So, anyway, we did that.  It wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be.
You know, it's never as bad as I think it's going to be, to be honest.  But, I guess I'm just cool that way, and go in thinking it's going to be bad, so I can come out at the end (hopefully) saying that it "wasn't so bad", which is nice.
But it was hot, and all the pieces of wood were heavy, and it was hot.  But I have FINALLY Learned how to stack it all in the truck nicely.  After three years, ya, I should know by now.  So that was cool, cuz it was all perfect and whatnot.
But it was all hot.  Supposedly, it's supposed to get to 80 degrees out today.  I don't know about that, but it's the warmest that it's been in a long time,for sure.
Then on the way back, we took a detour.  To the covered bridge.  It was cool.  I don't think I've ever been in one of them before, at least one that's made for cars.  It was made in 1932, if I remember what the sign said correctly.  That's, like, ancient! Okay, not really, but damn old, for sure.  My dad told me that all the big pieces of wood holding it up were cut from the same tree.  That had to be one big-ass tree.....For sure.

Last night was goodness.  Like I told yesterday.  But better.
Even though we weren't talking, it was still good.
Okay, maybe not better, but good.
Because it felt right.  Like, good right.  You know when you finish something that you've been working on for a while, and you look at it, and you feel all good about it?  Or when you get to the point in something where you see that it just might work out?  Maybe you know it, maybe you don't; either way, that's what it was.
Like, calm, and peaceful sort of, yet totally amped all at the same time!
It was kind of nice.  Okay, more than kind of, but we won't go there...... ;)

Year: 1932

Cast: Marie Dressler, Jean Hersholt, Myrna Loy, Richard Cromwell

Director: Clarence Brown

When their mother dies in childbirth, the Smith children turn to their nanny Emma (Dressler). As they grow up, Dressler loves them as though they were her own. She has a special bond with Ronnie (Cromwell), who never knew his mother, though Isabelle (Loy) is stuck up and insists on treating Emma as little more than a servant. As the children grow older, their father Frederick (Hersholt) and Emma being to feel lonely and end up marrying each other. On their honeymoon, Frederick dies, and leaves everything in his will to Emma so she can properly provide for the children. Isabelle refuses to believe her father would leave her nothing, and tries to prove that Emma killed her father.

Marie Dressler was definitely one of the more interesting stars of the 1930s. While she'd had some success in silent film, she had pretty much disappeared from the radar until Anna Christie in 1930. She won the Best Actress Oscar for Min and Bill, and was nominated again for Emma. While not at all the type of beautiful star so many people adored, Dressler was one of the top box office stars of her time. She was certainly one of the most talented and dynamic actresses. In Emma, she's extremely sympathetic, and gives one hell of a performance. It's hard to believe a woman would be able to love "her" children after the way Isabelle treats her, but there's never a doubt that Dressler means every word she says when she refuses to allow the lawyers to talk about the kids the way the do, even if it means she'll be found guilty of murder.

Loy is also interesting in this film. Before her breakout year of 1934, she was often cast as villainous characters, and that's pretty much what she is here. She's stuck up, self centered, selfish, and vindictive. And so completely easy to hate. She really does give a very good performance that's completely against the type she would soon come to play.

The film does lose a bit of steam in the middle. While the murder trial is indeed interesting, I was much more enthralled by the relationship/romance between Emma and Frederick. There was a lot of genuine emotion and affection in this love story between two older people, and that made the first half of the films a lot more interesting than the second half. A romance like this is so rare to find in film, especially classic film. I really would have loved an entire film just about Emma and Frederick's marriage.

Siamo ai primi del '900 e in Europa inizia ad affermarsi questo nuovo "sport", questo nuovo approccio alla natura e alla vita all'aria aperta, grazie, soprattutto all'inizio, alla passione di alcuni giovani ciclisti Britannici, poi Belgi e Francesi.

In Italia "solo" nel 1932 grazie a Luigi Bergera viene fondato l'A.C.C.P., l'Auto Campeggio Club Piemonte che approccerà alla nuova forma di turismo soprattutto grazie all'avvento dell'auto; non vi nascondo un certo piacere nel leggere che la nascita del campeggio è avvenuta in quel di Torino, mia seconda (terza? quarta?) casa e precisamente in via Carlo Alberto nr. 41... un piccolissimo segno del destino, come quella di scoprire che Luigi Bergera, il fondatore, era un appassionato di montagna...

Buona lettura!

continua...

For anybody that hasn't been watching the Olympics, last night Jamaican runner Usain Bolt broke Michael Johnson's 1996 200 meter world record setting a new record of 19.30 seconds. It was an amazing moment watching the charismatic Bolt take the gold. But what sparked my interest was of course, the shoes! Click here for more pictures and videos.

