Virginia Film Festival 2008 - Day One

As noted here yesterday, the Virginia Film Festival opened its four-day run on Thursday evening with the regional premiere of Lake City, a new film starring Oscar-winning actress Sissy Spacek (who calls the Charlottesville area her home) and Troy Garity, the son of Oscar-winning actress Jane Fonda (who accompanied Garity to the festival).

The three actors arrived just before the screening and fielded questions from print and broadcast journalists. Fonda -- whose appearance was only announced at the last minute -- was a bigger draw than her son, but she graciously pushed him to center stage, saying "you're the one in the movie." For his part, Garity attributed his enthusiasm for Lake City to the fact that Sissy Spacek would be in it.

Spacek arrived a few minutes later and answered questions about working with Garity and about the film industry in Virginia. She was full of praise for the quality of film technicians and support staff in the Commonwealth, but she also made a pitch for more tax incentives to bring film productions here. She noted that Virginia competes with other states that do provide such incentives, and that it would be a shame if, for instance, New Mexico played Virginia as a stand-in. (Later in the evening, Rita McClenny, head of the Virginia Film Office, told me that North Carolina was a rival for the chance to host the production of Lake City.)

Once inside the auditorium in Culbreth Hall -- which was filled to near-capacity by movie lovers, industry insiders, aspiring filmmakers, members of the press, and several people who were part of the cast and crew of Lake City -- the festival's artistic director, Richard Herskowitz, offered a few words of introduction, including some reminiscences of festivals past. (Herskowitz is leaving the University of Virginia for new positions in Texas and Oregon.) One of his piquant memories was of a question posed to Vanessa Redgrave about her knowledge of economics. (Full disclosure: I asked that question during the 2005 Virginia Film Festival.)

Herskowitz also introduced members of the production team of Lake City, including producers Mark Johnson and Weiman Seid and co-directors Perry Moore and Hunter Hill, as well as Spacek and Garity, who each said a few words of welcome. The two co-stars, the directors, and production designer David Crank discussed the film on a panel after the screening.

Here is video of the stars arriving in Charlottesville. (That's the UVA marching band you hear playing in the background.)

Here is video of Richard Herskowitz's opening remarks:

More photos and videos will be posted through the weekend.

Update: Here is the panel discussion that followed the screening of Lake City.

Part I:



Part II:



Part III:

Update: More video clips from Day One and Day Two can be seen here.

Redpath Launches Radio Ads

The Libertarian Party's candidate for the U.S. Senate in Virginia, William Redpath, has launched a series of radio ads around the state, urging voters to cast their ballots for him on November 4.

There are three ads in the series: one addresses badly needed reforms in the tax code, another calls for liberalizing foreign trade policy, and a third urges an overhaul of entitlements programs.

The Redpath for Senate radio ads can be heard on line here. (They are available in QuickTime format.)

These radio spots are currently scheduled to air in the Charlottesville, Harrisonburg, Norfolk,Richmond, Roanoke, and Virginia Beach media markets, although there is a possibility that they might be expanded to other parts of the state.




Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Virginia Film Festival Opens Tonight

Oscar-winning actresses Sissy Spacek and Jane Fonda will be among the guests tonight as the 21st annual Virginia Film Festival opens in Charlottesville. The festival continues through Sunday evening.

Special events include a rebroadcast of the Orson Welles radio production of The War of the Worlds, based on the novel by H.G. Wells. It was 70 years ago tonight that Welles' Mercury Theatre of the Air scared the wits out of America by presenting the story of a Martian invasion as a series of (what sounded like) on-the-spot radio news reports.

The Adrenaline Film Project returns this year, with several teams of filmmakers charged with writing, filming, and editing a short subject within 72 hours. There will also be panel discussions about making movies in Virginia and in Charlottesville, a "family film day" on Saturday, and a screening of a new short film about interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, The Response, with Dahlia Lithwick of Slate, actor Peter Riegert, and two of the attorneys who have represented prisoners held at Gitmo.

WINA-AM radio will be broadcasting The War of the Worlds, in its entirety, at 4:00 p.m., during Coy Barefoot's "Charlottesville--Right Now" program and again at 7:00 p.m., the same time that the film festival's re-creation will take place in the University of Virginia observatory. George Pal's 1953 film version of the H.G. Wells story will be screened in Culbreth Hall on the UVA grounds at 10:00 p.m.

Spacek and Fonda will attend a screening of a new movie, Lake City, which was filmed in Virginia. In addition to Spacek, Lake City features actors Dave Matthews (a former bartender at Miller's on Charlottesville's downtown mall) and Troy Garity (son of Jane, and grandson of Henry, Fonda), who will be escorting his mother. The screening will be followed by a panel discussion featuring directors Perry Moore and Hunter Hill and producer Mark Johnson, a member of the Virginia Film Festival's advisory board.

The theme of this year's Virginia Film Festival is "Aliens," and the 80 films and 100 guest speakers will explore the idea of aliens as immigrants and emigrants, displaced individuals, and of aliens as visitors from (or to) outer space.

Watch this blog for day-by-day reports on the festival's activities. Part One is here.


Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Local Election Officials Discuss Preparations for November 4

On Wednesday afternoon, I joined Lee Catlin, the spokesperson for the Albemarle County government, and Will Harvey, secretary of the county's Electoral Board, at a news conference where we discussed the preparations we are making to make Election Day an efficient and pleasant experience for area voters.

Two local television stations covered the event. WCAV-TV noted on its web site:

"We knew this very early in the year, when the February primary had so much interest, we realized that we would be dealing with record number of voters this year," said Rick Sincere of the Charlottesville Electoral Board.

That's including thousands of newly registered voters, nearly 6,000 in Albemarle County, and 9,000 in Charlottesville. Officials saying that it was apparent early on, that this could be a historical year.

"We had 61% turnout in 2004 and that was pretty much record turnout for a presidential election, we're expecting perhaps 85% turnout," said Sincere.

Another indicator, the large amount of absentee ballots being submitted this election.

"For mail in absentee ballots, we have sent out 3,723, 2,145 of them have come back already," said William Harvey of the Albemarle County Electoral Board.

And as officials continue their preparations for Tuesday, they have some suggestions for voters.

Best time to vote:
9am - 11:30am, 1:30pm - 3:30pm

No political paraphernalia

Know Polling Place

Bring Proper I.D.

Officials saying they will make sure that everyone that's eligible, will have their vote counted.

"We will be conducting a transparent, fair, and clean election. people can be assured that they're votes will be counted," said Sincere.

Here is the video of Mark Tenia's report on Channel 19:

Over on Channel 29, Jenn McDaniel reported:

Charlottesville and Albemarle are both seeing record registration numbers. They've increased the number of election officials to make sure they can deal with the crowds.

In Charlottesville, voters should know they may see different types of ballots but they will all be counted the same way. If, for some reason, you're told you can't vote, push a little bit and don't just accept that as an answer.

"The electoral board takes the attitude that we want every vote to count and if there's a way we can find that they are properly registered than that's what we'll do," said Albemarle County Electoral Board's Will Harvey.

If you show up wearing a button, shirt or hat saying vote for a certain candidate, you'll be asked to take it off. It's not allowed within 40 feet of a polling place. If you don't, you can still vote but a report will be filed with the commonwealth's attorney.

The best times to vote are between 9 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. or 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Also, remember to take a driver's license, social security card, government ID or some other kind of acceptable identification.

Here is the video of McDaniel's story:

For some reason, the only tidbit the Daily Progress gleaned from our news conference was in regard to the State Board of Elections' clarification of the rules for the restricted 40-foot zone around polling places, the zone in which electioneering is not allowed:

Voters at polling places who refuse to remove buttons, T-shirts or other apparel with political messages will face possible misdemeanor charges, local election officials said Wednesday.

Election Day workers in Charlottesville and Albemarle County have been told to ask voters wearing political clothing or a button to either cover it up or remove it.

The move is part of a newly clarified state guideline that bans all such exhibitions of campaign material at Virginia’s polling places.

Two Charlottesville-based groups along with the Virginia ACLU said Wednesday that they will sue over the policy, asserting that it is a violation of free speech.

If the voter does not agree to cover or remove the political apparel, the poll workers must file an incident report with the commonwealth attorney’s office for possible prosecution.

Even if a voter refuses to remove his campaign button or T-shirt, he will still have the opportunity to vote.

“No one will be refused the right to vote for violating this policy,” said Rick Sincere, chairman of Charlottesville’s Electoral Board.

The law banning campaign material at polling places has been on the books for “generations,” Sincere said. In the past, he added, voters have generally been happy to comply.

Fellow blogger Tim Hulsey was on hand with my video camera to record the whole news conference; unfortunately, the tape ran out earlier than expected, so all that he captured was Will Harvey's opening remarks and a portion of my opening remarks. The Q&A is lost in the ether.

Here is Will Harvey of the Albemarle County Electoral Board, introduced by Lee Catlin:

And here I am, trying not to repeat the same sensible things that Will had to say:

There is also a nice photo of Will and me together on WINA-AM's web site.

Somebody Needs an Economics Lesson

The graduated income tax, which has been imposed on American citizens since the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified in 1913, has advantages and disadvantages. Economists and policymakers can argue about it in a rational and civil manner.

As for myself, I believe the tax code is too complex and it is used as much for social engineering as it is for revenue raising. The only legitimate use for a tax is to raise money to provide government services. It should not be used to nudge personal behavior in one direction or another, or to pick winners and losers among businesses, or to reward a favored group over against a disfavored group.

Let me add that those who favor the graduated income tax can make intelligent arguments on its behalf, even if I disagree with their conclusions.

But sometimes one of those supporters of the income tax says something so stupid that they deserve to be called out on it.

One example of this can be found in today's Arizona Daily Star, a newspaper published in Tucson.

In a guest article submitted by Sheila Tobias, identified as "an author and educator in Tucson," the argument for making richer people pay a larger proportion of their income in taxes is buttressed by this:

Since when does the hoarding of wealth by individuals, rather than jobs creation, do more to "grow the economy?"

Hoarding?

Tobias must have got her economic education from editorial cartoons of the 1930s, showing wealthy people stuffing their money into mattresses or burying it in the backyard.

Doesn't she know that wealth cannot be hoarded -- unless it's hidden in that cartoonish manner -- it can only be invested.

Either the money is put into bank accounts, where it is made available for loans (mortgages, car loans, small business loans), or it is put into investment accounts (buying stock, building businesses, and, yes, creating jobs). It does not sit idle.

Even Jesus Christ understood this. In the parable of the talents, He said:

Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them. To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. The man who had received the five talents went at once and put his money to work and gained five more. So also, the one with the two talents gained two more. But the man who had received the one talent went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money.

After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. The man who had received the five talents brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.’

His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!’

The man with the two talents also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two talents; see, I have gained two more.’

His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!

Then the man who had received the one talent came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. So I was afraid and went out and hid your talent in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’

His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.

Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents. For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

To Sheila Tobias, rich people are like that "wicked, lazy servant" when in fact the opposite is true -- those who are productive and take risks earn more money than those who are greedy and risk-averse.

I certainly hope that, as "an educator," Ms. Tobias is not teaching her students anything about economics. If she is, they will turn out as ignorant as she is.

H/T: Neal Boortz

NYT Recommends Charlottesville

Joshua Kurlantzick, whose byline is usually attached to articles about foreign policy in The New Republic and other opinion journals, has written a travel article for the New York Times, suggesting that readers might enjoy "36 Hours in Charlottesville, Va."

Beginning, as might be expected, with a reference to Thomas Jefferson and the architecture he designed or inspired at Monticello and on the grounds of the University of Virginia, Kurlantzick goes on to note:

But the town itself is far more cutting-edge than its architecture. As American regional cuisine has gone upscale over the past decade, Charlottesville has been at the center of many changes, with local chefs updating traditional Southern fare by marrying grits, fried chicken and other standbys with French, Asian and other influences. The town's music scene, too, has served up megastars like the Dave Matthews Band and helped to launch the modern roots-rock wave. Even Virginia wine, once more Burger King than Bordeaux, has caught on. Local vineyards that never used to get invitations to competitions now hold their own with the finest of California or France. Even Jefferson would be proud — the third president succeeded at nearly everything, but he couldn't coax a decent wine out of Virginia's soil.

The NYT web site also includes a colorful slideshow of scenes in the Charlottesville area, with views of the downtown mall, Monticello, various restaurants and shops, the Barboursville ruins, and Ash Lawn-Highland.

'I Am Not a Vegetarian,' Says Candidate

In most parts of the country, politicians have sex scandals. Look at Florida Congressman Tim Mahoney, whose trouser-snake escapades have torpedoed his chances of re-election. Tap your toe toward Senator Larry Craig and see how he responds. Offer to be Congressman Vito Fossella's designated driver.

In Montana, however, sex habits are not as salient as eating habits. Whoever would have anticipated a candidate releasing an official statement affirming that he's a carnivore? Yet here it is, as reported in the Billings Gazette:

Republican gubernatorial candidate Roy Brown this week accused Democrats of spreading a false rumor that he is a vegetarian in this meat-loving state.

"I am not and have never been a vegetarian," Brown said.

"I am disgusted by the baseless allegation that I am a vegetarian and that my personal eating habits should somehow be construed as opposed to the economic interests of Montana's livestock industry."

Brown did say that he and his family temporarily cut back on their consumption of meat and dairy products 25 years ago when they were caring for a dying loved one who couldn't eat those products.

The Gazette's Charles Johnson traced the unfounded rumors of Brown's preference for vegetables to an email from one of the candidate's neighbors.

Brown was responding to an undated e-mail sent by his Billings neighbor, Pat Etchart, to Dennis McDonald, chairman of the Montana Democratic Party and a Melville cattle rancher.

McDonald, in turn, forwarded Etchart's e-mail to some cattle ranchers Friday and asked: "What do you make of this?"

The letter also has been send to agricultural publications and blogs.

In the e-mail, Etchart said that when the Browns moved next door in Billings, Roy Brown invited her husband and her to their house to get acquainted.

"In the course of conversation, he told us that he and his wife are vegetarians," Etchart wrote. "At the time, I thought nothing of it, but as Roy now makes the rounds and campaigns for governor, I have a concern. Would it not be a problem, in a state where cattle ranching is such a vital industry, to have a governor who does not eat meat?

"What caused me to think about this is that I told my brother-in-law, a rancher who usually votes Republican, about it. And he said that he could never vote for a vegetarian, because it's against his economic interest."

Reached in Billings, Etchart, a Democrat, confirmed that she sent McDonald the e-mail.

Brown's dining habits may not make a difference in the long run. The latest poll shows incumbent Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer has a 33-point lead over his Republican opponent. According to the Flathead Beacon:

Schweitzer was picked by 60 percent of likely Montana voters to Brown's 27 percent, in a survey released Friday by Montana State University-Billings. Libertarian Stan Jones captured 4 percent, and 8 percent were undecided.

The poll does not break down demographically to indicate who Montana vegans favor.

The Gremlin in the DCCC

A few days ago, I reported that I had received a weird call from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, urging me to vote for Glenn Nye for Congress and Barack Obama for President.

This was weird, I said, because Nye is running for Congress in the Second Congressional District in southeastern Virginia, while I live and vote in the Fifth Congressional District in central and southside Virginia.

Well, I just checked my voicemail and discovered another call from the DCCC, again touting congressional candidate Glenn Nye. The only difference between the calls was that the first one was a recording with a male voice and the second one had a female voice.

Surely I am not the only person in the 434 area code who is receiving these misdirected campaign calls.

The question is: Did the DCCC just get a bad phone list that is running (and rerunning) through a robocall computer program? If so, the committee had better start purging its staff of incompetent computer technicians, because somebody should have caught that error.

Perhaps there is just a random gremlin in the program, but -- considering that my first Glenn Nye call came on October 17 and my second one came on October 24 -- that little imp should have been uncovered by now.

Or perhaps Thelma Drake's campaign has a tactically positioned mole in the DCCC, who is making sure that Virgil Goode's constituents get the Glenn Nye calls, while voters in the 757 are being urged to vote for Tom Perriello.

I can't wait to see the write-in results from both districts.

When a Libertarian Debates

Say what you will about the Libertarian Party, its candidates enliven the political process.

This past Wednesday, in debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters in Williamsburg, Nathan Larson, a Libertarian candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in Virginia's First Congressional District, faced off against Republican incumbent Rob Wittman and Democratic challenger Bill Day.

The result, according to press reports, was an actual debate rather than an exchange of predictable soundbites.

The Flat Hat, a student newspaper at the College of Willam and Mary, noted in an editorial headlined "Debates Need Third Parties":

While Democrat Bill Day and Republican Rob Wittman vied to show their support for energy independence and fiscal responsibility, Libertarian Nathan Larson helped shape the debate — and drew some jeers from the audience — with his plans to drastically reduce or eliminate the role of government. We applaud the Williamsburg League of Women Voters’ decision to admit him. Open political discourse comprises a key tenet of the American democratic ideals, and we hope that in the future, debate organizers will seek to include all registered candidates.

The traditional debate has become a tennis match of platitudes. Game-changing moments rarely emerge between the memorized volleys. But drop in a third-party candidate and the calculus changes.

Larson’s argument that the American economy would have been better served by allowing bad banks to fail required the others to justify their support for the Treasury Department’s bailout package. Without him, Day and Wittman likely would have stuck to criticizing the original bailout package’s earmarks or lack of accountability as they’d done in the past.

Larson is the only Libertarian candidate for the U.S. House in Virginia this year. (LP national chairman Bill Redpath, who ran for Virginia governor in 2001, is on the ballot statewide as a candidate for the U.S. Senate. His opponents include former Republican Governor Jim Gilmore and former Democratic Governor Mark Warner. They are all seeking to fill the seat being vacated by 30-year incumbent John Warner.)

Writing in the Daily Press about the LWV debate, Hugh Lessig reported on Larson's positions and the reactions from the audience:

Larson said the government should stop "bailing out businesses that are failing." The only way for capitalism to work, he said, is when poorly managed companies are allowed to fail. That allows capital to flow to businesses that are good stewards of their money....

Larson said he favored abolishing Medicare, an answer that brought gasps from some older members of the audience. In his view — where government plays as limited a role as possible — the tax dollars that fund Medicare would be better spent in the private sector with insurers and other private organizations that could provide health care to the elderly....

Larson said he would privatize the Chesapeake Bay. If it came under private ownership, there would be a natural incentive to harvest its resources responsibly and prevent pollution. The key to environmental protection, he said, is to establish property rights over all resources, extending to sections of the ocean floor.

Reporter Alex Guillen of The Flat Hat focused on some other topics covered by the three debaters. He noted, for instance:

Larson argued for privatizing transportation and other areas of government.

“There’s no service the government provides that couldn’t do better privately,” he said.

Larson said that education should be privatized and, in a move that drew laughs from the audience, made optional. Larson argued for the abolition of almost all government services and taxes, although he was unable to say how he would convince Congress to do so.

There was even a rare moment of agreement among all three, said Guillen:

Larson, again shocking the audience, advocated the abolition of Medicare.

After touching on federal recognition of Indian tribes — which Wittman and Day supported and Larson did not — all three candidates affirmed their support of nationwide congressional redistricting by an independent, non-partisan body.

The three differed in how they would advise the incoming president, however:

Larson said he would give the next president some economics books to read, bringing a laugh from the audience.

Wittman argued that the next president must reach across the aisle to enact change.

Day was more specific, saying that the next president must focus on the national debt, balancing the budget and securing energy independence, issues he said cross party lines.

In an email to Libertarians around Virginia, Larson provided the text of his closing remarks at the Williamsburg debate:

Now is the time to begin restoring freedom to America. Congress should completely deregulate the economy, so that businesses can thrive to their fullest potential. We should break the government monopoly on currency, so that entrepreneurs can create gold- and silver-backed currencies that will be more stable than our present U.S. dollar. Government services should be privatized and funded entirely by user fees, so that the different needs and desires of customers can be better accommodated through a competitive marketplace. Taxation should be abolished so that Americans will be free to devote their money toward productive investments, charitable contributions, and improvements in their quality of life, rather than having their incomes siphoned off into wasteful government programs, including unnecessary foreign wars and bailouts of poorly managed companies.

Historically, we've seen that nations such as the Soviet Union, in which government tried to exercise too much central control over the economy, have often collapsed. At best, they tend to experience economic stagnation compared to freer countries. The current recession is a result of some of the same kinds of harmful government interference. By electing a Congress that will simply rein in government, and let the market correct itself, America can get through the recovery faster and continue on to a more prosperous future.

While the editorial board of The Flat Hat praised the League of Women Voters for including Nathan Larson in the debate, credit is also due to Congressman Rob Wittman and to Bill Day. In a year in which candidates are refusing to debate their opponents in fora that might attract a large audience, Wittman and Day deserve congratulations for being unafraid to debate someone who brings new ideas to the table. Regardless of who the official "sponsor" might be, the two major parties generally control the terms of these sorts of events, usually excluding third-party and independent candidates, so Wittman and Day's openness to participation by all certified candidates is welcome.

Let's hope other candidates follow their example in future campaigns.

Charlottesville Election Official Training

With more than 28,000 registered voters this year (up from just over 21,000 four years ago), Charlottesville is gearing up for record turnout on Election Day, coming up in less than a fortnight.

As noted here previously, anticipating the higher number of voters and working to make voting as efficient and manageable as possible, the Electoral Board decided to buy new equipment to supplement the Hart Intercivic eSlate machines that have been used here since May 2002. The complementary eScan system uses paper ballots and a digital scanner to read and record the votes on them. Voters will have a choice whether to use the traditional electronic voting device (the eSlate) or the digitally-scanned paper ballot (the eScan).

In addition, we have purchased electronic pollbooks (EPBs) that promise to make the check-in process smoother than ever. With the entire citywide voter list on every laptop, we no longer have to divide the lines alphabetically -- no more "A-L" and "M-Z", because any voter can walk up to the first free position at what we call the "RVL table" ("RVL" means "registered voters list").

As a consequence of having the additional, new equipment and knowing that heavy turnout will bring with it new challenges, the Office of Voter Registration & Elections decided that it would be best to put a heavy emphasis on training of election officials (pollworkers) this year. Some level of training is required before every election, but this year we thought it best to assure as close to individual attention as possible.

Instead of one big session for all of the pollworkers from across the city, we divided them into four groups. In addition to the usual training for Chief Election Officers, Assistant Chiefs, and Closing Specialists, we also have had separate training sessions for election officers from (1) Recreation and Clark precincts, (2) Walker and Carver precincts, (3) Jefferson Park and Tonsler precincts, and (4) Venable and Alumni Hall precincts. (Venable is now our largest precinct, as measured by number of registered voters, with more than 5,600 and surpassing traditionally largest Recreation.) Moreover, new election officers have been required to attend special training sessions in the registrar's office.

Tonight was the training session for Jefferson Park and Tonsler, held at the Carter Family Life Center on Cherry Avenue, which also serves as the polling place for Jefferson Park precinct. I snapped a few photos with my cell phone to record the event for posterity.



















Update: I will be a guest on "The Schilling Show" on WINA radio (1070 AM) on Monday, October 27, to talk about what to expect on Election Day in Charlottesville -- not just the expected large turnout but also the new voting equipment and streamlined procedures for voter check-in with the EPBs. My segment will be on sometime during the 1:00 - 2:00 p.m. broadcast with host Rob Schilling. If you can't tune in, there will be a podcast available soon after the program has been aired.

'Sending a Message'

In a pre-election roundup by Will O'Bryan ("Outing the vote: Gay locals talk politics in the final stretch to Nov. 4"), Metro Weekly, a publication with a largely gay readership in Washington, D.C. (not to be confused with The Metro Herald, a publication with a largely African-American readership in Alexandria, Virginia, for which I write), quotes a supporter of Bob Barr who will be casting a write-in ballot for the Libertarian nominee:

Outside Washington, you might have former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, also of Georgia, on your ballot, running for the Libertarian Party. Of course, you can always just write him in on a D.C. ballot. That's what D.C.'s Berin Szoka says he'll be doing.

''When I vote for Barr, the point is not whoever the Libertarian candidate is. Voting Libertarian is a way of sending a message.... The more votes the Libertarian Party gets, that communicates something. That's why I'm voting at all.''

Before supporting Barr, however, Szoka had publicly -- and somewhat jokingly -- dubbed himself the ''HomoPaulertarian-in-chief,'' promoting Rep. Ron Paul's (R-Texas) dark-horse candidacy for president.

''He's always been a hero of mine. I was delighted when he ran for president,'' says Szoka. ''At the same time, I was astonished by the enthusiasm among young people.''

While Szoka's philosophical leanings tend toward the libertarian, the 28-year-old shares a view probably not uncommon among many who eschew Democrats and Republicans for smaller political parties.

''I think both the major political parties are philosophically corrupt.''

With such strong convictions, one can imagine how difficult it might be for Szoka to pull the lever for either.

Instead, says Szoka, ''I vote for limited government in all respects: social issues, economic issues, foreign policy. Keep the government away from the bedroom, the boardroom and invading foreign countries.''

In a winner-take-all political system, he readily admits, any ''third-party'' presidential vote will remain a largely symbolic gesture. But Szoka is surely not the only gay Washingtonian making that gesture.

I should note that I have known Berin Szoka since he was a law student at the University of Virginia, and I was pleased to see that Metro Weekly sought out his views for this article, which also looks at local elections in D.C. and its suburbs and congressional races as well as the big kahuna, the presidential race in which either Barack Obama or John McCain is the most likely victor.



Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Unusual Search Terms

It has been a while since I checked into the odd search terms that bring people to this blog. (Those compendiums have themselves proved to be effective bait, as attractive to readers as honey is to Winnie the Pooh.)

In recent days, new readers have found their way here using Google, Yahoo, and other search engines to find out about these topics:

ayn rand's the children's hour

did franklin roosevelt have erectile dysfunction?

does the first amendment protect cindy sheehan

does the first amendment protect political speech

hanson brothers circumcision interview

how would benjamin franklin react to film fantasy about witchcraft

jesuit Thoughts on masturbation

marquette university gay sex

Pornography in Buena Vista Virginia

sponge bob barr

tyler whitney sex tape

One unusual search has stood out, not because it is humorous or inscrutable, but because it is unexpectedly frequent. A number of visitors have been looking for an article written by my friend, Mike McGough, some 20 years ago. Then the editorial page editor for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (now with the Los Angeles Times), McGough did a piece for The New Republic about the decline of high school debate called "Pull It Across Your Flow."

His article elicited a letter-to-the-editor from me, which in turn led to our meeting for lunch and subsequently a two-decade friendship. It also inspired me to write my own article on high school debate and -- apparently -- it also inspired sociologist Gary Alan Fine to write a whole book on the subject called Gifted Tongues: High School Debate and Adolescent Culture.

At first I thought that a debate coach somewhere had assigned his students to read McGough's original essay, but when I saw that the searches were coming from various locations around the country (and not clustered around one city or state), I decided that hypothesis was groundless.

I am still at a loss, as is Mike McGough. Can anyone out there answer the question of why a 1988 article about high school debate suddenly has such a surge in interest? Both the author and I would like to know the cause.




Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Unusual Campaign Call

As most of my readers should know, I live in the Fifth Congressional District of Virginia, where incumbent Republican Virgil Goode is being challenged by Democrat Tom Perriello this year.

I was just checking my voicemail (on my home phone, with a 434 area code) and found a message from the "D-triple-C" (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), telling me to expect some information in the mail about, and asking me to support, "Glenn Nye" for Congress.

Isn't Glenn Nye running against Thelma Drake in the Second Congressional District? And aren't all (or at least most) of the telephones in that district linked to area code 757?

Should I take the DCCC's advice, and write in the name of Glenn Nye instead of their party's nominee in my district, Tom Perriello?

Odd call. Odd phone list. Odd use of campaign resources.

Kiwi TV Focuses on Charlottesville

International interest in the U.S. presidential election is piqued, as anyone who has traveled abroad recently or who has read the foreign press knows.

Even in countries that have their own elections this year, people want to know what's going on in the United States.

