}

Friday, February 29, 2008

Leap Day

Since this February has an extra day, I decided to postpone today’s podcast, kinda like a woman can propose marriage today (like she couldn't otherwise—sheesh, this is the 21st century already!). Okay, it's nothing like that. In fact, it's a lie. I was just too busy. But the podcast is still delayed.

The games begin

Last week, I wrote about Republican spin, and talked about one of the tactics they’ll use against Barack Obama, should he become the Democratic presidential nominee. This week, they’ve done exactly as I predicted.

Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain was introduced in Ohio by a far-right radio host who several times referred to Obama as “Barack Hussein Obama,” in a clear effort to make voters think Obama is Muslim when he’s not. McCain later apologised for the radio head’s remarks, but did it matter? He got double bang for his buck: He got a surrogate to smear Obama and he got to seem all reasonable by apologising. Sweet deal.

The irony in all this, as Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn pointed out, is that this tactic was too low even for Alan Keyes, whom Illinois Republicans imported to run against Obama for the US Senate. In that campaign, Keyes said a lot of right-wing nonsense, and he publicly doubted that Obama was a real Christian, but he never used Obama’s middle name. Why? Zorn reported that Keyes’ campaign management steered Keyes away from the tactic because it was "rude, uncivil, needlessly provocative and incendiary."

Even Karl Rove, Bush’s “architect,” and the undisputed master of the dark art of negative campaigning and sleaze, nevertheless advised his fellow Republicans not to go down the “Hussein” road because it would sound like a bald appeal to bigots. This is one time Rove was right.

If this were all about some small-market right-wing radio guy, it would be no big deal. But most of the Republican spin machine has begun targeting Obama. Right-wing darling Ann Coulter refers to Obama as “B. Hussein Obama”. An editor at the National Review has tried to link Obama to domestic US terrorists because, basically, Obama used to live in the same neighbourhood as ex-members of the “Weather Underground”. He must therefore publicly repudiate them, and every other aging leftist radical of the 1960s, though apparently McCain doesn’t have to repudiate right wing terrorists who blow up abortion clinics and gay bars.

We can see three things from all this. First, the Republicans have decided that Obama will be their opponent in November. Second, that they think no one will notice if they use smear and sleazy tactics—again—to try and hoodwink Americans into voting for them.

Mainly, this shows us how utterly intellectually bankrupt the Republican Party is that they have to use spin, smear and sleaze to make up for their total lack of substance or marketable ideas. After all, what are they asking Americans to vote for? Health care only for those who can afford it, permanent tax cuts for the super rich, a 100 year war in Iraq they started based on lies, illegal spying on American citizens, sweetheart deals for Republican-connected businesses, the list goes on and on.

Americans want change. They don’t want another four years of the failed Bush-Cheney policies, and the only way to avoid a re-run is to vote Democratic. The question now is whether the media will let the Republican Party get away with using the same tactics Karl Rove originally taught them, or if the media will stand up to them and demand substance.

The Democrats will win any battle based on reality, substance and the issues.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

AmeriNZ 75 – Big Bucks


Episode 75 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

On today’s episode, we have big money in New Zealand. That’s up first. Then, a German backpacker got in trouble and had to clean up. Another backpacker cleaned-up financially. Apple’s iPhone maybe illegal in Australia. It was the NZ Prime Minister’s birthday yesterday. The NZ election draws near, and that means some political talk, both about NZ and the US. Comments round out this episode.

Don’t forget to listen to or download my older episodes! My first anniversary of podcasting is at the end of March.

The New Zealand dollar today hit a new 23-year high against the US dollar. Experts are now predicting that the Kiwi dollar will hit 85 US cents, or higher.

Jan Philip Scharbert, a 28-year-old German backpacker from Munich was caught after he tagged (sprayed graffiti) a rock wall and the ice of Franz Josef Glacier in the South Island. They made him clean off his graffiti.

But another backpacker, probably from Australia, won $1 million in the NZ lottery on his second day in New Zealand. He bought the ticket on impulse, and now won’t be picking fruit to earn some money, as he’d planned.

Speaking of Australia, the Apple iPhone may be illegal in Australia. The problem is that it would normally be illegal to tie purchasers of the iPhone to only one service provider, as the company has done in other countries.

Yesterday was the birthday of Helen Clark, the Prime Minister of New Zealand. She turned 58. The government she leads is now in its third term and faces an election later this year, probably October. The NZ Labour Party, which she leads, is currently trailing the conservative National Party in the polls, but it’s too early to count Labour out. Another lesbian is entering Parliament as an MP.

I don’t like Ralph Nader. I think that John McCain has credibility problems. Both give me a chance for a mini-rant.

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

Big Fatty Online

“I’m Sorry” by Roger Green


Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Embarrassment of riches

I’ve almost felt sorry for Republicans this year. Their entire field started out without a single candidate I’d consider for even one second. Apparently, many Republicans felt the same way, with many deciding to stay home or expressing only lukewarm support for any of the candidates, including especially their now presumptive nominee, John McCain.

Democrats, on other hand, had a wealth of excellent candidates. I could have supported any of the top three, Edwards, Clinton or Obama. When Edwards dropped out (after I already mailed off my ballot for the Illinois Democratic Primary, in which I’d voted for him), I became “uncommitted” because I can support either Clinton or Obama.

A New York Times poll has shown that a majority of Democratic voters feel the same way I do:

Democratic…primary voters indicated they saw few substantive differences between their candidates on issues like the war in Iraq and health care. Most have confidence in both candidates to handle the economy, the war in Iraq and an international crisis. And large numbers think it is likely that either candidate would make an effective commander in chief.

Unfortunately, some Democrats feel differently. I couldn’t help but notice that the strongest, most intense feelings I’ve seen on the Interwebs have been among Clinton supporters who spend a lot of time complaining about and belittling Obama supporters. The poll suggests why:

[Clinton’s] supporters are, in general, more committed; nearly 8 in 10 of Mrs. Clinton’s backers said they strongly favored her, while 6 in 10 of Mr. Obama’s supporters strongly favored him. Only 18 percent of her supporters backed her with reservations; about a third of Mr. Obama’s supporters said they had reservations about their candidate.

To win in November, those who strongly favour the losing candidate must transfer their support to the winning one. Democrats have a history of letting petty differences get in the way of focusing on the real objective, which is defeating the Republicans. Petty bickering allows spoilers to wreak havoc, as Ralph Nader did in 2000, delivering a Republican president.

The poll found that 8 in 10 Republicans are satisfied with McCain as their nominee. This increasing unity among Republicans will make it far easier for the party to use every Karl Rove tactic at their disposal to retain power, aided and abetted by Ralph Nader sniping at the Democrats at every opportunity.

To defeat the Republicans, Democrats must unite and focus on preventing another four years of Bush-Cheney policies. The stakes are too high to do anything else.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Scare tactics again

The Bush-Cheney regime is again revving up their favourite spin machine, spewing scare tactics with reckless abandon. This time, it’s over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but it’s the same nonsense they’ve tried for the past seven years.

FISA is a thirty-year old law that governs how the president can spy on people on US soil. Under FISA, the president needs a warrant to spy. The Bush-Cheney regime found obeying the law too restrictive and ordered illegal wiretaps, without a court order.

The regime convinced telecommunications companies to help with the illegal spying, and that’s what the current battle is all about. The Bush-Cheney regime wants to retroactively grant telecommunications companies immunity from prosecution.

This is a typical of the Bush-Cheney regime’s above-the-law mentality, but no one—including them—should be able to flout the law and get away with it. Their cry that telecommunications companies won’t help them spy without this legal dodge is utter nonsense: Telcos will cooperate as they did before the Bush-Cheney regime—in accordance with law, pursuant to warrants. If they refuse, they can be prosecuted.

The companies would have known that what the Bush-Cheney regime was asking was illegal—that’s why they all employ armies of lawyers. They should have refused to spy without a warrant, but instead they broke the law and they must be held accountable for that, just as the Bush-Cheney regime must be.

But the regime is also trying to frame Democrats as preventing spying on terrorists, which is an outright lie. The old FISA law—including the requirement that warrants be obtained—is again in force. There’s no need for Congress to do anything, but there’s a moral, legal and constitutional obligation for them to stand up to the Bush-Cheney scare tactics.

The Bush-Cheney regime has successfully used scare tactics in the past, most notably to win the 2002 midterm elections and the 2004 presidential election. This time, though, Congress isn’t being run by the rubber-stamp Republicans, and he may not get his way.

Given the Bush-Cheney regime’s belief in dictatorial powers of the presidency (a subject in itself), it’s probable that they’re conducting illegal spying right now. The difference is that without immunity from prospection, telecommunications companies are unlikely help them break the law.

As long as Congressional Democrats remain firm in their resolve to stand up for the rule of law, this stand-off can be carried on until a new president is sworn in. Not a perfect solution, but probably the best we can hope for until this rogue regime is gone.

Monday, February 25, 2008

Retire, Republican Ralph

Once again Ralph Nader is launching a presidential campaign he can’t possibly win. Why? What can he possibly hope to achieve, apart from helping John McCain? The fact is, while Nader can’t win, he could very well deliver us four more years of Bush-Cheney policies.

Not many people aside from his most fervent supporters would call Nader a likeable person, which raises his first problem: To win, he’d need to convince tens of millions of people to vote for him, rather than the candidates of the two main parties. He simply can’t do that. There are too many people who dislike him, and his lack of warmth won’t attract new voters to make up the difference.

Then there’s the arithmetic: No third party candidate has won the presidency since Abraham Lincoln in 1860, and it’s probably impossible for Nader to do so. He’d have to, first, qualify for the ballot in states with enough Electoral Votes to win, and it’s doubtful he can. Then, he’d have to convince at least a plurality of the voters in all those states to vote for him, which I don’t believe he can do (see above).

What Nader can do is siphon off enough votes in close states to deliver those states to McCain and the Republicans, just as he helped deliver Florida to Bush in 2000. But even when he doesn’t do that, he helps to weaken the Democratic nominee by reinforcing Republican propaganda that the Democrats and their candidate are bad. This he did in both 2000 and 2004, helping the Bush campaign again.

Democrats and Republicans alike know all this. Among Republican candidates, Mike Huckabee was at least honest about it when he told CNN "I think it always would probably pull votes away from the Democrats and not the Republicans, so naturally, Republicans would welcome his entry into the race."

Indeed, in 2004 the Democratic Party worked openly to keep Nader off state ballots and it was common knowledge that the Republican Party funded efforts to get Nader on them. They will spare no expense to help Nader this time, either, because his campaign will help theirs.

If Ralph really cares about America as he says he does, and if he really wants to see the country change as he claims, then he ought to do the right thing and stop helping to elect Republicans. Retire, Ralph. America doesn’t need you, and the people who want to see freedom restored to America don’t want you. But the Republicans do.

Friday, February 22, 2008

AmeriNZ 74 – Short subjects


Episode 74 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Today’s is a short episode, and that relates to my first topic: I’m running out of storage space on Podomatic, so I’ll soon take down my earliest episodes. If you ever wanted to listen to or download them, now’s the time! In about a week or so, I’ll be deleting my earliest episodes.

Okay, so I messed up some things on the answers to the questions on the last episode. Deal with it! Did you know that the light in New Zealand and Australia is different? Researchers say that it is and matters. Our petrol is bloody expensive compared to America. A conference was held in New Zealand to ban cluster bombs. The USA boycotted the meeting. Surprise! The United Kingdom may soon cut off residency access to some Commonwealth citizens. Comments including a voice letter round out this episode. Nigel will be back!

Don’t forget to listen to or download my older episodes!

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

Britain set to abolish Kiwi ancestry visa

Ramble Redhead

Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

A new media victim?

Yesterday I wrote about Republican spin against a Democratic candidate. Today we have evidence the media can be guilty of questionable behaviour, too—or do we?

The New York Times, often called the most important newspaper in America, ran a story quoting unnamed sources saying that presumed Republican nominee John McCain may—or may not—have had a romantic (meaning sexual) affair with a lobbyist, and this is what the media focused on. McCain, of course, denied the allegations.

The right wing media immediately spun this as the evil “liberal” New York Times picking on McCain. Was it really?

To be sure, their focus on a personal relationship between McCain and the lobbyist—attributed to anonymous sources—was hardly defensible. But the larger issue here is whether or not McCain used his position to try and influence public policy to the benefit of the clients of that lobbyist. That simple question has been lost in the aftermath. CBS News reported that the McCain campaign was pleased with itself, having shifted the focus onto the New York Times itself.

I have to admit that initially I was all ready to accept the right wing spin about this being the New York Times beating up on McCain. But when I thought about it on my own—without filtering—I saw things differently. Did McCain try and influence public policy on behalf of private interests? The public has a right to know, no matter how imperfectly the New York Times raised the question.

Answer, McCain: Don’t try and shift the focus.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Things to come

There’s been a lot of media nonsense directed at both the Democratic US Presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Whichever one of them is the nominee can expect more of the same, much of it directed by the Republican Party and campaign.