After a little google'ing I found out, as a tribute to Michael Johnson, Bolt wore a gold colorway of the Puma Theseus II's. And upon searching some more, realized that it was a special colorway made just for him. I was a little disappointed, you would think because of Bolt, Puma would fully take advantage of this and start churning out these sneakers to the public like chocolate milkshakes. So I e-mailed Puma and let them know how I feel and hopefully they'll reply back with some good news(btw puma, i wear a size 9.5 or 10 *wink wink*). But in the meantime, if you guys want to ever see the light of day where you'll have a chance to have a pair of Bolt's on your feet, I suggest you let Puma know at:

customerservice@puma.com
http://about.puma.com/EN/7/118/118/

I mean, what have you got to lose besides a minute of your day?
Anyway, enough of the rambling. Here are videos of both Usain Bolt and Michael Johnson's record breaking accomplishments along with pictures of both athletes and their golden sneakers:

Usain Bolt 19.30 200 meter record:

Michael Johnson 19.32 200 meter record(video is a little long but just watch at least the first 2 minutes if you're in a rush):

Behind the scenes with Usain Bolt in Beijing and doing promotion for Puma:

Usain Bolt:

Michael Johnson:

And if you want a pair of the sneakers Usain Bolt is wearing in the Puma promo photos, you can get them HERE.

Congratulations to Shawn Johnson for her long awaited, and well deserved, gold medal. In the words of Nastia Liukin and her father/coach, this really was the perfect ending for USA gymnastics for these Beijing Olympics. In the end, the US women actually ended up getting more medals than the Chinese women, including 1 Gold, 3 Silvers for Shawn Johnson and 1 Gold, 3 Silvers, 1 Bronze for Nastia Liukin. Of course, no matter how fervently Bela Karolyi says it on NBC with Bob Costas, I think objectively you can say that the Chinese team had the more successful Olympics, given their golds. Whether you believe that's due to some scoring arbitrariness though is up to you. In my (uninformed) opinion, all of the scores were a little arbitrary, not just the Chinese, and I did not see any reason to think the Chinese were getting anything more than an innocent home crowd bump.

Give Bela credit though, he has an unwavering passion for USA Gymnastics, and I absolutely respect that. He really is the reason why gymnastics is so popular and successful here.

One last thing about SJ. I don't know why, but the medal ceremony always gets me. If I were an athlete who had just garnered a gold and was standing there with the anthem playing... well, I'd be one of those with tears in my eyes. So it was very nice to see Shawn Johnson on the podium finally getting her gold, with her parents in the stands pretty much wrecked and ecstatic, and with her fully appreciating the moment and becoming a little emotional. All in all, great job by the Americans, and 2012 is already shaping up to be a great competition. It will be interesting to see how many of the "20" year old Chinese girls will be on the team (He Kexin anyone?), and whether the Russians will redouble their efforts to get back into gymnastic relevance.

Now, Usain Bolt.

First off, he has absolutely the perfect name for Olympic competition... Not just the obvious "bolt" and its lightning connotations, but the "Usain" is sufficiently pronouncable and exotic at the same time. It just rolls off the tongue, no?

Second, yes, he's a bit of a brash youngster, perhaps even a jerk to some! Now, in the world of NFL wide receivers like Chad Johnson and TO and so on, he'd fit right in... which maybe makes some of his antics a bit unbearable in the Olympics. And, he's gotta get another pose besides his finger pointing thing into the air.

I mean, once in a while, maybe just once per race, would be borderline for this trite pose. But to do it during his introductions, then when he finishes, and to do it for every preliminary round AND the finals? We've seen this about 12 times already, and it's gotta go.

Now, about the running itself... Best I've ever seen. And this is all that probably matters. I never ever thought that Michael Johnson's 19:32 would ever be broken. For those that don't remember, that number was INCREDIBLE back in 1996. He broke the record by an unthinkable amount, and it seemed like one of those seismic shifts that just wouldn't be accounted for until say 2050 if at all. But this guy just broke it without a problem. Absolutely incredible.

For those who haven't seen him run, I would go post haste to youtube and look for his races. His 100m dashes seriously look like he's jogging. His 200m final was so incredibly dominant that he's practically the only on on the track. His race around the turn was flawless. And he'll be unbeatable in 2012 as well.

1 ton yoğurt

              Salata , pilav ve kavurma olarak ikram edilen düğün yemeğinin malzemeleri. Ülkemizin % 10 oranındaki milyar dolarlık adamların çocukları için  3 gün 3 gece masalsı düğün için hiçbir masraftan kaçılmamış anlaşılan. Bu durum aynı zamanda ülkemizin vatandaşları arasındaki ekonomik  uçurumun boyutlarını gözler önüne sermektedir. Düğüne 15.000 davetli katılmış gelin ve damat'a 18 kg altın ve 320.000 YTL takı hediye edilmiş. Basına yansıdğı kadarı ile bu takılara bilumum emlak ve  döviz  tutarları dahil değildir herhalde.

