-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total ........................ 1,237
Average per Day ................. 42
Average Visit Length .......... 1:49
This Week ...................... 297
Page Views
Total ........................ 2,081
Average per Day ................. 64
Average per Visit .............. 1.5
This Week ...................... 448
--- Visits this Week ---
Hour 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 (10)
2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
5 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 5
6 3 3 2 3 2 0 0 (13)
7 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 4
8 1 2 2 1 0 0 3 9
9 2 1 0 0 0 1 6 (10)
10 2 2 3 0 3 2 1 (13)
11 0 2 3 0 0 8 2 (15)
12 4 4 2 1 1 2 1 (15)
13 3 6 3 0 2 1 3 (18)
14 1 4 4 2 5 1 1 (18)
15 6 9 4 1 1 1 1 (23)
16 5 4 3 1 1 3 5 (22)
17 5 1 3 1 0 4 5 (19)
18 5 5 3 1 1 6 1 (22)
19 2 0 0 3 5 1 1 (12)
20 3 4 2 8 2 2 3 (24)
21 6 1 1 2 1 0 1 (12)
22 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3
23 4 0 1 0 2 4 2 (13)
24 3 1 3 2 0 1 3 (13)
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
59- 53- 41- 30- 29- 41- 44- 297
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 2 1 3 0 2 3 (13)
2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
5 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 6
6 8 3 4 3 3 0 0 (21)
7 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 4
8 5 4 3 1 0 0 5 (18)
9 2 2 0 0 0 1 (10) (15)
10 2 5 5 0 3 3 1 (19)
11 0 2 5 0 0 (11) 12 (30)
12 4 5 2 1 1 2 2 (17)
13 3 6 4 0 2 1 4 (20)
14 1 7 6 2 (11) 1 1 (29)
15 (13) (10) 9 2 1 1 1 (37)
16 8 9 7 1 1 4 6 (36)
17 9 1 4 2 0 4 8 (28)
18 (14) (14) 4 1 1 (16) 5 (55)
19 2 0 0 3 5 1 1 (12)
20 3 6 2 9 2 2 4 (28)
21 7 2 1 3 1 0 1 (15)
22 0 0 0 3 2 0 2 7
23 5 0 2 0 2 6 2 (17)
24 3 1 5 3 0 2 3 (17)
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
93- 81- 65- 39- 37- 60- 73- 448
Monday, October 24, 2005
BATTLE HYMN OF THE REPUBLICANS
Mine Eyes have seen the bungling of that stumbling moron Bush;
he has blathered all the drivel that the neo-cons can push;
he has lost sight of all reason 'cause his head is up his tush;
The Doofus marches on.
I have heard him butcher syntax like a kindergarten fool;
There is warranted suspicion that he never went to school;
Should we fault him for the policies - or is he just their tool?
The lies keep piling on.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
His wreckage will live on.
I have seen him cut the taxes of the billionaires' lone heir;
As he spends another zillion on an aircraft carrier;
Let the smokestacks keep polluting - do we really need clean air?
The surplus is now gone.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Your safety net is gone!
Now he's got a mighty hankerin' to bomb a prostrate state;
Though the whole world knows its crazy - and the U.N. says to wait;
When he doesn't have the evidence, "We must prevaricate."
Diplomacy is done!
Oh, a trumped-up war is excellent; we have no moral bounds;
Should the reasons be disputed, we'll just make up other grounds;
Enraging several billions - to his brainlessness redounds; The Doofus marches on!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
THIS...DOO...FUS...MAR...CHES...ON
he has blathered all the drivel that the neo-cons can push;
he has lost sight of all reason 'cause his head is up his tush;
The Doofus marches on.
I have heard him butcher syntax like a kindergarten fool;
There is warranted suspicion that he never went to school;
Should we fault him for the policies - or is he just their tool?
The lies keep piling on.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
His wreckage will live on.
I have seen him cut the taxes of the billionaires' lone heir;
As he spends another zillion on an aircraft carrier;
Let the smokestacks keep polluting - do we really need clean air?
The surplus is now gone.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Your safety net is gone!
Now he's got a mighty hankerin' to bomb a prostrate state;
Though the whole world knows its crazy - and the U.N. says to wait;
When he doesn't have the evidence, "We must prevaricate."
Diplomacy is done!
Oh, a trumped-up war is excellent; we have no moral bounds;
Should the reasons be disputed, we'll just make up other grounds;
Enraging several billions - to his brainlessness redounds; The Doofus marches on!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'!
THIS...DOO...FUS...MAR...CHES...ON
REVIEW: Dennis Kyne: All We Want Is The Truth!
By Keith Hannaleck, 10/1/2005
Besides rockin’ down the house, he gets his point across really well on this CD...
Artist: Dennis Kyne
Title: I’m Not Resisting
Genre: Rock
Label: Independent
What happens to a man that is in the Army for 15 years and he gets out five years before retirement, and then decides to start offering the truth about the military to those that will listen? If you can deal with it all the bullshit the military deals out for 20 years, you get to walk away from it and collect a paycheck for doing nothing the rest of your life. Well there has to be a damned good reason for a person to pack it all in with 75% of the commitment already fulfilled. Listen to this CD for the answers.
Dennis Kyne is one such person that turned his back on a fully benefited military retirement because his conscience would not allow him to see it through until the end. He needed to start again somewhere else, and start with the truth first. I believe in national security and our military but I do not support some of the senseless wars the U.S. has waged.
Kyne left behind 15 years of sacrifice to expose some of the awful truths about our military in a book called "Support The Truth," a play on words from the commonly used "support our troops" motto. And now we have a musical version of his story, well part of it, in I’m Not Resisting. He communicates his tale through some hearty rock tracks. Some of the subject matter obviously pertains to his protesting activities and ensuing arrests, depicted on the cover of this CD. Switching between the acoustic and electric guitar, Kyne makes his way through 11 tracks of emotional fist waving at our government and military. In a bit of irony, our government wants us to support our troops but does not think twice about putting our brothers and sisters in harms way, even using them as guinea pigs in some cases. Kyne sings about all of this and the tragedies of veterans coming home changed forever. Some are insane and living like dogs on the street. These are the realities of war and our government likes to turn its head to this heartbreak. Kyne is not going to let it slide; he wants everyone to know what the truth is.
Besides rockin’ down the house, he gets his point across really well on this CD. If he is playing an acoustic number like the opener "All We Want Is The Truth," sounding like Iggy Pop every step of the way, he has this high level of energy that bites like a pit bull and it hangs on without letting go. His message is so important that there is no time to waste in any song, and he makes the best use of his time. This is what you call optimizing your moment in the sun. Five of the tracks are crackling with spontaneity. They were recorded live at KZSU Stanford Live. The rest of the tracks sound live off the floor in the studio as well. The entire album has that feel, that gritty edge and undying tension that you would need in conveying such a message. This element turns out to be Kyne’s most reliable friend. He has a decent voice and his guitar playing is above average. It is a good thing because there is no way that this recording would have the meaning it does without the piss n’ vinegar of a hard-edged voice and some rockin’ six-string to drive it home.
He has some great support along the way from his comrades Shawn Packer (guitar), James Bradford (bass), Ryan Hoffman (drums), and Ward Reilly (percussion on track 1). You cannot make music this good without a little help and nobody knows better than Kyne.
Best tracks for my money are "All We Want Is The Truth," "Scratched Out In Soul" and "Whiskey." For me these are the songs that define Kyne’s purpose and meaning for making this CD in the first place. This CD is jam packed with powerful eye opening messages and good music to back it all up, when does it get any better or more in your face than that?
© Keith "MuzikMan" Hannaleck
September 30, 2005
Rating-8/10
01. All We Want is the Truth (3:44)
02. Curbside (3:26)
03. All In (4:22)
04. What's the Purpose? (3:21)
05. Playin' it Cool (3:20)
06. Corner (3:52)
07. Scratched Out in Soul (0:16)
08. Whiskey (4:44)
09. Cut Around Sally (4:09)
10. Sittin' In Tally (3:50)
11. Hangin' (2:38)
Monday, October 03, 2005
ABC News news
October 3, 2005
ABC News Closes in On Anchor Duo
Net Denies Decision Made By Michele Greppi, TV Week
While it is not finalized and could change, ABC News is moving toward naming Bob Woodruff and Elizabeth Vargas as the permanent co-anchors of "World News Tonight," succeeding the late Peter Jennings, according to informed sources.
Such a decision would be a blow to Charles Gibson, the current co-host of "Good Morning America," who has been filling in on "World News Tonight," and frequently acting as the face of ABC News on big breaking stories. Mr. Gibson, 62, is believed to want the "World News Tonight" anchor job which would cap a distinguished career that has earned him widespread respect within ABC News and beyond.
If he doesn't get the job, sources said Mr. Gibson would likely stay with "GMA" for another year and a half, and then might leave the network. ABC, a division of the Walt Disney Company, has been hesitant to move Mr. Gibson away from "GMA" at a time he and co-hosts Diane Sawyer and Robin Roberts have led a strong resurgence for the hugely profitable morning program which has moved it closer in the ratings to NBC's "Today Show" than it has been in a decade.
An ABC News spokesman on Friday told TelevisionWeek that no decisions about "World News Tonight" have been made and because things are going so well, there is no pressure to move quickly. "Your story is wrong," said Jeffrey W. Schneider, VP and spokesman for ABC News. "To be clear, no decision has been made. At best your sources are ill-informed gossips. At worst, your sources know they don't know what they are talking about. We are in no rush to make this decision. When we are prepared to make an announcement, we will make one."
However, well-connected sources inside ABC and other sources in the TV news circle say that ABC News hopes to beat CBS News to the punch by rolling out a younger-generation flagship newscast. Mr. Woodruff, who is 43, is seen as the epitome of that future. The ABC News spokesman said that what CBS does is not a factor in when ABC News will make its changes. Mr. Woodruff and Ms. Vargas have often anchored "World News Tonight," as has Mr. Gibson, since Peter Jennings announced he had been diagnosed with lung cancer in April. Mr. Jennings died in early August.
Inside ABC News, many regard Mr. Woodruff as a worthy successor to Mr. Jennings. He is a polished newsman who has reported from Iraq, New Orleans, the South Pacific tsunami or, as he did earlier this year, from inside North Korea.
Although Ms. Vargas, 42, who co-anchors "20/20" with John Stossel, has done several serious prime-time specials and reportedly has the enthusiastic backing of ABC News Senior VP Paul Slavin, she does not have the widespread rank-and-file support that Mr. Woodruff does. There is speculation that Mr. Woodruff often might be deployed in the field on big stories with Ms. Vargas at the anchor desk.
"World News Tonight" has been closing in on "NBC Nightly News" since last year, before Tom Brokaw turned the anchor desk over to Brian Williams, and "World News Tonight" edged "Nightly" in the 25-54 demographic for the just-concluded third quarter.
Meanwhile, there is speculation that pieces are falling into place for the next generation of "Nightline." Anchor Ted Koppel and executive producer Tom Bettag will leave the show and the network at the end of December. Informed sources said "primetime>live" correspondent and legal analyst Cynthia McFadden would take the anchor role held since 1979 by Mr. Koppel. Under this scenario, Terry Moran, who now covers the White House, would be a "Nightline" correspondent; and Jim Avila, the former NBC News correspondent who joined ABC News in 2004, and since has broken a number of big news stories, may succeed Mr. Moran on the White House beat.
Veteran investigative journalist Martin Bashir, who joined "20/20" in September, 2004, is also expected to be assigned as a "Nightline" correspondent.
The ABC News spokesman dismissed possible changes on "Nightline" as speculation.
Mr. Woodruff, who trained as a lawyer and is a veteran foreign correspondent, is currently also an anchor on ABC News' "World News Tonight Saturday." He moved to New York in 2002 after working for ABC in London.
Ms. Vargas joined Mr. Stossel as co-anchor of "20/20" in September, 2004. She has anchored numerous ABC News specials, including several one-hour "Vanished" reports and a "Child First Safety Special." She joined ABC from NBC News, where she was a correspondent and substitute anchor for "Dateline NBC" and "Today," and also a substitute anchor for NBC Nightly News' weekend editions.
ABC News Closes in On Anchor Duo
Net Denies Decision Made By Michele Greppi, TV Week
While it is not finalized and could change, ABC News is moving toward naming Bob Woodruff and Elizabeth Vargas as the permanent co-anchors of "World News Tonight," succeeding the late Peter Jennings, according to informed sources.
Such a decision would be a blow to Charles Gibson, the current co-host of "Good Morning America," who has been filling in on "World News Tonight," and frequently acting as the face of ABC News on big breaking stories. Mr. Gibson, 62, is believed to want the "World News Tonight" anchor job which would cap a distinguished career that has earned him widespread respect within ABC News and beyond.
If he doesn't get the job, sources said Mr. Gibson would likely stay with "GMA" for another year and a half, and then might leave the network. ABC, a division of the Walt Disney Company, has been hesitant to move Mr. Gibson away from "GMA" at a time he and co-hosts Diane Sawyer and Robin Roberts have led a strong resurgence for the hugely profitable morning program which has moved it closer in the ratings to NBC's "Today Show" than it has been in a decade.
An ABC News spokesman on Friday told TelevisionWeek that no decisions about "World News Tonight" have been made and because things are going so well, there is no pressure to move quickly. "Your story is wrong," said Jeffrey W. Schneider, VP and spokesman for ABC News. "To be clear, no decision has been made. At best your sources are ill-informed gossips. At worst, your sources know they don't know what they are talking about. We are in no rush to make this decision. When we are prepared to make an announcement, we will make one."
However, well-connected sources inside ABC and other sources in the TV news circle say that ABC News hopes to beat CBS News to the punch by rolling out a younger-generation flagship newscast. Mr. Woodruff, who is 43, is seen as the epitome of that future. The ABC News spokesman said that what CBS does is not a factor in when ABC News will make its changes. Mr. Woodruff and Ms. Vargas have often anchored "World News Tonight," as has Mr. Gibson, since Peter Jennings announced he had been diagnosed with lung cancer in April. Mr. Jennings died in early August.
Inside ABC News, many regard Mr. Woodruff as a worthy successor to Mr. Jennings. He is a polished newsman who has reported from Iraq, New Orleans, the South Pacific tsunami or, as he did earlier this year, from inside North Korea.
Although Ms. Vargas, 42, who co-anchors "20/20" with John Stossel, has done several serious prime-time specials and reportedly has the enthusiastic backing of ABC News Senior VP Paul Slavin, she does not have the widespread rank-and-file support that Mr. Woodruff does. There is speculation that Mr. Woodruff often might be deployed in the field on big stories with Ms. Vargas at the anchor desk.
"World News Tonight" has been closing in on "NBC Nightly News" since last year, before Tom Brokaw turned the anchor desk over to Brian Williams, and "World News Tonight" edged "Nightly" in the 25-54 demographic for the just-concluded third quarter.
Meanwhile, there is speculation that pieces are falling into place for the next generation of "Nightline." Anchor Ted Koppel and executive producer Tom Bettag will leave the show and the network at the end of December. Informed sources said "primetime>live" correspondent and legal analyst Cynthia McFadden would take the anchor role held since 1979 by Mr. Koppel. Under this scenario, Terry Moran, who now covers the White House, would be a "Nightline" correspondent; and Jim Avila, the former NBC News correspondent who joined ABC News in 2004, and since has broken a number of big news stories, may succeed Mr. Moran on the White House beat.
