My state rep wants to defund NHPTV

God forbid citizens should be burdened by obligations! (4.00 / 2)

Obligations is what makes them citizens, isn't it?  And citizens are such a nuisance.  Somehow, I think even beasts of burden prefer carrying something on their backs to being tethered in a stall, to be shorn and milked until it's time to be "humanely" dispatched.

I understand that "canned" music makes cows give more milk.

If there's anything that's duplicative, it's Republican poobahs.  Six of one, half dozen of the other.  Talk about a burden.  They don't cost much, but oh the bother!

---

by: hannah @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 12:12:29 PM CST

How exactly does NHPTV burden the NH property taxpayer? (4.00 / 5)

The costs for this are paid from UNH's budget. UNH budget revenue sources include state aid, federal grants and other aid, student tuition and various other fees, and miscellaneous other sources. Not a nickel of property tax. If he says otherwise, ask him to show ou the property tax bill that will increase because of NHPTV.

On the other hand... television and related video media are important fields in modern society. Students at UNH can majot in television media and get hands-on technical training working at NHPTX that can help prepare them for future careers. Isn't that part of the university mission?

Finally, why is the legislature so intent on micro-managing UNH. Surely the trustees and administration of the university have a better idea of how the money should be spent to fulfill their than state reps who have never been withing 20 miles of Durham.  

---

by: Mike Emm @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 12:29:34 PM CST

the taxpayers pay about $375k (4.00 / 5)

NHPTV's total budget is about $9M & USNH kicks in about $2.7M.  However, only about 1/8 of USNH's overall budget ($100M out of $800M) is paid by "The Taxpayers."  Without even getting into the value of the programming; NHPTV provides other services (e.g., providing programming to schools, coordinating rural broadband projects, and providing space on transmission towers to public safety agencies) which are worth far more than $375k.

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:20:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks, Tim (0.00 / 0)

I will make sure he understands this.  Yes, I will.  It won't change his mind but I will let him know.

---

by: Lucy Edwards @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 15:09:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Unfortunately, (0.00 / 0)

It won't change his mind

you can't change something that doesn't exist. What in hell is wrong with these people?

By and large, the "free marketplace" of pay TV has given us nothing but a stinking pile of trash, far from anything worthy of the name "educational".

But as we well know, the GOP thrives on ignorance and the low (or mis)-information voter; critical thinking and broad-based knowledge tends to make people suspicious of snake-oil salesmen like Beck, Hannity, et. al.

This isn't really about saving taxpayers money, it's just another case of the thugs trying to do away with something they don't like.

Public broadcasting is only the tip of the iceberg. Once the Comcasts and their ilk have finally done in free over-the-air broadcast television, what will also be lost with it is the concept of public airwaves (with a mandate for public service) that has been the foundation of broadcasting since 1934. The so-called "free market" has been actively chiseling away at this concept for a few decades now, and the handwriting is on the wall.

2012 is sooner than you think. Ready?
Peter Leishman is ready right now -  http://peterleishman.org

---

by: GreyMike @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 20:58:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What's the warranty period on our laser? n/t (4.00 / 2)

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 13:35:11 PM CST

Yikes. (4.00 / 2)

other available educational sources

As Bugs would say, "What a maroon".

What does he have in mind as alternatives? Glenn Beck and his chalkboard?

Perhaps you could ask the representative to spell out exactly what these phantom resources would be.

Also, you may want to ask him about the exact percentage of NHPTV's budget current funded directly by NH "taxpayers".

And, if they don't like public TV, what about NHPR? Or are they off the hook because they're in the tank for these bozos?

Just a few thoughts, I'm sure I'll think of more...

2012 is sooner than you think. Ready?
Peter Leishman is ready right now -  http://peterleishman.org

---

by: GreyMike @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:04:33 PM CST

I agree with... (0.00 / 0)

the sentiments and thoughts expressed by both Joe Lahr and Rep. Vaillancourt himself...

http://www.nhinsider.com/nhigb...

http://nhinsider.squarespace.c...

http://nhinsider.squarespace.c...

I'd be curious to see those rebutted (if someone wants to do so), as I think the evidence so far is clearly against the value of NHPTV based on the cost versus programming generated, perhaps solved by spending less and getting more local community television programming instead.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:21:48 PM CST

Sorry, I don't visit nhinsider. (4.00 / 2)

And this is also trollish: lisking to a right-wing site, trying to drive up their eyeball count, without providing any summary.

