Tag Archives: power

Taylor Lautner Talks Werewolf Vs. Vampire Fights On ‘Letterman’

‘It’d be a tough call. [Werewolves are] very strong. We are very fast,’ Lautner said on ‘Late Show With David Letterman.’ By Eric Ditzian Taylor Lautner on “The Late Show with David Letterman” Thursday Photo: CBS “Eclipse” has been tearing up the multiplex for days, but that doesn’t mean the vampire film’s stars get a break from their appearance-a-minute publicity duties. Ashley Greene, Nikki Reed and Xavier Samuel have already jetted across the pond for the London premiere , and the cast is expected to pop up at random surprise appearances across the U.S. throughout the weekend. Lucky for Taylor Lautner, then, that the “Late Show With David Letterman” actually tapes in the afternoon, so perhaps the 18-year-old was able to get a decent night’s sleep before the hectic weekend schedule shifts into gear. Wearing a fitted gray suit, Lautner chatted with the talk-show host about his persistent onscreen shirtlessness, who would win in a fight between a vampire and a werewolf, and how he got started in the business. About that last topic of conversation, thank the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. “[My karate instructor] was actually the blue Power Ranger for a year,” Lautner laughed. The Ranger-turned-teacher encouraged Lautner to start auditioning, which led to a few commercials and then the decision to move the entire Lautner family from Michigan to Los Angeles when he was 11. He soon landed a starring role in “The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D.” And now, of course, he’s the proudly shirtless Jacob in the “Twilight” movies. But when Dave wanted to know if Jacob could take down Edward Cullen in a fight, Lautner wouldn’t take the bait. “It’d be a tough call,” he said. “[Werewolves are] very strong. We are very fast. We work as a pack. That’s kind of our thing.” Check out everything we’ve got on “The Twilight Saga: Eclipse.” For young Hollywood news, fashion and “Twilight” updates around the clock, visit HollywoodCrush.MTV.com . Related Photos The Evolution Of: Taylor Lautner Highlights From The ‘Eclipse’ Cast’s Talk Show Tour ‘The Twilight Saga: Eclipse’

Go here to see the original:
Taylor Lautner Talks Werewolf Vs. Vampire Fights On ‘Letterman’

New York Power Authority Applies For Long Island Offshore Wind Farm Lease From Feds

photo: Julian Menichini via flickr Never to be left out of the action, New York has joined other northeast states in marching down the path towards building offshore wind farms: Reuters reports the New York Power Authority will soon be applying for a lease from the federal government required to build a 350-700 M… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read more here:
New York Power Authority Applies For Long Island Offshore Wind Farm Lease From Feds

Taylor Lautner Says ‘Twilight’ Merchandise Can Be ‘So Weird’

‘I haven’t seen anything too crazy,’ he tells MTV News. By Jocelyn Vena, with reporting by Josh Horowitz Taylor Lautner Photo: MTV News There seem to be a multitude of products with the “Twilight” stars’ faces on them. Lunchboxes, clothes, posters, cardboard cutouts — you name it, Taylor Lautner , Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson most likely have their likeness on it. And it seems that the wolf in that pack finds it all a bit daunting. “I haven’t seen anything too crazy. There’s a wide variation,” he revealed to MTV News about all the “Twilight”-related merchandise. “There’s ChapStick. There’s makeup kits. There’s the T-shirts, and there’s chocolate bars.” There isn’t a particular item that weirds him out, just the fact that there’s so, so much of it. “It’s just weird to see all those different things,” he said. “I don’t [have any of it]. I definitely do not.” While Stewart’s face isn’t on anything too out of the ordinary , she’s heard stories about some of the stuff the guys are on. “I’ve heard that there are pretty obscene items that you can get with the boys’ faces on them,” she said. “I’m actually just on T-shirts and dolls and stuff, to be honest. I don’t think I’m on bed sheets and stuff like that, which is still funny-weird.” Just how strange does it get? Pattinson will explain . “I like the glitter lube stuff. I thought that was really funny,” he laughed. “I was just like, ‘I did not sign that! Where is the paper?’ I think, yeah, I’m pretty sure it’s glitter. … I think it’s lube.” What’s your favorite piece of “Twilight” merchandise? Discuss in the comments! Check out everything we’ve got on “The Twilight Saga: Eclipse.” For young Hollywood news, fashion and “Twilight” updates around the clock, visit HollywoodCrush.MTV.com . Related Videos MTV Rough Cut: Taylor Lautner MTV Rough Cut: Robert Pattinson MTV Rough Cut: Kristen Stewart Related Photos ‘Eclipse’ Stars In New York “Eclipse” Premieres In Los Angeles Behind The Scenes At “Eclipse” Premiere In Los Angeles

