I just gave $25, and here is what happened. I was immediately matched by 'gerald v' from woodbridge, ct. I sent him a personal note, asking him if he wanted to compare notes about the election and I opted to share my email address with him. The campaign immediately asked me if I wanted to pledge to match someone else.
I'll keep you updated if Gerald responds!
(Originally posted here on weiksner.com.)
Check it out (you may want to skip to the first two minutes of introduction and go right to the documentary itself):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naJQc6vFlFY
And then you can also watch the second part here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsQ6twcWevY
Given the failures of the central government in Iraq, the Bush administration has taken a new tactic: working directly with tribal leaders. To tout the success of this new approach, President Bush himself went to Anbar province in early September and General Petraeus pointed to the decline of violence as evidence that the surge is working. But Sheik Abu Risa, the man who met with Bush and is credited for pulling together the local coalition, was killed yesterday by roadside bomb. What's going on?
The Bush administration version of the story is that Al Queda is responsible for his death. His death is a blow to our efforts, but it demonstrates why we can't let the terrorists win.
Al Jazeera has a different version of the story. Indeed, there has been remarkable peace in Anbar, but it has come at quite a cost. The local Sunni tribes have killed or displaced the 15,000 Shiite families that used to live there. According to Al Jazeera, Sheik Abu Risa was just a front man who has rise to power came from his role in dolling out US construction money. He was finally killed by real Sunni sheiks who resented his connection to the US. And Al Jazeera worries that the weapons that the US provides to the former insurgents will only add more fuel to an impending civil war in Iraq.
We need to be asking ourselves: how big is the refugee problem in Iraq? what is causing it? How can it be fixed? Is the surge a dangerous band-aid or the new solution touted by the Bush administration? I have to say that this report makes me even more skeptical about the success of the surge.
(Originally posted here on my blog, weiksner.com)
First, I raised the question: how does Obama plan to fix the oil sharing problem? No one responded, but I think Chris Dodd has the best proposal on this subject yet, whereby the oil revenue would be split among the federal government of Iraq, regional governments and directly to Iraqis.
Second, bocamp22 asked whether partitioning proposed by Biden should be part of the solution. CatsAngel responded by questioned how Shiites and Sunnies could really be separated and Kent Wicker worried that partitioning could lead to ethnic cleansing. Personally, I am not a fan of partitioning and I think it can't possibly solve anything if the oil issue isn't resolved first.
Third, several members asserted their belief that military withdrawal would threaten our security. My personal belief is that the state of Iraq poses no threat, but that the terrorist activity within Iraq may pose a threat. I think the innovation of Obama's plan is that he offers an alternative to a military presence -- namely, humanitarian aid and diplomacy -- to mitigate this risk.
Fourth, several members questioned whether humanitarian aid and diplomacy would work. Chickmd called diplomacy with Iraqi's neighbors an "error in judgment" because these neighbors are our enemies. I agree that this is a risk, so I'd like to how Obama wants to go about this delicate task. As for humanitarian aid, Chickmd believes that Obama like "all other democrats he does not care how he wasts other peoples tax dollars." He wants out now and to cut our losses completely, but when I pressed him, he preferred Bush's plan to Obama's if he were forced between those two unsavory choices.
But the highest rated comment by d_jinx says that Obama's strategy is risky and uncertain, but better than not trying anything different: "Gotta get started because what we what we're doing now ain't encouraging."
Amen to that, brother!
A mashup is "a web application that combines data from more than one source into an integrated experience." For example, weiksner.com has several mashup features: I feature videos from youtube, you can listen to my favorite music on last.fm and you can see my links from del.icio.us.
The beauty of mashups is that sharing is built right into my normal workflow. I listen to music most of the day through last.fm anyway, so why not share it for everyone else's benefit? When I am researching various topics, why not share the interesting resources I find since I use del.icio.us to manage my bookmarks anyway?
In 2008, many candidates running for president to dogcatcher will be distributing videos on the Internet through youtube and other sites. Perhaps even more interestingly, supporters, opponents, and average citizens will also be making videos about candidates. Wouldn't it be interesting and useful to watch a few of them about the candidates in your races?
