• California,  Politics

    Warren Beatty: “Does that make me a ‘girlie-man’?”

    Jay Billington Bulworth

    Vs.

    Terminator

    Read the Hollywood and LA Times spin on the Warren Beatty trial baloon for California Governor 2006 here (free registration required):

    “I see nothing wrong with Maria [Shriver] becoming a Republican. I’d say many of my best friends are Republicans,” says Warren Beatty, Oscar-winning actor-director and liberal citizen-activist. Over the phone, his legendary voice purrs. He knows exactly what he’s saying, and although his tone is wry, he’s not really joking.

    Though Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s poll numbers have been dropping thanks to advertising campaigns by teachers and nurses, Hollywood, usually a hotbed of liberal activism, has so far remained mum about this former denizen.

    Well, after Hollywood’s darling, Democrat Governor Gray Davis (King of the Power Outages and Public Spendthrift), bankrupted the State of California it was time for the studio Lefties to remain mum.

    In the last few months, Beatty, the star of and force behind such seminal films as “Shampoo” and “Bonnie and Clyde,” has become the first big name to break the entertainment community’s unofficial speak-no-evil toward Schwarzenegger and his wife, Shriver.

    Over the weekend, Beatty, 68, gave his first commencement speech ever to the graduating class of UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy, and used the occasion to humorously but witheringly attack Schwarzenegger — much like the candid candidate Jay Billington Bulworth from his 1998 political satire. He derided the governor for “his reactionary right-wing agenda,” “his bullying of labor and the little guy,” his plan to spend money on a “totally unnecessary special election” and his refusal to raise taxes on the rich. Beatty asked Schwarzenegger to “cut down the photo ops, the fake events, the fake issues, the fake crowds … the scapegoats, the ‘language problems,’ the broken promises, the ‘Minutemen,’ the prevarications and put some sunlight on some taxes.

    “It’s become time to define a Schwarzenegger Republican — a Schwarzenegger Republican is a Bush Republican who says he’s a Schwarzenegger Republican,” Beatty said. “Can’t we accept that devotion to the building of the body politic is more complex and a little more sensitive than devotion to body-building?

    “Does that make me a ‘girlie-man’?” asked one of the 20th century’s most famous Lotharios.

    Uhhhhh Yeah! Well, at least a Red!

    Beatty, a political veteran who’s worked for every Democratic presidential candidate since Robert Kennedy in 1968, dismissed Schwarzenegger’s claims of uniting both sides of the political aisle. “By bipartisanship, do you mean the Kennedy family?” he said to the Berkeley crowd. “Governor — I knew Jack Kennedy.

    “Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Governor, you’re no Kennedy Democrat.”

    Thank God! And he is no Teddy either!

    Within hours, Beatty, a blue-chip Hollywood figure famous for 46 years, was swatted down by the Schwarzenegger team. The governor’s communication director, Robert Stutzman, dismissed him as a “crackpot.”

    “I don’t think that that’s the most intelligent response for Arnold to have his people give,” Beatty muses a couple of days later, though he seems jazzed by his return to the public policy limelight. “I guess I needed to say some of those things.”

    A spokesman for Shriver declined to comment about Beatty’s recent remarks, and Schwarzenegger spokesman Vince Sollitto said, “His comments don’t merit any more of a response than we provided before. We didn’t believe that they’re personal in nature.” He added a refrain that the governor’s office has tried to inject into the debate: “Warren’s just mad at Republicans because he’s afraid they’re going to cut off his Social Security.”

    Beatty advised the Kerry campaign during the last election, but stayed in the background because, he says, “I felt that the Republican campaign was too successfully demonizing the entertainment community. To be more publicly visible in that campaign could do as much harm as it would help.” Of course, the stakes change when it’s all-Hollywood mano a mano.

    “In California, it’s much more difficult to demonize the entertainment community when the governor is an entertainer. If I’m leading the way on that, that’s good,” Beatty says. Indeed, this is the second anti-Schwarzenegger speech that Beatty has delivered in the last few months, and he’s not ruling out more.

    In Hollywood, Beatty’s “the only one out there,” says Andrew Spahn, a DreamWorks executive active in Democratic politics. “He’s been out front on this and helped to give voice to some disorganized feeling.”

    Martin Kaplan, associate dean of the USC Annenberg School for Communication, notes, “Schwarzenegger has such a long personal history with so many players here. On balance, they’d rather be quiet than express publicly their views that they disagree with him. He’s a very congenial companion so it’s tougher to criticize someone that you have a relationship with than a politician you might not know. It’s axiomatic that Hollywood is a relationship town.”

    However, he adds: “What [Beatty’s] saying is something that people have been saying in private. He has nothing to lose. In same ways, he has at least the same kind of standing in this creative community that the governor does.”

    Before Schwarzenegger’s political ascension, he was regarded as a waning action star, long on chutzpah and marketing might. Beatty’s recent films might not have attracted the legions of teenage boys, but inside the community, he is still viewed as a brilliant A-list talent, part of the permanent aristocracy. Of course, power does change everything. At the Golden Globes this year, Schwarzenegger was the only person whose arrival in a room full of celebrities caused rubbernecking.

    A-List talent – Give Me a Break.

    Perhaps Beatty is on the A-List Party scene invited by the Left Winging Studio Folks like Norman Lear and David Geffen.

    Still, as it’s been for decades, whenever Beatty talks, the media wonder if he’s planning to run for public office. During his speech, Beatty said that Schwarzenegger “knows I’m a private citizen just as he was a year ago, I’m an opponent of his muscle-bound conservatism with a longer experience in politics than he has and, although I don’t want to run for governor, I’d do one helluva lot better job than he’s done.” A couple of days later, Beatty demurs and seems keen on simply being a “truth teller,” although he does say, “One never knows at what point one becomes sufficiently inflamed to take a step that one does not basically want to take.”

    One unusual feature of Beatty’s address was his reference to his own relatively modest background. “I grew up a nice Southern Baptist boy in Virginia. My parents and grandparents were teachers,” he told the graduating class. It seemed a pointed reference to Schwarzenegger’s frequent use of his rags-to-riches story as part of his campaign sell. Beatty explains that he was trying to make the point that “the usurpation by the rabid right wing of the message of the church on a national or state level shouldn’t be permitted. As a Democrat, I feel that the basic tenets of the Christian church that I grew up in are ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ and ‘Love one another.’ I simply believe that the philosophy of the Democratic Party is closer to those Christian principles than what has become the principles of what I would call the Republican activist base.”

    Warren, please the trial balloons in the MSM press are growing weary.

    Run and make the Terminator’s Day!

  • Politics

    Social Security Sell-Out Deal?

    Michelle Malkin has a piece about our good friends the Senate Mavericks and how they are selling out the American people on Social Security Reform. Read the piece here:

    BusinessWeek says Congress and the White House are inching toward a compromise on Social Security. Private accounts will not be part of the plan. Instead, the compromise would include (a) reducing the rate of growth in benefits paid to upper-income beneficiaries (as President Bush has suggested) and (b) sharply increasing taxes on upper-income taxpayers (i.e., those that earn more than $80,000 $90,000 per year). In other words, Republicans would give Democrats almost everything they want and get virtually nothing in return. Sounds like the kind of plan John McCain and other Senate “mavericks” will enthusiastically support.

    Time for baby-boom conservatives to exact their piece of flesh from so-called centrist Republicans.

  • Politics,  United Nations

    John Bolton: The Senate Debates

    The U.S Senate has begun debate on confirming John Bolton as U.S. Ambassasdor to the United Nations. Read the story here:

    Exhaustive investigations turned up nothing to disqualify John R. Bolton from becoming U.N. ambassador, and he should be quickly given the post, a top Republican said Wednesday as the Senate opened debate on the long-delayed nomination.

    Democrats, however, signaled anew that they may still try to block the nomination, which has been the subject of weeks of wrangling over whether Bolton, an outspoken conservative, mistreated co-workers or took liberties with government intelligence.

    Flap is watching the debate on C-Span2.

    Senator Dodd, you do not need additonal information. You will vote against his nomination, anyway.

    Up or Down Vote tomorrow!

  • Federal Judiciary,  Politics

    Justice Priscilla Owen Confirmed

    Finally!

    What patience after four years.

    Read about her confirmation here:

    Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen won Senate confirmation as a federal appeals judge Wednesday after a ferocious four-year battle, a personal triumph that also marked a victory for
    President Bush in his drive to install conservatives on the nation’s highest courts.

    The 56-43 vote was largely along party lines, and made the 50-year-old jurist the first of Bush’s long-blocked nominees to win approval under a newly minted agreement by Senate centrists meant to end years of partisan gridlock.

    “We cannot stop with this single step,” Majority Leader Bill Frist said in a written statement soon after the vote. The Tennessee Republican resurrected a threat to strip Democrats of their right to filibuster Bush’s picks for the nation’s highest courts if they violate the two-day-old accord.

    “We must give fair up-or-down votes to other previously blocked nominees. It is the only way to close this miserable and unprecedented chapter in Senate history,” he said.

    Hat Tip: Huffington Post

  • Media

    New York Times: Will Cut 190 Jobs

    New York Times Company will be cutting 190 jobs, including journalists at the New York Times and Boston Globe Newspapers. Read the story here:

    The New York Times Co. will shed 190 employees, mostly at its flagship newspaper, the company announced Wednesday.

    In a statement, the company said the reductions will include “fewer than two dozen” employees in The New York Times newsroom. About two-thirds of the reductions will occur at the Times, with the rest coming from the company’s New England Media Group, which includes The Boston Globe.

    Newsroom reductions will come from a “voluntary reduction program,” the company said. The reductions should be implemented by the end of August, Times Co. said.

    All told, the reductions amount to less than 2% of the company’s total workforce, it added. “Staff reductions will be carefully managed so that they do not adversely affect journalistic quality, the smooth functioning of the Company’s daily operations and the ability to achieve its long-term strategic goals,” the company’s statement said.

    Bill Keller, executive editor, wrote that the newspaper “concluded we can tolerate a slight contraction in staffing in certain parts of the newsroom, by reorganizing and consolidating duties in a way
    that will not damage the paper,” in a memo posted at Romenesko at www.poynter.org.

    “Throughout our 154-year history, we have experienced peaks and troughs but we have always found a way to prosper. We have continued confidence in our shared vision, intellect and values, and we know that we will weather this challenge as well,” wrote New York Times Publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr. and New York Times Co. CEO Janet Robinson in a memo.

    They also revealed: “Earlier this year, we began rigorously evaluating our operations to determine how we could further streamline them to improve efficiency and lower costs. At both The Times newspaper and the New England Media Group, many departments have identified cost savings and generally supported efforts to improve our bottom line. All of these efforts have included cross-functional groups of employees who are dedicated full-time to examining different functional processes.

    “Given the current challenges in the advertising at the Times and the Globe and the cloudy economic outlook for the remainder of the year, we believed it was prudent to accelerate these ongoing cost control efforts.”

    Flap has already reported that the New York Times will soon begin charging for on-line content. Read the piece here.

    Now, the job cuts come along to boost profitability.

    The blogosphere and other new on-line media are impacting traditional MSM, especially the traditional print newspapers.

    How will these newspapers adapt and survive?

    Stay tuned.

    Hat Tip: Huffington Post

  • Media,  Politics

    L.A Times: Perhaps O’Reilly Is Wrong

    Flap previously reported the assinine comments of Bill O’Reilly here.

    Now, the Los Angeles Times (free registration required) opines here:

    In a May 17 radio broadcast, telephilosopher Bill O’Reilly fantasized unpleasantly that terrorists might “grab” the Los Angeles Times editorial and opinion editor “out of his little house and … cut his head off.” O’Reilly went on, “And maybe when the blade sinks in, he’ll go, ‘Perhaps O’Reilly was right.’ ”

    What popped O’Reilly’s cork was an editorial one week ago on the Newsweek controversy. The magazine reported, apparently without good evidence, that American guards at the Guantanamo prison for terrorism “detainees” had flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet. This reportedly led to riots in Pakistan and Afghanistan in which 14 people were killed.

    Contrary to the impression you might get by following the story in the U.S. media, the riots were not about the journalists’ use of anonymous sources. They were about perceived American contempt for the faith, the culture and ultimately the lives of Muslim Arabs and other dark-skinned people in distant lands.

    It is legitimately maddening to Americans that people whom we have liberated from tyranny or the nearby threat of it, at a vast cost in American lives and dollars, should be so spectacularly ungrateful, and should misunderstand us so completely. Why don’t they love us? It doesn’t seem worthy of decapitation to suggest that ghastly stories (not all fabricated by Newsweek) about abuse of prisoners don’t help. Or that American preaching about liberal democratic values might be enhanced by practicing them. For instance, by letting the Gitmo detainees (some totally innocent) have lawyers.

    But to O’Reilly, “That’s like saying, ‘Well, if we’re nicer to the people who want to KILL US, then the other people who want to KILL US will like us more.’ ”

    Where did The Times’ editorial page get the idea that winning the war on terrorism depends on persuading societies that breed terrorists that they should like us and adopt our values? Actually, this is not some wooly left-wing notion concocted over a joint during a lesbian wedding reception in Santa Monica. It is the cornerstone of the George Bush presidency, according to Bush himself.

    In his State of the Union address in January, for instance, Bush said, “In the long term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America….”

    O’Reilly should be careful. Any further decapitation fantasies could get him in serious trouble with the Secret Service.

    Touché, Michael!

  • General,  Radio

    Divita V. Ziegler

    Vs.

    Flap has been listening to the machinations of this trial the past few days on KFI 640.

    Read about the trial here:

    A Jefferson Circuit Court jury ruled against former WDRB-TV morning host Darcie Divita yesterday on every claim in her defamation and invasion-of-privacy lawsuit against Clear Channel Broadcasting, doing business as 84 WHAS radio, and talk-show host John Ziegler.

    After a five-day trial and two hours of deliberation, the jury of eight women and four men returned the verdict at 4 p.m., upholding Ziegler’s repeated claim that the case had no merit.

    Thomas Clay, Divita’s lawyer, said she would appeal.

    Talk about a woman scorned agenda and a lawsuit that the judge should have stopped early as a matter of law (hasn’t the judge heard of NYT v. Sullivan?)!

    In the British court system she would be obligated to pay Ziegler’s attorney’s fees.

    And what chance does hshe have on appeal – NONE!

    Divita needs to GET OVER IT!

    For Ziegler’s show:

    Flap misses Phil Hendrie at times.

  • Computers,  Dentistry

    The Digital Dentist: Freeware Programs

    Dr. Lorne Lavine has a list of freeware programs that he finds indispensable:

    1. Firefox. If you haven’t tried this web browser, stop what you’re doing and download it now. Far more secure and many more features than Internet Explorer.

    2. AVG and AVAST. Both are excellent anti-virus programs. The free versions are meant for home use only.

    3. PDF Speedup. If you’re like me and open PDF’s all day long, you know how long it typically takes for Acrobat Reader to open the file. This program reduces that from 10 seconds to closer to 1 second!

    4. Picassa. Got a ton of digital images that you need to organize? This is a great free program, now owned by Google.

    5. PowerToys

    Check them out – you will be glad you did!

  • Adscam Scandel,  Canada

    Canadian Adscam Scandel: Groupaction cash

    Jean Brault former president of Groupaction

    A forensic audit presented yesterday reveals that Groupaction Marketing, one of the biggest beneficiaries of the federal sponsorship program, may have given more than $1.7-million to the federal Liberal party in unregistered donations. Read the story here:

    The sum is in addition to the $800,000 that nine advertising firms involved in the sponsorship program, including Groupaction, made in official donations to the Liberals, for a total of $2.5-million over the 10 years examined by Kroll Lindquist Avey, forensic accounting experts hired by the Gomery inquiry.

    The accounting firm was unable to trace any cash payments made to the Liberals but unearthed more than $400,000 in cash that Groupaction president Jean Brault would have had at his disposal between 1996 and 2002.

    Mr. Brault has testified that he was leaned on to help the Liberal “cause” as payment for the lucrative sponsorship and advertising contracts being sent his way. He said he provided envelopes of cash and put Liberal workers on his payroll.

    How can the Canadian people tolerate such blatant subversion of their government with these corrupt activities?