            Çok şükür aç değiliz açıkta değiliz ancak memurlarının yoksulluk sınırında yaşadığı  çalışan işçi kesiminin nerede ise tamamına yakınının  asgari ücrete tabi bir ülkede bu tarz bir aktivite ister istemez dikkat çekmekte. Konuyu ele almamın başka bir maksadı yok hani bize has bir deyim vardır ‘ Allah daha çok versin ‘ gözümüz yok. Tüketim toplumu olmamızın etkilerini bu aktivitedede görmek mümkün , yukarıdaki konsolide incelendiğinde tüketme ihtiyacı 3 gün 3 gece bayağı yüksek olmuş.

            Refah içinde yaşama özlemi ile yanıp tutuşan halkımızın ülkemizin bulunduğu mevcut ekonomik koşullardan dolayı bu özlemi her zamanki gibi bir sonraki bahara kalıyor. 60 yıldır ülkemiz yönetimlerine  hükümet etmiş siyasi oluşumların yürütmüş olduğu politikalardan  dolayı halkımızı bu özleminden uzaklaştırmış her geçen gün içinden çıkılmaz bir hal almıştır.

               Şöyle bir düşünelim toplumun % 10 unu teşkil eden bu bireylerin edinmiş oldukları maddi kazanımlar nüfusu 10 milyon ve civarı olan bir çok ülkenin bütçesi ile eşdeğer seviyelerde yadırgamıyoruz ancak ekonomik kalkınmanın toplumun geneline yayılmamış olmasının etkileri toplumun alt katmanlarında sosyal deformasyonlar üretmektedir. Bu durum hırsızlık , zina , adam yaralama , darp , gasp , öldürme vb. olayların  direkt yada dolaylı yollardan suç oranlarının artmasına sebebiyet vermektedir.

                Bağımsız ekonomik politikalar ile kendi kendine yeten bir ülke olmanın zamanının geldiği kanaatini taşımaktayım.Ekonomik varlığımızı elinde tutan veya  ekonomimize yön veren unsurların ülkemizde , 1932 - 1933 Stalin SSCB ‘sinin 10 Milyon Ukrayna vatandaşına yapmış olduğu dolaylı soykırım endişesini artırmaktadır.

              Bilindiği üzere 1932 yılında tarladaki mahsülünü merkezi hükümete vermek istemeyen Ukrayna ‘da yaşayan halka karşı Stalin liderliğindeki SSCB yönetimi bir   komisyon kurar.Bu komisyon Ukrayna çiftçisinin mahsülünü merkezi hükümetten sakladığı gerekçesi ile çiftçinin elindeki buğday , patates , un, et  ve hatta ekilecek tohumlarını bile elinden alır.Elinde hotum olmayan çiftçi ekemez biçemez bir kıtlık süreci başlar açlıktan dakikada 17 günde 25.000 kişi hayatını kaybeder.10 Milyon Ukrayna vatandaşı böylelikle toplu katliama maruz kalır. SSCB bu politikasını sadece Ukrayna'da değil bütün SSCB  ülkeleri , Kafkaslarda ve Kazakistan ‘da uygulamıştır.

            Gerçi SSCB kendi himayesindeki ülkelere yapmış denilecek ancak insanlığı yoksulluğa açlığa ve sefalete kurban etmek gerek iç unsurların etkisi ile  gerekse dış unsurların etkisi ile  olsun akla halkların ekonomik bağımsızlık ihtiyaçlarının ölçülerini ortaya koymaktadır. Sizcede öyle değilmi ?

             Ekonomik bağımsızlık politikalarının varolması gerektiğini tema edecek örnekler daha da çoklandırılabilir. Son 20 yıldır Afrika ülkelerinde yaşanan açlık artık dünya ülkeleri tarafından sıradanlaştırılmış doğallaştırılmıştır. Bir ülkede fakirlik ,  yokluk , açlık , sefalet o ülkelerin halkının kaderi olmamalı. Siyasi parti gözetmeksizin yönetime gelecek siyasi oluşumların politikalarının temeli insana hizmet , ekonomik refaha , eğitimde eşitlik , sosyal hizmetlerin tabana dönük ilkesine dayalı olması gerekmektedir.

           Bilgi  : Tarihe yansımış bilgiler dışındaki tesbitler ALINTI DEĞİLDİR

But the test of the fastest human being stretches over a slightly larger distance. This is why the argument is out for the 200m as the new (and true) measure of speed. It combines quickness and stamina, speed and strength, strategy and (perhaps) a bit of luck. This is why not only has the record not been broken since Michael Johnson ran to Olympic glory 1996, it has not even been remotely in danger. Johnson's mark is a full 0.3 seconds faster than any other human has run the race.

