Pitch a Show: 1/4/07
Brand new pitch-a-show thread for the new year. And since we’re so lousy about updating them regularly, we’re giving this one a start date rather than a discrete month whose bounds we would inevitably overstep.
November and December saw lots of Listener-Suggested shows produced. There was Jon’s The Pain of Borat, Sutter’s The Democrats’ New Reading List, patsyb’s “A Night in November,” Ben’s Global Warming Goes to the Supreme Court, and Emmett O’Connell’s Japanese Baseball show.
We’re still catching up on a few pitches that came in over the holidays; if we’ve left you hanging, here’s the link to the old thread where we’ll respond. If we left you hanging six months ago, here’s the link to our full archive of pitch threads.
Keep them coming.
- How This Works
- Every day one of our producers reads the pitch-a-show thread and responds in the thread with a roundup. We read every show suggestion and will respond to as many as we can.
Every day, that same producer takes the pitches that could make a good show and presents them to the whole staff in our 11 am story meeting. If the rest of the staff thinks the show might work on the radio, too, we write up a short description and post the idea as a new show under “Warming Up.” Sometimes the pitch dies in the meeting; we often reject our own ideas, too. (Often brutally. It’s not a meeting for wallflowers.)
When you pitch a show idea, try to answer the question “Why now?” We don’t want to be slaves to the news cycle — and we’re less news-bound than most public radio shows — but if you want us to do a show on Dostoevsky, for example, help us figure out why now is the time to do it. Is there something going on in Russia now that makes him especially relevant or interesting?
Pitch us ideas from your own reading habits and your own lives. We read The New York Times and listen to Fresh Air, too; we need your help catching the stories we might not see. Do you have regional insight on a national issue? Have you read something in a local paper with wider implications (or just fascinating in its own right)?
On the radio we need a conversation. We need questions. If you have a thesis or a conclusion, you’re better off writing a blog post or an article than pitching it as a show.
Give us as much information as you can. Are there any links you can leave us as a reference? Run a search on Technorati or Google Blogsearch; are any bloggers writing about this? We’re understaffed and distracted; point us in a direction and then help us down the road with a solid nudge.
We’re working hard to respond as quickly and as thoroughly as we can; please don’t be disappointed if your pitch doesn’t make it to the radio. Stick around. Pitch again. We’re reading.
Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback
January 4th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
This my favorite thread, so forgive me if I rush in avidly, elbows akimbo, Filene’s basement-style. You do so many things so well that I won’t even pretend to complain. Your cultural coverage exemplary, but I wonder if it isn’t slanted too much toward things we’re already supposed to know (Roth, Updike)- Most of us cower in our ignorance of, um, Spinoza, but who here has heard of Harry Partch, Ray Johnson, William S. Wilson, to name just three overlooked contemporary figures in music, art, and literature, respectively. I could go on, as most here could. You might pause to tease out some of the hidden figures. Happy to help in the event.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Chelsea wrote: “Allison: we can’t promise a series but we’ll look into ways in which can do some more shows on the economy. But if we were to do a series what is the first show that you would want to hear? Who would your dream guests be? I’m reading a paper about the economics of happiness, which does bear on quality of life issues, we’ll see if that becomes a show…”
Ted Halstead founded Redefining Progress. He’s in DC now, but might be interesting to hear. Or whoever is the latest Ex. Dir. Also, Paul Hawkins. His book “The Ecology of Commerce” is practically “old” now, but he’s immersied in the subject.
Hazel Henderson has been working on this stuff for a long time.
I’m sure there are people in Europe, particularly Germany and the Scandinavian countries. A lot of the environmental sustainability laws are meshed with the concept of thinking about the economy differently. Sustainability is simply so different that GDP. I’ll see what kind of names I can drum up.
thanks for considering this.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Category 5 Levees. Is the busiest port in the U.S. (20% of all U.S. exports, and 60% of our grain exports) worth it? Is the area supplying 20% of domestic oil production worth it? A show educating folks about the importance of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast would be timely. Explaining things like why port cities are near sea level and often below. A show educating folks about other nation’s technological commitments to protecting such cities (Dutch, England and the Thames…)
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0112-15.htm
January 4th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Libertarians and Democrats
This topic was kicked around a bit before the election when Markos Moulitsas wrote this essay. Basically, are the Republicans so turning off hard core Libertarians that they’d cross over and vote Democratic? I haven’t found any poll data to show that, but it was an interesting discussion.
Here are some links.
The Case for the Libertarian Democrat
The Libertarian Democrat: This Year’s Jackalope
Should Libertarians Vote Democrat?
Libertarian Democrats
And, my favorite corner of the conversation (because I was part of it) Matt Singer’s of Left in the West “F*ck You Democrats” and my response.
January 4th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Also, an addition to the library thread from last time around, here is an article on libraries as third places.
January 4th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
With the now twenty-year-long demise of independent bookstores, it’s time to pay attention to what our libraries are up to. Consider this: the Fairfax Library (VA) system’s circulation numbers dictate the library’s weeding policy. Books that haven’t been checked out in 24 months are being discarded. Check out the sample list of books on the chopping block in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/01/AR2007010100729.html?sub=new).
I can’t be alone in loving the serendipitdities and joys of browsing, of discovering writers, novels, topics that I’d never heard of or even imagined existed. And where will I find, twenty years from now, any sustained, book-length work that doesn’t rank high enough in circulation stats to be in our public (and later academic/private) libraries, whether I have heard of it yet or not?
Can we reverse this tide? Or does the short-term thinking that justifies dsipensing with books not read in two years trump the long-term commitments libraries must maintain for their public’s private pleasures and civic edification?
January 5th, 2007 at 7:41 am
Get thee to Washington D.C. January 27, 2007 for the Peace March:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3436
Needless to say, it’s a worthy and timely topic, and it would be an interesting opportunity for you to demonstrate your chops in the field. Why not bring Norman Mailer with you, have him compare and contrast the occasion with the March on the Pentagon he wrote about so beautifully in The Armies of the Night…In the event, I have a friend in D.C. who might be able to put someone from ROS up for the night.
January 5th, 2007 at 9:51 am
I just want to add to my post the comment of one of my favorite, thoughtful bloggers in the world of libraries, Lorcan Dempsey: http://orweblog.oclc.org/archives/001237.html. It’s a treasure trove of considerations regarding libraries information ROS folks will find engaging if you all don’t already read it regularly. Thank you.
January 5th, 2007 at 11:00 am
I keep finding my writing suaded in the Word direction. You too? The darn thing underscores the stuff it doesn’t like in green and red, and I want to make it go away. Do I now resemble Bill Gates in print? Is this a good thing? Does anybody who looks at language have any thoughts on this leveling process?
January 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
This summer I found out that one of my uncles friends works as a teacher in China. Apparently teaching wages are much higher in China than in the US. I think this might make for an interesting show. The Great Teacher Depression or The US Brain Drain.
January 5th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
I’d like to see the return of the Passion series, I enjoyed those shows and I miss them. I’m also always interested in hearing from Nicholas Baker about his conservation projects. A show about the Piccard family, three generations of Swiss explorers/adventurers who gone high, low, and long - what’s that family legacy all about?
January 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
In the world of words, I think it would be fun to have an hour discussing the words that no matter how many times we’ve looked them up, we still can’t recall the meaning the next time we come across it. They jar you in your reading. Your flow is interrupted as you try to remember the nuance or even the core meaning and you know you’ve looked up ten times before and now you are annoyed with yourself. Do you stop to look it up? Do you put down the book in perturbation? Do you just “shake it off” and read on without complete understanding?
