A Rebuttal

I am writing down some thoughts I have about an editorial, "Fighting For The People", I read this morning in my hometown newspaper the Chelsea Record. I am listed with a group of Councilors who the paper claimed "spearheaded" a campaign to to favor commercial interests over residential interests in regards to property taxes. The editorial goes on to say that taxes are too high on home owners and the editor asks "why would other councilors be willing to shift burdens at a time when every dollar counts for residential taxpayers?" Excuse me for not posting a link, the Chelsea Record has not updated it's website since right before Thanksgiving. I also tried to PDF and convert the story to an image but that did not work either.

First off I would like to address the measure itself. The debate was over the real estate shift, wheter or not to shift the tax to burden businesses more then residential units tax wise. The vote that is mentioned in the paper WAS NOT made on this. RATHER the vote was in regards to an amendment offered by Councilor Roy Avellaneda that would have scaled back the shift slightly (the measure he was trying to attach it to went for a full shift) but still would have allowed a rather large shift towards the business side. The amendment is what I voted for, I did NOT vote against the tax shift. Maybe I should say this again I voted FOR the tax shift. Without the amendment the average tax on residences would go down and businesses would go up substantially. With the amendment business taxes would still go up from the current year but residential taxes would have, on average, stayed the same.

I would also like to address my "spearheading" the amendment. As I stated another Councilor offered the amendment, I am not listed on it anywhere. I was not even informed of the amendment and only heard of it during debate when it was tossed into mix. I personally have never brought forward a measure without either knowing I had the votes to pass it or have tried to convince everyone but I am not here to critique the techniques of other Councilors. I did not see a Chelsea Record reporter that night, so I can see why there was an issue.

It should also be noted that we had just passed a Residential Tax exemption that gave people who live in their homes a decent sized tax discount (we also voted on a resolution to name this after a fellow Councilor.) Later in the night we also passed the local meals tax which placed a .075 percent tax on the purchase of any prepared food in the city. We were already pushing back taxes on home owners, we were shifting tax burden onto business AND we were putting an extra tax on the prepared food industry I think it is only fair that we compromise on something to help out the struggling businesses in the city. I would question the Councilors who voted against the local meals tax, for the residential tax exemptions, who say we can not cut education/safety or essential services. I do not understand how they intend to pay for all of that while cutting taxes for residential units.

We ask our public officials to make tough decisions all the time. I think it is only fair that when they make what is a difficult vote that we include a little context as well. I feel like I was portrayed as a crony for business in the city which I guess I am except for when I am not (when the Chelsea Record says that people like me who have opposed industrial and business proposals that would hurt local residents are anti business.)

I plan on writing an editorial for next weeks paper but I wanted to lay this out while it is still fresh on my mind. If you think I am wrong feel free to tell me.

Because sometimes the NYT is wrong

I read an article in the New York Times (Via The Big Money) by Bruce Buschel who is apparently opening up a new restaurant in New York and is writing about it in a blog for the paper. The article is entitled "100 Things a Restaurant Staffer Should Never Do, Part I". Overall I think it had some good points, number 3 is great "Never refuse to seat three guests before the fourth arrives", after all who has had to stand around waiting for a fourth person when you could start appetizers and drinks without them? The problem is there are some other rules that are not so great.

"7. Do not announce your name. No jokes, no flirting, no cuteness."

I do not mind knowing the name of the PERSON serving me, after all they are a PERSON. People have names, they have personalities, hire people with good personalities and let them loose. Sure if they go over board that is not good but I hate a non personal waiter. It makes me uncomfortable.

"10. Do not inject your personal favorites when explaining the specials."
"40. Never say, “Good choice,” implying that other choices are bad."
"43. Never mention what your favorite dessert is. It’s irrelevant."

