This is just a short note today:  check out Philip Baruth's analysis on Vermont Daily Briefing. 

Baruth, reviewing an interview he held in March, cites what he calls Douglas' “two-note campaign strategy”

I'm not so sure I'd call it “two-note” since Douglas isn't exactly trying to play a tune.  Boxing terminology actually comes to mind since the governor has been known to throw quite a few low blows and rabbit punches over the last six or seven years.

Let's hope that the people who can benefit most from VDB today will actually read it.

Below the fold:  Appropriate boxing terminology, defined; and Baruth's explanation of the “two-note” two-step.

But really, just go to the source over at VDB. Special note:  Counterpunch, defined below, is what Douglas' opponents should be practicing.  

And Chief Second (see below):  At this point, I'd recommend Philip Baruth.

Jab : A quick, straight punch thrown with the lead hand. It can be used as a set-up for power punches, as a way to gauge distance, to keep an opponent wary, or as a defensive move to slow an advancing opponent. 

Hook : A short power punch in which the boxer swings from the shoulder with his elbow bent, bringing his fist from the side toward the centre. 

Counterpunch : A counterattack, begun immediately after an opponent throws a punch. A “counter-puncher” typically waits for his opponent to throw punches, then blocks or slips past them and exploits the opening in his opponent's position. 

Chief Second: The person designated by the fighter to provide advice and assistance during the bout, usually the trainer. 

VDB's “two-note campaign strategy” a la Douglas:

Let me just go to the second note of the two-note Jim Douglas re-election strategy. The first note is the series of ads accusing the opponent of being a wild-eyed tax-addict.

The second is to pick up on some hot-button local security issue. So in his first run, against Doug Racine, it was heroin, and what he called “a Megan’s Law for drug dealers.” What Douglas said in that race was simple: “We need a Megan’s law for drug dealers, because heroin is here, it’s scary, and our children need to be protected.”

( – promoted by odum)

I’ve just received word that Former Army Spc. 4 Thomas James, who served 16 months of combat in Iraq (including several months after his supposed return date thanks to the back-door draft known as “stop loss”) is “seriously considering” a run for the U.S. House and his supporters are now actively seeking signatures to place himself on the ballot as a Progressive Party candidate for Vermont’s lone Congressional seat, which is now held by Dem Peter Welch.

The email I just got explains that James is a resident of Barre, currently working at a local organic farm, and is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War.  He is running largely on a platform which demands an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops and civilians contractors from Iraq, and that the troops be taken good care of upon their return.  He is also demanding the the Executive Branch be held accountable for its Constitutional violations.

The email I received on his behalf says James charges that Rep Welch be held accountable for his failure to act on election-time promises to do everything in his power to end the war in Iraq, with the email I received noting that Welch voted twice to continue funding the war before a high-profile public campaign forced him to vote “no”.

Unseating an incumbent has proven nearly impossible in Vermont, but it would seem that James’ entry into the House race could make for some really interesting campaigning.

I’ve now done some unpacking of the crony-based decision that came out of the Secretary of State’s office recently, which marked the end of a nearly eight year tip-toe through that Kafkaesque Looking Glass kind of world, which I’m now referring to as Kafka-Carroll Land.  I mean, just imagine a theme park built around a blend of those two authors’ works.  Oughta make a fortune.

Click here for the “unpacking” post.  This GMD post offers yet another piece of the background.

The good thing, the silver lining in all of this, is how well it demonstrates the need for a State Ombudsman Office in Vermont.  I’ve passed all of this along to some of the other people interested in the state ombudsman idea, of course, who know of cases involving not just Markowitz’s territory but other departments and agencies, and cases far more egregious than mine.  For many reasons, however, those cases never break into the light of day.

One of those reasons, and a primary one, is confidentiality of the parties involved.  It’s a very good reason, insofar as the confidentiality of innocent people is protected.  It’s a very bad reason when it acts only as a shield for the state to hide behind.

