Just as webinars are not quite the same as a face-to-face workshop, online conversations are less satisfying than diner chats and backyard fence conversations. Aside from the lag time between comment and reply, and the absence of facial expression and body language, a lot of people neglect to introduce themselves. That would be you, dear Anonymous. On NCPR blogs and at other visitor comment locations, fully 45% of the conversation is posted by you.
While creating a certain air of mystery has its appeal, and some people have legitimate reason to conceal their identity, I can't believe that nearly half the people who comment need to do so anonymously. Or is it one person typing maniacally through the night? Who can tell if Anon 9:14 pm is the same as Anon 3:27 am?
Why does it matter? Folks who follow the conversation need to be able to tell one voice from another--even if they don't know who it actually belongs to--so they can reply specifically and intelligibly. So please, unless you want to be not only unidentifiable, but indistinguishable from all the other unidentified, don't click "Anonymous" on the comment form. Instead select "Name/URL." Name can be anything you like, from "G" to "greatsatan2012," and the URL (web address) can be nothing--it's optional. Just as with "Anonymous," you don't need to register anywhere or log in to use this option. And for those of you comfortable with using your real name, please do so. I always do; it makes things more friendly.
The left-leaning Mother Jones magazine's fascinating cover story this month profiles a growing militia-style group on the right called Oath Keepers. The twist is that Oathkeepers are largely active-duty members of the military who are preparing to disobey their Commander-in-Chief.
In Pray's estimate, it might not be long (months, perhaps a year) before President Obama finds some pretext—a pandemic, a natural disaster, a terror attack—to impose martial law, ban interstate travel, and begin detaining citizens en masse. One of his fellow Oath Keepers, a former infantryman, advised me to prepare a "bug out" bag with 39 items including gas masks, ammo, and water purification tablets, so that I'd be ready to go "when the shit hits the fan."
When it does, Pray and his buddies plan to go AWOL and make their way to their "fortified bunker"—the home of one comrade's parents in rural Idaho—where they've stocked survival gear, generators, food, and weapons. If it becomes necessary, they say, they will turn those guns against their fellow soldiers.
As the article points out, the Oath Keepers are closely linked to civilian right-wing groups from the Tea Party to Birthers to 912ers.
Aside from the intra-military implications of rank-and-file troops vowing to disobey - and take arms against - their highest commander, here's what really interests me. If you read Oath Keepers' list of orders they will not obey, they're not much different from what a lot of people on the Left most feared during the Bush Administration.
Fort Drum folks out there: do you know any Oathkeepers? What do you think you've sworn an oath to - the Constitution? The Commander-in-Chief? Both? Are they vigilant, patriotic soldiers or a threat to chain of command so integral to a functioning military?
The question I asked: Is Saranac Lake dying? That's the argument being made by some locals, including Harrietstown supervisor Larry Miller.
When Republicans running for village office in Saranac Lake laid out their campaign platform last month, they argued that our community is "on the verge of failure." In a letter to the editor of the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, Harrietstown Supervisor Larry Miller echoed this claim, writing, "If the village continues down the current path it is destined for failure."
That sounds terrifying. Fortunately, this gloomy portrait of Saranac Lake is factually, provably wrong. As a journalist, I have visited, researched and written about small towns for 25 years. Compared with most of rural America - not just in the Adirondacks or upstate New York - our village is thriving.
The discussion is drawing a lot of attention at the Enteprise's website and I thought readers of the In Box might be interested in checking it out.
Among other things, he says he's moving his primary residence from Lake Placid to Saranac Lake, presumably so he can live in the district he wants to represent:
Q: Do have any intention of making a permanent residence inside the 23rd?
A: Yes, I do. I have a purchase contract that I just closed on last week. We're working on the financing and we hope to close on that property next month. It's in Saranac Lake, my hometown where I grew up. And I'll be moving back home.
Minorities make up nearly half the children born in the U.S., part of a historic trend in which minorities are expected to become the U.S. majority over the next 40 years.
In fact, demographers say this year could be the "tipping point" when the number of babies born to minorities outnumbers that of babies born to whites.
The Plattsburgh Press-Republican is giving a shout-out in a lead editorial today to Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.
The newspaper says she's brought a new level of attention on ag and dairy issues to the Senate.
...few have focused on the plight of North Country dairy farmers with the energy of current Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, herself an upstate native with a perspective on the region's rural economy.
Strange Maps, one of my favorite blogs, does it again with a map that uses Google data to compare the ratio of groceries to bars across the country.
As you can see, Wisconsin and the upper Midwest is clearly America's beer belly. But the North Country, especially St. Lawrence county, holds its own.
