http://mediamatters.org/items/200710240001?f=h_top
Beck responds to criticism: "We joke a lot about ... the Hollywood crowd living in Southern California"
Summary:
On the October 23 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, while responding to criticism of his recent comments about some victims of the California wildfires, CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck lashed out at "a few liberal bloggers" who, he said, "claim that I'm serious when I'm joking and try to cause trouble, and then they say I'm joking when I'm serious and try to cause trouble."
As Media Matters for America first documented, Beck said on his October 22 radio show: "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Beck added, "There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that."
Addressing his radio audience on October 23, Beck said, "[L]et me tell you, so you know, so you can tell those who want to make me into an evil supervillain. Who do you have to be to think that it's a good thing that anybody's house burns down? Who do you have to be?" Beck further explained, "When you listen to this program -- I hate to break it to, you know, those who don't listen to the show, but if they ever would listen to the show, let me give you a little piece of advice: You have to engage what I like to call 'your brain.' You actually have to think. I might be making a joke. I might be serious." Beck added, "We joke a lot about, you know, the Hollywood crowd living in Southern California. For example, I believe I have advocated Hollywood building giant air conditioners so they can fix the global-warming problem. I'm pretty sure I was joking then." He further stated, "But you wouldn't know that if you hadn't engaged your brain. So let me be serious for a minute. Let me extraordinarily clear. I clearly do not want anyone's house to be burned down."
Beck also defended his comments by saying, "Unfortunately -- and that's weird because that word sometimes is important in a sentence -- unfortunately, some people want to think the worst. But thinking the worst doesn't make it real. Thinking the worst doesn't change an illusion into reality." This appeared to echo a statement made to USA Today's On Deadline blog by Chris Balfe, the producer of Beck's radio program. On Deadline reported: "A spokesman for Beck expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility. 'To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately,' Chris Balfe, the show's producer, tells On Deadline through a spokesman."
From the October 23 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Let me get to your phone calls here in a second. I want to have a -- I want to have a frank and open conversation with you here for a second. Apparently, I have upset a few liberal bloggers. Woe is me. And I need to be extraordinarily clear on one thing. Not with you. And I'll explain in a second.
These people -- they're amazing. They're incredible. They claim that I'm serious when I'm joking and try to cause trouble, and then they say I'm joking when I'm serious and try to cause trouble. There's no way -- if you disagree with any of these people -- there's no way that you can ever win. And here's the interesting thing: Even if you agree with these people, there's no way you can ever win.
I shouldn't have to say this, especially in the United States of America, but for the benefit of the bloggers only, I will. The wildfires in California are a tragedy. I don't want anyone to lose their home. I don't care what their political stripes are. I don't want a soul to lose their home, and anyone who doesn't want to make me into an evil supervillain would understand that. You understand that. You've listened to me for years. In fact, you've got to look at the calendar every year and say, "Oh, jeez, there's a wildfire. Glenn's going to pop a blood vessel again."
If you've listened to me for years, you know wildfires are deeply personal to me. Wildfires make blood shoot out of my eyes. But for the bloggers, it doesn't matter what I really think. It doesn't -- they're not trying to convince you I'm a bad guy. You know. You know who I am. What they're trying to do is convince people who don't watch the TV show, who don't listen to the show. They're trying to convince them that I'm an evil supervillain.
Because those people can be convinced. So let me just -- let me tell you, so you know, so you can tell those who want to make me into an evil supervillain. Who do you have to be to think that it's a good thing that anybody's house burns down? Who do you have to be?
Let me put -- let me put this into perspective. I'm a dad of four kids. Put yourself into the situation that you go to sleep at night or, you know, it's nighttime, but you ain't going to sleep because you're the dad, you're the mom, and you see over the hill behind your house, you see a strange, red glow. You know what that glow is caused from. You've spent all day telling your kids, "Don't worry, kids. Don't worry. It's not coming here." You imagine how freaked out your kids are. Then imagine going to bed and your wife -- what she would say to me and I would be saying it to her, "Honey, just get some sleep. Just get some sleep. It's all going to be OK."
But you --neither of you sleep because you know the red, that glow, is starting to creep back over the hill. So at some point, you have to have the conversation, "Honey, what do we grab? What do we take? Do we take that book? Do we take that memento? Do we take those pictures? How about the computer? What can we shove into the trunk of our car? Our whole life might be gone."
Put yourself into the shoes of the firefighters, who do this every single year. These guys are heroes. So, please, who do you have to be? What kind of monster wants that to happen? When you listen to this program -- I hate to break it to, you know, those who don't listen to the show, but if they ever would listen to the show, let me give you a little piece of advice: You have to engage what I like to call "your brain." You actually have to think. I might be making a joke. I might be serious. We joke a lot about, you know, the Hollywood crowd living in Southern California. For example, I believe I have advocated Hollywood building giant air conditioners so they can fix the global-warming problem. I'm pretty sure I was joking then.
But you wouldn't know that if you hadn't engaged your brain. So let me be serious for a minute. Let me extraordinarily clear. I clearly do not want anyone's house to be burned down. Now, some people may want to interpret what they think I mean, but that's what I mean. Some people want me to have said that I'm seriously happy about people losing their homes or that I somehow or another believe that they deserve to have their house burn down. What kind of KKK-Nazi combination do you have to [inaudible] to actually believe that?
Unfortunately -- and that's weird because that word sometimes is important in a sentence -- unfortunately, some people want to think the worst. But thinking the worst doesn't make it real. Thinking the worst doesn't change an illusion into reality.
I just can't believe that I live in a country where I have to explain that.
— J.S. & B.J.L.
Posted to the web on Tuesday October 23, 2007
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Beck's CA wildfire comments not uncivil
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710230011?f=h_top
Beck producer: "To most rational people," Beck's CA wildfire comments not uncivil
Summary:
An October 23 post at USA Today's On Deadline blog highlighted nationally syndicated radio host Glenn Beck's statement -- documented by Media Matters for America -- concerning the Southern California wildfires that "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." The entry also noted that Chris Balfe, the producer of Beck's radio program, "expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility." On Deadline quoted Balfe saying: "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately." The On Deadline entry gave no indication that Balfe addressed Beck's statement linking the "handful of people who hate America" and the destruction of homes by the California wildfires.
According to CNN, the evacuation triggered by the fires is the largest evacuation forced by a natural disaster since hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
From the October 23 On Deadline entry:
Conservative talker Glenn Beck is under fire today for comments he made about some of the victims of the southern California wildfires during yesterday's edition of The Glenn Beck Program.
Media Matters for America, a liberal watchdog group, recorded Beck making the comment on his radio show during a lengthy monologue about the importance of coming together as one nation, with the understanding that: We all love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today. There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that.
In addition to the radio program, Beck hosts a prime-time TV show on CNN's Headline News. We have requested comment from Beck and will update this posting if he gets back to us before the end of the day.
Update at 10:17 a.m. ET: A spokesman for Beck expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility. "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately," Chris Balfe, the show's producer, tells On Deadline through a spokesman.
— S.S.M.
Posted to the web on Tuesday October 23, 2007
Beck producer: "To most rational people," Beck's CA wildfire comments not uncivil
Summary:
An October 23 post at USA Today's On Deadline blog highlighted nationally syndicated radio host Glenn Beck's statement -- documented by Media Matters for America -- concerning the Southern California wildfires that "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." The entry also noted that Chris Balfe, the producer of Beck's radio program, "expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility." On Deadline quoted Balfe saying: "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately." The On Deadline entry gave no indication that Balfe addressed Beck's statement linking the "handful of people who hate America" and the destruction of homes by the California wildfires.
According to CNN, the evacuation triggered by the fires is the largest evacuation forced by a natural disaster since hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
From the October 23 On Deadline entry:
Conservative talker Glenn Beck is under fire today for comments he made about some of the victims of the southern California wildfires during yesterday's edition of The Glenn Beck Program.
Media Matters for America, a liberal watchdog group, recorded Beck making the comment on his radio show during a lengthy monologue about the importance of coming together as one nation, with the understanding that: We all love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today. There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that.
In addition to the radio program, Beck hosts a prime-time TV show on CNN's Headline News. We have requested comment from Beck and will update this posting if he gets back to us before the end of the day.
Update at 10:17 a.m. ET: A spokesman for Beck expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility. "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately," Chris Balfe, the show's producer, tells On Deadline through a spokesman.
— S.S.M.
Posted to the web on Tuesday October 23, 2007
Some Victims of Calif. Wildfires "Hate America"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710230008?f=h_top
CNN's Glenn Beck: Some Victims of Calif. Wildfires "Hate America"
Summary:
CNN Should Distance Itself from Conservative Cable & Radio Host's Inappropriate Remarks
Washington, DC - Yesterday on his nationally syndicated radio program, CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck said: "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Beck's comment came as wildfires ravaged parts of Southern California. According to CNN, the evacuation triggered by the fires is the largest evacuation forced by a natural disaster since hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
Audio/Transcript: http://mediamatters.org/items/200710220003
"As these families suffer through the worst natural disaster since Hurricane Katrina, it is wholly inappropriate for Glenn Beck to claim that they 'hate America' simply because they may disagree with his politics. Many of these families have lost everything, and Beck owes them an apology," said Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters for America. "It's time for CNN to distance itself from Beck's comments or risk being seen as endorsing them."
Beck's comment immediately followed his statement that "we're all one America" and "just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function." Beck had been distinguishing his views from those of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who, according to the Financial Times, "has urged Republican presidential candidates to capture the political centre ground ahead of next year's election by focusing on healthcare reform and education." Beck criticized Schwarzenegger's proposed strategy as "not the way to win on any front" and offered the following clarification: "When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together, and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles."
From the October 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Schwarzenegger came out over the weekend and he said the Republicans need to run to the center and they need to grab the center. And the headline -- I looked at it, and I went "OK, OK, what is this? What is this? Oh, it's Schwarzenegger. I'm probably going to disagree with it." And then I started reading it, and I absolutely disagreed with it. He said they need to start talking about health care and education. That's not the way to win.
Let's talk about health care and education? That's not the way to win. That's not the way to win on any front. I'm not even talking about -- the least I care about is winning the election. How about winning the war? How about saving our country? And, you know, it made me think. I want to make this very clear. When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles. We come back to the center of the melting pot, that we're all one America, that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.
There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that. But you don't come into the center. You have to stand up for what you believe in.
###
Posted to the web on Tuesday October 23, 2007
CNN's Glenn Beck: Some Victims of Calif. Wildfires "Hate America"
Summary:
CNN Should Distance Itself from Conservative Cable & Radio Host's Inappropriate Remarks
Washington, DC - Yesterday on his nationally syndicated radio program, CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck said: "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Beck's comment came as wildfires ravaged parts of Southern California. According to CNN, the evacuation triggered by the fires is the largest evacuation forced by a natural disaster since hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
Audio/Transcript: http://mediamatters.org/items/200710220003
"As these families suffer through the worst natural disaster since Hurricane Katrina, it is wholly inappropriate for Glenn Beck to claim that they 'hate America' simply because they may disagree with his politics. Many of these families have lost everything, and Beck owes them an apology," said Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters for America. "It's time for CNN to distance itself from Beck's comments or risk being seen as endorsing them."
Beck's comment immediately followed his statement that "we're all one America" and "just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function." Beck had been distinguishing his views from those of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who, according to the Financial Times, "has urged Republican presidential candidates to capture the political centre ground ahead of next year's election by focusing on healthcare reform and education." Beck criticized Schwarzenegger's proposed strategy as "not the way to win on any front" and offered the following clarification: "When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together, and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles."
From the October 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Schwarzenegger came out over the weekend and he said the Republicans need to run to the center and they need to grab the center. And the headline -- I looked at it, and I went "OK, OK, what is this? What is this? Oh, it's Schwarzenegger. I'm probably going to disagree with it." And then I started reading it, and I absolutely disagreed with it. He said they need to start talking about health care and education. That's not the way to win.
Let's talk about health care and education? That's not the way to win. That's not the way to win on any front. I'm not even talking about -- the least I care about is winning the election. How about winning the war? How about saving our country? And, you know, it made me think. I want to make this very clear. When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles. We come back to the center of the melting pot, that we're all one America, that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.
There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that. But you don't come into the center. You have to stand up for what you believe in.
###
Posted to the web on Tuesday October 23, 2007
Beck: "A handful of people who hate America..."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710220003?f=h_top
Beck: "[A] handful of people who hate America ... are losing their homes in a forest fire today"
Summary:
On the October 22 edition of his nationally syndicated radio program, host Glenn Beck stated, "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Beck continued: "There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that." Beck's comment came as forest fires ravaged parts of Southern California, leaving one person dead, four firefighters wounded, and forcing about 1,500 people from their homes, according to The New York Times.
Beck's comment immediately followed his statement that "we're all one America" and "just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function." Beck had been distinguishing his views from those of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who, according to the Financial Times, "has urged Republican presidential candidates to capture the political centre ground ahead of next year's election by focusing on healthcare reform and education." Beck criticized Schwarzenegger's proposed strategy as "not the way to win on any front" and offered the following clarification: "When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together, and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles."
From the October 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Schwarzenegger came out over the weekend and he said the Republicans need to run to the center and they need to grab the center. And the headline -- I looked at it, and I went "OK, OK, what is this? What is this? Oh, it's Schwarzenegger. I'm probably going to disagree with it." And then I started reading it, and I absolutely disagreed with it. He said they need to start talking about health care and education. That's not the way to win.
Let's talk about health care and education? That's not the way to win. That's not the way to win on any front. I'm not even talking about -- the least I care about is winning the election. How about winning the war? How about saving our country? And, you know, it made me think. I want to make this very clear. When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles. We come back to the center of the melting pot, that we're all one America, that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.
There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that. But you don't come into the center. You have to stand up for what you believe in.
— A.C.S.
Posted to the web on Monday October 22, 2007
Beck: "[A] handful of people who hate America ... are losing their homes in a forest fire today"
Summary:
On the October 22 edition of his nationally syndicated radio program, host Glenn Beck stated, "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Beck continued: "There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that." Beck's comment came as forest fires ravaged parts of Southern California, leaving one person dead, four firefighters wounded, and forcing about 1,500 people from their homes, according to The New York Times.
Beck's comment immediately followed his statement that "we're all one America" and "just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function." Beck had been distinguishing his views from those of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who, according to the Financial Times, "has urged Republican presidential candidates to capture the political centre ground ahead of next year's election by focusing on healthcare reform and education." Beck criticized Schwarzenegger's proposed strategy as "not the way to win on any front" and offered the following clarification: "When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together, and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles."
From the October 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Schwarzenegger came out over the weekend and he said the Republicans need to run to the center and they need to grab the center. And the headline -- I looked at it, and I went "OK, OK, what is this? What is this? Oh, it's Schwarzenegger. I'm probably going to disagree with it." And then I started reading it, and I absolutely disagreed with it. He said they need to start talking about health care and education. That's not the way to win.
Let's talk about health care and education? That's not the way to win. That's not the way to win on any front. I'm not even talking about -- the least I care about is winning the election. How about winning the war? How about saving our country? And, you know, it made me think. I want to make this very clear. When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges -- I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles. We come back to the center of the melting pot, that we're all one America, that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government. It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.
There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that. But you don't come into the center. You have to stand up for what you believe in.
— A.C.S.
Posted to the web on Monday October 22, 2007
The GOP-Hater's Handbook
http://www.buzzflash.com/store/reviews/800
The GOP-Hater's Handbook: 378 Reasons Never to Vote for the Party of Reagan, Nixon and Bush Again (Paperback) -- Shipped On or Around November 15
By Jack Huberman
BUZZFLASH REVIEWS
"From the author of the bestselling Bush-Hater's Handbook, and in time for the 2008 election, here comes Jack Huberman's latest foray into the dark side of right-wing politics."
From the Publisher, Nation Books:
"Anyone in search of a concise, scary, and darkly entertaining overview of the Grand Old Party record--or in need of talking points for debating conservatives--will find the perfect guide in The GOP-Hater's Handbook.
Summarizing, detailing, and bewailing the more significant Republican outrages past and present--and some of the more trivial ones--this book is the brainchild of Jack Huberman, the former Canadian who took up U.S. citizenship just so he could vote against Dubya in 2000.
With punchy sidebars and political cartoons, The GOP-Hater's Handbook is the perfect gift for that special GOP-hater in your life--or for any misguided Republican you hope to rescue from the outer darkness."
Jack's previous book, the "Bush-Hater's Handbook," was one of BuzzFlash's top sellers.
,
Organized alphabetically.
The GOP-Hater's Handbook: 378 Reasons Never to Vote for the Party of Reagan, Nixon and Bush Again (Paperback) -- Shipped On or Around November 15
By Jack Huberman
BUZZFLASH REVIEWS
"From the author of the bestselling Bush-Hater's Handbook, and in time for the 2008 election, here comes Jack Huberman's latest foray into the dark side of right-wing politics."
From the Publisher, Nation Books:
"Anyone in search of a concise, scary, and darkly entertaining overview of the Grand Old Party record--or in need of talking points for debating conservatives--will find the perfect guide in The GOP-Hater's Handbook.
Summarizing, detailing, and bewailing the more significant Republican outrages past and present--and some of the more trivial ones--this book is the brainchild of Jack Huberman, the former Canadian who took up U.S. citizenship just so he could vote against Dubya in 2000.
With punchy sidebars and political cartoons, The GOP-Hater's Handbook is the perfect gift for that special GOP-hater in your life--or for any misguided Republican you hope to rescue from the outer darkness."
Jack's previous book, the "Bush-Hater's Handbook," was one of BuzzFlash's top sellers.
,
Organized alphabetically.
"Purple Rain" greatest film soundtrack
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071024/lf_nm_life/soundtracks_dc
"Purple Rain" greatest film soundtrack: Vanity Fair
Wed Oct 24, 2007
If you've hummed along, tapped your feet, or even danced in your seat while watching "Purple Rain," "Saturday Night Fever" or "Trainspotting," you're not alone.
