Ok folks, it's time to get serious about leadership now that Harry Chen appears to be out of the Guv Lite race. For those who don't know me very well, I assure you that I can roll out my bio on a secure google page in a few days time. I have the chutzpa to step up, but I will need your help.
Please email me to participate in prelimary work. Let me know how you can help.
Discretion, please. Lot's of under the radar work ahead.
natefreeman@gmail.com
Loading ...(Good activism comes from capitalizing resources we already have. Check it out! – promoted by Christian Avard)
Remember the controversial and ethically questionable mobile phone images of Saddam Hussein's execution? While that was a pretty extreme example, it really demonstrated how easy it is to make a visual record with a push of the button on your mobile phone.
I don't have a cell phone myself. For the recent bridge report, I used a $50 Vivatar digital camera which happens to have a video feature. Most cameras have the same feature if you spend $50 or more.
Well, here comes iPhone expanding our imagination of the possible once again, offering a new concept called the “Mobile News Network” a la Steve Jobs.
Below the fold, a brief report on this development from Cairn's blog. But before we get there, let me put out this nugget:
There's a future here in Vermont for citizen journalism using photos and video. Rest assured, you'll hear more about it soon.
As James Grimmelmann timely reports on The Laboratorium:
Steve Jobs says:
10:41 am [The Associated Press] call it the Mobile News Network, and it gathers content from many trusted sources. It makes use of the location API by automatically showing nearby sources. Allows news video and photos to be viewed directly through the app. You can even report on news yourself by sending a first-hand report that includes photos and text. The app will be free at the launch of the App Store. (emphasis added)
And James says:
“This is an amazing platform for citizen journalism, and it’s being delivered by one of the major names in news. Much will depend on what happens to those “first-hand reports,” but if the AP runs with this ball, it could be huge. Imagine an army of citizen-journalists, not just routing around the traditional media, but reporting with them. This is what happens when you give people general-purpose computers, portable anywhere, and hooked up to a worldwide network: amazing things are possible.”
(I’m bumping this to the top again: this just got covered in the Rutland Herald. – promoted by JulieWaters)
From the Sunday Times Argus.
 |
| From Drop Box |
BP posted the news about a steel truss bridge closing on Route 2 in Middlesex a couple of weeks ago, which led to brief discussion and resource links to AOT, once again provided by BP. Many thanks, my friend.
The problem of aging steel truss bridges is a lot bigger than most of us realize. It was refreshing to read Rep. Sue Minter appropriately expanding the scope of structural issues and transportation impact associated with all of the steel truss bridges across the state. From the June 6th Times Argus:
"What wears my patience thin is that the story of this bridge on Route 2 is something that's playing out in a lot of places in state," Minter says.
Commenting on BP's earlier diary, I discussed the quality of both the Taylor St and Granite St. bridges in Montpelier. But it's one thing to read state inspection reports, as versus taking a ride across the bridge in question in your car.
I can't get all of you in my car, so I decided to bring the bridge to you.
Below the fold: a special report in stills and video produced exclusively for GMD. But feel free to post it where ever you choose.
UPDATE: Some further comments: For career professionals at VTrans/AOT: This commentary does not criticize the good work you bring to the job every day. Please refer to my comment in the discussion in which I support your work. For Sec. David Dill: In my comments I also suggest that you are off to a good start in your leadership position. For AOT Spokesperson Mr. Zicconi: I defend my video commentary wholeheartedly and challenge you to quote me as presenting a report "riddled with inaccuracies." For Political Spokesperson Jason Gibbs: Political spin does not fix our bridges. Thank you in advance.
Back on the theme of economics, here is an interesting piece authored by Wagner James Au.
<!– sphereit start –>
Ah Vermont, that lovely New England state known for its maple syrup, Ben & Jerry’s ice cream…and now, limited liability corporations that only exist online.
On June 6th, Gov. Jim Douglas signed an inauspicious-sounding bill entitled “H.0888, Miscellaneous Tax Documents” that could revolutionize the way startup companies are formed and run. As New York Law School professor David Johnson explained to me, up until now, U.S. law required LLCs to have physical headquarters, in-person board meetings and other regulations that have little relevance in the digital age.
