http://views.washingtonpost.com/post-user-polls/2011/02/-super-bowl-commercials.html?hpid=talkbox1
How would you rank these Super Bowl commercials?
You've already had your morning water cooler discussions about the commercials that aired during Super Bowl XLV. So tell us, how would you rank these Super Bowl commercials? You can watch all of the commercials here and read Hank Stuever's take here.
When I log onto the Washington Post, the New York Times, or even the Johnson City Press web site, I expect to find news items. I’ve come to the sad realization that there will be some inclusion of what passes for “sports” in this nation despite my best efforts at wishing that inclusion away. I’ve found various ways and means to avoid watching such television programming and the print “sports sections” work as well for lighting the stove as any other remnant of a tree that I have on hand. In short, I’m usually able to avoid the associated idiocy associated with the various forms of tax-supported training programs geared at funneling new meat into the national athletics and gambling franchises.
But in the Washington Post today, on CNN today, the topic of discussion is not the Egyptian political uncertainty or that of the other Arab states that will be affected by Egypt. It is not the latest teavangelist plot to deform our government into a theocracy, spearheaded by the Palin-Beck-Huckabee groups. It is not even the football game played in Dallas. The primary topic I’ve seen, read, heard while getting ready for class, waiting for class is the commercial associated with the football game. Commercials!
Why bother to become excited about propaganda aimed at separating us from our money? Why do we sit through hours of sales pitches, which are then played repeatedly while someone describes their “cuteness,” “cleverness,” the “hotness” of the female or male models used in these commercials on steroids?
I recall very well the arguments that played out in each city and town that was awarding or denying cable television contracts. “Cable TV would free us from commercials.” “Cable TV would let us pay for and watch only those programs we wanted” There were other claims as well but those are the major selling points that have not come true.
Today we are handed up to 25 minutes of commercials in each hour of programming. We have supposedly “hundreds of programming choices that we can purchase from cable providers. But of the hundreds available at my home, there are 10-15 sports channels, another 10-15 popular music channels, countless shopping channels, and far too many “come to Jesus channels.” Not only are these not possible to deselect, they are also spread out through the few packages I want to purchase so that I cannot escape the.
Here’s the drift Cable providers and Congress. I want ala carte channel selection. I don’t want packages chosen to make some cable executive and his church or family happy. If, you are going to charge me for service and then stream one long series of commercials toward me while boosting the volume when they begin to play; then you need to quit billing me for commercial air time and frequency. I don’t want them, I’m not amused by them, and I won’t watch them. The mute button and off switch get lots of use at my home. If you want to broadcast them, then bill the advertiser for the airtime, not the consumer.
I won’t even watch commercials one night a year so that I can join in the next day’s idle conversations, Not last year, not this, and not next year. They’re commercials, a huge waste of my time. Nothing to see there. Keep moving people!
Monday, February 7, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
6 February 2011 Palin mangles Egypt statement
TRENDING: Palin: Obama's 3 a.m. call went to answering machine
By: CNN Political Coverage Manager Steve Brusk
Washington (CNN) - Sarah Palin, in her first comments on the uprising in Egypt, called the situation President Barack Obama's 3 a.m. phone call and said, "It seems the call went right to the answering machine."
Palin, the former GOP vice presidential candidate, spoke with Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody after her speech Friday night at the Reagan Ranch in Santa Barbara, California.
In the interview, the potential Republican presidential candidate said, "We need to know what it is America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And we do not have all that information (from the administration) yet."
She told "The Brody File" she was "not real enthused about what it is that's being done on a national level and from (Washington) in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt."
Palin criticized the administration's public response, saying "nobody yet has explained to the American public yet what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us ... who will be taking the place of (Egyptian President Hosni) Mubarak."
"In these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it's not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House," she said.
According to a transcript from CBN released Saturday evening, Palin said there were still unanswered questions on the protests that led to the upheaval.
"Remember President Reagan lived that mantra: Trust but verify," she said. "We want to be able to trust those who are screaming for democracy there in Egypt, that there is a true sincere desire for freedoms. And the challenge that we have, though, is how do we verify that what we are told, what it is that the American public are being fed via media, via protesters, via the government there in Egypt in order for us to have some sound information to make wise decisions on what our position is."
On the question of "who's going to fill the void" after Mubarak leaves office, Palin said "Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that, or by that."