This isn't dialog here.

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:40:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thought that was ok, rather than providing an extensive quotation.... (0.00 / 0)

I found other 'neutral' sites like Concord10, all of which are linking back to the original post by Lahr.  Since the above are all letter length, linking made the most sense to me.

The executive summary would be:
Joe Lahr, of Manchester TV: "So what do NH voters (and viewers) receive on Channel 11 for their $2.5 million?  Programs that are redundant, recycled, elitist and generally not useful; programs that simply miss the whole point.  NHPTV, and to be fair-most PBS stations across the county-has become an irrelevant and even obnoxious exercise in media democracy.  A medium that enters into the homes of nearly every citizen in our state, it should be a vehicle of real purpose and opportunity; but the fact is, that it is underutilized and lazy, living on its lofty PBS history and laurels."

Rep. Vaillancourt: one link documents who testified for and against his bill, and what was said by some of them... the other is his essay about why he's submitted the bill including this key sentence: "Public television may have been a good thing 40 or 50 years ago when the choices for the average viewer were minimal, but there's virtually nothing that Channel 11 provides today that a viewer cannot find on any of hundreds of channels available either on cable or with the dish."

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 15:29:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Shudder (4.00 / 1)

Lahr wants to turn public tv into Manchester public access. What has the state done to deserve that?



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 17:26:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

"elitist and not useful" (4.00 / 4)

 It's clear that Joe Lahr doesn't watch public television, he just recycles the GOP party line about it.

NH Crossroads - elitist?
NH Outlook - not useful?

Then there's Windows to the Wild. Monday is ice climbing on the Frankenstein Cliffs, and Tuesday is Mt. Washington in winter. Is it elitist to show winter in the north country? Windows to the Wild is a pretty terrific local show, full of history and local lore. Same for Wildlife Journal.

I can understand why Republicans hate stuff like NOVA - after all, that's science, and therefore frightening. They talk about how old things actually are, which makes the evangelical contingent unhappy. But Antiques Roadshow? What kind of a cretin hates Antiques Roadshow?

I watched the magnificent Ken Burns series on the national parks on PBS. Redundant? Recycled? Elitist? Oh - right, the series did point out that the parks belong to all US citizens. Clearly that's collectivism, and therefore must be squashed, like the godless communism it is.

The Teabaglicans would like 24 hours of public GOP TV, with occasional televised prayer breaks; funded by NOM and Operation Rescue.

Over my dead remote.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 17:56:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Lahr wants different content, not the elimination of Public TV. (0.00 / 0)

This is how I read the argument as stated in your quote.

it should be a vehicle of real purpose and opportunity;

Quoting Lahr,

New Hampshire Public TV should be about New Hampshire... the best use of this channel is simple:  it should serve the public interest of the people and the state.  It should be a combination of a statewide version of C-SPAN and a more local version of the old CN8 channel on Comcast.  The cost would be far less and the usefulness would be far greater.  Local events, local news, local gossip, local politics... New Hampshire Public Television should be New Hampshire Public Television.

But, this vision is likely to be even more expensive for the State because it produces even less "commercial type" content and will likely require multiple stations -- right?   Unless we are talking about a public station for Manchester, as suggested below.  

I suspect the true motivation for going after UNH's station is cost-cutting. Lahr's alternative vision, an idea that is not absurd, is unlikely to be funded by the Party in power because their agenda is cutting spending and reducing taxes. In effect, Lahr's argument is being used as a ploy, rather than serving as an opening argument in reshaping public television.  


whp

---

by: whp @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 20:58:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I think you're missing (4.00 / 1)

the real point, whp. Teabaglicans hate anything "public." They hate public radio and public tv, because they believe they are "liberal" media. That's what is behind this - not some noble intent to improve content.

---

by: susanthe @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 21:21:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How dare you (4.00 / 1)

bring that filth to our nice clean house? A house that is kindly  granting you a forum for your views - views we don't share. A house that is extending you a great deal of courtesy, in fact.

Go shit on someone else's carpet.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 15:38:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I am new here, please help me understand (0.00 / 0)

What is the "filth" in question?  Are you saying that NH-Insider is filth? Or, Lahr's column?  

thanks,

whp

---

by: whp @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 21:02:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

NH Insider (4.00 / 1)

is filth. Bringing that shit, via links, is dirtying up our nice clean virtual carpets.  

