Tag Archives: Obama

And So It Ends: Getting You Ready For Game 7 Of The NBA Finals

Mark J. Terrill – AP 1 day ago: Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant shoots as he is defended by Boston Celtics forward Kevin Garnett during the second half of Game 6 of the NBA basketball finals Tuesday, June 15, 2010, in Los Angeles. Los Angeles Lakers forward Pau Gasol (16) of Spain and Boston Celtics forward Paul Pierce, right, and Celtics Ray Allen, left, watch. The Lakers won 89-67. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill, Pool) View full size photo

Go here to read the rest:
And So It Ends: Getting You Ready For Game 7 Of The NBA Finals

Lady Gaga Arrives In Gaming World With ‘Dance Central’

‘Rock Band’ creator Harmonix is working on a new dance game that uses the Kinect camera on Xbox 360. By Russ Frushtick Lady Gaga Photo: Jeff Kravitz/ FilmMagic Harmonix was making rhythm games long before the days of “Rock Band,” but despite being fans of dance music, the developer has always had a difficult time implementing those kinds of tracks into their games. The solution was to launch an entirely new rhythm-game franchise: “Dance Central.” The key to “Dance Central” was Microsoft’s Kinect , a motion-sensing camera that’s able to track the precise body movements of anyone standing in front of it. No game pad or controller is required — simply walk up and you’re good to go. From there, the jump to making a dance game seemed like a perfect fit. It’s the easy-to-play nature of “Dance Central” that made Harmonix believe they could bring it to the masses. During Microsoft’s press conference at E3 2010 , Harmonix co-founder Alex Rigopulos admitted that it’s a challenge to get people to play a dance game. “At Harmonix we’re always thriving for new ways to get people experiencing music,” he said. “Dancing can be intimidating for some people, but ‘Dance Central’ was developed so that everyone can play.” As someone who has never been good at dancing (in games or out), I came upon “Dance Central” with a healthy amount of skepticism. Surprisingly, though, I found the game remarkably easy, even for someone as rhythmically challenged as me. Complex dance moves are broken down into individual steps, and the difficulty is slowly ramped up, so players can take one move at a time. If someone is having difficulty pulling off a step-clap-step in the middle of Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face,” for example, the game will pause and let the would-be dancer try the move again until they have it down. It took me no time at all to adapt to the dozen moves throughout Bell Biv DeVoe’s “Poison,” and I even managed to gain a decent-size crowd of onlookers. Warning: This game requires a healthy sampling of humility. Harmonix isn’t ditching its “Rock Band” roots anytime soon, though. The developer is hard at work on “Rock Band 3,” which will introduce keyboards and a new “Pro” mode, which helps players to learn real-world guitars, drums and keyboards just by playing through the game. Both “Dance Central” and “Rock Band 3” are planned for release in the fall. For more gaming news straight from E3, head on over to Multiplayer.MTV.com . Related Photos The Evolution Of: Lady Gaga Related Artists Lady Gaga

Continue reading here:
Lady Gaga Arrives In Gaming World With ‘Dance Central’

Behar Panel Sees ‘Bush-Like’ and ‘Corporatist’ Obama, Garofalo Slams ‘Anti-Intellectual’ Prayer