Do we drink more here? Or do we just have fewer grocery stores (and for a time we'll have even fewer during the P&C --> Price Chopper transition)? Is it a sign of poverty? Or community?
Massa, of course, announced his resignation last week following allegations that he had groped male staff-members in his office.
This comes on the heels of Rep. Charlie Rangel's demotion following ethics allegations, and Gov. David Paterson's announcement that he would drop out of this year's campaign.
It follows Jonathan Edwards' personal and political implosion and comes as a new book appears on the shelves describing Eliot Spitzer's disintegration.
Of course the grandfather of all these Democratic scandals is Bill Clinton's dalliance with Monica Lewinsky.
A unifying theme is that all these dalliances hint at a toxic lack of seriousness among Democrats and their leaders.
For better or worse, most don't involve the abuse of power.
Instead, they paint a portrait of a political party that can't focus on its goals or its mandate seriously enough to leave the hookers alone or stop pinching bottoms.
I'm not being snarky here. I'm flat-out disgusted.
The shocking thing about Clinton's behavior wasn't that he committed adultery, or even that he did it in the White House.
No, the shocking thing was that he was so careless with his own agenda and the responsibilities of his office that he would put it all at risk for a quicky.
Surely, similar misgivings passed through Gov. Paterson's mind before he picked up the telephone to intervene in an aide's domestic violence case?
And surely Eliot Spitzer paused outside that hotel room in Washington DC to think about the future of his state, and his oath to bring reform to Albany.
What does it mean that they kept on going, that they betrayed their trust?
When President Barack Obama came to office in 2008, he promised big changes and laid claim to a new gravity of purpose for himself and his party.
But if Dems really care about things like poverty, health care, the budget crisis, and closing Guantanamo Bay -- how come so many of them still have time for all this nonsense?
Obviously, Republicans have had plenty of ethical challenges of their own, some of them involving similar adolescent shenanigans.
South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford took creepy and inappropriate behavior to new levels last year.
Former North Country Rep. John Sweeney is currently cooling his heels in jail; and former state Sen. Joe Bruno -- a Queensbury native -- probably isn't far behind.
The difference is that when they were in power the GOP was remarkably effective at advancing its agenda.
There was plenty of sleaze, sure, but they also got the job done.
The North Country's two Democrats -- Plattsburgh Rep. Bill Owens and Glens Falls Rep. Scott Murphy -- have avoided any taint of scandal.
Both appear to be serving honorably and ethically.
But there's a growing risk to them and other Democrats as November 2010 approaches.
Headlines involving Eric Massa's towel snapping and Charlie Rangel's tax entanglements could outweigh any headlines trumpeting their actual accomplishments.
And that's something voters will have to think about.
Did Spitzer take the governorship knowing he would crash?
Here's a troubling thought:
When Eliot Spitzer ran for governor, and took over as New York's chief executive, he may have known that his political career was already doomed.
That's the theory of one of his top advisers and confidantes, Lloyd Constantine, who has just published a new book, unveiled this week in Politico.
“The secret things Eliot had been doing and [the] certainty that Eliot understood that they inevitably would come to light and bring him down, and all of us with him, had been steadily dripping venom into his mind,” Constantine writes.
This altered personality transformed “the brilliant, dedicated and decisive man I had known and loved for more than a quarter century” into someone he called “the Imposter.”
Constantine describes increasingly bizarre behavior on Spitzer's part, with weird rages interspersed with bouts of what he calls "serenity."
It's a troubling idea, one that nudges Spitzer toward the Jonathan Edwards category of narcissism in my mind.
What if he took the state's job, knowing he was about to take us all on this awful, ugly journey into dysfunction?
In many ways, our state's terrifying gridlock harkens back to his meltdown.
A figure with the clout and personal gifts to change Albany and navigate us through this recession turned out to be symptomatic of its deepest problems.
The full Politico article is worth reading. If nothing else, this book may pose a serious setback to Spitzer's effort to rehabilitate himself...
Tea party and Conservative favorite Doug Hoffman is officially back in the running for the House seat currently occupied by Plattsburgh Democrat Bill Owens.
The Lake Placid accountant, who became a conservative media sensation when he bumped Dede Scozzava out of the running, says he's the man to retake the seat. Here's his statement.
"I will champion the fight for less spending, lower taxes and shrinking the deficit. I will speak out about the need to defend our nation and the freedoms of its people. And, I will never back down from taking on the career politicians who conveniently forget that they represent and work for you; average American citizens, not the special interests who fill the back rooms of Washington with lobbyists and fill the campaign coffers of elected officials with money."
