Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
PEEK
Dispatches from the Real Economy: They're Locking Up the Deodorant
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein, Majikthise on November 27, 2009 at 5:48 PM.
The drugstore has locked down the deodorant.
Addendum: You can tell a lot about a neighborhood by what gets locked up to prevent shoplifting. Here in New York, supermarkets in poorer neighborhoods tend to put baby formula behind glass. Swankier places will keep it behind the counter at the pharmacy, or sometimes even out on the shelf.
Yuppie liquor stores keep all but their most expensive bottles out on the shelves to encourage customers to facilitate impulse buys. By contrast, liquor stores in rougher neighborhoods may keep the bulk of their inventory behind plexiglass. Liquor stores are an extreme example because they've got to worry about robberies as well as shoplifting, but it's the same merchandising principle at work. It's a tradeoff between accessibility and security.
Small, expensive items like razor blades and batteries are likely to be secured no matter where you go. But it's a bad sign that deodorant shoplifting has become enough of a problem to justify the expense of the giant plastic case and extra hassle for the employees.
Where Does Karl Rove Find the Nerve to Criticize Anyone About Deficits?
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 27, 2009 at 4:29 PM.
When Karl Rove helped run the White House, he accepted certain beliefs as truths. He believed, for example, turning massive surpluses into massive deficits was entirely reasonable. He believed reckless tax cuts for the already rich were an example of responsible governing. He believed expanding the size of government, adding to entitlements, increasing the federal role in education, and putting it all on future generations' tab, was perfectly sensible. He believed fiscal responsibility was a punch-line.
And now that Karl Rove is outside the White House, he believes he's entitled to complain about deficits from his perch in the media establishment.
What seems to concern the president is not the problem runaway spending poses for taxpayers and the economy. Rather, what bothers him is the political problem it poses for Democrats.
Last year, Mr. Obama made fiscal restraint a constant theme of his presidential campaign. "Washington will have to tighten its belt and put off spending," he said back then, while pledging to "go through the federal budget, line by line, ending programs that we don't need." Voters found this fiscal conservatism reassuring.
However, since taking office Mr. Obama pushed through a $787 billion stimulus, a $33 billion expansion of the child health program known as S-chip, a $410 billion omnibus appropriations spending bill, and an $80 billion car company bailout. He also pushed a $821 billion cap-and-trade bill through the House and is now urging Congress to pass a nearly $1 trillion health-care bill.
Rove wants to see an "honest appraisal" of where we are. Good idea. The stimulus was necessary because Rove's old boss left the president an economy on the verge of wholesale collapse. S-CHIP expansion was necessary because Rove's old boss rejected a bipartisan measure to help low-income children go to the doctor. Rescuing the auto industry was necessary because it was a continuation of Rove's old boss' policy and the nation couldn't afford to cut off American manufacturing at the knees at the height of the recession. Cap and trade, Rove neglected to mention, wouldn't add to the deficit, and is necessary because Rove's old boss ignored the climate crisis for eight years. The health care reform bill would cut the deficit significantly, and is necessary because Rove's old boss fiddled while the dysfunctional health care system got worse.
That's an "honest appraisal."
Read the rest of the post on the flip side »
Why the GOP Will Face an Uphill Battle Making Large Gains in 2010
Posted by Kos , Daily Kos on November 27, 2009 at 3:01 PM.
Massive Democratic gains in 2006 and 2008 were fueled in part by Democratic advantages in committee fundraising. While Bush's RNC handily outraised its Democratic counterparts at the DNC, both the Democratic House and Senate committees crushed their Republican counterparts. Not much has changed.
Fundraising for Democratic campaign committees is surging, helping the party to extend a winning streak in competitive special elections and giving House Democrats a more than 3-to-1 advantage over Republicans in cash stockpiled for the battles ahead, campaign-finance reports show.
The Democratic National Committee, along with the fundraising arm for House Democrats, outraised Republican committees last month. Overall, all Democratic committees ended October with nearly $38.8 million cash on hand, compared with $21.3 million for Republicans.
Here's the breakdowns ...
Read the rest of the post on the flip side »
Court Bars Couple from Having "Unnatural," "Hysterical," "Howling" Sex
Posted by Booman, Booman Tribune on November 27, 2009 at 1:57 PM.
Here's something straight out of Porky's:
A British woman lost her appeal Tuesday against a ban on her noisy sex sessions, after a court heard how her marathon romps that kept neighbours awake sounded like someone being murdered.Caroline and Steve Cartwright's "howling" lovemaking sounded "unnatural", "hysterical" and "like they are both in considerable pain", Newcastle Crown Court in northeast England heard.
A 10-minute recording of their sex sessions was played out in court, which also heard how she tried covering her face with a pillow to muffle her cries of passion.
Neighbours at their home in Washington, south of Newcastle, complained about the noise -- as did passers-by and the postman.
The couple were banned from "shouting, screaming or vocalisation at such a level as to be a statutory nuisance", but Caroline Cartwright, 48, appealed under human rights laws against her conviction for breaching the ban.
However, a judge on Tuesday upheld the original conviction and ordered that the banning order should stay.
Caroline Cartwright said she was unable to stop the din. "I tried to control it. I even tried to use a pillow (over her own face) to try and lessen the noise," she said.
The judge, Recorder Jeremy Freedman, rejected her claim.
The friggin' postman complained? That is some serious noise. Imagine having people play the sounds of your lovemaking in court. That must have been quite a scene. But at least it only lasted ten minutes. Thank god for small favors, I guess. I had some experience with loud dorm-mates in college, but nothing that could compare with this.
Strip-Club Owner Opens Dog Shelter Named After Newt Gingrich
Posted by Ben Armbruster, Think Progress on November 27, 2009 at 12:02 PM.
Last September, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich retracted an “Entrepreneur of the Year” award he accidentally presented to Dallas strip club owner Dawn Rizos and refunded the $5,000 donation Rizos made to Gingrich’s American Solutions for Winning the Future. At the time, Rizos said she would take the money to build a shelter for unwanted pit bulls. The Dallas Morning News reported yesterday that “Newt’s Nook: A Home For Pit Bulls” is now open:
A North Texas shelter for pit bulls has opened this week, thanks to a Dallas topless club owner’s contribution after Newt Gingrich’s conservative group snubbed her donation. [...]
Rizos says she decided to “make something positive out of his bad manners.”
She redirected the money to Animal Guardians of America’s sanctuary for rescued dogs in Celina, about 35 miles north of Dallas.
Gingrich didn’t attend the opening of “Newt’s Nook — A Home for Pit Bulls.”
Wingnuts Cite Lunatic Message Board Commenters as Authorities on Climate Science
Posted by Thers, Whiskey Fire on November 27, 2009 at 10:30 AM.
NewsBusters has always been a stupid fucking website, if rather pedestrian in its wingnuttery. But this breaks new ground:
An hilariously bizarre situation is happening in the wake of the growing Climategate scandal. Many of the mainstream media stories about global warming are simply pretending it doesn't exist. Perhaps they feel that by ignoring Climategate entirely that it will just go away. Unfortunately for them, the readers of these global warming stories keep bringing up the inconvenient truth of Climategate by mentioning the scandal in the comments section over and over and over again.
This is inverse nutpicking, or the inane tactic of citing lunatic shitheads in comments sections in order to destroy cedibility. NewsBusters is now pioneering the inane tactic of citing lunatic shitheads in comments sections in order to claim credibility.
There should be a clever name for this innovation, I guess, but really they're just being shitheads.
State Dinner Crashers: Reality Show Dupes Secret Service?
Posted by Adele Stan, AlterNet on November 27, 2009 at 8:41 AM.
On the one hand, you've gotta admire the moxie of Michaele and Tareq Salahi, publicity seekers who crashed Tuesday's state dinner, thrown by the Obama's in honor of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Trailed by cameras for Bravo's Real Housewives reality show, the couple found their way into the great fete, despite their lack of an invitation -- and even got their picture taken with Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. On the other hand, when you consider the fact that threats on the life of President Barack Obama, as AlterNet's Don Hazen reported, are 400 percent higher than those faced by George W. Bush, the episode raises serious questions about the quality of the president's Secret Service protection.
In September, AlterNet was prompted by reports of under-resourcing of the Secret Service to sent a petition signed by readers to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, requesting that Secret Service funding cutbacks not be allowed to endanger the safety of the president.
For White House events, the Secret Service not only provides the sort of bodyguard protection we're accustomed to seeing around the president, but also screens the visitors, who are usually required to provide personal information, such as date of birth and Social Security number, days ahead of the visit. The Salahis weren't on the White House guest list, and their vehicle was turned away before it got to the drop-off point. With cameras trailing, the Salahis simply hopped out and found their way into the line of guests, who went through a series of subsequent checkpoints. The Secret Service has acknowledged that the Salahis' passage through the first pedestrian check-point indicates a failure to follow procedure by the agents at that check point. No kidding.
More galling than that, though, is the fact that the Secret Service is trying to downplay the incident based on the fact that no one was hurt. "It's important to note that they went through all the security screenings -- the magnetometer screening -- just like all the other guests did," Secret Service spokesperson Ed Donovan told USA Today. But, as Ronald Kessler, author of a book on the Secret Service told the New York Daily News, "They could have assassinated the President or vice president using other means -- anthrax, for example." The Secret Service does not check for bioweapons, Kessler told the News.
Read the rest of the post on the flip side »