No, not the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything. Anyway, we know the answer to that … it’s 42.
But the Shop Tart may have the answer to my dry cleaning question. I’ll have to look into it, although I take stuff to the cleaners more often than once a month, so it might not work for me, based on her math. We’ll see.
Also, I’m not sure I want to look be “fabulous,” or even look that way. I’ll settle for clean and neat. My needs are simple.
Lately, I’ve had a streak of bad luck with my dry cleaning. First, the collar of my good blue blazer got messed up — lost its shape, become all puffed up or something (hard to describe). I took it back, and they kept it for awhile before telling me there was nothing they could do about it.
Then, they shrank the pants of a seersucker suit. Maybe the jacket, too, but definitely the pants. I just had them taken out a year or so ago and they fit perfectly just before I took them to the cleaners. Now the waist is tight, and that pulls the cuffs up toward my ankles.
Both the blazer and the suit are from Lourie’s, and therefore irreplaceable. Not that I have any money for buying new suits anyway.
Now, my OTHER seersucker suit needs cleaning. It was really steamy warm at Bud Ferillo’s house the other night when I was there for the Jim Rex fundraiser (which I still need to blog about, I just realized), and you know, even in seersucker, if it gets hot enough a gentleman will perspire. It was a very Old South experience.
But I’m afraid to take it to my usual cleaners.
Do you have one to recommend, one you really trust?
Finally getting around to trying to make this blog look halfway decent. Renovations are continuing, so please be patient.
In the meantime, what do you think so far?
The governor's note.
This is embarrassing. The governor, for all I say about him, is a classy guy, gently reared, and given to sending gracious, hand-written notes — the surest sign that a person’s mama brought him up right.
But when he does this, I always have trouble deciphering the message. As you know, he had already called me about my departure, and couldn’t have been nicer. I’m assuming this was sent after my Sunday column, which mentioned that call — without sugar-coating what I think of the job he’s done as governor.
I’ve made note of this in the past when he’s written to me, and some of y’all thought it was tacky of me to post it, but I’m perfectly sincere here. I’m not trying to be mean, or anything. I want to know what he said. Is it “Good luck?” “Good grief?” “God gives?” Or what?
Help me out here, folks. (Here’s hoping the comment function is working on this new blog.
A reader in Tennessee who apparently read this post of mine from last summer is obviously a guy who's got his priorities straight, and I'd like to be able to help him out:
Anybody know where he might be able to obtain these seeds? One of our correspondents wrote in July as follows:
… but I don't know whether that will be helpful or not, to a guy in TN. Any other tips for a guy who knows what's good? (Actually, I'm assuming the "guy" part, and on thin evidence, it now strikes me. If Chris is a gal, I apologize.)
And yes, I mean "earnest" and not "Ernest" like in my last post, although if you'd like you can attribute the seriousness of my message here to the influence of my serious new notebook.
Anyway, I wrote the following as a followup comment on my otherwise silly, fun post on Tina Fey, and it occurred to me I should elevate it to a separate post and see if we can get a good dialogue going on the subject here. Rather than rewrite it, I repeat myself:
As y'all know, I like to have fun and kid around, but I do
take the news and the issues of the day seriously, and at some point I
get turned off by people who day in and day out sneer and make jokes of
serious issues. I mean, let's have fun and kid around, but when one's
entire diet of commentary consists of such junk food, and it's all
about mocking and never taking anything seriously, I think it has a
corrosive effect on society. Taken at it's extreme, I think it has
helped raise a generation that has trouble respecting anyone and
anything in politics. The constant drip, drip of smarmy satire adds to
all the partisan attack politics and tactics of personal destruction to
prevent us from coming together to solve the problems we have in common
— which is what representative democracy can be all about.
Needless
to say, I have NO appreciation for Jon Stewart and The Daily Show. And
while I enjoyed meeting and kidding around with Stephen Colbert (see video), I can't get into his shtick, either.
But
even though the Palin gag was pretty hard-hitting satire, it was so
enjoyable that it caused me to have a soft spot for Tina I didn't have
before.
