Mid-Majors Can't Win National Championships

When Kansas won the NCAA national championship Monday night, I was celebrating 38K feet above ground. Work had sent me west, to San Francisco, for the annual RSA IT security conference. My flight conveniently took off three hours before the championship and landed about an hour after it finished.

I was happy Kansas won. I told my old roommate Blake earlier this year that there is no way a mid-major conference team can ever win an NCAA championship. Maybe it was a visceral comment, but I felt strongly all year that Memphis was overrated. Whenever a team has to go around saying they are ready for the tournament because they played nine non-conference games against other teams that made the tournament, you know there's a problem (Hint: None of Memphis' fellow Conference USA teams made the field of 65).

Memphis' biggest game of the year was against Tennessee, and they lost. Tennessee, in my opinion, was also overrated, because its conference, the SEC, had a down year. So the alleged best team in the country played one good team all year-- a team that was also overrated-- and that team won.

My NCAA bracket reflected my distaste for mid-majors. I had Memphis losing to Michigan State in the round of 16. I had Tennessee losing relatively early too (I was right there).

Why am I down on the mid-major conferences? The NCAA basketball season is long, unlike its sister football season, and the NCAA playoffs are long as well (also contrary to the football season). The point of a long season is to prepare a team for the post-season. Playing in a major conference, against opponents that are national caliber, day in and day out, prepares a team for the big dance.

Being a UCONN fan, I naturally favor the Big East. But I certainly respect many other conferences (even though I hope their teams lose to Big East foes). The ACC. The Big 10. The SEC (even though this was a weak year for that conference). And last but certainly not least-- the Big 12.

The Big 12 has had it rough for a long time. It's tough to find their games on national TV (thank you ESPN for being an exception). The conference tends to represent midwest schools that favor the pigskin over the three-point stripe. There's only one problem: Big 12 basketball is really fun to watch. The teams are well-matched and very talented. The style reminds me a lot of the Big East, and so I like watching Big 12 games.

I have also always favored Big 12 teams heavily in the NCAA tournament. And it's usually cost me. I had Texas winning the national championship last year-- that didn't work out. Before Kansas' victory Monday, the Big 12 had only won a single national championship in the last like 50 years.

So why did Memphis lose on Monday? Fittingly, it's because the team broke down in the final moments of regulation. Missed free throws. Not fouling when Kansas needed a three to tie (by fouling, they could only get two free throws). These are the types of mistakes made when you win every regular season game by 50. These are the types of mistakes you make when you don't play national caliber teams every night. These are the types of mistakes made by a mid-major conference team.

When Chalmers hit the three for Kansas to tie the game with less than five seconds remaining in regulation-- sending the game to overtime where everyone knew Kansas had the momentum-- I nearly jumped out of my United Airlines seat. My friendly pilot had placed the Westwood One broadcast of the game on the inflight radio system. I could even hear the pilot changing channels as we cruised out of range of a certain frequency. I certainly would have rather watched at home in front of my HD screen, but since the color commentators were Billy Rafferty and John Thompson (the dad), it wasn't all that bad.

I imagined that we were over the state of Kansas when the final horn sounded, and the Jayhawks captured the crown for the Big 12 and major conferences everywhere. I am sure bedlam reigned in Lawrence (as Brent Musburger would have said). And the Kansas faithful should know that high above them, in a Boeing jet sailing west, this major-conference fan was indeed smiling.

The Road to Denver

I have never been to Denver. Well, I have been to the airport, but not to the city. This August is looking like a great time to go.

Yesterday, a large group of my Democratic neighbors in the Massachusetts 8th Congressional District elected my good friend Nikko Mendoza to be a delegate to the Democratic Convention, which is in Denver this year in late August.

It was a long but exciting day, and another lesson for me in democracy. A few general observations:

-- The Bunker Hill Community College has a grilled cheese sandwich vending machine. The caucus I attended last night was in a BHCC auditorium. In the main lobby, where I was greeting caucus-goers with other Nikko supporters, a hot food vending machine offered the cheesy treats along with french fries and pizza. Curiosity overtook me. I tried a grilled cheese. Not horrible, but I am not about to buy one of the machines for my apartment.

-- We Democrats know how to demonstrate the chaotic side of the process. I remember watching some of the Iowa caucuses on TV. The Republican caucuses seemed neat and orderly, with people sitting in chairs and casting votes by dropping a paper in ballot box slots. Pretty uneventful TV. The Democratic caucuses were kind of like a cross between an organizational PTA meeting and a baseball game. Organized chaos, perhaps. The caucus yesterday at the BHCC was organized chaos. Matt O'Mally, one caucus organizer and recognized party member, wasn't even listed on the voter registration lists. Despite this, I was disappointed that many attendees got upset. As Democrats, we should know by now that we excel at organized chaos (See: Texas prima-caucus [Prima-Caucus is a new word for me!]).

-- I really like the community side of politics. It was truly great to see local Charlestown neighbors coming out to support John "Jack" Kelly, who was running on the same slate as Nikko. (Jack grew up in Charlestown). The community feel of the event was overwhelming, and great to see. I have often said that Boston is a city of neighborhoods, and it was great to spend a day in an adjacent neighborhood to where I live.

After the caucus, I went to the Mission on Mission Hill, where I ran into some Obama supporters just exiting their 8th Congressional Caucus. Unlike the Hillary caucus, which ended on one ballot, the Obama caucus went on forever.

I am also very proud of Nikko. She really deserves to be a delegate, as I have written earlier, and it's great to see her recognized for her efforts.

P.S. For anyone who really is interested, Nikko won with 85-percent of the votes cast. As I screamed after the results were announced "LANDSLIDE."

P.P.S. It's great to see extensive coverage of the caucuses yesterday in today's issue of Boston's hometown newspaper, The Boston Globe, given that the events were the big political news in the city of the last month. (For those who can't read my tone, the Globe didn't cover them at all.)

Cruel

Some metered spots on Beacon Hill switch to resident parking at 6 p.m. and remain resident-only from 6 p.m. until 8 a.m. I parked in one of these metered spots at 5:54 p.m. this past Friday. I returned thirty minutes later to find the ticket above on my windshield.

Check the time. The parking officer gave me a ticket 39 seconds before 6 p.m. Thirty-nine lousy seconds.

Granted, I was parked illegally. I will pay the ticket. But I have to take a minute to register a complaint with Boston transportation (BTD).

Here goes: There is a section of Beacon Street along the Common that is resident parking after 6 p.m. Before 6 p.m. parking is only allowed for state house press. There is signage clearly indicating that state house press can park before 6, and residents can park after 6. If I try to park on this street on a Saturday, they will give me a ticket. Even if there are no other cars on the street (e.g. plenty of parking for state house press), I get a ticket.

Fair enough. Except the majority of the time when I try to park on this street after 6 p.m., there are several state house press cars still parked. In many cases, especially during the spring, the combination of state house press cars and visitor cars parked illegally means I cannot find a spot at all.

Why doesn't BTD ticket these cars, which are also parked illegally, as vigilantly as they ticketed my car this past Friday, a mere 39 seconds to victory?

Cruel, I tell you. Cruel.

Caucus Saturday: I am Supporting Nikko Mendoza

This Saturday I am attending a district Democratic caucus in Massachusetts. I am supporting my good friend Nikko Mendoza, who is running to be the female delegate for Hillary Clinton representing the 8th Massachusetts Congressional district.

A couple of things that are strange about this.

1) I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primary. I voted for Barack Obama.

2) I don't live in the 8th Congressional district. I live in the 9th Congressional district. I can't even vote at the caucus I am attending Saturday.

These strange things should show you how strongly I support Nikko. To say she is a dedicated public servant in her role within Mayor Menino's office is an understatement. Nikko is on call 24-hours a day, 7-days a week for the people of Boston.

Furthermore, to say that Nikko is a dedicated supporter of Hillary Clinton is also an understatement. She helped organize ground efforts in Manchester, New Hampshire when Hillary was way behind in the polls there (She even inspired me to drive up there and help her).

She volunteered in Rhode Island on the second Super Tuesday, placing phone calls to Texas towns when the victory in Providence was secure.

