colliething
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
More fun with FEC filings
Let's look at the amount of support LP presidential candidates are reproting to the FEC:
All candidates (supposedly):
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+00+PR
I can't find Root in there. Perhaps he only filed very recently. Or perhaps he refuses to file - in which case more power to him. Fuck the FEC.
But I digress. Let's look at the 'individual contributions' lines of some of the candidates:
Smith: $5,242
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003403
Phillies: $6,577
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003080
Kubby: $5,630
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P00004671
Imperato: $150
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80002975
Jingozian: $0
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003304
Interesting that the LP candidates I am interested in (Smith, Kubby, Phillies) have similar levels of individual support, although Phillies has contributed quite a bit of his own money as well. Not so interesting - or surprising - is that Jingozian and The Imp don't seem to be getting much in the way of individual contributions.
Any chance we'll see THAT sort of information presented at "Liberty Decides"? We'll see.
¶ 5:15 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
All candidates (supposedly):
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+00+PR
I can't find Root in there. Perhaps he only filed very recently. Or perhaps he refuses to file - in which case more power to him. Fuck the FEC.
But I digress. Let's look at the 'individual contributions' lines of some of the candidates:
Smith: $5,242
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003403
Phillies: $6,577
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003080
Kubby: $5,630
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P00004671
Imperato: $150
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80002975
Jingozian: $0
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+P80003304
Interesting that the LP candidates I am interested in (Smith, Kubby, Phillies) have similar levels of individual support, although Phillies has contributed quite a bit of his own money as well. Not so interesting - or surprising - is that Jingozian and The Imp don't seem to be getting much in the way of individual contributions.
Any chance we'll see THAT sort of information presented at "Liberty Decides"? We'll see.
¶ 5:15 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Liberty Decides Addendum
In a release on the LD program, Shane Cory says: "Liberty Decides '08 is an objective way to measure the excitement for and strength of all our candidates in the same spirit as Republican and Democratic primaries."
But actually it's not.
The Republican and Democratic primaries are one-man-one-vote elections. Incidentally, so is the LP's actual process of selecting a nominee in convention. But Liberty Decides is not (1) an objective measure of excitement and strength, or (2) in the same spirit as R and D primaries.
Liberty Decides is an interesting idea with promise. It shows how much candidates are willing and able to either gather for the LP or pony up to be considered serious candidates. It is not, however, as presently constituted a tool that shows support for a candidate in the sense of a 'primary election'.
¶ 4:04 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
But actually it's not.
The Republican and Democratic primaries are one-man-one-vote elections. Incidentally, so is the LP's actual process of selecting a nominee in convention. But Liberty Decides is not (1) an objective measure of excitement and strength, or (2) in the same spirit as R and D primaries.
Liberty Decides is an interesting idea with promise. It shows how much candidates are willing and able to either gather for the LP or pony up to be considered serious candidates. It is not, however, as presently constituted a tool that shows support for a candidate in the sense of a 'primary election'.
¶ 4:04 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Liberty Decides - revisited
I've already discussed the LP's new Liberty Decides program a bit earlier. I've been disappointed - though not terribly surprised - that no effort has been made to include any metric of 'support' other than aggregate contributions. Using only aggregate contributions (to the LNC in the candidate's name, not to the candidate) allows crazy well-off guys who are only marginally if at all libertarian (yes, I mean you, Imperato and Jingozian and Root) to essentially buy a 'top spot' on the LP's website while the more traditional radical libertarian activist candidates are still trying to get together travel money to get to as many state conventions as possible.
Traditional LP grassroots candidates are at a big disadvantage here, as their supporters quite naturally want to focus on giving their money to the candidates to run what must be at this point pretty tight campaigns, money-wise. Including metrics other than aggregate support - such as number of individual contributions, percentages of contributions given my LP members, or other details, would help allay this disadvantage to a great extent. And, if there really is a groundswell of support within the Libertarian community for warmongering, social-security-loving, neo-geo-libertarianesque-wannabes, that should be evident as well. Important information.
But here's a very interesting thing about the program. From the rules page: Donations from the candidates will be counted towards funds raised. Also, any money contributed since the candidate has announced his or her intent to seek the nomination will be included (this includes the exploratory committee timeframe).
Put that together with information gleaned from the LP's FEC filings:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00255695/
and you should at least have some idea of what percentage of each candidate's initial $5,000 might have come from their own pockets. Since the reporting naturally lags the donations, it's not perfectly clear yet, but old reports give some idea of the situation. For example, as of the end of August (three months ago), Imperato had apparently given $3480.00 to the LNC (thanks, by the way) for the year 2007. Jingozian: $1,000 (again; thanks!). Root: at least $1,000 (aggregate amount not available). It'll be fun to see the numbers at the next report, to see how much of their aggregates has come form their own pockets. Again, it's great that they want to contribute to the LP; but it isn't so useful as a metric of support.
Of course, the rules also say: The primary metric of the program is funds raised for the Libertarian National Committee.
By which, apparently, the rules mean the only metric is funds raised for the LNC, since the very next sentence is:
Candidates will be ranked by the amount of money they have raised or attracted to the LP.
But the next sentence is very interesting:
Funds raised will be reported in total and also by month.
I don't see any 'reporting by month' on the website. it would have to go back until the time each candidate filed. Perhaps that will be in the next issue of LP News? Frankly, while I'm glad the LNC's Executive Director has come up with such a clever way to part fools from their money, I am very dubious about the value of this tool for activists. As presently constituted, this tool gives what I think is very misleading information about each candidate's relative depth of support, while giving (so far) precisely no information on the breadth of support or positions on critical issues.
¶ 3:17 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Traditional LP grassroots candidates are at a big disadvantage here, as their supporters quite naturally want to focus on giving their money to the candidates to run what must be at this point pretty tight campaigns, money-wise. Including metrics other than aggregate support - such as number of individual contributions, percentages of contributions given my LP members, or other details, would help allay this disadvantage to a great extent. And, if there really is a groundswell of support within the Libertarian community for warmongering, social-security-loving, neo-geo-libertarianesque-wannabes, that should be evident as well. Important information.
But here's a very interesting thing about the program. From the rules page: Donations from the candidates will be counted towards funds raised. Also, any money contributed since the candidate has announced his or her intent to seek the nomination will be included (this includes the exploratory committee timeframe).
Put that together with information gleaned from the LP's FEC filings:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00255695/
and you should at least have some idea of what percentage of each candidate's initial $5,000 might have come from their own pockets. Since the reporting naturally lags the donations, it's not perfectly clear yet, but old reports give some idea of the situation. For example, as of the end of August (three months ago), Imperato had apparently given $3480.00 to the LNC (thanks, by the way) for the year 2007. Jingozian: $1,000 (again; thanks!). Root: at least $1,000 (aggregate amount not available). It'll be fun to see the numbers at the next report, to see how much of their aggregates has come form their own pockets. Again, it's great that they want to contribute to the LP; but it isn't so useful as a metric of support.
Of course, the rules also say: The primary metric of the program is funds raised for the Libertarian National Committee.
By which, apparently, the rules mean the only metric is funds raised for the LNC, since the very next sentence is:
Candidates will be ranked by the amount of money they have raised or attracted to the LP.
But the next sentence is very interesting:
Funds raised will be reported in total and also by month.
I don't see any 'reporting by month' on the website. it would have to go back until the time each candidate filed. Perhaps that will be in the next issue of LP News? Frankly, while I'm glad the LNC's Executive Director has come up with such a clever way to part fools from their money, I am very dubious about the value of this tool for activists. As presently constituted, this tool gives what I think is very misleading information about each candidate's relative depth of support, while giving (so far) precisely no information on the breadth of support or positions on critical issues.
¶ 3:17 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Flat Daddy?