She told the interviewer, "Any radical Islamists, no, that is not who we should be supporting or standing by. So we need to find out who was behind all the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/05/palin-obamas-3-a-m-call-went-to-answering-machine/#more-145843
Cassi Creek:
The distillate is this. Palin is demanding to be told who we have selected to become the new leader(s) of Egypt. What she apparently wants is for the U.S. military to march into Egypt and install a government which will be a client state of the U.S., most particularly one that will bow to the demands of the Theocons and teavangelists who imagine that they can somehow install a pro-Christian, pro-American puppet show in Cairo.
Palin objects to the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet Palin offers no objection to the Christian analog, which she belongs to usurping a leadership role in American politics. She would be perfectly happy to see our Constitution re-written in a manner that allows the establishment of a national religion, hers of course. Nor would she see any departure from the intentions of the “founders,” other than perhaps Jefferson.
Once again, she has demonstrated her unfamiliarity with history and with English as a primary language. Whether or not she understands that Egypt is a sovereign nation on the continent of Africa is still undiscovered. Perhaps her handlers will steer her away from that “gotcha question.” She obviously believes we have the right to define the future for 83 million Egyptians without being invited to the party. I’m of the opinion that she should offer to go negotiate a new government, anti-Islamic, pro-American, using her immense body of personal knowledge and skills. Perhaps she can mold Egyptians into “real Americans” and change the history of the Middle East to hasten the second coming. I doubt it. But I do hope someone will publically offer her the opportunity, along with a one-way airline ticket. She should be a real hit in Cairo or Alexandria. Nothing that I can think of would do more to secure Egypt for the Muslim Brotherhood. In the interim, while we wait for her to emulate Reagan and illeagly negotiate with a foreign nation behind Obama's back; as Reagan's handlers did with Carter over Iran, someone should remind the Palin harpy that she holds no national or local political office and no one in D.C. owes her any information about past, ongoing, or future plans or programs.
By: CNN Political Coverage Manager Steve Brusk
Washington (CNN) - Sarah Palin, in her first comments on the uprising in Egypt, called the situation President Barack Obama's 3 a.m. phone call and said, "It seems the call went right to the answering machine."
Palin, the former GOP vice presidential candidate, spoke with Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody after her speech Friday night at the Reagan Ranch in Santa Barbara, California.
In the interview, the potential Republican presidential candidate said, "We need to know what it is America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And we do not have all that information (from the administration) yet."
She told "The Brody File" she was "not real enthused about what it is that's being done on a national level and from (Washington) in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt."
Palin criticized the administration's public response, saying "nobody yet has explained to the American public yet what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us ... who will be taking the place of (Egyptian President Hosni) Mubarak."
"In these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it's not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House," she said.
According to a transcript from CBN released Saturday evening, Palin said there were still unanswered questions on the protests that led to the upheaval.
"Remember President Reagan lived that mantra: Trust but verify," she said. "We want to be able to trust those who are screaming for democracy there in Egypt, that there is a true sincere desire for freedoms. And the challenge that we have, though, is how do we verify that what we are told, what it is that the American public are being fed via media, via protesters, via the government there in Egypt in order for us to have some sound information to make wise decisions on what our position is."
On the question of "who's going to fill the void" after Mubarak leaves office, Palin said "Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that, or by that."
She told the interviewer, "Any radical Islamists, no, that is not who we should be supporting or standing by. So we need to find out who was behind all the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/05/palin-obamas-3-a-m-call-went-to-answering-machine/#more-145843
Cassi Creek:
The distillate is this. Palin is demanding to be told who we have selected to become the new leader(s) of Egypt. What she apparently wants is for the U.S. military to march into Egypt and install a government which will be a client state of the U.S., most particularly one that will bow to the demands of the Theocons and teavangelists who imagine that they can somehow install a pro-Christian, pro-American puppet show in Cairo.
Palin objects to the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet Palin offers no objection to the Christian analog, which she belongs to usurping a leadership role in American politics. She would be perfectly happy to see our Constitution re-written in a manner that allows the establishment of a national religion, hers of course. Nor would she see any departure from the intentions of the “founders,” other than perhaps Jefferson.
