Coffee Shop

[nickydog]

 

Now that's an Ad!

 

Ha! That's excellent!

[NCTexan]

@NCTexan

 

It should be noted that right from the day after the 08 election the GOP establishment/media has pretty much been in the bag for Romney...with some notable exceptions, Rush & The Great One come to mind. The problem Mitt had and still has is a large part of the party doesn't like or support him, for various reasons. Now it is a loooong time till election day, but as it stands now, I don't think he'll win. In talking to people (and these are not right wing nutters) I keep hearing this. Conservatives will vote for him, the question is how hard will they work for him?

 

@Valin

 

All that may be true... but Newt doesn't help himself when plays the "pity party" card. He seems to have as many cards up his sleeve as he thinks will be useful at any given moment.

 

I'm not Mitt crazy but IMO he has always had a dramatically better chance of beating Obama than Newt. But it is what it is... on April 12, 2012.

[Geee]

Just saw this from Newt...

 

OVER, Del. -- During a meeting with 18 Delaware Tea Party leaders here on Wednesday, Newt Gingrich lambasted FOX News Channel, accusing the cable network of having been in the tank for Mitt Romney from the beginning of the Republican presidential fight. An employee himself of the news outlet as recently as last year, he also cited former colleagues for attacking him out of what he characterized as personal jealousy.

 

“I think FOX has been for Romney all the way through,” Gingrich said during the private meeting -- to which RealClearPolitics was granted access -- at Wesley College. “In our experience, Callista and I both believe CNN is less biased than FOX this year. We are more likely to get neutral coverage out of CNN than we are of FOX, and we’re more likely to get distortion out of FOX. That’s just a fact.”

 

I agree that Fox has been leaning strongly to Romney. However, to take the stand that CNN is more neutral in reporting is a laugh... about Newt or anything else... He's in deep excuse making and typical Newt hyperbole mode. That's what hurts him most.

 

http://www.realclear...g___113818.html

 

This is just a typical example of classic Newt Gingrich and one of the reasons that I couldn't get on his bandwagon even when my husband and son told me I should be. I have watched and listened to him closely over the years, they have not.

[Rheo]

Fox News' Ailes Blasts Gawker Spy Fiasco, Olbermann

 

 

"What is Gawker? Is that that pornographic website?" Ailes asked at an event in New York City hosted by The Hollywood Reporter. "I don't care if they have a mole because we're not doing anything wrong, so it doesn't matter... they hate me because I make money and I do it legitimately and they don't like my politics, and that's America."

 

Ailes also said that Keith Olbermann, recently fired from Current TV, might have a tough time getting hired after a series of messy exits from ex-employers.

"You'd have to find somebody as crazy as he is, I'm afraid," said Ailes. "Talking about burning bridges. This guy really burns 'em. I feel sorry for anybody who's out of work, so I don't want to trash him or say anything negative about him. He was great at sports, I thought."

 

He added: "Keith will find a job again, but it'll be a pet show in St. Louis, or something."

 

[Rheo]

Blunt John Stossel on Why He Left Liberal ABC News: 'It Sucked There'

 

 

Journalist John Stossel left the liberal confines of ABC News "because it sucked there." The libertarian reporter talked to the Heritage Foundation's Rob Bluey in an interview posted Thursday and exposed the liberal culture at his former network: "They were hostile to these ideas that have made us prosperous and I consider so important."

 

He added that ABC "tolerated" him and his good ratings, "But by the end, they were sort of saying, 'Oh, you're predictable, Stossel. All you want to do is libertarian economics all the time. I don't want to watch that.'" He joked that ABC preferred to do stories on how "[Michael Jackson's] still dead."

 

Stossel admitted that he was "not offered a job by Fox." He added, "I went over and begged, 'Please hire me. I can't stand it anymore.'"

 

On Barack Obama and his liberalism, Stossel derided, "It was like he's a magic politician who is going to do these things. And the promise is all people pay attention to."

 

[Chickadee]

 

Ashley Judd Slaps Media in the Face for Speculation Over Her ‘Puffy’ Appearance

 

Ashley Judd’s 'puffy' appearance sparked a viral media frenzy. But, the actress writes, the conversation is really a misogynistic assault on all women.

 

by Ashley Judd | April 9, 2012 4:45 AM EDT

 

The Conversation about women’s bodies exists largely outside of us, while it is also directed at (and marketed to) us, and used to define and control us. The Conversation about women happens everywhere, publicly and privately. We are described and detailed, our faces and bodies analyzed and picked apart, our worth ascertained and ascribed based on the reduction of personhood to simple physical objectification. Our voices, our personhood, our potential, and our accomplishments are regularly minimized and muted.