Veteran investigative journalist Martin Bashir, who joined "20/20" in September, 2004, is also expected to be assigned as a "Nightline" correspondent.
The ABC News spokesman dismissed possible changes on "Nightline" as speculation.
Mr. Woodruff, who trained as a lawyer and is a veteran foreign correspondent, is currently also an anchor on ABC News' "World News Tonight Saturday." He moved to New York in 2002 after working for ABC in London.
Ms. Vargas joined Mr. Stossel as co-anchor of "20/20" in September, 2004. She has anchored numerous ABC News specials, including several one-hour "Vanished" reports and a "Child First Safety Special." She joined ABC from NBC News, where she was a correspondent and substitute anchor for "Dateline NBC" and "Today," and also a substitute anchor for NBC Nightly News' weekend editions.
ABC Entertainment
ABC Early Leader in Demo; Fox, UPN Also Ahead of Last Season's Fall Pace
ABC, Fox and UPN have gotten off to a fast start this fall. (TV Week)
With strong premiere performances from its sophomore hits and the debuting sci-fi drama "Invasion," ABC-whose key demographic ratings perked up 16 percent over the course of last season-has emerged as the No. 1 network in the adults 18 to 49 demographic for the first days of the 2005-06 season, according to Nielsen Media Research.
Powered by "Lost," "Desperate Housewives" and "Grey's Anatomy," the network is enjoying double-digit increases in the demo over the same period a year ago. But eclipsing ABC in year-to-year growth are Fox and UPN, which have each benefited from strong opening ratings for new and returning shows.
In addition, for the first season in several years of a sitcom drought, two of the most promising broadcast network debuts are half-hour comedies-NBC's "My Name Is Earl" and UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris."
"After years and years of sitcoms not really resonating, perhaps now the comedy pendulum is swinging the other way," said Brad Adgate, senior VP of research for Horizon Media.
Last Tuesday at 9 p.m. (ET) NBC's "Earl" scored a 5.1 in the demo for its second airing, a decline of 23 percent from its debut number but still high enough to beat all of its network competition during the half-hour. Combined with the night's big demo winner, "Law & Order: SVU," at 10 p.m., "Earl" helped NBC win Tuesday in adults 18 to 49. An NBC spokesman declined to comment on the network's new-season ratings. Last Thursday at 8 p.m., UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris" declined 28 percent from its record-setting series premiere the previous week, tying the first half-hour of ABC's "Alias" for last place in the time period. Despite the week-to-week drop, "Chris" has improved the time period for UPN from last season by 85 percent in adults 18 to 49 and 68 percent in total viewers.
Like last season, 2005-06 looks like it will be another neck-and-neck competition between as many as four networks for the top spot in adults 18 to 49, Shari Anne Brill, VP and director of programming for Aegis Group's Carat, said. ABC is likely to do better than last year's third-place demo finish, she added. "I do expect that ABC has a much stronger chance to make second. They are looking very good now," Ms. Brill said.
ABC also looks like a potential winner to Mr. Adgate, who jokingly noted ABC's ratings success could finally lead to more substantial profits for the network.
"Certainly, there has been no sophomore jinx for 'Housewives' and 'Lost,'" he said. "Another hit or two and maybe next year they will ask for the big increases in the upfront."
On the second Wednesday of the season, an original episode of the mysterious drama "Lost" at 9 p.m. was the top-rated show for the night in the demo, scoring a 9.7, down 5 percent from its season premiere the previous week. "Lost" lead-out "Invasion" scored a 5.1, a 25 percent decline from its premiere, but was still the victor in the 10 p.m. time period. "Invasion" beat out the second episode of the season for NBC's historically dominant "Law & Order" (4.8) and the season premiere of CBS's "CSI: NY" (4.5).
But ABC's biggest success has come on Sundays, where "Housewives" debuted Sept. 25 at 9 p.m. with a 12.3 in the demo, easily winning the night and growing 38 percent from its series premiere last fall. At 10 p.m. "Anatomy" hit an 8.3 in adults 18 to 49, increasing 15 percent over its midseason premiere and growing 73 percent over the premiere of "Boston Legal" in the time period a year ago.
Last Tuesday ABC's highly promoted 9 p.m. debut of its presidential drama "Commander in Chief" was the most-watched show of the night with 16.4 million viewers but did little to increase the network's competitive time period performance in adults 18 to 49. "Commander" scored a 4.3 in the demo, improving by 5 percent the year-ago premiere average for "According to Jim" and "Rodney." That was only good enough for ABC to tie the first half of CBS's special two-hour "Amazing Race: Family Edition" and NBC's "Earl" and "The Office" comedy block. Late last week NBC gave "The Office" a full season pickup.
Fox, usually a fall ratings laggard until the beginning of postseason baseball in October, has enjoyed success, thanks to the continued strength of its new Monday 9 p.m. drama "Prison Break," which got an early debut Aug. 29. Last Monday "Prison Break's" rating in adults 18 to 49 grew 5 percent from its performance the previous week to a 4.0. Two days later Fox announced it was giving the show, along with the Sunday animated comedy "American Dad," a full season pickup.
"We're continuing to be happy with where we are, because we had a plan of getting our shows on early," Mr. Beckman said. "We're getting a much better sense of where we are after baseball."
The other bright spot for Fox was its new Tuesday lineup, which features the debuting procedural "Bones" at 8 p.m. and the returning sophomore medical series "House" at 9 p.m. Last Tuesday "House" won its time period in the demo with a 5.2 and tied NBC's "SVU" as the top-rated show for the night in adults 18 to 49.
The fact that Fox is performing early in the fall with series in their regular time slots is a good sign for the network, Mr. Beckman said.
"We're doing it with our schedule," he said, "not with stunts or anything."One of the more closely watched rescheduled time periods of the new season is CBS's Monday night comedy linchpin "Two and a Half Men" at 9 p.m., which scored a 4.8 last week, down 6 percent from its season premiere the previous week. With perennial 9 p.m. time period holder "Everybody Loves Raymond" no longer on the schedule, "Men," the former 9:30 p.m. show, has moved into the plum comedy spot for the night and become the network's most important sitcom. For the first two weeks, "Men"" was down 17 percent from "Raymond's" performance in the time period a year ago (5.0 versus 6.0).
"Men" is performing for the network, Kelly Kahl, senior executive VP of programming operations for CBS and UPN said. "Generally, we're pleased," Mr. Kahl said. "The competition in the hour has gotten much more difficult. We never expected it to do what 'Raymond' did."
An initial area of struggle for CBS was the time period premiere of the Wednesday 9 p.m. procedural "Criminal Minds," which scored a 3.3 in the demo, down 49 percent from its special Thursday debut the previous week and down 16 percent from the year-ago debuts of the time period's "King of Queens" and "Center of the Universe."
Not all Viacom networks had a disappointing 9 p.m. performance. UPN's "Veronica Mars" was down 24 percent to a 1.3 in the demo from last season's time period premiere of "Kevin Hill," but "Veronica" improved over its year-ago Tuesday premiere in a number of demos, including a 56 percent gain in women 18 to 34 (2.5) and more than doubling its female teen number (3.1).
"We did it a favor putting it behind '[America's Next] Top Model'; we didn't do it a favor putting it up against 'Lost.' Mr. Kahl said.
ABC, Fox and UPN have gotten off to a fast start this fall. (TV Week)
With strong premiere performances from its sophomore hits and the debuting sci-fi drama "Invasion," ABC-whose key demographic ratings perked up 16 percent over the course of last season-has emerged as the No. 1 network in the adults 18 to 49 demographic for the first days of the 2005-06 season, according to Nielsen Media Research.
Powered by "Lost," "Desperate Housewives" and "Grey's Anatomy," the network is enjoying double-digit increases in the demo over the same period a year ago. But eclipsing ABC in year-to-year growth are Fox and UPN, which have each benefited from strong opening ratings for new and returning shows.
In addition, for the first season in several years of a sitcom drought, two of the most promising broadcast network debuts are half-hour comedies-NBC's "My Name Is Earl" and UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris."
"After years and years of sitcoms not really resonating, perhaps now the comedy pendulum is swinging the other way," said Brad Adgate, senior VP of research for Horizon Media.
Last Tuesday at 9 p.m. (ET) NBC's "Earl" scored a 5.1 in the demo for its second airing, a decline of 23 percent from its debut number but still high enough to beat all of its network competition during the half-hour. Combined with the night's big demo winner, "Law & Order: SVU," at 10 p.m., "Earl" helped NBC win Tuesday in adults 18 to 49. An NBC spokesman declined to comment on the network's new-season ratings. Last Thursday at 8 p.m., UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris" declined 28 percent from its record-setting series premiere the previous week, tying the first half-hour of ABC's "Alias" for last place in the time period. Despite the week-to-week drop, "Chris" has improved the time period for UPN from last season by 85 percent in adults 18 to 49 and 68 percent in total viewers.
Like last season, 2005-06 looks like it will be another neck-and-neck competition between as many as four networks for the top spot in adults 18 to 49, Shari Anne Brill, VP and director of programming for Aegis Group's Carat, said. ABC is likely to do better than last year's third-place demo finish, she added. "I do expect that ABC has a much stronger chance to make second. They are looking very good now," Ms. Brill said.
ABC also looks like a potential winner to Mr. Adgate, who jokingly noted ABC's ratings success could finally lead to more substantial profits for the network.
"Certainly, there has been no sophomore jinx for 'Housewives' and 'Lost,'" he said. "Another hit or two and maybe next year they will ask for the big increases in the upfront."
On the second Wednesday of the season, an original episode of the mysterious drama "Lost" at 9 p.m. was the top-rated show for the night in the demo, scoring a 9.7, down 5 percent from its season premiere the previous week. "Lost" lead-out "Invasion" scored a 5.1, a 25 percent decline from its premiere, but was still the victor in the 10 p.m. time period. "Invasion" beat out the second episode of the season for NBC's historically dominant "Law & Order" (4.8) and the season premiere of CBS's "CSI: NY" (4.5).
But ABC's biggest success has come on Sundays, where "Housewives" debuted Sept. 25 at 9 p.m. with a 12.3 in the demo, easily winning the night and growing 38 percent from its series premiere last fall. At 10 p.m. "Anatomy" hit an 8.3 in adults 18 to 49, increasing 15 percent over its midseason premiere and growing 73 percent over the premiere of "Boston Legal" in the time period a year ago.
Last Tuesday ABC's highly promoted 9 p.m. debut of its presidential drama "Commander in Chief" was the most-watched show of the night with 16.4 million viewers but did little to increase the network's competitive time period performance in adults 18 to 49. "Commander" scored a 4.3 in the demo, improving by 5 percent the year-ago premiere average for "According to Jim" and "Rodney." That was only good enough for ABC to tie the first half of CBS's special two-hour "Amazing Race: Family Edition" and NBC's "Earl" and "The Office" comedy block. Late last week NBC gave "The Office" a full season pickup.
Fox, usually a fall ratings laggard until the beginning of postseason baseball in October, has enjoyed success, thanks to the continued strength of its new Monday 9 p.m. drama "Prison Break," which got an early debut Aug. 29. Last Monday "Prison Break's" rating in adults 18 to 49 grew 5 percent from its performance the previous week to a 4.0. Two days later Fox announced it was giving the show, along with the Sunday animated comedy "American Dad," a full season pickup.
"We're continuing to be happy with where we are, because we had a plan of getting our shows on early," Mr. Beckman said. "We're getting a much better sense of where we are after baseball."
The other bright spot for Fox was its new Tuesday lineup, which features the debuting procedural "Bones" at 8 p.m. and the returning sophomore medical series "House" at 9 p.m. Last Tuesday "House" won its time period in the demo with a 5.2 and tied NBC's "SVU" as the top-rated show for the night in adults 18 to 49.
The fact that Fox is performing early in the fall with series in their regular time slots is a good sign for the network, Mr. Beckman said.
"We're doing it with our schedule," he said, "not with stunts or anything."One of the more closely watched rescheduled time periods of the new season is CBS's Monday night comedy linchpin "Two and a Half Men" at 9 p.m., which scored a 4.8 last week, down 6 percent from its season premiere the previous week. With perennial 9 p.m. time period holder "Everybody Loves Raymond" no longer on the schedule, "Men," the former 9:30 p.m. show, has moved into the plum comedy spot for the night and become the network's most important sitcom. For the first two weeks, "Men"" was down 17 percent from "Raymond's" performance in the time period a year ago (5.0 versus 6.0).
"Men" is performing for the network, Kelly Kahl, senior executive VP of programming operations for CBS and UPN said. "Generally, we're pleased," Mr. Kahl said. "The competition in the hour has gotten much more difficult. We never expected it to do what 'Raymond' did."
An initial area of struggle for CBS was the time period premiere of the Wednesday 9 p.m. procedural "Criminal Minds," which scored a 3.3 in the demo, down 49 percent from its special Thursday debut the previous week and down 16 percent from the year-ago debuts of the time period's "King of Queens" and "Center of the Universe."
Not all Viacom networks had a disappointing 9 p.m. performance. UPN's "Veronica Mars" was down 24 percent to a 1.3 in the demo from last season's time period premiere of "Kevin Hill," but "Veronica" improved over its year-ago Tuesday premiere in a number of demos, including a 56 percent gain in women 18 to 34 (2.5) and more than doubling its female teen number (3.1).
"We did it a favor putting it behind '[America's Next] Top Model'; we didn't do it a favor putting it up against 'Lost.' Mr. Kahl said.
Monday, September 26, 2005
CPB cuts?
GOP Calls for End to CPB Funding
Study Group Seeks Ways to Fund Katrina Relief
By Doug Halonen- TV Week
Threatening to yank public broadcasting's federal purse strings, House Republicans last week proposed to eliminate federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting as part of an initiative to help the government pay for the mammoth recovery costs associated with Hurricane Katrina.
"Congress must ensure that a catastrophe of nature does not become a catastrophe of debt for our children and grandchildren," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., chairman of the House Republican Study Committee.
The committee, representing more than 100 conservative GOP lawmakers, recommended in a report last week that public broadcasters be required to pitch in for relief-by forgoing the $400 million federal appropriation that CPB is expecting to receive in fiscal 2006.
Permanently zeroing out CPB, which funnels federal funds to public radio and TV stations, would save the federal government more than $5.5 billion over the next 10 years, according to the GOP group.
The need for public broadcasting, however, is as evident as ever in the wake of the natural disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, however, said Michael Levy, a CPB spokesman.
"If there ever was a time that reinforces the extraordinary value and need for public television and radio, it is now," Mr. Levy said. "Public broadcasting again demonstrated its worth many times over by serving as a lifeline to those struggling to survive Katrina and rebuild their lives in its aftermath. Locally owned, locally controlled public broadcasters know their communities. And the public knows that in good times or bad, it can depend on public broadcasting to serve the public interest, whether through high-quality educational programming or with life-saving information."
The proposal came during a particularly good week for PBS in terms of awards. The network won 10 Primetime Emmys, including the award for outstanding miniseries. The broadcaster also won six News and Documentary Emmys, more than any other network for the fifth year in a row.