And what is about these words? Why don’t they stick?
January 5th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
A chat with Randy Olson about his film Flock of Dodos. Here’s another synopsis Flock of Dodos on Wiki
January 5th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Patsyb, you’ll be interested in the Fairfax County Public Library’s response to the WaPo, which I received by e-mail (I’m a member) and have pasted below:
You may have seen or heard media reports this week claiming that our
library system is eliminating classic literature from our shelves.
These
reports are absolutely incorrect. Although we occasionally reduce the
number of copies of a particular title — perhaps trimming Hemingway’s
“For Whom the Bell Tolls” from 110 copies to 108, for example — we’re
committed to offering classic texts by western culture’s leading
authors.
Here are just a few examples of the number of books we offer which a
January 2 Washington Post article implied that we’ve totally “weeded”
off our shelves:
“Dr. Zhivago” by Boris Pasternak — 50 copies of books, CDs and
cassettes.
“The Sound and the Fury” by William Faulkner — 99 copies of books,
CDs,
cassettes and large print books.
“The Glass Menagerie” by Tennessee Williams — 116 copies of books and
videos, including in some volumes of collected plays.
“To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee — 359 copies of books, CDs,
cassettes, DVDs, videos, e-books and large print books.
Because of the growing demand for more books in more formats and
languages, we do have to balance the need to offer classic literature,
and satisfy public demand, with our limited space. We can’t warehouse
every book that every resident may want to read. We use industry
standards, computer data and the expertise of librarians with decades
of
professional experience to offer a dynamic collection of classics, new
literature and reference materials to an increasingly diverse
population.
We take our stewardship of public property very seriously and strive to
prudently manage the public’s investment in the library. Our efforts
are
paying off: we’re on track to have our books checked out more than 12
million times by the end of this fiscal year, a 10 percent increase
over
FY2005 when we began our new “weeding” process.
To find other classics we offer, go to:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/library/catalogindex.htm
January 5th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
On my libertarian/Democratic idea, this is as close as I’ve come so far to a discussion about how libertarians voted:
January 5th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Hey, Peanut — Nicholson Baker was unable to manage that conservation project. He donated the collection of newspapers to Duke University in Nov. 2005, I believe. But how we preserve “the news” going forward and what news we’d select to preserve would make a great show, especially now that it’s all electronic and there’s so much of it.
January 5th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Ok. Fair enough, Sutter, there’s always more to these stories. I won’t quibble on the Fairfax case as all I’ve read is the same story everywhere (perhaps indeed cut-and-pasted around the globe; or just another endlessly reproduced UPI feed).
All of what you explain is precisely what needs airing. Given the many formats that you allude to, for example, how are users’ requests being met while libraries maintain their commitment as stewards of our culture? Is circulation the only way to measure stewardship, especially a stewardship that dares to think for the long haul as well as in the short term? I’m not sure what the answers are, but I know this is not being discussed enough.
January 5th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Just to be clear, my entire post was a paste from FCPL’s e-mail — I have no basis for evaluating FCPL’s claims.
Emmett — there was a good back-and-forth on your issue in The New Republic over the last couple of weeks, but I don’t believe it is available online. The articles were entitled “Liberaltarians” (advocating a progressive-libertarian truce, mostly on the libertarians’ terms), and “Kiss Me, Cato” (rejecting that proposal).
January 5th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Two ideas: 1. Clergy Sexual Abuse five years later: has it changed church and society http://www.bishop-accountability.org is a great source of information. Also, Rober Blair Kaiser.
2. regular updates on global warming.
Your shows on Lorraine Hunt Lieberson and Bach’s Chacone were wonderful.
January 5th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Sutter: Here they are:
TNR: Move On
TNR: Kiss Me, Cato
I love the subhead for “Kiss Me”: “Buzz off Ayn Rand”
January 5th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
And Liberaltarians.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:11 am
The problem Christianity has with Islam, is Islams claims to the connection it has with Christians - most Christians seen no common ground. For e.g. Muslims recognize Jesus as a prophet but Christians say He is the Son of God. http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Islam-Bible/5MuslimJesus/index.htm. There are many others examples.
It seems that Muslims are the true enemies of the Christians from the point of view of doctrine and belief. Today Evangelical Churches are hinting that Armageddon will be between the Christians and the Muslims.
Jesus asked us Christians to love our enemies, to do good to those who harm us; I believe the root to world peace is not the extermination of the Muslims but a formula of love, as Jesus and the apostle Paul preached. To love them for what they are – not what we want them to be. But does Americanism and true Christianity have any thing in common?
Over to you ‘Open Sourceâ€!!
January 6th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
In the ‘Edge.Org’ programme, Juan Enriquez mentions that Botswana is the second fastest growing country on the planet for the last two decades. I would very much like to hear the story of Botswana. Why is this the case? What has this meant on the ground for its population? What can be learned about Botswana that could be transferred to the rest of the African continent?
2007 seems to me the right time to look at the positive models of African future, especially in the light of the recent invasion of Somalia and the continuing plight of those in the Sudan, Uganda, Zimbabwe, etc.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
IMPEACHMENT: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/4489
It may not be a practical possibility, but the grounds for it should be raised, addressed, broadcast.
January 9th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Another message from yours truly, old softie:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070108/ap_on_sc/colombia_animal_shelter
This woman deserves more than a radio show, but maybe some day you can fit her into some elaborately conceived show about human-animal interaction.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I would like to hear a show on the “Space Elevator” idea. NASA wants to spend tens of billions of dollars on 40 year old appollo type idea. What we need to do to actually atain the benefits of space is to make the Earth to orbit costs much cheaper. I have heard shows on whether or not the direction NASA is going is correct but no talk about alternatives.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
david,
i have a series of films (on one dvd)about Jockin and “slum dwellers international” that i would like to send you. it says a lot. e-mail me your the address and i’ll send you a copy.
still looking for carlinous.
January 9th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Pitch a Show: Cheney’s Last Days
It is finally beginning to appear that the VP has lost substantial control over day-to-day operations in the world’s affairs. As this calculating man is preparing for his own exit strategy, he’s doubtlessly setting the stage to not only ensure his personal financial gain, but very likely also preparing a litany of pardons for crimes committed by his followers.
Why not a show on the indictments awaiting Cheney? It could be on laws criminalizing whatever war profiteering he’s personally involved in. Maybe on laws that should be passed before he’s no longer a sitting VP.
January 9th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
hurley: Maybe we could find her for a feature pegged to the anthropomorphism show? Kissing lions on the mouth. Sheesh.
Jason Hoppes: We got this pitch over the summer and determined that it wasn’t going anywhere for a while. If you hear differently, let us know.
enhabit: you can reach david at david radioopensource org (turn it into an email address).
chena: I haven’t heard that Cheney is awaiting indictments, and we try not to do shows that are too speculative. Can you back this up with a couple of links?
January 9th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Shoot. Read that wrong. Sorry, enhabit. If you’d like to send something with stamps and mailboxes and all the trappings, we’re at 15 Mount Auburn St. Cambridge, MA 02138.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
One Word.. anything related to: prisons.
the prison industrial complex is so big.. lots of subjects worth discussing in there.
Here’s my biggest one which ive been unable to get done on my own program: Prison Labor. Is his old film The Big One, michael more talks about how airlines were using prisoners for operators, and microsoft was packaging their software in Washington state prisons.. that was ten years ago… I wonder what the scene looks like now? What companies are laying off civilian workers and making deals to have prisoners make their stuff for substandard wages and big profit margins?
