The number one British single today in 1958:
The number one single today in 1962:
The number one album today in 1973 was Alice Cooper’s “Billion Dollar Babies”:
The number one British single today in 1958:
The number one single today in 1962:
The number one album today in 1973 was Alice Cooper’s “Billion Dollar Babies”:
Columbia Journalism Review has this immensely depressing story about Barack Obama’s toadies in the White House press corps:
IT WAS A QUIET DAY IN THE WHITE HOUSE press room until Chairman John Stennis of the Senate Armed Services Committee upstaged President Lyndon Johnson. The Mississippi Democrat told United Press International that the Pentagon now needed as many as 500,000 troops for the Vietnam War. The increase to half a million American soldiers was a landmark, a political thunderbolt in 1968 that would cause an outcry in a nation already divided by the endless bloodletting. Johnson, who struggled to control the flow of all Vietnam news, saw the bulletin on the UPI teletype next to his desk. He immediately confronted the UPI White House reporter, Merriman Smith.
Smith and Dan Thomasson of Scripps-Howard had been lolling in boredom until jolted by Johnson’s rage. In the Oval Office, Johnson was flanked by Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara and Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach. The president’s herculean task was to put the toothpaste back in the tube.
“You guys will write anything,” Johnson snarled. “You hear it from anyone, you hear it from Mr. Glutz, your hear it from Mrs. Glutz.”
Thomasson tensed. Smith was having none of it.
“Yeah,” Smith shot back. “What if it came from Senator Glutz?” The new troop level would be confirmed on March 31, the same day Johnson declared he would not seek reelection. Still, Johnson’s efforts that day to undercut the UPI dispatch riled Smith.
Dismissed but still in the Oval Office, Smith said to Thomasson loud enough for the president to hear: “Are we going to let that son-of-a-bitch lie to us?”
There are few such fiery exchanges with reporters inside President Barack Obama’s White House. Johnson’s exchange with Smith, for example, was the outgrowth of a long and testy personal relationship. On the Air Force One return from Dallas, Johnson dictated to Smith his first decisions as president. John F. Kennedy’s coffin was nearby. “He treated me like I was a member of his staff,” Smith told me later.
Obama would be hard pressed to come up with a reporter close enough to exchange anger and curses. If there were a candidate it would be Clarence Page of The Chicago Tribune, who has been dealing with Obama since his State Senate days in Springfield, Illinois. Obama has overcome his distaste for white-tie-and-tails when Page was president of the Gridiron in Washington. At the media club’s annual dinner, Obama advised Page that as president he should always keep handy his birth certificate. But seven years on, Page has yet to have that soul-baring beer.
“He’s a recluse,” Page said. “Besides his family, I don’t know who he is close to. Maybe his basketball buddies.”
Interviews in CJR inside and outside the White House show a dwindling core of less intrusive reporters, whose numbers continue to shrink along with American newspaper and news magazine circulation. For the most part, they are neglected by Obama. Daily exchanges between the president and reporters—once a staple of the beat—have almost been eliminated, according to research paid for by a fund established in the memory of White House correspondent Helen Thomas. Instead of the James Brady Press Room where sharp questions would be posed to the White House, Obama chose to announce his historic trip to Cuba behind closed doors. For one of the biggest stories of his administration, Obama decided to put the Havana trip announcement in a statement on his very own White House blog. Some veteran journalists view the White House press corps as sliding into irrelevance.
“I’ve never seen the White House press corps so weak,” said Seymour Hersh, dean of Washington investigative journalists. “It looks like they are all angling for invitations to a White House dinner.” When former New York Times columnist Russell Baker was asked for his view, he replied: “What White House press corps?” …
The withering relationship between the president and the press can be seen through the declining ranks of reporters on important trips at home and abroad. Almost gone are White House press planes, chartered by the government but paid for by news organizations. Once a feature of any presidential travel, there is simply not enough cash available for press planes. Gone, too, is the access to senior staff on such trips who can talk outside the White House bubble. For Obama’s African journey last year, reporters were forced to travel to Frankfurt on their own and then charter a plane to keep up with the president for five days.