Now for those of you who want a little bit of education about how the delegate selection process works in this state, here it is in simple terms. The Presidential primary on Super Tuesday determined the delegates awarded to Senator Obama and Senator Clinton. However, the delegates are awarded by Congressional district. In the 8th Congressional district, Senator Obama won seven delegates (and alternates) and Senator Clinton won two delegates.

Once the total count is determined, each congressional district holds caucuses to determine which individuals will fill the elected delegate positions. Each candidate holds a caucus. So in the 8th Congressional District, the Obama campaign and the Clinton campaign are holding separate caucuses.

At the Clinton caucus in the 8th district, the attendees will elect one female and one male delegate to the convention in Denver in August to fill the seats the primary voters gave the Clinton campaign in February.

Confused yet?

Simply put, in my case, I cannot think of a better delegate to represent me and my Democratic party than Nikko Mendoza. And I am looking forward to supporting her on Saturday even though I cannot vote for her. Anyone else who is a registered Democrat in the 8th District (meaning your Congressman is Mike Capuano), please join me in supporting her. The caucus is being held at Bunker Hill Community College in Charlestown. Also-- You should know that her full name on the ballot is Marie Nicole Mendoza.

8th Congressional District DNC Caucus for Hillary Clinton

Saturday, April 5 at 1PM (please arrive no later than 12:45PM - doors close promptly at 1)

Bunker Hill Community College
250 New Rutherford Avenue, Charlestown

Managing Boston Common Use

Local papers and bloggers are buzzing after news broke last week that the City of Boston Parks Department is considering kicking certain large events off the Boston Common. I have had a pleasant experience working with the Parks Department on issues related to the Common, and thought I would post my thoughts.

The Boston Common is a sacred space, and it is heavily used. With that use comes damage. I attended meetings this time last year with the Parks Department, as they planned to shut down the parade ground space on the Common to rehabilitate the turf (the parade ground is generally the area right above the Boston Common Garage. The project was not cheap, and for that reason it makes complete sense for the department to evaluate use of the parade grounds, and the entire park itself.

There are too many events on the Boston Common. Some of these events would benefit from switching their location to the City Hall Plaza area. For one thing, the T access to City Hall Plaza is immediate. Plus, the buildings around City Hall Plaza are a natural noise container. You do not know how many times I have heard that the noise on the Common is excessive-- and that noise travels right into the homes on the south slope of Beacon Hill.

In summary, given how much the City has spent on repairs to the Boston Common, it is the Parks Department's responsibility to taxpayers to evaluate use of the park to make sure the refurbished areas remain pristine for years to come.

Mr. Levanto Goes to City Hall

This past Tuesday one of the Boston City Council's committees held a hearing on towing policies in Boston and their affect on keeping the city's streets clean. Since I have been involved in this issue (fortunately or unfortunately) since I first volunteered in Beacon Hill, I decided I would got to the hearing to testify.

I took a half day off and decided to take a tour of City Hall in the process. Some of my friends work there, and I always like to meet my elected officials. In the morning, I stopped by the office of John Connolly, newly elected City Councilor at large. Mr. Connolly is a very hard worker-- I have heard anecdotes that he gets to the office early and stays very late. During my visit, he commented that he's been studying the budget process-- He's on the Ways & Means Committee.

I voted for John Connolly and can say, following my visit with him, that I am happy I did. We talked for twenty minutes about hot topics on Beacon Hill, many of which I have written about on this blog. I also mentioned to him that I had recently cheered on a basketball team of fifth graders (coached by my good friend Jen) who are from his home neighborhood of West Roxbury. New piece of Boston knowledge: "The 'Parkway' includes both Roslindale and West Roxbury-- the team in question was from Parkway.

I then went to the Council Chamber and attended the hearing. Here's a quick summary of my testimony: Street cleaning works, and towing cars for the sweeper is a great idea. There's a discussion underway about making street sweeping in Boston a year-round program. I think that's a great idea. Street sweeping is overwhelming effective, but it's worthless unless the street sweeper can reach the curb. Making the program year-round will be tricky, given that-- among many reasons-- there sometimes will be snow on the ground. But we can work through those issues. If you are still reading this (bless you), you can email me to learn more on this.

A Campaign Without Momentum

I have been talking to a lot of people lately about how the current Democratic primary race has shown no momentum for either side. I usually say this in the context of the way the media is covering the race.

I usually tell the story this way: If you had predicted, based on the way certain demographics voted on February 5th (Super Tuesday), the way things would have unfolded in this race, you would have said:

• Clinton loses the 11 contests between Super Tuesday and the primaries in Ohio and Texas.
• Clinton wins Rhode Island, Texas and Ohio but loses Vermont.
• Obama wins Wyoming and Mississippi.

Given this is exactly what has happened, how can anyone say that either side has momentum?

Dan Kennedy wrote a much more eloquent entry on this point, which is worth a read.

By the way, for further evidence of the lack of momentum in this campaign, look at when voters in Mississippi made up their minds. Way more than half of them said they made their choice more than a month ago. How does that support the claim of momentum for Obama the media is talking about this morning? (I heard the "momentum" word on WTKK during the drive to work.)

Certified Results

I received an official letter from the City of Boston on Saturday that read:

"You are hereby notified that it appears from the results of the February 5th, 2008 Presidential Primary, that you were elected to the Ward 5 Democratic Committee for the City of Boston."

I wonder if the elected Mayor of Boston receives the same type of letter?

So I guess that means my election has been "certified"? : )

Beacon Hill's Latest Thoughts On Suffolk University

The Beacon Hill Civic Association (BHCA) submitted its written concerns regarding Suffolk University's Institutional Master Plan Notification Form (IMPNF) in a letter to the BRA yesterday. Translation: The largest and primary civic organization on Beacon Hill has noted some issues it has with what Suffolk has said about expansion plans for the next 10 years.

I am sure the letter will be posted soon at the BHCA website, and as a board member to the group, I was involved to some extent in the creation of the document. Here are some interesting observations:

1) The letter notes a few areas where Suffolk didn't really follow the plans laid out in its previous Master Plan, which has expired. It notes how Suffolk grew a lot faster than it was expecting when the plan was accepted, among other things. This is important since Suffolk states in the IMPNF that it is capping enrollment for the next ten years at 5K students (well, they call them full-time-equivalent students, but let's just say it's the same). I was not on the BHCA board when the previous Master Plan went into effect, so I tend to believe Suffolk when it says it will stop at 5K students. I can see how some of my fellow board members, who have served much longer, are skeptical.

2) In general, the letter from the BHCA asks for a lot more detail. More detail about enrollment projections. More detail about the expected changes and alterations to buildings on Beacon Hill that Suffolk already owns. More detail about specific community relations programs that Suffolk is planning to mitigate the impact of students living, studying and playing on Beacon Hill.

The letter leaves a window open to Suffolk. The letter concludes: "While Suffolk has fully expressed its desire for expansion, the IMPNF is not adequate to support the proposition that its rapid growth can be accommodated in and near existing residential areas, without substantial harm to the residential communities. The additional information, disclosure and analysis that we request will assist in review of Suffolk University's proposals."

The IMPNF is "not adequate." My understanding is that the document Beacon Hill is responding to is a notification form-- not a full Master Plan. It's just the beginning. It follows that if Suffolk makes the Master Plan "adequate," the Civic Association *might* support it.

That being said, at its board meeting 10 days ago, which I attended and noted previously on this blog, the BHCA passed a policy of standing opposition. The mountain to climb for Suffolk is tall.

On the other hand, as someone who is always optimistic, it's to be noted that the BHCA submitted a separate letter to the BRA today that expressed non-opposition (which in Beacon Hill speak is not the same as support) for Suffolk's dormitory project in the Downtown Crossing area, near the Modern Theater and Suffolk's 10 West Street dorm space. This is also a residential area, by the way.

Other town-and-gown watchers in Brighton have praised what Suffolk has done in Downtown Crossing as a model for other institutions, such as Boston College, to follow. They have noted how Suffolk has paid close attention to the residents since its plans for the dorm at 20 Somerset Street were squashed amid the concerns of the Beacon Hill community and others. [The IMPNF proposes that the 20 Somerset building be used as a new location for an existing art school-- The New England School of Art and Design.]

If Suffolk were to work with the BHCA in response to the letter issued today, is there a chance the BHCA's board could ultimately support the final Master Plan? As a board member and someone who believes Suffolk has a place in my neighborhood, I say, "why not?"

