Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 929

You're Running Out of Time to Feel Cool Complaining About Twitter

If you want to write a column about how terrible Twitter is, do it now — before the company has its initial public offering this November, goes corporate, and becomes (if past is prologue) uncool. See: when a company goes public it has to do things that make it a lot less fun for people who liked the service from the beginning, as The Wall Street Journal's Farhad Manjoo explains. "First, it will have to run a lot more ads. This isn't surprising—every website turns on the spigot at some time—and it won't be ruinous," he writes. "But Twitter will also face intense pressure to alter its service in order to make the service more widely appealing." And the laws of cool state that once something has too much mass appeal, it can no longer be cool. In other words: Twitter is on the verge of losing any hipness it ever had. Don't you want to be the one who hated on the service before everyone else? (If you care about being cool the answer is yes.)

But you better hurry: This week we've already seen two compelling Twitter Is Terrible blog posts that haven't drawn the usual ire for the storied Twitter Is Terrible genre. Generally, when people write screeds against the platform, the Twitterati come out with the "Twitter is what you make it" defense, thus negating any complaints against the service. But, these two posts, one on The Daily Beast, the other on the personal blog of Dustin Curtis, creator of Svbtle, have people (mostly) agreeing on Twitter.

That's partly because the posts each make some good (and tweetable!) points. Like this perfect analogy from Goldberg: "Twitter is like doing cut-rate cocaine at a boring party where a lot of the guests dislike you. (As I said, I lived in San Francisco in the ’90s.) You’re not having any fun, but it’s really hard to stop." Or, this line from Curtis: "Twitter takes complex ideas and destroys them by forcing my brain to compact them into little 140-character aphorisms, truisms, or jokes."

But, they're also the first to note what people in the know will soon accept as the norm: Twitter isn't that cool anymore. You can argue "Twitter is what you make it" all you want. But social networks are more than that, they're also what everyone else makes it. If all the "right" people to follow on Twitter no longer want to tweet, then it's hard to make the best of the service for all of its benefits.

It's very possible that when Twitter goes public, it won't alienate early adopters. But, as we've seen with Facebook, that's an incredibly difficult prospect. As it grows and develops, all the cool kids will find a new platform or network or just leave Twitter altogether, at which point columns lamenting the end of the service's cool cachet will pop up all over the Internet. The Internet can only take so many reasoned posts about the terribleness of the service before it's so mainstream that it's no longer cool. So, you better get that column in soon. 

       

Lauraist Commies, Pirates, and 'The Rock': Minneapolis' Oddest Mayoral Candidates

On November 5, Minneapolis will elect a new mayor. Thanks largely to a registration process that requires paying 20 bucks and filling out a form, there are 35 people running for the office. Perhaps more interestingly, though, they represent 23 different political parties — none of them the Democratic Party. Allow us to introduce you to them.

We'll note that some of these aren't techincally "parties." For one thing, the application allows a candidate to offer a "political party or principle," so these might just be stated principles. For another, "party" implies multiple people are participating. In some of the cases below, that seems unlikely.

Count All Rankings

Candidates: One, Captain Jack Sparrow. (That is his legal name.)

Philosophy: We're starting with one of the best. Sparrow also calls himself Occupirate, offering some sense of what he's all about. He echoes some of the Occupy movement's greatest hits. One caption from the Star Tribune describes his appearance at a meeting: "Minneapolis Mayoral candidate Captain Jack Sparrow wanted the residents to vote on the [proposed new football] stadium and holding up a toy gun promised 'To be sure we will tax the rich and then we shall tax them again'." (Sparrow is pictured above.)

A blog post explains the party name:

After thinking about it, though, I decided it was worth running on one of several principles that are important to me. They are “Stop Foreclosures Now," "End Homelessness Now," and “Count all Rankings”. Because I could only run on one political principle, I recruited two other people from Occupy Homes MN to run on the other two principles, and I paid for their filing fees.

It's not entirely clear what the "rankings" one means.

Is this a real party? No, sadly.

Demand Transit Revolution

Candidates: One, Bob "Again" Carney, Jr. (pictured at left, above).

Philosophy: Carney explained his thinking in an online forum.

Simply put: the need for a high quality, affordable METRO WIDE transit system is one of the biggest equity and social justice issues we face as a society. We don’t have this today – outside of rush hour the service beyond the city street routes in Minneapolis and Saint Paul is woefully inadequate.

He also explains that a "heated discussion" referred to elsewhere doesn't match his perception. His website: BobAgain.com. (Is that a name? Maybe, apparently.)

Is this a real party? No.

Democratic-Farmer-Labor

Candidates: 10, including one of the apparent front-runners, Don Samuels.

