HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » liberal N proud » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 75 Next »

liberal N proud

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Sun Aug 8, 2004, 01:54 PM
Number of posts: 49,674

Journal Archives

Just got polled by the Washington Post

All political.

Is the economy going in the right direction?
Posted by liberal N proud | Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:27 PM (8 replies)

Since it is Talk Like a Pirate Day, I thought we should bring up the biggest pirate of them all

Posted by liberal N proud | Wed Sep 19, 2012, 07:35 AM (3 replies)

Songwriter Randy Newman making waves with new song "I'm Dreaming" ... of a white president.

I need to start this out with the claim from the site where I found the song:
I thought putting the word "sarcasm" in the headline would be a tip-off, but those of you calling Newman a "racist" are missing the point. He is making fun of racists, as a number of other comments have pointed out. You can disagree with his point of view, but he is not advocating racism. Exactly the opposite.


Remember it is supposed to be sarcasm.

Posted by liberal N proud | Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:41 AM (4 replies)

Maybe the republicans would do better if they tried to make everyone more wealthy!

They keep knocking people down and expect them to vote for them anyway.

The party of the rich would do better if it were lifting everyone and not just the rich.
Posted by liberal N proud | Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:58 AM (2 replies)

Talk like a pirate day arrrgh

Posted by liberal N proud | Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:54 AM (4 replies)

Mitt Romney's Responsibility Map - you decide what 47% don't matter.

Posted by liberal N proud | Tue Sep 18, 2012, 04:05 PM (2 replies)

Newsmakers Trade Access For Quotation Approval

In the wake of the new Romney video here is some discouraging news:

Renee Montagne talks to David Carr, the media and culture columnist for The New York Times, about the trend toward journalists agreeing to quotation approval as a condition of access. Carr says he doesn't think the people who are making history should be allowed to rewrite it


This past week, we spoke to writer Michael Lewis about his piece in the current issue of Vanity Fair about President Obama. We were not aware at the time that Lewis had agreed to have the White House approve the president's quotes prior to publication, part of the deal that allowed him extraordinary access to the president. The revelation that Lewis had agreed to quote approval to the White House fed into an ongoing media controversy about the practice, once verboten in journalism, but now many politicians and corporate leaders are now requiring quote approval before they'll agree to be interviewed.

David Carr had written about this in his latest column for The New York Times, and he joined us to talk about it.

Good morning.

DAVID CARR: Good morning.

MONTAGNE: Remind people about the old rules, that someone you interviewed didn't have any sway over what you wrote.

CARR: Historically, journalism is built on a transaction, calling a source and you ask them a question, they answer it, you write it down as carefully as you can and should it be useful you stick it in the newspaper or on the radio broadcast and that's the end of that.

Now, frequently - and I don't know if it came from Hollywood or politics first - but the rules of engagement have changed, where people say, yes, I'll speak freely to you, but if you're going to use anything, just run it by me. That sounds so friendly, but it's not.

Most often what ends up being in conflict is not that they misspoke, but that they accidentally spoke the truth and they don't want to get caught out. And so they ask for we just want to round the edges a little bit and before you know it they'd completely changed the meaning of what was said.


But then, in todays world, how can you make such demands of those who are reporting your daily activities? Everything is recorded.

Posted by liberal N proud | Tue Sep 18, 2012, 03:28 PM (1 replies)

Airlines charging 'you-get-to-sit-with-your-kid' fee

John Parish is giving his 5-year-old daughter the birthday present every child dreams of: a trip to Disney World. But he's afraid American Airlines has booked a travel nightmare for his family and other fliers. There's only one way out of the nightmare, he was told: Pay an additional fee, months after booking the trip.

Parish bought his tickets months ago, in March, and scored three seats together on a flight from Dallas to Orlando, Fla., for his wife, Amanda, and daughter, Megan. Then, in July, bad news arrived. American Airlines had changed the flight schedule for the return trip, and it had changed the plane, too. It was a bigger plane, but no longer could the family sit together. In fact, Megan had been moved onto the other side of the plane, rows away.

There were three seats together, an American customer service agent told him. But the only way he could get them was to pay $60 in extra fees for what was now considered premium seating. Parish was outraged. But a discussion with a supervisor got him nowhere.

"What bothers me about this situation is that they are trying to charge me for something I already had paid for because they changed flight schedules," he said. "I know it's only $60, but this is a little extreme. ... It's not fair when it is literally their fault because they are changing their schedule, but they put the onus of the cost and change on the consumer."

Amanda Parish said the family had booked the trip a full seven months in advance specifically to ensure that they'd all be able to sit together.


I would be telling them that they should be paying me to sit with my kid, because God knows know one else wants to. I would make sure the airlines knew that I was going to give that kid some really messy things to do while on the flight. They would be moving heaven and earth to get that kid back next to me when I was done with them. Two can play this game of chicken.

Posted by liberal N proud | Tue Sep 18, 2012, 07:10 AM (149 replies)

Chuck Todd trying to spin this...

talking about a "similar incident" then Senator Obama had in his first campaign.


Chucky starts in on Obama about 3:10 into the clip.

Posted by liberal N proud | Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:48 PM (18 replies)

Yes we are victims

Victims of the war on the middle class
Victims of the war on women
Victims of the financial ruin we have faced at the hands of the "job creators"

We are victims of the things that the rich greedy bastards have done to this world. They have done it for gain and to keep the rest of us from getting ahead.

Posted by liberal N proud | Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:46 PM (0 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 75 Next »