Tag Archives: words

Imagine If a Conervative Had Said It: Child- and Cop-killer Edition

Remember when media liberals were insisting ( falsely, by the way ) that RedState’s Erick Erickson had advocated shooting a census taker? Well imagine that a journalist had approached, say, Dick Armey and the following exchange had ensued. Then try to imagine what the media’s response would be. JOURNO: Obviously you don’t believe in killing census workers. ARMEY: Umm, not in that context, no sir. No, no. JOURNO: Okay, in what context? ARMEY: Just for the sake of this interview, no context. I don’t believe in that. There are too many other government forces out here that are much more powerful that I as a man would focus on. I wouldn’t focus on the census workers, sir, I’d focus on the police. Replace “census workers” with “babies” and “government” with “white,” and you have the exact statement from Malik Zulu Shabazz, leader of the New Black Panther Party, made in an interview with Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher (video below the fold). “So,” writes Tabitha Hale at RedState, “just for the sake of this interview, killing white babies is not okay. But those other times, in the proper context? It’s totally okay. You know, as long as the crackers are out of the way.” Mark Potok, please call your office . Oh the howling that would ensue if any Tea Party leader, let alone the head of a prominent organization like FreedomWorks, made a statement like that. “Killing census workers is not as productive as killing cops,” is what it would, rightly, be boiled down to. Shabazz is saying that he considers violence towards police officers to be a more productive activity in battling white people than killing their children. Phew. What a relief. Where is the media on this? Where is Chris Matthews to devote an entire hour-long special to the dangers of militant black supremacy groups, as he did with the Tea Party? Where is Rachel Maddow to devote an hour of her time to warning viewers that violent rhetoric can incite violent action, as she did in the context of the Oklahoma City bombing, naturally blaming it on conservatives? Where is Joe Klein to remind us of the definition of sedition — “conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state, in his words — and to accuse these groups of ” rubbing right up close ” to doing just that? Where are the host of media personalities who painted the Hutaree militia and a vague threat of “right-wing extremism” as the biggest threat to American peace since 9/11? They are all silent, because accusing the New Black Panthers of fomenting violence does not fit the narrative — it does not serve their political ends. And this is not some obscure member of the group holding a sign demanding that we “water the tree of liberty” — to use a Tea Party equivalent. This is the leader of a prominent (for a wacky fringe group) organization issuing a thinly-veiled endorsement of violence against police officers. The lack of condemnation even remotely similar to the hit jobs on the Tea Party movement is quite telling.

Continued here:
Imagine If a Conervative Had Said It: Child- and Cop-killer Edition