On Wednesday’s Joy Behar Show, HLN host Behar led a discussion of President Obama’s Address to the Nation with left-wing actress Janeane Garofalo and liberal commentator Ron Reagan, all of whom had some criticisms for President Obama regarding the BP oil spill and his speech on the subject. Garofalo started off complaining that “the prayer thing he did was pandering and anti-intellectual and just sort of a waste of time.” After Behar pointed out that Obama had blamed Mineral Management Service members who were still in place from the Bush administration, Garofalo did not give Obama a pass: “Right, so why did he not take care of that when he got into office?” Reagan complained that his speech was “too little too late,” and that “he`s a corporatist like all our other Presidents have been for a long, long time. That`s what`s being revealed here. Barack Obama is just as much a corporatist as George H.W. – or George W. Bush was.” While Behar was generally more inclined to defend Obama, at one point even she asserted that President Obama’s failure to meet with the head of BP was “so Bush, Bush-like. It`s shocking that he`s behaving this way,” prompting Garofalo to lament: “I don`t know who’s giving him the worst advice in the world. I don`t know, I don`t know why this presidency has been as disappointing as it has been. I really feel like he`s being advised terribly.” After Behar fretted that “some Sarah Palin clone” who would be “even worse” might replace Obama, Reagan pessimistically concluded that “you get somebody worse if it’s not Barack Obama”: BEHAR: And who`s going to take the place? Who are we going to get instead of him? Some Sarah Palin clone, or she herself? It`ll be even worse. REAGAN: That`s the dilemma. BEHAR: Isn`t that`s a scary thought? REAGAN: That`s the dilemma for liberals. That`s the dilemma for progressives and liberals is you get somebody worse if it’s not Barack Obama, even though Barack Obama isn’t doing what we want him to do. Below is a complete transcript of the segment from the Wednesday, June 16, Joy Behar Show on HLN: JOY BEHAR: President Obama appears to be doing everything he can to make sure Americans know that stopping the oil spill is his main priority. He met with BP executives today, and last night he delivered a speech on the disaster from the Oval Office. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: But make no mistake. We will fight this spill with everything we`ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused, and we will do whatever is necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy. BEHAR: Well, let`s just hope the next time Malia says, “Daddy, did you plug the hole?” she isn`t 47 years old. So was this speech enough to please his critics or did it just give them more material? Here with me to discuss this are Ron Reagan, liberal commentator, and actress and comedian Janeane Garofalo. … Janeane, start with you, did you like the speech? JANEANE GAROFALO: No, I didn`t feel that it was a strong speech, and I felt that the prayer thing he did was pandering and anti-intellectual and just sort of a waste of time. BEHAR: Anti-intellectual? He’s considered, like, overly intellectual? GAROFALO: He himself is. BEHAR: Yeah. GAROFALO: When politicians use that prayer stuff, it is anti-intellectual. It has nothing do with what has happened, it has nothing to do with any real way to solve a problem. You know, I felt this speech was not very effective. You know, fighting, fighting it with all that they`ve got, what would have been good is to undo the Bush policies that brought this. You know, Ken Salazar should not have been the Interior Secretary. That people from Mineral Management Services should not still have been able to work. BP has a terrible track record. It`s amazing that the Bush policies were allowed to still flourish, that the “drill, baby, drill” policy was still going. That any of these disasters could had been avoided because it wasn`t, it wasn`t unknown what could have gone wrong. BEHAR: Okay, well, he did blame a lot on the agency that was still in place. He did say that it was ineffective. GAROFALO: Right, so why did he not take care of that when he got into office? BEHAR: A good question. Ron, what do you think? RON REAGAN: Well, too little too late I agree with Janeane, he did bring up the Mineral Management Services, of course, and that really is the crux of this, to me. You know, BP was doing what BP could be expected to do – cut corners, act recklessly, all in the name of profits. But Mineral Management Service, which was supposed to be regulating them and overseeing this, had fallen asleep on the job. Actually, that`s not even the right way to put it. Fallen asleep on the job suggests they actually wanted to do the job somehow in the first place, but they didn`t, of course because they`re all former or, you know, prospective oil company employees there. That`s the criminality here, it`s not just BP, it`s the MMS. BEHAR: Do you think it would have been any different if a Republican was in office now? Be the same thing or worse? GAROFALO: Oh, no, the exact same because these are these type of conservative anti-regulation policies and also all this kind of oil culture of oil cronyism. I’m not going to say that Democrats don`t partake in that. Obviously they do. But it might be worse if Bush was in office in maybe more hiding scientific facts or maybe they would do that thing they always say about no fingerprinting, now`s not the time for the blame. Yeah, they always say that. BEHAR: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Whenever they’re to blame. GAROFALO: But the policies are still the same unfortunately. BEHAR: Yes. GAROFALO: The same Bush policies that we`ve been laboring under have been continued. There is no reason why MMS has been allowed to thrive the way they have. There`s no reason Ken Salazar should be at the Department of the Interior, and there`s no reason that BP should still be doing what they`re doing right now as we speak with other rigs. BEHAR: The left is very hard on him, though, I think. The left is going very hard. Part of the frustration, I think, with, on the left and the right, probably is that he can`t fix it. He can`t do it. People say he should do it. What do they want him do? GAROFALO: Well, there’s many, many things a President could and should do to make sure these types of things- BEHAR: Isn`t he doing some of it? GAROFALO: I would hope so, but there should had been regulation. You know, I mean, there should had been regulatory reform as he came into office. BEHAR: When he came into office. GAROFALO: Yes. BEHAR: Yeah. Why didn’t, Ron, why didn`t he do that? REAGAN: Well, because he`s a corporatist like all our other Presidents have been for a long, long time. That`s what`s being revealed here. Barack Obama is just as much a corporatist as George H.W. – or George W. Bush was. He`s a little less obvious about it. I think maybe his heart isn’t quite as in it. He`s not an actual oil man himself, but listen, he`s between a rock and a hard place here. He just proposed that we open up a lot of our coastline to deepwater drilling here, to offshore drilling. Completely ignoring the fact that any dependence on oil by America is dependence on foreign oil. That`s the thing that I think a lot of people don`t understand here. You can drill all- BEHAR: It`s kind of shocking in a way. It`s kind of shocking to me. REAGAN: Well, of course, but you can drill all that you want for oil on American territory, it goes into a global market. We`re going to sell it to China just as much as we`re going to sell it to, you know, American drivers here. There`s no such thing as American oil. It`s all fungible. It`s all global, so any dependence on oil is dependence on foreign oil. BEHAR: Well, he used the opportunity to bring up energy policy. Do you think that he was effective at all? Because I was a little disappointed in that. You know, we need alternative energy and there`s no question about it, and the American people are so lackadaisical about it that even now no one seems to see the urgency of the situation. GAROFALO: I think there’s many people who do see the urgency. They just aren’t given a forum to speak about it. There’s many people who are very concerned about this. There should have been clean energy reform made years and years ago. There`s many people who have tried to do this and because oil runs everything it keeps getting thwarted. There`s no reason why we shouldn`t have more clean energy and more reform in that area, too. It`s just, it`s one of those things it just keeps business as usual, it just keeps going and going and going. BEHAR: I know. Well, he met with BP men today. Ron, do you think that he kicked their butts today at all? REAGAN: No, I don`t think it`s about kicking their butts. No, of course not. It`s nice that there’s going to be a $20 billion fund to pay people off- BEHAR: Right. REAGAN: -but who says when the people actually get the money? There are people that are still waiting for a payoff from the Exxon Valdez, you know, I mean, you know, just because there`s money in a fund doesn`t mean it`s actually going to be going to people. I will imagine that BP will litigate every claim. BEHAR: He said, originally he didn`t want to meet with them because he didn`t want to hear their talking points. That is so Bush, Bush-like. It`s shocking that he`s behaving this way certainly.