The soundtracks from those movies have been named among the 50 greatest by the editors of Vanity Fair magazine. The full list will be revealed next month in a one-time Conde Nast magazine, Movies Rock, for subscribers of its 14 titles.
"Purple Rain" topped the chart even though it was described as "perhaps the best badly acted film ever," editors at Vanity Fair said, while "Trainspotting" came in at No. 7 and "Saturday Night Fever" was eighth.
The Vanity Fair editors said the "Purple Rain" soundtrack was a flawless combination of "funk, R&B, pop, metal, and even psychedelia into a sound that defined the '80s."
"A Hard Day's Night" came in a No. 2, followed by "The Harder They Come," "Pulp Fiction," "The Graduate" and "Superfly." "American Graffiti" and "The Big Chill" rounded out the top 10.
"Saturday Night Fever's" soundtrack is "required listening for anyone looking to heat up the dance floor," the editors said. "The white suit? Not so much."
Movies Rock, which will feature stories and photos of the projects, stars, directors and musicians who created the selected movies, launches ahead of a two-hour CBS broadcast of the same title in December.
"Purple Rain" greatest film soundtrack: Vanity Fair
Wed Oct 24, 2007
If you've hummed along, tapped your feet, or even danced in your seat while watching "Purple Rain," "Saturday Night Fever" or "Trainspotting," you're not alone.
The soundtracks from those movies have been named among the 50 greatest by the editors of Vanity Fair magazine. The full list will be revealed next month in a one-time Conde Nast magazine, Movies Rock, for subscribers of its 14 titles.
"Purple Rain" topped the chart even though it was described as "perhaps the best badly acted film ever," editors at Vanity Fair said, while "Trainspotting" came in at No. 7 and "Saturday Night Fever" was eighth.
The Vanity Fair editors said the "Purple Rain" soundtrack was a flawless combination of "funk, R&B, pop, metal, and even psychedelia into a sound that defined the '80s."
"A Hard Day's Night" came in a No. 2, followed by "The Harder They Come," "Pulp Fiction," "The Graduate" and "Superfly." "American Graffiti" and "The Big Chill" rounded out the top 10.
"Saturday Night Fever's" soundtrack is "required listening for anyone looking to heat up the dance floor," the editors said. "The white suit? Not so much."
Movies Rock, which will feature stories and photos of the projects, stars, directors and musicians who created the selected movies, launches ahead of a two-hour CBS broadcast of the same title in December.
'Viva Laughlin' has sung its final note
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2007/10/primetime-death.html
Prime-time deathwatch: 'Viva Laughlin' has sung its final note
October 22, 2007
The fall TV season has claimed its first new scripted-series victim.
On Monday, CBS canceled "Viva Laughlin" after only two episodes. Hugh Jackman was one of the executive producers of the series, which was met with largely scathing reviews and low ratings in its Thursday premiere. The second episode performed poorly in its regular 8 p.m. Sunday slot following "60 Minutes."
The drama, which revolved around an aspiring casino owner, featured characters who sang along with hit songs incorporated into the plot.
"It was obvious that the ratings weren’t there," said a network insider.
A repeat of "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" will air in the slot next Sunday. A new season of "The Amazing Race" will air in the time period starting Nov. 4.
-- Greg Braxton
Prime-time deathwatch: 'Viva Laughlin' has sung its final note
October 22, 2007
The fall TV season has claimed its first new scripted-series victim.
On Monday, CBS canceled "Viva Laughlin" after only two episodes. Hugh Jackman was one of the executive producers of the series, which was met with largely scathing reviews and low ratings in its Thursday premiere. The second episode performed poorly in its regular 8 p.m. Sunday slot following "60 Minutes."
The drama, which revolved around an aspiring casino owner, featured characters who sang along with hit songs incorporated into the plot.
"It was obvious that the ratings weren’t there," said a network insider.
A repeat of "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" will air in the slot next Sunday. A new season of "The Amazing Race" will air in the time period starting Nov. 4.
-- Greg Braxton
Politics Drove Federal Prosecution
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/23/AR2007102302081.html
Ex-Attorney General Says Politics Drove Federal Prosecution
House Panel Evaluating Justice Dept.
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; A03
Richard L. Thornburgh, who served as attorney general under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, accused the Justice Department yesterday of prosecuting a prominent Pennsylvania Democrat for political reasons, one of a series of cases singled out by House Democrats as examples of alleged GOP meddling at the Justice Department.
Thornburgh, who served as attorney general from 1988 to 1991 and whose law firm represents Cyril Wecht, a nationally known coroner from Pittsburgh, testified yesterday that Wecht had been indicted for mail fraud and a "hodgepodge" of other charges by overzealous prosecutors keen on pleasing political appointees in Washington.
"He has always been a contentious, outspoken, highly critical and highly visible Democratic figure in western Pennsylvania," Thornburgh told the House Judiciary Committee. "In other words, he would qualify as an ideal target for a Republican U.S. attorney trying to curry favor with a department which demonstrated that if you play by its rules, you will advance."
Thornburgh also said that Wecht "was not the only apparent political prosecution in western Pennsylvania," pointing to three high-profile cases of other local Democrats brought by U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan of Pittsburgh.
The testimony came as part of a special hearing focused on alleged political prosecutions of Democrats by the Justice Department, which has come under intense criticism from Congress this year for the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys and for its role in setting aggressive detention and interrogation policies.
The hearing also was held as the Senate is considering whether to approve the nomination of former federal judge Michael B. Mukasey as attorney general to succeed Alberto R. Gonzales, who resigned in August in the wake of the uproar over the prosecutor firings and other controversies.
In another case highlighted yesterday, Democrats alleged that Alabama Republicans pushed for the prosecution of former governor Don Siegelman, who is serving an 88-month sentence after being convicted on corruption charges.
Justice Department officials strongly object to claims that local Democratic politicians have been unfairly singled out for prosecution, pointing to criminal cases against former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (Calif.) and other prominent Republicans.
"It has been -- and remains -- the practice of the department to investigate and prosecute individuals who violate federal law without regard to their political affiliation," said Justice spokesman Peter Carr.
The administration and GOP lawmakers also sharply criticized a study highlighted yesterday by Democrats, that, based on newspaper and Internet reports, suggests a 5 to 1 ratio of Democrats to Republicans targeted for investigation by the Bush administration.
In the Pittsburgh case, Wecht was indicted on 84 charges related to allegations that he misused his public office as coroner for private gain. The charges include an alleged agreement to provide a local university with unclaimed cadavers from the county morgue in exchange for his private use of lab space.
Thornburgh, who was a two-term Pennsylvania governor before he became attorney general, was particularly critical of Buchanan, who has served in a series of senior Justice Department positions and was close to Gonzales's inner circle.
"The citizens of the United States must have confidence that the department is conducting itself in a fair and impartial" manner, "without actual political influence or the appearance of political influence," Thornburgh testified. "Unfortunately, that may no longer be the case."
Buchanan said in a statement issued through the Justice Department yesterday that the case against Wecht was "based solely on the facts and the law." She said it was "unfortunate" that Thornburgh aired his criticism in Congress rather than in the courts.
"Every investigation and prosecution is overseen by career prosecutors and experienced agents who analyze evidence from a law enforcement, not a partisan, perspective," Buchanan said.
In the Alabama case, Siegelman was convicted last year of accepting $500,000 from the chief executive of HealthSouth, Richard M. Scrushy, in exchange for appointing Scrushy to a state hospital board. Siegelman won election as governor in 1998 but was narrowly defeated in 2002 by Republican Bob Riley, who still holds the seat.
A GOP lawyer from Alabama, Jill Simpson, has told House Judiciary Committee investigators that a key Republican strategist in that state told her that former presidential adviser Karl Rove had pushed to bring corruption charges against Siegelman. Simpson also has alleged that Bob Riley's son, Rob, boasted about a Republican judge who would "hang Don Siegelman," according to an affidavit released by the Judiciary Committee.
Rob Riley and others named by Simpson have denied the allegations. Bush administration officials also have rejected Simpson's account, and the White House has said Rove had no involvement in the case. Louis V. Franklin Sr., the acting U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Alabama in the Siegelman case, says that Siegelman was under investigation prior to the alleged conversations recounted by Simpson.
G. Douglas Jones, a former Siegelman lawyer who served as U.S. attorney in Birmingham during the Clinton administration, testified yesterday that federal prosecutors assured him in 2004 that charges against Siegelman were unlikely -- but the case was revived later that year during a "top-to-bottom review" ordered by Justice Department officials in Washington.
"The charges that we were told had been 'written off' were obviously now back on the table, and for the first time it appeared that agents were not investigating any allegations of a crime but were now fishing around for anything they could find against an individual," Jones said.
Franklin and other career prosecutors in Alabama say they were not pressured by the White House or Justice Department political appointees in the case.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Ex-Attorney General Says Politics Drove Federal Prosecution
House Panel Evaluating Justice Dept.
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; A03
Richard L. Thornburgh, who served as attorney general under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, accused the Justice Department yesterday of prosecuting a prominent Pennsylvania Democrat for political reasons, one of a series of cases singled out by House Democrats as examples of alleged GOP meddling at the Justice Department.
Thornburgh, who served as attorney general from 1988 to 1991 and whose law firm represents Cyril Wecht, a nationally known coroner from Pittsburgh, testified yesterday that Wecht had been indicted for mail fraud and a "hodgepodge" of other charges by overzealous prosecutors keen on pleasing political appointees in Washington.
"He has always been a contentious, outspoken, highly critical and highly visible Democratic figure in western Pennsylvania," Thornburgh told the House Judiciary Committee. "In other words, he would qualify as an ideal target for a Republican U.S. attorney trying to curry favor with a department which demonstrated that if you play by its rules, you will advance."
Thornburgh also said that Wecht "was not the only apparent political prosecution in western Pennsylvania," pointing to three high-profile cases of other local Democrats brought by U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan of Pittsburgh.
The testimony came as part of a special hearing focused on alleged political prosecutions of Democrats by the Justice Department, which has come under intense criticism from Congress this year for the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys and for its role in setting aggressive detention and interrogation policies.
The hearing also was held as the Senate is considering whether to approve the nomination of former federal judge Michael B. Mukasey as attorney general to succeed Alberto R. Gonzales, who resigned in August in the wake of the uproar over the prosecutor firings and other controversies.
In another case highlighted yesterday, Democrats alleged that Alabama Republicans pushed for the prosecution of former governor Don Siegelman, who is serving an 88-month sentence after being convicted on corruption charges.
Justice Department officials strongly object to claims that local Democratic politicians have been unfairly singled out for prosecution, pointing to criminal cases against former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (Calif.) and other prominent Republicans.
"It has been -- and remains -- the practice of the department to investigate and prosecute individuals who violate federal law without regard to their political affiliation," said Justice spokesman Peter Carr.
The administration and GOP lawmakers also sharply criticized a study highlighted yesterday by Democrats, that, based on newspaper and Internet reports, suggests a 5 to 1 ratio of Democrats to Republicans targeted for investigation by the Bush administration.
In the Pittsburgh case, Wecht was indicted on 84 charges related to allegations that he misused his public office as coroner for private gain. The charges include an alleged agreement to provide a local university with unclaimed cadavers from the county morgue in exchange for his private use of lab space.
Thornburgh, who was a two-term Pennsylvania governor before he became attorney general, was particularly critical of Buchanan, who has served in a series of senior Justice Department positions and was close to Gonzales's inner circle.
"The citizens of the United States must have confidence that the department is conducting itself in a fair and impartial" manner, "without actual political influence or the appearance of political influence," Thornburgh testified. "Unfortunately, that may no longer be the case."
Buchanan said in a statement issued through the Justice Department yesterday that the case against Wecht was "based solely on the facts and the law." She said it was "unfortunate" that Thornburgh aired his criticism in Congress rather than in the courts.
"Every investigation and prosecution is overseen by career prosecutors and experienced agents who analyze evidence from a law enforcement, not a partisan, perspective," Buchanan said.
In the Alabama case, Siegelman was convicted last year of accepting $500,000 from the chief executive of HealthSouth, Richard M. Scrushy, in exchange for appointing Scrushy to a state hospital board. Siegelman won election as governor in 1998 but was narrowly defeated in 2002 by Republican Bob Riley, who still holds the seat.
A GOP lawyer from Alabama, Jill Simpson, has told House Judiciary Committee investigators that a key Republican strategist in that state told her that former presidential adviser Karl Rove had pushed to bring corruption charges against Siegelman. Simpson also has alleged that Bob Riley's son, Rob, boasted about a Republican judge who would "hang Don Siegelman," according to an affidavit released by the Judiciary Committee.
Rob Riley and others named by Simpson have denied the allegations. Bush administration officials also have rejected Simpson's account, and the White House has said Rove had no involvement in the case. Louis V. Franklin Sr., the acting U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Alabama in the Siegelman case, says that Siegelman was under investigation prior to the alleged conversations recounted by Simpson.
G. Douglas Jones, a former Siegelman lawyer who served as U.S. attorney in Birmingham during the Clinton administration, testified yesterday that federal prosecutors assured him in 2004 that charges against Siegelman were unlikely -- but the case was revived later that year during a "top-to-bottom review" ordered by Justice Department officials in Washington.
"The charges that we were told had been 'written off' were obviously now back on the table, and for the first time it appeared that agents were not investigating any allegations of a crime but were now fishing around for anything they could find against an individual," Jones said.
Franklin and other career prosecutors in Alabama say they were not pressured by the White House or Justice Department political appointees in the case.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
"Sippin' Safari"
http://www.salon.com/mwt/food/eat_drink/2007/10/23/tiki/
"Sippin' Safari"
Cocktail fanatic Jeff Berry talks about mixing the perfect zombie, the allure of tiny umbrellas and other secrets of the tiki bar.
By Robert Simonson
Oct. 23, 2007 For many years, so-called tiki drinks were the punch line of the cocktail world. The quasi-Polynesian tropical concoctions served in the kitschy mugs and adorned with paper parasols couldn't get any respect in a world of elegant martinis and stately manhattans. Not anymore.
In recent years, as the cocktail revolution has gathered steam, mixologists and drink historians have taken the time to reexamine the zombie, the mai tai and their brethren. What they discovered was a lost universe of finely honed drinks boasting complex flavors and requiring as much skill to execute as any libation in the bartender's lexicon. Leading the charge has been Jeff Berry, aka Beachbum Berry, a former screenwriter-turned-cocktail expert who has gone to great lengths to uncover the lost recipes and bar histories of one of the defining drinking trends of the mid-20th century.
In his most recent book, "Sippin' Safari," Berry relates the origins of a bygone rum-soaked world, including the lives and adventures of its pivotal figures and cocktail creators, such as Donn Beach (aka Ernest Raymond Beaumont-Gantt), founder of the once phenomenally popular Don the Beachcomber chain, and Trader Vic (aka Victor Jules Bergeron). Berry talked to Salon about his life as a South Seas alcohol archaeologist.
You explain the phenomenon of umbrellas in drinks in "Surfin' Safari." Hawaiian bartender Harry K. Yee used them instead of sugar cane sticks, because they were easier to clean up. Do you approve of them as garnishes, or do you find them silly?
Here's my thing. I'm trying to be an evangelist for these lost drinks that were actually worthy, that could actually hold their own against all the other alcoholic inventions in this country. Then, someone has a visual image in their mind and says, "Are you talking about those drinks that come in those mugs with the umbrella?" It kind of works against me.
As much as I love tiki mugs -- and I have a whole collection -- I don't serve drinks in them. I want to see the drink in a glass. It's a legitimate drink in the same way a manhattan is. I want to see a zombie in a nice, tall, frosted glass where I can see the color of the drink.
How did you develop an interest in tiki drinks?
I grew up in the San Fernando Valley in the late '60s and there were a ton of these places. My parents liked Chinese food so they would go to this place, Ah Fong. It had opened in the early '60s as the Bora Bora Room, but whoever opened it spent so much money on decor that they went broke soon after they opened. There was this guy named Benson Fong, who was a Chinese restaurant magnate back then; he would move his Cantonese crew into Polynesian places if they couldn't recoup their costs, and rename them Ah Fong.
Anyway, as a 10-year-old I'd walk in the door and it was just completely all-encompassing and enveloping, this Hollywood-art-directed Polynesian theme. It was amazing to my young eyes. You just wanted to live there. And these people around me were drinking these exotic drinks. When I got old enough to drink, I sought these places out. And of course they had all disappeared at that point.
Yes, most of the tiki palaces are gone now, aren't they?
In L.A., there were so many of them for so long that a few have survived. I couldn't afford to go to any of them when I got out of school. Trader Vic's Beverly Hills location lasted right up until this year. Don the Beachcomber, the original, was there; it lasted until 1984. I lived around the corner from it at one point, but I couldn't afford to go until their last year, when they were advertising an all-you-can-eat lunch for $4.95. I finally got to go in and see that celebrity chopstick case.
Why do you think there isn't a major tiki bar in New York, which is supposed to be the cocktail capital of the U.S.?
Doing all my research, I found out that that cliché about New York thinking the tiki trend was tacky, and being above it all -- that's not true. New York had a ton of these places. It had the Hawaii Tai on Broadway, the Luau 400, which was very expensive, and they had a Trader Vic's in the Plaza Hotel, which Donald Trump famously got rid of when he bought the hotel. I think New York just burns through trends faster than other places.
The most famous tiki drink is probably the zombie. But my chances of going into a bar and getting an authentic zombie are pretty slim, aren't they?
Slim to none. The problem with the zombie is nobody knew how to make it. Donn Beach was a victim of his own success in keeping it a secret. Everybody says, "Oh, the zombie, that's an awful drink. It's just eight different kinds of rum. It's just a gimmicky, crappy drink." And the reason for that is because people were guessing. They were all just trying to guess what was in this thing, because Donn wouldn't publish the recipe. The reason we know that Trader Vic's mai tai is a good drink is because, despite the fact that there were a million awful mai tais out there, he printed the recipe himself.
Most tiki drinks have a rum base. What do you think of the theory that rum's place in the drink world today has been supplanted by vodka? So many popular fruity drinks are now built on top of vodka.