Philosophy: Our comment above that none of the candidates was listed as belonging to the Democratic Party was a bit of a hedge. The DFL, as its known, is the state's affiliate with the Democrats. Five of the last six mayors of the city have represented this party.

Included in this group: Jeffery Alan Wagner, whose unorthodox campaign commercial appears at right.

Is this a real party? Yes.

End Homelessness Now

Candidates: One, Joshua Rea.

Philosophy: See above. Rea was apparently asked to run by Capt. Sparrow, not even having to put up his own $20.

Is this a real party? No.

Green Party

Candidates: Two, James Everett and Doug Mann.

Philosophy: Increased focus on environmental policy.

Is this a real party? Yes.

Independence Party

Candidates: One, apparently: Rahn V. Workcuff.

Philosophy: The site for the Minnesota Independence Party articulates its calues: fiscal responsibility, inclusivity, democracy.

Is this a real party? Yes

Independent

Candidates: Two, John Leslie Hartwig and Neal Baxter.

Philosophy: Well, the reason we said that there was apparently only one member of the Independence Party is that we're not clear if Hartwig and Baxter are independent or Independent. If they're independent, small I, then their philosophy is independence.

Is this a real party? No? Maybe?

Independent Responsible Inclusive

Candidates: One, Cam Winton.

Philosophy: Winton has a real website and an introductory YouTube video, but decided on a philosophy statement for his description. He "is a renewable-energy business leader, not a career politician," if you're into that. He is also for good schools and livability.

Is this a real party? No.

Jobs & Justice

Candidates: One, Merrill Anderson.

Philosophy: Anderson, whose Facebook page shows him holding a small dog, apparently doesn't live in Minneapolis, which seems like a negative. Here's what he wrote about Wagner's ad:

i'M JUST ANOTHER OF THE CANDIDATES NOT INVITED TO DEBATE WITH THE 8 ANOUINTED ONES. WHO ARE ALL SO ALIKE IN PERSONALITY AND PRESENTATION THE RACE WAS BECOMING BORING.

We assume he's for jobs and also justice.

Is this a real party? No.

Jobs Downtown Casino

Candidates: One, Dan Cohen.

Philosophy: Cohen, believe it or not, is the other front-runner, despite his unorthodox party declaration. In the 1960s, he was president of the city council, and calls himself an independent (small I) on his website. His priorities? Kill the Vikings Stadium and build a casino.

Is this a real party? No.

Last Minneapolis Mayor

Candidates: One, Bill Kahn. (The picture at right comes from his actual website.)

Philosophy: Kahn's philosophy, spelled out here, is simple: get rid of the mayor and replace the position with a revamped city council. He also offers a new organizational chart.

Is this a real party? No.

Lauraist Communist

Candidates: One, John Charles Wilson.

Philosophy: Having only a passing familiarity with Communism, we had to look this one up. And, like any good Socialists, the party is on Facebook. Here is the description of the party.

The Lauraist Communist Party exists to secure political independence for the people of the Midwestern United States and a homeland for the Lauraist religion. We use the term “Nation of Edgerton” to describe the area within a 173-mile radius of Minneapolis, Minnesota. We are a non-traditional Communist party, based on the ideology of Lauraism: the belief that Laura Ingalls Wilder is God, Communism (public ownership of business) is the best form of government, age of consent laws should be repealed, public transit should be returned to the routes, fares, and schedules of 18 September 1970, the Nation of Edgerton should secede from the United States as a Lauraist homeland, and all people, including children, deserve as much personal liberty as possible consistent with public safety and the rights of others. Capitalism is a per se violation of people’s rights by exploitation.

So that's that.

Is this a real party? We'll say yes, just for kicks. (Vote Mary!)

Legacy-Next Generation

Candidates: One, Edmund Bernard Bruyere.

Philosophy: There's a brief bio at a political website which indicates that Bruyere is a veteran and a Native American. Otherwise he's a bit of an enigma.

Is this a real party? No. (Searches for the "party" name return a lot of Star Trek results.)

Libertarian

Candidates: One, Christopher Robin Zimmerman.

Philosophy: The Libertarian Party of Minnesota's webpage tells us what we already know: they are the self-proclaimed "defender[s] of your individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Is this a real party? Yes.

Local Energy/Food

Candidates: One, Troy Benjegerdes.

Philosophy: Benjegerdes gave an interview to a local outlet describing his top three priorities: "promote local food, local energy, and local currency." That last point is "a bit on the wonkish-fringe, but I believe it really goes to the heart of doing something practical and achievable about rising global income inequality."

Is this a real party? No.

Pirate Party

Candidates: One, Kurtis Hanna.

Philosophy: First of all, we will note that it is an outrage that Capt. Sparrow isn't a member of this party. It seems like a good fit?