To The New York Times’ Peter Baker, who has covered the White House on and off since 1996, the death knell for the press plane came after an Obama Asia trip in 2014. The 40 journalists who followed Obama wound up with a Delta Boeing 777 with 365 seats. Each got stuck for almost $90,000 just for the plane. With hotel bills, transportation and meals, news companies were choking on $100,000 for each reporter.
As a result, only a small rotating group of reporters representing wire services, newspapers, network broadcasters, and big news magazines travel aboard Air Force One. They are charged a First Class fare plus extra fees to sit isolated in a tail-end compartment of the massive Boeing 747. Obama rarely visits. “He comes back at the end of foreign trips, but what he says is off–the-record so you can’t use it,” said one exasperated traveler. The designated “pool” reporter files a report quickly available to the cash-strapped stuck in Washington.
Long gone is the Boeing 707 configuration where pool reporters saw President Kennedy laughing with Chief Justice Earl Warren over Richard Nixon’s 1962 defeat in the California governor’s race. Also gone is the more open and relaxed White House press room inside the main entrance of the West Wing. A massive oak table—a gift of the Philippine government—was covered with camera gear and overcoats. There was a row of telephone booths—the kind used by Superman—for wire services and hard-core newspapers. Presidential visitors had to pass the press gantlet coming and going from the Oval Office. Racing to his booth with President Harry Truman’s announcement that World War II had ended, Merriman Smith slipped on the marble floor and broke his collarbone. He dictated a flash to UPI before seeking medical attention.
The number one single today in 1957:
Today in 1959, Goldband Records released a single that had been recorded two years earlier by an 11-year-old girl named Dolly Parton.
“Puppy Love” didn’t chart for Parton, but it did for other acts, including Paul Anka and Donny Osmond. And Parton had a pretty good career anyway.
The number one single today in 1974:
The Wisconsin State Journal reported this about Wisconsin Democrats, who with the exceptions of one presidential race (in a state that hasn’t given its Electoral College votes to a Republican since 1984) and one U.S. Senate race are 0 for the 2010s:
Wisconsin Democrats, hobbled by losses over the past six years, see this November as a chance to start winning.
Since 2010, they’ve lost a U.S. Senate seat, three gubernatorial elections to Gov. Scott Walker, two attorney general elections, control of the Assembly and Senate (twice).In the most recent election, they saw a three-time Walker appointee elected to the state Supreme Court, expanding its conservative majority. They’ve also seen their key ally — labor unions — atrophy after Republicans passed laws targeting them.
But Democrats smell opportunity this fall, starting with the rematch between GOP U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold, the Democrat he displaced in 2010.
That, coupled with a presidential race in which Republicans face deep internal fissures, and stumbles at the state level by ruling Republicans, have Wisconsin Democrats hoping to turn the tide. …
History puts wind at the backs of Wisconsin Democrats in a presidential election year, state party chairwoman Martha Laning noted. Wisconsin has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1984.
The flip-side of that opportunity, said UW-Madison political science professor Barry Burden, is that it puts Democrats in a must-win position. If they can’t capitalize on advantageous circumstances this fall — in the context of the last six years, and with a larger turnout that typically works to their benefit — the consequences would be disastrous, Burden said.
“If that were to happen, the Democratic Party would be not much more than a shell,” Burden said.
Former Democratic Party chairman Joe Wineke agreed that a Feingold loss in November would be “pretty devastating.” …
Democrats tell the Wisconsin State Journal they’re increasingly recognizing the value of backing candidates in local races for city councils and school boards.
They also recognize the 2018 election will be crucial. The winner of the gubernatorial election will have veto authority over the legislative district maps that get redrawn after 2020. Democrats frequently mention partisan redistricting that occurred after the 2010 election as part of the reason why they have been helpless to block the Republican legislative agenda.
Also in 2018, U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, whose 2012 defeat of former Gov. Tommy Thompson remains the Democrats’ brightest victory of the past six years, will be up for re-election.
“If this was just the governor, it probably would be tougher for the Democrats,” Wineke said. “But Tammy Baldwin will excite the liberal base. If we can get a Democratic candidate who can get the right message and raise the resources you need, it’s very doable to win the governorship back.”
Still, the campaign challenges facing Democrats are significant. They include the likelihood they will be outspent, plummeting union membership and — to a far greater extent in Wisconsin than nationally — an energized and unified Republican establishment.
