CapeCodToday Blog Chowder

FOCUS on the Future....

Big Brothers Big Sisters of Cape Cod and Islands Annual Focus Meeting a success

This past Saturday, our Board of Directors and staff (a total of 33 attendees) met at the Roadhouse Café in Hyannis to share their thoughts, concerns and create a recruitment and development strategy for the upcoming year.

Board member Michael Tritto, Director of Theatre at Cape Cod Community College and former Big Brother of the Year, facilitated the meeting.

Attendees were asked to write down questions (anonymously) and post them on the walls around the room. Wall space was divided into different categories- personnel, operations, board, fund-raising, etc. As all the questions were anonymous, there was no timidity in asking certain questions for fear of embarrassment. Each question sparked a productive debate and brainstorm.

Hot on everyone's mind, the topics of development and recruitment spawned the most creative and inspiring ideas.

Some things to watch out for from Big Brothers Big Sisters in 2006:

• website with on-line volunteer application and donation mechanism
• more efficient recruitment campaign
• more frequent volunteer informational sessions and recruitment events
• "Bigs" support and social groups
• greater focus on PR

We'd like to thank Roadhouse Café owner Dave Colombo for donating the venue (on right.
Breakfast and lunch were provided by Cup of the Bay in Wareham, Stop &  Shop and The Casual Gourmet in Centerville-all at a discounted price.

As always, our doors are open to any interested volunteers and donors-call us at (508) 771-5150 or stop  by our Centerville office: 1934 Falmouth Rd/Rt. 28 (diagonally across from the fire station and yellow blinking lights)

Grist magazine readers are angry at RFK Jr.

 

Cape Crusaders
Readers write back about the Cape Cod wind-farm project and more

30 Jan 2006

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little

Dear Editor:

He wants to send the windmills five miles farther out in the interests of the fishermen? Or is it because at five miles farther out he knows the windmills would be beyond the horizon and thus invisible from shore?

C'mon, Bobby! Join us and support this project!

Robert Kennedy Jr. has done a disservice to the very interests he claims to protect. There is an important element missing in his commentary: a disclosure. Mr. Kennedy and other members of the Kennedy family own property that overlooks this area. The arguments they use against this project are the same as those used by opponents to action on global warming, whom Mr. Kennedy vigorously opposes. This glaring conflict weakens the political authority the Kennedy family has maintained over many years.

The second is that the fishing industry will face losses. Mr. Kennedy ignores the perilous condition of the fisheries, largely due to incompetent state and federal fisheries management, which has allowed the depletion of fish, dwindling numbers of species, and compromised habitat.

The most important issue is that the nation's thirst for energy will demand oil exploration and production off the coast of New England. Allowing the construction of this facility creates a strong position from which to argue against any drilling. Interestingly, there are no regulations against oil platforms in this area.

Dave D
via Gristmill

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

Robert Kennedy Jr. has done a disservice to the very interests he claims to protect. There is an important element missing in his commentary: a disclosure. Mr. Kennedy and other members of the Kennedy family own property that overlooks this area. The arguments they use against this project are the same as those used by opponents to action on global warming, whom Mr. Kennedy vigorously opposes. This glaring conflict weakens the political authority the Kennedy family has maintained over many years.

Mr. Kennedy makes many incorrect assertions. The first is that this area is a navigational danger. It is a shoal, which is shallow water and is marked as such on the navigational charts.

The second is that the fishing industry will face losses. Mr. Kennedy ignores the perilous condition of the fisheries, largely due to incompetent state and federal fisheries management, which has allowed the depletion of fish, dwindling numbers of species, and compromised habitat.

Mr. Kennedy uses data on tourism developed by the Beacon Hill Institute, known for developing positions for the special interests funding the study. Wind installations in Denmark actually increase tourism, which is directly attributable to people who include wind farms in their sightseeing plans.

The most important issue is that the nation's thirst for energy will demand oil exploration and production off the coast of New England. Allowing the construction of this facility creates a strong position from which to argue against any drilling. Interestingly, there are no regulations against oil platforms in this area.

Mr. Kennedy needs to examine the facts before staking his claim. Surely the view of numerous oil drilling platforms would not be as pleasant as a stand of graceful wind machines.

