http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:30:23 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/01/25/133023.php ReporteretteChris and Kim Brancato knew something was wrong when their 12-year-old son came home with bruised ribs. Teachers "thought it was horseplay," and the boy never told his parents he was being bullied. So the bullies kept beating him up, his grades began to slip, and the Fluvanna Middle School honor roll student tried to kill himself. Only after the Brancatos noticed ligature marks on their son's neck, did things begin to happen. The Brancatos went to court and won. Now Del. Rob Bell (R-Albemarle County) is pushing a bully bill that would require schools to teach about "the inappropriateness of bullying, intimidation and harassment of others,"and would make schools report to parents with guidelines for filing a juvenile petition and contacting law enforcement. Aside from being more skeptical about their son's injuries early on which in turn, led to more than "$30,000 worth of medical bills, suicide watches and emergency hospitalization," the Brancatos did what they should have done. They went to court and got justice. And they didn't even have a bully bill to back them up. Let's imagine if the Brancatos did indeed have bully legislation on the books when their son was being beaten up. If the teachers thought the activities were horseplay, would there ever have been a phone call? Not likely. The Brancato's son would have kept getting bullied until his parents' curiosity over their son's bruises, neck ligatures and bad grades, turned into anger and action. Despite its good intentions, what we're left with is a bill based on a heap of what-ifs. What if the school had known better? What if the school had called the Brancatos? The bigger - and more delicate - what-if question is this: What if the Brancato's son had spoken up? For whatever reason, the victim stayed silent. His injuries were physical clues. His slipping grades were more clues. It took a suicide attempt for the 12-year-old to break his silence. The boy did not deserve the suffering. However, there is an important lesson to be learned that is being ignored: If you are attacked, you must defend yourself, or expect more attacks. "Defending yourself" doesn't have to mean being a black belt in Karate. Telling a parent or other authority figure matters most. Though we can sympathize with the Brancatos' story, Del. Bell's bully bill transfers the burden of parenting from parents to schools and that's a bad, ineffective idea. Let schools take care of math and reading lessons. Let parents take care of life's lessons. ***** Read The Daily Progress coverage of this story here. This post first appeared on Reporterette.com. Politics24682@blogcritics.org Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:30:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/01/14/120027.php ReporteretteIf Michael Chertoff is confirmed as Department of Homeland Security chief, he'll have his hands full reconciling conflicting positions within the administration regarding reported gang-terrorist activity.By now, many of us have heard of the reported link between El Salvadoran-based gang Mara Salvatrucha -- MS-13 for short -- and Islamic terrorists. (Michelle Malkin has good background here)In this morning's 9am ET hour of Fox New Live, reporterette Alyson Camerota said an FBI source told the network it was implausible that radical muslims would align themselves with a predominantly Catholic criminal gang.Are we to believe that MS-13 gangsters -- criminals accused of raping handicapped girls and chopping off fingers with machetes -- would never team up with Islamic terrorists for religious reasons?Camerota later ran a bite from Homeland Security official John Torres saying his agency had no evidence of a MS-13-al-Qaeda connection.Thinking for sure that I had misunderstood the report, I watched it again in the 10am ET hour. The story stayed the same. Camerota's sources in the FBI and the DHS are refusing to connect the violent activities of MS-13 with the terrorist motivations of al-Qaeda.A Boston Herald article echoes the FBI's curious position regarding reported activites between the two groups:"FBI officials steadfastly deny any connection between MS-13 - a brutal, international criminal organization that has thousands of members across the country - and the terrorist al-Qaeda network.``The FBI has not established a link between MS-13 and al-Qaeda,'' said Joe Parris, supervisory special agent in the FBI national press office. ``There is no link established.'' Even so,"Attorney General John Ashcroft has publicly said a high-ranking al-Qaeda leader, Adnan El-Shukrijumah, has offered top dollar to infiltrate the United States via the Mexican border." Administration apologists would say the apparent contradictions regarding reported linkages between MS-13 and the al-Qaeda network could be an elaborate misinformation campaign aimed at baiting terrorists: Pretend you're turning off the heat, then pounce on them. The skeptic in me refuses to believe that.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics24234@blogcritics.org Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:00:27 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/01/10/221624.php ReporteretteI've been sitting on this one for a few days. A few months actually. Look for TN Gov. Phil Bredesen to make a run for the Democratic nomination for president in '08. He's a fiscal conservative and frankly, a better budget trimmer than his predecessor Gov. Don Sundquist, a so-called Republican. He's also closed a loop hole that allowed illegal aliens -- ahem, potential terrorists -- to get TN drivers licenses.He's slashing TennCare, a taxpayer-sucking medical benefits debacle that began under Democratic Gov. Ned McWherter's administration. Hillary Clinton was in close contact with McWherter as she drafted her plan to nationalize healthcare when her husband was in the White House. Thankfully, the idea flopped, and the U.S. isn't in the fiscal shape TN was in when Bredesen took over.Bredesen is a red-state Democrat who knows how to win over voters from both parties. Bush may have swept the South in '04 but the GOP needs to realize that no-nonsense fiscal conservatives like Bredesen may indeed inspire a party-switch among Republicans unhappy with Bush's domestic agenda and approach to securing the Homeland against terrorism. If Hillary's smart, she'll use Bredesen as an ally. If Republicans are smart, they'll ditch the moderate agenda and begin acting like the conservatives their voters want them to be.