No longer. Under the new law, for example, a board meeting may be conducted “in person or through the use of [an] electronic or telecommunications medium.” A “‘virtual company’ will be, as a legal matter, a Vermont limited liability company,” said Johnson. And other states are required to recognize the corporation as a legitimate LLC. So while in the past many companies registered in Delaware to take advantage of that state’s business-friendly policies, with this law, Internet-driven startups may find Vermont even more ideal.
Johnson was instrumental to crafting the bill’s language; he, along with his NYLS students and a couple of professors at Vermont Law School, spent the last two years putting it together. He foresees virtual companies launched for countless reasons, such as the production of software or publications written by people across the country, even for corporations that exist only in Second Life.
As you may have guessed, this isn’t just an academic exercise for Johnson; he’s also developing software to manage virtual corporations through NYLS’ DoTank project. Since word of the Vermont bill’s passing got out, he said, “I’ve had two people beg me to be the first to get on the list” to start filing virtual incorporation papers. Indeed, it’s easy to see this becoming standard practice in coming years, with traditional office buildings being abandoned for dynamic companies that exist wherever its employees happen to crack open their computers.
Two years ago I wrote lyrics and came up with a tune in a grassroots effort to support the Scudder Parker campaign. “Scudder, Scudder” was penned by yours truly and produced by Amy Osha. It was played on WDEV and written up in the Rutland Herald. This was following the “Scudder, Scudder” debut on Vermont Daily Briefing with assistance from Peasants With Pitchforks. Hat tip to Philip Baruth for being the first to help to bring out the tune.
Writing a campaign song is a lot of fun, and I would like to help make the musical tradition of politics more evident here in Vermont. So, if you think this is a groovy idea and you know someone who might put their vocals out for the liberal cause here at home, please contact me.
Below the fold: which candidate gets the good vibes this year; the lyrics; a call for collaboration; and contact information.
While I lean toward the independent/progressive side of the political spectrum, I have decided to write a song in support of the candidate I feel has the best chance of defeating Jim Douglas. For that reason, this song is an anthem for Gaye Symington.
Here are the lyrics. There's a tune as well, but you'll just have to wait until “I'm Decided” comes out of production.
I'm Decided On Gaye
I'm decided on Gaye.
I'm decided on Gaye.
Time is wasting away.
So I'm decided on Gaye.
Douglas, what has he done?
In six years name just one.
Yea, he's cut a lot of ribbons.
Huh, I'm decided on Gaye.
Can we wait 'til 2010?
To get back to work again?
Or put up with Douglas spin?
Nah, I'm decided on Gaye.
I'm decided on Gaye.
Nothing more to say.
Time is wasting away.
So I'm decided on Gaye.
And here's the part where I call on my colleagues at GMD to spread the word about a campaign song looking for a singer. If you are in a band, or you know someone who is in a band or can strum and sing, I'm looking for you. Send me a note or give me a call and let's put this little ditty together. It's a fun project, a great revival of an old campaign tradition, and there's a good chance we can get airtime!
Thanks again for your time and help.
—
Nate Freeman
natefreeman@gmail.com
in Central VT: 802-485-4428
toll free: 888-244-2401
Huffington Post writer Wiliam Bradley picks up the other half of Clinton's recent gaffe regarding the 1992 and 1968 primaries and her assertion that both of these ran into mid-June.
Of course, the immediate focus has been on the offensive-to-many RFK reference. Today, however, Bradley's piece, The OTHER Big Problem With Hillary's Notorious Remarks, was like a breath of fresh air reminding us about Clinton's bold error regarding her husband's 1992 primary.
But as the New York Times pointed out yesterday, Bill Clinton was the presumptive nominee as early as late March. If the deal need to be sealed even further, he closed it during the New York primary in early April. That's at least 2 months earlier than Senator Clinton is claiming. Frankl, if she wants to make the case that, “It's not over 'til it's over,” then she can point to every primary in history when the delegates cast their ballots at the convention.
Mrs. Clinton has cited her husband's 1992 nominating battle in discussing her decision to stay in the race. While she said that he only wrapped up the nomination in June of that year, he was viewed as having secured it in March, when his last serious opponent dropped out.
