amateur night

it's a silly excuse for a party, but only halloween beats it in terms of drunken stupidity. yes, it's new year's eve once again.

i love my neighborhood full of walking destinations and absence of chain most everything. (now, if only we could shutter the dunkins and the subway, then we'd be getting somewhere REALLY good). i'm really not sure where i'll be, but it'll be as far from the nonsense as i can manage.

be careful, and be safe. there's nothing like a new year to live for, if not for everyone you love and who loves you, too.

what a difference a day makes

i've been off the grid for only 36 hours, but in that time the boston bruins have successfully put the montreal canadiens in the rear-view mirror for what will hopefully and rightfully be the rest of the 2010-2011 season. the even better part is that, with only 74 goals allowed in their first 35 games, they are not only the northeast division leader, but they are also the best defensive team in the entire league.

"they ought to call it goalie", and boston has the two best in the league. 2011 is going to be a very good year, and you heard it here first.

go broonz!

facebook is funny that way

just found out a good and long-time friend had a heart attack last night. (yeah, we're getting old, no question about that). naturally i didn't find it all out from him--he's in the hospital right now, and his phone, on which he was talking business when the whole thing started, had been immediately confiscated.

i've known him and his wife since my freshman year in college. (1978). they're the first friends to whom i confided my divorce. (they're also the first friends to reassure me that not all tragedies are all bad, even when they're pretty bad). i know their kids since they were born. (used to play uncle with his oldest at the beach--works better than any puppy, let me tell you). i'm as close to them as anyone i know, and, arguably, closer than even my own family.

so how do you think is the only way it was possible for me to learn what's going on?

at a time like this, it's remarkable how tenuous our electronic communication web can be. they canceled their land-line phone last year because they never used it. she lost her numbers (and i lost hers) when she changed carriers awhile back, and i never bothered to worry or catch up, because he and i are like a couple of kids with tins cans on a string connected between next-door bedroom windows the way we're always on our cell phones together, and who would need another number?

so, put that cell phone in a hospital plastic bag, and i'm like a babe in the electronic woods. if it wasn't for his daughter's facebook post, i'd still be marveling at how not even an inch of snow is left on the mill building roof across the canal. (wind is something, huh). from it i have hers again, she has mine, and i'm on my way to dartmouth-hitchcock medical center for some fun suggesting to him that his dick cheney conversion is almost complete. (long story, but lets just say we're the mutt and jeff of the political world, and always fun at parties).

1. facebook isn't always evil
2. you never have enough ways with which to get in touch with the ones you love

something new and fun for after christmas

i've been watching hockey since i can remember--ostensibly since the bruins first suited OHA champion bobby orr as their top draft pick in 1966, and for some time before that, too. in all those not quite 50 years, i had never to my recollection ever seen a 3-minute penalty assessed to any player in any game for any reason, until milan lucic earned his this past tex-mas eve. (watched courtesy of tivo on friday, natch). who knew such things were possible, though, at the time, i still couldn't have explained to anyone why.

jack edwards did his best to get a straight answer from the nhl on the assessment, and here's his explanation via nesn.com. it's not a simple set of circumstances, but it is, apparently, the way the rules can work. who knew? (now we do!)

edited to add that the game summary to which jack edwards linked shows that the atlanta thrashers were apparently as confused as we all are about the logic behind the penalty and man-advantage timing, since they had too many men on the ice just about exactly one minute later...

ah, the good old days

back a century ago, world wars were started over the semantic equivalent to "terrorists"--in the case of archduke ferdinand's assassin, "anarchists". it's especially important to consider that leading the world to such heights of destruction is hardly within the assassin's abilities. all these dirty little miscreants can accomplish is the provocation. WE have to supply the rest. (and, in the case of europe 100 years ago, we "civilized" people certainly showed ourselves well capable). so it is today that the ap is reporting possible "anarchist" links to the bombings in rome. everything old is new again.

one reason i find this so remarkable, and important to contemplate, is that certain congresspeople here these days are in a lather over investigations into "muslim terrorists". they are insisting that we specifically hound one particular religious group in the high-minded pursuit of sovereign safety for our nation and our citizens. fair enough, but i think anyone who arbitrarily limits the scope of such an investigation to one arbitrary label and not another is putting us MORE at risk, not less.

american christians took down the murrah federal building just as surely as saudi muslims took down the WTC's. anybody with a serious interest in stopping such things from happening in the future should be taking a full and wide-eyed view at extremism in general, not "terrorists" or "anarchists" or "muslims" or "christians" in specific, because those are only words, and useless labels when the real culprit is sociopathic criminal behavior, which is something that all cultures and religious seem to enjoy in abundance these days.

jackpot

many of you may have already heard--the screaming ant film festival recently awarded its grand prize to local lowell filmmaker jim higgins for his "a fairy's tale".

if you haven't yet seem jim's amazing still/motion photography technique, you are in for a double treat because the screaming ant people have put the winning film "live" on their website, and you can be amazed while watching the award winner itself.

no better way to spend 21 minutes online.

get it here.

the double edge of being that good

charlie farren and jon butcher each enjoyed remarkable popular success as "local" boston musicians who made good back in the 80's and 90's. charlie and his band, farrenheit, and jon and his, the jon butcher axis, were charted hitmakers with fat record contracts and big national tours whose related mtv videos can still be seen all over youtube. as with most things, some folks remember, and others not quite, and a whole new generation of fans and their idols have grown up to obscure the historical landscape.

last night at voices rock club in lowell, charlie farren and jon butcher put on a show that was just the two of them, and remarkable for how it played the hits, but didn't, all at the same time. charlie and jon are consummate musicians, singers and showmen, and they can take any song and make it memorable. (last night they did for "stop in the name of love" what i had never before heard done, and it was wonderful).

the irony is that those who had come "for the hits", as some fans so often do, didn't find a backing band or a real effort to put forward a facsimile, and they consequently were wishing it "rocked" a little bit more. their favorite part of the show, i'm sure, was jon and charlie trading turns at the mic while they delved through their top 40 hits in stellar fashion. (new man, loveland, it's only words, bad habit, ocean in motion, east coast, etc. etc.) and, don't get me wrong, i loved every power chord of it. but i liked it MORE when jon and charlie just played. new songs. old songs. quiet songs. poignant songs. they're so good that it just blows you away, yet, even so, some people's memory of how good they were then, too, just leaves them caught in the middle, wishing for it all. i, for one, didn't miss the bombast and the glitter. i lived my entire pre-married adult life, it would seem, reveling in the bombast and the glitter of both of them, and i wouldn't trade those days or memories for anything. but with jon's stratocaster put through nothing more than a couple simple fender tube amps, you can really HEAR how good he is. there are guys with $20,000-worth of equipment wishing they could some day sound half as good. and it's all right there for us to hear.

