"...in service to the polarizing Newt Gingrich"

by: elwood

Thu Oct 28, 2010 at 18:27:22 PM EDT

Alternate title: SENTINEL ENDORSES KUSTER!

More (Dean): And how could you not endorse her?- she is the heart and soul of the second district:

The Keene Sentinel Endorses Me

by: PaulHodes

Mon Oct 25, 2010 at 17:20:11 PM EDT

Monday Funnies on Tuesday

by: GreyMike

Tue Jul 27, 2010 at 19:17:52 PM EDT

Glancing through, I did a double take on page two (you have to see the newsprint version for this, and there is no fair-use way to link or scan this for the full effect); so for those of you who don't get this paper, please try to visualize:

Title above photo (four columns wide, top right side of page two surrounded with hairline box):

"GRAND OPENING"

Color photo of Jennifer Palin Horn with onlookers at the new CCRC HQ in the Colony Mill.

Caption in small print: Congressional candidate, etc., at the new CCRC HQ, etc.

Headline just below photo, in large bold type:

"Statewide, officials looking at Keene nudity"

Perfect for Letterman, no?

Of course the latter is actually a jump from a page one story about Free Staters disrobing and carrying on in general in Keene's Central Square, but the visual effect of the photo and the headline is priceless, especially for those of us with less-than-stellar eyesight who would miss that hairline border and maybe even the actual photo caption itself.

OK, going back to vacation now, just thought it was mildly entertaining. I had nearly forgotten that she was running, truth be told.

It's All About the Public Option

by: Dean Barker

Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 21:12:05 PM EDT

I'm more or less agnostic on the question of requiring people to have insurance.  It was, however, one of the more engaging policy episodes in the long Obama-Clinton nomination battle, and I'm glad I was there to watch it unfold.

When I took our Senior Senator to task, it was because he is so dreadfully opposed to real health care reform that he is willing to become Hillary for President '08 and federally mandate everyone to be insured.

To say it another way: He's climbing so far out on the ledge of his own GOPer principles because it's the only way he knows how to avoid a public option.

Judd Gregg knows a viable public option will ultimately mean the end of the private health care status quo. He knows that if Barack Obama and the Democrats deliver the beginning of the end of the health care catastrophe, it will eventually become as cherished as FDR's Social Security.

In terms of policy, Judd Gregg (and Hillary Clinton) may well be right to demand an insurance requirement of all Americans.  But the senator is not, in my opinion, making this argument on policy grounds.  It's a Hail Mary fourth quarter political calculation to avoid the expansion of government's role in the delivery of quality, affordable health care, something nearly every other industrialized nation on earth has. One last shot to avoid the successful accomplishment of this by the political party that, in his lifetime, has consistently shown more regard for the less well-to-do than his Grand Old one.

I would be willing to give Senator Gregg a pass on his remarks for an insurance requirement, or even praise, were it not for this one ineluctable consequence of his plan:

If every American were forced to buy insurance from the current private health care oligarchy, it would result in an even worse situation than what we now have. One way or another we will be facing some scenario where we are funneling public money into private companies who will saddle the formerly uninsured with barely affordable slow-motion indebtedness junk insurance.  And why shouldn't they?  They are for-profit companies that have no obligation to the Commonweal, but a significant obligation to the bottom line.

So, thanks but no thanks, Senator.  Elections have consequences; We the People gave Junior Senator "Stop Complaining About Health Care" an early retirement to a life of enrichment through Boards. We've got 60 Democrats.  Let's get Byrd and Kennedy in the same room with the other 58, get it past cloture, let the Landrieus and Feinsteins and other David Broders vote against it, and make darn sure we are 51 or more to pass on health care reform with a viable public option.

This is the moment we have been waiting for.  Judd Gregg knows this. Do we?

Screenshot: Suspension

by: Dean Barker

Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 21:07:17 PM EDT

Say what you will about the fact that the Sentinel serves an area of New Hampshire which is fairly progressive relative to the rest of the state.

It doesn't change the fact that it's a major state newspaper in a battleground state, and that by putting this out there, it is channeling an emerging view that the McCain campaign has begun to sink into the ridiculous with their bizarre, crudely political antics over the past few days. When Team McCain consistently treats the electorate as if it is stoopid, it's only natural that the press, especially a press accustomed to examining the candidates up close and personal in New Hampshire, would begin to regard his candidacy as un-serious.

(And for those of you who don't know, each of the NH-Primary candidates last year sat down with the Sentinel for an extended interview.  The interviews are wonderful, and will only grow in value going forward into the next presidency and beyond.)

For example, it's where deregulating economics wizard McCain admitted he was "surprised" by the sub-prime banking crisis.

McCain Keene Sentinel Interview From Last Year About To Get a Lot of Play

by: Mike Caulfield

Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 23:34:05 PM EDT

In the clip from last year, McCain knows less, significantly less, than our local reporters about the subprime crisis.

Deer in a headlights less. About three-quarters of the way through the clip Jim Rousmaniere asks if he was surprised at the subprime crisis. Yes, says, McCain, he was surprised at this. And he adds, he was surprised at the dot com crash.

Surprised at the dot com crash? You're kidding, right?