I consider these three to be a group, the opinion group I guess you could say. Anyone who has dined with me will have seen me, on at least one occasion, ask what the waitress/waiter thinks. They work in the restaurant, they know what other people order and what people were expecting and did not get etc. I depend on their opinion, after all even if they are just working their between gigs it is their job and they deal with the food all the time. The better the restaurant the more I trust that you picked someone to staff the tables who has an iota of a clue as to what people could possibly want to eat. I made a visit to Jimmy's Steer House in Saugus over the summer and it instantly became one of my favorite places to eat after I found a dish I really enjoy there, Calamari on Caesar Salad. When the waitress came over I was perplexed over what to get and when she saw I was torn over the Calamari salad she interjected that it is really good and suggested Caesar Salad as a trade for the normal salad. She was right , it was GREAT. Here is an example where her opinion did matter and her interjecting did make a difference. I could have easily dismissed the idea and went with the normal salad but that was why I was torn and her assurance that the Caesar option was good sold me on it.

If I go into your restaurant feel free to compliment me on my choice and please do tell me what the best dessert on the menu is! I want to know. I promise I won't tell your boss.

"18. Know before approaching a table who has ordered what. Do not ask, “Who’s having the shrimp?”"
"48. Do not ask what someone is eating or drinking when they ask for more; remember or consult the order."

These are both good rules to try to follow but I sure do hope that the owner is not going to be following them around to ensure compliance. After all I would rather have the right meal in front of me even if it meant asking to make sure it was mine. I do not want nervous waiters who are so afraid of a mistake that they may end up giving me the wrong dish. I also do not want nervous wait staff period, it makes me uncomfortable. After all as a patron my comfort should be taken into account, give your wait staff a break if they make a mistake on these rules other wise they will be nervous and will make me nervous.

"42. Do not compliment a guest’s attire or hairdo or makeup. You are insulting someone else."

From the department of petty complaints comes this gem. I do not even know what to say here, I guess in this place there is no such thing as a compliment. I do not see what is wrong with paying a compliment when you notice something that looks very nice, they obviously worked hard on it let them get complimented on it.

"32. Never touch a customer. No excuses. Do not do it. Do not brush them, move them, wipe them or dust them."

OK I understand this one I really do, after all it is a classic way for waitresses to elicit more tips from their male patrons. When a waitress does any of those motions they do increase their chance of better tips, unless there happens to be a woman at the table attached to the man and even more so if she controls the finances. It is a dangerous game to be playing but I am not sure if I want to see it outlawed outright.

For me most of the ones I picked out come down to the human factor. I want a person waiting on me, not a robot. My guess is that this place will be too expensive for me to dine in anyway, so I will not have to worry about it much. He has 50 more coming out soon, I am sure they will be just as pretentious and over the top as these.

Let me pull out the few I really like:

"4. If a table is not ready within a reasonable length of time, offer a free drink and/or amuse-bouche. The guests may be tired and hungry and thirsty, and they did everything right." (Not that hard)

"16. If someone requests more sauce or gravy or cheese, bring a side dish of same. No pouring. Let them help themselves." (I am a dipper myself so I love this)

"20. Never refuse to substitute one vegetable for another." (Personal favorite)

"31. Never remove a plate full of food without asking what went wrong. Obviously, something went wrong." (YES, full plate means something is wrong... One section untouched, something went wrong.Thought I can not help but feel that this may have been avoided if the waiter was allowed to express an opinion of some sort involving the dish I was ordering :/ )

I had some free moments so I decided to write my thoughts on my leaving the Chelsea City Council in December. Be warned it is self serving, I am leaving the City Council but am still a politician ;)

