News

Kicking the bottle

BRIDGET HUBER — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:17:11 GMT

Water supply
As several Maine towns battle the plans of Poland Spring to expand water-pumping operations across the state, a group of water-rights activists will bring the issue to Portland this Saturday.

As several Maine towns battle the plans of Poland Spring (and its parent company Nestle Waters North America) to expand water-pumping operations across the state, a group of water-rights activists will bring the issue to Portland this Saturday with a screening of the award-winning documentary FLOW: For Love of Water, a panel discussion, and a workshop aimed at convincing restaurant owners to take bottled water off their menus.

Nestle's foes cite a litany of reasons to kick the bottle. The long-term impacts of water extraction on aquifers and other bodies of water are not yet known. Bottled water is also vastly more expensive and less stringently regulated than tap water. And then there is waste: According to Food and Water Watch, a Washington DC-based consumer non-profit advocating for clean water and safe food, 1.5 million tons of plastic are made into water bottles each year, using 47 million gallons of oil.

Nestle spokeswoman Jane Lazgin says water is a healthy alternative to sugary or high-calorie bottled drinks, and notes that her company is taking steps to reduce its environmental impact — she highlights the "Eco-Shape" half-liter bottle, introduced in 2007, which uses 30 percent less plastic than its predecessor and is fully recyclable.

But for activist Mary Taylor, the true heart of the matter is corporate control of a essential resource. "It's water for life, not water for profit," she says. Taylor lives in Shapleigh, where Nestle angered many residents by sinking test wells at a state-owned wildlife management area two years ago without public comment. When the company approached Shapleigh's selectmen earlier this year about pumping water from town land, residents petitioned for and passed a six-month moratorium on testing and large-scale pumping, allowing the town to enact an ordinance to spell out the terms of how, when, and if water can be pumped or tested.

Earlier this month, Wells voters followed suit; Denmark residents are gathering signatures to pass their own moratorium. A group of Fryeburg residents has been fighting a Nestle tanker-truck loading center for more than three years. And a group of Rangeley residents has boycotted Nestle water after the Maine Supreme Court's July ruling upholding a 2006 Land Use Regulation Commission decision that lets Nestle develop a pumping station in nearby Dallas Plantation. Local residents say the pumping has caused changes in Rangeley's water table and the company's trucks are straining their roads.

Pingree returns from a Congressional crash course

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:30:04 GMT

Dispatch from DC
Newly elected Democratic House Representative Chellie Pingree split her time between the mundane and the meaningful during her freshman-legislator orientation in Washington DC last week.

We sing, we dance, we steal things

AL DIAMON — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:33:01 GMT

Politics and other mistakes
Last week, I profiled the Democrats running for governor of Maine in 2010. Thousands were taken ill.

Last week, I profiled the Democrats running for governor of Maine in 2010. Thousands were taken ill.

Don't put away the barf bags yet. I missed one.

ADAM COTE ran a surprisingly strong campaign for Congress this year, even though he extolled moderate positions in a who-can-out-liberal-whom primary. The Portland lawyer has never held elected office and lacks a platform for staying in the public eye. Which could be why I forgot him.

MAJOR DRAWBACK Cote was, until recently, a John McCain Republican. Is Sarah Palin available for fundraisers?

Speaking of Republicans, here comes their clown-mobile.

The first GOP candidate out the door is state senator PETER MILLS of Cornville. Mills, a lawyer, may be the smartest guy in the Legislature. (Yeah, well ...) As an unsuccessful 2006 gubernatorial candidate, he exhibited a coma-inducing campaign style, but his moderate stands on fiscal and social issues give him appeal beyond the Republican Party.

MAJOR DRAWBACK They also reduce his appeal in the GOP. It'll take some fancy footwork for him to survive a primary.

KEVIN RAYE of Perry is the new Senate minority leader, a position that probably won't improve his electability, since minority leaders tend to come off as either too partisan or too wimpy. Raye, the owner of a mustard company, ran a credible campaign for the 2nd Congressional District in 2002 and was a key staffer for US Senator Olympia Snowe, but he's unknown in southern Maine.

MAJOR DRAWBACK Like Mills, Raye is a moderate. If they both run, the GOP nomination goes to a right-winger.

Such as House Minority Leader JOSHUA TARDY of Newport. Tardy, an attorney, has political skills (his father was a Democratic legislator) and an engaging campaign style. He can play to conservatives in the primary, but in the general election, he'll have trouble getting in tune with 1st District liberals.

MAJOR DRAWBACK In the last two elections, Tardy led House Republicans to major defeats. The GOP may not let him blow another campaign.

