Tag Archives: nature

Snooki Gets Fine, Community Service In Disorderly Conduct Case

‘Thank you judge for understanding,’ ‘Jersey Shore’ star tweets after sentencing. By Gil Kaufman Snooki in court on September 8 Photo: TMZ “Jersey Shore” star Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi , appeared in a Seaside Heights, New Jersey, courtroom on Wednesday (September 8) to face misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct, creating a nuisance and being criminally annoying. After a brief hearing, the judge in the case found that she was not guilty of criminal conduct in the July 30 incident and agreed to a deal in which Polizzi pleaded guilty to disturbing the quiet enjoyment of the beach, and the disorderly conduct and public nuisance counts were dismissed. Polizzi had earlier pleaded not guilty to all three charges. She was sentenced to two days of community service and fined $533. “Ah never again! So scary…thank you judge for understanding, I’m very thankful for that! Whew…now I can breath!” Snickers tweeted a half hour after leaving court. Following the court appearance, Polizzi’s lawyer, Ray Raya, said the entire incident was blown out of proportion and that it was simply the case of a young woman having some fun and a few drinks with her friends. “She just acted silly on the beach that day,” said Raya in a press conference streamed on TMZ following the hearing. “Her conduct was not criminal … she stumbled into a couple of people on the beach.” Raya said it is the nature of Snooki’s unique reality-TV celebrity that everywhere she goes, she draws a big crowd, and on the day in question he said she was being trailed by more than 300 people who were screaming her name and trying to get her attention. “It was an anomaly in an otherwise well-lived life,” he said. But Raya took issue with comments by Judge Damian Murray during the hearing, in which the judge called the pint-size dynamo a “Lindsay Lohan wannabe,” comparing her to the recently rehabbed star with a history of drug issues and arrests. Raya pointed out that Polizzi has no such record and that she promised that this would be her last time in a courtroom for this kind of behavior. According to TMZ , the judge scoffed at Polizzi’s antics in the incident, during which she reportedly was spotted with a beer bong, falling off her bicycle and stumbling into other people on the beach. Murray urged Snooki to decide if “it was worth trading your dignity for a paycheck.” Murray also wondered how much was scripted and how much came from Snooki herself, saying that going through life acting “profane” and “self-indulgent” was no way to live. Polizzi assured him that nothing was scripted and that all her boozy antics were her idea alone. A contrite Snooki, wearing a dark gray suit, said she was “very embarrassed” by the incident and that she has never been in this kind of, well, situation, before. Raya said Polizzi has already served some time at the Popcorn Park Zoo as part of a community service agreement, feeding the lions and cleaning out animal cages. Related Photos Jersey Shore (Season 2) | Snooki

View original post here:
Snooki Gets Fine, Community Service In Disorderly Conduct Case

Rachel Bilson Because She’s Too Cute

I thought that I would finish off the day with some nice shots of cutie Rachel Bilson walking the streets in a sweet white dress because she’s almost perfect in my mind. I was kinda hoping that with all the strange weather we’ve been having this summer Mother Nature might kick up some wind or cover her in rain so that at least we’d get some action shots, but I guess she’s in California and everyday is perfect there. Stupid California.

Tea Party president jokes about murdering GLBTQ people

A Facebook exchange: Dennis Scranton: “I think fruits are decorative. Hang up where they can be seen and appreciated. Call Wyoming for display instructions.” Tim Ravndal: “@Kieth, OOPS I forgot this aint(sic) America no more! @ Dennis, Where can I get that Wyoming printed instruction manual?” (A reference to the torture and murder of Matthew Shepard in Wyoming in 1998). Randval has apologized. But the organization has not yet met demands to remove himl from office. What's it going to be, Tea Party and sympathizers? Are you going to have the guy who thinks murdering gays is hilarious as your president? Any official denunciation of violence coming our way anytime soon? I was in college and had just come out when Matthew Shepard was murdered. His death was such a horrifying and unexpected tragedy that it left its mark on everyone I knew, even though none of us had ever met him. To read the exchange between Scranton and Ravndal makes me wince as if from a physical blow. Matthew was my age – he'd be almost 34 now. Is the world now, no better than the world that he left? Is this truly where Tea Party and other anti-gay types want us to be? Because this is where the road of homophobia and discrimination against GLBTQ people ends. This is where the fractured discourse, alarmist propaganda, and fearmongering ends. In violence and death. It's not funny to me. Is it funny to you, Tea Party? added by: putdownmypants

