AP, Fox News scandals strike at liberty's heart

It could be said that the emergence of a "free press" is one of the most important developments to come out of the years we now remember as the "Age of Enlightenment." That freedom was not a direct result of that philosophy, of course, but it was certainly intertwined with the period that saw men, for the first time, truly challenge the authority of institutions — of popes and kings, monarchs and gods — that had previously been considered absolute.

And nowhere, we have been led to believe, is that concept of a free press as utterly sacred as it is here in America, where we, after separating from the intrusive British crown, not only enumerated it in the Constitution, but made it the first, and most visible, amendment.

However, with the news that the Department of Justice, in its zeal to find out who leaked classified information for a 2012 Associated Press story on a CIA investigation, subpoenaed the personal and work telephone records of about 20 AP reporters and editors, all of us (especially those of us in journalism) have learned that according to them, even the inalienable rights endowed by our mighty Creator have limits.

And then there was the follow-up story that revealed that the same department had been investigating the newsgathering activities of Fox News's chief Washington correspondent, James Rosen, sought to label him as a "co-conspirator" for his attempts to solicit classified government information about North Korea for stories — in other words, for reporting.

Combine that with the Obama administration's extraordinarily aggressive crackdown on whistleblowers (it has brought six cases against employees under the 1917 Espionage Act, three more than have ever been prosecuted previously), and it's beginning to look like this president is not altogether fond of the idea of having an independent press.

He backpedaled furiously this week, and said Thursday that he doesn't believe reporters should be "at legal risk for doing their jobs." Unfortunately, the policies that his people, including his snake-in-the-grass attorney general, have implemented run directly contrary to that belief.

As one famous writer might say, "Words are wind," and Obama's ring hollow.

I can understand the government's frustration with regard to the leaks. We are still in the midst of a low-level war against a myriad of Islamist threats that are unlikely to ever cease, and in a democracy, there will always be the need to weigh the First Amendment's protections against national security concerns.

That, however, does not mean that the unequivocal freedom of the press can be infringed upon in the manner it has. I'm not just saying that because of my chosen profession, either. I'm saying it because I have long believed that government entities — big or small, national or local — simply cannot be trusted; as the cliché goes, power corrupts.

The average citizen inevitably has but a limited amount of tools at their disposal should they choose to take on that corruption, and most can easily be swatted away, discredited, or stonewalled by the governmental machine.

But if there is one group that every government everywhere has always felt threatened by, it's the one that includes those of us blessed with a gifted pen, a few strong opinions, and the stony spine needed to publish them.

Our Founding Fathers were all too aware of the potent power of the written word — the fiery Samuel Adams not only launched his own paper in 1748, but regularly used a similar platform later on as a means of inciting the public towards revolution.

"It does not take a majority to prevail," he once said, "but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

That, in itself, is exactly what a free press does. And, even if they prove legal, this administration's attempts to strike at the heart of that is both Nixonian in its deviousness and despicable in its execution.

Perhaps Washington Post's Dana Milbank put it best when he so eloquently reminded his readers that the right to speak out precedes all others in matters of importance.

"To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn't want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. Guns? Privacy? Due process? Equal protection? If you can't speak out, you can't defend those rights, either," he wrote.

He's right. And if this president is truly looking to strike a balance between the freedom of the press and the country's national security interests, he's got to take the Department of Justice's foot off the scale first.

Email: janoski@northjersey.com

http://www.northjersey.com/news/209460481_AP__Fox_News_scandals_strike_at_liberty_s_heart.html

Nellie McKay comes to Ringwood

If you think there’s even a chance that Nellie McKay will go through the motions and call it a day when she appears at the Ringwood Public Library on May 19, then her show is guaranteed to surprise you. Of course, it will also probably surprise her too.

"They say rich people plan for generations and poor people plan for Saturday night," she said. "I’m kind of the latter. I just kind of take what comes."

It might not be the typical approach to a live performance, but then little about the 31-year-old singer/songwriter is typical. She refers to her music, which is a funky, piano-and-ukulele-based maelstrom of folk, jazz, and just about everything else, as "music for people who can’t make up their minds."

One song might be a sweet ballad; the next, a bouncing Caribbean-esque reggae tune featuring lyrics loaded with irony and humor. Next, a front-porch, ukulele-strumming, tongue-in-cheek analysis of feminism. Who knows?

Her track-list ADD might make it seem that she’s trying desperately hard not to be pigeonholed, but McKay said the opposite — if she could stick with just one thing, she’d probably be more successful (in the traditional music industry sense).

"It isn’t intentional. I think we’d sell a lot more records if we could just do one thing. It’s kind of against my own will," she said. "It’s nice if you can find one genre and excel at that and make that your thing."