Dave D
via Gristmill

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

I recently traveled to Germany and was amazed at the number of wind turbines that are in use. They were everywhere, but never did they cause me anxiety over how they fit into the landscape. It was fascinating to watch them turn, to see how many you could spot as you looked farther and farther to the horizon. It took a concerted effort to pick the low hum out of any other background noise -- even in the countryside. I say: Bring on the turbines! They create clean energy and are so cool!

Crystal G. Gilchrist

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

There seems to be some feeling that looking out on the ocean and seeing windmills will spoil the perfect beauty of a natural paradise. Um, folks, turn around, stop looking at the ocean for a moment, and look at Cape Cod -- it may be a nice place to live, but it's no Yosemite National Park. I think the roads and houses, etc., sort of take away from that. So if you can put up with destroying what was probably a natural wonderland 400 years ago, why should these windmills make a difference? The word hypocrite comes to mind.

Maybe if you stop the windmills, your next project should be to reclaim Cape Cod's natural beauty. OK, whose house is first to come down?

pw
via Gristmill

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

I am in complete agreement with Mr. Kennedy. First, Americans use and waste astounding amounts of energy. If we became responsible consumers of energy, we could shut down coal-fired plants without expanding the energy grid. Second, solar and wind power are best generated at the residential or commercial site where power is used so that it is not lost to grid transmission inefficiencies. Third, several other industrial wind parks are slated for some of the most scenic viewsheds in the Southern Appalachian Mountains. These wind parks involve towers 300 to 400 feet high, transmission lines, and roads into sensitive areas, as well as other structures.

It's a damn shame that the environmental movement doesn't focus on the simple and immediate benefits of energy-efficient appliances, light bulbs, and automobiles. That would impact global warming immediately without the sacrifice of our precious viewsheds. I live in Appalachia and am not a person of wealth, but I treasure the scenic beauty in my backyard just like Mr. Kennedy does. Industrial wind parks may have a role in a comprehensive energy policy, but not at the expense of pristine viewsheds while America continues daily to recklessly squander power.

James Dentinger
Madison, Wis.

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

It's distressing to witness environmental activists bickering over wind generators off Cape Cod. Bill McKibben, Michael Shellenberger, Ted Nordhaus, and The New York Times find an easy target in Robert Kennedy Jr. -- who, according to them, doesn't want his view or sailing opportunities sullied by unsightly windmills. To me, the issue appears a little more complicated.

Cape Wind power generators are not "vitally important" in the fight against global warming, as these commentators claim. Cape Wind, "one of the biggest projects in the world," will at best supply electrical energy for a projected 70 percent of Nantucket, Cape Cod, and Martha's Vineyard. This is not even a drop in a barrel of oil compared to United States energy needs, and hardly the results that will allow us to stop worrying about global warming.

The simple truth is that we must cut our energy use. Rather than building noisy, ugly, bird-killing giant windmills for a billion dollars, we as a society with dwindling resources might well consider investing in mass rail transit and energy-saving technology. Merely lowering the speed limit to 55 mph would save more energy per year than could be produced in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Like drilling in ANWR, which is admittedly more about torturing the enviros and milking the taxpayers than solving our energy problems, I have to suspect that building a wind farm off the coast of Cape Cod entails motives beyond satisfying our craving for energy. And the motives are not pretty.

fiver
via Gristmill

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

Thanks for this informative article. It is sad to see our community so divided.

The passing remark on the concerns of the Humane Society of the United States, Massachusetts Audubon, and the International Fund for Animal Welfare was of great interest to me, but you did not do much with it.

Inasmuch as we environmentalists can be divided into two groups -- physicists and chemists on the one hand, i.e., those more interested in energy production and pollution issues, and biologists and ecologists and ethicists on the other, i.e., those more interested in preserving biodiversity and defending animal rights -- Grist seems definitely on the side of the former. These two groups are by no means opposed to one another, of course. We are all worried about pollution; we are all worried about climate change. And we all (I hope!) recognize that we need to stick together. I only mean to point out that we who pay special attention to biodiversity-related issues are not receiving quite as much of your excellent journalistic attention as is fair.

Mark Stephen Caponigro
New York, N.Y.

Re: The Wind and the Willful, Muckraker, by Amanda Griscom Little
Dear Editor:

Ross Gelbspan stated that Cape Wind is a landmark project that "would offset approximately 880,000 tons of carbon dioxide a year, the equivalent of keeping over 150,000 vehicles off the road."

