Category: Other

Photographs of Tibetan monks at Longwu monastery

[From Photographs of Tibetan monks at Longwu monastery – Telegraph]

Hollywood is a cruel place that traffics on the looks of big stars. Which makes it insane there are actually working actors out there who have hideously ugly faces. Well, ugly stars out there… we salute you. Here are the 10 Ugliest Faces In Hollywood

[From Bullet Points: The 10 Ugliest Faces in Hollywood – 4/25/2008 ]

[From The 28 Creepiest Taxidermy Creations : COED Magazine]

Insurers Spending $700K a Day to Kill Healthcare Reform
by mcjoan
Digg this! Share this on Twitter – Insurers Spending $700K a Day to Kill Healthcare ReformTweet this submit to reddit Share This
Tue Sep 15, 2009 at 03:10:04 PM PDT

Wow, that could be providing a helluva lot of healthcare.

Washington, D.C. – A campaign finance watchdog’s analysis of insurance and HMO political contributions and lobbying expenses found the industries spent $126,430,438 over the first half of 2009 and $585,725,712 over the past two and a half years to influence public policy and elected officials. The group, Public Campaign Action Fund, found that in the first part of 2009, the industries were spending money at nearly a $700,000 a day clip to influence the political process and that the monthly pace of political spending this year has increased by nearly $400,000 over the average spent per month in the previous two years.

In addition to PAC contributions to our “public servants,” that’s funding 875 registered lobbyists for the insurance industry, and 920 for the HMOs. Which really is hardly a drop in the bucket for the industry, when you take into consideration their CEO compensation, which ranges from $3 million to $24 million.

Nice to know what our premiums are paying for, huh? We could cut out the middleman here. We could start giving all the money we’re spending on premiums directly to our representative and Senators. Maybe then they’d listen to us, the people who hired them, when it comes to vote.

Yeah, right.

[From Daily Kos: State of the Nation]

A Collection Of Pre-1930 Awkward Family Photos
CULTURE BUZZ These pictures should give you a pretty good idea of what AwkwardFamilyPhotos.com would’ve looked like 100 years ago. It starts out cute, but turns ugly and creepy fast…

[From A Collection Of Pre-1930 Awkward Family Photos: Pics, Videos, Links, News]

Brad Laner’s Eichler house
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Some of the artwork comes from Laner’s mother, Judy Koenig. She painted the triptych in the living room while getting her master’s degree at Cal State Northridge in the 1990s. Laner commissioned her to paint the geometric piece on the other wall.

[From Brad Laner’s Eichler house in Granada Hills – latimes.com]

1. The Mystery of Picasso (1956) Renowned French filmmaker Henri-Georges Clouzot follows his dear friend – Pablo Picasso – through the creation of twenty pieces, in a film that is a work of art within itself.

[From Ten Must-See Art Documentaries]

NEWTON, Massachusetts (CNN) — For Laura Geraghty, April 1, 2009, started out just as any other day. It was sunny but cool, she remembers.

[From Doctor says near-death experiences are in the mind – CNN.com]

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) — The actions of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple have prompted some top officials, including Gov. Bobby Jindal, to call for his dismissal.

[From Governor calls for firing of justice in interracial marriage case – CNN.com]

Top 10 Creepiest Ghost Movies
12.10.09 # 9:48 # Top Ten # 19 Comments
It is fast approaching that unique portion of the year when all true matters arcane and diabolical are given the festive treatment, as Halloween prompts folks to deploy their broomsticks for something other than sweeping up after the household pet. Although we have recently seen cinematic quotas of the supernatural gobbled up by vampire and zombie flicks, it would be remiss to overlook the genuine chills instilled by the most successful exponents of the ghost movie genre. So here are ten of the scariest ghost movies to put the frighteners on us poor, trembling cinema-goers

[From Top 10 Best Ghost Movies (Horror Movie List) – With Clips | Movie Moron]

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) — President Obama will visit New Orleans on Thursday for the first time since taking office, to address rebuilding efforts in the city ravaged by Hurricane Katrina four years ago.

President Obama will visit New Orleans, Louisiana, on Thursday to talk about rebuilding efforts.

During his trip, Obama will visit a charter school and host a town hall meeting to hear residents’ concerns, the White House said.

The president’s visit will focus on efforts to help rebuild the Gulf Coast, including cutting red tape and easing funding so residents can become self-sufficient.

“The president made a promise to come to New Orleans and wanted to fulfill that promise as soon as his schedule allowed,” said Nicholas Shapiro, White House spokesman.

Though this is Obama’s first trip there while in office, he has been to New Orleans five times since Katrina, Shapiro said.

[From Obama to make first visit to New Orleans as president – CNN.com]

Wall Street On Track To Award Record Pay

[From Wall Street On Track To Award Record Pay – WSJ.com]

Rachel Maddow first came on my radar in the spring of 2004, when she, along with Lizz Winstead and Chuck D of Public Enemy hosted an early morning radio show called Unfiltered on the newly minted Air America, an attempt to counter rightwing talk radio with liberal programming.

Radio has this ability to make the listener feel like they share a secret with the hosts and the few, hard-to-know listeners out there. I hoped people tuned in to listen to the hosts trade jokes and talk about politics and music, and mostly I wanted other people to learn about this Maddow character, who brought to every episode a dynamic mix of sparkling good humour, intelligent analysis and a broad view of what issues should matter.

Unfiltered didn’t make the first round of reshuffling at Air America, but Maddow hung in, hosting her own eponymous radio show and eventually moving to television, first as a guest pundit and now as a host of her own night time political talkshow on MSNBC.

Before it happened, most American liberals would have never imagined that Maddow could have her own programme on any cable network, much less the same network that had, just a few years before, tried to pull in a rightwing audience by giving hard right nut Michael Savage his own show (before pulling it after he told a gay caller to die from Aids).

It’s not just that Maddow is a liberal. After all, MSNBC had already given a spot to liberal commentator Keith Olbermann and his frequent, angry rants. It was mostly hard to imagine a cable news network rewarding a pundit for being sober-minded and nuanced in her analysis, as well as suspicion that homophobia would prevent it from promoting a lesbian who favours a more masculine way of dressing.

But 2008 was a year for re-arranging American expectations about who gets to have a voice in public. The Democratic candidate was not only black, but also overtly professorial, and this didn’t diminish his popularity with the public. Hillary Clinton and, yes, even Sarah Palin normalised the idea of more female authority in politics. In a very short period of time, the unthinkable became the reality, and Maddow had her very own MSNBC programme.

Maddow’s audience is still small, but she inspires devotion in her fans, because she doesn’t fit the tedious mould of most political talkshow hosts. Maddow openly identifies with the wild world of the liberal blogosphere, and even went so far as to wear pajamas on her show to cheekily demonstrate solidarity with bloggers after Palin denounced the netroots.

Like bloggers, Maddow knows that the key to building rapport with your audience isn’t making yourself into an aloof portrayal of authority, but to show your human side and sense of humour. To this end, Maddow lets her idiosyncrasies become known, such as her obsession with classic cocktails.

But what really endears her to American liberals is the way she takes her job and the authority it gives her seriously. Maddow is less interested in the shouting fests that dominate most cable news and instead favours in-depth interviews with experts who are permitted to show their expertise on air without being interrupted. Hers may be the only show on cable news were feminists come on air to speak their minds without being paired off with belligerent sexists who dominate the conversation by yelling over their points.

But Maddow isn’t opposed to fair-mindedness. She often brings on conservatives for the same kind of in-depth interviews, and even when she strongly disagrees, she always gives them a chance to air their views (and generally hang themselves with those views). Her show is the exact opposite of Bill O’Reilly’s show. Where he cuts people off for saying things he doesn’t like, Maddow digs in deeper.

She also gives far more coverage to issues other hosts avoid because they’re big downers. Maddow is the only reliable source of televised information on the growing problem of domestic terrorism in the US, and the only mainstream pundit to pay attention to the network of anti-abortion activists that quietly support the few that work up the courage to shoot doctors or bomb clinics. She doesn’t treat the rapid growth of the extreme right in America like it’s a joke or a minimal issue, as do other hosts, but as a serious threat to our democracy. In her transition to the mainstream media, the only thing Maddow seems to have given up is the thick-framed glasses she prefers to wear off-camera.

Unfortunately, the Maddow magic might not have much of a lifespan. During the US election, there was a hunger for televised liberal content, and no one does it better than Maddow. It seems that now, most liberals have turned off their TVs and returned to getting most information from the internet, and Maddow’s ratings have plummeted as a result.

Video clips of her shows are routinely traded on liberal blogs, but that doesn’t translate into ad revenue for MSNBC. Hopefully, the next round of US elections will push her ratings back up again, because we can’t afford to lose the sole voice of intellectual liberalism in the cable news desert.

[From Rachel Maddow, voice of America | Amanda Marcotte | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk ]

Daniel Suelo wasn’t poor, a victim of bad luck, mentally ill, or even uneducated. He just decided that he wanted to have nothing to do with money. So he gave up consumer culture altogether, and for the last 9 years, he’s survived by living in a cave in Utah, and dumpster diving, foraging, fishing, and occasionally hunting for food. He spends his time in the great outdoors–and in the public library, where he blogs about it all.

[From 48 Year-Old Blogger Has Gone 9 Years Without Spending Money | Environment | AlterNet]

All I can say is: the president gave a speech he could have given at any point in the last three years. No one in that room could disagree with any of the things he said. I sure don’t (with the exception of the hate crimes hooey). And he said it well and movingly. Like we didn’t know he could do that.
But the point of electing a president who pledged to actually do things is to hold him to account, and to see if he is willing to take any risk of any kind to actually do something. I had a few prior tests of his seriousness or signs that he gets it, a few ways to judge if this speech had anything new or specific or clear. He failed every test.
To wit:
He says he will end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell but he has done nothing, and he offered no time-line, no deadline for action and no verifiable record that he has done anything, despite his claims that he has.
He says he is ending the HIV ban, but it is still in force, a year and a half after it was signed by George W. Bush and passed by massive majorities in both houses.
He says he favors equality for gay couples but said nothing tonight to support the initiatives in Maine or in Washngton State or the struggle in Washington DC for marriage equality. That’s a test of real sincerity on this matter. He failed it.
He says he wants to end discrimination in employment even as he is firing more gay people solely for being gay than any other employer in the country – as commander-in-chief. And if an employer is firing gay people all the time, is it tolerable to accept as a response that he will stop doing it one day – but gives no time-line at all to hold him to?
Look: I didn’t expect these issues to be front and center given his appalling inheritance; I know he has many other things on his plate; I didn’t expect the moon; I didn’t believe he would do any of this immediately; I understand that the real job is for us to do, not him, and that most of the action is in the states. And I remain a strong supporter of him in foreign policy and in the way he is clearly trying to move this country past the ideological divides of the recent past.
But the sad truth is: he is refusing to take any responsibility for his clear refusal to fulfill clear campaign pledges on the core matter of civil rights and has given no substantive, verifiable pledges or deadlines by which he can be held accountable. What that means, I’m afraid, is that this speech was highfalutin bullshit. There were no meaningful commitments within a time certain, not even a commitment to fulfilling them in his first term; just meaningless, feel-good commitments that we have no way of holding him to. Once the dust settles, ask yourself. What did he promise to achieve in the next year? Or two years? Or four years? The answer is: nothing.
HRC, of course, is putting no pressure on him; Joe Solmonese’s disgraceful email actually took all pressure off him by saying he’d be happy to wait till 2017 for HRC to hold Obama accountable. HRC are putting pressure, as they always have, on gay people to go to the back of the line and be grateful a president attends their fundraising event. The only word for this is a racket. And if gay people do not rise up and demand change from this organization and stop funding a group whose goal has always been to sell the Democrats to gay people rather than secure civil rights, then they will continue to suffer the discrimination they live under day after day.

[From The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan]

TEHRAN, Iran — Three defendants in Iran’s mass trial of opposition figures accused of fueling the country’s postelection unrest have been sentenced to death, an Iranian news agency reported Saturday.

Two of them were convicted of membership in a monarchist group seeking to topple Iran’s Islamic Republic and restore a monarchy, the semiofficial ISNA news agency reported, quoting judiciary official Zahed Bashiri Rad.

The third defendant was convicted of having ties to a terrorist group for his alleged links to the People’s Mujahedeen, an armed opposition group, ISNA quoted Rad as saying.

[From Iran Sentences 3 To Death In Post-Election Mass Opposition Trial]

Dennis Miller and Bill O’Reilly had a discussion about cable news on “The O’Reilly Factor” Wednesday night to mark Fox News’ 13th birthday.

“Billy, I view it like a long piece of straightaway,” Miller said. “Like that road betwen Barstow and Vegas. Cable news is a long straightaway.”

MSNBC, Miller said, is in the left lane.

“On the left lane, MSNBC has gone completely over the shoulder, over the breastplate, over the hip, over the knee, over the bunion,” he said. “They are so far out there now that quite frankly Magellan and OnStar can’t locate them.”

Miller compared CNN to “that old faded yellow line down the middle of the road.”

“Periodically a rumble strip breaks out for the elections or the debates or something like that, but by and large, people know it, they’re familiar with it,” he said.

[From Dennis Miller Knocks Hannity, Beck On Fox News (VIDEO)]

Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kans.) told reporters on Wednesday that opposition to the president’s health care package was driven, in part, by knee-jerk partisanship and he urged Congressional Republicans to consider backing a version of reform.

The 1996 Republican presidential candidate also predicted, following a speech at a health care reform summit in Kansas, that “there will be a signing ceremony” for a reform bill sometime this year or early in 2010.

But the comments that seem likely to create the most ripples were those that dealt with Congressional opposition to the White House. Dole, according to reports, framed the pushback to Barack Obama’s reform agenda as almost perfunctory in nature.

[From Bob Dole: Health Care Will Pass, GOP Should Be Open To Reform]

Two thugs who attacked what they thought were a pair of transvestites picked on the wrong men – when their intended victims turned out to be cage fighters on a night out in fancy dress.

Dean Gardener, 19, and Jason Fender, 22, singled out the two men walking along a street in wigs, short skirts and high heels.

Bare-chested Gardener was caught on CCTV confronting one of the men in a pink wig, black skirt and boob tube – then seen swinging a punch, a court heard.

[From Thugs attack two men in dresses… who turn out to be cage fighters | Mail Online]

  

Evils of Censorship Important to Understand; Destruction of Free Speech is Top Priority of Police State.

The evils of censorship are a direct assault to the civil rights of the citizens of the United States of America as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Censorship is a way for the government of the United States to suppress people’s ability to freely express their ideas.

The suppression of the expression of free thought will lead to the actual repression of the thoughts themselves. Censorship sends the wrong message to the public, it makes people feel that it does not make any sense for them to be creative, because their full ideas will not stand a chance of being fully released.

There are many occurrences throughout society that show the extents of the evils of censorship. While various entities encourage censorship in one sense or another, the final determination is always left with the government. There are many reasons for censorship, but none of these reasons are grounds for the action, the determination of what should or should not be viewed, should be left to the individual doing the viewing, or for minors, should be left to the parents to determine.

The use of censorship not only limits the expression of the person being censored, but also limits the free will of the person who chooses to view or not view the particular media being censored.

[From Evils of Censorship – The Evils of Censorship Equals Destruction of Free Speech | Truth-It]

Stephanie Smith, a children’s dance instructor, thought she had a stomach virus. The aches and cramping were tolerable that first day, and she finished her classes.

[From Woman’s Shattered Life Shows Ground Beef Inspection Flaws – NYTimes.com]

Prices of your favorite grocery items are skyrocketing, but you probably don’t know it. Many companies are using a sneaky way to raise prices without driving customers to less expensive brands: they are shrinking their packaging. A jar of Skippy peanut butter, for example, is the same height and circumference it has always been, but now has a hidden, inward “dimple” on the bottom that decreases the amount the jar holds by two ounces. Boxes of breakfast cereal appear to be the same height and width they’ve always been, but manufacturers have reduced the boxes’ depth from front to back, decreasing the amount of cereal they hold. Rolls of Scott toilet tissue contain the same number of sheets as always (1,000), but the length of each sheet has been cut from 4 to 3.7 inches. A “six ounce” can of Starkist Tuna now holds just five ounces. When asked about the shrinkage, most companies point to higher costs for ingredients, manufacturing and fuel. Dan Howard, a marketing professor at Southern Methodist University, says the only way consumers can fight back against this sneaky way of increasing costs is to refuse to buy from manufacturers who engage in this deceptive tactic.

[From Sneaky manufacturers shrink packaging, while keeping prices the same | Center for Media and Democracy]

There are really only a few tricks to writing properly for the web. If you know how to write, you are already 95% of the way there.

These are some of the more common mistakes that I’ve seen in web copy and some tricks that I use every day to write effectively, from e-mails to site pages.

You don’t need to be an English major to understand any of this advice either. It is written in plain English that everyone can understand.

These are tips based on my own experience and education as a writer, and particularly as a writer specializing in the web.

If you’ve got some tips of your own feel free to share them in the comments section.

[From 20 Tips on How to Write for the Web | Webdesigner Depot]

It’s one thing when Fox News personalities say things that are totally loony; this happens at least once a day, if not at least once an hour.

It’s another thing entirely when Fox News Channel itself puts out advertising that is so obviously demonstrably false as to be discredited within minutes. That doesn’t happen quite as often, but it did just now. The above poster is part of an advertising campaign by Fox to try and claim that they are the only balanced news outlet out there, because they were the only one who covered the anti-Obama rallies on 9/12. The problem? Just about every mainstream news outlet covered them, including all the networks they claim didn’t. Want proof? Here:

[From The Daily Background » Epic Fox News Fail]

Recently, Americans have begun taking a stand for some of their most fervently held beliefs. Let’s see what they’ve had to say!

[From Dribbleglass.com–The Illiterate Minority]

Nicholas “Net Neutrality” Deleon here with truly shocking news: six Republican senators have tacked on an amendment to an appropriations bill that would block the FCC’s attempt to make Net Neutrality a reality. So remember, kids: when you think of a free and open Internet, don’t think of the GOP. It’s not your friend here.

The Senators involved are: Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas; Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas; Sen. Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina; Sen. John Ensign of Nevada; Sen. John Thune of South Dakota; and Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana.

It literally took two seconds to look up these guys’ top contributors, and you’ll be absolutely shocked at the findings. Guess who is Sen Brownback’s top donor this cycle? AT&T at a cool $11,000 so far! Sen. Brownback? Oh my, looks like AT&T has given him some $35,000 thus far! And what about that Vitter gentleman? Yeah, AT&T has given him $19,500 this cycle.

So that’s three out of the six senators who have a huge financial incentive to see to it that AT&T doesn’t have to play nice by the Net Neutrality rules.

You folks are free to draw your own conclusions, but if I were you I’d make a cool Twitter hashtag like “#ATTSENATORS.” I’m sure I’m not the only person who finds it a little bit suspicious that three of the senators who have attached their name to the amendment are sucking at the teat of AT&T.

But whatever. It’s just the Internet. Who cares about that?

[From AT&T linked to GOP senators who have proposed anti-Net Neutrality bill in Congress. Pretend to be shocked, please.]

News Anchors Can’t Stop Laughing Watching Paris Model Fall Twice On Runway (VIDEO)

[From News Anchors Can’t Stop Laughing Watching Paris Model Fall Twice On Runway (VIDEO)]