Yes. Not only that, but the rum market has been trying to become vodka for so long, that vodka has not only supplanted rum, but it's changed rum into becoming blander. It's "Bacardi: The mixable one." Rum really did have its day, though, from the 1930s, when the Don the Beachcomber thing got going, all the way into the late '70s, because even after the tiki bars died, there was still the piña colada and the frozen daiquiri. Cruise ship drinks, I guess you could call them.
You sought some of the tiki master bartenders who worked at the classic bars to get their stories. I bet they were surprised that anyone cared about their experiences.
Yeah, they were. For most of them, it was just a job and when the Polynesian thing dried up they just moved on to something else. Very few of them had a sense that this was anything else than just a way to make a living.
When I was writing the first books, it was incredibly difficult to get any information out of them. Their whole life was based on not giving these recipes out to anyone. They wouldn't give recipes out to anyone. I'd ask, "What's in this?" and they'd say, "Fruit juice." None of these guys had made one of these drinks in 40 years, but they would not part with the recipes.
Over the course of the years, you pried the secrets out of them.
It gets easier with every book.
You've said that there are only three places in the United States where you can still drink Don's original concoctions.
The Tiki-Ti in Los Angeles -- you can still get Don the Beachcomber drinks there. You have to know what drinks were served at Don's in order to pick one off the menu. A rum barrel or a panang or a montego bay.
The Mai Kai is in Fort Lauderdale. And the reason you can get Don's drinks there is the owners of the Mai Kai, when they built it in 1956, they poached a bartender from the Don the Beachcomber in Chicago specifically so they could get Don's recipes. They just tweaked the names of the drinks a little bit. The Navy grog became the yeoman's grog, like that.
The third place is a new place. I have not actually been there yet, but I've met Martin Cate, the guy who runs it. It's called Forbidden Island [Tiki Lounge] and it's in Alameda, which is in the San Francisco Bay Area. They're real Don drinks -- which he got from my books mostly.
-- By Robert Simonson
"Sippin' Safari"
Cocktail fanatic Jeff Berry talks about mixing the perfect zombie, the allure of tiny umbrellas and other secrets of the tiki bar.
By Robert Simonson
Oct. 23, 2007 For many years, so-called tiki drinks were the punch line of the cocktail world. The quasi-Polynesian tropical concoctions served in the kitschy mugs and adorned with paper parasols couldn't get any respect in a world of elegant martinis and stately manhattans. Not anymore.
In recent years, as the cocktail revolution has gathered steam, mixologists and drink historians have taken the time to reexamine the zombie, the mai tai and their brethren. What they discovered was a lost universe of finely honed drinks boasting complex flavors and requiring as much skill to execute as any libation in the bartender's lexicon. Leading the charge has been Jeff Berry, aka Beachbum Berry, a former screenwriter-turned-cocktail expert who has gone to great lengths to uncover the lost recipes and bar histories of one of the defining drinking trends of the mid-20th century.
In his most recent book, "Sippin' Safari," Berry relates the origins of a bygone rum-soaked world, including the lives and adventures of its pivotal figures and cocktail creators, such as Donn Beach (aka Ernest Raymond Beaumont-Gantt), founder of the once phenomenally popular Don the Beachcomber chain, and Trader Vic (aka Victor Jules Bergeron). Berry talked to Salon about his life as a South Seas alcohol archaeologist.
You explain the phenomenon of umbrellas in drinks in "Surfin' Safari." Hawaiian bartender Harry K. Yee used them instead of sugar cane sticks, because they were easier to clean up. Do you approve of them as garnishes, or do you find them silly?
Here's my thing. I'm trying to be an evangelist for these lost drinks that were actually worthy, that could actually hold their own against all the other alcoholic inventions in this country. Then, someone has a visual image in their mind and says, "Are you talking about those drinks that come in those mugs with the umbrella?" It kind of works against me.
As much as I love tiki mugs -- and I have a whole collection -- I don't serve drinks in them. I want to see the drink in a glass. It's a legitimate drink in the same way a manhattan is. I want to see a zombie in a nice, tall, frosted glass where I can see the color of the drink.
How did you develop an interest in tiki drinks?
I grew up in the San Fernando Valley in the late '60s and there were a ton of these places. My parents liked Chinese food so they would go to this place, Ah Fong. It had opened in the early '60s as the Bora Bora Room, but whoever opened it spent so much money on decor that they went broke soon after they opened. There was this guy named Benson Fong, who was a Chinese restaurant magnate back then; he would move his Cantonese crew into Polynesian places if they couldn't recoup their costs, and rename them Ah Fong.
Anyway, as a 10-year-old I'd walk in the door and it was just completely all-encompassing and enveloping, this Hollywood-art-directed Polynesian theme. It was amazing to my young eyes. You just wanted to live there. And these people around me were drinking these exotic drinks. When I got old enough to drink, I sought these places out. And of course they had all disappeared at that point.
Yes, most of the tiki palaces are gone now, aren't they?
In L.A., there were so many of them for so long that a few have survived. I couldn't afford to go to any of them when I got out of school. Trader Vic's Beverly Hills location lasted right up until this year. Don the Beachcomber, the original, was there; it lasted until 1984. I lived around the corner from it at one point, but I couldn't afford to go until their last year, when they were advertising an all-you-can-eat lunch for $4.95. I finally got to go in and see that celebrity chopstick case.
Why do you think there isn't a major tiki bar in New York, which is supposed to be the cocktail capital of the U.S.?
Doing all my research, I found out that that cliché about New York thinking the tiki trend was tacky, and being above it all -- that's not true. New York had a ton of these places. It had the Hawaii Tai on Broadway, the Luau 400, which was very expensive, and they had a Trader Vic's in the Plaza Hotel, which Donald Trump famously got rid of when he bought the hotel. I think New York just burns through trends faster than other places.
The most famous tiki drink is probably the zombie. But my chances of going into a bar and getting an authentic zombie are pretty slim, aren't they?
Slim to none. The problem with the zombie is nobody knew how to make it. Donn Beach was a victim of his own success in keeping it a secret. Everybody says, "Oh, the zombie, that's an awful drink. It's just eight different kinds of rum. It's just a gimmicky, crappy drink." And the reason for that is because people were guessing. They were all just trying to guess what was in this thing, because Donn wouldn't publish the recipe. The reason we know that Trader Vic's mai tai is a good drink is because, despite the fact that there were a million awful mai tais out there, he printed the recipe himself.
Most tiki drinks have a rum base. What do you think of the theory that rum's place in the drink world today has been supplanted by vodka? So many popular fruity drinks are now built on top of vodka.
Yes. Not only that, but the rum market has been trying to become vodka for so long, that vodka has not only supplanted rum, but it's changed rum into becoming blander. It's "Bacardi: The mixable one." Rum really did have its day, though, from the 1930s, when the Don the Beachcomber thing got going, all the way into the late '70s, because even after the tiki bars died, there was still the piña colada and the frozen daiquiri. Cruise ship drinks, I guess you could call them.
You sought some of the tiki master bartenders who worked at the classic bars to get their stories. I bet they were surprised that anyone cared about their experiences.
Yeah, they were. For most of them, it was just a job and when the Polynesian thing dried up they just moved on to something else. Very few of them had a sense that this was anything else than just a way to make a living.
When I was writing the first books, it was incredibly difficult to get any information out of them. Their whole life was based on not giving these recipes out to anyone. They wouldn't give recipes out to anyone. I'd ask, "What's in this?" and they'd say, "Fruit juice." None of these guys had made one of these drinks in 40 years, but they would not part with the recipes.
Over the course of the years, you pried the secrets out of them.
It gets easier with every book.
You've said that there are only three places in the United States where you can still drink Don's original concoctions.
The Tiki-Ti in Los Angeles -- you can still get Don the Beachcomber drinks there. You have to know what drinks were served at Don's in order to pick one off the menu. A rum barrel or a panang or a montego bay.
The Mai Kai is in Fort Lauderdale. And the reason you can get Don's drinks there is the owners of the Mai Kai, when they built it in 1956, they poached a bartender from the Don the Beachcomber in Chicago specifically so they could get Don's recipes. They just tweaked the names of the drinks a little bit. The Navy grog became the yeoman's grog, like that.
The third place is a new place. I have not actually been there yet, but I've met Martin Cate, the guy who runs it. It's called Forbidden Island [Tiki Lounge] and it's in Alameda, which is in the San Francisco Bay Area. They're real Don drinks -- which he got from my books mostly.
-- By Robert Simonson
I Will Have The Hottest First Lady In U.S. History
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/if_elected_i_will_have_the
If Elected, I Will Have The Hottest First Lady In U.S. History
By Sen. Fred Thompson
Presidential Candidate
October 17, 2007 Issue 43•42
My fellow Americans, in the coming presidential election, the voters of this nation will plot a course for the future. There are many candidates, each of whom brings a different vision of that future. But only one has the conviction and strength to lead this great country. Only one is a popular television and film actor ready to face the challenges of the 21st century head-on. And, most importantly, there is only one candidate with a bombshell trophy wife nearly a quarter-century younger than himself.
I urge each and every one of you to run a Google image search and see the evidence for yourself: photo after photo of a tall but wrinkled and sagging 64-year-old man—that's me—standing at various gala events, his arm wrapped around a stunning woman with glowing orange skin and beautiful platinum- highlighted hair. A bold woman, squeezed into a dress with a plunging neckline so low her enormous breasts seem almost ready to leap out and scream, "Hey world—look at us! We are married to a famous man we saw in Die Hard 2 when we were in college!"
That's her, ladies and gentlemen. That's my wife. Yes, we are actually married.
If elected, I pledge that same woman—who is a full six years younger than my eldest son—will be by my side at all state dinners, dressed to the nines, causing the Chinese delegation's jaws to drop in amazement at her gravity-defying rack.
This is my solemn vow to all Americans.
I am aware of the critics who doubt my ability to deliver on this promise. "What about Jackie Kennedy?" they ask. "Wasn't she a hotter first lady?" If all America cares about is hotness from the neck up, then yes. Though Jackie looked good in a pillbox hat, she never possessed that I-have-obvious-father-issues sort of hotness the people of this country appreciate so deeply. Go on, close your eyes and try picturing Jackie Kennedy on the cover of some magazine spilling out of a bikini. You can't do it, can you? Now try the same mental experiment with Mrs. Fred. The results speak for themselves.
I say America deserves hotter.
I am a man of simple conservative values, values I learned sitting around the kitchen table with my grandfather. It was there, at the age of 9, that he told me, "Boy, one day, you will find true love with a woman who will be born in about 15 years. Promise Jesus that when you marry her in your late 50s you will be true."
I intend to honor that promise.
In my many years in Hollywood and Washington, I've been with country-western singers, actresses, and models. America, I even once saw Nicole Kidman's bush when I accidentally walked into her trailer on the set of Days of Thunder, in which I played the role of Big John. But despite it all, I've grown to value and cherish my wife more than any starfucker I've ever known.
Because my wife is so much more than just a sweet slice, sweet though she may be. She is a mother who has given me two beautiful children, whom I adore, even if they do get confused sometimes and call me "Grandpa." But I know that in the Thompson household, when I ask the question, "Who's your daddy?" there is always one person I can rely on to scream out my name. This is my guarantee to you, the voters.
If you elect me as your next president, you will see this woman on TV nearly every day, jogging around the Rose Garden in tight Lycra shorts, bouncing all over the place with a figure that Americans of every stripe—from surgeons to truckers—will want to nail. Yours will be a first lady who is not only hot enough to appear in Playboy, but who might actually be willing to appear in Playboy. And if you choose me to be your next president, that is exactly what she'll do, in the November 2012 issue, guaranteeing me a second term once the public gets a good look at those truly incredible bazongas.
Thank you, and God bless America.
If Elected, I Will Have The Hottest First Lady In U.S. History
By Sen. Fred Thompson
Presidential Candidate
October 17, 2007 Issue 43•42
My fellow Americans, in the coming presidential election, the voters of this nation will plot a course for the future. There are many candidates, each of whom brings a different vision of that future. But only one has the conviction and strength to lead this great country. Only one is a popular television and film actor ready to face the challenges of the 21st century head-on. And, most importantly, there is only one candidate with a bombshell trophy wife nearly a quarter-century younger than himself.
I urge each and every one of you to run a Google image search and see the evidence for yourself: photo after photo of a tall but wrinkled and sagging 64-year-old man—that's me—standing at various gala events, his arm wrapped around a stunning woman with glowing orange skin and beautiful platinum- highlighted hair. A bold woman, squeezed into a dress with a plunging neckline so low her enormous breasts seem almost ready to leap out and scream, "Hey world—look at us! We are married to a famous man we saw in Die Hard 2 when we were in college!"
That's her, ladies and gentlemen. That's my wife. Yes, we are actually married.
If elected, I pledge that same woman—who is a full six years younger than my eldest son—will be by my side at all state dinners, dressed to the nines, causing the Chinese delegation's jaws to drop in amazement at her gravity-defying rack.
This is my solemn vow to all Americans.
I am aware of the critics who doubt my ability to deliver on this promise. "What about Jackie Kennedy?" they ask. "Wasn't she a hotter first lady?" If all America cares about is hotness from the neck up, then yes. Though Jackie looked good in a pillbox hat, she never possessed that I-have-obvious-father-issues sort of hotness the people of this country appreciate so deeply. Go on, close your eyes and try picturing Jackie Kennedy on the cover of some magazine spilling out of a bikini. You can't do it, can you? Now try the same mental experiment with Mrs. Fred. The results speak for themselves.
I say America deserves hotter.
I am a man of simple conservative values, values I learned sitting around the kitchen table with my grandfather. It was there, at the age of 9, that he told me, "Boy, one day, you will find true love with a woman who will be born in about 15 years. Promise Jesus that when you marry her in your late 50s you will be true."
I intend to honor that promise.
In my many years in Hollywood and Washington, I've been with country-western singers, actresses, and models. America, I even once saw Nicole Kidman's bush when I accidentally walked into her trailer on the set of Days of Thunder, in which I played the role of Big John. But despite it all, I've grown to value and cherish my wife more than any starfucker I've ever known.
Because my wife is so much more than just a sweet slice, sweet though she may be. She is a mother who has given me two beautiful children, whom I adore, even if they do get confused sometimes and call me "Grandpa." But I know that in the Thompson household, when I ask the question, "Who's your daddy?" there is always one person I can rely on to scream out my name. This is my guarantee to you, the voters.
If you elect me as your next president, you will see this woman on TV nearly every day, jogging around the Rose Garden in tight Lycra shorts, bouncing all over the place with a figure that Americans of every stripe—from surgeons to truckers—will want to nail. Yours will be a first lady who is not only hot enough to appear in Playboy, but who might actually be willing to appear in Playboy. And if you choose me to be your next president, that is exactly what she'll do, in the November 2012 issue, guaranteeing me a second term once the public gets a good look at those truly incredible bazongas.
Thank you, and God bless America.
Greg Bishop, More Info Coming Soon
Greg Bishop, CIA Disinformation AgentMore Info Coming Soon
More on this story will appear on The Konformist Newswire and Blog this week. Stay tuned...
Friday, October 26, 2007
Greg Bishop, CIA Disinformation Agent
The Konformist has just received indisputable evidence that Greg Bishop, a former Konformist Kontributing Editor and the winner of a Project Censored prize for his work with the magazine, is in fact a CIA disinformation agent planted within the paranormal community to control the terms of debate among topics such as UFOlogy.
According to the documents, Bishop, whose code name was "H44B-DAY" by the agency, received hundreds of thousands of dollars for his work. His work has led to CIA spin to be inserted within the paranormal community, and apparently the death of at least seven individuals who "knew too much."
Because of these revelations, we advise all Konformist readers to boycott all his work, which now includes numerous books. After all, why pay for something when it's already being financed by the US government?
According to the documents, Bishop, whose code name was "H44B-DAY" by the agency, received hundreds of thousands of dollars for his work. His work has led to CIA spin to be inserted within the paranormal community, and apparently the death of at least seven individuals who "knew too much."
Because of these revelations, we advise all Konformist readers to boycott all his work, which now includes numerous books. After all, why pay for something when it's already being financed by the US government?
ConsortiumNews.com October 2007
ConsortiumNews.com
Unlike many other Web sites, we try to minimize our major fund-raising appeals to one at mid-year and one at year's end. But that often leaves us financially vulnerable in between.
That's why we hoped sales of our new book, Neck Deep, would fill that in-between shortfall, so we can continue to report, edit and publish original journalism. Five dollars from each book sale through the publisher is rebated to Consortiumnews.com.
In late September, I sent out a message setting a goal of selling 1,000 books to generate $5,000 in needed revenue. Since then, however, only 300 books have been sold, leaving us 700 books short.
So, if you haven't ordered your copy of Neck Deep, please do so today. Or you can buy one for a friend or the local library - or if your organization is doing a fund-raiser, it can buy a whole box of books at about half the retail price.
Many of us in America have long viewed journalism as someone else's responsibility, that honest information should be our birth right, that we are essentially consumers and critics when it comes to news.
But we must realize that our comfortable view of journalism is no longer the reality and hasn't been for some time. Honest journalism must be fought for and supported in every way possible, including financially.
So please do what you can to help us continue our work. Go to the publisher's Web site at http://www.neckdeepbook.com/. If you prefer to order by mail, you can print out a form there or just send a check for the Neck Deep purchase price (paperback $22.95 or hardcover $29.95) plus $4 for shipping to The Media Consortium; Suite 102-231; 2200 Wilson Blvd.; Arlington, VA 22201.
Besides helping us, I'm confident you'll find Neck Deep to be a very readable and very important book.
Thanks.
Robert Parry, Editor
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com.
Unlike many other Web sites, we try to minimize our major fund-raising appeals to one at mid-year and one at year's end. But that often leaves us financially vulnerable in between.
That's why we hoped sales of our new book, Neck Deep, would fill that in-between shortfall, so we can continue to report, edit and publish original journalism. Five dollars from each book sale through the publisher is rebated to Consortiumnews.com.
In late September, I sent out a message setting a goal of selling 1,000 books to generate $5,000 in needed revenue. Since then, however, only 300 books have been sold, leaving us 700 books short.