But Hanna is their guy, representing the party's values. There's no American party website, so here's Canada's description of their philosophy: reform copyright and patent law, increase online privacy.

Is this a real party? Sort of. The Pirate Party won seats in the Icelandic Parliament earlier this year, but it's not a party in the U.S. yet.

The People's Choice

Candidates: One, James "Jimmy" Stroud, Jr.

Philosophy: We give Stroud credit. It is a savvy move to have "the people's choice" appear next to your name on the ballot. Should have gone with "Endorsed by Barack Obama" or something, though.

His campaign page notes that he is a "Modern Day Renaissance Man," emphasizing his diverse career history. No political views are articulated.

Is this a real party? No.

Police Reform

Candidates: One, Cyd Gorman.

Philosophy: There is nothing out there about Gorman. So we're guessing: police reform?

Is this a real party? No.

Republican

Candidates: One (one!), Ole Savior. (Ole Savior!)

Philosophy: This is not an adopted name like Sparrow's, but apparently Savior's actual (and providential) one.

His platform starts off with an oldie-but-goodie: getting rid of nuclear weapons. He is against Obamacare and for maintaining Social Security and Medicare. He is against Wall Street, somewhat putting him at odds with the national party.

Is this a real party? In most states.

Simplify Government

Candidates: One, Mark Anderson.

Philosophy: Anderson's platform is … spare. He wants the city to concentrate on basic services (public safety, roads) and phase out business licenses and welfare programs. Simple!

Is this a real party? No.

Socialist Workers Party

Candidates: One, Tony Lane.

Philosophy: Lane represents a long-standing left-wing group in the state, aiming for a "radical democracy that places people's lives under their own control," according to its website. "We believe socialism and democracy are one and indivisible." No word on their opinion of Laura Ingalls Wilder.

Is this a real party? Yes.

Stop Foreclosures Now

Candidates: One, Jaymie Kelly.

Philosophy: The third of the Sparrow triumvirate.

Is this a real party? No.

We The People…

Candidates: One, Abdul Rahaman, "The Rock."

Philosophy: Earlier this month, Rahaman gave an interview to a local radio station, noting that the government is no longer run by the people, but by special interests. His goal is to democratize decision-making, involving the people in every decision.

Is this a real party? No, but we're confident that if any of these ad hoc parties could thrive in Minneapolis, it's the one that encourages everyone to get involved in politics with little limitation.

Hat-tip: Maggie Koerth-Baker.

       

Did Hollywood Collaborate with Hitler?

Harvard scholar Ben Urwand thinks so. His claims in his new book The Collaboration have outraged New Yorker film critic David Denby, among others. 

Urwand, a junior fellow at the Society of Fellows at Harvard, argues that American film studios actively collaborated with Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s: "Hollywood studios agreed not to make films that attacked the Nazis or condemned Germany’s persecution of Jews." Studio heads, many of whom were Jewish, dealt directly with Nazi officials to make sure that Hollywood films remained available in the German market. Some of the claims Urwand makes are horrifying:

Jewish names were slashed from credits. One German official even harassed individual crew members working on productions deemed unflattering to Germany; threats even once extended to a wardrobe man. MGM also reportedly financed the production of German armaments, and in a particularly atrocious instance of accommodation, the head of MGM Germany divorced his Jewish wife at the request of Germany’s Propaganda Ministry. Urwand uncovered evidence that she ended up in a concentration camp.

Director Quentin Tarantino called Urwand's claims "really fuckin' interesting." (You can read a lengthy interview with him on the topic here.)

Denby reviewed the book for the September 16 issue of The New Yorker, and then followed up his review with a blog post on September 23, which points out even more flaws in the book's argument. He writes, "perhaps I’m naïve about academic publishing, but I’m surprised that Harvard University Press could have published anything as poorly argued as Urwand’s book." Urwand gathered his evidence from both German and American archives. But Denby draws very conclusions from Urwand's evidence. He says of studio heads:

They negotiated, they evaded, they censored their creative people, they hid, they schemed to preserve their business in the future. They behaved cravenly. But they did not collaborate.

Denby thinks "something broke down here in the vetting process, and that likely includes the expert academic reader reports that Harvard University Press surely commissioned, which are meant to protect the author, the press, and the facts." 

Urwand, for his part, is standing by his argument. He told The New York Times on Thursday, "this book is a work of historical scholarship, based on documents I uncovered in archives in nine U.S. and German cities. My objective as a scholar is to find those materials and make them public. There’s not a single statement in either piece by Denby that makes me question any of my findings.”

The Collaboration is available now through the Harvard University Press. 

       

Steve Carell Gets Creepy

Today in showbiz news: Steve Carell plays sinister, more Boardwalk Empire is on its way, and Michael B. Jordan has big things ahead.