This is just ... bizarre:
http://www.imalreadyhome.com/flatdaddy.htm
¶ 11:17 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
Monday, November 26, 2007
Thanksgiving pictures
For those who may be interested; my pictures from the Hogarth-sister
Thanksgiving:
Thanksgiving:
http://picasaweb.google.com/hogarth/Thanksgiving07
Regrettably, I didn't have a chance to get to see Dad on such a short
trip (only two days, and no car of my own), but I did spend a
wonderful early afternoon with oldest sister Nancy - without, I now
regret, getting any photographs. I am sure a picture or two of her
would have raised the whole tone of the collection :)
Try clicking on "Slideshow" if you have the stomach for family
photography - there are some more interesting pics mixed in as well
(especially if you have a foot fetish:). Do I have the cutest nieces
in the world or -what-!?!
--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
My take on the Libertarian (sic) presidential candidates
The LP national office has a fun new tool for 'horseracing' the LP candidates. Actually, it's a nifty idea for fleecing terminally vain and/or delusional people with more dollars than sense, like my favorite political punching-bag Daniel Imperato. I guess for that purpose, it's an admirable tool. w00t! Keep sending the money, suckas!!
But. It would be a much more useful tool for Libertarian activists and likely convention delegates (you know, the folks who actually select the LP nominee) with two simple additions, which I mentioned yesterday:
1) some indication of how many individual donors each candidate has (and, ideally, how many of them are Party members).
2) some indication (other than a link to their websites) of positions.
For number 2, here's my highly-biased-yet-nonetheless-totally-accurate take on their positions and where they stand as Libertarians. Taking them in the (current) order they stand on:
Wayne Allen Root
Surprisingly Libertarian-sounding on many issues. Surprising because I don't remember thinking that the last time I checked his site. Obviously been getting coaching and (amazingly enough) paying attention. However, still addicted to the so-called war on terror. Confused on Iraq - wants the Iraqis to decide whether American troops stay (not just GO, but STAY, mind you). He presents this mind-bender with an amazingly straight face: Republicans say "stay." Wrong answer. Democrats say "Go." Wrong answer. It is a much more complicated issue than that. Umm, no, Mr. WAR, it's not.
A for effort. B for issues other than war. D for warmongering. Bzzt. Next contestant, please!!
Michael Jingozian
I've been meaning to get around to looking into Jingozian. The first thing that strikes me is that his website is written entirely with the 'royal we'. The second is that his candidacy is some sort of flagship for a (mythical? fantasy? dream?) coalition of third parties who will 'reset America'. Goody, another 'revolution'. sigh. I'm so sure the Greens and the Constitutionalists will want to jump on the Libertarian boat and head down the river with us. There's also the rather hysterical (and not in the funny sort of way) message embedded in the assertion that We must RESET our Government right now. Valid solutions will not be possible after 2010. Whoa. Bummer. And... five-year-plan? Hoookay... step away from the Visio software, bud. Enough with the flow diagrams!
Still, he actually seems like a libertarian, to the extent he talks about issues at all (which ain't much, from my quick read). There's points for that! Definitely a possibility. At any rate, not bootable just yet.
Daniel Imperato
Need I say more? Must I?
Sigh. I suppose I must.
Socialist nutjob. Seriously, I've met this guy; take my word for it. "Saving Social Security" is a top issue - and he doesn't mean saving it for the first-against-the-wall party after the revolution, he really means we should save it. Runs his own press service to get his clips on the web. And let's not even get into the weird Catholic Knights thing. He sure gets an A for effort, though, with all his flying around to darken the doorsteps of state LP conventions. "The Imp" (as I like to call him) surely just wants the LP's ballot line for his "Independent" candidacy. He'll be sad when he gets hosed in Denver. I won't.
NOTA
As always, a popular favorite among Libertarians. Understandable at this point. Entirely. Depressingly.
Future/Unannounced Candidate
Ron Paul votes. No surprise he's doing well among Libs. I've heard lots of 'insider talk' that he will run as a Libertarian. I discredit most of it, but won't be surprised either way.
Christine Smith
Another chance to check her out. A welcome improvement in her website. I'm feeling pretty warmly about her right now: right on the front of the site: My first act as President would be to order the immediate withdrawal of every single U.S. troop and all U.S. government personnel from Iraq. SWEET. Other positions as well seem to follow a radical libertarian plumbline at first glance.
Top of my list right now. I'm surprised. And somewhat relieved.
George Phillies
Generally pretty plumbline libertarian. But: I'm not happy with his immigration position (closed borders) and I am appalled at this statement Eminent Domain takings should be limited to traditional public purposes. Whoops. Deal-breaker. Sorry, George.
Dave Hollist
Ah, Hollist. Here's the picture of a perennial candidate. Got some weird 'contract' idea of government. Interesting. Well, not really.
Steve Kubby
Pretty much plumbline libertarian, and my best hope until I just reconnected with Christine Smith (thank the gods!). Unfortunately, he blew it for me by endorsing another candidate (??!!?) and blew it again by releasing possibly the worst campaign video I've ever seen. And I'm a Libertarian, remember. The video wasn't just bad, it was also a commercial for another candidate (!!??!!) Bzzt! Next!!!
Alden Link
Western Civilization and its traditions are under attack by radical Islamic fundamentalists who seek to spread their message through violence.
and
Just as private property owners have the right to decide whom they wish to invite onto their property, the government of each nation state, as a representative of the citizens living therein, has the absolute right to decide who shall be permitted to enter their country.
So. Moving on.
Barry Hess
Still has a "Hess for Governor" website up. I'm not taking him seriously until he takes him seriously.
John Finan
G-D Flash site makes it hard to capture his amazing prose, but I'll do it if I have to type it. OK, I lied. Look it up, though (I won't link it). He apparently wants to nuke Iran to punish its president. He thinks war is 'unfortunate' (really?), but 'needs to be managed ... perhaps better'. Thinks we should remove troops from Iraq in the past (!!!) and yet 'rebuild' Iraq. Eh? How's that?
He boldfaces Al Gore's name (many times) as if he thinks that will help him. Whatever. Oh, and he's suggesting that his company's technology is the answer to many of America's problems. Yes. I see.
Socialist. Crazy. Deluded. Warmongerer. I just can't say enough about him. Oh, if you do check him out, don't miss the Christmas Tree page!!! Seriously. Gets an A for the funniest website, edging out The Imp.
Robert Milnes
Obviously using his presidential run to pick up chicks. Which puts him about two steps above The Imp, and miles above Finan.
I, personally, identify more with the Greens. Therefore I seek a woman Libertarian candidate for Vice-President to form a "hybrid" ticket. This ticket should combine the Green and Libertarian votes into one "Progressive Alliance" vote.
Good luck getting a date, Bob. You sure as hell aren't getting the LP nomination.
Bob Jackson
I want to like him because he's got this adorable male-pattern-baldness thing going. But... Eagle Scout??? Here's a guy who has actually embraced the stupid motto the national LP is pushing on its website: " Lower Taxes, Less Government, More Freedom". Blech. Ptooey. that hurts even with cut-and-paste. Issues: another warmongerer: We have a committed enemy that wants to destroy the United States by "a death of a thousand cuts". The United States can prevail against this aggression through better leadership. Don't-think-so.
So. Somewhat to my surprise, I find myself solidly behind Christine Smith at this point. I guess this exercise has been worth it. Thanks, Shane Cory! Hahahaha. No, seriously.
¶ 6:38 PM 5 Comments Links to this post
But. It would be a much more useful tool for Libertarian activists and likely convention delegates (you know, the folks who actually select the LP nominee) with two simple additions, which I mentioned yesterday:
1) some indication of how many individual donors each candidate has (and, ideally, how many of them are Party members).
2) some indication (other than a link to their websites) of positions.
For number 2, here's my highly-biased-yet-nonetheless-totally-accurate take on their positions and where they stand as Libertarians. Taking them in the (current) order they stand on:
Wayne Allen Root
Surprisingly Libertarian-sounding on many issues. Surprising because I don't remember thinking that the last time I checked his site. Obviously been getting coaching and (amazingly enough) paying attention. However, still addicted to the so-called war on terror. Confused on Iraq - wants the Iraqis to decide whether American troops stay (not just GO, but STAY, mind you). He presents this mind-bender with an amazingly straight face: Republicans say "stay." Wrong answer. Democrats say "Go." Wrong answer. It is a much more complicated issue than that. Umm, no, Mr. WAR, it's not.