Case in point: SRS, back before it became DCF, used to cite confidentiality regularly as the reason they could not open up the records so that their actions could be evaluated.  Legislators were thoroughly snowed, and I believe trepidatious about challenging the agency that held itself out as the one, true, real protector of children in the state.  It took years of noisy agitation by a wide range of people (including myself, and the academic grounding for reform provided by my dissertation) before the then-commissioner made an unfortunate comment to the press.  He said that all the leaders of the reform movement were child abusers.

That comment of course hit the Free Press and the Times Argus, and I believe that was the moment that a number of legislators decided there really was an important reason to take a closer look at SRS.  There was subsequently one important piece of legislation passed. It said in the case of a child in state custody dying, then the agency could open its records for scrutiny of its actions in the case.

The next child in state custody to die was Alexis Cormier.  For the very first time, SRS records were opened, and for the very first time, there were headlines that read unlike any that had appeared previously about SRS.

SRS cites errors in baby case

SRS: Agency admits mishandling case

You can see the 1999 Burlington Free Press story, first part here, second part here.

That was the first crack allowing light into the workings of the agency.  Note, however, that the only case in which such a light may be shone is when a child in state custody dies.

What about all the other cases short of death that  cause pain and loss to Vermonters?

A State Ombudsman would investigate and act for the Legislature, and be directly accountable to the Legislature.  As it is now, when legislators want to know about how things work or what problems there are in any office of the executive branch, they rely on the research and advice of the people who run those offices.  This amounts, to use a phrase that’s gotten a lot of use during these Bush years, to the fox guarding the hen house.  (Indeed, I had the honor of doing research for The Fox in the Henhouse: How Privatization Threatens Democracy, by Elizabeth Minnich and Si Kahn.)

Other reasons cases of bureaucratic injustice don’t make the light of day: the people who fall victim to that meat grinder are often either too worn out, or too scared, or simply do not know how  to present their case, or to whom.  Single shot presentations to one legislator at a time work about as well as trying to use birdshot to bring down a rhinoceros.  

A State Ombudsman would be the party to present each case to, and a State Ombudsman would collect data over time, as well as have the authority to look into a case to assure that the state was simply playing by the rules.  That’s precise, targeted intervention that can put the brakes on bureaucratic abuses that currently cost the state and its citizens hugely.

Though mine is not the most egregious case of injustice wrought by Vermont bureaucracy, it is one that has made the light of day, and can serve as a solid example of why we need a State Ombudsman.

Former legislator Tom Costello has jumped into the Democratic Lieutenant Governor primary with scant weeks to go before the deadline. Northfield businessman and famed videographer Nate Freeman jumped in a couple weeks ago.

Costello clearly has the backing of what most would consider the Democratic “establishment,” but is more accurately called the Democratic political class, as there isn’t really a Democratic establishment in Vermont in the sense that expression would be used in a larger state or at the federal level.

Costello and his backers are clearly beginning the process of attempting to shock and awe Freeman out of the race, touting Costello’s significant resume , impressive personal narrative, and electoral experience. Over the next couple weeks, various high profile Dems (including Costello) will almost certainly try to “explain” to Freeman why its in “the best interests of the Party” for him to back off from his challenge. Freeman, on the other hand, has a lot of learning to do about statewide elections, partisan dynamics and campaign finance if he’s going to be a viable candidate.

If he does, he’ll be walking into an interesting narrative that, sadly, will do a disservice to both candidates; the insider versus the insurgent. Establishment vs. Grassroots. While entertaining, such dualities will tell us little to nothing about what each has to offer (or, for that matter, answer some basic questions… is the experienced candidate Costello really so old school as to think that its no big deal to jump into this so late, or is he entering as a sacrificial lamb?).

So I’m proposing what we did 2 years ago, when there was a primary between Matt Dunne and John Tracy; an online debate in a chat room (I’d love to talk video, but too mant Vermonters dont have broadband). Same rules as before – candidates will sit at a computer and answer questions for an hour or so, with a GMD front pager on hand to verify they are answering the questions themselves, and not cutting and pasting. The date can be worked out based on everyone’s convenience.

Mr. Costello, Mr. Freeman – what say you?

A ‘Thank You’ to a Great President

Dear President Chavez,

I am writing today to express my sincere gratitude to you for all that you have done during past winters. Your generous contribution of heating oil – some free and some discounted –  to the people of the United States is appreciated more than you will ever know.

