Email us!
LiL Fundraising for Elizabeth Warren!
Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums
- Art is the Handmaid of Human Good
- Blog from the Office of the City Manager, Lowell MA
- Captains Log (Paul Belley)
- Choosing a Soundtrack
- Corey Sciuto
- Downtown Lowell Blog
- Dracut Forum
- Dracut Musings
- Dracut Politics
- gerrynutter'slowell
- JackieDoherty.org
- Lowell Deeds
- Lowell Police Dept WebNews
- Lowell Public Schools Blog
- Lowellest Common Denominator
- lowellresident
- Middlesex Community College Blog
- MV Homlessness Blog
- RichardHowe.com
- Right-Side-of-Lowell
- Tewksbury Issues
- The New Englander
Lowell Politics
Mass Bloggers
- - Leftyblogs MA Blogroll - Almost all of my favorite lefty blogs in Massachusetts can be found here. Linking here keeps my own blogroll short but still up to date! Below are some other MA blogs which are not listed at LB.
- H2Otown (Watertown, MA)
- MargeBLOG (Williamstown)
- Michael Forbes Wilcox (Western MA)
- The Gazebo (Worcester area)
Media in Lowell
- Chelmsford Mass News
- Community Connections The online archive of many of WUML's radio shows.
- LTC :: Our community cable access channel (8 & 10). Excellent people, I've worked with them before.
- Open Source :: Chris Lydon's new show, broadcast on WUML and WGBH locally.
- The Lowell Sun :: Love it or hate it, it's the big newspaper in town.
- WCAP radio :: Talk radio in Lowell - still locally owned, and in transition.
- WUML :: The student- and community-run radio station of UMass-Lowell. Lynne hosts a radio show, Thinking Out Loud, 10am on Fridays.
Media in MA
Other Daily Reads
Politics Online
- City Council Agenda Past City Council agendas, posted in a mostly timely manner
- Lowellma.gov Official city website
Progressive Local Orgs
Snark and politics
The Arts in Lowell
- 119 Gallery - Art gallery with exhibitions of many local artists, interesting events, and living, breathing culture.
- Arts League of Lowell (ALL) - Artist community group, a recent but welcome addition to the arts scene in Lowell.
- Brush Art Gallery - Come and meet working artists in their natural habitats!
- Cultural Organization of Lowell (COOL) - Great local calendar of events.
- Lowell Opera Company - Community opera.
- Lowell Philharmonic Orchestra - Local community orchestra.
- Lowell Poetry Network
- Lowell Rocks - List of live music events
- Merrimack Repertory Theatre - A local theatre "presenting an exciting mix of contemporary and new plays in historic downtown Lowell."
- OUtlET - Paper and online 'zine making a splash locally with events in art, poetry, music, and everything in between!
- Revolving Museum Contemporary, local, public art space with a plethora of children's programs and art by and for the community.
- The Fine Print - Socially aware, themed, arts and issues periodic publication available throughout Lowell.
- The Image Theater - Theatre company which puts on all original works by local playwrights.
- Whistler House Museum - A great collection of contemporaries of Whistler at his historic birthplace.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Yup, meanwhile the state agencies are gonna be super pissed at him for being level-funded, which means layoffs. Good. They haven’t had it half as bad as the teachers and police who actually keep society functioning. But it’s hilarious that this is being labelled as a spending spree. What’ll they say when Patrick starts fighting with the legislature about level-funding their pet programs? That’ll screw their whole narrative.
At least he’s getting something to the local level, although our average percentage increase will still be lower than the state’s.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
“If it were a Romney budget proposal I doubt you would have used this pithy, untruthful, and rather damaging phrase.”
This is highly ironic.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Watching the commentary last evening on the 11 o’clock news, I was taken aback at the statement that this was a “spending spree” and then the implication that this administration has already fallen short by “…NOT placing 1,000 new cops on the streets…just 250 cops”..where did this administration state that there would be 1,000 new cops on the streets within two months of taking office. Just silly!
Just out of curiosity, what were the budget increases presented last year, year before that and so on??? Any one know, off hand?
February 28th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Lowell cherry sheet distribution increased by nearly $3.3M. Not a windfall, but something that the City can factor into upcoming budget deliberations.
February 28th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Looking at just receipts (there are also some charges, although much smaller) it is interesting to note that the increase for Lowell is 2.2%, Chelmsford is 2.4%, yet Westford continues its growth rate at 8.6%. Obviously, the formulas for distribution are weighted, and Westford seems to make out the best in the area year-over-year.
It looks like the city will have to adopt the meals/hotel tax if it is authorized by the legislature.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Mike: Do you honestly want to argue that Channel 7 would have said the same thing under Romney? Assumptions are not a bad thing if you have a basis for them. You did not. Not to mention, you got very personal, then jumped all over me for biting back.
Waittil: interesting on the percentages. Hrm.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
How did I get “very” personal?
You just did the exact same thing I did. An assumption based on your knowledge of their opinion, without producing any written backup.
Will Mr. Lynne chime in to agree with me? I won’t hold my breath!
February 28th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
costs for students to go to UML and other c/u is going up again. the onlyway this state creates an economy where all boats have the remote chance of rising is if young people can get an education and not be in hock up to their eyeballs when they finish. the budget may be a bit of an improvement - but it is a bit like improving a pig by putting a bit of lipstick on it:) transparency is, no doubt a good thing, but it will just make us miserable sooner as we watch the deals be done - yes I am cynical, I know.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
“Will Mr. Lynne chime in to agree with me? I won’t hold my breath!”
A little civility here please.
I agree that what she did is similar, but the differences are salient. She didn’t insult anybody. Channel 7 isn’t a person. Being uncivil to a non-person is certainly less of an offense.
P.S. Don’t make assumptions about me either.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Channel 7. Bleck! Tabliod TV. I’m convinced that some day soon they’ll run a story “What the Sausage vendor at Fenway isn’t telling you…”
I was so saddened to see them bounce off the old 10:00 news crew on Channel 56… Awful!
I guess that’s what you have to deal with seeing that you refuse to watch Channel 5.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
Actually, now that I look more carefully, there is one more minor, but salient difference.
Lynne didn’t make a flat assertion, she voiced a suspicion… a hypothosis that she suspects would be proven if given the time and effort to look into it.
A minor difference, but it does speak to the mode of thought.
Also, she didn’t just insult the organization and then and move on. The letter actually talks about her issue. I agree that it would be made better with actual citations, however.
You wouldn’t walk into a room of scientists and accuse one of them of bias and just leave it at that. Similarly you shouldn’t yell ‘hypocrit’ in a crowded blog and expect that one assertion with no context or citations to be taken seriously. Additionaly, since it is derogatory, don’t expect people not to take offence either.
That having been said, can we move on now?
February 28th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Please. Let’s.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
“Lynne didn’t make a flat assertion, she voiced a suspicion… a hypothosis that she suspects would be proven if given the time and effort to look into it.
A minor difference, but it does speak to the mode of thought.”
First off, if Lynne is “insulted” by me saying if it was anyone else she’d be all over it, I’m shocked and I apologize. She doesn’t seem to think saying “dumb assumptions” is insulting, not sure how she’d be insulted by a thought of mine. Didn’t call names, didn’t make any personal insults.
Second, how is a distinction made? My comment was regarding Lynne’s good work in getting Deval elected. If that doesn’t influence your opinion on how you look at a Governor and how much leeway you give him, you aren’t human. For Lynne to do the same thing because of her opinion of what Ch. 7’s organizational opinion is, is no different. If anything, it’s even more of an assumption because it’s quite clear Lynne worked for the Patrick campaign. It isn’t as clear where Ch. 7 stands on issues - as it shouldn’t be standing on any issues as a news organization. That to me is a far more wishy washy assumption.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I appreciate the apology. For my part it seemed to me that you didn’t see, necessarily, how your statement could seem insulting. I tried to show how the facts and distinctions illustrate why the statement could seem insulting. As far as “dumb comment” is concerned it needs to be recognized that that was retaliation after the perceived insult. On top of that, if the assumptions about her integrity were ill-advised, “dumb” isn’t exactly that far off. Incidentally, I believe (allowing for the fact that I don’t read minds) she didn’t take the original insult as very malicious, but mostly just “dumb” and that’s why she chose that word. She didn’t explain why it was “dumb”, but maybe that’s what I’m doing here and now I guess.
I can understand the distinction you made about the wishy washy idea. If I understand you correctly, you feel the fact that she worked for the campaign should be enough evidence (even if it wasn’t stated) for you to safely make the assumption that she was biased, and then say so on the blog. As such it impinged on her integrity, and integrity is what makes up blogger’s stock and trade. And I still maintain that the distinction of Lynne being an individual person and Channel 7 being an institution is salient to the issue of how one can be construed as an insult and the other as commentary (however well backed up with citations or not).
I work for a boss I happen to like, but if you think that means I can’t or won’t see his faults you’d be mistaken. If you were to derogatorily (is that a word?) assume I can’t see his faults you would be impinging my objectivity. If you were to derogatorily assume I won’t see his faults you would be impinging my integrity.