Petraeus "Planned Burning of Qur’ans Could Endanger Troops"

KABUL—The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said the planned burning of Qurans on Sept. 11 by a small Florida church could put the lives of American troops in danger and damage the war effort. Gen. David Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians. “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Gen. Petraeus said in an interview. “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.” Hundreds of Afghans attended a demonstration in Kabul on Monday to protest the plans of Florida pastor Terry Jones, who has said he will burn copies of Islam's holy book to mark the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Afghan protesters chanted “death to America,” and speakers called on the U.S. to withdraw its troops. Some protesters threw rocks at a passing military convoy. Military officials fear the protests will likely spread to other Afghan cities, especially if the event is broadcast or ends up on Internet video. Mr. Jones, head of the 50-member Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., said in a statement that “We understand the General's concerns. We are sure that his concerns are legitimate.” Nonetheless, he added, “We must send a clear message to the radical element of Islam. We will no longer be controlled and dominated by their fears and threats.” Mr. Jones has been denied a permit for the demonstration, but has said he plans to go forward with the protest. Rev. Stephanie Sapp, spokeswoman for the center, said no one from the Pentagon or other federal agencies had expressed concern or asked that the event be canceled. She did say that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had discussed security measures. Pentagon officials said they were not aware that any Defense officials have reached out directly to Mr. Jones. But military officers said they hoped that Gen. Petraeus's statement—an unusual move since military commanders rarely get involved in politics—would convince Mr. Jones to change his plans. Gen. Petraeus declined to elaborate on the nature of the threats or violence that could occur, but westerners in Afghanistan have been warned away from restaurants and other public places amid the rising tensions. Other senior military leaders echoed Gen. Petraeus commentsMonday. Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, who oversees the effort to train Afghan security forces said he was informed of the planned Florida protests several days ago by a senior minister in the Afghan government. (more at link) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703713504575475500753093116.html?m… added by: existentialist

‘127 Hours’ Director Danny Boyle On James Franco, Amputation And Darren Aronofsky