I've spent my whole life in Chelsea living among long term neighbors, family members and newer residents. The first 26 years of my life in Chelsea seemed to culminate in my election to the Chelsea City Council (District 3). I remember going to school in the basement of the old Mary C Burke school (which is now a condo development, I was on the planning board when it was finalized and have responded to issues the current residents have to the best of my ability.) I remember playing in the old Merritt Park (now the New Mary C Burke school which is across from the site where a developer wanted to build a diesel power plant but we {local environmentalists and community activists/members} managed to stop it) and watching the councilor at the time lead an election rally when I was young, I would later go to school with his son and become his city councilor. As kids we checked out the old Forbes lithograph site (condos under construction,Aerosmith filmed a video there and a hosts a windmill whose base was moved across the site without resident input, because input was not required at the time, which prompted my sponsoring of a new comprehensive windmill ordinance.) Bradlees made way for Home Depot and features sidewalks that 18 year old Matt insisted be added to the site at a community meeting, 23 year old Matt approved while on the planning board and 26 year old insisted be kept free of snow so the local elderly residents can get to the local market and young children can get to school. My tenure occurred during the end of the boom years. I found it incredible to have been involved in the community visioning , in some cases approving plans as a member of the planning board and then dealing with the constituent problems that arise from massive redevelopment in a small area. It is rather ironic that now as the dust has settled, Webster has been repaved, Jefferson has received funding to be fixed, I step down. I enjoyed the busy years and fixing the problems that would arise, I do wonder what it would be like without all of those pending issues.

The highlights of the past few years have been:

* My election by my peers as the Vice President of the Council

* My appointment to the City Manager Evaluation Committee

* My appointment the next year to be Chair of the City Manager Evaluation Subcommittee
* Being the Main Sponsor on a Comprehensive Windmill Ordinance
* Being the main sponsor on a resolution calling for a freeze on tolls on the Tobin Bridge

* Being the main sponsor on a resolution calling for the retention of the resident discount program on the Tobin Bridge
* Signing onto resolutions trying to combat foreclosure in the city
* Working with the police department to curb drag racing with a massive reduction occurring during my tenure
* Working with city officials to reduce the number of trucks on residential roads and monitoring trucks through regular outreach to local citizens
* The repaving of Webster Ave

* The imminent reconstruction of Jefferson Ave
* The redesign of a pocket park taking the concerns of residents into account and brokering a compromise concerning the location of the basketball court
*My attendance at a vast array of cultural and community events, including my outreach to the public in publicizing them before and after the fact
* My advocacy of making more use of our preexisting sub committees in order to help increase transparency in local government
* Participating in Student Government Day in City Hall, getting a ticket while doing so and promptly paying for it at the City Clerks office!

In an unofficial capacity:

*My appearence on WFNX competing against Sam Yoon in "My Song is Better The Your Song"
* My oped piece on citizen involvement in the local community in the Chelsea Record
* Sitting on a panel for the Young Democrats of Massachusetts on running for office
* My subsequent appointment to the Executive Board of said group a few months later
* My defense of Chelsea against slander from a politician from another town
* Meeting the Latimer Society Girls Science Club in Cambridge on one of their trips
* Organizing a trip of the Boy Scout Troop to City Hall to meet with the City Manager and tour our emergency management center

It has been quite a ride in more ways then one. Most of my vacation time went towards attending events or meeting with constituents. I had a policy where I would make house calls and read every single piece of paper that went past my desk. I showed up to all meetings and attended the meetings of subcommittees I did not belong to to stay abreast of what was going on. I would routinely send out emails at midnight on a Saturday and be surprised to find our City Manager responding at 1am giving me enough time to respond by 1:15 am. It has also come with some fatigue, I began feeling like I could not give it my all for another term. I work an hour away and am looking to take on other projects in the next two years. Doing a sub par job was not ever an option and I felt that leaving midterm would be insulting to my colleagues and constituents.

I have liberal tendencies but have always been an advocate of governing in a smart, responsible, logical, ethical manner. Before making any major decisions I spoke with local residents and specifically looked for viewpoints contrary to what I believed. Ultimately I always voted the way I felt was best for city and my constituents. Generally I voted in line with people I traditionally considered my allies in the city but on a few occasions I went a different way but would always be up front and honest as to why I was voting the way I was. It is my hope that whoever fills my spot maintains the same level of good governance.

One of my philosophies that I carry with me is "Just because something is legal that does not make it right." I always have had zero tolerance for people that create injustice and hide behind legal manipulations.

People keep asking me what is next and I am not sure yet. As a rule former City Councilors and employees must wait a year before being appointed to any standing boards or commissions. I also may not have a Boy Scout troop to volunteer with as our numbers have dipped very low due to the closure of the elementary school that acted as a feeder for the troop. Most of my plans revolve around later 2010 so I may have a rare lull in life during the early half of 2010. Having been elected, appointed or running for something since I was 11 it will be odd to be so still. In Scouts it was Assistant Patrol Leader, Patrol Leader, Assistant Senior Patrol Leader, Senior Patrol Leader, Junior Assistant Scout Master, Assistant Scout Master, Merit Badge counselor. In school I was on Student Council and pulled an upset over the class Valedictorian to become the school treasurer my senior year. In college it was Treasurer of the Political Science Academy followed by President and later founding member and Deputy Executive of the Salem State Democrats (I was nominated to be President but was in my last half year of my Senior year and wanted someone who would be around the next year.) Leaving school I joined the Chelsea Planning Board and then was elected to City Council. I have to go through the process of dislodging myself from my position without the benefit of having lost a race or "retiring", all of these signs and stickers and business cards will be recycled. My Facebook Group which inexplicably doubled in size since I announced I was not running again needs retooling. Contacting residents I have built relationships with to tell them who their new councilor is. Telling one of my constituents, she was my crossing guard when I was 4, for the 10th time I will not be her councilor come January etc.

I still have a few more meetings with a few resolutions I plan on passing before I leave.

Stay tuned...

Political Guide: Volume I

With so many political races going on at the same time I thought it would be interesting to write a blog about endorsements. How they affect races, guidelines that explain endorsement behavior and other random tidbits tossed in for good measure. I consider these to be guidelines and not hard and fast rules. I have over ten years of experience watching, being involved in and studying political races and am a politician in a small city so do have some insight but be warned I could be wrong!

The first guideline I would like to lay out is that politicians endorse UP and support DOWN. What do I mean by this? Well for example let's take small town/city A they have a council, a mayor and a state rep (State Senator as well.) Generally speaking a councilor may end up endorsing a mayoral candidate and a state rep candidate. The mayoral candidate may endorse a state rep candidate. The state rep candidate will avoid endorsing anyone in the chain. So as you can see people lower on the ladder endorse those higher on the ladder but those who are higher up tend not to endorse down.

That is where the support comes in. The higher up a politician gets the more support, money and experience they have. This can be offered to those lower on the ladder in the form of supporters, money or staff members. While no official endorsement is provided the lower level candidate is able to build using the tools provided to him/her.

Once a candidate receives an endorsement they can use it in many ways. At it's most basic an endorser may be a vote but may not even live in the area where the campaign is happening. An endorser is good for a few things 1) They provide legitimacy to the candidate 2) They provide the candidate with connections to money 3) They provide the candidate with supporters/workers 4) They provide the candidate with press. Not all endorsements carry the same impact.

The affect of an endorsement on the electorate depends on a few factors. How well known is the person doing the endorsing, how is the endorser perceived by the public, how legitimate does the endorser seem, do people trust the endorser and who/what has the endorser endorsed in the past. An endorsement by the Republican Party in a Democratic stronghold may not have much sway. Newspapers can be hit or miss as they increase a candidates visibility but at times seem to endorse people for trivial reasons. The endorsement of a popular local politician with many followers is great because they can provide you with access to voters, volunteers and information. Even regular people without fancy official titles can get in on the act.

There are people in every social situation that act as connectors, if you were to draw out a diagram of how people get their information these people would be in the middle of a cluster and would be connected to other connectors. Other people trust the opinions of these people which makes their opinion very important. These are hard people to peg because sheer volume does not mean every person in their circle trusts them. A keen politician will know who is a valid connector and who just happens to appear to be one. For instance 1,000 followers on Twitter does not mean much if 950 of those people just follow that person because she followed them first. On the other hand a Twitter user with 150 legitimate followers would have more of an impact as those 150 people are following that user for their knowledge and not due to simple reciprocation. This works in the real world as well.

