Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Recent Comments:
Ho, Ho . . . Whoa! Secularists Get the Holiday Spirit {Politics Daily}
Nov 24th 2009 12:10PM "I think I'll start a new society based on the non-belief in a flat earth."
Since when have we started standing for what we don't believe in rather than what we DO believe in?
Black Friday: Fake Apple ad excites and disappoints fanboys {WalletPop}
Nov 19th 2009 2:59AM No, it stands for Idiot-proof, which means that even an idiot can use one. I don't know what that says about those who feel they can't.
Grown-up Reporter Dunks on Little Lad and Makes Him Cry {ParentDish}
Nov 15th 2009 4:06AM The article said the reporter was a bad guy. Everybody goes off on the reporter based on the headline!
If the headline had said: "reporter plays 30 minutes of basketball with kid and thrills him with a dunk and an NBA style reaction" everyone would be saying, "what a cool reporter."
Of course, he is now the victim of poor reporting, so maybe he learned a lesson in the end, anyway, as a reporter, even if what he did WASN'T a poor choice of action.
Everybody Loves Jeff Dunham -- Or Do They? {Inside TV Blog}
Nov 5th 2009 8:45AM His "racism" bashes all sides, and he's got Achmed calling him racist for saying he can't tell a Jewish joke. There isn't a comedian alive who pleases everyone (too clean, too dirty, too politically correct, too politically incorrect....)
If it is okay for someone to talk as filthy as they like and the liberal media defend it as freedom of speech, why not having someone point out the existing stereotypes to bring the conversation to the forefront?
I thought talking about something was always better than ignoring it and hoping it would go away. I commend Jeff for making things easier to talk about, even though I don't think everything he talks about is proper, either. It is comedy! As long as it is not vulgar, libelous, promoting immorality, or dishonest...it is comedy!
Ad Rant: David Spade brings pal Chris Farley back from the dead to shill for Direct TV {WalletPop}
Oct 27th 2009 6:47AM The dilemma here is that whatever remarks one might make about the writer's judmental attitude about something that is none of his business can come off as nothing short of also judgmental.
At risk of sounding hypocytical, and I don't know Jami nor the reasons for David Spade making the ad, taking a clip from a MOVIE (not exhuming the body) to make a comical commercial that in NO WAY deminishes the comic genius and, in fact, reminds us of Farley's ability to bring a smile to our lives, neither disrespects the actor nor discredits David for making the clip.
It seems arrogant to claim that this is morally reprehensible without knowing the reasoning behind the making of the ad, especially considering the fact that only family and friends are qualified to know if Farley would have, in fact, been for or against such creative editing after his death.
I am no David Spade fan, but come on, leave the guy alone. He is interacting with a friend from the past in a very creative way that in no way tarnishes the image of the deceased.
Claremont Museum of Art Facing Closure {Luxist}
Oct 7th 2009 11:39PM Fact #1: 9/11 happened one month ago in Bush years. Dems claim it was his fault, not the fault of then president, Bill Clinton.
Fact #2: then president, George Bush took the worst stock market colapse in United States since the depression resulting from a state of unbelievable horror and economic chaos to the highest stock market in the history of the world. That benchmark is the standard for our current "poor economy."
Fact #3: the world EXPECTED terrorist attacks to continue indefinitely. There were NONE under then president, George Bush's watch. Here or, for the most part, abroad, after the war in Afghanistan and Iraq began.
Fact #4: the "bad president" mentality was manufactured by the media (and a helped along by the discontented Democratic party in order to win power), just like the "good president" mentality has been for our present president, Barak Obama.
Fact #5: no president has control over any economy in any country of the world. The economy is market driven, and you can't manufacture a market. You can twist market factors (stimulus packages) but you cannnot ultimately manufacture a market.
"America is great because America is good. When America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great."
Lobbyists Annoyed With New Obama Regulations {Politics Daily}
Oct 6th 2009 7:21AM Actually, a flat tax would be a very GOOD thing, and would NOT negatively affect the poor. It would be an equalizer, with those with less income still feeling like a productive member of society, doing their part as citizens of these great United States.
And, we actually do not need a 20% flat tax; at a 10% flat tax rate, the rich would still pay more than they do now. AND, a flat tax need not eliminate charitable deductions. If they were the ONLY exceptions, charitable giving would actually INCREASE.
Everyone needs to do OUR homework. Imagine saying the poor should not have to pay sales tax. Even the poor (of which I am a member...under national poverty level with six children, so far all of whom have gone to college) do not balk at paying sales tax (although I admit I am grateful when I do NOT have to pay).
We are ALL happy to do our FAIR share to support a fiscally conservative government. Even those of us who are "poor."
Lobbyists Annoyed With New Obama Regulations {Politics Daily}
Oct 6th 2009 7:04AM This is a VERY GOOD thing. Of COURSE those whose benefit most from the positions (influence peddling lobbyists) would be the most angry that they are no longer able to benefit from their connections.
This is the way a democracy is SUPPOSED to function...outside of the realm of special interest groups who promote the good of the individual or organization over the good of the whole...in this case the whole being those who are law abiding citizens and tax paying residents of the United States.
Good job, President Obama! (And you should know, I am a Republican!)
White House Goes After Glenn Beck 'Smear' and Fox News 'Lies' {Politics Daily}
Oct 3rd 2009 1:20PM "behumanist" mentioned above: "You're jumping on any tidbit no matter how small to deride the President. Sorry, America has spoken and noone cares what you think any more."
I agree that there is too much belittling of the man we as Americans elected to office by a wide majority. We need to show a LOT more respect to the office of president than was shown to President Bush during his years in office...because President Obama IS our duly elected Commander in Chief, a decent human being, and worthy of a chance to do good.
However, America has NOT "spoken," and MANY many people care. In the last election, President Obama received slightly more than half the popular vote (a mere 52% in spite of extreme media bias FOR candidate Obama, despite widespread discontent with the Republican party, and despite the media-driven unpopularity of President Bush).
In spite of being one of the oldest presidential candidates in history, John McCain received a whopping 45.7% of the popular vote in spite of third and forth party candidates, and in spite of representing the (at the time) thoroughly media bashed Republican party.
In the 2008 election, John McCain receved more total votes than either of the 2000 candidates: the election popular vote winner, Al Gore, or the electoral vote winner (and eventual president), George Bush.
President Obama deserves our respect. He deserves a chance to succeed.
But it is wrong to EVER say effectivly: "shut up" to either side of a legitimate debate between potentially equally legitimate ideologies.
CQ Fires Senior Editor for Questioning Layoffs, Ignites Online Backlash {Politics Daily}
Sep 30th 2009 8:18PM Now we are advocating legislating OUR definition of kindness?
Any company HAS to have the right to make personnel decisions, and SOMEONE has to have the right to make the decisions within the company concerning personnel. We may not LIKE the decisions, but SOMEONE has to have the authority to make them.
Suppose the employees in question were "underperforming" and had been given chance after chance? Suppose they had been dishonest or manipulative or weren't meeting deadlines or were causing financial harm or chaos in the company. The company would be under legal requirements to NOT disclose reasons for termination lest being faced with a libel lawsuit. (Libel: defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any other form other than by spoken words or gestures.)
We may not LIKE the decision of others from our armchair coaching position, but legislating kindness does not seem to be the answer. Boycott if you don't like the result. SURE!
Demand the government involve itself in redressable action over perceived unkind actions: hardly the answer.