Oscar-winner says he’s made story of a man who can’t move into an action movie. By Josh Horowitz Danny Boyle Photo: Jordan Strauss/WireImage At the 81st Academy Awards in early 2008, Danny Boyle’s “Slumdog Millionaire” took home eight awards, including Best Director, while Darren Aronofsky’s “The Wrestler” lost both categories in which it was nominated. But that didn’t stop Boyle from wanting to emulate Aronofsky’s cinematic approach for his next project. Thus, “127 Hours.” follows one central character, in much the same way that “The Wrestler” focused on Mickey Rourke’s damaged grappler. Boyle’s new film is based on the true story of an avid outdoorsman who becomes trapped under a boulder in the wildness and is forced to saw off his own arm to escape. James Franco plays the unfortunate hiker. The film is one that Boyle has wanted to make for years. Only after virtually sweeping the Oscars, and being inspired by Aronofsky’s style, though, did he move forward with the project. As part of MTV News’ Fall Movie Preview, Boyle called us to chat about how his career has changed since “Slumdog,” the challenges of making a film about a man who can’t move, and why “127 Hours” may not be the ideal date movie. MTV: How are you? Danny Boyle: Good. We’re mixing “127 Hours” at Pinewood, and we’ve been kicked out of the big theater by “Harry Potter.” We’re next door in the little theater. MTV: I guess if you’re going to be kicked out by anybody, they have a big thing going on. Boyle: They’re not even here! Do you know what they do? It’s a big bank holiday this weekend here in Britain, and we’re working right through the weekend to get it ready, and what they do is they book the theater for months and nothing happens! It’s like, “Really?” MTV: Well, it is great to talk to you. So, you had, you know, a little bit of success with “Slumdog Millionaire.” Coming off of that, why this one? Boyle: I’d always wanted to do it. The story has an instant tension that draws everyone’s attention to it. So many people remember it vaguely. But it wasn’t that. I wanted to make the film and I tried to get it going. Of course, it’s a tough subject, but I had a way of doing it that wasn’t what you think. It would be compelling and would occupy you completely as a viewer so that the whole barrier — it’s just one guy stuck in one place — that wouldn’t become an issue because you’d be with him. You would be him, in effect. That was always my take on it. Anyway, once “Slumdog” kicked off, [producer] Christian [Colson] and I thought, “This is our chance to make this.” There’s no other moment in our careers when we’ll get a chance to make something like this, which is really a tricky prospect for any studio or financier. So we worked on it, we prepared a script, and then we had to find an actor. That’s the key to this. Beyond our vision of it, you have to have someone who’s not only going to share the vision but actually going to carry it much more than any film like “Slumdog” or a thriller or a big love story or anything that has a plot or the dynamics changing between two people. It’s just one guy. We got Franco. He’s amazing in it. MTV: There are a couple ways to go off something like “Slumdog.” Either you go with the project you’ve been wanting to make, or I’m sure you were offered every project under the sun. Boyle: I don’t think like that. It’s such an amazing thing that happened that you have to take advantage in the right way. It’s why we wanted to get [“127 Hours”] ready for Toronto, because that’s where we started with “Slumdog.” We wanted to take back there a film that had been made in its shadow. It’s wonderful to do that, because suddenly it’s not an intimidating shadow, it’s liberating because it’s a success that’s allowed you to make something you’ve always wanted to make and you believe but wouldn’t get made otherwise. Even though people, before they see the film, might think it a peculiar choice, but the film is really accessible. Whether they can get people into [the theater], I don’t know. If you want to take a girl on a Friday and say, “What should we go and see?” it’s tough to say, “It’s a film about a guy who cuts his arm off. What do you think?” But once you’re in there, it’s a big story for everyone. It’s a very universal thing. MTV: What are the challenges for you as a filmmaker, keeping things dynamic, and the challenges for an audience? Do you imagine them feeling what Franco is feeling for the length of the movie? Boyle: I always thought of it as the opposite of inert. Superficially, it looks inert, because he’s stationary. But I’d always thought of it as an action movie. He can’t move, but it’s an action movie. That’s what we’ve tried to do. I’m not going to brag now. You guys will have to decide whether we’ve succeeded or not, but that was the intention. I remember when we were doing “Slumdog,” and Darren Aronofsky showed up with “The Wrestler.” It’s one of those films that you look at as a director and think, “That’s it. You just follow this one actor around.” It’s different from his other movies, and it’s different from my other movies, but I wanted to make one like that, where it’s just you and an actor. MTV: I heard you talk about the videos that the hiker, Aron Ralston, took when he was stuck, and how he changed over those few days as he became dehydrated. Was the physical transformation difficult for Mr. Franco? How do you accomplish that in the film? Boyle: You can’t, because you can’t do it safely. It’s not like carbohydrate loss. You hear about an actor losing weight or putting on weight for parts. You can’t do that, because it happens over six days. He starts as an incredibly healthy young man and then this footage I saw by the end, when he’d been without water, the difference is shocking. It’s a vanishing. The only way you could do it is through CG, and we didn’t want to take that approach. We didn’t want to use makeup, but so much of the film is so close. It’s an intimate film. We tried to shoot in sequence to let James internally track it. We’ve not been able to move stuff. He was there for six days, and we’d go, “Can you move that line from day two to day four?” You can’t move it, because the journey is no nuanced. He becomes completely different. He’s a different person on each day. We’ve done it through James, rather than CG or weight loss. MTV: What about the moment when he slowly cuts off his own arm? How long a sequence is that in the film? How much do we see and experience? Boyle: It takes him 45 minutes in reality. It is in the film, obviously. The time it takes is respected by the filmmakers. We don’t cut away, pardon the expression, and come back and it’s gone. But it is cathartic, and that’s the key thing. The whole idea of the film is you enter the journey with him and you don’t cut away to a lot of people looking for him. It’s an immersive experience, and it’s cathartic when he does it because it’s a relief for everyone and a triumph in some way as well. MTV: In terms of the music, it’s A.R. Rahman doing the score again after “Slumdog.” Can you speak a little about what he’s done? Boyle: We’ve got a couple of songs, and the rest of the work is more guitar-based. Some of it is solo guitar, which felt appropriate given the nature of the story. Got a couple of wonderful songs. Free Blood (“Never Hear Surf Music Again”) at the beginning, which we used for the trailer. Music has always been a big part of a movie for me, and I hope we’ve done another one justice we’ve what we’ve used. From the saucy Jessica Alba in “Little Fockers” to James Franco’s grueling journey in “127 Hours,” the MTV Movies team is delving into the hottest flicks of fall 2010. Check back daily for exclusive clips, photos and interviews with the films’ biggest stars. Check out everything we’ve got on “127 Hours.” For breaking news, celebrity columns, humor and more — updated around the clock — visit MTVMoviesBlog.com . Related Videos MTV Rough Cut: 2010 Fall Movie Preview Fall Movie Sneak Peeks Exclusive Clips From The Fall’s Most Anticipated Films Related Photos Fall Movie 2010 Preview Week: Exclusive Photos

