PSoTD

Isn't it about time Ed Henry of CNN receives a blogger nickname? Russert and Matthews have one, why not good ole' Ed Henry? He's certainly deserving...

I wish Duncan Black, Atrios at Eschaton, was more influential in the world. It is easy to find him influential if you read him regularly - he has interesting things to say about interesting items, and frankly, to do that consistently on the Internet is pretty tough. Most bloggers don't. He's ahead of the curve on some things, and even on the things I disagree with him, I appreciate that he seems to be pretty clear in his posts. Yeah, he gets cranky sometimes, but...

I think he has a right to be. Yeah, he's a pretty popular blogger, as far as traffic is concerned, but that is still a drop in the bucket compared to ABC News or CNN, and yet, Duncan Black is far more intuitive and comprehending of the average viewpoint than just about anyone you'll see there. The world needs 100 Duncan Blacks at this point, on radio and television and print, doing editorial assessments as fluently in those mediums as Atrios does in his blog. Because as straight on as Black is on the blog, the world still keeps getting more fucked up every day, enabled by those same types of organizations as ABC News and CNN.

Too much of the time there is something grotesquely missing in the translation of the world between citizen commenters - aka bloggers - and the professional news media. It needs fixed, immediately. It is hurting the world. We need it to stop. As Jon Stewart said, "Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America." But it doesn't. The only way to stop the damage is to equalize the playing field. 62,000 readers per day, or even 150,000 readers per day, isn't going to give the Eschatons of the Internet much of a position to talk to the crowd. Nothing on the Internet, by itself, is going to, so it's not like efforts such as The Huffington Post are enough, either. Television is still the stand on the square. What is said on the blogs needs to go there, without ten levels of institutional filtering, and without competing with the need for advertising for purpose.

I'm not suggesting that Duncan Black needs to be a television personality. But his words and points deserve the reach that television provides, and the country needs the distribution of those points. Same for TBogg. Same for Rox Cooper. Same for, same for, same for... but then, there are so many blanks to fill on television. Bloggers ought to be discussing how this happens. Relying on cable channels such as CNN and MSNBC will just create some horrible packaging akin to what they already do for news that will guarantee a programmed noise ratio designed to make commercials appear to be signal. No thanks. Liberal and progressive bloggers eed to discuss how to present the ideas and discussion from blogs on television without relying on human appearance or character personality to sell the process.

So, as I see it, one of the biggest questions for 2007's liberal and progressive bloggers is - how do further bypass the institutional barriers that prevent greater distribution and understanding, and most importantly, diversity, of message?

And for everyone - from myself to our 6-year-old - it was very enjoyable.

But a question - why doesn't Hollywood make comedies about ne'er-do-well mothers trying to bring themselves back to role model status with their children? What is it that makes it a funny movie storyline premise for fathers, but not for mothers? It seems somewhat common.

Can anyone even remember a popular movie comedy of the past 10 years that had as a premise a mother who was failing in their child's eyes and was trying to improve her parent status?

When are baptisms of the kids of movie stars considered to be news?

I haven't seen quotes from the parents about the baptism in the news. Or grandparents, or any other relatives. Just Pastor Randy Flanagan, who apparently performed the ceremony. Does he have an agent? Is he part of an Affleck-Garner publicity blitz? What's the deal? Are celebrity-sired infant baptisms really part of the news mix now?

I'm curious as to how this became such a strongly-reported news story, I really am. Who wanted it in the press so bad? Are celebrity baptisms going to be a regular feature at AP and Yahoo! News and all these newspaper web site? Why was this considered news? That's the real story here.

I think Bob Geiger has it about right... nobody knows what will happen yet for the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary, and all this talk that Obama and Clinton are clearing the field is just so much claptrap. What is Dan Balz' motivation for writing this?

Publish an article like this for their area - things to do with the kids during Christmas vacation.

It's one I wish other bloggers would take as well - I'm taking a vow that I'm not going to blog here about the 2008 Presidential horserace - the polls - until the first Tuesday in November in 2007 at the earliest. I realize there's a reality that those poll numbers are important, and they say something about positioning of candidates, and blah blah blah... I am so sick of the front-runnering already, and I don't want to add fuel to something that disgusts me. I'll be happy to blog about candidate positions, policy ideas, etc. But the Clinton/Obama/Edwards/Wild Card polling story won't be seen here. The regular media covers that up the wazoo because it's easy to report and to consume - but it comes at a cost - a lack of effort to discuss important political positions that aren't so easy to report and to consume. Blogs can do that, and should. They should leave the shallow stuff to the CNNs and USA Todays of the communication marketplace.

I wonder what it is about them that makes the producers of the Rush Limbaugh show think that commercials for their program need to have the voiceover qualities of an advertisement for the circus, full of silly booming voices and whistles and kazoos?

Coming in 2007. I didn't know...

Then it will be a lot easier to tell when something is a joke, rather than serious.

Lesson Two: If you're not funny, don't try to be funny on television. Call it the Greenfield Law of Comedy.

Lesson Three: If you're of ordinary appearance and mind and still somewhat mysteriously have had a job for years on national television, don't highlight that mystery by pointing out your wife already knows more about how to do your job than you do.

It's kind of interesting that there are two national television programs that would have a piece, essentially promoting, a service that invents excuses for their clients, to... well, in their own words:

With the pressures of modern life many of us have occasion to stray from our commitments. This is often a short-term encounter, unrelated to our long term plans, but with modern technology, it has become increasingly difficult to carry on such a temporary activity without being detected. The surfacing of such an encounter in any way whatsoever, can put an incredible strain on all parties concerned. Family life, friendship and business's well-being can all be jeopardized for what may indeed have been a totally inconsequential short-term objective.

Alibi Network was established to provide a way out of this situation. We offer a service which can help protect your loved ones from undue anxiety, and help ensure the stability of long term relationships and financial security. Our alibis and personal privacy protection services are secure, discreet and professionally handled.

Those two national programs would be those of Neil Cavuto at Fox and Tucker Carlson at MSNBC. I wonder if the Alibi Network found some marketplace of individuals needing help with their "inconsequential short-term objectives" on those programs.

It gets swallowed up by the future. I remember the term "groundbreaking" being used a lot with this show, but when was the last time anyone saw "Elephant Parts"?

Good idea for a blog, makes you wonder why other daily shows, such as Hardball and Scarborough Country, don't have current blogs run by interested, but not program-employed, bloggers.

On the other hand, I really can't see how anyone can think of Imus as "wildly popular". Or even "mildly intelligent".

Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?

He's so convinced that the United States HAS TO WIN IN IRAQ AS SEAN HANNITY DEFINES WINNING. So...

Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?

I'm sure there are plenty of other pasty doughy Republican apparatchiks that would love to make the kind of money that Hannity is making promoting Republican Party talking points. So...

Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?

If Sean Hannity really believes this country still needs to sacrifice further to win this war...

Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?
Why Can't Sean Hannity Go Fight in Iraq?

Most Un-American Newspaper Graphic This Year.

Whether you agree or disagree with the Iraq Study Commission's determinations, their efforts in public service don't deserve this scumbaggery from the New York Post.