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.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
What’s particularly bothering me is that the Clintons and their surrogates are sounding shrill, really shrill, like desperate defensive people and not like good, strong candidates that have ideas and issues they’d like to bring into the debate…if you listen to that On Point interview, I swear to god, it’s like listening to some sane people together with one nutball. The difference couldn’t BE more clear…what they are trying to defend isn’t defensible, and therefore they have to be defensive.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
All my anti-Clinton friends are doing this, pointing to what this or that columnist says the Clinton’s are doing so horrible. I think it’s far better to listen to the CLinton’s themselves and decide, because I’m just not seeing all this “race-baiting.”
It’s absolutely killing me that this thing was a LOCK and damned LOCK and the dems had to go and throw a monkey wrench in it with these, for lack of a better term, “novelty candidates.” Throwing this thing to uncertainty in the sexist and bigotted South MAY, MAY turn out to have been a huge mistake.
I still feel Hillary or Obama have the advantage to win the White House but personally would have hedged my bets this go round.
Clinton and Obama ought to act fast, clean up the rhetoric and promise each other a place on the ticket and let the voters decide. Circle the wagons already people!!
January 25th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Thanks, Lynne.
After Edwards, I’ve been undecided about my second choice. Many of Clinton’s policies are more aligned with mine than Obama’s policies. But her attacks are helping crystallize it for me. She reinforces the view that politics is more about winning than governing, and that it ultimately doesn’t matter who wins because they’re in it for themselves.
Disappointment in our current Democratic congress has reminded me that just electing Dems isn’t enough. (Though it’s a start!)
Peter, it’s not just the attacks that Clinton has allowed her proxies to make, nor the attacks Bill Clinton has made, but it’s also her performance face-to-face. I’ve watched a lot of Clinton clips on the web, and it seems clear to me that she’s willing to tear down the Democratic party if that will give her a shot at the White House.
If you want to work for positive change in America, I don’t think the best way is going to be working for Clinton in the presidential race. It may be better to focus on progressive Democratic races elsewhere.
“Smarter than Romney, less evil than Cheney” is not exactly going to motivate me to canvass NH for her.
January 25th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Sigh…. I’m REALLY missing Kucinich already. Seriously.
Another year of holding my nose while I vote, I’m afraid.
January 25th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Lynne,
I’ve been waiting for this site to address this “non-issue” as it was termed 2-3 weeks ago when all of this dirty mudslinging started- not from the Clintons of course, but from people associated with the Clintons. Then the Clintons distance themselves from the mud and “denounce” what the associate said. Textbook! Too bad the allegation already had 24 hours in the news cycle though right? I am enjoying the nightly Bill Clinton rant against Obama and him addressing why his wife is “the candidate of inevitability”. (Think she wishes she could take that one back?) He looks a little less then “presidential” lately don’t you agree.
“But this dirty invocation of racism in our country, despite the fact we know that Bill and Hillary are anything but, this suppression of voter’s enthusiasm for going out and voting, it can’t be good for our party or our democracy. Does Hillary Clinton really want to ride into the White House on this platform of division and anger, does Bill really want to destroy his status as a respected ex-president in order to get them back in? It’s enough to make you want to stay home on election day with the covers over your eyes.”
Um, suck it up. Everyone of them has dirt under their nails. We’re all adults here and if these little tiffs are too much for you to handle wait until after the conventions. If you think this is negative wait until groups like Emily’s list get involved if Hillary wins the nomination. (my money is on her to do so.) Then it will get downright nasty. I’m not happy about it but I’m a realist. Nothing “supresses my enthusiasm” ever. How do you think I feel every election in this state? I hold my nose and get my ass to the polls no matter what, even if I don’t have one of my guys in the fight I take the lesser of the two evils and hope for the best. It’s too important not to. But everyone reading this already knows that right?
Nothing should “suppress voter’s enthusiasm”. If it does shame on that person. Unless firehoses and attack dogs are involved and I’m pretty sure there not. But that’s just my take and I could be wrong. Bill Clinton is going Malcolm X on the campaign trail (”by any means necessary.”) to get back into the white house and as Dennis Miller has stated before “nothing scares me more right now then Bill Clinton in the white house with all kinds of free time on his hands.”
January 25th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Dish Network, my satellite TV provider, has an interactive channel that asks questions and then shows you which candidates have positions similar to yours.
Mine came up Gravel (87%), Edwards (84%), Clinton (79%), Obama (73%)… McCain (41%). You can take the test online:
http://glassbooth.org/
Anyway, that’s why it’s distressing to me that Clinton’s campaign seems in conflict with her positions.
January 25th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Interesting, Mike. I came up with Gravel (81%) and then a 3-way tie at 79% with Obama, Edwards and Clinton, then a drop-off to 59% with Paul, 54% Huckabee and others down to McCain at 45%. But it was Kucinich at 84% that won my vote, had he still been in the race.
Gravel is not in the mix, and of the other 3 I would have to go with Obama, as Edwards is too far behind, and I just don’t like Hillary.
January 25th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
You guys sound like the mirror image of hillaryis44.org
I do see that Obama is a great speaker.
Both Clintons are better debaters and good on their feet, especially on defense.
Clinton supporters have a laundry list of Obama and media complaints too.
Are your views representative of Massachusetts? The poll that I saw (just in passing on the web somewhere) had Clinton with a comfortable lead.
January 26th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Remember, a party’s wins or losses are a matter of tactics, not substance.
Most people are basically uninterested in the intellectual and philosophical debates that lie behind the daily political trench warfare. They just don’t care about policy. It’s here that the correlation between sports and politics breaks down. In sports, as Vince Lombardi is said to have put it, “Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.”