This week, that interest focused on Charlottesville, when a crew from Television New Zealand came to our town to examine politics in a swing state that might help determine the outcome of the race between Barack Obama and John McCain.

In this video clip, New York-based correspondent Tim Wilson interviewed Albemarle County Supervisor David Slutzky and former Charlottesville City Councilor Rob Schilling, as well as Cordel Faulk of the UVA Center for Politics:

Of course, this isn't the first time that a foreign TV network has come to Charlottesville to gain insights on American politics.




Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Politics at 'The New Yorker'

That staid journal that is read more often for its cartoons than its articles (take that, Playboy!), the venerable New Yorker, has three good political reports that are worth a look.

The first is a profile of Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr, written by Raffi Khatchadourian. Here's a sample paragraph:

For many people, including skeptical libertarians, Barr still has the reputation of a partisan, but his self-imposed exile from the Republican Party is representative of a broader disaffection among conservatives who did not immediately rally behind McCain. Republicans in the mold of Barry Goldwater, who believe in small government, minimal constraints on the free market, and expansive civil liberties, have become profoundly uneasy about the direction of the country under President Bush, who has presided over the largest increase in federal spending since the Great Society, raised the national debt to more than ten trillion dollars, suspended habeas corpus for enemy combatants, and recently proposed the seven-hundred-billion-dollar bailout of Wall Street. David Boaz, the executive vice-president of the Cato Institute, and David Kirby, the executive director of America’s Future Foundation, have argued that, because of such policies, the libertarian vote, which for decades has been solidly Republican, “may be the next great swing vote.” According to surveys, as much as a fifth of American voters hold libertarian values, and in recent years more than seventy per cent of them have voted as Republicans. But Boaz and Kirby noticed that in the 2004 Presidential election only fifty-nine per cent of them voted for Bush, and between the midterm elections of 2002 and 2006 three million of them drifted away from the Republican Party—a shift that Boaz and Kirby argue “may well have cost Republicans control of Congress.” In this year’s Republican primaries, Ron Paul, the congressman from Texas and a longtime libertarian, earned more than twenty per cent of the vote in Idaho, Washington, Montana, and North Dakota. “His supporters are the equivalent of crabgrass,” Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist, told Time. “It’s not the grass you want, and it spreads faster than the real stuff.” In August, Newt Gingrich warned that if McCain chose as his running mate Senator Joe Lieberman, of Connecticut, Barr would win fifteen per cent of the vote.

Two other articles focus on the major parties' vice-presidential candidates.

Ryan Lizza profiles Joe Biden, who was chosen to be the running mate of his former rival for the Democratic nomination, Barack Obama. A sample:

On August 6th, Biden said, the Obama campaign “smuggled” him into Minneapolis, where Obama was campaigning, and the two senators stayed up late in a suite at the Graves 601 Hotel working out the details of a potential deal. Obama told Biden that the vetting had gone well—Biden assured me that it was “very complimentary.” Biden happens to be one of the least wealthy members of the Senate, although his family’s joint income was more than three hundred thousand dollars last year. (His wife, Jill, has a Ph.D. in education and teaches at Delaware Technical & Community College.) His relatively straightforward tax returns and uncomplicated financial situation made the process easier. “All these years and you still have no money,” Obama said to Biden, teasingly.

The conversation in Minneapolis ranged from foreign policy and possible appointments to the federal courts to the legislative strategy that would be needed to pass an Obama agenda. Obama wanted to know how Biden had managed his signature achievements—such as the 1994 crime bill, which added a hundred thousand federally funded police officers to city streets. He also tested Biden’s understanding of how broad his role would be, as opposed to that of another contender—apparently, Kathleen Sebelius, the governor of Kansas and the only woman known to be on Obama’s short list. “He said, ‘Well, you know, if I offered this to somebody’—he named her, a person—he said, ‘That person would be very happy if I assigned them to reorganize the government.’ And he said, ‘They’d be very happy doing that. How about you?’ ” That didn’t sound like much of a job to Biden. “No,” he told Obama. “That’s not what I want to do.”

Finally, Jane Mayer traces how Sarah Palin emerged as the leading contender for the Republican vice-presidential nomination. While Palin's name was known among political junkies for months before the GOP convention, she seemed to the general public to have sprung full-blown from the head of John McCain, who decided, without vetting, that he needed to have a Tina Fey lookalike at his side. Mayer sets the record straight. For example:

While Brickley and others were spreading the word about Palin on the Internet, Palin was wooing a number of well-connected Washington conservative thinkers. In a stroke of luck, Palin did not have to go to the capital to meet these members of “the permanent political establishment”; they came to Alaska. Shortly after taking office, Palin received two memos from Paulette Simpson, the Alaska Federation of Republican Women leader, noting that two prominent conservative magazines—The Weekly Standard, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, and National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.—were planning luxury cruises to Alaska in the summer of 2007, which would make stops in Juneau. Writers and editors from these publications had been enlisted to deliver lectures to politically minded vacationers. “The Governor was more than happy to meet these guys,” Joe Balash, a special staff assistant to Palin, recalled.

On June 18, 2007, the first group disembarked in Juneau from the Holland America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, and went to the governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. The contingent featured three of The Weekly Standard ’s top writers: William Kristol, the magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for the Times and a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, the magazine’s executive editor and the co-host of “The Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; and Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist.

By all accounts, the luncheon was a high-spirited, informal occasion. Kristol brought his wife and daughter; Gerson brought his wife and two children. Barnes, who brought his sister and his wife, sat on one side of Governor Palin, who presided at the head of the long table in the mansion’s formal dining room; the Kristols sat on the other. Gerson was at the opposite end, as was Palin’s chief of staff at the time, Mike Tibbles, who is now working for Senator Stevens’s reëlection campaign. The menu featured halibut cheeks—the choicest part of the fish. Before the meal, Palin delivered a lengthy grace. Simpson, who was at the luncheon, said, “I told a girlfriend afterwards, ‘That was some grace!’ It really set the tone.” Joe Balash, Palin’s assistant, who was also present, said, “There are not many politicians who will say grace with the conviction of faith she has. It’s a daily part of her life.”

Palin was joined by her lieutenant governor and by Alaska’s attorney general. Also present was a local woman involved in upholding the Juneau school system’s right to suspend a student who had displayed a satirical banner—“Bong Hits 4 Jesus”—across the street from his school. The student had sued the school district, on First Amendment grounds, and, at the time of the lunch, the case was before the Supreme Court. (The school district won.)

During the lunch, everyone was charmed when the Governor’s small daughter Piper popped in to inquire about dessert. Fred Barnes recalled being “struck by how smart Palin was, and how unusually confident. Maybe because she had been a beauty queen, and a star athlete, and succeeded at almost everything she had done.” It didn’t escape his notice, too, that she was “exceptionally pretty.”

This issue of The New Yorker also has an article that gives hope to those of us who still have creative ambitions long past the date we might have been considered precocious. Malcolm Gladwell writes about the difference between youthful genius and artists who succeed much later in life in an article called "Late Bloomers."



Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Redpath Endorsed by Veteran Democratic Legislator

A news release from the Redpath for Senate campaign notes that Theodore V. Morrison, Jr., a former member of the Virginia House of Delegates (he represented Newport News from 1968 through 1989) and a former member of the State Corporation Commission (1989-2007), will formally endorse Bill Redpath, the Libertarian candidate facing former Governors Jim Gilmore and Mark Warner, at a meeting in Richmond this evening. As a legislator, Morrison was once considered to be one of the most powerful members of the General Assembly, culminating in the chairmanship of the House Finance Committee. His nickname was "the Bill Killer."

When Morrison was first elected to the General Assembly, Virginia still had multi-member House districts. According to the 1977 Almanac of Virginia Politics, he represented House District 49 with Lewis Archer McMurran, who had first joined the House of Delegates in 1948, and Alan A. Diamonstein who, like Morrison, was in the class of 1968. (In a stunning upset in 1977, McMurran was defeated in the Democratic primary by Robert Scott -- now known as U.S. Representative Bobby Scott of the Third Congressional District.) Let me note that, as a result of both redistricting and the application of single-member districts to the Virginia legislature, House District 49 is now in Northern Virginia (Arlington County and the City of Alexandria, where it is represented by Delegate Adam Ebbin). That is also the same district where I sought election to the House of Delegates in 1991 and 1993.

The 1977 Almanac reported:

Theodore Morrison, as a member of the Courts of Justice committee, concentrates on the law and order issues. Crime is a big issue in this district and State-wide. He introduced numerous bills dealing with criminal procedures, such as provisions for handgun reporting by dealers and penalties for felons and misdemeanants on bail or recognizance who fail to appear. Neither bill passed. Passed were provisions dealing with search warrants, appointment of counsel for indigents charged with felonies, and disorderly conduct. Morrison also sponsored a bill to create a Juvenile Justice Information System which passed.

The 1981 edition of the Almanac of Virginia Politics added this information about Morrison's record:

Morrison has introduced a number of bills pertaining to arrest procedure and courtroom procedure. A 1979 bill, which passed, gave juvenile judges the right to order the parents of children in trouble to participate in certain programs to help rehabilitate their youngsters.

In 1980, Morrison wanted to give police the authority to attach devices to phones which would record the phone numbers called. The authorization, which would have been used for criminal investigations, was not approved by the General Assembly. Also killed was a Morrison bill to grant gas-tax refunds for gas used by race cars.

Morrison introduced a bill to tighten the Freedom of Information Act and called for a limit on the amount of money each legislator could spend on postage. Both passed.

