Archive for November 8th, 2007
Radiohead recently allowed fans to decide how much they wanted to pay for the band’s new album online. Not surprisingly, 62 percent of “buyers” decided to pay nothing at all. The remaining 38 percent pitched in an average of 6 dollars. This novel idea generated a lot of interest, with much of the blogosphere concluding it was not particularly successful.
I dunno. Bands only make about 1$ an album for CDs to begin with. I believe many of these online moochers wouldn’t have paid for an album anyway, and the marginal revenue lost will be recouped by all the publicity this has generated, as it leads to better ticket sales and positive hype for the CD’s eventual release. I like it. Paying a few bucks directly to the band beats paying 1 to the artist and 19 to the label.
November 8th, 2007
The elephant in the room is the real GOP. It’s the real George Bush. Why are we acting like the Republican leadership has decided on a sane course of action for this country that we just happen to disagree with? There are plenty of legitimate choices to be made about how government should run, how foreign policy should be conducted. But let’s stop pretending Republicans offer one of those choices. Let’s ditch the ludicrous notion that the only kind of politics we need is a coin with a D on one side and an R on the other.
The elephant in the room is the real Global Warming. The gradual warming that might eventually put our children at greater risk for skin cancer was 30 years ago. The one we’re facing now is more serious. At this late stage in the game, we shouldn’t still be talking about drafting a bill to send a hand-written thank you card to every company that voluntarily decides to cut CO2 emissions.
And why isn’t anyone talking about the elephant? Because the Bush Administration denies the existence of elephants. And the Bill of Rights that protects the freedoms of people who mention elephants.
November 8th, 2007
One of the cynically amusing aspects of all these ridiculous debates is the contrast between each party’s style. Republicans are all about saying the bold things they represent, the extremes to which they’ll go in order to protect the country. The Dems, on the other hand, are about saying what they’re not; trying to avoid boxing themselves into any position that isn’t popular or poll-tested.
I think there are several candidates on the Republican side (notably Giuliani and Thompson) who lack enough inquisitiveness into the wonky realm of policy to understand a few of the issues. So some of the frothy mouth is real because they genuinely don’t know what they’re talking about. Although, to the extent to which they do understand how government works — and Jesus, shouldn’t the president be well-versed in this? — they are willing to say fuck you to millions of Americans.
On the bride’s side of the aisle , most of the Dems (sans Richardson) have a pretty nuanced understanding of foreign and domestic policy, but lack faith in the public’s ability to connect the policy dots. And no one watches debates anyway, so the only thing that matters are the little snippets media outlets will show ad nauseum to “prove” who won and who lost. Thus, the Dems play to avoid making damaging gotcha clips, and Republicans shoot for fire-up-the-base clips.
History indicates voters are more likely to pick a leader boldly leading in the wrong direction than one timidly refusing to lead.
November 8th, 2007