Daily Archives: March 2, 2011

20 posts

We found yesterday’s worst Politico article ever

So yesterday we played an insane little game called Find Today’s Worst Politico Article Ever. And the Crasstalk Army rose to the challenge. You risked turning into David Broder-esque Beltway Zombies and actually spent time looking for the crappiest pieces of Politico crap that ever got crapped out.

Here’s the worst of the worst (remember, this is just one day’s worth of Politicrap):

Semicarbazone  and Epuff both suggested Bristol Palin’s Memoir: ‘Not Afraid of Life’

Essentially, this is a 4 paragraph article mentioning when the book is coming out, followed by a short blurb by a publisher. In fact everything in this article is probably going to be found on the inside sleeve of the book.

Except the conclusion of the article, of course, which states: “On Tuesday morning, Bristol posted on her Facebook fan page for the first time since December.”

Semicarbazone also suggested this hard-hitting interview with Andrew Sullivan.

HidingInCanada submitted this one, mainly due to its lulz-worthy headline:  Rahm Emanuel Taps Desiree Rodgers.

KnightOfTheBurningRiver submitted this piece of Mittens-related hackery. Do people actually read this crap? I refuse to believe it.

Semicarbazone found that Politico has basically given up and is now just stealing its Sarah Palin news from The Times of India.

Pssshwhatever found Politico obsessing over Eliot Spitzer’s awful CNN show in Aspbergian detail.

But there could be only one winner on this day, and that goes to Epuff, for nominating this thing. Amazingly, Politico figured out how to connect Charlie Sheen, Mike Huckabee and Chris Matthews into a fine bouillabaisse of SEO linkbait crappiness:

Two and a Half Mean: Huck says Matthews like Sheen

The awful play on the words. The use of a colon. The rhyming. As Charles Barkley would say, “that’s just turrrrible.” The rest of the article just repeats a few dumb soundbites that Huckabee made right before eating his fifth Hardee’s burger of the afternoon and fucking his cousin. Of course, Politico doesn’t actually ever take sides. They just repeat what the pundits say. See, journalism is easy when you’re as even-handed as Politico is! And if you can throw Charlie Sheen into the mix, go for it!

So congratulations to Epuff on winning our first-ever Politico contest. Here’s a little something I wrote in her honor. I think it really capture’s Epuff’s essence.

And yet we had no ideal Mistress stretching her form up to the clouds, nor yet a cruel Queen to whom to offer our corpses twisted into the shape of Byzantine rings! No reason to die unless it is the desire to be rid of the too great weight of our courage!

We drove on, crushing beneath our burning wheels, like shirt-collars under the iron, the watch dogs on the steps of the houses.

Death, tamed, went in front of me at each corner offering me his hand nicely, and sometimes lay on the ground with a noise of creaking jaws giving me velvet glances from the bottom of puddles.

“Let us leave good sense behind like a hideous husk and let us hurl ourselves, like fruit spiced with pride, into the immense mouth and breast of the world! Let us feed the unknown, not from despair, but simply to enrich the unfathomable reservoirs of the Absurd!”

As soon as I had said these words, I turned sharply back on my tracks with the mad intoxication of puppies biting their tails, and suddenly there were two cyclists disapproving of me and tottering in front of me like two persuasive but contradictory reasons. Their stupid swaying got in my way. What a bore! Pouah! I stopped short, and in disgust hurled myself — vlan! — head over heels in a ditch.

Oh, maternal ditch, half full of muddy water! A factory gutter! I savored a mouthful of strengthening muck which recalled the black teat of my Sudanese nurse!

As I raised my body, mud-spattered and smelly, I felt the red hot poker of joy deliciously pierce my heart. A crowd of fishermen and gouty naturalists crowded terrified around this marvel. With patient and tentative care they raised high enormous grappling irons to fish up my car, like a vast shark that had run aground. It rose slowly leaving in the ditch, like scales, its heavy coachwork of good sense and its upholstery of comfort.

We thought it was dead, my good shark, but I woke it with a single caress of its powerful back, and it was revived running as fast as it could on its fins.

Then with my face covered in good factory mud, covered with metal scratches, useless sweat and celestial grime, amidst the complaint of staid fishermen and angry naturalists, we dictated our first will and testament to all the living men on earth.

Anti-Union Right Wingers Are Union Members

Taking the right wing’s common hypocrisy to mind-numbing new heights, three major conservative commentators – who have been harshly critical of the demonstrations in Wisconsin by union members – all belong to the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists union (AFTRA), which is the AFL-CIO affiliate for television and broadcast workers.

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly have have all been outspoken in their lack of sympathy to the struggles of public employee unions in Wisconsin.  A representative for Glenn Beck denies that he is a union member, although it’s puzzling as to how that may be, since he, Hannity and O’Reilly famously all work for the same news organization.

According to AlterNet.org, which posted the story on February 26, 2011:

On Feb. 18, Limbaugh said on his radio program, “We are either on the side of the Wisconsin protesters or we are on the side of our country.” Hannity has featured several guests critical of the union and its supporters, including Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, on his Fox News television and radio shows.

On the Feb. 18 edition of “The O’Reilly Factor,” O’Reilly stated, “Governments can’t afford to operate” because of “union wages and benefits.”  But it turns out that opposing workers’ rights isn’t the only thing these blowhards have in common.

To read the rest of the story go here.

AFTRA card photo here.

American Idol: Let’s Meet the Boys

Last night we all got to see the top 12 boys individually perform for the first time [you know, rather than in a half-assed montage]. From the start I knew I hated this year’s male line-up because Scotty McBarotone was there, but more on him later.  Also I’m sure that ‘new’ 360 experience induced feelings of motion sickness in many viewers.

The show began with JLo marching out in all her glory, only to be immediately taken down a notch by Seacrest. Something about how she cried last week, old news. Though I have to say, in comparison to previous episodes she actually looks pretty bad; that 1990’s hairstyle does not flatter her face structure and ear flaps.

Let’s fastforward away from Jlo and stupid banter [because we can do that] and get on to the mantestants and their TWELVE [oh man, so many!] performances.
– I provided pictures from their RW-style intro pieces for your reading pleasure.

1.  
Boy was Clint awkward, his brick-like giant red shoes stifled his hyper dancing so he ended up shuffling around like a zombie that’s craving the brains of a nerd with thick-rimmed glasses. Maybe it was the cheesy light-blocks behind him or the awful background accompaniment, but I didn’t like it. He added no soul to a song that is SUPPOSED to be soulful.  I don’t think he’ll do well in the next elimination episode for three major reasons: he went first in a long line-up [forgettable], he was mean to the insecure chubby kid in the group auditions, his glasses.

2.
This kid just sounded so awful. However, it may have just been me, because I think it takes me a few episodes to get used to how grating the backup music sounds on this show. As of now, it seriously reminds me of a poor version of Eurovision. Why does all the production value go to the lighting?  Whoops, I already forgot everything about #2 [can’t even be bothered to read his name].

3.
Oh god, so if you ever wanted to hear usher sound like shit, or listen to usher with bronchitis with accompaniment by your little sisters keyboard, here you are. Have fun with it.
I’m glad at least the judges didn’t like it, and I enjoyed the post-singing banter:

  • Jlo: “Is that who you want to be as an artist?”
  • Number 3 guy, “NONONONONOO, of course not! Forgive me for hurting your precious ears, JLo!”

Note: This is the same guy who was a complete jerk to all of his team mates during the group-auditions. During that stage, I don’t think he realized he not only has to succeed by getting into the semi-finals – but he also has to appear likable to a general audience.  However, America’s collective memory is decidedly bad, so if he keeps being attractive and ups his live performance abilities he’ll probably go far. America’s bad memory is why I gave two other reasons for why Clinty Glasses to do poorly in this competition, maybe we’ll all forget about how big of a jerk he is to chubsters by next week.

4:
Jim Halpert, no wait, Tim Halperin.  This is the first time I remember seeing him, though I didn’t watch the initial auditions nor the 2 hour long episode with the final 24 ‘reveal’.
I thought this guy was actually good. I was wondering if anyone’s vocals would be capable of compensating for the shitty theater acoustics and background music, but I think he pulled it off. And by that, I mean he was tolerable.  However, judges didn’t like it. No skin off my back because he made a boring song choice.

5.
Ew, this guy. I don’t know why he thought that whispering a Doors song while dancing and prancing around awkwardly was a good idea [are you convinced yet that he’s a forest pixie?] I love that Jlo called him out about how he flips his hair more than Willow Smith.

6.
High-note Asperger’s kid.
I was ready to pass him off as a less entertaining Shauvaghn (from last season), because he shares her tendency to make unnecessary high-notes in the middle/end of songs. But I was surprised how well his vocals paired with the shitty guitar music he sang along with. So I guess some voices do match perfectly with the AI house band. On the otherhand, I noticed his singing was altered to have an echo effect, does that count as an unfair advantage in a singing competition?  He’s not going to do well in the inevitable Frank Sinatra episode

Half-time intermission: I want to discuss how fantastic Jlo is as a judge! This new lineup is working perfectly so far, much better than the Abdul or Kara of season’s past. Maybe it’s because there is less time devoted to the judge’s incessant ramblings in these early episodes so they’re forced make their comments concise & clear, but for the most part the judges are behaving like they’re actually competent. Good on them!

7.
This kid is a good singer, but he could do with some more charisma. That is all.

8.
I hate Scotty McBarotone. It’s not an irrational hate, I swear!
a. He just doesn’t doesn’t deserve to be there
b. Baby lock them doors, it looks like he’s put on some self tanner in this episode [like the pompous jerk he is]
c. He has a chronic case of babyface so it looks like he stepped out of a Pixar film.

d. He doesn’t have any range to his voice and he can’t possibly sing anything that isn’t country. AI isn’t just a singing competition, it’s a versatility+charisma competition.

I’ll admit I was a bit pissed off that he sounded good in this episode. His time on the chopping block will come though, oh yes, it will come.

9.
Stefano was pretty good, mainly because he made a great song choice that heavily worked towards his advantage. He is basically a replicate of Bruno Mars, except he chooses to hold his notes for a longer amount of time.

  • I love how Jlo exclaimed “You’re a beast!!” after he finished his song. This kind of stuff is what makes me really treasure her presence.
  • When Ryan went to interview Stefano, he asked if the song was dedicated to anybody. Poor Stefano knew he had to let Ryan down lightly, so he saved face with some awkward stammering and then a gave hallmark-card worthy, “ITS TO ALL THE LADIES… REALLY.”

10.
I’ve never liked this guy’s high-pitched (and yet) raspy voice. It’s one or the other dude, you’re going to end up like those dudes in Maroon 5. Of course he sang a Rod Stewart song, but kid, you’re no Rod Stewart. To make up for that unchangeable detail he danced around the stage with his arms flailing about like he had a strange form of epilepsy.  Though I am impressed by how white his teeth are.

11.
We’ll be seeing more of this guy, he’s pretty fun to watch.  Top 5 material? Probably not.

12.
This guy made me laugh, even though it sounded like he was singing a prelude to beating up his wife. I guess that’s what the song was meant to do? This is the first time I’ve perceived that dark/jealous side to that song. Maybe that’s because of the influence Hocus Pocus had on my childhood. (my ten-year-old self is screaming out, “I put a spell on you is about magic! Not jealousy!”)

I love how was just yelling at one point, I was cracking up.

Do any of you crasstalkers even watch this show? Season 9 was the first time I watched a whole season since Kelly beat Justin. I think I was re-drawn to it because the top 12 were leaked and I wanted to see their progression from awkward auditions to being the ‘best’ of the season. Added a whole new level of drama, I guess. This season, I just let my TV addiction get the best of me.

So, how’d ya’ll like dem boys?