But how will you find them? Right now, perhaps a friend will forward a video to you about a presidential candidate. If you are so motivated and know the name of a candidate, and that candidate has a unique name, perhaps you can search on google or youtube for videos. You are unlikely to find anything about your local candidates at the moment, and you'll likely be overwhelmed with the number of videos about Presidential candidates. Youtube and google and others are working on the filtering problem for too many videos, but what about the local candidates?
As many readers of this blog know, I help run a project called Voter Guide Toolkit. It helps solve part of this problem: who are the candidates in my races? But it doesn't yet solve the second part of the problem: are there any videos about him or her?
As you can see here on this part of Fred Thompson's youtube page, youtube has granted him his real name as the author and has somehow has a gray bar with "candidate" on it. This is a heavy-handed and expensive way to handle candidates, which is ok for important things like presidential campaigns. You can also see that viewers have add some tags, like "fdt" and "president," are added by any registered user of youtube. If enough people tagged him as "cool" or "loser" that would appear too. Using the user tags, how we would distinguish between the John Smith, a candidate for dogcatcher in a local race from just some kid who learning to walk with the same name? I think it would be hard in many cases. Maybe posts with tagged with "politics" and "johnson" would be pretty good. Add in my town, "menlo park" and perhaps that nails it.
Another solution is try to get video producers and other users to adopt a standard. In this example, I can find out the code ("lastfm:event=97947") for this event on last.fm. I attend the event in question, upload my pictures to flickr and tag it. Then, viola! everyone else can see what The Low Lows look like in concert. For politics, we'd create a database of canonical codes for sharing information about candidates that people could use for sharing media (blogs entries, videos, pictures, etc.) about candidates.
Having some kind of standard way to identify something as about a candidate is a cornerstone function of "open politics." And yet another cause for me to fight for...
Using a crude spreadsheet version of a long-tail distribution, I calculate that they've initiated 2,300 calls in the few hours since it's been launched. If paid outbound calls cost $1 a minute and each of these calls last 10 minutes, then the financial value of this service is about $25,000. A couple of interesting metrics to follow: how many calls are made, what is the distribution of calls per volunteers, and some measure of success (awareness of the new policy perhaps?)
Of course, this technique has important differences from normal outbound calls. First, they have got to control quality - imagine the possible disasters associated with posting supporters phone numbers on the Internet! Second, these enthusiastic supporters may do a better job than a crummy telemarketer. Third, the callers themselves are becoming more invested in the Obama campaign.
So, it is exciting to see a major candidate take such a risk! If it works, perhaps they will start making outbound calls to other lists other than supporters. And if it doesn't work, I hope they can learn from the mistakes rather than retreat from the initiative. For example, I think that they should try to make sure that they have opt-in lists for these kinds of calls. This technique would be less risky (although perhaps less valuable) if the receiver of the call was on board with the program first. It is refreshing to see new ways that citizens can get involved in politics other than donating money or being bombarded by ads.
But my real point is to link you to the solution: MapsForUs.org. You can bone up on New York City with this beautiful panaromic map. And they've got lots of fun items, like map of Solaris in Ultima III and this map of this map of Zork I. Brings you back, no?
But the real winner is this short video from the West Wing where they explain why everything you know about geography is actually wrong. Enjoy! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efjcrbNcW6s
I was signed up to attend an *awesome* fundraiser for Barack in Napa valley hosted by favorite vineyards, but he cancelled at the last minute. I lost the entire amount for the hotel room, which is a sad waste. The apparent reason is "He has had to change his plans and is now not going to make it on August 8 and instead is going straight to LA from Sacramento." What does that really mean?
Well, I hope they actually follow through and reschedule the event in October as promised. I want to meet the man himself and get a chance to get involved!
Obama has rightfully asked to raise the bar on political discourse. So, why didn't Obama privately ask Geffen to apologize? And if Geffen refuses to apologize, why is Obama not willing to call him out on it?
I look forward to contributing some cheers and other pure support, but as a true supporter, I also plan to contribute costructive criticism. I hope that the campaign staff and other supporters appreciate this. It's going to be a long and grueling campaign, and we all have to live and learn if we are going to succeed.
