Advice re: audio recording

I posted the following back on Sept. 22:

FYI, yours truly will be interviewed on 97.1 FM KFTK’s Allman and Smash in Morning talk radio show on Tuesday October the 11th at 8:10 AM CT. The show is based in St. Louis, Mo. – if you’re out of listening range but would like to hear it, go here to download their streaming audio player and you’ll be able to hear their show live.

Was just curious if anyone out there had any advice on how I can go about recording the show?  I want to make sure a copy of it gets posted here for anyone who may not get a chance to listen to it.  Any suggestions, please email me (email addy listed below my pic on the top left of the page) or post in the comment section.

Way to go, CavalierX!

Major congrats to CavalierX who was interviewed by the one and only G. Gordon Liddy on Sept. 27th.  Yes, you read that right: GGL interviewed Cav :)

Read the post where Cav discusses how it all happened and what the topic matter was here.  He provided a transcript link and an audio link to the interview in that same post.

Now, Cav says he was nervous (wouldn’t we all be?) but he certainly didn’t sound nervous.  You did a great job, Cav, so take a bow and accept all the flowers and accolades that get thrown your way!

I should also mention that Cav was one of the first bloggers to link up to my site as well as to comment here … so I guess we could call him a ‘veteran reader’ of the ST blog emoticon

My 2nd Blogiversary

Monday October 3 will officially mark my two year venture into the blogosphere. 

I started out blogging via  Blogger/  The web address that time was (which, if you visit, automatically brings you here now).  My first post as a blogger was on the Rush Limbaugh/Donavan McNabb ‘controversy,’  an ‘issue’ which was much ado about nothing (and incidentally, yet another example of a Republican talking about race issues and being blasted because of it) under close examination, similar to the Bill Bennett "controversy" we are reading about today. 

Liberal media bias combined with Democratic hypocrisy on any number of issues, along with my passion about conservatism were the big reasons I started blogging.  The blogger I read most at that time prior to my starting my own was Andrew Sullivan.  I no longer read Andrew’s blog, but I do give him some of the credit for inspiring me to start blogging about the issues.

For the first ten months of blogging – which I did on blogspot – I didn’t know that much about  how to run a successful blog.  I had the trackbacks and comments features via Haloscan but I rarely got comments and never got trackbacks.  I don’t think I sent a single trackback those first ten months, either.  In fact, I don’t think hardly anyone knew I existed.  I decided to go for a more polished look with a domain name in August of 2004 with the help of Lisa at Elegant Webscapes and I’m so glad I did.  I can’t tell you what having a domain name and a new look did for me in terms of really wanting to turn this into a successful blog.

Even after getting the domain name and new designs, though, I still didn’t know my way around the blogosphere that well and had a series of ups and downs for the first half of my second  year – where I was considering whether or not I should continue blogging at all.  There were time issues involved and not only that, but I think about 20-40 people were visiting here a day and it was making me wonder if this was something I really wanted to do.  It wasn’t until June of this year that I finally decided that this was something I wanted to continue to do, because whether I had 20 readers or 20,000, I was blogging about what I felt was important and if only 20 people found it important, that was ok too.  That’s one of the things you learn over time when you blog: if you blog based only on what you think others want to read rather than what you think is important, you might as well get out of it. 

So with that decision in mind, I’ve gone forward and had a great summer of blogging and good start to the fall.  I’ve got a good group of readers and commenters here who I enjoy conversing with, even if I don’t have as much time to do that as I used to.  And though I know there is some hate out there in the blogosphere directed towards this blog, it’s miniscule compared to the volume of hate mail that some bloggers receive.  The hate email and hateful comments I have received as a result of starting this blog are few and far in between, and those I do receive only add fuel to my fire and desire to continue doing what I love to do and that is to write about the issues, and give my opinion on them. 

Thanks to all of you who have helped in making this blog a success.  Here’s to another year of passionate discussions about the issues … I’m sure there will be many :)

Monday Update: Wow – Captain Ed’s 2 year blogiversary is on the same day as mine.  Here’s to many more, Ed!

After 4th Krugman correction, Times announces new policy

Via The Editor and Publisher:

Just days after it ran an editors’ note–under pressure from outside and within–that sort of admitted it had erred in a blast at Fox News’ Gerald Rivera during the Katrina tragedy, The New York Times finally ran a full correction on Sunday, on its editorial page, for a miscue by columnist Paul Krugman, while announcing a new policy on noting errors on that page.

Krugman had three times previously admitted getting wrong part of his Aug. 19 column about media recounts of the 2000 Bush-Gore race, but critics kept claiming that he still hadn’t gotten it quite right. Editorial Page Editor Gail Collins wrote on Sunday that it had turned into a "correction run amok."

After publishing his third correction on the Web, Krugman asked Collins, she wrote, "if he could refrain from revisiting the subject yet again in print. I agreed, feeling we had reached the point of cruelty to readers. But I was wrong. The correction should have run in the same newspaper where the original error and all its little offspring had appeared."

Collins also announced that the paper would henceforth be running regular corrections and "for the record" explanations under the Times’ editorials. Today she published several in the "for the record" category. One notes that Krugman, Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich all incorrectly stated that former FEMA director Michael Brown went to college with his predecessor Joe Allbaugh. Another corrects where Mick Jagger made a certain statement about economics.

It’s no longer arguable that the Newspaper of Record could easily be called the Newspaper of Corrections.  A great site that documents the corrections of newpapers all over the world is Regret The Error – which has noted some problems with the NYTimes inability to get the story right the first time around on more than one occasion (see this post for an example, which I blogged about here).

Another site you should bookmark is Times Watch, which is devoted to exposing the liberal media bias at the NYTimes.