So, if you haven't ordered your copy of Neck Deep, please do so today. Or you can buy one for a friend or the local library - or if your organization is doing a fund-raiser, it can buy a whole box of books at about half the retail price.
Many of us in America have long viewed journalism as someone else's responsibility, that honest information should be our birth right, that we are essentially consumers and critics when it comes to news.
But we must realize that our comfortable view of journalism is no longer the reality and hasn't been for some time. Honest journalism must be fought for and supported in every way possible, including financially.
So please do what you can to help us continue our work. Go to the publisher's Web site at http://www.neckdeepbook.com/. If you prefer to order by mail, you can print out a form there or just send a check for the Neck Deep purchase price (paperback $22.95 or hardcover $29.95) plus $4 for shipping to The Media Consortium; Suite 102-231; 2200 Wilson Blvd.; Arlington, VA 22201.
Besides helping us, I'm confident you'll find Neck Deep to be a very readable and very important book.
Thanks.
Robert Parry, Editor
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com.
The Case Against 'Jesus'
Christians' worst nightmare is materializing: The book that proves 'Jesus' never existed, and 'Christian' religion in all of its versions is a 1900-year-old fraud on humanity, is being readied for print.
Preparing a Fourth (Revised and Illustrated) Edition of my e-book The Case Against 'Jesus' for publication as a printed book has occupied so much of my time that I have not been able to produce issues of my newsletter lately. I hope to resume the newsletter next week.
Maybe print publication will help overcome the resistance to the book. If so and I can break through the blacklisting via some brave mass media person willing to discuss the book, and public attention results, "Christian" religion is on its way to the trash heap. The book PROVES that there never was any "Jesus Christ," there never were any apostles, there never were any "Christians," and the entire New Testament is fiction. The evidence I have provided is massive and irrefutable. Belief in "Jesus" and the purported events described in the New Testament does not survive this book.
The "Christian" prayer these days is: "Please God, don't let Burton Wolfe's book get out" - because if it does, the party is over for "Christianity."
I cannot tell you when the printed version of the book will appear, but my guess is that it will not happen until sometime next year. Meanwhile, you can read it as an e-book. For information on how to order the book, go to the web site of the online division of Wild West Publishing House. Click on the following URL to get there: http://ebooks.wildwestpublishing.com.
Sample comments on The Case Against 'Jesus'
"A brilliant case. Your work is first rate." - Gore Vidal
"I agree with you one hundred percent that the biblical Jesus is a total fabrication. I had always thought so as a hunch after some casual investigation, but you make the case beyond possible doubt." - Ralph Anspach, Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus, San Francisco State University
"Yours is the first statement, since Albert Schweitzer's at the beginning of the 20th Century, that Christianity will have to surrender the historicity of Jesus." - Professor G.A. Wells, Birbeck College, University of London. (Wells is one of the foremost biblical scholars in the world and the author of such classic works on Jesus as Did Jesus Exist?.)
"You may not call yourself a scholar, but you certainly have done a great deal of honest scholarly research...It often takes so-called 'amateurs' such as yourself to get us so-called 'scholars' to see that the Emperor has no clothes!...You have many excellent scholars who support you in your view that no Talmudic reference to Jesus is trustworthy...Why would a Jew admit that Jesus even lived?...I believe that you are to be commended for stressing the importance of the issue of whether Jesus ever lived, inasmuch as the existence of Jesus is the sine qua non for Christianity..." - Louis H. Feldman, Professor of Classics, Yeshiva University, New York. (Feldman is one of the foremost translators of the works of the First-Century historian Flavius Josephus.)
"Thank you so much for your book. It's having a stupendous effect in the free-thinking community of individuals not gullible enough to swallow the tall-tales the Catholic religion concocted to assert domination over governments and society. I hope sincerely that some day your book will be published and reach thousands who have digested the fantasy of a mythic Jesus and a supernatural god." - Leland W. Ruble, Editor-publisher of the journal Perceptive Freethought.
"Our acqusitions committee has found your work most engaging. Its lively and provocative approach should entice readers to rethink traditional positions regarding the status of Jesus and the origins of Christianity. It is our fervent hope that you will continue your research and complete your manuscript on this fascinating topic." - Steven L. Mitchell, Editor-in-Chief, Prometheus Books.
Contact Information:
admin@wildwestpublishing.com
Preparing a Fourth (Revised and Illustrated) Edition of my e-book The Case Against 'Jesus' for publication as a printed book has occupied so much of my time that I have not been able to produce issues of my newsletter lately. I hope to resume the newsletter next week.
Maybe print publication will help overcome the resistance to the book. If so and I can break through the blacklisting via some brave mass media person willing to discuss the book, and public attention results, "Christian" religion is on its way to the trash heap. The book PROVES that there never was any "Jesus Christ," there never were any apostles, there never were any "Christians," and the entire New Testament is fiction. The evidence I have provided is massive and irrefutable. Belief in "Jesus" and the purported events described in the New Testament does not survive this book.
The "Christian" prayer these days is: "Please God, don't let Burton Wolfe's book get out" - because if it does, the party is over for "Christianity."
I cannot tell you when the printed version of the book will appear, but my guess is that it will not happen until sometime next year. Meanwhile, you can read it as an e-book. For information on how to order the book, go to the web site of the online division of Wild West Publishing House. Click on the following URL to get there: http://ebooks.wildwestpublishing.com.
Sample comments on The Case Against 'Jesus'
"A brilliant case. Your work is first rate." - Gore Vidal
"I agree with you one hundred percent that the biblical Jesus is a total fabrication. I had always thought so as a hunch after some casual investigation, but you make the case beyond possible doubt." - Ralph Anspach, Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus, San Francisco State University
"Yours is the first statement, since Albert Schweitzer's at the beginning of the 20th Century, that Christianity will have to surrender the historicity of Jesus." - Professor G.A. Wells, Birbeck College, University of London. (Wells is one of the foremost biblical scholars in the world and the author of such classic works on Jesus as Did Jesus Exist?.)
"You may not call yourself a scholar, but you certainly have done a great deal of honest scholarly research...It often takes so-called 'amateurs' such as yourself to get us so-called 'scholars' to see that the Emperor has no clothes!...You have many excellent scholars who support you in your view that no Talmudic reference to Jesus is trustworthy...Why would a Jew admit that Jesus even lived?...I believe that you are to be commended for stressing the importance of the issue of whether Jesus ever lived, inasmuch as the existence of Jesus is the sine qua non for Christianity..." - Louis H. Feldman, Professor of Classics, Yeshiva University, New York. (Feldman is one of the foremost translators of the works of the First-Century historian Flavius Josephus.)
"Thank you so much for your book. It's having a stupendous effect in the free-thinking community of individuals not gullible enough to swallow the tall-tales the Catholic religion concocted to assert domination over governments and society. I hope sincerely that some day your book will be published and reach thousands who have digested the fantasy of a mythic Jesus and a supernatural god." - Leland W. Ruble, Editor-publisher of the journal Perceptive Freethought.
"Our acqusitions committee has found your work most engaging. Its lively and provocative approach should entice readers to rethink traditional positions regarding the status of Jesus and the origins of Christianity. It is our fervent hope that you will continue your research and complete your manuscript on this fascinating topic." - Steven L. Mitchell, Editor-in-Chief, Prometheus Books.
Contact Information:
admin@wildwestpublishing.com
Nas confirms album title will be epithet
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_en_ot/music_nas_album_title
Nas confirms album title will be epithet
By NEKESA MUMBI MOODY, AP Music Writer
Fri Oct 19, 2007
To some, it's a hurtful racial epithet. For Nas, it's an album title.
The rapper told MTV News that he would indeed be naming his new album after the N-word. And he denied earlier reports that the album's title would be spelled "N---a," considered in some circles a less inflammatory epithet. He said the disc is due out Dec. 11.
"(People) shouldn't trip off the (album's) title; the songs are crazier than the title," he said in an interview posted on MTV's Web site.
But some have been outraged by the rapper's choice.
"The title using the 'N' word is morally offensive and socially distasteful. Nas has the right to degrade and denigrate in the name of free speech, but there is no honor in it," the Rev. Jesse Jackson said in a news release. "Radio and television stations have no obligation to play it and self-respecting people have no obligation to buy it. I wish he would use his talents to lift up and inspire, not degrade."
There were reports that his label, Def Jam, had scuttled the title idea. But Nas told MTV that he has had no opposition from the label, and said his intent in naming the album the N-word was to take the sting out of it.
"We're taking power from the word," he added. "No disrespect to none of them who were part of the civil rights movement, but some ... in the streets don't know who (civil rights activist) Medgar Evers was ... they know who Nas is," the rapper said, referring to the civil rights leader slain in the 1960s.
"And to my older people who don't know who Nas is and who don't know what a street disciple is, stay outta this (expletive) conversation. We'll talk to you when we're ready. Right now, we're on a whole new movement. We're taking power from that word."
A representative for Def Jam did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment from The Associated Press sent after business hours.
The use of the N-word is common in rap, though rapper Chamillionaire recently declared he would no longer use that word or curse in his rhymes.
Nas confirms album title will be epithet
By NEKESA MUMBI MOODY, AP Music Writer
Fri Oct 19, 2007
To some, it's a hurtful racial epithet. For Nas, it's an album title.
The rapper told MTV News that he would indeed be naming his new album after the N-word. And he denied earlier reports that the album's title would be spelled "N---a," considered in some circles a less inflammatory epithet. He said the disc is due out Dec. 11.
"(People) shouldn't trip off the (album's) title; the songs are crazier than the title," he said in an interview posted on MTV's Web site.
But some have been outraged by the rapper's choice.
"The title using the 'N' word is morally offensive and socially distasteful. Nas has the right to degrade and denigrate in the name of free speech, but there is no honor in it," the Rev. Jesse Jackson said in a news release. "Radio and television stations have no obligation to play it and self-respecting people have no obligation to buy it. I wish he would use his talents to lift up and inspire, not degrade."
There were reports that his label, Def Jam, had scuttled the title idea. But Nas told MTV that he has had no opposition from the label, and said his intent in naming the album the N-word was to take the sting out of it.
"We're taking power from the word," he added. "No disrespect to none of them who were part of the civil rights movement, but some ... in the streets don't know who (civil rights activist) Medgar Evers was ... they know who Nas is," the rapper said, referring to the civil rights leader slain in the 1960s.
"And to my older people who don't know who Nas is and who don't know what a street disciple is, stay outta this (expletive) conversation. We'll talk to you when we're ready. Right now, we're on a whole new movement. We're taking power from that word."
A representative for Def Jam did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment from The Associated Press sent after business hours.
The use of the N-word is common in rap, though rapper Chamillionaire recently declared he would no longer use that word or curse in his rhymes.
25 Secrets of Mona Lisa Revealed
http://www.livescience.com/history/071018-mona-lisa.html
25 Secrets of Mona Lisa Revealed
By Jeanna Bryner, LiveScience Staff Writer
18 October 2007
New images uncover 25 secrets about the Mona Lisa, including proof that Leonardo da Vinci gave her eyebrows, solving a long-held mystery.
The images are part of an exhibition, "Mona Lisa Secrets Revealed," which features new research by French engineer Pascal Cotte and debuts in the United States at the Metreon Center in San Francisco, where it will remain through the end of this year. The Mona Lisa showcase is part of a larger exhibition called "Da Vinci: An Exhibition of Genius."
Cotte, founder of Lumiere Technology, scanned the painting with a 240-megapixel Multi-spectral Imaging Camera he invented, which uses 13 wavelengths from ultraviolet light to infrared. The resulting images peel away centuries of varnish and other alterations, shedding light on how the artist brought the painted figure to life and how she appeared to da Vinci and his contemporaries.
"The face of Mona Lisa appears slightly wider and the smile is different and the eyes are different," Cotte said. "The smile is more accentuated I would say."
Mona Lisa mysteries
A zoomed-in image of Mona Lisa's left eye revealed a single brush stroke in the eyebrow region, Cotte said.
"I am an engineer and scientist, so for me all has to be logical. It was not logical that Mona Lisa does not have any eyebrows or eyelashes," Cotte told LiveScience. "I discovered one hair of the eyebrow."
Another conundrum had been the position of the subject's right arm, which lies across her stomach. This was the first time, Cotte said, that a painter had rendered a subject's arm and wrist in such a position. While other artists had never understood da Vinci's reasoning, they copied it nonetheless.
Cotte discovered the pigment just behind the right wrist matched up perfectly with that of the painted cover that drapes across Mona Lisa's knee. So it did make sense: The forearm and wrist held up one side of a blanket.
"The wrist of the right hand is up high on the stomach. But if you look deeply in the infrared you understand that she holds a cover with her wrist," Cotte said.
Behind a painting
The infrared images also revealed da Vinci's preparatory drawings that lie behind layers of varnish and paint, showing that the Renaissance man was also human.
"If you look at the left hand you see the first position of the finger, and he changed his mind for another position," Cotte said. "Even Leonardo da Vinci had hesitation."
Other revelations include:
Lace on Mona Lisa's dress
The transparency of the veil shows da Vinci first painted a landscape and then used transparency techniques to paint the veil atop it.
A change in the position of the left index and middle finger.
The elbow was repaired from damage due to a rock thrown at the painting in 1956.
The blanket covering Mona Lisa's knees also covers her stomach.
The left finger was not completely finished.
A blotch mark on the corner of the eye and chin are varnish accidents, countering claims that Mona Lisa was sick.
And the Mona Lisa was painted on uncut poplar board, contrary to speculations.
In the larger picture, Cotte said when he stands back and looks up at the enlarged infrared image of Mona Lisa, her beauty and mystique are apparent.
"If you are in front of this huge enlargement of Mona Lisa, you understand instantly why Mona Lisa is so famous," Cotte said. He added, it's something you have to see with your own eyes.
25 Secrets of Mona Lisa Revealed
By Jeanna Bryner, LiveScience Staff Writer
18 October 2007
New images uncover 25 secrets about the Mona Lisa, including proof that Leonardo da Vinci gave her eyebrows, solving a long-held mystery.
The images are part of an exhibition, "Mona Lisa Secrets Revealed," which features new research by French engineer Pascal Cotte and debuts in the United States at the Metreon Center in San Francisco, where it will remain through the end of this year. The Mona Lisa showcase is part of a larger exhibition called "Da Vinci: An Exhibition of Genius."
Cotte, founder of Lumiere Technology, scanned the painting with a 240-megapixel Multi-spectral Imaging Camera he invented, which uses 13 wavelengths from ultraviolet light to infrared. The resulting images peel away centuries of varnish and other alterations, shedding light on how the artist brought the painted figure to life and how she appeared to da Vinci and his contemporaries.
"The face of Mona Lisa appears slightly wider and the smile is different and the eyes are different," Cotte said. "The smile is more accentuated I would say."
Mona Lisa mysteries
A zoomed-in image of Mona Lisa's left eye revealed a single brush stroke in the eyebrow region, Cotte said.
"I am an engineer and scientist, so for me all has to be logical. It was not logical that Mona Lisa does not have any eyebrows or eyelashes," Cotte told LiveScience. "I discovered one hair of the eyebrow."
Another conundrum had been the position of the subject's right arm, which lies across her stomach. This was the first time, Cotte said, that a painter had rendered a subject's arm and wrist in such a position. While other artists had never understood da Vinci's reasoning, they copied it nonetheless.
Cotte discovered the pigment just behind the right wrist matched up perfectly with that of the painted cover that drapes across Mona Lisa's knee. So it did make sense: The forearm and wrist held up one side of a blanket.
"The wrist of the right hand is up high on the stomach. But if you look deeply in the infrared you understand that she holds a cover with her wrist," Cotte said.
Behind a painting
The infrared images also revealed da Vinci's preparatory drawings that lie behind layers of varnish and paint, showing that the Renaissance man was also human.
"If you look at the left hand you see the first position of the finger, and he changed his mind for another position," Cotte said. "Even Leonardo da Vinci had hesitation."
Other revelations include:
Lace on Mona Lisa's dress
The transparency of the veil shows da Vinci first painted a landscape and then used transparency techniques to paint the veil atop it.
A change in the position of the left index and middle finger.
The elbow was repaired from damage due to a rock thrown at the painting in 1956.
The blanket covering Mona Lisa's knees also covers her stomach.
The left finger was not completely finished.
A blotch mark on the corner of the eye and chin are varnish accidents, countering claims that Mona Lisa was sick.
And the Mona Lisa was painted on uncut poplar board, contrary to speculations.
In the larger picture, Cotte said when he stands back and looks up at the enlarged infrared image of Mona Lisa, her beauty and mystique are apparent.
"If you are in front of this huge enlargement of Mona Lisa, you understand instantly why Mona Lisa is so famous," Cotte said. He added, it's something you have to see with your own eyes.
Limbaugh told journalist writing story on him...
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710160001
Limbaugh says he told journalist writing story on him: "[W]e're going to find out where your kids go to school"
Tuesday October 16, 2007
Summary:
During the October 15 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh claimed to have "once" participated in the kind of "destructive reporting and behavior" that, according to him, reporters "dish out." Limbaugh said his target was a reporter, whose name he said he would not "mention," who was writing "a cover story on me coming out of one of the big news magazines, and it was going to totally mischaracterize me and what I do and how I do it." Limbaugh continued: "[W]e found out who was writing it and made a couple phone calls to the person writing it. And we said, 'You know what? We're going to find out where your kids go to school. We're going to find out who you knocked up in high school. We're going to find out what drugs you used. We're going to find out where you go to drink and do -- we're gonna find out how you paid for your house. We're going to do -- and we're going to do exact -- and we're going to say that, you know what? You are no different than Al Goldstein. You both masturbate.' "
Limbaugh then claimed: "And the guy started screaming on the phone, just went -- 'You can't do that.' We said, 'Watch us.' And it changed the tone of the story by about 60 percent, I would say, from what it was going to be. But nobody does that to these people. Nobody does it to them. And that would be so much fun."
Limbaugh made this claim while discussing the founding of ProPublica, which "will produce investigative journalism in the public interest," according to its website:
ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that will produce investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will focus exclusively on truly important stories, stories with "moral force." We will do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.