RICK BENNETT of Oxford is a former Senate president and the guy who lost to current governor John Baldacci in the 1994 2nd District race. Not as moderate as Mills nor as conservative as Tardy, he's positioned to be the compromise candidate. He showed political courage this fall in opposing the casino referendum, even though it was popular in his hometown.

MAJOR DRAWBACK Bennett works for Cape Elizabeth millionaire Robert Monks, who's taken to endorsing Democrats.

DANA DOW of Waldoboro has served two terms in the state Senate, but didn't run for re-election this year so he could concentrate on his gubernatorial bid. He owns a furniture store. Other than that, I'm drawing a blank.

Movies are moving, hot dogs are hopping, Binga's is burning

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:07:24 GMT

Venue watch
Even as the temperatures drop and we head into hibernation mode for winter, Portland's drinking, dining, nightlife, and shopping scenes continue to evolve. Here's a round-up of comings and goings.

Even as the temperatures drop and we head into hibernation mode for winter, Portland's drinking, dining, nightlife, and shopping scenes continue to evolve. Here's a round-up of comings and goings:

The independent movie house MOVIES ON EXCHANGE is leaving its 32-year, name-affording home on lower Exchange Street and moving to the PORTLAND MUSEUM OF ART, where it will be known as the Movies at the Museum. In some ways, this is a return for co-owner and film professor Steve Halpert, who showed movies at the museum during the 1970s, and who's owned the theater with his wife Judy since 1980. PMA's director of education, Dana Baldwin, says the Halperts will work closely with the museum to carry forward the Movies' mission to bring high-quality alternative, foreign, and classic films to Portland. The partnership will also afford the PMA a chance to expand its audience, and the scope of its exhibits, thereby making "the museum an even more exciting, bustling place," she said. For example, during this winter's "Backstage Pass: Rock & Roll Photography" exhibit, the Movies at the Museum plans to screen rock-related films. Visit portlandmuseum.org/events/movies for more info.

Since moving a few doors down Free Street, ARABICA has doubled its business, insiders say.

A very nice gentleman at the corporate headquarters of PAPAYA KING in New York City confirmed that James Estabrook, who previously operated a Papaya King cart in Deering Oaks Park, will open a franchise at 5 Dana Street, where Big Mama's Diner used to be. Estabrook, reached via e-mail, says he hopes to open his doors by mid-December, with no major changes inside the space. Papaya King hot dogs, incidentally, are "tastier than filet mignon," according to the parent company's Web site.

PORT CITY MUSIC HALL at 504 Congress Street (the old Keystone Theatre/upstairs of the Stadium), plans to have its first major event on New Year's Eve (with performers TBA). The developers are currently hiring staff. Earlier this month, they submitted their "non-conforming signage" application to the city, which would allow them to remove the huge "The Stadium" lettering from above the door; they hope to replace it with a 1940s-style marquee.

Council sinks pier deal, floats arts TIF

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:49:50 GMT

City beat
Three pieces of big news came out of Monday's Portland City Council meeting. Make sure you stay in the loop.

Three pieces of big news came out of Monday's Portland City Council meeting. Make sure you stay in the loop:

Anyone worth their weight in municipal ordinances already knows that the city's deal with Olympia Cos., the developer chosen last year to repair and build on the Maine State Pier, is no more. The Community Development Committee, chaired by Cheryl Leeman, recommended last week that the council should kill the deal; the full body (minus councilor James Cohen, who has recused himself from pier-related matters) affirmed that recommendation Monday evening.

The main sticking point is an ongoing disagreement between the city and state over who owns the submerged lands beneath the pier. Although the city knew for months (years, even) that the ownership rights were ill-defined, they have not yet sued to establish their title; city attorney Gary Wood expects to file that lawsuit in January, and that it will take between 12 and 18 months to resolve. Without established ownership, the city can only issue a 30-year lease; but Olympia Cos. wanted a 75-year lease and is uncomfortable with the financial risk that comes with a shorter one.

So, what now? Well, nothing, until the new council is sworn in on December 1. The council could choose to relaunch the process completely, and issue a brand-new request for proposals (see "Saving a Sinking Waterfront," August 31, 2007). Maybe this time around they'd get more than two submissions? Or, the councilors could just go with the entity that submitted the only other proposal in February 2007: Ocean Properties, the development company with ties to former US senator George Mitchell and Governor John Baldacci's brother Bob. Ocean Properties has said it can work with a 30-year lease.

Both new city councilors, John Coyne (District 5) and Dory Waxman (at-large), prefer the Ocean Properties plan. However, due to Waxman's former role as a community organizer for the developer, several observers (including a few fellow councilors) hope she will recuse herself from any vote related to Ocean Properties. Waxman has not returned calls for comment on the pier issue.

A portion of property tax revenues from a downtown zone between Longfellow Square and City Hall will be dedicated to arts and culture in Portland, thanks to the council's establishment of the Arts District Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district.

UMaine feels the economic pinch

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:05:04 GMT

Tuition pressure
The University of Maine system is being asked by the state to describe how it would cut $10.6 million from its budget — the equivalent of 5.3 percent of the state money it gets — on top of the $19.1 million in cuts imposed earlier this year.

PPH almost sold. Now what?

JEFF INGLIS — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:41:23 GMT

Press Releases
The long-floundering Portland Press Herald is about to have a new owner. At least, all signs suggest that the money necessary to seal the deal will come through by the end of the year.

The long-floundering Portland Press Herald is about to have a new owner. At least, all signs suggest that the money necessary to seal the deal will come through by the end of the year. There are financial details to be finalized, and there's a slim chance the money won't materialize, but involved parties tell the Portland Phoenix that pens are very close to the financial paper, and that the financing may include an employee-ownership component.

As many had speculated, the likely new owner will be Maine Media Investments — owned by the governor's brother, Bob Baldacci; former US senator and defense secretary Bill Cohen; his son Kevin, a former Turner Broadcasting executive; housing and real-estate developer Mike Liberty; and Pennsylvania newspaper publisher Richard Connor (who was born in Bangor). Soon, this group will no doubt be making public what they plan to do to recover the paper's dying circulation, plummeting advertising revenue, and rock-bottom newsroom morale.

Connor himself was recently heard to say — while out and about in Portland — that he could see why the paper was struggling, since it was "so thin it blows off the front porch in the morning." That might signal an inclination to expand the news coverage, which has shrunk considerably in recent months, but it's unclear who would do that work: the employees union is "bracing" for significant layoffs after the deal is finalized, according to Portland Newspaper Guild acting administrative officer Kathy Munroe.

The new owners will have to navigate the complicated quagmire of determining what their readers actually want. The biggest dispute among the audience appears to be where a revamped Press Herald would strike a balance between local coverage and national and international news.

Some hints can be found in independent blogs. A poster named MediaDog at AsMaineGoes wants less wire-service copy, saying in an August post, "In this Internet era most wire news is stale by the time the papers reached readers' doorsteps."

At MediaMutt, Phoenix columnist Al Diamon's blog on the Down East magazine Web site, one commenter suggested last week that a more major overhaul is needed: "The newspaper has limited value in terms of keeping readers informed. I don't think I've ever seen a shallower newspaper than the version that is being published today."

Perhaps the best way to gauge the reaction from the Press Herald's audience, though, is to look at the comments on the paper's own Web site — specifically, those talking about the sale itself.

"I'm getting the Friday, Saturday, Sunday [subscription package] deal and the news is the same in all three papers," wrote one person, who said she is canceling her subscription.

Here come the bugs

AL DIAMON — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:51:06 GMT

Politics and other mistakes
I'm not one of those people who assumes that just because somebody casually mentions they're thinking about running for governor of Maine in 2010, that they should be restrained, subjected to electro-shock therapy, and deported to someplace where they can't do any harm.

I'm not one of those people who assumes that just because somebody casually mentions they're thinking about running for governor of Maine in 2010, that they should be restrained, subjected to electro-shock therapy, and deported to someplace where they can't do any harm.

North Korea, maybe. Or Miami.

Just kidding about the second one. Even I'm not that cruel.

As incumbent Democratic Governor John Baldacci gets fitted for webbed feet, a large yellow bill, waterproof wings, and a crutch, I welcome his potential replacements, who are beginning to emerge from the primordial slime of politics at the larval level.

With the Blaine House race wide open in '10, the candidates will be as numerous as ticks on a moose. Over the next two years, these proto-pols will be exploring their metamorphosed forms, testing their new wings, and making tentative blood-sucking noises through their proboscises.

So slap on the DEET, because here comes a rundown (in more than one sense of the word) of some of the likely — and unlikely — contenders, starting with the Democrats.

Outgoing Attorney General STEVEN ROWE of Portland (disclaimer: my wife is an assistant attorney general) is smart, experienced (in addition to his eight years as AG, he's a former speaker of the Maine House and a retired US Army captain), a competent manager, and severely charisma-impaired. He's likeable — if you can stay awake.

MAJOR DRAWBACK In 2007, his wife, Amanda Rowe, was a leading advocate for the Portland School Committee's controversial decision to allow some middle-school students to obtain birth control without parental consent. Expect the religious right to focus on that issue to the exclusion of all others. Rowe will have to be alert to keep the wackos from defining his candidacy as being about letting kids having sex.

JOHN RICHARDSON of Brunswick is also a lawyer, a former House speaker, and a person who tends to cause attention deficits whenever he opens his mouth. He currently serves as Baldacci's economic development commissioner, which may not be such a great platform for campaigning, at a time when development has pretty much ground to a halt. Richardson devoted a lot of his legal career to representing unions and can count on strong support from organized labor.

MAJOR DRAWBACK During the 2006 gubernatorial race, Richardson held a loopy press conference attacking Republican nominee Chandler Woodcock for a bunch of stuff that made no sense. Once he declares his candidacy, expect that video to show up on YouTube.

All the ugly people

AL DIAMON — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:48:23 GMT

Politics and other mistakes
Why did Maine voters give overwhelming approval to a tax-repeal referendum on Nov. 4, while simultaneously returning to office even more of the Democratic legislators who passed the unpopular tax in the first place?

I was confused for a while.

Why did Maine voters give overwhelming approval to a tax-repeal referendum on Nov. 4, while simultaneously returning to office even more of the Democratic legislators who passed the unpopular tax in the first place?

Why did the state’s electorate cry out for change, but, by wide margins, return to Congress incumbents Susan Collins and Mike Michaud — as well as Chellie Pingree, a person who supports the same policies as the incumbent?

Why — with everyone whining about the economy, economic development, and unemployment — did this election result in the rejection of a casino project whose proponents promised jobs, additional state revenue, and diversion from recessionary reality?

I searched in vain for signs of consistency in the returns. I wanted some assurance the state’s citizens hadn’t just trudged to the polls to make a bunch of random marks on their ballots. I wanted an indication they weren’t choosing their elected leaders the way novices pick race horses. (“I’m voting for the candidate with the funniest nickname.” “I’m voting for the referendum campaign with the cutest colors on its lawn signs.”)

I watched on TV as the winners declared victory and the losers made noises like they hoped they could get back their old jobs at the car wash, and I suddenly saw the pattern.

These campaigns weren’t about issues.

People hadn’t made decisions based on platforms or platitudes.

They didn’t care who had the sharpest arguments in debates or the most innovative ideas in their frontal lobes.

This whole mess came down to physical appearance. But not the way you think.

Welcome to the year of voting ugly.

On election night, almost all the defeated politicos looked sharp. Meanwhile, most of the winners could have been mistaken for the “before” picture in a Botox commercial.

Take the casino. The front person for the Oxford County gambling emporium was Pat LaMarche. OK, she’s no candidate for the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, but, if you ignore her personality, LaMarche is poised, well-groomed, and reasonably attractive.

In 2008, that’s called the loser look.

The anti-gambling side was represented by Dennis Bailey. His clothes could have been dropped off by a refugee-relief agency. His hair appeared to be staging a coup d’état against his scalp. His face indicated he’s expecting a hard winter, so he’s storing walnuts in his jowls.

What a stud.

He’s not like us

SHAY STEWART-BOULEY — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:46:44 GMT

Diverse city
While I’m still celebrating the election results — and don’t plan to stop until just before Thanksgiving — there is one sobering thing.

While I’m still celebrating the election results — and don’t plan to stop until just before Thanksgiving — there is one sobering thing: Despite the knockout punch in terms of electoral votes, with a projected 365 for Barack Obama to 173 for John McCain, the popular vote was something like 53 percent for Obama and 46 percent for McCain. Given the work of the GOP over the past eight years, that’s a lot closer than it should have been.

Journalists and pundits have already spent a lot of time discussing those who voted for McCain not because they thought he was a better candidate but because Obama is “not like us.” So I’m not going to talk about those voters.

At least, not the white ones.

I’ve noticed a growing murmur of discontent among a small but vocal segment of the African-American population: people who aren’t all that jazzed about the idea of President Obama because he’s not “the best” the nation could have produced for a black president.

I’m sure a lot of these naysayers actually did vote for Obama because the alternative was just too horrifying, but they don’t seem all that excited by the historic win that puts a non-white face into the pantheon of American presidents for the first time. That’s because, for them, Obama lacks a pedigree. He didn’t come from some established black family. He isn’t “special” enough. He is too “common” and so, by the way, is his wife.

Wow. Just, wow.

It’s not as if we haven’t heard and seen this kind of thing before, but it’s usually the battle between different types of rich white folks: the old money vs. the new money. “Old money” are those people who were born into wealth, and are typically several generations removed from the last time their relatives had to worry about how to pay the bills. “New money” are those who made their riches more recently, often through innovative ideas or hard work, or their children, who are the first generation to be raised around all that money.

Old money folks have tended to look down on new money folks, considering them crass, crude, and less important.

That’s funny, because that means that people who were born to privilege through no effort of their own often feel superior to people who actually came from lesser circumstances and became wealthy by being talented, dedicated, and relentless. Seems to me the new money people are the ones who are more special.