Once again, she has demonstrated her unfamiliarity with history and with English as a primary language. Whether or not she understands that Egypt is a sovereign nation on the continent of Africa is still undiscovered. Perhaps her handlers will steer her away from that “gotcha question.” She obviously believes we have the right to define the future for 83 million Egyptians without being invited to the party. I’m of the opinion that she should offer to go negotiate a new government, anti-Islamic, pro-American, using her immense body of personal knowledge and skills. Perhaps she can mold Egyptians into “real Americans” and change the history of the Middle East to hasten the second coming. I doubt it. But I do hope someone will publically offer her the opportunity, along with a one-way airline ticket. She should be a real hit in Cairo or Alexandria. Nothing that I can think of would do more to secure Egypt for the Muslim Brotherhood. In the interim, while we wait for her to emulate Reagan and illeagly negotiate with a foreign nation behind Obama's back; as Reagan's handlers did with Carter over Iran, someone should remind the Palin harpy that she holds no national or local political office and no one in D.C. owes her any information about past, ongoing, or future plans or programs.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
5 February 2011 Just waiting for the muskeg to melt
The Siege of Planned Parenthood
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: February 4, 2011
Maybe it’s all part of a grand theme. Last month, they voted to repeal the health care law. This month, they’re going after an organization that provides millions of women with both family-planning services and basic health medical care, like pap smears and screening for diabetes, breast cancer, cervical cancer and sexually transmitted diseases
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/opinion/05collins.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Five myths about Ronald Reagan's legacy
By Will Bunch
Friday, February 4, 2011
On Sunday, America celebrates the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan, whose presidency is a touchstone for the modern conservative movement. In 2011, it is virtually impossible for a major Republican politician to succeed without citing Reagan as a role model. But much of what today's voters think they know about the 40th president is more myth than reality, misconceptions resulting from the passage of time or from calculated attempts to rebuild or remake Reagan's legacy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2011/02/04/ST2011020403674.html?hpid=topnews
(Reuters) - Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's bid to trademark her name and that of her daughter, Bristol, ran into trouble at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office because the application forms were unsigned, government records show.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/04/us-palin-trademark-idUSTRE7135WI20110204?pageNumber=2
The news today tells us that we have not traveled far from the collective idiocy that led us to elect Reagan in 1980. He was never more than an actor playing the role his handlers scripted for him. He chose to ignore the outbreak of HIV/AIDS, to discharge thousands of mentally ill &/or mentally disabled from institution by dumping them onto the streets. In his terms we find the beginnings of Islamic terrorism, dealings with Iran carried on illegally, invasion of a small Caribbean island for no real purpose, and the savings & loan scandal that followed deregulation and led to the current monetary problems plaguing the U.S.
For those accomplishments the small portion of the GOP not trying to hand the nation over to our own breed of Taliban are trying to hang his name on anything that doesn’t move fast enough to escape the indignity.
Meanwhile, Palin, imagining herself to be his successor has demonstrate her mental acuity by failing to sign legal documents intended to allow her to sue anyone using her name in any manner. When she does crash and burn it is going to be truly spectacular, a meltdown of immense amusement!
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: February 4, 2011
Maybe it’s all part of a grand theme. Last month, they voted to repeal the health care law. This month, they’re going after an organization that provides millions of women with both family-planning services and basic health medical care, like pap smears and screening for diabetes, breast cancer, cervical cancer and sexually transmitted diseases
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/opinion/05collins.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Five myths about Ronald Reagan's legacy
By Will Bunch
Friday, February 4, 2011
On Sunday, America celebrates the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan, whose presidency is a touchstone for the modern conservative movement. In 2011, it is virtually impossible for a major Republican politician to succeed without citing Reagan as a role model. But much of what today's voters think they know about the 40th president is more myth than reality, misconceptions resulting from the passage of time or from calculated attempts to rebuild or remake Reagan's legacy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2011/02/04/ST2011020403674.html?hpid=topnews
(Reuters) - Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's bid to trademark her name and that of her daughter, Bristol, ran into trouble at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office because the application forms were unsigned, government records show.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/04/us-palin-trademark-idUSTRE7135WI20110204?pageNumber=2
The news today tells us that we have not traveled far from the collective idiocy that led us to elect Reagan in 1980. He was never more than an actor playing the role his handlers scripted for him. He chose to ignore the outbreak of HIV/AIDS, to discharge thousands of mentally ill &/or mentally disabled from institution by dumping them onto the streets. In his terms we find the beginnings of Islamic terrorism, dealings with Iran carried on illegally, invasion of a small Caribbean island for no real purpose, and the savings & loan scandal that followed deregulation and led to the current monetary problems plaguing the U.S.
For those accomplishments the small portion of the GOP not trying to hand the nation over to our own breed of Taliban are trying to hang his name on anything that doesn’t move fast enough to escape the indignity.
Meanwhile, Palin, imagining herself to be his successor has demonstrate her mental acuity by failing to sign legal documents intended to allow her to sue anyone using her name in any manner. When she does crash and burn it is going to be truly spectacular, a meltdown of immense amusement!
Friday, February 4, 2011
4 February 2011 Take that teavangelists
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/03/AR2011020304370.html
“Forcible rape' cut from antiabortion bill after backlash from women's groups
By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 3, 2011; 10:25 PM
Republican lawmakers have removed the term "forcible rape" from an antiabortion bill in Congress after women's groups accused them of trying to change the widely held definition of rape.
THIS STORY
• Legislative proposal puts abortion rights supporters on alert
• 'Forcible rape' cut from antiabortion bill after backlash from women's groups
• Pairing of religious conservatism with fiscal sets Iowa tea partiers apart
View All Items in This Story
The bill, called the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, seeks to permanently bar federal funds from being used to subsidize abortions. It allows exceptions in cases in which the pregnancy resulted from incest or when the life of the mother would be threatened if the fetus was carried to term.
In the original language, it also allowed exceptions in cases of "forcible rape." The term provoked an outcry from critics, who said that rape is by definition committed by force and that lawmakers were seeking to exclude from coverage certain kinds of rape by adding the modifier - for example, cases in which the victim was underage or unconscious.
The bill now would allow exceptions in all cases of rape.
A spokesman for Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), a chief sponsor of the bill, said Thursday that lawmakers decided to change the term because it was being "misconstrued."
sandhya@washpost.com
The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape
Drugged, raped, and pregnant? Too bad. Republicans are pushing to limit rape and incest cases eligible for government abortion funding.
— By Nick Baumann
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Cassi Creek:
The small victory noted above is still important despite its apparent size. The GOPers/teavangelists will do everything they can to block all access to abortion and then to birth control medications and morning after pills. They understand that they can mobilize the religious right voter base once again, making them forget about the GOP’s servitude to business and finance. They are willing to trade theocracy for continued power and wealth. To that end, they will sell the nation to the Christian right and to their financial masters. Keep on top of this because they will not accept the reality of the message this defeat sends.
Note, too, that there is also an attack on abortions for women who are placed at risk by pregnancy. The driving agents behind this will sacrifice the life of a women over a fetus every time the decision must be made. Then they will abandon that child to a life of poverty, pain and perhaps prison. Once they are born they are no longer sacred.
“Forcible rape' cut from antiabortion bill after backlash from women's groups
By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 3, 2011; 10:25 PM
Republican lawmakers have removed the term "forcible rape" from an antiabortion bill in Congress after women's groups accused them of trying to change the widely held definition of rape.
THIS STORY
• Legislative proposal puts abortion rights supporters on alert
• 'Forcible rape' cut from antiabortion bill after backlash from women's groups
• Pairing of religious conservatism with fiscal sets Iowa tea partiers apart
View All Items in This Story
The bill, called the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, seeks to permanently bar federal funds from being used to subsidize abortions. It allows exceptions in cases in which the pregnancy resulted from incest or when the life of the mother would be threatened if the fetus was carried to term.
In the original language, it also allowed exceptions in cases of "forcible rape." The term provoked an outcry from critics, who said that rape is by definition committed by force and that lawmakers were seeking to exclude from coverage certain kinds of rape by adding the modifier - for example, cases in which the victim was underage or unconscious.
The bill now would allow exceptions in all cases of rape.
A spokesman for Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), a chief sponsor of the bill, said Thursday that lawmakers decided to change the term because it was being "misconstrued."
sandhya@washpost.com
The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape
Drugged, raped, and pregnant? Too bad. Republicans are pushing to limit rape and incest cases eligible for government abortion funding.
— By Nick Baumann
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Cassi Creek:
The small victory noted above is still important despite its apparent size. The GOPers/teavangelists will do everything they can to block all access to abortion and then to birth control medications and morning after pills. They understand that they can mobilize the religious right voter base once again, making them forget about the GOP’s servitude to business and finance. They are willing to trade theocracy for continued power and wealth. To that end, they will sell the nation to the Christian right and to their financial masters. Keep on top of this because they will not accept the reality of the message this defeat sends.
Note, too, that there is also an attack on abortions for women who are placed at risk by pregnancy. The driving agents behind this will sacrifice the life of a women over a fetus every time the decision must be made. Then they will abandon that child to a life of poverty, pain and perhaps prison. Once they are born they are no longer sacred.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
3 February 2011 “Free Press” = free target
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs is putting out an advisory telling Indian journalists in Egypt to avoid trouble spots.
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned the attacks.
"The freedom of speech, whether journalists or demonstrators -- they should be fully guaranteed and protected. That is a ground principle of democracy," he said.