Read this article:
‘127 Hours’ Director Danny Boyle On James Franco, Amputation And Darren Aronofsky

Shameful News Industry Willing To Sacrifice Wikileaks To Get Shield Law | Techdirt

http://techdirt.com/images/topic_journalism.gif A few weeks ago, we noted, with some disappointment, that the politicians who had been pushing for a much needed federal shield law for journalism, Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein, were taking the politically expedient route of adding a specific amendment designed to keep Wikileaks out of the bill's protections( http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100804/10343410497.shtml ). Apparently, a bunch of newspaper folks have apparently stepped forward to support this move. Douglas Lee, at The First Amendment Center has an opinion piece calling those people out for sacrificing their overall principles just to get the shield law approved( http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=23303 ). The whole thing is a great read, but a few key snippets: > > It doesn't seem all that long ago that representatives of the newspaper > > industry would have recoiled from working with Congress to deny legal > > protection to anyone who leaked confidential or classified documents. > > Today, however, they seem happy to be doing so. Lee the goes on to quote various industry reps distancing themselves from Wikileaks and putting it down as “not journalism.” He also quotes them admitting that they feel they have to throw Wikileaks under the bus, or the law won't get passed, and then calls them out on the impact of that decision, hinting at the fact that at least some of this might be due to traditional journalists simply not liking new upstarts that are changing the game — like Wikileaks. > > As comforting as it might be to “real” journalists to incorporate editorial > > oversight into a shield law and to use it to distinguish further between the > > “us” who are entitled to the law's protections and the “them” who are not, > > at least two dangers exist in that approach. > > First, does anyone — including the most mainstream of traditional journalists > > — really think it a good idea that Congress and judges define, analyze and > > evaluate what is appropriate “editorial oversight”? For decades, news > > organizations have struggled to resist those efforts in libel cases and, > > so far, those struggles have succeeded. If those same organizations > > now invite legislators and judges into their newsrooms to see how worthy > > their reporters are of protection under a shield law, they shouldn't be > > surprised if the legislators and judges decide to stay. > > Second, is the free flow of information really served if the act's protections > > are denied to those who don't have or practice editorial oversight? > > As Schumer acknowledged in his statement, the act already contains > > language that would limit or deny protection to those who provide or > > publish classified military secrets. Specifically exempting WikiLeaks and > > other organizations that might otherwise qualify for protection under the > > act in at least some cases seems designed not to enhance the free flow of > > information but to channel that information to mainstream sources. It is the nature of politics today to compromise principles to get things through, but this move certainly seems unfortunate — and one that I imagine many news organizations will regret down the road. added by: toyotabedzrock

Sotomayor Says Court May Rule to Limit First Amendment in Response to Wikileaks

On Thursday, talking to students at the University of Denver, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the Wikileaks case will result in the Court likely weighing the First Amendment against national security. She made the comment in response to a question posed by a student. That was not the beginning of that question, but an issue that keeps arising from generation to generation, of how far we will permit government restriction on freedom of speech in favor of protection of the country,” Sotomayor said. “There’s no black-and-white line.” According to Sotomayor, the balance between national security and free speech is “a constant struggle in this society, between our security needs and our first amendment rights, and one that has existed throughout our history.” Following the release of over 90,000 documents by Wikileaks in July, the Pentagon found no evidence that the disclosure harmed U.S. national security or endangered American troops in the field. The Pentagon review team consists of military intelligence analysts, lawyers and others working for the Joint Chiefs of Staffs and other elements of the Defense Department. The Obama administration and certain members of Congress, however, have portrayed the release as a dire threat to national security. Obama asked Britain, Germany, Australia, and other allies to consider criminal charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the organization is guilty of “moral culpability” in the murder of U.S. soldiers. The ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Peter King, said the release of documents violates espionage laws and amounts to treason. The FBI is investigating and the Justice Department said it was looking into pursuing criminal charges in the case. Rep. Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, has demanded the death penalty for SPC Bradley Manning, the man arrested and charged with providing the documents to Wikileaks…. Continued at: http://www.infowars.com/sotomayor-says-court-may-rule-to-limit-first-amendment-i… added by: Dagum

ENDA is about men showering with women

Barney Frank: ENDA is about men showering with women Date: 8/27/2010 9:53:29 AM By Bryan Fischer “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27, emphasis mine). According to both Scripture and biology, there are just two genders, two and only two, male and female. Period. Pro-family advocates have from the beginning opposed the normalizing of transgenderism because it does gross violence to any rational view of human sexuality, and, even worse, will force women to share shower, bathroom and locker-room facilities with biological males. Nonsense, we’ve been told by the deviancy cabal. All hype, fear, and exaggeration. Nothing to fear here except homophobia, move along. It’s all just fear-mongering, nothing like that will ever happen. Your daughter will never run into a disrobed male in the locker room of your local public pool. This is an ongoing battle in our day, at the state level as well as the congressional level. This spring, Maine very nearly enacted a policy that would require ENDA-type regulations in every school in the state, including private Christian schools. It was narrowly turned back. A major goal of the Democrats in the current Congress is to get a transvestite-friendly ENDA bill passed this year. No worries, they say. Pro-family opponents are just trying to scare you with all this bathroom and locker room talk. And then along comes Rep. Barney Frank, the homosexual congressman from Massachusetts, to inadvertently save the day. Democrats tried to pass ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) in 1999, and were under extreme pressure to include transgenders under its umbrella. Transgenders are people who are so psychologically and mentally confused they think they are trapped in a body of the wrong sex. So we are talking here about biological males – males in every single cell of their bodies, with every strand of DNA male to the core, males according to “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” – who are convinced that they are women trapped in male bodies. Consequently, they want to act as women, dress as women, and use the same facilities women use, including bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms. The pro-family community has spoken with one voice. No, no, a thousand times no. We do not want our wives and daughters exposed to such perversion. We insist on a decent protection for the privacy of the females in our families, and do not believe that males have any moral, ethical or legal right to share shower facilities with them. In a long-buried piece from the homosexual newspaper, Bay Windows, dated June 10, 1999, Mr. Frank lets the proverbial cat out of the cathouse. In fending off transgendered activists, Frank told the paper it would be impossible to pass an ENDA bill which included special protections for such sexually abnormal individuals. Here’s what he had to say: “I’ve talked with transgender activists and what they want—and what we will be forced to defend—is for people with penis’ who identify as women to be able to shower with other women. There are no votes for that. And if that is the price for this bill, it is wrong.” (Emphasis mine) Read that again: ENDA, as currently fashioned, is about “people with penis’ who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.” Rep. Frank said since that’s what this bill is about, we’d have to defend that. They didn’t have the votes to do it in 1999. But they’re back, trying to break down the door to your daughter’s locker room in 2010. So if you want your daughter to share a shower at your school, or at the local YMCA, with “people with penis’,” then Barney Frank and his ruling class colleagues are the kind of congressmen you want. But if you want any kind of sane public policy on human sexuality, then they’re not. For my money, this is the ENDA the discussion about whether the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is good public policy. Let’s protect our wives and daughters and drive this misbegotten piece of legislation into oblivion. http://action.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147497842 added by: ReverandG