but i also get why jon and charlie have to regard their success as both a boon and a curse to whatever they would want to do next. they want to play. i want to listen. now if only everyone else could just sit down, put their nostalgia aside for a moment, and see it that way, too. my one criticism of last night's show would have to be the bar chatter that intruded on the softer moments--i get why they're there, marking time, to hear what they came to hear. it's just too bad, because i think a lot of people missed the best part of last night's show.

charlie and jon are releasing a new record together in february, and i cannot wait to get my hands on it. these guys are the real deal.

rock on!

late breaking music news

you already have your charlie farren jon butcher tickets for tonight, right? at voices rock club? right? ($15 in advance, $20 at the door if you're behind the times). well, if you're still on the fence, here's the kicker--carl johnson has just invited peter lavender to accompany his trio tonight, making it a four-piece for the opening set. it's the lowell equivalent of eric clapton inviting paul mccartney to come on over and sit in for a few.

if you haven't heard peter's songs, or heard them live, this is a great chance to see what it's all about. you know jon butcher and charlie farren are phenomenal talents, and the headline sets are going to be killer. this just puts the icing on the cake.

carl johnson and peter lavender. jon butcher and charlie farren. voices rock club and beautiful downtown centralville, lowell, massachusetts. tonight!

see you there!

the vacation running start

burn 'em or spurn 'em is the vacation day policy where i work, and having been a hard-working boy all year, i'm at the point starting friday where it's use 'em or lose 'em through the new year.

jackpot

thursday night it's a double feature--melvern taylor and his fabulous meltones for their usual bi-weekly convocation at toad, (7:30-9:30pm), and then quick-like-a-bunny back to lowell to catch the second and subsequent sets of corey b at fortunato's where it's walking distance to home, and the beer can be enjoyed more freely, (it's a vacation--who doesn't celebrate?), even if not savored quite as much, since the fort's taps just can't keep up with toad's.

friday night it's another double feature--big trouble (carl johnson and the boys) over at the newly renovated dubliner, as well as the dave norton trio back at their favorite spot by the bar in fortunato's. again it's guinness and bass ale (though not sierra nevada and harpoon, unfortunately--not every bar is like toad) vs not quite so much, but all the music is worth listening, so there's likely to be a little shuttle diplomacy going on regardless.

saturday night it's the second half of the voices rock club december music extravaganza, with charlie farren and jon butcher headlining a second appearance by the carl johnson trio in two weekends (you caught them opening last friday for treat her right, right?) in an extra-special "just charlie and jon" arrangement that's a "must see" if ever there was. tickets for this one are $15 in advance, and are almost gone, so you know what to do.

as if this wasn't all enough, sunday marks the triumphant return of treat her right to the toad stage (and minimalist-by-comparison-to-voices PA) fresh from their awesome show last weekend in lowell. let's see whose crowd rocks the hardest, shall we?

so there you have it--four bands (seven, actually) in four nights, and no better way to get ones vacation off to a good running start. i'm not promising anything, but day 5 of the classic carl johnson six-day weekend will be josh buckley (and carl) and the golden splinters for their regular monday night, and day 6 will be, of course, carl johnson and who knows how many of his friends at his usual tuesday night gig at voices. i'm thinking i ought to get into the tex-mas eve spirit and sponsor some sort of an early fund-raising effort for the merrimack valley food bank, whereby generous individuals might pledge a certain amount per consecutive evening that i'm able to keep this going, and if anybody knows of something compelling for this coming wednesday evening, i'm willing to make it 7, if you are.

tex-mas eve

the night before the night before christmas is a lowell holiday tradition--it's tex-mas eve. for several years now, all the best musicians in the city have come together to sing christmas songs and raise money for the merrimack valley food bank, and this year it's even more special than ever, in memory of tex-mas eve original, ed lyons, who passed away just 3 short months ago. eddie was, is and will always be lowell's best santa. be there to share the evening--tex-mas eve at the worthen house, 141 worthen st. lowell, on thursday night, december 23rd, 2010. as ed's long time friend and band-mate, dave norton says, "this one is for ed!", but it's for all of us, too.

here's the line up as of 12/14:

8:45 Call To Arms – Harmonica Styling’s, TexMas Eve begins
9:00 Tex MacNamara
9:15 Chris Phair
9:30 Bob Sevigny
9:45 Artie K
10:00 Peter Lavender
10:15 Carl Johnson
10:30 Donnie McHale
10:45 Tex MacNamara
11:15 Rev. JJ
11:30 Matty Siopes
11:45 Jen Kearney
12:00 The Impulse
12:15 Melvern Taylor
12:30 Josh & Mike
12:45 Corey B, Bryan Mac & Jared Ambrose
1:00 Tex MacNamara & Friends

don't miss it

the kkk took my baby away

not for nothing, but the ramones are something that some people get, some people don't, and everybody ought to appreciate more. (and the textbook dictionary definition of "don't get it" are all those swedes sitting politely in their dinner theater chairs...)

i'm put in mind of this particular immutable truth this morning reading that the roudenbush community center in beautiful bucolic downtown westford, massachusetts has announced plans for a "kreative kids klub" over the christmas break.

yes, now your kid, too, can join the kkk for the holidays.

when does it cross from being a review to bragging?

i caught the show over at voices rock club this past friday night, (the carl johnson trio opening up for treat her right), and you know what's coming--it was GREAT.

mike flynn over at WCAP got an exclusive interview with dave champagne before the show, and you can listen to the recording here. in it, dave talks about the sound of the band, the way he and mark sandman were drawn to the sound of chicago blues, and how that musical style evolved through the music they were writing into that ground-breaking sound (cowpunk? low rock?) that treat her right created to put the entire music world on its ear 20 years ago. it's extremely exciting to hear dave talk about the band's new recordings over at the same fort apache/camp street studios in boston/cambridge where their first record was the first, and now their next one is likely to be one of the last. (they even gave mike an advance copy of one of the new tracks, "poor heart"--one of new member, steve mayone's--that should be on that record, and that you can also hear in front of the interview). their live sets are a good 50% new FANTASTIC material, (my personal favorite is bad girls, "get off me daddy, you're crushing my SMOKES"), though you'll also get a lot of the GREAT stuff that made the band what it is, like "i think she likes me", "i got a gun", "marie", "picture of the future", "sin city", "junkyard", etc. etc. etc. (too many to grab links for all of them, but a quick search on youtube will turn you up most all of those and more).

