Category: politics

Twitter Back-Channel for the Presidential Debates on Current

Ashley Bischoff2 Comments

If you’ve been to a conference over the last few years, you may have encountered a “back-channel”. A back-channel is simply an alternate communication channel that continues alongside the primary communications channel. For instance, there may be an IRC room where audience members can discuss a panel while the panel is going on.

For the upcoming Presidential and Vice-Presidential Debates, the channel Current is doing just that with Twitter in a project that they're calling Hack the Debate. In short, if you tweet during while you’re watching the debates, just include the tag “#current” and your tweet will be overlaid onto the broadcast (probably similar in look to subtitles or closed-captioning, but just with a lot more people contributing to the feed).

In this promo video, the Current team goes over how this might have worked if Twitter had been around for the Kennedy/Nixon debates:

I don’t know about you, but I think this sounds like it could be good fun. And while I might normally watch the debates on CNN or MSNBC, I think I’ll give Current a try. If you’d like to play along, here’s the schedule for the upcoming debates:

First presidential debate:
Friday, September 26
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS
Vice presidential debate:
Thursday, October 2
Washington University in St. Louis, MO
Second presidential debate:
Tuesday, October 7
Belmont University, Nashville, TN
Third presidential debate:
Wednesday, October 15
Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

That news item from the Commission on Presidential Debates goes on to say that all debates will be 90 mins in length and will start at 9 p.m. Eastern / 8 p.m. Central / 6 p.m. Pacific. And, yeah, that first one — on Friday September 26 — is this Friday.

Let’s Vote for Gail — She’s For Light Rail

Ashley Bischoff6 Comments

Last night’s Colbert Report featured an analysis of Gail Parker, an independent who ran for Senate in Virginia. As Colbert pointed out, she garnered over 26,000 votes, far more than the ~ 9,000 separating votes Jim Webb (D) and George Allen (R). Naturaly, the go-to point-to-be-made was that if more people voted for Webb or Allen instead of Parker, the race might not have been so close.

Anyhow, Parker’s primary campaign platform was that she wanted to extend light rail service thoughout Virginia. As she put it, Virginians “need more trains: reliable, clean, efficient, quiet, safe Rail service.”. That’s all well and good, but the best part of her, erm, platform is her barbershop quartet-esque campaign jingle:

Let’s vote for Gail —
she’s for light rail.
Vote Gail Parker US Senate!
She’s independent,
the US Senate
needs Gail “for Rail” this time!

Let’s vote for Gail —
she’s for light rail.
Vote Gail Parker US Senate!
She’s independent…

[Post-jingle epilogue:]

“I’m Gail Parker, candidate for
the United States Senate and I paid
for, and approved, this ad.”

It’s so damn catchy that, if I were living in Virginia, I’d almost have to vote for her just for the jingle. Oh, and not that it counts for anything, but she’s also apparently acronym compliant: FEW / ROA / NARFE / ISC2 / AARP / NAACP — did she think anyone would know what half of those mean? (And before you start mashing your thumbs into the comment box, yes, I’m aware of both the AARP and the NAACP ;).)

The New Democratic Agenda

Ashley Bischoff6 Comments

With the Democrats’ newly regained control of the House and (likely) the Senate, some have been speculating as to their new agenda. And, it looks like rightwasright.us has the scoop on the Democrats’ new goals. Here’re a couple excerpts:

  • Tofurkey to be named official Thanksgiving dish
  • Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems
  • Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor
  • Ban Christmas: replace with Celebrate our Monkey Ancestors Day
  • […]

Indeed, it is a parody, but I’m guessing that both sides of the aisle could get a chuckle out of this one. (Via: BoingBoing)

I’ve Got Your Eminent Domain Right Here

Ashley Bischoff1 Comment

Eminent domain is the “power of the state to appropriate private property for its own use without the owner’s consent.”. It’s traditionally used when a public project needs to make use of private land, such as building a highway. I suppose that giving up one's house for the sake of a highway isn’t pleasant for the people that own the land, but perhaps it’s necessary. All the same, eminent domain has drawn the line at taking private property for private use… until now.