A for effort. B for issues other than war. D for warmongering. Bzzt. Next contestant, please!!
Michael Jingozian
I've been meaning to get around to looking into Jingozian. The first thing that strikes me is that his website is written entirely with the 'royal we'. The second is that his candidacy is some sort of flagship for a (mythical? fantasy? dream?) coalition of third parties who will 'reset America'. Goody, another 'revolution'. sigh. I'm so sure the Greens and the Constitutionalists will want to jump on the Libertarian boat and head down the river with us. There's also the rather hysterical (and not in the funny sort of way) message embedded in the assertion that We must RESET our Government right now. Valid solutions will not be possible after 2010. Whoa. Bummer. And... five-year-plan? Hoookay... step away from the Visio software, bud. Enough with the flow diagrams!
Still, he actually seems like a libertarian, to the extent he talks about issues at all (which ain't much, from my quick read). There's points for that! Definitely a possibility. At any rate, not bootable just yet.
Daniel Imperato
Need I say more? Must I?
Sigh. I suppose I must.
Socialist nutjob. Seriously, I've met this guy; take my word for it. "Saving Social Security" is a top issue - and he doesn't mean saving it for the first-against-the-wall party after the revolution, he really means we should save it. Runs his own press service to get his clips on the web. And let's not even get into the weird Catholic Knights thing. He sure gets an A for effort, though, with all his flying around to darken the doorsteps of state LP conventions. "The Imp" (as I like to call him) surely just wants the LP's ballot line for his "Independent" candidacy. He'll be sad when he gets hosed in Denver. I won't.
NOTA
As always, a popular favorite among Libertarians. Understandable at this point. Entirely. Depressingly.
Future/Unannounced Candidate
Ron Paul votes. No surprise he's doing well among Libs. I've heard lots of 'insider talk' that he will run as a Libertarian. I discredit most of it, but won't be surprised either way.
Christine Smith
Another chance to check her out. A welcome improvement in her website. I'm feeling pretty warmly about her right now: right on the front of the site: My first act as President would be to order the immediate withdrawal of every single U.S. troop and all U.S. government personnel from Iraq. SWEET. Other positions as well seem to follow a radical libertarian plumbline at first glance.
Top of my list right now. I'm surprised. And somewhat relieved.
George Phillies
Generally pretty plumbline libertarian. But: I'm not happy with his immigration position (closed borders) and I am appalled at this statement Eminent Domain takings should be limited to traditional public purposes. Whoops. Deal-breaker. Sorry, George.
Dave Hollist
Ah, Hollist. Here's the picture of a perennial candidate. Got some weird 'contract' idea of government. Interesting. Well, not really.
Steve Kubby
Pretty much plumbline libertarian, and my best hope until I just reconnected with Christine Smith (thank the gods!). Unfortunately, he blew it for me by endorsing another candidate (??!!?) and blew it again by releasing possibly the worst campaign video I've ever seen. And I'm a Libertarian, remember. The video wasn't just bad, it was also a commercial for another candidate (!!??!!) Bzzt! Next!!!
Alden Link
Western Civilization and its traditions are under attack by radical Islamic fundamentalists who seek to spread their message through violence.
and
Just as private property owners have the right to decide whom they wish to invite onto their property, the government of each nation state, as a representative of the citizens living therein, has the absolute right to decide who shall be permitted to enter their country.
So. Moving on.
Barry Hess
Still has a "Hess for Governor" website up. I'm not taking him seriously until he takes him seriously.
John Finan
G-D Flash site makes it hard to capture his amazing prose, but I'll do it if I have to type it. OK, I lied. Look it up, though (I won't link it). He apparently wants to nuke Iran to punish its president. He thinks war is 'unfortunate' (really?), but 'needs to be managed ... perhaps better'. Thinks we should remove troops from Iraq in the past (!!!) and yet 'rebuild' Iraq. Eh? How's that?
He boldfaces Al Gore's name (many times) as if he thinks that will help him. Whatever. Oh, and he's suggesting that his company's technology is the answer to many of America's problems. Yes. I see.
Socialist. Crazy. Deluded. Warmongerer. I just can't say enough about him. Oh, if you do check him out, don't miss the Christmas Tree page!!! Seriously. Gets an A for the funniest website, edging out The Imp.
Robert Milnes
Obviously using his presidential run to pick up chicks. Which puts him about two steps above The Imp, and miles above Finan.
I, personally, identify more with the Greens. Therefore I seek a woman Libertarian candidate for Vice-President to form a "hybrid" ticket. This ticket should combine the Green and Libertarian votes into one "Progressive Alliance" vote.
Good luck getting a date, Bob. You sure as hell aren't getting the LP nomination.
Bob Jackson
I want to like him because he's got this adorable male-pattern-baldness thing going. But... Eagle Scout??? Here's a guy who has actually embraced the stupid motto the national LP is pushing on its website: " Lower Taxes, Less Government, More Freedom". Blech. Ptooey. that hurts even with cut-and-paste. Issues: another warmongerer: We have a committed enemy that wants to destroy the United States by "a death of a thousand cuts". The United States can prevail against this aggression through better leadership. Don't-think-so.
So. Somewhat to my surprise, I find myself solidly behind Christine Smith at this point. I guess this exercise has been worth it. Thanks, Shane Cory! Hahahaha. No, seriously.
¶ 6:38 PM 5 Comments Links to this post
Monday, November 19, 2007
Liberty Decides
The LP has a new program to showcase LP presidential candidates:
http://www.lp.org/libertydecides/
There is a lively discussion of the program here:
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/11/16/liberty-decides-08/
Here is a note I sent to Bill Redpath and Shane Cory. I urge others to think about these two simple ideas and, if you judge them sensible, to write Redpath and Cory and your LNC representative(s) and ask them to be considered:
Gentlemen,
I am sure you are getting lots of feedback on this innovative program, so I will keep it short. I have two suggestions:
1) One easy way to help readers distinguish between candidates who have more dollars than sense would be to list - along with the total contribution - the NUMBER of individual contributions, and/or make a certain number of individual supporters a criterion at the same level as total dollars raised/given.
2) Give each candidate a table with the plank number on the left side and a 50-word (or fewer) blank spot on the right side. Then publish it with each candidate's picture and let libertarians judge which candidates are most in line with the Party's platform. Make filling out this questionnaire a condition of listing.
These two simple measures - requiring a 50-word statement on each platform plank from each candidate, and listing the number of individual contributors as well as total dollars raised - would represent a -significant- improvement on a very interesting program, I think.
Thanks for your time and work!
--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com
¶ 2:36 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
http://www.lp.org/libertydecides/
There is a lively discussion of the program here:
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/11/16/liberty-decides-08/
Here is a note I sent to Bill Redpath and Shane Cory. I urge others to think about these two simple ideas and, if you judge them sensible, to write Redpath and Cory and your LNC representative(s) and ask them to be considered:
Gentlemen,
I am sure you are getting lots of feedback on this innovative program, so I will keep it short. I have two suggestions:
1) One easy way to help readers distinguish between candidates who have more dollars than sense would be to list - along with the total contribution - the NUMBER of individual contributions, and/or make a certain number of individual supporters a criterion at the same level as total dollars raised/given.
2) Give each candidate a table with the plank number on the left side and a 50-word (or fewer) blank spot on the right side. Then publish it with each candidate's picture and let libertarians judge which candidates are most in line with the Party's platform. Make filling out this questionnaire a condition of listing.
These two simple measures - requiring a 50-word statement on each platform plank from each candidate, and listing the number of individual contributors as well as total dollars raised - would represent a -significant- improvement on a very interesting program, I think.
Thanks for your time and work!