One potential guest: Morgan O. Reynolds, Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the NCPA and professor of economics at Texas A&M University. who has written on the subject.
Or try Chris Levister of Wiretap Magazine.
Ill probably do this one eventually.. but Id love to hear you guys tackle this.
January 10th, 2007 at 12:03 am
I would like to hear a show on the “Space Elevator†idea. NASA wants to spend tens of billions of dollars on 40 year old appollo type idea. What we need to do to actually atain the benefits of space is to make the Earth to orbit costs much cheaper. I have heard shows on whether or not the direction NASA is going is correct but no talk about alternatives.
Jason I’m as big a fan of space elevators as anyone (bias warning I work part-time for Liftport) but a space elevator is not ready to be considered a replacement for conventional solutions.
We don’t know that we _can_ build one, or that it would cost less than existing solutions.
That said a show about ‘what to do’ in space would be pretty keen.
January 10th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Brian “Kilroy” Dunbar is totally correct about the fact that nobody has ‘proven’ that building a Space Elevator (SE) can be done.
I’m not trying to disagree with that when I point out that a lot of smart people (including those at BKD’s employer, Liftport) are putting a lot of time and money into solving the engineering problems involved with building an SE.
There are also a lot of smart people who would like to see it done. Some of whom I interviewed for my article about the post-SE commercialization of space in my article for the Liftport book (excerpted on my blog, The Space Elevator Journal, Permalink: http://spacelf8r.blogspot.com/2006/11/space-elevator-roi.html).
I feel like we’re at the same place rocketry was before WWII. They got it done then.
January 10th, 2007 at 11:20 am
References to Cheney’s impending criminal prosecution(s)
++++++++++++++++
The Nation
article | posted December 29, 2003 (web only)
“Will the French Indict Cheney?”
by Doug Ireland
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040112/ireland
(bribes related to Halliburton)
********************************
The Nation
article | posted October 31, 2005 (web only)
Did Cheney Know Plame Was Undercover?
by David Corn
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051114/cornweb
(valerie Plame affair)
********************************
Christian Science Monitor
from the November 03, 2005 edition
“Dick Cheney: no change of role visible”
By Linda Feldmann
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1103/p01s01-uspo.html
(The indictment of Scooter Libby indicates Cheney personally discussed Plame to be a cia undercover agent)
********************************
Counterpunch
November 7, 2005
The Vice President Lied About What He Knew
Cheney and the Cover Up
By JASON LEOPOLD
(Cheney lied when he said Wilson was a stranger to him)
********************************
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s website:
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Oct05/scooter.html
Pelosi Statement on Criminal Indictment of I. Lewis Libby
Friday, October 28, 2005
Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616
Washington, D.C. – House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following
statement today following the criminal indictment of Vice President Cheney’s
Chief of Staff I. Lewis Libby:
“The criminal indictments of a top White House official mark a sad day for
America and another chapter in the Republicans’ culture of corruption. At the
heart of these indictments was the effort by the Bush Administration to
discredit critics of its Iraq policy with reckless disregard for national
security and the public trust.â€
********************************
January 10th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Should you ever contemplate a show about police violence, of which there seems to be a lot in the US lately (the groom to-be recently shot in New York, the 13 year-old killed in Los Angeles, no charges filed by LAPD, etc.) you might want to incorporate the episode related here:
http://improbable.com/2007/01/09/historian-jaywalks-police-take-him-down/
in which celebrated Spanish historian Felipe Fernandez-Armesto (World, no less), an almost parodically Oxbridge type, is thrown to the ground, man-handled by five beefy cops, handcuffed, and arrested for J-WALKING as he attempts to cross a street in Atlanta en route to a conference of historians. The interview with him would be funny — frankly, it sometimes is — were it not for the institutional state of mind the incident suggests…He’s a bright chap, as he himself might put it, who has written widely on many matters, including the environment, and he’s an indefatigable talker…Actually, instead of a show about police violence, you might construct a show around him, giving this incident all due significance in the process. Have a look if you can.
January 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Hey Jason, Brian Dunbar and Pboake-
(Following up on Greta’s response to the space elevator pitch) I didn’t realize we were hosting a a colony of space enthusiasts here. Cool. I think we’d be willing to do *some* show on space, if you could pitch/help us think of something compelling. Brian Dunbar - can you explain what you mean by a show about “what to do in space”? It sounds kind of interesting, but without a fleshed out pitch I have no idea what that means.
Also, I notice from a quick glance through pboake’s site that there seem to be some cool space blogs out there. Any you guys read on a regular basis that you think are good or worth reading for ideas?
Also, hurley are you pitching us a show about police violence? I can’t tell.
January 10th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Robin says: Also, hurley are you pitching us a show about police violence? I can’t tell.
Neither can I, Robin. Sorry for the confusion. A show about police violence worthwhile, but I was trying to point your attention to the surreal episode visited on your neighbor from Tufts, Prof. Fernandez-Armesto, as an example of police violence and perhaps any number of other things.. If you do a show about police violence, you might refer to this event. If you don’t, you might consider a show about him, incorporating the ridiculous and disturbing events in Atlanta into your show. He’s not my favorite contemporary historian, but in the spirit of the ROS venture, I thought I’d point these things out.
January 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Katherine and I are catching up on pitches that came in on Friday the 5th.
hurley: I don’t think we’ll be able to make it down to Washington on the 27th, but Katherine’s been thinking about/pitching a global warming protest in April. Chelsea’s also been thinking about a broader show on contemporary dissent. Help us with those?
patsyb: thanks.
baileyman: I think “spellcheck-as-leveler” is too small for a full hour, but your questions might fit into one of our language in the digital age shows.
Rendfest: Sounds like an interesting feature with your uncle’s friend. Can you send me his/her contact info or links if you see this emerging as a larger trend?
greta radioopensource org (turn it into an email address).
January 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
peanut: Yes, it would be fun to revive the Passion series. The way we think about Passion shows, though, is not so much as hours about interesting people, but as hours about interesting phenomena with interesting guests. Does that make sense?
allison: I’ve wondered about these teflon words a million times, too, but however frustrating and perplexing they are, I don’t think they’d sustain a full hour of radio.
OliverCranglesParrot: We talked briefly with Randy Olson a while back before Flock of Dodos was released (when were doing shows on Intelligent Design and Intelligent Design in Dover and Kansas). We wouldn’t devote an hour specifically to his film, but we’d certainly consider him when we revisit I.D.
emmettoconnell: Nihilist pitched liberaltarians a while back, and the idea’s on our story board. The libertarian-Democratic mix came up in some of our pre-election shows (e.g., on the Montana Senate race), but what do you think would make a good peg at this point? It’s definitely something we’re watching.
RobertPeel: Clergy sexual abuse we probably wouldn’t do without some kind of news peg, but on the global warming front, we do have a few ideas percolating to add to our ongoing series.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Hello Christopher Lydon! Your show is fabulous! I listen whenever I can. How is your saintly brother, Patrick? I’ve lost touch with him directly, but I take comfort in thinking that he is still out there somewhere, doing his wonderful work.
I’m including a short piece for your review that I’ve just offered to some Op-Ed pages around the country - and I wonder if there’s a show for you in my basic suggestion: that, as George Bush has shown us, an imperial Presidency is possible in modern America, directed by a President who is unresponsive to almost anything and anyone but his own ideas. And, if Congress, for whatever reason, is unwilling or unable to challenge such a President, now or in the future, what is our recourse? In Europe, parliaments can vote “no confidence” and force changes at the top. In California, the citizens can spur a recall. What if American voters, through a Constitutional amendment, had the option in every mid-term election to recall the President, the Vice President, or both?