So it is our duty as fans to honor that moment. Michael Johnson's perfect race. A lifetime of sport immortalized in 19.32 world-record breaking seconds. Enjoy it all over again.

Will Jamaica's Usain Bolt rewrite it? Immortality awaits.

And just for fun - because international crews have no problem conveying excitement.

And why not - the actual telecast that came into U.S. homes that day. "He destroys his own record!"

12 de agosto de 1932

Relativa quietude quanto à luta armada.

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

13 de agosto de 1932

Apesar de 13, nada de novo hoje se registrou quanto à luta

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

       As mulheres se juntam aos combatentes da Guerra de 1932.

Transcrição do Diário de Gessner Pompílio Pompêo de Barros (MT 1896 – RJ 1960), Itapetininga, SP, página 136, em referência à Revolução Constitucionalista de 1932.

Forças mineiras na Revolução Constitucionalista de 1932.  Fonte:  A NOITE ILUSTRADA.

     Campanha para o alistamento de 200.000  -- Acervo Laire Jorge Giraud

31 de julho de 1932

Boatos, muitos boatos.  Boatos tolos e boatos inteligentes, adrede preparados por gente fina.   Já se começa a falar da beligerância de São Paulo.  O povo recrudesce o seu entusiasmo.  Há já mais esperança na vitória, coisa que havia arrefecido no quarto ou quinto dia da revolução.

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ 

Transcrição do Diário de Gessner Pompílio Pompêo de Barros (MT 1896 – RJ 1960), Itapetininga, SP, página 131-132, em referência à Revolução Constitucionalista de 1932.

UPDATE: Here's the story. Thanks, Spud.

I went to a motorcycle rally in Ocean Shores today with one goal — see an Indian motorcycle.

Okay, two goals. I also had to write a news story or something. But I got to see this 1932 original condition Indian motorcycle, which was pretty outstanding.

I'll probably post that story thing tomorrow, but for now just enjoy the glory of an American original.

Se dovessimo immaginare uno scenario distopico, il primo pensiero che ci verrebbe in mente potrebbe essere quello di un regime in cui trionfano miseria presso il popolo e controllo totale, o cose alla 1984 di George Orwell. Ciò che il lungimirante Aldous Huxley formulò nel 1932 rappresentava tutto un altro genere di mondo: pensate ad un mondo florido, senza guerre nè malattie e nel quale gli esseri umani hanno libero accesso ad ogni sorta di piacere materiale, dalla droga [il soma] ai giochi sportivi al sesso agli svaghi [i cinema odorosi].

Detto così sembrerebbe quasi un'utopia, infatti non è tutto: se questo è quello che percepiscono gli abitanti di quella civiltà, ciò che c'è alle spalle e alla base della società de "Il mondo nuovo" è un sofisticato sistema di controllo delle nascite [che avvengono in provetta; non esiste la figura materna], di predestinazione sociale e di ipnopedia [educazione meccanica all'ordine e alla convenienza perpetrata ai bambini durante il sonno], e altre agghiaccianti caratteristiche.

Huxley, ben 76 anni fa, aveva già compreso e di conseguenza predetto numerose dinamiche sociali: dal consumismo al presunto benessere materiale, dalla omologazione all'annullamento dei sentimenti sconvenienti all'ordine sociale fino all'appiattimento dell'individualità. Un regime per essere efficiente non dev'essere sanguinario, temibile e poliziesco; tutto è più semplice se questo può godere del consenso implicito di una popolazione imbambolata e dipendente da un benessere superficiale. Subdolo e dolce, si tratta di un regime light, estremamente moderno, anzi contemporaneo. Quantomai vicino alla realtà dei nostri giorni.

Nel 1958 viene pubblicato "Brave New World Revisited" ["Ritorno al Mondo Nuovo"], opera di carattere saggistico in cui Huxley rianalizza alcuni temi del romanzo del 1932 e constata che una gran parte di ciò che aveva teorizzato era già in atto. Un'immagine molto efficace ci viene data per esempio dalla similitudine uomo-uccello:

"Libero come un uccello" diciamo noi e invidiamo quelle creature alate che si possono muovere a piacimento nelle tre dimensioni. Ahimè, ci siamo scordata la sorte del tacchino. Quando un uccello impara a ingozzarsi a sufficienza senz'essere costretto a usare le ali, rinuncia al privilegio del volo e se ne resta a terra, in eterno. Qualcosa di simile vale anche per gli uomini [...]

