Tag Archives: politicians

AP Orders Staff: ‘Stop Using the Phrase “Ground Zero Mosque”’

Posted on August 19, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

In an unusual move, the Associated Press has publicly released an advisory memo to its reporters on how to cover of the Ground Zero mosque story – and the first rule is that journalists must immediately stop calling it the “Ground Zero mosque” story. “We should continue to avoid the phrase ‘Ground zero mosque’ or ‘mosque at ground zero’ on all platforms,” reads the advisory, which was issued by the AP’s Standards Center. Instead of the “Ground Zero mosque,” AP recommends that reporters use the terms “mosque 2 blocks from WTC site,” “Muslim (or Islamic) center near WTC site,” “mosque near ground zero,” or “mosque near WTC site.” The AP suggests that it might “useful in some stories to note that Muslim prayer services have been held since 2009 in the building that the new project will replace.” In addition, the news service offers a “succinct summary of President Obama’s position” on the mosque, but doesn’t include the positions of any other politicians. Also included in the advisory is a “Fact Check” to provide “additional background” for reporters. “A New York imam and his proposed mosque near ground zero are being demonized by political candidates – mostly Republicans – despite the fact that Islam is already very much a part of the World Trade Center neighborhood,” reads the first paragraph of the Fact Check. “And that Muslims pray inside the Pentagon, too, less than 80 feet from where terrorists attacked. And that the imam who’s being branded an extremist has been valued by both Republican and Democratic administrations as a moderate face of the faith.” One of the “facts” that the AP feels the need to “clarify” is that Ground Zero mosque organizer Feisal Abdul Rauf is a moderate Muslim. “Rauf counts former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright from the Clinton administration as a friend and appeared at events overseas or meetings in Washington with former President George W. Bush’s secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and Bush adviser Karen Hughes,” says the article, though it does also mention briefly Rauf’s comments about America being an “accessory” to the Sept. 11 attacks. The advisory also “fact checks” pure opinion statements made by conservatives, like former House Speaker Newt Gringrich’s assertion that “America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization.” “Such opinions are shared by some Americans, while others are more reluctant to paint the religion with a broad brush and more welcoming of the faith in this country,” reads the Fact Check. “Bush, himself, while criticized at the time for stirring suspicions about American Muslims, traveled to a Washington mosque less than a week after the attacks to declare that terrorism is ‘not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.'” AP is arguable the most influential news organization in the country, and many media outlets adhere to its guidelines in their reporting.

See the original post:
AP Orders Staff: ‘Stop Using the Phrase “Ground Zero Mosque”’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Smile! Aerial images being used to enforce laws

Posted on August 16, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Aug 14, 12:17 PM EDT Smile! Aerial images being used to enforce laws By FRANK ELTMAN Associated Press Writer AP Photo AP Photo Buy AP Photo Reprints RIVERHEAD, N.Y. (AP) — On New York's Long Island, it's used to prevent drownings. In Greece, it's a tool to help solve a financial crisis. Municipalities update property assessment rolls and other government data with it. Some in law enforcement use it to supplement reconnaissance of crime suspects. High-tech eyes in the sky – from satellite imagery to sophisticated aerial photography that maps entire communities – are being employed in creative new ways by government officials, a trend that civil libertarians and others fear are eroding privacy rights. “As technology advances, we have to revisit questions about what is and what is not private information,” said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Democracy and Technology. Online services like Google and Bing give users very detailed images of practically any location on the planet. Though some images are months old, they make it possible for someone sitting in a living room in Brooklyn to look in on folks in Dublin or Prague, or even down the street in Flatbush. Sean Walter, an attorney and first-term town supervisor in Riverhead, N.Y., insists he is a staunch defender of privacy rights and the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. But Walter supported using Google Earth images to help identify about 250 Riverhead homes where residents failed to get building permits certifying their swimming pools complied with safety regulations. All but about 10 eventually came to town hall. Walter said the focus was safety, not filling town coffers with permit money, which averaged about $150 depending on the size of the pool. A 4-foot fence is required, gates have to be self-closing and padlocked. All pools must have an alarm that sounds when sensors are activated indicating someone is in the pool. “We have a town employee who is a personal friend of mine whose son was found face-down in a swimming pool,” Walter said. “He's OK, but I don't want to be the supervisor that attends the funeral of a child that drowns in a swimming pool.” Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C., fears that while Walter's focus was safety, other municipalities may use the images to check for other transgressions. “It's only a matter of time,” Coney said. “There are lots of ordinances where this can be used. In California, where they deal with brush fires, could a satellite image show if a homeowner has brush growing too close to his home? What if someone has junk cars on their lot in violation of ordinances?” Riverhead resident Tony Villar said the town's action “could be considered Big Brother looking down at you.” “But at the same time, if the government can listen to your telephone conversations in the name of terrorism,” he said. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EYES_IN_THE_SKY?SITE=TXKER&SECTION… Standing outside the Riverhead Public Library, Walter Casey of Flanders agreed. “I think it's a great intrusion on people's privacy; they should use it on the politicians' backyards.” The New York Civil Liberties Union's Donna Lieberman said there are ways to enforce requirements “without this sort of engaging in Big Brother on high. Technically, it may be lawful, but in the gut it does not feel like a free society kind of operation.” In Greece, officials are struggling with a debt crisis and have sought to catch tax-evaders by using satellite photos to spot undeclared swimming pools – indicators of taxable wealth. Google spokeswoman Kate Hurowitz said in a statement that Google Earth acquires its information from a broad range of commercial and public sources. “The same information is available to anyone who buys it from these widely available public sources,” she said. “Google's freely available technology has been used for a variety of purposes, ranging from travel planning to scientific research to emergency response, rescue and relief in natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the Haiti earthquake.” At least nine lawsuits seeking class-action status have been filed in the United States, contending that Google collected fragments of e-mails, Web-surfing data and other information from unencrypted wireless networks as it photographed neighborhoods for its “Street View” feature. Google is also facing investigations or inquiries in 38 states as well as in several countries, including Germany, Spain and Australia. The Mountain View, Calif., company said in May it had inadvertently collected the data from public Wi-Fi networks in more than 30 countries, but maintains it never used the data and hasn't broken any laws. Google Earth posts updates about every two weeks on selected images from its providers, with images ranging from a few weeks to a few years old. For big cities like Chicago, tracking illegal pools, porches and decks through Google Earth requires frequent imaging updates, so the Chicago buildings department uses it as a reference tool on a case-by-case scenario, said spokesman Bill McCaffrey. “We're not opposed to adopting new technology, but until it advances where we can get photos of more recent updates, we don't have any plans to implement it,” he said. Smaller towns such as Champaign and Naperville, Ill. opted to use satellite images as reference only. “Mostly it's so we can see that we're going to the right building when we go to do inspections,” said Ann Michalsen, lead inspector for code enforcement in Naperville. It's also important for police officers to know they have the right destination when executing search warrants, said Joe Pollini, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. “Most departments would use it as a preliminary step, but they would also use active surveillance with their own aircraft,” he said. The nonprofit group Consumer Watchdog is seeking to determine the extent of the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration's use of Google Earth in its investigations, spokesman John M. Simpson said last week. Federal contracting records reviewed by Consumer Watchdog show that the FBI has spent more than $600,000 on Google Earth since 2007. The Drug Enforcement Administration, meanwhile, has spent more than $67,000. Simpson has called on Congress to investigate how U.S. law enforcement and intelligence communities are using Google technologies. The group says it has concerns that data could be used for racial profiling. The New York Police Department's Real Time Crime Center uses satellite imaging and computerized mapping systems to identify geographic patterns of crimes and to pinpoint possible addresses where suspects might flee – information relayed to investigators on the street. The NYPD also has two major security initiatives where a network of public and private cameras will eventually link and be searchable. The NYCLU has filed lawsuits in opposition. “We live in an environment where we are told that if it's on camera, if you have a video record, that will make us safer,” Lieberman said. “That may be appealing, but it is an unproven assertion. There's no evidence of that. Yet we see millions, if not billions, of post-9/11 money has gone to law enforcement for installing cameras in every conceivable nook and cranny.” http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EYES_IN_THE_SKY?SITE=TXKER&SECTION… added by: DefKid

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Olbermann Cherry-picks Gingrich, Accuses GOP of Blaming Unemployed for Bad Economy

Posted on August 13, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Keith Olbermann on Thursday cherry-picked an article by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to make a pathetic case that Republicans are targeting and blaming unemployed Americans for the country’s economic woes. In his opening “Countdown” segment on MSNBC, the host began, “When it came time to invade, Republicans used cherry-picked intelligence to make the case for war in Iraq. Now, they`re using cherry-picked intelligence to wage war on the middle class.” Particularly in Olbermann’s crosshairs was Gingrich who the “Countdown” host claimed “targeted one individual American who`s struggling to make ends meet and held him up as part of the problem.” Ironically, it was Olbermann that was guilty of cherry-picking as he quoted a very tiny portion of a Human Events article the former Speaker wrote Wednesday (video follows with commentary and full transcript at conclusion): After showing clips of various Republicans talking about how extending unemployment benefits reduces the incentive for those out of work to accept jobs being offered to them – including positions that pay them less than they were previously making as well as below what they’re getting on unemployment – Olbermann went after Gingrich: KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: But now, as we mentioned, Republicans have targeted one individual American who`s struggling to make ends meet and held him up as part of the problem. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich writing yesterday, quote, “The extension of unemployment benefits has given people a perverse incentive to stay on unemployment rather than accept a job.” He continued “`The Wall Street Journal` quotes an engineer who admits he turned down more than a dozen offers because the salary would have been less than he made on welfare. This story encapsulates the problem of the long-term unemployed, the depth and length of this recession is at risk of creating a permanent pool of unemployed Americans who get so used to being unproductive that they are willing to accept welfare indefinitely instead of taking a job.” The man who turned down those offers will tell his own side of the story in just a minute and the reasons for turning down a job are not always as simple as Mr. Gingrich is. “The Journal” interviewed Rick Helliwell about his company`s difficulty finding people, quote, “The jobs require a little more than a high school diploma and fluency in English. They include free accommodation of medical care and starting pay of about $30,000 a year. Mr. Helliwell speculates that Americans might be hesitant to move to Dubai where the jobs are based.” Speculates — you might add other possible reasons for giving up a job, such as — saving the country, or because Republicans thought you unfit to work. Gingrich was referring to an article in the Wall Street Journal published Monday entitled, “Some Firms Struggle to Fill Jobs Despite High Unemployment”: With a 9.5% jobless rate and some 15 million Americans looking for work, many employers are inundated with applicants. But a surprising number say they are getting an underwhelming response, and many are having trouble filling open positions. “This is as bad now as at the height of business back in the 1990s,” says Dan Cunningham, chief executive of the Long-Stanton Manufacturing Co., a maker of stamped-metal parts in West Chester, Ohio, that has been struggling to hire a few toolmakers. “It’s bizarre. We are just not getting applicants.” Employers and economists point to several explanations. Extending jobless benefits to 99 weeks gives the unemployed less incentive to search out new work. Millions of homeowners are unable to move for a job because the real-estate collapse leaves them owing more on their homes than they are worth. Later in the piece came this: Some workers agree that unemployment benefits make them less likely to take whatever job comes along, particularly when those jobs don’t pay much. Michael Hatchell, a 52-year-old mechanic in Lumberton, N.C., says he turned down more than a dozen offers during the 59 weeks he was unemployed, because they didn’t pay more than the $450 a week he was collecting in benefits. One auto-parts store, he says, offered him $7.75 an hour, which amounts to only $310 a week for 40 hours. “I was not going to put myself in a situation where I was making that small of a wage,” says Mr. Hatchell. He has since found a better-paying job at a different auto-parts dealer. With this in mind, Gingrich wrote in his piece Wednesday entitled “Indisputable Failure”: An article in the Wall Street Journal Monday painted a frustrating picture of the joblessness situation, showing that, despite our high unemployment, many firms are having trouble filling job openings. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, if job openings were getting filled at a normal rate, the unemployment rate would be 6.8% instead of 9.5%. So there are actually many jobs out there that need to be filled. Yet, in the worst recession since the Great Depression, many employers can’t make hires. The article cites several reasons for this phenomenon, a few of which are long term trends such as our education system not producing enough qualified engineers. But others factors fall squarely on the backs of this administration and Congress. For instance, the extension of unemployment benefits has given people a perverse incentive to stay on unemployment rather than accept a job. The part-owner of a machine parts company, Mechanical Devices, is looking for as many as 40 new engineers, but is quoted in the article as saying many applicants at job fairs were “just going through the motions so they could collect their unemployment checks.” The article also quotes an engineer who admits he turned down more than a dozen offers because the salary would have been less than he made on welfare. This story encapsulates the problem of the long-term unemployed. The depth and length of this recession is at risk of creating a permanent pool of unemployed Americans, who get so used to being unproductive that they are willing to accept welfare indefinitely instead of taking a job. Readers should notice that Gingrich NEVER mentioned Hatchell’s name. Isn’t it difficult to “target” someone without saying his or her name? In fact, the Hatchells didn’t even know about what Gingrich said until Olbermann’s crew informed them and invited the couple on the show to discuss it. Kind of makes it look like they were actually targeted by Olbermann and NOT Gingrich. Making the “Countdown” host’s position even weaker, Gingrich’s unnamed reference to Hatchell represented one sentence in a 1300-word article! I guess that qualifies as “targeting” in Olbermann’s world. In reality, if the “Countdown” host wanted to point fingers, he should have done so at the Journal and not someone referring to one of its articles. Yet, such logic didn’t prevent Olbermann from attacking Gingrich and other Republicans. But what was most fascinating about this lengthy segment is that it ended up proving Gingrich and the GOP’s point. As Olbermann spoke to Mike and Sarah Hatchell, they admitted that he turned down job offers because they would have paid him less than what he was making on unemployment. Now, the harsh reality for this couple and many in this situation is that such a pay cut might force them out of their homes. However, the conservative argument is that this is still a disincentive for such folk to accept gainful employment that could put them in a better position of getting a higher-paying job in the future. History has shown people that are working actually have a greater likelihood of being offered a job than those that aren’t. More importantly, as the Journal noted Monday: If the job market were working normally-that is, if openings were getting filled as they usually do-the U.S. should have about five million more gainfully employed people than it does, estimates David Altig, research director at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. That would correspond to an unemployment rate of 6.8%, instead of 9.5%.  And that’s coming from someone working for the Fed. With this in mind, not only were Olbermann’s accusations concerning Gingrich and Republicans targeting “one individual American who`s struggling to make ends meet and held him up as part of the problem” completely false, this segment actually proved what the Journal and conservatives have been claiming about the downside of extending unemployment benefits. Nice try, Keith!  Full transcript: KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: Good evening from New York. When it came time to invade, Republicans used cherry-picked intelligence to make the case for war in Iraq. Now, they`re using cherry- picked intelligence to wage war on the middle class. In our fifth story tonight: without the cloak of national security to hide behind, Republicans are about to meet one member of the middle class who is fighting back. We asked him to come on tonight because it is the first time in this “blame the unemployed” strategy from the right that we can recall Republicans targeting an individual American. For months, Republican politicians have argued that extending unemployment benefits will slow job growth, because Americans would rather take a handout. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re clearly going to dampen the capacity of that growth if you basically keep an economy which encourages people to, rather than go out and look for work, to stay on unemployment. OLBERMANN: Two Republican — SEN. JON KYL (R), ARIZONA: Continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work. (END VIDEO CLIPS) OLBERMANN: Two Republican candidates for Senate have gone further and said that Americans should start accepting lower salaries. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS) RON JOHNSON (R), WISCONSIN SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: When you continue to extend unemployment benefits, people really don`t have the incentive to go take other jobs. You know, they`ll just wait the system out until their benefits run out, then they`ll go out and take, probably not as high-paying jobs as they would like to take, but that`s how you have to get back to work. SHARRON ANGLE (R), NEVADA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: You can make more money on unemployment than you can going down and getting one of those jobs that is an honest job, but it doesn`t pay as much. And so, that`s what`s happened to us, is that we have put in so much entitlement into our government that we really have spoiled our citizenry. (END VIDEO CLIPS) OLBERMANN: It is the continuation of President Bush`s economic philosophy that American workers should keep working into their old age, that working, you know, three jobs just to make ends meet is fantastic. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m a divorced single mother with three grown adult children. I have one child, Robbie, who is mentally challenged, and I have two daughters. GEORGE W. BUSH, FMR. U.S. PRESIDENT: Fantastic. I mean, we are living longer and people are working longer, and the truth of the matter is, elderly baby boomers have got a lot to offer to our society. And we shouldn`t think about giving up our responsibilities in society. Isn`t that right? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s right. BUSH: You don`t have to worry. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute — BUSH: You work three jobs? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Three jobs, yes. BUSH: Uniquely American, isn`t it? I mean, that is fantastic, that you`re doing that. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Thank you. BUSH: Get any sleep? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not much. Not much. (END VIDEO CLIP) OLBERMANN: But now, as we mentioned, Republicans have targeted one individual American who`s struggling to make ends meet and held him up as part of the problem. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich writing yesterday, quote, “The extension of unemployment benefits has given people a perverse incentive to stay on unemployment rather than accept a job.” He continued “`The Wall Street Journal` quotes an engineer who admits he turned down more than a dozen offers because the salary would have been less than he made on welfare. This story encapsulates the problem of the long-term unemployed, the depth and length of this recession is at risk of creating a permanent pool of unemployed Americans who get so used to being unproductive that they are willing to accept welfare indefinitely instead of taking a job.” The man who turned down those offers will tell his own side of the story in just a minute and the reasons for turning down a job are not always as simple as Mr. Gingrich is. “The Journal” interviewed Rick Helliwell about his company`s difficulty finding people, quote, “The jobs require a little more than a high school diploma and fluency in English. They include free accommodation of medical care and starting pay of about $30,000 a year. Mr. Helliwell speculates that Americans might be hesitant to move to Dubai where the jobs are based.” Speculates — you might add other possible reasons for giving up a job, such as — saving the country, or because Republicans thought you unfit to work. This as “The New York Times” reports that yet another Republican politician, South Carolina`s Governor Mark Sanford, has been approved by the Department of Labor to accept stimulus money targeted to expanding that state`s unemployment benefits — an expansion Governor Sanford once predicted would cause tax increases, but which now appears to have embraced wholeheartedly — he now appears to have done so — signing the bill two months ago, expanding those unemployment benefits for his state to the tune of $98 million. Governor Sanford joining the ranks of other Republican governors who once denounced such stimulus spending before they embraced it, such as Dave Heineman of Nebraska and Georgia`s Sonny Perdue. But despite the rush of Republicans to embrace the stimulus, most of America seems to have forgotten that it was their party, not President Obama`s, that bailed out Wall Street banks. A new poll finding that more Americans, 47 percent, think President Obama signed the Troubled Asset Relief Program, TARP, into law, only 34 percent know it was actually, shh, President Bush who did it. And now, as promised, COUNTDOWN exclusive, the man singled out by former Speaker Gingrich, because he in Gingrich`s words, admits he turned down more than a dozen offers because the salary would have been less than he made on welfare, Mike Hatchell joining us from his home in Lumberton, North Carolina, along with his wife, Sara. Eleven-year-old Wyatt unfortunately visiting family in California, although thrilled, I`m sure, that we`re showing his Science Achievement Award photo on national TV tonight. Mike and Sarah, thanks for joining us tonight. MIKE HATCHELL, MECHANIC: Thank you, Keith. SARA HATCHELL, WIFE OF GOP TARGET: Thank you. M. HATCHELL: How are you? OLBERMANN: Let me start with your bio, Mike. You`re at 52 years old now, former law enforcement officer, used to have your own business as a mechanic. You were unemployed for 59 weeks, collected $450 a week in benefits and Mr. Gingrich suggests you got used to being unproductive. If that`s not true, why did you turn down so many job offers? M. HATCHELL: Keith, it`s really hard for someone like Mr. Gingrich to understand the fact that when you have a mortgage, off family to support, you have car payments, insurance, everything else, that when you`re going out and looking for a job, you know, and, obviously, it was a job, different jobs that I was looking at that were going to pay probably half of what I`m used to making. So, that was the situation. I mean, when they`re offering me these jobs, they`re saying, well, this is — this is going to be a situation where we`re going to start you out at the entry level wage. And I — obviously, I`ve got some 32 years of experience in the automotive business and it`s kind of hard for me to do that, and then looking also the fact that even at 40 hours at $7.75 an hour or whatever it might, you know, it`s going to total $310, $320 a week. After you pay taxes, everything that comes out, Social Security and everything else, you might be $275, $265 or something like that. I mean, with the mortgage and everything else, I mean, yes, I was drawing unemployment of $450 a week, which I actually paid into since I was a young man. OLBERMANN: Right. HATCHELL: You know, probably at least 35 years. And I felt like that, well, it`s unemployment insurance, it`s not welfare, that Mr. Gingrich has spoken about. And I felt like, well, until such time as I can actually get a gainful job that`s going to help me keep my house, keep my family fed, not necessarily anything other — you know, expensive, nothing, just doing those basic things, I was not going to take any other job. OLBERMANN: They seemed to leave out the idea that it is insurance and you did pay into it. That`s sort of — pay now and don`t get it later. M. HATCHELL: Yes, sir. OLBERMANN: If you had — if you had taken those lower-paying jobs, your family would be considerably worse off now than it actually is, correct? M. HATCHELL: Yes, sir. I would hate to even think. You know, I mean, with a mortgage payment, if you don`t make the mortgage, I mean, they`re going to come and take the house. And, unfortunately, we`d be out on the streets, you know, God knows doing what, you know? But, you know — I mean, it`s just unreal. I mean, that`s all you can do, is try to do the best you can, you know? And when I found a situation where I did have a better offer, of course, I took it. You know, something I knew that would work for me. So — OLBERMANN: Sarah, let me ask you something, can you weigh in on how you reacted when we brought Mr. Gingrich`s remarks to your attention today? S. HATCHELL: I was appalled, frankly, that he would even consider welfare being a part of unemployment insurance. I saw my husband beat the streets of Robeson County, a very poor county, to try to find work, to save our home. It`s been a really bad couple of years. OLBERMANN: Whichever one — whichever one of you wants to take this, can you give us some idea of your life financially? Meaning, you seem like a typical American family. How is the classic American Dream looking for you right now in terms of your retirement? Your son`s college is coming up in the not-too-distant future — how`s that looking? M. HATCHELL: Obviously, I mean, with the unemployment, after 59 weeks without a job, you know, I mean, the IRA accounts, you know, that got drained. We basically have no retirement other than, hopefully, the government will have Social Security. We all know how big that might be in the future. We`re still struggling. I mean, you know, for not making enough wage and actually keeping everything up, insurance, you know, the mortgage, food on the table, you know. We actually struggle to the point where we lost one car. Not able to make the two car payments, you know, so she had a vehicle and I had a vehicle. And quite honestly, I mean, we`re still behind on our mortgage. I mean, we`re still trying to make that up, you know, make sure we keep the house. Just haven`t been able to get to the point where we can actually catch up with the back payments that we got behind on. So, it`s really tough, you know? And we just continue to fight. I mean, I go to work. I feel like as long as I`m working, you know, and I go to work every day, you know, then things are going to get better. And I hope my wife will get a job here soon. You know, she`s been out of work even longer than I have, some 25 or 26 weeks. So, it`s tough. It`s tough in the South, as we would say. So — OLBERMANN: Last question, Mike. Is there anything else you`d like to say to Mr. Gingrich or the other Republicans who say that, you know, the unemployed stay that way for the benefits, so that they`re, you know, spoiled or lazy and should take those lower-paying jobs and get off the public dime? M. HATCHELL: Keith, I think it`s no surprise to us that, as it has been for quite some time, that our politicians are going to use that word, are not in touch with the American people, especially the middle class or the lower class people, because — I mean, that`s the only thing that`s keeping us going. I mean, when I was on unemployment, I would sit there in front of the television, reading newspaper, look online, to make sure, you know, whether they were going to extend my benefits or not, so I could tell whether or not I need to make other arrangements, maybe find some place to live, you know, or move some place that I could afford to live. And it was just, it was always tough, you know? I mean, when that`s all you have to depend on, I mean, what are you going to do? Your life is in their hands, pretty much, you know? And I don`t think there`s anyone out there just drawing unemployment just to be drawing it. OLBERMANN: Yes. M. HATCHELL: I mean, obviously, they didn`t ask to be laid off, you know? And as far as I know, it`s still unemployment insurance, and we all pay into that. It should be a situation where anyone who calls it welfare, I don`t understand how he even calls it welfare. While we`re on the term, I don`t mean to speak out of turn, Keith, he was talking about this company that was trying to hire 40 engineers. OLBERMANN: Yes. M. HATCHELL: That particular story they read, OK, they were actually machinists that the company was trying to hire, and most of the machinists I know — I have been in the automotive field all my life — machinists make considerably more than $13 an hour, that`s what this company was actually offering for a machinist. And I can understand why they wouldn`t accept that. If they`ve been working as machinists, I`m sure their unemployment was either at that level or more, and they were in the same situation that I was where had they taken a lesser paying job, they would have lost everything, you know, even more so than we have, you know? So, I just think that — you know, Washington is not in touch with the actual people, I`m afraid. And that`s nothing new. I think it`s always been that way since I was a young child. So, I wish it was different, but it`s not. So — OLBERMANN: Mike and Sara Hatchell — I think we`ll take the common sense wisdom of Mike the mechanic over Joe the plumber any day. We thank you for your time and for your willingness to come forward and, obviously, our best wishes to you and the family. Thank you much. S. HATCHELL: Thank you, Keith. M. HATCHELL: Thank you, Keith, very much. Thank you for having us on. OLBERMANN: Our pleasure.