See the rest here:
Taylor Lautner Says ‘Twilight’ Merchandise Can Be ‘So Weird’

‘Eclipse’: The Reviews Are In!

Some reviewers agree with one critic who praised the novelty of a blockbuster saga centered on ‘a girl’s primal dream of being desired.’ By Eric Ditzian Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson in “Eclipse” Photo: Summit Would it be an exaggeration to say “Eclipse” is the most polarizing film of the year so far? In one corner, you have the Twilighters lining up outside theaters across the country to be among the first to check out the latest romance-laden adventure starring Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Lautner. Those fans will line up again and again before the weekend is over, likely bringing “Eclipse” an opening box-office haul to match, if not exceed, the $142.8 million that “New Moon” grossed in November. In the other corner, you’ve got the skeptics, the who-watches-this-crap haters and the bloggers taking to the Web to spew vitriol at every moment of teen romance “Eclipse” has to offer. There will be no d

Salon’s Walsh Jumps the Shark — Calls GOP Senators Bigots for Invoking Manhattan’s Upper West Side

Did you know that calling attention to an area where a Supreme Court justice nominee is from, which happens to be a well-known bastion of liberalism, is bigoted ?  If you didn’t, you want to take a look at the wisdom of Salon.com’s Joan Walsh. In her June 28 post “It’s not even coded bigotry anymore,” Walsh argued that references to SCOTUS nominee Elena Kagan’s Upper West Side of Manhattan roots are bigoted -since the neighborhood has Jewish features, references to it are anti-Semitic and as she puts it, “not even coded.” “That said, Republicans on the Senate Judicial Committee are trying to make the case she’s outside the mainstream of American jurisprudence, by attacking her clerking for (and admiring) legal giant Thurgood Marshall, the first African American Supreme Court justice, while singling her out as a denizen of ‘Manhattan’s Upper West Side’ – you know, the neighborhood known for Zabar’s and bagels and, well, Jews,” Walsh wrote. Walsh wasn’t clear about what she thinks these Senate Republicans are trying to accomplish. Conventional wisdom suggests Kagan will be easily confirmed, but pointing out the neighborhood she is from, with documented evidence of having an ideological liberal leaning , is going to accomplish what? She also took a stab at ranking Senate Judiciary Committee Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, with her own efforts to be coded – by invoking his middle name, “Beauregard.” (Remember when liberals hemmed and hawed over using President Barack Obama’s middle name, “Hussein,” as if that were a coded effort to suggest he was Muslim ?) Her beef with Sessions was that he voiced his disapproval of judicial activism. “Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions of Alabama, who wasn’t crazy about Sonia Sotomayor, you’ll recall, denounced Kagan having ‘associated herself with well-known activist judges who have used their power to redefine the meaning of our constitution and have the result of advancing that judge’s preferred social policies,’ and he cited Marshall, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund leader who argued Brown vs. Board of Education,” Walsh wrote. Therefore with that evidence, Walsh declared any GOP senator that opposes Kagan a bigot. “So there you have it. Unable to find any personal statements by Kagan they can use to prove she’s beyond the pale, so to speak – no ‘wise Latina’ moments on her transcripts – they deride her for coming from the Upper West Side, and admiring one of the heroes of American justice, who happens to be black,” Walsh wrote. “Stay tuned for more not-so-coded bigotry from the GOP.”

Original post:
Salon’s Walsh Jumps the Shark — Calls GOP Senators Bigots for Invoking Manhattan’s Upper West Side

Obama Can Shut Down Internet For 4 Months Under New Emergency Powers

President Obama will be handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the floor. The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency. Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor. In response to widespread criticism of the bill, language was added that would force the government to seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Still, this would hand Obama the authority to shut down the Internet on a whim without Congressional oversight or approval for a period of no less than four months. The Senators pushing the bill rejected the claim that the bill was a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet, not by denying that Obama would be given the authority to shut down the Internet as part of this legislation, but by arguing that he already had the power to do so. They argued “That the President already had authority under the Communications Act to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” when there is a “state or threat of war”, reports the Sydney Morning Herald. ears that the legislation is aimed at bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the U.S. government in an offensive against free speech were heightened further on Sunday, when Lieberman revealed that the plan was to mimic China’s policies of policing the web with censorship and coercion. “Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN’s Candy Crowley. While media and public attention is overwhelmingly focused on the BP oil spill, the establishment is quietly preparing the framework that will allow Obama, or indeed any President who follows him, to bring down a technological iron curtain that will give the government a foot in the door on seizing complete control over the Internet. As we have illustrated, fears surrounding cybersecurity have been hyped to mask the real agenda behind the bill, which is to strangle the runaway growth of alternative and independent media outlets which are exposing government atrocities, cover-ups and cronyism like never before. Indeed, China uses similar rhetoric about the need to maintain “security” and combating cyber warfare by regulating the web, when in reality their entire program is focused around silencing anyone who criticizes the state. The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers. added by: im1mjrpain

CNN’s Acosta and Costello Parrot Obama Talking Points on Offshore Drilling Moratorium