Wanting to win very badly is an admirable and necessary quality in politics.
January 26th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Scary food for thought:
I was watching Countdown last night and Keith O brought up a poll…
If it were Obama vs. McCain, the race is tied 42-42 nationally (and in Massachusetts, he’d actually lose according to a state SUSA poll).
Hillary vs. McCain was better in Massachusetts (she’d win, but barely), but nationally, it was something like 46-44% with McCain on top.
I’m really crossing my fingers for a SC miracle, with John Edwards coming in second to beat Hillary and keeping alive his candidacy, because he really may be our best hope in defeating McCain… those are some really, really scary numbers with Hillary and Obama.
January 26th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Bill Clinton is reminding me exactly why I disliked him so much.
January 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Ive been saying it from day one: All three top democratic canidates are weak and will struggle in the general election. And its democrats that deserve it because Joe Biden or Chris Dodd were both canidadtes that would wrap up this election hands down.
Hillary Clinton is WAY too polarizing to be President. Its NEVER gonna happen. As a Republican, Im really hoping Hillary is nominated. It’ll be a cakewalk. Democrats are finally beginning to realize that a Clinton presidency is not what they want, and certainly not what the independants want. The woman will say ANYTHING to get elected.
I agree that Obama is a great speaker, but what has he actually done? I cannot think of someone less qualified than him to be President. The problem with Obama is the same reason I did not vote for Deval. Giving someone such big power and authority when they have virtually no experience whatsoever. Sure, they can give a nice speech, but what can they actually ACCOMPLISH? Deval Patrick has answered that question for us- not much.
John Edwards is living in his ambluance chaser fantasy land, and is the weakest of the three democrats by far. He’s virtually out of the race, so he’s not even worth writing about.
Spare me the poll numbers, please. The election is months away, any polls on possible match ups come November are pure garbage at this point.
But all in all, a Republicans advice for what its worth: nominate Obama, if you wan to win. Expect the same results from him as you expected from Deval, but at least he’s a Democrat!
January 26th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Big Willie gave is Nafta and the rush to globalization, so-called welfare reform not so thinly disgusied as a new war on the poor, a declining blue collar standard of living, a crazy-ass foreign policy, a series of jerk water scandals, little blue dresses and a whole lot more. So, why be surprised now by what the doublemint twins do to try to get back to renting out the Lincoln bedroom to high roller donors? Clinton will likely go down in history as one of the slickest dudes to ever gain the White House because he did lots and lots of things that were really bad for a good many of the people who still voted for him. Hard for me to imagine 4 hears of W1, 8 years of Clinton1, 8 years of W2 and then possibly 8 more of Clinton 2 and not see the working class reduced to abject poverty and the country’s social policy in flames.
January 26th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
You (or the person you quoted) can’t possibly be serious implying that President Clinton, once called “the first Black President” a racist!? I do wish that it were not he slapping around other candidates. It’s beneath the dignity of a President.
Only Democrats can make the knee-jerk “Hillary-can’t-win” prediction a self-fulfilling prophecy by staying home in November.
January 26th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
She also lost the support of the people of South Carolina!
Bill is generally thought to have had a good record as President, especially since the US budget went into the black at the end of his term. But a lot of the “prosperity” that drove the revenue in those days was soon to have its bubble burst. And that Nafta treaty that was implemented in 1994 without fair protections ended up quintupling the trade deficit between his first year in office and his last.
January 27th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Bill Clinton is NOT a racist, Christopher. He’s a cynic.
January 27th, 2008 at 10:36 am
It’s called divide and conquer. People already dislike Hillary, so the Obama people are going to run against the more popular Clinton. The more Bill’s in the headlines, Hillary is on the sidelines. I don’t care for any of the above but someone should ask Obama which Clinton he’s running against.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Along with a couple people here, I’m just not feeling the outrage. Politics ain’t beanbag and it’s a little more than a week before Super Tuesday, this is the most heated point in the cycle. If this is as bad as it gets between our dems, I’m feeling ok about it.
I’m also sympathetic to the Clintons’ complaint that while all Hillary’s skeletons are on full display after 15 years of demonization from the Rush Limbaughs of the world, Obama hasn’t been dragged through the mud at all. Not that he deserves to be, but do we think the Republicans will hesitate? I think the vast majority of things coming from Bill have been above the belt even if they haven’t all been nice.
I’m probably 52% Clinton, 48% Obama at the moment, will make up my mind a week from Tuesday in the ballot box and be happy with whichever one wins. Let’s not get overheated and talk about being unwilling to support this or that candidate because they’re playing a little rough down the stretch in a tight race while still keeping mostly civil.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I, ALSO, AM FED UP WITH THE CLINTONS,
TO THINK OF BILL CLINTON IN THE WHITE HOUSE ALL DAY
WITH NOTHING TO DO, IS A LITTLE SCARY !!!!!!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I’m for Hillary for one basic reason. If Hillary gets elected it will be the first pair of “testicles” in the White House in sixteen years.
January 28th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
I am an independent. Obama will not get the vote from those of us who could go either way. I will vote for a fiscally conservative Democrat or a socially conservative Republican (You don’t get too many of those though). I really just think that Hillary is much more electable to the main stream and I would prefer a Democrat to win. For the same reasons that people in this thread don’t like the Clintons, these are the reasons that the mainstream does like them.
Obama is to left as Bush is to Right
No Thank you!
January 29th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
What is a “socially conservative” Republican? This term doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of what you are saying.
If you mean “socially liberal” Republican, I could understand that.
January 31st, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Yes that is what I meant Shawn a socially liberal Republican (Kind of what Mitt Romney “used” to say he was when he ran for office in MA. Thanks for the correction. Just my personal feelings that I want to vote for someone electable.