Read the rest here:
Olbermann Cherry-picks Gingrich, Accuses GOP of Blaming Unemployed for Bad Economy

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Baffled by Wall Street’s Anti-Obama Sentiment: The President ‘Has Not Done’ Much to Business

Posted on August 12, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

During Morning Joe on Thursday, MSNBC’s Chuck Todd appeared baffled by a discussion of negative feelings directed towards Barack Obama from Wall Street. The confused journalist wondered, “Look, at the end of the day, he has not done that much when it comes to business stuff.”   Mad Money host, Jim Cramer relayed to Todd that Wall Street is upset because, “Most of the people on Wall Street are behind the scenes guys” and the President is demagoging the issue and demonizing them.  Todd became upset that, regardless of what the President does, “He is getting trapped and hit from both sides, but it isn’t just that, this is how sour the American public is.” To understand why Wall Street and the American public might be “sour,” one needs to look no further than the cap and trade energy proposal, health care, the financial reform bill, the stimulus, or the nationalization of the automobile and student loan sectors. Perhaps Todd could listen to what a colleague on CNBC said. Back in February, Maria Bartiromo asserted that “there are a lot of people on Wall Street and in business increasingly that have said to me actually, ‘I don’t know that I would vote the same today given the fact that we did not expect he was so much to the left, and we did not expect that there was going to be such a big bite in business.’ I mean, that’s a fact.” Recently the media have been expressing incredulity at Barack Obama’s falling poll numbers. This includes MSNBC’s news anchor Contessa Brewer lamenting that after everything President Obama has done, “What else do people want?” Sounding a similar note, Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos on Thursday touted, after all of Obama’s achievements, “What more could the President have done?”

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CNN’s Sanchez: Reid’s Racist Gaffe Emblematic of Angle’s Incompetence

Posted on August 12, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Discussing Harry Reid’s racially-charged comment about Hispanic Republicans, Rick Sanchez miraculously managed to turn the embattled senator’s gaffe into an example of his opponent Sharron Angle’s incompetence. On the prime time “Rick’s List” yesterday, the CNN host actually gave serious consideration to the Nevada Democrat’s claim while exploring the extent to which the Angle campaign is “blacking out” Hispanic media outlets. “Also, do you think a Hispanic-American can be a Republican?” teased Sanchez. “Harry Reid doesn’t think so. And I’m going to tell you what Hispanic groups are saying about his opponent as well.” Instead of interviewing a Hispanic Republican who is offended by Reid’s insensitive remarks, Sanchez brought on Miguel Barrientos, a liberal talk show host, to “drill down” on why Angle is allegedly ignoring Hispanic journalists. “These charges against Angle, are they real?” asked a bewildered Sanchez. “Is she really blocking out the Latin media? Or is this just a case of opportunism by her opponent, Harry Reid?” After Barrientos confirmed that Angle apparently does not feel the need to reach out to media personalities who describe themselves as “activists” who “get involved very heavily in the political area,” Sanchez wondered if the Republican Senate nominee is merely an incompetent campaigner: Well, look, maybe she’s just not good at this. Maybe she’s hired people who aren’t very savvy at reaching out to the media. Maybe they’re not very organized and they don’t return phone calls. You know, there’s a stretch between someone not being competent at dealing with the media and somebody blocking out a specific part of the media, simply because they don’t like them, because they’re Hispanic or black or Asian or whatever the accusation is. Reid drew fire when he claimed he doesn’t “know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.” Rather than criticize Reid for insulting the intelligence of every Hispanic Republican in America, Sanchez characterized the Senate majority leader’s statement as something that “some, possibly even what many, Americans think.” A transcript of the relevant segment can be found below: CNN Rick’s List August 11, 2010 Also, do you think a Hispanic-American can be a Republican? Harry Reid doesn’t think so. And I’m going to tell you what Hispanic groups are saying about his opponent as well. This is a hot political story, and I’m going to take you through it when we come back. This is RICK’S LIST. I’m glad that you’re here. RICK SANCHEZ: I am so excited about that. Can’t wait to share it with you. Welcome back. I’m Rick Sanchez. It may be what some, possibly even what many, Americans think. But should it be said by the Senate Majority Leader? What am I talking about? Should Harry Reid suggest that no self-respecting Hispanic-American can be or should be a Republican? Play it, Kel. Sen. HARRY REID (D-NV): I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK? Do I need to say more? SANCHEZ: No, you don’t need to say more. Now, as a South Floridian, I can tell you, senator, that there are many Hispanic Republicans. The question is whether Senator Reid is taking advantage of his opponent’s problems with Hispanics in Nevada. A problem that seems to have come to a head lately with the Latino reporters saying that Sharron Angle is blacking out the Latin media, blacking them out. They say they’re not invited to her press events, that they’re not set press releases, and their phone calls aren’t even being returned. Those are the accusations. Those are the charges. Now we asked both camps about this. Here’s what I got from Reid’s camp. Right? He sent me this tweet saying, look, Rick, “Angle’s anti-saving jobs, helping unemployed, social security, Medicare, and says immigration reform overriding our culture.” So he takes a shot at her. Well, here’s what Angle tweets, alright. “Harry Reid pulls out race card again, whacks himself in the head.” So you could see that they’re going at each other here. Now we asked Angle to join us tonight but she declined. I’ll read you her comment nonetheless. “We have brought on more communication staff,” she says, “in recent days, and we will be reaching out to all media outlets aggressively between now and Election Day.” “This attack,” she says, “is an attempt by Harry Reid to distract the voters from his record and his insensitive comments yesterday regarding Hispanic voters.” So here we go, tit-for-tat, right? Joining me now to wade through all this is Miguel Barrientos. He’s a community activist and radio host for KLAV-AM out in Las Vegas. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to roll the R’s while on American television. That was kind of neat. All right. Let’s start with this. These charges against Angle, are they real? Is she really blocking out the Latin media? Or is this just a case of opportunism by her opponent, Harry Reid? MIGUEL BARRIENTOS, KLAV-AM talk show host: First of all, hello, Rick. We have been working in the community through our radio show. We’re activists. We get involved very heavily in the political area. And we have contacted Sharron Angle’s office saying we want to hear what’s going on, we want to know what the tea party feels about, you know, opening the door to the Latinos, especially when you’re talking about immigration issues. And we have not gotten any phone calls returned. We don’t get support from their staff to say, “this is what we feel.” We always hear what they say on the local print media, but doesn’t come forward and talk to our community to our media. SANCHEZ: Well, look, maybe she’s just not good at this. Maybe she’s hired people who aren’t very savvy at reaching out to the media. Maybe they’re not very organized and they don’t return phone calls. You know, there’s a stretch between someone not being competent at dealing with the media and somebody blocking out a specific part of the media, simply because they don’t like them, because they’re Hispanic or black or Asian or whatever the accusation is. Are you sure when you make this accusation that you’re saying, “look, she’s got a problem with Hispanics?” BARRIENTOS: Well, I’m not – I don’t think she dislikes Hispanics. When you have potentially 100,000 voters that are going to be coming out to vote in the elections and she’s not paying attention to the segment of the community, maybe you’re right. Maybe she doesn’t understand, maybe she’s incompetent, maybe she’s not interested in the Latino vote at this point. SANCHEZ: She says that she’s going to try and hire some people to reach out to you. What’s your reaction to that? BARRIENTOS: Well, I think now that you brought it to her attention, maybe she’s going to get a little smarter on how she’s going to run the campaign and get some Latinos out there to maybe speak on her behalf, which I think is a good idea. SANCHEZ: There’s a possibility that someone in her camp would feel like you’re not going to give her a straight shot anyway. In other words, that much of your coverage is going to be directed towards the Democrat because the voting record there in Nevada tends to be from Hispanics, more of a Democratic vote than a Republican vote. How would you answer that charge? BARRIENTOS: Well, we have issues on the table, Rick. We have issues such as immigration reform. You know, this is something that we have been fighting since 2003 here in Nevada. We’ve been working with the politicians. The Republican Party has basically ignored our call. They don’t support anything that has to do with immigration reform. The DREAM Act is a big issue that our community is faced with, and we need to open up the doors for higher education for those who qualify. I mean, it’s always negative, negative, negative, when it comes down to our issues. So how are we supposed to feel when they’re not really taking care? We’re part of the constituency in her district. SANCHEZ: We’ll leave it at that, then. We understand your point of view and we’ll continue to drill down on this topic. Miguel Barrientos, thanks so much, sir. BARRIENTOS: Thank you, Rick.