Loyalty plays a role in the endorsement process as well although it will only get a politician so far. Loyalty plays the biggest role in a close race with similar candidates as that could be one of the differences between candidate A and candidate B. A person who endorses someone out of sheer loyalty without sharing any political ideaologies with the candidate risks affecting the trust of others in future elections although that does not stop them from offering the support mentioned earlier in the blog.

Like I said before these are my thoughts and they are mixed in with political theory and sociological theory that stuck around in my head from my college days. I would be interested to see if other people agree with these assesments, just let me know.

UPDATE:

After posting this blog some news was released about the Boston Mayoral election concerning the Sam Yoon endorsement of Michael Flaherty. It is not uncommon for former rivals to rejoin the race as endorsers for another candidate, especially when promised a role in the future government (This does not always mean a position, it can also equate to influence.) This happens all the time at the national level, as was seen in the last Democratic Primary for president when we saw multiple shifts in the Democratic landscape. It does seem to be an uncommon occurrence in this area especially given the fact that I do not believe Boston even has a Deputy Mayor (Yoon will be the Deputy Mayor to Flaherty if Flaherty is elected.) We are all used to seeing bumper stickers with two names on them for President and Governor, it will be interesting to see that at the Mayor level in Boston.

For disclosure purposes on the update I do not have a candidate I am supporting in the Mayors race. The two higher profile endorsements I have outstanding in the current election would be for Andrew Kenneally for At Large City Council in Boston and Michael Capuano for Senator.

Union!

I woke up this morning and checked my Twitter feed (@mattfrank if you would like to follow) and came across this story on the Boston Hyatt's laying off their workers so they could hire people to do their jobs for half the pay. What is even worse with the story in the Globe was that the workers were asked to train their replacements having been told they were training temporary workers who would work during vacation periods and when the work load required more workers, they were "fill ins". It turns out they were replacements and the workers had unwittingly saved Hyatt a fortune by training these new workers for the hotel before receiving their pink slips. As a City Councilor in Chelsea I am sure that many of these workers could have been residents of my city commuting to Hyatt for job with a reasonable pay.

I must have had a psychic connection today because in short order I found out some of the people and organizations I respect most had come out in support of these workers. Boston City Council President Mike Ross was on Twitter pushing the event and spoke, Congressman Capuano was in attendance and the Teamsters apparently showed up in full force. I have yet to meet Mike Ross but from what I read and hear he seems like a class act who genuinely cares about people. I actually sat in for a few minutes on a panel he was giving at State Convention that the Young Democrats helped organize and was impressed. I have always liked Congressman, and with any luck future Senator, Capuano and was very happy to see him standing up for the workers. What I like about Congressman Capuano is that he stands up for what he believes in, it does not matter if he is the Selectman, Mayor, Congressman or running for Senate he will do what he thinks is right.

Finally there are the unions that organized the event and those that showed up. Teamsters Local 25 did not organize the event but I recognized them instantly from the pictures I saw online. Local 25 is my fathers union, I have had the pleasure of being under their protective umbrella in the past. When I was younger my father job hopped, something that continued for quite a few years, which is not uncommon among many in the workforce. Then he got a job, a union job, that he has held for a very long time (he has moved around within the organization but has stayed put.) Even through the eyes of a kid I could see the differences. For starters we were eligible for eye glasses with the healthplan which meant we were able to get them replaced more often. There was better medical care, dental care and they all extended through to children until they leave college. My father seemed happier, workers stayed in their jobs longer which I would imagine makes it easier on management in a way if workers are not coming and going so fast. On a regular basis the union sponsors a blood drive and on one occasion I visited with my father (after I was 18 of course) and we even made it into the Union newsletter which may still be one of the widest circulated photos of me around. I realize unions have their problems but what I've seen from Local 25 has convinced me that workers in most unprotected fields need some sort of union coverage.

Getting back to the workers who were layed off from the Hyatt... They were not part of a union and never have been. The unions decided to get involved themselves. On one hand it is a kind gesture, defending workers. On the other hand it is self preservation, after all if Hyatt manages to get away with this the practice could spread to unionized hotels and other unionized fields. This is about more then just these workers, a line must be drawn to stop the spread of this practice to other companies.

