Well I'll be damned, this Radio weblog still works! I took a break because I've been experimenting with my typepad blog.

A Republican veep would be good.

I will add that to the list. A few weeks back I read and liked John Robb's recommendation: Contract Sport (at least I think it was John Robb who recommended it...).

I am new to The New Yorker; my parents gave all of us a subscription at Christmas. This past weekend I asked my dad what he liked in this issue. I tried to express my hurdles with this magazine -- it has a different rhythm than any other magazine I get, and can't quite get a way to approach it week to week (IOW not front to back). My question, which he heard as "what should I read in this issue," was actually "how should I read this thing"?

Dad reads it this way: Start with The Talk of the Town. Next read the movie reviews (or maybe he meant the featured movie review. This week would be Anthony Lane's review of "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"). Then he moves onto authors he likes. From the March 22 issue, he marked: Kathy Gannon: Letter from Afghanistan, Andy Borowitz (Shouts & Murmurs), Jeffrey Toobin: Annals of Law, Alice Munro (Fiction), and Adam Gopnik: A Critic at Large, and Anthony Lane's review. The only N.Y. writer I know is the guy with the glasses who lost some cash in the dotcom boom then wrote a book about it (what was his name? He reviews movies, I saw him on Charlie Rose...).

So here's an Andy Rooney-like nitpicking observation: how many titles does each article have in this damn thing? Dad marked Kathy Gannon's article, so do I refer to it as "Letter from Afghanistan"? Maybe that is that the name of her column, and this installment is titled "Road Rage," is that it? Is "Letter From" a section (kind of like the chron has Datebook) where Ms Gannon happens to be this week's author???

Anyone know of a Dummies book titled something like: "'The New Yorker' & Other Literary Rags - A Guide for White Trash Readers"?

I met my mom at the Palace hotel at 5:30pm. Luckily, she'd arrived at 5:00, a full hour early but just in time to secure the remaining two seats in the last row. Standing room only.

"This is my daughter," my mom pointed to me, "this is my mother," we waved to her East Bay friends and my San Francisco friends from accross the room.

The Governor was late, some got antsy. Others spontaneously broke into song: the Star Spangled Banner and "Shout for Dean - Cheney/Bush Disease" by the Auditorials.

Someone tossed a Bushocchio doll into the air and the crowd volleyed it back and forth in camraderie. "Paging Dr. Dean...paging Dr. Howard Dean.." someone said as the clock ticked on...where was he?

Finally he showed and all was forgiven -- the crowd gave him standing o after standing o. "With receptions like this, maybe it's not too late to get back in the race" he said laughing. It was the Governor at his best, lighting the room on fire with passion and joy.

Ronn just appeared on Hardball. Chris started by asking "is San Francisco as bad -- oops I mean as left as people think it is?" to which Ronn replied absolutely not, San Francisco is part of the larger bay area which may lean a wee bit left if it leans at all. Then they moved onto gay marriage, political centrists, the FCC and the negative campaign ads.

The best question was "why do people call into talk-radio shows?" Some people call because they have something to add, Ronn said. But many people call in "because of something called 'ego', Chris, a word neither you nor I are familiar with". The line got an approving laugh from Matthews.

All in all a good segment. Chris also plugged Ronn's new book. I think Ronn's next book should be "Liberals are from Mars, Conservatives are from Venus," a guide for talking to the other side. I wonder which side would buy more copies?

Good article in today's Salon on Stern's wedge strategy. It's not the indecency hysteria that caused Clear Channel to pull Stern's show from six markets, he claims, but rather his anti-Bush remarks. Is he sincere or strategically using this political claim as a wedge to keep himself on the air?

"He's got one of the biggest audiences in all of radio, and perhaps the most loyal," says Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers magazine, the nonpartisan monthly that covers radio's news/talk industry. "And that's why he's so dangerous for the White House."...

..."Our research shows many, many people in the 30- to 40-year-old range who were Bush supporters are rethinking that position and turning away from Bush because of what Howard Stern has been saying," says Harrison....

...There are early signs that Bush supporters are indeed nervous about Stern's crusade. This week Limbaugh wrote a newspaper Op-Ed column dismissing Stern's claims against Bush as coming from "the left-wing fringe." (Stern returned fire, labeling Limbaugh a Bush "lackey.")...

..."There's no question," says Harrison, "Stern is the sleeping giant of liberal radio."...

Too good to be true?

Tom DeLay's funny-money trail

The GOP strongman's political machine has stopped at nothing to extend its power. Now it's facing indictments for violating Texas campaign finance laws.

By Lou Dubose

test...

Wow me weblog seems to be working again. 

I hate to say this, but I think many voters are unconsciously starting to resent these early endorsements. Unlike me, they have not been following the race since the first debate last January.

Some family members and a few friends think Dean didn't earn his front-runner status. They think he cruised in on the coattails of the cronies within the party who made it easy for him with early endorsements (like I said, they just started watching the race).

They also think the media has made it easy for Dean: "the media selected their candidates a few months ago. And overwhelmingly, they selected Howard Dean" said moderate San Francisco talk show host Pete Wilson a few minutes ago.

Maybe you guys should hold back the next few endorsements for a few days. I would like people to come to their own conclusions, and they will, that Dean is the best candidate.

--just my $.02!!

PS(Caller to Pete Wilson's show just said "I'm a Clark supporter, but the more I listen to him, the more I like Dean".)