Comedian Evan Sayet doesn't mind preaching to the choir with his unabashedly conservative material.
Sayet, who divides his time between sober political punditry and satire, tells Breitbart News the choir needs all the enthusiasm it can muster these days.
"If this is a culture war, I've gotta be a part of this fight with the weapons I do have. There's no Bill Maher for the right," Sayet says.
Despite the Kingston Trio's nearly unprecedented success in record sales, by early 1961 a rift developed and deepened between Guard on one side and Shane and Reynolds on the other. Guard had been referred to in the press and on the albums' liner notes as the "acknowledged leader" of the group,[8] a description never wholly endorsed by Shane and Reynolds, who felt themselves equal contributors to the group's repertoire and success. Guard wanted Shane and Reynolds to follow his lead and learn more of the technical aspects of music and to redirect the group's song selections,[41] in part because of the withering criticism that the group had been getting from more traditional folk performers for the Trio's smoother and more commercial versions of folk songs and for the money-making copyrights that the Kingston group had secured for their arrangements of public domain songs.[1] Shane and Reynolds felt that the formula for song selection and performance that they had painstakingly developed and rehearsed still served them well.[41]Such an obvious business model: take someone else's freely-given effort and spin it into cash. It's like they invented the internet.
Furthermore, over $100,000 appeared to be missing from the Trio's publishing royalties (an accounting error eventually rectified)[41] and that created an additional irritant to both sides: to Guard because he regarded it as inexcusable carelessness and to Shane and Reynolds because it highlighted what they perceived as Guard's propensity to claim individual copyright for some of the group's songs,[42] including "Tom Dooley" (though Guard eventually lost a suit over copyright for that number to Alan Lomax, Frank Warner, and Frank Proffitt)[43] and "Scotch and Soda".[42]
In a 5-2 vote this week, the Randolph County School Board of Education banned the book from county school libraries after the mother of an 11-grader complained. The mother claimed Ellison's work was inappropriate for 11th grade summer reading, citing both language and subject matter.I await the ban of all textbooks.
In response, Board members each received a copy of the novel to assess for themselves. According to The Courier-Tribune of Asheboro, N.C., at Monday's meeting, the board chair rejected "Invisible Man" as a "hard read," and another member stated he couldn't "find any literary value" in it.
Sorry Belle … I think it is partly an allergy stemming from a certain view of their history: the great British blues band (with Peter Green) morphing into an American soft-rock ensemble. When Rumors (1977) came out, the UK was in the throes of punk and I was 18 …. they were everything I hated and I’ve never been able to shake the association.Peter Green's sort of dull, but there's a degree to which I sympathize with the view of Fleetwood Mac as near-worthless wallpaper. Rumours and Tusk I now find terrific almost all the way through, so in advance of Chris's comment I wrote:
Almost all of Rumors and Tusk is worth a listen. Personally I was put off by how smooth it all was when I was younger, and repulsed by the idea that they spent $1,000,000 recording Tusk. I suppose I am now just as dull as they were.Hooray for me getting on Fleetwood Mac's lawn! Everybody else GET OFF IT.
Writers are taught to avoid cliches in their art, but Oscar-nominated scribe Aaron Sorkin simply can't help himself.Mmmmmmmm, the sweet smell of cliché avoidance.
Sorkin's HBO drama The Newsroom packs plenty of overt, and obvious, anti-conservative cliches in an average episode. Sunday's season finale stuffed as many as Sorkin and his writing team could rally, proving he cares more about scoring political points than crafting solid stories.Solid stories can't use clichés? Yet Indisputably Good Things like complaining about liberals complaining about conservatives RELY on clichés. It is a piddle wrapped in a hysteria inside an angina.
The sense of projection is stunning. So, too, is Sorkin's inability to separate his rage for conservatives from his duties on his very own show.I have never seen this show, and likely will never see this show. But it seems to me that, two seasons in, maybe Sorkin has developed a sense of duty that, in some perversion of the universal law that being mean to conservatives is wrong, delivers him large bags of money.
AARON SORKIN'S 'NEWSROOM' TAKES LAST SHOT AT CONSERVATIVES, DUBS THEM HOMOPHOBIC, ANTI-SCIENCE
"The cardinal sin of capitalism is greed, but the cardinal sin of socialism is power. I'm not sure there's a clear choice between those evils," Scalia said. "While I would not argue that capitalism as an economic system is inherently more Christian than socialism … it does seem to me that capitalism is more dependent on Christianity than socialism is. For in order for capitalism to work - in order for it to produce a good and a stable society - the traditional Christian virtues are essential."Keeping someone else's granny alive is just not worth it if it turns you into a sourpuss at tax time.
Scalia, who is Catholic, discussed how religious orders once took care of orphans and the elderly, which is now done in large part by "salaried social workers" and financed by tax dollars.
"The governmentalization of charity affects not just the donor but also the recipient. What was once asked as a favor is now demanded as an entitlement," he said. "The transformation of charity into legal entitlement has produced donors without love and recipients without gratitude. ... It's not my place or my purpose to criticize these developments, only to observe that they do not suggest the expanding role of government is good for Christianity."
In this society steeped in misogyny, celebrity and inequality, I was someone to be both envied and hated – even as the rape threats continued to come. And of course women turning on me led a man who was stalking me to crow: “Even some feminists are turning on Caroline Criado-Perez now, they can see her real motives. Could be a big backfire #assraped”. He was right though. It was feminists too.And it doesn't stop: she's still getting the same messages from the same people.
The impact of all this on my life has been dramatic. When it was at its height I struggled to eat, to sleep, to work. I lost about half a stone in a matter of days. I was exhausted and weighed down by carrying these vivid images, this tidal wave of hate around with me wherever I went. And I kept being asked to relive the experience for endless media interviews – when I look back at that relentless attention, I can’t quite comprehend it. It didn’t feel real then, and it doesn’t feel real now. I still can’t quite believe this has happened to me.
The psychological fall-out is still unravelling. I feel like I’m walking around like a timer about to explode; I’m functioning at just under boiling point – and it takes so little to make me cry – or to make me scream.
And I’m still being told not to feed the trolls.
I can’t begin to tell you how much I hate that phrase. That phrase takes no account of the feelings of the victim – only of the feelings of a society that doesn’t care, that doesn’t want to hear it, that wants women to put up and shut up. It completely ignores the actions of the abuser, focusing only on the actions of the victim – because that’s what we do in this society. We police victims. We ask “why doesn’t she leave?” instead of asking “why doesn’t he stop?”
In March 2009, Logitech formed a special team with an urgent mission. The maker of computer peripherals, especially keyboards and mice, had been caught off-guard when consumers in China unexpectedly fell in love with a new mouse that was not Logitech’s. The company closely monitored its direct rivals, especially Microsoft, but this market insurgency was engineered by a Chinese company called Rapoo, at best a faint blip on Logitech’s radar screen.What? Reverse innovation?
You may think that this storyline, in which a healthy multinational finds itself under siege from a developing world upstart, is unlikely or unusual. If so, think again. Thanks to the rising phenomenon of reverse innovation, we can expect that the scene that played out at Logitech will repeat itself in industry after industry.
Reverse innovation definedBe careful of assumptions rick folks! You may find you have them exactly BACKWARDS. Haw haw.
A reverse innovation is any innovation that is adopted first in the developing world. To be clear: What makes an innovation a reverse innovation has nothing to do with where the innovators are, and it has nothing to do with where the companies are. It has only to do with where the customers are.
Historically, reverse innovation has been a rare phenomenon. In fact, the logic for innovations flowing downhill, from the rich world to the developing world, is natural and intuitive. After all, it is the richest customers in the richest countries that will always demand the newest technologies. In due time, the costs of new technologies come down, and incomes in the developing world rise. As a result, innovations trickle down. Right?
Be careful. The intuitive assumption that poor countries are engaged in a process of gradually catching up with the rich world has become toxic. It is a strategic blind spot that has the potential to sink an increasingly common aspiration: to generate high growth in the emerging economies. The assumption can even inflict long-term damage in home markets. That is because surprisingly often, reverse innovations defy gravity and flow uphill to the rich world. As a result, a defeat in a developing country half a world away can lead directly to a stinging blow in your own back yard.
For years, employers have relied on graduating students' grade point averages to assess their skills and potential. But employers as well as colleges have been wondering for years, can a GPA alone really tell you that much?Student guide with sample question here in a PDF.
Next spring, seniors at 200 colleges will be offered the chance to take a new test billed by some as a "post-grad exit exam," which may prove more important than that coveted high GPA.
The 90-minute Collegiate Learning Assessment Plus (CLA+) is an expansion of the Collegiate Learning Assessment, which 700 schools have already used to measure their own performances. On a scale of 1600 (like the SATs), the CLA+ evaluates students' problem solving, quantitative reasoning, writing and critical reasoning faculties.
"What we’re offering to students is the opportunity to illustrate to employers that they have these skills," Chris Jackson, director of business development at the Council for Aid to Education, the non-profit that created the CLA+, told MSN News.
Fifty years ago, Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I have a dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial to a crowd of over 200,000 people. The crowd had gathered to protest the dangerous state into which race relations had fallen in the summer of 1963. King’s memorable speech was part of “the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom,” and its solemn cadences ring as powerfully today they did 50 years ago. No one who heard it could forget its immensely powerful assault on segregation, the demise of which no respectable person—northerner or southerner—mourns today. No one should forget that King’s speech was a major catalyst in moving a still reluctant nation to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.State into which race relations had FALLEN? I suppose asshole is thinking back to the glorious era shortly after America's founding when the Founding Fathers ensured that nearly all the black people in the US had some kind of useful function.
But [King] slips badly when he says, “We can never be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote.” The two problems could not be more distinct. The exclusion from the polls of an individual by virtue of race is a denial of what King rightly names “citizenship rights.”...okay...
It is easy to think of a legal remedy that could be introduced against formal prohibitions against the right to vote
just as it is easy to envision remedies to legal barriers to entry into labor markets. Striking them down is a no-brainer because at one stroke the new laws are able to expand opportunities for all citizens and shrink the size of government.Whoa there, it isn't an end in itself to shrink government. Look at your cheapskate nation for fuck's sake.
But wanting some particular political agenda to come before a state legislature does not have those simple virtues. There are thousands of agendas from which to choose, and there is no reason to believe that all people of any race or group should unite behind any of them. While it is easy to forge a strong coalition to remove legal barriers to entry in political and economic markets, it is a treacherous business—and one easily derailed—to try to create a single substantive agenda that people of all races and from all walks of life should support.Isn't there some process through which things like this are worked out? Word's on the tip of my tongue, starts with "politica". Being able to "have things for which to vote" seems like a pretty fucking good idea to me.
Portraying Ronald Reagan as a racist because he was in favor of lifting economic sanctions against South Africa is simplistic and dishonest.Dude, you were adopted. Your adoptive father was a racist.
If you knew my father, you’d know he was the last person on Earth you would call a racist.