it's also worth pointing out that the treat her right show came with a complete set intro from local legends-in-the-making, the carl johnson trio. (carl on stratocaster with pete capra on five-string bass and justin beaulieu on drums). carl's originals, mixed in with covers of everything from zep/memphis minnie to luther allison to bob dylan, come alive in the hands of three guys so good at what they do, and playing together since they were teenagers. it was a perfect segue into the headline super-set (THR were playing for almost two hours with only a break when dave had to run outside and move his car, to which steve mayone immediately riffed a home-made homage that was hysterically funny and so-so-good) and it definitely puts me right on (over?) that line where reviewing turns to bragging.

yes, i was there. (hope you were too!)

carl and pete and justin are opening up for jon butcher and charlie farren this coming saturday in the same room, and advance tickets for this one (going quickly--not many left if i understand the reports correctly) are $15 over at voices right now.

must-hear music, and it's right down the road from you here in beautiful, wonderful shangri-lowell.

life is GREAT!

or, put still another way...

imagine a time to which everyone waxes nostalgic and wants to return. imagine the burgeoning american middle class after the end of world war two, and straight through the sixties, with a car in every garage, and a chicken in every pot. imagine that, during all that time, the wealthiest 1% of this country owned a full and fat 25% percent of everything, meaning that they had a barn full of cars, and a whole yard full of chickens. that ought to be enough, right?

now imagine a time, thirty or forty years later, when everybody is concerned that things have gone terribly, terribly wrong. imagine a shrinking middle class, whose children can't afford to live in the same house their parents did, or buy a new car this year for that matter, or always be able to afford fresh chicken. (college kids live on ramen noodles--it's a proven fact). now the wealthiest 1% of the country are owning fully HALF of it, meaning that they now have TWO barns full of cars, and TWO yards full of chickens, and, to top it all off, their wealth is still increasing.

to whom has there been a redistribution of wealth?

why is it that we're being told that a tax break on the rich is how to avoid a redistribution of wealth?

the redistribution of wealth is real, and it's to the wealthy. it's also a profound problem for the future of this nation (somebody has to pay for our army with which to defend ourselves) if the rest of us can't afford the taxes we're being asked to pay for everything.

ironically, you would think more of the wealthy would have figured this out, beyond just warren buffet and bill gates, and insisted on paying for the benefit of being richer every year. instead, they've gotten the republican party by proxy to cry foul (not fowl--they already have plenty of those) over being asked to pay just a little bit more of their portfolios so that the whole system doesn't collapse on the backs of the barely-getting-by middle class.

crazy.

or, put another way...

imagine there are three houses in town. one is a mansion, worth a little less than a million dollars. the second is a nice little colonial, worth a little less than a hundred thousand. the third is a little shack worth about ten thousand. imagine further that the municipal budget for fire and police protection of those properties is $1000 a year. by coincidence, and the magic of mr. palmaccio's axiom that the correct answer to every high school textbook math problem is always a round number, a tax rate of 1$ per $1000 of assessed value can be assessed to pay for things. so the rich guy in the mansion pays $900, the middle class guy in the colonial pays $90, and the poor guy in the shack pays $10.

are you with me so far?

now imagine that ronnie the mayor decides that it's quicker and easier to just hit everybody with the same tax every year, so as to skip the complication of assessed value, etc. so the rich guy in the mansion is asked to pay $900, the middle class guy in the colonial is asked to pay $90, and the poor guy in the shack pays is asked to pay $10.

fair enough, right? everybody's still paying their fair share. right?

now imagine that things change a little bit over time. over a period of, say, 30 years, the rich guy builds a second million dollar mansion, though the value of the colonial and the shack don't change. the rich guy in the mansion is still paying his $900, the middle class guy in the colonial is still paying his $90, and the poor guy in the shack pays is still paying his $10.

but the city police car and fire truck are now protecting TWO mansions instead of just one, so the cost of the services (and the municipal budget) goes up from $1000 to $1900. there's a deficit, isn't there--a deficit of $900.

so who do we ask to pay for this, and how?

do we chop it up 810/81/9?

or, do we realize that the guy with two houses is creating a disproportional tax burden on the others?

instead of almost doubling the middle class guy's $90 bill, wouldn't it be fairer to send the full $900 increase in burden to the guy who is enjoying all that extra wealth, and related services to protect it? the colonial guy is still living in the same house. but his actual taxes have almost doubled. the rich guy now has two houses, but an ever-increasing part of his piece is now being paid for by mr. middle class so his increase is not so much.

welcome to our federal budget and our income tax levy.

the hidden eureka behind residential tax rates

our local property taxes are calculated and levied in a non-intuitive, yet rather brilliant way. most people seem to fail to actually grasp the essence of the process, but i'll try to summarize it to get our discussion going.

you see, in order to find a fair way for everyone to pay their fair share of municipal service benefits via our ubiquitous "property tax", we rely on both a tax *rate*, (for example, the residential property tax rate here in lowell, is currently set at $13.27 per $1000 of assessed value), as well as a tax *basis*, which, if you infer from the immediately preceding parenthetical aside, is the assessed value of real property being taxed. the two multiplied together yield the actual tax *levy*, and by resetting both every year, our system consistently endeavors that owners of municipal property pay a proportional share of services to that property. (fire, police, public works, etc., and we'll try to stay away from the third rail issue of public school funding here--this is about the levy, not about where that money is eventually spent). in point of fact, that tax rate itself is meaningless as a guide to how much of a burden we bear as taxpayers--it's only when you understand the total city budget, and the assessed value of all the real property, that you can understand how much your tax bill will be every quarter, and decide how fair you think that is. (e.g. your assessed value has most likely gone way down quite a bit over the past few years, but your tax rate has gone way up so that the resulting calculation doesn't fluctuate so much, though, as we all know, it ALWAYS goes up...)