At least three other Republicans are considering a run. Should be an interesting primary.
In an article this week, the magazine Politico raised questions about whether tea party insurgents like Hoffman are the strongest GOP candidates.
The early results from tea party candidates, despite their focus on hot-button issues such as opposition to President Barack Obama’s health care reform bill and concern about budget-busting policies of both parties, have not been pretty.
But Hoffman won't be easy to beat in the primary. He'll be well-funded and will likely have plenty of media support on talk radio and the blogs.
Tonight Hammond's town council names a committee to study wind power. They meet in the library; about 40 people are here.
The community's deeply divided; the appointments are politically charged. Iberdrola wants to erect 72 turbines here, near the St. Lawrence. Find out more tomorrow on The 8 O'Clock Hour.
Here's a weird snippet. At an appearance in Calgary, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin described growing up using Canada's single-payer socialized healthcare.
The vocal opponent of health-care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse.
“We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada,” she said. “And I think now, isn't that ironic?”
Having grown up in Alaska, my guess is that her family crossed the border not because healthcare was more affordable, but because it was closer.
Alaska's a big place.
In those days, the Al-Can border was essentially invisible, and communities often shared services across the line.
Still, it seems that experience should have left Palin with a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of what "socialized" medicine looks like.
Hearts and minds - and 3 cups of tea - in Afghanistan
I saw Three Cups of Tea author Greg Mortenson speak to hundreds of people at Fort Drum on Saturday. Unfortunately, Mortenson wouldn't let us record any of the speech, nor did he give an interview. But we'll hear some reaction later this week.
I mention this because the core philosophy of Mortenson's Central Asia Institute is being replicated in the U.S. military's revised strategy in Afghanistan.
Mortenson's mission is very simple: educate girls. He repeats again and again what he's heard during more than a decade of building schools in the most remote regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Women tell him: a) we want our babies to stop dying. b) we want our girls to go to school.
On the same day that Mortenson was at Fort Drum, the New York Times reported on a new effort that will put female soldiers on the front lines specifically to talk with Afghan women:
Next month they will begin work as members of the first full-time “female engagement teams,” the military’s name for four- and five-member units that will accompany men on patrols in Helmand Province to try to win over the rural Afghan women who are culturally off limits to outside men. The teams, which are to meet with the Afghan women in their homes, assess their need for aid and gather intelligence, are part of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s campaign for Afghan hearts and minds. His officers say that you cannot gain the trust of the Afghan population if you only talk to half of it.
In his speech, Mortenson quoted Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen as telling him, "we cannot capture the hearts and minds of Afghanis, we must engage them."
I'm not saying Mortenson is driving military policy, but the Pentagon brass are clearly listening to people like him.
And we can only hope the U.S. military has as much success in Afghanistan as Mortenson and his Central Asia Institute has had.
The Library and Archives of Canada, the Supreme Court, Parliament Hill, the Chateau Laurier, the locks down to the river, the National Gallery...Ottawa's capital core boasts some truly lovely buildings and spaces.
And then there's the U.S Embassy on Sussex Drive:
To be brutally honest, the word I always think of gazing at my own embassy is 'sinister'. The style is very modern and (for my taste) dreadfully sterile. Worst of all, it's hemmed in by a lot of really unsightly concrete barriers.
Having slagged the embassy's appearance, let me add some praise. I've gone there for consular services, entering with dread. (Bureaucracy can be bad enough in relaxed circumstances.) But I came away impressed by the professionalism, courtesy -- and yes, efficiency! -- encountered within the bunker.
These are troubled times, and safety certainly does matter. But folks, where the barriers are concerned, we are talking u-g-l-y. It's a black eye on an otherwise graceful space.
Apparently, US Ambassador David Jacobson has aesthetic reservations too. He describes his first reaction to the site in this Ottawa Citizen article.
"They took me on a tour around the city on my way to my office," he said. "It was quite a day. The leaves were turning. We drove past the Rideau Canal and the Rideau Falls, which were magnificent. The National Gallery was imposing and Parliament Hill was majestic. We rounded the corner as we approached my new office. You can imagine -- my pulse quickened. When I first laid eyes on the Embassy of the United States in Canada the first words out of my mouth were, 'What's the deal with those concrete barriers?' ”
This past Saturday, Jacobson and federal Transport Minister John Baird announced the blocks in question will be replaced by attractive rigid posts.
According to the Ottawa Citizen, the work is projected to cost $3.125 million and may take over a year to complete. The U.S. Government will provide $500,000 toward the project. Canada's federal government will contribute $2.5 million, and the City of Ottawa will add $125,000 to relocate water and sewer mains. A bike lane is also planned.