Driver arrested after officer finds her distracted by adult toy during traffic stop

CINCINNATI – It was likely the most unique traffic stop two police officers from Elmwood Place police have ever had. Officers pulled over 32-year-old Colondra Hamilton for an equipment violation on Aug. 17 around 7:30 p.m. in the 200 block of Township Avenue in Elmwood Place. Officers found Hamilton to have her pants unbuttoned with a female sex toy in her lap. She told officers she had been using the toy while driving, as well as watching a video on a computer her passenger was holding. It is not clear what the nature of that video was. Hamilton was also found to be in possession of a broken crack pipe. Hamilton is charged with driving with misdemeanor impaired alertness and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia. According to court records, Hamilton has a lengthy criminal history. Court records show that a warrant was issued for Hamilton's arrest after she failed to appear for her arraignment just hours after she was processed and released from the Hamilton County Justice Center. Charges against the passenger do not appear to have been filed. added by: TimALoftis

Networks Skim Over White House Oil Claim: ‘Vast Majority’ of Spill is Gone

A president with close ties to an oil company helping hide the magnitude and damage of an oil spill would be big news, if he were a conservative. But it seems even when the environmentalists and the left are upset over President Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill, the national news media barely notice. On Aug. 4, Obama administration energy adviser Carol Browner said, “The vast majority of the oil has been contained, it’s been burned, it’s been cleaned.” Officials said that 75 percent of the oil had been “captured, burned off, evaporated or broken down in the Gulf of Mexico,” according to CBSNews.com. That night two of the three network evening shows reported the widely disputed claim without question. Only NBC “Nightly News” included any people skeptical of the White House claim. The networks have only aired a few reports about scientists disputing the claim, and have ignored liberal outrage. “[T]onight on these beaches some good news and relief,” Matt Gutman told “World News” viewers. “A new government report says that 75 percent of that oil has been cleaned up either by man or Mother Nature. And it now seems this war against this oil is coming to an end.” Gutman’s report on the success of the oil cleanup included President Obama and Browner, but not a single person who disagreed with the White House claim. The Boston Globe reported Aug. 20, that Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution mapped a 22-mile-long underwater oil plume back in June. Other scientists at University of Georgia estimate that 70 to 79 percent of the oil from the leak remains, contrary to the White House assertion. Even if 75 percent of the oil had disappeared, the White House comments made it sound like the remaining problem is a small one – but one-fourth of the total spill would still be 53.5 million gallons of oil. CBSNews.com said that is more than four times greater than the Exxon Valdez spill. But rather than criticize Obama, CBS “Evening News” took the opportunity to subtly attack the previous president. On Aug. 4, Katie Couric teased Mark Strassmann’s report saying, “The White House made it clear today it is not declaring ‘Mission Accomplished’ yet in the Gulf of Mexico.” Strassmann followed her remarks with his story about the static kill operation to seal the well and cited the government report that “most of what has leaked, an estimated 205 million gallons, has vanished.” CBS included two Coast Guard official quotes including Admiral Thad Allen’s. Networks Ignore Left-Wing Anger over Oil Spill, Barely Include Skeptics Many people – even those on the left – have criticized the administration for its handling of the Gulf disaster. And now some of them are calling the White House’s 75 percent oil cleanup claim untrue. Left-wing news blog, The Huffington Post, called it a ” public relations coup ” for the White House, and characterized it as spin. Liberal filmmaker Spike Lee called the oil cleanup claim a “lie” and called for journalists to find the real story in an Aug. 7 meeting of the Television Critics Association. Politicians on both sides of the aisle argued the announcement came too early. On Aug. 19, Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., called Obama’s announcement premature and warned that it could be wrong. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also criticized the administration for “another in a long line of examples where the White House’s pre-occupation with the public relations of the oil spill has superseded the realities on the ground.” A Yahoo News blog reported that the White House and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) haven’t released the data that supposedly proves their claim. “Two weeks after it touted a report painting a rosy picture in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of the BP oil disaster, the federal government has yet to release any of the supporting data used to reach its conclusions,” Brett Michael Dykes wrote for Yahoo. Dykes also mentioned a new scientific study from researchers at the University of Georgia who found almost the opposite: that up to 79 percent of the oil is still in the Gulf. Those researchers warned that massive plumes of oil remain in deep water. In fact, scientists at the prestigious Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution published a peer-reviewed study in Science describing their June discovery of a hydrocarbon plume roughly the size of Manhattan , more than 3,000 feet below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. On Aug. 19, CBS “Evening News” and NBC “Nightly News” used a meager 180 words combined to mention Woods Hole’s findings of that huge plume. According to Nexis, since the White House made its claim on Aug. 4, the network morning and evening shows have aired 61 stories mentioning the oil spill. But only six reports on the broadcast morning and evening news shows included anyone skeptical of the assertion (Gulf fishermen, scientists or others). A couple of additional stories mentioned doubt about the numbers, but without quoting sources. Obama Claims to be Running Oil Cleanup, Media Blame BP for Lack of Press Freedom From beginning to end, networks coverage of the oil spill has been more like cover for the Obama administration than serious reporting. ABC, CBS and NBC started by failing to scrutinize the administration’s response to the BP spill for four weeks . Then they ignored the federal fingerprints on the lack of press access to the oil spill area, even when CBS reporters were ordered away from a soiled beach by Coast Guard and BP contractors. After the oil spill, many news outlets complained about lack of access for reporting the oil spill CBS, Associated Press, Mother Jones and The Times-Picayune all claimed that local and federal authorities and British Petroleum workers inhibited their reporting. But even with Obama’s history of managing the press, the media blamed BP almost entirely. Mother Jones, a left-wing magazine, called it a “corporate blockade at Louisiana’s crude-covered beaches.” “It’s a running joke among the journalists covering the story that the words ‘Coast Guard’ affixed to any vehicle, vessel, or plane should be prefixed with ‘BP,'” Charlie Varley told Newsweek. “It would be funny if it were not so serious.” It’s also not funny that many in the news media and on the left would rather blame BP for controlling federal agencies like the U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) than recognize the similarities between limited media access in the Gulf and Obama’s previous actions controlling the press. Obama also has a long-standing pattern of micromanaging press coverage, sometimes to the point of blocking access. So when many reporters were complaining of access problems, it was surprising how little blame had been directed at the administration. During the campaign, Obama had three reporters from publications that had endorsed John McCain kicked off his plane. Since then he has openly attacked his detractors (including Rush Limbaugh) and was once criticized by a couple reporters (Chip Reid and Helen Thomas) for stage managing a town hall meeting. Another reason to think the White House was blocking the press is that they claimed to be calling the shots for the Gulf clean up. Browner said on “Meet the Press” May 30, “the government’s been in control from the beginning … don’t make any mistake here, the government is in charge.” ( Watch video ) Obama told AP the same thing, saying that BP had to get permission from Washington for all the clean up. So it stands to reason that the White House wouldn’t have trouble telling BP to allow the media unfettered access to report on the oil spill if it wanted to. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

Original post:
Networks Skim Over White House Oil Claim: ‘Vast Majority’ of Spill is Gone