Like Jim Carrey in The Truman Show or Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love, the first trailer for Bennett Miller's Foxcatcher features Steve Carell as you've never seen him before. Cloaked in thick makeup and affecting a strange, breathy voice, Carell, playing reclusive heir and eventual murderer John du Pont, is completely terrifying. We just might have one of those brilliant, career-redefining performance on our hands. The movie focuses on the relationship between du Pont—who established a wrestling facility at his farm—and wrestler brothers Mark and Dave Schultz, played respectively by Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo. Du Pont, a paranoid schizophrenic, eventually murdered Dave, though the trailer seems to focus mostly on his obsession with Mark. 

Christoph Waltz is likely going to play the villain in David Yates's new Tarzan movie, starring Alexander Skarsgard as the titular character. Waltz will apparently play a "Belgian soldier named Captain Rom who attempts to capture Tarzan in exchange for a ransom in diamonds." Well, that's familiar territory for him. A bad guy with an accent who probably speaks a foreign language in the movie. Nothing new here. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Michael B. Jordan may have a major role in the Independence Day sequel. Though, it's not a done deal, he's apparently just talking with director Roland Emmerich. Jordan's career is certainly on the rise after his excellent work in Fruitvale Station—he may also be in the Fantastic Four reboot—but we hope he doesn't abandon smaller, more intelligent films entirely. Meanwhile, Bryce Dallas Howard is in negotiations for Jurassic World. Yay, reboots. [The Wrap, The Wrap]

HBO renewed Boardwalk Empire for a fifth season today. That's good news. Boardwalk is a strong show, despite often being on the receiving end of critical ill will. The fourth season is currently chugging along nicely, thanks to Jeffrey Wright's super creepy turn as Dr. Valentin Narcisse, and we'll welcome a fifth go-around with this ever expanding cast of 1920s outlaws. [Entertainment Weekly]

Oprah's TV channel buys Oprah movie. That may as well be the headline for the news that OWN—the Oprah Winfrey Network—has purchased the TV rights to Lee Daniels' The Butler, which co-stars Oprah Winfrey. The movie will show on OWN starting in 2017 after it debuts on pay cable, so in four years get ready to sit on your couch and be completely absorbed by Oprah. On Oprah's network. It's Oprah's world, we just live in it. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Here's a trailer for Frozen, the latest animated film from the Disney machine. We were hoping this would be a throwback to the good old days of Disney's movie musicals, what with the Book of Mormon's Robert Lopez and his wife Kristen Anderson-Lopez writing songs, and Broadway stars like Idina Menzel and Jonathan Groff providing voices. Unfortunately, the trailer looks fairly, well, typical. All we see here are a bunch of gags and a talking snowman, who happens to sound like Josh Gad. Oh well.

       

All of Ted Cruz's Republican Critics

Senator Bob Corker fought with Ted Cruz on the Senate on Thursday afternoon — at one point Corker called him "confused" — giving us an in-person confrontation to cap off months of increasingly angry criticism of Cruz from his fellow Republicans.

Cruz has pushed for Republicans to threaten to shutdown the government unless President Obama agrees to defund Obamacare, and then faux-filibustered the defunding bill in order to keep Democrats from adding funding back in. Many Republicans were critical of both of these things. With Cruz present on the Senate floor on Thursday, Corker criticized him, and questioned the real reason for his crusade.

"It's my understanding again, relative to this vote tonight happening tomorrow instead, is that my two colleagues, who I respect, have sent out e-mails around the world and turned this into a show possibly, and, therefore, they want people around the world to watch maybe them and others on the Senate floor...

I’m just asking the question, is it more important to the senator from Texas and the senator from Utah that the people around the country watch this vote, or is it more important that we have a good policy outcome from our standpoint?"

Corker mocked Cruz for his 21-hour filibuster, which he followed by voting to begin debating the thing he was trying to stop. He said the House was ready to vote on a government funding bill. In a body that prides itself on a tradition of collegiality and formality, this was a big deal, and it garnered a lot of attention on Twitter,

But in his short Senate career — he only took office nine months ago! — Cruz has not made a lot of friends. In fact, in recent weeks, many of colleagues and allies have gone on the record to denounce him. So have fellow Republicans in the House, and Republican strategists, and conservative editorial pages. An anonymous GOP aide summed up the party's take on him last week, telling The Huffington Post:

"Some people came here to govern and make things better for their constituents. Ted Cruz came here to throw bombs and fundraise off of attacks on fellow Republicans. He's a joke, plain and simple."

As far back as February the haters were laying it on thick behind closed doors. "[He's] Jim De­Mint without the charm," one Republican senator told The Washington Post. Meanwhile, his relationship with fellow Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn  is "frosty." This probably has something to do with the fact that he refused to endorse Cornyn's re-election bid.