During his discussion, Limbaugh read from a post about ProPublica on the conservative website American Thinker, which read in part: "Efforts are being made to wrap this propaganda venture in the cloak of pure public interests." Limbaugh later commented:
LIMBAUGH: I'll tell you, folks, the way to deal with this -- I have always said it. I don't know anybody who's doing it. Maybe I should found ProDestroya and get a bunch of people willing to do investigative journalism on these investigative journalists. You know, AntiPublica. They get to sit there -- who are these people that get to act as though they are sin-free, that they are as clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, that they've got no skeletons in their closet? They can go out and dig up dirt on -- and everybody's got dirt. They can go out and dig whatever up and then they can slant it and taint it, smear it and lie about it, do whatever they want, and nobody examines who these people are. And if you try, they get mad. "Well, we're journalists, we're immune. You can't treat us the way we treat other people."
From the October 15 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: Here's who it is that's funding this ProPublica bunch. "It is Herb and Marion Sandler, legendary capitalist, multibillionaire, builders of a financial empire, philanthropic allies of Peter Lewis and George Soros. They're ponying up $10 million a year for a charitable venture to supply investigative reporting at no cost to newspapers, which are laying off editorial employees and others as their bidness [sic] model becomes obsolete. Efforts are being made to wrap this propaganda venture in the cloak of pure public interests."
And ProPublica, does that -- you know, that's a Latin name. Does it not sound like something a bunch of socialists would come up with? ProPublica. "The board comprises a distinguished multi-ethnic panel that even includes a white, male former congressman, Jim Leach [R] of Iowa. Former Wall Street Journal editor Paul Steiger is in charge for the time being. No doubt there will be window-dressing stories going after subjects who could be described as liberal in some sense," just to show that they're, you know, balanced and so forth, but that'll be just at the outset here.
Thomas Lifson at the American Thinker says, "Given the background of the holders of the purse strings, there's reason to suspect that the venture will be used to go after opponents of the left. Even Jane Mayer of The New Yorker described them and their circle as hard-core partisans. The Sandlers are famous, celebrated, notorious for their policy of not spending a penny without getting their money's worth and more. They're going to hire up to 24 journalists and pay salary and benefits comparable to the biggest newspapers," which, in essence, you know what this is -- a safety net for some of those journalists who have been canned or who have been let go. So the same journalists who weren't doing their jobs in the first place are now going to get hired to not do their jobs as well as they had been. The whole thing is a ruse, and it's a tax dodge. The whole thing is a tax -- and it's giving away its work. It's a tax dodge for these donors. So, "No longer tethered to the responsibility of earning their way in the marketplace, this talent pool of investigative journalists can be turned loose on potentially anyone. If you look hard enough, you can find all sorts of difficult-to-explain matters that, at a minimum, can tie up and distract even the most innocent paragon of virtue. For real people born as sinners, there's always something that investigative journalists can find."
I'll tell you, folks, the way to deal with this -- I have always said it. I don't know anybody who's doing it. Maybe I should found ProDestroya and get a bunch of people willing to do investigative journalism on these investigative journalists. You know, AntiPublica. They get to sit there -- who are these people that get to act as though they are sin-free, that they are as clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, that they've got no skeletons in their closet? They can go out and dig up dirt on -- and everybody's got dirt. They can go out and dig whatever up and then they can slant it and taint it, smear it and lie about it, do whatever they want, and nobody examines who these people are. And if you try, they get mad. "Well, we're journalists, we're immune. You can't treat us the way we treat other people."
I've had journalists tell me this. "Well, we're journalists." Why are you immune? Why are you immune to the same kind of destructive reporting and behavior that you dish out? You know, we have practiced -- I've practiced it once. I am not going to tell you the story because I'm don't want to give it away, and I would have to mention names, and I'm not going to mention names. But there was a cover story on me coming out of one of the big news magazines, and it was going to totally mischaracterize me and what I do and how I do it. And we found out who was writing it and made a couple phone calls to the person writing it. And we said, "You know what? We're going to find out where your kids go to school. We're going to find out who you knocked up in high school. We're going to find out what drugs you used. We're going to find out where you go to drink and do -- we're gonna find out how you paid for your house. We're going to do -- and we're going to do exact -- and we're going to say that, you know what? You are no different than Al Goldstein. You both masturbate. You're no different than Al Goldstein, and you're both journalists, and so forth."
And the guy started screaming on the phone, just went -- "You can't do that." We said, "Watch us." And it changed the tone of the story by about 60 percent, I would say, from what it was going to be. But nobody does that to these people. Nobody does it to them. And that would be so much fun. But I'd need to be wearing body armor every day. Oh, no question, these people are playing for keeps.
— A.J.W.
Limbaugh says he told journalist writing story on him: "[W]e're going to find out where your kids go to school"
Tuesday October 16, 2007
Summary:
During the October 15 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh claimed to have "once" participated in the kind of "destructive reporting and behavior" that, according to him, reporters "dish out." Limbaugh said his target was a reporter, whose name he said he would not "mention," who was writing "a cover story on me coming out of one of the big news magazines, and it was going to totally mischaracterize me and what I do and how I do it." Limbaugh continued: "[W]e found out who was writing it and made a couple phone calls to the person writing it. And we said, 'You know what? We're going to find out where your kids go to school. We're going to find out who you knocked up in high school. We're going to find out what drugs you used. We're going to find out where you go to drink and do -- we're gonna find out how you paid for your house. We're going to do -- and we're going to do exact -- and we're going to say that, you know what? You are no different than Al Goldstein. You both masturbate.' "
Limbaugh then claimed: "And the guy started screaming on the phone, just went -- 'You can't do that.' We said, 'Watch us.' And it changed the tone of the story by about 60 percent, I would say, from what it was going to be. But nobody does that to these people. Nobody does it to them. And that would be so much fun."
Limbaugh made this claim while discussing the founding of ProPublica, which "will produce investigative journalism in the public interest," according to its website:
ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that will produce investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will focus exclusively on truly important stories, stories with "moral force." We will do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.
During his discussion, Limbaugh read from a post about ProPublica on the conservative website American Thinker, which read in part: "Efforts are being made to wrap this propaganda venture in the cloak of pure public interests." Limbaugh later commented:
LIMBAUGH: I'll tell you, folks, the way to deal with this -- I have always said it. I don't know anybody who's doing it. Maybe I should found ProDestroya and get a bunch of people willing to do investigative journalism on these investigative journalists. You know, AntiPublica. They get to sit there -- who are these people that get to act as though they are sin-free, that they are as clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, that they've got no skeletons in their closet? They can go out and dig up dirt on -- and everybody's got dirt. They can go out and dig whatever up and then they can slant it and taint it, smear it and lie about it, do whatever they want, and nobody examines who these people are. And if you try, they get mad. "Well, we're journalists, we're immune. You can't treat us the way we treat other people."
From the October 15 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: Here's who it is that's funding this ProPublica bunch. "It is Herb and Marion Sandler, legendary capitalist, multibillionaire, builders of a financial empire, philanthropic allies of Peter Lewis and George Soros. They're ponying up $10 million a year for a charitable venture to supply investigative reporting at no cost to newspapers, which are laying off editorial employees and others as their bidness [sic] model becomes obsolete. Efforts are being made to wrap this propaganda venture in the cloak of pure public interests."
And ProPublica, does that -- you know, that's a Latin name. Does it not sound like something a bunch of socialists would come up with? ProPublica. "The board comprises a distinguished multi-ethnic panel that even includes a white, male former congressman, Jim Leach [R] of Iowa. Former Wall Street Journal editor Paul Steiger is in charge for the time being. No doubt there will be window-dressing stories going after subjects who could be described as liberal in some sense," just to show that they're, you know, balanced and so forth, but that'll be just at the outset here.
Thomas Lifson at the American Thinker says, "Given the background of the holders of the purse strings, there's reason to suspect that the venture will be used to go after opponents of the left. Even Jane Mayer of The New Yorker described them and their circle as hard-core partisans. The Sandlers are famous, celebrated, notorious for their policy of not spending a penny without getting their money's worth and more. They're going to hire up to 24 journalists and pay salary and benefits comparable to the biggest newspapers," which, in essence, you know what this is -- a safety net for some of those journalists who have been canned or who have been let go. So the same journalists who weren't doing their jobs in the first place are now going to get hired to not do their jobs as well as they had been. The whole thing is a ruse, and it's a tax dodge. The whole thing is a tax -- and it's giving away its work. It's a tax dodge for these donors. So, "No longer tethered to the responsibility of earning their way in the marketplace, this talent pool of investigative journalists can be turned loose on potentially anyone. If you look hard enough, you can find all sorts of difficult-to-explain matters that, at a minimum, can tie up and distract even the most innocent paragon of virtue. For real people born as sinners, there's always something that investigative journalists can find."
I'll tell you, folks, the way to deal with this -- I have always said it. I don't know anybody who's doing it. Maybe I should found ProDestroya and get a bunch of people willing to do investigative journalism on these investigative journalists. You know, AntiPublica. They get to sit there -- who are these people that get to act as though they are sin-free, that they are as clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, that they've got no skeletons in their closet? They can go out and dig up dirt on -- and everybody's got dirt. They can go out and dig whatever up and then they can slant it and taint it, smear it and lie about it, do whatever they want, and nobody examines who these people are. And if you try, they get mad. "Well, we're journalists, we're immune. You can't treat us the way we treat other people."
I've had journalists tell me this. "Well, we're journalists." Why are you immune? Why are you immune to the same kind of destructive reporting and behavior that you dish out? You know, we have practiced -- I've practiced it once. I am not going to tell you the story because I'm don't want to give it away, and I would have to mention names, and I'm not going to mention names. But there was a cover story on me coming out of one of the big news magazines, and it was going to totally mischaracterize me and what I do and how I do it. And we found out who was writing it and made a couple phone calls to the person writing it. And we said, "You know what? We're going to find out where your kids go to school. We're going to find out who you knocked up in high school. We're going to find out what drugs you used. We're going to find out where you go to drink and do -- we're gonna find out how you paid for your house. We're going to do -- and we're going to do exact -- and we're going to say that, you know what? You are no different than Al Goldstein. You both masturbate. You're no different than Al Goldstein, and you're both journalists, and so forth."
And the guy started screaming on the phone, just went -- "You can't do that." We said, "Watch us." And it changed the tone of the story by about 60 percent, I would say, from what it was going to be. But nobody does that to these people. Nobody does it to them. And that would be so much fun. But I'd need to be wearing body armor every day. Oh, no question, these people are playing for keeps.
— A.J.W.
J.K. Rowling outs Hogwarts character
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071020/ap_on_en_ot/books_harry_potter
J.K. Rowling outs Hogwarts character
By HILLEL ITALIE, AP National Writer
10-20-7
Harry Potter fans, the rumors are true: Albus Dumbledore, master wizard and Headmaster of Hogwarts, is gay. J.K. Rowling, author of the mega-selling fantasy series that ended last summer, outed the beloved character Friday night while appearing before a full house at Carnegie Hall.
After reading briefly from the final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," she took questions from audience members.
She was asked by one young fan whether Dumbledore finds "true love."
"Dumbledore is gay," the author responded to gasps and applause.
She then explained that Dumbledore was smitten with rival Gellert Grindelwald, whom he defeated long ago in a battle between good and bad wizards. "Falling in love can blind us to an extent," Rowling said of Dumbledore's feelings, adding that Dumbledore was "horribly, terribly let down."
Dumbledore's love, she observed, was his "great tragedy."
"Oh, my god," Rowling concluded with a laugh, "the fan fiction."
Potter readers on fan sites and elsewhere on the Internet have speculated on the sexuality of Dumbledore, noting that he has no close relationship with women and a mysterious, troubled past. And explicit scenes with Dumbledore already have appeared in fan fiction.
Rowling told the audience that while working on the planned sixth Potter film, "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," she spotted a reference in the script to a girl who once was of interest to Dumbledore. A note was duly passed to director David Yates, revealing the truth about her character.
Rowling, finishing a brief "Open Book Tour" of the United States, her first tour here since 2000, also said that she regarded her Potter books as a "prolonged argument for tolerance" and urged her fans to "question authority."
Not everyone likes her work, Rowling said, likely referring to Christian groups that have alleged the books promote witchcraft. Her news about Dumbledore, she said, will give them one more reason.
J.K. Rowling outs Hogwarts character
By HILLEL ITALIE, AP National Writer
10-20-7
Harry Potter fans, the rumors are true: Albus Dumbledore, master wizard and Headmaster of Hogwarts, is gay. J.K. Rowling, author of the mega-selling fantasy series that ended last summer, outed the beloved character Friday night while appearing before a full house at Carnegie Hall.
After reading briefly from the final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," she took questions from audience members.
She was asked by one young fan whether Dumbledore finds "true love."
"Dumbledore is gay," the author responded to gasps and applause.
She then explained that Dumbledore was smitten with rival Gellert Grindelwald, whom he defeated long ago in a battle between good and bad wizards. "Falling in love can blind us to an extent," Rowling said of Dumbledore's feelings, adding that Dumbledore was "horribly, terribly let down."
Dumbledore's love, she observed, was his "great tragedy."
"Oh, my god," Rowling concluded with a laugh, "the fan fiction."
Potter readers on fan sites and elsewhere on the Internet have speculated on the sexuality of Dumbledore, noting that he has no close relationship with women and a mysterious, troubled past. And explicit scenes with Dumbledore already have appeared in fan fiction.
Rowling told the audience that while working on the planned sixth Potter film, "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," she spotted a reference in the script to a girl who once was of interest to Dumbledore. A note was duly passed to director David Yates, revealing the truth about her character.
Rowling, finishing a brief "Open Book Tour" of the United States, her first tour here since 2000, also said that she regarded her Potter books as a "prolonged argument for tolerance" and urged her fans to "question authority."
Not everyone likes her work, Rowling said, likely referring to Christian groups that have alleged the books promote witchcraft. Her news about Dumbledore, she said, will give them one more reason.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
TOP 10 PLACES TO GET SPOOKED ON HALLOWEEN
http://www.shermanstravel.com/destinations/top_ten/Places_to_Get_Spooked_on_Halloween
TOP 10 PLACES TO GET SPOOKED ON HALLOWEEN
By ShermansTravel Editorial Staff
ShermansTravel.com
They say the freaks come out at night – and on no night more so than October 31. Our top ten places to get spooked on Halloween are a frightful blend of spine-chilling cities, weird wayside towns, and baffling bodies of water. We propose four uncanny urban settings, both stateside and across the pond, where ghosts and ghouls add to the daily hustle and bustle. Or, discover the places where legends are born, like Transylvania, Roswell, and Salem. We’ve also hacked our way through several hair-raising hotels to recommend a night where a notorious ax-murder once slashed or the hotel where Stephen King was inspired to write The Shining. So pack your best costume, vampire stake, or ghost buster, and head out for the Halloween night of your dreams (or nightmares)!
Bermuda Triangle
Edinburgh
Lizzie Borden B & B
London
New York
Roswell
Salem
Savannah
Stanley Hotel
Transylvania
1. Bermuda Triangle
We’ve all heard of the Bermuda Triangle – that mysterious oceanic abyss blamed for swallowing a slew of aircrafts and ships, and, more humorously, all of the socks that seem to vanish from washing machines. Also known as the Devil’s Triangle, the term loosely refers to a triangular sea span with its apexes at Miami, Bermuda, and San Juan (Puerto Rico). Dozens of peculiar marine and aviation mishaps have occurred at a disproportionately high rate here – among the more sensational stories, an entire squadron of 1945 Navy bombers is thought to have disappeared here, ditto several enormous merchant ships, all without a hint of wreckage or drowned corpses. Some attribute the strange occurrences to anomalous electromagnetic energy, while others believe that aliens are using the area as a portal to visit the planet or, that the lost city of Atlantis lies below. Plan on a cruise through the baffling Bermuda Triangle this Halloween and you just might get to find out more.
2. Edinburgh
Descend into the underworld, literally! A forgotten city lies beneath Edinburgh’s South Bridge – an underground maze of chambers, vaulted rooms, tunnels, and passageways shrouded in mystery and intrigue. The bricked-in city opened in 1788 (it was closed in the early 1800s due to insufficient waterproofing) but was virtually unknown to the thriving city above it before being rediscovered in 1985. It’s thought that thousands of people lived and died in these vaults, many of whom never glimpsed the light of day. Nowadays, 20 or so rooms and merchant quarters have been excavated, and tours through the cavernous hollows pass by oil lamps, leather shoes, smelting metal, animal bones, wine bottles, and other haunting remnants of the people who lived here. Not surprisingly, the vaults are famous for their strong paranormal presence, as well; many visitors swear they’ve seen wraithlike ghost shadows down below – some have even captured the haunting images in photographs. Check Mercat Tours for times and themes.
3. Lizzie Borden B & B
Good night, sleep tight – don’t let the axe murderers fright! For a bone-chillingly good scare and a guaranteed sleepless night, we recommend a Halloween getaway to the Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast, a Greek Revival house in Fall River, Massachusetts (about 50 miles south of Boston). Built in 1845, the house famously became the setting for the 1892 ax murders of Abby and Andrew Borden, allegedly by their very own daughter, Lizzie! The house has since been restored with late-19th-century period pieces, which contribute to the atmosphere, especially as you can stand today in the place where Lizzie’s stepmother received 18 blows to the head – and the one where her father endured a slightly less brutal 11! While circumstantial evidence tied Lizzie to the crime, she was ultimately acquitted, and the case was never solved. Aside from the eerie happenings reported on the premises to pique your interest, there’s small on-site museum showcasing memorabilia related to the crime and a gift shop where you can pick up silver-toned hatchet earrings for yourself or that special somebody.
4. London
While it may be merrie olde England on the surface, there is a frightening underbelly to be discovered in the ancient capital city of London. Forget high tea – and head out for a spot of ghost-hunting instead, with haunted nooks and crannies in courtyards, churches, and alleyways that recall bloody and brutal London events from times long ago. London Ghost Walk covers the most frighteningly fun highlights and offers specialized tours that follow in the bloody footsteps of London’s most heinous criminal, Jack the Ripper. Hang around some of the top tourist attractions after dark, too, and you may well get a little something extra with your admission – a ghostly monk is said to wander the cloisters of Westminster Abbey, while the headless ghost of Anne Boleyn, the unfortunate second wife of King Henry VIII, is known to linger outside of the chapel at the Tower of London – apparently still upset about her beheading after only three short years of marriage.
5. New York
As if the streets of New York weren’t freakish enough all year long, on Halloween the freakiest of them all get to show off their eccentricities to applause and prizes – not social judgment – as part of the annual Halloween parade that marches up Sixth Avenue. Attended each year by over 2 million New Yorkers reveling in the spooky spirit, the village spectacle is not to be missed, but the fun doesn't end when it does. Countless costume parties abound around town – the parade crew tends to hit Webster Hall, famous for its raging all-night bash. Another popular annual event celebrating the ghoulish holiday is the Halloween Extravaganza and Procession of Ghouls at the world’s largest gothic cathedral, St. John the Divine. This unique event kicks off with a horror flick accompanied by an organist who brings the eerie soundtrack to life - it's a spine-tingling combination in the dimly lit cathedral. After the film, an elaborate procession of costumed characters and outrageous puppets strut their spooky stuff down the center aisle, to a blitz of special effects.
6. Roswell
The year was 1947, the place was an unassuming desert town in New Mexico, and the event was perceived as so extraordinary that, some 60 years later, Roswell remains a household name. U.F.O. enthusiasts today relish this tiny town as the U.F.O. capital of the world, citing the “Roswell Incident,” in which a craft carrying four large-headed alien beings purportedly crashed, followed closely by an entourage of military and government personnel, who swooped in to collect the wreckage. Conflicting newspaper reports came out in the days following the event – after releasing a statement confirming that they had indeed collected debris from a spaceship crash, the US military later retracted it, and dismissed the flying object as nothing more than a downed weather balloon. Decide where you stand on the issue with a visit to Roswell’s International UFO Museum and Research Center, where photos, documents, and dioramas shine some light on where conspiracy theorists got their ideas about government cover-ups and alien autopsies. You can also arrange to tour the crash site with a local guide for an out-of-this-world Halloween – just be sure to keep your eye on the sky.
7. Salem
Home to the ill-reputed witch trials of 1692, Salem, MA, today is, according to legend, still haunted by the women executed as part of the hysteria. Every October, Salem milks its gruesome past with its annual month-long Haunted Happenings festival of ghost tours, street fairs, and costume balls. Be sure to stop by The Witch House, one of the oldest buildings in Salem and the onetime home of Jonathan Corwin, the judge who ultimately sent 19 women to their doom. Also worth joining are the eerie tours led by Salem Historical Tours: one visits the local cemetery, thought to be the country's second oldest, while another heads out for a nightly stroll past haunted houses and more.
8. Savannah
There’s no way around it – a saunter through the Southern city of Savannah is just plain spooky. Forget sightseeing: With dozens of tour groups dedicated to showcasing haunted Savannah, you’d best be prepared for some fright-seeing instead! Try strolling the cobblestone streets of Georgia’s oldest city on the nighttime Ghosts of Savannah walking tour, rolling around town with a narrated guide on Carriage Tours of Savannah, or opt for a Creepy Pub Crawl, if you wish to sample some spirits while you look for them. So just what is it about this deceptively pretty city that makes it so ghoulishly grim? Believers cite a long history of violence and bloodshed dating back to the Revolutionary and Civil Wars, not to mention widespread diseases and fires here. As if that weren't sufficient, many parts of Savannah's historic section were built over old cemeteries, to boot. You can literally eat and sleep with ghosts here - grab a bite to eat at the Pirate House, a popular centuries-old local restaurant with a ghostly clientele, then rest up (if you can!) at any number of haunted bed and breakfasts; a particularly creepy choice is the 1851 Marshall House that once served as a hospital for many Civil War soldiers and yellow-fever victims.
9. Stanley Hotel
Who hasn’t gotten the goose bumps from reading (or watching) Steven King’s haunting thriller, The Shining? Test your tolerance for the terrifying by spending a night in the place that inspired the novel, the Stanley Hotel. Built in 1909, the hotel is in fact a grand estate, with a spectacular Colorado mountainside location, old-fashioned rooms with impressive vistas, top-notch amenities, and an award-winning restaurant. What makes this place truly unique and a tad creepy, however, is the presence of otherworldly residents. Flora Stanley, the first owner’s long-deceased wife, can still be seen and heard, late at night, either tinkling the piano keys in the music room or wandering around the lobby. Plus, the entire fourth floor (once the servants’ quarters) teems with strange after-dark commotion: if you stay in room 418, you might hear children playing outside your door, but find nary a soul in the hallway. For the ultimate scare (or inspiration), stay in room 217 – where King himself laid his head.
10. Transylvania
It’s hard to deny the fright factor of fanged, bloodsucking vampires who awake from coffins in the night to hunt their prey. So why not up the horror ante this Halloween and visit Transylvania, the alleged birthplace of these dark and fearsome creatures? Indeed, this western province of Romania is considered to be the home of Count Dracula; to wit, you can even tour his alleged keep, the daunting Bran Castle (more commonly known as Dracula’s Castle), an eerie 14th-century bastion about 20 miles from Brasov, in the shadows of Mount Bucegi, that’s said to have briefly housed the Romanian prince on whom the great fictional vampire is based. If that doesn’t leave your blood cold, head for the hills above the town of Miklósvár to explore bat-filled caves or, tour medieval villages in a horse-drawn sleigh.
TOP 10 PLACES TO GET SPOOKED ON HALLOWEEN
By ShermansTravel Editorial Staff
ShermansTravel.com
They say the freaks come out at night – and on no night more so than October 31. Our top ten places to get spooked on Halloween are a frightful blend of spine-chilling cities, weird wayside towns, and baffling bodies of water. We propose four uncanny urban settings, both stateside and across the pond, where ghosts and ghouls add to the daily hustle and bustle. Or, discover the places where legends are born, like Transylvania, Roswell, and Salem. We’ve also hacked our way through several hair-raising hotels to recommend a night where a notorious ax-murder once slashed or the hotel where Stephen King was inspired to write The Shining. So pack your best costume, vampire stake, or ghost buster, and head out for the Halloween night of your dreams (or nightmares)!
Bermuda Triangle
Edinburgh
Lizzie Borden B & B
London
New York
Roswell
Salem
Savannah
Stanley Hotel
Transylvania
1. Bermuda Triangle
We’ve all heard of the Bermuda Triangle – that mysterious oceanic abyss blamed for swallowing a slew of aircrafts and ships, and, more humorously, all of the socks that seem to vanish from washing machines. Also known as the Devil’s Triangle, the term loosely refers to a triangular sea span with its apexes at Miami, Bermuda, and San Juan (Puerto Rico). Dozens of peculiar marine and aviation mishaps have occurred at a disproportionately high rate here – among the more sensational stories, an entire squadron of 1945 Navy bombers is thought to have disappeared here, ditto several enormous merchant ships, all without a hint of wreckage or drowned corpses. Some attribute the strange occurrences to anomalous electromagnetic energy, while others believe that aliens are using the area as a portal to visit the planet or, that the lost city of Atlantis lies below. Plan on a cruise through the baffling Bermuda Triangle this Halloween and you just might get to find out more.
2. Edinburgh
Descend into the underworld, literally! A forgotten city lies beneath Edinburgh’s South Bridge – an underground maze of chambers, vaulted rooms, tunnels, and passageways shrouded in mystery and intrigue. The bricked-in city opened in 1788 (it was closed in the early 1800s due to insufficient waterproofing) but was virtually unknown to the thriving city above it before being rediscovered in 1985. It’s thought that thousands of people lived and died in these vaults, many of whom never glimpsed the light of day. Nowadays, 20 or so rooms and merchant quarters have been excavated, and tours through the cavernous hollows pass by oil lamps, leather shoes, smelting metal, animal bones, wine bottles, and other haunting remnants of the people who lived here. Not surprisingly, the vaults are famous for their strong paranormal presence, as well; many visitors swear they’ve seen wraithlike ghost shadows down below – some have even captured the haunting images in photographs. Check Mercat Tours for times and themes.
3. Lizzie Borden B & B
Good night, sleep tight – don’t let the axe murderers fright! For a bone-chillingly good scare and a guaranteed sleepless night, we recommend a Halloween getaway to the Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast, a Greek Revival house in Fall River, Massachusetts (about 50 miles south of Boston). Built in 1845, the house famously became the setting for the 1892 ax murders of Abby and Andrew Borden, allegedly by their very own daughter, Lizzie! The house has since been restored with late-19th-century period pieces, which contribute to the atmosphere, especially as you can stand today in the place where Lizzie’s stepmother received 18 blows to the head – and the one where her father endured a slightly less brutal 11! While circumstantial evidence tied Lizzie to the crime, she was ultimately acquitted, and the case was never solved. Aside from the eerie happenings reported on the premises to pique your interest, there’s small on-site museum showcasing memorabilia related to the crime and a gift shop where you can pick up silver-toned hatchet earrings for yourself or that special somebody.
4. London
While it may be merrie olde England on the surface, there is a frightening underbelly to be discovered in the ancient capital city of London. Forget high tea – and head out for a spot of ghost-hunting instead, with haunted nooks and crannies in courtyards, churches, and alleyways that recall bloody and brutal London events from times long ago. London Ghost Walk covers the most frighteningly fun highlights and offers specialized tours that follow in the bloody footsteps of London’s most heinous criminal, Jack the Ripper. Hang around some of the top tourist attractions after dark, too, and you may well get a little something extra with your admission – a ghostly monk is said to wander the cloisters of Westminster Abbey, while the headless ghost of Anne Boleyn, the unfortunate second wife of King Henry VIII, is known to linger outside of the chapel at the Tower of London – apparently still upset about her beheading after only three short years of marriage.
5. New York
As if the streets of New York weren’t freakish enough all year long, on Halloween the freakiest of them all get to show off their eccentricities to applause and prizes – not social judgment – as part of the annual Halloween parade that marches up Sixth Avenue. Attended each year by over 2 million New Yorkers reveling in the spooky spirit, the village spectacle is not to be missed, but the fun doesn't end when it does. Countless costume parties abound around town – the parade crew tends to hit Webster Hall, famous for its raging all-night bash. Another popular annual event celebrating the ghoulish holiday is the Halloween Extravaganza and Procession of Ghouls at the world’s largest gothic cathedral, St. John the Divine. This unique event kicks off with a horror flick accompanied by an organist who brings the eerie soundtrack to life - it's a spine-tingling combination in the dimly lit cathedral. After the film, an elaborate procession of costumed characters and outrageous puppets strut their spooky stuff down the center aisle, to a blitz of special effects.
6. Roswell
The year was 1947, the place was an unassuming desert town in New Mexico, and the event was perceived as so extraordinary that, some 60 years later, Roswell remains a household name. U.F.O. enthusiasts today relish this tiny town as the U.F.O. capital of the world, citing the “Roswell Incident,” in which a craft carrying four large-headed alien beings purportedly crashed, followed closely by an entourage of military and government personnel, who swooped in to collect the wreckage. Conflicting newspaper reports came out in the days following the event – after releasing a statement confirming that they had indeed collected debris from a spaceship crash, the US military later retracted it, and dismissed the flying object as nothing more than a downed weather balloon. Decide where you stand on the issue with a visit to Roswell’s International UFO Museum and Research Center, where photos, documents, and dioramas shine some light on where conspiracy theorists got their ideas about government cover-ups and alien autopsies. You can also arrange to tour the crash site with a local guide for an out-of-this-world Halloween – just be sure to keep your eye on the sky.
7. Salem
Home to the ill-reputed witch trials of 1692, Salem, MA, today is, according to legend, still haunted by the women executed as part of the hysteria. Every October, Salem milks its gruesome past with its annual month-long Haunted Happenings festival of ghost tours, street fairs, and costume balls. Be sure to stop by The Witch House, one of the oldest buildings in Salem and the onetime home of Jonathan Corwin, the judge who ultimately sent 19 women to their doom. Also worth joining are the eerie tours led by Salem Historical Tours: one visits the local cemetery, thought to be the country's second oldest, while another heads out for a nightly stroll past haunted houses and more.
8. Savannah
There’s no way around it – a saunter through the Southern city of Savannah is just plain spooky. Forget sightseeing: With dozens of tour groups dedicated to showcasing haunted Savannah, you’d best be prepared for some fright-seeing instead! Try strolling the cobblestone streets of Georgia’s oldest city on the nighttime Ghosts of Savannah walking tour, rolling around town with a narrated guide on Carriage Tours of Savannah, or opt for a Creepy Pub Crawl, if you wish to sample some spirits while you look for them. So just what is it about this deceptively pretty city that makes it so ghoulishly grim? Believers cite a long history of violence and bloodshed dating back to the Revolutionary and Civil Wars, not to mention widespread diseases and fires here. As if that weren't sufficient, many parts of Savannah's historic section were built over old cemeteries, to boot. You can literally eat and sleep with ghosts here - grab a bite to eat at the Pirate House, a popular centuries-old local restaurant with a ghostly clientele, then rest up (if you can!) at any number of haunted bed and breakfasts; a particularly creepy choice is the 1851 Marshall House that once served as a hospital for many Civil War soldiers and yellow-fever victims.
9. Stanley Hotel
Who hasn’t gotten the goose bumps from reading (or watching) Steven King’s haunting thriller, The Shining? Test your tolerance for the terrifying by spending a night in the place that inspired the novel, the Stanley Hotel. Built in 1909, the hotel is in fact a grand estate, with a spectacular Colorado mountainside location, old-fashioned rooms with impressive vistas, top-notch amenities, and an award-winning restaurant. What makes this place truly unique and a tad creepy, however, is the presence of otherworldly residents. Flora Stanley, the first owner’s long-deceased wife, can still be seen and heard, late at night, either tinkling the piano keys in the music room or wandering around the lobby. Plus, the entire fourth floor (once the servants’ quarters) teems with strange after-dark commotion: if you stay in room 418, you might hear children playing outside your door, but find nary a soul in the hallway. For the ultimate scare (or inspiration), stay in room 217 – where King himself laid his head.
10. Transylvania
It’s hard to deny the fright factor of fanged, bloodsucking vampires who awake from coffins in the night to hunt their prey. So why not up the horror ante this Halloween and visit Transylvania, the alleged birthplace of these dark and fearsome creatures? Indeed, this western province of Romania is considered to be the home of Count Dracula; to wit, you can even tour his alleged keep, the daunting Bran Castle (more commonly known as Dracula’s Castle), an eerie 14th-century bastion about 20 miles from Brasov, in the shadows of Mount Bucegi, that’s said to have briefly housed the Romanian prince on whom the great fictional vampire is based. If that doesn’t leave your blood cold, head for the hills above the town of Miklósvár to explore bat-filled caves or, tour medieval villages in a horse-drawn sleigh.
Beast of the Month - September 2007
Beast of the Month - September 2007
Michael Vick, NFL Quarterback
"I yam an anti-Christ... "
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"
"Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson?
Joltin' Joe has left and gone away."
"Mrs. Robinson,” Simon & Garfunkel (from the film The Graduate)
All you sports fans out there who have a problem with Barry Bonds, you might as well get over it. It's time to accept the fact that the most cherished sports record in the USA, career Major League home runs, is now owned by a blatant cheater. Live with it, and just be glad that someone as dishonest as Bonds isn't, say, President of the United States.
Besides, as the era of 756* begins, its clear that more is amuck with professional athletics than Bonds roiding up. Consider the following:
* In the MLB, Bonds isn't the only dude that's on the juice all by his lone gunmen self. Jason Giambi (2000 AL MVP) and Rafael Palmeiro (he of the 500 HR and 3000 hit club) are two of the more noted players whose careers have been tainted by evidence of steroid use. (Former slugger Jose Canseco has claimed, perhaps with some hyperbole, that 85 percent of all major leaguers are on the stuff.) As for Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, while there is no "proof" that they cheated as well, their unconvincing testimony before Congress in 2005 on the issue has led to Mac being shut out of the Hall of Fame after becoming eligible this year - something which will likely happen to both Sosa and Bonds as well.
* In cycling, the Tour de France has had evidence and allegations of doping that far exceed those of baseball. In 2006, the four runner-ups in 2005 to retiring seven-time champ Lance Armstrong (Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, Francisco Mancebo and Alexandre Vinokourov) all did not compete in the race due to evidence of doping. (Though Vinokourov himself was not charged in 2006, five of his teammates were, forcing him to withdraw. In 2007, he was personally busted during the race.) The eventual "winner" of the race, American Floyd Landis, was caught with banned substances in his urine samples and will likely lose his title after appeals. The 2007 contest was rife with arguably even more doping controversy, culminating with race leader Michael Rasmussen being removed for lying about his reasons he missed three drug tests. The eventual winner, Alberto Contador, was a prime suspect in the 2006 doping scandal. Meanwhile, though there is no firm evidence linking Armstrong to doping, widespread allegations cloud his storied career.
* In the NBA, a league already with an increasingly bad public image due to thuggish behavior of the post-Jordan playing crop, a gambling scandal involving referee Tim Donaghy threatens the basic integrity of the game. Though the scandal only involves Donaghy at this point (as petty tyrant David Stern repeatedly insists in his "bad apple" defense) the idea that other NBA refs may have been compromised by mobsters is not implausible, especially considering the league's lackadaisical response to evidence that something was fishy. Anyone who saw Game Six of the 2002 Lakers-Kings playoff series (where the Lakers "won" following officiating that looked like a Florida election involving a member of the Bush family) should have little trouble believing a conspiracy of refs involved in the rigging of important games.
* The good news for the NHL is that they're even deemed worthy of mention, after commissioner Gary Bettman's self-destructive reign has removed ice hockey from the quartet of American major league sports. (Memo to Mr. Bettman: real sports leagues have cable TV contracts with ESPN, not the Outdoor Life Network.) Still, if missing an entire season due to an owner lockout wasn't enough to discredit the NHL, an illegal gambling ring which may have included the Great One Wayne Gretzky himself should do the trick.
True, the history-making runs of Tiger Woods and Roger Federer in golf and tennis are inspiring tales, but all in all, the pickings for sport heroics are pretty slim right now. Indeed, the only sports of late to have any good news are lacrosse (where the Duke team members were proven to merely be drunken racist preppies, instead of drunken racist preppies who rape strippers) and soccer (although The Konformist doubts a preening overrated metrosexual with a self-absorbed diva wife will popularize a boring sport in America if Pele couldn't.)
Still, with all due respect to all the other scandals, the sports league with the biggest PR disaster of late would have to be, hands down, the National Football League. Some would say it's a long time coming. After all, for all the outrage that has followed the revelations and allegations of steroid abuse in baseball, few would argue that steroid use in the MLB is even comparable to that in the NFL. Likewise, while the hip-hop gangsta style of new NBA stars has given rise to a korporate unfriendly "thug life" image, pro football, with it's inherently more violent style of play, clearly attracts more dangerous and borderline personalities.
Why has the NFL gotten such a free ride for so long? Primarily, it's about money. Since the NFL-AFL merger and the rise of the Super Bowl in the 70s, football, not baseball, has really been America's pastime. The korporate media has avoided tarnishing the reputation of the largest multi-billion dollar sports-entertainment empire known to man (not to mention the most successful "Reality TV" series ever, culminating in the four major TV network conglomerates having current contracts with the league.) The obfuscation of NFL scandal was aided by Pete Rozelle and Paul Tagliabue, two sharp businessmen and charming salesmen during their historic reigns as commissioner.
There's a new sheriff in town now, however, and at the very least, Roger Goodell believes the writing is on the wall. If the NFL didn't clean itself up, even worse scandal would soon follow. Before this summer, Goodell had already delivered the following suspensions for bad behavior:
* Chris Henry of the Cincinnati Bengals was suspended for eight games after numerous incidents involving law enforcement, with allegations of crimes ranging from drunk driving, assault with a deadly weapon, and assault of a minor.
* Tank Johnson of the Chicago Bears was also suspended for eight games for his misdeeds, with alleged crimes ranging from drunk driving, assault and various weapon charges. His best friend and bodyguard, William Posey, was shot to death following a bar fight last December.
* In perhaps the most notorious case, Pacman Jones of the Tennessee Titans was suspended for the entire 2007 season for his troubles with the law, which has led to five arrests and questioning by police eleven times. Due to his penchant for troublemaking at nightclubs and strip clubs, he has been charged with assault, battery, felony vandalism and obstruction of justice. In his most infamous altercation, a strip club argument (during which he allegedly grabbed a stripper by her hair and slammed her head) in Las Vegas during All-Star weekend ended when one man in Pacman's entourage allegedly returned to the club and fired shots into the crowd. One bullet paralyzed former pro wrestler Tommy Urbanski, and two hit a security guard whose life Pacman had coincidentally threatened earlier that evening.
All of this bad behavior makes one long for the start of the 2006 season, when the biggest bogeyman in the NFL was Terrell Owens, whose disgraceful acts were wanting more money and dissing his quarterbacks.
This summer, however, even Pacman's troubles were eclipsed by Michael Vick, The Konformist Beast of the Month. Vick's problems received more airplay than the others, in part, because Vick, unlike the others, was no mere role player. As quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, he was a three-time Pro Bowler in football's most high profile position, who was given the prestigious honor of being the cover athlete for Madden Football 2004. Vick came up only one game short in 2005 from playing the Super Bowl. And though 2006 had been a disappointing year for him in passing (he completed only 52.6 percent of his throws during the season) he became the first QB to rush for over 1000 yards in a year.
Of course, the other reason Vick's legal issues received more airplay was the grotesque nature of his activities. While drunk driving, assault and shootings that lead others to be crippled are hardly minor crimes, being involved in the cruel "sport" of dogfighting shows not a momentary lapse of reason, but a premeditated plan to participate in the torture and death of man's best friend. And as bad as forcing canines to participate in a battle to the death may be, perhaps even worse is personally killing Fido in a gruesome fashion, such as by drowning, hanging, electrocution, strangulation and gunshots. These were the charges that Vick faced, charges he plead guilty to after his co-conspirators did the same and began to provide more evidence against him. As it stands, he likely faces one year to eighteen month in federal prison over his crimes.
In retrospect, there were warning signs that Vick was a trouble case. In 2005, he was sued by a woman who claimed was given genital herpes by him. (According to her, he received treatments for the disease under the alias Ron Mexico, which led to the Vick-based character "Mike Mexico" in the videogame Blitz: The League.) Last November, he gave the finger to fans booing him in the Georgia Dome after a home loss. In January, he was caught in Miami with a water bottle with a hidden compartment that contained a "small amount of dark particulate" and an odor consistent with marijuana, according to a police report. (Dubiously, lab tests found no evidence of pot, which many suspect was not due to science but rather NFL pressure to silence the controversy.) Granted, none of these activities is in the same ballpark as training pit bulls to fight to the death, and far be it that The Konformist staff condemn a man for having STDs, giving people the finger or carrying pot. Still, it should have raised NFL eyebrows that Vick was no mere Organization Man.
As is sometimes the case when pro athletes get into legal trouble, the question of race is part of the mix, as Vick is an African-American. It's hard to completely dismiss the possibility that if, say, Peyton Manning or Brett Favre (not to unfairly link either man to such criminal conduct) had been involved in illegal dogfighting, the whole thing would've been covered up. (Then again, many suspect that Vick had already used his "Get Out of Jail" card at Miami International.) On the other hand, some of the defenses for Vick seem like embarrassing apologetics. The worst example came from the lips of actor Jamie Foxx (who admittedly was great as a black QB in the Oliver Stone football flick Any Given Sunday.) As Foxx put it, "It's a cultural thing, I think. Most brothers didn't know that, you know. I used to see dogs fighting in the neighborhood all the time. I didn't know that was Fed time. So, Mike probably just didn't read his handbook on what not to do as a black star." Of course, the idea that Africa-Americans can't be expected to understand that training dogs to kill each other (and then viciously executing underperformers) is barbaric behavior, well, that's a sentiment we'd more expect to be uttered by Bill O'Reilly than an Oscar-winning actor. (A tip to Jamie: stick to your Ray Charles impersonations.)
Of course, not all African-Americans leaders reflexively jumped to Vick's defense. Hip hop mogul Russell Simmons, an animal rights supporter, quickly urged Nike to pull its sponsorship of Vick after the allegations surfaced. Joining him in condemning dogfighting was Revered Al Sharpton, hardly a guy who critics would allege is above playing the race card. And though the Atlanta chapter NAACP leader R.L. White sounded a bit like Foxx over the controversy, NAACP president Dennis Courtland Hayes bluntly declared that Vick "is not a victim... He absolutely must account for what he has done."
Indeed, looking at the evidence in the Vick case, it could be compellingly argued that rather than act improperly or show a rush to judgment, the feds went by the book and fairly targeted the man who deserved it, the guy who financed the whole dogfighting operation. Bad Newz Kennels started in 2001, not-so-coincidentally when Vick had just signed a multi-million dollar contract with the Falcons and entered the NFL. All of the participants in the dogfighting scheme, including Vick, concede he almost exclusively bank-rolled the entire operation.
The NFL, at this point, knows all this. They also know that part of Vick's confession (and the other participants' guilty pleas) was that Vick provided most of the money for gambling on the dogfights. As any sports fan will tell you, illegal gambling is the cardinal sin of pro sports, as it opens the door for mobsters to control compromised participants and fix games. It is perhaps just as much for the gambling aspects as the repulsive cruelty to animals that Goodell has suspended Vick from the NFL indefinitely.
In the end, Vick is a symbol of the coarsening of American culture during the zeroes. You don't have to be Bill O'Reilly to concede hip hop is no longer exposing injustice with the gangsta style but rather glorifying violent nihilism because it sells millions. (Indeed, Russell Simmons aside, hip hop has been central in glorifying dogfighting, with rapper DMX using dogfight lingo and imagery in his album covers, videos and songs. Coincidentally, DMX's Arizona home was raided on August 24 in another investigation involving dogfighting.) And you don't have to romanticize the "good old days" to think there's something wrong when sports most popular athletes include guys like Michael Vick, Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant. And you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that there may be a link between such a grim culture and what is happening at Abu Ghraib and Camp X-Ray. Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio, indeed.
In any case, we salute Michael Vick as Beast of the Month. Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Mikey!!!
Michael Vick, NFL Quarterback
"I yam an anti-Christ... "
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"
"Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson?
Joltin' Joe has left and gone away."
"Mrs. Robinson,” Simon & Garfunkel (from the film The Graduate)
All you sports fans out there who have a problem with Barry Bonds, you might as well get over it. It's time to accept the fact that the most cherished sports record in the USA, career Major League home runs, is now owned by a blatant cheater. Live with it, and just be glad that someone as dishonest as Bonds isn't, say, President of the United States.
Besides, as the era of 756* begins, its clear that more is amuck with professional athletics than Bonds roiding up. Consider the following:
* In the MLB, Bonds isn't the only dude that's on the juice all by his lone gunmen self. Jason Giambi (2000 AL MVP) and Rafael Palmeiro (he of the 500 HR and 3000 hit club) are two of the more noted players whose careers have been tainted by evidence of steroid use. (Former slugger Jose Canseco has claimed, perhaps with some hyperbole, that 85 percent of all major leaguers are on the stuff.) As for Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, while there is no "proof" that they cheated as well, their unconvincing testimony before Congress in 2005 on the issue has led to Mac being shut out of the Hall of Fame after becoming eligible this year - something which will likely happen to both Sosa and Bonds as well.
* In cycling, the Tour de France has had evidence and allegations of doping that far exceed those of baseball. In 2006, the four runner-ups in 2005 to retiring seven-time champ Lance Armstrong (Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, Francisco Mancebo and Alexandre Vinokourov) all did not compete in the race due to evidence of doping. (Though Vinokourov himself was not charged in 2006, five of his teammates were, forcing him to withdraw. In 2007, he was personally busted during the race.) The eventual "winner" of the race, American Floyd Landis, was caught with banned substances in his urine samples and will likely lose his title after appeals. The 2007 contest was rife with arguably even more doping controversy, culminating with race leader Michael Rasmussen being removed for lying about his reasons he missed three drug tests. The eventual winner, Alberto Contador, was a prime suspect in the 2006 doping scandal. Meanwhile, though there is no firm evidence linking Armstrong to doping, widespread allegations cloud his storied career.
* In the NBA, a league already with an increasingly bad public image due to thuggish behavior of the post-Jordan playing crop, a gambling scandal involving referee Tim Donaghy threatens the basic integrity of the game. Though the scandal only involves Donaghy at this point (as petty tyrant David Stern repeatedly insists in his "bad apple" defense) the idea that other NBA refs may have been compromised by mobsters is not implausible, especially considering the league's lackadaisical response to evidence that something was fishy. Anyone who saw Game Six of the 2002 Lakers-Kings playoff series (where the Lakers "won" following officiating that looked like a Florida election involving a member of the Bush family) should have little trouble believing a conspiracy of refs involved in the rigging of important games.
* The good news for the NHL is that they're even deemed worthy of mention, after commissioner Gary Bettman's self-destructive reign has removed ice hockey from the quartet of American major league sports. (Memo to Mr. Bettman: real sports leagues have cable TV contracts with ESPN, not the Outdoor Life Network.) Still, if missing an entire season due to an owner lockout wasn't enough to discredit the NHL, an illegal gambling ring which may have included the Great One Wayne Gretzky himself should do the trick.
True, the history-making runs of Tiger Woods and Roger Federer in golf and tennis are inspiring tales, but all in all, the pickings for sport heroics are pretty slim right now. Indeed, the only sports of late to have any good news are lacrosse (where the Duke team members were proven to merely be drunken racist preppies, instead of drunken racist preppies who rape strippers) and soccer (although The Konformist doubts a preening overrated metrosexual with a self-absorbed diva wife will popularize a boring sport in America if Pele couldn't.)
Still, with all due respect to all the other scandals, the sports league with the biggest PR disaster of late would have to be, hands down, the National Football League. Some would say it's a long time coming. After all, for all the outrage that has followed the revelations and allegations of steroid abuse in baseball, few would argue that steroid use in the MLB is even comparable to that in the NFL. Likewise, while the hip-hop gangsta style of new NBA stars has given rise to a korporate unfriendly "thug life" image, pro football, with it's inherently more violent style of play, clearly attracts more dangerous and borderline personalities.
Why has the NFL gotten such a free ride for so long? Primarily, it's about money. Since the NFL-AFL merger and the rise of the Super Bowl in the 70s, football, not baseball, has really been America's pastime. The korporate media has avoided tarnishing the reputation of the largest multi-billion dollar sports-entertainment empire known to man (not to mention the most successful "Reality TV" series ever, culminating in the four major TV network conglomerates having current contracts with the league.) The obfuscation of NFL scandal was aided by Pete Rozelle and Paul Tagliabue, two sharp businessmen and charming salesmen during their historic reigns as commissioner.
There's a new sheriff in town now, however, and at the very least, Roger Goodell believes the writing is on the wall. If the NFL didn't clean itself up, even worse scandal would soon follow. Before this summer, Goodell had already delivered the following suspensions for bad behavior:
* Chris Henry of the Cincinnati Bengals was suspended for eight games after numerous incidents involving law enforcement, with allegations of crimes ranging from drunk driving, assault with a deadly weapon, and assault of a minor.
* Tank Johnson of the Chicago Bears was also suspended for eight games for his misdeeds, with alleged crimes ranging from drunk driving, assault and various weapon charges. His best friend and bodyguard, William Posey, was shot to death following a bar fight last December.
* In perhaps the most notorious case, Pacman Jones of the Tennessee Titans was suspended for the entire 2007 season for his troubles with the law, which has led to five arrests and questioning by police eleven times. Due to his penchant for troublemaking at nightclubs and strip clubs, he has been charged with assault, battery, felony vandalism and obstruction of justice. In his most infamous altercation, a strip club argument (during which he allegedly grabbed a stripper by her hair and slammed her head) in Las Vegas during All-Star weekend ended when one man in Pacman's entourage allegedly returned to the club and fired shots into the crowd. One bullet paralyzed former pro wrestler Tommy Urbanski, and two hit a security guard whose life Pacman had coincidentally threatened earlier that evening.
All of this bad behavior makes one long for the start of the 2006 season, when the biggest bogeyman in the NFL was Terrell Owens, whose disgraceful acts were wanting more money and dissing his quarterbacks.
This summer, however, even Pacman's troubles were eclipsed by Michael Vick, The Konformist Beast of the Month. Vick's problems received more airplay than the others, in part, because Vick, unlike the others, was no mere role player. As quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, he was a three-time Pro Bowler in football's most high profile position, who was given the prestigious honor of being the cover athlete for Madden Football 2004. Vick came up only one game short in 2005 from playing the Super Bowl. And though 2006 had been a disappointing year for him in passing (he completed only 52.6 percent of his throws during the season) he became the first QB to rush for over 1000 yards in a year.
Of course, the other reason Vick's legal issues received more airplay was the grotesque nature of his activities. While drunk driving, assault and shootings that lead others to be crippled are hardly minor crimes, being involved in the cruel "sport" of dogfighting shows not a momentary lapse of reason, but a premeditated plan to participate in the torture and death of man's best friend. And as bad as forcing canines to participate in a battle to the death may be, perhaps even worse is personally killing Fido in a gruesome fashion, such as by drowning, hanging, electrocution, strangulation and gunshots. These were the charges that Vick faced, charges he plead guilty to after his co-conspirators did the same and began to provide more evidence against him. As it stands, he likely faces one year to eighteen month in federal prison over his crimes.
In retrospect, there were warning signs that Vick was a trouble case. In 2005, he was sued by a woman who claimed was given genital herpes by him. (According to her, he received treatments for the disease under the alias Ron Mexico, which led to the Vick-based character "Mike Mexico" in the videogame Blitz: The League.) Last November, he gave the finger to fans booing him in the Georgia Dome after a home loss. In January, he was caught in Miami with a water bottle with a hidden compartment that contained a "small amount of dark particulate" and an odor consistent with marijuana, according to a police report. (Dubiously, lab tests found no evidence of pot, which many suspect was not due to science but rather NFL pressure to silence the controversy.) Granted, none of these activities is in the same ballpark as training pit bulls to fight to the death, and far be it that The Konformist staff condemn a man for having STDs, giving people the finger or carrying pot. Still, it should have raised NFL eyebrows that Vick was no mere Organization Man.
As is sometimes the case when pro athletes get into legal trouble, the question of race is part of the mix, as Vick is an African-American. It's hard to completely dismiss the possibility that if, say, Peyton Manning or Brett Favre (not to unfairly link either man to such criminal conduct) had been involved in illegal dogfighting, the whole thing would've been covered up. (Then again, many suspect that Vick had already used his "Get Out of Jail" card at Miami International.) On the other hand, some of the defenses for Vick seem like embarrassing apologetics. The worst example came from the lips of actor Jamie Foxx (who admittedly was great as a black QB in the Oliver Stone football flick Any Given Sunday.) As Foxx put it, "It's a cultural thing, I think. Most brothers didn't know that, you know. I used to see dogs fighting in the neighborhood all the time. I didn't know that was Fed time. So, Mike probably just didn't read his handbook on what not to do as a black star." Of course, the idea that Africa-Americans can't be expected to understand that training dogs to kill each other (and then viciously executing underperformers) is barbaric behavior, well, that's a sentiment we'd more expect to be uttered by Bill O'Reilly than an Oscar-winning actor. (A tip to Jamie: stick to your Ray Charles impersonations.)
Of course, not all African-Americans leaders reflexively jumped to Vick's defense. Hip hop mogul Russell Simmons, an animal rights supporter, quickly urged Nike to pull its sponsorship of Vick after the allegations surfaced. Joining him in condemning dogfighting was Revered Al Sharpton, hardly a guy who critics would allege is above playing the race card. And though the Atlanta chapter NAACP leader R.L. White sounded a bit like Foxx over the controversy, NAACP president Dennis Courtland Hayes bluntly declared that Vick "is not a victim... He absolutely must account for what he has done."
