yorke might tell you to fuck off (if he deigns to respond).

Not so the guy who broke through as one-third of Das Racist, the rap group behind “Combination Pizza Hut and Taco Bell,” which was memorialized by The New York Times in 2009 as “an entrancing but numbing track based largely on the repetition of the title phrase.” Victor Vazquez, the 30-year-old rapper, punk rocker, novelist, and visual artist also known as KOOL A.D., parted ways with Das Racist in 2012, but says he tries “to think of everything I do as part of a continuous idea—I guess because it is all one continuous idea, in that all human life is one continuous idea.”

Peep the artwork, and you’ll get what he means. Maybe.

Vazquez is quick to point out that the hooks for Pizza Hut/Taco Bell and “Michael Jackson,” another of Das Racist’s hits, both came from a song he wrote in 2006, before the rap crew existed. Broadly speaking, his work feels remarkably consistent across his various media—a strong sense of unity emanates from beneath the seeming chaos. Vazquez’s mind is sensitive and humanistic, preoccupied by the philosophical challenges and existential absurdity of living in American society, yet nonetheless living as a part of it.

BEAUTIFUL DOG PIC (2014), by Victor Vazquez

He’s also absurdly prolific. A few months ago Vazquez married Saba Moeel, a fashion designer/musician he’s known since he was 15. A baby is on the way, and so is a book: O.K., A NOVEL, due out this fall, is a 442-page experimental narrative done as 100 fragmented episodes. Vazquez frequently switches up the narrators and breaks from standard prose into lists, screenplay-style scripts, dictionary entries, tweets, and fake ad copy.

His drawings and paintings, which gained some prominence in a 2009 “cartoon-off” with The New Yorker‘s Farley Katz (widely deemed to have ended in Vazquez’s favor), have shown in galleries in Oakland, California, and New York City. An internet-age artist through and through, he also sells visual art pieces via Instagram—some go for hundreds of dollars in seconds. The KOOL A.D. Twitter feed is itself a spectacle, and its oblique comedy and wild musings were partially compiled in Joke Book, his 33-page chapbook of “axioms and aphorisms,” such as: “NPR is to Fox as Starbucks is to Dunkin’ Donuts in that who cares” and “If you’re using a French word to describe it, it can’t be all that ‘avant-garde,’ now can it?” You can almost feel his mischievous smile.

The records keep dropping, too: Vazquez’s Bandcamp page now advertises 12 solo releases, with six full-length albums since 2012. He plans to make his latest, WORD O.K., a “visual album” (a la Beyoncé) with videos to accompany each track.

It’s hard to get much further from Beyoncé than WORD O.K., though. The video for one song, “WORD,” is a three-and-a-half minute, highly NSFW animated short that feels like an acid-fueled journey through a dystopian corporate carnival. It pans smoothly from Bart Simpson wearing a McDonald’s tee and smoking a joint to a sexualized, anthropomorphized rabbit doing the same. Yin-yangs, peace signs, and other pop symbols breathe in and out of cartoon orifices.

His associations might seem offhand, but really they are part of a thoughtful effort to deconstruct and rearrange cultural objects in ways that challenge our deepest assumptions. “We are all part of one universal organism, but at the same time we’re also distinct individual creatures,” he says. “It’s a paradoxical duality that, say, the yin-yang, as one of many symbols or combination of symbols, describes in a sort of shorthand.”

O.K., A NOVEL comes out this fall.

The ability to perceive the universal in particular moments and places, creating heightened impressions that encourage broader, often subversive, considerations, is where Vazquez’s work shines brightest. In “Open Letter,” the five-minute opener of WORD O.K., he raps: “The ice might melt and drip away / But picture yourself rolling in a Lincoln / Seeing pawnshops slink in your peripheral vision / And drift away.” On “Special Forces,” the final track, he takes a completely different rhetorical tack, bluntly repeating “Polo is owned by Nestle,” three times in a row.

In conversation, Vazquez is more explicit about how he relates to the world, artistically and politically. A proud San Francisco Bay Area native (three of his recent releases, 51, 19, and 63, are named after local bus routes), he’s outspoken about the impacts of gentrification.

“There’s nothing wrong with a couple new coffee shops or bars or restaurants,” he says. “But the rich people that move to a spot because it’s ‘cool’ often enough don’t really understand the politics of their being there.” He points to the tech industry: “You might take a private bus line to your software development company or whatever and essentially live a life that’s completely segregated from the majority of people in the world, and in the meantime you’re trying to develop products and concepts that are ostensibly going to enrich those people’s lives? When you don’t know a single thing about them? Don’t even ride the bus with them? Eat at a restaurant that replaced the restaurant they used to eat in and is now too expensive for them to go to? That kind of atmosphere breeds resentment and contention.”

When I ask if any particular political label suits him, his answer is characteristically circular: “I mean, I appreciate art and music and religious and spiritual concepts and, like, even drugs and socializing and sex and conversation and mediation as means of learning and acting that are less hampered by the seemingly inevitable dogmas you tend to find when you follow any argument about how people are supposed to live to its ‘logical’ conclusion.” As for thinkers who have influenced him, he sends me a list of more than a hundred names, including Swizz Beats, Jay-Z, Andy Warhol, Frantz Fanon, John Zerzan, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, and Walter Benjamin.

So it’s hard, perhaps even for KOOL A.D., to predict exactly where he’s headed. Will his fans age with him, and stay along for an unpredictable ride? “I have a feeling some of my fans aren’t aging at all. Some might even be growing younger,” he says. “I’m trying to crack the immortal demographic.”

As always, Victor Vazquez sets his own terms.

See original: 

Kool A.D.’s Bizarre Pop-Culture Carnival

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Kool A.D.’s Bizarre Pop-Culture Carnival

Yet Another IRS Scandal That Isn’t

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Jonah Goldberg is outraged that there continues to be no outrage over the endless IRS “scandal.” Most of his column is the usual collection of misleading innuendo, but there is one new item: the IRS’s claim that Lois Lerner’s computer crashed in 2011 and thousands of her emails were lost. That does sound pretty fishy:

So now the IRS claims that a computer crash has irrevocably erased pertinent emails (an excuse I will remember when I am audited). National Review’s John Fund reports that the IRS’ manual says backups must exist. If emails — which exist on servers, clouds and elsewhere — can be destroyed this way, someone should tell the NSA that there’s a cheaper way to encrypt data.

Far be it from me to doubt the word of John Fund, but perhaps Goldberg should instead have read the Washington Post yesterday. The explanation for the crash, perhaps surprisingly, turns out to sound pretty plausible. Basically, the IRS keeps six months worth of email backups on tape, so when congressional investigators started asking for email records in mid-2013, backups were available only through late 2012. Lerner’s computer crashed in mid-2011, so everything prior to that was lost because it existed only in local files on her PC. The IRS has since tried to recover Lerner’s emails from the PCs of people she sent emails to, but that was only partially successful.

Nothing here sets off alarm bells to me. The key question, I think, is whether the IRS has contemporaneous documents showing that Lerner’s computer crashed in 2011 and attempts to recover her hard drive failed. And they do. This is well before the scandal broke, so it would take a pretty Herculean brand of conspiracy theorizing to imagine that this was somehow related to the scandal. Either Lerner deliberately crashed her hard drive because she suspected her actions might prompt an investigation two years later, or else the IRS has faked a bunch of emails from 2011 between Lerner and the IT team trying to recover her hard drive.

There’s also, as Steve Benen points out, the fact that Congress is mostly concerned with Lerner’s behavior in the election year of 2012. If the IRS were involved in a cover-up, faking a hard drive crash that destroyed emails from 2010 and 2011 is a pretty incompetent way of doing it.

So, anyway, that’s where the outrage is. Most of us concluded long ago that regardless of whether IRS policies were correct, the evidence pretty strongly suggests that they were bipartisan, targeting political groups on both left and right. There’s just no scandal there. At most there’s bad judgment, and probably not even that. Likewise, Lerner’s hard drive crash might turn out to be a scandal, but so far it sure doesn’t look like one.

From:

Yet Another IRS Scandal That Isn’t

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yet Another IRS Scandal That Isn’t

Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last week’s budget bill was hurried through before anyone really had a chance to read the hundreds of riders and amendments that got tacked onto it. This was a very deliberate decision. John Boehner may have said that he wished Congress had more time to review the bill, but he knew perfectly well that the main reason for the rush was the fact that the House passed a 3-day continuing resolution after the final text was first posted. There were only three days to look at the bill because that’s what the Republican leadership wanted.