In response to his no-named haters, Cruz simply said "I'm always impressed by the courage of anonymous congressional aides." But many of the best put downs have come from established members of his own party. Here are some Republican senators who have publicly expressed frustration with Ted Cruz, some of whom express it more politely than others:

New York Rep. Peter King

King is quickly cementing his place as the foremost hater of all things Ted Cruz, among both Democrats and Republicans. On MSNBC's Morning Joe on Thursday morning he said that, with Obamacare crusade, Cruz had "tapped into a dark strain in the American political psyche." During the interview he also chastised Cruz for not caring about or conferring with the Senate. "I don’t think it is possible to heal tensions with Ted Cruz. Hopefully we can heal tensions with some of his supporters. The reason I say that is that he seems intent on doing whatever he has to do without regard to either the party or, quite frankly, to the Senate. So I think what we have to do is reach out to his people and let them know that they are following a false leader here."

And "false leader" isn't even the worst thing he's called Cruz in the last seven days. "It is just a form of governmental terrorism," King told The New York Times on Tuesday of Cruz's Obamacare strategy. Last week on CNN King also accused Cruz of committing a "fraud against the American people" for arguing that his government shutdown brinksmanship might actually work. "We as House Republicans should stop letting Ted Cruz set our agenda for us. If he can deliver on this fine. If he can't, then he should keep quiet from now on and we shouldn't listen to him," he said. "Either put up or shut up."

Sen. Ron Johnson

Johnson's also part of the "this isn't going to work, guys" camp. In The New York Times on Wednesday, he more or less said it was time to pack up and go home on this one. "This is not a situation where you dig your heels in and Obamacare gets defunded," the Wisconsin Republican said. "I think people are willing to hope that’s true. I wish it were true. Trust me, I hope Senator Cruz’s oratory convinces five Democratic senators to vote with us. I just don’t think that’s going to happen." Johnson went on to say that Cruz and others are misleading voters into thinking they can defund healthcare. "They just want anybody who offers them a path, whether it’s realistic or not," he said.

Sen. Bob Corker

Thursday's fight isn't the first time Corker has had snarky words for Cruz. The Texas senator went to Princeton as an undergraduate, and Harvard for law school, so it was pretty obvious who Corker was referring to when he tweeted this:

I didn’t go to Harvard or Princeton, but I can count -- the defunding box canyon is a tactic that will fail and weaken our position. –BC

— Senator Bob Corker (@SenBobCorker) September 19, 2013

Corker's particular beef with Cruz may stem from all the calls he's getting from his constituents, asking him to support a House bill he already supports. Cruz's constant chatter is confusing America, which isn't doing anyone any good. "Do I think this has been a constructive process? Not particularly," he told The Times on Wednesday.

Sen. Richard Burr

In July, North Carolina Republican Senator Richard Burr had some equally harsh words for Cruz's plan to shut down the government. "I think it's the dumbest idea I've ever heard," Burr told public radio reporter Todd Zwilich in August. "I think some of these guys need to understand that you shut down the federal government, you better have a specific reason to do it that's achievable."

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch

Of course, some senators are a little more delicate in their reprimands. "We’re getting so late here there really could be a shutdown. That doesn’t help anybody," Hatch told The New York Times on Wednesday.

Sen. Tom Coburn

In the same Times piece, Sen. Tom Coburn was diplomatic. "I love their vigor and their spirit," Coburn said of the Senate's lively new Republicans. "But to be told we’re not listening by somebody who does not listen is disconcerting." Disconcerting. Right.

Sen. Lamar Alexander

Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander distanced himself from Cruz's circle. "I’m not in the shut-down-the-government crowd," he said. "I’m in the take-over-the-government crowd."

Sen. Lindsey Graham

Way back in February, when Cruz was even greener than he is now, Graham suggested that he might want to prove himself and not just come in swinging. "[T]he one thing I will say to any new senator — you’re going to be respected if you can throw a punch but you also have to prove you can do a deal," Graham told Politico. In that same piece, an anonymous senator said "It’s becoming a trend when you’re a new arrival,... They don’t get to know the Senate or the other senators; they just start talking. And that takes away from [Cruz’s] ability to be an influential legislator."

Sen. John McCain

On Wednesday, McCain denounced Cruz's references to Nazis in his Obamacare filibuster. "I resoundingly reject that allegation," McCain said on the Senate floor. "That allegation in my view does a great disservice, a great disservice for those brave Americans and those who stood up and said what’s happening in Europe cannot stand."

That's not the first time McCain voiced his displeasure with all things Cruz, or even the first time this week. In Cruz's October GQ profile, one of the McCain's advisers said "He fucking hates Cruz." 