Here’s the piece
January 10th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Chris, My transmission was interrupted. Here’s the piece I mentioned. Keep up the great work.
Big Deciders, Little Deciders, Mad Deciders,
And Mid-Term Decisions
“Recall the President of the United States: ☠Yes ☠Noâ€
“Recall the Vice-President of the United States: ☠Yes ☠Noâ€
There he goes again. The Decider has made another Decision – to escalate his
war in Iraq by adding thousands of American surge troopers.
If you haven’t been paying close attention to the Decider, it might seem an
odd Decision. After all, it was only two months ago that millions of voters (the
“Little Decidersâ€) decided to toss out the Decider’s enablers – Republican
hamburger helpers who assisted him in making a hash out of things like American
foreign policy, New Orleans, oil prices, public ethics, privacy rights, the
Constitution, environmental policy, Social Security reform, the budget deficit, etc.
The post-election wisdom was that the Little Deciders had declared that the
Big Decider was really a Bad Decider, and that he ought to start correcting his
course. Turns out, that’s not the Bad Decider’s M.O. Instead, he’s a Decider who
makes a Decision and then holds to it, no matter how Bad it proves to be. Worse,
the more that people criticize Big Bad’s Decisions, the more he digs in the heels of
his cowboy-like boots and stays his wayward path.
Now, we face two more years of a Decider run amok – a powerful yet unruly
fellow pinging off the walls of his personal reality bubble, like a mutinous teenaged
emperor who has locked himself in his room but persists in issuing Decisions that
get people killed, drain the Treasury, and trash what’s left of our civilized standing
in the civilized world.
At this point, we must acknowledge the worst: that the Bad Decider has
devolved, frighteningly and tragically (like Old Yeller with rabies) into the Mad
Decider. Clearly, this is not what the Little Deciders bargained for in November.
So, what to do?
The I-word surfaces often in these conversations, but current political wisdom
holds that, after the Republicans’ crass impeachment stunt in 1998, Americans
aren’t keen to have that circus back in town. The irony is that, while the Senate
appropriately found Bill Clinton innocent of high crimes and misdemeanors, the
Chinese menu of charges Bush might face today could cling to him like sticky-rice.
Even if Democrats could summon the political stomach to try to impeach
Bush, they couldn’t stop there. They would have to aim also at the Decider-Behind-
the-Curtain, Dick Cheney, and there just isn’t time or sufficient political will to
impeach and convict both, no matter how much they deserve it.
Does that mean the only option for America’s Little Deciders is to huddle
under their desks for two more years and hope things don’t get irrevocably bad?
Maybe. But, in the mean time, let me propose a Plan B: a strategy to revoke the
political power that a Mad Decider like Bush might use to abuse, and, instead, give
it to the Little Deciders to use as they thought they were in November.
The plan is for a Constitutional amendment I call the “Mid-Stream Look-
Around.†Beginning in 2010, it would require mid-term election ballots in every
state to carry the following two items:
“Recall the President of the United States: ☠Yes ☠Noâ€
“Recall the Vice-President of the United States: ☠Yes ☠Noâ€
If the nation’s Little Deciders are happy with things as they are, they simply
can check “No†in both boxes. Or, in a situation like the 1930 mid-terms, when the
country was neck-deep in the Great Depression, such an amendment would have
allowed voters to dump Herbert Hoover for VP Charles Curtis, if they thought it
might have helped. Or, remembering Dan Quayle, the amendment would let voters
keep the boss, but fire a shaky Vice President before he could do any (more) harm.
And, of course, in November, 2006, voters could have gone beyond just
sending a message to a man who would refuse to hear it. They could have sent him
packing, along with his snarling Vice Presidential puppeteer (“Pay no attention to
the man in the bunker!â€).
That last option leaves the Speaker of the House in line to make the Big
Decisions for the ensuing two years – in this case, Nancy Pelosi. Granted, she
wouldn’t be most folks’ first choice for the First Job, and she might not turn out to
be George Washington or Thomas Jefferson – but at least she’s not the dangerously
flawed George Walker Bush. And that’s a Decision a lot of Little Deciders I know
wish they could make.
January 10th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I’m having a little trouble formulating this, but I wonder whether there’s something in the idea of the concept of institutionalized dissent. Shortly after 9/11 (maybe not THAT shortly — could have been when the 9/11 Report was published), there was a piece in the New Yorker about how FDR used to essentially pit members of his administration against one another and have them argue opposing positions in front of him to help him figure out the right approach. In contrast, my sense from reading about the Cuban Missile Crisis was that JFK was his own internal dissenter, deeply questioning what the generals and others were telling him at every step. And in contrast to both of these, it’s no secret that the current administration punishes dissent, including internal dissent.
How can, should and do organizations manage dissent? There’s always a stigma associated with the sqeaky wheel — this is why we have statutes protecting whistle-blowers — but these people serve a critical function within organizations, be they corporate, governmental, non-profit, or whatever. What, if anything, are the prospects for institutionalizing dissent? And what can government and private institutions do to promote dissent and carve out a place for the gadflies?
Ideal guests for such a program would probably include organizational behaviorists, and perhaps some newspaper folks (newspapers being one of the few institutions with a long history of institutionalized dissent, in the form of the ombudsperson).
January 11th, 2007 at 1:45 am
Bomb testing in southern Nevada (in fact, really close to Las Vegas)
There is a mini-row brewing in Utah and Nevada over the postponed Divine Strake bomb tests at the Nevada Test Site. These tests involve powerful bombs meant to determine how a nuclear bunker buster would affect an area, but these tests concern many people.
Nuclear bombs were tested at the Nevada Test Site, which is only about 70 miles northwest of Las Vegas, from 1951 to 1992, and these tests have caused elevated cancer rates in Utah, Nevada, and their neighboring states. Those who developed cancer in this area are commonly referred to as “down winders.” Further, I have even heard stories of it raining mud in Salt Lake City, which is several hundred miles away from the test site, soon after tests back in the 50s and 60s.
Although the Divine Strake tests do not involve nuclear devices, people are concerned that the bombs will kick up dust contaminated with nuclear waste from the tests. People in the region do not want another generation of down winders, and what infuriates people even more is that the government admits that tests will kick up toxic dust but states that Divine Strake tests pose no risk.
I don’t think a discussion on the ethics or need for weapons testing is warranted since that subject is discussed from time to time. How about these talking points: Should governments conduct large scale weapons tests like this so near major cities (Las Vegas in the instance)? Since governments do test weapons and test side effects are experienced over large areas, where would you recommend as a test site — in the middle of a desert like in southern Nevada, in the ocean, on a deserted island, etc.?
Hopefully, this story can lead to a fruitful discussion.
January 11th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Robin
“(Following up on Greta’s response to the space elevator pitch) I didn’t realize we were hosting a a colony of space enthusiasts here. Cool. I think we’d be willing to do *some* show on space, if you could pitch/help us think of something compelling. Brian Dunbar - can you explain what you mean by a show about “what to do in spaceâ€? It sounds kind of interesting, but without a fleshed out pitch I have no idea what that means.”
“What to do in space”.
You hang around obsessed nerdly people and you start speaking shorthand. Then jargon. Pretty soon your only company is your dog and people who speak that dialect of jargon.