CNN’s Carol Costello and Jim Acosta revealed their disdain for a federal judge’s decision to overturn the Obama administration’s 6-month moratorium on offshore drilling when the expert they interviewed on the June 25 “American Morning” made a convincing case against the moratorium. Tom Bower, an author who has written extensively on the oil industry, tried to explain the devastating economic impact the moratorium would inflict on an already beleaguered industry, but Costello and Acosta were blinded by ideology: “But isn’t safety more important than money?” queried Costello. “Because, I mean, these oil companies make massive amounts of money each day.” Bower, author of “Oil, Money, Politics and Power in the 21st Century,” drew the ire of Costello and Acosta for calling the Gulf oil spill an “aberration” and noting the oil industry’s “phenomenal” overall safety record.      “But that’s what they say, it is just an aberration, but the BP disaster happened,” argued Costello. “Nobody thought that could happen either. So, it’s just not logical, is it, that argument?” “What do you mean they’re doing a very good job on the whole down there?” demanded Acosta. “I don’t know what that means. In what sense? You know, I mean, this entire body of water is at risk right now. It has been poisoned. And I’m just curious, what do you mean by doing a good job?” Taking aim at Republicans and moderate Democrats like Sen. Mary Landrieu (La.) who continue to support offshore drilling, Acosta asked Bower: “I’m just curious, you know, is there a little bit of a having your cake and eat it too, when it comes to some of these Gulf Coast politicians saying we want the jobs and the protection from any environmental impact at the same time?” Loaded questions designed to advance the White House’s narrative reflect Acosta’s underlying liberal tendencies. Costello also parroted the Obama administration’s narrative: Well, let’s talk about this moratorium because, and I’m just going to play devil’s advocate here. Let’s say — I mean, what’s wrong with these oil companies to stop drilling in the deepwater, these 33 wells, for four more months? Because that’s all we’re talking about when you take the moratorium in its entirety. What’s wrong with that? Bower’s response, unlike Costello’s sputtering rant, was succinct and nonpartisan: Well, the cost. We see each oil platform, each rig costs at least half a million dollars a day, and often more, and they just can’t afford that sort of equipment lying idle and the contractors will find other places around the world who want the rigs, and they’ll just take them there, so there’s just no choice. After dismissing the expert, Acosta, turning to Costello to offer his informed opinion, lamented that “it just doesn’t feel right, you know, to say that as a whole, the industry’s just doing a great job down there.” The transcript of the segment can be found below: CNN American Morning 6/25/10 6:41 a.m. CAROL COSTELLO, co-host: The Obama administration loses another effort to put a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf. But does lifting that ban serve our nation’s best interests? You know, Bonnie is talking about this storm coming in. JIM ACOSTA, co-host: Yeah.                      COSTELLO: Wouldn’t it be a good idea if they continue to stop drilling on those 33 rigs — you know that are affected by this? ACOSTA: It’s another potential complication for this whole thing. COSTELLO: Yes. We’re going to get really into that with author Tom Bower, who has written a lot on BP and the oil industry. It’s 41 minutes past the hour. ACOSTA: Welcome back to the “Most News in the Morning.” You know, a showdown looms this morning over offshore drilling. A federal judge denied the administration’s request to postpone an order that would end a six-month moratorium. COSTELLO: That means if anyone wants to start up the deep water drills, they certainly can, but the White House says it will introduce a new ban in a few days. We wanted to know what a moratorium really means for safety though. Is it really necessary? Joining us from London this morning: Tom Bower, who is the author of “Oil, Money, Politics and Power in the 21st Century.” Good morning, sir. TOM BOWER, author of “Oil, Money, Politics and Power in the 21st Century”: Good morning. COSTELLO: Well, let’s talk about this moratorium because, and I’m just going to play devil’s advocate here. Let’s say — I mean, what’s wrong with these oil companies to stop drilling in the deepwater, these 33 wells, for four more months? Because that’s all we’re talking about when you take the moratorium in its entirety. What’s wrong with that? BOWER: Well, the cost. We see each oil platform, each rig costs at least half a million dollars a day, and often more, and they just can’t afford that sort of equipment lying idle and the contractors will find other places around the world who want the rigs, and they’ll just take them there, so there’s just no choice. COSTELLO: But isn’t safety more important than money? Because, I mean, these oil companies make massive amounts of money each day. BOWER: Well of course, safety is critical. As we’ve now seen, the catastrophe follows if these are not safe. But on the whole, all the oil corporations are working safely. This is just an aberration. COSTELLO: But that’s what they say, it is just an aberration, but the BP disaster happened. Nobody