In his piece, Bradley speaks mostly on the subject of the California primary and Jerry Brown. But it's nice to see an emerging reality check on Clinton's revisionist history regarding the 1992 primary rising to the surface in the wake of the emotionally charged coverage of the RFK comment.
The link, Bradley's opening paragraph bio below the fold.
The OTHER Big Problem With Hillary's Notorious RemarksWilliam Bradley; Huffington Post; May 25, 2008.
Hillary Clinton: “My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it.”
What a remarkably wrong-headed paragraph. The formerly inevitable Clinton got into obvious trouble for her assassination comment. (And is now trying desperately to spin her way out. Lotsa luck.) But the sentence before it is totally wrong as well, as I can tell you that the Clintons knew that they would have no trouble in the 1992 California primary.
In May 1992, I passed on a message to Bill Clinton's national campaign chairman, Los Angeles attorney Mickey Kantor, who later held two Cabinet posts in the Clinton Administration. The message? That Jerry Brown, the former California governor who emerged as Clinton's most persistent opponent, would run no TV ads in the California primary and would pull back from the sharp attacks he'd been leveling on the frontrunner.
The primary was not “in the middle of June,” as Hillary said in the first part of her gross misstatement about it. It was on the first Tuesday in June, as it had been for decades to that point, on June 2nd. Clinton was way ahead in the race. There was no suspense about him getting the nomination. And Brown's decision not to run TV ads in California — he had plenty of money for that — and to refrain from the harsh attacks that had marked his campaign to that point made it very clear that the fight was over.
William Bradley bio:
William Bradley is an award-winning columnist and former political advisor. His NewWestNotes.com is the California leader in real-time political analysis. Bradley has been a senior advisor in several presidential and gubernatorial campaigns, co-founded a newspaper in California's state capital, dabbles as a Hollywood consultant and producer, and has written for a score of major national and international publications. A Berkeley grad and Navy vet, he is a USC senior fellow and a national political analyst and host on XM Satellite Radio.
Donald Ray Pollock was interviewed today on NPR's “On Point” regarding his new book about life in the real-life town, KnockEmStiff, Ohio. The collection of fictional stories reflects a community at about ten times it's actual level of dysfunction, yet southern men and women calling in seemed very appreciative of Pollock's description of poor, uneducated paper mill folk afflicated by their deviant sexual encounters, alcoholism, violence, and bizarre, bread-sack, “huffing bactine” highs.
The desperate, trapped, self-destructiveness of the narrative sparked a question in my mind as I pulled fabric into an intricate corner of the chair I was busy upholstering. Interestingly, only moments later (at the 37 minute mark if you listen to the podcast), a caller from Boston verbalized what I was thinking:
“…about the working pattern [sic] of the people: is the [sic] same people Hillary Clinton is talking about, the people voting for her?”
or, paraphrased by Tom Ashbrook:
“It's a good question. Is this the white working class that's been talked about so much in the presidential campaign, Don?”
Since this is a work of fiction, it's not surprising to hear the immediate response, “Well, I don't know about that.” But the anecdote that follows about voters who live in the “hollers” around KnockEmStiff, the town where the author lives, seems to confirm what the MSM still won't touch, even after Obama's historic speech on race in America.
Pollack continues, below the fold.
Pollack: I do know that in Southern Ohio, at least down where I live, there are a lot of Hillary Clinton supporters, and, I'm a liberal, and what I'm afraid is going to happen… it seems to me that a lot of these people who are for Hillary are … you know, probably going to switch to McCain.
Ashbrook: Because of race issues?
Pollack: You know I hate to say it, but I think it is, I wish people could get past the color of a man's skin, but it seems like that with people that I run into and we start to talk about politics a bit … even if they won't come out and admit it, yea, I can't think of any other reason than that. Like I say, Hillary's got a lot of support down there, and maybe that's the people she's talking about.
The fact of American racism isn't surprising news, but still it's interesting to hear it acknowledged by anyone when they don't necessarily have to discuss it. Maybe we should even acknowledge the reality of Clinton's “hard working white voters” comment. It's easy for those of us in the whitest state in the country to be shocked, agog and aghast that such a phrase actually be said out loud. The taboo surrounding the subject is a visceral reaction against bringing such a profane subject into the sacred realm of public discourse.