According to the EPA, if every American household replaced five of their current light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs, it would save as much energy as if we took 8 million cars off the roads. Perhaps Ross Gelbspan needs to go back to the basics, do the math, and advocate for conservation rather than the wind-power industry.

Dona
Re: No More Mr. Nice Guy, Soapbox, by Bill McKibben
Dear Editor:

Terrific op-ed. The efforts of no environmentalist should be discounted, but global warming is a bigger, tougher, and more potentially devastating problem than any other in environmentalism. It is simply a difference of magnitude.

No issue needs to take a "back seat" because the fight against global warming is the struggle to save birds, plants, trees, ecosystems, and all the rest.

scott s
via Gristmill

See the original page in grist here, and make your own comments below. 

Nor'easter

Duxbury Beach, MA... gale warning, fat swells, astronomical high tide, northeast-facing beach, etc... There's a ten foot concrete sea wall between the houses and the sea, but the storm surge rolls right over that.

This is good surfing weather, although all the surfers I knew in Duxbury go to Rhode Island to surf (there is good surfing in neighboring Marshfield). The part about riding the Big Kahuna into 10 foot concrete wall adds tension to your fun.

If the fishing fleet get caught slippin' it isn't unusual for 10-100 lobster pots to wash ashore, and if you get to them before the lobstermen do.... free lobster for a month.

I've also seen sailboats, cabin cruisers, whales, trans-Atlantic cable (the TA cable- between France and the USA- came ashore on Cable Hill in Duxbury... the first message was sent by Napoleon III), sharks, sunfish, a thousand sneakers, oil filters, and jellyfish be hurled ashore by storms.

Keeping a lawn going is tough on Duxbury Beach. A lot of people just have sand yards. The only plants that grow here without intense labor are beach grass, beach plum bushes, poison ivy and goldenrod.

This isn't even that bad of a storm. I was trapped here in the Perfect Storm (a mammoth 1991 Nor'Easter that they made that George Clooney movie about), and the waves were breaking over these very same houses. The original house that became the house this picture was taken from was smashed into matchsticks in the Perfect Storm.

Rebuilding these houses means putting them on stilts... usually concrete pilings that create a look where one could park a non-SUV under the house. Duxbury Beach lies between a huge salt marsh and the Atlantic Ocean, and the water can pool up easily. Woe is thee who has a basement on Duxbury Beach.

Romney makes the richer get richer, and...

Romney spending plan would increase island's state aid

By David Kibbe, Ottaway News Service, Nantucket Unquirer & Mirror

Gov. Mitt Romney earlier this week proposed a $25.2 billion state budget for next fiscal year that would overhaul the way the state distributes school aid to cities and towns, and result in an additional 63,762 in education aid to Nantucket.

One Cape Democrat, however, is already calling the overall plan a “disaster.”

Romney said his new aid formula would give more money to growing communities by basing half of the distribution formula on property values and half on income. Cape and Islands communities have long complained that the decade-old formula counts them as wealthy due to high property values, without considering their relatively low median incomes.

So local officials were taken aback when Romney’s new formula actually reduced Chapter 70 funding - the main category of education aid - in a number of Cape towns, even though some will see big net gains in other local aid accounts. Nantucket, however, would see a $63,762 increase in education aid to $898,930 under the Romney plan... Read the rest of this story in the Inquitrer & Mirror here, and comment below.

Mashpee- Governor Proposing $25.2 Billion Budget, Mashpee Shortchanged

By MICHAEL C. BAILEY, Enterprise Newspapers

Education aid would receive a $163 million funding increase under Governor W. Mitt Romney’s spending plan for Fiscal Year 2007.
Mr. Romney released his FY07 budget proposal Wednesday, laying out a $25.2 billion spending plan that he said “reflects a marked improvement in the fiscal health of the Commonwealth, allowing us to share the benefits of the turnaround with our cities and towns.”

The governor’s figure represents a 5.3 percent increase over the FY06 budget.

A point of interest to Cape schools are proposed changes to the Chapter 70 state education aid formula. “My budget increases and more equitably allocates aid to our local school districts” by a total of $163 million, Mr. Romney said. His budget also includes an extensive proposed overhaul of the Chapter 70 formula.

The governor’s budget would allot $3.4 billion to Chapter 70. Under Mr. Romney’s proposal, Bourne would receive $4.6 million in state aid, an increase of approximately $100,000 over last year. Falmouth would also receive an extra $100,000, bringing that town’s FY07 aid to $4.5 million. Sandwich would receive $5.8 million, a $200,000 increase.

Mashpee’s aid would not increase. Its Chapter 70 aid would hold steady at about $4 million...

Read the rest of this Mashpee Enterprise story here, and comment below

D/Y: Sullivan sees no compromise on school funding
By Craig Salters/ csalters@cnc.com / The Register

The towns of Dennis and Yarmouth have three options when it comes to regional school funding: stick with the existing regional agreement, adopt the more recent Chapter 70 formula or come up with a compromise formula ... and quick.

But Tuesday night's meeting of Yarmouth selectmen saw the board's chairman, Jerry Sullivan, express a desire to move away from the existing formula. He also expressed serious doubt that the two sides will be able to reach a compromise agreement.

"My personal view is that there doesn't seem to be support for the regional agreement," said Sullivan after Tuesday night's regular meeting. Sullivan was quick to point out that no formal vote on the matter had been taken; he did, however, discuss his views at the board meeting and encountered no disagreement.

That leaves the controversial Chapter 70 funding formula, which has been estimated to save Yarmouth million but would place that burden on Dennis. Unlike the traditional regional agreement, which funds regional schools on a per-pupil basis, the Chapter 70 formula relies on median income and other factors.

On numerous occasions Dennis officials have stated their desire to continue the existing regional agreement and a strong opposition to switching to the Chapter 70 formula. One case against the switch is that, by leaving the per-pupil formula, Dennis taxpayers would essentially be subsidizing Yarmouth students...

Read the rest of this Register story here, and comment below.

Less isn't ever more

By Adrian Walker, Globe Columnist | January 30, 2006

There are a lot of people who were happy with how they fared when Governor Mitt Romney unveiled his $25.2 billion budget proposal last week. John Drew was not one of them.

The proposed budget includes more money for public health, education, and local aid. But for Drew, the executive vice president of Action for Boston Community Development, the antipoverty agency, it falls well short for one constituency: poor people.

''We're angry," he said yesterday. ''It doesn't take much to understand that jobs for kids for the summer, for the homeless, for counselors working for kids in the city, these things are important."

Though the budget represents an increase of 5.3 percent, there was belt-tightening in some areas, even as Romney renewed his familiar call to cut the income tax rate to 5 percent. Last year, the Legislature approved a supplemental $1.35 million increase in Head Start funding. That increase is nowhere to be found in the latest proposal.

''If we don't get that money, it would mean that hundreds of children could lose their child care services," Drew said. ''That's not a good investment."

Some housing programs and programs for teens also took hits. The Summer Jobs Program, now funded at $4 million, would shrink to $2 million...

Read the rest of this Globe column here, and comment below.

Now Hear This: Yahweh has Spoken!

Now Hear This: Yahweh Has Spoken!

By Greg O’Brien, Codfish Press

God has spoken! Or at least those who presume to speak for God, and in Massachusetts, that’s the difference between what’s real and imagined.

In a throwback to 1075 when Pope Gregory VII (on right, no relation) dominated church and state—raising armies, levying taxes, deposing kings and condemning souls—the Archdiocese of Boston and its splinter sects (a.k.a. Council of Churches) intensely lobbied the State Legislature in recent weeks in a holy cow, come-to-Jesus spin campaign that bore the good fruit of a one-sided 147 to 3 margin last week in the House on a bill that would have mandated religious organizations to file annual financial reports with the state.

The resurrected strength of the Catholic Church in Boston

A sure sign of the resurrected strength of the Catholic Church in Boston, the vote was more about power, politics and a twinge of old fashioned Irish guilt, fear and distortion than it was about separation of church and state, as opponents of the measure had attested in letters, sermons and sub rosa calls to lawmakers who finally did the math: churches equal loyal parishioners, who show up in the thousands on reelection day. No political upside here on a “yea” vote that would have placed needed checks and balances on an institution that collectively has operated behind closed doors, often at the peril of the faithful. Even Gov. Mitt Romney, a devoted Mormon, had vowed to veto it, noting the bill’s “onerous reporting requirements, oversight and intrusion in religious practice.”

Onerous intrusion, ironically, was the reason Martin Luther in the 1500s pressed the concept of separation of church and state on grounds of financial accountability, objecting to the Catholic Church’s selling of indulgences—spiritual get-out-of-jail cards. Citing scripture, Luther drew a sharp distinction between the “laws of creation” and the “natural laws” the government has charge to enforce. Ask any accountant today and he or she will tell you that bean counting—an annual reporting of finances and real estate holdings—is as “natural” as it gets.