I should also mention that I revised my opinion of Dennis Miller just from the couple of brief spots I've done on his radio show.
I had always thought of him as just too much of a wise guy, too
impressed with his own snarky cleverness, to be borne. But he's
actually deeper than that, and pleasant to talk to.
Of
course, this is just a corollary to something I've found about life —
almost anyone is a more likable, admirable person once you get past the
shorthand, bumper-sticker version of that person. To know a person is
to appreciate him or her more. Maybe this sounds trite, but in our 24/7
headline news/blog world, we increasingly go by the bumper sticker, and
don't get into people deeply enough to appreciate them.
And just
to get WAY philosophical on you…. One of my great disappointments
with this blog is that I had hoped, by having this forum for going way
beyond what I'm able to say and explore in the paper, I could forge
some avenues where I could have more meaningful exchanges with my
readers and fellow citizens about the important issues of the day —
and the people who are important players in those issues.
Unfortunately,
the resistance to that is just tremendous. So much of what passes for
dialogue here remains on the superficial, partisan, shorthand,
bumper-sticker simplistic level. I try to say something to provoke
thought, and somebody gives some standard, boilerplate ideological
response, and someone else shouts the established bumper-sticker
counter to THAT, and off we go on the kind of pointless partisan
merry-go-round that you can read or hear anywhere in the blogosphere or
on 24/7 talking head "news." And what is the point in that?
I
draw hope from the fact that occasionally, we get to the point where
some actual, mutually respectful dialogue occurs between people who
HAVE gotten to know each other beyond the surface here. I see this
particularly with Phillip and Herb and Karen and a handful of others —
and in the past (although, unfortunately, not so much lately) from you,
Randy. I even get an encouraging word now and then from bud or Doug.
I just wish I knew how to build on that. I'm open to suggestions.
Maybe I need to make this a separate post…
… which I just did.
How about it? Do you see any way we can start having conversations here that matter?
Last week, the folks in our Information Services department came up with a new — well, it’s new to me — laptop to replace the one that got stolen, the one I’d had ever since I started this blog. Which is great; they’ve even programmed it to do cool and mysterious things my old one never dreamt of.
But there’s one problem — whenever I’m typing, suddenly my typing cursor will jump, without warning, from where I’m TRYING to type to some other random part of the page, either in the middle of some previous sentence or out of the text box completely. This happens two or three times per sentence, and it’s sufficiently maddening that, as you might have noticed, I didn’t post at all yesterday.
The only "explanation" I could offer is that the typing always leapt in the direction of wherever the mouse pointer was at that moment.
The folks in information services figured it out today — the problem is that the laptop has a touchpad, and I’ve never gotten used to the things, so I plug in a USB mouse. The problem is that the heel of my hand, or ball of my thumb, or whatever you call the parts of the hand near the wrist, keep brushing against the touchpad. Every time that happens, it’s the equivalent of a mouse click, so the typing cursor jumps to where the mouse pointer is, if you can follow that.
So all I had to do was go to the control panel, and deactivate the touchpad. Simple. Obvious. I should have thought of it.
Only one problem: There’s nothing in the control panel about the touchpad. And nothing down in the right-hand corner of the taskbar, either (I’m running Windows XP). As far as this computer is concerned, it doesn’t HAVE a touchpad. Except that it does.
I’m sure the folks in IS will figure this out on Monday. In the meantime, I’ve got a piece of cardboard over the touchpad, and that’s working. But I was wondering — between now and then, does anybody out there have any suggestions for turning the blasted device off?
Seems like this comment I put on this comment string is worth a separate post, since I’m looking for feedback:
Above we have 32 comments. Seventeen of them are by or about Lee
Muller (10 by him, including the first and the last; seven about him.)That means the majority of comments are not about the subject at
hand. The subject at hand, of course, is my effort to elevate public
discourse above the level of polarization and pointless shouting.I’d like to thank Harry, Karen, Phillip, Bart and, eventually bud
(once he decided not to "harp on the past") for engaging the topic
positively, and Randy and David for at least engaging the topic.Anyone have any suggestions as to what do do with the fact that most
of the string was occupied with polarizing distractions? This is a
serious question, because now that the election is over I’m evaluating
how much energy to put into the blog, given that we are so short-handed
and I’m so harried these days.When I started this blog, I had a staff of six full-time people
(including four associate editors) and one part-timer to write for,
edit and produce the editorial pages. And even then it was extremely
difficult to squeeze out the time from a 24-hour day to blog. Now I
have three full-timers (down to two associate editors) and one
part-timer in the editorial department. Finding time for the blog long
ago reached the point where most people would say "impossible."My Sunday column spoke directly to why I do this blog. It’s about
carving out a place that is an alternative to most of the hyperpartisan
blogosphere, which reflects the style of nondiscourse framed by the
parties, the advocacy groups and the shouting-head television "news." A
place where people can interact constructively, and even listen to each
other.I deeply appreciate those of you who try to have a constructive
conversation in spite of all the shouters in the room. Unfortunately,
there are many, many people of good will who simply won’t try that hard.Anyway, anybody have any constructive suggestions for going forward?
Of course, the very first comment I get it likely to be from Lee. But after that, I’d very much appreciate some relevant feedback from the rest of you.
"You" in this case would be whoever is getting to see the 3rd season of the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour instead of me.
Has anyone else had this happen with Netflix?
The problem with this is that I was really hoping to have a chance to browse through the season before the election to find a certain skit, which is a political humor classic.
It starred impressionist David Frye, and he did all the characters — LBJ, HHH, Nixon and Wallace. It was the story of the 1968 election told as the Sword in the Stone. Does anyone besides me remember it?
Anyway, they keep sending me stuff from further down in my queue, such as "Mongol," which I saw last night and which was excellent, and "Don’t Mess With the Zohan," of which I saw less than 5 minutes before deciding it was the worst movie I had seen in many a year.
Earlier today I got this internal global message from Leroy Chapman, who as the paper’s editor in charge of the political reporters does the job I once did (poor guy):
Colleagues,
The government team is assembling a panel of voters in our community to watch the presidential and vice presidential debates with us and, afterward, serve as a focus group on how the debaters fared during a roundtable discussion we’ll have here at the newspaper. We will feature this panel on thestate.com and include it in our debate coverage.
Know somebody who’s mad for McCain, crazy for Palin, in love with Obama and rooting for Biden? Know somebody who is undecided? Please, send them my way. Especially the undecideds.
We, of course, want diversity — men, women, young, old, political, apolitical, Democrat, Republican, independent, black, white, brown, etc. Keep that in mind as you think of folks who might be interested.
Anticipating a fun experience. Please let anyone who is interested know we would like for them to sit on the panel for all four debates.
Thanks for your help
So, how about it? Anybody want to apply to be on the panel? If so, you can reach Leroy at [email protected].
Don’t make me come out there and "volunteer" some of you Army-style…
So I was sitting in a hotel room too tired to move, and on the TV is a movie I’ve never particularly cared to see: "Kingpin," with Woody Harrelson and Randy Quaid.
Anyway, there was this scene in which Harrelson’s character had a big bet on whether he could pick up the 6-7-10 split. Of course, you know he’s going to do it. (I did it myself once when I was really into bowling back in high school.) But what floored me is that the scene wasn’t cut. You see Harrelson turned toward the camera, and you see him turn and bowl, and you see the ball roll all the way down the lane, and pick up the spare, and Harrelson turns back to the camera.
So how did they do that? Was what happened with the ball and the pins faked with CGI? Was there a magnet under the ball controlling it? It looked legit. But how many takes would that have, uh, taken?
Consider this to be a test of my new theory that you can ask any question, however esoteric, on a blog, and from somewhere out there, someone will have a relevant and accurate answer. We’ll see.
Today, I forgot to bring my camera to work. Normally, I remember all my school supplies (mainly because I keep them in the briefcase out of which I live), but this morning I left my Canon PowerShot A95 on the kitchen table.