See more here:
CNN’s Sanchez: Reid’s Racist Gaffe Emblematic of Angle’s Incompetence

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

NBC’s Todd Proclaims If GOP Wins in November It’s Still ‘A Bad Election Night For All of Washington’

Posted on August 12, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

On Thursday’s Today show, NBC’s chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd started building the narrative for the liberal media to spout in case the Republicans win majorities in the House and Senate in the upcoming midterms – that the voters are just cranky about everyone and everything. Todd even went on to absurdly state that if the GOP has a big win it will still be seen as a “A bad election night for all of Washington.” All of Washington? Even for the party that is victorious? Todd, on with Today co-anchor Ann Curry, came up with that conclusion after reciting results from a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll that showed “Everybody is angry at all things Washington” as Todd noted “Democrats hit an all-new high in their negative rating. Republicans have even a higher negative rating. The Tea Party, which had enjoyed a positive rating for awhile, now they have a negative rating.” Todd, then, went on to prematurely throw cold water on any sort of GOP win as he claimed: “If the Republicans get the majorities, it’s because people have decided to go into the ballot box and hold their nose, they’re not happy with anybody.” The following is the full transcript of the segment as it was aired on the August 12 Today show: ANN CURRY: What do Americans think about the economy and about the politicians in charge during these tough times? We’re getting some answers this morning from a newly released NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. We’ve got NBC’s political director and chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd here in the studio this morning to fill us in. Hey Chuck, thanks for being here. CHUCK TODD: Good morning. [On screen headline: “Unhappy America, NBC News/WSJ Poll On Economy, Obama & Congress”] CURRY: So even though Jim Cramer sounds very positive, there’s a lot of pessimism, as we’ve seen in the markets, but also on Wall Street, but also on Main Street according to this new poll. TODD: Americans are feeling doom and gloom. He may not be seeing doom and gloom but look at those numbers about where people feel like we’re still in a recession. Sixty-four percent say we have yet to hit bottom. It’s an unbelievable number. Nine months ago in January, only 53 percent had that. So here we were the Obama administration told us that this was going to be recovery summer. We’ve had the administration arguing that the recovery is on their way. Jim Cramer was telling us that the financial numbers say that. The American people don’t feel it. CURRY: And they don’t feel like the country is heading in the right direction, which is even more and they’re, they’re really concerned about where it’s going. TODD: That’s right, that’s right. And they say 58 percent say we’re heading in the wrong direction. Of course this is taking a huge political toll on President Obama. Right now, his highest yet negative rating on handling the economy – 52 percent. Even people who approve of his job overall, are disapproving of the way he’s handling the economy. CURRY: And, and they’re disapproving him, I mean we’re getting into the nubbins- TODD: Sure. CURRY: -in terms of what specifically they’re disapproving him, about, in terms of what he’s done. TODD: That’s right. They don’t, they’re not, they don’t feel the recovery. And I think part of this may be a disconnect. He’s out there every day saying it’s coming. It’s getting better. And he goes to these places that are hiring 500 people here and 1,000 people there, and they’re trying to say, “Look, it’s gonna get better. It’s gonna get better.” People aren’t feeling it. And now they’re getting more pessimistic and you do wonder if they’ve stopped listening to Washington because they’re sitting there saying, “Hey, Washington’s saying it’s getting better. I’m not feeling like it’s getting better.” And then that leads to this crankiness, right now, that they feel about all politicians. CURRY: They’re feeling crankiness about both political parties. TODD: That’s right. CURRY: Republicans a bit more, but even the Tea Party gets a hit in this poll. TODD: It does. Everybody is angry at all things Washington. Democrats hit an all-new high in their negative rating. Republicans have even a higher negative rating. The Tea Party, which had enjoyed a positive rating for awhile, now they have a negative rating. Look, what this is leading to is in November, Democrats are still in big trouble. They could lose both of their majorities. But if the Republicans get the majorities, it’s because people have decided to go into the ballot box and hold their nose, they’re not happy with anybody. CURRY: So the bottom line is Americans are unhappy and this could, the midterm elections could be a- TODD: It’s going to be, it’s going to be a bad election night for all of Washington. Democrats are in big trouble. Even if they hold their majorities the public is saying, “You’re not doing your job right and we don’t like it.” CURRY: I was gonna try to bust you because what you said, privately, is that it’s gonna be a hold your nose election. Alright. TODD: It is! It’s a hold your nose election. They’re gonna walk into that ballot box and whoever they pick, they’re not happy about it. CURRY: Chuck Todd, not good news. But it tells us something. TODD: It does. CURRY: Thank you so much this morning. TODD: You got it, Ann.

Follow this link:
NBC’s Todd Proclaims If GOP Wins in November It’s Still ‘A Bad Election Night For All of Washington’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why the Taliban is winning in Afghanistan

Posted on July 3, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

One of them asked me, 'Why do you hate us?' I replied, 'Because you blow down our doors, enter our houses, pull our women by the hair and kick our children. We cannot accept this. We will fight back, and we will break your teeth, and when your teeth are broken you will leave, just as the British left before you. It is just a matter of time.'” What did he say to that? “He turned to his friend and said, 'If the old men are like this, what will the younger ones be like?' In truth, all the Americans here know that their game is over. It is just their politicians who deny this.” The defeat of the west's latest puppet government on the very same hill of Gandamak where the British came to grief in 1842 made me think, on the way back to Kabul, about the increasingly close parallels between the fix that Nato is in and the one faced by the British 170 years ago. Now as then, the problem is not hatred of the west, so much as a dislike of foreign troops swaggering around and making themselves odious to the very people they are meant to be helping. On the return journey, as we crawled back up the passes towards Kabul, we got stuck behind a US military convoy of eight Humvees and two armoured personnel carriers in full camouflage, all travelling at less than 20 miles per hour. Despite the slow speed, the troops refused to let any Afghan drivers overtake them, for fear of suicide bombers, and they fired warning shots at any who attempted to do so. By the time we reached the top of the pass two hours later, there were 300 cars and trucks backed up behind the convoy, each one full of Afghans furious at being ordered around in their own country by a group of foreigners. Every day, small incidents of arrogance and insensitivity such as this make the anger grow. There has always been an absolute refusal by the Afghans to be ruled by foreigners, or to accept any government perceived as being imposed on the country from abroad. Now as then, the puppet ruler installed by the west has proved inadequate to the job. Too weak, unpopular and corrupt to provide security or development, he has been forced to turn on his puppeteers in order to retain even a vestige of legitimacy in the eyes of his people. Recently, Karzai has accused the US, the UK and the UN of orchestrating a fraud in last year's elections, described Nato forces as “an army of occupation”, and even threatened to join the Taliban if Washington kept putting pressure on him. Shah Shuja did much the same thing in 1842, towards the end of his rule, and was known to have offered his allegiance and assistance to the insurgents who eventually toppled and beheaded him. Now as then, there have been few tangible signs of improvement under the western-backed regime. Despite the US pouring approximately $80bn into Afghanistan, the roads in Kabul are still more rutted than those in the smallest provincial towns of Pakistan. There is little health care; for any severe medical condition, patients still have to fly to India. A quarter of all teachers in Afghanistan are themselves illiterate. In many areas, district governance is almost non-existent: half the governors do not have an office, more than half have no electricity, and most receive only $6 a month in expenses. Civil servants lack the most basic education and skills. This is largely because $76.5bn of the $80bn committed to the country has been spent on military and security, and most of the remaining $3.5bn on international consultants, some of whom are paid in excess of $1,000 a day, according to an Afghan government report. This, in turn, has had other negative effects. As in 1842, the presence of large numbers of well-paid foreign troops has caused the cost of food and provisions to rise, and living standards to fall. The Afghans feel they are getting poorer, not richer. There are other similarities. Then as now, the war effort was partially privatised: it was not so much the British army as a corp

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Morning Shows Spare a Scant Two and a Half Minutes for ‘Landmark’ Gun Ruling

Posted on June 29, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Despite referring to it as “landmark” and “huge,” the network morning shows on Tuesday mostly ignored Monday’s Supreme Court ruling, which declared the Second Amendment a fundamental right that cannot be violated by state governments. Good Morning America, The Early Show and Today devoted just two minutes and 34 seconds to discussing the important decision. ABC’s GMA offered 21 seconds with a single Juju Chang news brief during the two hour program. This didn’t stop the show’s hosts from covering crucial topics, such as spending eight and a half minutes dissecting whether Michael Douglas’ ex-wife deserves residuals from his upcoming Wall Street sequel. CBS’s Early Show allowed 25 seconds for Jan Crawford to explain the significance of the decision. Host Chris Wragge rushed, “Now what’s the importance, if you can just tell us quickly, of this 5-4 decision?” Crawford exclaimed, “Chris, this was a huge ruling that basically extended gun rights nationwide.” Apparently, it wasn’t as compelling as the five minutes and 15 seconds the same show devoted to cooking flank steak for the Fourth of July. NBC provided the most coverage, one minute and 48 seconds. This included an anchor brief by news reader Nancy Morales and a full report by Pete Williams. Morales described the decision as “landmark.” Williams actually included a brief clip of NRA Vice President Wayne LaPierre promising more lawsuits against cities and states that don’t follow the court’s instructions. The lack of coverage follows the same pattern from 2008 when the Supreme Court overturned Washington D.C.’s gun ban. On June 27, 2008 , all three morning shows gave a total of three minutes and 33 seconds to the story. Early Show, instead, focused four minutes on the extremely relevant subject of how to Feng Shui your house for pets A transcript of the coverage can be found below: GMA 06/29/10 7:14 JUJU CHANG: Chicago’s mayor is vowing to rewrite the city’s ban on handguns, after a Supreme Court decision made it unenforceable. The high court ruled Americans have a basic right to own a handgun for self-defense , wherever they live. Chicago may instead demand that gun owners buy insurance, register guns with local police and equip them with traceable bullets. Today 06/29/10 7:17 NATALIE MORALES: Major cities across the U.S. are bracing for new challenges to their gun control laws. On Monday the Supreme Court’s ruling on Chicago’s handgun ban said an individual right to keep and bear arms is among the fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty. 8:02 NATALIE MORALES: Some big cities in the U.S. are bracing for new battles over gun laws, following a landmark ruling Monday by the Supreme Court. NBC’s justice correspondent Pete Williams has more. Pete, good morning. PETE WILLIAMS: Natalie, for the first time in the nation’s history, the court said the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, limits what state and local governments can do in restricting gun ownership. POLICE VIDEO: We have got shots fired over here. WILLIAMS: The ruling means the end of a 38-year-old Chicago law strictly banning handguns, challenged by city residents who wanted to have a gun at home for self-defense. By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court said the nation’s founders considered the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms among the fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty. Chicago officials said they might now try requiring gun registration or training courses. But, advocates of gun rights vow to fight any city that tries to raise barriers to gun ownership. WAYNE LAPIERRE (NRA): I think the action goes to wherever the politicians make it so hard for average citizens to qualify, make the process so intimidating, so restrictive, citizens never get the guns. WILLIAMS: The next legal battles are already brewing over carrying guns in public or taking them into bars and restaurants. But advocates of gun control say the court’s ruling applies only to the right to keep a gun at home for self-defense. PAUL HELMKE (Brady Handgun Control): It doesn’t mean anybody can have any gun any place, anytime. You are allowed to have reasonable restrictions in the middle on who gets guns. WILLIAMS: Local governments can still impose some restrictions on owning a gun but this ruling sparks a new round of legal challenges on what’s reasonable, Natalie. Early Show 06/29/10 7:15 CHRIS WRAGGE: And quickly, on a separate note here, I want to talk about this Supreme Court ruling. They ruled that had state and local governments cannot ban guns. Now what’s the importance, if you can just tell us quickly, of this 5-4 decision? JAN CRAWFORD: Chris, this was a huge ruling that basically extended gun rights nationwide. It said cities and states across the country cannot flatly outright ban handguns, that you have a fundamental right to own a gun in your own home to protect yourself.

