laceblade

AS YOU MAY RECALL, I attended the Pod Save America live show in Madison, on October 6th.

I had prepared a question for the Q&A session, work-shopping it the night before via text message with a friend who's also obsessed with this podcast, but felt too shy to get in line. My boyfriend then pointed out to me that everyone else in line was a dude ("Don't worry, these bros have got it under control"), and I bolted, beating another approaching guy and making it ON TO THE SHOW WITH MY QUESTION!!!

Anyway, I've finally written up a transcript with bonus material from December 26th's pod, as it had some related content that I'd like to look back on.

JON FAVREAU AND JON LOVETT BOTH MADE DIRECT EYE CONTACT WHILE SPEAKING WITH ME. MY SOUL LEFT MY BODY.

---

The audio to this episode can be found here.
I come in at about 1:21:00, aka the last question of the podcast.

ME: I guess, we had the #wiunion protests here, and it was a similar vibe to what I see going on right now, in that a lot of people were really excited about politics for the first time, we had people live-tweeting Senate floor sessions who previously didn't know who their senator was. It was pretty awesome. And, Scott Walker is like, weak right now, he has low poll numbers, he kind of got pushed around during the budget fights that ended recently, and my question is basically, when the gubernatorial candidates are kind of, um, basic? for lack of a better word, or the campaigns are kind of shitty, like, what can you-- what can we as voters and citizens do to get other people excited, and like, hold on to that energy?

[applause; PS as soon as I said the word "shitty," Jon Favreau broke into a huge grin.]

JON LOVETT: So what you're saying is, how do you get people excited to vote in an election that's really important, but they're not excited about the candidate on their side? Is that what you're asking?

[laughter]

ME: Yes.

DAN PFEIFFER: It's a hypothetical we'll probably never experience.

[laughter]

JON FAVREAU: Let's say...

LOVETT: So, I know a few things that DON'T work.

[uproarious laughter]

TOMMY VIETOR (?): Starting a podcast...

LOVETT: It's really hard. But, I think...I mean, you guys have anything? [gestures to co-hosts]

[laughter]

ERIN GLORIA RYAN: I mean, I don't know, I think that we all have this fresh example of what happens when you don't vote, or when people don't vote. And I think a lot of people who didn't vote probably feel bad about the fact that they didn't vote. It literally just happened. Just be like, 'Hey, remember that? In November? When that happened? And how much you hated it? Let's make it not happen again.'

FAVREAU: We are a personality-obsessed when it comes to politics, so all the stories about the candidates and the presidents and the politicians, and all the drama's around them, and it is at the expense of talking about the issues. And I think what you'd find if you talk to people, and you talk to your friends, and you talk to voters, what they care about is not the drama between the players and the game, but the issues that are actually going to affect their lives? And so I think we need to figure out a way to have the issues break through in the conversation, and to talk about THAT. And if you can get someone excited about climate change, and affording college, and healthcare, THAT can get them to the polls.

[applause]

PFEIFFER: Also, Scott Walker is fucking terrible and we should get rid of him!

FAVREAU: That too, that too.

PFEIFFER: I'd lead with that!

LOVETT: Enthusiasm is also contagious. And if you care, and you can get someone near you to care, you can go and take that out there and make people passionate. So you have to stay invested in the fight, and you have to care a lot about how this fight ends.

---

( From December 26th mail-bag episode, We're Saying 'Pod Save America' Again )

Finished Reading
Kitty Takes a Holiday by Carrie Vaughn - This one is my favorite of the 3 I've read so far! ( Cut for discussion of suicidal character, which was a main plot in this book )
UGH I LOVE IT. ty again to littlebutfierce for talking these books up <3 <3 <3

Kaze Hikaru 11 & 12 - Wow, ( so spoilers )
It was all very dramatic & makes me excited for how this series will continue the intense events yet to come!!
I love every character and UGH JUST SO GOOD, I really did not expect to like this series as much as I do. I've been aware of it for some time but I'm glad I finally picked it up.

Shinjū by Laura Joh Rowland - Christ there's a lot of suicide in the books I read this week! ANYWAY, the novel begins with a double-murder that was arranged to look like a shinjū, or "lovers' suicide," in which two people are bound together & throw themselves in the water to drown because they're unable to marry - in this case, due to familial class differences. Sano Ichiro is a new yoriki working for the shogunate, & he ends up violating bushido to keep investigating this weird case, even after repeatedly told not to.
The writing doesn't do much for me, & the characters are pretty rote BUT there were a number of plot progressions that came totally out of left field for me, & I couldn't put the second half of the book down.
This is the first in a long series, so I'm willing to stay with it & see if the writing improves. I've got the next book on hold at the library.

Unico by Osamu Tezuka - I don't know why I keep Tezuka manga, as I always hate it. It had such an adorable cover!!! But I think I'm finally done for good.