anyway, to summarize, by re-assessing property values every year, (or as frequently as is feasible given the resources of the city assessors office), and resetting the property tax rate every year, so that the two of them multiplied together yields exactly the right amount of money to pay for everything the city does for the benefit of all, we create a system whereby fairness is both the object and result of the tax code. (the whole thing actually works rather well, even if it's hard sometimes for people to figure out what's actually going on).

with me so far?

i say this is a subtly brilliant process, and one that should be instructive to our current national debate about income tax rates, and associated "cuts". (though i'm not holding my breath). in fact, if such a system could ever be applied to our federal budget, our income tax rates would change every year to reflect changes in our collective income. lose your job? you pay less relative to everyone else. hit the lottery, you pay more. but that's the way it already works, right? and that's already "fair", right? well, i'm here to ask you, "how so"??? when people enjoy a windfall, as has, say, the top one half of one percent since the reagan-sponsored changes to our system were implemented 30 years ago, under our present system they actually pay LESS than their fair share based on their share of total income. it would be as if their house went WAYYYY up in value, (which by the way, they all have), but they still paid at the same lower rate, so they're not paying the same share of the total tax levy as before. on the flip side, if you're in the middle or at the bottom, and clearly, the value of your proverbial house (the sum total of middle and lower class income) has gone way down, though nobody is resetting your proportional burden, your actual share of federal taxes is proportionally higher than it was 30 years ago. in effect, your basis never is allowed to readjust lower, but, like for the rich your rate continues to be the same, and so your wealth is effectively and literally being transferred to the top 1/2%, and there's nothing being done about that.

the bottom-line answer is, if you're not one of the top 1/2 percent, but in the "middle class", that you are paying MORE of the overall burden now than at any time before the tax system was changed to benefit those with more, and those at the top are paying LESS. we're being 3-card-monte'd on only half the equation, which is the *rate*, and not the *basis*. the *basis* is total government spending, which is skyrocketing. the *rate* for those gaining the most benefit from that spending isn't going up. *we're* getting stiffed with that bill. (actually, our children, but that's another sad story for another time).

bernie sanders has it right. our tax system is being perverted for the benefit of those not being asked to pay their fair share. something needs to be done.

mr sanders goes to washington

no, not capra-corn and the 1939 jimmy stewart classic, but a real-life modern day one-man-against-the-tide celebration of our particular and peculiar brand of democracy in action. before it's over, i'm guessing we're unlikely to hear "i guess this is just another lost cause, mr. paine", though it's clear it is one, but even so i say "you go bernie", and today i'm a fan.

http://www.cspan.org/Watch/C-SPAN2.aspx

it started this morning at 10:25am, and he's still going strong 8 hours later. i'm going out for a few hours tonight, (treat her right at voices, yes!), but the very first thing i'm going to check, with hope held high, is that bernie will still be taking the fight to both sides of the profoundly corrupt aisle when i return home. i hesitate to hope, but if bernie could only make it through the night, i truly believe that everyone will begin to tune in, and to listen, and to agree that we have to stop this insane redistribution of national wealth and income to the most wealthy at a pace not seen since before the great crash in 29, and at the cost to all the rest of us.

our country is too important to ruin for the sole benefit of the most wealthy.

you go, bernie

truce

when i was very small, my parents took the family to the gettysburg national military park and accompanying battlefield museum. i wasn't old enough to form a cohesive memory of the day, but certain aspects of the experience have stuck with me all of my life.

right now i can still see the bullet hole in jenny wade's sister's red-painted back door as if it were right in front of me, and i'm taken by the tragedy of jenny, fallen in the kitchen while kneading dough, for no better reason than the randomness of war. (civilians amidst such conflict are often the ones to suffer most, though at least jennie's death was arguably accidental, as opposed to, rather, the horrific burning of palestinian civilians by internationally banned white phosphorous munitions, but i will do my best not to digress).

a second indelible impression was taken at the point of the angle, looking back across better than 900 yards of open field, to a line of trees broken only by the almost overlooked virginia monument marking the point of origin of one of the most storied and futile follies ever told of the horrors of war. (i learned later that pettigrew's brigades marched an additional 400 yards across the field of fire to join pickett's formation, taking them through a full three quarters of a mile of hell before they died at the point of hancock's cannon, and take the link to the photograph, and imagine having to march that distance under withering fire). i can still hear the ranger's story of how armistead's men actually scaled the small stone wall to reach the cannons that were their undoing, and how almost all of over 5000 men were fallen, captured or killed without shelter, quarter or mercy. there is no way for a child to comprehend, and, i worry, a man, either...

the third moment from that day occurred at the foot of culp's hill, looking at the strange little cairn marking spangler's spring, whereby our guide described the legend of union and confederate soldiers, separated by a continent of mistaken patriotism and but 50 yards of bloody ground, taking opportunity to attend the cool, fresh water together, by truce and against all likely orders from elsewhere and above. the humanity of that moment is what has always given me hope, balanced against that day of awe and fear, that all in the end can put aside differences and share this earth with goodwill and kinship.

it may seem odd to you that i would be reminded of such a moment when learning of the impending plans of the westboro baptist church (aka the log in every other christian's eye) to picket the funeral of elizabeth edwards, but i feel good reason and motivation for it to be so. yes, these are the same westboro baptist church folks who saw fit to protest and picket the funeral of lance corporal matthew snyder with their "god hates fags" rhetoric despite corporal snyder's heterosexuality and supreme sacrifice for his country. (accusing his grieving parents of raising matthew "for the devil", and expressing their "logic" that "god killed matthew so his servants would have an opportunity to preach"). they are also the folks whose tour bus is scheduled to arrive in manchester, nh, at 5:45pm on saturday evening, where they will somehow find "reason" to protest a high school play portraying, among other things amidst the results of over 600 first-person interviews, a mother's unconditional love for her murdered son. (judy sheperd's, in "the laramie project").

i can think of no better way to invest my saturday evening than to be counted quietly in defiance of such profound un-christianity and hate, and i like to believe that all of us, right and left, democrat and republican and independent, jew, christian, muslim and otherwise, can drink from that same spring of humanity, and long enough to stand together against those who would twist elizabeth edward's life into anything but a noble american story, deserving of all human and humane respect.

in the news

a friend of mine is in the news today. it's perfectly likely that one or more of yours are, too. you see, the ap impact team has begun to collect stories of homeowners run afoul of various large banks and other TARP criminals and their shoddy recordkeeping, whereby these unfortunates find themselves shunted into foreclosure (and worse) processes regardless of reason or justification. as you can imagine, the process of extricating ones self from such a morass is anything but easy.

