Man Kept Dead Mother's Body In A 'BACKPACK For Nearly A Decade'

Doesn't get more "that's fucked up" than this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Olbermann: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' (VIDEO)

I was blown away by this special comment. In light of all the fuss that has stirred up since word of the construction of a Muslim 'Mosque' was spread, the mainstream media was business as usual, i.e. not getting the accurate facts out to the public.

It's not that hard, really. Watch Keith do it here.

There isn't going to be a mosque near ground zero, because of two main facts which Keith brought to light. First, the group which purchased that property is going to build an Islamic community center, very different from a place of Muslim worship. Secondly, the property is nowhere near ground zero; it is a couple blocks over, and view of ground zero is blocked by buildings if one stands at that property.

It is hard for me - and I'd like to think for many - not to be jaded to see the media be so politically-driven and convoluted with their facts. In recent months we've seen the debacle with Shirley Sherrod and now this. My fingers are cross that at least some news commentators can get things right.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and the appeal of Fox News

I will admit right off the bat that I'm not a regular viewer of Glenn Beck's or Bill O'Reilly's programs on Fox News. I will also admit that I watch MSNBC much more often than The Fox News Channel. Nevertheless, I try to force myself to watch Fox News every now and then and listen to what these guys have to say.

After a few months of watching clips and videos of Beck's and O'Reilly's shows, I have to say I sort of understand their massive appeal (according to the dominating ratings they receive month after month). They are charming TV personalities who captivate a large audience with their 'common sense' approach. Their issues / discussion pieces do not rely on heavy research, but rather an over-simplified, A-B-C style, dizzying rhetoric that is designed to satisfy a general public that more often than not probably would not look further into the issues after watching their shows, and thus would would believe in the truthfulness and sincerity of these men.

For examples of these approaches, look no further than Beck's chalkboard or O'Reilly's "Talking Points" segment. Both of these methods are employed to simplify what would otherwise be very complex political issues that require pages (even books) of explanation in order to be understood.

While these have been my observations over the past few months, the video / article with which this piece is linked is very interesting in its own right. At the beginning of the discussion, O'Reilly asks Beck why the he seldom covers social issues such as same sex marriage and abortion, to which Beck responds "I think we have bigger fish to fry", referring to the country's more pressing political issues that require debate, and also noting that social issues are private / religious in nature and should not be interfered with by the government.

This is the highlight of the article, that Glenn Beck does not think that gay marriage is a threat to America. In my opinion, however, the interesting part came in the discussion that ensued, during which O'Reilly tried to point out Beck's rather extremist political views (namely his belief that "the country is burning" and that he will soon feature a piece on the 1920s President Calvin Coolidge on his show). It was fairly clear that O'Reilly's intention was to paint Beck as a radical, but Beck not only did not get serious and engage in real debate with O'Reilly, he essentially laughed it off.

No one can really deny that these two men are good entertainers, and that often times Keith Olbermann appears grumpy in comparison. But does charisma equal quality / sensible news and political commentary? How can the rhetoric approach of these men compare with that of Rachel Maddow's, who provides in-depth analysis to every story she covers?

Maybe these men are genuine in their beliefs. Maybe they just do what they do to make money. All I can hope for is for the audience to be able to tell the difference.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Tea Party Crushing Chamber Of Commerce In GOP Primaries

While not definitive in anyway, this is indeed a sign that the Tea Party is not perfectly in line with the Republicans. The Tea Party's biggest motif, if they have any, is that they are anti-establishment. The Republican Party essentially is part of the establishment, even if some of the Republicans claim they want to shrink it. I guess it's nice to see some Tea Partiers actually voting on what they believe in. In the cynical political climate of today, that's all we can really ask for.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Rachel Maddow Takes On Bill O'Reilly: 'Stupid,' 'Bullpucky' (VIDEO)

Good.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Stimulus money helps homeless schoolchildren | McClatchy

Stimulus money helps homeless schoolchildren | McClatchy

An example of the Stimulus at work that's NOT at a car manufacturing plant or solar panel site.

Fareed Zakaria Returns Anti-Defamation League Award Over Ground Zero Mosque

Take it to 'em, Fareed!



The fact is, innocent Muslim Americans died in 9/11, alongside Americans of other ethnicity. Let us not forget that the 9/11 attacks were set in motion by a very small group of Muslims with extreme ideologies.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost