Today marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War, and Ken Burns thinks modern America is still learning its lessons. We like to boast of a post-racial world, for instance, but “we are continually brought up short by the old code words and disguised prejudice of a…
Continue reading …Speculation is rife that high-trousered music guru Simon Cowell will quit as a judge on the UK X Factor – who can fill his shoes? We knew this day would eventually come. Ever since Simon Cowell – distraught at the prospect of sitting through another afternoon of hopeless singing dog acts – backed away from Britain’s Got Talent and replaced himself with David Hasselhoff, the writing has been firmly on the wall. And now it’s happened. If reports are to be believed, Simon Cowell will no longer be taking part in this year’s The X Factor. If true, this is a potentially devastating loss for The X Factor. To all intents and purposes, Simon Cowell is The X Factor. He invented it, he produced, he judged it, he co-wrote the theme tune. There’s a very good chance he rushed backstage during every single ad break and made plates of sandwiches for all the contestants. Cut The X Factor open and it bleeds Cowell. But, now that he’s decided that America is more important that little old Britain, thoughts must inevitably turn to his replacement. And that’s going to be a lot more difficult than it looks. The current The X Factor judges all have their pre-determined roles – Dannii Minogue says “pitchy” a lot, Cheryl Cole wears dresses made out of spoons and cries all the time, and Louis Walsh sits there talking away to himself – but Simon Cowell was the undisputed leader. If he said a contestant was bad, you listened. If he gave a contestant a creepy wink during their audition, you knew to keep an eye on them. If he smiled – well, if he smiled you’d instinctively cover your eyes to stop his gleaming teeth from setting your retinas on fire – but then you’d pay attention. So we should just be honest with ourselves. We will never truly be able to replace a man as overwhelmingly multifaceted as Cowell. The best we can ever expect to achieve is to simply replace elements of him. With than in mind, here are some leading contenders: The musical knowhow – When Cowell extracted himself from American Idol, his replacements were Steven Tyler from Aerosmith and Jennifer Lopez. Each knew a lot about performing hits – and, to some extent, appearing in dreadful films – but they lacked Cowell’s cold, hard business sense. If Cowell was also replaced by a pop star on The X Factor, the show would make itself vulnerable to all sorts of endless, dreary monologues about following your dreams and believing in yourself and all that nonsense, and it’d never produce another Leona Lewis again. What we really need is someone who knows how to make money. Contenders: Ashley Tabor, head of Global Radio and manager of The Wanted; Duncan Bannatyne from Dragon’s Den. The haughty demeanour – Remember what made Simon Cowell famous in the first place? It was his unstoppable cruelty during auditions. Nobody could reduce obese teenage girls from Huddersfield to tears quite as effectively as him. He’s softened a little in recent years, so his resignation would be a perfect opportunity to bring in someone as uncompromisingly rude as he used to be. Contenders: Jerry Sadowitz; Bill Sikes from the novel Oliver Twist. The terrible, terrible hair – Despite the importance of his business acumen and his attitude, the thing that most The X Factor viewers will miss about Simon Cowell is his haircut. It’s hard to overstate the importance of that weird, wiry, flattened-down broom of a haircut. It kept Cowell human. It typified the whole ethos of The X Factor. People looked at that haircut and thought “If Simon Cowell can become rich and successful despite having the single most confusing hairstyle in all of recorded history, then so can I. So can I.” Therefore, a total misunderstanding of what makes a haircut look nice should be chief among the requirements when it comes to finding a replacement. Contenders: Donald Trump; a matted piece of six-week-old roadkill. The X Factor Entertainment Television Simon Cowell ITV Television industry Stuart Heritage guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Speculation is rife that high-trousered music guru Simon Cowell will quit as a judge on the UK X Factor – who can fill his shoes? We knew this day would eventually come. Ever since Simon Cowell – distraught at the prospect of sitting through another afternoon of hopeless singing dog acts – backed away from Britain’s Got Talent and replaced himself with David Hasselhoff, the writing has been firmly on the wall. And now it’s happened. If reports are to be believed, Simon Cowell will no longer be taking part in this year’s The X Factor. If true, this is a potentially devastating loss for The X Factor. To all intents and purposes, Simon Cowell is The X Factor. He invented it, he produced, he judged it, he co-wrote the theme tune. There’s a very good chance he rushed backstage during every single ad break and made plates of sandwiches for all the contestants. Cut The X Factor open and it bleeds Cowell. But, now that he’s decided that America is more important that little old Britain, thoughts must inevitably turn to his replacement. And that’s going to be a lot more difficult than it looks. The current The X Factor judges all have their pre-determined roles – Dannii Minogue says “pitchy” a lot, Cheryl Cole wears dresses made out of spoons and cries all the time, and Louis Walsh sits there talking away to himself – but Simon Cowell was the undisputed leader. If he said a contestant was bad, you listened. If he gave a contestant a creepy wink during their audition, you knew to keep an eye on them. If he smiled – well, if he smiled you’d instinctively cover your eyes to stop his gleaming teeth from setting your retinas on fire – but then you’d pay attention. So we should just be honest with ourselves. We will never truly be able to replace a man as overwhelmingly multifaceted as Cowell. The best we can ever expect to achieve is to simply replace elements of him. With than in mind, here are some leading contenders: The musical knowhow – When Cowell extracted himself from American Idol, his replacements were Steven Tyler from Aerosmith and Jennifer Lopez. Each knew a lot about performing hits – and, to some extent, appearing in dreadful films – but they lacked Cowell’s cold, hard business sense. If Cowell was also replaced by a pop star on The X Factor, the show would make itself vulnerable to all sorts of endless, dreary monologues about following your dreams and believing in yourself and all that nonsense, and it’d never produce another Leona Lewis again. What we really need is someone who knows how to make money. Contenders: Ashley Tabor, head of Global Radio and manager of The Wanted; Duncan Bannatyne from Dragon’s Den. The haughty demeanour – Remember what made Simon Cowell famous in the first place? It was his unstoppable cruelty during auditions. Nobody could reduce obese teenage girls from Huddersfield to tears quite as effectively as him. He’s softened a little in recent years, so his resignation would be a perfect opportunity to bring in someone as uncompromisingly rude as he used to be. Contenders: Jerry Sadowitz; Bill Sikes from the novel Oliver Twist. The terrible, terrible hair – Despite the importance of his business acumen and his attitude, the thing that most The X Factor viewers will miss about Simon Cowell is his haircut. It’s hard to overstate the importance of that weird, wiry, flattened-down broom of a haircut. It kept Cowell human. It typified the whole ethos of The X Factor. People looked at that haircut and thought “If Simon Cowell can become rich and successful despite having the single most confusing hairstyle in all of recorded history, then so can I. So can I.” Therefore, a total misunderstanding of what makes a haircut look nice should be chief among the requirements when it comes to finding a replacement. Contenders: Donald Trump; a matted piece of six-week-old roadkill. The X Factor Entertainment Television Simon Cowell ITV Television industry Stuart Heritage guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Hearing Will Determine if Yeardley Love Murder Case Moves to Trial FULL 15th Semifinalist Revealed America s Got Talent Top 48 Results (Part 1) FULL True Blood Season 3 Clip: Alcide and Sookie (Part 1) Updates from George Huguely Preliminary Hearing Almost one year since the death of Yeardley Love, the prosecution and defense called witnesses Monday during a preliminary hearing in the murder case against her ex-boyfriend, George Huguely . A 'crime scene': Graphic testimony in Huguely hearing | The Hook … And Lawrence, in his opening statement at the preliminary hearing of accused murderer George W. Hughely IV, reiterated his claim that Huguely had no intention of killing Love. “Just a pair of panties,” replied officer K.W. Blackwell … George Huguely due in court over Yeardley Love, UCA lacrosse … George Huguely is due to appear in court in Charlottesville today, in connection with the death of UCA lacrosse player Yeardley Love. Huguely allegedly killed Love in May 2010 by slamming her head into a wall after storming into her … Potomac Fever: Hearing on murder charges for George Huguely Not a pleasant topic for debate, I know, but-for you legal buffs out there-former UVA lacrosse player George Huguely , 23, is due in court today for a preliminary hearing on murder charges in the May 3rd death of one-time girlfriend and … Preliminary hearing Monday in U.Va. lacrosse case | News Life Huguely also has been charged with felony murder, robbery, burglary, statutory burglary and grand larceny and is nonetheless becoming held at the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail, a corrections employee mentioned. … carterjohnson says: RT @CBS19 : After more than 9 hours, George Huguely 's Preliminary Hearing has ended @jessicajaglois will have details on 19News Nightcast @11
Continue reading …MSNBC's Ed Schultz began his show Monday talking about all the jobs President Obama has created since he took office. Unfortunately, as he made the case about how terrible the Bush years were by comparison, the “Ed Show” host wrongly informed his viewers that Democrats took over in January 2009 (video follows with transcript and commentary): ED SCHULTZ: Folks, let me tell you something. I was watching Rachel’s show the other night, and the, she sent her, one of her guys out on the street to start asking some questions to people about who’s in Congress and what their names are. And it was amazing to me how little people on the street knew. Let me just tell you one thing: this is the only chart you need to know come next election. This is the only chart you need to watch. This is the only chart that matters to American families. Are we headed in the right direction? And sometimes we get lost in the 24-hour news cycle, and we don’t see the progress the country’s making. Here’s the progress right here. Here’s where the Democrats took over. Here’s the plan right there. We never saw that during the Bush years. So get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight’s question: Who do you trust to create private-sector jobs? It is indeed funny how Schultz mocked “how little people on the street knew” about “who’s in Congress and what their names are.” After all, the date he pointed to on his chart when he claimed “Here’s where the Democrats took over” was January 2009. Hate to break it to you, Ed, but the Democrats took over both chambers of Congress in January 2007. Of course, it's understandable that Schultz doesn't want his viewers to know that the unemployment rate was 4.4 percent when the Democrats took over, or that the last budget done by a Republican Congress produced a deficit of only $160 billion. He also doesn't want folks to know that over seven million more people were employed in December 2006 as compared to today, or that there are still 2.8 million fewer workers in America than on the day Obama was inaugurated. Putting even a finer point on this, our friend Moe Lane produced an interesting chart Monday comparing some economic numbers today to four years ago that I'm sure Schultz would also like his viewers to not be aware of (h/t Weasel Zippers ): Not a pretty picture, is it? As for Schultz's claim we never saw job growth during the Bush years, I guess he was sleeping from September 2003 till June 2007 when the nation experienced 46 consecutive months of employment gains: As for Schultz's question, “Are we headed in the right direction,” the Real Clear Politics “Right Track-Wrong Track/Direction of the Country” poll average currently shows 31.4 percent saying “Right” and and 61.4 percent saying “Wrong.” But “the only chart you need to know come next election…the only chart you need to watch…the only chart that matters to American families” is the one Schultz misrepresented to his viewers Monday night. And this shill is amazed by how little people on the street know. Well, Ed, it's because five days a week, on both television and radio, you're badly misinforming them.
Continue reading …Bad news for eco-conscious stoners: That joint you just smoked hurt the planet. Marijuana grown indoors accounts for 1% of America’s yearly electricity consumption, or $5 billion worth of energy, a study finds. That’s equivalent to the annual energy bills of 2 million homes. And in terms of CO2 emissions,…
Continue reading …One of the four bodies that cops found on a desolate Long Island beach last week is that of an infant or child, reports the New York Post. “One doesn’t match the others. It’s a young person, possibly as young as an infant, or a child,” says a source. “If…
Continue reading …Kimberly Stewart has starred as herself in the E! True Hollywood Story episode of “The Hilton Sisters.” So it makes total sense that she’s carry the baby of a fellow actor … Oscar-winner Benicio del Toro. Yes, you read that right. The 31-year-old daughter of Rod Stewart isn’t in a relationship…
Continue reading …Château Margaux expert to breathe new life into historic California winery Perhaps Francis Ford Coppola made him an offer he couldn’t refuse, or perhaps wine expert Phillipe Bascaules just loves the smell of Napa Valley in the morning: either way Coppola, director of film classics such as The Godfather and Apocalypse Now has lured the prominent winemaker from Château Margaux to breathe life into his California winery. Coppola said his aim is to make the estate the finest in America for the production of Old World wines, as he announced he has also bought the historic trademark Inglenook. Bascaules takes over from Scott McLeod, who had resigned as the estate’s winemaker. Inglenook occupies an important part in the development of wine in the US. The winery was founded in California’s Napa Valley in 1879 by a Finnish sea captain, Gustave Niebaum, who established it as one of the finest in the world. Niebaum brought some of the best European grapevines to Napa. Coppola bought part of the Inglenook property in 1975 with the profits from The Godfather. He spent the next two decades adding bits to re-establish the old estate, but the trademark had eluded him until now. Coppola said the arrival of Bascaules was intended to hour the estate’s heritage and restore its legacy. He said he wanted to help with “invigorating the vineyards, planning a new state-of-the-art winemaking facility, and focusing on what it would take to achieve my goal of restoring this property into America’s greatest wine estate.” Bascaules, in the same statement, said: “I was charmed by the beauty of the estate and its unique environment. I found the tasting of 1959 Inglenook astonishing with regard to its freshness and complexity, and when I tasted some samples of the 2009 vintage, I recognized the incredible potential of this property. I understand Francis Ford Coppola’s desire to bring the quality of the wines to their fullest potential and I’m excited to explore new methods to reach this goal.” The statement continues: “Rubicon will continue to be the proprietary name of Inglenook’s flagship wine, and Bascaules, who spent the past 21 years at Château Margaux, will lead a team of talented winemaking professionals dedicated to the goal of making Rubicon the finest New World estate wine produced in the Old World style.” Bascaules served as estate director for 11 years at Château Margaux. Francis Ford Coppola Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Congressman Paul Ryan gave the Republican response to the President’s weekly address this weekend and I don’t have much to add that our own Nicole Belle didn’t already mention at C&L in her post on his Sunday show appearance on Meet the Press, but the Republican Party apparently wants us to take his budget proposal seriously enough that he was chosen to be their voice to respond to the President this week. So here we go with the same old “up is down, tax cuts create jobs, let’s destroy our social safety nets in order to save them and let’s send the have-mores some more money because god knows they all aren’t doing well enough already” business. Oh yeah — and the country is supposedly broke, unless you look at the hordes of cash the upper 1 percent are holding onto and not being taxed on. Ryan wants us all to be scared to death about this “crushing debt” we’re facing, but it’s funny he didn’t seem to have those same concerns when Bush was breaking the bank. Transcript via the LA Times : Hello. I’m Congressman Paul Ryan from Janesville, Wisconsin – and Chairman here at the House Budget Committee. It’s no secret our government has a spending problem –- and the problem has gotten so bad it’s threatening our future and hurting our nation’s ability to create jobs. Republicans made a pledge that we would work to change this if given the opportunity to lead. Since January, we’ve been urging President Obama to listen to the people and work with us to reduce spending. The president started this year by proposing a freeze that would make no cuts at all. But now bipartisan legislation is in sight to enact the largest spending cut in American history. This is good news for job creators in America –- but much more has to be done to put…. … our nation on a true path to prosperity. Earlier this week, the House Budget Committee advanced a new budget for the United States government that will move the debate in Washington from billions in spending cuts to trillions. We did so because it is unconscionable to leave the next generation with a crushing burden of debt and a nation in decline. Washington’s obsession with the next election has come at the expense of the next generation. We are calling this budget The Path to Prosperity, because it is more than just a budget. It is a commitment to honor the American legacy of leaving the next generation a more prosperous nation than the one we inherited. More prosperous — but only for that 1 percent. By removing the anchor of debt that weighs down our economy and advancing pro-growth tax reforms, this budget is a jobs budget. It sends signals to investors, entrepreneurs, and job creators that a brighter future is still possible – a future in which America is still an engine of growth that leads the world. Right now, that legacy is in grave danger. This nation is going deeper and deeper into debt -– and the spending choices we make today will determine the kind of lives our children enjoy tomorrow. The facts are these: Washington has not been telling you the truth about the magnitude of the problems we are facing. Unless we act soon, government spending on health and retirement programs will crowd out spending on everything else, including national security. It will literally take every cent of every federal tax dollar just to pay for these programs. The non-partisan experts have been clear about what this means: Each day that Congress fails to act, the government takes one step closer to breaking its promises to current retirees. Each year that policymakers kick this can down the road means trillions of dollars in empty promises are being made to future generations. If we stay on the current path, we are heading toward a debt-fueled economic crisis –- meaning massive tax increases, sudden cuts to vital programs, runaway inflation, or all three. Make no mistake: The prospect of a crisis is casting a shadow on economic activity in this country. Uncertainty is keeping job creators from hiring as fast as they should be. Businesses know that all this borrowing and spending today means higher taxes and lower incomes for their customers down the road. Economists agree: Advancing a credible solution to this crisis will begin to restore confidence and create better conditions for job-creation immediately. The President’s recent budget proposal is worse than just a commitment to this status quo. It would actually accelerate this country’s descent into a debt crisis. It would double the debt held by the public by the end of his term, and triple it in a decade from now. It would raise taxes by $1.5 trillion, even though the problem is that Washington spends too much, not that Americans are taxed too little. It would permanently enlarge the size of government by sending government spending as a share of the economy skyrocketing to levels that a healthy economy simply cannot sustain. And it offers no real reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership. Our budget is very different: Instead of locking in the spending spree of the last two years, our budget cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the President’s budget over the next ten years. This keeps government spending as a share of the economy consistent with the historical average of 20 percent, so that individuals and the economy can be free. Instead of letting deficits spiral out of control, our budget keeps borrowing in check and puts us on the path to balance. Instead of adding $13 trillion to the debt over the next decade and trillions more in the years to come, this Path to Prosperity lifts this crushing burden of debt that is threatening our economy and our children’s future. It is not too late to fix America’s problems. It is not too late to get our country back on track so our kids can also realize the American Dream. We can – and we must – preserve this nation’s exceptional promise, because that is exactly what previous generations of Americans worked so hard to do for us. It is time for officials in Washington to stop acting like politicians, and to start acting like leaders. We have a legacy to fulfill. It is time for all of us to get to work, put an end to the empty promises and advance a plan to prosperity.
Continue reading …