in my friend's case, once the arbitrary computer system decision was made that the loan should be in foreclosure, (at least in this case the bank's computer system was lucky enough to be attempting foreclosure on a loan they actually owned, though as you'll see from the story many aren't nearly so "fortunate"), no amount of being current on the payments or submitting requested paperwork to the endless succession of workout departments could stop the loan from periodically being referred to the bank's foreclosure attorney, only to be moved back out again on various indecipherable technicalities. (try getting a good night's sleep when all you can think about is an impending knock by the sheriff's department). all that was desired was to pay back money owed according to the agreement signed. all that was done was to pay back money owed as specified in the agreement, but following the agreement is, as is proved many times over in the myriad cases such as this and such as are described in the ap article, often no defense against a profoundly negligent bank.

for those eager to hear how this all ends for my friend, i can hint that retention of competent legal counsel (at great personal expense, but you're either going to fight or you're not, and, believe you me, we're going to fight) has made a world of difference in the likely outcome. by way of helpful advice to those possibly facing similar circumstances, let me exhort you, if you're underwater, to, seriously, WALK AWAY. seriously. WALK AWAY. declare bankruptcy if you must, (it protects you from being sought for foreclosure losses among many other convenient things), but WALK AWAY. in fact, owing to the banks' incompetence, (as exemplified by their inability to process their paperwork correctly), you will likely enjoy many months of rent-and-mortgage-free living in your present home while you look around for your next digs. the damage to your credit rating is relatively minor, since the banks will, in addition to screwing you out of your house by their malfeasance, already have cratered your credit just for spite, and there's as little to be done about that as there is to be done about being illegally foreclosed.

the final chapter will be written when class action lawsuits are brought in your home state, and you participate in holding these criminals accountable for their actions. until then, don't get mad, get even. get a lawyer. fight back.

otherwise you're out on the street with the gnawing and sinking knowledge of not having done everything you can to stand up for yourself.

yes, your government bailout dollars at work...

music done well

worried that i'm not getting out enough? fear not, friday is almost here, and it's going to be a good one.

first up are the carl johnson trio, (carl with longtime friends and bandmates pete capra and justin beaulieu), and headlining are the estimable and inexorable treat her right, and it's all at voices rock club at the corner of aiken in lakeview over in the center of centralville. (cennaville, that is). this is one of those that you will not want to miss at any price, and even so gary's skipping the cover, so what else is it going to take to get you out on a friday night? the sound in this club is the hands-down best in the city, which is worth the trip all by itself if you've never heard it and only just heard about it. and treat her right is accelerating on that same trajectory that took them to every radio in town twenty years ago, and the great news about that is, not only can you see them live on friday night for yourself, but there's recording afoot at the old fort apache studios, now camp street, where all the best boston records have always been cut.

the song (free for download, too!) on the link is an original by newest treat her righter steve mayone, and done by the current lineup in a sound and a style that's both true to the roots, (just the cocktail drum, two guitars and jim fitting's harp), as well as it's own unique and beautiful incarnation. if you've been catching them or word of their recent shows at toad and elsewhere, you know that there's a pile of new material that's really going to shine on record.

until then, friday's the when and voices rock club is the where. you really should be there.

government done well

when i bought my previous pieces of real estate, the participation of my mortgage companies always meant that they always got all the fun down at the registry of deeds after. imaginings of dour government bureaucrats toiling away in dour government bureaucracies colored my daydreams of what i was pleased to have been missing. all this came to an abrupt and pleasant end this afternoon.

i recently had good fortune to have offer to buy a parking space in my condominium accepted for a sum that didn't break the home equity line of credit bank. the transaction was remarkably simple, (no title search, no appraisal, no inspection, no nuthin), and the experience of having to navigate the north middlesex registry of deeds all on my lonesome wasn't nearly what one might have expected. it was actually great.

oh, don't get me wrong, the registry of deeds building itself is, indeed, dour as you might imagine poorly-maintained public anachronisms to be. if you aren't already following the register's blog, (thanks, dick howe, as always for the great insights into the goings-on), you may not have seen the photos which do, indeed do justice to the condition of the outside of things, but please let me assure you that the deteriorating fiscal condition of our commonwealth has, indeed, found its way to the corridors of our county registry of deeds. which is a flat-out shame, because the condition of the bureaucracy within is refreshingly vibrant, without waits, inconvenience, or difficulty, even if you happen to be, as i am, a novice. toss your cell phone and car keys temporarily in the metal detector basket, walk right on in, and enjoy.

the registry staff are courteous, helpful, and efficient at what they do. i suppose it helped that i had all my paperwork together on the first try, but i was given the impression that if i had some things out of order, they'd have done all they could do to try to help me resolve any difficulties. the deed was accepted, (fee accepted via personal check), scanned and returned to me in literally five minutes. (no lines, no waiting). yeah, i imagine in a hot real estate market there may have been more people there with me getting things done, but i also expect that the way things are run there (another opportunity to give props to dick howe) would enable them to keep on top of things nevertheless.

a thoroughly pleasant experience, and almost enough fun to make one want to be able to afford to buy more property just to do it all over again. (gotta remember to buy that lottery ticket).

there may be a lot about which to complain about our government, but the north middlesex registry of deeds and the folks within are absolutely not among them.

"was it over when the germans bombed pearl harbor?"

sorry--just watched animal house again this past weekend, and i'm still laughing. ("germans?" "forget it, he's rolling").

pearl harbor remains one of those seminal artifacts of world history that's profound both for its truth, as well as for its mythology, part of which makes it possible to use as the basis for such joking, even though there are those, like my father, who would be and are appalled. the difference i've observed tends always to be based on experience--if you were alive when, you have never forgetten the infamy, or the importance of its consequences. if you were born after and only learned from those alive when, you retain some useful pieces, but sometimes remain susceptible to the myth even so. if all you've done is heard about it through cultural references, a la animal house, then you simply can have no idea.