By 1987, Morrison was representing a single-member district (House District 93) within the City of Newport News. The Almanac of Virginia Politics published that year had a much more extensive profile of him, which reported:

Ted Morrison has represented the city since 1968 and is one of the most powerful members of the House. In 1983 he became Chairman of the House Finance Committee, and he has previously chaired the House Chesapeake and Its Tributaries Committee and the Virginia Code Commission. He is second in seniority on the House Courts of Justice Committee, and he is a close friend and ally of Speaker A.L. Philpott.

Morrison is a defense attorney who is very well respected for his fine tuned legal expertise and his knowledge of the state code. Known by his colleagues as "The Bill Killer," Morrison considers himself to be an independent thinker whose duty lies frequently in preventing passage of bills he considers to be abominations.

One of his proudest accomplishments was the creation of the Intermediate Court of Appeals, a ten-member court established in January of 1985 to relieve the backlog of cases before the Virginia Supreme Court.

Morrison sponsored probably the most controversial bill of the 1985 session -- a bill which would have required teenage girls considering abortions to have either the consent of their parents or the consent of a judge before undergoing the procedure. His bill passed the House, but was amended in the Senate to substitute the approval of an "independent doctor" rather than a judge. However, this version was unacceptable to Morrison, and the bill did not pass.

He very quietly created a storm of controversy in Newport News right after the 1986 session ended. During the session he sponsored and passed a bill requiring all cities in Virginia (except Virginia Beach) to own their courthouses rather than lease them. His actions thwarted plans of the Republican-dominated City Council to lease a courthouse from a developer as part of the Newport Centre downtown development plan and saved the city's taxpayers a great deal of money. The city had planned to lease a building for one million dollars a year for seven years, with an option to buy at the end of that time, yet the building would cost only $6 million to build.

Morrison was a key budget negotiator during the special Transportation session of the General Assembly. Although he was not a supporter of increasing the sales tax, he worked closely with the Commission and the Governor to put together the revenue package. Hampton and Newport News will benefit greatly from the completion of Highway 664, an express connector which will give these two cities more direct linkage to Suffolk.

Here is the news release from Bill Redpath's campaign about Morrison's endorsement of the Libertarian Senate candidate:

Former 20-year Member of Virginia House of Delegates to Endorse William Redpath, Libertarian for US Senate

William Redpath, the Libertarian Party nominee for US Senate in Virginia in 2008, will be endorsed for that office by Theodore V. Morrison, Jr., a 20-year former conservative Democratic Party member of the Virginia House of Delegates and former Chairman of the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

The endorsement will occur on Monday, October 20, at 7:30PM, at the meeting of the Libertarian Party of Richmond, at the Legend Brewing Company, 321 W. Seventh St. in Richmond. A business meeting at 7PM will precede the endorsement.

Mr. Morrison will be endorsing Mr. Redpath due primarily to the candidate’s proposal for a Flat Tax to replace the complicated and deduction & credit-riddled individual and corporate income taxes in the United States. A Flat Tax would likely increase savings and stimulate entrepreneurism and economic growth in the United States.

Other positions of Mr. Redpath can be seen on his website, www.redpath2008.com.

(Click the graphic above to see the snapshot profile of Theodore Morrison from the 1987 Almanac of Virginia Politics.)



Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Bill Redpath Visits Charlottesville - Part II

As I noted previously, U.S. Senate candidate Bill Redpath made two appearances in Charlottesville on October 16. In the afternoon, he was a guest on "The Schilling Show" on WINA-AM. In the evening, he was a guest of University Libertarians at the University of Virginia, speaking in Newcomb Hall to an audience of students and Charlottesville residents.

Redpath has been traveling around the state, meeting with groups of voters and with journalists. While he has not been permitted to participate in debates with his principal opponents, former governors Jim Gilmore and Mark Warner, he has been able to get some press attention.

For instance, last week Redpath had an op-ed piece in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, which addressed the current economic situation. He began his article by drawing an analogy to a popular movie of the 1970s:

Driving from campaign event to campaign event--when I was the Libertarian candidate for governor in 2001, I drove 7,000 miles in the last five weeks of the campaign, and I never left Virginia--these days, sometimes I think about the movie, "Smokey and the Bandit." Maybe it's because of the passing earlier this year of my father, a quiet, stoic, Midwestern electrical engineer, who was a tightly closeted Burt Reynolds fan.

But, in particular, I think of one segment, in which (unless my memory fails me) Sheriff Buford T. Justice deems the pursuit of The Bandit (Burt Reynolds) insufficiently important to skip a meal. The sheriff runs into a roadside diner and orders a meatloaf sandwich, which he gobbles down while talking to the man seated next to him, who, unbeknownst to him, is the subject of his pursuit.

The Bandit eggs Sheriff Justice on to describe the ostensibly unlawful exploits of The Bandit. When The Bandit suggests the possible misconduct is insufficiently egregious, the sheriff turns to The Bandit and says, "Son, that's baby [poop] compared to what this guy's done."

The reason that I think of this scene is that for all of the (very valid) recent concern about high gasoline prices, the "credit crunch," the woes on Wall Street, and the resulting bailout bill (which I would have voted against), I think these problems are small potatoes when compared to this nation's main economic problem of the 21st century: our aging population and the coming entitlement spending explosion.

Entitlement spending is a major theme of Redpath's campaign. He addressed it on the radio with Rob Schilling, during an address at Virginia Commonwealth University last week, and again at the University of Virginia last night. He is concerned about the coming bankruptcy of both Social Security and Medicare. (See the video, below, for more details about Redpath's views on this issue.)

Reporting on Redpath's speech at UVA, associate editor Emily Poe of the Cavalier Daily wrote:

U.S. Senate candidate William Redpath, the current Libertarian National Committee chairman, spoke yesterday about his ambitions and goals for the country if elected, primarily those regarding national security, social security and public education.

The Liberty Coalition at the University hosted the event, which provided a forum for numerous views running contrary to those espoused by Jim Gilmore and Mark Warner, the Republican and Democratic candidates for the U.S. Senate, respectively.

Redpath, a clear non-favorite to win the election according to the most recent polls, which show Gilmore and Warner far ahead of alternative candidates, emphasized that he is running for office just as much for the chance of succeeding as for the chance of spreading different opinions and views.

“I wanted there to be a Libertarian voice in this election,” Redpath said.

Poe added:

Less trade regulation, in conjunction with reduced government spending, a flat tax system and an emphasis on improving the value of the dollar — possibly via the implementation of a gold standard — would better help address the financial concerns facing the country and world today, Redpath said.

Among those economic concerns, Redpath identified Social Security as one of the most significant. In fact, he said he believes the nation’s biggest economic problem this year is that the first wave of baby boomers are now eligible for Social Security.
“The Social Security trust fund is a complete economic illusion,” he said.

The “6.2 percent solution” provides the best option for the Social Security problem, Redpath said, which would allow workers to waive their Social Security accounts in order to put that money into their own accounts.

Individual citizens, though, are not the only ones who should be saving, Redpath noted. Government officials also need to cut back spending in both energy and regulatory sectors, he said. In regards to energy issues Redpath said the development of new energy technologies should be left to the energy experts — not the federal government.

Redpath spoke for about an hour at UVA, including a good 30 minutes of Q&A discussion with members of the audience. Conforming to YouTube standards of length, I have divided his presentation into eight parts.

Jim Lark, a former national chairman of the Libertarian Party, introduced Redpath.

Part I:

Part II:

Part III:

Part IV:

Part V:

Part VI:

Part VII:

Part VIII:

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Bill Redpath Visits Charlottesville - Part I

Bill Redpath, the Libertarian candidate for the U.S. Senate in Virginia, made two appearances in Charlottesville on Thursday. The first appearance was as a guest of local talk-show host Rob Schilling on WINA-AM's "The Schilling Show" between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m. Redpath used that as an opportunity to promote his speech that night at the University of Virginia, and to answer questions from Schilling -- a former member of the Charlottesville City Council -- and from the radio audience.

The night before, Redpath had been at Christopher Newport University in Newport News, participating in a forum with Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr (a former congressman from Georgia). For his part, Barr had also been a guest (by telephone) on "The Schilling Show" on Wednesday. (For a podcast of Rob Schilling's interview with Bob Barr, look here and scroll down.)

In his comments on the radio, Redpath noted that he had put about 4,000 miles on his car already this month, and that, when he ran for governor of Virginia in 2001, he traveled 7,000 miles during the last month of the campaign, without ever reading the Commonwealth.

The Cavalier Daily reported on Redpath's address at UVA, which was sponsored by the University Libertarians. CavDaily associate editor Emily Poe covered the event and wrote in today's edition:

The core of his platform, Redpath explained, focuses on reducing of the general scope of the federal government. He noted that for the nation to move forward successfully federal officials must reduce spending on a “long list of things.”

Scaled back federal involvement in areas like education, which Redpath said should be handled by state, local and private institutions, was also echoed in other aspects of Redpath’s platform, including national security.

Redpath said national security is — and will always be — one of the most vital issues facing the United States. Contrary to how some other politicians might address security concerns, however, Redpath said he believes the best way to secure the nation’s borders and take care of external military affairs is to practice “non-interventionist” foreign policy.

“I think that certainly getting the U.S. military out of Iraq is a no-brainer,” Redpath said.

Redpath said extending such a non-interventionist policy to more native concerns, such as the economy and pressing social concerns, is also needed.

“The U.S. should unilaterally drop its trade barriers, to bring other nations of the world into a great capitalist peace,” Redpath said, noting that he is a proponent of unrestrained free trade.

