September 19, 2003
Writer responds to file trading defenders
Scott Matthews' piece on file sharing in Salon, Why Copying Isn't Cool, generated a number of critical reader letters, and this response from Scott.
More on Gen. Clark's entry into the race
Bob Herbert of the NY Times on Gen. Wes Clark's entry into the race. He's too dismissive of Howard Dean, but that's what the Dems are up against.
Meantime, there's this, too: Late-Arriving Candidate Got Push From Clintons.
JD said:
Um, Andy, Lieberman and Kerry are going after Dean because they want to be president.
The idea that Dr. Dean is "always angry, ranting and raving" is nonsense, of course. He's passionate, in the same vein as Teddy Roosevelt or Harry Truman. And what he does have is the courage to say things that almost every Democrat believes.
The GOP may want to spread the myth that Dr. Dean is a leftie -- and some of big media are buying into it -- but that's nonsense too. He's for a balanced budget (unlike Bush's $500+ billion annual deficits). He's against gun control. He's for the death penalty in some cases. And, most of all, he's in favor of creating opportunities for small businesses (unlike the present administration, which is only concerned with big corporations and the mega-rich) and against tax-and-spend liberalism.
That may not be the kind of candidate the GOP wants to run against. But it's the Dean record.
andy said:
Dean = Bad Temperment (to be POTUS)
Essentially, that's what guests on tonite's Charlie Rose PBS show concluded... and these are pundits (the "unbiased" kind) who are paid big bucks to provide political analysis (eg, ABC's Halperin).
If I recall, I think that was the same conclusion on today's Washington Week in Review show.
Apparently, Dean did an interview and got flustered -- big time. Wasn't it with ABC's George S.? Not good at all. And, during several of the debates, when they started ganging up on Dean, he was visibly getting flustered. Dean has a message and ought to be given his time in the spotlight to get it out there, but to be considered seriously for POTUS is an entirely different story...
In all fairness (disclosure, and all that jazz), I'm tipping in Clark's direction -- if you'll allow a shameless plug, see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yrs4clark/
JD said:
Like I said, you're citing the usual know-nothing old media punditocracy. Dean got flustered on Tim Russert's show when Russert asked him an absurdly arcane question. His popularity on the Net shot up after that.
Andy, I watched both debates, and Dean wasn't flustered at all. As Slate's political columnist said, he hit a home run in Baltimore.
But the talking heads have their talking points. If Dean wasn't riling people up, they'd be lambasting the rest of the field for being mealy-mouthed me-too Republicans in disguise. So you can't win with the Washington press corps. If you want to follow these guys into the darkness, be my guest.
I've still got an open mind about Clark, but I think his chances for the nomination died this week when he said he voted for Nixon and Reagan and wasn't even a Democrat until 11 years ago. He'll still be a good VP candidate.
Music file sharers keep sharing
NY Times: Despite high-profile lawsuits against people accused of distributing music over the Internet, millions continue to share songs.
And here's a chart on whether people think it's stealing or not.
Court to rehear recall election postponement
We're still having technical problems on this blog. Stay tuned.
Meantime, breaking news: An 11-judge panel will rehear the postponement of California's recall election.
A look at AOL News
The new AOL News page looks pretty good. But then, Gary Kebbel and his crew are pretty talented. (Thanks to Susan M. for the pointer.)