Ever since last November's election of President Barack Obama, I've used the In Box to advocate for a renewal of the Republican Party.
My argument was and is for a GOP that builds its agenda around ideas and policies that can improve Americans' lives.
We need a vibrant, thoughtful conservative movement. But so far the renaissance hasn't happened.
Instead, Republicans have often embraced a virulent and unthinking animosity toward Mr. Obama's agenda.
Why do I say 'unthinking'?
Because too often the conservative movement has attacked and voted against ideas that Republican leaders once advocated for themselves.
Republicans pioneered the idea of forming a bipartisan deficit-reduction panel.
When Democrats embraced the idea, GOP lawmakers voted against it.
Republicans supported the idea of urging seniors to do end of life planning with their doctors.
They then attacked the policy -- included in early drafts of the health care bill -- as 'death panels.'
Republicans, under the Bush administration, began the national effort to bail out the banks and restore the finance industry.
The Bush White House created "TARP."
Now those efforts, carried forward by the current White House, are derided as 'socialism' and an attack on free market capitalism.
GOP leaders scorned President Obama's stimulus package, but raced to hoover up as many of the dollars for their districts and pet projects as possible.
Perhaps nowhere is this double-think more painfully obvious than on national security.
Dick and Liz Cheney -- the former Vice President and his daughter -- have attacked the Obama Administration's terrorism policies relentlessly.
Dick Cheney condemns the abandonment of so called 'enhanced interrogation' techniques -- torture, in simple parlance -- used against some detainees
He has also sneered at the Obama administration's plan to close Guantanamo Bay, arguing that the move would make America less safe.
What he neglects to point out is that waterboarding and similar techniques were also rejected by Mr. Obama's Republican opponent in 2008, Sen. John McCain.
Another uncomfortable fact is that President Bush himself acknowledged in 2007 that "it should be a goal of the nation to shut down Guantanamo."
Meanwhile, Liz Cheney has attacked plans to use Federal civil courts to try accused terrorists.
In an advertisement last week, her activist group went a step further.
She accused the Justice Department of hiring lawyers who formerly defended Guantanamo detainees, labeling these attorneys 'the Al Quaeda 7.'
The attack is so reprehensible that many conservatives have condemned it.
But it turns out the Bush Administration also hired a number of attorneys who had formerly defended terror suspects.
And it turns out the Bush Administration tried almost all of the detainees in its custody under Federal civil courts, not military tribunals.
As Ms. Cheney well knows, those trials proceeded without complication and without controversy, resulting in guilty verdicts and lengthy sentences.
So why would the GOP spend so much of the last year attacking the Obama administration for embracing policies that its own leaders once supported?
Why not spend the time developing a new, attractive, positive Contract for America, a proven strategy that won a landslide victory in the 1994 congressional elections?
One possible explanation is the document uncovered by Politico last week, revealing the Republican Party's internal strategy.
That official RNC document portrayed Mr. Obama as "the Joker" and argued that "fear" would one of the primary methods for winning elections in November 2010.
"What can you sell when you do not have the White House, the House, or the Senate...?" it asks.
The answer: "Save the country from trending toward Socialism!”
According to Politico, the GOP hopes to leverage "extreme negative feelings toward the existing Administration," triggering "reactionary" and "visceral" responses.
It may or may not be a strategy that will work at the ballot box this year. But how will it help Republicans govern?
What does it tell us about how the GOP would lead our nation through a deep recession, a time of war, and a time of dangerous Federal deficits?
Yes, Americans are uncomfortable with the systemic deficit spending that Mr. Obama is proposing. And we're not satisfied with many of his policy proposals.
Rather than trot out scurrilous (and hypocritical) attacks, Republicans should come up with sound, workable and appealing alternatives.
Last night I spoke to a group of Boy Scouts that meets out at Paul Smith's College.
The young men of Troop 12 were holding their awards ceremony, handing out badges, remembering their accomplishments of the last half-year.
It was pretty cool.
Here's a confession: I was a lousy Scout. It just wasn't my cup of tea. My group's scout leader deserved more than a merit badge.
A Nobel peace prize maybe?
More recently, I've been uncomfortable with the Scouts' policy of rejecting leaders and kicking out boys who are gay.
Last night, though, all that baggage fell away as I watched these guys talk about their sense of mission and their responsibilities to their community.
Helping a family that had lost its home in a fire; cleaning up a section of highway; gathering food for local pantries.
And then getting outdoors to ski and snowshoe and winter camp.
It doesn't get much better than that.