Here, in the northern part of our country winter temperatures often fall well below zero. Many citizens have suffered not only discomfort, but also health problems related to the inadequate heating of their homes.  Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has received testimony that some of his constituents have had to chop up their furniture to use for fuel – that was during last winter. Worse is predicted for next winter.

During the recent Congressional Hearings on the cost of heating oil, testimony was given stating that people will freeze to death in New England during the upcoming winter heating season.  Testimony also was given to explain the cause of the rapid increase in the cost of oil. Several expert witnesses testified that a large portion – maybe 70% – of the increase was due to Commodity Futures Speculators.

Some might suggest that the logical solution to the problem would be to arrest the Speculators, nationalize the oil companies, increase auto efficiency to 50MPG, and move toward wind, solar and tidal energy sources. None of those efforts will be timely enough to save the lives that will be in jeopardy this winter.  The time has come for a hero to emerge.  President Chavez, that is you. Only you can save us from the policies that have led the United States to this long, dark winter.

That other president, the one we have in our country, probably has access to more money than you have. Unfortunately, his priorities are not as humanitarian as yours. He has gotten himself, and us too, entangled in a rather gruesome situation in Iraq. Maybe you have read about it in your press. It looks like we will be spending all of our money for generations to come on weapons. That brings up another problem. Many in the United States cannot afford health care. If it is not too much trouble, next time you are talking to your friend, Fidel, please tell him we need doctors over here. Also, the need for dentists is so critical that my best friend  relocated from the United States to Costa Rica because she had a toothache.

In appreciation of your generosity during previous winters, I have been passing the word to everyone I know. I have been asking them to buy only Citgo gasoline.  

Please say, “Hello”, to the wife and family for me. Oh, I almost forgot to say that I admire the people of Venezuela who were smart enough to vote for you. Maybe some of them would be willing to come up here and help us run an election in November.   Right now it looks like we need a lot of help.

Rosemarie Jackowski            dissent@sover.net

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist living in Vermont.   She was arrested, tried, and sentenced for her participation in a peaceful protest of the war.  She appealed her conviction to the State Supreme Court. The conviction was over-turned. Then the government announced plans to retire her. After years of legal proceedings, all charges were dismissed.

 Loading ...

(Aw, what the hell. I’ll promote it, even though it has me in it. I swear I got a haircut the next day… – promoted by odum)

step right step right up here it is be the first to see it its the inaugural preeemiere debut episode of VTblogosphereTV! It will be showing on Onion River Community Access (ORCA) Media Monday, July 7  at 9 PM, Tuesday July 8 at 2AM and noon, and Saturday, July 12 at 1PM. ORCA is central VT’s Public access television station. I got real lucky and landed John Odum as the first guest. You may have heard of him. Guy’s a natural. Right here is a sneak preview of first ten minutes of the show.

Below I’m going to get grandiose and offer some reasons the progressive blogosphere needs to expand and migrate to public access television.  

1. Public access Television is just sitting there waiting.

You may have noticed that public access television often features the community calender and wingnut religious programming produced out of state. When these PEG (Public, Educational, Governmental) stations began, there was great hope that they would democratize media. The problem is the service areas were often fragmented and there was no social infrastructure. As an example, ORCAMedia’s service area is not even contiguous– it is basically an island of towns around Montpelier, and another island around Randolph. Very tough to build community based media given the odd carve up of the state’s 24 PEG’s by the cable companies. But guess what– the progressive blogosphere could provide the infrastructure to create more media democracy. And if public access TV as it stands now is an underutilized resource, the advocates for PEG’s don’t have much of an argument to get more stations, if they can’t fill the few they have now with content. When fiber optic hits, the number of stations up for grabs will be substantial. So you want HBO17 or more public access channels?

2.The blogosphere has come of age.