Brandon Scholz, a Republican strategist and former director of the state GOP, said Democrats’ weakened position in the state showed in their failure earlier this month to beat conservative incumbent Justice Rebecca Bradley.
“When you’re going up against a majority that has all the resources … it’s awfully hard to pull yourself out of the desert,” Scholz said.
The story goes on to mention something I brought up here last week:
But as the Supreme Court race demonstrated, relying on antipathy toward [Gov. Scott] Walker may not be enough to carry the day.
Republicans nationally and in Wisconsin have done a better job than Democrats in promoting a brand, said Mike McCabe, founder of Blue Jean Nation, a nonpartisan grassroots group that advocates for “citizen-centered, people-powered politics.”
McCabe said Republicans have conveyed to voters the principles in which their positions are rooted – less government, lower taxes and individual freedom – while Democrats struggled to do the same.
Interestingly, no one quoted after McCabe in the story had a response to McCabe.
Also interestingly, no one quoted the senior Democratic member of the Wisconsin Congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. Ron Kind (D–La Crosse), who sent this news release separately:
U.S. Representative Ron Kind (WI-03), Chair of the New Democrat Coalition, will speak with hundreds of business leaders from across the country on a conference call Tuesday to discuss the Coalition’s American Prosperity Agenda. He will provide an overview of progress on the agenda and gather input from participating business leaders.
The New Democrat Coalition developed the American Prosperity Agenda as a set of guidelines to help America remain competitive in a changing economy. The agenda focuses on supporting U.S. small businesses by increasing access to capital, expanding export opportunities, and investing in innovation.
Congressman Kind will update business leaders on the Coalition’s legislative progress, and business leaders will provide feedback on how initiatives would help their companies.
Remember the New Democrats? Apparently they never got to Wisconsin.
Kind is successful enough as a politician in that he keeps getting reelected in a relatively swing district, and he comes across in public far better than, say, the previous Democratic chair, let alone people who are supposed to represent the Democratic Party in the media. Of course, the state Democratic Party has demonized business for so long that the concept of not being knee-jerk hostile to business must be a foreign concept at Dumocrat headquarters.
Today in 1967, the four Beatles signed a contract to stay together as a group for a decade.
The group broke up three years later.
The number one British single today in 1970 came from that year’s Eurovision winner, a one-hit wonder:
Ann Coulter started her column of Wednesday with …
Before we begin, can we stop referring to Wisconsin as “Midwestern nice”? That’s all we’ve heard since Ted Cruz beat Donald Trump there: Wisconsinites are just so nice, they couldn’t abide Trump’s rough style.
Does anyone remember the whole taking over the capitol thing? How they nearly recalled a sitting governor a few years ago? Remember the protesters fighting with cops, rounds of arrests in the rotunda, the drum circles and chanting? How about the midnight raids on citizens for supporting the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill”?
Wisconsin is a lot of things, but “nice” is not one of them. “Soviet” is more like it. It was always a bad state for Trump because there are virtually no immigrants in Wisconsin, and peevish Wisconsinites refused to believe the rest of the country about the cultural mores we’re bringing in.
… which prompted Andrew Turnbull to post on the Fans of Best of the Web Today Facebook page:
Who ARE you, and what have you done with the real Ann Coulter? …
Does anyone remember the whole taking over the capitol thing? How they nearly recalled a sitting governor a few years ago? Remember the protesters fighting with cops, rounds of arrests in the rotunda, the drum circles and chanting? How about the midnight raids on citizens for supporting the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill”?”
Um, Ann…do I really have to point out that the thugs who did the “whole taking over the capitol thing” were…Leftists and Libs? Leftists and Libs weren’t voting in the Wisconsin Republican primary.
And, Ann, do I really have to remind you that the recall effort against Scott Walker was a Democrat thing, not a Republican thing. Democrats didn’t give Cruz the Republican primary win. Oh, and that recall effort? Walker won by a slightly greater margin in the recall than he did in the previous general. Damn those mean-as-snakes Wisconsinites, huh?
About those protesters fighting with cops, arrests, drums, midnight raids – ALL Leftists and Liberals and Democrats, NOT the Republican voters who delivered Cruz’ Republican primary victory.
She used to be so spot-on and acerbic. Now she’s just vicious, and with credibility and intellectual honesty on a par with MSNBC and the mainstream media.