But now, after five albums and a decade in the business, she is (true to form) currently doing something completely different: providing the musical end of the off-Broadway show "Old Hats," a revue of sorts featuring long-time entertainers Bill Irwin and David Shiner.

There’s eight shows a week, McKay said, and each one — between the music, the comedy, and the audience-engaging skits — has "something for everybody."

"It’s nice once in a while to be part of the big machine… you get swept up alongside it, and it’s nice to see people laugh," she said.

It seems to be a good fit for McKay, whose off-kilter humor somehow works its way into nearly everything she does. Songs like, "Won’t U Please B Nice," where she sings in a soft, charming voice, "If you would sit / Oh so close to me / That would be nice / Like it’s supposed to be / If you don’t I’ll slit your throat / So won’t you please be nice," are as disarming as they are funny.

She doesn’t readily admit to the humor, however, and believes that she "just gets lucky" sometimes.
"I think I grew up in a pretty funny house, and maybe that seeped into some of the lyrics," she said.

The wit does provide a counterweight to the heavy topics she addresses in her songs, however. She’s not afraid to voice her opinion about political or social issues like feminism or animal rights. (McKay is a vegetarian.)

"I think most people have the same politics — it’s mostly common sense — but it gets perverted," she said. "Most people think it’s wrong to make animals suffer, but they do it because they eat them."

She tries to make all of her statements "in an entertaining way," though. And the only thing she can guarantee for the library show is that she’ll "try to keep it moving."

"I don’t know. This is a daytime show… can you drink at the library?" she said.

McKay will be playing on Sunday, May 19 at 2 p.m. Tickets are available at ringwoodlibrary.org.

Email: janoski@northjersey.com

http://www.northjersey.com/arts_entertainment/music/207663551_An_unusual_act_comes_to_Ringwood.html

Staying "Boston Strong" in trauma's wake

"Sing with me, if it's just for today, maybe tomorrow the good Lord will take you away," - Aerosmith

It is well after midnight that I come upon the scene: a smoking white car with a crushed front end, turned around in the middle of my lane less than a hundred yards away. Its flannel shirt-clad driver, a kid of maybe 20, is standing with one foot out the open driver's side door, talking on a cell phone. No lights, no cops. I pull over.

"You OK, man?" I yell.

The statue of Paul Revere in the North End

"Yea, I'm alright," comes the shaky reply. "Hit a deer."

He points across the pavement and I cringe as I see the shattered but still-alive mass of fur desperately trying to pull itself with its working legs out of the lane and into the safety of the high grass. My stomach turns as, after a little more useless dialogue, I drive away into the night, wishing I could do something - anything - to put that deer out of its misery.

Three weeks later, my girlfriend and I are in the back of a Boston taxicab on the way back to our hotel after a night of wandering between the tightly-wound brick buildings of the historic North End, where Paul Revere's monument and the Old North Church stand sentinel over the cobblestone paths and colonial ghosts that meander along the harbor edge.

"Dream On" plays on the radio (no lie) as we pass the new Boston Garden, where a packed house is watching the Celtics play the Knicks. I'm telling our portly, scally-cap wearing cabbie about the Shore's slow recovery after Hurricane Sandy.

"It still looks like a bomb hit down there," I say absentmindedly. I've forgotten where I am.

He gives a gruff laugh.

"Hey, gotta' watch yourself with that kinda' talk around here," he says.

I give a confused look, but then it registers and for some reason I'm instantly thinking back to that kid and his smoking car back in New Jersey and how these stupid, horrifying moments shake our lives in the single tick of a second hand.

That we could freeze those moments - the ones just before "it" happens - and do something that averts the crisis, like they do in the movies!

If that kid had taken a different way home, or that deer had been scared back into the trees, both their worlds would have been saved. Instead, one stood in shock, the other dying.

Were things much different on Boylston Street barely two weeks before? Throngs of people, innocent fathers, mothers, sons, cheering as loved ones cross the finish line of what, for many, is a once-in-a-lifetime event in one of America's oldest, proudest cities.

Then, in the time it takes to exhale, shattered bodies litter the ground as limbless spectators and dead bodies transform the streetscape from quiet city Boston to the French village at the end of "Saving Private Ryan."

One split second, one fraction of a fraction of a fraction of our lives, and what was peaceful and safe has become a tangled mass of confusion, panic, and immeasurable pain.

I never thought when I began writing this column three years ago that I would have to try so often to make sense of the senseless, to bring logic to the clearly insane. This is too much though, and I lack the heart and faith necessary to explain how the death of an 8-year-old who once made a poster that said, "No more hurting people, peace" could possibly have a worthwhile purpose.

So I will not try, except to say that this world is brutal, and tragedy will strike, fearsome and unannounced, like a coiled snake when its log is overturned, no matter how unconscionable. I can't fix it. And I hate writing about it.

