Skip to content

Filling your Ipod

Saturday, February 9, 2008

This software (TubeTV) is pretty cool, so I thought I would pass the word. It’s totally free. It will download and convert any youtube video (I think it works on other types of internet video too), convert it to Ipod format (some other formats as well) and put it in your Itunes Library. You have to tinker with some settings to make it work just right, but it’s not difficult.

Filed in Uncategorized | | Comments (0)

McCain and Bloomberg: centrists both, if you disregard their positions on the issues

Saturday, February 9, 2008

I am horribly confused. Michael Bloomberg’s fantasy of running for president as a “centrist” candidate has officially foundered, according to Chuck Hagel, now that John McCain has locked up the Republican nomination. Why?

Well, apparently, according to the Times, Bloomberg is a moderate and a centrist, and so is McCain. These adjectives, in McCain’s case, are simply asserted as fact. (“Yes, the mayor’s chances are diminished by the success of Senator John McCain, a moderate candidate who has emerged as the Republican front-runner.”)

So, we are to believe, McCain and Bloomberg occupy the same mythical “center” of the ideological center, which is apparently located one half of the distance between liberal and conservative. That being the case, there’s not a speck of difference between them, so long as you don’t count their views on abortion rights, gay rights, aid to cities, the death penalty, gun laws, realistic views toward taxes (Bloomberg thinks that taxes are a necessary evil). Only in the weird and wonderful world of our corporate media could these guys be considered to represent similar political positions. They can’t both be “centrists”, if the word is to have any meaning.

In fact, from a brief review of the article on Bloomberg at Wikipedia, it appears that the only things of substance about which they truly agree is the advisability of the Iraq war and a craven allegiance to the interests of corporate America. Given the fact that the most Americans have long since come to the conclusion that the war in Iraq was a mistake and has been a miserable failure, it hardly seems like a position in favor of the war defines a central position in today’s political landscape. Nor does fealty to corporate America. But then again, maybe in the minds of the media, those positions define the center, at least their view of the “responsible center”. Apparently, judging from the tepid response Bloomberg’s fantasy candidacy engendered, the American people don’t agree.

What’s truly annoying about this article is the easy way in which the reporters label McCain a “moderate” or “centrist”; descriptions he himself eschews. The man is a certified right winger; he’s just not completely balls out crazy, though he’s a lot closer to being balls out crazy than most people realize. This is just another illustration of the fact that in this country, at the present time, the acceptable continuum of political thought consists of a mild liberalism on the left, to a theocratic/corporatist/totalitarian conservatism on the right. Lefty positions outside of that continuum (single payer health care, for instance, which is a fact of life in most rational democracies) are simply defined as being outside the bounds of acceptable discourse, while no right wing position, no matter how extreme (e.g., torture, “unitary executive”, i.e., presidential dictatorship) is out of bounds on the right. And so the media defined “center” drifts to the right, while the actual center drifts left.

Filed in Media, Presidential Politics | | Comments (5)

Friday Night Music: Jimmy Cliff

Friday, February 8, 2008

Many Rivers to Cross. The group singing with him is The Sounds of Blackness. This one starts a bit slow, so you have to be patient.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HWAIWsP5OM[/youtube]

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

Drinking Liberally: A report

Friday, February 8, 2008

Our second Drinking Liberally went well last night. It was held at the Bulkeley House in New London, in the “Ice House”, which we liberals had all to ourselves. A few pictures, starting with a look at the facilities prior to the start of the festivities:

drinking-liberally-2008-02-0718-14-54-2008-02-07-at-18-14-52.jpg

A couple of crowd shots:

drinking-liberally-2008-02-0719-56-44-2008-02-07-at-19-56-34.jpg

drinking-liberally-2008-02-0719-54-52-2008-02-07-at-19-54-52.jpg

A not so crowded shot, of folks deep in conversation about weighty political issues (or not):

drinking-liberally-2008-02-0719-55-04-2008-02-07-at-19-55-04.jpg

And finally, Audrey Heard showing off her Iphone:

drinking-liberally-2008-02-0719-55-30-2008-02-07-at-19-55-28.jpg

Now we have to decide between the Ice House and the Harp and Hound as a permanent place to go. The pros and cons:

Ice House: Pros
Better food, more conveniently located between Waterford and Groton, better facilities, less likely to fill up with non-liberals as the evening wears on.
Cons: Relatively poor selection of beers on tap, perceived as being in dangerous location. This is actually not true as the parking lot is an extremely short walk from the entrance.

Harp and Hound Pros
Great Beer Selection, conveniently located for Groton residents who prefer not to cross the bridge.
Cons: Irish pub food (need I say more); relatively cramped quarters.