thought that could happen either. So, it’s just not logical, is it, that argument? BOWER: We don’t stop driving on the road because of a car crash. People carry on driving and people walk up staircases and fall down them, but we still walk up stairs. So in the end — ACOSTA: Totally different when you’re talking about an entire body of water as important as the Gulf of Mexico. I mean, the question that I have is we’ve heard the governor of Louisiana, and I’m sure you watch him closely as well, Bobby Jindal, you know, talk about why this moratorium should be lifted for the sake of jobs and so forth. But at the same time, the governor is saying we need to built berms, we need to do all these other things to protect our coastline, and I’m just curious, you know, is there a little bit of a having your cake and eat it, too, when it comes to some of these Gulf Coast politicians saying we want the jobs and the protection from any environmental impact at the same time? BOWER: Look, I’m not an apologist for the oil industry, but I must tell you that on the whole, their record is very good. And America needs the oil, it needs the gas, and the product in the Gulf has been superb, and they’re doing very good job down there on the whole. So, you know, just like we don’t stop fly when a plane crashes, you just got to improve the regulation — ACOSTA: What do you mean they’re doing a very good job on the whole down there? I don’t know what that means. In what sense? You know, I mean, this entire body of water is at risk right now. It has been poisoned. And I’m just curious, what do you mean by doing a good job? Because the other day, there were CEOs from the entire oil industry testifying on Capitol Hill saying that if they were to also engage in deepwater oil drilling, they essentially have the same plan of action in place if there is a major catastrophe, which is, well, we just have to, you know, see if we can plug the hole. BOWER: Look, again, I can only say I’m not an apologist for the industry, but they are extracting amazing amounts of oil from the most difficult conditions. You got to ask why they’re in the Gulf and not getting it from Mexico, Venezuela or Russia. That’s one of the great issues. ACOSTA: Are you saying that we basically put ourselves in this position? I mean, is that your point? BOWER: I think the countries have gotten the oil to put America in that position. But on the whole, they have done a very good job in the Gulf and the executives who testified on the Hill like (INAUDIBLE) have not had these sort of catastrophes that BP is just having. So, I got to repeat on the whole, they’ve done an amazing job to find oil and gas there, and they are bringing it out safely. The point is that the administration discovered that the regulators, the MMS have done a very poor job so the government has got some of the blame here. They’ve let the oil corporations get away with murder for too long. They’ve now learned a lesson. They’ll clearly have much better regulations down in the Gulf and elsewhere as well, because, believe me, they’re going to have to start digging for oil and drilling for oil off other coastlines around the U.S. again in the near future because America needs the oil. COSTELLO: Funny you mentioned that because BP is doing that, you know, off the shores of Alaska and it’s doing this maneuver where they’re drilling it’s three miles offshore, they drilling down very deeply, and then they’re going to make a horizontal line, something that’s never been done before. So, BP, itself, is being allowed to go ahead with this process when we know that BP doesn’t have it together when it comes to extreme disasters and how to fix things. BOWER: You’re absolutely right. The horizontal drilling is really quite well established now. There’s nothing new on that. That is a very effective way of getting huge amounts of oil out which previously would have got lost. But I think BP has learned a lesson. I don’t think they’re going to make that sort of error again. They’re going to be more careful than ever. They can’t afford another catastrophe nor can any other oil corporation. I mean, you just got to set the seed that of course oil is a very risky business as I show in the book. What they’ve done down in the Gulf is quite phenomenal. This is a catastrophe which never should have happened. Everyone is learning lessons. They’re going to do their best to prevent it from happening again, but the government has got as much responsibility now as the oil corporations to make sure that the regulations are there and enforced. COSTELLO: Tom Bower, many thanks to you this morning. We appreciate it. BOWER: Pleasure. ACOSTA: I’m not sure I agree that they’re doing a bang-up job down there, but that’s just my take on it. COSTELLO: You mean BP or the oil industry as a whole? Because I think he was separating them out. ACOSTA: I think he was trying to separate it, but it just doesn’t feel right, you know, to say that as a whole, the industry’s just doing a great job down there. COSTELLO: It’s sort of like you have to trust them that catastrophes similar to what’s happening with BP doesn’t happen again. And the oil companies are saying, “well, we have a great safety record.” But BP said that, too. ACOSTA: Yes. We can’t go on like this. We’ll move on. –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow you on Twitter.

