Blacknell.net

Politics, technology, and society. And the seasonal incursion of pro cycling.

Month: February 2011

Arlington’s Gang Problem Reemerges On A Sunny Day

Remember these guys from last summer?  They're warm weather math gang and literary bangers, it seems.  My friend PedroGringo discovered this along the W&OD today:

"Shoulder your duds, and I will mine, and let us hasten forth; Wonderful cities and free nations we shall fetch as we go."

Walt Whitman rules the W&OD, yo.

Sharing Our Roads

This week's Clarendon Cycles column starts:
“Get off the !@#$%^& road!” “!@#$ you, I have just as much a right to be here as you do.” And so goes a rather sizeable proportion of most on-road cyclist/motorist conversations. It doesn’t accomplish anything, except perhaps raising the blood pressure of those involved and setting the stage for a more aggressive conflict the next time a similar interaction occurs. It’s stupid, pointless, and childish.
And I've got a bit of experience with it.  Click the link above for more. Ricky Albores has thoughts in a similar vein.

Midweek Makeover: Could Really Use An Airport Right Now

Took me a while to realize that I wanted to know the name of the artists, but this track - B.o.B - Airplanes (Feat. Hayley Williams of Paramore) - has been working its way into my head over the past couple of months: YouTube Preview Image And then I recently came across a mashup involving the B.o.B. track and Kylie Minogue.  Ah, Kylie.  Now that's someone who has the secret to lasting.  I remember being in awe of her in the late 80s, found her making up a travel soundtrack in the early 00s, and she's still cranking it out: YouTube Preview Image And here's Jarod Ripley mashing the two together:

Jarod Ripley - "Get Outta My Airplane" from Jarod Ripley on Vimeo.

The Kind of Journalism I’d Like To See

Ignoring that it's from Huffington Post, and despite the fact that the author initially engages in the very behavior he bemoans, I still think this piece on the the lazy left-right dichotomy of American journalism is worth reading.  Peter Goodman identifies the problematic action:

Journalists so frequently deal in the false liberal-conservative dichotomy because it generates the sort of tension that feeds narrative, and narrative makes for more accessible stories. Simply dividing up he interests into two neatly-differentiated competing camps enables lazy beat reporters to claim to have painted all of reality with but two phone calls. Why venture outside and talk to ordinary people -- whose experiences and views almost always challenge the traditional labels -- when we can simply sit at our desks and dial up a D and then an R and gather a pair of quotes that supposedly cover the whole spectrum of the American take on anything?

He identifies *why* this action is a problem:
Left versus right: These are overly-simplified labels that perpetuate division, and we ought not cater to them, because that amounts to lazy journalism. That is about who won the week, and who controls the conversation, as opposed to the much more difficult, nuanced and crucial questions that remain operative irrespective of phony ideological labels: How will we make the economy function again for the vast majority of Americans, for whom the last quarter-century has delivered downward mobility? How will we get our fiscal house in order while adding quality paychecks and making health care affordable? These are concerns that are common to nearly every household, regardless of ideology, and these are questions that must be pursued at face value, with good information, critical scrutiny and the pursuit of pragmatic policy.
And then he proposes a solution:
In the sort of journalism I am interested in practicing here, I want my reporters to reject the false idea that you simply poll people at both extremes of any issue, then paint a line down the middle and point to it as reality. We have to reject the tired notion that objectivity means the reader can get all the way to the bottom of the story and not know what to think. We do have to be objective in our journalism, but this does not mean we are empty vessels with no ideas of our own, and with no prior experiences that influence what we ultimately deliver: That is a fantasy, and an unhelpful one at that, because every time the reader discovers that personal values have indeed "intruded" into the copy, they experience another "gotcha" moment that undermines the credibility of serious journalism.
Rather, objectivity means that we conduct a fully open-minded inquiry. We do not begin our reporting with a fully-formed position. We do not adhere to the contentions of one think tank or political party or government organ as truth. We don't write to please our friends or sources or interest groups. Rather, we do our own reporting, our own independent thinking, our own scrutinizing. But at the end of that process, we offer a conclusion, and transparently so, with whatever caveats are in order. We do not concern ourselves with how others may describe our place on the ideological spectrum, and we do not hold back when we know something, or lard up our journalism with disingenuous counter-quotes to cover ourselves against the charge that we staked out a position. As long as our process is pure, so is the work.
Now, I don't think, for a second, that his solution is going to be swiftly adopted by many (any?) of the major news orgs out there.  But it's something we need to support and demand.  Without it, we're at great risk of losing what makes a democracy worthwhile - an informed populace.  I don't think I'm overstating the case, here.  The muddleheaded middle approach that forms the core of modern American journalism is the sort of the journalism that leads to popular support for the war in Iraq, the idea that Obama somehow brought in an era of Big Government, or the perception anyone in DC actually gives a damn about the deficit.  That kind of ignorance simply isn't sustainable, and real journalism is one of the few things that can cure it.

Virginians – 3 Feet to Pass Needs Your Support

Friends in Virginia - I would consider it a great personal favor if you could take the time to 1) act on this yourself, and 2) pass this along to your friends. We've got a real shot at making this happen. It's not a magic bullet that will make everything better, but it's a *substantial* step forward in the effort to make roads a safe place for all users.  This isn't national politics where we are but one of a million voices on an issue - your call or email to a Delegate *will* make a difference.  Just last week a chorus of voices helped bring a critical vote to our side.  We can do it again. From FABB:
Herndon & Fairfax residents -- write to Representatives Rust, Hugo & Comstock about SB 928 (increasing min. passing distance to 3′ for motorists passing bicycles, and adds bicycles to the list of vehicles that a motorist shall not follow more closely than is reasonable). It may be heard in committee as early as tomorrow morning, Feb. 10. See attached [the VBF link below] for easy link for writing to your reps.
From the Virginia Bike Federation:
As we reported yesterday, SB 928, the three feet passing bill, was passedunanimously by the Senate on Monday. It’s now headed to the House, where it must get through committee and then a full House vote. This bill increases the minimum passing distance from 2′ to 3′ for motorists passing bicycles, and adds bicycles to the list of vehicles that a motorist shall not follow more closely than is reasonable (prohibits aggressive tailgating of bicycles). It may be heard in committee as early as Thursday morning, Feb. 10; or it could be heard by the full Transportation Committee next Tuesday morning, Feb. 15. Please write to your delegates now, and ask them to support SB 928 — especially if your delegate is one of the committee members listed below. The Who’s My Legislator page will tell you who your delegate is. BikeWalk Virginia has posted an alert too, along with a sample letter.

Chairman:

May, Joe T. /Loudon 804 698-1033 deljmay@house.virginia.gov

Vice Chair:

Oder, G. Glenn/Newport News — PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT

Members:

Carrico, Charles W., Sr. /Galax 804 698-1005 delccarrico@house.virginia.gov Cosgrove, John A./Chesapeake 804 698-1078 deljcosgrove@house.virginia.gov Rust, Thomas Davis/Herndon 804 698-1086 deltrust@house.virginia.gov Hugo, Timothy D./Fairfax 804 698-1040 delthugo@house.virginia.gov Scott, Edward T./Culpeper 804 698-1030 delescott@house.virginia.gov Tata, Robert/VaBeach 804 698-1085 delbtata@house.virginia.gov Villanueva, Ronald A./VaBeach 804 698-1021 delrvillanueva@house.virginia.gov Comstock, Barbara J./Fairfax 804 698-1034 delbcomstock@house.virginia.gov Garrett, T. Scott/Lynchburg 804 698-1023 delsgarrett@house.virginia.gov Cox, John A./Hanover 804 698-1055 deljcox@house.virginia.gov Cleaveland, William H./Roanoke 804 698-1017 delwcleaveland@house.virginia.gov Habeeb, Gregory D. delghabeeb@house.virginia.gov Ward, Jeion A./Hampton 804 698-1092 deljward@house.virginia.gov Ebbin, Adam P./Arlington 804 698-1049 delaebbin@house.virginia.gov BaCote, Mamye E./Newport News 804 698-1095 delmbacote@house.virginia.gov Brink, Robert H./Arlington 804 698-1048 delrbrink@house.virginia.gov Toscano, David J./Charlottesville 804 698-1057 deldtoscano@house.virginia.gov McQuinn, Delores L./Richmond 804 698-1070 deldmcquinn@house.virginia.gov Carr, Betsy B./Richmond 804 698-1069 delbcarr@house.virginia.gov Filler-Corn, Eileen/Fairfax 804 698-1041 delefiller-corn@house.virginia.gov

Marking St. Reagan’s 100th

by noting that he was a tax-raising debt-exploding terrorist-arming amnesty-giving race-baiting homophobia-indulging liar. Forever and ever, amen.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén