Best Super Bowl Ads

Well, that Tracy Porter interception pretty much clinched it. So now it's time to rate some of the Super Bowl ads. A pre-game advertising roundup is at AdAge, "Who's Buying What in the Super Bowl 2010."

I especially liked the FLO-TV spot, with a remix of The Who's "My Generation." Seemed to strike the right tone, with the band doing an awesome halftime show:

You can vote for your favorites here, although not all the sponsors submitted spots.

Tebow Super Bowl Advertisements

Here they are. Can't imagine all the fuss from the left over this (actually, come to think of it, that's not true):

But see the Blog Prof, "More on Tim Tebow Super Bowl Commerical Derangement Syndrome (SBCDS)."

Cases in Palin Derangment: High School Crib Notes Edition

This is the leftists rage of the day, so, what the heck, I'm gonna throw old Sully a link, and in turn I'll get linked at Memeorandum:

I was too busy tapping away at my laptop to notice this little high-school trick. Having mocked president Obama for using a TelePrompter - not long after he made mincemeat of Republicans with no such TelePrompter at their retreat - she had to scribble down her priorities as president on her palm for the truly tough-as-nails Q and A she had to endure for ten minutes or so last night.

Written on her hand:

"Energy"

"Budget [crossed out] (Cuts)"

"Tax"

"Lift American spirits"

My favorite detail is "[Budget] Cuts". Which just about sums up the real Tea Party agenda on spending. But it also suggests that she was told in advance of the questions she would be asked, one of which was what would be you priorities if you were elected president? Now think about this: she had to write on her hand her priorities as president.

I stand by my belief that none of this matters to the people who support her, and that she remains a very potent, content-free and destructive force in American politics.

There's more where that came from, but you get the idea. And with that, we're having a whole new era of Palin Derangment Syndrome.

And here's a test: How many readers have NEVER written crib notes on their hand? Perhaps a few. Now, how many have pronounced "corpsman" as "corpse-man" in a nationally televised broadcast? I see. None. And with that, the trophy for ultimate stupidity goes to TOTUS.

And of course, the lefties didn't get too riled up about that.

You Must Be RINO If You Don't Advocate Shooting Illegal Immigrants on Sight!

Geez, I've forgotten how totally whacked old Texas Fred can be. Check out his entry, "Is Sarah Palin a TRUE Conservative?":

I may lose a few readers and fans over what I am about to say, but that’s the breaks.

I am NOT a fan of Sarah Palin. I have long said so. I believe that if Sarah Palin is the BEST the RNC can offer up, we are is some seriously deep poop. I said it when she was running with McCain on the GOP ticket and I say it now as she once again supports McCain. I have made it a topic in more than a few posts on this blog and I have yet to see anything to convince me otherwise.

Supporting John McCain now is just further proof that Palin is NOT a Conservative!

John McCain is a used up RINO. He is a wild card. You never know what McCain is going to do or who he’s going to side with. If Palin supporting him doesn’t open your eyes to the the lack of Conservatism that Sarah Palin possesses, I don’t guess anything will.

I don’t know about you, but to my way of thinking, if someone supports, and campaigns for a RINO, and make NO mistake about it, John McCain IS a RINO, that tends to make me believe that this individual supporter is quite likely a RINO too.

The Democrat party is now openly socialist while today’s Republican party is the Democrat party of 20 years ago. The results of these leftist shifts are plainly seen today with obscene deficits, a huge and growing federal government, misguided foreign policy and rising taxes on an already over-taxed working family. Conservatives have had enough! SOURCE

I could not have said it any better myself ....

There are many in the GOP that are convinced that we have to accept whatever the GOP/RNC throws out there. They say that if we don’t, we fragment the GOP and allow the Dems to gain more power. Those people do have a point, the GOP needs to be united and strong, but I have to ask; if we accept RINOs, if we are willing to settle for anything less than the very best in Conservative candidates, are we any better than straight ticket Dems and the moonbats that they vote for?

We know that politicians like Kay Bailey Hutchison, Lindsey Graham, Newt Gingrich, John Cornyn and a multitude of other self proclaimed GOP members are nothing but RINOs. Are we going to allow those RINOs to take the GOP further into the abyss of liberalism? The GOP is nothing other than Dem Lite as it currently stands. The GOP needs to be the party of Reagan!

Do YOU have the guts to stand and say so? Do YOU have the guts to fight and take the GOP back? Do YOU have the guts to declare that YOU will not accept the lesser of ANYTHING? Do YOU have the guts to vote for only the most Conservative patriots as we leave the RINOs to die off into extinction and take the GOP back?

2010 and 2012 will tell the tale.

That's interesting, and I'm not for RINOs either. But just so folks are clear on where Texas Fred's coming from, here's his litmus test on who's RINO and who's not:

We must have comprehensive immigration reform that benefits the American taxpayer at least as much as it benefits the immigrants, the LEGAL ones, and as far as I am concerned, the ILLEGALS that are literally pouring into this nation can either be rounded up and deported or allowed to starve to death or die of thirst as they cross the hot desert of the American southwest, that saves the American patriot the problem of having to buy so many rounds of ammunition.

And what the hell, the critters in the desert have got to eat too!

Somehow I doubt that Sarah Palin wants to round up illegal aliens shoot them on sight. And don't miss Texas Fred's additional points from the comments: "Just shoot the bastards and be done with it …"

See also Robert at American and Proud and Jenn at Political Jungle. These are your true conservatives: TRUE, I tell you!

RELATED: From the Washington Post, "Sarah Palin Watch: She Looks Trim, Fit — and Brimming With Energy and Plans." (Via Memeorandum.)

No Bias Here: Prop. 8 Trial Judge Vaughn Walker is Gay

First of all, I DON'T ENDORSE THE CONTENTS OF THE SIGNS AT THE IMAGE BELOW. It's mockery of the hate, and there's more at Laughing Squid, "San Francisco’s Answer to Westboro Baptist Church."

At the same time, I really am MOCKING Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who's presiding over the Proposition 8 trial in San Francisco. It turns out he's gay, and --- surprise!! --- there are questions of impartiality. See the San Francisco Chronicle, "Judge Being Gay a Nonissue During Prop. 8 Trial" (via Memeorandum):

The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage being heard in San Francisco is that the federal judge who will decide the case, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay.

Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise - or advertise - his orientation.

They also don't believe it will influence how he rules on the case he's now hearing - whether Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure approved by state voters to ban same-sex marriage, unconstitutionally discriminates against gays and lesbians.

"There is nothing about Walker as a judge to indicate that his sexual orientation, other than being an interesting factor, will in any way bias his view," said Kate Kendell, head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is supporting the lawsuit to overturn Prop. 8.

Yeah. Right.

See Ed Whelan, "Judge Walker’s Skewed Judgment."

RELATED: Michelle Malkin instead, "The Anti-Prop. 8 Mob Strikes Again."

More on Sarah Palin's Speech in Nashville

Via Dana Loesch, Piper Palin plays at the tea party convention. And Stogie has some thoughts on Palin:

While looking at Palin yesterday, I asked myself, honestly, does she "look like a president"? I had to say no. Also, I find her sing-song, happy voice kind of annoying; it doesn't sound serious enough. She needs to work on speech making and sounding serious and even somber at times. Image is very important and works on a subconscious level. Palin needs to work hard on both her message and her image.

See also, Another Black Conservative, "My Notes On Palin’s Tea Party Convention Speech."

Sarah Palin on Fox News Sunday: GOP and Tea Parties 'Should Be Merging'

A wide-ranging interview with Chris Wallace. Governor Palin settles questions about the future of the tea party movement. But as always, her comments on life and family are unmatched: "I want to empower women," at about 9:15 minutes:

Plus, Palin speaks for me perfectly on the administration and national security. See the Orlando Sentinel, "Sarah Palin Tells ‘Fox News Sunday’: Barack Obama Needs to ‘Toughen Up’ If He Wants to Be Re-Elected."

Also, at Fox News, "Palin 'Would Be Willing' to Take On Obama in 2012."

VIDEO HAT TIP: The Rigth Scoop, "Watch Sarah Palin on Fox News Sunday."

George Will on California GOP Senate Primary: Chuck DeVore Will Be the Republican Nominee

Via Chuck DeVore on Twitter:

Reactions to Sarah Palin in Nashville

This photo and more available from Founding Bloggers.

Saving me some time, there's a killer roundup of reactions at Knoxville News, "Sarah Palin Has Tea Party, Conservatives in Palm of Her Hand."

One very interesting piece is at the Nashville Post, "Beginning of the End: Sarah Palin Hijacks the Tea Party Movement"(also from Memeorandum):

The tea party movement is dead. The one I was familiar with anyway. Judson Phillips held it down and Sarah Palin drove a stake right through its heart live last night on C-Span in front of an unsuspecting audience.

Sarah Palin didn’t give a tea party speech last night. She gave a partisan Republican address. It was a purely political speech designed to position her for a presidential run in 2012 or 2016. Period. She wasn’t there to celebrate the organic nature of a movement she had nothing to do with creating. She was there to co-opt the name and claim the brand as hers. And she did.

The movement, that came to be officially recognized almost a year ago but whose roots go back further than that, has been snuffed out and replaced in the public mind. The movement that began as a people’s movement of angry independent, libertarians and conservatives will now be thought as the movement of people like Palin, Dick Armey, Judson Phillips, Mark Skoda, etc. Essentially, a wholly owned subsidiary of the “Official Conservative Movement” and the Republican Party.

This new tea party bears no resemblance to the one that began a year ago as a reaction to the collapse of our financial system and the subsequent bailout. That movement of ragtag and unorganized libertarians, independents and conservatives was something new and unique. An authentic protest movement angered not just by the new President, Barack Obama, who had presided over the bailouts but the president who started the ball rolling and whose incompetence had led to the crisis in the first place, George W. Bush.

I think that's only partly correct, especially in my personal experience as one highly active in the SoCal tea party movement. I'll have more on this, but Mark Tapscott, one of the original tea party leaders, is closer to my sense of things, "Sarah Palin is Miles Ahead of Every Other Politician in America":

Watching Sarah Palin's speech to the Tea Party National Convention last night in Nashville on PJTV, it was clear that she has a rapport and comfort with the Tea Partiers that is unmatched among politicians at the national level.

While I suspect that mine is a minority view among the leadership of conservative activism and journalism (and I am often reminded in a jocular sort of way that my view of Palin is a minority among my colleagues at The Examiner and The Weekly Standard), I believe Palin is miles ahead of every other national figure in understanding where the country has been in the last year and what the Tea Party movement means about the future course of American politics.

That doesn't mean I think Palin is or even should be a candidate for president or any other elective office in 2012 or any other time. What it does mean is I believe Palin has a unique insight into the state of things and is moving systematically and intelligently in concert with that insight. Where that leads, nobody, including Palin, likely knows at this point.

I'm Considering a New Textbook ...

The flyer's here: "American Government and Politics: Deliberation, Democracy, and Citizenship."

My current book is George C. Edwards, et al., Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy, 14/E. I've been using the Edwards text for 10 years, and I hadn't even thought about switching to a new volume but the cost of the book is out of control. A brand new copy at my bookstore's going for almost $150.00 and a used book is about $97.00. Although I've never been primarily driven by price considerations for students, it's simply much too expensive this year; and there are more and more alternatives becoming available all the time (online e-books, all-paper three-hole volumes, etc.).

With just so much to be done every semester (and little time), having a good book and getting into a good learning routine is crucial -- and it's taken me a long time to find a rhythm. The Edwards book has a powerful thesis suggesting that "politics and government matter," especially for young people, who in turn are increasingly apathetic. The scholarship is first rate and the revised editions are available by the January following the November elections every two years. I like that, and in the past I'd really appreciated all of the instructor's ancillary materials -- including a students' practice webstite, which had been free to use until the 13th edition came out.

I've found my groove with Government in America, but I think perhaps I should move on, and not just because of price. I have no idea if I'll adopt the Bessette volume, in any case. I found an examination copy in my mailbox as I was leaving work Thursday, and I've been reading the book this weekend. I'm liking it. There are so many texts on the market I could be reading different books all year, without that much variation. (So I'd be glad to settle on something quickly.) If you look at the chapters at the flyer, however, I'm pleased that there are two whole chapters on American citizenship, exceptionalism, and civic culture (tied together by the thesis of "deliberative democracy"). And importantly, the chapters on civil liberties and civil rights come right after (chapters 6 and 7). The order is important. I stress a "building blocks" approach in the classroom. Teaching the debates over the ratification of the Constitution, for example (with the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists), provides a surprisingly good lead-in to the study of the Bill of Rights, especially as it relates to current events in civil liberties. A number of books place civil liberties at the end of the text (along with civil rights), and by that time it's almost finals week. (And there's considerably less engagement as the semester's winding down.)

Anyway, I'm not making a decision right away. The authors of the American Government and Politics: Deliberation, Democracy, and Citizenship are at Claremont McKenna in Pomona, so I've thought of contacting them, especially John Pitney, to whom (I think) I introduced myself at an academic conference a few years back.

Anyway, more on this later. My classes alone could potentially lead to the sale of over 400 copies of the main textbook annually. Not all of them will be new, but a good portion of them will. Publishers know this and compete frantically for new faculty adopters. I'll check out a few other volumes as well, but the same criteria of price, book structure and accessibility, and ancillary technologies will be driving my decision.

Sarah Palin's Speech in Nashville

Glenn Reynolds snapped some shots, "SOME PICS FROM SARAH PALIN’S SPEECH."

And CNN has a clip, "Palin Blasts Democrats in Tea Party Speech":

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin drew many standing ovations from a friendly crowd Saturday night as she blasted Washington Democrats and the Obama administration in a keynote speech for what was billed as the first national Tea Party Convention.

"It's so inspiring to see real people, not politicos, inside-the-beltway professionals, come out, stand up and speak out for common-sense conservative principles," Palin said.

Palin sought to hold Washington accountable as she took on a number of issues, including national security, the economy, and the recent election of Republican Scott Brown to the Massachusetts Senate seat left vacant by the late Ted Kennedy.

"America is ready for another revolution and you are a part of this," Palin said.

She called the Tea Party movement a "ground-up call to action that is forcing both parties to change the way they're doing business."

Palin gave particular attention to Brown's election, calling him a representative "of this beautiful movement."

I'm going to have more on this later. But see also, the Los Angeles Times, "Sarah Palin to Tea Party Convention: 'This is About the People'; MSNBC, "Palin to Obama: ‘Stop Lecturing, Start Listening’" (via Hot Air); and the New York Times, "Palin Assails Obama at Tea Party Meeting."

Leftist David Weigel reports, "Palin Speaks: “How’s that Hopey-Changey Thing Working Out for Ya?”." (Via Memeorandum.)

Plus, C-SPAN has the full speech, "Sarah Palin Remarks to Tea Party Convention."

Palin to Lead Tea Party Movement?

A pretty favorable piece from this morning's New York Times: "Palin, Visible and Vocal, Is Positioned for Variety of Roles."

But more critically, at Politico, "Palin's Risky Bid to Lead Tea Party":

After flirting coyly for months, Sarah Palin this weekend launches an aggressive play to become the leader of the tea party movement, a move with major political upside for the former Alaska governor but also one rife with risk.

Her positioning could boost her prospects of securing the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, which she is widely believed to be eyeing. And the tea party is a natural fit for Palin, whose populist anti-Washington rhetoric and working mom persona have made her a movement favorite since its grass-roots activists burst onto the scene last year in opposition to the big-spending initiatives of President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress.

Palin compared the movement to the American Revolution and the struggle for civil rights, while identifying with its activists, in an op-ed piece this week in USA Today. And her keynote speech Saturday night to a gathering here that bills itself as the first National Tea Party Convention will be followed by appearances at recently announced tea party rallies in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's hometown next month and in Boston in April.

But embracing the movement also has a potential downside. Not only could it drag her into the controversies and in-fighting that have swirled around the movement; it also could further alienate the independents and Democrats who were left with a sour taste from her 2008 GOP vice presidential campaign. And the chaotic collection of local groups that make up the movement may not accept her — or anyone else — as a leader anyway.

Read the whole thing (here).

When you get further down it's clear (again) that a centralized tea party leadership is not really possible. Sarah Palin can best be considered as the movement's premier activist. She identifies with the goals of limited government and she walks the walk of those in the grassroots. Palin won't make everyone happy. But so far she's done nothing that would damage her brand. In fact, I remain convinced that all the jockeying she's been doing, following the very successful book tour promotion, has been to further solidify her credentials as a savvy political operative with high-powered potential for a run at the 2012 GOP nomination.

I'm looking forward to the speech. Don't forget to get registered at PJTV for the live feed.

RELATED: At the New York Times, "Tea Party Looks to Move From Fringe to Force." (Via Memeorandum.)

Sarah Palin Tonight in Nashville

Dana Loesch is getting reader for Sarah Palin's headline speech: "Sarah Palin Tonight in Nashville." At the picture are guests entering the ballroom:

From the National Tea Party Convention

Founding Bloggers has pictures, here and here:

Rachel Maddow: Calling for 'Civics Literacy' Makes You a 'White Hooded' Racist

At Newsbusters, "Maddow: Tea Party Conventioneers Are Racists In White Hoods":

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Listen to Maddow. What a crock. Oh sure, lteracy tests were required in the Jim Crow south, right. But actually, Tancredo's exact words were "we do not have a civics literacy test before people can vote in this country ..." See the Boston Herald, "Former GOP Rep. Tancredo: Civics Literacy Test Should Be Required to Vote."

As Newsbusters points out, civics literacy tests have been a requirement of immigration to the United States since 1917. And interestingly, Maddow's own employer has a civics literacy test on its home page, where it says:

When immigrants want to become Americans, they must take a civics test as part of their naturalization interview before a Citizenship and Immigration Services (INS) officer ....

Sarah Palin Live Stream From Nashville Tea Party Convention!

Are you watching Sarah Palin's speech tonight from Nashville? Supposed to be live streamed. The sign up page is here.

Also, here's a report on the ground from Carl Cameron at Fox News:

Andrew Breitbart Slams Media at Nashville Tea Party Convention!

From Gateway Pundit, "Andrew Breitbart at National Tea Party Convention to Media: “It’s Not Your Business Model That Sucks, It’s You That Sucks” (Video):

Transcript from Newsbusters, "Breitbart to Media at Tea Party Convention: 'It's Not Your Business Model That Sucks, It's You That Sucks!'":

When I watched Contessa Brewer on MSNBC raise the question whether or not a protest was racist in which she showed a man have his gun around his chest and his holster. MSNBC did an entire discussion on are these protests, these gun-wielding freaks, are they racist. Does everybody here know what happened with that photo where they cut the head off? That was an African-American gentleman. That my friends is not media bias. That is contempt for the American people.

In order to create the perception that the minority is the majority and the majority is not just the minority, but a bad, racist, homophobic, all those buzzwords that they learned in the freshman orientation class at Wesleyan, are used as weapons to try to destroy you and intimidate you to not speak up and to speak your mind. And your days of doing this are over. It's not your business model that sucks, it's you that sucks.

Also, from the Los Angeles Times, "Tea Party Convention Opens With Speakers Slamming Mainstream Media."

Glenn Reynolds Interviews Andrew Breitbart at Nashville Tea Party Convention

The pic's c/o Dana Loesch on Twitter:

Glenn's interview is here: "Andrew Breitbart v. The Arrogant Bastards."

Anne Hathaway in GQ Magazine Britain!

I have been trying to do some blogging on the Nashville tea party. I especially wanted to post some new videos from the convention, and Glenn Reynolds' interview clips in particular. But YouTube has been down, which was the problem. It's up now, but as I've been surfing the web for something else to post, here's some Anne Hathaway distraction material:

Cover credit is actually from The Superficial, but check GQ's page as well, "Queen of All She Surveys."

More good stuff at John Hawkins' Linkiest. Plus, lots more good stuff at the Washington Rebel. And at Theo's, "Saturday Night is Bath Night ..."

UPDATE! Blazing Cat Fur links!

Meg Whitman Pulls First TV Ad Spot

From the Los Angeles Times, "Whitman Tweaks Campaign Ad to Fix Inconsistency":

Gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman stumbled out of the gate this week with the campaign's first TV commercial fudging how long the Republican candidate has lived in the state.

"The state is in the worst shape that I've seen in the 30 years that I have lived in California," Whitman says in the ad.

One problem: Though the former EBay chief first moved to California nearly 30 years ago, in 1981, she hasn't continuously lived here since then. She was out of state from roughly 1992 to March 1998. The Whitman campaign declined to specify when she moved out of state.

After The Times and others reported the inconsistency, California Democratic Party Chairman John Burton called on her to pull the ad ...

And at National Review, "Treating a Residency Comment as a Bigger Deal Than the D.C. Snownami."

The Next Industrial Revolution

Some readers might recall my discussion last week at my entry, "Fourth Quarter GDP, the iPad and American Power." With respect to Apple's information industry dominance, I noted:

It's still early to say, but these kinds of developments at the macro level (economic growth) combined with those at the micro level (industry innovation and market dominance), are generally encouraging for the larger questions of American world leadership in the years ahead.

Well, I'm reminded of that discussion after reading the cover story at the February edition of Wired, "In the Next Industrial Revolution, Atoms Are the New Bits." The piece begins with a lengthy review of the next generation manufacturing model for the Rally Fighter, from Local Motors (pictured below). I'm not hip with some of the insider's tech-geek lingo, but the leap-frog innovation and decentralized design and decision processes are exactly the kind of first-mover advantages I had in mind last week. The U.S. is not going to be overtaken by the Chinese in the next wave of industrial and manufacturing competition. Readers shouldn't miss that introduction, so I'll skip that to quote a bit from the main thesis of the article:

Here’s the history of two decades in one sentence: If the past 10 years have been about discovering post-institutional social models on the Web, then the next 10 years will be about applying them to the real world.

This story is about the next 10 years.

Transformative change happens when industries democratize, when they’re ripped from the sole domain of companies, governments, and other institutions and handed over to regular folks. The Internet democratized publishing, broadcasting, and communications, and the consequence was a massive increase in the range of both participation and participants in everything digital — the long tail of bits.

Now the same is happening to manufacturing — the long tail of things.

The tools of factory production, from electronics assembly to 3-D printing, are now available to individuals, in batches as small as a single unit. Anybody with an idea and a little expertise can set assembly lines in China into motion with nothing more than some keystrokes on their laptop. A few days later, a prototype will be at their door, and once it all checks out, they can push a few more buttons and be in full production, making hundreds, thousands, or more. They can become a virtual micro-factory, able to design and sell goods without any infrastructure or even inventory; products can be assembled and drop-shipped by contractors who serve hundreds of such customers simultaneously.

Today, micro-factories make everything from cars to bike components to bespoke furniture in any design you can imagine. The collective potential of a million garage tinkerers is about to be unleashed on the global markets, as ideas go straight into production, no financing or tooling required. “Three guys with laptops” used to describe a Web startup. Now it describes a hardware company, too.

“Hardware is becoming much more like software,” as MIT professor Eric von Hippel puts it. That’s not just because there’s so much software in hardware these days, with products becoming little more than intellectual property wrapped in commodity materials, whether it’s the code that drives the off-the-shelf chips in gadgets or the 3-D design files that drive manufacturing. It’s also because of the availability of common platforms, easy-to-use tools, Web-based collaboration, and Internet distribution.

We’ve seen this picture before: It’s what happens just before monolithic industries fragment in the face of countless small entrants, from the music industry to newspapers. Lower the barriers to entry and the crowd pours in.

The academic way to put this is that global supply chains have become scale-free, able to serve the small as well as the large, the garage inventor and Sony. This change is driven by two forces. First, the explosion in cheap and powerful prototyping tools, which have become easier to use by non-engineers. And second, the economic crisis has triggered an extraordinary shift in the business practices of (mostly) Chinese factories, which have become increasingly flexible, Web-centric, and open to custom work (where the volumes are lower but the margins higher).

The result has allowed online innovation to extend to the real world. As Cory Doctorow puts it in his new book, Makers, “The days of companies with names like ‘General Electric’ and ‘General Mills’ and ‘General Motors’ are over. The money on the table is like krill: a billion little entrepreneurial opportunities that can be discovered and exploited by smart, creative people.”

A garage renaissance is spilling over into such phenomena as the booming Maker Faires and local “hackerspaces.” Peer production, open source, crowdsourcing, user-generated content — all these digital trends have begun to play out in the world of atoms, too. The Web was just the proof of concept. Now the revolution hits the real world.

In short, atoms are the new bits.

RTWT at the link.

Mainstream Outlets Flirting With Objective Reporting on Tea Parties

Another Black Conservative reports, "Tea Time in Nashville: The Tea Party Convention." He's right to note the MSM outlets will milk purportedly outlandish criticisms of the administration for all they're worth, on Tom Tancredo, for example.

Yet, Dan Riehl discusses MSNBC at his report, "MSNBC Does Reasonable Report On Nashville Event." And see also the Los Angeles Times, "'Tea party' Convention a Forum for Woes, Worries." At least with this passage, I think the Times is trying to be fair as well:

Some advocates want to require citizens to pass a civics test before being allowed to vote, a proposal reminiscent of the Jim Crow laws used to keep blacks away from the voting booth.

Former Colorado Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo, the convention's opening speaker, raised the issue to enthusiastic applause.

"People who could not spell the word 'vote' or say it in English put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House -- name is Barack Hussein Obama," Tancredo said.

The remarks didn't go over well with everyone.

"I don't think that's the way to unite people. You might have thoughts about some things, but some things are better left unsaid," said Lisa Mei Norton, a defense contractor by day who moonlights as a singer-songwriter of tea party pop inspired by talk radio.

Norton opted to perform her song "A Revolution's Brewing" on Thursday night, instead of her version of "Where Were You Born?" -- a country-infused song questioning the president's birthplace.

Added: Uh oh ... I hope I didn't speak to soon! See Top of the Ticket, "Joseph Farah, to Cheers at Tea Party Convention, Again Questions Location of Obama's Birth."

Jay-Z at Interview

From Elvis Mitchell's interview with Jay-Z:

ELVIS MITCHELL: Would you have ever thought there would be a time where you could have a song like “Empire State of Mind” blow up the way it has, and, yet, there aren’t any record stores around any more? Isn’t it strange that we got to this point?

JAY-Z: It’s horrible. I mean, you didn’t foresee this specifically, but you knew something would happen because whenever people reject change, things change for them anyhow. I think that’s what happened to the record business when Napster came around. The industry rejected what was happening instead of accepting it as change. Here we are today, more than a decade later, and we still haven’t figured it out.

MITCHELL: Well, it still speaks to the power of music that something like “Empire State of Mind” can pop like that. There’s still an appetite for it.

JAY-Z: Well, I don’t think the appetite is the problem. I think the consumption of music is at an all-time high. But I think the ways that record companies are trying to monetize it is just all over the place. At the end of the day, music is in the clouds. That’s where it’s at now. Before, you could hold it, look at it, turn it around. Now, it’s just in the air. That’s where it’s gonna wind up. You won’t need a shelf or a wall unit like my mom and pop had with all these big-ass records. You’ll just need your phone to call it up.

MITCHELL: I’m sorry, I’ve gotta stop you here. You must hear this all the time, but whenever you say something that’s a phrase from one of your songs . . . When you said “all-time high,” I just went right to “Numb/Encore.” Does that kind of thing happen often?

JAY-Z: All the time. It’s good. . . . It’s weird and good.

MITCHELL: I think it has to do with how you fold certain phrases into your lyrics in the way that people talk.

JAY-Z: I think it comes from me trying to tell the story in the most clear, concise, and truthful way—taking those everyday words and phrases and capturing them in a way that they become something else.

The people who write the headlines at places like the New York Post do something similar. They turn these phrases that you know into hooks. Sometimes they’re clever. Sometimes they’re stupid, like TIGER’S TALE. [laughs] Actually, that was pretty clever. Rakimsaid, “I can take a phrase that’s rarely heard/Flip it/Now it’s a daily word” [from “Follow the Leader,” off Eric B. & Rakim’s 1988 album Follow the Leader]. That’s what I’m talking about.

MITCHELL: But having that power of understanding the way people speak obviously really means something to you.

JAY-Z: I started doing it on a small level, just for the people around me. Then I realized the impact it had, the connection it created with the millions of people who’ve been through the same thing that I’ve been through, or who can relate to my ambitions or emotions . . . You don’t have to be from Marcy projects to relate to the idea of, I’m not gonna lose. I’m gonna fight, and I’m gonna make something out of nothing. You know, that’s pretty much the American dream as it stands now. So, for me, the realization that I could speak to people like that came first on a small scale. Then it just started happening—I started having this vibration.

MITCHELL: You’ve always had a really good ear for things like that in your music, but one of your real gifts is that you can hear those sorts of things in other people’s music, too—like The Notorious B.I.G. or the Neptunes or Kanye West. That’s part of what makes you a great collaborator.

JAY-Z: I just really love the music. Everyone who makes music is a good collaborator at their foundation because in order to make music, you have to connect to it in a way that other people can’t. Other things can get in the way, whether it’s the boxes that people put themselves in, or the feelings they might have towards a person. But those things don’t get in the way for me. To me, there shouldn’t be any lines. All these ways we classify things as R&B and hip-hop and rock . . . It’s bullshit. It’s all music. If you put yourself in that box, then you won’t be able to hear that it’s all music at its soul. When people say stuff like, “Oh, that’s soft rock. I don’t listen to that,” I find that elitist. It’s music-racist. [laughs]

MITCHELL: That was one of the big parts of rap for a while. Not only were you not supposed to listen to other kinds of music, you weren’t supposed to listen to other MCs either.

JAY-Z: Yeah, but that was all bravado. That was all about, “I’m the best! No one else exists!” I pretty much forget all that in terms of collaborating. I really just like breaking down those barriers, whether it means doing an album with Linkin Park, an album with R. Kelly [The Best of Both Worlds, 2002], or playing at the Brandenburg Gate with Bono.

MITCHELL: Or doing a song like “Empire State of Mind” with Alicia Keys?

JAY-Z: Exactly.

MITCHELL: If you think about all the guys in hip-hop that you came up with, you’re one of the only ones who is still here—and part of the reason is that a lot of those guys didn’t break out of that box you’re talking about. In fact, most of them are still in it.

JAY-Z: I think a big part of that is insecurity. You know, successful people have a bigger fear of failure than people who’ve never done anything because if you haven’t been successful, then you don’t know how it feels to lose it all. You don’t have that fear. So why do you think people get stuck in those boxes? It’s that fear of going back down. “I had success. I had a number one record. I had a number one album. I have to make this kind of record again or else I’m going to lose it all.” So that’s how you end up making the same song over and over. People find their zone, a place that’s comfortable, and they say, “I’m not gonna try that other thing. What if I fail? Then I’ll have to go back! What if I can’t get in the club anymore?” [both laugh] It’s difficult for me as well. The Blueprint 3 was the most difficult album that I’ve ever made.

MITCHELL: Why is that?

JAY-Z: Well, what I was trying to do with this album—which is the same thing I was trying to do on Kingdom Come [2006]—is go somewhere that hadn’t been gone before, to try to chart a new territory in rap. The reason I’ve been grounded, though, and able to make albums, is because I’ve allowed my friends to come with me and voice an opinion. That’s who keeps you grounded—the people who have known you longest. People who don’t know you, you don’t know their motives. They smile at you all day, “Oh, that’s great. You’ve done it again! You’re the greatest!” And that’s not good for an artist. You’ve gotta keep the people that have been around you, who saw you when you didn’t have anything, so they have the confidence to say, “Get out of here. That shit is bullshit!” I welcome that.

RTWT at the link. "Empire State of Mind" lyrics here.

Obama the Fiscal Conservative?

At the video, CNN's Rick Sanchez interviews Judson Phillips, the organizer of the Nashville tea party convention. It's a moderately interesting discussion, but toward the end Mr. Phillips blanks when Sanchez argues that President Obama inherited the current unprecedented budget deficits from the Bush administration. It's simply not true, as Julia Seymour argues at the Wall Street Journal, "Obama Submits Largest Budget in History, But Networks Portray Him as Fiscal Conservative":

President Obama just submitted a $3.8 trillion budget proposal, the largest federal budget ever, which will come with a "record amount of red ink." The projected deficit of that budget would be $1.6 trillion, yet the networks didn't criticize him for being spendy.

To put this in perspective: Obama is proposing a budget $700 billion larger than big spender Pres. George W. Bush's last budget. It's TWICE the size of Pres. Bill Clinton's last budget of $1.9 trillion, who was credited with generating a budget surplus.

Despite the "staggering" size of Obama's budget, which broadcast networks admitted was "dripping with red ink," the reports managed to paint him as a fiscal conservative and deficit slasher.

NBC's Savannah Guthrie portrayed all the excess spending as a way to get the economy back on track saying: "He's asking for $100 billion to spur job growth - things like tax cuts for small business, tax breaks to increase wages - and he's doing this knowing that it will drive up the deficit, certainly even more in the short term. But all economists agree the real way to get a chunk out of the deficit is to increase hiring."

But Guthrie was highlighting only a tiny fraction of the overall budget and failed to criticize the administration for not finding ways to cut more waste.

CBS's Bill Plante also agreed with Obama's spending priorities for the $3.8 trillion budget Feb. 1 when he said the president "needs" to spend right now.

"The president has a serious money problem. He needs to spend more money in the short-term to create jobs, but he desperately needs to spend a lot less over the long-term," Plante said on "The Early Show."

Obama began his budget announcement on Feb. 1 by once again passing the buck to "previous administrations." Clearly blaming Bush for what he termed a "decade of profligacy," Obama criticized the funding of two wars, prescription drug spending and tax cuts before presenting himself as a fiscal conservative.

ABC's David Muir must have bought it, because his Feb. 1 "World News" report echoed Obama. Muir pinned the record deficits on President Bush's tax cuts and war spending when he answered the question: "How did we get here?"

His timeline of the expanding federal deficit began with an image of Bush signing a bill and the words "Tax relief for America." This has long been the claim of the national news media. While Bush was certainly responsible for helping balloon the federal deficit, American's for Tax Reform's tax policy director Ryan Ellis told the Business & Media Institute the tax cuts weren't the problem, overspending was.

"The networks are stupid if they think tax cuts had anything to do with this," Ellis explained. Tax revenues were higher than the average when Bush took office, but fell before the tax cuts because of the dot-com bust and the 2001 recession.

"Federal tax revenues are much more dependent on the economy than they are on tax policy. Tax revenues ROSE as a percent of the economy in the years after the BTC (Bush Tax Cuts) became law. They only fell again when the economy imploded."

According to Ellis and others, the real problem is government spending. Even a budget expert with the liberal Brookings Institution told the Wall Street Journal that Obama's "proposals will still leave us with unsustainable deficits as far as the eye can see."

Yet, none of the broadcast network morning or evening news shows mentioned that Bush's last budget was $700 billion less than Obama's proposal for 2011 or that Clinton's last (nominal) budget was half its size.

A couple of those reports cited political dissatisfaction with Obama's budget but none actually criticized Obama for spending too much.

There's more at the link.

RELATED: From Rasmussen, "Americans Reject Keynesian Economics" (via Memeorandum).

Tea Parties Generating Major National Media Attention

Really interesting things are happening down in Tennessee. Glenn Reynolds comments on the MSM press conference at the Nashville tea party convention: "Funny to think that the Tea Party movement is less than a year old, and that when it started only bloggers were covering it."

And here's Bill Whittle's great discussion with Andrew Klavan on exactly this topic:

I'll be updating on the convention as I find new information. But check Memeorandum. Also, interesting piece from WSJ, "Tom Tancredo to Tea Partiers: ‘Thank God John McCain Lost’."

Plus, at ABC News, "Tea Party Fireworks: Speaker Rips McCain, Obama, 'Cult of Multiculturalism'," and from Nashville Scene, "Morning Roundup: Tea Partiers Hiss Mention of 'Socialist Ideologue' Obama on Convention's Opening Night."

'Orange County Local News Network' Just Spammed My Blog!

Now, that's got to be a compliment, or something!

I saw Mike Reicher and Gretchen Meier at last night's Newt Gingrich lecture. They were sitting right in front of me, on the floor actually, during the talk. In fact, that's Mike Reicher on the right in this picture, where we see Speaker Gingrich exiting stage right:

The truth is, I would have never even known who the hell Mike Reicher and Gretchen Meier were until someone at "Orange County Local News Network," their online magazine, spammed my comments. They left a link to their story on the event last night, "Gingrich Riles Irvine Crowd With Jobs, Other Proposals."

Here's a screencap of the editorial staff, at the introductory essay, "Hello, Orange County!":

Look, I've been blogging long enough to know some of the do and don'ts of the trade, and one thing these folks might want to do is get to know who's out there blogging on the issues before they start making theirselves at home in the comments with advertising links. I'll give 'em credit though: It's a pretty gutsy move to a launch magazine start-up in this economic environment. But if they're adopting an old-school hierarchical mindset, they're going to be in for some epic fail. Folks might remember what happened to Hollywood Today. Editor and Publisher Jeffrey Jolson actually went so far as to allege libel in an e-mail to me, and I told him to take a hike (see, "Jeffrey Jolson, Publisher and Editor-in-chief at Hollywood Today, Responds to Absence of Source Attributions at Tareq Salahi ATFB Story").

Thus, my suggestion to the editors at Orange County Local News Network is understand that there is NO HIERARCHY anymore. Bloggers take down the media's big boys all the time nowadays, so it pays to learn the lay of the land. In this case, a link first THEN a track-back would have been perfectly legit. Indeed, that's how you go about making folks feel appreciated, and in turn you might get some links thrown back your way. So, yo! You sho' wanna be keepin' good with us homies (citizen journalists) of the blogosphere! Because, man, sometimes "It's REALLY Hard Out There..."

Kris Stoke Newington is a Bleedin' Idiot!

Man, this is both a blast from the past and a shot out of thin air, to mix the metaphors there. But Kris Stoke Newington, for the damnedest of reasons, left this broadside just now:

Trust you Donald, to weigh in of "practicalities" and "military effectiveness" - given you've never served and all.

Even you will be aware that gays have been openly serving in the British military for the past 10 years - with dignity and the respect of their peers, junior and seniors.

I don't suppose you're now going to lecture us on Brit Forces being a bit "gay" for your liking. I doubt our troops would.

You've rolled out the same tired arguments - and their foundation rests on your twin specalities of prejudice and conjecture. Go you.

I await your "editing".

Editing? No way, this is gold, I tell you, GOLD!!

Kris is commenting at my post, "Against Gays in the Military," where I write -- WAIT FOR IT -- >>>>> ...... ******* ++++++ ### ..... $$$$$ ..... @@@@ !!!! >>>>>> :

I don't write about it often, but I oppose "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Some of my opinions have been influenced by academic research, especially, Aaron Belkin's, "A Modest Proposal: Privacy as a Flawed Rationale for the Exclusion of Gays and Lesbians from the U.S. Military." Also interesting has been some of the milblog arguments against the ban on open service. I'm also not convinced current policy has been effective ...

Perhaps the title of the post was confusing for "Stoke-Hooligan"? But that'd be Mackubin Thomas Owens who's "against gays in the military," at the Wall Street Journal, not me. Actually, I thought dunderhead Scott Erik Kaufman might have been tripped up by the title, so aggressively on the prowl he is to find "stoopid" conservatives. But maybe he should be hanging out at the Political Jungle or American and Proud instead. Real blogging Einsteins over there, ya know, with good old Texas "Dunce Cap" Fred sitting in the corner!

But wait! I've been trying to get along with all the shoot-the-immigrants-advocatin' bloggers of Texas Fred's posse! Oh well, ... screw it. They never link my blog anyway!

Condescending Leftists

I don't use the old-fashioned term "liberal" to describe today's political left, and while my view on this has been firmly grounded in abstract ideological thinking (which some, in futility, have challenged), it's interesting we have some confirmation of such leftist identification in David Paul Kuhn, discussing Gallup's new poll, "Majority of Dems View Socialism Positively."

And that socialist ideological foundation -- found in places like the vapid rogue's gallery of Larisa Alexandrovna, Lawyers, Guns and Money, and No More Mister Nice Blog (and not to mention the T-Bogg demon seed) -- provides the background for Gerard Alexander's essay, "Why Are Liberals So Condescending?" (via Memeorandum):

Every political community includes some members who insist that their side has all the answers and that their adversaries are idiots. But American liberals, to a degree far surpassing conservatives, appear committed to the proposition that their views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while conservative positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological and unworthy of serious consideration. Indeed, all the appeals to bipartisanship notwithstanding, President Obama and other leading liberal voices have joined in a chorus of intellectual condescension.

It's an odd time for liberals to feel smug. But even with Democratic fortunes on the wane, leading liberals insist that they have almost nothing to learn from conservatives. Many Democrats describe their troubles simply as a PR challenge, a combination of conservative misinformation -- as when Obama charges that critics of health-care reform are peddling fake fears of a "Bolshevik plot" -- and the country's failure to grasp great liberal accomplishments. "We were so busy just getting stuff done . . . that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are," the president told ABC's George Stephanopoulos in a recent interview. The benighted public is either uncomprehending or deliberately misinformed (by conservatives).

This condescension is part of a long liberal tradition that for generations has impoverished American debates over the economy, social issues and the functions of government -- and threatens to do so again today, when dialogue would be more valuable than ever.

Liberals have dismissed conservative thinking for decades, a tendency encapsulated by Lionel Trilling's 1950 remark that conservatives do not "express themselves in ideas but only in action or in irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas." During the 1950s and '60s, liberals trivialized the nascent conservative movement. Prominent studies and journalistic accounts of right-wing politics at the time stressed paranoia, intolerance and insecurity, rendering conservative thought more a psychiatric disorder than a rival. In 1962, Richard Hofstadter referred to "the Manichaean style of thought, the apocalyptic tendencies, the love of mystification, the intolerance of compromise that are observable in the right-wing mind."

This sense of liberal intellectual superiority dropped off during the economic woes of the 1970s and the Reagan boom of the 1980s. (Jimmy Carter's presidency, buffeted by economic and national security challenges, generated perhaps the clearest episode of liberal self-doubt.) But these days, liberal confidence and its companion disdain for conservative thinking are back with a vengeance, finding energetic expression in politicians' speeches, top-selling books, historical works and the blogosphere. This attitude comes in the form of four major narratives about who conservatives are and how they think and function.

RTWT at the link.

Post-American Bandstand with Pat Boone

Pat Boone on Pajamas TV!

Tea Party Nation Convenes in Nashville

I haven't met Chuck DeVore yet, but I can't find anything to disagree with in this interview with Dylan Ratigan. Dan Riehl, also at the clip, has the MSNBC video, which includes Ratigan's longer introduction:

As Dan notes, he's been a consistent critic of Tea Party Nation and its pay-to-play scheme for the convention. Personally, I have no qualms with the profit motive. It's just that Judson Phillips' organizing model seemed a bit more self-interested than I'd prefer, although by the looks of those who're heading to Nashville, such concerns have been subordinated in the larger grandeur of the moment. See Gateway Pundit, for example, "Liveblogging the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville" (via Memeorandum). And Melissa Clouthier has some comments on the movement. See, "The Tea Party Movement, Tea Party Nation & Judson Phillips: A Round-Up."

Also, at the Washington Post, "'Tea Party' Leaders to Unveil National Strategy for Grass-Roots Organizing." And, at CNN, "Tea Party Convention Aims to Boost the Movement."

The Left's Shameful Politicization of the Census

Marco Rubio is absolutely awesome in the interview here, and as always, Michelle Malkin shreds the Democratic Party's illegal alien political empowerment census scam:

And at Michelle's blog, "The Super-Sized Census Boondoggle."