Rex Kickass

So, remember those ACORN videos? The one where the guy dressed up like a pimp trying to get ACORN to "break the law?" Well the kid who did them got arrested by the FBI this week for tampering and attempting to wiretap Senator Landrieu's phone system. He posted bond to get out of jail... and the judge released the 25 year old under the condition that he goes back and lives with his parents. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/...efe_to_live.php There's something so great about someone who consistently behaves like a petulant child to get notoriety getting treated like a petulant child when he breaks the law.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 01:59 PM) J D Salinger dead at 91 That's sad.

CNN has made a signficant effort in the last year to provide as middle of the road reporting as they can with the staff they have. I think, to a degree, that they have succeeded. I also think, they've also made some horrible choices in what and how they cover stories too. On the basis of fair coverage, I would go down the line and say BBC, PBS, NPR, CNN.

That's assuming he even survives his primary.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 09:31 PM) Thanks for elevating the discussion. Stay classy, kap.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 12:39 AM) Again, he was campaigning. It's all the man knows how to do. "CHANGE". Yea, ok. "Words, just words". That's about all. You've said the same thing over and over again for two years. And frankly, its not true. If all he knew how to do was campaign, he'd probably be doing a lot better in the polls and so would the Democrats.

Howard Zinn has died.

I only saw bits and pieces, but Obama kinda shat on everyone today. Democrats and Republicans. Can't say I agreed with his whole speech, but I was sorta impressed at how much he came off like an insult comic at times.

So PPP did a poll about what news is most trusted. The winner is Fox News. But why? Because Liberals and Moderates trust everyone about equally except for Fox News. And Conservatives only trust Fox News. And its more belief than trust at this point. Conservatives: FOX NEWS: 75/13 CNN: 22/60 ABC NEWS: 16/67 NBC NEWS: 15/66 CBS NEWS: 14/68 Moderates: CNN: 47/31 NBC NEWS: 44/33 CBS NEWS: 41/33 ABC NEWS: 39/34 FOX NEWS: 33/48 Liberals: NBC NEWS: 64/22 CNN: 63/21 CBS NEWS: 56/29 ABC NEWS: 50/31 FOX NEWS: 26/66 http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP...ational_126.pdf

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 01:57 PM) you dont have to buy a tablet every day. But at $599 to $799 plus tax, chances are you'll still be ahead given the lifespan of the average well used ipod touch. Newspapers also don't have costly glass screens that can easily crack.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 01:15 PM) Here's a reason. It's like reading a newspaper. But reading a newspaper is like reading a newspaper. And its much cheaper. And you aren't sad when you leave it on the train accidentally.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 04:20 PM) Um... Based on previous standards, it is my guess that in 8 years, this man will be confirmed rapidly with a 91-4 vote in the Senate when President Palin appoints him to head the FCC. Update: Fox News goes into mourning. This is awesome. Hope they throw the book at these assholes.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 08:00 PM) Since he raised spending by 25% in his first year for most departments, that "spending freeze" is a pimple on an elephant's ass. If by 25% you mean 7%, you'd be right. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/26...ns-health-care/

Fences is my jam right now actually.

I don't enjoy the Green Limousine.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 10:45 AM) Well it looks like the R's will pick up there 2nd seat for sure. This time DE, as Beau Biden says he will wait until 2014 to run. There's still time in DE. The Dems do have a deep bench and Biden's win was no means assured. It's a small state and there's a big Dem party in DE.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 11:41 AM) That's a complaint I can deal with - one against CBS for changing its practices. But even then I think financially they're probably forced to, and the guy in the commercial is a popular football player who's probably going to be a recognizable figure in the NFL. Honestly, I think that's where most of the anger comes from on this. Over the past few years CBS and the SuperBowl have rejected ads that have covered topics like eating vegetables instead of meat, churches that allow gay people to go to them, some crazy moveon ad, etc. In some cases, I'm sure there were legitimate content reasons to reject the ad - but in most, they cited "issue advocacy" as a reason to reject the ad and the money. Now, Focus on the Family, is using a sports player to broach a controversial issue in a setting that is, frankly, not an appropriate venue and also the most watched event of the year. And nobody is blinking an eye. Maybe this commercial is harmless, but the speculation from reports surrounding this commercial indicates that it grapples with a difficult issue and advocates a specific position. Instead, it seems to indicate that issue advocacy is A-OK this year, as long as it represents a conservative worldview. And that is concerning.

The commercial will probably be a lot less controversial than anyone on either side of the issue picks. However, I think some of the offense taken is legitimate. CBS and the SuperBowl has a history of rejecting advocacy group's ads - and I don't think there's any other legitimate definition of what Focus on the Family is.

The problem with the internet is that its so easy to wall yourself off. You only experience what you know you like, by and large. The fragmentation of audience has made providers more and more desperate to build an audience so it seems like any fad gets latched onto these days. And when it comes to newsworthy events, its more about outrage than anything else, followed by overreaction. We didn't act like this before. Case in point? Aviation. Yesterday, a flight from LGA to Louisville was diverted to Philly because an orthodox jewish teenager was wearing wearing tefillin and saying his morning prayers. Because a stewardess got hebrew and arabic concerned and decided that terrorists now bomb airplanes with leather webbing wrapped around their arms and small black boxes on their forehead. Do you realize that we actually were much more likely to experience terror in the air during the 1980s than now? In fact, US airliners experienced six such attacks and hijackings in a five year period during the 1980s. What do you think would happen if that happened now? Great piece on Salon by Ask The Pilot about this today. http://salon.com/news/air_travel/index.htm...erican_hysteria

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 22, 2010 -> 02:23 PM) Like everything, there's the good, and there's the bad. There's more information out there, which means more information that can be destorted. But at the same time, we have more news outlets with more exposure so things can't slip through the cracks as easily (though i guess some would argue if you have 2-3 people at the head of all of those outlets it really doesn't matter). Also, the fact that I can be arguing with someone about topic X, and be able to pull up the right answer on the interwebs on my phone within 30 seconds, is absolutely amazing. I dunno how this country functioned prior 2000. Seriously. I think we've become an angrier country for it.

I wonder if the internet is becoming a curse rather than a blessing. Last week, my roommate and I were talking about how life has changed in the last 20 years, especially politically. He's a good dozen years older than I am - and I asked him if it seemed to him that we started entering an outrage spiral in that time, where the policy or underlying meaning of something didn't matter so much as the offensive action that happened to overlay it. Where the story stopped being about the substance of an issue as much as how the issue or candidate or elected official is polling. In politics, do we care too much about momentum at the expense of our own daily lives? Has life become so fast that we've stopped using level heads and started relying solely on gut reaction? And is that a good thing?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2010 -> 10:52 AM) So the Dems lost because the unions weren't working hard enough to influence the election? Hmm, they ought to be applauding the supreme court in that case. Labor doesn't need more money to influence an election. It needs to inform its members. But organized labor won't take those steps unless they're asked to by the campaign they support. There is manpower cost and there are some organizational cost involved. This election was close enough that you have to wonder if Coakley campaigned instead of vacationed between Christmas and New Years if that would have been enough to shift the election those 5 points. Brown campaigned from day one. Coakley campaigned from January 6. Based on all the data that is coming out now, it seems like what holds true about this election more than anything is that your base will vote for you, but you have to show them the respect of asking for their vote.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 05:04 PM) I'm just kidding you. Sorry, politics makes me a sad panda lately.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 04:18 PM) You've learned to backpeddle quite well, Rex. I don't think being a realist equals backpedaling. But whatever.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 21, 2010 -> 03:13 PM) http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01...are.php?ref=fpa f*** you too, Obama. The session is open until January 2011. There's still 11 months to get this passed. This kind of makes sense and its really just a way to make sure that reconciliation happens. What you aren't seeing reported right now is back channel negotiation. Essentially, the Senate is going to agree to make some concessions to the house bill in reconciliation after the fact and the House will vote for the Senate bill as is. That's the plan, as far as I can tell. Setting aside what's become a super toxic debate for a few months to work on something like a jobs package which is what should be his front and center public voice right now is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not happy about where this is either, but this is not "shutting it down."