In an era when boys and their families are challenged by everything from high divorce rates to videogame drivel, a lot of young guys need all the help they can get.
How long's it been since you've recited the Boy Scout Oath? (I know for me it had been thirty years at least.)
On my honor, I will do my best To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.
His supporters, including Minerva town supervisor Sue Montgomery-Corey, say he would be a great addition to the APA.
“We believe that he will represent the needs of Adirondack communities and businesses well,” Corey wrote last week.
Critics of the nomination point out that Hornbeck is a member of the board of Protect the Adirondacks, a group that is suing the APA.
Is it an ethical conflict for him to join an Agency that he voted to sue?
Maybe so. But his supporters point out that local government groups are also currently suing the APA.
Should we prevent local government leaders from serving on the APA board (or other state agencies) if they've been involved in legal clashes with the state?
Hornbeck's nomination is complicated by other factors, most beyond his control.
First is the fact that there are already three former green-group leaders on the APA board.
If Hornbeck is confirmed, half of the appointed members on the APA board would be former environmentalists. Is that too many? It's a fair debate to have.
Second is the reality that Hornbeck was nominated by Governor David Paterson at a time when Paterson's own political future was imploding.
Hornbeck finds himself lost in the swamp that is Albany politics.
Finally, the APA itself is in the midst of political tumult, facing renewed hostility and litigation from property rights activists and other critics.
In a way, Hornbeck's nomination has become part of a larger debate over the APA's identity and future.
In an editorial last week, the Plattsburgh Press-Republican argued that this was the wrong time for Hornbeck to join the Agency:
Hornbeck might be the fairest-minded individual to ever breathe Adirondack air, but his background certainly invites disdain from those at the other end of the ideological spectrum.
Sen. Betty Little, who opposes the nomination (and has squared off with the APA on many issues), points out that Protect Adirondacks has been vocal against the Adirondack Club and Resort proposal in Tupper Lake, one of the important decisions the APA will have to rule on in the next few years. How objective can Hornbeck be on that?
Even if he can be, asking anyone to believe it stretches credulity.
Hornbeck's appointment is not only an affront to the pro-development Adirondackers, it is a disservice to an agency trying hard to earn the public's confidence.
For the first time, you can hear what Hornbeck himself has to say about these issues and the controversies swirling around his appointment.
Before commenting here, please go listen to our conversation, hear Hornbeck's views. Then chime in below.
Three Cups of Tea author is giving a very powerful speech at Fort Drum. This week on NCPR we'll hear military spouses in the audience - many with husbands in Afghanistan - reflect on Mortensen.
On Wednesday Canada's Parliament opened a new session with something called the speech from the throne. Written by the party in power (which gets to call itself 'the government') the throne speech summarizes that party's hopes & plans for the nation.
Sometimes proposals are run up the metaphoric flag pole to test public response. Like changing the words in O Canada to be gender neutral.
It's not a new idea. Unofficially, some have already changed the supposedly offending line “true patriot love, in all thy sons command” to “in all of us command”. The throne speech suggested re-examining the 1908 lyrics, which read “thou dost in us command”.
That raised a few eyebrows. (Gentle reader, dost thou recollect the words 'thou' and 'dost'? Who among our youth can utter them in context?)
O Canadahas been around as poetry set to music for over a century but it was not made the official national anthem until 1980, when it replaced God save the Queen. Lyrics exist in several versions and tinkering with them isn't new. In the late 1960's, a joint committee of MPs and senators added these English lines "from far and wide" and "God keep our land glorious and free!"
But by Friday afternoon the gender-fixing idea was already being abandoned, as explained by the Prime Minister's spokesperson Dimitri Soudas:
We offered to hear from Canadians on this issue and they have already spoken loud and clear. They overwhelmingly do not want to open the issue. The Government will not proceed any further to change our national anthem.
Comments from readers in response to media coverage include many complaints that the issue was minor. Messing with national symbols is bound to stir emotions. That fact prompted many suggestions the whole exercise was a calculated distraction.
In any event, those arguing in support of gender neutrality, like Senator Nancy Ruth, have been drowned out by a loud chorus saying the anthem is just fine and should be left alone.
For now, the official English version stays thusly:
O Canada! Our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
Official French version:
Ô Canada! Terre de nos aïeux, Ton front est ceint de fleurons glorieux! Car ton bras sait porter l'épée, Il sait porter la croix! Ton histoire est une épopée Des plus brillants exploits. Et ta valeur, de foi trempée, Protégera nos foyers et nos droits Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.