The Case For and Against a Libyan No Fly Zone

By Lady_E

Two weeks in to the Libyan uprising events continue to unfold at breathtaking speed as opposition and Gaddafi forces engage in heated battles for control of the country.  The initial opposition momentum that resulted in close to half of the country falling to opposition hands and threatening Gaddafi’s control of Tripoli has shown signs of receding as Gaddafi has successfully reinforced his control of Tripoli and now begun counter-attacks to reclaim opposition-held territories.   Though opposition forces have claimed success in repulsing Gaddafi’s most recent counter-offensive, opposition forces are now debating requesting foreign intervention under a UN banner, specifically targeted air strikes against weapons compounds and military installations such as radar stations.  Foreign military intervention of this type would be a major escalation of international involvement (to date limited to non-military measures by the UN Security Council, the European Union and the United States) and appears to have little support from Security Council and NATO nation state members.

Gaddafi’s brutal crackdown and the developing humanitarian crisis has led many to ask what, if anything, the international community could do.  Are there other options available? The most often mentioned proposal is the imposition of a No Fly Zone (NFZ) over Libya.  This article is not advocating for or against an NFZ.  An NFZ may sound like a relatively simple solution and most people are probably familiar with the general concept (as it has been used before and during the Gulf Wars and in the Balkan conflicts), but there are serious concerns about a Libyan NFZ, for both the potential enforcing foreign nations and for the opposition movement within Libya.

Many serious international commentators have weighed in on a No Fly Zone, for and against.  Each view deserves careful consideration and the point of this article is to provide readers with links to the varying arguments to spur debate and present a more fleshed out backdrop of the competing concerns and interests.  Before we begin, however, a quick note on the actual mechanics of how an NFZ would come into being.  An NFZ would have to be authorized by the UN Security Council under its Chapter VII Charter Mandate and could be enforced either by UN member states or the NATO military alliance.   An NFZ is a military intervention, not a non-military measure. From a practical standpoint, Russia (a veto-holding Security Council permanent member) is currently ruling out a UN Security Council NFZ and the NATO Alliance members are similarly split on the issue.  For more on this aspect, see here.

Arguments For a No Fly Zone

Britain Prime Minister David Cameron, House of Commons Address:  Prime Minister Cameron has proposed taking the lead on coordinating a military no fly zone, saying “[w]e must not tolerate this regime using military force against its own people. In that context I have asked the Ministry of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Staff to work with our allies on plans for a military no-fly zone.”

Michael Rubin, American Enterprise Institute, USA Today: Mr. Rubin argues that American credibility is on the line and that we cannot stand by in the face of civilian “slaughter.”  He suggests that “Obama should take action: First, he should order U.S. fighter jets based in Sicily and on Mediterranean aircraft carriers to enforce a no-fly zone over northern Libya. Not only would this prevent Libyan planes from again strafing civilians, but it would also enable safer evacuation of non-Libyans.  If Gadhafi’s henchmen continue their slaughter, Obama might impose no-drive zones for military vehicles.”

David Cortright, University of Notre Dame’s Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, NY Times Room for Debate Forum:  Mr. Cortright argues for a multi-lateral no fly zone authorized by the UN, but endorsed by the Arab League and one that includes Arab governments such as Egypt and Morocco.  He argues “[m]ore than 200 Arab organizations and intellectuals have urged Arab League support for a no-flight zone. Gaining the league’s support in this new era of more responsive politics in the region should be possible and must be a priority. This will make it easier to convince China and other hesitant Security Council members to approve U.N. authorization and will hasten Colonel Qaddafi’s downfall.”

Marc Lynch, Foreign Policy Magazine: Mr. Lynch argues that it is time for concrete actions against Gaddafi’s regime.  “It is time for the United States, NATO, the United Nations and the Arab League to act forcefully to try to prevent the already bloody situation from degenerating into something much worse.  By acting, I mean a response sufficiently forceful and direct to deter or prevent the Libyan regime from using its military resources to butcher its opponents. I have already seen reports that NATO has sternly warned Libya against further violence against its people. Making that credible could mean the declaration and enforcement of a no-fly zone over Libya, presumably by NATO, to prevent the use of military aircraft against the protestors.”

Arguments Against a No Fly Zone

Marc Leon Goldberg, UN Dispatch: Mr. Goldberg responds to Marc Lynch and challenges the effectiveness of an NFZ:

“There has been a sort-of coalescing around the idea that a No Fly Zone is useful way to intervene to stop the killing. I am not so sure. While it is true that some of the slaughter has been perpetrated by Libyan air force, air assets alone are not responsible for the killing. If Qaddafi and his inner circle are intent on violently suppressing this revolt, they will use their superior ground forces as well. A No Fly Zone is a humanitarian half measure. It would let the international community say that it is doing something, but there is very little a No Fly Zone can actually do to stop ongoing slaughter.”

Defense Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen, General Mathis, Pentagon News Conference:  Gen. Mathis points out that an NFZ would first require disabling Libya’s air defense system, a significant military exercise. Sec. Gates stated “there would be multiple consequences to military action, including to United States forces already at war in the region. “If we move additional assets, what are the consequences of that for Afghanistan, for the Persian Gulf?” and that “we also have to think about, frankly, the use of the U.S. military in another country in the Middle East.”

Edward Rees, Senior adviser to Peace Dividend Trust, The Atlantic: Mr. Rees argues “enforcing a no-fly zone (NFZ) over Libya is unlikely to do as much good as its backers hope, and could in fact backfire.”  Mr. Rees highlights the practical effectiveness of an NFZ because of the size of Libya, the lack of nearby air bases from which to impose the NFZ (meaning it may have to be enforced from aircraft carriers), the risk of downing the wrong aircrafts and being drawn into a ground conflict.

Kori Schake, Hoover Institution, NY Times Room for Debate Forum: Ms. Schake presents four reasons why the US should not use military force, including the fact that “we have not had an ambassador in Libya for months, and we have evacuated our diplomats; we ought not overestimate how much we understand what is occurring in the country or the shape Libya’s rebellion will take.”

To read more views, see the New York Times Room for Debate Forum: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/01/should-the-us-move-against-qaddafi

 

Getting Into The Chicago Code

In the era of serialized television, where every drama has to give us a tight narrative that builds up to a singular climax I have forgotten about the procedural drama, particularly cop shows. Many say that watching five seasons of The Wire ruined other shows like Law and Order for them, because the former attempts to ground us in reality as much as possible where good does not trump evil and storylines don’t end in neat packages. On the other hand, not all television has to be jam-packed with so much plot that it can be likened to a novel. The goal is to be entertained, so when I saw the aggressive promos for the new Fox drama The Chicago Code I made sure to hop on.

The Chicago Code is the brainchild of Shawn Ryan, who is only the creator of the second greatest crime drama of all-time, The Shield, which was also integral in paving the way for basic cable networks to push scripted dramas that dealt with heavier fare. So there was a good amount of hype and expectations that this show would live up to that standard of excellence, despite being on a Big Four network. Does The Chicago Code deliver on these expectations? Well, kind of.

The show follows the exploits of three major characters. Chicago Police Department superintendent Teresa Colvin (Jennifer Beals), CPD detective Jarek Wysocki (Jason Clarke), and corrupt Chicago alderman Ronin Gibbons (Delroy Lindo). The main premise is that Colvin forms a secret task force to bring down Gibbons. However, the show relies on a “case of the week” format and attempts to tie them in to the main arc. It also makes heavy use of voiceover narration, which is a sticking point for a lot of people. Not trying to compare the two, but the voiceovers are more similar in style to Goodfellas than say, Dexter, but it’s a love/hate aspect of the show. I don’t think they are a crutch but that seems to be a minority opinion. The more glaring negative is hammy, cliche dialogue. The show is shot on location in Chicago (more on that later) and it’s obvious the writers want to let us know that we are in the motherfucking Chi. The pilot has one too many Chicago Cubs/White Sox references, and over the top lines like “YOU THINK YOU CAN CHANGE THINGS IN CHICAGO?!” I’m also not sold on some of the actors, namely Billy Lush who plays a mole inside the Irish Mafia.

On the plus side, the show is beautifully shot for a network drama. I may be biased but the directors take full advantage of their photogenic location with drawn-out car chases and aerial shots. Jennifer Beals may be the most unrealistic choice ever to play a police superintendent but she does a fine job, even though as a native Southsider she manages to sound like a Masshole. Delroy Lindo does a great job of chewing scenery and acting like a mix between Harold Washington, Rev. Jesse Jackson and Mayor Daley. The show sets him up as an evil genius and so far he’s up to the task. I’m still not sold that we will get a huge payoff on the main corruption storyline, but the show is certainly enjoyable enough on a weekly basis that I keep watching. Those looking for intricate storytelling should probably just watch The Wire again, but if you’re a fan of Law and Order and shows of that ilk I highly recommend diving into The Chicago Code.

Supreme Court Decides in Favor of Wesboro Baptist

The United States Supreme Court this morning voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church in a case brought by the father of a Marine killed in Iraq whose funeral Westboro picketed in 2006. The majority opinion, only Samuel Alito dissented, determined whether Albert Snyder, the father of a Marine killed in Iraq, was entitled to monetary damages due to his suffering emotional damages as a result of Westboro’s protest at his son funeral in Westminster, MD five years ago.

Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder was 20 years-old when he died in Iraq in a non-combat-related vehicle accident in Al-Anbar province on March 3, 2006. Westboro Baptist church members staged a protest at Snyder’s funeral in his hometown of Westminster. The elder Snyder has claimed emotional distress and physical problems related to the protest, and has said he cannot separate memories of his son from the hate-filled protest.

The Court, however, found that Westboro was engaged in protected public, not private, speech “in a public place on a matter of public concern” and therefore Snyder was not due any damages.

“Simply put, the church members had the right to be where they were,” Chief Justice John Roberts said, writing for the majority. “Westboro alerted local authorities to its funeral protest and fully complied with police guidance on where the picketing could be staged. The picketing was conducted under police supervision some 1,000 feet from the church, out of the sight of those at the church. The protest was not unruly; there was no shouting, profanity, or violence.”

Roberts, however, went on to note the Court was not deciding on the larger Constitutional question of whether protests at funerals are protected. This ruling only affected Albert Snyder’s rights to compensation in this specific instance.

“Our holding today is narrow,” Roberts wrote. “We are required in First Amendment cases to carefully review the record, and the reach of our opinion here is limited by the particular facts before us.”

Roberts pointed out, as the Court has said in the past, that even reprehensible speech that the overwhelming majority of Americans disagrees with must be protected under the right to free speech. “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable,” Roberts wrote in today’s decision.

Left unsettled by the Court in this decision, however, is the larger of question of whether a state can block a person’s or group’s protest at a funeral. Maryland and 43 other states have passed laws in recent years barring demonstrations at funerals because of the Wesboro protests.

In an impassioned dissent, Justice Alito wrote that the right to free speech does not allow for “the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case.” Alito believes the Westboro Church member “brutally attacked Albert Snyder” and that he is entitled to damages as compensation for his suffering “severe and lasting emotional injury.”

Photo here.

Afternoon Numbers: SF Edition

In a startling change from past designs, the iPad 2 will be 10' long, 5' wide, and weigh 1,200 lbs. It's designed for the burgeoning hill giant demographic.

Absolutely nothing interesting happened today.  Nothing whatsoever was announced at the Moscone Center in San Francisco today.  There was nothing doing with tablet computing.

