Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (423523)	10/7/2008 5:42:22 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571935

Minnesotans are going to love this one.....Franken may win his election yet. The Senator's New Clothes By Kate Klonick - October 7, 2008, 3:51PM Does Senator Norm Coleman pay for any of his personal expenses? In what is becoming a clear pattern, reports show that his political contributors have paid for an array of Coleman's basic expenses, including his rent, his utility bills, his trips to the Bahamas, and -- in the latest revelation -- even his clothes. From Harper's: I've been told by two sources that [local businessman and political contributor Nasser] Kazeminy has in the past covered the bills for Coleman's lavish clothing purchases at Nieman Marcus in Minneapolis. The sources were not certain of the dates of the purchases; if they were made before Coleman joined the Senate in 2003, he obviously would not be required to report it under senate rules. But having a private businessman pay for your clothing is never a good idea if you're a public official (Coleman was mayor of St. Paul from 1994 to 2002). Oddly, the Coleman camp didn't issue a denial to Harper's inquiries, stating only, "[a]s required, any gift Norm Coleman has received from his friends has been fully reported." Late update: Coleman gave a slightly more heated denial to the Kazeminy clothing question to a Pioneer Press reporter, who caught the incumbent senator as he was heading out of a cafe in Fergus Falls, MN: "First of all, every gift I've ever received has been reported, ok. But the idea of responding to the things bloggers throw out is something I'm not going to get into. There are very awful things that are said about people on the blogs," he said. [Reporter Dave] Orrick then asked for a simple yes or no answer on the suit question. "That's the answer, period. You can read it in the answer," he said. tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com

To: Road Walker who wrote (423523)	10/7/2008 5:52:20 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1571935

Boss Is Not Amused After Columnist’s Humor Brings a Retort From Fox News By IAN AUSTEN Published: October 5, 2008 Heather Mallick, an opinion columnist for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s Web site, is known for her use of humorous exaggeration. But last week after removing a column by Ms. Mallick, which said that Gov. Sarah Palin has “a toned-down version of the porn actress look” and suggested that Republican men were sexually inadequate, the government-owned CBC ruled that its opinion writers had to stick to the facts even when they were joking around. Although the broadcaster’s Web site, www.cbcnews.ca, has relatively few readers in the United States, Ms. Mallick’s comments became an issue last month on the Fox News Channel, which, because of Canadian cable TV rules that limit its distribution, has relatively few viewers in Canada. Greta Van Susteren, the host of “On the Record,” condemned the column as “beyond vicious” and repeatedly referred to Ms. Mallick as “a pig.” A right-of-center columnist for The National Post, of Toronto, also criticized the column. The CBC ombudsman, Vince Carlin, said in a report that his office had received more than 300 complaints about the column. In an e-mail message, Ms. Mallick said she believed that the complaints had been “orchestrated” by Fox News and came largely from Americans. “My problem is that I have to write with a certain kind of reader in mind, and that person is always going to be my vision of an intelligent Canadian,” Ms. Mallick said. “I don’t write for Fox viewers.” In his report, Mr. Carlin said that after the column had been mentioned in at least three Fox News broadcasts, his office and Ms. Mallick had “received an alarming number of truly vicious and vituperative messages.” Mr. Carlin said that parts of the column broke internal CBC News guidelines requiring that “even in a work of opinion, facts should be respected and arguments should reasonably flow from these facts.” Ms. Mallick, Mr. Carlin wrote, was unable to present evidence to support her suggestion that that Republican men were deficient sexually or that Ms. Palin’s supporters were “white trash.” After receiving Mr. Carlin’s report, John Cruickshank, the publisher of CBC News, removed Ms. Mallick’s column from the network’s Web site (it is still available at www.heathermallick.ca) and promised in an online posting to improve the editing of opinion items. Both Mr. Cruickshank and Mr. Carlin said that the column would have worked if it had been labeled as satire, but Ms. Mallick disagreed. “It wasn’t satire though; it was straightforward political commentary, admittedly with jokes,” she said by e-mail. “I had no idea anyone would take the remark about sexually inadequate Republican men literally!” IAN AUSTEN nytimes.com

To: Road Walker who wrote (423523)	10/7/2008 6:21:23 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571935

JF, I do agree that we need better regulation. But that's wasn't my original point. Obama and Biden have done a terrific job painting with a broad brush and blaming deregulation in general for this mess. That's not the truth, but it's good enough for "Joe Sixpack and hockey moms" (tm Palin). McCain for the most part has been forced onto the defense, having to answer for his changing views on regulation and deregulation. Meanwhile, it astounds me that only the minority party in Congress is going to take the fall for this. I don't care if the majority party has only been the majority for two years. That's two years they wasted doing nothing but blame the other side for all of the nation's troubles. Not only that, but the public seems willing to write a blank check to a Congress that has lower approval ratings than Bush. Now how's that for insanity? That's why I think McCain has to turn the tables on Obama with regard to the financial crisis. McCain has little to lose anyway, so why shouldn't he fight fire with fire? Point out every instance of a congressional representative opposing reform and accepting the status quo for their own electability. Maxine Waters is an obvious target, but what about Raines and even Dodd himself? But hey, maybe McCain has more to lose than I thought, which is why he's too afraid of burning the bridges to his colleagues in the Senate? Tenchusatsu