English translation of the French lyrics:
O Canada! Land of our ancestors, Thy brow is wreathed with a glorious garland of flowers. As in thy arm ready to wield the sword, So also is it ready to carry the cross. Thy history is an epic Of the most brilliant exploits. Thy valour steeped in faith Will protect our homes and our rights Will protect our homes and our rights.
I'm always a little queasy about books and movies that portray white people 'saving' people of color.
That's the narrative in Sandra Bullock's weeper 'The Blind Side' -- up for an Oscar this weekend.
The movie tells the story of a Southern mom who adopts a big, sweethearted African American boy.
"I think what you're doing is so great," croons one of the other privileged moms. "You're changing that boy's life."
"No," Sandra sighs (lumping humility on top of her generosity), "he's changing mine."
One problem here is that the black kid, Big Mike, is portrayed as essentially silent, a blank slate.
Through the movie, white people talk at him, around him, about him, to him, but he hardly speaks. (Even little kids give him advice.)
Another problem is that this isn't an accurate reflection of how whites generally think about or act toward people of color, or of how we think about race in general.
The movie is a fantasy, a comforting fable in the tradition of what Rudyard Kipling called the 'white man's burden.'
Why is there a North Country connection?
The last few months, we've been reporting constantly on the future of our region's prison 'industry.'
We have more than a dozen state and federal lock-ups in our region, along with a parallel system of county jails.
For generations, corrections has been a kind of tradition in our small towns.
It's a trade just like carpentry or plumbing that gets handed down from father to son, mother to daughter.
But really, incarcerating people isn't like carpentry at all. It's far more morally complicated.
Especially when the jailers are mostly white and the people behind bars are mostly black and Hispanic.
I worry that as we talk about this thing we do, we're telling ourselves similar fables and half-truths to the ones in that movie.
Sometimes, I hear people in the corrections trade describing inmates as the scum of the earth, beyond salvaging. I sense a real loathing.
Other times I hear advocates for the industry claiming that we are in the business of reforming and educating people.
Sometimes I hear people celebrating the fact that we separate inmates from the corrupting influences of their home communities and families.
It's for their own good, we say.
Other times I hear people claiming that inmates don't deserve to see their families. They've committed a crime and should do hard time.
In the same breath, I hear folks up here lay claim to a healing spirit, while decrying new laws that emphasize drug treatment and job training.
I also hear local people mingling concerns about their own livelihoods and financial interest with their anger and resentment toward inmates and their urban culture.
Frankly, I think this confusion is hurting us, both morally and economically.
If the North Country wants to remain a place where mostly white people incarcerate men who are mostly not white, we need to think about what that means.
What need to talk honestly about our motives, our responsibilities, and our methods.
This is especially important now, when in practical terms most of New York state's political power lies in New York City.
We need to have a real, substantive conversation with urban leaders -- black, Hispanic, and white -- about our prisons.
Why now?
In the movie, Big Mike is silent, powerless. He's comfortingly passive. Sandra Bullock gets to call the shots.
Heck, she even teaches him how to play football.
That's not the reality in New York state. People of color aren't silent or powerless or passive.
They control much of the political power in Albany. They hold the purse strings, in the Governor's mansion and the state Senate.
In a way that makes us deeply uncomfortable, we are dependent on them.
And they have made it increasingly clear that the current arrangement is no longer acceptable.
I've written here before about my love for newspapers, and my particular respect for the newspaper culture in the North Country.
We're blessed with a ridiculously fertile newspaper and magazine culture.
A city with the population of our region would have one good newspaper, if lucky.
We have many, many of them thriving, and each with their local communities' interests at heart.
This blog regularly excerpts (and provides links) to their work.
We like to think that NCPR's newsroom is part of that community, helping to tell the story of one of the richest, most fascinating places on earth.
A new and cool way this new-media-old-media circle is being completed is that the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, published in Saranac Lake, has decided to publish some of our In Box columns.
They will appear on a regular basis, the first running this weekend.
Here's managing editor Peter Crowley's editorial about the partnership:
Today we begin a new column which will run on this page every Saturday — a weekly selection of Brian Mann’s writings from the In Box, North Country Public Radio’s news blog.
Mr. Mann lives in Saranac Lake, has been an NCPR reporter for 11 years and contributes constantly — usually several times a day — to the In Box on www.ncpr.org.
His thought-provoking writings there are worth publishing, so we asked him if we could be the one to do it.
Plus, most of our local audience wouldn’t otherwise read this blog. He and the NCPR team liked the idea, so here we are.
Since these pieces are not original to this newspaper, we have chosen to call this feature “Forwards from the In Box”; in a newspaper-layout kind of way, we’re clicking the “forward” button to pass these on to you.
And we wouldn't send you junk mail; these, in particular, are worth sharing.
While Mr. Mann properly keeps his opinions out of his news reporting on the radio, he frees them online — and, by extension, here.
It’s meaty stuff; whether you agree with him or not, he knows what he’s typing about and presents strong, logical, humanistic bases for his arguments.
We hope this feature generates some responses in terms of letters to the editor and Guest Commentaries.
You won’t be able to read or comment on it on our Web site, however.
Rather, if you want to read it online, go to www.ncpr.org; you can join the comment conversation there, too.
We heartily thank Mr. Mann and NCPR for partnering with us in this way.
It's still unclear whether Democrats will engineer a squeak-through finish for the massive healthcare reform package, or not.
What's clear is that it is a deeply flawed bill, one that doesn't do enough to contain costs, contain the ridiculous behavior of the insurance industry, or shift care to more effective (and low-cost) preventative medicine.
And journalists are, at least in large measure, culpable.
How come?
Because we participated in a nearly year-long scream fest that embraced all the talk-show theatrics without explaining or humanizing the real issues.
The fact is that leaving 40 million Americans uninsured is devastating our economy.
It's also clear that with an aging population of baby boomers, we have to find ways to deliver better care to more people more efficiently.
The current system isn't just unfair and immoral; it's also teetering toward implosion.
This bill is a clumsy, special-interest driven effort to wrestle with some of those problems. It's not smart enough or effective enough.
But rather than tell that story, reporters indulged the sport of bandying flat-out lies (death panels), distortions (this bill represents a government 'take-over' of health care) and hypocrisy (Republicans blasting the public option while defending Medicare).
Journalists also suckered for simplistic arguments from the left, accepting the idea that a vast new entitlement could be created without sharply controlling costs and limiting benefits.
A lot of reporters also echoed the fiction that the public option -- or some comparable form of 'single-payer' coverage -- is the only effective step forward.
The simple truth is that modern journalism isn't very well equipped to talk about an issue this complex.
Healthcare brings together nearly every controversial issue of our time in one thorny package.
Rather than sort through it and help our audiences understand, we obsessed over Sarah Palin's tweets.
Another of the nonsense narratives peddled by reporters is that this fight has been surprisingly hard, or bungled, or mismanaged.
As if every other big battle -- over civil rights, say -- hadn't been just as messy.
This is what big problems, and big debates, look like in functioning democracy.
It's slow, it's clumsy and we as a society don't always get it right the first time.
That story is harder to tell. It's ambiguous, made up of shades of gray rather than good vs. evil.
But it's also more interesting, more human, and more true.
Another Adirondack black eye for state environment officials
The Adirondack Park Agency will likely be on the hook for at least $200,000 for the legal fees of Salim "Sandy" Lewis, the town of Essex farmer who prevailed after a lengthy lawsuit.
Now the Department of Environmental Conservation has agreed to pay Lake Placid's Jim McCulley $58,000 to settle a legal battle involving the Old Mountain Road, also known as a leg of the Jackrabbit ski trail.
McCulley's attorney Matt Norfolk issued this statement today:
The settlement brings Jim some vindication and, of course, credibility. Jim was right on the law and facts concerning the history and status of Old Mountain Road and he was right on the law and facts concerning DEC's unlawful closure of Old Mountain Road and I believe he was right on DEC's preferential treatment of recreational organizations allowing them unfettered, exclusive use of Old Mountain Road by motorized vehicles.
In an interview with the Plattsburgh Press-Republican, state officials confirmed the settlement.
I spent the better part of Thursday deep underground, in a cave under a limestone escarpment near Albany.
We crawled for a couple of hours through the darkness, shimmying on our bellies at times.
There were two brief patches where we could stand upright. I never thought I'd feel so grateful for a few extra inches of headroom.
Complicating matters was the fact that the cave is also a creekbed. We were sloshing through snowmelt that was sluicing down from the woods in daylight up above.
The objective was to inspect and tally bats, part of "white nose syndrome" research that continues around the Northeastern US.
I'm telling this story with a very particular motive: to remind you about our upcoming pledge drive.
How do these two thing connect?
Put bluntly, there are very few public radio stations in the country that can afford to have a reporter spend a day underground rooting around after sick bats.
It's too expensive, too time-consuming, and (yes) too risky.
(Did I mention that I'm so sore this morning that I keep startling my dog Sara with my groans?)
When I do in-depth work like this -- or when David Sommerstein spends a day working on a story up on the St. Lawrence River, or when Todd Moe and Joel Hurd orchestrate a complicated instudio music event -- it's because of you.