A View From the Interior: Policing the Protests at the Wisconsin State Capitol by Sue Riseling - There have been a number of books published about the Wisconsin union protests. I doubt I'll ever read John Nichols', as I find him pompous & stupid. The ones written by the protestors don't really interest me either. HOWEVER, I have two checked out & this is the first one I've managed to read, written by Sue Riseling, Chief of UW-Madison Police.
The book is entirely focused on how the protests were policed, & why certain decisions were made. Riseling's style is pretty straightforward, but I found the book fascinating. The breakdown of clusterfucky project management was very intriguing, & it didn't hurt to have a book filled with characters who are super familiar to me.

Her insights into policing are great. When it's first suggested to clear out the entire building with no warning, here's her thought process:

The thought of abruptly switching gears and having uniformed police clear people out for no particular reason except "today is the day" struck me as fundamentally wrong. It is a lesson I learned a long time ago and try to continually teach to new police officers: "Can I?" and if yes, "Should I?"
Can I muster enough police officers to empty this building by 6:00 tonight? You bet. The mass arrest plans were in place, the civil disobedience plans were in place, the hard (riot) gear for police was on-site and ready for use, and the University Police force's Police Extraction Response Unit was here, along with the EOD canines. Unlike last Friday or Sunday, today I had everything I needed to make this happen.
Should I? No. It would be a ridiculous tactic, bad philosophy, and constitute an egregious use of power. The Assembly was still meeting and the building had to remain open. There was nothing to be gained from the spark that would ignite or the firestorm that would follow if we forced people out of the Capitol today. If we thought the crowds were big now, imagine how large they would be if we proceeded to shatter the trust and evict protesters without warning. Just to achieve the goal of clearing the building because we can made no sense.

Once the Assembly session was over, of course, then there WAS a reason to clear the building (the building had hours - staffing it with police was costing tens of thousands of dollars - cleaning crews couldn't do their jobs & the whole building smelled like BO & human waste - capacity hazards, etc.

She makes clear things that those within the building understand, but people tweeting to #wiunion usually did not & lots of people usually don't - that things that look like dramatic progressions have actually been agreed upon by both sides ahead of time to make more political theater.
One example is the part where Ted (full confession: my former boss & friend) is asking for troopers to accompany his staff to visit the houses of a few senators after they'd skipped town (preventing the Senate from voting on the "budget repair bill" due to a lack of quorum). Ted relays to Riseling that "conversations were occurring between various leaders and a few of the missing senators. Some of the senators had intimated that if they were found in the state, they would return to the Capitol."
Purposely concocted political theater, & yet I remember people totally losing their shit when the pages & troopers went to knock on doors.

Riseling steps into a power vacuum of controlling various police agencies (excluding the city & county cops, who refused to enter the fucking building, jackholes). The daily meetings are almost painful to read, especially the actions of Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs. The power structure and decision-making authorities are unclear, which is never good.
Once they decide to close the Capitol at 4pm on a particular Sunday, Tubbs pushes for voluntary compliance, meaning that while most of the protestors leave the building when asked, everyone's aware that a few of them will stay behind & refuse to leave.
DOA & Tubbs & others basically state that once this happens, they will refuse to open the building on Monday as usual, until those people leave.
Of course, this is never explained to protestors, & since Tubbs & the majority of the committee refuse to allow Riseling & her officers to simply arrest these protestors and physically remove them from the building (a process with which they're really familiar!!), Tubbs allows the actions of a hundred or so people to close access to the building for thousands of others, pissing everyone off.
Riseling asks lots of questions related to this - if we don't arrest the protestors who refuse to leave the building & they stay over night, then what happens Friday morning? If we only allow 354 people into the building, are these protestors counted in the 354 figure? At what point will they actually cut off people from sleeping inside the Capitol? Nobody answers her questions - always a sign of shitty management & a totally dysfunctional workplace, in my experience.

It's semi-hilarious to read about protestors sitting in the Rotunda with messages they wanted to give to the media upon their arrest, & having already discussed their techniques/etc., while unknown to them, no arrests were going to occur.

Riseling is frustrated with this, realizing that the overall goal is a political desire to limit overall access to the building, rather than to keep the peace (p. 249). Riseling's goals are safety balanced with facilitating people's rights to exercise their First Amendment rights.

It's hilarious later on, when the overall goal is to close the building, & Chief Tubbs suggests an exchange of people, allowing protestors inside to go home & shower/change, while allowing someone outside the building to come in & take their place. Riseling says that their repeated goal is to return the Capitol to regular business hours, with nobody spending the night inside the building. Given that goal, exchanging people one-to-one runs right contrary to that - the total # of protestors in the building would never decrease!

15 days into the protests, Riseling figures out that the Capitol Police's secretary has solely been in charge of logistics, which was why logistics had been failing. tbh, Capitol Police in general came off as a complete shitshow in this book.

UW Police was way more open to logical suggestions & rolling with the surroundings of reality, & also accepting leadership & pointed questions from a woman. It's clear that a lot of dudebros are not down with this.

Several times, it's clear that Republicans put themselves into dangerous positions by not being open with the police about their plans. They'd pull surprises & erode the trust with the public, & every time the police would have to come running.

Her reflections on how policing can help facilitate people exercising their rights is pretty enjoyable to read, although it's clear it's something an officer & manager must actively think about & work toward.
Passively having ideas like "let's get this shit & lockdown" & then executing plans that don't actually facilitate your overall goals ruins the settings for everyone. Overall, I liked this book quite a bit.

Tears of a Lamb, vol. 1 - I randomly picked this up from the library while home for the holidays at my home!library.
It starts off with Hasumi inexplicably having a strong desire to enter the apartment of her classmate, Kanzaki. She never explains why, so they just have nonsensical & epic arguments in front of their classmates. I almost stopped reading it after a chapter two, but I'm so glad I continued!
It turns out that Hasumi is trying to locate a ring that she thinks is in the apartment from the person who lived their two-tenants ago, who was her friend. Hasumi's also dealing with an eating disorder caused by stress, & I guess I just imprinted on her pretty strongly. I'm interested in seeing where this goes, although I think I'll need to use our library's outer-loan system to obtain future volumes.


Currently Reading
I'm kind of skimming through Brian Jacques's Loamhedge. Later Redwall books don't really do it for me, even though the earlier ones were pretty formative! I've always been a little interested in Loamhedge, though. It's the original abbey from which Abbess Germain & the other mice came, running from a plague, back in the days of Martin the Warrior.
I wanted to learn more about it, but the plot of the hare who uses a wheelchair & is seeking a magical cure to be able to walk again is making me really uneasy.
I'm heading back to Madison in a few hours, so I'll likely just skim this to see wtf happens.

Panel Description
Madison, Wisconsin, home of WisCon, became the center of national attention this spring when newly elected Republican Governor Scott Walker introduced a "Budget Repair" Bill that eviscerated the collective bargaining rights of most state workers' unions. This sparked daily demonstrations of up to 150,000 at the Capitol and around Wisconsin as protestors peacefully stood up for teachers, police, firefighters and other state workers. The drama has included kids getting a living civics lesson on participatory democracy by coming with their parents to march in solidarity with their teachers; the pranking of Governor Walker, who inadvertently disclosed his anti-democratic plans via a phone call he thought was from a billionaire donor; the 14 Democratic senators fleeing the state in order to prevent a voting quorum and to buy some time for citizens to learn what was really in the bill; and Egyptians calling from overseas to purchase and donate pizzas to protestors. Come listen to those who of us who have been a part of it and learn what we're doing as the struggle goes on.

Panelists: L. Timmel Duchamp (moderator), Cabell Gathman, Cat Hanna, Victor Raymond, Fred Schepartz

---

I was pretty disappointed with this panel. My impressions are not intended to be a transcript, nor a complete representation of what was discussed.

I came to the panel a few minutes late, as the last panelist (Schepartz) was introducing himself. He seemed to be discussing how he posted about the protests/etc. on Facebook multiple times every day during the protests.

People in the audience periodically stood up to explain how they also posted news to Facebook, to offer how many nights they had slept at the Capitol, to show their own protest posters to the rest of the audience.

I had a glimmer of hope when Timmi commented that in democracies, public spaces are necessary, and that during the Wisconsin's protests, the concept of the "people's house" was taken very seriously (the space being the Capitol itself). Protestors occupied this space, retook the building after having been kicked out, etc.

Cabell also chimed in, stating that in addition to physical public spaces, virtual public space was vital in these protests, with people sharing news on Twitter, protestors stuck inside the Capitol communicating with those outside of it, etc.

But other panelists, and more importantly, the audience, didn't really pick up on this thread, and the conversation drifted back to what I found to be self-congratulatory discussions, people giving their personal stories.


I'm not trying to belittle other people's activism, nor their pride in it. I guess I just expected there to be some deeper analysis on this panel, it being WisCon.

The subject of the police was broached a few times, but mostly people just remarked on the fact that in these protests, the police agreed with the protestors, and it was an oddity as compared to other protests.

I think this would have been a perfect opportunity to discuss the fact that police cooperation/endorsement was (in my opinion) a key reason why the protests were successful. However, I think that reinforces the power of the police, in deeming which social groups are worthy/etc. This is especially concerning when one considers the mostly-white, self-identified "middle class" makeup of the crowd. How would the protests have turned out if the topic were different, if the protesters were primarily people of color?

I opted not to say anything, partly because I was low on spoons but also because a person sitting behind us made a few comments like, "The police are NEVER on your side," etc. and I didn't want to get more angry/start a fight (I have multiple close relatives who are cops).

---

This panel had some similar issues to the one on Class that came before it, and I think bcholmes hits it on the nose when discussing the attitudes of those who took part in the protests:

I feel like we have an interesting influx of people who've become politicized by the protests in February/March. And I don't want to sound as if I'm saying, "oh noes we're totally being invaded by people who are not us", but I do feel like the content of their contributions has been much more "worker power rah rah rah" and not quite in the geeky analytic way that I'm accustomed to.

So. Feel free to talk about the protests or class (or both) in the comments; feel free to also discuss the intersectionality with race, etc.
I might not respond to all comments right away because I've been low on spoons lately, but I will eventually.