We have several billionaires building rockets and standing up companies to send tourists to space. Several others are building new launch systems for cargo. The ESA wants to do more in space, we (via our agency NASA) are heading back to the moon.
The solar system is becoming a more mysterious and complicated place, the more we push out and explore. There are a half-dozen known Kuiper Belt Objects (KBO) the size of Pluto, and they have moons of their own!
We might be on the cusp of a true space age. 98% of the resources in the solar system are extra-terrestrial, the sun is pouring energy across the solar system - we can go up and just _get_ it for free. Given some luck and hard work it’s possible to relocate industry to orbit.
Previous societal changes ‘just happened’ and we paid a price for that. No one knew what changes would be wrought by the introduction of a reliable steam engine for example, and we got slums and polluted skies for our troubles.
It’s easy to get distracted by current event. Iraq, Bush, those are immediate problems. Still, it might be a good idea to start talking about what happens next now and not letting the coming changes smack us in the face.
Also, I notice from a quick glance through pboake’s site that there seem to be some cool space blogs out there. Any you guys read on a regular basis that you think are good or worth reading for ideas?
He doesn’t blog that I know of but Neil degrasse Tyson is taking up the slack left by Carl Sagan’s death. He’s hyper-intelligent, personable, and knows a great deal about subjects like this.
Plus he sounds like a good guy to have a beer with - I’m not sure if that’s rare for an astrophysist but there you are.
Rand Simberg - Transterrstrial Musings
http://transterrestrial.com/
Hit up his blogroll for the best ‘blogs on space’.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t point you to Liftport’s blog
http://www.liftport.com/progress/wp
I did excise a long screed on all this (then lost my re-write by closing my text editor without saving). I’m always happy to yap on at length about this or other topics - links , guest ideas etc.
brian dot dunbar at liftport dot com
January 11th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Possibly a Passion show, possibly an interesting discussion in its own right, possibly an entree into a larger issue:
Is Morse code the Latin of the digital age?
As of this past December, ham radio operators no longer need to learn Morse code to get a license. Some peopel think this spells doom for the language, but some aren’t so sure.
Paul Saffo argues that
There’s an extensive discussion at eham.net, where ham radio enthusiasts argue for or agains the idea.
Even the New York Times (reprinted online here) did a write-up, putting “dead” in quotes.
I know nothing much about this, but it’s an interesting story — and a case in point of how the Internet allows some very small subcultures to gather and preserve identities that might otherwise be lost.
January 11th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Another idea for a show:
You’re approached by an eccentric billionaire. They want to carve Mt. Rushmore 2.0, reworking the face of another mountain to feature portraits of four individuals. But instead of US presidents, this Rushmore will be dedicated to US artists.
You get to pick which four US artists will be carved into the mountain. Who do you pick?
The few ground rules:
The artists must be representative of the United States, though they don’t necessarily have to be from here.
The artists must be dead.
Representatives from any artistic discipline are fine — painting, writing, film, whatever.
The group of 4 must be somewhat diverse, meaning that you can’t pick 4 novelists or painters or directors. Sexual or ethnic diversity is encouraged, but not required.
Your decision is final.
I first came up with this idea in 2004, and I’ve revisited it a couple of times. My own current picks: Harry Houdini, Charles Mingus, Charles M. Schulz, and Preston Sturges.
Who’s on your mountain, and why?
January 11th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
Maybe this is too obvious, but how about a show about open source software: Free Software Foundation, Richard Stallman, Eric Raymond, Linus Torvalds, what the Novell-Microsoft deal means, Nicholas Negroponte and the One Laptop Per Child initiative.
January 11th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Can’t seem to think of a news peg for the libertarian/Democrat idea, but there is one today for the “Political Party 2.0” idea I had a month of so back with a statistical analysis of Dean’s 50 State Strategy.
January 11th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Here’s an idea, playing off of Peter Mao’s and the above libertarian/Democratic ones: the emergence of emergence as a political philosophy.
Hobbes posited a “natural society” of all against all, where everyone raged only for their own sakes, stealing food from babies. Anthropologists and anarchists like Murray Bookchin say that that never really happened, so why base a political philosophy on it?
Modern democracies have seemed to move away from a distinct political philosophy and more toward pragmatism, but even then, we hold onto a lot of the beliefs that go back a long ways.
But Time Magazine, for all its cheesy delivery, acknowledged that the distributed user communit of the internet is “Person of the Year.” From kiva.org to Wikipedia to Linux, a distributed world of direct, person-to-person (p2p) interaction is vibrantly altering our economy. And in the real world, church and radical groups stayed in New Orleans to help long after the cameras left, without government direction.
Bill Gates said he couldn’t see how innovation in software could occur without a profit motive, yet Firefox is gaining market share with the GPL “viral license.” Why?
Could it be that we’re living, but the political machinery has yet to grasp, a world where p2p, radically libertarian, yet inherently community-oriented (and still capitalistic) social structures are doing more to organize daily life than the actions of government? Or maybe it takes the DARPA’s innovation and the guarantees of private property and civil liberties that make the mojo work!
Show capsule: is the market taking over and government falling away, or is democratic capitalism just doing its job?
January 12th, 2007 at 9:40 am
A pitch: Slow is Beautiful
With the era of American excess winding down, we might be forced to give up our Mega-Loud, Super-Fast lifestyle. Don’t worry. Celebrate the Slow!
In the kitchen:
The “Slow Food†movement might have been the start of it all. The tenet of Local Eating will get you organic potatoes from your Community Supported Agriculture farm. It will also fuel the waiter’s endless description about the bucolic lifestyle of your chicken dinner. Check out the folks at The 100 Mile Diet. They pledged to eat only foods that were grown within a 100-mile radius of their home – in Canada.
http://www.100milediet.org/
On the streets:
London-based podcast “The Bike Show†describes Patrick Field as “the world’s slowest professional cyclistâ€. He is the man behind the London School of Cycling, and the Dunwich Dynamo – a midnight charity ride for Kicks. He explains, “I ride a bike by choice, but if I thought that driving a Cadillac would make my life more beautiful, I wouldn’t have any problem getting a Cadillac.†(Part 2 of the interview is best – link follows)
http://bikeshow.blogspot.com/2007/01/8-january-2007-doorstep-adventures-with.html
At your office:
Carmine Coyote’s blog “Slow Leadership†trashes your typical performance metrics and motivational posters. His pillars are Tempo, Attention, Balance, Perspective, Direction, Relationships, Enjoyment and Gratitude. His manifesto states, “Slow Leadership opposes the pressure for homogeneity in leadership, especially the urge to equate leadership purely with getting short-term results.â€
http://www.slowleadership.org/2006/05/why-slow-leadership.html
January 12th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Low-tech ,ancient open source.
I was making an announcement to my Circles community on our forum, when I found myself writing this:
SPA is a time to relax, hang out with other fiber artists, and learn and teach. All in a very informal setting. There are no classes. The Doubletree Hotel is fully booked with attendees of SPA, so they literally take over the hotel. You’ll find a lobby full of spinning wheels, knitters by the pool (where you might see a syhnchronized swimming performance), every you turn you will see people plying their craft. Most likely with their slippers on. Your only obligation if you attend the SPA is to be willing to teach someone what you’re doing if they ask. You can’t get more ‘open source.’
