Yesterday a teenager in Germany killed himself and fifteen people. He had told others about his plan to kill on an internet chat site.
"Heribert Rech, the state interior minister of Baden-Württemberg, told a news conference that an unidentified person wrote on the German-language chat room that he had access to weapons 'and I will go tomorrow morning to my old school and do a really nice barbecue. You will hear from me tomorrow.'"
The gunman's name is 17-year-old Tim Kretschmer. According to the article, before the shooting took place Kretschmer posted on a web site and said, "I am sick of this messy life. Always the same. Everyone makes fun of me. No one recognizes my potential. I am serious."
Kretschmer was seeing a therapist for his depression but had decided to stop going. He took one of his father's guns to do the shooting and ended up killing himself in a "Volkswagen dealership".
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
RNC Chairman Michael Steele rumored to face a no confidence vote, segregationist to be elected in his place.
Michael Steele, the first African-American RNC chairman, is rumored to be facing a no confidence vote instigated by Katon Dawson, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party.
This follows several media 'fiascos' on Steele's part; the largest being when Steele attacked radio show host Rush Limbaugh's hope that Obama fails. This catfight ends as suddenly as it begins. Limbaugh's response succinctly summarizes the RNC's concerns - by showing even the slightest support towards Obama, Pelosi, et al., he jeopardizes the GOP's chances in the 2012 election. Should Obama's economic plan fail, some feel his defeat is certain, though not in the way Limbaugh expects.
But the art of political gaffes is hardly limited to talk show disputes.
Ironic words given Steele's current position: facing down Katon Dawson, loser in the RNC Chairman election and a man who entered politics in order to fight desegregation.
The RNC's first elected African-American chairman is under the threat of replacement by a man who lived in a whites-only community for the last dozen years. Whether or not Steele understands the main motivation for his sudden political climb (hint) and whether or not someone who bends like a limp noodle in the face of conflict is at all fit to run a major political party, this is not the greatest way to shed accusations of racial insensitivity.
Certain fringe elements of the Republican party, perhaps the ones whom Limbaugh jokingly calls "informed, involved, engaged and caring", have drawn fire for their own ugly, inflammatory remarks during the 2008 presidential election. Michael Steele's election marks a supposed change wherein the GOP transforms into an equal opportunity racial utopia but instead the rumor mill is pushing for Katon Dawson, loser by eight votes, to oust him because they don't think he can handle the job.
For the record, Katon Dawson is hardly more qualified.
Dawson fails to mention that Atwater, apprentice and former RNC chairman himself, capped his infamous career by touting racism as a major political goal of the GOP's southern strategy.
This follows several media 'fiascos' on Steele's part; the largest being when Steele attacked radio show host Rush Limbaugh's hope that Obama fails. This catfight ends as suddenly as it begins. Limbaugh's response succinctly summarizes the RNC's concerns - by showing even the slightest support towards Obama, Pelosi, et al., he jeopardizes the GOP's chances in the 2012 election. Should Obama's economic plan fail, some feel his defeat is certain, though not in the way Limbaugh expects.
But the art of political gaffes is hardly limited to talk show disputes.
Steele's victory "marks a step away from the balkanized Southern white ethos of the party," Marc Ambinder [CBS News chief political consultant] said.
[...]
"We have been mis-defined [sic] as a party that doesn't care, a party that's insensitive, a party that is unconcerned about minorities, a party that is unconcerned about the lives and the expectations and dreams of average Americans," Steele said. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
Ironic words given Steele's current position: facing down Katon Dawson, loser in the RNC Chairman election and a man who entered politics in order to fight desegregation.
I’ve always been involved in politics. And I guess it goes all the way back to my school career and education. I, in the 1960s was a product of school segregation, where we took our schools and completely disbanded them, and made racial equality. Fifty-Fifty. And the kids had no choices. They closed Booker T. Washington, Blease [sic], down here. A pretty good school.
Government reached into my life and grabbed me and shook me at the age of fifteen. I remember how blatant it was that government just thought that they knew better, that government just thought they knew better what to do in my school.
The RNC's first elected African-American chairman is under the threat of replacement by a man who lived in a whites-only community for the last dozen years. Whether or not Steele understands the main motivation for his sudden political climb (hint) and whether or not someone who bends like a limp noodle in the face of conflict is at all fit to run a major political party, this is not the greatest way to shed accusations of racial insensitivity.
Certain fringe elements of the Republican party, perhaps the ones whom Limbaugh jokingly calls "informed, involved, engaged and caring", have drawn fire for their own ugly, inflammatory remarks during the 2008 presidential election. Michael Steele's election marks a supposed change wherein the GOP transforms into an equal opportunity racial utopia but instead the rumor mill is pushing for Katon Dawson, loser by eight votes, to oust him because they don't think he can handle the job.
For the record, Katon Dawson is hardly more qualified.
They made America a better – different – place. But you go look at the people... A protégé of mine, Lee Atwater. Lee Atwater was in his early thirties and one of the most powerful people in the country, with an office in the White House.
Dawson fails to mention that Atwater, apprentice and former RNC chairman himself, capped his infamous career by touting racism as a major political goal of the GOP's southern strategy.
Luckily, this no confidence vote is just a rumor so far. One that Dawson has denied. It seems the RNC might continue its own image reconstruction. Whether or not Dawson can convince a single African-American to vote for him may in fact be a moot point either way.Atwater : ''You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968 you can't say 'nigger' -- that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
''And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me -- because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 'Nigger, nigger.'''
Slumdog Millionaire sweeps the world
Eight Academy Awards (including Best Picture and Best Director). Four Golden Globes. Five Critic's Choice Awards. Eight BAFTA (British Academy of Film and Television Arts) awards. And the list goes on for Slumdog Millionaire since the beginning of this year and also throughout 2008. Did the critics get it right this time? Does Slumdog live up to its' awards list? After experiencing the film four times in theatres, I feel no award amount can fully grant justice to the brilliance of this movie and I fully agree with motives behind the academies. It's always satisfying when a masterpiece is recognized.
The USA Today reported that Slumdog has already grossed over 217 million dollars in the box office and is still selling tickets across the globe. For the first time in a long time, my favorite movie of all time is extremely praised in the media, including newspapers, television broadcasts, radio broadcasts and online reviews.
"Slumdog Millionaire is one in a million."
"Four out of four stars."
"With dazzling, magical realism and vigorous storytelling, the film has an enchanting power, fusing a fairy tale quality with gritty realism. Yet even with interwoven surrealistic images, the story portrays cultural accuracy. In a highly charged, intensely Technicolor world, there is poverty and privation but also laughter and hope, accentuated by the tribute to Bollywood musicals during the final credits."
All of these quotes come from an article posted on the USA Today's website by journalist Claudia Puig. They are truly sincere comments and completely sum up the movie like an ordinary watcher like myself would say. If you haven't seen it already, Slumdog Millionaire targets every emotion you could ever experience. It's a film that will truly change your life and I'm glad the critics gave it the recognition it deserves.
The USA Today reported that Slumdog has already grossed over 217 million dollars in the box office and is still selling tickets across the globe. For the first time in a long time, my favorite movie of all time is extremely praised in the media, including newspapers, television broadcasts, radio broadcasts and online reviews.
"Slumdog Millionaire is one in a million."
"Four out of four stars."
"With dazzling, magical realism and vigorous storytelling, the film has an enchanting power, fusing a fairy tale quality with gritty realism. Yet even with interwoven surrealistic images, the story portrays cultural accuracy. In a highly charged, intensely Technicolor world, there is poverty and privation but also laughter and hope, accentuated by the tribute to Bollywood musicals during the final credits."
All of these quotes come from an article posted on the USA Today's website by journalist Claudia Puig. They are truly sincere comments and completely sum up the movie like an ordinary watcher like myself would say. If you haven't seen it already, Slumdog Millionaire targets every emotion you could ever experience. It's a film that will truly change your life and I'm glad the critics gave it the recognition it deserves.
Monday, March 9, 2009
People see God as just another person
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101617951
This can be taken in many ways. Personally, I do not believe in God. I see it as people creating God, and therefore seeing Him as the same as them. I think it is ironic that this study was posted on the same day that Obama singned the bill to make stem cell research easier, and not as resticted. This is a start to keeping religion separate from science. The side that does believe in God, however, sees it as God being equal to them. He is supposed to be a companion, and we are created in "His" image.
This can be taken in many ways. Personally, I do not believe in God. I see it as people creating God, and therefore seeing Him as the same as them. I think it is ironic that this study was posted on the same day that Obama singned the bill to make stem cell research easier, and not as resticted. This is a start to keeping religion separate from science. The side that does believe in God, however, sees it as God being equal to them. He is supposed to be a companion, and we are created in "His" image.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
The newsless front page, or not
A blogger asks, whither the five Ws on a recent Wash Post front page. And the WP editor responds.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Cowboys Release Owens
This past Christmas, my brother and I swapped our presents underneath our Christmas tree and to our surprise, we both opened up a Cowboy-blue Terrell Owens jersey in our size. A little more than two months later, Owens is now reported to be released from the Cowboys and is now a free agent. Needless to say, today was a depressing day in the Mundy house.
My dad called me out of my room first thing in the morning to listen to the developing story of T.O. 's release and after watching ESPN for a few hours, not one reporter/sports anaylst believed this was a bad move. I know T.O. causes a lot of drama and I know he doesn't have the cleanest track record, but as a Cowboy fan he was fun to watch and my favorite player.
The country definitely didn't agree. ESPN asked the nation if they would want T.O. on their team and every state rejected him. This made me wonder: Does personality outshine talent in every case?
Jerry Jones, owner, president and general manager of the Dallas Cowboys, said his personality had nothing to do with his decision to let Owens go. However, ESPN reporters had different opinions to why Jones made the move. At the age of 35, T.O. doesn't have too many career runs left and will probably play in September with another team, but reporters felt his behavior was too unruly and that is why Jones cut the strings. I thought this could be true, but T.O. is #2 in all-time receiving touchdowns just behind Jerry Rice. That's a heavy statistic to swallow...and one to pass-up.
All day I kept squinting at the television, hoping the news was just misread or misreported. My wish didn't come true. Reporters in Dallas and across the country elaborated on this new information and even interviewed Cowboy teammate Terrence Newman. But after listening to every side of every reporter, I began to believe that Jones did release T.O. because of his personality. However, I didn't get the real story until I heard the words from Jones himself. Why do reporters report information they know will stir up the audience, even if they know the information is stretched? Jones' interview posted on the Dallas Cowboy website plainly stated his reasoning behind Owens' release and should have been the key source for all ESPN reports. Jones let T.O. go not because of who he was off the field, but his lack of performance on the field this last season. As a Cowboy fan, I wish they went to the mouth of the source rather than the minds of the analysts. True fans deserve the truth, right?
My dad called me out of my room first thing in the morning to listen to the developing story of T.O. 's release and after watching ESPN for a few hours, not one reporter/sports anaylst believed this was a bad move. I know T.O. causes a lot of drama and I know he doesn't have the cleanest track record, but as a Cowboy fan he was fun to watch and my favorite player.
The country definitely didn't agree. ESPN asked the nation if they would want T.O. on their team and every state rejected him. This made me wonder: Does personality outshine talent in every case?
Jerry Jones, owner, president and general manager of the Dallas Cowboys, said his personality had nothing to do with his decision to let Owens go. However, ESPN reporters had different opinions to why Jones made the move. At the age of 35, T.O. doesn't have too many career runs left and will probably play in September with another team, but reporters felt his behavior was too unruly and that is why Jones cut the strings. I thought this could be true, but T.O. is #2 in all-time receiving touchdowns just behind Jerry Rice. That's a heavy statistic to swallow...and one to pass-up.
All day I kept squinting at the television, hoping the news was just misread or misreported. My wish didn't come true. Reporters in Dallas and across the country elaborated on this new information and even interviewed Cowboy teammate Terrence Newman. But after listening to every side of every reporter, I began to believe that Jones did release T.O. because of his personality. However, I didn't get the real story until I heard the words from Jones himself. Why do reporters report information they know will stir up the audience, even if they know the information is stretched? Jones' interview posted on the Dallas Cowboy website plainly stated his reasoning behind Owens' release and should have been the key source for all ESPN reports. Jones let T.O. go not because of who he was off the field, but his lack of performance on the field this last season. As a Cowboy fan, I wish they went to the mouth of the source rather than the minds of the analysts. True fans deserve the truth, right?
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
USA Today spends two years, finds nothing conclusive. EPA to spend $2.5mil in factchecking.
USA Today's science fair project, whose lead is the best foreshadowing, begins with a cliche, slides into a noncommittal half truth and finishes with a self congratulatory pat on the back.
The EPA has promised to investigate air quality outside of 50 to 100 schools where pollution might pose significant health risks. Whether or not they will use charcoal badges, the main process used by USA Today in their testing, was not mentioned. Considering how one unrelated consultant asks that charcoal badge air testing be 'avoided like the plague' and a second a bit more clearly explains that they actually underestimate environmental pollutants, I doubt it.
But thats evidence for you. Or rather the journalistic appearance of evidence. USA Today's real kicker is their computer simulation which shows 435 schools where the air outside appeared more toxic than the air outside a closed Ohio school - a simulation so accurate that three states have already tested and found nothing. Nothing.
What were they supposed to find? 'Elevated levels of chemicals' such as those found via charcoal badges and pumps in a joint effort between USA Today and John Hopkins University. Should parents be afraid? The answer is a very definite maybe. After all, "no one knows for certain what's in the air". Not even the USA Today, whose champion of the hour was a sample of chromium. The paper thoughtfully failed to follow through on its investigation and tell us whether this chromium was the 'relatively harmless' variety or the hexavalent airborne AIDs version. Scientifically valid testing, though, is the job of the EPA. The EPA, according to USA Today, is at fault here - its regulators are not required to check for 'hundreds of the most dangerous chemicals' (Note: Yes they are.)
This little oversight on the EPA's part may be why they are checking 50 to 100 schools for 'elevated levels of chemicals'. That's around 1/7th of the 1st percentile of toxic schools. I can only imagine why the EPA would be so lazy. Maybe its because it's being prodded into action on account of a bunch of 'maybes'. USA Today's little 2-year-old science fair project has done nothing but been proven wrong by independent testing - something the paper admits in its story and then protests with all the puerile vindictiveness it can muster.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's bewildered clay face speaks volumes. The EPA's hand is forced. $2.5 million will be sacrificed in the name of half-assed journalistic research. This $2.5 million dollar fact checking operation will cover only 1/7th of the most at risk schools.
If you want to check up on the old alma mater to see if you have cancer, feel free; I've already checked most of the area high schools. If you're frightened by loud noises, quick movements and your own shadow then you South Fort Myers and FMCS alumni may want to contact a doctor.
The EPA has promised to investigate air quality outside of 50 to 100 schools where pollution might pose significant health risks. Whether or not they will use charcoal badges, the main process used by USA Today in their testing, was not mentioned. Considering how one unrelated consultant asks that charcoal badge air testing be 'avoided like the plague' and a second a bit more clearly explains that they actually underestimate environmental pollutants, I doubt it.
But thats evidence for you. Or rather the journalistic appearance of evidence. USA Today's real kicker is their computer simulation which shows 435 schools where the air outside appeared more toxic than the air outside a closed Ohio school - a simulation so accurate that three states have already tested and found nothing. Nothing.
What were they supposed to find? 'Elevated levels of chemicals' such as those found via charcoal badges and pumps in a joint effort between USA Today and John Hopkins University. Should parents be afraid? The answer is a very definite maybe. After all, "no one knows for certain what's in the air". Not even the USA Today, whose champion of the hour was a sample of chromium. The paper thoughtfully failed to follow through on its investigation and tell us whether this chromium was the 'relatively harmless' variety or the hexavalent airborne AIDs version. Scientifically valid testing, though, is the job of the EPA. The EPA, according to USA Today, is at fault here - its regulators are not required to check for 'hundreds of the most dangerous chemicals' (Note: Yes they are.)
This little oversight on the EPA's part may be why they are checking 50 to 100 schools for 'elevated levels of chemicals'. That's around 1/7th of the 1st percentile of toxic schools. I can only imagine why the EPA would be so lazy. Maybe its because it's being prodded into action on account of a bunch of 'maybes'. USA Today's little 2-year-old science fair project has done nothing but been proven wrong by independent testing - something the paper admits in its story and then protests with all the puerile vindictiveness it can muster.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's bewildered clay face speaks volumes. The EPA's hand is forced. $2.5 million will be sacrificed in the name of half-assed journalistic research. This $2.5 million dollar fact checking operation will cover only 1/7th of the most at risk schools.
If you want to check up on the old alma mater to see if you have cancer, feel free; I've already checked most of the area high schools. If you're frightened by loud noises, quick movements and your own shadow then you South Fort Myers and FMCS alumni may want to contact a doctor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)