I don’t know if the blogosphere has passed puberty, but I dont think the only way to measure its expansion is to measure the increase in hits to blogs. Another measure is how the talent of the blogosphere migrates to other media. The rise of the rightwing cable TV punditry was basically facilitated by right wing talk radio. The morons on the radio became the morons on the TV, and corporate interests moved the culture of yelling to cable TV lock stock and barrel. Corporate interests will not find homes for progressive bloggers doing quality commentary, analysis, and real live journalism. we will have to build it ourselves

3.More voices drown out the pundits. The blogosphere spends a lot of it efforts decrying the insulting absurd hateful rhetoric that often comes out of the cable yap-world. That is time well spent, but also getting our voices in the cable-yap world would help democratize media. Emailing FOX News about O’Reilly’s racist rantings is one thing; directly refuting his nonsense on TV is an entirely different animal. Think about it– Glenn Beck has a show and we dont?

4.TV watchers may not be hep to the blogosphere

While we discuss everything from FiSA to the governor’s race, there is a parrallel discussion going on on TV that has completely different premises and parameters. Many people watching TV go to TV station website to get their news and only understand the blogosphere as it has been defined to them by the corporate media. Getting on public access TV and defining ourselves for that audience would do much to democratize the media.

5.The new dynamic is local left/corporate right

People come to associate local opinion with the blogosphere and rightist kookiness with corporate cable news. I beieve this is already happening in VT, and Democracy Now! on public access helps that connection. (Democracy Now is supposed to be coming to ORCA any week now…) But that is a national show and more local progressive shows would greatly democratize the media. The stuuf coming out the national corporate press will seem even more alien with countering local voices.

Okay thats only a sampling of all the great reasons why the progressive blogosphere needs to expand to public access TV. I know these aren’t new ideas, and some PEGs are doing a great job delivering the goods– this is just a little contribution. Such a migration could do for TV what the blogosphere did for journalism. Yeah I said I’d get grandiose, but I think a small progressive state like VT is just the place to show how it’s done. So I hope people would be willing to be interviewed, interested in making fun little productions, motivated to further progressive movement begun on the blogs. I plan on doing this show monthly, but if people are motivated to make media, this could grow, as they say, organically. Oh yeah, and John Odum’s a natural.  

Paul MacGowan has a long history in videography beginning in Burlington many, many years ago.   He recently participated as an offline editor for an HBO documentary airing tomorrow night, July 7th, at 9pm.

Full details below the fold.  Is the subject about art or emotional illness?  You tell me.