It made me wonder if there isn’t a topic here for ROS. “Open source” is a mindset. Bucking up against the concepts of intellectual property, fear-based competition, etc. Human societies have been faced with the tension of these opposing philosophies forever. As I was writing about the event above, I was prompted to think about it from the lineage of “women’s work”. Certainly, from the dawn of time, some women have withheld that secret ingredient to their deaths. In the same timeline, there have also always been the open sharing of new weaving techniques or home maintenance tricks. The SPA, which is held in Portland, ME has, in all previous experiences, exhibited a wonderfully warm and open exchange amongst women. It is representative of the most ancient form of open source.
Interesting?
January 12th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Allison: We finally did an economics show. We’ll continue to pursue more shows on behavioral economics and economic trends.
Mcasemo: We’ve been talking about producing some more New Orleans shows. We can’t guarantee that we will specifically do a show on port cities…we have to see where our research takes us.
PatsyB: We have talked many, many times about doing this kind of show and we never come to an agreement, which means that we will probably never do a library show.
Steve Peterson: As for bomb testing we’re going to get the ball rolling with a web feature.
Scarequotes: For now Curains for Cursive has satiated our need to mourn the loss of outdated modes of communication.
Peter Mao: We don’t foresee doing an entire hour on Open Source software though we did discuss it on our Changing the World show.
January 12th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Steve Heffner - Presidential powers is an important topic, one we’ve looked into quite a bit. Most recently just this past week, on the show we did about how Congress should oversee the war. We will continue to follow that story though. BTW, if you have a long op-ed type piece like this you’d like to share with us, the best way to do so is to post it on your own blog and then put a link on the thread.
Sutter - the institutionalized dissent idea is interesting, and I can almost hear it as a high-concept show. But what would we say after the points you’ve just made? Who is going to argue against dissent being a crucial component to functioning democracies? Still, I think there could be something there. I’ll bring it up, but more thoughts are appreciated.
Brian Dunbar - thanks for replying to my request for more info, and for posting those space blog links. I like the “what to do in space” idea! If I hear you correctly, it sounds like, we have all this money and all these toys, but what should we actually be *doing* up there? And the point about extracting resources from space is totally new to me. I’d like to hear someone talk about that. Anyway, I’ll bring it up and see if it takes.
January 12th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Here’s another idea: elitism in America.
For all the talk of decentralization and progress, movies like “The Good Shepherd” remind us that there is still an elite that, unoficially, holds enormous power in America. Yale has Skull and Bones and Scroll and Key. DC scientists and their friends have the Cosmos Club. Michigan has Michigamua, where Gerald “Flippum Back” Ford once donned Native American headgear and painted his skin red to engage in downright cultic initiation rituals. Discussion of that elite has been almost invisible in the mainstream media.
Yet a large fraction of the time that NPR airs a guest on foreign policy, they come from the Council on Foreign Relations. When Bill Gates wants to go golfing and have time to chat with a senator, he might fly out to The Vintage golf club in southern California, where you have to own a home in the Vintage neighborhood to be a member (and it’s not cheap).
G. William Domhoff asked “Who Rules America?” years after Mills wrote “The Power Elite.” Yet a look at a chart of which other corporate boards to which Citigroup’s board members belong is makes you think you’re taking a class in knitting. http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/corporate_community/Citigroup_corp_L1.gif
With all the liberated netizens now “powered up” on broadband and Christopher’s inspiring announcement of the Open Source community as a “churning, breathing community of learners” (approx.), might we now have the gumption to ask? And the listeners, to lay out their local scenes?
January 13th, 2007 at 4:26 am
This is kinda hard to relate, I’ve been trying to articuate it for some time, but have been unable to find a word or even a sentance to sum it up. Here goes: The enlightenment era idea of democracy keeping us happy, is gone, we used to believe that democracy and capitalism went together, as well as totalitarianism and comunism, however this no longer appiles. It seems the greatest capitalists on the earth are the Chinese, also with a repressive government. So… all these years we thought it was democracy that was keeping us happy in the US, when maybe it was capitalism. And now, all over the world opressive reqiemes are giving the people what they want (stuff), as in China and Russia and everyone is happy to go along with the politics of those governments. 10 years ago the Russians were free-er, but poor, and with 21st century conviences. Ask them now and they will say life is better, but it’s less free. In the US we are less “free,” wiretips, survalance, and an impending national identifcation car, and a majority of people seem to welcome it, why are they so passive? Stuff! This is a focus of the Bush whitehouse. Keep the economy strong at ALL COSTS, because that’s how you keep power. Keep the stuff coming! And China, don’t tell them they live under opression, with all the opertunity created by their “experiments” in capitalism, they would easily tell you they’re better off. So, freedom is on the way out, all over the world, and is replaced by gadgets, digital cable, cheap goods, and low interest rates.
January 13th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
hi
i am interested right now on the topic of microcredit. It was touted as an answer to the poverty circle in developing nations but has raised many criticism, some saying that it raises dependence upon loans and does not really increase revenues on long term. Also, it might push borrowers into the formal economy instead of having a steady income from a standard “job”.
I believe however that the possibilities of microcredit has not yet been fully untapped and that it might be the solution. I am thinking for example about kiva.org, a project that relates citizens from “developed” countries and microentrepreneurs from various third-world countries. In the year that saw Grameen Bank and its founder, Muhammed Yunus, awarded the Nobel Prize, and the United Nations declaring 2005 as the International Year of Microcredit, can we build upon this recent public recognition ? Isn’t Microcredit a new way to redefine capitalism ?
January 13th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
17.
You’ve probably read this:
http://bostonreview.net/BR31.6/scarry.html
but if you haven’t you might. The wonderful and truly scary Scarry, with whom Chris conducted a
facinating interview years back about citizen governance aboard the plane that crashed in Pennsylania on 9/11, here turns her attention to material and theoretical breaches by the US of the Geneva Accords and much military doctrine besides, and their likely consequences. This from toward the end:
And what if the military does manage to hold the line? What if over time we come to see again and again that our civilian leaders do not obey the law and our military leaders do? And that our civilian leaders do not know how to safeguard the American population and our military leaders do? (Hurricane Katrina is an example: only when the military arrived did rescue begin.) Would this lead to our eventually preferring military over civilian leadership? It is exactly this situation that Charles Dunlap—the writer with whom we began—warns against in an earlier, 1992 article entitled “The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012,†an article that ought to be as widely read and debated in the civilian world as it has been in the military world.
I haven’t read the article she refers to, but I will. She’s up to something deeply interesting and important, and I’d be happy to hear her again in conversation with Chris.
January 14th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Let it ride! The most blatant example of political hypocrisy is the lottery. Gambling is illegal in most states unless the state is your bookie. I used to bartend at a bar that sold Keno tickets and I would watch with dismay, as people would bet up to $50 every five minutes. The bookies are everywhere; look no further than your local convenience store. In fact, try going into a store in a low-income area, you’ll be waiting 10 minutes for the clerk to deal out all the tickets to the desperate people in front of you.
The lottery is a tax on the poor. The money people spend could be better spent on essentials.
Lottery sales in Massachusettes in 2005 were $4.48billion, of which 935 million was profit returned to the state.
Invite State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill on the show. Go over the figures w/ him. Two thirds of the revenue goes to advertising (selling false hope), administrative costs, and winnings. Of the 935 million profits, much would have been received anyway as sales tax on the essentials bought.
So, at a time when MA. Is contemplating slot machines, lets examine the merits of the lottery. Interesting guests or angles would be someone who was addicted to scratch tickets. Someone who has won the lottery would make an interesting guest, how did it change his or her life?
A great guest would be Melissa Kearney who just published a paper called “State lotteries and consumer behavior.