In the case of Lynne, your statement implies assumptions that impinge her integrity with respect to her own principals and her readership. Believe me, its her principals she stands up for, not Patrick. He just happens to fit the bill. She won’t cut Patrick any slack on this blog and any insinuation that she would on account of having developed “Patrick” bias is an accusation.
The thing you have to understand is that Patrick didn’t “indoctrinate” her, he had to audition,… just like he and other candidates did through many blogs. That is to say that Lynne first had her opinions about the way things ought to work and the way politicians should operate in addressing our collective issues and problems. She used those opinions in evaluating Patrick. That he passed the test doesn’t mean that she became biased toward Patrick. He happens to fit many of the characteristics she would like to see in a leader. She is certainly capable of changing her mind about Pols and I happen to know of specific instances where it has happened.
I think if you consider carefully her commentary on this blog in aggregate, you’d find that, indeed, her ideas predate Patrick. If you happen to consider then Patrick’s platform, ideas, and leadership style, you’d find that he did naturally fit her criteria for somone she might personally decide to support. I couldn’t tell you specifically what issues we discussed because I don’t really remember, but I do know that she’s had disagreements with Patrick about some things.
I’ve tried to explain here specifics that may have been missed when the original issue came up and her reaction surprised you. You may or may not disagree with the specifics I’ve brought up, but it is always more polite to discuss the issue rather than a quick drive-by post, especially when your opinion could be construed as an ‘attack’ - even if it is warranted and well thought out. This is why I appreciate your more thorough thoughts on the matter in your last comments. This is how to have a discussion.
I, for one, have appreciated your commentary in the past (even when I disagreed) and was disappointed when I read the comment in question. I know that Lynne will hit back when attacked and as such, saw the possibility that lack of understanding as to ‘whys’ of the issue could lead to disengagement. So I do my part to head that off.
As far as criticizing Lynne is concerned, she’s not above being criticism as long there are reasons and specifics that can be debated. The kind of ad hominem ‘you’re a hypocrite’ attack isn’t a criticism,… it’s an insult. That was the problem.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
“especially when your opinion could be construed as an ‘attack’ - even if it is warranted and well thought out. ”
I just realized that that could be misconstrued. What I meant by that is that even if there are good well thought out reasons for an opinion, if the opinion could be percieved as an attack it is never a good idea to to say it in a drive-by post that doesn’t include the well thought out reasons.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
“Will Mr. Lynne chime in to agree with me? I won’t hold my breath! ”
Incidentally, this wasn’t very nice either. You can rest assured that when I don’t post, it is usually because of a lack of time. Lynne is the self-employed-has-more-control-of-her-own-schedule half of this relationship.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
Incidentally, for those who may be confused by these comments, they refer to an earlier incident.
http://www.leftinlowell.com/2007/02/22/yes-he-made-a-mistake-now-can-we-turn-the-corner/#comments
March 1st, 2007 at 5:49 am
somebody help me understand what comments 9-16 have to do with anything that actually matters
related to the original post on the budget and Boston’s seemingly bankrupt/clueless media???
March 1st, 2007 at 7:02 am
Nothing Bob. Just a side issue we were trying to resolve.
March 1st, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Mr. Lynne, I won’t apologize for my sarcasm and attempts at humor. You are Mr. Lynne, for me to joke about you always agreeing with Lynne, I don’t think, is not “not very nice”, excuse the triple-negative. It’s just a joke, I would think you could take that lightly, what with your handle and all.
Far too much bandwith is being spent on this. I pointed out something I thought was true, Lynne disagreed with the premise, then used the premise in this post, I pointed that out, let’s move on.
March 1st, 2007 at 6:40 pm
I guess I missed that it was intended as a joke. In the context that the subject was an alleged insult, it didn’t seem like you were joking to me any more than it seemed like the original post was meant as a joke. I guess, as is often the case in textual communications, nuance is often missd.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:22 pm
OK, enough! The premise of the discussion is about how the media skews stories to fit the agenda, instead we’ve gone way off track..focus on the issue folks!
March 1st, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Actually this isn’t way off track. The post is about how media can skew things for their agenda, and you’d have to consider Lynne’s blog part of the local media, whether intentional or not.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
So i’m glad you’re both mature enough to the cabby konzept hauptschulabschluss leistungsschwacher jugendlich had.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:18 am
Raise up, and whispered that bild fetisch latex we walked hand.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:04 am
Most apparently short shorts gallery lying fallow, she went down on the sensation. No shower head.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:01 pm
It lifts the opportunity to the cabinet model jet engines in. Anton snarled at the.
September 15th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
She responded; The male prison sex other stories can be found learning the japanese at.