As of late last week, the committee's recommendation for CPB-included in a massive package of proposed cuts for dozens of federal programs-had not been publicly embraced by House Republican leaders. "We still haven't discussed any specific proposals," said a spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.
But the proposal comes at a particularly sensitive time for public broadcasting.
In the wake of a major on-air publicity campaign by public broadcast stations, the House earlier this year restored $100 million that had been proposed to be cut from CPB's $400 million budget next year, but declined to provide the more than $100 million public broadcasters wanted for other programs.
A Senate committee subsequently voted to leave the $400 million intact, and to provide much of the additional funding public broadcasters had been seeking, including $35 million for digital TV conversion and $40 million to beef up public broadcasting's interconnection system. In addition, the Senate committee also provided $25 million of the $32 million public broadcasters wanted to fund children's TV shows such as "Sesame Street" and "Postcards From Buster."
The full Senate has yet to vote on public broadcasting's appropriations. In addition, assuming Senate approval, the appropriations bill must still be approved by a conference committee of leaders in the Senate and the House. So the new search by House lawmakers to find ways to underwrite the massive recovery costs for Hurricane Katrina has undermined the security of public broadcasting's federal funding.
"We take it as a serious threat," said John Lawson, president and CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations.
"If there's an across-the-board cut to domestic programs, we will do our part," Mr. Lawson added. "But we will fight any attempt to target CPB funding for deep cuts or elimination."
In a speech to the Media Institute in Washington last week, Ken Tomlinson, CPB's outgoing chairman, insisted that the contribution that public broadcasting makes to educational programming makes the case for continued funding by government.
"There's ample justification for public broadcasting," Mr. Tomlinson said.
But his critics accuse Mr. Tomlinson of having undermined CPB's case with his Republican colleagues on Capitol Hill by blasting PBS and NPR as tax-supported bastions for liberal ideologues.
"The irony is that Tomlinson has made CPB a target for the budget ax," said Jeff Chester, executive director of the watchdog Center for Digital Democracy.
Demanded 'Balance'
In his swan song speech as CPB chairman last week, Mr. Tomlinson insisted that he had never tried to eliminate public broadcasting shows that he believes exhibit a liberal bias.
"I demanded political balance in public broadcasting, and there are people in this town who would see me pay for this sin," Mr. Tomlinson said.
"In the end, if I threatened the cozy atmosphere of public broadcasting over the failure to balance the liberal advocacy journalism of Bill Moyers, my answer is, so be it.
"This thing of balance is not rocket science, and that is why I had so little tolerance for public broadcasting's inability to achieve balance," he said. "Let the record show that, if I was frustrated, I gave as good as I got."
Mr. Tomlinson also said he thought that public broadcasting should focus on improving education-based programming for children.
"I am highly skeptical of so-called nonpartisanship in public broadcasting, because it seems to me that means the same old liberals making the same old decisions," he said. "But I do strongly believe in bipartisanship in public broadcasting, and Republicans and Democrats and conservatives and liberals should join together to support education-based children's programming."
In response to requests from leading Democratic lawmakers, CPB's inspector general is investigating the propriety of Mr. Tomlinson's efforts to study political bias and his hiring of lobbyists to influence legislation he opposed that would have forced CPB's board to include station representatives. In addition, the inspector general is investigating whether CPB inappropriately cut corners earlier this year to hire Patricia Harrison as CPB's president-the candidate that Mr. Tomlinson allegedly favored.
The inspector general's report had been expected to be released as early as this month, but sources said it now isn't expected to be released until early November.
***
CPB Expected to Pick Halpern
By Doug HalonenTV Week
Cheryl Halpern is expected to be named the successor to Kenneth Tomlinson as chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting when the Republican-dominated board meets today.
Ms. Halpern, a CPB board member, is a longtime Republican activist and political donor who appears to share Mr. Tomlinson's belief that public broadcasting has a liberal bias that's in need of a fix. As a result, critics are asking what difference she will make.
"At her confirmation hearing [to become a CPB board member], she left the impression that she would like to have the authority to intervene directly in program content when she thought the program was not balanced," said Celia Wexler, VP of advocacy for Common Cause. "That's a real big concern."
"We don't have real high expectations," John Lawson, president and CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations.
Ms. Halpern has been on the CPB board since 2002 and chairs the Audit and Finance Committee. She previously was on the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which has oversight of Voice of America and other government broadcasters, and was a community activist. She lives in Livingston, N.J.
The other CPB board member who has been mentioned as a possible successor for Mr. Tomlinson is Gay Hart Gaines, who previously served as a chairman of GOPAC, a Republican fund-raising group headed at the time by former Rep. Newt Gingrich, R-Ga. GOPAC is credited with helping Republican candidates win a majority of the seats in the House in 1994.
Study Group Seeks Ways to Fund Katrina Relief
By Doug Halonen- TV Week
Threatening to yank public broadcasting's federal purse strings, House Republicans last week proposed to eliminate federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting as part of an initiative to help the government pay for the mammoth recovery costs associated with Hurricane Katrina.
"Congress must ensure that a catastrophe of nature does not become a catastrophe of debt for our children and grandchildren," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., chairman of the House Republican Study Committee.
The committee, representing more than 100 conservative GOP lawmakers, recommended in a report last week that public broadcasters be required to pitch in for relief-by forgoing the $400 million federal appropriation that CPB is expecting to receive in fiscal 2006.
Permanently zeroing out CPB, which funnels federal funds to public radio and TV stations, would save the federal government more than $5.5 billion over the next 10 years, according to the GOP group.
The need for public broadcasting, however, is as evident as ever in the wake of the natural disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, however, said Michael Levy, a CPB spokesman.
"If there ever was a time that reinforces the extraordinary value and need for public television and radio, it is now," Mr. Levy said. "Public broadcasting again demonstrated its worth many times over by serving as a lifeline to those struggling to survive Katrina and rebuild their lives in its aftermath. Locally owned, locally controlled public broadcasters know their communities. And the public knows that in good times or bad, it can depend on public broadcasting to serve the public interest, whether through high-quality educational programming or with life-saving information."
The proposal came during a particularly good week for PBS in terms of awards. The network won 10 Primetime Emmys, including the award for outstanding miniseries. The broadcaster also won six News and Documentary Emmys, more than any other network for the fifth year in a row.
As of late last week, the committee's recommendation for CPB-included in a massive package of proposed cuts for dozens of federal programs-had not been publicly embraced by House Republican leaders. "We still haven't discussed any specific proposals," said a spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.
But the proposal comes at a particularly sensitive time for public broadcasting.
In the wake of a major on-air publicity campaign by public broadcast stations, the House earlier this year restored $100 million that had been proposed to be cut from CPB's $400 million budget next year, but declined to provide the more than $100 million public broadcasters wanted for other programs.
A Senate committee subsequently voted to leave the $400 million intact, and to provide much of the additional funding public broadcasters had been seeking, including $35 million for digital TV conversion and $40 million to beef up public broadcasting's interconnection system. In addition, the Senate committee also provided $25 million of the $32 million public broadcasters wanted to fund children's TV shows such as "Sesame Street" and "Postcards From Buster."
The full Senate has yet to vote on public broadcasting's appropriations. In addition, assuming Senate approval, the appropriations bill must still be approved by a conference committee of leaders in the Senate and the House. So the new search by House lawmakers to find ways to underwrite the massive recovery costs for Hurricane Katrina has undermined the security of public broadcasting's federal funding.
"We take it as a serious threat," said John Lawson, president and CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations.
"If there's an across-the-board cut to domestic programs, we will do our part," Mr. Lawson added. "But we will fight any attempt to target CPB funding for deep cuts or elimination."
In a speech to the Media Institute in Washington last week, Ken Tomlinson, CPB's outgoing chairman, insisted that the contribution that public broadcasting makes to educational programming makes the case for continued funding by government.
"There's ample justification for public broadcasting," Mr. Tomlinson said.
But his critics accuse Mr. Tomlinson of having undermined CPB's case with his Republican colleagues on Capitol Hill by blasting PBS and NPR as tax-supported bastions for liberal ideologues.
"The irony is that Tomlinson has made CPB a target for the budget ax," said Jeff Chester, executive director of the watchdog Center for Digital Democracy.
Demanded 'Balance'
In his swan song speech as CPB chairman last week, Mr. Tomlinson insisted that he had never tried to eliminate public broadcasting shows that he believes exhibit a liberal bias.
"I demanded political balance in public broadcasting, and there are people in this town who would see me pay for this sin," Mr. Tomlinson said.
"In the end, if I threatened the cozy atmosphere of public broadcasting over the failure to balance the liberal advocacy journalism of Bill Moyers, my answer is, so be it.
"This thing of balance is not rocket science, and that is why I had so little tolerance for public broadcasting's inability to achieve balance," he said. "Let the record show that, if I was frustrated, I gave as good as I got."
Mr. Tomlinson also said he thought that public broadcasting should focus on improving education-based programming for children.
"I am highly skeptical of so-called nonpartisanship in public broadcasting, because it seems to me that means the same old liberals making the same old decisions," he said. "But I do strongly believe in bipartisanship in public broadcasting, and Republicans and Democrats and conservatives and liberals should join together to support education-based children's programming."
In response to requests from leading Democratic lawmakers, CPB's inspector general is investigating the propriety of Mr. Tomlinson's efforts to study political bias and his hiring of lobbyists to influence legislation he opposed that would have forced CPB's board to include station representatives. In addition, the inspector general is investigating whether CPB inappropriately cut corners earlier this year to hire Patricia Harrison as CPB's president-the candidate that Mr. Tomlinson allegedly favored.
The inspector general's report had been expected to be released as early as this month, but sources said it now isn't expected to be released until early November.
***
CPB Expected to Pick Halpern
By Doug HalonenTV Week
Cheryl Halpern is expected to be named the successor to Kenneth Tomlinson as chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting when the Republican-dominated board meets today.
Ms. Halpern, a CPB board member, is a longtime Republican activist and political donor who appears to share Mr. Tomlinson's belief that public broadcasting has a liberal bias that's in need of a fix. As a result, critics are asking what difference she will make.
"At her confirmation hearing [to become a CPB board member], she left the impression that she would like to have the authority to intervene directly in program content when she thought the program was not balanced," said Celia Wexler, VP of advocacy for Common Cause. "That's a real big concern."
"We don't have real high expectations," John Lawson, president and CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations.
Ms. Halpern has been on the CPB board since 2002 and chairs the Audit and Finance Committee. She previously was on the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which has oversight of Voice of America and other government broadcasters, and was a community activist. She lives in Livingston, N.J.
The other CPB board member who has been mentioned as a possible successor for Mr. Tomlinson is Gay Hart Gaines, who previously served as a chairman of GOPAC, a Republican fund-raising group headed at the time by former Rep. Newt Gingrich, R-Ga. GOPAC is credited with helping Republican candidates win a majority of the seats in the House in 1994.
Jennings
Remembering Peter Jennings- By Michele Greppi TV Week
Not one of the 2,000 or so who attended last week's memorial service for Peter Jennings is likely to forget it, ever.
It served perfectly as a reflection of his life and the ways in which he touched the lives of so many others, from colleagues and competitors to the public, both powerful and powerless, and, of course, his loves.
The power brokers of Disney and ABC, electronic journalism and of New York City queued up on the sidewalk outside Carnegie Hall, where they attracted knots of lookie-loos.
The result, said ABC News alumnus Jeff Gralnick, now a consultant for NBC News, was "a perfect New York moment. A cop walks up to four 'barrier leaners' and wants to know if they are there 'for the show. If not, youse gotta move on, please.'"
Mr. Gralnick spoke for many when he said: "'The show.' It was one. And the right one."
Those who studied the loops of photos that played over the stage-adorned only by the architecture, the tools of the speakers and the musicians and two exuberant sprays of flowers that seemed fresh from a cottage garden-saw a man who seemed forever tanned, windblown and madly in love with his life.
Those invited to reflect on Mr. Jennings as they knew him did so intimately and modestly. There was no emotional one-upmanship as had happened at the memorial after the December 2002 death of Roone Arledge, the ABC Sports and News president who made Mr. Jennings and so many others stars.
Those who listened to the words and the music that filled Carnegie Hall-from Yo-Yo Ma doing Bach, Wynton Marsalis and Clark Terry doing jazz, Natalie MacMaster blending Celtic and bluegrass influences and Alison Krauss breaking hearts-were reminded how eclectic Mr. Jennings' passions were. People laughed. They cried. They marveled at the articulacy of his son Christopher and daughter Elizabeth. They envied the expression on their father's face in photos of the family as it played together. They grieved, still and silent, for Mr. Jennings' widow Kayce as Ms. Krauss sang "Slumber My Darling."
Then they gratefully pulled themselves together while the Gates of Praise Choir sang "He's Got the Whole World in His Hands."
They walked back into the sunshine resolved to lead a life that would warrant them even a piece of so fond a farewell and musing about possible figurative meanings of the words printed on the back of the program:
"I hate dirty hockey." Peter Jennings, Aug. 7, 2005
Once again, he left us with much to think of.
Not one of the 2,000 or so who attended last week's memorial service for Peter Jennings is likely to forget it, ever.
It served perfectly as a reflection of his life and the ways in which he touched the lives of so many others, from colleagues and competitors to the public, both powerful and powerless, and, of course, his loves.
The power brokers of Disney and ABC, electronic journalism and of New York City queued up on the sidewalk outside Carnegie Hall, where they attracted knots of lookie-loos.
The result, said ABC News alumnus Jeff Gralnick, now a consultant for NBC News, was "a perfect New York moment. A cop walks up to four 'barrier leaners' and wants to know if they are there 'for the show. If not, youse gotta move on, please.'"
Mr. Gralnick spoke for many when he said: "'The show.' It was one. And the right one."
Those who studied the loops of photos that played over the stage-adorned only by the architecture, the tools of the speakers and the musicians and two exuberant sprays of flowers that seemed fresh from a cottage garden-saw a man who seemed forever tanned, windblown and madly in love with his life.
Those invited to reflect on Mr. Jennings as they knew him did so intimately and modestly. There was no emotional one-upmanship as had happened at the memorial after the December 2002 death of Roone Arledge, the ABC Sports and News president who made Mr. Jennings and so many others stars.
Those who listened to the words and the music that filled Carnegie Hall-from Yo-Yo Ma doing Bach, Wynton Marsalis and Clark Terry doing jazz, Natalie MacMaster blending Celtic and bluegrass influences and Alison Krauss breaking hearts-were reminded how eclectic Mr. Jennings' passions were. People laughed. They cried. They marveled at the articulacy of his son Christopher and daughter Elizabeth. They envied the expression on their father's face in photos of the family as it played together. They grieved, still and silent, for Mr. Jennings' widow Kayce as Ms. Krauss sang "Slumber My Darling."
Then they gratefully pulled themselves together while the Gates of Praise Choir sang "He's Got the Whole World in His Hands."