Journalists became targets Wednesday -- they were beaten, bloodied, harassed and detained by men, most all in some way aligned with Mubarak.
Numerous news outlets -- including the BBC, ABC News and CNN -- reported members of their staffs had been attacked, most on the streets of Cairo. In several cases, news personnel were accused of being "foreign spies," seized, whisked away, and often assaulted.
"It was pandemonium. There was no control. Suddenly a man would come up to you and punch you in the face," said CNN's Anderson Cooper, describing being attacked by pro-Mubarak demonstrators along with two colleagues outside of Tahir Square.
CNN's Hala Gorani got caught Wednesday morning in a stampede of demonstrators, some of whom were riding on camels and horses.
"I got slammed against the gates and was threatened by one of the pro-Mubarak protesters who was ... telling me to 'get out, get out!'" Gorani said. "The pro-Mubaraks, whoever they are, whoever sent them, are being threatening toward camera crews, journalists, anybody who looks like they may be onlookers."
A BBC correspondent, Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, and his crew were "arrested by members of the secret police" on Wednesday after interviewing a presidential adviser, the BBC reported. They were later released, the network said.
The Dubai-based Al-Arabiya news network was among the worst hit, its office damaged and several of its staff targeted. Among them was correspondent Ahmed Abdullah, who his editor confirmed Wednesday was found bloodied and
transported to a hospital after being severely beaten by his captors.
Maurice Sarfatti told the Brussels-based Le Soir newspaper, which he writes for along with publications in Switzerland and France, that he "received a steam of blows to the face" from men claiming he backed leading opposition figure Mohamed ElBaradei.
"I am being guarded by two soldiers with Kalashnikovs (rifles) and bayonets," said Sarfatti, according to a translation from Le Soir. "They say I will be taken before the intelligence services. They say I am a spy."
http://us.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/03/egypt.journalists/index.html?hpt=C1
Anderson Cooper attacked? Forget the protests -- this is news!
By Alexandra Petri
In Cairo, Molotov cocktails have reportedly been tossed at the Egyptian Museum. A wave of looters broke into King Tut's treasury, damaging pharaonic artifacts that archaeologists call priceless. Items that have survived for millennia smash and shatter, falling victim to a single cruel, thoughtless toss.
OH MY GOSH, THEY ATTACKED ANDERSON COOPER!
Stop the presses! Forget all that. This is Anderson Cooper we're talking about here! THE Anderson Cooper, of CNN fame! Sure, the museum may contain manuscripts, but Anderson's eyes contain volumes.
I know the Egyptian Museum hosts valuable artifacts, but how does it look in a tight black t-shirt? They may have sphinx memorabilia. But Anderson Cooper is a real-life sphinx, shrouded in questions and mystery.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/compost/
Cassi Creek: this separates democratic nations from third world dictatorships. While the press may disclose all the secrets a government agency might wish to avoid airing; blocking media access to transmission systems, will make real journalists dig for the things that no one has yet leaked. Every nation has them and doesn’t want them exposed.
Egypt has just assured that the world’s journalists will latch onto these restrictions as if their lives depended upon it. In this type of political turnover thousands of lives will depend upon journalists doing their jobs to discover all the suppressed information that Mubarak and friends have managed to hide away over the decades.
Whether they be tabloid reporters, senior international correspondents, Pulitzer winners, or local stringers; this is the chance for every journalist to be as careful, accurate, and brave as the men and women who’ve covered the births and deaths of nations over the last two centuries. Help keep Anderson Cooper, and all his colleagues safe and reporting in with the latest verified news. Keep watching, reading, and listening!
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned the attacks.
"The freedom of speech, whether journalists or demonstrators -- they should be fully guaranteed and protected. That is a ground principle of democracy," he said.
Journalists became targets Wednesday -- they were beaten, bloodied, harassed and detained by men, most all in some way aligned with Mubarak.
Numerous news outlets -- including the BBC, ABC News and CNN -- reported members of their staffs had been attacked, most on the streets of Cairo. In several cases, news personnel were accused of being "foreign spies," seized, whisked away, and often assaulted.
"It was pandemonium. There was no control. Suddenly a man would come up to you and punch you in the face," said CNN's Anderson Cooper, describing being attacked by pro-Mubarak demonstrators along with two colleagues outside of Tahir Square.
CNN's Hala Gorani got caught Wednesday morning in a stampede of demonstrators, some of whom were riding on camels and horses.