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics24111@blogcritics.org Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:16:24 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/19/153523.php ReporteretteOn my way home from a Christmas shopping trip to the Sam's Club in Charlottesville this weekend, I noticed about a dozen protestors outside Wal-Mart. A few signs caught my attention:"VIOLENT TOYS = VIOLENT BOYS"and"YOU DON'T HAVE TO KILL TO BE A HERO"If you follow the logic, the next time Ann Coulter gets a pie thrown at her, she should urge shoppers to boycott Wal-Mart's bakery department. But to the protestors, toys, not tarts, are taboo.Are they scared of the knife-wielding GI Joe Force Recon Marine action figure?Or maybe it's the Mission: Paintball Plug n' Play set which "turns your TV into a paintball park!"I can't help but wonder if these protestors were the kids on the playground the bully always picked on because he knew they would never fight back. These are the same tattle-tales that want us non-bullies to believe the world's a safer place if boys played like girls. They do not understand that the sexes are different. Young boys tend to play rougher than girls because they're wired that way. Boys need more GI Joe and less Ritalin. They need to spend more time role playing good guys versus bad guys and less time sitting in a classroom soaking in a "sensitivity training" lesson.Of course, when boys turn violent, these protestors would have you lay the blame on Wal-Mart, not the parents. You see, there's always a bully a blame.My husband grew up watching shoot-em-ups and -- gasp! -- even shot cap guns, bb guns, you name it. Is he a violent man? No. But he can be -- and I want him to be -- if a violent person threatens him or our family.Speaking of violence, I wish I had gone to Wal-Mart and bought this naughty toy. I would have walked up to the protestors and have politely given them a demonstration.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Culture23436@blogcritics.org Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:35:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/09/152055.php ReporteretteEdward Lee Pitts is a reporter for a newspaper whose motto is "To Give the News Impartially, Without Fear or Favor."Yet according to an email posted on the Drudge Report, Pitts was far from impartial when he helped stage a question from a soldier to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. In the email addressed to Chattanooga Time Free Press staffers, Pitts says "...we worked on questions to ask Rumsfeld about the appaling lack of armor their vehicles going into combat have." Media attention quickly focused on the soldier who had asked the question as Pitts -- a 2003 graduate of Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism -- basked in the afterglow of a successfully executed stunt."The great part was that after the event was over the throng of national media following Rumsfeld- The New York Times, AP, all the major networks -- swarmed to the two soldiers I brought from the unit I am embedded with."Most news consumers never see this side of journalism because reporters and their willing newsroom accomplices work behind a guise of "objectivity." Yet, in Pitts' email, the author's bias is clear. He seems to have no problem sharing it to his colleagues, yet it is doubtful he would have ever revealed his thoughts to his readers. And you've got to ask your self "why?"There are some people in the news business who see their job as a craft. There are others -- usually the troublemakers -- who see it as an art. And the production of art affords the artist a poetic license if you will. In Pitts' case, his brush stroke was pinpoint and precise: buddy up with a soldier and coach him, and hope his boss picks on him for a question. If it works, you've got a lead story. A-block. Front page. Top of the hour. There is no wonder Pitts began his email with the following sentence: "I just had one of the best days as a journalist today."Did his editors?This article first appeared on Reporterette.com. Politics23103@blogcritics.org Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:20:55 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/11/14/152549.php ReporteretteNothing scares secular lefties more than an election where some 60 million Americans cast a vote for -- gasp! -- a President who finds great comfort in his faith.Beltway blasphemy!Republicans call it winning an election. Maureen Dowd calls it "merging church and state." And as the reality of a victorious conservative electorate sinks in, Dowd says she is ..."... not getting a peace, charity, tolerance and forgiveness vibe from the conservatives and evangelicals who claim to have put their prodigal son back in office."Instead, she is ..."... getting more the feel of a vengeful mob - revved up by rectitude - running around with torches and hatchets after heathens and pagans and infidels."Vengeful mob? Torches and hatchets?That's the difrerence between liberals and conservatives. Imagery Dowd uses to describe church-going Christians is imagery conservatives reserve to describe murderous thugs like the savages who killed and mutiliated the bodies of four Americans in Fallujah last March. Although Dowd's word choice is unfortunate, what is more troubling is her fear of Protestant evangelicals, an attitude reminisicent of anti-Catholic sentiments that emerged in 1928 when New York Governor Alfred Emanuel Smith became the Democratic presidential candidate. John F. Kennedy, facing similar hurdles when he ran for office, addressed the mistrust of Catholics to Southern Baptist leaders in 1960:"I am not the Catholic candidate for President [but the candidate] who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters -- and the church does not speak for me."Bush delivered a similar response to his critics just days after his re-election:"I will be your president regardless of your faith, and I don't expect you to agree with me, necessarily, on religion. As a matter of fact, no president should ever try to impose religion on our society. If you're a Jew or a Christian or a Muslim, you're equally American."Liberals conveniently ignore such similarities in history, particularly when they involve the hero of the Democratic Party and a conservative Republican President. Instead of taking a hard look at why Democrats lost the electoral and popular vote, Dowd and other liberal pundits are trying to de-legitimize the Republican win and guilt-trip the Bush administration into watering down its second-term agenda by "reaching out to Democrats" and helping "unite a divided country."This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics22224@blogcritics.org Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:25:49 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/11/11/114420.php ReporteretteThis letter is one of many collected by Israeli intelligence officials showing Yasser Arafat's involvement in bankrolling terrorist activity. Just days after the 9-11 attacks, the PLO cut this deal with Arafat:The Palestinian Liberation Organization The Palestinian National Authority The President's BureauTo the Fighting President Brother Abu Amar, may the Lord protect you, Greetings,I hereby request you to allocate financial aid in the sum of $2500 for the following brethren: 1. Ra'ed el Karmi (note: former commander of a group in the Fatah/Tanzim Tulkarm that masterminded the attack on the Bat-Mitzvah party in Hadera). 2. Amar Qadan (note: a senior activist of Presidential Security/Force 17 in Ramallah, involved in the activities of its operational cell).Thank you,Your son, Hussein al Sheikh (note: senior Fatah activist in the West Bank)(Note: in Yasser Arafat's handwriting:)Treasury/Ramallah Asslocate $600 to each of them. Yasser Arafat (signature) (19/9/2001)This is the same man French President Jacques Chirac called a "man of courage and conviction who, for 40 years, has incarnated the Palestinians' combat for recognition of their national rights."If those aren't words spoken from a true apologist for terror, I don't know what are.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics22122@blogcritics.org Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:44:20 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/11/09/095023.php ReporteretteThe Thomas Jefferson quote Barbra Streisand used for her November 8 statement regarding Bush's re-election first appeared on Democratic Underground by a poster claiming to be Elizabeth Edwards:"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt. If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake."The quote comes from a letter written by Jefferson to John Taylor following the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798, a set of four laws passed by the Federalist-controlled Congress under the John Adams administration. The laws were designed to control the activities of foreigners in the U.S. during a time of impending war with France, but in effect, the Acts were used to restrict the growth of the Jefferson Democratic-Republicans, not to be confused with today's modern Republican party.The Acts backfired. Only one alien was actually deported and only ten people were convicted of sedition.Confusing a law enacted by a war-time Congress with a vote cast by a war-time electorate, Streisand has taken Jefferson's quote out of context. She is essentially accusing the GOP of electoral tyranny and in doing so, she is blinding herself to the reality that more and more Americans find the Democrats' left-wing politics repulsive.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics22033@blogcritics.org Tue, 9 Nov 2004 09:50:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/10/27/120858.php ReporteretteIn a speech at Harvard University this week, ABC News President David Westin warned against commentary in the news media:"The more time we express our opinions, the less time we have to talk about the facts."Westin still doesn't get it.He is is still stuck in the old-news mentality, the one that gave us three networks, three newsmen. The one where Walter Cronkite would sign off every evening with "And that's the way it was." These were the days newsmen were objective, unbiased, they say.Wrong. There has always been bias. To believe reporters are not biased and have no opinion is to believe they are inhuman, almost God-like beings whose intentions are pure and good, and void of any selfish motivations. To me, that is a very arrogant way of seeing yourself if you are a reporter.The truth is many reporters do have strong opinions and many times those leanings inevitably seep into their stories. Having or sharing an opinion is nothing to be ashamed of; you just have to be up front about it. Most reporters, however, are afraid to reveal who they really are, fearful that their media bosses may punish them for their misplaced honesty. Honesty, you see, is not always welcome in newsrooms.At least when Westin's your boss.This post first appeared on Reporterette.com Politics21490@blogcritics.org Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:08:58 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/10/18/145314.php ReporteretteI've never watched his cartoons but South Park co-creator Matt Stone is on to something:"It doesn't matter who you're gonna vote for. If you really don't know who you're gonna vote for, or are uninformed, or haven't really thought about it? Just stay home." (San Francisco Chronicle Oct. 17, 2004.)Amen!There's a reason why our founding fathers made land ownership a prerequisite for voting. In the 18th century agrarian economy, landowners had a vested interest on electoral outcomes. With property so closely tied to economy, land matters were money matters, and therefore political matters.Fast forward to 2004.Information -- and the manipulation thereof -- has already become one of the United States' most valuable commodities. Think internet. Think snap polls. Think round-the-clock TV/radio news. With the presidential election less than 3 weeks away, it is unfathomable for any tuned-in voter to be undecided (although they've shown us they are quite capable of voting for their favorite American Idol contestant). Stone's message: Information drop-outs should stay at home."If you really don't know or you're just going to vote for George Bush because he's already in office, or you're gonna vote for John Kerry because he's on the cover of Rolling Stone, don't do that. That's lame."Read on.Originally posted at Reporterette.com Politics21118@blogcritics.org Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:53:14 EDT