They walked back into the sunshine resolved to lead a life that would warrant them even a piece of so fond a farewell and musing about possible figurative meanings of the words printed on the back of the program:
"I hate dirty hockey." Peter Jennings, Aug. 7, 2005
Once again, he left us with much to think of.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
RwR meter 9/20/05
Ramblin with Roger
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total .......................... 940
Average per Day ................. 40
Average Visit Length .......... 2:17
This Week ...................... 281
Page Views
Total ........................ 1,633
Average per Day ................. 66
Average per Visit .............. 1.6
This Week ...................... 463
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 7
2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 4
3 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 7
4 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
5 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3
6 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 7
7 1 2 0 3 0 4 1 [11]
8 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 8
9 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 6
10 1 2 3 1 1 4 3 [15]
11 4 7 0 0 0 2 4 [17]
12 4 3 3 1 1 4 3 [19]
13 3 4 2 1 0 2 2 [14]
14 1 5 5 0 3 2 5 [21]
15 2 4 4 1 2 1 3 [17]
16 5 3 0 0 1 0 1 [10]
17 8 2 3 2 2 3 3 [23]
18 6 2 7 1 0 2 4 [22]
19 3 1 2 1 0 2 0 9
20 1 2 0 1 2 4 3 [13]
21 0 1 0 2 2 2 3 [10]
22 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 7
23 6 1 2 0 1 2 1 [13]
24 3 4 4 0 2 3 0 [16]
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
56- 57- 41- 23- 24- 41- 39- 281
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 7
2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 4
3 0 2 5 3 0 0 0 [10]
4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
5 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 6
6 6 4 3 1 0 1 0 [15]
7 1 2 0 8 0 4 1 [16]
8 3 1 1 1 0 2 2 [10]
9 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 7
10 5 2 [10] 3 1 5 4 [30]
11 5 [11] 2 0 0 7 4 [29]
12 8 5 4 1 1 [12] 3 [34]
13 4 [12] 4 1 0 5 2 [28]
14 1 8 9 0 4 6 7 [35]
15 2 4 8 1 2 1 3 [21]
16 [18] 4 [12] 0 1 0 1 [36]
17 [15] 3 4 3 4 3 3 [35]
18 9 5 [16] 1 0 2 7 [40]
19 5 1 2 2 0 2 0 [12]
20 1 9 0 1 2 6 3 [22]
21 0 1 0 3 2 2 5 [13]
22 1 2 1 3 1 0 0 8
23 11 1 2 0 1 2 1 [18]
24 5 8 5 0 2 3 0 [23]
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
102- 94- 88- 34- 32- 65- 48- 463
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total .......................... 940
Average per Day ................. 40
Average Visit Length .......... 2:17
This Week ...................... 281
Page Views
Total ........................ 1,633
Average per Day ................. 66
Average per Visit .............. 1.6
This Week ...................... 463
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 7
2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 4
3 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 7
4 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
5 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3
6 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 7
7 1 2 0 3 0 4 1 [11]
8 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 8
9 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 6
10 1 2 3 1 1 4 3 [15]
11 4 7 0 0 0 2 4 [17]
12 4 3 3 1 1 4 3 [19]
13 3 4 2 1 0 2 2 [14]
14 1 5 5 0 3 2 5 [21]
15 2 4 4 1 2 1 3 [17]
16 5 3 0 0 1 0 1 [10]
17 8 2 3 2 2 3 3 [23]
18 6 2 7 1 0 2 4 [22]
19 3 1 2 1 0 2 0 9
20 1 2 0 1 2 4 3 [13]
21 0 1 0 2 2 2 3 [10]
22 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 7
23 6 1 2 0 1 2 1 [13]
24 3 4 4 0 2 3 0 [16]
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
56- 57- 41- 23- 24- 41- 39- 281
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 7
2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 4
3 0 2 5 3 0 0 0 [10]
4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
5 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 6
6 6 4 3 1 0 1 0 [15]
7 1 2 0 8 0 4 1 [16]
8 3 1 1 1 0 2 2 [10]
9 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 7
10 5 2 [10] 3 1 5 4 [30]
11 5 [11] 2 0 0 7 4 [29]
12 8 5 4 1 1 [12] 3 [34]
13 4 [12] 4 1 0 5 2 [28]
14 1 8 9 0 4 6 7 [35]
15 2 4 8 1 2 1 3 [21]
16 [18] 4 [12] 0 1 0 1 [36]
17 [15] 3 4 3 4 3 3 [35]
18 9 5 [16] 1 0 2 7 [40]
19 5 1 2 2 0 2 0 [12]
20 1 9 0 1 2 6 3 [22]
21 0 1 0 3 2 2 5 [13]
22 1 2 1 3 1 0 0 8
23 11 1 2 0 1 2 1 [18]
24 5 8 5 0 2 3 0 [23]
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
102- 94- 88- 34- 32- 65- 48- 463
RwR meter 9/13/05
Ramblin with Roger
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total .......................... 659
Average per Day ................. 47
Average Visit Length .......... 3:54
This Week ...................... 331
Page Views
Total ........................ 1,170
Average per Day ................. 90
Average per Visit .............. 1.9
This Week ...................... 627
http://s11.sitemeter.com/stats.asp?site=s11ersie
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 4 1 3 1 1 1 0 11
2 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 6
3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3
5 1 2 0 3 3 0 2 11
6 1 3 1 0 1 3 1 10
7 3 3 1 0 0 2 0 9
8 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 6
9 0 0 2 2 1 1 2 8
10 7 2 4 0 4 2 6 25
11 4 5 5 3 3 5 5 30
12 4 3 4 1 2 2 1 17
13 9 3 2 1 3 3 1 22
14 15 2 2 1 1 4 4 29
15 9 3 2 1 1 8 2 26
16 1 6 2 4 1 1 3 18
17 6 3 0 1 2 2 3 17
18 5 2 1 0 0 3 2 13
19 3 1 1 0 1 2 2 10
20 3 2 2 1 2 0 2 12
21 4 3 2 0 0 3 2 14
22 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 6
23 3 2 3 2 1 1 3 15
24 4 3 1 2 0 0 1 11
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
93- 52- 40- 25- 30- 46- 45- 331
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 5 1 6 3 1 1 0 17
2 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 9
3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 7
5 1 2 0 7 11 0 3 24
6 1 4 2 0 1 4 2 14
7 4 6 1 0 0 5 0 16
8 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 6
9 0 0 2 4 5 4 6 21
10 10 7 12 0 5 8 22 64
11 5 6 7 5 7 8 9 47
12 7 3 7 2 3 8 1 31
13 9 6 3 1 4 3 1 27
14 36 3 4 1 3 5 7 59
15 30 20 2 7 1 11 2 73
16 23 9 6 8 1 4 3 54
17 9 4 0 1 3 3 12 32
18 7 6 1 0 0 8 2 24
19 4 1 1 0 1 5 2 14
20 3 3 2 1 8 0 2 19
21 6 4 3 4 0 4 3 24
22 6 1 0 0 1 2 0 10
23 4 3 3 2 1 1 4 18
24 6 3 1 2 0 0 3 15
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
182- 94- 65- 51- 59- 85- 91- 627
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total .......................... 659
Average per Day ................. 47
Average Visit Length .......... 3:54
This Week ...................... 331
Page Views
Total ........................ 1,170
Average per Day ................. 90
Average per Visit .............. 1.9
This Week ...................... 627
http://s11.sitemeter.com/stats.asp?site=s11ersie
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 4 1 3 1 1 1 0 11
2 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 6
3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3
5 1 2 0 3 3 0 2 11
6 1 3 1 0 1 3 1 10
7 3 3 1 0 0 2 0 9
8 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 6
9 0 0 2 2 1 1 2 8
10 7 2 4 0 4 2 6 25
11 4 5 5 3 3 5 5 30
12 4 3 4 1 2 2 1 17
13 9 3 2 1 3 3 1 22
14 15 2 2 1 1 4 4 29
15 9 3 2 1 1 8 2 26
16 1 6 2 4 1 1 3 18
17 6 3 0 1 2 2 3 17
18 5 2 1 0 0 3 2 13
19 3 1 1 0 1 2 2 10
20 3 2 2 1 2 0 2 12
21 4 3 2 0 0 3 2 14
22 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 6
23 3 2 3 2 1 1 3 15
24 4 3 1 2 0 0 1 11
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
93- 52- 40- 25- 30- 46- 45- 331
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 5 1 6 3 1 1 0 17
2 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 9
3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 7
5 1 2 0 7 11 0 3 24
6 1 4 2 0 1 4 2 14
7 4 6 1 0 0 5 0 16
8 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 6
9 0 0 2 4 5 4 6 21
10 10 7 12 0 5 8 22 64
11 5 6 7 5 7 8 9 47
12 7 3 7 2 3 8 1 31
13 9 6 3 1 4 3 1 27
14 36 3 4 1 3 5 7 59
15 30 20 2 7 1 11 2 73
16 23 9 6 8 1 4 3 54
17 9 4 0 1 3 3 12 32
18 7 6 1 0 0 8 2 24
19 4 1 1 0 1 5 2 14
20 3 3 2 1 8 0 2 19
21 6 4 3 4 0 4 3 24
22 6 1 0 0 1 2 0 10
23 4 3 3 2 1 1 4 18
24 6 3 1 2 0 0 3 15
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
182- 94- 65- 51- 59- 85- 91- 627
RwR meter 8/26/05
Ramblin with Roger
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total ........................... 23
Average per Day ................. 12
Average Visit Length .......... 3:25
This Week ....................... 23
Page Views
Total ........................... 41
Average per Day ................. 21
Average per Visit .............. 1.8
This Week ....................... 41
http://s11.sitemeter.com/stats.asp?site=s11ersie
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 8/20 8/21 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 8/26 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
0 0 0 0 0 0 23 23
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 8/20 8/21 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 8/26 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
0 0 0 0 0 0 41 41
-- Site Summary ---
Visits
Total ........................... 23
Average per Day ................. 12
Average Visit Length .......... 3:25
This Week ....................... 23
Page Views
Total ........................... 41
Average per Day ................. 21
Average per Visit .............. 1.8
This Week ....................... 41
http://s11.sitemeter.com/stats.asp?site=s11ersie
--- Visits this Week ---
Day
Hour 8/20 8/21 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 8/26 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
0 0 0 0 0 0 23 23
--- Page Views this Week ---
Day
Hour 8/20 8/21 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 8/26 Total
---- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------
0 0 0 0 0 0 41 41
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
The Beatles as Musicians I
The Beatles as Musicians: Volume I: The Quarry Men Through Rubber Soul By Walter Everett
A stream of consciousness review by Don Labriola
Just began reading the intro to Volume I and if this book walks the walk as well as it talks, it'll be a terrific read. According to the author, at least two years of college-level music theory are required to follow much of his discussion, but regardless of the readers' background in musicology, I think there will be a lot here that would be of interest to any serious Beatles fan.
The intro states that the book is the result of "the study of many thousands of audio, print, video, and multimedia sources, including the close consultation of uncounted audio recordings of the Beatles' compositional process, traced through tapes that are treated as the equivalents of compositional sketches and drafts. All available concert, broadcast, and demo recordings in both audio and video formats have been scoured for the broadest possible understanding of what the Beatles did musically... The reader will find particularly helpful both the thoroughness with which every recording is contextualized, both historically and musically, and the fact that aspects of the Beatles' choices of instruments, vocal production techniques, recording equipment, and studio procedures -- the essence of their recording practice -- are exposed here as in no other source."
As if that isn't enough, the book is meticulously indexed and includes huge reference and notes listings, as well as musical references for the reader whose musicology chops may be a bit rusty, such as a table of "chord functions", which describes how each chord form is typically used in the Beatles' music (one example: "III#: Aside from its implied role as V of VI, III# is known only as a surprising substitute for I6 on its way to IV in the reharmonizing codas of 'I Want to Hold Your Hand' and 'Yes It Is'.") There's also a lengthy appendix that describes in detail the instruments that the Beatles used, everything from the banjolele, which was the first instrument Lennon & McCartney played in the early 50s, through the Vox Continental MK 1 4-octave keyboard that the band used live ca. 1965-6. All in all, over 100 pages of reference material.
OK, maybe this sounds frighteningly anal, even for me. But as I've mentioned before, there's a plethora of material out there about the Beatles' personal lives, their drug use, sexual encounters, legal battles, and on and on ad nauseam. But very little has been written about the music itself, which I consider a heckuva lot more interesting than the blow-by-blows of Yoko's relationship with Paul or voyeuristic descriptions of Brian Epstein's sex life. What was it about the Beatles' music that made it sound so fresh 40 years ago? What did these four guys, none of whom could even read music, do that had never been done before? Why has the music remained far more popular than anything else produced back then (or since)? Here's a book that finally tries to explain why their compositions rose above the background noise.
Even if I only skim the denser sections, and don't take the time to explore all the author's examples, I think that this will be a fascinating read.
Volume II covers the period from Revolver through Anthology.
***
p.s. 9/22
One thing I just discovered is that reading this book requires that you also purchase the "Beatles: Complete Scores" book (published by Hal Leonard), which is an oversized 1100-page hardcover collection of full transcriptions of all known Beatles recordings. The BaM text refers constantly to measure markings in the Scores book (as well as timing positions in the EMI recordings), so without it, you're lost.
The good news is that you can find copies of "Scores" on Amazon for just under $51. That's not exactly pocket change, but it's pretty reasonable for a book that size. Just ordered my copy.
IAC, I have started to read BaM Vol One and I'm surprised by how thoroughly it discusses the 1950s Quarry Men-period Lennon-McCartney compositions. It goes through dozens of them (in chronological order) and includes a half-dozen score excerpts, even comparing versions heard on different home recordings. Did you know, for example, that McCartney wrote "When I'm 64"
(the music, not the lyrics) when he was 16 years old? It was one of his first compositions.
A stream of consciousness review by Don Labriola
Just began reading the intro to Volume I and if this book walks the walk as well as it talks, it'll be a terrific read. According to the author, at least two years of college-level music theory are required to follow much of his discussion, but regardless of the readers' background in musicology, I think there will be a lot here that would be of interest to any serious Beatles fan.
The intro states that the book is the result of "the study of many thousands of audio, print, video, and multimedia sources, including the close consultation of uncounted audio recordings of the Beatles' compositional process, traced through tapes that are treated as the equivalents of compositional sketches and drafts. All available concert, broadcast, and demo recordings in both audio and video formats have been scoured for the broadest possible understanding of what the Beatles did musically... The reader will find particularly helpful both the thoroughness with which every recording is contextualized, both historically and musically, and the fact that aspects of the Beatles' choices of instruments, vocal production techniques, recording equipment, and studio procedures -- the essence of their recording practice -- are exposed here as in no other source."
As if that isn't enough, the book is meticulously indexed and includes huge reference and notes listings, as well as musical references for the reader whose musicology chops may be a bit rusty, such as a table of "chord functions", which describes how each chord form is typically used in the Beatles' music (one example: "III#: Aside from its implied role as V of VI, III# is known only as a surprising substitute for I6 on its way to IV in the reharmonizing codas of 'I Want to Hold Your Hand' and 'Yes It Is'.") There's also a lengthy appendix that describes in detail the instruments that the Beatles used, everything from the banjolele, which was the first instrument Lennon & McCartney played in the early 50s, through the Vox Continental MK 1 4-octave keyboard that the band used live ca. 1965-6. All in all, over 100 pages of reference material.