"Il mondo nuovo" è la storia di un'utopia all'interno di una distopia troppo grande, che finirà per sconfiggerla; la lotta di individui come Bernardo e Helmholtz, in cui la sensibilità e la determinazione per un cambiamento è presente in loro sotto forma potenziale, ma limitati e condizionati anch'essi dal lavaggio del cervello della società totalitarista in cui si trovano; l'amore e l'irrequietezza di un Selvaggio. Huxley ci consegna una narrazione precisa e attenta di un mondo iper-organizzato in verticale, alla quale però non mancano punte di intensità come la scena del contatto con la Natura [«Ma è terribile!» disse Lenina ritirandosi con orrore dal finestrino. Era terrorizzata dal vuoto turbinoso della notte, dai neri flutti schiumosi che si sollevavano sotto di loro..] o del matrimonio in cima allo strapiombo.

Veramente una lettura necessaria e importante. Consigliatissimo anche "Ritorno al mondo nuovo".

fabio

“Hunt first the enemy, then the woman.” Count Zaroff

The Most Dangerous Game is a film with a split personality; we are first introduced to the strange dark twisted personality of the Russian Count Zaroff... In the second half, we have an exciting stylishly filmed, well-paced action chase. There is also a Max Steiner score, which contributes immensely to the moody atmosphere. Background music in film was still rare at this time so this was somewhat groundbreaking. Steiner did the music for both this film and King Kong. Also, contributing to the film’s style is the exquisite art direction, including some very weird ornate doorknockers and a strange direct from hell large mural on wall. All this evoking the peculiar sinister personality of the host.

  The story involves big game hunter Bob Rainsford (Joel McCrea) who is the sole survivor of a shipwreck run afoul in shallow waters. He finds himself on a small island and comes upon a creepy fortress that is the home to Russian Count Zaroff (Leslie Banks). Zaroff invites Rainsford to stay and later that evening introduces him to two other guests Eve Trowbridge (Fay Wray) and her brother Martin (Robert Armstrong) also recently stranded along with two sailors from a previous shipwreck.      

    Learning that Rainsford is a big game hunter, the Count begins to tell of his passion for hunting and how recently he has become bored with hunting just animals.  Now he has become interested in what he calls “The Most Dangerous Game.”

    “You mean tigers?” Rainsford asked, to which the count replies no.

    Later that evening, Eve takes Rainsford aside and secretly tells him how she suspects something strange is going on. The two sailors have vanished after seeing Zaroff’s trophy room.  Rainsford is skeptical about Eve’s assumptions refusing to pursue it any further. Later that night, Eve’s brother, Martin whose had been drinking heavily and being obnoxious, disappears.

Rainsford and Eve begin to search the fortress for Martin stumbling upon Zaroff’s trophy room they discover a man’s head mounted on a wall and another’s inside a jar. These scenes were startling back in 1934 and are still shocking today.  Zaroff with his two henchmen enter the room carrying Martin’s covered body on a stretcher. When Eve recognizes that it’s Martin, she starts hitting Zaroff on his chest. He orders one of the Cossacks to take her away. Lifting her up one the goon carries her off screaming in a scene that turns reminiscent of Kong carrying Anne Darrow off into the jungle (the famous Fay Wray scream!). Disappointed that Rainsford is unsympathetic to his new “game” him a madman., Zaroff decides that Rainsford will be his next prey and the survivor gets Eve.. Come midnight, Rainsford will be given a knife, a head start and a promise that if he can survive until dawn, he will be free to leave unharmed. Of course, The Count reminds him that no one has ever survived until dawn. The Count always gets his game.

   The second half of the film is a true classic with some of the most exciting and excellent scenes ever put on film. Given a head start, Rainsford and Eve go off deep into the foggy swampy forest. At one point Rainsford and Eve are chased up a tree by dogs, Rainsford for the first time understanding what animals feel like when being hunted. Eventually Rainsford and Eve are cornered near a waterfall. Zaroff sends in one of his dogs to attack Rainsford, then aiming his rifle, he shoots and we see both Rainsford and the dog fall into the water.

Zaroff takes Eve, back to his fortress where he plans to enjoy his new trophy, only to soon discover that Rainsford is alive and the dog was shot.

    Top acting honors go to Leslie Banks best known for his role in Alfred Hitchcock’s 1934 version of “The Man Who Knew Too Much.”  Banks nicely blends sophistication and terror into the strange immoral personality of Zaroff.  Joel McCrea, with his all-American good looks,  performs well in some scenes though managing to look somewhat stiff in others, while Fay Wray is not given much to do other than be by McCrea’s side and look good, which she does well.   

    “The Most Dangerous Game” has an interesting back-story. Based on the ell known short story by Richard Connell the film was simultaneously filmed with “King Kong.” Both films had Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong and Noble Johnson (Ivan the Cossack) in the cast. The actors were able to do the two films at the same time due to the time consuming special effects of Kong, which left them with free periods where they could work on one film and then the other. You may also notice that some of the same sets were used for both films, especially in the chase scenes at the end; even some of the “screams” may sound familiar. “The Most Dangerous Game” was originally budgeted at approximately four hundred thousand dollars, a healthy amount for its time. However due financial problems at RKO the budget was reduced to a little more than two hundred thousand, which necessitated some cost cutting, and eliminating scenes especially at the beginning of the film, the ship scenes and the sinking where everything happens rather quickly.  

    As usually happens there are differences between the source material and the film, for example in the short story, there is no shipwreck. Rainsford accidentally falls overboard when he investigates a far off gunshot he heard. There is also no female character in Connell’s story, which may account for Fay Wray’s character being little more than ornamental for most of the film. The short story is pretty much a one on one confrontation between Zaroff and Rainsford.

    This was the first adaptation of Connell’s story, which if you are interested in reading is available free online. The film has been remade officially and unofficially over the years. In 1945, Robert Wise directed “A Game of Death” where the Zaroff character was changed to a more current hate figure that of a Nazi officer. RKO even used some of the same footage from the 1932 film. In 1952, there was “Run for the Sun” with Richard Widmark and Jane Greer. Other unofficial remakes with a similar thematic concept include “Surviving the Game,” “Bloodlust,” “Hard Target” and “Open Season” (1974). The film’s influence is even felt in David Finchers 2007 film “Zodiac” when Jake Gyllenhaal’s character Robert Graysmith  identifies quotes from “The Most Dangerous Game” when reading letters sent into the newspaper by the killer.

This article will appear in the July 24th issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Will the Democratic Party Learn the Lessons of 1932?

by Nancy Spannaus

The attempt by the de facto British agents in the Democratic Party, to knock out the FDR potential in the party by destroying Hillary Clinton, was in full swing, when Jeffrey Steinberg wrote the history of Franklin Roosevelt's 1932 victory over London's Wall Street fascist, John Jacob Raskob, for the April 4 edition of EIR. And, despite Clinton's stunning series of victories in the April-June primaries, the British operation appeared to succeed in mounting sufficient pressure to get Clinton, and her supporters, to concede to the crowning of Obama.

Yet, over the last few weeks, it has become clear that the lessons of FDR's 1932 victory are rapidly becoming the lessons for the Denver Democratic Party convention, for an increasing number of Democrats. A broad collection of groups has been formed, ranging from The Denver Group to PUMA (Party Unity My Ass), which are holding meetings and conference calls, with the aim of keeping Clinton in the race, and to ensure a roll call vote at the Denver nominating convention.

- An Organizing Process -

The first reaction among many of the 18 million people who voted for Hillary Clintonin the primaries, to Clinton's suspension of her campaign June 6, was heavy demoralization. “I had to pick them up off the floor,” LaRouche said. But most importantly, LaRouche's Political Action Committee (LPAC) had to fight the tendency of Hillary supporters to react with fanatical rage, and get them, as well as Obama supporters, to understand the historical political period they were in. Without an understanding of Britain's war against the United States, and the decisive economic and political turning point which has been reached, there was no way that any effective counterattack could be made against the British tools in the Democratic Party. The issue is not Hillary Clinton's campaign, but whether the nation will survive.

LaRouche's intervention came in three ways. First, he emphasized that, in reality, the nominee of neither political party was knowable at the present time. Not only did both McCain and Obama have serious weaknesses, which could be used to knock either or both of them out, but the nation and the world were entering a period of political and economic turmoil, the equal of which no one alive today has ever seen. “Behind the scenes, it is the issues of this presently accelerating general physical-economic breakdown of the world's present financial-monetary system, which is on the mind of those who are the players planning to create a new system,” LaRouche wrote. It is the solution to that breakdown which has to be the subject of political mobilization.

Second, the LaRouche PAC released a powerful exposé of the British agent destroying the Democratic Party (among others), namely, megaspeculator George Soros. LaRouche introduced the blockbuster pamphlet, titled, “Your Enemy, George Soros,”with a statement June 16, which put the matter this way: “George Soros does not actually own Senator Barack Obama; some other people do; but, Soros is a key controller, and seemingly the virtual owner of both Democratic Party Chairman Howard `Scream' Dean, that Party, perhaps your political party, and, in fact, your nation, which are both what political-economic hit-man George Soros is aiming to destroy.” This dossier is now circulating in several hundred thousand copies, with the inclusion of Steinberg's article on the 1932 convention.

Third, LPAC released a new 100-minute DVD on its website, entitled “1932: Speak Not of Parties, But of Universal Principles,”which presents Roosevelt's 1932 election in the context of the sweep of the American System's battle against the British Empire, from the time of Abraham Lincoln to FDR's death. While still being duplicated for mass circulation as of this writing, the 1932 video has had an immediate impact among visitors to the LPAC website, and has been widely circulated and reproduced in the two weeks since its posting.

- The Denver Group -

Overall, more than 40 organizations have been formed across the country, that are supporting the nomination of Hillary Clinton, or, at minimum, demanding a full nominating process and roll call vote at the convention.

The most visible campaign is being waged by The Denver Group, an unaffiliated political action committee. One of the PAC's spokespersons is Georgetown University law professor Heidi Li Feldman, who, in an interview with Fox-TV news reporter Neil Cavuto, on July 14, brought up the history of the 1932 convention, and insisted that things could change by August, so that Clinton could conceivably still win the Democratic Party nomination.

For this to happen, of course, Clinton would have to be nominated officially at Denver, and there would have to be a roll call vote. Thus, The Denver Group is raising the alarm that none other than Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi are attempting to prevent Clinton's name from being placed in nomination. The group put a full-page ad in the Chicago Tribune July 11, and announced that it intends to put on television ads as well, to keep up the pressure to make sure that Clinton is nominated.

In the July 17 edition of CQToday, the legislative news-daily from Congressional Quarterly, The Denver Group published a striking ad as well. Under a large photo of FDR, the title reads: “Would Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi have kept his name off the ballot?” The text then reads as follows:

“Franklin Roosevelt went into the 1932 Democratic Convention 90 delegates short of the 2/3 majority needed to win the nomination. He finally won on the 4th ballot in a contentious convention. The Democratic Party survived.

“Senator Obama and Senator Clinton both go to the convention without the necessary majority needed to secure the nomination. Yet there is talk that Howard Dean, Nancy Pelsoi and some elements of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] want to subvert the democratic process by keeping Senator Clinton's name from being placed in nomination.

“Senator Clinton is still a candidate. She is the popular vote winner who won more votes than any Democratic primary candidate in history. Democratic processes demand that Senator Clinton's name be officially placed in nomination. There must be an open convention with an honest roll call vote so super delegates who will decide this nomination can vote according to their judgment and conscience for eithercandidate as Democratic Party rules provide.

“And if some in the DNC are afraid that a democratic process could produce a result different from the preconceived set of expectations, as someone once said, `the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.'

“Keep the Democratic Party democratic.”

- A Broader Mobilization -

Another of the groups fighting for an open convention is PUMA PAC, which has announced plans for a pre-convention conference in Washington, D.C., on the weekend of Aug. 8-10. Among its announced goals are “to see that our votes are counted, our primary results are respected, and [that] what is important to us is recognized and included in the party platforms.”

PUMA is also holding local meetings, and sending representatives to address other groups. One PUMArepresentative spoke at an LPAC town meeting in Seattle, Washington.

While the understanding of the nature of the fight within the group varies, one of its founders, Will Bowers, who appeared on the Blog radio show “Let's Get Real,” on July 15, showed acute understanding by characterizing Hillary Clinton as “a new FDR.” Bowers took the opportunity of the broadcast to clarify reports that he had endorsed John McCain, saying that he is fighting to see Clinton's name placed in nomination, and to see that she wins the Democratic nomination. Only if this effort fails, Bowers said, would he vote for McCain.

In this, of course, Bowers is by no means alone, as polls taken by various insurgent groups in the Democratic Party indicate that anywhere from 20% to 30% of Democrats who voted for Clinton, would either vote for McCain, or stay home, were Obama the nominee.

- Acting in History -

While Barack Obama continues his move to the right, the Democratic Party's prospects in the coming election appear more and more problematic.There is considerable demoralization among some of the Obama ranks, which rah-rah rallies are not likely to reverse.

With the acceleration of the financial breakdown crisis, however, and the ideas of the LaRouche PAC on the scene, the potential for an upheaval in the current situation is only growing. Most important, is the growth in historical understanding within the ranks of some grassroots Democratic Party leaders, an understanding that still evades the majority of top party officials.

In a widely circulating memo, a leading Clinton activist from the West Coast provided an account of the massive operation directed against the Clinton candidacy by the DNC. The memo, which contained a strong current of truth, began with the fact that DNC chairman and Soros creature Howard “Scream” Dean spelled out a Presidential strategy in late 2004, following John Kerry's defeat in the Presidential election that year. Dean insisted that the Democratic Party Presidential nominee had to be selected by the beginning of March 2008, at the latest, to give the Party the maximum time to organize the campaign.

According to the memo, Dean, Soros, Pelosi, and other self-proclaimed party fixers met right after Super Tuesday (Feb. 5) and decided--backroom style--that Obama, not Hillary Clinton, would be the nominee. They fanned out to the national media, and made their decision known, encouraging a flood of pro-Obama propaganda.

Then, beginning in early March 2008, Clinton began winning a string of primary elections, by wide margins, as she fine-tuned her message to the lower 80% income brackets, who were already reeling from the economic collapse.

As the memo noted, “Hillary ... is a true Roosevelt liberal.She believes in markets provided they are properly regulated and are not distorted by speculation. She thinks government has a role to play in building infrastructure and extending favorable credit terms to certain sectors. She favors reindustrialization to restore balance to our economy, tariffs to prevent dumping, job growth. She supports public service to restore a sense of citizenship and national purpose. She believes that government has an obligation to provide education, health care and safety nets. She supports the nation state and the protection of national borders. These are the solutions which appeal to the middle class in its struggle to survive and prosper as the forces of globalization intensify.

“These views are anathema to the free market advocates who support Obama. Those people trace their roots back to the House of Morgan and the imperialistic doctrines of the British Empire. To them the world is not a collection of nation states each with its own unique identity, history and destiny, but a global marketplace where capital is fluid, entrepreneurs are free to move production to the lowest cost venues and goods and services flow freely across national borders. The EU and NAFTA are paradigmatic examples of this. An economic system of this nature favors capital over labor, low cost venues over high cost venues, and thus works to the detriment of our middle class. It subordinates national sovereignty to international bodies like WTO and GATT. It insulates globalists from the will of the people.

“I have racked my brain to discover the reason why so much public hatred has been directed toward Hillary Clinton over the years, but especially now in context of this election.... But I believe the overriding reason for this national pathology is the fact that Hillary advocates an agenda based on the theories of Roosevelt as opposed to Milton Friedman. In that sense she presents a serious challenge to the globalists and their new world order....”

With a little over a month to go before the national convention in Denver, the situation within the Democratic Party is still totally up for grabs. As the CQTodayDenver Group advertisement emphasized, drawing upon the LPAC account of the 1932 Democratic Convention, Franklin Roosevelt went into Chicago 90 votes short of the nomination. He won, on the fourth ballot, after a ferocious fight against the London/Wall Street apparatus, represented then at the DNC by J.P. Morgan asset John Raskob. Today, Soros and Felix Rohatyn agents Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi represent that same London-centered faction, out to destroy the party and bring fascism to the United States. The question today, is whether the Democratic Party will have the moral fitness to survive, by beating back the London-steered wrecking operation.

 

Cash Baptist Church was called into conference by motion and sec. for the purpose of calling a pastor.  Date for this purpose was postponed until 2nd Sunday in Nov. having time to see Rev. Warf hamilton.

Claude Gregory, mod.

Mildred Green, c.c.

Pastor called 2nd Sund November, Warf Hamilton was called.

Cash Baptist Church was called into conference for the puropseof approving the letter to the Mt. Zion Association meeting at Marked Tree, Arkansas.  It was approved with the exception of a few corrections.

Conference stood open until after evening services.

Rev. Ruth, mod.

Mildred Green, C.C.

Cash Baptist church was called into conference by motion & se. Bro. Ruth acting as moderator by motion & sec. messengers were selected to the association at Marked Tree.  These being Mr. W.W. Gibson, Mrs. Dan Lee and Miss Helen Gregory, other member mas act as substitute in their absence.  Motion & sec. that Bro. Ruth conduct baptism.  Conference was left open until following night when the Lord's Supper was observed.

Bro. Ruth, mod.

Mildred Green, c.c.

Collections

H.H. Hanks          $1.00

Bobby Green         $1.00 paid

W.W. GIbson         $2.00

Jennie Linn            $1.00

Pearl Gregory         1 doz. qt. fruit

Velma Turnage          .50

Bill Gildwell            $1.00

H.L. Stevens & wife   2 chickens

40 cents general collection.

Hi havia una vegada un país petit que no era país, per això va fer un referèndum amb l'objectiu d'aprovar un ambiciós estatut. La part mes ambiciosa d'aquest estatut era la definició de Catalunya com a un Estat dins la República Espanyola, primer pas per a una futura autodeterminació per al poble català. La llengua catalana seria segons aquest estatut l'única oficial a Catalunya.

El poble va votar en referèndum celebrat el 2 d'agost de 1931,hi participà al voltant d'un 75% de la població,i obtingué mes de un 90% de vots a favor.

Mes endavant va ser "convenientment" raspallat i retocat pel govern espanyol demostrant un gran respecte per a la democràcia.

L'historia sempre es repeteix?, doncs no tan sols caldria fer unes senzilles comparacions:

• La societat civil estava molt mes unida i mobilitzada.
• Les autonomies no estaven devaluades, aquest era el primer estatut d'autonomia de l'història d'Espanya.
• La situació politíca era força diferent amb un govern en mans d'esquerra republicana de Catalunya, que havia guanyat les eleccions per una gran majoria.

Feu una ullada a aquest link de l'estatut aprovat pel poble, comparat amb el estatut retallat del 1932.

www.elperiodico.com/info/suplementos/estatut/pdf/fcdp1.doc