"I got slammed against the gates and was threatened by one of the pro-Mubarak protesters who was ... telling me to 'get out, get out!'" Gorani said. "The pro-Mubaraks, whoever they are, whoever sent them, are being threatening toward camera crews, journalists, anybody who looks like they may be onlookers."
A BBC correspondent, Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, and his crew were "arrested by members of the secret police" on Wednesday after interviewing a presidential adviser, the BBC reported. They were later released, the network said.
The Dubai-based Al-Arabiya news network was among the worst hit, its office damaged and several of its staff targeted. Among them was correspondent Ahmed Abdullah, who his editor confirmed Wednesday was found bloodied and
transported to a hospital after being severely beaten by his captors.
Maurice Sarfatti told the Brussels-based Le Soir newspaper, which he writes for along with publications in Switzerland and France, that he "received a steam of blows to the face" from men claiming he backed leading opposition figure Mohamed ElBaradei.
"I am being guarded by two soldiers with Kalashnikovs (rifles) and bayonets," said Sarfatti, according to a translation from Le Soir. "They say I will be taken before the intelligence services. They say I am a spy."
http://us.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/03/egypt.journalists/index.html?hpt=C1
Anderson Cooper attacked? Forget the protests -- this is news!
By Alexandra Petri
In Cairo, Molotov cocktails have reportedly been tossed at the Egyptian Museum. A wave of looters broke into King Tut's treasury, damaging pharaonic artifacts that archaeologists call priceless. Items that have survived for millennia smash and shatter, falling victim to a single cruel, thoughtless toss.
OH MY GOSH, THEY ATTACKED ANDERSON COOPER!
Stop the presses! Forget all that. This is Anderson Cooper we're talking about here! THE Anderson Cooper, of CNN fame! Sure, the museum may contain manuscripts, but Anderson's eyes contain volumes.
I know the Egyptian Museum hosts valuable artifacts, but how does it look in a tight black t-shirt? They may have sphinx memorabilia. But Anderson Cooper is a real-life sphinx, shrouded in questions and mystery.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/compost/
Cassi Creek: this separates democratic nations from third world dictatorships. While the press may disclose all the secrets a government agency might wish to avoid airing; blocking media access to transmission systems, will make real journalists dig for the things that no one has yet leaked. Every nation has them and doesn’t want them exposed.
Egypt has just assured that the world’s journalists will latch onto these restrictions as if their lives depended upon it. In this type of political turnover thousands of lives will depend upon journalists doing their jobs to discover all the suppressed information that Mubarak and friends have managed to hide away over the decades.
Whether they be tabloid reporters, senior international correspondents, Pulitzer winners, or local stringers; this is the chance for every journalist to be as careful, accurate, and brave as the men and women who’ve covered the births and deaths of nations over the last two centuries. Help keep Anderson Cooper, and all his colleagues safe and reporting in with the latest verified news. Keep watching, reading, and listening!
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
2 February 2011 Palin’s history defended
Posted at 8:14 AM ET, 02/ 2/2011
Right-wing bloggers defend Sarah Palin's fake history
By Stephen Stromberg
According to the right-wing blogosphere, Sarah Palin knows more about history than I do.
Last week, I wrote that Palin got some history wrong when she claimed that the Soviets incurred crippling debt in their effort to launch Sputnik. Palin seemed to want to suggest a lesson to apply to the U.S. debt debate. But as I wrote, her narrative doesn't have much to do with what actually happened. ..”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/02/the_right-wing_conspirosphere.html
The danger found in this article stems not from the lack of factual knowledge actually resident in the gray drive of Palin, but in the willingness of those who should know better to allow her leniency on her lack of basic knowledge while simultaneously demonstrating their own lack of concern for facts in ideological conflicts. Palin is adept at making things up while blaming the error on others. There is no reason to allow historical revisionism for the purpose of backstopping her innate lack of education.
We are not only encountering willful destruction of the American public education system, we are seeing it replaced whenever possible by a system that is constructed to replace fact with lies, science with myths, and to denigrate the benefits and value of higher education in this nation. Higher education may soon come to mean “able to read the directions on a microwave meal.
Today in Puxatawney, Palin failed to see either her shadow or any shred of truth about the history of this nation.
Right-wing bloggers defend Sarah Palin's fake history
By Stephen Stromberg
According to the right-wing blogosphere, Sarah Palin knows more about history than I do.