OK, maybe this sounds frighteningly anal, even for me. But as I've mentioned before, there's a plethora of material out there about the Beatles' personal lives, their drug use, sexual encounters, legal battles, and on and on ad nauseam. But very little has been written about the music itself, which I consider a heckuva lot more interesting than the blow-by-blows of Yoko's relationship with Paul or voyeuristic descriptions of Brian Epstein's sex life. What was it about the Beatles' music that made it sound so fresh 40 years ago? What did these four guys, none of whom could even read music, do that had never been done before? Why has the music remained far more popular than anything else produced back then (or since)? Here's a book that finally tries to explain why their compositions rose above the background noise.
Even if I only skim the denser sections, and don't take the time to explore all the author's examples, I think that this will be a fascinating read.
Volume II covers the period from Revolver through Anthology.
***
p.s. 9/22
One thing I just discovered is that reading this book requires that you also purchase the "Beatles: Complete Scores" book (published by Hal Leonard), which is an oversized 1100-page hardcover collection of full transcriptions of all known Beatles recordings. The BaM text refers constantly to measure markings in the Scores book (as well as timing positions in the EMI recordings), so without it, you're lost.
The good news is that you can find copies of "Scores" on Amazon for just under $51. That's not exactly pocket change, but it's pretty reasonable for a book that size. Just ordered my copy.
IAC, I have started to read BaM Vol One and I'm surprised by how thoroughly it discusses the 1950s Quarry Men-period Lennon-McCartney compositions. It goes through dozens of them (in chronological order) and includes a half-dozen score excerpts, even comparing versions heard on different home recordings. Did you know, for example, that McCartney wrote "When I'm 64"
(the music, not the lyrics) when he was 16 years old? It was one of his first compositions.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Rethinking the Runoff, New York Times
By SAM ROBERTS
Published: September 18, 2005
Call it the run-on primary. The results of last week's election to
choose a Democratic challenger to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg have
politicians, the public and good-government groups pondering whether a
process envisioned as a vehicle for electoral reform needs fixing or has
even run its course.
Runoffs were in store for Herman Badillo, center left in top photo, and
Abraham D. Beame in 1973, and for Edward I. Koch and Mario M. Cuomo,
center photo, in 1977. But Ruth W. Messinger avoided a runoff with Al
Sharpton in 1997.
For the fourth time in nine mayoral races, the preliminary returns
suggested that no candidate had reached the 40 percent threshold
required to avoid an automatic runoff between the top two vote-getters.
But this time, with Fernando Ferrer tottering only 250 votes shy of that
threshold, according to the earliest unofficial count, Representative
Anthony D. Weiner decided, in the interests of his party and his own
political future, to defer to Mr. Ferrer rather than mount the
potentially divisive runoff that Mr. Bloomberg's strategists had been
eagerly expecting. (While the latest count now shows Mr. Ferrer barely
over 40 percent, final results may not be known until Tuesday.)
Mr. Weiner's beau geste has flummoxed election officials who are
debating whether having a runoff is legally up to the voters or the
candidates. The decision will depend, in part, on the official vote
count, which politicians have been known to interpret flexibly in the
past for less noble purposes. That potential legal anomaly is prompting
a reassessment of the entire primary runoff process.
Runoffs were instituted in the 1970's in part to assure that a candidate
had wide support from the party before heading into a general election.
Otherwise, in a field of many Democratic candidates, a politician with a
relatively low number of votes could emerge as the party's nominee.
But for the Democrats in recent years, runoffs have increasingly bred
division - often along racial and ethnic fault lines. In fact, a runoff,
or the threat of one, contributed to the defeat of the candidate of the
city's Democratic majority by a Republican in the last two mayoral
elections.
It's arguable, meanwhile, whether runoffs have met their stated goal of
producing the most representative candidates.
Calls for a runoff were raised in 1965 after Abraham D. Beame won a
four-way mayoral primary with 327,934 votes, which, with 32 percent of
Democrats voting, meant that only about 14 percent of enrolled party
members voted for him. He was defeated that year by John V. Lindsay, a
liberal Republican congressman.
The real impetus for runoffs was the 1969 primary victory of Mario A.
Procaccino, who tapped into the rage of middle-class white voters
outside Manhattan who were rebelling against Mayor Lindsay's brand of
liberalism and perceived favoritism toward blacks and Hispanics.
Procaccino led a five-man field with 33 percent of the vote but was
anathema to many liberal and mainstream Democrats: "If you think my
record is that of a bigot, you're out of your mind, your cotton-picking
mind," he declared. He lost to Mr. Lindsay, the incumbent (he had been
defeated in his own Republican primary and won on the Liberal Party line).
After the recommendation of a bipartisan mayoral panel, whose members
included Herman Badillo, the former Bronx borough president, the
Legislature imposed a runoff, effective in 1973. Even before the
election, Mr. Procaccino challenged its constitutionality, arguing, "How
is a poor guy like myself to run in two elections?"
He lost the lawsuit and did not run again for mayor, but Mr. Badillo
did. In the 1973 primary, he finished second, with 29 percent, to Mr.
Beame's 34 percent. Mr. Badillo, like Mr. Ferrer a Puerto Rican, was
defeated after a raucous runoff (some Beame followers, masquerading as
fired-up Badillo supporters, brandished bongo drums in white
neighborhoods; then, when the diminutive Mr. Beame accused him of
racism, Mr. Badillo responded fatally, "You are a malicious little man").
Four years later, Edward I. Koch finished first in a seven-candidate
mayoral primary, with only 20 percent, and won a runoff against Mario M.
Cuomo, who had 19 percent. Mr. Koch went on to win that November. In
1989, Mr. Koch was defeated for the nomination by David N. Dinkins, who
was renominated without a runoff in 1993.
But it is only in recent elections that the runoff has actually
undermined Democrats, producing bitter feelings that endured and often
exposing searing racial divisions within the party and contributing to
their successive defeats in November general elections.
In 1997, Ruth W. Messinger was nearly plunged into a runoff against the
Rev. Al Sharpton (she got 39 percent in the preliminary count), but
eight days later absentee ballots helped her squeak past 40 percent. He
sued, claiming fraud. The lawsuit was dismissed, but the damage was
done. The long count weakened Ms. Messinger, and the charges by Mr.
Sharpton left black voters, in particular, disaffected. Whatever her
chances before the primary, she lost the general election to the
incumbent, Rudolph W. Giuliani, a Republican.
In 2001, Mr. Ferrer won the Democratic primary but lost an acrimonious
runoff to Mark Green. Lingering anger by Mr. Ferrer's supporters is
believed to have seriously damaged Mr. Green in the general election,
and he was defeated by Mr. Bloomberg, then a novice politician.
If some people think the system seems broken, there is no shortage of
solutions for fixing it.
Among the earliest suggestions in the 1960's was for a runoff if too
small a proportion of the electorate turned out. The present system has
not improved turnout, to be sure. Last week, Mr. Ferrer received 182,428
votes, with about 17 percent of Democrats voting, which means that about
7 percent of the city's Democrats actually voted for him.
Mr. Green has proposed having an earlier primary and runoff because a
late September runoff leaves too little time to raise money and campaign
effectively for a contested race in November. He and a number of
politicians would also impose an instant runoff, a form of preferential
balloting, in which voters can rank their choices in the primary. In
other states, that system has passed muster with federal voting rights
officials.
The runoff now also applies to the two other citywide offices,
comptroller and public advocate, but Jerry H. Goldfeder, a professor of
election law at Fordham Law School, would broaden it. Scott Stringer was
nominated for Manhattan borough president last week with 26 percent of
the 147,650 votes cast, or about 4 percent of Manhattan's voting-age
citizens.
Another stated reason for runoffs was that they might increase black and
Hispanic representation by encouraging multiethnic and racial
coalitions. That rationale was frequently challenged; Mr. Badillo
contends he might have won without a runoff in 1973 and testified in a
civil rights challenge that the process discriminated against candidates
with less money and encouraged negative campaigning (the money problem
has been mitigated by public campaign financing).
Mr. Badillo now favors the runoff. "It will require that you build up a
larger constituency to win the election rather than a particular group
you are appealing to," he said.
Mr. Sharpton, who was opposed to a runoff until he almost found himself
qualifying for one in 1997 against Ms. Messinger, these days opposes
runoffs. "It gives an advantage to the opposing party, and it only slows
down the process," he said.
In fact, leading black political officials and strategists are of mixed
mind as to whether runoffs help or hinder minority candidates,
particularly now that non-Hispanic white voters will be a minority for
the first time this year.
"The playing field has leveled," said Bill Lynch, an adviser to Mr.
Ferrer. "It's hard to say whether a runoff helps or hurts so-called
minorities. You're finding minority candidates very much players in the
regular election."
But Mr. Green argues that there is one compelling reason to keep runoffs
- the same one advanced two years ago when the mayor proposed to scrap
the primary system and replace it with nonpartisan elections, including
a runoff.
"The argument that you don't want a wacko unrepresentative candidate of
the party because he or she gets 21 percent far exceeds any competing
arguments, especially since it's not at all clear that the runoff system
is antiminority," he said. "Beame beat a minority, Green beat a
minority, Dinkins and Ferrer won outright. Of the four examples, it's
two to two."
Published: September 18, 2005
Call it the run-on primary. The results of last week's election to
choose a Democratic challenger to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg have
politicians, the public and good-government groups pondering whether a
process envisioned as a vehicle for electoral reform needs fixing or has
even run its course.
Runoffs were in store for Herman Badillo, center left in top photo, and
Abraham D. Beame in 1973, and for Edward I. Koch and Mario M. Cuomo,
center photo, in 1977. But Ruth W. Messinger avoided a runoff with Al
Sharpton in 1997.
For the fourth time in nine mayoral races, the preliminary returns
suggested that no candidate had reached the 40 percent threshold
required to avoid an automatic runoff between the top two vote-getters.
But this time, with Fernando Ferrer tottering only 250 votes shy of that
threshold, according to the earliest unofficial count, Representative
Anthony D. Weiner decided, in the interests of his party and his own
political future, to defer to Mr. Ferrer rather than mount the
potentially divisive runoff that Mr. Bloomberg's strategists had been
eagerly expecting. (While the latest count now shows Mr. Ferrer barely
over 40 percent, final results may not be known until Tuesday.)
Mr. Weiner's beau geste has flummoxed election officials who are
debating whether having a runoff is legally up to the voters or the
candidates. The decision will depend, in part, on the official vote
count, which politicians have been known to interpret flexibly in the
past for less noble purposes. That potential legal anomaly is prompting
a reassessment of the entire primary runoff process.
Runoffs were instituted in the 1970's in part to assure that a candidate
had wide support from the party before heading into a general election.
Otherwise, in a field of many Democratic candidates, a politician with a
relatively low number of votes could emerge as the party's nominee.
But for the Democrats in recent years, runoffs have increasingly bred
division - often along racial and ethnic fault lines. In fact, a runoff,
or the threat of one, contributed to the defeat of the candidate of the
city's Democratic majority by a Republican in the last two mayoral
elections.
It's arguable, meanwhile, whether runoffs have met their stated goal of
producing the most representative candidates.
Calls for a runoff were raised in 1965 after Abraham D. Beame won a
four-way mayoral primary with 327,934 votes, which, with 32 percent of
Democrats voting, meant that only about 14 percent of enrolled party
members voted for him. He was defeated that year by John V. Lindsay, a
liberal Republican congressman.
The real impetus for runoffs was the 1969 primary victory of Mario A.
Procaccino, who tapped into the rage of middle-class white voters
outside Manhattan who were rebelling against Mayor Lindsay's brand of
liberalism and perceived favoritism toward blacks and Hispanics.
Procaccino led a five-man field with 33 percent of the vote but was
anathema to many liberal and mainstream Democrats: "If you think my
record is that of a bigot, you're out of your mind, your cotton-picking
mind," he declared. He lost to Mr. Lindsay, the incumbent (he had been
defeated in his own Republican primary and won on the Liberal Party line).
After the recommendation of a bipartisan mayoral panel, whose members
included Herman Badillo, the former Bronx borough president, the
Legislature imposed a runoff, effective in 1973. Even before the
election, Mr. Procaccino challenged its constitutionality, arguing, "How
is a poor guy like myself to run in two elections?"
He lost the lawsuit and did not run again for mayor, but Mr. Badillo
did. In the 1973 primary, he finished second, with 29 percent, to Mr.
Beame's 34 percent. Mr. Badillo, like Mr. Ferrer a Puerto Rican, was
defeated after a raucous runoff (some Beame followers, masquerading as
fired-up Badillo supporters, brandished bongo drums in white
neighborhoods; then, when the diminutive Mr. Beame accused him of
racism, Mr. Badillo responded fatally, "You are a malicious little man").
Four years later, Edward I. Koch finished first in a seven-candidate
mayoral primary, with only 20 percent, and won a runoff against Mario M.
Cuomo, who had 19 percent. Mr. Koch went on to win that November. In
1989, Mr. Koch was defeated for the nomination by David N. Dinkins, who
was renominated without a runoff in 1993.
But it is only in recent elections that the runoff has actually
undermined Democrats, producing bitter feelings that endured and often
exposing searing racial divisions within the party and contributing to
their successive defeats in November general elections.
In 1997, Ruth W. Messinger was nearly plunged into a runoff against the
Rev. Al Sharpton (she got 39 percent in the preliminary count), but
eight days later absentee ballots helped her squeak past 40 percent. He
sued, claiming fraud. The lawsuit was dismissed, but the damage was
done. The long count weakened Ms. Messinger, and the charges by Mr.
Sharpton left black voters, in particular, disaffected. Whatever her
chances before the primary, she lost the general election to the
incumbent, Rudolph W. Giuliani, a Republican.
In 2001, Mr. Ferrer won the Democratic primary but lost an acrimonious
runoff to Mark Green. Lingering anger by Mr. Ferrer's supporters is
believed to have seriously damaged Mr. Green in the general election,
and he was defeated by Mr. Bloomberg, then a novice politician.
If some people think the system seems broken, there is no shortage of
solutions for fixing it.
Among the earliest suggestions in the 1960's was for a runoff if too
small a proportion of the electorate turned out. The present system has
not improved turnout, to be sure. Last week, Mr. Ferrer received 182,428
votes, with about 17 percent of Democrats voting, which means that about
7 percent of the city's Democrats actually voted for him.
Mr. Green has proposed having an earlier primary and runoff because a
late September runoff leaves too little time to raise money and campaign
effectively for a contested race in November. He and a number of
politicians would also impose an instant runoff, a form of preferential
balloting, in which voters can rank their choices in the primary. In
other states, that system has passed muster with federal voting rights
officials.
The runoff now also applies to the two other citywide offices,
comptroller and public advocate, but Jerry H. Goldfeder, a professor of
election law at Fordham Law School, would broaden it. Scott Stringer was
nominated for Manhattan borough president last week with 26 percent of
the 147,650 votes cast, or about 4 percent of Manhattan's voting-age
citizens.
Another stated reason for runoffs was that they might increase black and
Hispanic representation by encouraging multiethnic and racial
coalitions. That rationale was frequently challenged; Mr. Badillo
contends he might have won without a runoff in 1973 and testified in a
civil rights challenge that the process discriminated against candidates
with less money and encouraged negative campaigning (the money problem
has been mitigated by public campaign financing).