i've always been astounded at our obstinance not to confront hitler in europe, even though by 1941 he had already conquered poland, czechoslovakia, norway, france, belgium, luxumbourg, the netherlands, greece, yugoslavia, etc. etc. etc., begun his bombardment of england and scotland, as well as his policies of mass exterminations at home. in fact, he was the one to actually and finally declare war on us (december 11th, 1941) and it has always made me wonder what it actually would have taken to spur us to action, if not for pearl harbor. (it's not a pretty picture of us). england, except for german procrastination on operation sea lion, was as good as fallen. (tell me how you'd plan to approach fortress europe from any longer distance than the english channel?)

as for pearl harbor, and its infamy, all i know who recall the unprovoked nature of the attack describe it as both galling and sobering for its being on us soil, and without apparent ability to adequately defend ourselves. my father enlisted immediately, as did so many others, and the greatest generation finally got itself down to work on saving the world for us and for everyone else. of course, we also hustled all our japanese americans into internment (concentration?) camps, and established our precedent for exceptionalism that drives us to this day, but these were and are small prices to pay while the entire world hung and might hang in the balance. my father's stories of sailing on bull halsey's flagship are both stirring and mundane, illustrating as they do how sacrifice was once required of everyone, though no one ever described it so.

the final figures that stand out for me begin with the 500,000 american servicemen who lost their lives, both in the pacific, and in europe, defending our country and our ideals. we're often told that the american civil war cost more lives than all the other wars by this country combined, but i think that factoid obscures the fact that world war II isn't so far off that total all by itself. (700,000 to 500,000). or you could take our last 10 years in iraq and afghanistan and multiply by 100...

the way i see it, pearl harbor is the moment when we as a nation resolved to grow up. we sent a few boys to europe in world war I, and lost over 100,000 of them, but even that was a lark compared to our investment of national life, property and identity in world war II. we ALL went to war in the early 40's. people gave up tires and gasoline, not to mention sugar, butter, meat and even shoes so that the army would have enough. people raised their own vegetables. factories that once built cars were commandeered to produce tanks. (check out this ad from dupont illustrating the sacrifice being asked of women related to their undergarments, and, yeah, i like the look of the "after" bra better, too). while we're contemplating our "war on terror", which is neither a war nor about terror, and complaining about things like having to have our bodies scanned, we should perhaps think more about what true war costs, and is all about. on this date in 1941, our entire country had to answer a very important call. thanks, dad, and all the other dads, for answering, and for their families at home being in true support. this world would be a far different and poorer place without such.

"at last, after two thousand years of research, the illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator. at last...

facebook is a bizarre place indeed, and those of you who have held onto all your reservations about joining and resisted can rest assured you're quite likely right in all your presumptions of privacy-invasion and classic internet bad behavior. my excuse was that my 30th high school reunion committee used it to disseminate information about the event (we won't say how many years ago) and it was convenient for me to get started. kinda like newports at columbia point, and you can take my word/rationalization that i never do the net equivalent of inhale, or not. it all is what it all is.

the most recent entertainment provided me by the site (it's a lot like pornography and the editorial page of the lowell sun--almost zero redeeming social importance, but you're getting to know me, aren't you) has to do with a self-propelled meme that originally exhorted people to replace their facebook picture with a favorite cartoon character to express support for efforts to stop child abuse, but just as quickly turned on a bizarre counter-argument that the original idea proponents were all pedophiles looking to wangle responses from kids more easily owing to their friendly cartoon alter egos.

can you spell laugh out loud?

for my part, i think i got just about as far as "replace your picture with a cartoon character", and, except for a brief dilemma between taz the tasmanian devil and marvin the martian (refer to the post title for the answer as to which was chosen, and, if you don't get the reference, you absolutely need to update your cultural awareness, but lets not digress too far) it was near-instantaneous that i had the little black man in the green sort-of roman centurian outfit scowling on my profile. i mean, seriously, can anyone resist the character behind classic lines like "where's the kaboom? there was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom", "oh dear, now i shall have to create more martians", and "it obstructs my view of venus"? as marvin himself would say, the whole thing has made some people so very, very angry. and that's hysterical.

first of all, it's the internet. for example, just the other day someone i know said something complimentary about john mayer's music, and the immediate response from one netizen included not only complaints about mr. mayer's presumed misogyny, but such all came complete with references to hitler, thus fulfilling godwin's law in two extremely quick net snippets. priceless! second of all, facebook is one of the most fertile breeding grounds for trivial social expression that were ever invented, including just in the past few months women bragging on the color of their bodice-wear, and telling us all "where they like it". (where being where they like to put their purse--haha--but i think you can see the potential for silliness here). we facebookers are daily bombarded with messages to post this to support the troops, post that to not support the cancer, and to do all sorts of things that, essentially, are intended and useful only for enabling more people to waste more time than ever before. (look at the cartoon at the bottom of my main blog page for my own opinion on the subject). whoever doesn't realize that computer viruses don't have to be actual programs just needs to open their minds a little wider and smell the internet coffee. can you spell "time suck"? (the germans have a great word for it--zeitdeib--which means, literally, "time thief").

yes it is.

myself, i'm just for marvin, chuck jones in general, and everybody behind those classic warner brothers cartoons, too, not to mention, speaking of michigan j. frog, leon redbone who will be appearing at jonathan's restaurant in ogunquit, maine, this coming march.

chillax, peeps!

the most wonderful time of the year

it's not lowell, but it's lisa redmond, and i think the merits of a good story should be good enough to set aside regional distinctions and include one from tewksbury, don't you?

first of all, by way of stage-setting, if you don't have $48,000 lying around that you wouldn't miss, it might be hard to get your head around the logistics of this one, but apparently an oxy-addicted medical office worker, in addition to her past conviction for forging prescriptions, now stands accused of forging and fraudulently charging her way through $48,000 of her boyfriend's money under the ruse of paying for their daughter's medical bills. (lisa was uncharacteristically vague on the ages of the principals, and the blood relationships and any prior failed marriages that may have been relevant, but perhaps there'll be follow-up).

second of all, it should be pointed out to the competitive among us that this paragon of plunder was not, actually, from the merrimack valley, where is so frequent to hear of such things, but, rather, south yarmouth down they-ah on the cape where apparently they've taken "happy holidays" to a whole new level. and, as is so often usual when the morally-deficient are first called on their malfeasance, the story of progeny's medical bills was concocted without consideration for how it might conflict with the consequent need to explain to the police that "he knew about it all along". this one is rich.

sadly for myself and for her, nobody told this woman that, with a judge's assistance, making off with $48,000 in free money is just a spit in the alimonial ocean, all of which is simply further proof that this particular drug addict just didn't get how to be a "high functioning" drug addict, as are so many prescription-predicated suburban housewives these days, both divorced and otherwise.