Since I had two interviews this morning — with Vince Ford, who’s seeking Kay Patterson’s Senate seat, and Rep. Joe Neal, defending House District 70 — I had to stoop to a desperate measure: I used the Sony Model DCR-SR40 camcorder that the nice folks at thestate.com gave me awhile back.
This is a pretty cool video camera, with a built-in 30-gig hard drive. It shoots pretty nice video, with MUCH higher resolution than my little Canon, which is actually intended to shoot still pictures.
There’s just one little drawback — its format is (as near as I can tell) MPEG-4, and I do not have any software that can edit MPEG-4 video. Nor can I convert these files into a format that I CAN use. That means the only way I can share video with you is if I keep it really, really short and load it onto the blog unedited, as in the clip you see above, which as short as it is, almost crashed our VMIX thingie when I loaded it.
That’s not terribly helpful when I want to share video with you from interviews that last 30 or 45 minutes or more.
This, I suspect, is the reason why the nice folks gave me this camera — they couldn’t figure out what to do with the files, either.
Anyway, I’ve wasted absurd amounts of time searching the Web for help with this problem, looking for codecs and such. Apparently, I am the first person in the history of the world to have this problem, because I’m not running into any helpful support out there.
I even got desperate enough to e-mail Sony for help, and did so, after getting through all the barriers manufacturers erect to letting you ask a direct question. Here’s the only answer I’ve received so far:
Thank you for contacting Sony.
This message confirms that your e-mail has been received and your request is currently under review. Thank you for your patience as we strive to provide you with the best service and support possible.
Your Sony Online Support Team
… which leads me to suspect that Sony has fallen into the hands of the Sirius Cybernetic Corporation. Next, I’m going to ask them if they can provide me with a drink that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
But while I’m waiting for my tea, I thought I’d check to see if Y’ALL have any suggestions for me. Helpful ones, I mean…
Folks, for what it’s worth, and whatever it means, this blog will most likely have its millionth page view sometime tomorrow. That’s Friday, May 2, 2008.
Or Saturday at the latest.
I won’t be exactly sure when we’ve hit the mark. I’ve got two counters going — the one you see in the upper right hand corner of your screen (at 997,549 as I type this), and the internal dashboard one in TypePad (at 996,986). The one you see is consistently running about 500 or 600 page views ahead of the internal one. I don’t know whether to believe either of them, of course.
Still haven’t decided how to celebrate. I won’t be able to tell who the millionth visitor is, but maybe I’ll award some arbitrary prize to the first person who leaves a comment after the first counter ticks over, or after both of them have, or something.
One thing I DO know is that the big moment is likely to come when I’m too busy to notice it, Fridays being my worst days of the week.
Anyway, I’m still open to celebration suggestions…
Here’s a pet peeve. I needed to share with a colleague a handful of Word files that had been sent to me. Unfortunately, they had been e-mailed to me as a compressed folder attachment, and my colleague didn’t have the unzip software.
So I had to unzip the things, save them to a folder, and then e-mail them to her.
My question is, why do people do that — create unnecessary barriers that just make work on both ends? The total size of all these files was less than a 72 dpi photo, so there was no need whatsoever. The e-mail went out in the blink of an eye.
I can only conclude that such items are generated by people who don’t know much about computers, or whose knowledge is 10 years out of date.
And another thing — why are so many things on the Web in PDF format, which takes my browser SO much longer than HTML, and can’t be searched as easily, and all sorts of other mean, nasty, ugly things? I can understand when it’s an image of a document that only exists in hard copy form — say, a 30-year-old newspaper page. But most documents these days start out in electronic form. Why not keep things simple, and keep the interaction smooth?
The usual culprits in this instance are academics.
There was no question, as this day dawned, that Barack Obama was going to have to denounce his ex-pastor in unequivocal terms — no more of that, Well, you just have to understand about the black church stuff.
Right now, I’m trying to decide rather urgently — did he go far enough in what he said today? I don’t mean "far enough" to satisfy me, or even you, necessarily. I just mean, did he do what he had to to save his candidacy? Because there’s no question in my mind that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s statements of the last two days put the Obama campaign below water.