Read more:
CNN’s Acosta and Costello Parrot Obama Talking Points on Offshore Drilling Moratorium

Ludacris Says Nicki Minaj And Lil’ Kim Should Make A Record Together

Luda insists that a Minaj-Kim collabo would ‘kill the entire industry.’ By Mawuse Ziegbe Ludacris Photo: MTV News What’s a good way for Lil’ Kim and Nicki Minaj to resolve their issues ? Do a collabo, says Ludacris. If the two rap divas put their bewigged heads together and traded rhymes on a song, Luda thinks minds would blown by the resulting track. “I think if Lil’ Kim and Nicki Minaj do a record together it’s gonna kill the entire industry,” Luda told MTV News. He added that the two femcees should take advantage of the lack of high-profile ladies in the game right now: “You don’t have that many women in the industry so the lane is wide open.” The ATL rapper insisted that the two should work on music not only for themselves, but for their fans as well. “The fact that we have females out there that’s going back and forth — and I’m not saying it’s either one’s fault — I feel like y’all need to come together and squash all this bulls— and make records together,” Luda said. “Because [there’s] a lot of women that wanna hear what the hell y’all got to say.” Other MCs have weighed in on the controversy as well. Miami hip-hop queen Trina said the Minaj and Kim drama reflects on all femcees. “This makes us all look bad. There’s barely any female artists as is — we don’t need this,” Trina told MTV News. 50 Cent said that Kim should calm down with the swagger-jacking accusations because there is a lack of female hip-hop artists for Minaj to be inspired by. “It’s obvious … she was inspired by some of Kim’s [style]. But that’s not bad. There’s not a whole lot of female artists that you can make reference to, so you’ll see those little influences even stronger,” 50 said in an interview with Power 98.3 FM in Phoenix. Hip-hop vet Rah Digga also said the stars should keep it about the music. “My advice to everybody is just do you,” Digga told MTV. “Make your music, don’t pay attention to what’s going on around you, just do what you do best and let the fans blog it out.” Do you think Nicki Minaj and Lil’ Kim should collaborate on a song? Sound off in the comments below! Related Artists Ludacris Lil’ Kim Nicki Minaj

See more here:
Ludacris Says Nicki Minaj And Lil’ Kim Should Make A Record Together

Hydropower Without Dams: Alaskan Village Powered Entirely by New Hydrokinetic River Turbine

photo: Business Wire A couple weeks back when writing about whether hydropower really should be considered a clean power source , there were a couple varieties that were left out. Thanks to the remote town of Eagle, Alaska we can highlight one of them. It’s there that Alaska Power & Telephone has installed a new hydroki… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read the original:
Hydropower Without Dams: Alaskan Village Powered Entirely by New Hydrokinetic River Turbine

The Roots Are At ‘Crossroads’ On How I Got Over, Says ?uestlove

‘You really don’t hear any hip-hoppers dare use the word ‘midlife crisis,’ the drummer tells MTV News. By Mawuse Ziegbe, with reporting by Steven Roberts ?uestlove Photo: MTV News The Roots’ long hip-hop career is rivaled by only a few acts. With the release of their 11th studio album, How I Got Over, however, the Philly collective shows it can still push boundaries, exploring some fairly un-hip-hop themes. “The whole premise of How I Got Over is basically … a coming-of-age record,” ?uestlove told MTV News last week of their latest effort, which came out Tuesday (June 22). The Roots drummer added that the band wanted to switch things up and touch on some thought-provoking themes, a practice he said is more typical of rock than hip-hop. “There hasn’t been a real precedent of anyone being at the crossroads [in hip-hop]. I hear [it] a lot in rock records … where it’s sort of like, ‘I’m at a point in my life where I don’t know what to do and things are happening around me.’ ” The Grammy-winning group known for keeping a tireless touring schedule has more recently eased up on the concert dates, putting down roots as the house band for NBC’s “Late Night With Jimmy Fallon.” The band has no doubt arrived at an enviable level of success for an act that dropped its first effort back in ’93. Still, ?uest explained that the group wanted to get candid on How I Got Over about the issues confronting them at this stage in the game. “You really don’t hear any hip-hoppers talking about some sort of … existential existence of God or even dare use the word ‘midlife crisis’ in any of their verses. So we wanted to make a completely honest record.” But How I Got Over isn’t all existential musings, ?uestlove insisted. The drummer points to tracks like the upbeat “The Fire,” which features soul singer John Legend, who also happens to be working on a collaborative album with the legendary Roots crew. “As far as ‘The Fire’ is concerned, we wanted to balance the record out also, with a sign of hope, a ray of hope,” ?uest said. ” ‘The Fire’ is … almost an anthem, if you will. It’s like a hang-on-in-there, if you will, for us.” Are you glad to hear the Roots will touch on some more complex subjects on their next album? Tell us in the comments!

Continue reading here:
The Roots Are At ‘Crossroads’ On How I Got Over, Says ?uestlove