Two recent incidents hint at what’s to come. Though these apply specifically to Barack Obama, similar tricks have been played against Hillary Clinton, and would be if she wins the nomination. The point here is the tactic, not the person.

First, Barack Obama’s wife Michelle was attacked by Republicans for saying she’d never been proud of her country. Trouble is, that’s not what she said. In the context of talking about her husband’s campaign, she said:

Let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change.

She was clearly talking about her husband’s campaign and, specifically, voters’ response to it. And, it seems to me, the word “really” is significant—that doesn’t imply the previous absence of pride, just that this pride is special. Nevertheless, the Republican spin began immediately, implying she was somehow disloyal or anti-American. Trying to capitalise on the Republican propaganda, John McCain’s wife echoed it—twice—in an effort to reinforce the party spin.

Later that same day, on MSNBC’s “Hardtalk”, a graphics technician momentarily flashed a photo of Osama bin Laden as Chris Matthews talked about Barack Obama. Matthews immediately apologised and MSNBC, saying "This mistake was inexcusable," claims to be taking the error seriously. This sort of thing has happened before, and often suspiciously conveniently.

So when syndicated columnist Barbara Wallraff complained, "Don't we have other things to complain about?" I raised an eyebrow. AP television writer David Bauder wrote:

Wallraff noted how changing one letter can also transform "Bush" to "bust" or "lush." She said the spell-check on one of her computer programs always suggests "Osama" as a substitute when she types "Obama." It's far different if something like this is done intentionally, she said.

That would be true if there wasn’t such enormous political capital for Republicans if they can confuse the two people in voters’ minds. In such a context, it’s difficult to believe that all of these are “slips of the tongue”, or the equivalent, as we are meant to believe.

These are mere shadows of what is to come, no matter who the Democratic nominee is. All of us must be on our guard against Republican spin being treated as legitimate. Certainly I’ll be doing whatever I can to expose Republican tricks. It seems the price of liberty really is eternal vigilance.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

AmeriNZ 73 – Rambles


Episode 73 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Today’s episode is a ramble through miscellany, inspired by a recent podcast from Tom, the Ramble Redhead, in which he answered questions he received in an email. You’ll probably know me a bit better after listening. I also steal an idea from another of Tom’s podcasts: Playing a bunch of clips from other podcasters talking about me (because, ya know, I can).

A little New Zealand news rounds out the episode, including some gay news. Then it’s comments to finish, along with an update to Episode 72.

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

Podcast clips featured (links are to the episodes clipped): Feast of Fools, We’re Mean Because You’re Stupid, Ongline Podcast, My Gay Two Cents, ArcherRadio, Big Fatty Online, Ramble Redhead.

Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Monday, February 18, 2008

Book meme challenges

Blogging buddies or whatever the word is (I've often wondered what to call someone you know but don't know, you know?) Nik and Lost in France have issued a couple book meme challenges. I don't normally do memes (and how many times have you read that on a blog, just before the blogger does one?), but since I recently started the Book Talk series of posts—and haven’t posted much to it—the meme seemed appropriate. So, here we go.

Nik’s challenge

1. One book that changed your life?
Dracula by Bram Stoker. It was the first grown-up book I ever read and, curiously, the only “horror” book I've ever read. I was around 11 or 12 at the time and home from school sick so I inhaled the entire book in about two days—an achievement I've never matched, I don't think. This book told me in a way no teacher ever could about the power of the printed word. A close second would be 1984 by George Orwell, which I read in the same era, because even, though I found it really hard going, it kind of laid the groundwork for my grown-up politics.

2. One book you have read more than once?
I don't re-read books, mostly because it takes me a long time to get through them in the first place (I'm a slow reader), but I do re-read short stories. However, one novel I did re-read was To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee (both times I read it was for classes). A book I re-read on my own was Annie Proulx's novella, Brokeback Mountain, because it's short and because the movie was being made and I knew I’d finish re-reading it before the movie came out (I did, by the way).

3. One book you would want on a desert island?
I think I need to choose a series: “Tales of the City” by Armisted Maupin. Light, easy-going and thoroughly entertaining, like spending time with a fun group of friends. These will, one day, be books I re-read.

4. One book that made you laugh?
I can't think of a book that made me laugh throughout it, though there have been parts of many books, like the “Tales of the City” series, that have had me laughing from time to time. I generally stick to more serious subjects or non-fiction.