But the burn of all burns came in March, when McCain called Cruz, along with freshman senators Rand Paul and Justin Amash, wacko birds in The Huffington Post. When Jon Ward asked him if the three were positive forces for the party he paused and said:

"They were elected, nobody believes that there was a corrupt election, anything else [...] But I also think that when, you know, it's always the wacko birds on right and left that get the media megaphone. I think it can be harmful if there is a belief among the American people that those people are reflective of the views of the majority of Republicans. They're not."

Karl Rove

The former member of the Bush administration said Cruz is basically making his plan up as he goes along, and shouldn't be surprised if the GOP pushes back. "Well, this strategy of defunding Obamacare was an ad hoc strategy laid out without consulting with his fellow senators and at every step of the way, it’s been sort of cobbled together on the fly," Rove told The Daily Caller on Tuesday.

Republican presidential strategist David Kochel

Kochel, who advised Mitt Romney in Iowa, argued that Cruz is hurting himself in Washington, where people actually care about results, to appeal to conservatives in Iowa. “He’s hurting himself with the D.C. establishment in order to help himself with the base in Iowa and elsewhere. D.C. is interested in whether something is going to be effective. Conservative caucus activists aren’t concerned about that," he said in a Politico article published today, implying not unfairly that Cruz isn't too concerned with being effective either.

"He looks like it’s all just complete grandstanding to no effect whatsoever except to call attention to himself. It’s not like the Rand Paul filibuster, which actually did affect public policy and start a real conversation," he added. 

The Wall Street Journal editorial page

In a Wall Street Journal editorial published Monday — one that agreed with defunding Obamacare — the opinion board skewered Cruz for calling for a government shutdown and then retiring to the wings. The board wrote: 

When Mr. Cruz demands that House Republicans "hold firm," he means they should keep trying to defund ObamaCare even if it results in a shutdown that President Obama will blame on Republicans. It's nice of him to volunteer House Republicans for duty. The supposedly intrepid General Cruz can view the battle from the comfort of HQ while the enlisted troops take any casualties.

Photos via C-SPAN, Associated Press.

       

Russia and the U.S. Reach an Agreement on U.N. Syria Weapons Resolution

The key powers of the United Nations Security Council reached an agreement on a resolution outlining Syria's legal obligation to give up its chemical weapons stockpile to international control. That resolution, which the full Council will discuss later on Thursday, reportedly does not authorize specific enforcement provisions under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter if Syria does not comply with the resolution. 

Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. tweeted on Thursday that the draft resolution is a result of an agreement between the U.S. and Russia "legally obligating #Syria to give up [chemical weapons] they used on their people." It will, she added, "[establish] that #Syria's use of [chemical weapons] is threat to international peace & security & creates a new norm against the use of [chemical weapons]." Mark Lyall Grant, the British ambassador to the U.N., will introduce the resolution to the full council, which he described as "binding and enforceable." 

P5 agree on binding and enforceable draft #UNSC resolution text to eliminate #Syrian CW arsenal. We shall introduce text to full SC tonight.

— Mark Lyall Grant (@LyallGrant) September 26, 2013

"P5" refers to the five permanent members of the Security Council — Britain, France, the U.S., Russia and China. There are 10 other members of the Council. 

Comments from Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov indicate, however, that the resolution will not authorize specific enforcement practices ahead of time under the U.N. Charter, meaning that the Security Council would have to reconvene and approve a separate resolution for enforcement should any party in the agreement not comply with its terms. "There will be no enforcement in line with Chapter 7," Lavarov told reporters on Thursday, adding, "the resolution which will be submitted to the UN Security Council is in line with the Geneva framework on the destruction of chemical weapons in Syria." According to the AFP, the Council would meet again later to discuss implementing sanctions against Syria if all doesn't go according to plan. 

       

Yoko Ono Has Better Things to Do Than Worry About Jay Z Dissing Her

Jay Z throws some shade on Yoko Ono halfway through Justin Timberlake's new album, which is streaming this week. It's a familiar diss, more tired than shocking, and it begins Hov's verse on the thumping "Murder": "Yoko Ono, she got that Yoko Ono / You know that shit that made John Lennon go solo / Know that shit gotta be lethal / If that shit broke up The Beatles."

Thankfully, Ono isn't particularly sweating the denouncement. She has better things to worry about, she says.

"Many, many people in the world think that I did break up The Beatles," the veteran artist, songwriter, and peace activist told The Atlantic Wire in an interview this week. "Instead of using my energy and my time trying to correct them, I'm just going on writing songs. I'm using my energy on that."

Which sounds accurate, because that's precisely what she's been doing. At 80—an age when most artists find themselves settling into retirement and maybe the odd nostalgia tour—Ono has been riding a strangely restless creative and political wind. Last year, she and Sean, her son with John Lennon, launched a campaign against fracking, uniting artists, attending protests in Albany, and courting the ire of the Independent Oil & Gas Association. In June, shortly after completing her instruction book, Acorn, she curated the Meltdown festival in London.