NOTE: Letter excerpt taken from "Re: Suffolk University Institutional Master Plan Notification Form dated January 11, 2008," signed John Achatz, Chairman, Beacon Hill Civic Association and dated February 27, 2008.

Sec. Galvin Should Have Stuck to His Hunches

In May 2007, Massachusetts was set to hold its primary on March 4, 2008. Mass. Secretary of State William Galvin admonished his counterparts at certain states, such as Florida, since they were moving up their primary dates (as Massachusetts ultimately did). This is what he told the New York Times:

Though Florida meant to pump up its importance in the primaries, it might have done better sticking to March, said William Galvin, the secretary of state in Massachusetts and leader of a National Association of Secretaries of State committee that opposes the movement toward earlier primaries. If no candidates emerge as clear front-runners after the ''super-duper'' primary on Feb. 5, Mr. Galvin said, states that vote later could prove pivotal.

''This is kind of like the track touts trying to figure out what's going to happen at the Kentucky Derby,'' he said.

Here we are in February 2008, and Galvin was right on the money. As much as I liked to vote on Super Tuesday, how neat is it for voters in Texas and Ohio, who could possibly participate on the last primary day that means something this election season?

EDITORS NOTE: Text pulled from: New York Times, "Seeking an Edge, Florida Changes Its Primary Date," May 4, 2007

The Today Show Visits Sugarbush

I learned to ski at Sugarbush back in 2001, thanks to the generosity of my good friend Tom Hopcroft. Many have commented to me since then that Interstate 89 (which runs diagonally through New Hampshire) is the highway that connects Boston to Sugarbush.

It is exciting that the Today Show decided to visit. Take a look at one of the broadcasts below.

Thoughts from the Beacon Hill and National Trails

I was in Austin, Texas this week for a few days for some work meetings. Along the way, I mentally put together a post that updates everyone on what I have been working on as well as gives my current thinking on this amazing election we're in the middle of.

Before I talk about the national campaign, I want to note for a second a debate that is raging in my neighborhood of Beacon Hill in Boston.

It's about Suffolk University. A week ago, the Beacon Hill Civic Association, of which I am a board member, passed a policy that notes specific concerns regarding Suffolk's proposed expansion in downtown Boston. I supported the policy, and I am happy the board passed it, since things could have been far worse. A bit of background:

-- Suffolk is in downtown Boston, and it is trying to grow. A few of the University's buildings are located in Beacon Hill. The neighbors on Beacon Hill are wary of Suffolk's plans to expand, given the stressed nature of "town-and-gown" relationships in other Boston neighborhoods. It follows that every loud party on Beacon Hill over the past few years has been blamed on Suffolk.

-- Suffolk is in the middle of laying out for Boston its plans for the next several years, in a document called an Institutional Master Plan. The process has been rocky, primarily because no one on the Beacon Hill Civic Assocation belives Suffolk and vice versa. I have been trying to formulate my own opinion, and I have found that means listening to the civic association, and listening to Suffolk, and then shooting for the middle of both arguments.

-- Many in the neighborhood simply want Suffolk to leave. Literally, they want Suffolk to sell their properties here and move to some other part of Boston. I saw a draft policy that discussed this last week. Umm. This is a tad scary. What would be next? My neighbors decide that they also want renters like myself to move on, preserving the neighborhood for property owners?

All this being said, here's what I think: Suffolk is an asset to Beacon Hill in many ways. I want the institution to grow and continue to contribute here. That means Suffolk must detail in a very comprehensive way how its expansion will impact the neighborhood. Which means Suffolk needs to admit there will be an impact. Suffolk must use additional drafts of its new master plan to lay out specifics. And I am happy to help them in this process. Finally, I don't think it's a good idea for Suffolk to just leave the Hill. I for one would miss the institution.

Well there you have it. Now I move on to my points about the national Presidential race:

1) You know everyone is engaged this election season when my football-watching former roommate, Blake, called me on Super Tuesday evening and asked to come over to watch election returns, as if we were watching the Super Bowl. A native of Texas, Blake is always a good one to speak to for a level-set on the election, since he has perspective from outside of the liberal bastion of Boston.

2) The campaign has clearly moved to Texas. There were many ads on TV for both Obama and Clinton that I saw while in the hotel room in Austin. Also, a few people spoke of the debate this week on the University of Texas campus and how there are only 100 tickets. (But there is a debate watching party for all candidates at the Hyatt hotel.)

3) I met with a work-related friend for coffee, and she told me that on Super Tuesday evening, she and her husband went to a wine bar to watch returns. The atmosphere seemed more like a big college football game; when the announcers called a state for a given candidate, cheers would erupt, as if Obama or Clinton were scoring touchdowns.

4) I was up in Vermont this weekend, and at my ski house, debate inevitably moved to the campaign. I have spoken with quite a few women who are not fans of Hillary, which leads me to my next point, a crititque of the media:

5) I think Hillary has gotten a bad rap from the press (and I say this as someone who is supporting Obama). I have heard repeatedly that Obama "has the momentum." In reality, what has happened over the past few weeks is exactly what everyone was expecting. It just so happens that Obama has benefitted from a few states that have his "type" of voters. So he has been victorious. But momentum? Have the pundits seen the latest polls out of the states voting on March 4? Hillary is ahead. If those polls do change, it will only, in my opinion, be because of the so-called momentum they are placing behind Obama.

At the same time, I don't think the media's favoring of Obama is because Hillary is a female. I think it's because she is the "establishment" candidate. How amazing is it that even though she is a woman, Hillary is often picked by those who make up their minds in the voting booth? The reason? As David Plotz noted in last week's Slate political gabfest, it's because Hillary is the "safe" pick. She's the establishment candidate. Unfortunately for her, the media like underdogs or "mavericks." In addition, voters tend to be romantic. They like fresh faces and discussions of hope and change. I have a general theory that voters will pick hope and change over practicality every time. It's a core Amercian fundamental. But that's the topic of another blog post.

Finally, what the heck is wrong with Bill Clinton? Yesterday, I heard that he blamed the recent losses by his wife on well-off voters participating in caucuses who "don't really need a President," but rather have bought into needing change or hope. Is that how he classifies me, an Obama voter here in Massachusetts? I don't understand what is wrong with him, but I am kind of embarrassed.

Kudos to everyone who is acknowledging that today is in fact my 32nd birthday. It's raining here in Boston. Is that a sign? : )

Election Hangover

Ward 5 Democratic Ballot, Boston, February 5, 2007

I am pleased that the voters in my ward elected me to the Ward Democratic Committee (there were 35 names on the ballot running for 35 slots, but I am pleased in any event). By the way, don't worry: I did vote for all 35 of the ward committee candidates nominated by my ward (the vote cast above is just for effect).

I wonder how many people actually saw my name?

So what's next? Well, for me, it's back to watching Chris Matthews. My brother Brett gets to vote on Tuesday in Virginia, and he's still undecided.

Obama Has Caught Clinton

(Editor's note: I have endorsed Barack Obama in the presidential race. My reasons are in an earlier post on this blog.)

A new 7News/Suffolk poll has the Massachusetts democratic race a dead heat as we head into election eve. Obama leads by two points, within the margin of error.

Also, I am not sure if it was smart for Senator Clinton to make a remark related to the Pats loss yesterday.

Slate's "Today's Papers" is the first outlet I have seen that notes Obama has caught up to Clinton in national polls.

I should mention that the polls I trust the most are the Reuters Zogby polls. A great story from the 2000 campaign that is more myth than reality (I heard it from a friend so I am not sure if it's true, but it is interesting.) Rogby had been showing in its overnights up to the election that Gore was seeing a late surge. The morning of the election, they calculated their final numbers, and gave Gore a slight win in the popular vote. Seeing this was counter to all other polls, Zogby told his peeps to redo the numbers. They came out the same, and Zogby released them. They ended up being right on the money with the outcome of the election. This part is true, the Zogby poll did correctly predict the outcome of the popular vote.

That being said, some very encouraging signs for Barack Obama in the recent batch of overnight polls. He has pulled into the lead in California. He has pulled into the lead in Missouri. It looks like his victory in Georgia may be of South Carolina proportions. The latest New Jersey poll has the race a tie.