A New Joan of Arc 

The Joan of Arc in all this is Senate Assistant Majority Leader Marian Walsh (on right), vilified by church authorities for her role as chief sponsor of the disclosure bill.

Throughout her political life, Walsh has always endeavored to do the right thing, regardless of the political consequence. Raised in Holy Name Parish in West Roxbury, a lawyer, a graduate of Harvard Divinity School and an outspoken advocate for the disenfranchised, Walsh was the first public official in the state in 2002 to call for Bernard Cardinal Law’s resignation and possible prosecution over the church’s sex abuse scandal. Months later, she proposed landmark and initially controversial legislation—The Reckless Endangerment Act (ultimately approved in the House and Senate)—making it a crime for anyone directly or indirectly to put children in physical or emotional risk.

“They told us (in church) to spread the Good News and stand up for the little guy,” she said in a recent interview in the Boston Irish Reporter.

It’s time now for the legislature to stand up for the little guy, and take another look at the disclosure issue.

Remembering Mrs. King

Coretta Scott King passed away last night. I never had the opportunity to see her in person, but she had a quiet dignity that came through in photos and on television. Throughout her life, she never waivered from her cause. She had a clear focus and presence of mind--and a strength of purpose that made me want to be like her. And every time I saw a picture of her with her husband, she was standing right beside him. Close, so that their shoulders touched. Never behind, like so many women --so his shoulder is just in front of hers.

To learn more about Coretta Scott King, visit The King Center's web site.

Voodoo Politics. Who do? Reilly do.

Democrat heads are spinning this morning with the news that guberatorial candidate Tom Reilly is going with Marie St. Fleur, a State Rep. from Boston, as a running mate. 

She is Haitian. It's got to be the Voodoo.  

Can't quite figure out the politics on this one.  Maybe Reilly thought running with a black would siphon off support from Deval Patrick, the Democrat running for Governor. Maybe he thought running with a women would close the gender gap with Kerry Healy, the Republican running for Governor. Maybe it was the Voodoo.

Reilly  pissed off a lot of people in the process of his self flagalation, because it wasn't necessary to electing a Democrat.  Candidates for Gov. and Lt. Gov. run seperately in the primary, then run as a team in the general.  It was necessary though to try to save the Reilly ship, overladen with money, from sinking.

He pissed off  all the other candidates running for Lt. Gov. and their supporters.

• Tim Murray, Mayor of Worcester, a white Irish Catholic man and all his buddies from Worcester County.  
• Andrea Silbert, a white suburban working mother. 
• Debra Goldberg, a Jewish feminst from Brookline and even
• Sam Kelley, a shrink from the South Shore who won't even survive the Convention. 

It must have been the voodoo. 

Maybe this is his idea of affirmative action.  But why St. Fleur? Wasn't Dianne Wilkerson available?  It was the voodoo.

"Queer Spawn" reunite in Provincetown

Grad film festival presents world view
"Queer Spawn" reaches emotional climax in Provincetown
Jamie Feldmar, Staff writer, Washington Square News

While various parka-clad celebrities trounced around blustery Park City last week during Sundance, another film festival attracted less snow, pretentious Hollywood hanger-ons, outlandish antics and paparazzi chases. It was also significantly more accessible to the average NYU film buff.

Participating in NYU’s Graduate Film Festival, which showcases short documentaries, is the crowning achievement for those enrolled in NYU’s broadcast journalism graduate school. Fourteen films produced by the university’s own opened to audiences gathered at the third-annual festival in the Cantor Film Institute last Saturday.

Does having gay parents affect children’s lives?

Anna Boluda, 30, of Barcelona, screened “Queer Spawn,” a film that raises the question: “Does having gay parents affect children’s lives?” Boluda followed families from both New York and potentially less-forgiving Texas. Over the course of several months, she learned the nitty-gritty of filmmaking.

“We do everything by ourselves,” Boluda said. “I started at the end of last spring, and worked through production, shooting and editing. You just have to find your topic, grab a camera and go.” The result of her work was a film both humorous and poignant, exploring the lives of gay couples and their children across the country.