In a recently decided Supreme Court case, the City of New London, Connecticut wanted to take away some Fort Trumbull residents’ houses and give that land to Pfizer so that it could build a plant there. The city cited “eminent domain” as their justification but the residents balked at that idea and sued. The case went from the New London Superior Court to the Connecticut Supreme Court and from there to U. S. Supreme Court. And on June 23rd, the Supreme Court ruled against the homeowners.

With that out of the way, a private developer wants to make the most of this newfound power and build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road in Weare, New Hampshire. Naturally, there’s already a house there, though in this case the house is owned by Justice David H. Souter, one of the Supreme Court justices that supported the recent ruling:

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter’s home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called “The Lost Liberty Hotel” will feature the “Just Desserts Café” and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon’s Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged.”

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans. […]

Though Clements insists that this is “not a prank”, I doubt his request will go any further than the nearest circular file. All the same, I wish Clements the best of luck — even if his request is denied (or ignored), perhaps this will bring some public attention to this atrocious Supreme Court decision.

(Via: Boing Boing)

An Open Letter on the 2004 Presidential Elections

Ashley Bischoff4 Comments

Preface: I’ve sent this letter to my parents and a few close friends. If you didn’t receive one, I probably thought you already believed as I do about this issue (this will make sense once you’ve read it). After changing the salutation, I now present this as an open letter to Hand Coding readers.

Dear Readers,

As you know, the presidential elections are coming up on November 2nd. And, the two leading candidates are John Kerry and George Bush. But, this letter isn’t about John Kerry.

In the aftermath of September 11th, George Bush signed the USA PATRIOT Act into law (which stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”). Among other provisions, the USA PATRIOT Act:

  • Allows the FBI to obtain search warrants which would permit phone and Internet surveillance on every office and residence that an individual has visited over an entire year — without ever having to identify the suspect in question. This “roving” surveillance allows investigators to monitor those media whether or not other people who are not suspects also regularly use it. [Section 206]

  • Reclassified voice mail to be governed under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). Before this step, if the FBI listened to your voice mail illegally, it couldn’t use the messages as evidence against you. But the ECPA has no such rule; so even if the FBI gains access to your voice mail in violation of the statute, it can freely use it as evidence against you. [Section 209]

  • Allows your phone company or Internet provider to hand over your messages (such as e-mail and voice mails) to any law enforcement agent without your knowledge or consent, so long as they reasonably believed that the immediate danger of death or serious physical injury required it to do so. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 later amended those requirements from “reasonable belief” to “good faith belief” and dropped the requirement that the threat to life or limb be immediate. [Section 212]

  • Authorizes the use of “sneak and peek” search warrants in connection with any federal crime, including misdemeanors. A “sneak and peek” warrant authorizes law enforcement officers to enter private premises without the occupant’s permission or knowledge and without informing the occupant that such a search was conducted. [Section 213]

  • Allows the FBI to request your personal information from businesses — including financial records, medical records, student records, even your library records — without ever having to prove that they have probable cause to suspect you of a crime, or even that your records are relevant to an investigation. Furthermore, these demands for records come with a “gag order” which prohibits the business from telling anyone, ever, that they received such an order. [Section 215]

While this wouldn’t be the first time that federal government passed dubious legislation, I took specific exception to the USA PATRIOT Act. Though I supported the Bush administration up until this point, I found that I could no longer stand behind a president that championed the removal of so many of our freedoms.

I’m not necessarily asking you to vote for John Kerry. But, I am urging you to not to vote for George Bush. Personally, I’ll be voting for Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate. I can imagine what you may be thinking — if John Kerry is elected, might he raise our taxes or otherwise increase the size of government? Yeah, that is possible. But would you rather have higher taxes or fewer freedoms?

All the best,

[signed] Alex

To put this letter in context, both of my parents are registered Republicans (as Pennsylvania law requires registering with a political party in order to vote in primaries). They’re both conservative and have voted for Republicans for as long as I’ve known them.

I agree with some things that the Republican party stands for (lower taxes, for instance). But, this time around, I felt that I had to make an effort to change their minds — this election was just too important. And, if you would like to write a similar letter to your friends or relatives, I’m also granting permission for use of this letter as a starting point.