Mr. Badillo now favors the runoff. "It will require that you build up a
larger constituency to win the election rather than a particular group
you are appealing to," he said.
Mr. Sharpton, who was opposed to a runoff until he almost found himself
qualifying for one in 1997 against Ms. Messinger, these days opposes
runoffs. "It gives an advantage to the opposing party, and it only slows
down the process," he said.
In fact, leading black political officials and strategists are of mixed
mind as to whether runoffs help or hinder minority candidates,
particularly now that non-Hispanic white voters will be a minority for
the first time this year.
"The playing field has leveled," said Bill Lynch, an adviser to Mr.
Ferrer. "It's hard to say whether a runoff helps or hurts so-called
minorities. You're finding minority candidates very much players in the
regular election."
But Mr. Green argues that there is one compelling reason to keep runoffs
- the same one advanced two years ago when the mayor proposed to scrap
the primary system and replace it with nonpartisan elections, including
a runoff.
"The argument that you don't want a wacko unrepresentative candidate of
the party because he or she gets 21 percent far exceeds any competing
arguments, especially since it's not at all clear that the runoff system
is antiminority," he said. "Beame beat a minority, Green beat a
minority, Dinkins and Ferrer won outright. Of the four examples, it's
two to two."
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Scum victimize Katrina contributors
@ A new low in phishing
There are always people who will take advantage of tragic situations so it is no real surprise that we’re seeing spam and phishing making use of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
We’ve seen various spam messages using keywords like New Orleans and Katrina in an attempt to by-pass filters. Some are fake news message. Others are ‘stock tips’ for companies that will supposedly benefit from the clean-up or rebuilding contracts.
A message arrived a short time ago that is a new low in scamming and so offends us that we’re sending this special warning.
It appears to be a message from Amazon suggesting that you make a donation to the American Red Cross for victims of Katrina. But the message does NOT come from Amazon at all.
The From: address is faked to make it seem to come from Amazon. The look of the message copies the style used by Amazon and the wording is mostly lifted from the real Amazon appeal on their web site.
But the link in the email isn’t to the Amazon site, instead it goes to another web site – though the link uses the Amazon web address in it to make the url look more legitimate. Tracing the link takes us to the details for the “ China Railway Telecommunications Center “ in Beijing which could be real or just a front.
As with other phishing scams, the link takes you to a site that looks legitimate and lures you into entering your account, password or credit card details.
We picked this particular message as spam because it was sent to an address that we don’t use with Amazon, otherwise it would not have immediately rung any alarm bells. Having seen the messages on the real Amazon site it looked sincere.
The moral of this story is to NEVER use links in email messages from banks, online stores etc. If an email prompts you to action, ignore the link in the email and enter the normal link amazon.com citibank.com paypal.com ebay.com etc in your browser. Anything you need should show up on the home page or after you login to your account yourself.
For example, there are many phishing scams pretending to come from Paypal. They usually say there’s some security or other problem which needs to be fixed with a bogus link. If you think any such message might be real (almost certainly it won’t be real) then go to Paypal.com and login to your account (ie ignore the link in the email, even if it looks OK). When logging into your account, the Paypal system will automatically tell you of anything you need to do or update on your account.
Sadly there’s no point in complaining to the company being spoofed – it’s not their fault and there’s little they can do to stop messages going out in their name. The authorities might close the web link being used but by the time they’ve done that, people have been tricked and the baddies are long gone.
@ Donations Welcome
Of course, we’re not suggesting that you do not donate to the various appeals for victims of recent events. But you do have to be careful about any email solicitation like this and scams generally.
Amazon were quick to respond with a scheme to donate using your normal account details direct to the American Red Cross. Go here for details.mMoney will go direct to the American Red Cross.
The Salvation Army is doing their usual amazing job.
There are always people who will take advantage of tragic situations so it is no real surprise that we’re seeing spam and phishing making use of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
We’ve seen various spam messages using keywords like New Orleans and Katrina in an attempt to by-pass filters. Some are fake news message. Others are ‘stock tips’ for companies that will supposedly benefit from the clean-up or rebuilding contracts.
A message arrived a short time ago that is a new low in scamming and so offends us that we’re sending this special warning.
It appears to be a message from Amazon suggesting that you make a donation to the American Red Cross for victims of Katrina. But the message does NOT come from Amazon at all.
The From: address is faked to make it seem to come from Amazon. The look of the message copies the style used by Amazon and the wording is mostly lifted from the real Amazon appeal on their web site.
But the link in the email isn’t to the Amazon site, instead it goes to another web site – though the link uses the Amazon web address in it to make the url look more legitimate. Tracing the link takes us to the details for the “ China Railway Telecommunications Center “ in Beijing which could be real or just a front.
As with other phishing scams, the link takes you to a site that looks legitimate and lures you into entering your account, password or credit card details.
We picked this particular message as spam because it was sent to an address that we don’t use with Amazon, otherwise it would not have immediately rung any alarm bells. Having seen the messages on the real Amazon site it looked sincere.
The moral of this story is to NEVER use links in email messages from banks, online stores etc. If an email prompts you to action, ignore the link in the email and enter the normal link amazon.com citibank.com paypal.com ebay.com etc in your browser. Anything you need should show up on the home page or after you login to your account yourself.
For example, there are many phishing scams pretending to come from Paypal. They usually say there’s some security or other problem which needs to be fixed with a bogus link. If you think any such message might be real (almost certainly it won’t be real) then go to Paypal.com and login to your account (ie ignore the link in the email, even if it looks OK). When logging into your account, the Paypal system will automatically tell you of anything you need to do or update on your account.
Sadly there’s no point in complaining to the company being spoofed – it’s not their fault and there’s little they can do to stop messages going out in their name. The authorities might close the web link being used but by the time they’ve done that, people have been tricked and the baddies are long gone.
@ Donations Welcome
Of course, we’re not suggesting that you do not donate to the various appeals for victims of recent events. But you do have to be careful about any email solicitation like this and scams generally.
Amazon were quick to respond with a scheme to donate using your normal account details direct to the American Red Cross. Go here for details.mMoney will go direct to the American Red Cross.
The Salvation Army is doing their usual amazing job.
Death & Bush -Doctorow
An essay attributed to writer E.L Doctorow
I fault this president (George W. Bush) for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be all they could be.
On the eve of D-day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.
But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the WMDs he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man. He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.
But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel a personal responsibility for the thousand dead young men and women who wanted be all they could be.
They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of aborted life.... They come to his desk as a political liability which is why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.
How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled plan
for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a disaster. He does not regret that rather than controlling terrorism his war in Iraq has licensed it.
So he never mourns for the dead and crippled youngsters who have fought this war of his choice. He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who knew those
costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it is one of the options, but when it is the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have to.
This president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator. He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one thing --- to take power,
to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of themselves and their friends. A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent becomes inappropriate.
And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives and children.
He is the President who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of the dead; he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty; he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance; he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills --- it is amazing for how many people in this country this President does not feel.
But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving the wealthiest one percent of the population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the safety regulations for coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a- half benefits for overtime because this is actually a way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.
And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it.
But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that spontaneously aroused oversoul of alarm and protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all, this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little wars all over the world most of the time.
But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the classic archetype of democracy was morphing
into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.
The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern
our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his characteristic trouble.
Finally the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail: How can we sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves.
E.L. Doctorow
Edgar Lawrence Doctorow occupies a central position in the history of American literature. He is generally considered to be among the most talented, ambitious, and admired novelists of the second half of the 20th century. Doctorow has received the National Book Award, two National Book Critics Circle Awards, the PEN/Faulkner Award, the Edith Wharton Citation for Fiction, the William Dean Howell Medal of the American Academy of Arts and Letters, and the residentially conferred National Humanities Medal.
Doctorow was born in New York City on January 6, 1931. After graduating with honors from Kenyon College in 1952, he did graduate work at Columbia University and served in the U.S. Army. Doctorow was senior editor for New American Library from 1959 to 1964 and then served as editor in chief at Dial Press until 1969. Since then, he has devoted his time to writing and teaching. He holds the Glucksman Chair in American Letters at New York University and over the years has taught at several institutions, including Yale University Drama School, Princeton University, Sarah Lawrence College, and the University of California, Irvine.
I fault this president (George W. Bush) for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be all they could be.
On the eve of D-day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.
But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the WMDs he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man. He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.
But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel a personal responsibility for the thousand dead young men and women who wanted be all they could be.
They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of aborted life.... They come to his desk as a political liability which is why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.
How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled plan
for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a disaster. He does not regret that rather than controlling terrorism his war in Iraq has licensed it.
So he never mourns for the dead and crippled youngsters who have fought this war of his choice. He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who knew those
costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it is one of the options, but when it is the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have to.
This president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator. He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one thing --- to take power,
to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of themselves and their friends. A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent becomes inappropriate.
And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives and children.
He is the President who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of the dead; he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty; he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance; he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills --- it is amazing for how many people in this country this President does not feel.
But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving the wealthiest one percent of the population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the safety regulations for coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a- half benefits for overtime because this is actually a way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.
And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it.
But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that spontaneously aroused oversoul of alarm and protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all, this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little wars all over the world most of the time.
But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the classic archetype of democracy was morphing
into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.
The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern
our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his characteristic trouble.
Finally the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail: How can we sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves.
E.L. Doctorow
Edgar Lawrence Doctorow occupies a central position in the history of American literature. He is generally considered to be among the most talented, ambitious, and admired novelists of the second half of the 20th century. Doctorow has received the National Book Award, two National Book Critics Circle Awards, the PEN/Faulkner Award, the Edith Wharton Citation for Fiction, the William Dean Howell Medal of the American Academy of Arts and Letters, and the residentially conferred National Humanities Medal.
Doctorow was born in New York City on January 6, 1931. After graduating with honors from Kenyon College in 1952, he did graduate work at Columbia University and served in the U.S. Army. Doctorow was senior editor for New American Library from 1959 to 1964 and then served as editor in chief at Dial Press until 1969. Since then, he has devoted his time to writing and teaching. He holds the Glucksman Chair in American Letters at New York University and over the years has taught at several institutions, including Yale University Drama School, Princeton University, Sarah Lawrence College, and the University of California, Irvine.
Monday, September 05, 2005
Open Letter to W
OUR OPINIONS: An open letter to the President
from the Times Picayune, New Orleans, LA
Dear Mr. President:
We heard you loud and clear Friday when you visited our devastated city and the Gulf Coast and said, "What is not working, we’re going to make it right."
Please forgive us if we wait to see proof of your promise before believing you. But we have good reason for our skepticism.
Bienville built New Orleans where he built it for one main reason: It’s accessible. The city between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain was easy to reach in 1718.
How much easier it is to access in 2005 now that there are interstates and bridges, airports and helipads, cruise ships, barges, buses and diesel-powered trucks.
Despite the city’s multiple points of entry, our nation’s bureaucrats spent days after last week’s hurricane wringing their hands, lamenting the fact that they could neither rescue the city’s stranded victims nor bring them food, water and medical supplies.
Meanwhile there were journalists, including some who work for The Times-Picayune, going in and out of the city via the Crescent City Connection. On Thursday morning, that crew saw a caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers headed into town to bring food, water and supplies to a dying city.
Television reporters were doing live reports from downtown New Orleans streets. Harry Connick Jr. brought in some aid Thursday, and his efforts were the focus of a "Today" show story Friday morning.
Yet, the people trained to protect our nation, the people whose job it is to quickly bring in aid were absent. Those who should have been deploying troops were singing a sad song about how our city was impossible to reach.
We’re angry, Mr. President, and we’ll be angry long after our beloved city and surrounding parishes have been pumped dry. Our people deserved rescuing. Many who could have been were not. That’s to the government’s shame.
Mayor Ray Nagin did the right thing Sunday when he allowed those with no other alternative to seek shelter from the storm inside the Louisiana Superdome. We still don’t know what the death toll is, but one thing is certain: Had the Superdome not been opened, the city’s death toll would have been higher. The toll may even have been exponentially higher.
It was clear to us by late morning Monday that many people inside the Superdome would not be returning home. It should have been clear to our government, Mr. President. So why weren’t they evacuated out of the city immediately? We learned seven years ago, when Hurricane Georges threatened, that the Dome isn’t suitable as a long-term shelter. So what did state and national officials think would happen to tens of thousands of people trapped inside with no air conditioning, overflowing toilets and dwindling amounts of food, water and other essentials?
State Rep. Karen Carter was right Friday when she said the city didn’t have but two urgent needs: "Buses! And gas!" Every official at the Federal Emergency Management Agency should be fired, Director Michael Brown especially.
In a nationally televised interview Thursday night, he said his agency hadn’t known until that day that thousands of storm victims were stranded at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center. He gave another nationally televised interview the next morning and said, "We’ve provided food to the people at the Convention Center so that they’ve gotten at least one, if not two meals, every single day."
Lies don’t get more bald-faced than that, Mr. President.
Yet, when you met with Mr. Brown Friday morning, you told him, "You’re doing a heck of a job."
That’s unbelievable.
There were thousands of people at the Convention Center because the riverfront is high ground. The fact that so many people had reached there on foot is proof that rescue vehicles could have gotten there, too.
We, who are from New Orleans, are no less American than those who live on the Great Plains or along the Atlantic Seaboard. We’re no less important than those from the Pacific Northwest or Appalachia. Our people deserved to be rescued.
No expense should have been spared. No excuses should have been voiced. Especially not one as preposterous as the claim that New Orleans couldn’t be reached.
Mr. President, we sincerely hope you fulfill your promise to make our beloved communities work right once again.
When you do, we will be the first to applaud.
from the Times Picayune, New Orleans, LA
Dear Mr. President:
We heard you loud and clear Friday when you visited our devastated city and the Gulf Coast and said, "What is not working, we’re going to make it right."
Please forgive us if we wait to see proof of your promise before believing you. But we have good reason for our skepticism.
Bienville built New Orleans where he built it for one main reason: It’s accessible. The city between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain was easy to reach in 1718.
How much easier it is to access in 2005 now that there are interstates and bridges, airports and helipads, cruise ships, barges, buses and diesel-powered trucks.
Despite the city’s multiple points of entry, our nation’s bureaucrats spent days after last week’s hurricane wringing their hands, lamenting the fact that they could neither rescue the city’s stranded victims nor bring them food, water and medical supplies.
Meanwhile there were journalists, including some who work for The Times-Picayune, going in and out of the city via the Crescent City Connection. On Thursday morning, that crew saw a caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers headed into town to bring food, water and supplies to a dying city.
Television reporters were doing live reports from downtown New Orleans streets. Harry Connick Jr. brought in some aid Thursday, and his efforts were the focus of a "Today" show story Friday morning.
Yet, the people trained to protect our nation, the people whose job it is to quickly bring in aid were absent. Those who should have been deploying troops were singing a sad song about how our city was impossible to reach.
We’re angry, Mr. President, and we’ll be angry long after our beloved city and surrounding parishes have been pumped dry. Our people deserved rescuing. Many who could have been were not. That’s to the government’s shame.