[image error]And just last week she released Take Me to the Land of Hell, her third full-length album since relaunching the Plastic Ono Band moniker in 2009—40 years after forming the conceptual supergroup with John at the end of the '60s. Teeming with abrupt stylistic lurches and unlikely guests (Questlove, Lenny Kravitz, Ad-Rock, and Mike D top the guest list), the record is among Ono's most eclectic and, perhaps, best works. Fittingly, the set bridges past and present in odd, unexpected ways: the disc is full of nods to '70s funk flourishes and antiwar slogans ("Stop the violence! Stop all wars!" Ono chants on "Cheshire Cat Cry"), and its title refers to those erstwhile days with the late Beatle.

"The whole world was giving me hell, John and me. We were surrounded by really nasty people," Ono explained. "But we were in love, and our heaven was created right in hell. And in a way, we never wanted to escape from it. We were in love and it's fine that we were in hell. So Take Me to the Land of Hell is like, 'Take me to the land where John and I were.'"

By design, Plastic Ono Band's lineup encompasses a revolving door of members and guests. These days, its core contains Ono, Yuka Honda, Keigo “Cornelius” Oyamada, and Sean. It was the latter—who was not yet born during the group's first incarnation—who suggested resurrecting the Plastic Ono Band name in the first place.

"Sean called me one day. He said, 'Mommy, I want to ask you something: would you mind if we revive the Plastic Ono Band?'" Ono recalled. "I said, 'I don't understand, why would you want to do that?' Well, he's the son of John and Yoko and we were the ones who created the Plastic Ono Band. It's his parents. So it's a different take on it than me."

[image error]Sean co-produced the record, but he's also the subject of "Little Boy Blue," a sort of spiritual offspring to John Lennon's "Beautiful Boy." "We didn't know that Sean was going to have to go through some suffering," said Ono of the song's genesis, "and I feel very guilty about that, in a way. John would have felt guilty too, if he was around. So what I have to say to him: 'Your mom understands you.'"

Frequent collaborator Honda, meanwhile, helped connect Ono with the album's cast of guests, including the Beastie Boys' Mike D and Ad-Rock, who appear on the fidgety "Bad Dancer." ("They're really hip," Ono said of the pair. "[Yuka Honda] just said, 'We can ask the Beastie Boys.' [I said,] 'Are you sure?' 'Let's try it or something.'") The most fruitful conjoining, though, may be "Tabetai," a start-stop polyrhythmic groove featuring tUnE-yArDs. "When I heard tUnE-yArDs, I thought, 'I've got to have them on my album.' It's just fantastic," Ono said. But she bristled when asked if she'd been influenced by any of the new generation of artists: "They don't influence me. I influenced them."

The album's disorienting amalgamation of styles—funk and spoken-word, trip hop and sparse piano balladry—led Ono to debut the songs online one song at a time rather than in album form. But she says it's all part of the design.

"There are many facets of me and I don't want to just show one facet," Ono said. "Like my album. It has several different forms of music. I just get tired of being the good girl Yoko. So this was an experiment."

Top photo: Reuters; additional photos of Ono: Associated Press

       

This Fireman Saving a Kitten Is the Only Video You Need to See Today

We realize there's only so much time one can spend in a day watching new trailers, viral video clips, and shaky cellphone footage of people arguing on live television. This is why, every day, The Atlantic Wire highlights the videos that truly earn your five minutes (or less) of attention. Today:

This video of a fireman saving an unconscious kitten from a burning building touches our hearts so much that we don't even mind that it's a quasi advertisement for the GoPro camera:

Well, this "escalated" quickly...

Okay, so we've been hearing about how bad the film Now You See Me is. But is it us or does this clip pointing out all the stuff that's wrong with the movie kinda make you wanna rent it?

Brothers are the best:

And here's a baby laughing his sleep. Clearly he is dreaming of world domination:

       

Why a Scam Artist Wants to Subpoena John Boehner

Why does a scam artist with multiple identities want to subpoena John Boehner in a fraud case in Ohio that involves a prominent charity for Army veterans and a suitcase full of cash? 

Meet Bobby Thompson, a scam artist accused of defrauding people out of more than a $100 million that they thought was being donated to a fake charity, the United States Navy Veterans Association. Authorities have also Thompson identified as Harvard-trained lawyer and former military intelligence officer John Donald Cody. Investigations into the charity by the St. Petersburg Times in 2010 revealed that it was nothing more than an elaborate lie. Thompson was arrested in May 2012, finally, after this slight hiccup in the investigation: 

[Thompson] disappeared for almost two years after his 2010 indictment on theft, money laundering and other charges tied to his Tampa, Fla.-based charity. He was tracked and arrested last year in Portland, Ore., where agents and deputy marshals found him with fake IDs and a suitcase containing $980,000 in cash.

