Month: June 2009

Today marks the release date of Dave Matthews Band‘s latest (and first LeRoi-less) album, Big Whiskey and the GrooGrux King, and reviews are already pouring in like streams of…bourbon? Scotch? Ah, forget the substance—is the press toasting our boys, or roasting our boys?

The Washington Post places its Groo review below Book World’s take on Richard Wolffe’s Renegade: The Making of a President. (Geez, Obama, share the spotlight.) Allison Stewart writes that the album "marks the first time in years they’ve sounded both interesting and interested," and  speculates whether Groo will be the last DMB album. Rolling Stone senior editor David "My Record Collection is Bigger than Yours" Fricke awards 4.5 of 5 stars, praises drumer Carter Beauford and bassist Stefan Lessard and says Matthews "shreds his voice like Eddie Vedder against a brick wall of Pearl Jam" on the song "Time Bomb."

Most publications seem to praise the Freudian sex-and-death drive of the new album, but Paste notes that "the weight of their pain creeps into the nooks where a joyful ‘Tripping Billies’-era DMB might have stuffed an extra dance." LA Times writer Ann Powers responds that, no, there’s an admirable strength to finding some joyous moments amidst the darkness.

How does Dave Matthews Band feel about the album? As previously reported on C-VILLE, our Big Whiskey boys were scheduled to take to the stage at New York’s Beacon Theatre last night for a concert that streaming media website Hulu would simulcast. Watch the show below for context clues, but get comfy—the set is only a few minutes shy of three hours:

What’s your take on the album? Is Big Whiskey worth a shot? Leave your thoughts below.

In direct opposition to the Charlottesville Planning Commission’s vote on the rezoning of 814 Hinton Avenue in Belmont, City Council last night gave their initial support to the applicants, Andrew Ewell and Hannah Pittard.

At the public hearing in front of City Council, no dissenting voice approached the stage, quite a different scenario from the last time this item was on the agenda.

In last month’s public hearing in front of the Planning Commission, 32 residents spoke up both for and against the possibility of the new restaurant opening right next door to Belmont BBQ.

Councilor Holly Edwards said that she enjoyed walking through the neighborhood in the past weeks. She said she observed some of the opponents sitting and eating at the restaurants on Hinton Avenue in Belmont.

With a 4-0 vote (Councilor Satyendra Huja was absent), the item will be subjected to a second reading on June 15.

Who’s the best gubernatorial candidate, from a green point of view? Short answer: I don’t know. I just don’t know. I really just don’t know.

I had hoped to deliver a ringing endorsement of one of the three Democratic candidates, and maybe while I was at it a scathing denouncement of at least one of the other two. However, after several hours of trying to educate myself on their environmental positions and records, I have learned two things:

1. I should have started paying attention to this much sooner. Like, years ago.

2. None of the three (Creigh Deeds, Terry McAuliffe, Brian Moran) seems worthy of a ringing endorsement. The issue of scathing denouncements is somewhat murkier.

The primary is only eight days away (June 9), so I’m looking for a mutually beneficial discussion, here, readers. I’ll tell you some stuff I’ve learned and you chime in, please. Also, vote! Vote like the wind. Pretend it’s last November. Wear your moose-huntin’ hat if it gets you to the polls.

First of all, here’s the Sierra Club providing a side-by-side comparison of the candidates’ positions, in their own words. It’s a total snoozefest. McAuliffe and Moran have exactly the same goals for renewable energy. Everybody loves the easy-to-love passenger rail, and ditto for the Chesapeake Bay. Moran comes off as somewhat more hard-core than his opponents, notably on the issue of the Surry coal plant, which he’s against. More on that below.

The issue of who will be effective, apart from actual positions, comes up in various places. One voter’s pithy perspective is quoted in this Staunton News-Leader story: "The other two candidates ‘deserve it more,’ Young said a few days later, but ‘McAuliffe has the potential to do a lot more.’" McAuliffe is seen as the electable, well-funded candidate who might actually get some stuff done. Indeed, effectiveness seems to be the main reason for the Virginia League of Conservation Voters’ endorsement of McAuliffe (download the group’s statement here). The Post’s endorsement of Deeds is surprising in that context, but its paragraph on environmental issues is quite flaccid.

Ultimately, to me, fossil fuels are THE current environmental issue in Virginia. Climate change, mining and drilling: Those are your crises. And none of these three guys, predictably for major-party candidates, seems willing to truly draw a line in the sand. McAuliffe is criticized for supporting offshore oil drilling. Deeds is lambasted for parroting the clean-coal line. And Moran, most disappointingly, takes heat for supporting the proposed Wise County plant even as he trumpets his opposition to the Surry plant.

I really have no idea who to vote for. Please offer opinions.