But there is nothing sacred about sublimating or repressing the facts of who we are as Americans and how black people and white people are different. In fact, talking about the reality of racism is a healthy departure from the politically correct, emotionally dysfunctional process of not talking about one of the fundamental social issues in America throughout it's ongoing history.
The fountain of power Obama drew from in his speech on race in Philedelphia came from breaking the presumed taboo and speaking out loud, using concrete examples how America still suffers from the ugly reality of racism. Obama's speech on racism rose beyond the brand of eloquence because it broke the myth of this American taboo. Weeks later, as if following in the dual wakes of Obama's speech and Clinton's “hard working white voter” comment, Pollack's confirmation of the reality of racism was as if a first ray of light shining into racism's dark, quiet closet.
Hearing the acknowledgement that Pollack's fictional description of KnockEmStiff, Ohio as a complicated truism of what Clinton meant by “hard working white voters” was, in a weird way, reassuring. Acknowledging the fact that people in Southern Ohio refuse to vote for a black man for no other reason than the color of his skin was perhaps the first time I have heard a truthful, honest extension of the conversation Obama started in the wake of the Pastor Wright controversy.
To hear a white, southern author being interviewed by a white, Yale-trained journalist having a frank conversation about the unspeakable reality of white people voting against Obama because he is a black man seemed as if to calm the growling dogs of fear. It was as if Pollack was saying, “Easy boy. It's ok. Easy, there.” There's no need to be afraid. We can talk about this.
Fear of black skin. Distaste of black smell. White fright, rising to anger, in the face of black confidence. Americans make a choice to not discuss the truth of how so many of us vote from the belly of repressed emotion and the misery of KnockEmStiff-like lives.
Against mathematically reality in a three way race, is Pollina's commitment to the gubernatorial campaign similar in any way to Hillary Clinton's fight-to-the-end primary campaign?
Would Pollina consider a primariy race against Symington and put his support behind her if she won said primary so long as Symington pledged the same?
When will the campaign season begin to focus on Douglas' negatives instead of the tired old Dems vs. Progs debate?
Pollina will come in with less than 20% of the vote, guaranteed. Is he furthering either the liberal cause or even the Progressive Party cause by staying in the race?
At some point, will Vermonters stop listening to someone who has never won a campaign, despite all of his promises?
As I write, the introductory remarks for Symington's gubernatorial bid announcement are being broadcast live on the Mark Johnson show. And despite all that I have said here on GMD in regard to my frustrations with the Speaker, I am ready to get behind her in this year's uphill battle for the #1 office in the state.
Why? Perhaps I am realizing that some of my frustrations with her sense of leadership could be intrinsically gender-oriented. I'm not sure if this is true, since I recall back to the impeachment issue my primary frustration was based on Dem leadership here in Vermont not listening to their base. Be that as it may, I feel it is time to open up the possibility that some of my misgivings have been misplaced, since I have have been expecting the kind of leadership that is less tactical and more unbending in confrontation with Jim Douglas.
Also, leadership means taking risks. We have yet to see any other leading Democrat to assume the risk of loss of power that Speaker Symington is taking on today. She has a very good chance of failure. She can lose. If she gains the office by virture of plurality in a Dem controlled legislature, she will be working without a full mandate from the people, and may face a more strident second term campaign than prior governors. For this, I think many of us who have tried and failed in our own endeavors should think about the courage of this attempt. I would hope that those who have been more conservative by not tempting failure in their lives might appreciate what is at stake for Speaker Symington even more.
It is true that Symington leaves an impression of a politician who aspires to be politicly unimpeachable — that she doesn't want to get her hands dirty with the necessary unpleasantries of public life. It is true that she needs to expand her expertise in areas she may not currently feel comfortable. It is true that sometimes appears to be above the difficulties of many Vermonters. But perhaps we have simply lost too much time since the turn of the century at the other end of the pendulum: buried in the dirt of political chicanary; led by those who are far too comfortable with un-nuanced cowboy chuckling; played by imposter “regular folk” politicians whose lives are unaffected by the decisions they make for the rest of us.
Gaye Symington deserves our consideration and respect for stepping forward today. I offer my own congratulations and voting support as she takes on a risk that no one else in the Democratic Party has made this year.
Good luck, Speaker Symington. Best to you.
Nate Freeman