The crowds he is drawing are significant. Thousands yesterday in Delaware. Today, he's in New Jersey, Connecticut and here in Boston.

Endorsement: Barack Obama

I am a sucker for hope.

My 11th grade history teacher, Dorothy Agranwitch, made her students keep journals to reflect on world events. After observing a semester's worth of remarks in mine, she inscribed a statement that I will never forget. Written in her elegant, Radcliffe-inspired script, she said, "Your prose and interpretation brings one word to my mind: hope."

It follows suit that I quickly fell in love with Bill Clinton, since he made me believe in sappy things like hope and change. President Clinton ushered in change at a time when we needed it; breaking from the Reagan and Bush years to reinvigorate the country. What follows was laudable: a booming, if not irrational, Internet economy; and a general feeling that this country was the best country in the world. When I authored a column for The Daily Free Press while at BU, my last entry discussed the huge crowds that greeted Clinton when he visited Northern Ireland. Citizens there saw him, and the U.S., as a beacon. It's hard to imagine any foreign entity seeing us in such a light today.

At a time when change is once again needed, and for other reasons I detail in this post, today I announce my support for Senator Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States. I will vote for Senator Obama this Tuesday in the Massachusetts Democratic primary.

Let me say that for many (also sappy) reasons, I am proud of the way things have transpired this primary season. Turnout in the early primaries has been overwhelming. Younger voters, and many previously uninterested, have come out in large numbers. The country is engaged in a way I have never seen before.

We also benefit from a field of impressive Democratic candidates. As the New York Times led its endorsement of Hillary Clinton: "This generally is the stage of a campaign when Democrats have to work hard to get excited about whichever candidate seems most likely to outlast an uninspiring pack. That is not remotely the case this year."

To be sure, Hillary Clinton and Obama share many overall policy objectives, and among the ones I support:

*Universal Healthcare: The healthcare system in the U.S. is healthcare for the affluent. An excellent way to cut overall cost from the system is to encourage routine care, and routine care has to be available to all. Government has a role to make this happen, since the market favors profit-- and that doesn't necessarily mean healthier people. The problems with the system have also subjected doctors to role players, rather than industry leaders. This is a problem.

*Focus on the environment. Having worked for Al Gore, this is a big deal for me.

*Recognizing that the Al Qaeda that attacked us on September 11 is based in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq.

Given the similarities in positions offered by Clinton and Obama, the choice on paper was difficult for me. But a couple of distinctions between the candidates in recent weeks have provided clarity.

First, Obama believes strongly that everyone should have a seat at the table. He understands that the world is more complicated than "with us or against us", and that there is no harm in asking for help to combat the world's problems. Hillary believes this too, but not enough, in my opinion. Her vote to support designating Iran's politics a part of terror is a case in point. The harder answer-- and more accurate one, in my opinion-- is to keep Iran at the table. Cutting them out of the discussion only emboldens them. And that starts the cycle we all witnessed leading up to the Iraq war.

Senator Edwards impressed me with his commitment to restore America's standing in the eyes of the world. I think Barack Obama is more committed to that than Hillary Clinton.

Second, I think the American political scene needs a refresh. President Bush has so damaged America's stead in the world, that I find it hard to believe any connection to politics as usual will be acceptable in the eyes of our International allies. Hillary Clinton to many in the U.S. and abroad is more of the same. We need a clean break to start over.

Finally, as much as I loved Bill Clinton, I can't figure out why he's involving himself in this race. This is Hillary's campaign, and I was impressed by her ability to run the campaign and not rely on the involvement of her husband. The Onion Magazine ran a headline in this week's issue that read: "Bill Clinton: Screw it, I am Running!" In recent weeks, Bill Clinton has shown me that he will be involved in Hillary's campaign and her presidency. Which brings into question: Which Clinton will call the shots in the White House?

I am very disappointed in Bill's words. The inspiration provided by Hillary as the architect of her own success now seems shallow, or at least hollow. Moreover, to relate Senator Obama's success in South Carolina to Rev. Jesse Jackson's success there is disingenuous at best.

Bill Clinton inspired me in 1992. He did so again in 1996 when he ran for reelection. I volunteered for that campaign. Clinton represented the "Bridge to the 21st Century." Bob Dole was Clinton's opponent then. He could not avoid talking about the past. His service in WWII. His years in the Senate. Everyone admired him but yearned for the future.

Ironically enough, in 2008, part of Hillary's Clinton's message is a return to the past. As much as I liked the Clinton years, I am not a fan of looking back. Not in 1996, and not now.

Thank you, Senator Dodd, Senator Biden, Congressman Kucinich. Thank you Senator Edwards. Thank you Senator Clinton. The primary season was phenomenal. But my choice is Obama.

Close to Decision Time

Florida goes to the polls today, and there's one week left to Massachusetts.

My good friend Kate Strouse Canada sent me her current thoughts on the campaign. I think she provides some great insight. Read on:

You've asked me a couple times what I think about the Democratic crop of candidates. I've given it a lot of thought this weekend and thought I'd share some of my not yet totally fleshed out thoughts with you.

I like John Edwards and his attack on corporate America and that he truly believes in social service programs and in helping the poor. The poor (and the military) in my opinion have lost the most over the past 8 years and having someone in the White House who will push an agenda to get them back on their feet is really important to me. I also feel like we need someone who will do some sort of "New Deal" policies and I think he's charismatic and likeable enough to get a lot done.

This being said, he's not going to win. He'll probably be a VP candidate again but he just doesn't have what it takes (whatever that is) to do it.

Hillary and Obama have very similar policy positions in my opinion. Hillary is smart, she surrounds herself with knowledgeable, smart people and she knows the system. That being said, she's more of a centrist and, like her husband, will make a lot of compromises to get things done. This isn't always a bad thing. BUT - I struggle with the democratic idea that we would have either a Bush or a Clinton running our country for possibly 28 years. It troubles me a little bit. Of course - if it comes down to Hillary being the nominee it won't trouble me as much as a John McCain or Mitt Romney presidency.

Obama is young, fresh and more of a establishment guy than people give him credit for. He's extremely savvy, has great advisors and comes off as more "real" than the other candidates. Notice I say - comes off as. There is no question this guy isn't a politico. As someone said recently - you don’t become a Senator in a corrupt state like Illinois when you're only in your 40s without knowing how to play the game. I like that he's invigorating youth - and African Americans - to vote. There have been a lot of articles in the Baltimore Sun about African Americans registering to vote and pledging to vote - and they've had African American candidates to vote for before but he's really something different to them. I also really like Michelle Obama. She's tenacious, willing to speak her mind and willing to "go there" on a lot of issues. I don't think his depth of knowledge is as strong as Hillary's and I don't think he'll get a tremendous amount done as President at first, but I think he has the potential.

Given all of that - here is my litmus test. Being a tried and true Democrat it doesn't matter to me policy wise who is the nominee. I will vote for them. BUT - I want someone who will FIGHT. The Republican machine is still strong and still nasty and whether it's Romney or McCain the Karl Rove style of campaigning will still be around in this election. I don't want the Democratic candidate to sit back and not respond when they are attacked - ala John Kerry. If there are questions about race or gender, or service or whatever it is - I want the candidate to fight back and keep fighting until they get their message across. I know Democrats try to be all nice and "inclusive" but the stakes are high this year and this is not the time to sit back and think you're "above that type of politicing". I feel like Hillary will definitely fight. Obama has shown me a little bit of this in the past few days but I need to see more.

The other thing I'm hoping is that if Hillary is the candidate, that Obama fights for her. AND - if Obama is the candidate that both Hillary AND Bill fight for him. It has to be unified.
Because another 4, or 8 years, of a Republican (especially John McCain) - would put this country down a very dangerous path, both within our "borders" and across the globe.

The Crew at Kill '08
Killington, Vermont
January 21, 2008

The Presidential Race Shifts Here
Hillary Event Tuesday, I am Still Undecided

I heard Massachusetts mentioned for the first time this morning. Tim Russert talked about how the state is "delegate rich" and is a place where Barack Obama thinks he can win delegates.