Even $20 or $40 a year can give us that extra bit of freedom to really dig after a story.
You provide those extra few inches of headroom that let us stand up and look around and sort out what's really going on.
So take a minute today and go to our Support page and make a donation.
When you tune in next week and hear the incredibly cool sounds from that bat cave, you'll know that you made it happen.
Heisler contacted Sasha Tarrant in the NBA's legal counsel department. Tarrant tells me the league's intellectual property group is looking into it, but otherwise the league has no comment yet.
I have messages in to team owner Basem Awwad. I'll update when I hear from him.
It's also worth noting that Heisler is skeptical about the entire new league - the Federal Hockey League. You can read about his concerns here.
A couple of months ago, one of the guests of On Point, our mid-morning national talk-show, mentioned Kirsten Gillibrand as one woman who might make a possible future presidential candidate.
It struck me at the time as a stretch.
Gillibrand's resume at the time was still pretty fragile:
A one-and-a-half term congresswoman from upstate New York, filling out Hillary Clinton's term in the US Senate.
It's still premature to talk about presidential aspirations, to be sure.
But Gillibrand's handling of Harold Ford Jr. and her peculiar political adeptness suggest that there's a lot more to come.
Let me recap a little. When Gillibrand ran against (the now incarcerated) John Sweeney in 2006, she led a smart, ruthless, focused campaign.
Sweeney imploded, but Gillibrand had put herself in a position to capitalize, and maybe even nudge him over the edge of the cliff.
Then she ran against Essex County's Sandy Treadwell, who seemed like the perfect moderate, decent Republican to take back a traditional GOP seat.
She ran circles around him.
Then, after being picked by Governor David Paterson to fill Hillary Clinton's seat, Gillibrand faced a firestorm of criticism from downstate Democrats and journalists.
At the event where Paterson picked her, I heard some of my reporter colleagues from Albany and Manhattan essentially writing her epitaph.
But one after another, Gillibrand convinced Big City Democrats not to challenge her in this year's primary.
And then she carefully, meticulously boxed out Ford. Put simply, she made him look like an idiot.
At present, she's running essentially unopposed and unless things change dramatically, Gillibrand will win a full term in the Senate.
The next steps could be even more interesting. Like Clinton, Gillibrand has played the apprentice, junior senator role carefully.
She's stepped out front on one or two issues -- backing gays in the military, for example -- but only in areas that shore up her political position.
I'm guessing that, if she wins in November, we'll see a much higher profile over the next six years.
Grocery stores in northern New York have gone through a shake up over the last six months.
Penn-Traffic, which owned P&C grocery stores, filed for bankruptcy in November. Price Chopper put in a bid for some of these stores. But after many negotiations and last-minute offers, a federal judge approved the sale of all 79 Penn Traffic stores in New York, Pennsylvania and New England to Tops Friendly Markets.
Tonight, Tops announced it will sell these P&C grocery stores to Price Chopper:
Paterson administration communication director leaving
Gov. David Paterson's communication director resigned today. Peter Kauffmann said he couldn't "in good conscience" continue in his position. here's his statement:
I have been honored to serve the people of New York during a difficult time in our state’s history. As a former officer in the United States Navy, integrity and commitment to public service are values I take seriously. Unfortunately, as recent developments have come to light, I cannot in good conscience continue in my current position. I have notified the Governor that I am resigning as Director of Communications.
Today will be my last day in the Executive Chamber.
Kauffmann is the third of Paterson’s top people to resign in the last two weeks.
Meanwhile, our Albany reporter Karen DeWitt says Paterson is spending the day out of the public eye, and key groups, including county Democratic Party chairs, and African American community leaders, are meeting privately to consider his future and their support.
The North Country's on tap to play a pretty big role in the professional hockey feeder system.
Today, officials of the single A Federal Hockey League are announcing a second North Country team - the Akwesasne Warriors. This is their newly unveiled logo. Listen to the full interview I did with the owner/president of the team, Basem Awwad from Ottawa:
The FHL is a brand new league, with games starting in November. We'll see how it does. But with schools like St. Lawrence and Clarkson already feeding its best players into professional hockey, it's pretty cool to think more players who spend time skating in the North Country may make it to the NHL.
Just as webinars are not quite the same as a face-to-face workshop, online conversations are less satisfying than diner chats and backyard fence conversations. Aside from the lag time between comment and reply, and the absence of facial expression and body language, a lot of people neglect to introduce themselves. That would be you, dear Anonymous. On NCPR blogs and at other visitor comment locations, fully 45% of the conversation is posted by you.