---

by: susanthe @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 21:18:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Public Television Helps Our Economy (4.00 / 1)

...it helps our businesses, our R&R, our tourism, and certainly our educational system.  

Democrats believe in those causes.  Do the Republicans?  That's the question I pose to your House Rep.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:24:46 PM CST

Republicans don't believe in education (4.00 / 6)

Education prevents more Republicans.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 15:40:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Screwing local businesses. (4.00 / 1)

Ken Burns' production company is in Walpole; Ciao Italia on the seacoast...

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 14:59:47 PM CST

Followup re local businesses (4.00 / 1)

During the years my family ran the Walpole Inn, we got a significant amount of both room and restaurant business from folks working on Ken Burns productions.  This was a benefit to us and to our employees, and provided Rooms and Meals Tax revenue as well.

The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. --Marcus Aurelius, courtesy of Paul Berch

---

by: Lucy Weber @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 17:00:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Penny wise, pound foolish. (4.00 / 4)

This is yet another divestment from the children of New Hampshire in a disturbing pattern of such behavior from the new statehouse so far.

NHPTV's state funding goes toward local programming.

Eliminating it would, I imagine, put the existence of educational programs like Granite State Challenge, which serves schools across this state, at risk.

The fewer investments we make in our children today, the more we pay in dollars and values tomorrow. I don't like to talk about my professional life here, but I have seen this trade-off play out on the micro- and macro- level for the 15 or so years I've been in front of a classroom.

Of course, letting the free market run unfettered in front of our childrens' eyeballs is as old as Nixon:

I've said this already, but to repeat:

When I was a wee lad, being raised by a single working mom in a home without too many books, my after school, pre-dinner time consisted of either cartoon violence, TeeVee drama violence, or Mr. Rogers.

Absolutely my dreams of what I could become in life would have been less if the canvas of what I saw back then consisted only of people trying to sell me things in-between bouts of gun battles.

I am ashamed of this legislature.  How dare they try to take away what little we offer our children on TeeVee.

This is exactly the kind of bill that motivates me to work for candidates who believe in children, who will fight for their future, who live in the real world rather than Aynrandville.

November 2012 can't come soon enough.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 18:11:47 PM CST

What exactly are children getting from NHPTV? (0.00 / 0)

Especially, what are they getting that is not on other channels also?

'Aynrandville', as you put, aka the (somewhat) free market, has generated umpteen channels devoted to almost every interest group they can define, including at least 8 or 9 kids channels, some of which are violence free.  In fact, I'd argue it's the FCC and other interested that have stopped more channels from popping up.  I don't want 500 channels, I want 50000.


BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 19:16:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

how elitist (4.00 / 2)

of you to assume that every child's family can afford cable.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 19:36:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How monopolistic (0.00 / 0)

of you to not allow competition to drive down prices.  Cable is expensive because of regulation.  We'd have 50,000 channels if we didn't regulate it to a trickle.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:28:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

that doesn't excuse your elitist assumptions (0.00 / 0)

I'm dealing in current reality, not a Randian pipe dream.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:30:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You don't have the slightest idea of what you're talking about. (4.00 / 1)

None, nada, zilch.

The number of channels is limited by the bandwidth capacity of coaxial cable - not some bogeyman at the FCC.

Go learn something before wasting our bandwidth here with your paranoid ignorant nonsense.

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:41:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, sir... (0.00 / 0)

I do know what I'm talking about, since that's my profession.  We are now at an age where bandwidth is no longer the bottleneck it was.  Or have you not heard of "On Demand" programming?

We live in an age of informational abundance.  That was not true in the 1970s, nor even in the 1990s.
I remember when nobody knew what email was in 1990, when I had it on my business cards... now, if you don't have it, you look outdated and out of place.

We have transformed society, beginning with the Victorian Internet aka the telegraph, and every few years, the transformation has redoubled.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:51:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Take some remedial classes. (0.00 / 0)

If that is your profession, your clients are in trouble.

Both the last mile and the trunks of the networks that reach the consumer, are congested.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 05:10:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

How Insular and elitist (4.00 / 9)

To assume that cable is available throughout New Hampshire.  It isn't.  Without Public TV, we get one channel.

Our son grew up on Mr. Rogers and the Electric Company. I was happy to have those options rather than Opriah whose subject matter often was not appropriate for children.