Okay, so I’m lying.  Apple announced the iPad 2: Electric Bugaloo today.  It’s 30% thinner, twice as powerful, five times as intuitive, and 100% more magical.  It’ll prolly cost the same as the iPad 1: The Phantom Menace when that one came out.  Should you buy it?  I don’t know.  I don’t have an iPad and there’s probably better things out there to spend money on in the middle of a recession.  Shock of shocks, AAPL closed up 2.81 (.8 %) to $352.12.   The DJIA was up by a hair (.07%) to close up 8.78 at 12,066.80.  The NSDQ did a shade better, closing up .39% to close up 10.66 at 2,48.07.  Meanwhile, the redheaded stepchild bastard S&P closed up a modest .16% to close at 1,308.44, up 2.11.

In other news, Charlie Sheen is doing much better without a publicist, offering a subdued interview to CNN saying that he is sorry that his children were taken away by the police and that he understands that the police are doing their jobs and blah blah blah.  Bottom line: there was no reference to goddesses, tiger blood, winning, or Adonis DNA.  So Charlie Sheen’s stock is up… meaning that it’s up from $.02 to $.025

In other insanity news, Qaddafi almost killed a bunch of reporters from CNN when the Libyan Air Force dropped a bomb.  To be clear, the reporters were in Libya.  They were almost killed because Qaddafi is now bombing his own people.

On the “Who Hates Jews Today?” front, there haven’t been any reports of anti-semitic slurs against the Chosen People.  Then again, we do control the media so maybe my people have just gone with not publicizing the anti-Semitism.

In conclusion, we need a cure for cancer. Obviously Steve Jobs has an uncanny ability to meld sleek design, consumer electronics, hip marketing, and planned obsolescence into one shiny package and as long as we all keep buying iPads and iPhones, the economy will be fine.  Charlie Sheen should “free-ball” his publicity from now on and nothing bad will happen as a result of him being on Twitter.  And the current leader on the PGA Insanity Open is Qadaffi, who last was heard saying, “The American president will leave office, the European leaders will leave their offices, and Gadhafi will still be a leader.”

And Charlie Sheen is WINNING!

Clouds Are Not to Be Trusted

Did you know that your precious pictures, videos and email live in a cloud and could disappear at any time?  This week Google accidentally lost data for 40,000 to 150,000 users (reports vary) and is trying to restore the data.  Flickr is well known for deleting photos and Facebook might remove your art photos because some old cat lady is a prude who is just thinking of the poor children.  Usually photos are on your computer since you had to retrieve them from your camera, but email often exists only on your provider’s servers.  Cnet has put together a video showing how to backup your data from Gmail and some other tips for backing up your other data.

Medical Science to Rest of World: “Run for your lives, it’s HPV!”

HPV, or the human papillomavirus, has long been considered a woman’s worry, with advocates going so far as to text message young women aged 18-26 to remind them about getting all their vaccinations. Not that it is impossible for males to contract the virus, but the biggest danger with HPV is getting cervical cancer, right?

Wrong. HPV, as it turns out, is a gender-neutral offender. In fact, “while women are able to naturally fight the virus, men are not as inherently able.” Because we’ve largely ignored HPV’s impact on men, we’ve let it infect them at alarming rates.

How alarming? Half of all men are thought to have HPV. Yup, that’s one out of two men. In the world. And that might be lowballing it: “some scientists say privately the actual figure is more like 100 percent.” Emphasis added, because what the fuck. A hundred goddamn percent! Scientists are never 100% sure of their findings; hell, I’m only 98% sure I’m wearing pants right now. But how many men have HPV? A hundred percent of them. That means if you are a man, you have HPV. I AM 100% CERTAIN OF THIS FACT, BECAUSE SCIENCE.

So, um, dudes and ladies, get your HPV vaccinations. If you don’t, you will turn into a tree.

 

DoW Update:  As pointed out by by Booboo, “There are over 150 subtypes of HPV. 2 of them are strongly associated with cervical and anal cancer. These are the 2 that the vaccine affects. There are a half dozen or so that may cause warts, a few that may cause non-cancerous changes in cervical tissue. The rest are extremely common but benign. Do you have HPV? Probably. Is it one of the virulent cancer-causing strains? Far less likely. However, cancer is a bitch and if you are in the appropriate age group you should seriously consider the vaccine.”