Maine task force to seek offshore power

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:36:38 GMT

Energy in the drink
A new Ocean Energy Task Force, created by Governor John Baldacci last week, is charged in part with investigating the realities of drilling for oil and gas off the coast of Maine.

Two many Americas

MIKE MILIARD — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:55:16 GMT

Could an Obama administration mean an end to the red-state/blue-state divide?
It's worth reminding ourselves that when the Republicans are out of power, they go apeshit.

In North Carolina, a man electrified his John McCain campaign sign so it delivered a nasty shock to the nine-year-old neighbor trying to steal it. In California, a man hanged a Saran Palin effigy — stylish black pumps swaying softly in the breeze. In Pennsylvania, at a Palin rally, a corpulent man gleefully toted a stuffed monkey, a Barack Obama sticker wrapped around its head like a turban.

The interminable months of this election just past were marked by some strange and ugly behavior. It seemed at times to be the concentrated distillation of the past eight wildly partisan years — years in which the so-called red-state/blue-state dichotomy has become ingrained in America's fabric.

So, now that we're getting a new president, what happens?

That a number of rightward-leaning folks — Colin Powell, Christophers Buckley and Hitchens — endorsed Obama was encouraging. They believed something legions of rabid rightists do not: that the only way forward for this country is to elect a man of decency and competence with an inclusive vision for the country. Still, no one's naïve enough to suggest that the entire nation will dissolve into a big melty goop of purply bipartisanship the second Obama takes office.

But 10 days on from that momentous election, with the map seemingly redrawn (even vermillion Indiana turned blue) it's worth asking whether or not we might expect some changes in our national character.

McCain, in the gloaming of his candidacy, presided over one of the most disgracefully divisive campaigns in US history. The language and insinuation employed by his ticket and its supporters should be abhorrent to anyone who cares about the promises of liberal democracy: "the real America" . . . "traitor" . . . "the other folks."

Meanwhile, Obama — worldly, biracial, unbeholden to baby-boomer hang-ups, born in a blue state but with red-state roots — showed throughout the campaign that he means to offer something better. A cease-fire (or at least an abatement) in the culture wars. A sense of unity and common purpose. A general appeal to our better natures.

But what can we realistically hope for? Can "the first truly 21st-century figure in American politics," to borrow Washington Post op-ed writer E.J. Dionne's words, actually bridge these deep national divisions? Will the end of the Bush years signal the simultaneous end of interstate rifts? Or will the antipathies between the government and its malcontentsonly calcify further?

Short answers, in order: we'll see; no; and potentially, but hopefully not.

Fair is foul

ADAM REILLY — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:45:12 GMT

What's the fuss over the Fairness Doctrine really about?
These are scary times for far-right conservatives.

These are scary times for far-right conservatives. Everywhere they look, there's another doomsday scenario to ponder: President-elect Barack Obama is a closet Communist! Another Hitler! A race warrior who's going to ban guns, kill newborn babies, and just might be the Antichrist!

Most of these dark anxieties simmer on the right's outermost fringes. But one — the conviction that Obama's win and Democratic gains in Congress mean the impending resurrection of Fairness Doctrine, a defunct policy aimed at creating a balance in broadcasting — is tormenting both the wing nuts and conservatism's grownups.

Consider: Jay Severin, a host on Boston's WTKK-FM (96.9), recently accused Fairness Doctrine supporters of "standing by watching while fascists come to my house, burn it down, and kill my family." Yikes. Meanwhile, back in September, Washington Post columnist George Will warned that "Liberals, not satisfied with their domination of academia, Hollywood, and most of the mainstream media, want to kill talk radio" — by resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine, natch.

Why all the fuss? For one thing, despite all the hyperbole, talk of a Fairness Doctrine comeback isn't as loony as it seems, judging from recent remarks by some prominent Dems. But there may be another reason. Outrage over the Fairness Doctrine is becoming a pawn in the fight over Net Neutrality, the principle of all Web content moving freely and equally without discrimination from ISPs — which, given the stakes, should make Democrats drop the former subject altogether.

An outdated solution
For most of the second half of the 20th century, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asserted that the right to broadcast — on scarce, publicly owned frequencies — came with civic responsibility. Broadcasters, the FCC held, should devote some of their programming to controversial matters of public interest. They should also allow divergent points of view to be presented on their stations. That's the Fairness Doctrine in a nutshell. (In one famous case, the Supreme Court ruled that the author of a critical biography of Barry Goldwater had the right to respond to a torrent of criticism directed at him from a Christian broadcaster in Red Lion, Pennsylvania.)

The doctrine's intentions were commendable. But it was vague, and spottily applied, and co-existed uneasily with the First Amendment's right to free speech. And in 1987 — at the height of Reagan-era deregulation — it was voluntarily abolished by the FCC. The FCC's decision was upheld on appeal to the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1989, and subsequent congressional efforts to restore it have failed.