For Immediate Release HBO Docs
THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE
TAKES AN UNFLINCHING LOOK AT THE RISE AND FALL OF A
TROUBLED ARTIST WHEN THE DOCUMENTARY
DEBUTS JULY 7, EXCLUSIVELY ON HBO
When neo-expressionist Chuck Connelly burst on the New York art scene in the ‘80s, he found himself compared to Van Gogh, and his work was discussed in the same breath as that of successful contemporaries Jean-Michel Basquiat and Julian Schnabel. During that time, Connelly sold more than a million dollars’ worth of art and was represented by one of New York’s most successful dealers.
Today, however, he is remembered primarily for alienating every collector and gallery owner with whom he worked. An unflinching portrait of the ascent and decline of an enigmatic artist, THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE debuts MONDAY, JULY 7 (9:00-10:05 p.m. ET), exclusively on HBO.
Other HBO playdates: July 8 (11:45 p.m.), 10 (8:00 p.m.) and 16 (3:50 a.m.)
HBO2 playdates: July 7 (12:55 a.m.), 16 (11:35 p.m.) and 22 (3:25 a.m.)
THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE is part of the HBO Documentary Films summer series, which features a provocative new film every Monday night at 9:00 p.m. (ET/PT) through Aug. 25.
Directed by Jeff Stimmel and shot over a six-year period, this intimate and often troubling character study explores the creative passion of a painter who is his own worst enemy. Along with cinema verité footage, the film features candid interviews with such individuals as artist Mark Kostabi, curator Atanasio diFelice and art dealers Annina Nosei, Eduard Doga and Mary Lou Swift.
The documentary chronicles Connelly’s early career and his entry into the center of the art scene. Emulating his idols in both alcoholism and a no-holds-barred style of creating art, Connelly started to lash out at what he considered the hypocrisy and financial dishonesty of that world. Before long, he alienated everyone around him, lost every opportunity that came his way and fell into obscurity.
In 1999 Connelly left New York, where he had painted for nearly 20 years, and moved to Philadelphia. Though his work is in the permanent collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and his paintings sell in online auctions, he hasn’t had a major art show since the 1990s, and continues to struggle as an artist, angry at being almost entirely forgotten.
Reflecting his working-class Pittsburgh roots, Connelly holds “traditional” beliefs that art is about personal expression and craftsmanship, a less-than-fashionable notion in today’s elite art world, the inner workings of which are glimpsed in the film.
Segments of THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE include:
In a home video, Connelly has a drunken tirade in which he becomes belligerent toward his wife Laurence. Dealer Mary Lou Swift thinks that he drinks because he is unhappy in his life, but also because he sees a correlation between creating art and being an alcoholic.
At a Pittsburgh cemetery, Connelly visits Andy Warhol’s grave, observing that dying was Warhol’s best career move, adding, “Now he’s a hero.”
Connelly’s violent personality has driven away everyone who has worked with him, including his latest patron, Matt Garfield. Laurence tells her husband, “You make people fall out of love with you.” Later, the artist reads aloud a letter from his wife about the terms of their separation agreement. It’s nothing new, Connelly concedes, saying, “Gallery. Patron. Wife. All gone down the drain.”
Driven by desperation, Connelly hires actor David Nelson to pose as a young, upcoming artist to sell his work to galleries and art dealers. Nelson poses as Connelly’s early art school alter ego Fred Scaboda, visiting galleries to attempt to sell his work, and embellishing stories of the inspiration behind each piece. Though the tales are entirely fabricated, one gallery owner responds, “I see that your work is very autobiographical.”
The film concludes with “The Chuck Show: A Retrospective,” which shows onscreen some of the 3,000 paintings in storage in Connelly’s attic. Assessing his prospects, Connelly says, “I’m at the point if you don’t toot your horn, who’s gonna toot it for you?” He adds with a laugh, “Call me an egomaniac…but call me.”
People who haven’t forgotten Connelly still debate his talent, with some continuing to call him a genius. THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE asks whether someone this uncompromising can make a comeback in an art world based increasingly on commerce not just art.
THE ART OF FAILURE: CHUCK CONNELLY NOT FOR SALE was produced and directed by Jeff Stimmel; executive producer for Films Transit International, Diana Holtzberg; editor, Paula Heredia; associate producer, Joanna K. Stimmel: original songs by Paul A. Anderson. Produced in association with BBC Storyville, ZDF/Arte: For HBO: supervising producer, Sara Bernstein; executive producer, Sheila Nevins.

— Paul MacGowan
Video Expeditions
802.865.0123
paul@vexp.org
www.vexp.org

WATCH THE MOVIE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YirkQ0yYPxs

“Obviously, someone was thinking ahead,” said department spokesman Stephen Wark.

This is the first and perhaps biggest understatement in this article .

The second is by the reporter stating that this potential for big profits presents an enormous financial incentive for re-licensing the aging nuclear cash cow .

Why bother with new power sources the old ones are working just fine ,look at all this money .

“They”were thinking ahead by covering all the bases .$750million in unexpected profits from a “sweetener ” clause added almost as an after thought to the original Yankee/Entergy deal.

Back in the winter of 2002, when Vermont regulators were pondering the sale of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant to Entergy, a Louisiana-based energy giant, a short clause was inserted into the sales agreement that no one at the time paid much attention to.

But that little-known provision could reap about $750 million in unexpected profits for two of Vermont’s utilities, Central Vermont Public Service and Green Mountain Power, in coming years if the Vernon reactor is re-licensed and energy markets remain high. The most recent state estimates indicate the profit-sharing provision in the contract with Entergy could hit $1.2 billion over the life of the 10-year agreement. It’s not clear at this point whether the windfall would be used to lower electricity rates for Vermont ratepayers.

The so-called “strike price” provision in the 2002 sales contract is a profit-sharing agreement between Entergy and the state’s two largest utilities, CVPS and GMP. The potential profits present an enormous financial incentive for regulators to approve the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee, which wants to keep operating for another 20 years.

Legislators, who also must approve the re-licensing, say their requests for basic information about the profit-sharing deal have been stymied by Entergy Nuclear, the utilities and state regulators.