After failing with white middle-class voters in Pennsylvania — and not least of all because of what we’d already heard from the Wright pulpit — this latest stuff could not be allowed to stand.
Normally, I’d allow myself a little time to decide whether what Sen. Obama said today was enough. But at the moment, I’ve trying to decide whether it makes the Bob Herbert column I just put on tomorrow’s op-ed page too outdated.
We have this problem with The New York Times. While The Washington Post, for instance, gives us its opinion columnists in plenty of time for us to run them the same day that the Post does, The Times takes a far more self-centered approach, not moving its copy until it’s damned well good and ready — which is generally hours after our next day’s pages are done. Consequently, when we run columns by Herbert, Dowd, Brooks, et al., it’s generally a day later. Which is not usually a problem. A good opinion is a good opinion a day later.
Anyway, Bob Herbert had a strong column on the Wright situation this morning, and I picked it for tomorrow over — well, over a lot of things, but in the end, it was down to that or a Samuelson piece that’s embargoed until Wednesday. I chose the Herbert. But his column says, in part:
For Senator Obama, the re-emergence of Rev. Wright has been devastating. The senator has been trying desperately to bolster his standing with skeptical and even hostile white working-class voters. When the story line of the campaign shifts almost entirely to the race-in-your-face antics of someone like Mr. Wright, Mr. Obama’s chances can only suffer.
Beyond that, the apparent helplessness of the Obama campaign in the face of the Wright onslaught contributes to the growing perception of the candidate as weak, as someone who is unwilling or unable to fight aggressively on his own behalf.
Hillary Clinton is taunting Mr. Obama about his unwillingness to participate in another debate. Rev. Wright is roaming the country with the press corps in tow, happily promoting the one issue Mr. Obama had tried to avoid: race.
Mr. Obama seems more and more like someone buffeted by events, rather than in charge of them. Very little has changed in the superdelegate count, but a number of those delegates have expressed concern in private over Mr. Obama’s inability to do better among white working-class voters and Catholics.
Then today, Obama comes out swinging on the issue…
So right this moment, I’m trying to decide whether to run Herbert because he still makes good points, or ditch him because Obama has at least tried to do something Herbert says he needed to do.
Right now, I’m at the coin-toss stage…
Don’t know whether this is legit or not, but it is interesting. A friend sent me (without comment) the above video, along with the forwarded text below:
Before you click on the attachment, scroll down on this series of e-mails to read the narrative about what is going on in he attachment. It is incredible.
Scroll down and read the narrative before you watch the video…
Canadian Snipers in Afghanistan
This footage is pretty graphic and is the antithesis of the "Global
Hawk"; one on one, enemy in sight, one at a time, etc. I guess the
"technology" is in the weapon and the ammo and the "wonder" is in the
personnel who use it.They never saw, or heard it coming.
Canadian Sniper wiping out Taliban Snipers. In Afghanistan . These
video shots are not made through the shooter’s telescopic sight… they
are made looking through the spotter’s scope. The spotter lies right
next to the sniper and helps the sniper to find and home in on thetarget.The sniper is using a 50 caliber rifle. A 50 cal. round is about 7-8
inches long and the casing is about an inch in diameter. The bullet
itself is one-half inch in diameter and roughly one and one-half inches long..Pay close attention to the beginning of the video. A Taliban is laying
on top of the peak in front of you… when you hear the shot fired….
watch what happens. The sniper is also about a half mile away… or
more. A Canadian sniper in Afghanistan has been confirmed as hitting an
enemy soldier at a range of 2,310 meters, the longest recorded and
confirmed sniper shot in history. The previous record of 2,250 meters
was set by US Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock in Vietnam in 1967. The
Canadian sniper was at an altitude of 8,500 feet and the target, across
a valley, was at 9,000 feet. Canadian sniper units often operated in
support of US infantry units, which were grateful for their help.The record lasted only one day, until a second Canadian sniper hit an
enemy soldier at 2,400 meters (8000 feet).The Canadian snipers fire special.50-calibre McMillan tactical rifles,
which are bolt-action weapons with five-round magazines. The Canadian
snipers were the only Canadian troops operating without helmets or flak
jackets as they had too much other equipment to carry. Each three-man
team has one sniper rifle, three standard rifles (Canadian C7s), one of
them with a 203mm grenade launcher.When you watch what appears to be debris see if it isn’t a body flying after being hit.
There’s no original source cited, so I don’t know that clip’s provenance. Nor do I know whether my friend who sent it thought it was horrible, or cool, or what.
But I did have some questions watching it, such as:
And now you might have a question for ME, which is, if I have so many questions, why pass it on? Why, because it’s interesting, and intriguing. Also, who knows — y’all might have some answers to my questions.
FYI, here’s another clip that purports to be about Canadian snipers:
My question about the movie theme music was answered promptly, for which I am grateful. Now, let me ask another question that maybe some of y’all can answer: Why don’t we get the option of train travel in this country?
Yeah, I know there’s Amtrak (which I wrote about not long ago), and if I don’t mind going to the station in the wee hours of the morning, I will have the privilege of going one of a number of places along a corridor that runs along the Eastern seaboard. But I’d better want to go one of the few places the train goes, because outside of a few urban areas far to the north of us, there are no connecting locals to take us anywhere else.
In Europe, train travel is fast replacing airlines as the way to go. They even have supersleek, luxury bullet trains that go 200 miles per hour. Companies that provide service (remember when you got service from airlines) find they can make a competitive go of this, according to the piece in today’s Wall Street Journal headlined "Touring Europe at 200 Miles an Hour":
High-speed rail operators in Europe are ambitiously adding routes and cutting travel times, looking to snatch customers from the short-haul airline market. They are also adding perks, such as DVD and movie rentals and free newspapers. Plush high-speed trains are luring customers weary of the bare-bones service offered on the many discount airlines that have proliferated throughout Europe: Eurostar Group Ltd. trains (which run in the United Kingdom, France and Belgium) have 33 inches of leg room in coach, for example. Discount airline Ryanair has 30 inches of leg room — and the seats don’t recline.
Spain, which is at the forefront of the rail boom, got high-speed service connecting Madrid and Barcelona last month. The journey was slashed by two hours: Now it takes just two hours, 35 minutes. Switzerland in January saw the opening of a $3.5 billion, 22-mile tunnel that passes through the Alps, cutting travel time by 45 to 75 minutes within the country and between Switzerland and Italy.
I’m still wiped out from the trip I took over the weekend — driving all day Friday to central Pennsylvania in the rain, driving to northern New Jersey Saturday, driving back to central PA Sunday, driving back to Columbia on Monday. On Sunday, I did get to ride trains — from Isalen, NJ, on New Jersey Transit, then zipping around Manhattan on the subway. I dig that so much — just go down some steps, step on a train and find yourself in another world in minutes — that I go places I don’t have to go, just to ride the subway: We’ve got an hour! Let’s zip down to Little Italy and back! I’ll get you a cannoli!
Of course, the NJT and the subway are both ancient — I found myself at one point under New York looking at a off-painted girder and wondering just how long it had been holding up the skyscrapers above — and the scenery through the Newark area is even more grittily decayed looking in real life than it is in the opening credits of The Sopranos. But at least I get where I’m going without having to drive.
Several years ago, I would have flown this trip — the part to PA, at least. Nowadays, air travel can take more time, and more hassle, than driving. Literally.
If luxury train travel can be economically competitive over there, why not over here? Is it the regulatory environment, or what?
Someone sent me a copy of that video about how fast the world is changing, and about how China has more economic growth in its little fingernail than we’re likely to have in a billion years and stuff. I’m not sure whether this was an update of the video or what (I know there are several versions of it floating out there); there was no accompanying information.
Anyway, while it was very interesting once again, it left me with a maddening question: What is that background music?
It’s from a movie, a movie I’ve seen. I’m even willing to go so far as to say I might have liked the movie. But I can’t place it.