See the rest here:
Behar Panel Sees ‘Bush-Like’ and ‘Corporatist’ Obama, Garofalo Slams ‘Anti-Intellectual’ Prayer

USA Today Frets Obama Unable to ‘Infuse Courts with Women and Minorities’ – i.e. Liberals

The “deeply polarized confirmation process in the Senate” has “undercut Obama’s effort to significantly infuse the federal courts with more women and minorities,” USA Today’s Joan Biskupic fretted in a Wednesday front page article in which she refused to identify Obama’s nominees as liberals as she attached the positive “diversity” patina to Obama’s agenda without any regard for the irony such “diversity” is ideologically uniform. She led her June 16 story, “ Push for court diversity hits snag: Partisan rancor ties up action on Obama nominees ,” however, by noting the ideology supposedly pushed by President George W. Bush: “President Obama came into office determined to stop the rightward shift of the federal courts — after eight years of appointments by President Bush — and to add more diversity to the bench.” She then outlined Obama’s achievement: So far he is setting records for the number of women and minorities nominated to lifetime appointments. Nearly half of the 73 candidates he has tapped for the bench have been women. In all, 25% have been African Americans, 10% Hispanics and 11% Asian Americans. But, his noble quest has been thwarted: Yet as Obama tries to make gains in diversity among judges, he faces a deeply polarized confirmation process in the Senate. During his first 18 months in office, his administration has been thwarted by unprecedented delays. The situation, which has received little notice against the backdrop of a pending Supreme Court nomination and the administration’s complex legislative agenda, could undercut Obama’s effort to significantly infuse the federal courts with more women and minorities. Deep in her article, Biskupic at least acknowledged how Democrats had blocked a “diverse” nominee who happened to be conservative: This is a long-building situation. Senators on both sides recall old grievances and try to settle scores. The senior Judiciary Committee Republican, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, often invokes President George W. Bush’s nominee Miguel Estrada, whose nomination to the influential Washington, D.C.-based appeals court was filibustered by Democrats. Estrada, who would have been the first Hispanic on that court, withdrew in 2003, after two years of delays. From April: “ USA Today’s Biskupic Sees SCOTUS of ‘Ideological…Conservatives’ and ‘Pragmatic Liberals ‘”

Go here to see the original:
USA Today Frets Obama Unable to ‘Infuse Courts with Women and Minorities’ – i.e. Liberals

Behar Panel Sees ‘Bush-Like’ and ‘Corporatist’ Obama, Garofalo Slams ‘Anti-Intellectual’ Prayer

