Blogs
The YouTube Election
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sun, 08/20/2006 - 11:24(Originally posted on various blogs in various formats,
OAC,
The Official Lamont Blog
and Greater Democracy.)
Today’s New York Times has this article,
The YouTube Election.
But YouTube may be changing the political process in more profound ways,
for good and perhaps not for the better, according to strategists in both
parties. If campaigns resemble reality television, where any moment of a
candidate's life can be captured on film and posted on the Web, will the
last shreds of authenticity be stripped from our public officials? Will
candidates be pushed further into a scripted bubble? In short, will YouTube
democratize politics, or destroy it?
Well, for me, good campaigns don't resemble reality television. Sure, some people may try to use something like YouTube to make their campaign like reality television, and most people will recognize how vapid such a campaign really is.
No, good campaigns resemble the political discussions over Sunday dinner. We all tried to be polite, no matter how hard it was. We struggled with issues. Sometimes, we might even admit that we had said something wrong.
Snakes on a campaign
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 21:10Okay, everyone is talking about Snakes on a Plane, so I thought I should add my brief snarky comment. Back on the 14th, MSNBC reported that U.S., U.K. at odds over timing of arrests in the British terror plots.
My friends wearing tin foil hats suggested that the timing was altered to coincide with remarks by Cheney and Lieberman about how Democratic voters in Connecticut, by rejecting Lieberman, were supporting terrorists.
This is ridiculous. We should all recognize that the timing of the arrests was made to help ticket sales for Snakes on a Plane.
Sen. Edwards and Ned Lamont
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Thu, 08/17/2006 - 23:08
Sen. Edwards and Ned Lamont address a bunch of bloggers in New Haven, CT
DR. ALEKSEJ N. VUKOLOV
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Thu, 08/17/2006 - 11:40DR. ALEKSEJ N. VUKOLOV was born May 24, 1917 in Novocherkassk, Russia.
His father was an officer in the Russian Army, WW1. Germany was defeated but the homeland was lost to communists in the Russian revolution. His father fought in the White Army and retreated to Yugoslavia. Aleksej's mother was Polish and left Russia with her son during an amnesty period. They settled in Yugoslavia with his father. One year later, his parents divorced. His mother worked and re-married in 2 years.
He graduated from a Russian Cadet Military Academy as a cavalry officer in his new country's army. He fought Germans on horseback in the mountains at the beginning of World War 2. His King surrendered to Hitler and signed the Geneva Convention. Hitler honored it. Aleksej was a prisoner of war for four years. After the war, he returned to a much changed country under communist Tito's absolute control. He became a dentist.
He emigrated to U.S.A. in 1956, settling in Louisville Kentucky with only $10. He entered dental school at the University of Louisville, graduating in 1959, second in his class (one year earlier than required).He came to Connecticut and practised dentistry in West Haven until he retired. He was Captain in the Connecticut Horse Guard, Second Company, for 25 years. He studied with Karl Mikolka, Classical Dressage, for 6 years learning technique. He taught dressage and trained 2 horses to Grand Prix level.
Connecticut is 2006’s Iowa
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Wed, 08/16/2006 - 13:19(Cross posted to Greater Democracy)
Over the past week, all the pundits have been explaining the meaning of Ned Lamont’s victory over Joe Lieberman. It is a victory of the liberals over the moderates some tell us. Others say that it is a victory of the anti-war crowd. Still others suggest it is a victory of the outsiders over the insiders. As a staffer on the Lamont campaign and a frequent contributor to Greater Democracy, I want to add my thoughts on this. It is a victory of good old-fashioned American Democracy.
Polls have shown that the war was a very important issue for voters in Connecticut. They have shown that many people voted for Ned Lamont because they no longer approve of Sen. Lieberman. Yet to me, the line that sums it up most succinctly was at the nominating convention when the Southbury delegation cast its vote saying, “Madam Secretary, Southbury, the town that invited Joe Lieberman to speak in February, and is still waiting for a return call, proudly casts five votes for Ned Lamont!”
To put it into the language of this blog, Lamont’s victory was a victory of post-broadcast politics. The disengaged beltway sound-byte isn’t good enough anymore. People want a representative democracy where candidates go out and engage in an honest and vigorous discussion about the issues. These discussions are not simply a candidate talking at potential voters, but a multi-way discussion.