If the profits were used to keep electricity rates down, the creation of the provision was “extremely savvy,” Shumlin said.

If  the profits are used for leverage to keep the aging nuclear plant running it is equally savvy from a different perspective.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps…

We’re about to go into another news cycle of debate about the death penalty, in light of recent news. It won’t be fun.

Let me be clear; there are certain crimes that generate a reflexive, almost instinctive reaction. At least that’s how they feel to me, and looking at others, I expect that’s a fair description. Crimes that seem to demand the death of the perpetrator. Sometimes they may seem to demand the torture of the perpetrator. Or maybe (and I’m not trying to be funny – I’m dead serious), a death by slow torture. And by slow, I may mean over as long a period as possible. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t feel that sometimes, and frankly, I don’t quite trust anybody who would suggest they didn’t.

But we are not children. There are a lot of things we want, and many of those wants are just as primal and visceral as the above desire for painful retribution. Somebody pushes us, we want to punch them. Somebody torments our kid, we want to beat the crap out of them.

But we don’t. It’s not easy, but we don’t. It’s because we decided a long time ago, when our heads were clearer, that its wrong. Immoral. And morality, when done right – by which I mean when it’s not the nakedly self-serving, situationally-convenient morality of most right-wingers and so-called conservative Christians (the kind that tells you not to sweat it, all your impulses and biases actually just happen to line up with those of your lord & savior…. what a happy conicidence!) – is not easy. Morality is not supposed to be easy, or casual. Sometimes, sure, but when it comes to matters of intense, unreasoning passion, morality is a gauntlet.

But it’s a gauntlet that keeps us from being part of the problems in the world instead of part of the solutions.

I suspect most people in this online community understand the innate immorality of capital punishment. We may all have that moral understanding put into a vise in the coming weeks and months as the debate gets rolling (and gets angrier). But character isn’t defined by whether or not you take the moral stance when things are easy. Anybody can do that.

Moral character is a test of strength. You don’t really know the strength of that character until its put under pressure. Until then, it may just be a lot of fluffy sounding talk. And there’s plenty of that in the world already.

A special heads-up to fellow GMDers on recent developments in the race for Lieutenant Governor:  a primary is upon us, and I have no intention of backing down.  See the press release below the fold, and don't forget to visit www.NateFreeman.com for the latest.

Best, 

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT 

natefreeman@gmail.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (July 6, 2008)

CONTACT: Nate Freeman, 802-485-4428

FREEMAN WELCOMES PRIMARY

Describes race as Ordinary Vermonters vs. Montpelier politics-as-usual.

NORTHFIELD — Nate Freeman, candidate for Lieutenant Governor, said Saturday morning that he welcomes a primary against Rutland attorney Tom Costello.

“I look forward to a vigorous primary as our Vermont grassroots campaign challenges Montpelier politics-as-usual,” Freeman said.

Asked about attorney Costello, Freeman said, “Officials from the Vermont Democratic Party asked me last week to wait for Tom's final decision. My response was that an established politician could have little credibility coming to this campaign so late in the campaign season. Established politicians such as Mr. Costello should have been making their announcements last November instead of 'inching closer to a decision' on the 4^th of July. Vermont can't afford to wait for the last minute to address our critical issues, and we should be skeptical of established politicians who wait until the last minute to something as serious as a statewide campaign.”

Mr. Costello has strong support from Senate president pro tem, Peter Shumlin. This fact does not appear to deter Freeman.

“In my opinion, Peter Shumlin is once again throwing a colleague under the bus as he maneuvers and manipulates Vermonters toward his own political goals. Politics-as-usual in Montpelier needs to take a back seat to Vermonters' need for change. Vermont can't afford to wait another two years for real change in the executive branch.”

Nate Freeman is the owner of Freeman's Upholstery Shop in Northfield and Green Mountain Kitty Litter. He is a member of the Northfield School Board and a member of the transportation advisory committee for the Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission.

Mr. Freeman is also a published author who in 1999 received a Vermont Arts Council grant as an art producer/presenter.

—

For information on the Freeman campaign, see www.natefreeman.com or call 802-485-4428.

# # #