“Free trade is a pro-consumer policy and that’s the only thing we all are, we’re all consumers,” Redpath said.

What follows, in four segments, is Redpath's interview on "The Schilling Show" committed to video. (For an audio podcast, check out WINA's newly revamped web site.)

Part I:

Part II:

Part III:

Part IV:

The second part of this short series on Bill Redpath's visit to Charlottesville will feature video from his speech at the University of Virginia, including about a half-hour of Q&A dialogue with audience members.

Sarah Palin Visits Richmond

The McCain campaign misled thousands of its supporters in Virginia today, disappointing many of them in the process.

Last week, the campaign announced that vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin would be appearing at a rally in Richmond. The venue was to be the Arthur Ashe Center.

The response was so overwhelming that, two days before the rally (which was scheduled for Columbus Day), it was announced that the venue had been changed to the Richmond International Raceway in Henrico County.

According to the raceway's web site, it can seat up to 112,000 people. So it was not much of a stretch to think that there would be no problem in finding seats for the thousands of people likely to attend.

Attendance was sure to be high, especially since the weather forecast was for clear and sunny conditions with temperatures in the mid- to high 70s -- summer weather for mid-October. Since Monday was a holiday, many people would be free from work and school and able to attend. (Others, of course, would just play hooky.)

To the surprise of many, rather than holding the rally inside the racetrack, campaign organizers had erected temporary bleachers on the RIR parking lot, bleachers which could hold about 2,500 people -- 3,000 if they really were packed tight.

That left 15,000 to 20,000 people standing in line when the rally area was filled up, and standing outside the security perimeter when the rally began and the signs began to wave and the music began to play.

I was lucky. I was among those who got the "best of the worst" in the standing room area -- flush up agains the security fence with a clear view of the podium (so I was actually able to get some good video and photos -- see below).

Others were not so lucky, and were so far away from the action that even the heavy-duty sound system was not sufficient to make Governor Palin's speech audible for them. (Chants of "louder, louder" could be heard from that section of the audience, only to be misinterpreted by the candidate as heckling.)

Had the McCain campaign announced that the rally would be held "on the grounds of the Richmond International Raceway," I would not be so critical of it for being misleading. Sometimes accuracy is the best public relations.

Let's just hope, for the sake of John McCain and Sarah Palin, that this discourteous treatment of supporters and potential voters did not also dissuade some of them from casting their ballots for the Republican ticket on November 4.

With that bit of scolding out of the way, let me turn to a new target.

Sarah Palin announced, before her stump speech, that she had brought "a special guest" with her from Virginia Beach. That guest turned out to be the son of country-music legend Hank Williams, who was invited to sing the national anthem.

What a mistake that turned out to be!

Singing without accompaniment, Hank Williams, Jr. -- most famous in his own right for composing the theme song for Monday Night Football on ABC -- absolutely butchered "The Star Spangled Banner." He started off-key, and only got worse from there.

Put in as kindly a fashion as possible, Williams delivered an idiosyncratic rendering of our national anthem -- and I use "render" in the sense of "tearing into pieces." He was off the beat, improvised his own melody, and just about embarrassed himself and Governor Palin in the process.

Were it not for the crowd singing along -- and singing it correctly -- Williams would have been booed off the stage. And he would have deserved it. His performance made one long for Roseanne Barr.

Want proof? Here's the video.

I have posted more photos from the Richmond International Raceway rally over on Facebook.

Come Out, Come Out, Wherever You Are

Today (October 11) is the annual observance of National Coming Out Day. It commemorates the date of the second march on Washington for lesbian and gay rights in 1987. (The first such march was held on October 14, 1979. Is there some kind of connection between gay rights and Columbus Day weekend?)

The larger purpose of National Coming Out Day is to encourage gay men and lesbians, as well as bisexuals and others of the LGBTQ alphabet-soup spectrum, to be honest with themselves and others about their sexual orientation. The holiday (such as it is) has spread to other countries, such as the Netherlands, where it gets two days (October 10 and 11!) and Britain, where it is celebrated on October 12. (This will be a busy weekend for jet-setters.) The Human Rights Campaign has a page on its web site with information about NCOD events around the United States, along with some videos of personal testimonials about the importance of coming out.

My friend, Paul Varnell, who writes for the Chicago Free Press and whose articles also appear on the Independent Gay Forum, usually devotes one of his columns each year to the subject of coming out, in general, and National Coming Out Day, in particular. (I pointed readers toward one of Paul's articles on this subject three years ago.)

This year, in a Chicago Free Press column headlined "Coming out more," Paul writes about the way National Coming Out Day is commemorated:

Some major urban gay community centers and gay groups on college campuses organize an event where lots of people announce that they are gay or lesbian. There seems to be something empowering (or protective) about coming out in the midst of a group or at a formal event.

Actually, I suspect that many of the people participating in those events are to some extent “out of the closet” already, but perhaps NCOD events encourage people to be a little more open in their lives as well as publicize the existence of a considerable number of gays—a fact of which most people remain oblivious. It probably has a similar educative effect on the closeted gays and lesbians who might be standing around on the periphery watching what is going on. Reaching our closeted fellow gays is as important as reaching heterosexuals.

If we are to make substantial political progress, we need to make ourselves ever more visible. People have to get to know us to find out that we don’t fit whatever stereotypes they hold about gays and that in many cases we are people they already know. And they need to be alerted to a greater awareness that in many cases we have partners we cannot legally marry, that the hard-pressed U.S. military rejects our skills and that AIDS research at the National Institutes of Health seems to have stalled.

Not every justification for coming out is political, however. Varnell continues:

And coming out is an act of community benevolence. Each person who comes out makes it slightly easier for the next man or woman by acquainting more people with gays. Remember that we all found it easier to come out because people had come out before us and made the path that much smoother....

Most people picking up a gay newspaper and reading this are probably already out to some people. The goal is to come out to more people—in your family, among your co-workers, your friends and your fellow church members.

He adds a few words of advice for those who choose to come out, on October 11 or any other day:

Avoid a big announcement. Treat any disclosure as casually as possible, as if the other person already knew you were gay and you are just mentioning it explicitly in some context or other. People will take a cue for their own attitude from your attitude.

Try to come out in connection with something positive about yourself, some accomplishment in connection with being gay, so you are inviting the other person to share your happiness.

Immunize yourself against moralistic disapproval. Fight back against it or laugh at it. If someone says they disapprove of homosexuality, simply tell them not to engage in it.

I would add that those of us who came out a long time ago should be more compassionate and understanding of those who have not yet made that step forward in their lives. We should remember what a difficult decision it was to be honest and to shed the shells in which we lived. Opening the closet door is even harder in real life than it is in a South Park episode. Just ask Larry Craig and Mark Foley.

Bill Redpath Speaks at VCU

U.S. Senate candidate Bill Redpath, who is carrying the Libertarian Party's banner in the race to succeed retiring Senator John Warner in Virginia, spoke on Wednesday evening to a receptive audience at Virginia Commonwealth University.

Sponsored by Libertarians at VCU and the student publication, the Broad Street Journal, Redpath's address covered the range of issues being discussed by voters in the run-up to this year's general election, plus more topics that are not the stuff of water-cooler conversations: the economy in general and the Wall Street bailout in particular, free trade, the value of the dollar, Social Security and Medicare, John McCain and Barack Obama, the war on drugs, terrorism, the war in Iraq, gambling, same-sex marriage, and ballot-access laws in Virginia and other states.

As it happens, today (October 9) is Bill Redpath's birthday, and some of his supporters have suggested making contributions to his campaign as a way of conveying happy birthday wishes. There is a secure donation page for credit-card contributions on the Redpath campaign web site.

In the first part of this video recording of Redpath's speech, the candidate is introduced by VCU student (and blogger) Steven C. Latimer, speaking on behalf of the two sponsoring organizations:

Part II:

Part III:

Part IV:

Part V:

Part VI includes an answer to a question I posed about ballot-access laws and what Bill had to do, as a third-party candidate, to get his name on Virginia's general election ballot:

Part VII (the final segment):

Bill Redpath will be appearing in Charlottesville next Thursday, October 16. He will be a guest on "The Schilling Show" on WINA-AM at 1:00 p.m. and he will be speaking at the University of Virginia that evening.

There are three other candidates in the Virginia Senate race: former governors Jim Gilmore (Republican) and Mark Warner (Democrat) and Independent Green candidate Gail Parker, who ran for the Senate seat now held by Jim Webb in 2006.

This Just In: Signature Announces Sondheim Award

This news release from Signature Theatre in Arlington just became available about 35 minutes ago:

Signature Theatre to Honor Stephen Sondheim at Gala Benefit in April

Theatre to pay tribute to composer by establishing annual ‘Sondheim Award’

Arlington, VA − October 6, 2008 – Eric Schaeffer, the Artistic Director of Signature Theatre, tonight announced that Signature will honor Stephen Sondheim at a Gala Benefit in April and establish an annual award as a tribute to America’s most influential contemporary musical theater composer. Signature will salute Mr. Sondheim at a black-tie Gala Celebration on Monday, April 27, 2009, in Washington, DC highlighted by a musical tribute, festive dinner, and dancing and inaugurate an annual honor to be known in future years as The Sondheim Award. The award will be presented to individuals for their career contributions to interpreting, supporting, and collaborating on Sondheim’s musical works. Schaeffer announced the gala and creation of the award at Signature’s second Great American Musicals in Concert benefit performance of Sondheim’s Anyone Can Whistle. Proceeds from the April event will benefit the non-profit Signature Theatre.