--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com
¶ 2:36 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Friday, November 16, 2007
If you're thinking about getting XM Radio...
Please email me. I can get $20 if you subscribe with me as a referrer.
And I know everyone wants me to be wealthier.
And I know everyone wants me to be wealthier.
XM rocks. I just picked up the Pioneer Inno so I can wear a dorky
antenna on my head and listen to CSPAN while walking the dogs.
Do I have an exciting life, or what?!
¶ 10:43 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Today at Work
http://www.savagechickens.com/blog/2007/11/thursday.html
But now it's yabba-dabba-doooo! time!! Outta here!
¶ 5:15 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
A 'Libertarian' advocate of mass murder ...
... wrote this to and about me as the result of an unsatisfactory email exchange: The behavior you're exhibiting is typical of the most extreme (and thus rare) cases of a correspondent's polemical reach vastly exceeding his grasp.
Horrors! A guy who thinks slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians was a life-saving measure finds me coming up short intellectually. I am crushed.
¶ 1:29 PM 1 Comments Links to this post
Horrors! A guy who thinks slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians was a life-saving measure finds me coming up short intellectually. I am crushed.
¶ 1:29 PM 1 Comments Links to this post
Sunday, November 11, 2007
The English Language
The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary. - James Davis Nicoll
¶ 9:05 PM 0 Comments
Links to this post
Friday, November 09, 2007
And speaking of music...
Bill and I caught the Future Kings of Nowhere (http://www.trianglerock.com/music/bandetail.php?actor_ID=2944) last night after the Wake LP meeting at TNN. They were minus at least one person, but I was -amazed- at what a drummer and guitarist (and two voices) could deliver. Of course, I seem to be having a thing for drummers these days, especially signing drummers. This one was adorable, and an awesome backup vocalist - though he was a bit overfussy about his equipment, it seemed.)
Such a wonderful clear sound, good melody but not -too- much melody (because I have an aversion to an excess of melody). Great voices. I had maybe heard one piece of theirs on WKNC, Bill had heard several, but every piece was immediately accessible and pleasant to listen to. Go listen to Ten Simple Murders. Now. Now!!! http://mp3.groovo.org/3pm/futurekingsofnowhere-10SimpleMurders.mp3
¶ 1:07 PM 1 Comments Links to this post
Such a wonderful clear sound, good melody but not -too- much melody (because I have an aversion to an excess of melody). Great voices. I had maybe heard one piece of theirs on WKNC, Bill had heard several, but every piece was immediately accessible and pleasant to listen to. Go listen to Ten Simple Murders. Now. Now!!! http://mp3.groovo.org/3pm/futurekingsofnowhere-10SimpleMurders.mp3
¶ 1:07 PM 1 Comments Links to this post
Happy Day
Thanks to Marc for introducing me to a new word. On a Friday, no less!
Hoplophobia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia
AND (as if that isn't enough excitement for one day) ...
... I scored second-row tickets to my husband's favorite band, the Dresden Dolls, in January. w00t!
¶ 12:57 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Hoplophobia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia
AND (as if that isn't enough excitement for one day) ...
... I scored second-row tickets to my husband's favorite band, the Dresden Dolls, in January. w00t!
¶ 12:57 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
How could this possibly be a crime?
I suppose it could be littering:
http://wral.com/news/state/story/2021634/
Raleigh — North Carolina State University police are trying to find out who left a noose made of toilet paper dangling from a restroom stall door in the Sullivan Shops building.
"This could be someone's idea of a prank, or it might constitute a crime," Chancellor James Oblinger said.
How irksome. The LP should issue a statement that hate-is-not-a-crime.
¶ 5:38 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
http://wral.com/news/state/story/2021634/
Raleigh — North Carolina State University police are trying to find out who left a noose made of toilet paper dangling from a restroom stall door in the Sullivan Shops building.
"This could be someone's idea of a prank, or it might constitute a crime," Chancellor James Oblinger said.
How irksome. The LP should issue a statement that hate-is-not-a-crime.