January 14th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Melissa Kearney
January 14th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
jfink: A good pitch in that you thought of a number of ideas for a high-concept show; but the slow-food movement has been covered pretty extensively in public-radio world…
allison: A fun conceit for a show. It would need a fantastic talker with a real “sermon” in order to work; and do you think there’s enough to say to sustain an hour? Let us know if you come up with possible guests.
faithandreason: There’s no question that America still has an elite. We’ve talked about this in a number of our Race and Class shows. But what’s the new angle here, and who would be it’s champion?
OliverCranglesParrot: Thanks a lot for elaborating on your ideas. Kearney sounds interesting, but the show idea is still somewhat vague in that hermaneutics of religion is a huge thing to tackle. Do you have a specific angle in mind? We’ll certainly tuck Kearney’s name away for future shows that touch on Biblical interpretation. As far as the Peninsular War goes, I’m afraid the Thucydides show probably filled our historical-parallels quota for the moment.
January 15th, 2007 at 10:18 am
Marc McElroy: This is a good example of what Robin was talking about when she described the think piece in a response to a pitch a few weeks ago. It’s an interesting thesis, but really more of a personal argument than a show.
heri rakotomalala: We talked about microcredit and the Grameen Bank for a segment of our recent Edge.org Optimism show, and I’m not sure that we’re ready to do a full hour about it so soon.
hurley: We’re big Elaine Scarry fans, too, as you know, and I hadn’t seen this Boston Review article even though the most recent issue has been on my desk for a few weeks. I’ll give it a quick read and bring it up at a meeting soon. Thanks for the tip!
Nother: I’m skeptical that we could make this fresh or new. It’s been covered so much, you know? (Having said that, I’ll check out the Kearney paper — as soon as the Brookings web site is back online…)
January 15th, 2007 at 10:30 am
(Note: because of a holiday backlog (think of it as a yulelog), these responses are from pitches made on January 6th and 7th.)
Johnny Wharton: We’ll think about this. Knowing virtually nothing about Botswana — which, I suppose, is part of the reason for your pitch — I wonder if this could be included in a series we’ve been kicking around the office for a while: Best Practices.
hurley: As you wrote, impeachment “may not be a practical possibility.” So much today is — from increased Congressional oversight to questions about purse string power to rancorous bi-partisan war policy questioning to dramatic falls in popular support for the war — that I think for the time being we don’t need to play what-if games. The reality is interesting enough!
January 15th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
The lottery is a tax on the poor. The money people spend could be better spent on essentials.
No it’s not. A tax is non-optional - no one forces anyone to play the lottery.
Me - I’m not much for state- sponsored gambling but but a tax on anybody it ain’t. Fuzzy verbage clouds the issue.
January 16th, 2007 at 3:02 am
There is a topic that was bought to my attention recently that has not received any “main-stream†press that I am aware of, the 911 conspiracy theories. I have always scoffed at these accusations but after spending some time researching, I have some doubts about the “Official Story.†While I am not fully convinced of any of the theories to date, some of the evidence provided by various online sources seems very robust.
Regardless, if the folks like Dr. Steven Jones are wrong, I would like to see it put to bed once and for all. Likewise, if they are right, we better do something about it.
Consider watching some documentaries available on YouTube:
911 Mysteries
Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of Our Republic
Oil, Smoke & Mirrors
In Plane Sight
Consider reading a few sites:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf
http://www.911truth.org/
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
http://belowgroundsurface.org/
I took the time to read some “debunking†articles such as those found in Popular Mechanics, The American Thinker and Skeptic magazines. I found that they addressed some questions but left those that I found most disturbing unanswered, namely, the molten steel in the basement, rate of collapse of the towers (including WTC7) and the hole in the Pentagon before the outer wall collapses. I am a Mechanical Engineer working for an aerospace company and have a firm grasp of physics, that is why I am so concerned about these allegations.
An interview with BYU physics professor Dr. Steven Jones would be nice. Obviously, you would need to find some individuals that could address the conspiracy theories without resorting to name calling.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:01 am
Confessions of another, older economic Hitman,
Hi, I am an enthusiastic and long-time listener of your show but this is my first post here. Having been in journalism for a long time, I am well used to having my story ideas brutally rejected – No wallflowers here!
One show I remember you doing very well was the confessions of an economic hitman, a kind of kill and tell on U.S. foreign policy. The impression Chris left me with was that he would really have loved to believe it all but couldn’t quite let himself be swayed, due mainly, it seemed, to the sheer enormity of the claims. Here was a man who so tantalizingly offered us the proof for all the conspiracy theories we so love to flirt with (apologies to those who wholeheartedly espouse them) on an, unfortunately, all too shiny silver platter.
Recently, in my reading – perhaps skimming is a better term as it was on the web – I came across Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC. He was a highly decorated marine who apparently almost rose to the rank of commandant of the Marine Corps. His career blocking characteristic and the one that interests me is that he was a spectacular whistle blower and critic of the involvement of corporate America in U.S. foreign policy. Again though and for the same reasons, I find myself asking whether he was completely on the level. It would be interesting to hear what historians think of the validity of his claims about the driving force behind foreign policy, especially in light of the seeming determination of this administration to widen the conflict in the Persian Gulf or indeed, to start it in the first place.
More interesting than that though would be to put to the historical test, his most explosive claim that American industrialists planned to overthrow Roosevelt in a coup d’etat, leading to the question: whether and in what measure they were successful in achieving their aims without having to resort to a military coup.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:12 am
disgruntled: On the subject of whistleblowers and the military, you might be interested in Very Personal War (1971), James Hamilton-Paterson’s book about Cornelius Hawkridge, an employee of the US administration in Vietnam and a fierce critic of the war. In a recent letter to the London Review, Hamilton-Paterson (a fine writer) mentioned Hawkridge in the context of current events in Iraq:
Ed Harriman’s catalogue of the corruption and financial shenanigans surrounding the US presence in Iraq reveals remarkably consistent practice (LRB, 7 July). In 1971 I wrote a book about Cornelius Hawkridge, a Hungarian-American who conducted a vendetta against the military and civilian corruption that dogged the American presence in Vietnam. I still have many volumes of corroborative evidence presented to US Senate hearings at the time: Improper Practices, Commodity Import Program, US Foreign Aid, Vietnam; Military Club Fraud and Currency Manipulations etc. They detail the same kinds of practice as Harriman does. The General Accountability Office’s report of May 1967 revealed that the civilian contractor RMK/BRJ could not account for $120m worth of materiel shipped from the US to Vietnam. RMK/BRJ’s name crops up frequently in investigations from the period in connection with the disappearance of huge sums of taxpayers’ money – one reason for this was the company’s gross overcharging for gasoline (Harriman found evidence of the same thing). The acronym stood for Raymond, Morris-Knudsen, Brown, Root and Jones. Much of the current investigation surrounds Halliburton’s subsidiary KBR, which stands for Kellogg, Brown and Root. I have yet to see anyone point out KBR’s genealogical connections.
A few years ago in Manila I had dinner with John Negroponte when he was still US ambassador there. Later, he would become ambassador to post-Saddam Baghdad and then George W. Bush’s intelligence supremo. He was a Vietnam veteran, and I plied him with questions about the massive corruption during the war. ‘Yes,’ said Negroponte, who had also been involved in the covert funding of the Contras in Nicaragua, ‘we learned an awful lot from that war.’ Foolishly, I took this to imply repentance.