People Ashley Judd

 

Richard Drew

 

As an actor and woman who, at times, avails herself of the media, I am painfully aware of the conversation about women’s bodies, and it frequently migrates to my own body. I know this, even though my personal practice is to ignore what is written about me. I do not, for example, read interviews I do with news outlets. I hold that it is none of my business what people think of me. I arrived at this belief after first, when I began working as an actor 18 years ago, reading everything. I evolved into selecting only the “good” pieces to read. Over time, I matured into the understanding that good and bad are equally fanciful interpretations. I do not want to give my power, my self-esteem, or my autonomy, to any person, place, or thing outside myself. I thus abstain from all media about myself. The only thing that matters is how I feel about myself, my personal integrity, and my relationship with my Creator. Of course, it’s wonderful to be held in esteem and fond regard by family, friends, and community, but a central part of my spiritual practice is letting go of otheration. And casting one’s lot with the public is dangerous and self-destructive, and I value myself too much to do that.

 

However, the recent speculation and accusations in March feel different, and my colleagues and friends encouraged me to know what was being said. Consequently, I choose to address it because the conversation was pointedly nasty, gendered, and misogynistic and embodies what all girls and women in our culture, to a greater or lesser degree, endure every day, in ways both outrageous and subtle. The assault on our body image, the hypersexualization of girls and women and subsequent degradation of our sexuality as we walk through the decades, and the general incessant objectification is what this conversation allegedly about my face is really about.

 

A brief analysis demonstrates that the following “conclusions” were all made on the exact same day, March 20, about the exact same woman (me), looking the exact same way, based on the exact same television appearance. The following examples are real, and come from a variety of (so-called!) legitimate news outlets (such as HuffPo, MSNBC, etc.), tabloid press, and social media:

 

One: When I am sick for more than a month and on medication (multiple rounds of steroids), the accusation is that because my face looks puffy, I have “clearly had work done,” with otherwise credible reporters with great bravo “identifying” precisely the procedures I allegedly have had done.

 

Two: When my skin is nearly flawless, and at age 43, I do not yet have visible wrinkles that can be seen on television, I have had “work done,” with media outlets bolstered by consulting with plastic surgeons I have never met who “conclude” what procedures I have “clearly” had. (Notice that this is a “back-handed compliment,” too—I look so good! It simply cannot possibly be real!)

 

[nickydog]

 

Ashley Judd Slaps Media in the Face for Speculation Over Her ‘Puffy’ Appearance

 

Ashley Judd’s 'puffy' appearance sparked a viral media frenzy. But, the actress writes, the conversation is really a misogynistic assault on all women.

 

by Ashley Judd | April 9, 2012 4:45 AM EDT

 

The Conversation about women’s bodies exists largely outside of us, while it is also directed at (and marketed to) us, and used to define and control us. The Conversation about women happens everywhere, publicly and privately. We are described and detailed, our faces and bodies analyzed and picked apart, our worth ascertained and ascribed based on the reduction of personhood to simple physical objectification. Our voices, our personhood, our potential, and our accomplishments are regularly minimized and muted.

People Ashley Judd

 

Richard Drew

 

As an actor and woman who, at times, avails herself of the media, I am painfully aware of the conversation about women’s bodies, and it frequently migrates to my own body. I know this, even though my personal practice is to ignore what is written about me. I do not, for example, read interviews I do with news outlets. I hold that it is none of my business what people think of me. I arrived at this belief after first, when I began working as an actor 18 years ago, reading everything. I evolved into selecting only the “good” pieces to read. Over time, I matured into the understanding that good and bad are equally fanciful interpretations. I do not want to give my power, my self-esteem, or my autonomy, to any person, place, or thing outside myself. I thus abstain from all media about myself. The only thing that matters is how I feel about myself, my personal integrity, and my relationship with my Creator. Of course, it’s wonderful to be held in esteem and fond regard by family, friends, and community, but a central part of my spiritual practice is letting go of otheration. And casting one’s lot with the public is dangerous and self-destructive, and I value myself too much to do that.

 

However, the recent speculation and accusations in March feel different, and my colleagues and friends encouraged me to know what was being said. Consequently, I choose to address it because the conversation was pointedly nasty, gendered, and misogynistic and embodies what all girls and women in our culture, to a greater or lesser degree, endure every day, in ways both outrageous and subtle. The assault on our body image, the hypersexualization of girls and women and subsequent degradation of our sexuality as we walk through the decades, and the general incessant objectification is what this conversation allegedly about my face is really about.

 

A brief analysis demonstrates that the following “conclusions” were all made on the exact same day, March 20, about the exact same woman (me), looking the exact same way, based on the exact same television appearance. The following examples are real, and come from a variety of (so-called!) legitimate news outlets (such as HuffPo, MSNBC, etc.), tabloid press, and social media:

 

One: When I am sick for more than a month and on medication (multiple rounds of steroids), the accusation is that because my face looks puffy, I have “clearly had work done,” with otherwise credible reporters with great bravo “identifying” precisely the procedures I allegedly have had done.

 

Two: When my skin is nearly flawless, and at age 43, I do not yet have visible wrinkles that can be seen on television, I have had “work done,” with media outlets bolstered by consulting with plastic surgeons I have never met who “conclude” what procedures I have “clearly” had. (Notice that this is a “back-handed compliment,” too—I look so good! It simply cannot possibly be real!)

 

 

That was good.

[Rheo]

h/t Chicks on the Right

[Rheo]

Shattered Glass and the Blind Eye of a President

[Rheo]

New Thread