The new employees will not receive benefits or health insurance. These laid off workers are now going to get some sort of government help. If that was not bad enough these new imported workers make so little that they too will be qualified for government assistance in some form. We are now responsible for the OLD and the NEW workers in this deal. How is this fair? Is Hyatt really in that much trouble? If you look at the numbers, I do not think so.

This has happened before. If you have been to the doctors recently chances are some operator in India knows your whole medical history from the medical transcription service your doctor probably uses, being carried across multiple countries by wire. Try getting a local on the phone when you call any major help line. Tax companies are now working on wiring up offices in other countries to process your tax return. Now when you check into a hotel someone making minimum wage with no real connection to the hotel is going to be alone with your stuff while your gone. If you had a hard time trusting the cleaning crew BEFORE wait until you meet the new crew who doesn't know where the pool is and who turn over every 3 months.

Hyatt is what is wrong with this country. By taking these people out of the work force and slashing their pay they are reducing the overall economy so they can pad their own pockets. Most other major hotel chains have come out against the practice and Hyatt is having a rough time publicity wise out on Twitter and other services. It is important that we keep on this company to show them this is not OK and will not be tolerated by the American consumer. What they did was legal... that does not make it right.

Boycott, boycott, boycott

50 Dollars!!??!!??

I am just stopping by here for a quick story, then back to packing.

I worked late in the square tonight so I was able to sleep in a little and then get to work by 11am. After waking up I ran some errands and dropped a few things off at my new apartment and then had to make one more stop before going back to Cambridge. I will not say who I ran into or where I ran into him (other then the fact that it was in Chelsea) but I do have to say I am amazed at the audacity of this guy's request.

While walking down the street I get stopped by a gentleman asking for some money. Normally I just say hello and keep on walking but he stepped right in front of me and put his hand out to shake my hand. Never having been one to walk away from a hand shake I shook the guys hand and went to keep moving when he started his spiel "I know what your thinking, that I just want some money but it is more then that. You've seen me around , you know where I am" well this was true I HAVE seen him around so now I am intrigued. "You see I normally work for so and so but they are in the hospital this week and I am out of work until he gets back on his feet" now you have to remember that I do not remember the exact words coming out of his mouth and my paraphrasing is making him come across as much more coherent then he actually was, I continue to listen. "so to get to my point, I am going out on Sunday and just need 50 dollars for dinner with my buddies and two packs of cigarettes." Excuse me? 50 dollars? Your asking me for a hand out, in the middle of the street and it is 50 dollars? For dinner? When is the last time I spent 50 dollars on myself for dinner? So he goes on for a little bit more and I have enough so I politely tell him I have to get to work and do not carry cash on me.

His response as I am trying to extricate myself from this situation was " Well, I know who you are and I am not going to vote for you!" I ask him his name and where he is from and inexplicably he tells me and I respond "Your not in my district, your a republican, I'm not running for reelection and you haven't voted in years!" Having campaigned in Chelsea for numerous people for over a decade and having done projects on the district breakup and voter blocks while in college I am quite well versed on where everyone is from. Not to be deterred he shoots back "well can you at least buy me a cup of coffee on your debit card?"

Were you expecting me to say I bought him the coffee? Who am I Tip O'Neil? Of course I did not buy him the coffee I told him to have a great day and walked away. I just canceled my cable subscription to save money and I'm going to give you 50 dollars to go out on the town?

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY?

I have always been a fan of books on dystopian futures and alternate history. As someone who also tends to be knowledgeable on the first wave of technology (generally joining on the second wave after the kinks get flushed out but before it becomes very popular) it takes some maneuvering to settle these two interests. I feel that technology can be of great use to people if used properly. Research that would normally take months or even years can be done in weeks and even days. People can communicate instantly in multiple ways with all sorts of different people. On the other hand any casual observer of dystopian future novels (think 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Brave New World) or movies (Terminator, Idiocracy, Matrix) can tell you that the future is bleak because of technology. I will approach my concerns one by one in the following paragraphs.