¶ 5:38 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Today's dumb statement ...
...comes from a short paper (I'd say 'mercifully short', but it wasn't; not enough, anyway) on income redistribution:
http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc123f.pdf
That the Social Security Act and the Social Security System have the term "security" in them is also evidence in support
of the position that our income transfer system is attempting to promote economic security.
I guess that's like the evidence that the 'War on Drugs' is attempting to promote drugs. or war.
Hmm. He may have a point.
But seriously. What it is evidence of is that those who were trying to sell SS (for whatever reason) know that 'security' is considered to be a Good Thing by the people they were trying to sell it to. What a dork.
¶ 5:04 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc123f.pdf
That the Social Security Act and the Social Security System have the term "security" in them is also evidence in support
of the position that our income transfer system is attempting to promote economic security.
I guess that's like the evidence that the 'War on Drugs' is attempting to promote drugs. or war.
Hmm. He may have a point.
But seriously. What it is evidence of is that those who were trying to sell SS (for whatever reason) know that 'security' is considered to be a Good Thing by the people they were trying to sell it to. What a dork.
¶ 5:04 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
More thoughts on "Get out the vote" (GOTV) for the LP
I made a few (very few) calls using the LP Ballotbase system the other
day. It did bring back memories of when I was an enthusiastic but
stupid supporter of ... gosh, what was his name?... ah, yes, Mondale.
Heh. Anyway. After thinking about it some, I wonder about the whole
idea of GOTV for a 'third' party. Is it really a good idea?
day. It did bring back memories of when I was an enthusiastic but
stupid supporter of ... gosh, what was his name?... ah, yes, Mondale.
Heh. Anyway. After thinking about it some, I wonder about the whole
idea of GOTV for a 'third' party. Is it really a good idea?
Some general discussion of GOTV is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_out_the_vote
Note this section:
"In contexts of the efforts of candidates, party activities and ballot
measure campaigns, "get-out-the-vote" (or GOTV) is an adjective
indicating having the effect of increasing the number of the
campaign's supporters who will vote in the immediately approaching
election. ... GOTV generally is distinguished from preliminary
activities necessary to carrying it out. That is, GOTV includes
telephoning known supporters on the day of the election (or
occasionally in the last few days before it to remind them to vote,
and providing rides to the polls to known supporters), but the process
of identifying those supporters is generally described as a separate
part of the campaign, voter identification ("ID-ing") -- the major
focus of canvassing."
My concern with Ballotbase and all GOTV efforts for the LP is that it
strikes me as a bit 'cargo cult-ish' - if GOTV works for R/D, why not
for us? But the thing is.... most people are either registered as R
or D!!! Not L!! So while *calling people* (in a targeted fashion)
*might* be good for Libertarian *campaigning*, I think it's largely
wasted in terms of GOTV. GOTV makes most sense when you've got a big
chunk of the electorate registered in your party, or already on your
side. If I get a GOTV call from someone I've never heard of in a
political party I don't know very well or at all, it -might- remind me
to vote, but probably not for that particular person.
I suppose the LP's Ballotbase numbers -are- targeted in some way.
Perhaps they are registered Ls, or at least registered 'independent'
or 'unaffiliated'. Maybe more sophisticated targeting has been done. I
need to check into that. Anyone here plugged in enough to know? I do
know that GOTV to a well-targeted list is a LOT of fun - it's sort of
the icing on the election effort for activists - only surpassed by
standing in the rain at the polls handing out sample ballots (I only
partly jest; that kind of stuff can become addictive). But calling a
steady stream of people who are -not- likely to be on your side, or to
not even -know- about your side... that can be demoralizing.
Stephen Gordon posted about ballotbase during last year's election:
http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000474.shtml
"BallotBase works! In our first test case, we tripled the number of
Libertarian votes in the district. In a different race, we had a State
House candidate in the Vermont primaries who won by one vote. It's
clear that BallotBase calls were the deciding factor in that race."
And that seems to indicate to me that some sort of targeting is
happening. I'm really curious now to know what level of targeting.