We happily watch PBS most evenings. Quality programming is a rare commodity and, frankly, this strikes me more as an attempt at censorship rather than budget control.  

I, as a taxpayer, pay for quite a few services I never use but which provide some sort of value to other N.H. residents.  When I pay our electric bill, I contribute to the weatherization program that helps businesses and homes become more energy efficient.  When I buy gas, I contribute to the road maintainance for roads I will never drive on.  There is no reason that other N.H. taxpayers shouldn't fund something that I will use.

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

by: Elin Phinizy @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 22:14:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree that cable isn't available everywhere... (0.00 / 0)

I agree the North Country and much of the rest of NH needs infrastructural help... (what? he wants to spend taxpayer money, and not let the free market solve it? If we had a free market, it might, but we don't... I can't get cable on my road just 15 minutes from Concord.)

I'll maintain that our town granted monopolies to just one cable company buildout are part of the problem.  I'll also maintain that we could better spend the money spent now on NHPTV on fostering real local programming, on building informational infrastructure.

And Ken Burns isn't going away because we defund NHPTV.  Sorry.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 17:47:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Who said anything about Ken Burns? (4.00 / 4)

 Do you even watch PBS? I'm talking about shows like American Experience or Secrets of the Dead or even, heaven forbid, the show about Tuba players that I watched last night.  

You want to deprive me of my right to watch PBS just to fund some mythical local programming that won't even be available for me to watch unless it is carried on the  one major network channel that we receive.  That is censorship.

BTW, there is no cable anywhere in the town where I live - it is not a question of monopolies - no cable company wants to service us.

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

by: Elin Phinizy @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 20:12:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Steaming load (4.00 / 5)

Cable is expensive because of regulation.

Cable is expensive because MSOs are thieves, period. Cable content is not regulated by the FCC, and you know it if you are actually "in the business". It's been the Wild West for operators since the 1980s. Deregulation of the "free market" didn't drive down prices then, and it won't now that there's practically nothing left to deregulate.

There is no real competition in cable, Comcast is the largest MSO in the US by nearly double the size of its nearest non-DBS (satellite) competitor (Time Warner) as reported by NCTA. DBS is the de facto competition in mostly rural states such as NH, since no MSO if going to come in to overbuild cable plant in any low-density areas where their "homes passed by" rate is likely to be only a few per mile.

Cable programming isn't the answer anyway; your "50,000 channels" are already here: it's called the Internet.

And if it had its way, Comcast (and Verizon) would like to kill that idea, too.

2012 is sooner than you think. Ready?
Peter Leishman is ready right now -  http://peterleishman.org

---

by: GreyMike @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 07:57:04 AM CST

[ Parent ]

TANSTAAFL. (4.00 / 7)

I really shouldn't have to explain this to a supposed conservative.

There are three business models for television shows.

1. Public TV relies on individual memberships and donations, corporate donations, and some tax funding.
2. Pay TV relies on pretty expensive monthly subscription fees.
3. Over-the-air and basic cable rely on advertisers trying to sell stuff to the audience: e.g., candy (often in the form of breakfast cereal).

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. Private enterprise doesn't run TV shows for children unless it can sell their eyeballs to advertisers.

But if you are so out-of-touch with the reality of the marketplace that you think the number of channels on your TV is the limiting factor in content choices, you're probably beyond educating.

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 19:42:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Non-commercial forprofit TV is alive and well... (0.00 / 0)

Yes, commercials are one method, but certainly not the only method.  Like print media, it's a dying method today, thanks to technology like adblocking, adskipping, and extremely fast and cheap downloadable content.

As for cost, the actual cost of the 'adfree' channels is probably less than $1 a month, or it would be, if the monopolies weren't practicing price controls.  Instead, you often have to buy a bundle, like HBO's 10+ channels, to get the one you want, because they won't alacarte it despite the technical ability to do so.  With nobody else competing, they won't, because they can get away with it.

And any day I can get someone repeating the line
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, the ghost of Robert Heinlein gives me a warm hug.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:41:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You're tiresome. (4.00 / 3)

First you claim that public television is redundant to private enterprise.

When challenged you change your ground: Well, private enterprise WOULD provide alternatives if only the FCC or the Trilateral Commission or the Illuminati or somebody would let them.

And you got me to quote Heinlein??

Did you get the sun to rise this morning too, you self-important twit?

---

by: elwood @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:46:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, I am saying it's good now, and could be better... (n/t) (0.00 / 0)

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 17:37:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Granite State Challenge. (4.00 / 2)

But I said that above.