Those who’ve attended the first two sessions WILL BE POLLED on a permanent location. Whatever the ultimate choice I hope we can keep it going. People seemed to have a good time, judging by the fact that most of them stayed pretty late.

Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

Outrage of the week

Friday, February 8, 2008

This week the Attorney General of the United States declared that the law does not apply to members of the executive branch. He did it twice. First he told the Judiciary Committee that torture is legal as long as the Justice Department clears it in advance. By extension, anything is legal as long as the Justice Department clears it in advance. Then he told the committee that the Justice Department would take no action on contempt citations issued by Congress to executive branch officials who refuse to honor lawful Congressional subpoenas if the President directs them not to appear. The president, according to Mukasey, is the law. Read the testimony at the second link.

Outrageous, but not as outrageous as the fact that this testimony has been virtually ignored by the media. It is simply par for the course for the Bush Administration to announce that it has no obligation to follow the law. It is living by Nixon’s maxim that “if the president does it, it’s legal”. Somewhere in Hell, Nixon is turning green with envy.

The fact that this is being ignored in the media is outrageous, but not as outrageous as the fact that Congress has done, and will do, nothing about it. Our democracy is being stolen and Congress has done nothing but emit feeble clucks of disapproval.

Mukasey has so clearly violated his oath of office. He clearly lied at his confirmation hearings. He has made Shumer and Feinstein, who are primarily responsible for the fact that he was confirmed, look like fools. He should be impeached. In fact, the House should impeach a large number of these people, if for no other reason than to put an official seal of disapproval on their actions. The Senate will not convict, but there doesn’t need to be a trial in the Senate-the House can time the impeachments so they happen toward the end of the term and at the time that these criminals would leave office anyway. It wouldn’t be much, but at least it would put Congress on record.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism | | Comments (0)

Something happening here

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

It has been much remarked in the blogosphere, though not so much in the mainstream media, that turnout among Democrats has been extra high this year. A case in point is our fair town of Groton, where the votes cast for the top candidates are as follows. (All figures courtesy of the Courant, Dems here, Forces of the Darkside here):

Obama: 1,403
Clinton: 1,285

McCain: 686
Romney: 405
Huckster: 112
Total R: 1203

Groton registered voters are historically split fairly evenly among Democrats, Independents and Republicans, with Democrats holding a slight registration edge over Republicans. However, Republican turnout is usually higher than Democratic turnout, which accounts for the fact that Republicans have dominated the Town Council time out of mind.

Yesterday, the losing candidate (Hillary) got more votes than the total votes cast for all the remaining Republican candidates. Amazingly, Groton Republican outdid the state as a whole. In Groton, their top three combined got about 93% of Clinton’s vote; statewide they got about 84%. (Figures here and here) (If we factor in the statewide Democratic registration edge, Clinton gets fewer votes than the three Republicans, but the total Democratic vote still indicates a turnout almost twice as high as Republican turnout). What does that tell us? I think it tells us that the pollsters should be adding another choice when they poll Republicans: None of the above. Republicans don’t like their choices. Independents must like those Republican choices even less. As I pointed out above, Democratic turnout in Groton usually lags Republican turnout , so we have to work hard to turnout voters. Republicans, particularly in the more affluent districts where they tend to congregate, usually turn themselves out (I suspect that with few exceptions, that is a trend that holds statewide). What if they don’t this year? Where are the foot soldiers going to come from to turn them out? I have a feeling the party stalwarts are as uninspired as the Republican masses, and, at least here in Groton, I’m not sure that after all these years of phoning it in (comparatively) that the Republicans would know how to do it if they wanted to.

By comparison, Democrats, and I suspect a lot of Independents, are ready to vote for either of our candidates (or a yellow dog for that matter) to get rid of Bush and the horse he rode in on. The Republicans will roll out the slime machine, but people are so disgusted with the present government that it may not work this time, particularly because we’ll be deep in recession by the time November rolls around. Democrats here and everywhere are going to be working hard to get people to the polls, and this year, unlike any other, they are going to find their job a lot easier.

As long as we don’t form a circular firing squad we should do fine. It won’t hurt if the Republicans form one of their own.

Filed in Democrats, Local issues | | Comments (2)

The Day Loves them some McCain

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

You had to go beneath the fold of this morning’s Day to see a mention of a Democrat. The headline was all Rs, and the meanest, biggest, bestest R of them all was big John McCain, the maverick Republican from Arizona.Y ou know, he’s such a maverick that he complains a little before doing what he’s told. A picture of him and his trophy wife took up more real estate on the Day’s front page then all of the articles (pictures and text) about the Democrats.

John McCain would be DOA as a presidential candidate would it not be for one thing: the determination of the press corps to prop him up. Just as with Bush, circa 2000, the press will resist reporting on the true John McCain, while blithely reinforcing Republican talking points about whatever candidate we finally nominate. Luckily, the Dems, or at least some of them, are ready to push back, including Howard Dean, who is already beginning the attack. It’s going to take some doing, for as lapdog Chris Matthews has said: “ The press loves McCain. We’re his base, I think“.

Filed in Media, Presidential Politics | | Comments (0)

Reminder: Drinking Liberally Thursday night

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Light blogging tonight. I am watching/listening to the returns on Brave New Films, where they do the heavy lifting of watching CNN for me, report the results, and reinforce all my preconceptions. What more could you ask?

Now’s a good time to remind everyone that Thursday night is the second meeting of the Southeastern Connecticut (nascent) chapter of Drinking Liberally. We’ll certainly have plenty to talk about. If we have a clear winner by then those who backed the winning candidate can lift a glass in celebration, while those who backed the loser can briefly drown their sorrows, before we all come together behind our candidate, whoever he or she may be. For we must remember, to paraphrase our founding Democrat, “We are all Clintonites; We are all Obama-ites”. And, in the event there’s still no clear winner, we can engage in fruitless speculative debate about what will happen next.

Time: 6:30, Place: Bulkeley House, Bank Street, New London. Easy parking in the back.

Filed in Local issues, Presidential Politics | | Comments (0)

Pictures from the Obama rally

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Good Morning, Democrats. Time to be the Deciders. A timely reminder in this morning’s comics:

ba080205.gif

Guess which party’s primary they’re voting in?

Actually, the main point of this hurried post is to put up some pictures of the Obama rally that Betsy Moukawsher sent me last night. Betsy was up close, but to the rear.

obama-010.jpg

obama-003.jpg

obama-001.jpg

Filed in Presidential Politics | | Comments (3)

The pundit speaks

Monday, February 4, 2008

As an amateur pundit I cannot aspire to the lack of prescience endemic in the professional punditocracy. But that doesn’t mean I can’t inflict my prognostications on a helpless public. At least in my case, I’m not inflicting myself on a million living rooms.

Anyway, here’s my take on tomorrow. I am predicting that Obama will exceed expectations, at least as reflected in the polls. My thinking is fairly simple. I’m fairly sure there are a lot of people out there like me and my wife who have been wavering between Clinton and Obama. So, not only are there a lot of folks out there who call themselves undecided, but also a lot that could switch. I’m guessing that the undecided and the waverers break in a large proportion for Obama. I’m not saying that he will necessarily get more votes than Hillary, but I am saying he will get a lot more than the polls are showing.

Maybe I’m projecting, because despite some issues I have with him, I’m leaning toward Obama at the moment. But I think that a lot of people are looking for a break with the past, and for better or worse, Hillary is part of that past. I think Bill Clinton was a good president; I think Hillary would be a good president; but I don’t want to go through another eight years of having to deal with rabid Clinton haters, and frankly, I relish the idea of getting out of the dynastic cycle into which we have blundered. There are almost 300 million people in this country and there’s no reason the president must be named Bush or Clinton.

Now, I know that legions of Obama haters could arise, but it’s not a dead certainty, and he may be positioned to blunt a lot of the worst of it. This country needs inspiration and it is not going to get that from Hillary. And I say this fully cognizant of the fact that inspiring leadership is not always great leadership. I was 13 when JFK was killed. He was my hero for years, but I now know that, while he was indeed inspiring, he was not terribly effective. It is debatable whether he could have gotten the Civil Rights Act through the Congress, not to mention the Voting Rights Act. The uninspiring LBJ did that, helped, to be sure by the wave of support for JFK’s policies created by JFK’s death. When Hillary pointed out that it took an LBJ to get those acts through Congress, she was right. Remember, in today’s political world, Barack is not Martin Luther King. He’s JFK.

But these are not the 60s, and Barack is not really JFK, and the political realities with which we must deal are not the same as then. In any event, to a great extent, tomorrow is not about what people need, but what they want. They want someone to make them feel that this can be a great country again, and we can be a great and good people, and Hillary can’t give them that.

So that’s my prediction. If I’m right, I’m a genius. If I’m wrong, well like the professional pundits I will pretend I never wrote or thought any of the above, and next week I’ll be telling you that I knew Hillary would get the undecideds and late switchers all along.

Filed in Presidential Politics | | Comments (3)