And then one of the editors, bless his heart, pitches in whether he was surprised "at the S & L's?" and Keating Five McCain says he was surprised about that too.

Asked if the subprime crisis is bigger than the S & L crisis, McCain backs off and says he relies on a lot of smart people in his employ, and "most of them did not anticipate this."

Watch it: http://www.nhelects.com/NHPrim...

The funny thing about this interview, of course, was at the time it was taken, we all hardly noticed it. McCain seemed down for the count.

But now a video of small town editors doing what the national press seems incapable of -- asking intelligent questions -- is about to stun the world. Look for it in a media outlet near you.

Bipartisan Disgrace

by: Mike Hoefer

Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 22:05:10 PM EST

Last week, the state Senate voted 19-5 to trash those principles, passing a constitutional amendment that would turn public education and its funding mechanisms back to the Legislature - back to the very institution, in some cases the very people, responsible for its currently unconstitutional, unfair and, in some communities, inadequate condition.

They seem to take special efforts to make sure readers know that all the Senators in southwestern NH supported the Amendment, calling them out by name.

This assault on constitutional principles was supported by all the state senators who represent districts in southwestern New Hampshire: Peter Burling of Cornish, Peter Bragdon of Milford, Harold Janeway of Webster, Molly Kelly of Keene and Bob Odell of Lempster,
It is a bipartisan disgrace.

At this point I'm hoping that this is all a part of a "We tried everything else" strategy that will eventually lead to rational discussion about revenue options in our state.

Pollyanna perhaps...

The Hillary Clinton Complex Candidacy

by: Dean Barker

Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:10:58 AM EST

This admission of mine is courtesy of two new state newspaper items.  The first is the Keene Sentinel endorsement of Hillary (h/t gradysdad), which really surprised me.  I simply assumed that a paper serving the southern Connecticut River Valley would go for someone further to the left, such as John Edwards.  But the endorsement reminds me that, in many respects, Senator Clinton has a very progressive voting record (and really, everyone should check out the Sentinel's interviews with the candidates).  From the endorsement:

At home, the new president will have to address the fact that comprehensive health insurance is now beyond the reach of an increasing number of Americans. The new president will have to redouble the country's commitment to veterans and their families, especially in light of the wave of wounded men and women returning home from Iraq. The new president will have to pursue an effective yet humane strategy to curb illegal immigration. The new president will need to restore an ideological balance on the Supreme Court, reflecting the wide range of beliefs in American society. The new president will have to ease the country toward energy independence, without killing off the economic engine that is the envy of the world. And the new president will need to reshape key regulatory agencies, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that have become dangerous appendages of the industries they are supposed to govern.

But then there's the other side.  The Concord Monitor blog notes that it was Condi Rice, not Colin Powell, that ultimately convinced Clinton of authorizing the use of force in Iraq, a position she continues to defend.  This is, well, breathtaking to me, since every other candidate on our side (and including our two NH-Senate candidates) either has expressed regret for their Iraq war vote or support, or else demonstrated that they were against it from the start.  I don't want to live in the past, but going to war on false premises is a black mark upon our nation so huge that it can't be glossed over.  Indeed, this lone position on the Iraq is what ruled her out for me back when I set out to be a "decided" voter.

I confess I really can't figure her out, despite feeling that she would be an outstanding Commander in Chief.

Sentinel Endorses McCain. Dem Today?

by: Mike Hoefer

Fri Dec 21, 2007 at 08:27:27 AM EST

What we see in McCain is a grown-up; a known quantity with a 30-year record of public service; a conservative who is confident in his abilities and yet smart enough to seek counsel. If he becomes the Republican nominee in 2008, the country has a chance of enjoying a substantive presidential contest, unburdened by fear-mongering and irrelevancies

I think that means their Dem endorsement will be out today. If so, they update the web around noon.

Newspaper Website Competition

by: Laura Clawson

Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 20:44:01 PM EST

The difficulty here lies in how stiff the competition is. (Very)

The Union Leader and Concord Monitor have, in my opinion, fairly reasonable sites.  No, the search function doesn't always work very well, but they're easy to navigate and offer lots of free content.

But after that, things get pretty ugly pretty quickly.

The Keene Sentinel wants you to pay for almost everything, including letters to the editor, so I don't even know much about the site. (Other than that paywalling a little local paper like that is dumb dumb dumb, so strike one against them.) But here's what else I know: Aside from AP headlines, they offer about as many sports headlines as news ones on their front page. And the layout is terrible - even the parts that aren't ads kind of look like them.

The Nashua Telegraph at least has free registration, but it's not exactly loaded with easy-to-identify interesting content.  In fact, most of the articles linked on the front page are linked in something like a 6-point font, with just headlines, no descriptions.

The Valley News is an interesting case.  It doesn't offer very many articles online, but the ones that are available are free and include summaries; as well, they list several print-only articles. It's not a lot of content, but they're completely up front about what is and is not available, so it's a user-friendly site.

So my question is, which is the worst?  How do we weigh user-friendliness against content availability?  How does a paper's circulation factor in - how much more should we expect of larger papers?  What other factors would you include in your judgment?

In a future post I intend to ask about the quality of the political reporting itself, but at the moment, it's all about the websites.