‘The Girl Who Played With Fire’: Middling, By Kurt Loder

Cyber-icon seeks better movie. By Kurt Loder Noomi Rapace in “The Girl Who Played with Fire” Photo: Music Box Films The good news about “The Girl Who Played With Fire” is that hacker-punk avenger Lisbeth Salander is right at the center of it. In “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo,” the first movie drawn from Swedish author Stieg Larsson’s “Millennium Trilogy,” Salander (Noomi Rapace) was a bit peripheral, a sort of cyber-sidekick to investigative journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) on his quest to solve a 40-year-old mystery involving a secretive industrial clan. Here, she’s the focus of the story, which is more of a straight-ahead thriller, and unsurprisingly, she’s a treat to watch. At the end of the first film, Salander had taken off to the Caribbean with millions of dollars of bad-guy cash. Now she’s back in Stockholm, paying a visit to her sleazy social-worker custodian, Bjurman (Peter Andersson), whose last encounter with his angry ward left him with a new appreciation for tasers and an unexpected collection of nasty tattoos. Meanwhile, Blomkvist has commissioned a sensational story for his magazine by two young reporters — a blockbuster expose about sex trafficking that incriminates a score of government big shots. Then the reporters are murdered, and Salander’s fingerprints are found on the gun that killed them. The gun belonged to Bjurman, and it turns out he’s dead, too. Salander is suddenly on the run, and determined to find the truth about the murders. Blomkvist is, too — he knows his odd little friend is innocent. The story expands into areas of espionage, corruption and sexual abuse, with a towering white-haired killer lumbering into the action in the service of a vile Russian thug. We also learn about the devastating childhood incident that landed Salander in a mental institution (and gives the movie its name). There’s a lot of stuff happening, in other words. But the best parts are pure Lisbeth. She takes her taser and makeup box along to pay a visit to another sex pig (they’re her mission in life), and leaves him tied up like a very sad clown. She takes on a trio of greasy bikers and leaves them deeply wishing she hadn’t. We also get a glimpse of her sensitive side (who knew she had one?) in an artfully shot lesbian sex scene. Noomi Rapace owns this iconic character, and even though we’re getting more of her here, we can’t get enough. The bad news about the movie is that it’s not well-made. It’s a chopped-down Swedish TV movie, and it looks it. Niels Arden Oplev, who directed the first film, is here replaced by its second-unit director, Daniel Alfredson, who brought along a new writer and cinematographer, too. The picture is flat and disjointed, and some of its gaudier elements (the white-haired killer might have drifted in from an old Bond movie) aren’t as much fun as you keep wishing they were. There’s also the usual ungainliness of any middle installment of a movie series — we have to wait for the story’s ambiguities and unanswered questions to be clarified in the final film, “The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest,” which is due out here in the fall. The bad news about that picture is that it was also made by Arden, back-to-back with this one. Lisbeth Salander’s most formidable opponent may turn out to be her director. Don’t miss Kurt Loder’s reviews of “Predators and “The Kids Are All Right,” also new in theaters this week. Check out everything we’ve got on “The Girl Who Played With Fire.” For breaking news, celebrity columns, humor and more — updated around the clock — visit MTVMoviesBlog.com .

Visit link:
‘The Girl Who Played With Fire’: Middling, By Kurt Loder

Off to Sweden? Elin Woods Given "Wide Latitude" Over Custody Decisions in Tiger Split

One of the burning questions surrounding the Tiger Woods divorce settlement is where Elin Nordegren and the couple’s children will live once the split is final. That’s still unclear, but it appears as if she will call the shots. Sources familiar with the divorce say Elin Woods will have control over where they reside, opening the door for her to potentially settle in her native Sweden. The agreement was supposed to be finalized by the end of last week, but there is still one document being negotiated – presumably pertaining to the kids. No wonder Tiger’s been so frustrated and distracted lately. CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION : Tiger’s almost single at last! Woo! As for the property settlement, we reported last week that Elin will get right around $100 million , somewhere between 1/5 and 1/6 of Tiger’s net worth. In other words, he’s worth between $500-600 million. All those earlier reports of her getting $750 million? Probably a little over the top, considering he doesn’t even have that much. Still, $100 million. Wow. As for whether Elin actually moves to Sweden permanently with the kids, it’s uncertain. But the divorce deal gives her ” wide latitude ” in figuring it out. What do you think she should do? Leave for good?

Continued here:
Off to Sweden? Elin Woods Given "Wide Latitude" Over Custody Decisions in Tiger Split

Lindsay Lohan’s Lawyer Says Fingernail ‘Could Barely Be Seen By The Naked Eye’

Lohan’s ‘penalty is far harsher than what others would have received under similar circumstances,’ Shawn Chapman Holley says in a statement. By Jocelyn Vena, with reporting by Gil Kaufman Lindsay Lohan in court on Tuesday Photo: Dave McNew/ Getty Images After Lindsay Lohan was sentenced to 90 days in jail to be followed by 90 days in rehab for violating her probation, the actress’ lawyer is speaking out. “Ms. Lohan and I are extremely disappointed in the sentence handed down by Judge Revel,” Lohan’s attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, told MTV News in a statement Thursday (July 8). “We believe that the penalty is far harsher than what others would have received under similar circumstances. “The reality is that Ms. Lohan, like most defendants, had to balance work commitments with court requirements,” the statement continues. “To be punished so severely for doing so, particularly in light of the fact that she substantially complied with each of her probationary conditions, is harsh and unfair. Ms. Lohan is prepared to serve her jail time and to comply with the court’s orders.” Holley also defended her client’s decision to come to court with the message “f— u” stenciled on her middle finger . “With respect to Ms. Lohan’s nails, the fact is, the words could barely be seen by the naked eye,” she explained. “That a courtroom camera, purportedly there to accurately chronicle the proceedings, would use a telephoto lens to zoom in as it did to Ms. Lohan’s fingernail is a commentary on the entire issue.” Lohan also responded to the controversy surrounding her nail art in a Twitter post Wednesday. “Didn’t we do our nails as a joke with our friend DC?” she tweeted. “It had nothing to do w/court. It’s an airbrush design from a stencil xx.” Do you believe that Lohan’s punishment was unfair? Tell us in the comments! Related Photos Lindsay Lohan Goes To Court The Highs And Lows Of Lindsay Lohan Related Artists Lindsay Lohan

Link:
Lindsay Lohan’s Lawyer Says Fingernail ‘Could Barely Be Seen By The Naked Eye’

Lindsay Lohan Is Going To Jail… Still Hot

I’m sure you’ve all heard by now that Lindsay Lohan has been sentenced to 90 days in jail for violating probation or being an all around self righteous lady douche or something along those lines, but did you also know that she had the words F@#k U written on her fingernail the whole sentencing. Me neither, but the folks over at

See the original post:
Lindsay Lohan Is Going To Jail… Still Hot

LeBron James Launches Twitter Feed

Basketball star accumulates 200,000 followers in 24 hours as he decides which NBA team to sign with next. By Kyle Anderson LeBron James Photo: Elsa/Getty Images For the past week, the country has been eagerly anticipating the answer to a pressing question. No, not “How will the Gulf of Mexico recover from this oil spill?” Rather, it is “Where will LeBron James play basketball next?” The dynamic and multitalented James, who is friends with Jay-Z and who last year starred in a documentary about his high school hoops team , became a free agent on July 1 and has been fielding offers from a number of NBA teams for his services. While he searches for a new contract (and possibly a new city), he recently acquired something he has never had before: his own verified Twitter account. James made his Twitter debut on Tuesday, identifying himself as the “King of Akron” in his bio description. “Hello World, the Real King James is in the Building ‘Finally,’ ” he wrote in his first (and so far only) tweet. “My Brother @oneandonlycp3 gas’d me up to jump on board so I’m here. Haaaa.” Clearly there was demand for James’ thoughts on the service, as he has accumulated nearly 216,000 followers in less than 24 hours. James was referring to fellow basketball star (and free agent) Chris Paul, who has been a star for the New Orleans Hornets and is also in search of a new home. Rumors have swirled that Paul and James would be signed together as a package deal, though they are both playing their decisions close to the vest. “Couldn’t convince him to tell me which team he’s goin to but convinced him to join twitter lol…my brother from another mother,” Paul tweeted . On Tuesday night, James said he would announce his decision during a special ESPN telecast on Thursday at 9 p.m. ET. Oddsmakers seem to believe he is headed to the Chicago Bulls, but the Cleveland Cavaliers (his team for the past six seasons), Miami Heat, New York Knicks and Los Angeles Clippers have all made pitches to him. Where do you think LeBron James will end up? Let us know in the comments! Related Photos If LeBron James Played On A Movie Team