This means that we’ll be discovering cute little buried acorns in this bill for a while, and today Patrick Caldwell digs one up:

One small section could upend the Internal Revenue Service’s ability to regulate political organizations hoping to become nonprofits. Tacked on as a symbolic effort to mollify conservatives’ anti-IRS mania, the text is so overly vague that it could mean the dissolution of longstanding rules. Or nothing at all. No one’s really sure.

….The relevant section is buried on page 439 of the gigantic bill. Just nine lines long and 68 words, the two clauses say money designated for the IRS cannot be used to “target citizens of the United States for exercising any right guaranteed under the first Amendment” or to target “groups for regulatory scrutiny based on their ideological beliefs.”

….All of the tax experts reached by Mother Jones were mystified by the use of the word “target,” an unusual term to be applied to the IRS. “I’m not even sure what targeting means,” says Owens.

This is obviously a sop to tea partiers, who continue to be obsessed by the idea that the IRS “targeted” them unfairly in 2010. The real scandal, of course, wasn’t the fact that tea party groups got some scrutiny, but the fact that more groups don’t get scrutiny. The law pretty clearly limits the tax exemption of groups that are directly engaged in political activity, and it ought to be applied to far more groups than it is now. That includes tea party groups, virtually all of which were created specifically to engage in political activity.

But now that law is in conflict with a hastily written provision that forbids “targeting” any groups for engaging in free speech. If courts interpret that as forbidding the IRS from going after groups engaged in political advocacy, it could upend campaign finance law in the United States.

Or maybe not. But you can rest assured that this will be coming to a court near you sometime soon.

Read more:  

Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

Hate Obamacare, Love the Benefits From Mumble-Mumble-Care

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In Time this week, Stephen Brill catches up with a couple who had serious health care issues and desperately needed insurance:

When we spoke in October and Stephanie told me she didn’t “think Obamacare will help us,” I suggested that she might be mistaken and that if she was unable to get information from the then sputtering website she should consult an insurance broker. (Insurers pay the brokers’ fees, not consumers.)

“When they came to my office, Stephanie told me right up front, ‘I don’t want any part of Obamacare,’ “ recalls health-insurance agent Barry Cohen. “These were clearly people who don’t like the President. So I kind of let that slide and just asked them for basic information and told them we would go on the Ohio exchange”—which is actually the Ohio section of the federal Obamacare exchange—”and show them what’s available.”

What Stephanie soon discovered, she told me in mid-November, “was a godsend.”

This kind of story is quickly becoming a classic, along the lines of “Keep the government out of my Medicare.” But I still wonder whether, in the end, this is good or bad for Obamacare. Obviously, getting people signed up is good, regardless of how it happens. But how many people who are benefiting from Obamacare will become supporters of Obamacare? You’d think that virtually all of them would, but if they don’t really know they’re benefiting from Obamacare, maybe they won’t.

Then again, maybe it’s all for the best. If Republicans try to cripple Obamacare in some way, the word will quickly go out in all 50 states that Congress is doing something that will damage Kynect or Covered California or Healthy NY or whatever. Maybe that actually makes Obamacare safer than ever.

This article is from:

Hate Obamacare, Love the Benefits From Mumble-Mumble-Care

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hate Obamacare, Love the Benefits From Mumble-Mumble-Care

Big food companies want to call GMO foods “natural”

Big food companies want to call GMO foods “natural”

Shutterstock

Is genetically engineered food natural? The Grocery Manufacturers Association, a trade group representing some of the world’s biggest food and food-related companies, including ConAgra Foods, Bayer CropScience, and the Coca-Cola Company, thinks so.

And it’s pressing the Food and Drug Administration to see things its way. From a Dec. 5 letter to the feds:

GMA’s members have a strong interest in “natural” labeling for foods containing ingredients derived from biotechnology. Several of the most common ingredients derived from biotechnology are from crops such as soy, corn, canola, and sugar beets. …

[T]here are approximately 65 class action lawsuits that have been filed against food manufacturers over whether foods with ingredients allegedly derived from biotechnology can be labeled “natural.” …

GMA intends to file a Citizen Petition solely direct at asking FDA to issue a regulation authorizing foods containing foods derived from biotechnology to be labeled as “natural.”

An Environmental Working Group rep told The New York Times that the association’s request is “audacious.” The Center for Food Safety is also appalled. “There is nothing natural about genetic engineering,” said Colin O’Neil, the center’s government affairs director, in a press release:

Genetic engineering, by its very definition, is not a natural process. It is an artificial and novel process, which often involves inserting foreign (often bacterial) genetic material into a food plant, crop or animal. The U.S. Patent Office has granted numerous patents on genetically engineered plants, finding that they and novel elements in them are not naturally occurring.