As ironic as it seems modern day Americans are more concerned about our privacy and safety from our own government then if others are out to harm us. While government privacy should be a major concern many of us forget about the censorship that can be exhibited by the massive corporations that we buy goods and services from. Walmart, for instance, has been known to ban books that it finds mildly offensive. Amazon, acting as a witless giant, not only took 1984 titles off the shelves of its store (they were unauthorized) they struck them out of people Kindles. In many rural areas Walmart IS THE local book store, a fact many of us who live in a city that is still griping to many of it's book stores forget. If Walmart chooses to ban a book, then it is not available in large swaths of the country and puts people in rural areas at the mercy of the giant retailer (mind you pulling a book due to low sales is quite different then pulling a book because you do not like what is inside the covers.) On the other side of the seesaw is Amazon which is just as powerful as Walmart in many areas, if not more so. In an amazing move , even more so considering it involved the book 1984, Amazon deleted every copy of 1984 on every Kindle reader in the world. Within seconds 1984 ceased to exist in its electronic form. While Amazon was acting in a logical manner, after all it was a mistake the book was sold at all due to distribution rights AND they refunded all the buyers, it still shows how insecure information is when it is trusted to corporations.

Trusting the corporations we do business with everyday is important as Web 2.0 becomes increasingly mainstream. The question is should we trust these companies? After all many of them were all to willing to hand over information without a fight when the Government came knocking . Also let's face it while all these companies claim to be morally above the fray on many occasions they have been known to toss citizens to the wolves when it got in the way of their business plans, like this story from 2005 detailing how Yahoo China helped the Chinese government arrest of a pro democracy blogger. Even our own government has gotten in on the action, and I'm not talking about Bush, Obama at one point was trying to collect information about users that visited Government websites and created his own misinformation collection center .

Even when companies are attempting to be altruistic they can be brought down thereby causing issues for anyone who depends on their services for life or work. Blackberry has been known to go through black outs on occasion, cell phones were blocked after 9/11 (proving the government is capable of shutting down cell service if needed), in China and Iran it is common place to shut down cell phones and social networking sites if they sense trouble. Of course there are also common black outs like the one that hit the Northeast in 2003 and I am sure New Orleans was without the Internet during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Twitter has shown it is susceptible to attacks from foreign countries when the world went blank for a few hours as the Russians tried to silence one blogger. Twitter was also the epicenter of a controversy when it was found out that Twitters files , which were residing on Googles "information cloud" were hacked , rather easily I may add, by hackers thereby proving that the Google Cloud concept is not all that safe , and becomes less stable as more people join your circle.

In a world overrun by technology and failing newspapers it is important that we retain some vestige to the past. Technology is too easily changed, too easily controlled , too easily corrupted to be trusted 100 percent. In 1984 the protagonist had to change all the newspaper clippings by hand to reflect the new reality, in our future world that can be done with one click from the Amazon offices. Our technology has finally made 1984 possible, from web cams to flat tvs to citizens collecting information for the government. While we are not in that situation now we must remain vigilant to protect ourselves from the incremental increases that could ultimately lead us down that road. Books in their paper form, in their classic form are timeless creations. Newspapers are easily archived and hard to change. Printed pictures can be socked away for generations and found later on.

Even in the realm of the printed page we are allowing ourselves to be dumbed down. It is a sad day when Fahrenheit 451 comes out in comic form, FAHRENHEIT 451 IN COMIC FORM and this was seemingly done without any sense of irony.

Who will stand up for our rights even if we do not do it ourselves. Do you think that webmasters will defy government orders in the same way that librarians did in the face of the Patriot Act? How will you even know the change has been made? If done right there is no clear link to the former past because after all we have "always been at war with Eastasia" right or was it , no it has to be right that's what the web log says.

Mentioned by my friend
http://highlyopinionatedmomof2.blogspot.com/2009/08/i-dont-generally-do-this.html

BTW I am not all that scared of security cameras as they require more man power then is worth it in most countries to track people.