See the article here:
LeBron James Launches Twitter Feed

Bozell Column: Oliver’s Ugly America

Oliver Stone shocked many when his movie “World Trade Center” was released in 2006. It was a masterpiece, a meditation on two firemen trapped in a darkened tomb of broken concrete, twisted metal and shattered glass. They had rushed headlong into the collapsing skyscrapers, only to be buried alive. So many of their colleagues died, but in the end these heroes were located by searchers and rescued. Stone maintained it wasn’t a political movie, and for the most part, it wasn’t. It was a personal story. But this movie was also a gift to our country, a reminder not to forget this dark day’s victims and its heroes. It was only political in that it was patriotic. It reminded us all across our country of how our fellow Americans in Washington, New York and Pennsylvania were mercilessly murdered. It came closest to politics (or patriotism) when the firemen were found by a man who vowed to join the War on Terror. Sadly, that was but a brief hiccup in Stone’s career, a befuddling, out-of-character career move. In most of his movies, Oliver Stone is clearly not a fan of America, both her leaders and her policies. Think “Born on the Fourth of July,” “Platoon,” “JFK,” “Nixon” and “W.” Now he is promoting a new documentary called “South of the Border,” which debuted June 25. Its philosophy is illustrated by the poster: The American eagle’s talon is pierced by a large thorn coming out of a blood-red South America. It’s no overstatement to say Stone deeply adores the trend of Yanqui-bashing leftists coming to power, from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to Evo Morales in Bolivia to Lula da Silva in Brazil. In a recent interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Stone vouched for Chavez, endorsing him as “absolutely” a “good person.” When asked about Chavez’s censorship of opposition press, he claimed there was none. “There’s no pattern of censorship in this country. I’ve been there,” proclaimed this geopolitical expert. “So, you can see it. You can go down to South America, spend three days, and you’ll see the most vibrant opposition in the world.” Stone somehow missed the Venezuelan penal code from 2005, which states: “Anyone who offends with his words or in writing or in any other way disrespects the President of the Republic or whomever is fulfilling his duties will be punished with prison of 6 to 30 months if the offense is serious and half of that if it is light.” Oh, and that sanction applies to those who “disrespect” the president or his flunkies in private, too. At the unveiling of “South of the Border” at the Venice Film Festival last September, Time’s Richard Corliss reported that Stone and Chavez appeared in matching dark jackets, white shirts and red ties. When the festival announcer introduced Stone and not Chavez, Stone grabbed the strongman’s hand and raised it overhead like they were presidential running mates. The crowd screamed in support, Stone holding hands with a man who famously suggested our last president was Satan. It’s not merely that Stone is infatuated with Chavez. He doesn’t seem to consider, in his flowery “most vibrant opposition in the world” exclamation, that his last make-believe movie on clueless George W. Bush (and his bullying father George H.W. Bush) could not have been made in Venezuela if the subject were that country’s president. Stone would be in prison. This kind of performance reminds me of how Stone scorned the evil dominance of America right after 9/11. On Oct. 6, 2001, he participated in a panel discussion where he proclaimed that six companies have control of the world. (These all-powerful conglomerates were actually entertainment companies: AOL Time Warner; Disney; Fox’s parent, News Corporation; Sony; Viacom; and Vivendi Universal.) Stone said the six represented “the new world order … And I think the revolt of Sept. 11 was about ‘F—- you. F—- your order.’” He also wondered, “Does anybody make a connection between the 2000 (presidential) election and the events of Sept. 11?” The United States has provided great latitude to filmmakers mocking our presidents — even imagining the assassination of our last president — and somehow still, America, with all its freedoms offered to Hollywood, is mocked as an evil empire. It is absolutely surreal that Stone would ever make a movie like “World Trade Center,” which made heart-warming heroes out of Americans. Stone isn’t just a critic of America, but of Americans, yet there’s a certain paradox here. On the one hand, we want to dominate, exploit and enslave the world. On the other, we’re powerless, rudderless puppets to those who roll over us and dominate. Stone somehow remains blind to the sweet land of liberty that allows him to stab that eagle in the foot with all of his might.