Last week, I wrote that Palin got some history wrong when she claimed that the Soviets incurred crippling debt in their effort to launch Sputnik. Palin seemed to want to suggest a lesson to apply to the U.S. debt debate. But as I wrote, her narrative doesn't have much to do with what actually happened. ..”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/02/the_right-wing_conspirosphere.html
The danger found in this article stems not from the lack of factual knowledge actually resident in the gray drive of Palin, but in the willingness of those who should know better to allow her leniency on her lack of basic knowledge while simultaneously demonstrating their own lack of concern for facts in ideological conflicts. Palin is adept at making things up while blaming the error on others. There is no reason to allow historical revisionism for the purpose of backstopping her innate lack of education.
We are not only encountering willful destruction of the American public education system, we are seeing it replaced whenever possible by a system that is constructed to replace fact with lies, science with myths, and to denigrate the benefits and value of higher education in this nation. Higher education may soon come to mean “able to read the directions on a microwave meal.
Today in Puxatawney, Palin failed to see either her shadow or any shred of truth about the history of this nation.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
1 February 2011 Tehran – ran - ran - ran, Cairo - run - run
For Egypt's Mubarak, push has come to shove
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/31/AR2011013104490.html
…The Muslim Brotherhood is the best-organized opposition political force in the country, but it has been relegated to the margins of the popular uprising. So far, this is a secular revolution. A post-Mubarak Egypt whose foundation is laid now would include the Brotherhood but not in a central role. If Mubarak were to hang on until September - and the multitudes in the streets went glumly back to their everyday lives - the purposeful and tenacious Brotherhood would end up playing a much bigger role in charting the nation's future…
Already, demonstrators have noted that the rubber bullets and tear-gas canisters fired by Mubarak's hated police are stamped "Made in the USA." It is true that Mubarak has been a useful and fairly reliable ally for three decades. But it is also true that cold-eyed analysis would conclude that the 82-year-old Mubarak's day is done, that the clamor for democracy in Egypt has reached a point of no return and that it is better for U.S. interests to be on the right side of history.
The United States will in any case retain some influence in Egypt, if only because of the $1.5 billion in aid we give annually. It would be good if we retained some moral influence as well - but we won't if the administration is seen to back a corrupt dictator whose mandate is utterly expired.
There's another reason to give Mubarak a mighty shove: We believe in freedom and democracy. We really do.
It is thrilling to watch as Egyptians assert the rights that we hold to be inherent and universal - to assemble, associate and speak freely, to give their consent to be governed, to withdraw that consent when it is abused.
We can't take the position that democracy is good only when we approve of the leaders who are elected. We'd never convince the Egyptians that this was anything but rank hypocrisy. We'd never even convince ourselves.
Cassi Creek:
“ Shaking in the forest, what have you to fear?
Here there may be tigers, to punch you in the ear.
With gloves of stainless steel, bats carved out of bricks
Knock you down and beat you up and give your ass a kick.
When push comes to shove, you're afraid of ..”
Like any “ leader for life,” Hosni Mubarak is afraid of many things. He has to maintain continual guard against the chance of assassination by agents of one or more opposition party. He has to assume that his food may be poisoned, that his bodyguards may be plants, just waiting for the right moment to pull the trigger. He can’t trust his physician. His life is a continual waltz through the halls of paranoia.
“Shaking in the bedroom, covers on your head,
Are you still in fear of the hand beneath the bed?”
Now he has come to the apparent end of his “for life” job. If he is smart enough to look around him and agree that the time to leave is now, while he can still walk out, he may be able to find a safe, if extremely costly, place to live out his natural days. He needs a remote location with heavily controlled access where he and a retinue of family, retainers, and the necessary number of “still loyal” servants can live in royal style, on money somehow obtained from Egypt’s treasury, and pretend that the world has not shifted beneath his feet. Even if he finds such a place, most likely in a small but ever-practical European nation that will pretend he is not residing there as long as the “rent” is paid in full, on time, and in specie; he will never be secure from the threat of assassination. “Leaders for life” create many enemies during their period of leadership. There will be a long line of people who were interned and interrogated, a line who’s families were displaced or interrogated, and beggared. There will be religious assassins ready to kill him for this or that insult to the prophet or the prophet’s thoughts. He will have angered one facet of the faithful or another for many reasons.
It is time for the United States, which has supported Mubarak for decades, to invite him to vacate his job and palace. Our support of him along with our support of Israel, makes us unwelcome to much of the population of Egypt today.
While we need to encourage his departure, we cannot afford to harbor him in his retirement. We offered shelter to the Shah of Iran in 1979 when the Islamic revolution took place. While I don’t care how many Iranian mullahs we may insult, we do not need assassination teams bent on sending Mubarak to Paradise or perdition. We do not need religious fanatics of any breed thinking that they have license to hunt in our nation; or to hunt for our citizens in any nation.