The film reaches its emotional climax during footage of a week-long retreat in Provincetown, Mass., designed specifically for “queer spawn” to meet other kids with gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender parents. Boluda’s subjects were surprisingly candid — talking about everything from struggling with their sexuality to dealing with discrimination. In the decidedly liberal atmosphere of Greenwich Village, it should be noted, the film received a raucous round of applause...

Read the rest of this Washington Square News story here, and please comment below. 

Crossing paths outside Faneuil Hall

An item in the Political Notes column of the Cape Cod Times last month mentioned that Congressman Bill Delahunt's longtime chief of staff, Steve Schwadron, was moving on to work in a DC-based public affairs company.

Prior to working for Delahunt, Schwadron served in the same capacity for Gerry Studds, Delahunt's predecessor in the 10th District.

In fact, in Schwadron's first day on the job "he watched U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy announce his candidacy for the presidency," noted Times political reporter Kevin Dennehy.

I remember that day as one of hundreds of people outside Faneuil Hall in Boston for Kennedy's formal announcement, which he made inside the venerable forum.With Jimmy Carter's presidency in disarray and the country mired in post-Vietnam malaise, it had been rumored for months that Kennedy would run.

The dedication of the John F. Kennedy Library two weeks earlier, which bore a remarkable resemblance to a political rally, made Kennedy's entry into the race all but certain. Then two things happened in the interim - one of seismic importance, the other seemingly minor but devastating for Kennedy's candidacy.

On Nov. 4, 1979, 90 Americans were taken captive at the US embassy in Tehran by Islamic militants.  Nearly half would soon be released, but 52 would remain hostages for the next 14 months, the remainder of Carter's term.

The second event took place on the night of the day the hostage crisis began. Kennedy was interviewed by Roger Mudd for "CBS News Special Reports" and flubbed the question he should have been able to answer sleepwalking - why do you want to be president?

Rather than respond in the confident cadences of his older brothers, Kennedy rambled into painful incoherence. Fortunately for him, the interview coincided with the first network broadcast of the movie "Jaws," which shifted a huge chunk of TV viewers away from an interview with a politician.

But for those people watching CBS, the ones who followed politics, it was obvious that Kennedy's rationale for running was based on little more than entitlement. And like the thoroughbred which stumbles while still in the gate, Kennedy never recovered.

Little could hardly anyone have known, but the events in Tehran had rendered his candidacy irrelevant. The days and weeks that Americans remained captive soon stretched into months, and just before 1979 came to its merciful end, the Soviets invaded a forgotten corner of the globe called Afghanistan.

The world had quickly turned ominous and Kennedy's brand of liberalism, more the legacy of his brother Robert than of JFK,  was no longer ascendant. The country was swerving right, a shift hastened by a widespread tax revolt in California the year before and the contentious debate over control of the Panama Canal in the spring of '79.

Kennedy was among the first victims of the shift, having waited four years too long for the campaign everyone knew he'd eventually run. Another victim was Carter, who responded, also too late, with the threat of force to protect the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf (the largely forgotten Carter Doctrine).

When Carter decided to do more than threaten force, eight American soldiers were killed when their helicopters collided in the Iranian desert during a failed rescue mission in April 1980 (during a briefing before the US invasion of Grenada four years later, Ronald Reagan asked how many helicopters would be used. Double it, he responded. Had Carter done that, you'd be giving this briefing to him, Reagan said, according to biographer Richard Reeves).

Three days after the Mudd interview and the start of the hostage crisis, Kennedy announced his candidacy. What do I remember about that day, from the perspective of a spectator outside Faneuil Hall?Only one thing, really, aside from a glimpse of Kennedy coming outside to cheers from the crowd.

On my way there, I watched from about 50 yards away as a beautiful and innately elegant woman stepped out of a cab. Even more than two decades later, I'm pretty sure she took my breath away. It was Jackie Onassis, as she was known then, and how about that, she arrived in a taxi, alone, and not in a limo. I always liked that about her - who knows how many days she brightened for countless New York cabbies.

Someone was waiting to open a door for her into Faneuil Hall and then she was gone, this ephemeral vision passing in all of a few seconds, like an unusually vivid shooting star. It was the only time I saw the woman I remember as Jackie Kennedy in the flesh and one of my few concrete memories of the day. 

And the button above remains my only souvenir.

_{The photo of Ted Kennedy  at the 1980 Democratic Convention comes courtesy of the Democratic National Committee.} 

Germany Learning the Hard Way about Wind Power