Indeed, now it's time for many other states to get involved in the Presidential race. I have still not picked a candidate of my own, but several of my friends are supporting Hillary Clinton. In fact, my friend Elizabeth sent a note about an organizational meeting for local supporters of Hillary Clinton. Hillary won't be there, but some other Boston polticial notables will be. Here are the details:

Where: At the Community Church in Copley Square Boston
Date: Tuesday, January 29
Time: 6 p.m.
It's free to attend. It's meant to be a way to get local Hillary supporters together.

If you have questions you can call Elizabeth at: 508-942-6340.

My appearance on Greater Boston

I was on Greater Boston with Emily Rooney on December 10. I talked about trash in Boston. You can watch it by clicking here.

Charles Bridge

Prague

December 18, 2007

Endorsement: Not Yet

I admire the fact that in New Hampshire and Iowa, they carefully pick their presidential candidates. I try to do that as well.

It's hard for me though. Four years ago, I didn't make up my mind ahead of the Democratic primary in Massachusetts until the night before the primary. I drove to Vermont in the weeks leading up to the primary to ski, and I changed my pick each and every time I saw a candidate or heard them on TV. I ultimately picked John Kerry.

Up until the Iowa Caucuses, I was leaning toward John Edwards. I don't like the fact he made a lot of money representing children in cases against doctors. One of my good friends, Martha, is a Doctor and delivers babies for a living-- and we've had many intelligent conversations about this.

I guess I was leaning Edwards because I felt as though he was the Democrat who had the best chance to win in November. He also talks a lot about fundamentally changing America's view in the eyes of others around the world. In one of the first debates I watched, he said, "We need to make America the country people think of when they think about freedom again." I like that.
I also like Senator Edwards positions related to corporate America. The American economy is the envy of the world, but it's far too easy for a limited few to manipulate the system for their benefit. Government is necessary to make sure the economy gives all equal opportunity. I am not an economist, but that's what I believe.

Finally, I think if he had had another week four years ago, Edwards would have won Iowa and beaten Senator Kerry.

When Senator Edwards lost in Iowa, I decided to go to New Hampshire to volunteer with some of my friends who were helping out Hillary Clinton. Yesterday afternoon, I came very close to deciding I supported her.

I was in the office of a co-worker, a smart woman who told me why she, ultimately, would vote for Hillary. It's the reason why I like Hillary-- the answer to the now infamous Charlie Gibson question. In the final New Hampshire debate, Gibson asked the Democrats how they would respond to a nuclear attack on an American city. The stark terms Gibson used shook me: He said that experts give a 40-percent chance of an attack on a U.S. city in the next ten years.

Hillary is realistically the only person who has the real-world experience necessary to answer the question. She's the only person talking about what practically she can do from day one to fix all the problems President Bush has made. Hope doesn't really cut it when a nuclear bomb goes off.

My mom likes Barack Obama. She is an independent living in Connecticut (which votes the same day I do here in Massachusetts on Feb. 5). She says the "unite" message Barack Obama is preaching is what the country needs right now. I can totally see her point. When I hear Obama speak, I hear what I want to hear-- and I actually believe he can make it happen.
However, I felt the same way when I paid attention to the Gubernatorial race in Massachusetts 18 months ago-- the first time I heard Deval Patrick speak. I bought into his message of hope. I rallied around him, even though there were other candidates that on paper had better credentials for the job.

Governor Patrick has been in office a year, and hasn't done much I really like. The idea of putting three casinos in Massachusetts is ridiculous. As someone who grew up near two casinos in Connecticut, I can tell you what will happen. But that's the topic for another blog entry.

The Patrick lesson creates pause in my mind for Obama. I want to believe in hope and change, but we need to be realistic about how bad things are and pick someone who can make repairs happen.

Despite all this, something happened last night that is pushing me back toward undecided (away from Clinton). My good friend and former roommate Blake, who's from Texas, noted to a group of friends and me that neither Hillary nor Obama has a chance of winning the general election. He has a fair point. Hillary is a polarizing figure, and Obama's hope message might ring hollow to the general electorate. It caused me to go back to the original reason I was supporting Edwards-- Blake says he's probably the only Democrat with a chance of winning in November.
It's discouraging that the primary process might lead to a Democratic candidate who doesn't have a chance.

Sigh... I am undecided. There's still a lot of time until February 5. And the good news is we now have only one year left of President Bush. And yes, I am counting the days.

2008 Political Prediction

You heard it here first, the biggest political story of 2008 will be the independent presidential candidacy of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Happy New Year!

Back in Boston

Well, "Jason Bourne on a Budget" is done, and I am back in Boston in my apartment, finishing up last-minute Christmas shopping. We're already talking about a sequel, perhaps to Italy in 2008 (another country that does figure into Bourne... in fact, the first place he landed in "The Bourne Identity").

I will get pictures up soon.

Final "Jason Bourne on a Budget" Chapter

MUNICH-- After one final night in Munich (spent at Hofbrauhaus, of course), Scott and I are up early for a mid-day flight back to the United States.

We see that the snow has stopped, for now, on the U.S. east coast, so it looks as though we've picked a good window to return home. After the few very light flakes we saw when we first arrived, we have not seen any snow at all here.

We've begun to put together lists that rank the three cities we visited over the past week on various categories. Here's a sampling:

Best Christmas Village
1) Munich
2) Zurich
3) Prague

Prettiest
1) Prague
2) Zurich
3) Munich

Most Likely to Spend a Comfortable Day or Two
1) Zurich
2) Munich
3) Prague

The trip was clearly a success, and now it's time to go home and do what all Americans do: Have a vacation from a vacation to get some rest.

We've met a wide variety of people on this trip. A Nebraska college student who has been backpacking around the world. A French chemist who received his Ph.d. in Chemistry in the UK and is hosting his parents for Christmas in Munich. A Swiss psychologist on the train to Munich, and her German boyfriend who offered us Swiss cookies. A Canadian photographer and his wife spending eight days in Prague.

We learned a lot about them and about how they view America. We think that Americans geography in many ways hurts the American perspective. We're so isolated. In Europe its a short train ride, and suddenly its Crowns instead of Euros, cobblestone streets everywhere instead of pavement, and bars that are open until 5 a.m. instead of 1 a.m.

For the next trip here, I am bringing my skis!

There's No Place Like Home (in Munich)

MUNICH-- We did not even need a map to get from the train station to the hotel. We're resting here before our final dinner in Munich, likely back in town near Marienplatz.

On the train from Zurich to Munich, we sat next to a young couple (lady from Switzerland and gentleman from near Munich). We engaged in what will certainly be the most significant political conversation of this trip. We emphasized that not many people in the U.S. are currently happy with President Bush's performance. The couple was generally very interested in what the possibilities are of the U.S. next President changing the course in Iraq.

As a whole, they do not see much hope for Americans to change course, primarily because we are too wrapped up in putting America first and not cooperating. It was a fascinating conversation.

Anyway, I will post more later.

Go For Zurich Departure

ZURICH-- We're checking out of our hotel this morning for an early afternoon train to where Jason Bourne on a budget began: Munich.

Last night we walked through Niedendorf, a young hip part of Zurich. Niedendorf satisfies the two requirements of a hip area: greasy late-night food and lots of Starbucks (remember we came up with that theory back in Munich).

We met a bartender who herself has seen the Bourne movies. She says she could not tell, initially, that the Bourne Identity was not filmed in Zurich, even though the movie took place in the city. The movie does have blue tram cars that are a signature here; we've seen them all over the place.

In any event, I will post more about Zurich when we get to Munich tonight.

Arrival in Zurich

ZURICH-- We arrived in Zurich this morning, and are just now getting into our room at the hotel here. It's about 1 p.m. local time on Wednesday-- about 7 a.m in Boston.

The train ride was uneventful, though I must say the Prague train station is pretty confusing if you can't read English. Only after two trips to the International help desk was I confident that we were ok. The problem was the train number on my ticket registered for a train going to Salzburg, even though the car we ultimately went to was marked for Zurich. Our train traveled southwest out of Prague, crossing the border into Austria. We then traveled west to Salzburg, where we met with a train coming out of Vienna.

Luckily for us, we were in a car that could sleep six, but no one else showed up. We had the entire car to ourselves, and therefore conveniently moved to the bottom bunk on each side.