While we supported Mubarak, we have no obligation to offer him shelter. We will only do further harm to our policies and positions in the Middle East. Nor do we wish to openly interfere in any ongoing regime changes in Arab nations that may decide that now is the time to become members of the emerging world rather than remain in the third world of tribalism, illiteracy, and religious fanaticism.
.
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/31/AR2011013104490.html
…The Muslim Brotherhood is the best-organized opposition political force in the country, but it has been relegated to the margins of the popular uprising. So far, this is a secular revolution. A post-Mubarak Egypt whose foundation is laid now would include the Brotherhood but not in a central role. If Mubarak were to hang on until September - and the multitudes in the streets went glumly back to their everyday lives - the purposeful and tenacious Brotherhood would end up playing a much bigger role in charting the nation's future…
Already, demonstrators have noted that the rubber bullets and tear-gas canisters fired by Mubarak's hated police are stamped "Made in the USA." It is true that Mubarak has been a useful and fairly reliable ally for three decades. But it is also true that cold-eyed analysis would conclude that the 82-year-old Mubarak's day is done, that the clamor for democracy in Egypt has reached a point of no return and that it is better for U.S. interests to be on the right side of history.
The United States will in any case retain some influence in Egypt, if only because of the $1.5 billion in aid we give annually. It would be good if we retained some moral influence as well - but we won't if the administration is seen to back a corrupt dictator whose mandate is utterly expired.
There's another reason to give Mubarak a mighty shove: We believe in freedom and democracy. We really do.
It is thrilling to watch as Egyptians assert the rights that we hold to be inherent and universal - to assemble, associate and speak freely, to give their consent to be governed, to withdraw that consent when it is abused.
We can't take the position that democracy is good only when we approve of the leaders who are elected. We'd never convince the Egyptians that this was anything but rank hypocrisy. We'd never even convince ourselves.
Cassi Creek:
“ Shaking in the forest, what have you to fear?
Here there may be tigers, to punch you in the ear.
With gloves of stainless steel, bats carved out of bricks
Knock you down and beat you up and give your ass a kick.
When push comes to shove, you're afraid of ..”
Like any “ leader for life,” Hosni Mubarak is afraid of many things. He has to maintain continual guard against the chance of assassination by agents of one or more opposition party. He has to assume that his food may be poisoned, that his bodyguards may be plants, just waiting for the right moment to pull the trigger. He can’t trust his physician. His life is a continual waltz through the halls of paranoia.
“Shaking in the bedroom, covers on your head,
Are you still in fear of the hand beneath the bed?”
Now he has come to the apparent end of his “for life” job. If he is smart enough to look around him and agree that the time to leave is now, while he can still walk out, he may be able to find a safe, if extremely costly, place to live out his natural days. He needs a remote location with heavily controlled access where he and a retinue of family, retainers, and the necessary number of “still loyal” servants can live in royal style, on money somehow obtained from Egypt’s treasury, and pretend that the world has not shifted beneath his feet. Even if he finds such a place, most likely in a small but ever-practical European nation that will pretend he is not residing there as long as the “rent” is paid in full, on time, and in specie; he will never be secure from the threat of assassination. “Leaders for life” create many enemies during their period of leadership. There will be a long line of people who were interned and interrogated, a line who’s families were displaced or interrogated, and beggared. There will be religious assassins ready to kill him for this or that insult to the prophet or the prophet’s thoughts. He will have angered one facet of the faithful or another for many reasons.
It is time for the United States, which has supported Mubarak for decades, to invite him to vacate his job and palace. Our support of him along with our support of Israel, makes us unwelcome to much of the population of Egypt today.
While we need to encourage his departure, we cannot afford to harbor him in his retirement. We offered shelter to the Shah of Iran in 1979 when the Islamic revolution took place. While I don’t care how many Iranian mullahs we may insult, we do not need assassination teams bent on sending Mubarak to Paradise or perdition. We do not need religious fanatics of any breed thinking that they have license to hunt in our nation; or to hunt for our citizens in any nation.
While we supported Mubarak, we have no obligation to offer him shelter. We will only do further harm to our policies and positions in the Middle East. Nor do we wish to openly interfere in any ongoing regime changes in Arab nations that may decide that now is the time to become members of the emerging world rather than remain in the third world of tribalism, illiteracy, and religious fanaticism.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