Mayor Ray Nagin did the right thing Sunday when he allowed those with no other alternative to seek shelter from the storm inside the Louisiana Superdome. We still don’t know what the death toll is, but one thing is certain: Had the Superdome not been opened, the city’s death toll would have been higher. The toll may even have been exponentially higher.
It was clear to us by late morning Monday that many people inside the Superdome would not be returning home. It should have been clear to our government, Mr. President. So why weren’t they evacuated out of the city immediately? We learned seven years ago, when Hurricane Georges threatened, that the Dome isn’t suitable as a long-term shelter. So what did state and national officials think would happen to tens of thousands of people trapped inside with no air conditioning, overflowing toilets and dwindling amounts of food, water and other essentials?
State Rep. Karen Carter was right Friday when she said the city didn’t have but two urgent needs: "Buses! And gas!" Every official at the Federal Emergency Management Agency should be fired, Director Michael Brown especially.
In a nationally televised interview Thursday night, he said his agency hadn’t known until that day that thousands of storm victims were stranded at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center. He gave another nationally televised interview the next morning and said, "We’ve provided food to the people at the Convention Center so that they’ve gotten at least one, if not two meals, every single day."
Lies don’t get more bald-faced than that, Mr. President.
Yet, when you met with Mr. Brown Friday morning, you told him, "You’re doing a heck of a job."
That’s unbelievable.
There were thousands of people at the Convention Center because the riverfront is high ground. The fact that so many people had reached there on foot is proof that rescue vehicles could have gotten there, too.
We, who are from New Orleans, are no less American than those who live on the Great Plains or along the Atlantic Seaboard. We’re no less important than those from the Pacific Northwest or Appalachia. Our people deserved to be rescued.
No expense should have been spared. No excuses should have been voiced. Especially not one as preposterous as the claim that New Orleans couldn’t be reached.
Mr. President, we sincerely hope you fulfill your promise to make our beloved communities work right once again.
When you do, we will be the first to applaud.
Labor Day 2005: September 5
Labor Day 2005: Sept. 5
The first observance of Labor Day is believed to have been a parade on Sept. 5, 1882, in New York City, probably organized by Peter J. McGuire, a Carpenters and Joiners Union secretary. By 1893, more than half the states were observing a "Labor Day" on one day or another, and a bill to establish a federal holiday was passed by Congress in 1894. President Grover Cleveland signed the bill soon afterward, designating the first Monday in September as Labor Day.
Who Are We Celebrating?
149.1 million
Number of people age 16 or older in the nation's labor force in May 2005. Among the nation's workers are 80.0 million men and 69.1 million women. These men and women represent 66 percent of the civilian noninstitutionalized adult population.
Employee Benefits
82%
Percentage of full-time workers age 18 to 64 covered by health insurance during all or part of 2003.
79%
Percentage of workers in private industry who receive a paid vacation as one of their employment benefits. In addition -
* 79 percent of workers receive paid holidays.
* 18 percent have access to employer assistance for child care.
* fewer than 10 percent have access to subsidies for commuting,
telework opportunities and adoption assistance.
* 11 percent have access to long-term care insurance.
See Table 630, 2004-2005 edition.
Another Day, Another Dollar
$40,668 and $30,724
The annual median earnings, respectively, for male and female full-time, year-round workers in 2003.
$1,327
Average weekly wage in New York County, N.Y., for the third quarter of 2004, the highest among the nation's 317 largest counties. St. Joseph County, Ind., led the nation in growth of average weekly wages over the third quarter 2003-2004 period, with an increase of 10.4 percent. < http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cewqtr.pdf>
Our Jobs
Americans work in a wide variety of occupations. Here is a sampling:
Occupation/Number of employees
Gaming services workers/85,000
Hairdressers, hairstylists and cosmetologists/718,000
Chefs and head cooks/281,000
Firefighters/258,000
Musicians, singers and related workers/179,000
Bakers/183,000
Taxi drivers and chauffeurs/286,000
Service station attendants/96,000
Farmers and ranchers/825,000
Pharmacists/232,000
Teachers/6.5 million
See Table 597, 2004-2005 edition.
7.3 million
Number of workers who hold down more than one job. So-called moonlighters comprise 5 percent of the working population. Of these moonlighters, 3.8 million
work full time at their primary job and part time at their other job,
and about 293,000 work full time at both jobs. See Table 590, 2004-2005 edition.
10.3 million
Number of self-employed workers.
See Table 586, 2004-2005 edition
20.3 million
Number of female workers in educational, health and social services industries. More women work in this industry group than in any other. Manufacturing was the most popular industry among men, with 11.3 million workers.
28%
Percentage of workers 16 or older who work more than 40 hours a week. Eight percent work 60 or more hours a week. Table 584, 2004-2005 edition.
15.8 million
Number of labor union members nationwide. About 13 percent of wage and salary workers belong to unions, with New York having among the highest rates of any state - 25 percent. North Carolina has one of the lowest rates, 3 percent. Table 640, 2004-2005 edition.
58,600
Number of jobs added in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Ariz., between September 2003 and September 2004, the highest of the nation's 317 largest counties. Among these counties, Rutherford, Tenn., experienced the highest rate of job growth, 9.2 percent.
4.5 million
The number of people who work at home.
The Long and Winding Road - to Work
24.3 minutes
The average time it takes to commute to work.
Of the 233 counties with populations of 250,000 or more, Queens (41.7 minutes), Richmond (41.3 minutes), Bronx (40.8 minutes) and Kings (39.7 minutes) - four of the five counties that comprise New York City - experienced the longest average commute-to-work times. Workers living in Prince William County, Va. (36.4 minutes); and Prince George's County, Md. (35.5 minutes) - suburban counties located within the Washington, D.C., metro area - also faced some of the longest commutes.
More Than 100 hours
The amount of time the average American spends commuting to work each year. (This exceeds the typical two weeks of vacation time taken by many U.S. workers over the course of a year.)
2.0%
Percentage of workers nationwide who face "extreme" commutes to work - that is, they spend 90 or more minutes traveling to their jobs.
Among the 10 counties with the highest-average commuting times, the highest percentages of extreme commuters were found in the New York City metro area: Richmond, N.Y. (11.8 percent); Orange, N.Y. (10.0 percent); Queens, N.Y. (7.1 percent); Bronx, N.Y. (6.9 percent); Nassau, N.Y., (6.6 percent); and Kings, N.Y. (5.0 percent).
The first observance of Labor Day is believed to have been a parade on Sept. 5, 1882, in New York City, probably organized by Peter J. McGuire, a Carpenters and Joiners Union secretary. By 1893, more than half the states were observing a "Labor Day" on one day or another, and a bill to establish a federal holiday was passed by Congress in 1894. President Grover Cleveland signed the bill soon afterward, designating the first Monday in September as Labor Day.
Who Are We Celebrating?
149.1 million
Number of people age 16 or older in the nation's labor force in May 2005. Among the nation's workers are 80.0 million men and 69.1 million women. These men and women represent 66 percent of the civilian noninstitutionalized adult population.
Employee Benefits
82%
Percentage of full-time workers age 18 to 64 covered by health insurance during all or part of 2003.
79%
Percentage of workers in private industry who receive a paid vacation as one of their employment benefits. In addition -
* 79 percent of workers receive paid holidays.
* 18 percent have access to employer assistance for child care.
* fewer than 10 percent have access to subsidies for commuting,
telework opportunities and adoption assistance.
* 11 percent have access to long-term care insurance.
See Table 630, 2004-2005 edition.
Another Day, Another Dollar
$40,668 and $30,724
The annual median earnings, respectively, for male and female full-time, year-round workers in 2003.
$1,327
Average weekly wage in New York County, N.Y., for the third quarter of 2004, the highest among the nation's 317 largest counties. St. Joseph County, Ind., led the nation in growth of average weekly wages over the third quarter 2003-2004 period, with an increase of 10.4 percent. < http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cewqtr.pdf>
Our Jobs
Americans work in a wide variety of occupations. Here is a sampling:
Occupation/Number of employees
Gaming services workers/85,000
Hairdressers, hairstylists and cosmetologists/718,000
Chefs and head cooks/281,000
Firefighters/258,000
Musicians, singers and related workers/179,000
Bakers/183,000
Taxi drivers and chauffeurs/286,000
Service station attendants/96,000
Farmers and ranchers/825,000
Pharmacists/232,000
Teachers/6.5 million
See Table 597, 2004-2005 edition.
7.3 million
Number of workers who hold down more than one job. So-called moonlighters comprise 5 percent of the working population. Of these moonlighters, 3.8 million
work full time at their primary job and part time at their other job,
and about 293,000 work full time at both jobs. See Table 590, 2004-2005 edition.
10.3 million
Number of self-employed workers.
See Table 586, 2004-2005 edition
20.3 million
Number of female workers in educational, health and social services industries. More women work in this industry group than in any other. Manufacturing was the most popular industry among men, with 11.3 million workers.
28%
Percentage of workers 16 or older who work more than 40 hours a week. Eight percent work 60 or more hours a week. Table 584, 2004-2005 edition.
15.8 million
Number of labor union members nationwide. About 13 percent of wage and salary workers belong to unions, with New York having among the highest rates of any state - 25 percent. North Carolina has one of the lowest rates, 3 percent. Table 640, 2004-2005 edition.
58,600
Number of jobs added in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Ariz., between September 2003 and September 2004, the highest of the nation's 317 largest counties. Among these counties, Rutherford, Tenn., experienced the highest rate of job growth, 9.2 percent.
4.5 million
The number of people who work at home.
The Long and Winding Road - to Work
24.3 minutes
The average time it takes to commute to work.
Of the 233 counties with populations of 250,000 or more, Queens (41.7 minutes), Richmond (41.3 minutes), Bronx (40.8 minutes) and Kings (39.7 minutes) - four of the five counties that comprise New York City - experienced the longest average commute-to-work times. Workers living in Prince William County, Va. (36.4 minutes); and Prince George's County, Md. (35.5 minutes) - suburban counties located within the Washington, D.C., metro area - also faced some of the longest commutes.
More Than 100 hours
The amount of time the average American spends commuting to work each year. (This exceeds the typical two weeks of vacation time taken by many U.S. workers over the course of a year.)
2.0%
Percentage of workers nationwide who face "extreme" commutes to work - that is, they spend 90 or more minutes traveling to their jobs.
Among the 10 counties with the highest-average commuting times, the highest percentages of extreme commuters were found in the New York City metro area: Richmond, N.Y. (11.8 percent); Orange, N.Y. (10.0 percent); Queens, N.Y. (7.1 percent); Bronx, N.Y. (6.9 percent); Nassau, N.Y., (6.6 percent); and Kings, N.Y. (5.0 percent).
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Bank robbery
Hostage ordeal ends in suicide
Suspect hangs self in Albany bank; 4 captives are safe
By MATT PACENZA and BOB GARDINIER, Staff writer, Albany (NY) Times Union
First published: Sunday, August 28, 2005
ALBANY -- An armed man who took four hostages at a Pine Hills bank hanged himself Saturday evening, ending a tense five-hour standoff with police in the midst of a busy neighborhood. The hostages were unharmed.
Just after 6 p.m., three female employees and one male customer of the Trustco Bank at Madison Avenue and West Lawrence Street hustled out the bank's front door, just across the street from the Albany Police Department's Center Station. When a police SWAT team stormed the bank, they found the suspect dead, hanging in a back room.
The scene unfolded as nearby streets and restaurants were busy with families dropping off arriving college students. Dozens of residents peered around police barricades as the drama played out. An official using a bullhorn pleaded with the hostage-taker to surrender and free the hostages.
Police officers surreptitiously entered the building at about 5:15 p.m., but they were not directly involved in the release of the hostages or the suicide of the suspect, police said. They gained entrance after a police helicopter hovered 30 feet above the bank, creating a diversion so that a team could enter the building for a possible rescue attempt.
But less than an hour later, officers saw the hostages inside the bank gesturing for them to enter. Police in turn waved for the hostages to exit. They exited the bank at 6:07 p.m. As a precautionary measure, officers handcuffed the three employees and one customer. They determined that the suspect was still inside.
They even ordered the bank customer, a man, to drop to his knees and put his hands behind his head. Police reacted cautiously, authorities said, because they did not know until that moment that there was a fourth hostage in the bank. It was quickly determined that the customer was not the suspect. The hostages were debreifed, taken to an area hospital for evaluation and then released to their families, police said.
The confrontation began at around 1 p.m., when the suspect -- who police declined to identify by name Saturday night, saying only that he was a "youngish," white male -- entered the bank as it was closing. A silent alarm in the bank was triggered, said Detective James Miller, Department of Public Safety spokesman.
About 30 minutes after the drama ended, Mayor Jerry Jennings held an impromptu conference. "All four of them are safe; he committed suicide," said Jennings.
The standoff paralyzed a bustling neighborhood. Police escorted diners and bar patrons at several Madison Avenue establishments out their back doors as the afternoon dragged on.
Gari McGladrigan was in Albany to drop off her 18-year-old son, an incoming freshman at The College of Saint Rose, at his dorm room. She waited anxiously Saturday afternoon, unable to get to her car that was trapped behind police barricades.
"I had to say goodbye to my son in the middle of all this," said McGladrigan.
The Middletown, Conn., resident and emergency room nurse is no stranger to stress.
Her husband, a paramedic and the Saint Rose student's stepfather, is currently serving in a medical unit in Tikrit, Iraq.
"It's been a trying year," she said.
About an hour before the standoff ended in suicide, an official's voice amplified by a bullhorn could be heard. These sentences were clear: "Open the door. ... We can work it out. ... We need some way to talk now. ... Pick up your phone and call."
Officers were in communication with the hostage-taker earlier in the afternoon, according to Jennings, but those talks broke off as the afternoon waned. The police's work was complicated by the fact that the suspect was able to view security cameras from inside the bank that gave him a view of the street outside, according to the mayor.
As of Saturday night, police were not saying why the unidentified man had entered the bank or why he had taken the hostages. They also would not specify with what weaponry he had.
At least two teams of SWAT officers, police snipers and other police converged on the bank at about 1 p.m. Vehicles and officers from the FBI were also on scene.
Madison and Western avenues were closed between Allen and North Main streets. Police, in cordoning off the area, shut down neighborhood businesses, asking employees and patrons to stay inside places like the Price Chopper at 1060 Madison, a Mobil station at 1075 Madison, and Mahar's tavern at 1110 Madison.
Susan Graham, a nearby resident who was dining at Junior's, just west of the bank, said a police officer had told patrons at 1:30 p.m. to remain inside the restaurant. About two hours later, those inside were escorted out a back door and evacuated from the area.
Scores of neighborhood residents and the media gathered on sidewalks and street corners watching the scene unfold.
"The Albany Police Department did a fantastic job," said Bob Leonard, a Trustco bank spokesman. After being asked about previous robberies at the location, he said, "It's just unfortunate, we wish it didn't happen."
Matt Pacenza can be reached at 454-5533 or by e-mail at mpacenza@timesunion.com.
Suspect hangs self in Albany bank; 4 captives are safe
By MATT PACENZA and BOB GARDINIER, Staff writer, Albany (NY) Times Union
First published: Sunday, August 28, 2005
ALBANY -- An armed man who took four hostages at a Pine Hills bank hanged himself Saturday evening, ending a tense five-hour standoff with police in the midst of a busy neighborhood. The hostages were unharmed.