to me though, saddest of all, and as is so often the case, the guy's bank account is left to cover for the entire multitude of sins... (oh, have i heard that one before...)

but the best part of the story?

her probation for the forged prescriptions was due to run out on sunday, december 12th.

merry christmas!

the way it works

first a disclaimer: i have no dog in the wikileaks fight. i believe in whistle-blowing as an important concept, but it would seem that recently releasing all those state department communiques was less about whistle-blowing, and all about "because i can". (both for assange, and for the state department grunt who cared nothing for what they were about when he stole them). i would prefer to reserve my righteous indignation for a whistle-blower who does some actual good, and needs the help.

that all being said, i find it predictable and chilling that, as always, the money interests leverage their money, and put the screws to whomever they oppose in a way that's all but impossible to fight. to wit, paypal has just announced that they're pulling the funding conduit plug on wikileaks, and it's pretty obvious that WL is as good as done as an entity now. relocating servers to switzerland to try to stem the denial-of-service attacks from the feds is one thing, but keeping the lights (and the internet connection) on without money is something that's generally beyond even the most strident idealist, even in this "information age". yeah, folks could send checks to the australian post office box, but, really.

what i find most disappointing is that the press hasn't dug that one level deeper to uncover the source of the pressure on paypal to drop its commercial association with wikileaks. the press release from paypal states that"our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity", but, exactly, when has due-process taken place on this??? the swedes seem to want us to think that julian took a few unwarranted liberties with his "female party guests", (nods to animal house, and the copy of which sits on my tivo right now awaiting enjoyment), which shouldn't be relevant to wikileaks at all, and the united states government and all the other governments have been crying treason about the airing of their dirty laundry, but it's fair to say that opposing ones and others' government is a time-honored tradition, and we have that third branch here (the judicial one, if you haven't been following along) to help us sort out the tougher questions, of which i think its fair to say this is or should be one.

yes, i'm leaning towards the government's position on the "stolen" and "illegal" parts, but i'm not quite so quick to agree that it's good precedent to condone economic war with any entity, sovereign or otherwise, without due process. assange is getting screwed extra-judicially, and that can't be right in a civilized world.

(word to the wise-guy wise is to make sure your assets are all offshore, for sure).

for fun

saturday night live, as lame as it can be, sometimes hits it out of the park and makes all the months and years between worthwhile bits (will forte's hu jintao "do sex to me" is my most recent... what's yours?) worthwhile. to wit, here's a several-year-old video satire of "straight talk" from chris parnell posing as "global century investment" ceo peter burke, taking questions from the audience: "but if you were moving out of stocks and into bonds three years ago, why were your brokers telling people like me to do the exact opposite?" "well, obviously, if you think, as we did, that stocks are heading down, and you want to unload them before a crash, you have to convince somebody out there to buy them--it's just common sense". (audience nods approvingly). soon after which amy poehler had the line of the piece:

"i'd just like to say, that even though i think you're an evil person, and even though i came here intending to kill you, i've been really impressed with your honesty".

yes, when you tell people exactly how and why you're screwing them, and with a straight face, inexplicably, they very often give you a free pass for it. (that's how democrats avoid getting dumped upon in pieces like my most recent where i, ostensibly unfairly, singled out the 52 "tea party caucus" members for their billion dollars in earmarks, and didn't feel the need to talk about the rest of d-associated congresspeople who are, for all intent and purposes, just as bad, if not worse).

just rest assured that i, like you, i hope, get why the video is so funny.

it's because we're so funny.

too bad our federal fiscal situation isn't funny at all.

sapere aude

meet the new party, same as the old party

did you know that there's a "tea party caucus" now in our government, trading on the brand name so vigorously and disingenuously defended by its far-flung devotees as having nothing to do with any cohesive national movement or credit or blame therewith? (yes, it's true--it's founded by republican michele bachman from minnesota, and currently boasts membership of 52 of our sitting congresspeople). so, wouldn't you think that such a "tea party caucus" would at least feel some small sort of motivation to pay some minor effort to mirroring the ideals of its nominal grass roots?

right.

the national journal took the time to shoot this particular and particularly foul-smelling fish in its particular barrel, and the analysis is summarized and can be found here. it would seem, surprise surprise, that the 52 congresspeople in question, belonging to the ironically-named "tea party caucus", collectively requested seven hundred sixty-four (that's 764, or almost 15 APIECE) earmarks, valued at a grand total of one billion, forty-nine million, seven hundred eighty three thousand, one hundred fifty dollars. (that's $1,049,783,150, though no word on the cents).

ever with a helpful sense of humor and irony, story author reid wilson thought enough of us to include "tea party caucus" founder, michele bachman's, seminal soundbyte, offered when she announced the formation of the group back in july: "the american people are speaking out loud and clear. they have had enough of the spending and bureaucracy, and the government knows best mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of congress. [this] group will serve as an informal group of members dedicated to promote americans' call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government".

oh, this is rich.

a shameless cut and paste from the bottom of reid's story:

here's the list of "tea party caucus" members and their earmark requests in fiscal year 2010, courtesy of citizens against government waste's "pig book":