Anyway, we must go back and chat about Prague for a bit. It's a beautiful city-- the most beautiful city I have ever been too. We remarked so many times that you just can't take enough pictures, and you really have to go to understand. On the second morning in Prague, we went to the Castle on a large bluff overlooking downtown Prague, and invested in a tour that was well worth the price.

Prague depends quite a bit on tourism. Apparently a lot of Brits come here for bachelor parties. For that reason, many of the shops are cheesy in their attempt to appeal to visitors, everyone can speak English and pretty much everything is written or translated in English, and you have to be careful not to get ripped off. Case in point, on our first day, we went to a place called Cafe Grand Praha, right in Old Town Square and next to the Astronomical clock. We ended up spending a fortune.

Unfortunately, the tourists put a pall on the feel of the place. In Munich, there were tourists, but you never got the sense that the locals catered to those from out of town-- or perhaps better put, they took care of us, but you never got the sense it was out of desperation. In Prague, you can tell that the tourists are very important to the economy.

Anyway, on our one night in Prague, we went to a place on Wenceslas Square called "The Beer Factory" (see what I mean about the cheese? The name was even in English!) and met a local bartender Kate (her nickname for Americans). She directed us to an area off the beaten path, where we had dinner (at about 15-percent of what we paid at the Cafe Grand Praha).

On the morning of our departure for Zurich, we went to the Castle (as noted earlier) and then walked past the American Embassy.

Some random facts about Prague:

-- Everyone speaks English (at least everyone we, as tourists, ran into), and in general, the English is better than in Munich. Pretty much everyone learns English by interacting with tourists (I took an informal poll. A few learned in high school when they traveled to the U.S.). Everyone we spoke to on the tourist path had been to the U.S., which means either everyone goes to the U.S., or we were speaking to some fairly privileged kids.

-- They have Budweiser beer in Prague. No kidding. Apparently Anheiser-Bush got the name Budweiser from the beer in the Czech Republic. Like in America, Budweiser's parent in Prague is equally watered down and cheap. You have to work to find it though. We found it at a very local pub off the tourist march that was occupied by what looked to be local college students listening to techno music.

-- The smog in Prague is really, really bad, which is ironic, give how pretty the city is. It was tough to take a picture of the city from the Castle vista because of the smog.

-- While in Munich girls can't stay away from Schmuck (German for Jewelry), in Prague if you want perfume, you gotta go to the "Rossman" (name of a Prague chain of perfume stores).

Here in Zurich, I finished off my Christmas list this morning and bought myself a Swiss watch. Scott noted a preliminary summary of the three cities: Prague (prettiest), Munich (most fun), Zurich (best for shopping). Then again, we still have to go out in Zurich tonight.

Funny story about the train ride. We were woken up about 10:30 to get our passports stamped on the way out of the Czech Republic. About five minutes later a new border guard knocked on our door (from the country we were entering). Having no idea what the route was to Zurich, I quipped: "What country are we entering now?" The guard, after giving me an incredulous look, responded: "Austria." His intonation showed he was disappointed I had no clue where I was.

Scott is out cold. Time for me to take a nap. We're headed to old town Zurich tonight.

P.S. No snow on the ground in any of the cities we've been to. Can't wait to get back to Boston : )

Report from Tourist-Land

PRAGUE-- Just a quick post, as Scott and I need to get moving today. We're taking a train tonight to Zurich.

Prague is a beautiful city-- the prettiest I have been to in Europe. It is overrun by tourists and clearly dependent on them for a large part of its economy. For that reason, everyone here speaks English. Our bartender in one establishment, Kate, tells us she learned English at a bar serving tourists.

We managed to see the building in Prague where they filmed the bank scene in The Bourne Identity. Even though the movie takes place in Zurich at the beginning of the plot, the bank scene there was shot here.

More later. For now, breakfast and then a full day of touring before our night train. I should post next from Zurich.

Closing Munich Chapter 1

PRAGUE -- It's shortly after midnight Monday morning here in Prague, and we've arrived safely in the capital city of the Czech Republic. It was kind of cool to cross the border. A Czech border guard walked through each compartment in our train, followed closely by a German police officer. In succession, they each stamped our passports-- The Czech officer welcomed us in, and then the German police officer stamped us out of Germany. The stamps are pretty cool-- The German one has a little picture of a train on it.

Scott and I manged to stay out of trouble leaving Munich. At the train station, we traded forty of our remaining Euros for 800 Crowns, which are the currency here in Prague. We are officially carrying three different types of currency! Of course, we had no idea what a Crown was when we got to the train station, though we did know the money in Prague was different than in Germany. Upon arriving in the center of Prague, we bought a Coke Lite to get change for the metro.

Can't really give you an early read on Prague, except to say the metro is very clean. While on the train, Scott and I mapped our plan for day 1 here tomorrow, which will include visiting the Castle across the river and walking on the Charles bridge over the river Vltava.

Before leaving Munich on Sunday, we had breakfast at the Weisses Brauhaus (boiled white sausages) downtown, and we took a trip out to see the Olympic village, which is north of the city center. Scott and I got into an argument on whether space needles, such as the one in Munich, are becoming "more common." (Scott says they are. He has stood next to the one in Toronto, seen pics of the one in Seattle and thinks there's at least one somewhere in Asia. In fact, there's even one in Prague. Still, despite all the evidence, Ross believes space needles are not, in fact, becoming more common. What we have here is a difference of opinion). If you have thoughts, leave a comment to this post, and we know you have thoughts. We did take some pictures from the restaurant in the needle (though it was cloudy), and we did see the Olympic village where the tragic events in 1972 took place.

We were sad to leave Munich; it's a special city that was good to us. But we know we will be back there for one more night later this week.

Speaking of Munich, a couple of additional random facts:

-- You can't pry a woman from her Schmuck in Munich. ("Schmuck" is the word for jewelry, so we think, given where it appears in stores there).

-- Ashton Kutcher has apparently set up a phone company in Munich. T-Mobile in German is "T-Punkt." All kidding aside, we did have to use a T-Punkt phone at the Munich train station to call ahead and make sure we had guaranteed late arrival here in Prague. Once again, everyone speaks English...

A Somber Day

MUNICH -- One of the great things about this trip is Scott and I are kind of just making our itinerary up as we go along. While on the plane, we noticed that there is a town within range of the Munich subway called Dachau, and upon further review, we discovered it is the same, infamous Dachau-- where one finds the Dachau concentration camp (called "Gedenkstatte"). We went there on Saturday (I am writing this on Sunday morning, which has dawned sunny-- our second straight day of good weather).

The subway system here is fantastic. It's similar to what I saw in Berlin when I was there in 2000. S-Bahn trains cover a large area outside of Munich, including to the airport; whereas U-Bahn trains cover more ground within Munich itself. To get to Dachau, we took an S-Bahn train.

While the system is great, it's not exactly a simple task for an American to buy a train ticket. Each station has ticket machines, but everything is in German (there's a way to push a button on the machine that looks like a flag to change the language, but I haven't been able to get it to work). So basically picture us taking at least five extra minutes for each subway ride spent in front of this ticket machine, trying to figure out how to make it work. When it finally did, we would raise our hands in triumph. Which is all the more ironic since they don't even check the tickets when you get into the station or on the train-- not once has anyone even asked for our ticket.

As you could probably imagine, Dachau is a pretty terrible place. It's not where one would go to laugh. Hidden behind a relatively new housing complex, and accessible via a discreet path, the Bavarian state has preserved as much as it can from the World War II days. Two of the more than 30 original bunkers where prisoners lived have been reconstructed, and there is a very nice museum and gift shop (as soon as you can find the entrance). Scott and I took a two hour tour that was fantastic. It included a trip to the incinerator and gas chamber. In a bit of dark irony, the gas chamber at Dachau was never used, for once it was completed late in the war, the Nazi's found they no longer had enough coal to burn the bodies once they were dead -- the Allies had bombed the large German coal mines by that point.

We tried to figure out why our tour guide did what she did. She was a volunteer, has been doing tours for eight years, and has a full time job as a marketing researcher. Her English is very good. We decided she must have had a relative who was either an inmate at Dachau or a member for the SS (Secret Police) that inflicted the terror on Dachau's subjects. By the way, two random facts: Dachau is pronounced without the "c," and we actually saw "Dachau II," since it was the second camp built there-- the first was torn down in 1937.