See more here:
Morning Shows Spare a Scant Two and a Half Minutes for ‘Landmark’ Gun Ruling

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

WaPo ‘On Gardening’ Feature Blasts Sarah Palin’s Wooden Fence

Posted on June 24, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

It seems no section of the newspaper is free of bias and/or political cheap shots. Take today’s Local Living section of the Washington Post, whose “on gardening” feature writer Adrian Higgins blasted “Sarah Palin’s… wrong to the landscape”* in the form of the 14-foot-tall wooden fence she erected between her Wasilla, Alaska, property and an adjacent lot rented by author Joe McGinniss: Do bad neighbors make bad fences? I’ve seen a few fences in my time, but none quite as defiantly ugly as the one now shielding Sarah Palin and her family from what she suggests are the prying eyes of her new neighbor , an author named Joe McGinniss.  As a prop in the theater of contemporary politics, the screen is a masterstroke. This billboard of a fence looks like the heroic, makeshift response of a woman protecting her besieged family from a loathsome spy. Writes Palin on her Facebook page: “Wonder what kind of material he’ll gather while overlooking Piper’s bedroom, my little garden, and the family’s swimming hole?” This, in turn, spawned ugly and threatening responses against McGinniss. “She’s pushed a button, and unleashed the hounds of hell,” McGinniss told NBC’s Matt Lauer. However genuine the motives behind the fence, from a design, horticultural and sheer aesthetic standpoint, it looks like a disaster. Higgins did eventually get back to his area of expertise, explaining why overly tall fences are bad for backyard gardens. And Higgins did crack a joke at the expense of D.C.-area local government bureaucrats who disapprove of tall fences. All the same, Higgins’s swipe at the Palins was gratuitous, a needless intrusion of politics into a generally apolitical section of the paper. *”Sarah Palin’s fence didn’t have to be so ugly,” was the online article’s headline. The above photo by Mark Thiessen of the Associated Press was included with the Higgins article along witha caption reading, “You betcha, a two-tone and 14-foot-high fence is a bad idea.”

More here:
WaPo ‘On Gardening’ Feature Blasts Sarah Palin’s Wooden Fence

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Urgent Priorities and Common Sense in the Gulf

Posted on June 24, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

The ramifications of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico have not even begun to surface. We will be dealing with the ecological damage for years as the prime nesting grounds for shrimp, oysters and countless other varieties of sea life are destroyed by the leak at the bottom of the ocean that nobody seems to be able to deal with. The economic damage is another entirely different animal that is going to rock the Gulf Coast and head inland with reverberations that will be seriously felt around the whole country. The Obama administration is completely lost on how to deal with the spill and the president seems helpless except to appoint commissions and place blame anywhere except 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I know that an oil leak at this depth has never had to be dealt with before and is a seriously difficult thing to fix, but somewhere on this earth, somebody knows how to fix it and it’s high time to find him or her. The other part of the equation, the cleanup, is a horse of a different color and there are literally hundreds of ways to go about that, practical and simple methods that seem to either go over or under Obama’s head. I’ve seen demonstrations on television using things as mundane as the hay I feed my animals to clean up the oil. There are fabrics that have been developed that soak up the oil and reject the water and there is any number of machines people have come forward with, but none of them are appearing on the horrible scene on the Gulf Coast beaches. Why is Obama afraid to let common citizens test the methods they’ve come up with, what could it possibly hurt. Let’s just use a little cowboy logic in this situation. Bring all these people with ideas to the Gulf Coast, give them all a stretch of water to work with and see which ones work the best. That’s so simple and what can it hurt? Let the people try out their ideas. If they don’t work they can simply be disregarded without any harm to anybody. If they work the can be deployed en mass. I know the walls of the White House are covered with ivy league diplomas and Nobel Prizes, but there isn’t enough common sense in that bunch to change a spark plug. It’s time for the politicians to stop using this crisis for an excuse to raise our taxes and advance their confounded socialist agenda. It’s time for them to get out of the way and let the people with the practical ideas have a go at cleaning up this mess. And by the way President Obama, the moratorium on drilling in the Gulf is nothing less than pure dumb. You’re taking the last vestige of economic hope away from people who have no way left to make a living because no matter how much money British Petroleum ponies up, it’s going to run out way before those shrimp and oyster beds come back and long before the tourists start streaming back to the Gulf Coast. Stopping the drilling is nothing less than cheap political pandering and another sign of the total lack of experience in your administration. Just more proof of your lack of understanding and just how baffled you are by your job. You’re lost, Mr. President. Why don’t you admit it and look for some help among the great, unwashed masses. I think you’d find that we’re pretty dern good people who have been solving problems for generations. Maybe you can’t ‘plug the damn hole” but you can get out of the way and let some people with the common sense your administration lacks come in and do something right for a change. And believe me, it would really be a change.

Read this article:
Urgent Priorities and Common Sense in the Gulf

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , ,