CitizenSugar -- Breaking News, Together.

Divine Intervention: 1 in 2 Say Prayer Saves the Dying. Do You?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:44:20 -0700

Paging Dr. God? More than half of adults in the US put more faith in the divine than in a doctor's care — 57 percent said God's intervention could save a dying family member even if their doctor had declared treatment futile. Researchers say this data should spur doctors into being prepared "to deal with families who are waiting for a miracle."Oddly, the strong show of faith over doctoring may be a result of leaps in medical care. The author of the study says that advances in trauma treatment has allowed more patients to survive past the scene of an accident, living longer and allowing more time for hope and prayer. He says, hospital trauma specialists "are much more heavily engaged in the death process," and that he frequently meets people who think God will save their dying loved one. It's a tricky balance, mediating a miracle. He says, "you have to respect that," while still showing the medical facts that may ultimate prove otherwise.With prayer even being credited with softening gas prices, where do you stand? Source

Divine Intervention: 1 in 2 Say Prayer Saves the Dying. Do You?

Of course prayer works. Faith is most important in times of trial and miracles happen.

Prayer could help the patient, but it's probably the biggest comfort to the one praying.

Faith can't trump science and fact. Doctors are the only ones who can save lives.

Other. I'll tell you my opinion in the comments.

Eyebrow-Raising Political Analysis — Do the Looks Have It?

CitizenSugar — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:30:45 -0700

While we're breathlessly awaiting Liberty's big text from Obama to see who he picks for Veep, Bella says it's maybe the "pluck" that matters most. Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine was making the rounds, stumping for Obama this weekend, humbly demurring talk of a #2 slot and showing up on Meet the Press. While he was conducting official business, his brows were the object of scrutiny on NPR's Wait, Wait . . . Don't Tell Me! Brow expert Eliza Pertrescu bashed Kaine's brows saying, "his eyebrows are definitely too feminine . . . his eyebrows are too manicured; whoever did it made him look almost like a woman." She also dished on the candidates arches as well. It's official — every aspect of the campaign has been scrutinized. With breathless attention to Obama shirtless and Kaine's eyebrows questioned, are male candidates finally getting the attention to looks that Hillary faced all campaign? Do a candidate's looks matter? Source

Eyebrow-Raising Political Analysis — Do the Looks Have It?

Yup. We want to see candidates who are attractive, it's a survival of the fittest thing.

A little. But it's that way with life, not just politics.

No! I can think of a million candidates who weren't attractive. This is silliness.

Other. I'll show you my brows in the comments.

85 Percent Want Kids-Only Sections on Airplanes — Do You?

CitizenSugar — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 10:00:43 -0700

Could "Kids or non?" be the new query akin to the smoking section question hitting airplanes soon? Judging by these results, lots would like that. In a survey of more than 10,000 travelers, 85 percent were in favor of special sections for parents traveling with babies or small kids. Oh man, maybe they should remake Snakes on a Plane with kids instead of snakes! Will it happen? Probably not. A spokesman for the Air Transport Association said kids-only sections would be "logistically difficult" to implement, and could result in an "adults-only" (not the XXX kind) passenger being bumped to the kids section in cases of overcrowding, which given the cutbacks in seats is increasingly common. The folks behind the survey, AirfareWatchdog, give some tips to cope in the mixed-age skies, including this one, which seems a little mean even if it is practical: "Take very early morning flights (5 a.m. or 6 a.m., if they're available). Parents can rarely manage to dress, feed, wash, and otherwise organize infants and toddlers in time to catch flights that early in the day." But the ultimate retaliation is a taste of their own medicine: "Just grin and bear it. Or start wailing, kicking and screaming yourself."Is the thought that kids are the ones causing problems an unfair assessment? After all, tons of famous (Naomi Campbell, Courtney Love, et al.) and otherwise adults are removed from airplanes for unruly behavior all the time. Do you avoid kids on planes? Is this a perfect solution, or does it make flying the skies less-than-friendly?Source

85 Percent Want Kids-Only Sections on Airplanes — Do You?

It's a perfect solution! It would make flying more comfortable for all parties! Let's do it.

It's a person's right to sit where they'd like. Having kids is not a crime, this isn't fair.

It could be an option on flights that head to places like Disney, but not a mandate.

Other. I'll tell you how I feel in the comments.

47% Favor Laws to Create Political Balance on TV — Do You?

CitizenSugar — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:00:21 -0700

So we asked this question a while back when we were talking about the Fairness Doctrine — should the government mandate political balance on TV and radio? Now Rasmussen has polled on it, and it turns out nearly half — 47 percent — think this is a great idea. It seems that thought doesn't extend to the Internet. The survey found that 57 percent said the government should not require websites and blogs to present opposing viewpoints (though 31 percent said the net should keep it fair and balanced.) The pretty even split seems to mirror so many aspects of the US political landscape — and there's a whole landscape of opinions about it out there from folks who think the Fairness Doctrine could "correct" any pro-Obama media bias, to Christian stations who are nervous that a return of the 1949 FCC policy could dampen their ability to preach the Gospel. Where do you fall on the spectrum? Are you anti-Fairness Doctrine, would you like to see it cover all media, or leave the web alone? Source

47% Favor Laws to Create Political Balance on TV — Do You?

No Fairness Doctrine at all. There's nothing "fair" or free about forcing speech.

Yes, patrol the TV and Radio — I agree with the 47 percent. But leave the web alone.

Let's make sure all media, including the web, produces equal coverage for all sides.

Other. I have another solution, I'll tell you in the comments.

Ease & Access vs. Security & Responsibility: Voting Too Easy?

CitizenSugar — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:53:57 -0700

I filled out my voter registration card months before I turned 18. It sat on my dresser impatiently until finally I was old enough to send 'er in. It was fun and easy. This election, the very process of voter registration has sparked passionate points of view: this editorial advocates for a minimal civics test that hopeful voters would have to pass in order to wield the power of the punch card.
He says, "I really don't want someone on the streets of Hollywood, who just failed to identify the vice president of the United States on one of Jay Leno's "Jay-Walking" segments, helping to select the person who will lead my government for the next four years." Given that we require basic knowledge to become a citizen or operate a motor vehicle, is choosing the future of the country a responsibility that should have stricter requirements? Despite this opinion, the US seems to be moving away from more restrictions, to easy-as-pie-voting. A new Ohio voting law allows for a window of time (Sept. 30-Oct. 6) during which voters can register and vote early, immediately. Voting registration is controversial and there's a partisan aspect to the split according to this piece in the WSJ:
Traditionally, Democrats favor fewer checks on verification and greater access to voting to encourage larger turnouts, particularly among lower-income and minority voters, who tend to favor Democrats. Republicans usually push for closer monitoring, in such forms as laws with strict requirements for voters to present identification, which can result in lower turnout.

Does an ever increasingly easy/free-for-all access to voting a requirement of a democracy, or does the gravity of the task of voting deserve stricter requirements and heightened security measures?Source

Ease & Access vs. Security & Responsibility: Voting Too Easy?

Ease & Access! More people voting is better. Less restrictions equals more democracy.

Security & Responsibility. It's not hard now, fill out the card! The test is a good idea too.

Other. I'll leave my easy vote in the comments.

Warming Leaves Us No Choice But to "Prepare For Extinction"?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:00:24 -0700

Top scientist Bob Watson says that we need to prepare for a rise in temperature of 39 degrees Fahrenheit. A jump that big would have catastrophic effects — it means between 7 million and 300 million more people would be affected by flooding and that the water availability in Africa would dry up by 50 percent.
In other words, 4 billion people left without water, 5 billion at risk for flooding, and half a billion left hungry. Some say there's no planning for that coming shift and that humans are staring down the barrel of extinction. Or in the possible words of Chief Seattle, "the end of living and the beginning of survival." Want more science to hammer that home?
To see how far this process could go, look 55.5 million years to the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, when a global temperature increase of 6C coincided with the release of about 5,000 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, both as CO2 and as methane from bogs and seabed sediments. Lush subtropical forests grew in polar regions, and sea levels rose to 100m higher than today. It appears that an initial warming pulse triggered other warming processes. Many scientists warn that this historical event may be analogous to the present: the warming caused by human emissions could propel us towards a similar hothouse Earth.

Are we the new dinosaur? Source

Warming Leaves Us No Choice But to "Prepare For Extinction"?

No more doomsday eco-talk! Humans are not facing extinction, end of story.

Perhaps extinction is extreme, but our world is changing in a permanent way.

This is entirely possible and more people need to use language like this to say so.

Other. I'll tell you my opinion in the comments.

Racist or Funny? Spanish Teams Pose With "Slit" Chinese Eyes

LibertySugar — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:45:10 -0700

While making a slit-eyed gesture and standing near a Chinese dragon, members of Spain's Olympic basketball teams posed for an advertisement, apparently unaware of offensive overtones. Two large photos, one of each team's members pulling back the skin by their eyes, filled an entire page in Spain's most popular newspaper. A sponsor of the Spanish Basketball Federation published the questionable good-luck message, but apparently the sport's governing body saw no reason to object either, as its seal also appears on the ad. Racism and sports have collided before in Spain. Perhaps the International Olympic Committee will consider Spain's cultural insensitivity when assessing Madrid's bid for the 2016 or 2020 Olympics.

Racist or Funny? Spanish Teams Pose With "Slit" Chinese Eyes

Racist! This ad is offensive.

Funny. What's wrong with a little teasing between sports rivals.

This is an isolated bad joke, but it's not the end of the world.

Other. I'll tell you in the comments.

Crackdown on Tickling: Will Rules For Priests Stop Abuse?

CitizenSugar — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:00:21 -0700

The Archdiocese of Cincinnati has released the most comprehensive list of rules to date addressing behavior between priests and children. Among other changes is the requirement of those who have contact with kids to get background checks. Victim advocates support the new rules but realize they're not a panacea. Specific rules also address conduct and communication through touch.

On the list of appropriate touches: side hugs, pats on the head, holding hands during prayers. Inappropriate moves include bear hugs, kissing, lap-sitting, and tickling. The sexual abuse scandals have haunted the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict XVI has been including apology outreach as part of nearly every official trip, from Boston to Australia. The new rules are similar to those teachers already have to abide by, with rising teacher/student scandals causing states to crackdown as well. Should religious figures be considered in the same realm as secular adult/child relationships? Will outlining what's appropriate stop abuse, or is it just a bunch of words?Source

Crackdown on Tickling: Will Rules For Priests Stop Abuse?

It's a move in the right direction. Applying standards and enforcing them will really help.

If the rules don't stop abuse, at least it gets the topic in the open and removes secrecy.

A list of rules on paper will not fix anything. The problem is too deeply rooted.

Other. I'll tell you my opinion in the comments.

Was 9/11 a Government Conspiracy?

CitizenSugar — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:00:13 -0700

The seventh anniversary of of September 11 is approaching and it seems like it's impossible to remember a time before. This horrific tragedy has entered the global lexicon of experience and colored everything since in a way few events in history have. Almost every person has a story of their own from that day, and a personal way of dealing with it since — some stay away from the movies and documentaries as if the facts are still too fresh; others obsessively pore over every true tale and listen to the 911 calls from that morning, hoping to that bitter medicine will hold answers. Still others out there think very differently about that morning — those who believe the events were perpetrated by the government. From thinking that the collapse of the buildings was actually caused by controlled demolition explosions, to wondering whether there was actually a commercial plane at the Pentagon crash site, theories abound. This passionate collection of conspiracy claims and arguments against them recently posted on YesButNoButYes, got me thinking about the different camps. New York Magazine a couple of years ago broke down the various schools of thought on the level of conspiracy people believe there to have been. The piece is called "The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll" and they list almost all of the theories ever floated including the "HOP" level: LIHOP (Let it Happen on Purpose) to MIHOP (Made it Happen on Purpose.) It's a comprehensive read and exposes the complexity of people's thoughts about 9/11. While it's possible we may never know a story that will satisfy everyone, what do you think? Source

Was 9/11 a Government Conspiracy?

No. Conspiracy theories disrespect the memory of those taken and our intelligence.

Yes. Given the evidence, we need more investigation; there are too many questions left.

Maybe. The aftermath of 9/11 in terms of civil liberties and the war, does make it odd.

It couldn't be more complicated. I'll tell you how I think in the comments.

Waterboarding "Thrill Ride" Hits Coney Island: Political Art?

CitizenSugar — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:00:07 -0700

Folks trekking out to Coney Island are looking for a little summer diversion involving water — but the newest attraction to grace the boardwalk takes that expectation and adds a political message. Called the "Waterboard Thrill Ride," the sideshow is decorated with SpongeBob, advertises that "it dont [sic] Gitmo better" and charges $1 for a look through a barred window onto what appears to be an interrogation scene.Robots portray a prisoner and an interrogator. After the dollar is paid, the lights come on and the prisoner begins to convulse violently as water is poured on his face. The artist behind the installation says its aim is to provoke people into thinking critically about the technique. He says, "robot waterboarding became a way of exploring the issue without doing any harm. It's putting a unique experience on the table. And it doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to look in there and say: 'That's really what's going on? That's crazy.'" And who doesn't fancy a little torture demo with their corndog?There's a video of the "ride" in action, including reaction from some bystanders, some of whom hadn't heard of waterboarding before. In that sense, is it a decent public service — or does it turn a serious message into a silly sideshow?

Waterboarding "Thrill Ride" Hits Coney Island: Political Art?

It's political art for sure. It's visually designed to blend in and it causes people to think.

Dumb! It's more serious than a boardwalk attraction, and using Spongebob lures kids.

It's just a gimmick. I don't think it will change minds either way.

Other. I'll pay my buck in the comments.

Convention in Jeopardy: Does Edwards Have to Come Clean?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 12:15:05 -0700

Usually former presidential candidates are a shoo-in for a plum speaking role at their respective conventions. Certainly John Edwards as the third-to-last man standing this year, with supposed big promises from Barack for a good time-slot in exchange for his endorsement and fiery, progressive antipoverty rhetoric that sparks the base, would be a key (if not keynote) speaker. But the matter of his alleged love child and his lack of response to the story is in the way, big time. One former DNC chair says, "if there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable, and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention."Edward's own former strategist agrees:
He absolutely does have to (resolve it). If it's not true, he has to issue a stronger denial. It's a very damaging thing. The big media has tried to be responsible and handle this with kid gloves, but it's clearly getting ready to bust out. If it's not true, he's got to stand up and say, "This is not true. That is not my child and I'm going to take legal action against the people who are spreading these lies." It's not enough to say, "That’s tabloid trash."

After somewhat questionable photos surfaced this week of (perhaps?) Edwards holding his love child (her name is Frances) one professor says speak up or be shown the door, "it would be sort of party suicide to take someone with that kind of scandal and place them up.” Is an Edwards explanation in order?Source

Convention in Jeopardy: Does Edwards Have to Come Clean?

Absolutely. Silence at this point is an admission. The party needs to know who he is.

Ridiculous! Edwards is doing the right thing by not acknowledging the story at all.

I would just like some resolution so we can stop talking about it — even if it's true.

Other. I'll tell you in the comments.

Three States Consider Banning Affirmative Action: Right Move?

CitizenSugar — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:45:47 -0700

With one comment John McCain made Sunday that he supports an Arizona initiative that would ban hiring practices that favor one group over another McCain has brought attention to similar calls in two other states. He said that the initiative gives "the people of Arizona the opportunity to end preferential treatment based on race, sex, ethnicity, or national origin by state or local governments." Arizona, Colorado, and Nebraska are all considering ballot initiatives that ban affirmative action hiring practices. Sunday's comment combined with one 10 years ago where McCain called affirmative action "divisive" shows the anti-affirmative-action campaign is gaining steam toward their ultimate goal of getting "either the Supreme Court or the Congress to get the policy changed at the national level."The crux of the argument being debated in the initiatives is whether it's a ban on discrimination or an attack on programs that help women and minorities. Which do you think it is?Source

Three States Consider Banning Affirmative Action: Right Move?

Right move! It is a form of discrimination. We should all just be people, not quotas.

Step backward. Getting rid of programs that help minorities is detrimental to everyone.

Other. I'll tell you in the comments.

"Bazaar" Is Right! Tyra Plays Michelle Obama in Mag — Why?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:00:03 -0700

Tyra Banks has a penchant for playing dress-up (see: episode where she wore a fat suit), but in the September issue of Harper's Bazaar, she's slipping into a power suit to portray Michelle Obama in a fashion spread. While the dress-up stand-in seems odd, the mag has ventured into the politics of mimicry before, featuring fashion models posed next to cardboard cutouts of the candidates. Given the sometimes questionable authenticity surrounding a campaign, this seems to make sense on a deeper level (candidates = cardboard), but what does the Tyra stunt mean? While the vocal African-American supermodel has spoken out on race in the past, is the larger statement that she has a potential first lady to portray at last? Or is this just a huge September mag fashion stunt? One of the shots has been leaked, you can see for yourself. Source

"Bazaar" Is Right! Tyra Plays Michelle Obama in Mag — Why?

It's a ridiculous dress-up stunt that makes no sense. Good try finding meaning, though!

Of course it's a message about race. Tyra was a pioneer, too, so the homage is nice.

They couldn't get the real Michelle, so they compromised.

Other. I've got the solution, I'll tell you in the comments.

Condom Vending Machines in Jail: Hooked Up or Turned Off?

CitizenSugar — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 13:00:03 -0700

Inmates in a California prison are about to have access to free condoms as part of a controversial new pilot program that hopes to limit the spread of STDs among inmates. The prison will get 10 condom vending machines that will be stocked with 1,200 condoms a week.The hope is that the condoms will limit the spread of sexually transmitted diseases among inmates. A spokeswoman for the Center for Health Justice says, "We know risk behavior is being reduced. We will eventually be reducing HIV infections by this measure." Gov. Schwarzenegger has twice vetoed legislation on statewide condom distribution, but agreed to conduct a one-year trial.And no, taxpayers will not be shelling out for the rubbers (that was my first question) — a nonprofit group is paying to supply the prison with the machines and condoms, which will cost a total of $60,000.The prison guard's union is against the plan because condoms can be a place to hide drugs and weapons — not to mention the fact that sex in prison is illegal outside of conjugal visits. Prisoners will be informed of this nooky-is-against-the-law fact when they're told where the machines are. Source

Condom Vending Machines in Jail: Hooked Up or Turned Off?

Hooked up. It's the smartest way to prevent disease, and ultimately save money too.

Turned off. It's prison, not a booty call. Plus, sex in prison is illegal! Why tempt them?

Other. I'll tell you what I think in the comments.

Will Kids Who Don't Know Nature, Grow Up to Hate the Planet?

CitizenSugar — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:30:33 -0700

After waking up to a bird singing the car-alarm song note for note the other day, this I can believe: a recent survey shows kids have almost completely lost touch with the natural world. Half of the 700 quizzed were unable to identify a selection trees, flowers, and animals, and playing outside ranked as their least favorite way to spend time. Computer time trumped backyard expeditions for most. Think it's just a sign of the changing times, and if kids need to know what an oak tree looks like, well, that's what is Google is for? According to famed Brit nature program guru Sir David Attenbourough says it's a bad omen for the preservation of the environment.
The wild world is becoming so remote to children that they miss out, and an interest in the natural world doesn't grow as it should. Nobody is going protect the natural world unless they understand it.

The blame for the gap in knowledge can be spread around: overprotective (or disinterested) parents don't introduce kids to the outdoors, and ironically conservationists keep kids away for fear they'll damage the landscape. One "play development officer" (my next job please) says, "something magical occurs when children and wild spaces mix." The only way kids will learn to protect the planet is if they're allowed to learn about it through play — and kids are the future of the globe. Source

Will Kids Who Don't Know Nature, Grow Up to Hate the Planet?

This is so true! If kids don't know the plants and animals, why will they save them?

Kids might learn about the outside in different ways now, but some knowledge is key.

So unlikely. Knowing the name of a tree can't predict future eco-awareness.

Other. I'll leave my own natural specimen in the comments.

Does Congress's Apology For Jim Crow and Slavery Matter?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:45:35 -0700

As part of Congress's whirlwind-meets-marathon pace (like voting on 10 amendments in one minute at a pace of six seconds per) in order to finish up before the end of session, votes have been fast and furious. The votes aren't on trivial matters either: Whether people should be allowed to register to vote on election days and if Massachusetts can allow out-of-state gay couples to marry are on the agenda. Part of the voting frenzy included a key apology.The House voted Tuesday to apologize to black Americans for wrongs committed under slavery and Jim Crow laws. The resolution was fronted by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), the only white lawmaker representing a mostly black district (who's also facing a black challenger in a primary next week.) It's not the first time Congress has apologized — they've said sorry to Japanese-Americans for their treatment in WW II and native Hawaiians for the overthrow of their King, but this the first national apology for slavery.Five states have issued apologies, but Congressional efforts have stalled previously because they've included reparations. The Cohen resolution says that Africans forced into slavery "were brutalized, humiliated, dehumanized and subjected to the indignity of being stripped of their names and heritage." The move is largely symbolic, and given that reparations weren't mentioned, some think the apology is meaningless. "If you don't follow the apology with action, talk is cheap. Talk is less expensive than reparations."Should Congress have apologized? Are reparations necessary for it to be meaningful?Source

Does Congress's Apology For Jim Crow and Slavery Matter?

Of course it matters! It's a step in the right direction, and they were right to vote yes.

It's just talk. It's a nice sentiment, but it means nothing to those who were "brutalized."

It doesn't matter and it's not necessary. They should spend the time on important issues.

Other. I'll tell you in the comments.

Did This Ad Do Anything to Cement Obama as a "Celebrity?"

CitizenSugar — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:23:49 -0700

A representative for Britney Spears may have been speaking for the world when he gave his reaction to the McCain ad featuring Brit for a split-second saying, "Why would we want to get Britney Spears involved in presidential politics?" Wise words perhaps.

Get Flash to see this player.

Featuring shots of Paris Hilton as well as Britney, the ad is generating a meta-buzz — not about the message really, but the ad itself. To me the most interesting thing to come out of the ad is not the comparison, but that the Hiltons have given $4,600 to McCain, and they're testy about the ad — and perhaps the choice of celebs: haven't Britney and Paris been celebs for longer than Barack? Maybe they should have picked someone from High School Musical?What do you think of the piece? Is the message lost in the delivery?

Did This Ad Do Anything to Cement Obama as a "Celebrity?"

It does nothing, and who cares? It's a silly ad and getting buzz for all the wrong reasons.

It makes a good point. Comparing Obama to the celebrity paparazzi-magnets is valid.

Not at all. It's a ridiculous argument and using Britney is a gimmick.

Other. I'll tell you what I think in the comments.

Could Sex Without a Condom Be the New Engagement Ring?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:30:46 -0700

Condom-free sex is the new engagement ring. As shocking and lurid as that sounds, the story behind the headline is actually kind of logical. As told in an NPR piece in conjunction with the Youth Radio organization, for young kids in physical relationships now, they've never known a time before the threat of HIV/AIDS. What they have known however, is the impermanence of marriage. A ring, as they say in the piece, is temporary — STDs are not.That's why the new engagement is sitting down with your partner, having a serious talk about commitment, and taking the plunge to get tested together. One of the teens interviewed said, "to have sex without a condom, it's like saying I love you." What it stands for is trust, a commitment, and a shared future together. Precautions are still taken to prevent pregnancy — it's not about that, it's about the trust that the other person won't stray or put your health in danger. Does this trend make sense? Is trusting your health to another, the truest form of commitment? Want more? You can listen to the whole three-minute piece. Source

Could Sex Without a Condom Be the New Engagement Ring?

Sure! Marriage isn't permanent at all — losing protection is really the ultimate bond.

I can see why it's happening, but it's a really dangerous trend. You can't divorce AIDS.

No! There's no commitment deeper than marriage. This is scary and makes no sense.

Other. I'll commit to leaving my opinion in the comments.

Does Civil Disobedience Like "Critical Mass" Inspire Change?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:03:45 -0700

If you live in a city, chances are you know to avoid the streets during the last Friday of every month. That's when the event, Critical Mass, takes over with hoards of bicyclers all gathered together to ride the streets, snarling traffic, and calling attention to the plight of the two-wheeled rider. Some call it a social movement, a celebration, some a protest ride, and others, the mildly creative, "Critical Mess." Whatever the nomenclature, it's a happening that inspires passion — like this video taken at last Friday's Critical Mass ride in New York City.
In the video — especially in the slow-motion replay — it appears as though the police officer approaches the bicyclist and shoves him over. The officer has since been placed on desk duty pending investigation of the incident, but the video fully encompasses the conflicting viewpoints of mass disobedience as a means to enact change. The riders intend to disrupt order. That's the means by which they make their message heard — the thought is if enough people, a critical mass of people, follow suit and subjugate the norm, the norm will be questioned. However, from those on the other end of the "conversation," the disruption caused by these methods does more to denigrate the cause than to gain followers. To those questioning why the police don't do more to control the event, and perhaps stop events like the one captured in the video, the Seattle Post Intelligencer had this to say yesterday: "police don't exactly have a hands-off policy, but they're not going to devote significant resources to the regular act of civil disobedience."Is Critical Mass the perfect example of change-inspiring civil demonstration, or is the emphasis really on "disobedience?"

Does Civil Disobedience Like "Critical Mass" Inspire Change?

CM is perfect! It's nonviolent, directly related to their message and changes behavior.

It's ridiculous to think that you'll gain sympathy to a cause by bothering everyone.

It's neither. It's just one of those things that happens in cities — not a big changer.

Other. I'll ride on into the comments.

Is the John Edwards Love Child Story Newsworthy?

CitizenSugar — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 07:00:34 -0700

OK, I'm sure you've heard. John Edwards may or may not have a mistress and a love child. I've had my fingers crammed in my ears, doing the la-la-la-can't-hear-you song, all week. But now this weird meta story has developed from the whole affair (ahem): should the media be covering it — and if not, what does that mean? The story was originally broken by the National Enquirer — Edwards was supposedly caught visiting his mistress and love child at an LA hotel. (The reporters have since filed criminal charges.) In the double whammy of who the source is, and the scandalous topic, some news outlets have run with it, some dropped it like a hot potato, and some have been banned from talking about it. Fox ran an update yesterday with the hotel guard saying that when Edwards found out about the reporters, "his face just went totally white." Some at Slate are asking why the MSM isn't covering the story, citing a double standard (why Larry Craig and not Edwards). The Daily Kos says it's right not to cover it considering the source, and the LA Times issued a memo banning their bloggers from writing about the story. Is it a cover-up or a double standard? Does the story need more investigation? Or is it just good judgment to let the story go?Source

Is the John Edwards Love Child Story Newsworthy?

Of course! It deserves investigation — all leads should be followed, it's good reporting.

Not in the least. It's just garbage, and I'm glad not to read about it.

We heard enough about what Jesse Jackson said about nuts — this must be news, too!

Other. I'll sneak into the comments and leave my opinion.

Holy Campaign, Batman! Which Candidate Is the Godliest?

CitizenSugar — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:45:55 -0700

John McCain's having a little contest over on his website letting us vote on his new campaign poster. The finalists are up now, check out the top 10 designs submitted by supporters. Fun! But the buzz around the Internet today is over the giant head in the clouds, shining almighty heaven motif of choice #1. Talking Points Memo posted it saying, "it's lucky for McCain that Barack Obama is the one with a hubris problem. Otherwise, this McCain poster in support of his campaign to be elected God might raise some eyebrows. . . ." I giggled.

Speaking of Obama's (perceived! By comedians!) Jesus-complex, last night on The Daily Show, in the segment following Obama's semester abroad, titled "Obama Quest: The Legend Begins, Continues" Jon Stewart mentioned a little side trip Obama had to make to Bethlehem. It seems a certain manger from a very early point in his past needed visiting . . . watch and see.

Holy Campaign, Batman! Which Candidate Is the Godliest?

McCain. That's a poster for a Sunday School wall if I ever saw one. Hear the angels?

Obama! Come on. Born in a manger. I don't know what other proof we need he's holy.

Sorry. I'm too busy building my Ron Paul shrine to trifle with your crazy fake-God poll.

Other. I'll tell you all about how silly this is in the comments.

Congressman Targets Islamic Subway Ads — Train Wreck?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:45:30 -0700

The Islamic faith may be getting a ticket to ride — the New York City subways that is. A series of ads selling Islam are planned to hit cars in September — unless one US congressman has his way. Rep. King (R-NY) says advertising for Allah is fine — but he thinks the people sponsoring the messages unacceptable.The 1,000 posters set to grace the subway's 6,200 cars are sponsored by the Islamic Circle of North America and showcase Q&A style headlines like, "Head Scarf?" or "Prophet Muhammad?" followed by "You deserve to know." One cleric promoting the campaign said:
The idea is to evoke certain thoughts in the mindset of the person who is looking at the ads and get them to a point where they can reflect upon certain words that one could define as hot words or key words that get thrown around a lot but are not necessarily defined in the most proper context.

Why would Rep. King have a problem with that? It's not the ad, it's the money behind it. One of the backers is Siraj Wahhaj, imam of a Brooklyn mosque. Though he was the first Muslim to lead a prayer before the House of Representatives, he was also a character witness for convicted 1993 World Trade Center bombing mastermind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.King (also a ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee) says, "he is a known Islamic extremist, and you would be giving him credibility and stature through a known government facility." King is asking the MTA to can the campaign. Should they?Source

Congressman Targets Islamic Subway Ads — Train Wreck?

Total train wreck. It's free speech — the ads are acceptable regardless of the backers.

Right on track. King's raising a salient point — running the ads validates the backers.

Other. I'll give you my roundtrip in the comments.

What Will Happen To Newspapers? Are They Going Extinct?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:00:38 -0700

Do you get a newspaper thumping onto your front porch? If you do, chances are the number of people creating that paper has been considerably slashed. A new study shows that 85 percent of daily papers have cut newsroom staff in the last three years. Fewer journalists, means fewer stories — the papers surveyed have cut foreign news by two-thirds and national news by half. Part of the reason for the shrinkage, is the move toward the web. No longer able to cash in on the lucrative classifieds and ads that fueled a traditional paper, the speed with which the news happens online is causing quite a vortex of information and people to produce it. The study shows that while editors realized the advantages of the web, the energy to produce the material leads to a limited scope of questionable value — not a great trade-off. And about that move to the web. Traditional once only-paper news sources, like the New York Times now allow comments on certain stories. It's a welcome mat of reader input following in the example of blogs and nonprint media like CNN — allowing unprecedented — and sometimes questionably thought out commentary, once screened by an editorial staff. Should newspapers allow comments on their news stories? Can the sunset of the newspaper trade be buoyed by adopting more web-friendly tactics — or should newspapers stay insular and impartial? What's the future of the black and white and read all over?Source

What Will Happen To Newspapers? Are They Going Extinct?

Nope. We'll always need papers — there's more competition, but they're irreplaceable.

Yup. Pretty soon all news will be broken and reported online, who can wait for print?

Either way, they'll have to fully adapt to the web to survive — that includes comments.

Other. I'll report my opinion in the comments!