For some reason, the music suggests something about the Scottish highlands. I picture characters running about on the heath in kilts — maybe something out of a remake of "Kidnapped" — with a wide, moving shot taken from a low-flying helicopter.
But I’m almost sure that image has nothing to do with this music. Maybe I’m thinking of a similar shot of the wilds of New Zealand from the "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. But I don’t think that’s it, either.
Normally, I can place things like this immediately, which is what is so crazy-making about this instance.
Where is it from?
Routinely, I get releases like this one from members of Congress, particularly our senators:
Graham Announces $3 Million to Assist Homeless and Disadvantaged in South Carolina
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today announced South Carolina will receive more than $3 million to assist homeless and disadvantaged persons throughout the state. The Emergency Food and Shelter program funds may be used to supplement and expand ongoing efforts to provide shelter, food and supportive services for the state’s hungry, homeless, and people in economic crisis….
In the list that followed, Lexington County got $137,496, and $236,484 will be going to Richland.
This got me to thinking: How will this money actually get spent? Will it go to more feckless, indecisive muddling on the part of our local elected governments? Will it go to an effort that is trying to help the homeless in a comprehensive way in spite of the failure of local governments, such as that led by Amos Disasa of Eastminster Presbyterian?
Maybe it’s dedicated to a specific program that asked for it; the release doesn’t say. But I was wondering what ideas you, the readers — specifically Doug Ross, who has a good deal of personal experience helping the homeless — as to how the money should be used.
This morning, noting this post and the comments on it, Cindi sent a note to Gordon and Mike, whom she knows from past lives (Gordon was my boss when I was Cindi’s boss when she was a reporter 20 years ago; Mike Cakora was one of our "community columnists" when we had that program on the op-ed page several years back):
Good morning Gordon and Mike
I hope you’re both doing well.
I’ve just been reading over your comments on Brad’s blog, and it occurred to me that if y’all read the legislative study committee report that is the backdrop for the news release he posted, 1) you might find it interesting and 2) you might be able to help me think through this — either via e-mail or through a continued discussion on Brad’s blog, whichever you prefer.
I think the report should shed additional light on precisely what is being considered. In short, the majority report recommends hiring a consultant to further think through what to do with the ETV licenses; the minority report says this is plan is a recipe for losing a valuable state resource, which will revert to the feds if we don’t have a plan in place in less than a year.
My initial, uninformed take is to agree with the minority report, written by Rep. Dwight Loftis. By way of background, Sen. Jim Ritchie — who along with Loftis first got this conversation going in the State House a year ago — had been spinning me in advance on the importance of the state taking action. He’s a proponent of a laptop for every student, by the way, a plan I am not sold on….
I feel like this is something our editorial board needs to weigh in on at some point….
Also, since Rep. Loftis has added me to his broadband e-mail list, I have received a handful of articles on the topic that I would be happy to share with either or both of you if you’d like.Cindi
Gordon urged me to post the report Cindi referred to on the blog so we could have a discussion here. Here’s the report.
Mike also answered as follows:
To the extent that I can contribute, I will. After my first scan of the report, I want to look at the FCC deadlines that the minority report is concerned about. I need to get clear on FCC terminology too.
Environmentally speaking, Clearwire looks to be involved with Sprint and Intel in trying to rescue WiMax according to breaking news.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/02/sprint_clearwir_1.htmlThus Clearwire’s role as a proponent in some of the BTAs in this state is interesting. I pulled the latest lobbyist report and found that while all the usual players — Sprint Nextel, Intel, Time Warner, etc. — have lobbyists, Clearwire does not.
Mike Cakora
So if you’re hip to the highly technical issues involved, here’s your chance to jump in. Personally, I’m depending on Cindi to figure it out and help me make up my mind. This is your chance to help Cindi — and Mike and Gordon as well.
Back before I started this blog, people like Dan Gillmor told me that the Blogosphere was chock-full of people who knew more about various issues (especially technical ones) than I or any other journalist did. While that is occasionally the case, it hasn’t been as often as I’d like. This seems like a good opportunity to realize the true potential of blogging.