5. One book that made you cry?
Books may not have me laughing all that much, but neither do they make me cry. Still, like laughter, there have been teary moments in several books, like the “Tales” series, Brokeback Mountain and others.

6. One book you wish had been written?
This is an odd question. I mean some people might choose a sequel to a favourite novel, or maybe just one more book by a favourite, but now dead, author. I'll be more mundane. I wish there was a comprehensive history of the GLBT communities in New Zealand, especially from the 1980s onward.

7. One book you wish had never had been written?
I have to echo Nik here, too, and say all the right-wing bullshit books. Pick any one—no self-respecting pile of dog poo would be wrapped in them. I've been lucky: I've never read a book that was that bad.

8. One book you are currently reading?
Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy by Charlie Savage. Did I say I never read another horror book? This comes close.

9. One book you have been meaning to read?
Actually, there are several I've been meaning to finish, which is probably worse. When I get bored with a book—or just too busy—I stop reading it. Starting other books is lower on the list for me than finishing what I started reading, but somehow new books manage to jump the queue, anyway.

10. Now tag five people.
Nope. Anyone who wants to do the meme, be my guest (and please let me know you did). But I’m not getting into that whole meme madness more than I already have.

Lost in France’s Page 123 Challenge

One more meme challenge before I stop: "Pick up a book on the top of your book stack, turn to page 123, read the first five sentences, then post the next three sentences on your blog."

Everyone seems to be interpreting this to mean the book they’re reading at the moment, and for me that’s “Takeover” (see number 8, above). I also counted the incomplete sentence at the top of the page (only one word was on the previous page…). So:

“But even for believers in inherent executive authority, there remained an obstacle to maximum presidential power. An inherent executive power is not the same thing as an exclusive executive power. It’s one thing to say that if necessity arises, the president can direct government to do something that was not specifically authorized to do by the Constitution or federal statute—monitoring phone calls that touch U.S. soil in search of spies and terrorists, for example.”

And now you now why I don’t do these memes.

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Diversity with an asterisk

The Washington Post published a story entitled “Southern Baptists Diversifying to Survive”. The third paragraph read:

Faced with a crisis of aging and departing members, the nation's largest non-Catholic Christian bodies—Southern Baptists, United Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians—are reaching out to minorities in ways they never have before.

As you might expect, by “minorities” the WaPo’s reporter, Jacqueline L. Salmon, meant only racial minorities, African-Americans in particular. The bulk of the article deals with the supposed increase in participation by African Americans in the US’ Southern Baptist Convention, a church that, whatever it may be now, began life as a church for pro-slavery and racist Southerners.

All of the churches listed have kept their distance from—or openly expressed their contempt for—gay and lesbian members. Clearly the “diversity” the “largest non-Catholic Christian bodies” are seeking has limits.

My own journey away from Christianity began when the denomination of my childhood—the Lutheran Church—took measures to exclude lesbian and gay clergy. That told me that the church didn’t want or need me as a member, and in time I realised that I didn’t need them.

Nothing much has improved in the years since. This supposed “reaching out to minorities,” since it excludes GLBT people, sounds not only hollow but also pretty self-serving as the churches struggle to survive.

Personally, I think that some real diversity—inclusive diversity—could help the old churches to grow, not just stop their decline. But maybe that’s one prayer than can’t be answered.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Is the Force with us?



This video is about the same general thing as my post a few days ago. (Thanks to both Joe.My.God and This Boy Elroy, where I found this),

AmeriNZ 72 – Reconciliation


Episode 72 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

I begin with a discussion of the Australian Prime Minister finally saying “sorry” to Aborigines. After a sound clip and some explanation, I include the special perspective of a guest commentator, an Australian who talks about how this was received, then about the topic of compensation and more. How does all this compare to New Zealand? From there it’s on to a talk about iTunes and a real surprise. That gives me a chance to tell you a bit more about where I’m coming from. Comments round out today’s episode.

From my perspective, this is what podcasts are all about—real people talking about what’s really happening, without the mainstream media filtering it. Let me know what you think.

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

AmeriNZ 71 – Nik the AmeriAuck


Episode 71 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Joining me today is Nik Dirga, a journalist and a fellow American ex-pat who lives in Auckland (which makes him an AmeriAuck) with his wife and son. This is the first time I’ve had a chat with another American living in Auckland. We talk about Nik’s experiences as an expat, what his impressions of New Zealand are, and how all that relates to others who may be thinking of becoming an expat.

Check out Nik’s blog, Spatula Forum, where there’s a link to his book, Also called Spatula Forum.

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

When “liberal” means “good”

Today a rising MP in the NZ National Party, Katherine Rich, announced she won’t stand in the next election. I always thought she was a tough opponent for the Labour Party, and would make a formidable obstacle to Labour’s re-election.

But I also respected her because she was in the centre of the otherwise conservative National Party, and her centrism couldn’t have been easy. Her being a moderate made former leader Don Brash demote her when she couldn’t go along with some his Party’s more draconian anti-welfare proposals. I immediately wondered if her departure means the party is shifting firmly to the right again.

What struck me about the coverage was that many reporters were talking about her departure as a blow to the National Party because she’s a liberal. In other words, they were saying being liberal is a good thing. How very different from my homeland.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Faster?

I eliminated a couple widgets (Amazon and my Frappr map) to make the page load faster. So, has it worked, or do I need to eliminate more?

You can still get to my Frappr Map by clicking on the link, and I’ll include occasional links to Amazon products as part of posts. But hopefully eliminating widgets will speed up the page.

Curious timing

Some recent events have had awfully curious timing. Actually, “convenient” might be a better word.

The Bush-Cheney Justice Department announced that it was filing charges against alleged spies who they claim sold secrets to China.

Also, the Bush-Cheney Pentagon has announced that it’s filing charges against six people allegedly behind the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The Bush-Cheney administration has held prisoners in Cuba without charge or trial for years, but now they suddenly decide to bring them to an unconstitutional military tribunal. Why now?

Meanwhile, Fox “News” Channel was reporting over the weekend on the theft of two diesel tanker trucks, always mentioning the possibility that they’d been stolen by “terrorists”. They reported that unnamed terrorists said they wanted to steal such tankers to use as bombs. Fox commentators always talked down that possibility—after they raised it to talk about, thereby creating the fear in viewers’ minds that the thefts were part of a plot (authorities say that plain theft of the fuel was the motive).

I’m certainly cynical and distrustful of everything that the Bush-Cheney regime and its hard-right allies do, but all of this is awfully convenient for the Republican nominee. The tribunal proceedings will likely begin during the campaign in which their nominee will attempt to paint himself as tougher on terrorism. Reminding Americans of the 9/11 attacks, the Republicans think, will help their candidate. The charges against the alleged “spies” is similarly intended to make Americans fearful of hidden enemies, as is hyping talk of an imaginary terrorism-related theft.

All of this is classic Rovian fear-mongering, intended to scare the shit out of Americans so they vote Republican. With their probable nominee being fought by hard-right conservatives, and in trouble with the centre for saying that Americans don’t care if the Iraq war goes on for another hundred, thousand or ten thousand years. Republican campaign plotters realise they need to deflect attention.

The question is, will Americans be fooled again?

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Climbing the iTunes page

Last month, when my AmeriNZ Podcast made the front page among featured Personal Journal podcasts on the iTunes Music Store (USA), I was pretty thrilled. I even blogged about it.

Since then, I’ve been saying that it was only a matter of time before I dropped off the featured page, because there are some podcasts coming along that will be far more popular than mine. I still think that. However, when I looked at the US version of the iTunes Music Store yesterday, I found my podcast had actually moved up (screenshot above). Who’d have guessed that?

I’m up to 21 5-star reviews at the moment, and they’re part of the reason I’ve moved up on the featured page. Thanks to that, I’ve also gained new listeners, and that also helps the positioning of my podcast. So, those people who have written me a review have helped my podcast’s audience to grow.

I can’t thank the reviewers enough for taking the time to leave 5-star reviews. They have all been generous and kind, and some have been downright surprising. I appreciate each and every one. Others have clicked “yes” to the question “Was this review helpful?” and that helps, too.

And, in case you want to leave a review of your own, just click here and you’ll be re-directed to the iTunes Music Store (you do have to have the iTunes player installed first). If that doesn't work, just type "AmeriNZ Podcast" in your iTunes search window, and it'll take your there. As I said last month, I’ll never ask for a donation or cash support of any kind—not that there’s anything wrong with that, it’s just not what I do. So, if you want to support my podcast, this is a way you can do it.

Thanks again!

Friday, February 08, 2008

AmeriNZ 70 - Political clarity


Episode 70 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Another podcaster and Jason again join me for a political chat as we try and bring a little clarity to recent events. Mitt Romney has suspended his campaign: What does that means for McCain and the Republicans? Super Tuesday produced no clear winner for Democrats, but does that mean that we’re heading for a brokered convention? Pundits and spin: There was plenty of that on the Super Tuesday coverage. Who might be the vice presidential candidates for the two parties? All that and plenty of opinion, too.

Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

I’m also part of the podcaster’s group shows this week (those episodes are no longer available).

Links for this episode:


Jason’s View from DC


Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Super confusers

I watched the “Super Tuesday” US election coverage on CNN and was fascinated by the way it unfolded. I liked the speeches of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, hated Romney’s and Huckabee’s and practically fell asleep when McCain was talking.

But what startled me was how the narrative of the “talking heads” changed as the night wore on. All night long, the pundits were saying that McCain didn’t get his “knock-out blow” to emerge as the Republican nominee. Eventually, they allowed that he was the front-runner, but nothing more. This continued right until the last hour when suddenly the Republican-aligned pundits all started saying that McCain was the “presumptive” Republican nominee, that Romney and Huckabee couldn’t win the nomination, and that the party could now start to unite around McCain.

What happened? Did they all suddenly get a talking points memo telling them to push the narrative that the party was uniting behind McCain? Only moments earlier they’d been talking about how prominent conservatives in the Republican Party hate McCain and have declared they won’t support him. But after assuring us that McCain is a “real conservative”, they started the narrative that McCain is the nominee and Republicans will unite.

This narrative is clearly in the Republicans’ interest, just as their narrative about Democrats being “deeply divided” is. But the fact is, Democrats, despite their present differences, are united in their determination to take the country back from the ideologues that tried to destroy it. Republicans, meanwhile, are busy trying to out-conservative each other and pander to religious and political extremes.

I’m glad the Republicans are so divided and belligerent. It will help ordinary American voters see how the party represents only a continuation of Bush-Cheney’s failed policies. The country wants change, and only Democrats can deliver it. No phony narrative can cover up that simple truth.

Grab a word


In celebration of Waitangi Day, Air New Zealand’s “Grab A Seat” specials site featured all domestic NZ destinations with their Maori names (for example, Tamaki-makau-rau is Auckland, as in the screen cap above; embiggen to make it a bit more readable). I thought it was a nice gesture, even though I know that the whingers and moaners who call talkback radio and write letters to the editor of newspapers probably hated it. But New Zealand has two official languages—English and Te Reo Maori. What’s wrong with remembering that, especially on our national day?

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

AmeriNZ 69 – Changes


Episode 69 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

America is ready for change. I wouldn’t change NZ for anywhere. A NZ-US free trade deal is in the works again. Or not. The changes to my blog have started. You’ll be able to relax.

Tomorrow is Waitangi Day, New Zealand's national holiday. It marks the day the Treaty of Waitangi was signed. So, I'll be able to watch the US election results from Super Tuesday. America desperately needs change, and what’s important is that we stay focused on that.

New Zealand is a great place to live, so don’t believe all the newspaper propaganda about Australia being better for Kiwis. A NZ-US free trade deal as part of a package with other nations may be considered by the US. But it’s limited. Finally, I update the changes to my blog and give you some rest.

I’m recording a new political discussion via Skype on Thurday, February 7, at 7:30pm EST (US) time. You're welcome to join us.


Leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode: Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Change America

America is only hours away from “Super Tuesday” in which voters in half the US states will select delegates to their parties’ presidential nominating conventions. What’s becoming increasingly clear is that Americans, regardless of party, want change. The question becomes, who is best positioned to deliver that change?

I feel strongly that there’s one certainty: Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are better than any of the Republican contenders. The only way that change will happen is if a Democrat is elected president in November along with solid Democratic majorities in both houses of the US Congress.

The Republican Party wants to keep things as they are. All their candidates talk about doing what George Bush has done, only more so in some cases. None of the Republicans will bring us change.

So if we want to change America, to restore its promise and its good name, then the answer is clear: We must vote for change, we must focus on change, and we must keep our eyes on the prize—the restoration of America. That’s what’s really at stake for American voters.

NZ Herald: No poof teachers?

The New Zealand Herald reported in a story today that a survey of primary school principals in New Zealand found that “many primary school principals believe male primary teachers should be heterosexual, rugby-playing ‘real men’”.

Really?

Nowhere does the article present any evidence to back its opening claim. It reports “the main reason [more male teachers were needed] was to meet the needs of single-parent children. Seven per cent specifically mentioned the need for a ‘father figure’… Sports leadership was the second most cited reason why more male role models were needed in schools.”

And this indicates homophobia how, exactly? Instead of providing supporting evidence, the article uses a great deal of space to quote people saying how the results seemed “strange” and how sexual nature was the "absolutely wrong thing to focus on". Most of the quotes went to the study’s author decrying homophobia and sexism in schools.

The survey was based on a mere 169 responses out of 250 sent out beginning three years ago. Apparently the Herald’s reporters have no idea how flawed that is as a survey—which is how they reported it. If they want readers to accept their take on the survey, they should have reported the true results and not just quoted the study author extensively to “prove” something that, we must assume, the actual results did not.

If the Herald writers had presented even a shred of evidence to back their claim, then this post might be about the substance of the study. But with such truly awful reporting I can only—once again—criticise the Herald for apparently manufacturing a story where none exists.

Of course, I’ve criticized the Herald before for apparently manufacturing news. Somehow, I doubt this will be the last time.

Saturday, February 02, 2008

AmeriNZ 68 - John Ong is everywhere


Episode 68 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

New Zealand’s clean and green is a bit faded. A NZ website has a bout of homophobia, while an American comedian will go pink for New Zealand. If you’re happy and you know it, you’re probably not 44. I give you a chance to make fun of me. And, John Ong is everywhere.

The NZ government’s newest report on the environment, Environment New Zealand 2007, has found that things aren’t all that great with NZ’s environment (read the NZ Herald story or the Stuff story).

In NZ we have a press agency called the NZPA for news-sharing among New Zealand media, and sometimes overseas. The main news websites carry the reports—sometimes exactly the same.

There was an NZPA report that a man was sexually attacked at a public toilet in Christchurch. The NZ Herald website correctly headlined their story, “Man sexually attacked and robbed in toilet block”. But rival stuff.co.nz headlined their version, “Manhunt for toilet block gay sex attacker”.

I fired off a complaint to Stuff, pointing out that there’s no such thing as a "gay sex attack" (or even a "homosexual sex attack"); sex attacks are the actions of violent, depraved individuals who may or may not be heterosexual or homosexual. Sex attacks are crimes of violence, not sex. I said that by using the word "gay" they reinforced negative stereotypes of gay men generally, including the myth that they prey on "innocent victims".

On the brighter side, an American comedian will be turning pink for New Zealand.

Speaking of happiness, did you know there's a sort of universal path of happiness over a lifetime? Does it relate to my life?

Two new podcasts are starting up.

I'm going to put a link to my Frappr map, but take away the map widget because my blog is taking too long to load, so I'll be removing most of them. So, leave a pin while it's still easy to do! To round-out the tech talk, I give an iTunes update plus give two new email addresses you can use.

I’m recording a new political discussion via Skype on Thurday, February 7, at 7:30pm EST (US) time. You're welcome to join us.

Please leave a comment. Or, you can email a comment to comment(at]amerinz.com, or send a personal email to me (won’t be read on the podcast) to arthur{at)amerinz.com. You can also still use my other address, amerinz[at) yahoo.com or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Links for this episode

We're Mean Because You're Stupid

There Are Some Who Call Me Tim episode on Big Fatty's new podcast

Big Fatty Online

John Ong's Ongline Podcast


Blue Savannah by Erasure iTunes USA Store or iTunes NZ Store. You can also buy Blue Savannah through Amazon.com.


Get AmeriNZ Podcast for free on iTunes

Friday, February 01, 2008

Tourism promotes AmeriNZ


Okay, so Tourism NZ didn't really promote this blog. But in recent weeks by far the most common “accidental” path to my blog has been from searches for the latest NZ tourism TV commercial featuring the song “Forever Young”. So, in a blatant attempt to keep such searches landing here, I've embedded the YouTube version of the commercial above.

For those who missed it, awhile back Tourism NZ introduced a new commercial featuring graphics from Peter Jackson's Weta Digital and the song “Forever Young”. That song was originally recorded in the 1980s by the German group Alphaville, but it became a hit when recorded by the Australian band Youth Group. This version was featured on one of those “music from” CDs for the American TV show “The O.C”.

For the commercial, the song was re-recorded by NZ band Pluto. So, now you know.

I also mentioned this on my podcast, Episode 36, and I'm sure you'll want to check that out, too (since that's why searches have landed on this blog...).

Podcast delayed

Due to circumstances beyond my control (a.k.a. “life”), today's podcast is delayed until tomorrow. Sorry.