According to FDA policy, food labels can’t be false or misleading. A reasonable consumer would not expect foods labeled “natural” to contain GE ingredients. As such, labeling GE foods with the word “natural” would be exceptionally misleading to consumers.

The same agro-corporations and food manufacturers that want to put the word “natural” on their GMO products are aggressively opposed to putting the word “GMO” on their GMO products. Some labeling is OK, but only if Big Food gets to choose the labels.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

,

Politics

Original link: 

Big food companies want to call GMO foods “natural”

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Big food companies want to call GMO foods “natural”

Compost Council Launches Site That Connects Buyers and Sellers

Locally sourced compost is at the center of buy-compost.com’s model. Photo: Flickr

In the last few years, composting has become a profitable business. You can buy compost from big box stores, but one organization thinks the best compost for your backyard comes from your neighbor’s.

That’s why the U.S. Composting Council has launched buy-compost.com, a site that connects compost buyers with sellers in their own neighborhood via an interactive map, which highlights sellers in your zip code within a 125 mile radius.

Both small scale consumers and “prosumers,” like landscapers, nursery workers and other industry professional can use the site to locate healthy, local compost.

Sellers have also committed to donating compost to community gardens all around the country. This month, the council will launch the Million Tomato Compost Campaign – an effort combined with chefs and community gardens throughout the U.S. to grow one million tomatoes using donated compost.

“The Million Tomato Compost Campaign spreads the word that compost is a key component to building the healthy soil needed to grow sustainable, local food that helps build healthy communities,” the council says on its website.

Many chefs have agreed to help educate their communities, including schools and nonprofits, on how to grow their own sustainable food. Chef Nathan Lyon, host of Discovery Health’s local food-focused A Lyon in the Kitchen, will act as the face of the Million Tomato campaign.

Christina Caldwell

Contributing Writer

Like this story?

You’ll love our newsletters!

why join?

learn about the perks

View the original here: 

Compost Council Launches Site That Connects Buyers and Sellers

Posted in GE, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Compost Council Launches Site That Connects Buyers and Sellers

Interior: We’ll maybe finalize those fracking rules next year

Interior: We’ll maybe finalize those fracking rules next year

Bad news, water lovers: You’re going to need to wait until at least 2013 before you know if you’re drinking fracking fluid.

Last May, the Department of the Interior, America’s most introspective governmental bureau, announced proposed regulations for the fracking process. The proposal was … not very strong. Companies would have to provide information on chemicals used in the process, but only after the fact.

ncindc

The fast-acting Department of the Interior.

Nonetheless, the fracking industry was hella mad, because if you government pencil-necks say companies have to worry about where chemicals end up or, worse, have to tell everyone what chemicals they use, those companies will have to fire everyone and probably resort to a life of crime. And besides, they noted, the existing rules states have are already so oppressive.

But Interior was all, too bad, guys. We’re going to crack down! By the end of the year, you watch, we’ll have final rules.

And, lo, The Hill reports:

The Interior Department no longer plans to finalize rules this year that will impose new controls on the controversial oil-and-gas development method called hydraulic fracturing, a spokesman said.

“In order to ensure that the 170,000 comments received are properly analyzed, the Bureau of Land Management expects action on the [hydraulic fracturing] proposal in the new year,” Interior spokesman Blake Androff said.

So that’s that.

Incidentally, I am not clear why it will take so long to go through those 170,000 comments. The breakdown is almost certainly as follows.

152,000 comments are in support of fracking regulations, but call for them to be tighter than proposed. All 152,000 share 82 percent of the same language; 76,000 include the words “Sierra Club” and 76,000 include the abbreviation “NRDC.” 98.6 percent of them originated from the states of California or New York.
18,000 comments oppose any regulation and are from “regular Joes,” including people named Tex Rillerson, Won Jotson, and, for some reason, Bon Jaynor. In those 18,000 comments, the word “jobs” appears 269,000 times.

So once they’ve sorted those comments out into two piles, measured the height of each, and applied some magic calculus to the result, Interior will announce final rules. Sometime. Maybe 2013. We’ll see.

In the meantime, drink up.

Source

Interior delays ‘fracking’ rules, The Hill

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Follow this link – 

Interior: We’ll maybe finalize those fracking rules next year

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Interior: We’ll maybe finalize those fracking rules next year