Letters to the Portland Editor, November 14, 2008

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:07:31 GMT

Time to respect all people
Employees of our prisons and jails deserve better wages and in-depth training.

Divide and be conquered

BY STEVEN STARK — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:57:04 GMT

The GOP relied on talk radio to carry its water, but votes are worth more than ratings
Things do indeed look bad for their Grand Old Party. Actually, it's even worse than they think.

What with their decisive loss in the presidential election and the party's distinct minority status in the House and Senate, the Republicans could be forgiven for being pessimistic. Things do indeed look bad for their Grand Old Party.

Actually, it's even worse than they think.

Since the dawn of the 20th century, guess how many times the incumbent party has failed to succeed itself in the White House after one term. Once in 11 tries — in 1976 when Reagan took out Jimmy Carter. Statistically at least, the odds are not good for a Republican in 2012.

On top of that, counting last Tuesday, the Republicans have now failed to win the popular vote in four of the past five presidential elections. And in the fifth, they barely got by John Kerry. So despite appearances (owing to Washington's high neocon profile), it's actually been 20 years since the GOP was a dominant force in presidential politics.

There are plenty of theories circulating about how the GOP got itself into this mess, but one prime suspect clearly isn't getting its due — conservative talk radio.

The partisans will howl in protest, but while certainly not the only culprit, the relentless stream of invective from the right side of the dial has undeniably been a major contributor to the GOP's demise. It's no coincidence that the Republican eclipse began just when conservative talk radio found its audience.

Rush Limbaugh's show was syndicated in 1988. It's been a steady climb toward the top of the ratings for him and his imitators ever since, but pretty much downhill for the party they all support. Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and the others are enormously successful media performers and they may have single-handedly rescued AM radio from financial oblivion over the past two decades.

But while wildly popular with their devotees, these partisan bloviators are enormously unpopular with the electorate as a whole. Limbaugh, for example, has about a two-to-one unfavorable rating nationally, according to a Rasmussen Poll.

What's more, these figures are all rabble-rousers — high intensity, "hot" performers whose appeal is based on energizing their base. That's all well and good for radio — it works, after all. But it's becoming increasingly apparent that it's a terrible way to structure the energy of a mainstream political movement that seeks to win more than 50 percent of the national vote.

California’s shame

EDITORIAL — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:17:22 GMT

Equal marriage rights suffers a setback, but there is hope. Plus, young voters.
The politics of division as practiced by lame-duck president George W. Bush at the connivance of his onetime Svengali Karl Rove are not dead.

The politics of division as practiced by lame-duck president George W. Bush at the connivance of his onetime Svengali Karl Rove are not dead.

Democrat Barack Obama’s decisive national victory over Republican John McCain certainly dealt a body blow to those who would pit whites against nonwhites, the native born against immigrants, the haves against the have-nots, and those who practice their fundamental right to worship as they choose against those who exercise their equally constitutional right not to worship at all.

But anyone who doubts that the politics of intolerance and inhumanity are alive and well need only to look to California, Florida, and Arizona, which voted to deny same-sex couples the basic human right to marry that couples of differing genders enjoy. The Taliban would be proud.

The situation in Arkansas is even more dispiriting. Voters in that state went so far as to mandate that only married couples can adopt children or serve as foster parents. Since heterosexual unions are the only couplings recognized in Arkansas, voters removed the possibility that straight singles could adopt in order to bar gays and lesbians from becoming parents or guardians. Pity the children.

While the same-sex-marriage bans in Arizona and Florida (the latter, for good measure, also outlawed civil unions) undeniably hinder the just cause of civil rights, the vote in California was most significant.

In May, the Republican-dominated California Supreme Court issued a ringing declaration establishing that couples of the same gender had the equal right to marry as those of differing genders. “An individual’s sexual orientation — like a person’s race or gender — does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights,” the court ruled.

California voters thought otherwise. Although the state went overwhelmingly for Obama, voters allowed the state constitution to be amended in order to outlaw marriage for gay and lesbian couples. In a predominately multicultural state like California, it is difficult to pinpoint the constituent groups responsible for the defeat. But the effect of African-Americans who approved the ban by a margin of more than 70 percent is difficult to deny.

The irony, of course, is bitter. The same day that a black American was elected president for the first time, his fellow citizens denied the dignity of marriage to same-sex couples. What a country.

Equally undeniable was the opposition of religious groups to same-sex marriage. The Mormon-led movement was joined by Catholics and Evangelicals Protestants who decided that the teaching of Jesus Christ to love your neighbor as yourself need not apply in California — or, by extension, to the rest of the nation.

Falling down

LANCE TAPLEY — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:04:58 GMT

Mistreatment of Maine prison guards lands heavily on inmates
Critics of the state Department of Corrections say the hostage-taking last June at the Maine State Prison dramatically illustrates that the concrete, high-tech lockup in Warren is showing cracks from stress on the prison guards.

"Three years and counting: The Portland Phoenix's prison scoops keep piling up," by Portland Phoenix staff

Critics of the state Department of Corrections say the hostage-taking last June at the Maine State Prison dramatically illustrates that the concrete, high-tech lockup in Warren is showing cracks from stress on the prison guards. The crisis ended when a prisoner surrendered after holding a knife over the prison librarian and an inmate for seven hours.

Zachary Matthews, the staff person for the guards’ union, Local 2968 of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), told the Portland Press Herald that to prevent prison violence, “Nothing replaces boots on the ground and staffing levels that are adequate or better.”

More bluntly, former union president Ira Scherr says: “There’s not enough staff to run the prison. They’re all overworked and tired.”

A hostage-taking is a failure of prison security, but Corrections has not said publicly it was the guards’ fault, and the department has not released information on what its internal investigation has found. Commissioner Martin Magnusson’s first reaction was to praise prison staff for its “exceptional job” in handling the situation without anyone getting killed. In July testimony before the Legislature’s Criminal Justice Committee, he suggested violent incidents at Warren were inevitable because prisoners will always fabricate weapons.

“There are probably 300 inmates right now with a weapon in their hand,” he said. This statement did not disturb committee members, who expressed no interest in investigating the cause of the prison violence. Committee members are mostly former or current members of law enforcement, and they usually defer to the Corrections bureaucracy.

But guards and former guards paint a picture of overworked, not-well-paid, often-inexperienced — and, in some cases, teenaged — correctional officers who become so stressed that they not only create an insecure institution, they also sometimes take out their frustrations on prisoners. For three years, the Phoenix has published stories about prison guards’ abuse of inmates. But it’s not just the prisoners who are abused.

Hard, long hours
Scholars who study prison guards and their interactions with prisoners lay the blame for disorderly, violent institutions on a host of factors, including overcrowding, a lack of inmate educational and vocational programs, and the presence of harsh Supermax solitary-confinement units — all conditions within Maine’s prison system. A major cause is poor prison management, especially prison leadership’s fostering of an “us versus them” guard culture (on this subject, see “Time for a Clean Sweep?” by Lance Tapley, July 25).

Scattered after-thoughts

DEIRDRE FULTON — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:52:39 GMT

Post-Election
With the Phoenix going to press on Tuesday evening (before most election results came in), I struggled to come up with ways to be relevant on the morning after.

With the Phoenix going to press on Tuesday evening (before most election results came in), I struggled to come up with ways to be relevant on the morning after.

Kind of like those CAMPAIGN SIGNS that litter Franklin Arterial and the rest of Portland’s major roadways. Ever wonder what happens to them post-election? I did too.

Not surprisingly, few candidates were jumping at the chance to talk with me on November 3 about something as mundane their post-election sign-disposal plans. “Try me at 1 am, Wednesday morning — I’m sure I’ll have something quotable to say, and probably mostly coherent,” Senate District 8 candidate Eric Lusk suggested.

Others were thinking practically about future campaigns: “Into the basement with them,” House District 118 candidate Jon Hinck said.

“I’ll take my signs down on Wednesday,” House District 114 candidate Peter Stuckey told me. “I’ll put the cardboard out in next week’s recycling bin. I’ll save the wooden stakes and metal wires, and the big hand-painted signs for the next time someone I know and support needs them. That’s how I got all my stakes and sign boards this time. Hopefully I’ll need them again myself in two years.”

Smart move. After all, when Cyrus Hagge ran for Portland city council in 2006, he resurrected decade-old campaign signs from a pile in his garage. Reuse!

As for national election signs, perhaps some local establishment should follow in the footsteps of a South Carolina barbecue joint, which is offering one free appetizer in return for one recycled campaign sign from November 5 through 12.

For those of us who can’t let go, however — whose many waking moments have been consumed by political fever for weeks, months on end — there will be ample opportunity for rehashing, and reliving these exciting days.

Check out the VIDEO YOUR VOTE collaboration between YouTube and PBS (YouTube.com/videoyourvote), in which voters videotaped their ballot-casting experiences and uploaded them to the Internet. The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer selected 50 high schools to participate in the video exercise, and Cheverus High School was one of them.

“In the first presidential election since YouTube’s inception, this program aims to gather massive amounts of polling place video ... serving as an online library for Election Day footage,” a press release reads.

The more posterity the better, this being a history-making election and all.

By the way, despite how perfect things might feel (for some) during these post-election days, we’re still not fodder for study by the SOCIETY OF UTOPIAN STUDIES, which had its 33rd annual meeting at the Holiday Inn by the Bay in Portland last week.

So now what?

SARA FAITH ALTERMAN — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:00:16 GMT

The time for obsessive-compulsive election monitoring has come to an end. Cupcakes, anyone?
I have an election hangover.

I have an election hangover.

No, not because I was drunk with the power of voting on Tuesday, or even because I celebrated historic political victory with fistfuls of booze. Rather, I've consumed way too much election coverage for way too long and, now that it's all over, my head feels fuzzy and my stomach is churning, as I rack my reeling brain and ponder how I can possibly occupy myself with equally obsessive fervor from now on.

I liken this post-election mourning process to the same anticlimax that rocked Red Sox Nation in 2004, a few weeks after our beloved idiots shattered the curse that haunted this city for 86 years. Boston's collective inner monologue went a little something like this: "We won! We won! Holy shit, we won! I've been waiting my whole stupid life for this moment, and it finally happened! Woooo, Red Sox, woooooooo!!! WOOOOOOOOOHELLYEAHSUCKAS! . . . So . . . now what?"

Hell yeah, suckas, "so,now what?" is right.

Many of my friends and colleagues have, like myself, restructured the last year and a half of their lives around keeping up-to-the-minute on political coverage. We trolled the Internet like rabid news-junkie hyenas, searching for plump and juicy info nuggets, monitoring blogs and stats and statements. RSS feeds served us a constant stream of political morsels. Daily Kos and fivethirtyeight.com held us at rapt attention. And the TV coverage, oh, the TV coverage, ensured that, whenever we had a spare 15 minutes of couch time or were too zonked on weekend mornings to drag our asses to an overpriced brunch, we could mesmerize our gluttonous selves with more election coverage, more candidate tidbits, more Sarah Palin gaffes, more, more, more!

Now, the election is over, and I think we're all at a bit of a loss.

Whenever an entire nation collectively gears up for anything, à la China for the 2008 Beijing Olympics, or Germany for the 2005 release of the latest David Hasselhoff album, it's easy for its residents to get swept up in the frenzy. This election captivated Americans and the international community, not only because of its historic implications but, perhaps, because of the wealth of information that's at our fingertips at any given second. Our latent OCD gets rattled by the instantaneous accessibility of election information, thanks to laptops, Blackberries, Twitter. Four years is a long time for technology to develop, after all, and each presidential election sees spankin' new information-gathering and -transmitting tools.

Hope restored

EDITORIAL — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:09:55 GMT

Barack Obama's election has sparked international wonder. His task, however, is great.
Barack Obama's election has sparked international wonder. His task, however, is great.

Seventy-five days from this Thursday, America's long nightmare will have ended.

The reign of the George W. Bush-Dick Cheney junta will be over. Dubya will be winging his way to Crawford, Texas. There, he can comfortably adapt himself to history's probable judgment that he was the worst president in the United States' history. His henchman, Cheney, will have the leisure to prepare for what we hope will be a lifetime of defending himself against lawsuits for the torture he sponsored and the assault on civil liberties he engineered.

Democrat Barack Obama's decisive win over Republican John McCain in Tuesday's election is truly a triumph of hope. For some voters, McCain was no doubt more horrifying than Obama was appealing. But for legions of Obama supporters, his victory offers the transcendent promise of a new national beginning.

When Obama takes the oath of office in January, he will face the greatest battery of challenges any president has had to contend with since 1933, when Franklin Roosevelt crossed the threshold of the White House during the Great Depression.

The Cold War presidencies of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Reagan all had to face the menace of an aggressive Russia, then known as the USSR. The Soviet threat, however, was singular. And the foundation of our security was a robust economy that exhibited resilience seemingly beyond strain.

The facts today are very different. America is in an economic retreat that promises to be far graver than a periodic downtick. Compounding this domestic anxiety, the nation is mired in two unsuccessful wars, the prosecution of which has led to more — not less — international instability.

This is the reality Obama inherits. But while the political and policy challenges he faces are daunting by any measure, they are at least tangible, concrete — even if solutions today appear elusive.

As Obama himself has defined it, his true test, his greatest challenge, will be nothing less than spiritual: to restore a modicum of comity to national debate, to dial down the rhetoric of division, and to promote a sense of common purpose. If Obama can renew America's faith in itself, he will be on the road to re-energizing and re-defining a sense of national purpose appropriate to the 21st century.

The "Yes, we can" message of hope preached by Obama on the campaign trail was the seed of his electoral success. It is a message that will be fortified and nourished by the pride so many feel for the achievement of an African-American being elected president, and is the ultimate realization of the refrain "Rosa sat so Martin could walk, and Martin walked so that Barack could run."