More generally, they are getting invested with worth by the society in which they are raised.

A society whose leadership believes in a form of civilization more free than the bestial chains of survival of the fittest.

I believe in freedom and opportunity.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 20:22:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree with you... (0.00 / 0)

And shows like Granite State Challenge would continue to exist in Lahr's vision, for example.  You're discussing the exceptions, not the rule.

I believe in freedom and opportunity as well.  I think we just disagree in what that actually means and how to get more of it.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:46:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

$$$ (4.00 / 1)

Lahr's vision would cost money.  One big reason NHPTV doesn't do that much local programming is because it costs more money to buy someone else's existing programming than to roll your own.

I know Steve Vaillancourt says he does his local-access show for $100/week, but (although he is a skillful performer with some professional training) he is an amateur doing a show whose production values wouldn't be suitable for regular TV.  And his local access channel is heavily subsidized by the government.

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 22:07:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oops (0.00 / 0)

It costs LESS to buy someone else's show

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 22:09:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Buying content isn't a good use of that money... (0.00 / 0)

That's the point here that Lahr, Vaillancourt, and I are all making.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 17:49:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

for one thing... (4.00 / 1)

All that programming on NHPTV has its rights cleared for use in school.  Everything can be used free of charge for at least 2 weeks & in many cases it is available free for a year.

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:50:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Items bought with taxpayer money (0.00 / 0)

shouldn't be rentals, they should be free for good. (Information doesn't expire... the one year limit is sad, not a good thing)
If you are using taxpayer money to buy limited licenses, it's money poorly spent.

BH's token Republican / Libertarian / TeaPartier / Free Stater, courtesy of a Federal Affirmative Action grant, despite many of his comments being marked down and hidden.

---

by: SethCohn @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 17:51:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

So saith the Lord (4.00 / 1)

We are truly blessed to receive His gospel.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 17:56:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I want to say thank you (4.00 / 4)

to the Blue Hampshire gang for taking this and running with it.  May I also suggest that you all start e-mailing your representatives about issues before them, and if they respond, post their responses where others can read them.  If they don't respond, or give you "I will read the bill when it comes before me", let others know that too.  Follow up.  
You might try this with Charlie and Frank as well, and Kelly too.  They work for us.  Since we can't count on them the way we could count on Paul and Carol to do the right thing, we have to keep reminding them to keep their eyes on the ball, jobs, jobs, jobs, and also educating our children and fixing our energy supply problem and the climate problem, etc.  
Add their names and e-mail addresses to your address book, make a group, be efficient, be effective.  

---

by: Lucy Edwards @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 20:56:00 PM CST

You're Right Lucy (4.00 / 1)

"They" need to hear from Us."  Otherwise, they can legitimately (though they may anyway) say they've only heard from people who agree with them -- cut, cut, cut, against, against, against.

One of our approaches in passing gay marriage was to send E-Mails, letters, and make calls from constituents to those who we knew weren't going to support us, so that they would hear from our side too.  

And who knows.  We might switch a few.  And on national issues, Bass and Guinta and Ayotte need to hear from us as does Jeanne Shaheen -- so they can all add up the totals on issues.  As you say, "be efficient, be effective."  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 21:55:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Attacking things people like is effective because (4.00 / 4)

it puts them on the defensive mode and wastes their time.
The central flaw in the demand model is that it's not possible to know what one likes until after it's been tried and time finding out has been wasted.  But, conservatives, not having much sense of time, are not aware.  Besides, the demand model has the advantage of locating the assessment of value in the recipient/buyer, thus relieving the provider of the obligation to deliver fair value.

Also, if the purpose of competition is to decrease price, then price is no longer a determinant of intrinsic quality, artistry and creativity.

Economic theory can't work because it is logically flawed.  Economists assume that human behavior is constant; in reality it's variable.  But then, conservatives don't live in the real world; they live in an idea world.  They think a thought (I want to be king) and then manipulate people into believing they are what they intend.
By taking the intention for the act, it was possible, for example, to declare the mission in Iraq accomplished when it was barely begun.

---

by: hannah @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 01:44:03 AM CST

Economic theory DOES work within (4.00 / 5)

a wide range of life. It fails miserably in other areas.

The same with politics and technology.

Save us from ideologues with a hammer, to whom every situation must be a nail.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 05:13:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]