Strollerderby : MTV

Morning News - GOP Calls Sotomayor Racist

Brett Singer — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:00:00 GMT

The Republican/Conservative Hive Mind Coalition has decided how to attack Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor. What is it? Drum roll, please... She's a racist! This comment from Rush Limbaugh is... well, you decide: "Limbaugh called the president 'the greatest living example of a reverse racist,' and said that he has picked another for the Supreme Court vacancy of retiring Justice David Souter. Limbaugh later equated Sotomayor to former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke." David Duke? Huh? The comment Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and Hive Mind members are clinging to is one that Sotomayor made at a Duke Law School symposium in 2001: "a wise Latina woman would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

I haven't read much about Judge Sotomayor, but I think the GOP Hive Mind is grasping at straws by clinging to one quote that she made. How difficult would it be to review cases that were before her while she served as a judge, and to talk about those? I've said plenty of things that I wouldn't want thrown back at me if I were up for an important post. (Supreme Court seems unlikely since I don't have a law degree, but maybe I could be the head of the Department of Video Games and Comic Books.) Also, as a white man who grew up in the Bronx and worked for two years at a job where there were many Latina women, I can honestly say that a great many of them reached better conclusions than I did. So there.

Speaking of the GOP, Mitt Romney seems to think he's still running for President. He's mad at President Obama for the way he's handling our foreign policy. (Grrr... Mitt is angry... Grrrr...) I love how it's OK for people to criticize the President when said President is a Democrat. Remember how we were all supposed to support President Bush because we were a nation at war? That attacking the Commander-in-Chief of the United States could be damaging to troop morale, and make us look bad in the eyes of foreign leaders? I guess that doesn't matter anymore.

One more political item -- Dick Cheney (aside: if my name were "Richard" I wouldn't use "Dick" as my nickname) admitted that there was "no link" between Saddam Hussein and the September 11th attacks. But he still thinks we did the right thing by marching into Iraq. He, too, took issue with President Obama's policies. I'm not 100% positive about this, but didn't various Bush administration officials and the Republican/Conservative Hive Mind spend a lot of time and energy telling the public that Saddam Hussein was, in fact, involved in the September 11th attacks? If so, what is Cheney saying now -- sorry, my bad?

On to less important matters. Susan Boyle checked into the hospital after losing "Britain's Got Talent." She is said to be "suffering from exhaustion," which I think officially makes her a real celebrity, since I have never heard of anyone other than a celebrity checking into a hospital because they were tired. (I know, that's reductionist, and an over-simplification, and probably other words that basically mean the same thing as those two. Bear with me, I'm exhausted.) The funny thing about Susan Boyle? She didn't "lose." She came in second. She was a complete unknown and now she's famous enough to check into a hospital for exhaustion without being laughed at. She will certainly have some sort of career in the entertainment business if she wants to. How is that "losing"? A year from now, let's see who has had a better career -- Susan Boyle or the dance troupe Diversity. My money's on Boyle.

OK, one more serious thing: a federal judge has ruled that "Guantanamo evidence must be made public." This is "the unclassified evidence that it says justifies the continued imprisonment of more than 100 Guantanamo Bay prisoners." So, you know. So there.

Here's a headline you don't like to see: "Federal Reserve puzzled by yield curve steepening." It's one thing if I'm puzzled by financial matters facing our nation. But the Federal Reserve? They shouldn't be puzzled. They should know stuff. Lots of stuff.

Finally, something silly and utterly unimportant. Kathy Griffin says that Eminem walking out of the MTV Movie Awards was "a stunt." What happened? Sasha Baron Cohen, aka Bruno, stuck his heinie in the rapper's face.

Here's what happened:

And here's what Kathy Griffin thinks of it:

See? Now you know everything you need to know to start your day. Enjoy!

Image: Latina.com

Dad Charges Daughter With Grand Theft Auto

Morning News - Mike Tyson's Daughter Injured

13 Year Old Alfie Definitely Not A Dad

UPDATE: Time Warner and Viacom Reach Agreement, SpongeBob Saved

Brett Singer — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 03:52:00 GMT

The war has ended, and we are all winners -- the kids can watch Dora, the grown-ups can watch Colbert. Technically, the kids can also watch Colbert, and the grown-ups can even watch Dora.

Viacom and Time Warner have reached an agreement, terms to be fleshed out later, that will keep the various channels on the air for Time Warner Cable subscribers, according to the New York Times. Perhaps they took Dora's advice to "stop and think" for a minute.

One interesting idea did come from this, however, via the comments below: pay-per-minute television. I like it. They'll never DO it, but I like it. It would probably greatly reduce TV viewing in most households. "Hey kids, there's a Spider-Man marathon on! 65 episodes in a row!" (That was this morning, actually.) If you add, "It'll only cost us a dollar a minute!" I might just pick up a book, y'know?

Anyway, for now, everyone can keep watching their favorite shows. And thank goodness -- isn't there a new "Hills" spinoff? (Note: if there is, I don't know what it's called because I don't watch that show. But somebody must.)

Original post follows below:

*-*-*-*

If you get your TV service from Time Warner Cable and your kids love them some SpongeBob and Dora The Explorer, you might want to stock up on DVDs.

Viacom wants an increase in the fee Time Warner pays to carry their channels, and Time Warner doesn't want to pay it. The deadline is midnight tonight. What channels are those? A partial list: Nickelodeon, MTV, VH-1, Comedy Central. So no Diego for the kiddies, and no Daily Show and Colbert Report for you. (Or for your kids, if they enjoy a humorous take on current events.)

Unsurprisingly, both sides think they are right. In a press release, Viacom says the following: " Ultimately…if Nickelodeon, COMEDY CENTRAL, MTV and the rest of our programming is discontinued - over less than a penny per day – we believe viewers will see this behavior by their cable company as outrageous." The fee increase Viacom is asking for is "about 25 cents a month, or $3 a year, per subscriber for its package of channels," according to the LA Times. Time Warner says its about Viacom trying to make up for decreased ad revenue: the LA Times quotes Time Warner Cable spokesman Alex Dudley as saying, "Advertising revenue stinks so they are looking to stick our customers for the difference. We have to hold the line for our customers. They are holding our customers hostage for a bunch of networks with sagging ratings and only one or two good channels."

Personally, I've felt for years that it should be possible to pick and choose which channels you actually want to receive. For example, Comedy Central, sure. But no one in my house watches Nickelodeon, so that one can go. Of course, that's not how it works. Oh well.

The thing is, while both sides may or may not have valid points in this matter, customers don't really care. It's not like Time Warner will offer refunds if they drop the Viacom channels from their lineup (although I suppose they might if it lasts long enough). But I think it you ask cable customers, the vast majority would say that they pay too much for their service. Take away channels that they actually want to watch, and that makes it even worse. It's two rich companies fighting with each other over more money, and while they fight, I don’t get to watch "The Hills." (Note: I don't actually watch "The Hills." That's just an example.)

Anyway, midnight tonight. If Viacom and Time Warner can't come to an agreement by then, bye-bye Dora and Jon Stewart. Let's see what happens.

Source: LATimes

Disney Bails on Narnia

Miss Piggy Wants a Bailout For Christmas

Best of FameCrawler: 9-12-08

Whit Honea — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 20:00:00 GMT

Creepiest Angelina Jolie Photos You'll Ever See

Jennifer Garner Smoking While Pregnant?!

Jillian Grace Naked Photos!!

Christina Aguilera VMA 2008: Video!

Sarah Palin: Now She's a Racist?

Matthew McConaughey is Quotable?

Jon Voight Loves McCain and Palin; Angelina Jolie, Not so Much

Robin Williams Does Sarah Palin on Letterman: Video!

Tina Fey Back to SNL for Palin Sketch? Awesome!

VMAs 2008 Britney Spears Wins Best Female Video

MTV's Super Sweet Sixteens Get Exiled

SunnyChanel — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:39:00 GMT

I have a confession. I love to watch MTV’s My Super Sweet Sixteen. The manipulation! The entitlement! The inappropriately slutty dresses! It’s like watching a teen angst train wreck and a great guide for parents about how not to raise spoiled princesses whose demands far surpass a Bridezilla on her wedding day. But things are about to change for these teens. Premiering tonight, MTV takes eight past Sweet 16ers like Chelsi, Meleny and Bjorn and makes them open wide for “a serious dose of reality”.

“Fed up with their seemingly endless mooching, their parents have had enough of this Sweet 16 set and are ready to send them away to learn the lesson of a lifetime. They've arranged to place their children in remote parts of the world with host families who have never tasted anything close to the high society life.”

MTV ships off these privileged self-proclaiming princesses (and one prince) and sends them to such exotic locales as “the jungles of the Amazon, the tundra of the Arctic Circle, the Andes Mountains and remote islands in the South Pacific”. Yeah, don’t think they’ll be able to shop till they drop in the outskirts of Kenya and cell phone reception? Forgetaboutit.

If you have questionable tastes in television like I do, check it out tonight at 10:30 ET/PT on MTV and you can check out more of the show here.

Southern Belles Struggle to Objectify Themselves

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:36:00 GMT

Thanks to the Internet, I have no reason to buy a TV. All the fun stuff that makes me embarrassed to be a member of the human race winds up on Jezebel.com eventually. Most recently, Jezebel brought my attention to an eye-opening MTV “documentary” about Southern Belles. Following the lives of three young women who see themselves as valiantly struggling to uphold a dying tradition, we learn that tried-and-true Southern gals never ask boys on dates, but are old maids if they’re not married by the time they’re 24.

I also learned, from 24-year-old Leigh Ann’s failure of a romantic life, a few tips to avoid ending up a crazy cat lady, which is Leigh Ann’s professed greatest fear in life. For starters, do not say things on the first date like, “I’ll probably never get engaged at the rate I’m going.” And do not have five or six cats that you dress up in neon bonnets. I've got nothing against crazy cat ladies or kitties in drag—I'm just saying, if being a crazy cat lady is your biggest fear in life, acting like a crazy cat lady might not be the best way to go.

MTV did seek out one rogue Belle, who is not planning to get married till she’s way over the hill. She put it best: “I, like, want to get married after I’m 30—what every other girl would consider their worst nightmare!”

Oh, and in case you were wondering who started that annoying hole in the ozone, it was 18-year-old Raini, who has teased her hair “365 days a year” ever since she was a little girl—because that is the only surefire way to one up all of your girlfriends so that you can land a husband before they do! As you can see from the clips on mtv.com, the proper teasing procedure requires at least half an aerosol bottle of hairspray. I felt light-headed just watching it. Enjoy!

Photo: mtv.com

Study: Teens Like Friends

Amy Kuras — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:05:00 GMT

Kids today...with their MySpace and their texting and their fancy cell phones. Turns out that while the methods they use to connect have changed, teens and young adults today still place a high value on relationships.

A survey of more than 2400 12-to-24-year-olds released earlier this year by Social Techologies and MTV found that 85 percent of them said that relationships with friends make them happy, while only 73 percent said the same about relationships with romantic partners.

Surprisingly, parents rank pretty high up there too.

Almost three quarters of the youth surveyed said their relationships with their parents made them happy, while only 42 percent said their parents "stress them out a little." Half mentioned at least one of their parents as a hero. But only 30 percent said they felt their parents gave them the right amount of attention -- but whether they wanted less or more, the survey didn't say.

Young people also didn't draw much distinction between friendships made online and friendships made in the real world, and most said using the Internet made them happier.

Inertesting though this insight into the mind of youth is -- has there ever been a generation of teens that didn't value their friends, latch onto the technoloogy of the time and secretly kind of didn't mind their parents?

The whole survey can be found here: http://www.socialtechnologies.com/MTV.aspx