Thompson's trial starts on Monday in Cleveland, and the defense has subpoenaed Boehner and two former Ohio attorney generals, Jim Petro and Betty Montgomery. Why, you ask? Because the defense wants to show that, despite his other faults, Thompson's multiple donations to prominent Republicans were all legal. Other Republican names you may recognize that received donations from this guy: 

Former President George W. Bush Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney Former Republican presidential nominee John McCain Former Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani.

That's a whole lot of prominent Republicans. But Boehner doesn't have anything to fear as long as Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine is here. DeWine, who led the investigation into Thompson's fraudulent activity, wants to make sure the subpoenas go away because they aren't instrumental to the case against Thompson. He described Thompson's political generosity as "kind of a sidebar to the scam" that's "not really an essential part of proving the elements of the crime of him taking this money." The donations are at least somewhat relevant, though, because DeWine said he believes Thompson used photos of himself standing next to all those important political big shots to solicit money for his fake charity. 

       

The NSA Used to Spy on MLK — and the Senator Who Forced It to Reform

For those inclined to be sympathetic toward the public appeal made by NSA chief Keith Alexander on Wednesday — that the NSA stops terror attacks like the one in Nairobi — there's a declassified document that outlines the agency's unsympathetic past, which includes spying on politicians, reporters, and Martin Luther King, Jr.

That spying took place more than four decades ago, years before the Church Committee reforms of the late 1970s that revised the agency's role, and before the clear delineation that the National Security Agency was prohibited from surveilling people in the United States. At that time, the NSA apparently had few qualms about keeping an eye on those the government considered "domestic terrorist and foreign radical" threats. George Washington University's National Security Archive obtained the documents and provides an overview.

During the height of the Vietnam War protest movements in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the National Security Agency tapped the overseas communications of selected prominent Americans, most of whom were critics of the war, according to a recently declassified NSA history. For years those names on the NSA's watch list were secret, but thanks to the decision of an interagency panel, in response to an appeal by the National Security Archive, the NSA has released them for the first time. The names of the NSA's targets are eye-popping.

One previously redacted section of the document is below. The "Frank Church" that is mentioned is the senator that would later chair the committee reforming the NSA's practices.

[image error]

At the National Press Club on Wednesday, Alexander suggested that the agency's current role — with its even-more-sweeping collection of data pertaining to Americans — is critical to national safety, The Hill reports.

"If you take those [surveillance powers] away, think about the last week and what will happen in the future," he said. "If you think it's bad now, wait until you get some of those things that happened in Nairobi."

He said the United States is fortunate to be able to have "esoteric" discussions because the NSA and other agencies are effective in stopping terrorists.

Among those who find the discussions somewhat concrete are a group of four senators that only a few hours later unveiled a package of reforms aimed at limiting the sort of data collection Alexander insists keeps us from experiencing mass killings — at malls, anyway. Senators Ron Wyden, Mark Udall, Rand Paul, and Richard Blumenthal unveiled a package that will be discussed at the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, restricting the ability of the NSA to search its databases for citizens' information and ending the bulk collection of phone metadata.

The ultimate fight over the NSA's practices, though, will likely occur at the Supreme Court. Speaking to a group in Northern Virginia, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia predicted that the high court would eventually tackle the privacy issues at the heart of the agency's work. (The court tossed a lawsuit earlier this year, finding that the plaintiffs didn't have standing.) Scalia figured his body would hear the case — but he wasn't excited about it. The Hill:

"The consequence of that is that whether the NSA can do the stuff it’s been doing...which used to be a question for the people...will now be resolved by the branch of government that knows the least about the issues in question, the branch that knows the least about the extent of the threat against which the wiretapping is directed," Scalia said.

(The issue of the court's technological prowess has come up before.) It's hard not to wonder how Scalia would feel if he were to learn that he, too, had been subject to the gaze of the NSA. (One former analyst claimed he "held in my hand" information pertaining to Justice Samuel Alito.)

Sen. Church's advocacy for change, it's worth noting, was independent of knowing that he was being watched. (He was not the first choice to lead the committee, which originally didn't include the NSA in its scope.) But Church certainly came away with a better understanding of the agency's abilities. From the new documents:

The capabilities that. NSA now possess[es] to intercept and analyze communications are awesome. Future breakthroughs in technology will undoubtedly increase that capability. As the technological barriers to the interception of all forms of communication are being eroded, there must be a strengthening of the legal and operational safeguards that protect Arnericans.

Sounds like something Ron Wyden might say.

Photo: Church, left, holds a CIA dart gun during a committee hearing. (AP)