Thanks to a quirk in the calendar (D.C.’s Emancipation Day), April 15 won’t be tax day for a few years.
Today being 2016 tax day, Merrill Matthews says:
President Obama says tax avoidance “is a big global problem,” and it is—to big-spending liberals who fume that they don’t have enough taxpayer money to redistribute and waste on crony projects.
Actually, tax avoidance is not only legal and appropriate; as an American, it’s your patriotic duty. The less money taxpayers send to the government, the less money government wastes, and the more money citizens have to spend and invest—both of which create jobs and wealth.
But let’s start with some definitions. The IRS explains:
Tax avoidance—Avoidance of tax is not a criminal offense. Taxpayers have the right to reduce, avoid, or minimize their taxes by legitimate means. One who avoids tax does not conceal or misrepresent, but shapes and preplans events to reduce or eliminate tax liability within the parameters of the law.
Tax evasion—Evasion involves some affirmative act to evade or defeat a tax, or payment of tax. Examples of affirmative acts are deceit, subterfuge, camouflage, concealment, attempts to color or obscure events, or make things seem other than they are.
Hmm, that last sentence could describe an Obama press conference, but I digress.
Tax avoidance is absolutely legal, appropriate, and widely practiced—even by the tax experts who fill out Obama’s Form 1040. Tax evasion, by contrast, is illegal.
Maybe Obama misspoke and meant to say “tax evasion,” because the only ones who think tax avoidance is a global problem are those who think the government deserves most of our income, whether we actually owe it or not.
On second thought, that does sound a little like the president. He was the one who started pushing the term “economic patriotism,” as a way of castigating companies that legally leave some their profits overseas—after paying taxes on that money—to avoid being taxed again when they bring that money back to the U.S.
The fact is that minimizing your tax obligation is the patriotic thing to do, for several reasons.
First, the U.S. Constitution limits the federal government to those powers enumerated in the document. But Washington has repeatedly ignored those limits and expanded its powers to the point that it now invades every aspect of our lives.
One thing we as voters can do to fight that expansion is to stop feeding the problem—which is what our tax dollars do.
By legally minimizing what you pay in taxes, you help starve the beast and stunt its growth—just like the Founders envisioned.
Second, you put pressure on Washington to make the tax system simpler—hopefully, something close to a flat tax with few or no deductions.
Many of the problems we face as a country are the result of a bloated, complicated, and incomprehensible tax code. There are some 74,000 pages in the code, up from 67,500 when Obama took office.
The Tax Foundation says that Americans annually spend 6.1 billion hours of lost productivity and $31.7 billion in direct out-of-pocket costs complying with the tax code. Talk about waste!
But by taking advantage of all the legal options to minimize our taxes, we demonstrate that the nominal tax rates are mostly a sham. We all pay a lower effective rate, which makes the argument that Congress should scrap most of the tax breaks and lower the rates more compelling.
Finally, by minimizing our tax obligations, we help grow the economy.
I hate to break this to the president, but the government doesn’t create jobs; the private sector does. When taxpayers keep more of their money, they can buy more products and services, which creates jobs. Or they may choose save it, which allows companies to borrow that money and invest it, thereby creating jobs and growing the economy.
Tax avoidance is not a global problem, as Obama asserts. It’s a tool for fighting big-spending liberals.
For seven years, Obama has pushed, and often passed, higher taxes so he can redistribute that money to his supporters and cronies. When Americans—both individuals and corporations—engage in tax avoidance, they stymie his efforts. That’s what I call real economic patriotism.
Today in 1964, the Beatles appeared on the BBC’s “Morecambe and Wise”:
The Beatles had the number one single on both sides of the Atlantic that day:
The number one British single today in 1972 wasn’t exactly a one-hit wonder, but it wasn’t a traditional hit either:
The number one British album today in 1965 was “The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan”:
Today in 1970, Johnny Cash performed at the White House, getting a request from its resident:
The number one British single today in 1969:
Today in 1969, MC5 demonstrated how not to protest a department store’s failure to sell your albums: Take out a Detroit newspaper ad that says “Fuck Hudsons.”
Not only did Hudsons not change its mind, Elektra Records dropped MC5.
Detective Kenneth Hutchinson of a California police department had the number one single today in 1977: