This entry was posted on December 30, 2010 at 8:11 am and is filed under Free For All . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Old Haley’s in the news again; this is an odd ethical question.
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour suspended [two] sisters’ life sentences on Wednesday, but 36-year-old Gladys Scott’s release is contingent on her giving a kidney to Jamie, her 38-year-old sister, who requires daily dialysis.
Reportedly, Gladys was willing to donate the kidney before the suspension. But can the government require such an act?
Picking up trash? Yeah. Working in a homeless shelter? Yes. But a body organ?
And if the government can bargain for a kidney, why can’t private citizens?
^ Yeah, that’s a weird story. The gist of the move to get them out is that they were busted for stealing a meager amount of money, and the need for a transplant is secondary to the original injustice of the life sentences. I’m not sure about the legality of “requiring” a procedure the women have already planned, but me thinks Barbour is using it as a face-saver against conservative “crime & punishment” hawks.
Ok, let me see if I’ve got this. Christine says she paid her campaign to use her house as a campaign office. If I’m following the logic (not likely), she’s saying she paid the rent for her campaign office, which is also her house. Ok, assuming that makes a lick of sense, where did the perrenially unemployed career candidate get the money for the rent? On her home. That was a campaign headquarters. Or something.
The way I heard her explain it, it was the other way around. The campaign rented an office, and she paid the campaign rent money to use it as her temporary home. No I don’t know where she got the money from, but then, how often do we grill candidates about where they get their rent money from?
Mickey Kaus has a interesting post on the buzzword (buzzphrase?) of the near future: income inequality.
As he points out, the concern about income inequality isn’t (or shouldn’t be) that incomes are widely disparate. It should be that the conditions for the low income earners are bad.
Who cares if we have wide income disparity if the bottom quintile have good lives? After all, the problem with income gaps in Brazil or in Latin America isn’t the gap itself: it’s the awful barrios and conditions that the poor live in.
Kaus also argues (I’m not convinced) that if we wish to raise the lower income groups (instead of dragging down the high) that a good approach would be to tighten immigration controls since they, especially illegals, drive down the costs of labor.
^ You’ve got Dan Abrams and Tommy Christopher on the run. There’s about 30 vile right-wing commentors over there who will be thrilled. Slow news day indeed.
Has anyone noticed Harris Faulkner, who is subbing for Shepard Smith this week, and her attire for her news reports? She looks like she is a cocktail waitress rather than a news reporter. Even MSNBC wouldn’t let their hosts on air with all that cleavage. She tries too hard.
Refudiate. This is so dumb. The smart thing to have done was to own it, which she seemed to at first. Could she believe that anyone, let alone the ‘MSM’ would do anything but roast her for this?
Uhh..you mean people like me that caught and reported it immediately after the show last Sunday? I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was a heavily staged piece of revisionism inserted at the beginning of a show that was probably taped months earlier.
I didn’t realize she said ‘d’, which makes even less sense, but accidentally hitting ‘p’ instead of ‘f’ is laughable enough. It was a harmless combining of words like when people say “flustrated” for “flustered” and “frustrated”. As Laura says, she had already covered it and moved on. The “new version” was thin-skinned and silly.
claudiva, I haven’t watched the Fox Report this week, but I agree about the way these women dress! Come on; they are supposed to be presenting serious news stories, yet they dress as if they’re going to a summer picnic (in the middle of winter) or to some cocktail party, as you state.
WTH?
I rarely watch the other networks at this time, so I don’t know whether the anchors/readers at CNN or MSNBC do the same. But it is sure apparent at FNC, and is annoying (although maybe the men viewers like this attire). I do not, and think these women demean themselves by wearing such things.
We’ll support an investigation into Christine O’Donnell’s campaign finance issues when Charlie Rangel’s fat, gelatinous lard@$$ is in prison. In an extra dollop of gall, he is now panhandling for donations to pay his legal bills.
In between ineptly running for office, O’Donnell has done some sort of marketing/publicity work for various rightwing organizations, and got paid for her work. That is how she paid her rent.
claudiva, I haven’t watched the Fox Report this week, but I agree about the way these women dress! Come on; they are supposed to be presenting serious news stories, yet they dress as if they’re going to a summer picnic (in the middle of winter) or to some cocktail party, as you state.
Cocktail party? Summer picnic? That’s better than certain ones who look like they’ve just come in to work, after dancing on the night shift at Scores or trying to pick up clients outside the Lincoln Tunnel.
December 30, 2010 at 8:55 am
Yes Christine, it’s all them evil liberals out to stop a Juggernaut Of Truth that lost by 17 points.
The only job the woman has had for years is “political candidate”. The rent’s too damn high, and somebody had to pay it..
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/christine-odonnell-calls-campaign-probe-thug-tactic-predicts-more-to-come/
December 30, 2010 at 10:49 am
Old Haley’s in the news again; this is an odd ethical question.
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour suspended [two] sisters’ life sentences on Wednesday, but 36-year-old Gladys Scott’s release is contingent on her giving a kidney to Jamie, her 38-year-old sister, who requires daily dialysis.
Reportedly, Gladys was willing to donate the kidney before the suspension. But can the government require such an act?
Picking up trash? Yeah. Working in a homeless shelter? Yes. But a body organ?
And if the government can bargain for a kidney, why can’t private citizens?
This is a real head scratcher.
December 30, 2010 at 10:58 am
^ Yeah, that’s a weird story. The gist of the move to get them out is that they were busted for stealing a meager amount of money, and the need for a transplant is secondary to the original injustice of the life sentences. I’m not sure about the legality of “requiring” a procedure the women have already planned, but me thinks Barbour is using it as a face-saver against conservative “crime & punishment” hawks.
December 30, 2010 at 11:04 am
What if she’s pardoned (the penalty is being suspended) and then refuses to give/donate the kidney?
If the police come does she hold a guy to her back? “You’ll never get my kidney alive, coppers!!”
December 30, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Ok, let me see if I’ve got this. Christine says she paid her campaign to use her house as a campaign office. If I’m following the logic (not likely), she’s saying she paid the rent for her campaign office, which is also her house. Ok, assuming that makes a lick of sense, where did the perrenially unemployed career candidate get the money for the rent? On her home. That was a campaign headquarters. Or something.
December 30, 2010 at 12:16 pm
The way I heard her explain it, it was the other way around. The campaign rented an office, and she paid the campaign rent money to use it as her temporary home. No I don’t know where she got the money from, but then, how often do we grill candidates about where they get their rent money from?
December 30, 2010 at 12:21 pm
No I don’t know where she got the money from, but then, how often do we grill candidates about where they get their rent money from?
I guess when former staffers start complaining that campaign cash is supporting the candidate’s lifestyle instead of paying staff..
December 30, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Well…
Don’t worry, I’ll think of something clever.
December 30, 2010 at 12:46 pm
No worries J$. I still wouldn’t vote for her..but I still think she’s adorable.
December 30, 2010 at 1:01 pm
Adorable like when a little kid puts on grownup clothes and tries to use big words.
December 30, 2010 at 1:17 pm
Mickey Kaus has a interesting post on the buzzword (buzzphrase?) of the near future: income inequality.
As he points out, the concern about income inequality isn’t (or shouldn’t be) that incomes are widely disparate. It should be that the conditions for the low income earners are bad.
Who cares if we have wide income disparity if the bottom quintile have good lives? After all, the problem with income gaps in Brazil or in Latin America isn’t the gap itself: it’s the awful barrios and conditions that the poor live in.
Kaus also argues (I’m not convinced) that if we wish to raise the lower income groups (instead of dragging down the high) that a good approach would be to tighten immigration controls since they, especially illegals, drive down the costs of labor.
The rest here: No New Brazil.
December 30, 2010 at 4:37 pm
A Cable News Late Night Commercial Resolution For 2011:
No more dancing in weight-loss ads. STOP THE MADNESS!
December 30, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Must be a slow day…I’m engaged in an anchor wardrobe discussion fight on Twitter.
December 30, 2010 at 6:26 pm
^ You’ve got Dan Abrams and Tommy Christopher on the run. There’s about 30 vile right-wing commentors over there who will be thrilled. Slow news day indeed.
December 30, 2010 at 7:13 pm
^ That’s missing a
or something. Sounds more ‘real’ than I intended. Carry on.
December 30, 2010 at 9:21 pm
Has anyone noticed Harris Faulkner, who is subbing for Shepard Smith this week, and her attire for her news reports? She looks like she is a cocktail waitress rather than a news reporter. Even MSNBC wouldn’t let their hosts on air with all that cleavage. She tries too hard.
December 31, 2010 at 12:56 am
Refudiate. This is so dumb. The smart thing to have done was to own it, which she seemed to at first. Could she believe that anyone, let alone the ‘MSM’ would do anything but roast her for this?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/refudiate-was-a-typo-political-revisionism-2010/?partner=rss&emc=rss
December 31, 2010 at 1:19 am
Could she believe that anyone,
Uhh..you mean people like me that caught and reported it immediately after the show last Sunday? I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was a heavily staged piece of revisionism inserted at the beginning of a show that was probably taped months earlier.
I didn’t realize she said ‘d’, which makes even less sense, but accidentally hitting ‘p’ instead of ‘f’ is laughable enough. It was a harmless combining of words like when people say “flustrated” for “flustered” and “frustrated”. As Laura says, she had already covered it and moved on. The “new version” was thin-skinned and silly.
December 31, 2010 at 1:20 am
‘f’ instead of ‘p’. Oy, it’s late..
December 31, 2010 at 8:17 am
claudiva, I haven’t watched the Fox Report this week, but I agree about the way these women dress! Come on; they are supposed to be presenting serious news stories, yet they dress as if they’re going to a summer picnic (in the middle of winter) or to some cocktail party, as you state.
WTH?
I rarely watch the other networks at this time, so I don’t know whether the anchors/readers at CNN or MSNBC do the same. But it is sure apparent at FNC, and is annoying (although maybe the men viewers like this attire). I do not, and think these women demean themselves by wearing such things.
December 31, 2010 at 8:27 am
We’ll support an investigation into Christine O’Donnell’s campaign finance issues when Charlie Rangel’s fat, gelatinous lard@$$ is in prison. In an extra dollop of gall, he is now panhandling for donations to pay his legal bills.
In between ineptly running for office, O’Donnell has done some sort of marketing/publicity work for various rightwing organizations, and got paid for her work. That is how she paid her rent.
December 31, 2010 at 8:30 am
claudiva, I haven’t watched the Fox Report this week, but I agree about the way these women dress! Come on; they are supposed to be presenting serious news stories, yet they dress as if they’re going to a summer picnic (in the middle of winter) or to some cocktail party, as you state.
Cocktail party? Summer picnic? That’s better than certain ones who look like they’ve just come in to work, after dancing on the night shift at Scores or trying to pick up clients outside the Lincoln Tunnel.