Go here to read the rest:
Bozell Column: Oliver’s Ugly America

Norah Specifies What Kind Of Butts Boehner Likes

The fall-out from Lazy-Gate continues.  After rolling a clip of John Boehner rebutting Joe Scarborough’s assertion that the GOP House leader is lazy, Norah O’Donnell got into the act, with some [presumably] unintentional humor. Seconding Scarborough’s suggestion that Boehner is known to hang out in bars, O’Donnell declared on today’s Morning Joe that: “There’s been a reputation that John Boehner likes his butts and he likes his booze.” Realizing that her words lent themselves to more than one interpretation, Norah clarified . . . O’DONNELL: Meaning cigarette butts. Which in turn provoked a big round of belly-laughs on the Morning Joe set.

See the original post here:
Norah Specifies What Kind Of Butts Boehner Likes

Andrew Garfield Is The New Spider-Man

Sony has announced that the relative unknown will play Peter Parker in the upcoming ‘Spider-Man’ reboot. By Josh Wigler Andrew Garfield Photo: Getty Images Spider-Man’s secret identity is no longer a secret: Andrew Garfield is officially the new man under the superhero’s mask. Sony Pictures has announced that Garfield (“The Social Network,” “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus”) will portray Peter Parker in director Marc Webb’s forthcoming “Spider-Man” reboot . Based on a screenplay written by James Vanderbilt, the new “Spider-Man” film is said to bring the web-slinging hero back to his high school roots, meaning that the 27-year-old Garfield will need to tap into his inner teenage angst for the comic book role. “Though his name may be new to many, those who know this young actor’s work understand his extraordinary talents,” Webb said of Garfield’s casting. “He has a rare combination of intelligence, wit and humanity. Mark my words, you will love Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker.” In a joint statement, Sony Pictures Entertainment co-chairman Amy Pascal and President of Columbia Pictures Matt Tolmach said: “Spider-Man is a classic superhero — a young man who balances his responsibility to serve humanity and crush evil with the shyness and normalcy of someone struggling to find himself. The role demands an extraordinary actor. You need someone who can magically transform himself from Peter Parker into Spider-Man. An actor who will depict the vulnerability of youth and the strength and confidence of a legendary figure at the same moment. We have found that actor in Andrew Garfield. From the first time we saw him in the upcoming film ‘The Social Network,’ to his glorious screen test, which floored all of us, we knew that we had found our new Peter Parker.” “I’m incredibly excited about Andrew Garfield,” added producer Avi Arad. “In the Spider-Man tradition, we were looking for a smart, sensitive, and cool new Peter Parker who can inspire us and make us laugh, cry, and cheer. We believe we have found the perfect choice to take on this role and lead us into the future.” The upcoming “Spider-Man” reboot will be shot in 3-D and is scheduled to hit theaters on July 3, 2012. In winning the role of Peter Parker, Garfield beat out an extensive list of rumored candidates ranging from “Kick-Ass” star Aaron Johnson to “Journey to the Center of the Earth” actor Josh Hutcherson . Garfield succeeds outgoing star Tobey Maguire, who played the superhero in three previous Sam Raimi-directed films. For breaking news and previews of the latest comic book movies — updated around the clock — visit SplashPage.MTV.com .

View original post here:
Andrew Garfield Is The New Spider-Man

BP Spill Bill Advances in the Senate

Photo via TMC Net This legislation seems like a no-brainer: A bill that takes steps to prevent another such disaster, in the wake of the worst oil spill in the history of both the Gulf and the United States. Thankfully, such a bill — one that requires deep water drilling be better regulated, demands oil companies employ more preventative measures and have thorough response plans, and eliminates the ‘liability cap’ on how much those companies must pay in damages when they cause a spill — is advancing in the Senate. In other words, it may not be long before we see a ‘BP spill bill’. Here are th… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read the original post:
BP Spill Bill Advances in the Senate