Just after 6 p.m., three female employees and one male customer of the Trustco Bank at Madison Avenue and West Lawrence Street hustled out the bank's front door, just across the street from the Albany Police Department's Center Station. When a police SWAT team stormed the bank, they found the suspect dead, hanging in a back room.
The scene unfolded as nearby streets and restaurants were busy with families dropping off arriving college students. Dozens of residents peered around police barricades as the drama played out. An official using a bullhorn pleaded with the hostage-taker to surrender and free the hostages.
Police officers surreptitiously entered the building at about 5:15 p.m., but they were not directly involved in the release of the hostages or the suicide of the suspect, police said. They gained entrance after a police helicopter hovered 30 feet above the bank, creating a diversion so that a team could enter the building for a possible rescue attempt.
But less than an hour later, officers saw the hostages inside the bank gesturing for them to enter. Police in turn waved for the hostages to exit. They exited the bank at 6:07 p.m. As a precautionary measure, officers handcuffed the three employees and one customer. They determined that the suspect was still inside.
They even ordered the bank customer, a man, to drop to his knees and put his hands behind his head. Police reacted cautiously, authorities said, because they did not know until that moment that there was a fourth hostage in the bank. It was quickly determined that the customer was not the suspect. The hostages were debreifed, taken to an area hospital for evaluation and then released to their families, police said.
The confrontation began at around 1 p.m., when the suspect -- who police declined to identify by name Saturday night, saying only that he was a "youngish," white male -- entered the bank as it was closing. A silent alarm in the bank was triggered, said Detective James Miller, Department of Public Safety spokesman.
About 30 minutes after the drama ended, Mayor Jerry Jennings held an impromptu conference. "All four of them are safe; he committed suicide," said Jennings.
The standoff paralyzed a bustling neighborhood. Police escorted diners and bar patrons at several Madison Avenue establishments out their back doors as the afternoon dragged on.
Gari McGladrigan was in Albany to drop off her 18-year-old son, an incoming freshman at The College of Saint Rose, at his dorm room. She waited anxiously Saturday afternoon, unable to get to her car that was trapped behind police barricades.
"I had to say goodbye to my son in the middle of all this," said McGladrigan.
The Middletown, Conn., resident and emergency room nurse is no stranger to stress.
Her husband, a paramedic and the Saint Rose student's stepfather, is currently serving in a medical unit in Tikrit, Iraq.
"It's been a trying year," she said.
About an hour before the standoff ended in suicide, an official's voice amplified by a bullhorn could be heard. These sentences were clear: "Open the door. ... We can work it out. ... We need some way to talk now. ... Pick up your phone and call."
Officers were in communication with the hostage-taker earlier in the afternoon, according to Jennings, but those talks broke off as the afternoon waned. The police's work was complicated by the fact that the suspect was able to view security cameras from inside the bank that gave him a view of the street outside, according to the mayor.
As of Saturday night, police were not saying why the unidentified man had entered the bank or why he had taken the hostages. They also would not specify with what weaponry he had.
At least two teams of SWAT officers, police snipers and other police converged on the bank at about 1 p.m. Vehicles and officers from the FBI were also on scene.
Madison and Western avenues were closed between Allen and North Main streets. Police, in cordoning off the area, shut down neighborhood businesses, asking employees and patrons to stay inside places like the Price Chopper at 1060 Madison, a Mobil station at 1075 Madison, and Mahar's tavern at 1110 Madison.
Susan Graham, a nearby resident who was dining at Junior's, just west of the bank, said a police officer had told patrons at 1:30 p.m. to remain inside the restaurant. About two hours later, those inside were escorted out a back door and evacuated from the area.
Scores of neighborhood residents and the media gathered on sidewalks and street corners watching the scene unfold.
"The Albany Police Department did a fantastic job," said Bob Leonard, a Trustco bank spokesman. After being asked about previous robberies at the location, he said, "It's just unfortunate, we wish it didn't happen."
Matt Pacenza can be reached at 454-5533 or by e-mail at mpacenza@timesunion.com.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Gay Batman
Swiped from http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2005/08/19/5
'Gay Batman' show riles comics publisher
PlanetOut Network - published Friday, August 19, 2005
Paintings of gay fantasies involving comic book heroes Batman and Robin have raised more than just eyebrows while on display in a New York gallery -- especially for DC Comics, which owns the copyrights to the characters.
Lawyers for the comic books publisher wants the display closed and has threatened legal action against the Kathleen Cullen Fine Arts gallery, which opened the exhibit in February.
The watercolor paintings by Mark Chamberlain show the superheroes in a number of semi-naked, homoerotic poses. One depicts the Caped Crusader and his companion kissing.
"DC Comics wants me to hand over all unsold work and invoices for the sold work," said gallery owner Kathleen Cullen.
The Web site Artnet posted several images of the paintings, and it reported receiving a similar letter from DC Comics. DC Comics reportedly refused to comment on the matter.
Conflicts over the use of commercial or cartoon imagery in fine art is not uncommon, according to Artnet. Both Andy Warhol and Robert Rauschenberg settled suits over copyright violations in their work, and artist Jeff Koons took a similar case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and lost.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Dance
When I meditated on the word Guidance, I kept seeing "dance" at the end of the word. I remember reading that doing God's will is a lot like dancing. When two people try to lead, nothing feels right. The movement doesn't flow with the music, and everything is quite uncomfortable and jerky. When one person realizes that, and lets the other lead, both bodies begin to flow with the music. One gives gentle cues, perhaps with a nudge to the back or by pressing lightly in one direction or another. It's as if two become one body, moving beautifully. The dance takes surrender, willingness, and attentiveness from one person and gentle guidance and skill from the other. My eyes drew back to the word Guidance. When I saw "G" I thought of God, followed by "u" and "I". "God, "u" and "I" dance." God, you, and I dance. As I lowered my head, I became willing to trust that I would get guidance about my life. Once again, I became willing to let God lead.
My prayer for you today is that God's blessings and mercies be upon you on this day and everyday. May you abide in God as God abides in you. Dance together with God, trusting God to lead and to guide you through each season of your life.
There is no cost but a lot of rewards; so let's continue to pray for one another. And I Hope You Dance!
-Unknown
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
The Message Thing By JIM WALLIS
Since the 2004 election, there has been much soul-searching and hand-wringing, especially among Democrats, about how to "frame" political messages. The loss to George W. Bush was painful enough, but the Republicans' post-election claims of mandate, and their triumphal promises to relegate the Democrats to permanent minority status, left political liberals in a state of panic.
So the minority party has been searching, some would say desperately, for the right "narrative": the best story line, metaphors, even magic words to bring back electoral success. The operative term among Democratic politicians and strategists has become "framing." How to tell the story has become more important than the story itself. And that could be a bigger mistake for the Democrats than the ones they made during the election.
Language is clearly important in politics, but the message remains more important than the messaging. In the interests of full disclosure, let me note that I have been talking to the Democrats about both. But I believe that first, you must get your message straight. What are your best ideas, and what are you for - as opposed to what you're against in the other party's message? Only when you answer those questions can you figure out how to present your message to the American people.
Because the Republicans, with the help of the religious right, have captured the language of values and religion (narrowly conceived as only abortion and gay marriage), the Democrats have also been asking how to "take back the faith." But that means far more than throwing a few Bible verses into policy discussions, offering candidates some good lines from famous hymns, or teaching them how to clap at the right times in black churches. Democrats need to focus on the content of religious convictions and the values that underlie them.
The discussion that shapes our political future should be one about moral values, but the questions to ask are these: Whose values? Which values? And how broadly and deeply will our political values be defined? Democrats must offer new ideas and a fresh agenda, rather than linguistic strategies to sell an old set of ideologies and interest group demands.
To be specific, I offer five areas in which the Democrats should change their message and then their messaging.
First, somebody must lead on the issue of poverty, and right now neither party is doing so. The Democrats assume the poverty issue belongs to them, but with the exception of John Edwards in his 2004 campaign, they haven't mustered the gumption to oppose a government that habitually favors the wealthy over everyone else. Democrats need new policies to offer the 36 million Americans, including 13 million children, who live below the poverty line, as well as the 9.8 million families one recent study identified as "working hard but falling short."
In fact, the Democrats should draw a line in the sand when it comes to wartime tax cuts for the wealthy, rising deficits, and the slashing of programs for low-income families and children. They need proposals that combine to create a "living family income" for wage-earners, as well as a platform of "fair trade," as opposed to just free trade, in the global economy. Such proposals would cause a break with many of the Democrats' powerful corporate sponsors, but they would open the way for a truly progressive economic agenda. Many Americans, including religious voters who see poverty as a compelling issue of conscience, desire such a platform.
Similarly, a growing number of American Christians speak of the environment as a religious concern - one of stewardship of God's creation. The National Association of Evangelicals recently called global warming a faith issue. But Republicans consistently choose oil and gas interests over a cleaner world. The Democrats need to call for the reversal of these priorities. They must insist that private interests should never obstruct our country's path to a cleaner and more efficient energy future, let alone hold our foreign policy hostage to the dictates of repressive regimes in the Middle East.
On the issues that Republicans have turned into election-winning "wedges," Democrats will win back "values voters" only with fresh ideas. Abortion is one such case. Democrats need to think past catchphrases, like "a woman's right to choose," or the alternative, "safe, legal and rare." More than 1 million abortions are performed every year in this country. The Democrats should set forth proposals that aim to reduce that number by at least half. Such a campaign could emphasize adoption reform, health care, and child care; combating teenage pregnancy and sexual abuse; improving poor and working women's incomes; and supporting reasonable restrictions on abortion, like parental notification for minors (with necessary legal protections against parental abuse). Such a program could help create some much-needed common ground.
As for "family values," the Democrats can become the truly pro-family party by supporting parents in doing the most important and difficult job in America: raising children. They need to adopt serious pro-family policies, including some that defend children against Hollywood sleaze and Internet pornography. That's an issue that has come to be identified with the religious right. But when I say in public lectures that being a parent is now a countercultural activity, I've found that liberal and conservative parents agree. Rather than fighting over gay marriage, the Democrats must show that it is indeed possible to be "pro-family" and in favor of gay civil rights at the same time.
Finally, on national security, Democrats should argue that the safety of the United States depends on the credibility of its international leadership. We can secure that credibility in Iraq only when we renounce any claim to oil or future military bases - something Democrats should advocate as the first step toward bringing other countries to our side. While Republicans have argued that international institutions are too weak to be relied upon in the age of terrorism, Democrats should suggest reforming them, creating a real International Criminal Court with an enforcement body, for example, as well as an international force capable of intervening in places like Darfur. Stronger American leadership in reducing global poverty would also go a long way toward improving the country's image around the world.
Until Democrats are willing to be honest about the need for new social policy and compelling political vision, they will never get the message right. Find the vision first, and the language will follow.
Jim Wallis, the editor of Sojourners magazine, is the author of "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It."
So the minority party has been searching, some would say desperately, for the right "narrative": the best story line, metaphors, even magic words to bring back electoral success. The operative term among Democratic politicians and strategists has become "framing." How to tell the story has become more important than the story itself. And that could be a bigger mistake for the Democrats than the ones they made during the election.
Language is clearly important in politics, but the message remains more important than the messaging. In the interests of full disclosure, let me note that I have been talking to the Democrats about both. But I believe that first, you must get your message straight. What are your best ideas, and what are you for - as opposed to what you're against in the other party's message? Only when you answer those questions can you figure out how to present your message to the American people.
Because the Republicans, with the help of the religious right, have captured the language of values and religion (narrowly conceived as only abortion and gay marriage), the Democrats have also been asking how to "take back the faith." But that means far more than throwing a few Bible verses into policy discussions, offering candidates some good lines from famous hymns, or teaching them how to clap at the right times in black churches. Democrats need to focus on the content of religious convictions and the values that underlie them.
The discussion that shapes our political future should be one about moral values, but the questions to ask are these: Whose values? Which values? And how broadly and deeply will our political values be defined? Democrats must offer new ideas and a fresh agenda, rather than linguistic strategies to sell an old set of ideologies and interest group demands.
To be specific, I offer five areas in which the Democrats should change their message and then their messaging.
First, somebody must lead on the issue of poverty, and right now neither party is doing so. The Democrats assume the poverty issue belongs to them, but with the exception of John Edwards in his 2004 campaign, they haven't mustered the gumption to oppose a government that habitually favors the wealthy over everyone else. Democrats need new policies to offer the 36 million Americans, including 13 million children, who live below the poverty line, as well as the 9.8 million families one recent study identified as "working hard but falling short."
In fact, the Democrats should draw a line in the sand when it comes to wartime tax cuts for the wealthy, rising deficits, and the slashing of programs for low-income families and children. They need proposals that combine to create a "living family income" for wage-earners, as well as a platform of "fair trade," as opposed to just free trade, in the global economy. Such proposals would cause a break with many of the Democrats' powerful corporate sponsors, but they would open the way for a truly progressive economic agenda. Many Americans, including religious voters who see poverty as a compelling issue of conscience, desire such a platform.
Similarly, a growing number of American Christians speak of the environment as a religious concern - one of stewardship of God's creation. The National Association of Evangelicals recently called global warming a faith issue. But Republicans consistently choose oil and gas interests over a cleaner world. The Democrats need to call for the reversal of these priorities. They must insist that private interests should never obstruct our country's path to a cleaner and more efficient energy future, let alone hold our foreign policy hostage to the dictates of repressive regimes in the Middle East.
On the issues that Republicans have turned into election-winning "wedges," Democrats will win back "values voters" only with fresh ideas. Abortion is one such case. Democrats need to think past catchphrases, like "a woman's right to choose," or the alternative, "safe, legal and rare." More than 1 million abortions are performed every year in this country. The Democrats should set forth proposals that aim to reduce that number by at least half. Such a campaign could emphasize adoption reform, health care, and child care; combating teenage pregnancy and sexual abuse; improving poor and working women's incomes; and supporting reasonable restrictions on abortion, like parental notification for minors (with necessary legal protections against parental abuse). Such a program could help create some much-needed common ground.
As for "family values," the Democrats can become the truly pro-family party by supporting parents in doing the most important and difficult job in America: raising children. They need to adopt serious pro-family policies, including some that defend children against Hollywood sleaze and Internet pornography. That's an issue that has come to be identified with the religious right. But when I say in public lectures that being a parent is now a countercultural activity, I've found that liberal and conservative parents agree. Rather than fighting over gay marriage, the Democrats must show that it is indeed possible to be "pro-family" and in favor of gay civil rights at the same time.
Finally, on national security, Democrats should argue that the safety of the United States depends on the credibility of its international leadership. We can secure that credibility in Iraq only when we renounce any claim to oil or future military bases - something Democrats should advocate as the first step toward bringing other countries to our side. While Republicans have argued that international institutions are too weak to be relied upon in the age of terrorism, Democrats should suggest reforming them, creating a real International Criminal Court with an enforcement body, for example, as well as an international force capable of intervening in places like Darfur. Stronger American leadership in reducing global poverty would also go a long way toward improving the country's image around the world.
Until Democrats are willing to be honest about the need for new social policy and compelling political vision, they will never get the message right. Find the vision first, and the language will follow.
Jim Wallis, the editor of Sojourners magazine, is the author of "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