“As Signature prepares to celebrate its 20^th anniversary season, we have decided that it is very fitting and appropriate to honor Stephen Sondheim, the composer whose musicals mean so much to us. Through his long collaboration with our company and the 18 Sondheim productions we have presented over the years, Steve’s works have come to be our ‘signature.’ Steve has been a great friend to Signature over the past two decades and we look forward to doing many more presentations of his musicals in the future. I’m thrilled that Steve has agreed to accept this tribute and inaugurate ‘The Sondheim Award’,” stated Schaeffer.

Stephen Sondheim said, “When Signature approached me about creating an award in my name, I was simultaneously flattered, honored and embarrassed – flattered that Signature should think so highly of me, honored because I think so highly of Signature, and embarrassed because I'm pathetically neurotic about being in the spotlight. The fact is that Signature has done me proud over the years, not merely in the frequency with which they have produced musicals I worked on but because the quality of the productions has been so consistently high and inventive. I look forward to being embarrassed when I inaugurate the award this spring.”

For information on sponsorship for The Sondheim Gala, ranging from $2,500 to $50,000, please visit www.signature-theatre.org or contact Signature Theatre at (571) 527-1828.

Stephen Sondheim wrote the music and lyrics for Bounce (2003), Passion (1994), Assassins (1991), Into the Woods (1987), Sunday in the Park with George (1984), Merrily We Roll Along (1981), Sweeney Todd (1979), Pacific Overtures (1976), The Frogs (1974), A Little Night Music (1973), Follies (1971, revised in London 1987 and in New York 2001), Company (1970), Anyone Can Whistle (1964) and A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum (1962); as well as lyrics for West Side Story (1957), Gypsy (1959), Do I Hear a Waltz (1965), and additional lyrics for Candide (1973). Side by Side by Sondheim (1976), Marry Me a Little (1981), You’re Gonna Love Tomorrow (1983), and Putting it Together (1992, 2000) are anthologies of his work. For film he composed the scores for Stravinsky (1974) and Reds (1981) and songs for Dick Tracy (Academy Award, 1990). He wrote the songs for television’s Evening Primrose (1966), co-authored the film The Last of Sheila (1973) and the play Getting Away With Murder (1966), and provided incidental music for the plays The Girls of Summer (1956), Invitation to a March (1961), and Twigs (1971). He won Tony® Awards for Best Score of a Musical for Passion, Into the Woods, Sweeney Todd, A Little Night Music, Follies (1971 version), and Company. All of these shows won the New York Drama Critics Circle Award, as did Pacific Overtures and Sunday in the Park with George, the latter also receiving the Pulitzer Prize for Drama (1985). Mr. Sondheim is on the Council of the Dramatists Guild, having served as its president from 1973 to 1981, and in 1983 was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Letters. In 1990, he was appointed the first Visiting Professor of Contemporary Theatre at Oxford University, and in 1993 was the recipient of the Kennedy Center Honors.

Signature Theatre is nationally renowned for its presentation of Stephen Sondheim’s musicals. Since the 1991-1992 season when the company first mounted Sweeney Todd, Signature has performed Assassins (1992-1993), Company (1993-1994), Into the Woods (1994-1995), Passion (1995-1996), Sunday in the Park with George (1996-1997), A Stephen Sondheim Evening (1997-1998), A Little Night Music (1998-1999), Sweeney Todd (1999-2000), Gypsy (2000-2001), Putting It Together (2000-2001), Company (2000-2001), Follies (2002-2003), A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum (2003-2004), Pacific Overtures (2004-2005), Assassins (2005-2006), Into the Woods (2006-2007), Merrily We Roll Along (2007-2008), and Anyone Can Whistle (2008-2009). Signature’s Eric Schaeffer was the Artistic Director of the Sondheim Celebration at the Kennedy Center in 2002.

ABOUT SIGNATURE

Under the leadership of co-founder and Artistic Director Eric Schaeffer and Managing Director Maggie Boland, Signature is a non-profit professional theater company dedicated to producing contemporary musicals and plays, reinventing classic musicals, and developing new work. To date, Signature has presented over 25 world premiere productions and is renowned for combining Broadway-quality productions with intimate playing spaces. In addition to the finest talent from the DC metropolitan area and New York, Signature has been a home to such theater luminaries as John Kander and Fred Ebb, Cameron Mackintosh, Terrence McNally, as well as Stephen Sondheim. Signature has been nominated for 234 Helen Hayes Awards for excellence in the professional theater and has been honored with 59 Helen Hayes Awards, including Outstanding Musical in 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997, 2000, 2005, and 2006, and Outstanding Play in 1999.

Contact Info
Ticketmaster (703) 573-SEAT (7328)

Signature Administration (571) 527-1860
Signature Theatre
4200 Campbell Avenue
Arlington, VA 22206

http://www.signature-theatre.org

Come On, Get Happy

According to a story in The Hollywood Reporter, the 1970s Friday-night hit from ABC, The Partridge Family, is being resurrected by NBC.

Nellie Andreeva writes:

"The Partridge Family" has found a new network home at NBC.

The Peacock has picked up a contemporary single-camera take on the classic ABC sitcom to be written by Jeff Rake.

It is one of two projects Rake has sold in the past week, along with untitled dramedy at Fox, a collaboration with Mitch Hurwitz to which Anthony and Joe Russo are attached to direct. Both projects have landed script commitments with penalty.

"Partridge" hails from Reveille, Geffen Records and Sony TV.

A fan of the 1970s series, Rake plans to "turn the premise on its head."

"In the original, the kids actually recruited their mom to front the band, which I can't see happening in any family on this planet," he said. "The new version will reflect what seems to me to be the more realistic family band scenario these days: a struggling, sort of well-meaning mom pimping her kids in order to create a wholesome-slash-sexy cash cow."

The Partridge Family was originally part of a must-see Friday-night line-up that included The Brady Bunch, The Odd Couple, and Love, American Style. There was also a half-hour comedy in the mix that never had much of a life -- whether the Bobby Sherman vehicle, Getting Together, or Nanny and the Professor (with Juliet Mills), or the ill-conceived Anna and the King, starring Samantha Eggar and Yul Brynner. (Really, who thought American audiences wanted to watch a stylish period comedy about a Southeast Asian autocrat in the middle of the Vietnam War?) Despite the success of the shows surrounding them, all these series fizzled rather than sizzled.

People might be surprised to learn that The Partridge Family actually had higher ratings than The Brady Bunch, which only achieved its status as a cultural icon later, through years of syndicated reruns in the afterschool hours.

In fact, The Partridge Family's audience grew from its Brady Bunch lead-in. I have a theory to explain this. Who would a teenage boy (or girl) in the early 1970s choose as a fantasy date -- Keith Partridge or Greg Brady? 'Nuff said. (My own preference was always for Danny Partridge, but then he was my age, not older, and I always go for the brainy type. Chacun à son goût.)

I am of that age for which The Partridge Family was an integral part of growing up. I won't embarrass myself by describing the posters on my bedroom wall or my habit of reading Tiger Beat and 16 magazines. But even the most cynical music critics would have to admit that the pop sound of the Partridge Family -- fronted by teen idol David Cassidy with Oscar-winner Shirley Jones singing back-up and driving a psychedelic bus -- had a certain pleasant quality to it. It had a nice beat, and you could dance to it.

Funny thing is, VH1 attempted to bring back The Partridge Family about five years ago, a project that seems to have sunk into the memory hole. Here's The Hollywood Reporter again, via CNN, on November 10, 2003:

An updated version of the 1970s sitcom favorite "The Partridge Family" is being hatched at VH1.

Sony Pictures Television, which holds rights to the popular show about a musical family, will produce a reality series for the cable channel chronicling the casting of the new Partridges as well as a scripted half-hour pilot featuring the winners.

"'The Partridge Family' is a part of pop culture that everyone remembers with tremendous fondness," said Zack Van Amburg, senior vp development and cable programming at SPT. "VH1 is just the right network for this."

I remember the reality-show auditions for that new Partridge Family; but what happened to the series itself?

Let's get the detectives from Without a Trace to investigate.

Dear Leader, Yes We Can!

No comment is necessary, except for crediting Reason.tv with this great mashup celebrating the best (worst?) of Obama-sycophancy.

This video is also available on YouTube, where it will live on and on and on as a reminder to these children about what their well-meaning but muddle-headed parents made them do. (I've passed this along to some Red Diaper Babies of my acquaintance, to give them a dose of nostalgia.)

Warren Coats Talks About the Bailout

The U.S. Senate has approved, by a vote of 74 to 25, a bailout bill. The House of Representatives voted down a similar bill on Monday by a narrow margin, and returns Thursday to consider another version (or versions).

Jake Tapper of ABC News reports:

The Senate tonight overwhelmingly passed the economic rescue package, or Wall Street bailout, as a way of forcing the House of Representatives to take a second vote on the bill, which it rejected in different form earlier this week. ...

Deliberations took place behind the scenes Wednesday, as senators added breaks and sweeteners to their version of the economic rescue plan. ...

The Senate modified the $700 billion financial rescue plan with a provision that gives the Treasury Department the authority to buy troubled mortgage securities.

The bill also now includes an extension of numerous tax breaks for research and development and renewable energy companies, as well as personal tax breaks for college tuition and disaster victims.

It proposes adjusting the Alternative Minimum Tax, so it doesn't hit more than 20 million middle class Americans in 2009.