Instead, I will simply quote the final lines of the opening monologue of "Gone Baby Gone," the movie made by another Boston boy about a missing child, because it offers the only advice that makes any sense at this point.

"This city can be hard," it says. "When I was young I asked my priest how you could get to heaven and still protect yourself from all the evil in the world. He told me what God said to his children: 'You are sheep among wolves. Be wise as serpents, yet innocent as doves.'"

Stay strong Boston.

Email: janoski@northjersey.com

http://www.northjersey.com/news/206798031_Staying__Boston_Strong__in_trauma_s_wake.html?page=all

Mayweather vs Guerrero preview: Sun Tzu and another Mayweather victory

Steve Janoski returns to Bad Left Hook with his thoughts on Saturday night's Floyd Mayweather vs Robert Guerrero fight in Las Vegas.

*****

Mention to the average sports fan that Floyd Mayweather Jr. is fighting this weekend, and their first question will be, "Oh, really? Against who?"

After your reply, the light will drain from their eyes and they will say, "Who's Robert Guerrero?" You will explain that too - a 30-year old Californian who's had some tough fights but is nothing really special.

Then they will ask the one you knew was coming.

"What about that Pacquaio dude? Weren't they supposed to fight or something?"

And then it will be up to you, the boxing fan, to explain why the two never fought, and why, instead, the "best boxer of our generation" is once again climbing into the ring for a bout that he's nearly guaranteed to win against a man nobody particularly wants to see him fight. You, dear boxing fan, are Floyd Mayweather's apologist - even if you don't like him.

I have bounced back and forth over the years when ruminating upon whether or not Floyd Mayweather's fighter's heart exists. Is it ever really fair to question such a thing in a man who fights for a living, especially when he's fought some impressive bouts against some great fighters? After all, as the saying goes, if you're close enough to kill the bull, you're close enough to be gored as well.

But even I - a Mayweather admirer - can't dispute that he's always taken the safest path, and fights men only when he's positive he can win. He went after De La Hoya and Mosley after they were clearly past their primes, and Ricky Hatton once he realized the Englishman's massive flaws would surely preclude him from winning. And then there was Marquez, the smaller, shorter-armed boxer whose love of battle, Mayweather knew, would force him into the role of aggressor that he is never comfortable with. And so it has been since Mayweather left light-welterweight.

I thought he was breaking this ugly streak when he picked the physically talented Victor Ortiz and the skillful veteran Miguel Cotto as opponents for his annual battles, but it was not to be - he's back to his old habits, and this Guerrero fight is a Sharmba Mitchell-esque sham, little more than a tune-up even for a 36-year-old, visibly declining Mayweather.

Don't get me wrong - it's his prerogative to do these things and pick these fights. It's his cheek feeling the blow of a leather-clad fist, his body absorbing the punishment, and (as Mayweather is so keen on telling us) his wallet that fattens further.

And it's hard to argue with that record. 43 fights, 43 victories, and he's rarely even tested. Entire YouTube videos are made showing the clean punches he's taken, and there's not much material for the amateur Spielbergs to work with. The ancient warrior Sun Tzu would say that Mayweather is, in fact, running his career perfectly; it was, after all, the great general who said, "The skillful fighter puts himself into a position that makes defeat impossible."

Tzu wrote another maxim, however, that may prove a harder lesson for his modern counterpart to understand: if you win all the time and make it look easy, don't expect the same plaudits.

"His victories bring him neither reputation for wisdom, nor credit for courage," wrote Tzu of the man who struggles too little. And, if you're like Mayweather, and you've also become known for a decade-long habit of cherry-picking, you can't bitch when history records you as something less than the coveted "Greatest Of All Time."

Sure, fighting any and all comers is hardly necessary to become a champion in this alphabet-title world, and seeking out young talent and destroying it is not a prerequisite for a man who's made very clear he's only looking to pad his bank account...but it is necessary to be recognized as a legend.

On Saturday night, Robert Guerrero, who is a very good man but a very flawed boxer, will become the forty-fourth fighter to lose to Floyd Mayweather Jr. Few will be shocked, fewer will be awed. But when the boxing annals of this era are recorded, Mayweather will not be remembered like Marquez the Warrior, who took on all comers, or Pacquaio the Daring, who leapt weight classes to war with bigger men. He will be Mayweather the Cautious. Mayweather the Tentative. He will be "The One Who Would Not Take Chances."

Now, in the autumn of his career, that lack of respect will bother him, even as he blusters about with his talk of money and wealth being the only things that matter. But his path is already chosen, and when his flock of leaching yes-men moves on and he retires to a life of having to repeatedly explain why he never fought Pacquaio or Martinez or Alvarez, he will have no one left to blame but the face that gazes back at him in the mirror.

http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/1/4291854/mayweather-vs-guerrero-preview-sun-tzu-another-victory-showtime-boxing-news