The trip to Dachau sandwiched two excursions into Munich's city center, which is less than a mile from our hotel. In the morning, after breakfast, we went downtown to Marienplatz, the city square where there is currently a large Christmas Market, and we climbed the tower of the Glockenspiel, which is in the middle of the "New Town Hall" in Marienplatz, to take pictures of the view. We could not see the Alps, but at least it was sunny on Saturday and we could see the famous Munich view of the Olympic park (we're going there today, Sunday).

After Dachau, we went back to Marienplatz to have dinner at the Ratskeller restaurant. Then we took the U-bahn out to a neighborhood called Schwabing, north of the city center, to visit a couple of bars. Schwabing is a young and hip section of town. We could tell this because there are a lot of places to buy pizza and greasy food late at night, and there were a bunch of Starbucks and a chain of coffee shops called "San Francisco Coffee Company." (Wonder if San Francisco knows they're here?)

Which brings us to day two of our random observation section:

1) Munich is a very friendly town. Scott and I like it a lot. It's far friendlier that what I remember about Berlin, which is good since I was judging all of Germany based on that trip, which brings up a very important point:

2) We have yet to see a single German flag flying here. We're in the state of Bavaria (Munich is its capital city). Bavaria is known as a friendly, good natured area. Well, Munich sees itself more as Bavaria than as Germany. Pops, the elderly man we met at the beer hall the first night, says Berlin is not in Bavaria and so Berlin is not as nice. In any event, the Bavarian flag is a white and blue checkerboard. We've seen that a few places, however, it's not plastered everywhere. More importantly, not one German flag.

3) Everyone here speaks English. I mean everyone. We crashed a fortieth birthday party at a small Schwabing bar, and even though everyone was speaking in German, they had a "Happy Birthday" sign in English hanging in the main room.

By the way, the woman who turned forty was at the wall in 1989 when it came down. They showed a photo of her on top of it as part of this projected slide-show roast at the party. It was a very powerful picture, though few in the room reacted. We think that maybe going to the wall in 1989 was common for people in there 20s. Kind of like the protests in the U.S. during Vietnam.

By virtue of where we were sitting, we were in pretty much all of the key photos taken at the birthday party. Which means when they show them at this woman's fiftieth birthday party, everyone is going to wonder who the h*** we are.

Today, Sunday, we leave Munich to travel to Prague. I should be able to get online at the hotel there.

Editor's Note: The photos on these posts are taken from other websites (Scott showed me how to do it). They are not taken by me. I forgot the cable to connect my camera to the computer. Real photos I have taken will have to wait...

Jason Bourne Meets the Hofbrauhaus


MUNICH -- Scott and I accomplished our first objective last night, which was to stay awake.

We did it by making a trip to the world famous Hofbrauhaus, which is basically a very big beer hall. Literally the place is one large room with long tables. We had some beer with a U.K. couple named Frank and Karen (or Katie... something with a K). They live in northern England. After moving to a different table because the first was reserved, we sat with a very nice older American gentleman who we nicknamed "Pops," along with two native Germans.

If you hadn't guessed it, in Munich you can basically sit at a table with anyone you want. It's weird, but kind of cool. You just go up to a table with an open seat and say "FRY?" (Which means "free")... And you sit your butt down. A native Munich woman we met earlier yesterday told us that the natives are proud of this. In America, it wouldn't go very well.

Which leads me to a round of useless, random observations:

-- They have a lot of bikes here. I mean a ton. They have special bike lanes and you'd better not walk in them for fear of death. We saw bike racks with literally fifty or a hundred bikes.

-- Everyone here speaks English. Lucky for us, since the only words we know are "Beer" and the aforementioned "Fry"... And as you can see, good luck on my actually spelling those words the right way in German.

-- They sell alcohol on the street. It's this hot wine called Gluwein (pronounced Gloo-- VINE). It's pretty potent stuff. And they sell it right on the street. If you pay extra, they let you keep the coffee cup mug used to serve it. So there's a bunch of people walking around with these random mugs (well, those are probably all tourists). This was when we walked down the Neuhasser street market.

-- They really like pretzels here. They sell them in every restaurant. And I guess it's a nice gesture to buy a "round" of pretzels for your table at a beer hall. Someone did that last night for us. Scott made the comment that you could take a Munich native to Fenway, give them a soft pretzel and a serving from the Sausage Guy, and they would be in heaven. Wouldn't even have to go in the ballpark.

Anyway, we also saw the Christmas market here, which was nice. We met this very nice family where the husband is from the U.S. and the wife is from Munich, so they have an apartment in Munich and a home in the U.S. They directed us to a nice restaurant where we had our first taste of local fare-- sausages, sauerkraut and pretzels. In the restaurant, we overheard another family speaking Spanish. The daughter spoke German. Here I am thinking--- "I can't even speak English good."

Jason Bourne on a Budget is a go

Scott and I have touched down in Munich. It's about zero Celsius here, and there is a very light snow falling. We found our hotel pretty well.

The trip here was fairly uneventful. Scott and I spent the day Thursday in Philadelphia in the rain. Shortly after arriving, I realized I have forgotten the cable to connect my camera to the computer, so pics will have to wait for my return.

During the day, the weather situation the northeast collapsed. I read email after email of colleagues attempting to leave work, but only finding they could creep a few meters before having to turn around and come back to the office. Meanwhile, Scott and I had our picture taken with the Liberty Bell.

We set two early rules for the trip:
-- Whenever we put our name down for a table, we will use the name "Bourne."
-- We are going to take a picture of every type of beer we consume (two so far at the Philly airport).

We managed to get some sleep on the plane, which was rather bumpy and left Philadelphia about an hour late (typical, so says Scott).

We're soon to leave the hotel to find lunch... It's six hours ahead here.

Youth and the Media

I just came home from a panel discussion organized by MassINC called: "Plugged In, Tuned Out: Young Adults and the Media."

Panelists, including Adam Gaffin (who I finally got to meet) of UniversalHub, discussed why young adults are turned off by the newsmedia. A couple of interesting take-aways:

-- As noted by Bianca Vazquez Toness, a panelist from WBUR, maybe young voters don't pay attention to the media because the media don't report on what young voters care about. She just wrapped up a story for WBUR on what young voters do care about. The answers? The draft and the environment. Not necessarily surprising. When was the last time the New York Times wrote a front page story on the stances Presidential candidates have on the draft?

-- The previously mentioned Gaffin did a great job summarizing the role of bloggers in today's media environment. He noted how bloggers are ideal for giving first-hand accounts of breaking news events; he noted the plant explosion last year north of Boston in Danvers. But to actually explain why the explosion happened, we need the Boston Globe and the professional news journalists.

As a whole, the panel focused far too much on the topic for a general audience, rather than for the young-adult age group advertised. Case in point: "The Daily Show" came up once, and that was by a questioner.

As a result of the panel, I plan to follow Dan Kennedy's blog. He was a panelist.

Of the coverage today of the recent National Intelligence report that discusses how Iran is not building a nuclear bomb, I find this excerpt very interesting from today's New York Times:

Intelligence officials had said just weeks ago they were ending the practice of declassifying parts of intelligence estimates, citing concerns that analysts might alter their judgments if they knew the reports would be widely publicized.
But in a statement on Monday, Donald M. Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, said that since the new estimate was at odds with the 2005 assessment — and thus at odds with public statements by top officials about Iran — “we felt it was important to release this information to ensure that an accurate presentation is available.”

Simply put, they didn't want to publish the report, but they had to because the administration was inaccurately portraying Iran. Which makes me wonder, don't the people who write the National Intelligence reports talk to the administration peeps discussing policy? In fact, don't they work for the same administration? Aren't we all on the same team.

The New York Times gets it. They carefully noted the timing of when the researchers were filing the report versus what President Bush and V.P. Cheney were saying publicly.

NOTE: Excerpt from New York Times, December 4, 2007. "U.S. Finding Says Iran Halted Nuclear Arms Efforts in 2003," Page A1.

Back row (LtoR): Mr. & Mrs. Tinder, Mrs. & Mr. Levanto

Front row (L to R): Akemi and me

November 25, 2007

Morgantown, W.V.

Interesting story my brother Mark just emailed me. It's sad that we all begin Christmas shopping before Thanksgiving now...

I decided on Saturday night that I wanted to get my kids Nintendo Wii for Christmas. We went everywhere and nobody had them in stock, but Toys R Us was getting a shipment so they told me to come back at 9:00 on Sunday. I show up at 8:45 (Yes, I skipped church) to a line of 75-100 people at the door and a store manager announcing to the crowd "No pushing, no shoving, and remember that if you don't have a ticket, you don't get a Wii." I've never seen anything like it. Needless to say, about two hours later I walked out with one of the last Wiis they had. They sold out of 100 of them in about two hours (Of course, the tickets were gone in about five minutes). The funniest part of it was this: I was in line behind this incredibly obnoxious woman and I noticed that the line next to us was moving faster and was shorter -- so I gave up my spot and went to the end of the other line (there were only two lines). As it turns out, the faster line was being serviced by two registers, so it was moving twice as fast. I get to the front (about five people ahead of the woman) and she gets mad and leaves her line and cuts in front of me. Everyone in my line freaks out (except me -- I figured if she wanted it that bad she could have it, plus with two registers I was next either way), but the woman refused to move. It was only when the two cashiers informed her that they would refuse to serve her that she returned to her original spot. Unbelievable.

I am going to see Mark this Thursday at Thanksgiving.

My thoughts from the democratic debate that happened this past Thursday.

1) I don't agree with Senator Clinton that the recent "increase" in support from the Iranian Guard is hurting Iraq. The key here is the word increase. In all my reading I am not sure if Iran's support is recent. Iran has always had influence in Iraq-- even when Saddam Hussein was in power.

2) I agree with John Edwards stance on torture, racial profiling, and the Patriot Act that he layed out to the gentleman in the audience who noted he was racially profiled all the time.

3) It is so clear that Joe Biden is your candidate if foreign policy is the biggest issue for you; Hillary Clinton is if healthcare is the biggest issue.

4) How many times do we have to be told in each debate that Senator Chris Dodd speaks Spanish? This time, he proved it to us.

5) I do agree that the honor-system-timelimit does not work.

As for me, I went into the debate leaning toward Edwards and come out leaning toward Edwards.

Upcoming Travel

Here's a review of some upcoming travel for me.

Wednesday, November 21 - Friday morning, November 23
Franklin, Conn.
Thanksgiving

Friday, November 23 - Sunday, November 25
Morgantown, W.V.
UCONN v. WVU in football

Thursday evening, December 13 - Friday, December 21
Munich, Germany
Prague, Czech Republic
Zurich, Switzerland
"Jason Bourne on a Budget" with Scott Lauber

Scott and I are slowly planning our trip to Europe in December. Jason Bourne on a Budget, as we are calling it.

We land in Munich on December 14 and stay for two days. Then we take a train to Prague for two days. The only remaining question is where do we go after Prague. Scott is in Boston this weekend staying with me, and it would appear we are leaning toward Zurich. The other options are Berlin and Vienna.

We leave Munich on December 21 to fly back to the United States.

I Blame the Boston Globe for Voter Apathy

Idealistically, the media serves as the town crier. The person who stands in the middle of the town square and tells the community what it needs to hear. Certainly the media also tells an audience what they want to hear; but clearly human beings do not often want to hear what they need to hear.

It is not surprising to me that turn out for the recent Boston City election was low. If you had lived in Boston in the weeks leading up to the election, you never would have known there was one. The Boston Globe did not cover the election. Globe columnist Adrian Walker wrote a column on election day that noted how dead the election season was.

He concludes:

People just don't pay enough attention to the City Council to feel invested in who serves on it.

That's too bad, because on a range of issues, from neighborhood violence to property taxes, the council holds the most significant platform, other than the mayor's. The council has a limited ability to act, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. Nine nervous candidates are waiting to see if voters today reach the same conclusion.

To be frank, these two paragraphs infuriate me. That a Globe columnist says it's disappointing the public does not pay enough attention to the City Council should be reflection of the Globe's coverage. Looking at Mr. Walker's own columns is telling. I do not see one column about the City Council election in his recent archive, which goes back to early October-- a month to the election. I did see one column about the Boston Red Sox, which is interesting given that Mr. Walker is not a sports columnist. I understand certainly the Red Sox have a cultural impact far beyond just the Sports page, but his Red Sox column was published one week to the election. One week later, Mr. Walker is criticising his readers for not caring to vote.

How is anyone to pay attention to the City Council race when the Boston Globe doesn't bother to cover it?

I was in London when my neighborhood organized a candidates' forum, sponsored by several neighborhood groups. Almost all of the Boston City Council candidates were there (including the top five vote-getters in the election who battled for the four at-large seats), and between 70 and 100 residents attended. The Globe did not cover it. It's a good thing that I had already done a lot of research on the race before the forum took place. I was not here for it, and there's no way I would have read about it in my local city newspaper. (Props to the Beacon Hill Times and Back Bay Courant for covering it, though).

Adam Gaffin at the Universal Hub hosted a blog string on this topic, and the discussion is pretty good. Apparently, Globe City Editor Brian McGrory finds the City Council boring. Well, Mr. McGrory, why should we be surprised, then, that the voters do not go to the polls? Adam Gaffin also dissects the Globe's online coverage during election night in a previous post. Long story short, if you wanted to know who won the City Council elections in Boston on election night, one would not have found them on Boston.com.

To be sure, the City Council election is not as important as many other elections. People generally don't want to care about it. But they need to know about the races, the key issues, and the positions of each of the candidates. And the responsibility of giving people what they need to know rests on the media.

Where were the profiles of the candidates? The in-depth profiles of each and what issues they stand on? The coverage of the debates?

The election is past us now, and despite the fact not many went to the polls, the results are very important. Matt O'Mally, a former city council candidate, breaks down some of the numbers on his blog. What's great about numbers in a low-turnout election is that you know the voters who actually voted are the types who will vote in *every* election. If you want to earn "the base," you have to understand them.

For those following from afar, John Connolly did in fact win a seat on the Boston City Council this week.

Endorsement: John Connolly

I figured I would take a litte more space to explain why I am voting for John Connolly. I met John two years ago when he first ran for the at-large City Council seat. I was actually volunteering for Mayor Menino at the time, holding a sign for him outside a Mayoral debate at WGBH. John Connolly was there shaking hands. I remember being overwhelmed by his energy.

At the election a few weeks later, he got my vote, along with Patricia White and Michael Flaherty. I was shocked he did not win, simply because I saw, first-hand, how hard he was campaigning.

Connolly has not lost a step in the two years since that election. He wants to make a difference, and frankly, I think it's time for a little change on the City Council (even with Sam Yoon a relative newcomer). But his energy is not why I am voting for him. There are two reasons why.

First, John understands that there are a lot of people like me who want to live in Boston for the long term but are freaked out by the cost of owning a home here. That's not even mentioning the cost of raising a child here. Since I first moved here in 1994 to go to BU, it was pretty much taken for granted that you have fun in your 20's in the city, and then get married and move to the suburbs. Now that I have lived here for a bit, and want to stay, I cannot simply accept that reality.

Second (and this point isn't often made, but it's important), John Connolly understands the limitations of the City Council. Let's face it-- The City Council cannot do much. But there are certain areas where the Council can have an impact. Connolly is smart about the change he wants to make; his platform is not overly ambitious, but it's laser-like in its focus. I like that.

No question that John Connolly really wants this. I received two separate auto calls from him tonight... In the first, he simply restates his credentials. In the second, he seeks to deflect the criticism related to mailer-gate.

Speaking of mailer-gate, here's my two cents on that. For those of you not in Boston, Connolly sent two separate mailers attacking a City Councilor, Stephen Murphy, this weekend. The problem is, he didn't say the mailers came from him. I will stop there. The tactic was wrong. While it will not cost Connolly my vote, it was wrong. I can't believe he expected that no one would find out. I am in complete disbelief.

That being said, Connolly deserves a shot. And while I could vote for three other candidates to fill the at-large City Council seats, Connolly will get my only vote.

Endorsements

On Tuesday, November 6, I will be voting for the following candidates:

Michael P. Ross
Boston City Council District Seat
District 8

John Connolly
Boston City Council
At Large

I live in the City of Boston, Ward 5, Precinct 4.