James Hamilton-Paterson
January 16th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Sorry if I’m a bit “unintellectual” for the pitch a show blog, (apologies for no famous writer references). but I am a politial junkie, and an optimist, and a “relatively young person”; and I’d like to see a show on how to shift the poltical thinking, talking, and doing in this country from short term mode to long term? This is an ongoing problem manifested often at the national level, but one that is particularly pertinent right now even in the local sphere, as manifested in Seattle’s local political struggle with what to do with our waterfront freeway. That conversation is all about short term cost and inconveneince, and not about long term benefits and possibilities. Don’t just identify the problem either - I want to know what the experts think we should do about the problem - how do we SHIFT THE PARADIGM!
thanks! Evan B
January 16th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Katherine:
The new angle on elitism in America is that while theories of race and class have been with us since Plato and earlier, the new fandagled internet era is helping us visualize the pockets within which elitism hides. The series on race and class sprung out of real visions of post-Katrina New Orleans, and laid bare the “two Americas” that brought John Edwards to the 9th Ward to announce his candidacy.
In another way, the internet is doing more to make available information on what may be one version of the modern elite.
http://www.theyrule.net is a chilling (but fun) exploration of the network of interconnections linking the corporate boards in America with major institutions like the Council on Foreign Relations and Harvard University. On its own it gets people talking, in my experience.
At the same time, groups such as the Center for Responsive Politics has made searching for local big money contributors to political campaigns an easy thing. Google Earth has been sprouting posts on the geography of elitism, such as the Bohemian Grove in California.
Who would be the “champion” for such a show? I would propose G. William Domhoff, sociology professor at UCal-Santa Cruz, who has updated his theories with better technologies… not a perfect champion, and his theories have plenty of holes, but he discusses not just the stratification of society by race and class, but who it is we’re talking about and what are the factors that make them up.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Skeptics vs. psychics.
James Randi recently revised the rules of his $1,000,000 Paranormal Challenge. Once, anyone who claimed a paranormal ability could try to claim the money; starting in April, Randi’s foundation will focus on high-profile psychics and specifically target some people (John Edward, Sylvia Browne).
Apparently Randi always meant for the challenge to take down high-profile spreaders of bunk, rather than delusional no-profile individuals. But it hasn’t really worked to that effect. Why would John Edward risk millions of dollars in revenue to prove his power?
I read “Randi’s challenge has been a failure” on the Straight Dope Message Board this morning, and I’ve been thinking ever since that it’d make an excellent starting point for a show. After several decades, psychics are no scarcer on the ground than before. Is taking on paranormal claimant’s a sysiphean task?
Good people to talk to would be Randi, of course, but also some of the great skeptical bloggers out there: Skeptico, the Two Percent Co., or Orac. Or Robert Carroll of The Skeptic’s Dictionary. I’m not well aware of reputable psychics, but I’m sure there are people to talk to.
January 17th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
5 Minutes to Midnight
Citing a Second Nuclear Age and adding Global Climate Change, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the minute hand of the Doomsday Clock on January 17, 2007, ahead to 5 minutes to midnight. The clock has been steadily advancing since 1991.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded by former Manhattan Project physicists and has campaigned for nuclear disarmament since 1947. There are so many authors, topics, and places for elaboration and departure in the announcement and the new issue of the Bulletin I’m not sure exactly where to aim a tightly themed show suggestion. There was a question inside the issue asking whether the scientific vision of an impending doomsday has stripped us of hope that seems worth leading from. It’s countered by a shorter piece on 21st century technologies being solid grounds for optimism.
January 17th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
How about a show on “Open Source Intelligence” which is the government’s use of pubicly available information (the internet, commercial databases, blogs, wikis, radio, TV, etc.) for intelligence purposes. I find this very interesting because it seems to indicate that the U.S. intelligence community has failed in its traditional espionage efforts. To answer the question of why now, I think given the recent appointment of a new Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Mike McConnell who was involved with the Department of Defense’s Total Information Awareness (TIA) project which raised the hackles of civil libertarians and Congress, it might be a timely topic. I also understand the DNI has appointed a senior intelligence officer to oversee open source intelligence and created a new Open Source Center at the CIA.
Links include:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-04-mcconnell_x.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_intelligence
http://www.gcn.com/print/25_6/40152-1.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/10/eveningnews/main1198667.shtml (article and interview about the new Open Source Center at CIA)
Possible guests include:
DNI Appointee - Admiral Mike McConnell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michael_McConnell
Assistant Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Open Source - Eliot A. Jardines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_A._Jardines
Congressman Rob Simmons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Simmons
Former Asst. CIA Director - Mark Lowenthal
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/h032005.html
January 17th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Massachusetts activism is alive and well…From raging grannies to Gold Star and Military families to vets against the war….check out work done by http://www.peopleunited4peace.org
January 18th, 2007 at 3:50 am
How to Delevitate Beyond Hegemony
January 19th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
I second Sosa’s suggestion on open source intelligence… one think I would like to add is the possibility that intelligence today may be less about what data you gather than how you analyze it, and the country with the fastest computer wins! Social networking analysis is letting the NSA’s program of obtaining call records from major phone companies (but for brave Quest) guess what your intentions are, not by what you say on the phone but by statistically grouping you with people you phone… better not call Quetta, Pakistan! Statistical techniques like singlular value decomposition and its nephews on crack, postively-constrained matrix factorization (PMF), latent class modeling, structural equation modeling, and their friends let the government do facial recognition, voice recognition, gait analysis, etc. If you ever watch the CBS show “Numbers,” you’ll see a layperson’s description of what I’m talking about within a few episodes.
My suggestions for guests:
Kevin Bankston, Staff Attorney, or Cindy Cohn, Legal Director, for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org);
Mark Rotterberg, Director, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC);
Fernanda Viégas, MIT investigator of the “Blogger’s Expectations of Privacy” report.
January 19th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
I’d love to hear a discussion about how the idea of groupthink might relate to what is going on in the Bush Administration. I am bewildered how can a small group of people in power (at this point it seems like hardly more than a handful) can be so focused on their particular perspective that nearly everyone else, not only in this country, but, indeed, in the whole WORLD can see that their actions are crazy, and yet they are so entrenched in their perspective that they seem unable to change their course and their minds. It seems like some kind of group paranoia is becoming a self fulfilling prophesy that is making the world a frighteningly dangerous place.
The term Groupthink was originally coined by William Whyte of Fortune Magazine, in 1952. He defined it as a level of conformity that goes far beyond “normal†conformity to group norms. He described it as a “rationalized†conformity to an open, articulate philosophy which holds that group values are not only expedient but right and good as well. He said that when engaging in groupthink, members go along with what they believe is the consensus. Groupthink can cause groups to make irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group’s balance. Irving Janis, of Yale, developed an extensive theory of groupthink. He described it as a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group and the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. He felt that highly cohesive groups are much more likely to engage in groupthink. The group isolates itself from outside experts and the closer they are, the less likely they are to raise questions to break the cohesion. Does this sound familiar?
Several political incidents of the 20th Century have been described as possible cases of groupthink. The one I see as most like what we are now dealing with, in terms of the level of dangerousness to the world, was the state of mind within the Kennedy Administration during the Bay of Pigs invasion. Although, in retrospect, it was clear to many that the plan was fatally flawed from the beginning, no one within the administration spoke out against the plan. Kennedy’s top group of advisers fit every one of the main causes of groupthink. They had all been educated in the country’s top universities, causing them to become a very cohesive group. They were also all afraid of speaking out against the plan, because they did not want to upset the president. The PresidentR