On Wednesday’s Joy Behar Show, HLN host Behar led a discussion of President Obama’s Address to the Nation with left-wing actress Janeane Garofalo and liberal commentator Ron Reagan, all of whom had some criticisms for President Obama regarding the BP oil spill and his speech on the subject. Garofalo started off complaining that “the prayer thing he did was pandering and anti-intellectual and just sort of a waste of time.” After Behar pointed out that Obama had blamed Mineral Management Service members who were still in place from the Bush administration, Garofalo did not give Obama a pass: “Right, so why did he not take care of that when he got into office?” Reagan complained that his speech was “too little too late,” and that “he`s a corporatist like all our other Presidents have been for a long, long time. That`s what`s being revealed here. Barack Obama is just as much a corporatist as George H.W. – or George W. Bush was.” While Behar was generally more inclined to defend Obama, at one point even she asserted that President Obama’s failure to meet with the head of BP was “so Bush, Bush-like. It`s shocking that he`s behaving this way,” prompting Garofalo to lament: “I don`t know who’s giving him the worst advice in the world. I don`t know, I don`t know why this presidency has been as disappointing as it has been. I really feel like he`s being advised terribly.” After Behar fretted that “some Sarah Palin clone” who would be “even worse” might replace Obama, Reagan pessimistically concluded that “you get somebody worse if it’s not Barack Obama”: BEHAR: And who`s going to take the place? Who are we going to get instead of him? Some Sarah Palin clone, or she herself? It`ll be even worse. REAGAN: That`s the dilemma. BEHAR: Isn`t that`s a scary thought? REAGAN: That`s the dilemma for liberals. That`s the dilemma for progressives and liberals is you get somebody worse if it’s not Barack Obama, even though Barack Obama isn’t doing what we want him to do. Below is a complete transcript of the segment from the Wednesday, June 16, Joy Behar Show on HLN: JOY BEHAR: President Obama appears to be doing everything he can to make sure Americans know that stopping the oil spill is his main priority. He met with BP executives today, and last night he delivered a speech on the disaster from the Oval Office. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: But make no mistake. We will fight this spill with everything we`ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused, and we will do whatever is necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy. BEHAR: Well, let`s just hope the next time Malia says, “Daddy, did you plug the hole?” she isn`t 47 years old. So was this speech enough to please his critics or did it just give them more material? Here with me to discuss this are Ron Reagan, liberal commentator, and actress and comedian Janeane Garofalo. … Janeane, start with you, did you like the speech? JANEANE GAROFALO: No, I didn`t feel that it was a strong speech, and I felt that the prayer thing he did was pandering and anti-intellectual and just sort of a waste of time. BEHAR: Anti-intellectual? He’s considered, like, overly intellectual? GAROFALO: He himself is. BEHAR: Yeah. GAROFALO: When politicians use that prayer stuff, it is anti-intellectual. It has nothing do with what has happened, it has nothing to do with any real way to solve a problem. You know, I felt this speech was not very effective. You know, fighting, fighting it with all that they`ve got, what would have been good is to undo the Bush policies that brought this. You know, Ken Salazar should not have been the Interior Secretary. That people from Mineral Management Services should not still have been able to work. BP has a terrible track record. It`s amazing that the Bush policies were allowed to still flourish, that the “drill, baby, drill” policy was still going. That any of these disasters could had been avoided because it wasn`t, it wasn`t unknown what could have gone wrong. BEHAR: Okay, well, he did blame a lot on the agency that was still in place. He did say that it was ineffective. GAROFALO: Right, so why did he not take care of that when he got into office? BEHAR: A good question. Ron, what do you think? RON REAGAN: Well, too little too late I agree with Janeane, he did bring up the Mineral Management Services, of course, and that really is the crux of this, to me. You know, BP was doing what BP could be expected to do – cut corners, act recklessly, all in the name of profits. But Mineral Management Service, which was supposed to be regulating them and overseeing this, had fallen asleep on the job. Actually, that`s not even the right way to put it. Fallen asleep on the job suggests they actually wanted to do the job somehow in the first place, but they didn`t, of course because they`re all former or, you know, prospective oil company employees there. That`s the criminality here, it`s not just BP, it`s the MMS. BEHAR: Do you think it would have been any different if a Republican was in office now? Be the same thing or worse? GAROFALO: Oh, no, the exact same because these are these type of conservative anti-regulation policies and also all this kind of oil culture of oil cronyism. I’m not going to say that Democrats don`t partake in that. Obviously they do. But it might be worse if Bush was in office in maybe more hiding scientific facts or maybe they would do that thing they always say about no fingerprinting, now`s not the time for the blame. Yeah, they always say that. BEHAR: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Whenever they’re to blame. GAROFALO: But the policies are still the same unfortunately. BEHAR: Yes. GAROFALO: The same Bush policies that we`ve been laboring under have been continued. There is no reason why MMS has been allowed to thrive the way they have. There`s no reason Ken Salazar should be at the Department of the Interior, and there`s no reason that BP should still be doing what they`re doing right now as we speak with other rigs. BEHAR: The left is very hard on him, though, I think. The left is going very hard. Part of the frustration, I think, with, on the left and the right, probably is that he can`t fix it. He can`t do it. People say he should do it. What do they want him do? GAROFALO: Well, there’s many, many things a President could and should do to make sure these types of things- BEHAR: Isn`t he doing some of it? GAROFALO: I would hope so, but there should had been regulation. You know, I mean, there should had been regulatory reform as he came into office. BEHAR: When he came into office. GAROFALO: Yes. BEHAR: Yeah. Why didn’t, Ron, why didn`t he do that? REAGAN: Well, because he`s a corporatist like all our other Presidents have been for a long, long time. That`s what`s being revealed here. Barack Obama is just as much a corporatist as George H.W. – or George W. Bush was. He`s a little less obvious about it. I think maybe his heart isn’t quite as in it. He`s not an actual oil man himself, but listen, he`s between a rock and a hard place here. He just proposed that we open up a lot of our coastline to deepwater drilling here, to offshore drilling. Completely ignoring the fact that any dependence on oil by America is dependence on foreign oil. That`s the thing that I think a lot of people don`t understand here. You can drill all- BEHAR: It`s kind of shocking in a way. It`s kind of shocking to me. REAGAN: Well, of course, but you can drill all that you want for oil on American territory, it goes into a global market. We`re going to sell it to China just as much as we`re going to sell it to, you know, American drivers here. There`s no such thing as American oil. It`s all fungible. It`s all global, so any dependence on oil is dependence on foreign oil. BEHAR: Well, he used the opportunity to bring up energy policy. Do you think that he was effective at all? Because I was a little disappointed in that. You know, we need alternative energy and there`s no question about it, and the American people are so lackadaisical about it that even now no one seems to see the urgency of the situation. GAROFALO: I think there’s many people who do see the urgency. They just aren’t given a forum to speak about it. There’s many people who are very concerned about this. There should have been clean energy reform made years and years ago. There`s many people who have tried to do this and because oil runs everything it keeps getting thwarted. There`s no reason why we shouldn`t have more clean energy and more reform in that area, too. It`s just, it`s one of those things it just keeps business as usual, it just keeps going and going and going. BEHAR: I know. Well, he met with BP men today. Ron, do you think that he kicked their butts today at all? REAGAN: No, I don`t think it`s about kicking their butts. No, of course not. It`s nice that there’s going to be a $20 billion fund to pay people off- BEHAR: Right. REAGAN: -but who says when the people actually get the money? There are people that are still waiting for a payoff from the Exxon Valdez, you know, I mean, you know, just because there`s money in a fund doesn`t mean it`s actually going to be going to people. I will imagine that BP will litigate every claim. BEHAR: He said, originally he didn`t want to meet with them because he didn`t want to hear their talking points. That is so Bush, Bush-like. It`s shocking that he`s behaving this way certainly.

Joe Scarborough Defends Obama’s Speech, Gives Soft Interview to Axelrod

MSNBC “Hardball” host Chris Matthews felt a “thrill” up his leg when Obama spoke at the Democratic National Convention in 2008. Keith Olbermann’s leftist bias was great enough to merit a Saturday Night Live parody of his show “Countdown With Keith Olbermann.” And yet both trashed President Obama’s Oval Office speech on Tuesday. “Maybe I missed something. I thought it was a great speech if you’ve been on another planet for the last 57 days,” Olbermann remarked. Matthews said that he didn’t “sense executive command.” But Joe Scarborough, who has repeatedly thrown his support behind President Obama’s handling of the crisis, thought the speech “struck all the right notes,” and was in disbelief on his morning show over the media’s general distaste for the speech. Scarborough then hosted David Axelrod for an interview that can only be described as a barrage of softballs. “I just wonder if this is a season, that, no matter what the President’s doing, he is going to get hit by both sides right now?” Scarborough asked Axelrod, senior advisor to President Obama. “He gives a speech that you guys thought struck all the right notes, as did we,” he said to Axelrod. “Gets hammered. What’s the next step? What is the knitting process? What do you do now?” Donny Deutsch, advertising executive and chairman of Deutsch, Inc., chimed in later to pledge his affection for Obama’s speech. “I thought it was a great speech, by the way,” he assured Axelrod. “I don’t know what I would have done different.” He then decided to give the administration some advice, in the form of a question. “If I was in your inner circle, I would say the 20 minutes today with BP is the opportunity,” he told Axelrod. “There is a clear bad guy here. With everything that goes wrong in the world, we need the perp-walk. I would say he can’t spank them hard enough.” Axelrod delivered his answer. But Deutsch wasn’t satisfied. “David, even your answer to me was very methodical. I want to see anger in your eyes. That’s what the American public wants.” The overall interview lasted eight minutes. The segments including Joe Scarborough and Donny Deutsch are included below. The transcripts of the segments, which aired June 16 at 7:21a.m. and 7:26a.m., EDT, are as follows: JOE SCARBOROUGH: David, I just wondered–you’ve been in politics a long time. This happens to every politician. I just wonder if this is a season, that, no matter what the President’s doing, he is going to get hit by both sides right now. DAVID AXELROD: Yeah, I think that that’s probably true, Joe. And you know, one of the things that we’ve learned over a long period of time through a very long campaign and in this building, is that you just got to stick to your knitting. You got to keep doing your work, you got to keep moving forward. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Keep your head down, yeah, keep your head down. So what does the president do? He follows up on a speech. He follows up, as I was saying last bloc, on the very successful Gulf Coast tour where a lot of conservatives were very pleased with the President, liked what he was doing. He gives a speech that you guys thought struck all the right notes, as did we. Gets hammered. What’s the next step? What is the knitting process? What do you do now? DAVID AXELROD: Well, first of all, I think as to the speech, I think he imparted the information that needed to be imparted to the American people about where we are, what we are going to do to make the people in the Gulf whole and hold BP accountable, how we are going to clean this thing up and how we are going to deal with the problems that led to it. And he made a strong pitch for a new energy policy. It was an important presentation. In terms of what we’re–I mean, we have a meeting with BP today to deal with the issue of claims and putting money in an escrow account so that–independently administered–so that people have some confidence that they can–down there who have been hurt by this–that they can get some recompense for the money that they’ve lost. We’re going to  talk to them about some of the containment strategies, and what we need to do to make that–to accelerate that process. Obviously, he’s going to follow up with members of the senate on the Energy–on the Energy bill. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Okay. DAVID AXELROD: So we’ve got a lot of work ahead of us. And then there’s the day-to-day work of trying to intercept this oil and protect the coast and protect the people as best that we can. (…) (7:26 a.m. EDT) DONNY DEUTSCH, chairman of Deutsch, Inc.: David, you know, I’m one of the–I thought it was a great speech, by the way. I don’t know what I would have done different. If I was whispering in your ear, and tell me if you’d say ‘Donny, I agree with you’– DAVID AXELROD: You are whispering in my ear! DONNY DEUTSCH: If I was in your inner circle, I would say the 20 minutes today with BP is the opportunity. There is a clear bad guy here. With everything that goes wrong in the world, we need the perp-walk. I would say he can’t spank them enough. Wherever you’re going to kick them–he’s going to kick ass–kick harder. I’d say, “David, tell them to do that.” What would your response be to that? DAVID AXELROD: Well my response is we have one mission, and one mission–and that mission is to make sure that the people of the Gulf are made whole, that BP pays every dime they owe, that this–that there’s an independent administrator to make sure that that happens, that they do everything they need to to collect as much oil as they can. And it’ll be clear, I think, to them and to the country that that is–that that is not a negotiable–those are not negotiable issues. DONNY DEUTSCH: David, even your answer to me was very methodical. I want to see anger in your eyes. That’s what the American public wants. (Crosstalk) DONNY DEUTSCH: Everything you said is right. It’s like, “There’s a bad guy out there. There’s a bad–there’s somebody with a black hat out there. This oil company– (Crosstalk) DAVID AXELROD: You’re a–I know you’re not just a creative genius but you’re a great businessman. And you understand that the best way to express yourself is to take from the company what they owe and put it away, and make sure that people are taken care of. That is–you know, that is much more important, I think, to the people of the Gulf than sort of contrived expressions. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Kicking ass. DAVID AXELROD: I think that everybody down there–everybody down there who met with the President understood his sense of connection, his sense of advocacy. But they weren’t asking him to get angry, they were asking him to get results. They were asking him to get the money from BP that they are owed, and to restore the Gulf.

Follow this link:
Joe Scarborough Defends Obama’s Speech, Gives Soft Interview to Axelrod

Hot New Trend: Old Fashioned Incandescent Lightbulbs

Image credit: Grassrootsmodern What’s hot in restaurant design these days? Retro light bulbs, of the old, carbon-filament power-sucking kind. And the warmer the light, the less efficient they are, some running under 2 lumens per watt. (a fluorescent bulb runs at 80 lumens per watt). The New York Times covers the trend, interviewing a designer:… Read the full story on TreeHugger

View post:
Hot New Trend: Old Fashioned Incandescent Lightbulbs

Oil Spill Esimate DOUBLED AGAIN: 2.5 Million Gallons Leaking a Day

Photo via Reuters Well, things keep on getting better and better in the ongoing saga of catastrophe that is the BP Gulf oil spill . Shortly after Obama took to the oval office to give a speech to reassure the nation about the spill , officials released the newest estimates of how much oil was leaking from the Deepwater Horizon site. And they weren’t pretty:… Read the full story on TreeHugger

See the rest here:
Oil Spill Esimate DOUBLED AGAIN: 2.5 Million Gallons Leaking a Day

MSNBC Panel Not Impressed By Obama Speech

On a special edition of Tuesday’s Countdown show on MSNBC which aired after President Obama address to the nation, the panel of Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman were not impressed by the President’s speech, as the group complained that it was not “specific” enough and lacked details. Matthews complained that in the Obama administration, “meritocracy is going too far,” and asserted that it was “ludicrous” that the President had mentioned that Energy Secretary Carol Browner has a Nobal Prize. Matthews: Well, I thought a couple of things were surprising to me. Why does he continue to say that the secretary of energy has a Nobel Prize? I mean, it`s almost gotten ludicrous. We have Carol Browner do it again tonight. I know I`ve mocked him for doing it, saying I`d barf if he did it one more time. But it`s not important. This meritocracy is going too far. This I`m the new guy here, the head the MMS. I`m not sure whether these degrees are going to help or these awards from overseas. Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Tuesday, June 15, Countdown show on MSNBC:  KEITH OLBERMANN: Chris, I`m going to start with you. Maybe I missed something. I thought it was a great speech if you`ve been on another planet for the last 57 days. But was that what was needed tonight? Did he shoot really low? CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, I thought there was a bit of news there and I don`t whether it`s optimistic beyond belief, which is, in the coming days or weeks, these efforts should capture up to 90 percent of the oil leaking out of the well. Well, that`s the first I`ve heard of that. In coming days, we`re going to have this thing capped. We`re going to effectively solve the problem? Secondly, he didn`t mention what power he has as chief executive of the country to make them understand they need to put this escrow account in third party hands. Is he going to litigate? Is he going to file an amicus brief with class action suit? Wait seven years for this to happen? Or is he really going to demand it to happen? He said, I can ask them to do this. I`m amazed he just says he has that power. We`ll see. And as for the energy bill, I think you hit on something important there. Cap and trade passed the House. It hasn`t gotten anywhere in the Senate. And one reason it has gotten there is, remember how he jump- lined for immigration after Harry Reid for a while there? He had the bill in the queue. He pushed this aside for immigration, knowing he wasn`t going to be able to get immigration through, or even come with an I.D. card as part of a comprehensive solution. And then he pushed it aside and then he put it back in line again. It`s not clear. Now, the hard part of this is the heavy-lifting of energy transition. He said we have to accelerate this thing, accelerate the transition to renewables. That is the hardest thing in the world. That`s what broke Jimmy Carter. That`s what Ronald Reagan took a buy on completely. And Bill Clinton didn`t do anything. It`s the hardest thing in the world. He`s saying, I`m going to do it, and then no more information. OLBERMANN: Nothing. Nothing specific. Nothing specific at all. MATTHEWS: The best you can do, if you do it, and the question: Is he going to do it this year? Is there going to be a bill that goes from cap and trade to something like Lugar? Is there a particular direction he`s going in? He didn`t tell us. OLBERMANN: But he didn`t even say the Senate needs to pass the bill that`s already on the table. MATTHEWS: Well, at least something. You need to go to conference. OLBERMANN: Howard, I got the feeling, Howard, that the president would have said, hey, I was as surprised by this as you were. He talked about how he had approved the expansion of the offshore drilling and said he`d been assured everything was going to go all right. And then he had the analogy, which many people expected would be more contemporary about 9/11, was instead about World War II. And he said something I found just extraordinary, it`s nice- speechifying. But let me read it again. “Our determination to fight for the America we want for our children, even if we`re unsure exactly what that looks like, even if we don`t yet know precisely how we`re going to get there, we know we`ll get there.” It`s nice, but again, how? Where was the “how” in this speech when the nation is crying out for how? HOWARD FINEMAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. you said he aimed too low. I don`t think he was specific enough, Keith. You talked about the energy bill. The fact is that Harry Reid has told him there aren`t 60 votes in the Senate to get beyond a filibuster with cap and trade. That`s the detail of it. But beyond that, I think the American people, both in the Gulf and everywhere else, wanted to know more how this was going. Somewhere between earlier today and tonight, this went from being a war and all about an assault on the Gulf to an epidemic. That`s one thing that I thought was interesting. The commander-in-chief thing was lost. And I thought it was, he had to confess but in a way didn`t confess enough. Why he had approved offshore oil drilling and he had accepted these assurances? Who were these assurances from? Who were they from? Now, if you connected the dots between that paragraph and the one below where he said the MMS was a disaster and a mess, you might get a little bit of an idea why that it happened. I think this is a war. I think he was commander-in-chief or should have been commander-in-chief tonight. I think, just, if he`s going to make the analogy to World War II, it should have been like Franklin Roosevelt explaining exactly what was happening in Europe, where Patton was going, where the troops were going, what the losses were, what the advances were, what the troop`s strengths were. Tell everybody. They` been watching television for the last 59 days. They want to know how we`re doing. OLBERMANN: Right. Even if we don`t know precisely how we`re going to get there we know we`ll get there. There wasn`t any specificity to it. FINEMAN: Yes. OLBERMANN: I`m going to revise my remark, Chris. I don`t think he aimed low. I don`t think he aimed at all about this. It`s startling to have heard this, isn`t it? MATTHEWS: Well, I thought a couple of things were surprising to me. Why does he continue to say that the secretary of energy has a Nobel Prize? I mean, it`s almost gotten ludicrous. We have Carol Browner do it again tonight. I know I`ve mocked him for doing it, saying I`d barf if he did it one more time. But it`s not important. This meritocracy is going too far. This I`m the new guy here, the head the MMS. I`m not sure whether these degrees are going to help or these awards from overseas. I think it`s interesting. We have a blue ribbon panel now that`s going to look in to what went wrong. Can`t we move a little quicker than that, than to name a commission? That`s what they`ve done here. Another commission and another guy mentioned — they mentioned for having a Nobel Prize. I think there`s a lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk here. References — you know what they don`t refer to, his cabinet. Now, this is cabinet government like I`ve never seen before. I asked Admiral Allen the other day, “Who do you work for?” Because there`s been concern in the Gulf as to the lack of a clear-cut chain of command, like the president of the United States, Rahm Emanuel, cabinet does what they`re told. Now, I asked Allen, “Who do you work for?” Well, he says, “I work for Janet Napolitano over at homeland security and then she sort of reports to the president.” And go — wait a minute, isn`t the president calling the shots here? And here he was delineating everybody`s job like Admiral Allen and he`s got this Nobel Prize guy and then he`s got this blue-ribbon panel. I don`t sense executive command. And I thought that was the purpose of this speech tonight, command and control. I`m calling the shots. My name is Barack Obama. I`m the boss. I`m telling people what to do. I didn`t get that clarity. And I think that command and control, a phrase that`s made, worked its way around the White House is essential here. He must be chief executive. He can no longer be Vatican observer or intellectual, or a guy calling in experts, or naming commissioners or whatever. I think he`s, or citing people for their Nobel prizes, I think he has to be the boss. And he never mentioned here anything beyond BP, like, aren`t there other oil companies that could help clean up this mess? You know, we`ve had Hofmeister on, the former Shell executive, saying you`ve got to get all these tankers in there, all these people out there skimming. I don`t sense this as a real national effort yet.

See the original post here:
MSNBC Panel Not Impressed By Obama Speech

Obama’s Gulf Spill Speech: "We Cannot Consign Our Children to this Future"

Photo via the New York Times Obama just wrapped his first address to the nation from the oval office, discussing the federal response to the BP Gulf spill and how the event relates to energy policy in general. The speech was pretty standard Obama — plenty of powerful rhetoric and sweeping appeals to look forward. What I was listening for, however, weren’t vague reassurances and calls to rally around clean energy. I was looking for any hints of the actual policy ideas the president intends to support to actually set those appeals into action. Here’s what I found: … Read the full story on TreeHugger

View original post here:
Obama’s Gulf Spill Speech: "We Cannot Consign Our Children to this Future"