In the run-up to the House vote earlier this week, economist Warren Coats published two commentaries on the proposed bailout -- one for the Cato Institute, one on his own blog.

In a September 26 article headlined "The D E F's of the Financial Markets Crisis" on Cato.org, Coats explains (citations omitted):

The background to our current financial problems is that the United States as a whole is over-leveraged. There is too much debt and too little saving. Efficient borrowing/lending can be very beneficial, but too little saving for the whole country and for individuals during their working years reduces productive investment and the income growth it produces and increases the economy's vulnerability to shocks. As a nation our net savings rate became negative in 2005 and remained near zero until this year. This has been possible because of high savings rates in the rest of the world and the ability of foreign governments, firms and individuals to invest large amounts of these savings in the United States. Foreigners were willing to invest in the United States (largely in government and private sector debt and to a much lesser extent in equity) for only modest yields because of their confidence in the safety of U.S. investments and they were able to do so because our (previously) overvalued currency (the so called "strong dollar") created a large current account deficit (excess of imports over exports) that foreign investments in the U.S. helped finance.

The inflow of foreign savings has kept interest rates low in the U.S. in recent years. This is a so-called "real" rather than a "monetary" phenomenon. During the period from December of 2001 until November of 2004 the Federal Reserve's overnight interest rate (fed funds rate) target was below 2% and the unusually low interest rates of this period are thought to have fed the housing price bubble. Many have claimed that these low rates were the result of excessively easy monetary policy, but this claim is somewhat contradicted by the evidence. During this period of low interest rates, the broad measure of the money supply (currency plus the public's deposits with banks-M2) grew on average at 6.2%, exactly the same average rate as between 1980 and now. During the shorter period between December 2002 and June 2004, when the fed funds rate was below 1.25%, M2 grew on average at 6.1% per year. However, when the fed funds rate was above 5% from November 1994 through March of 2001 the average growth rate of M2 was 6.4%. The Federal Reserve's adjustments in its interest rate target were largely stabilizing the growth in the money supply. A significantly higher fed funds rate during the 2002 to 2004 period would have resulted in much lower if not negative M2 growth. Interest rates were determined largely by the inflow of foreign saving. Nonetheless, interest rates were negative in real terms (less than the inflation rate) and contributed to market exuberance. A slower than trend M2 growth (and thus higher fed funds rate) might have been more appropriate. Furthermore, M2 began growing in March of 2004, and the Fed should have begun increasing its Fed funds target rate sooner than it did.

Coats, who spent more than 25 years at the International Monetary Fund and has helped some two dozen emerging economies build their banking and currency systems, concludes in his Cato article (citations omitted):

It is appropriate for the government to intervene to restore or preserve stable financial market if doing so saves taxpayers money in the long run. However, such interventions should be well-targeted and should minimize to the extent possible creating moral hazard incentives for financial institutions to take risks with taxpayers' money. We are rapidly reaching the point where the creditworthiness of the United States government itself is coming into question as a result of the growing list of unfunded commitments it has made.

Both private sector and government debt has skyrocketed in recent years. Credit market debt stood at $2.3 trillion in 1990, $6.4 trillion in 2000 and $12.9 trillion at the end of 2007. U.S. government debt (leaving aside state and municipal debt) was $3 trillion in 1990 (51% of total national output that year), $5.8 trillion in 2000 (59% of GDP), and $9.5 trillion (69% of GDP) at the end of June this year. Twenty-eight percent of it ($2.6 trillion) is foreign owned. The Treasury and Federal Reserve have just added a potential additional trillion dollars to this debt with their various rescue actions and proposals. Annual interest on this debt at the 3.8% currently paid for 10-year government bonds (while below the average interest on the debt) would be almost $400 billion or about 14% of the total federal budget. This seems quite manageable until the true deficit including the unfunded liabilities of Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security is calculated. According to Richard Fisher, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, these are ten times the existing debt. Interest payments on the full true debt would exceed total federal tax revenue. Existing government spending promises simply cannot be met. Some mix of reductions in existing entitlements and increases in tax revenue will be required. Our goal should be to minimize the negative impact on economic growth of that mix in order to maximize the additional government revenue arising from a higher tax base.

In a piece on his own blog, called "The Big Bailout: What Next?," Coats -- who was once an assistant professor of economics at the University of Virginia -- writes about a similar financial markets situation in Sweden in the 1990s and how the Swedes addressed it. He concludes:

No convincing evidence has been presented that existing liquidity and bank resolution tools are not up to the job of seeing us through the adjustments to earlier excesses now underway. As long as that remains the case the Federal Reserve and FDIC should continue to rely on them. Should fresh evidence indicate otherwise, the authorities should turn first to increasing deposit insurance limits, establishing a mortgage insurance agency (to replace Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), and only as a last resort the injection of tax payer financed capital into (and thus government take over of) financial institutions judged too big to fail.

Both pieces by Warren Coats are well worth reading in their entirety. Some of the economic jargon might make hard slogging, but he does a good job of putting the current situation in perspective.

The Dangers of Voting

Since I drive around a lot on Election Day -- moving from precinct to precinct, visiting each of Charlottesville's eight polling places, plus the Central Absentee Precinct and the Office of Voter Registration and Elections -- it was a shock to find. out that the most recent scientific studies show that Election Day is hazardous for drivers.

According to HealthDay News:

Driving or walking to the polls on Election Day is a longstanding political tradition in the United States, but new research suggests it might be more dangerous than you think.

After crunching traffic fatality numbers, researchers discovered that Americans were about 18 percent more likely to die in accidents during polling hours on presidential election days than on other Tuesdays.

The increased risk is greater than it is on New Year's Eve or Super Bowl Sunday, the Canadian researchers added.

Reporting on the study, Patti Neighmond of NPR interviewed the study's principal author, Dr. Donald Redelmeier of the University of Toronto, for Morning Edition:

"We studied all the U.S. presidential elections over the last 32 years, beginning with Jimmy Carter in 1976 and ending with George Bush in 2004," he says of the research, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Redelmeier studied the U.S. in particular, he says, because this country maintains excellent statistics on vehicle crashes, noting exactly what time of day, when, where, vehicle, type and other information. He compared the number of crashes, injuries and deaths on Election Day Tuesday to the Tuesdays before and after.

His research revealed an 18 percent increase in motor vehicle deaths on voting day. "This equaled about 24 people [deaths] per election," Redelmeier says, adding that "this was remarkably consistent across different locations and years."

Redelmeier also found that about 800 more people suffered disabling injuries as a result of the crashes. These injuries and deaths far outnumber those reported during times associated with an increase in drinking and driving, such as Super Bowl Sunday and New Year's Eve. Unlike on those days, Redelmeier says, alcohol didn't seem to be an issue on voting day. And the crash rate didn't increase in the evening, when people might be more likely to drink.

An extract of Redelmeier's original article can be found on JAMA's website; subscribers can see the full article.

Do as O Says, Not as O Does?

The Obama for President campaign is running a TV ad in Virginia that highlights the policy differences between Barack Obama and his principal opponent, Republican nominee John McCain, on the issue of equal pay for equal work.

Politico, the newspaper for political geeks, has posted a video of this ad to YouTube:

New York-based journalist Deroy Murdock has looked beneath the surface of these claims and has discovered that when it comes to equal pay for male and female employees, Senator Barack Obama is better at talking the talk than walking the walk.

His running mate, Delaware Senator Joseph Biden, also talks a good game but fails to deliver in his own practice as an employer.

But -- surprise -- Arizona Senator John McCain is better at delivering the goods than he is at talking about equal pay issues.

Here's what Murdock found in his research for an article on National Review Online, first with regard to Senator Obama:

Based on calculations using Senate pay records posted by LegiStorm.com, a political transparency organization, between October 1, 2007 and March 31, 2008, Obama’s 28 male staffers divided among themselves total payroll expenditures of $1,523,120. Thus, Obama’s average male employee earned $54,397 on an annualized basis.

Obama’s 30 female employees split $1,354,580 among themselves, or $45,152, on average.

Among Obama’s top five highest-paid — and likely most senior — employees, one was female. Among his top 20, seven were women.

All told, for every dollar that Obama paid his average male staffer, his female counterpart made just 83 cents.

Here are Murdock's findings about Senator Biden's office practices:

As for Biden, his 14 male staffers split a total payroll outlay of $1,077,128.40. So, Biden’s average male employee earned $76,937.74 per annum.

Biden’s 27 female employees divided $1,517,874.47, or $56,217.57, on average.

Among Biden’s top five highest-paid aides, one was a woman. Among the top 20, 11 were women.

All told, for every dollar that Biden paid his average male staffer, his female equivalent made only 73 cents.

Why are these numbers important? Murdock explains:

This number is significant. Not only does Biden discount women by more than a quarter per dollar paid to men, on average. Biden collides into the standard by which his own campaign berates major companies for alleged pay discrimination.

Beneath the website banner “Fighting for Pay Equity,” Obama-Biden’s women’s issues page complains that, “Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices.”

Biden actually pays his average female employees four cents less than the level that triggers outrage on his own campaign’s website!

So what did Murdock find out, based on publicly available data, about John McCain's senate office employees? Here's the shocking evidence about McCain:

McCain’s 17 male staffers split $916,914, thus averaging $53,936. His 25 female employees divided $1,396,958 and averaged $55,878.

On average, these figures show, women in John McCain’s Senate office make $1.04 for every dollar a man makes — a full 31 cents higher than Biden pays. (For detailed figures see this chart. I outline my methodology in my previous piece.)

What do they say about people who live in glass houses?