NAME                EARMARKS        AMOUNT

Aderholt (R-AL)        69        $78,263,000
Akin (R-MO)             9        $14,709,000
Alexander (R-LA)       41        $65,395,000
Bachmann (R-MN)         0                  0
Barton (R-TX)          14        $12,269,400
Bartlett (R-MD)        19        $43,060,650
Bilirakis (R-FL)       14        $13,600,000
R. Bishop (R-UT)       47        $93,980,000
Burgess (R-TX)         15        $15,804,400
Broun (R-GA)            0                  0
Burton (R-IN)           0                  0
Carter (R-TX)          26        $42,232,000
Coble (R-NC)           19        $18,755,000
Coffman (R-CO)          0                  0
Crenshaw (R-FL)        37        $54,424,000
Culberson (R-TX)       22        $33,792,000
Fleming (R-LA)         10        $31,489,000
Franks (R-AZ)           8        $14,300,000
Gingrey (R-GA)         19        $16,100,000
Gohmert (R-TX)         15         $7,099,000
S. Graves (R-MO)       11         $8,331,000
R. Hall (R-TX)         16        $12,232,000
Harper (R-MS)          25        $80,402,000
Herger (R-CA)           5         $5,946,000
Hoekstra (R-MI)         9         $6,392,000
Jenkins (R-KS)         12        $24,628,000
S. King (R-IA)         13         $6,650,000
Lamborn (R-CO)          6        $16,020,000
Luetkemeyer (R-MO)      0                  0
Lummis (R-WY)           0                  0
Marchant (R-TX)         0                  0
McClintock (R-CA)       0                  0
Gary Miller (R-CA)     15        $19,627,500
Jerry Moran (R-KS)     22        $19,400,000
Myrick (R-NC)           0                  0
Neugebauer (R-TX)       0                  0
Pence (R-IN)            0                  0
Poe (R-TX)             12         $7,913,000
T. Price (R-GA)         0                  0
Rehberg (R-MT)         88       $100,514,200
Roe (R-TN)              0                  0
Royce (R-CA)            7         $6,545,000
Scalise (R-LA)         20        $17,388,000
P. Sessions (R-TX)      0                  0
Shadegg (R-AZ)          0                  0
Adrian Smith (R-NE)     1           $350,000
L. Smith (R-TX)        18        $14,078,000
Stearns (R-FL)         17        $15,472,000
Tiahrt (R-KS)          39        $63,400,000
Wamp (R-TN)            14        $34,544,000
Westmoreland (R-GA)     0                  0
Wilson (R-SC)          15        $23,334,000

TOTAL                 764     $1,049,783,150

to be fair, ms bachman resisted submitting any of her own. but, seriously, folks--this "tea party" nonsense has long ago jumped the shark, and it needs to be called what it is:

a republican party pig (not a wolf--we're talking about pork here) in double-speak-sheep's clothing, attempting to divert our attention from an extremely obvious truth.

next time you see a pol out in front of a "tea party" rally, you might best refer back to this earmark list and ask yourself who's zoomin' who. they're republican, they have their hand in your pocket, and they're selling snake oil of a most foul kind.

something completely selfish

since moving to downtown lowell three years ago, i've happily acquired a local:

* gas station (you read the last/next post, right? haffner's is great)
* bank (enterprise, and they're great, too)
* dentist (pappey of athanasoulas and pappey, and he's great, but the real stars are the hygienists in general and mary in particular, who is especially great)
* optometrist (thomas fabello at community eye care, who is likewise great)
* haircutter (can't and won't choose between hair stylist and barber, for my own personal reasons and prejudices, so i needed a new way to put it, but either way you say it, salon city and it's owner, alicia vacca, are, you guessed it, great)
* orthopedist (50 year old guys playing soccer are known to become in need of such things, and dr samuel gerber and orthopaedic surgical associates of lowell are great)
* i'm soon to have a new generally practicing doctor (which is a long story about being too healthy to feel like i had urgent need of one, some difficulty with aetna's reputation as an insurer, and general procrastination, but i'll tell you all about mill city medical very soon, so expect stories of greatness)
* speaking of not quite yet, i'm still in the market for a local convenience market (due to difficulties not needing to be rehashed with a certain neighboring establishment and its argumentative owners, which all is not quiet so great, but new asia over on dummer street will do until one comes along, and, as you can guess, they're absolutely great)
* grocery store (an honor to be split between the battambang market over on church street, which has better prices and quality on produce and seafood than anywhere i've found in the city, not to mention asian condiments and etc., and is, as you know, great, and demoula's market basket over on fletcher, where i come by my orange juice and such non-asian-traditional goods, which is, for that, great enough)
* butcher (lowell provision over on aiken avenue which also carries shaw farm products about which i'll mention in a moment after assuring you that lowell provision is, absolutely, great)
* dairy (this one has gone back and forth with richardson's, though for breadth of products and quality, you simply can't beat shaw farm, and their whole milk in the quart glass bottles is one of the singular joys of my existence, which is, you know, great)
* farm coop (world peas CSA is great)

and this list might go on for quite some time, but i need to get to the point:

i have yet to achieve a local lawyer, and i was hoping to solicit some personal recommendations.

there's always the odd real estate closing, (doing another one in a few weeks with enterprise to get me an amazing 3.25% rate refinancing the condo which will enable me to come by a parking spot in my building for free, and, yeah, i'm bragging), but also the need to keep track of my will, healthcare proxy and trusts for my kids (the tax man gets 'em otherwise) now that my not-quite-evah-luvin is no longer my legal spouse. (more needed to take care of some other loose ends, too, but that is to be just between me and my future and potential lawyer...)

i tried to get on the schedule with a well-known local practice, but it's remarkable how difficult it is to actually do business with some people. (they never called back, despite repeated calls to). so i'm at square one, and eagerly hoping to gain the benefit of others' local experience to find a good one. you know, fair, honest and effective. i don't mind paying for requisite quality, but i do mind throwing good money away, no matter what the hourly rate.

anyone have any suggestions?

it kicks!

i thoroughly enjoyed reading an actual local story in today's paper of record (rip van mill city boys), and i thoroughly enjoyed the reported results of haffner's ceasing sales of booze, butts and stupidity tickets, i mean the lottery, in their hudson, nh, store. (i'd link it, but they charge me and you for such access, so you'll just have to get it the way i do, in the old-fashioned print version). props to john collins for the excellent write-up.

as for the story, the whole thing apparently started when a nh state liquor sting nabbed a clerk for the third time passing booze to a minor, and the resulting conversation with the police chief prompted haffner's owner, david fournier, to decide to drop the whole "sin" package.

of course, there is an obvious quote from a nicotine addict predicting dire consequences of not supplying junkies with their habits, but the best news is that in the two months since the decision, sales have been rising in the store, not declining. profit margins on lottery tickets and cigarettes not being what they once were, that's good news for fournier and haffner's, and for the rest of us who prefer not to wait in line behind people picking out their losing lottery tickets while we wait in line for our bottle of gatorade and to pay for our gas. (my personal #1 convenience item is indeed gatorade, though i'm sure yours may vary). haffner's also gets out from under square-footage regulations related to the sale of alcohol, and can offer a more customer-friendly array of products on their shelves, now, too.

i've been a devoted downtown lowell haffner's customer for all three years i've been living here, and i'm all the more so this morning. if they sold gatorade and other stuff here downtown, i'd buy it there, too. (i've always wondered what they do with those unused garage bays...)

yes, as craig ferguson is fond to say, it's a great day for america!