Indeed, looking at the evidence in the Vick case, it could be compellingly argued that rather than act improperly or show a rush to judgment, the feds went by the book and fairly targeted the man who deserved it, the guy who financed the whole dogfighting operation. Bad Newz Kennels started in 2001, not-so-coincidentally when Vick had just signed a multi-million dollar contract with the Falcons and entered the NFL. All of the participants in the dogfighting scheme, including Vick, concede he almost exclusively bank-rolled the entire operation.
The NFL, at this point, knows all this. They also know that part of Vick's confession (and the other participants' guilty pleas) was that Vick provided most of the money for gambling on the dogfights. As any sports fan will tell you, illegal gambling is the cardinal sin of pro sports, as it opens the door for mobsters to control compromised participants and fix games. It is perhaps just as much for the gambling aspects as the repulsive cruelty to animals that Goodell has suspended Vick from the NFL indefinitely.
In the end, Vick is a symbol of the coarsening of American culture during the zeroes. You don't have to be Bill O'Reilly to concede hip hop is no longer exposing injustice with the gangsta style but rather glorifying violent nihilism because it sells millions. (Indeed, Russell Simmons aside, hip hop has been central in glorifying dogfighting, with rapper DMX using dogfight lingo and imagery in his album covers, videos and songs. Coincidentally, DMX's Arizona home was raided on August 24 in another investigation involving dogfighting.) And you don't have to romanticize the "good old days" to think there's something wrong when sports most popular athletes include guys like Michael Vick, Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant. And you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that there may be a link between such a grim culture and what is happening at Abu Ghraib and Camp X-Ray. Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio, indeed.
In any case, we salute Michael Vick as Beast of the Month. Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Mikey!!!
Torre walked: Good for him
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AvjAnVPTCVV0B7dztUTngogRvLYF?slug=ti-torre101807&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Torre walked: Good for him
By Tim Brown, Yahoo! Sports
October 18, 2007
CLEVELAND – George Steinbrenner's men in Tampa, his various sons, lawyers and allies, had neither the evidence nor the conviction to expel Joe Torre.
So it was better, perhaps, to insult a 12-year employee in the privacy of a conference room than to risk their fan base, their clubhouse and what little is left of their organizational reputation.
Better, in the end, to announce that Torre refused to remain the highest-paid manager in the game, because they all agreed – "Unanimous," president Randy Levine emphasized – that Torre was absolutely the right man to manage the Yankees next season. But, apparently, only next season, or less.
Better to have Torre walk than to explain why they pushed, when the next manager cannot match Torre's baseball and interpersonal sophistication.
That was no contract offer. That was no negotiation.
That was an invitation to be fired, to be humiliated again, to have Steinbrenner awake one afternoon with eyes for Don Mattingly or Joe Girardi or Tony La Russa, to open a lame-duck season possibly lacking his MVP third baseman, his legendary closer, his All-Star catcher and two-fifths of his starting rotation.
To his credit, Torre returned to the airport and boarded a plane bound for the rest of his life.
He left $5 million in Tampa, along with his Yankees No. 6, along with 25 players and a coaching staff he adored. He left behind the job of his life and vacated his seat at the center of the baseball universe.
Good for him.
Those men in Tampa believe no more in Joe Torre than they do Carl Pavano.
First, they cut his base salary, from $7 million to $5 million. Then they promised him $1 million if the Yankees went to the playoffs, another $1 million if they advanced to the American League championship series, and $1 million more if they went to the World Series, at which point his option for 2009 – worth $8 million – would vest.
"Joe Torre," Levine said, "turned that offer down today."
Well, of course he did.
After 12 consecutive seasons in the playoffs (the 12 seasons before Torre netted one postseason appearance – under seven different managers), he turned that offer down. He turned down a pay cut, an interim standing, the daily temperature readings from Tampa and the opportunity to be fired when Kei Igawa made his rotation out of spring training.
"It's nobody's fault," Levine said. "All of us are in it together."
Except at the end of the day, all of them were still in that conference room, staring at the contract Torre had pushed back across the table.
"We respect his decision," Levine said. "We appreciate everything he's done, but it's now time for the New York Yankees to move forward."
Judging from the offer, they not only respect it, but applaud it.
The Yankees are now seven years without a World Series championship. If, in their opinion, Torre was at fault, they could have saved him the trip to Tampa, acted on Steinbrenner's ALDS ultimatum, and hired the next guy.
Instead, the men who spent the past week working up Torre's performance review rode both sides, covering themselves in case this decision lands in the same heap as their decisions on Pavano, Igawa, Kyle Farnsworth and Roger Clemens.
"All I can tell you," Levine said, "is that the Yankees made the decision based on what's best for the Yankees. … We obviously wanted Joe Torre to come back. That's why we made the offer. We thought it was a fair offer. If we didn't think it was fair, we wouldn't have made it."
Torre was the final arbiter on that, it appears. As a result, Torre becomes something other than a Yankee, and the Yankees likely become more vulnerable at the dawn of a critical offseason.
It appeared the division series loss was the end for Torre, as Steinbrenner had threatened. In Torre's final game, fans chanted his name. Players lined up behind him. Columnists railed against an organization that no longer recognized Torre's touch. Chien-Ming Wang pitched poorly twice, and the Yankees were done, and Torre got a flimsy one-year offer.
That's how it went. Steinbrenner's son, Hal, said the contract's terms were based not on the division series flameout, but the body of Torre's work.
"We spent two long days analyzing this," Hal Steinbrenner said. "It was not about the last month or the last two months. We analyzed a lot of factors."
He listed none of them.
So, Torre is gone for the moment. He said last week that he might think over other managing jobs as they come up, but didn't really want to move anywhere. That leaves … the Mets?
But, not the Yankees.
"With what he's accomplished, I think that he should manage as long as he wants to manage," Cleveland Indians manager Eric Wedge said. "I know there's a business side of it, but from what I understand, for him to look at that [contract] and say no, good for him. You know what? He's earned and deserves to do whatever the hell he wants to do."
He didn't want to go home. It's how it worked out. Yes, good for him.
"I guess I hope that however it came down – and nobody knows but Joe and whoever he was dealing with – I hope Joe is happy," Boston Red Sox manager Terry Francona said. "I think he deserves the respect. And I think you're going to hear people in baseball, every area of baseball, say probably very, very kind, respectful things about Joe. … And they're all deserved. I just hope he's happy."
Tim Brown is a national baseball writer for Yahoo! Sports.
Torre walked: Good for him
By Tim Brown, Yahoo! Sports
October 18, 2007
CLEVELAND – George Steinbrenner's men in Tampa, his various sons, lawyers and allies, had neither the evidence nor the conviction to expel Joe Torre.
So it was better, perhaps, to insult a 12-year employee in the privacy of a conference room than to risk their fan base, their clubhouse and what little is left of their organizational reputation.
Better, in the end, to announce that Torre refused to remain the highest-paid manager in the game, because they all agreed – "Unanimous," president Randy Levine emphasized – that Torre was absolutely the right man to manage the Yankees next season. But, apparently, only next season, or less.
Better to have Torre walk than to explain why they pushed, when the next manager cannot match Torre's baseball and interpersonal sophistication.
That was no contract offer. That was no negotiation.
That was an invitation to be fired, to be humiliated again, to have Steinbrenner awake one afternoon with eyes for Don Mattingly or Joe Girardi or Tony La Russa, to open a lame-duck season possibly lacking his MVP third baseman, his legendary closer, his All-Star catcher and two-fifths of his starting rotation.
To his credit, Torre returned to the airport and boarded a plane bound for the rest of his life.
He left $5 million in Tampa, along with his Yankees No. 6, along with 25 players and a coaching staff he adored. He left behind the job of his life and vacated his seat at the center of the baseball universe.
Good for him.
Those men in Tampa believe no more in Joe Torre than they do Carl Pavano.
First, they cut his base salary, from $7 million to $5 million. Then they promised him $1 million if the Yankees went to the playoffs, another $1 million if they advanced to the American League championship series, and $1 million more if they went to the World Series, at which point his option for 2009 – worth $8 million – would vest.
"Joe Torre," Levine said, "turned that offer down today."
Well, of course he did.
After 12 consecutive seasons in the playoffs (the 12 seasons before Torre netted one postseason appearance – under seven different managers), he turned that offer down. He turned down a pay cut, an interim standing, the daily temperature readings from Tampa and the opportunity to be fired when Kei Igawa made his rotation out of spring training.
"It's nobody's fault," Levine said. "All of us are in it together."
Except at the end of the day, all of them were still in that conference room, staring at the contract Torre had pushed back across the table.
"We respect his decision," Levine said. "We appreciate everything he's done, but it's now time for the New York Yankees to move forward."
Judging from the offer, they not only respect it, but applaud it.
The Yankees are now seven years without a World Series championship. If, in their opinion, Torre was at fault, they could have saved him the trip to Tampa, acted on Steinbrenner's ALDS ultimatum, and hired the next guy.
Instead, the men who spent the past week working up Torre's performance review rode both sides, covering themselves in case this decision lands in the same heap as their decisions on Pavano, Igawa, Kyle Farnsworth and Roger Clemens.
"All I can tell you," Levine said, "is that the Yankees made the decision based on what's best for the Yankees. … We obviously wanted Joe Torre to come back. That's why we made the offer. We thought it was a fair offer. If we didn't think it was fair, we wouldn't have made it."
Torre was the final arbiter on that, it appears. As a result, Torre becomes something other than a Yankee, and the Yankees likely become more vulnerable at the dawn of a critical offseason.
It appeared the division series loss was the end for Torre, as Steinbrenner had threatened. In Torre's final game, fans chanted his name. Players lined up behind him. Columnists railed against an organization that no longer recognized Torre's touch. Chien-Ming Wang pitched poorly twice, and the Yankees were done, and Torre got a flimsy one-year offer.
That's how it went. Steinbrenner's son, Hal, said the contract's terms were based not on the division series flameout, but the body of Torre's work.
"We spent two long days analyzing this," Hal Steinbrenner said. "It was not about the last month or the last two months. We analyzed a lot of factors."
He listed none of them.
So, Torre is gone for the moment. He said last week that he might think over other managing jobs as they come up, but didn't really want to move anywhere. That leaves … the Mets?
But, not the Yankees.
"With what he's accomplished, I think that he should manage as long as he wants to manage," Cleveland Indians manager Eric Wedge said. "I know there's a business side of it, but from what I understand, for him to look at that [contract] and say no, good for him. You know what? He's earned and deserves to do whatever the hell he wants to do."
He didn't want to go home. It's how it worked out. Yes, good for him.
"I guess I hope that however it came down – and nobody knows but Joe and whoever he was dealing with – I hope Joe is happy," Boston Red Sox manager Terry Francona said. "I think he deserves the respect. And I think you're going to hear people in baseball, every area of baseball, say probably very, very kind, respectful things about Joe. … And they're all deserved. I just hope he's happy."
Tim Brown is a national baseball writer for Yahoo! Sports.
Attorney general nominee's answer on torture
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/18/mukasey.hearing/
Attorney general nominee's answer on torture frustrates Democrats
Michael Mukasey refused to directly disavow harsh interrogation methods
Said he would resign before following an order he believed unconstitutional
Nominee expected to receive confirmation
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The refusal of attorney general-nominee Michael Mukasey to directly disavow waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques frustrated Senate Democrats Thursday.
Under tough questioning on torture policy on the second day of his confirmation hearings, the retired federal judge repeated his view that torture is unconstitutional, but he would not categorically declare any specific techniques to be prohibited.
"I don't think I can discuss techniques," Mukasey told the committee, as skeptical Democrats pressed on.
When asked by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, if waterboarding was constitutional, Mukasey responded "I don't know what's involved in the techniques. If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional."
Whitehouse continued, "'If it's torture.' That's a massive hedge, I mean it either is or it isn't. Do you have an opinion whether waterboarding -- which is the practice of putting someone in a reclining position, strapping them down, putting cloth over their faces and pouring water over the cloth to simulate the feeling of drowning -- is that constitutional?"
"If that amounts to torture, it is not constitutional," Mukasey said.
"I'm very disappointed in that answer," Whitehouse said.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, said they, too, were dissatisfied by the conditional answers.
Although waterboarding was specifically prohibited in a law passed by Congress, the Bush administration has declared that while it does not torture detainees it won't publicly reveal which harsh interrogation techniques may be used.
Mukasey attempted to explain his conditional responses.
"I know the way cross-examinations proceed. You start with an easy step and then you go down the road. I don't want to go down the road on interrogation techniques," he said. "Did the things that were presented to me seem over the line to me as I sit here? Of course they did."
But he added, "I think I need to be very careful about where I go on that subject."
Several Democratic senators also reacted coolly to Mukasey's views on presidential authority under the Constitution to order surveillance without a court-issued warrant.
During the previous day's testimony, Mukasey said he does not believe the president has legal authority to approve torture techniques for use on terror suspects, something former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refused to say.
Mukasey disavowed a memo written by former Justice official Jay Bybee that justified certain harsh techniques. "The Bybee memo, to paraphrase a French diplomat, was worse than a sin. It was a mistake. It was unnecessary," he said.
Although senators gave no signal they would oppose the nomination, which appears solidly on track, Democrats made clear they were less pleased with Mukasey's answers than they had been the previous day.
"I don't know whether you received some criticism from anybody in the administration last night after your testimony, but I sense a difference and a number of people here -- Republican and Democratic alike -- have sensed a difference," Leahy told the nominee.
Mukasey assured Leahy he had not been so criticized and had spent Wednesday night with his family.
On the first day of Mukasey's confirmation hearing Mukasey made it clear to senators he would be independent from the White House and would make legal decisions based "on facts and law, not by interests and motives."
Mukasey also said he would resign from office if faced with a presidential order he believed was unconstitutional.
"I would try to talk him [the president] out of it -- or leave," he said. In his short opening statement, Mukasey said everyone in the Justice Department is "united by shared values and standards."
"I am here in the first instance to tell you, but also to tell the men and women of the Department of Justice, that those are the standards that guided the department when I was privileged to serve 35 years ago, and those are the standards I intend to help them uphold if I am confirmed," Mukasey said.
On Wednesday, Leahy predicted Mukasey, a retired federal judge appointed to the bench by President Reagan, would have no trouble winning Senate confirmation "because we know that we need somebody to clean up the Department of Justice."
Leahy said the hearing would conclude Thursday, after the panel hears from outside legal experts regarding Mukasey's views and legal opinions.
Attorney general nominee's answer on torture frustrates Democrats
Michael Mukasey refused to directly disavow harsh interrogation methods
Said he would resign before following an order he believed unconstitutional
Nominee expected to receive confirmation
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The refusal of attorney general-nominee Michael Mukasey to directly disavow waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques frustrated Senate Democrats Thursday.
Under tough questioning on torture policy on the second day of his confirmation hearings, the retired federal judge repeated his view that torture is unconstitutional, but he would not categorically declare any specific techniques to be prohibited.
"I don't think I can discuss techniques," Mukasey told the committee, as skeptical Democrats pressed on.
When asked by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, if waterboarding was constitutional, Mukasey responded "I don't know what's involved in the techniques. If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional."
Whitehouse continued, "'If it's torture.' That's a massive hedge, I mean it either is or it isn't. Do you have an opinion whether waterboarding -- which is the practice of putting someone in a reclining position, strapping them down, putting cloth over their faces and pouring water over the cloth to simulate the feeling of drowning -- is that constitutional?"
"If that amounts to torture, it is not constitutional," Mukasey said.
"I'm very disappointed in that answer," Whitehouse said.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, said they, too, were dissatisfied by the conditional answers.
Although waterboarding was specifically prohibited in a law passed by Congress, the Bush administration has declared that while it does not torture detainees it won't publicly reveal which harsh interrogation techniques may be used.
Mukasey attempted to explain his conditional responses.
"I know the way cross-examinations proceed. You start with an easy step and then you go down the road. I don't want to go down the road on interrogation techniques," he said. "Did the things that were presented to me seem over the line to me as I sit here? Of course they did."
But he added, "I think I need to be very careful about where I go on that subject."
Several Democratic senators also reacted coolly to Mukasey's views on presidential authority under the Constitution to order surveillance without a court-issued warrant.
During the previous day's testimony, Mukasey said he does not believe the president has legal authority to approve torture techniques for use on terror suspects, something former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refused to say.
Mukasey disavowed a memo written by former Justice official Jay Bybee that justified certain harsh techniques. "The Bybee memo, to paraphrase a French diplomat, was worse than a sin. It was a mistake. It was unnecessary," he said.
Although senators gave no signal they would oppose the nomination, which appears solidly on track, Democrats made clear they were less pleased with Mukasey's answers than they had been the previous day.
"I don't know whether you received some criticism from anybody in the administration last night after your testimony, but I sense a difference and a number of people here -- Republican and Democratic alike -- have sensed a difference," Leahy told the nominee.
Mukasey assured Leahy he had not been so criticized and had spent Wednesday night with his family.
On the first day of Mukasey's confirmation hearing Mukasey made it clear to senators he would be independent from the White House and would make legal decisions based "on facts and law, not by interests and motives."
Mukasey also said he would resign from office if faced with a presidential order he believed was unconstitutional.
"I would try to talk him [the president] out of it -- or leave," he said. In his short opening statement, Mukasey said everyone in the Justice Department is "united by shared values and standards."
"I am here in the first instance to tell you, but also to tell the men and women of the Department of Justice, that those are the standards that guided the department when I was privileged to serve 35 years ago, and those are the standards I intend to help them uphold if I am confirmed," Mukasey said.
On Wednesday, Leahy predicted Mukasey, a retired federal judge appointed to the bench by President Reagan, would have no trouble winning Senate confirmation "because we know that we need somebody to clean up the Department of Justice."
Leahy said the hearing would conclude Thursday, after the panel hears from outside legal experts regarding Mukasey's views and legal opinions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
