|   Browse Inside this book Get this for your site |  |
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
The North Iowa Tea Party Latest Billboard comparing Obama to Hitler and Lenin
One of the weirdest, and saddest, things I've seen. Normally, I would never compare anyone to Adolf Hitler, much less Vladimir Lenin. But these idiots from the Tea Party, who think they know it all though they know nothing, are demonstrating how bereft of intellect and historical knowledge they truly are.Tuesday, April 20, 2010
From Madalyn Murray O'Hair to Anthony Flew: My own intellectual journey in disbelief
by Jorge Reyes
Browsing the internet today, I read the obituary of the British rationalist philosopher Anthony Flew.
For most of his life Flew has been a consistent and strong advocate for natural philosophy, unemcumbered by belief in God or miracles. To him, he advocated a negative form of atheism, placing the burden of proof of belief in any transcendence squarely on the shoulders of theists. Since propositions of belief in God cannot be disproven, he would say, then he argued that it would be senseless to even advocate a rational marriage between belief and unbelief, like much of philosophy has tried to do. One key to understanding much of Flew's philosophy: to follow evidence wherever it leads, something also said by Socrates more than two thousand years ago.
By a strange twist of intellectual honesty (some people call it intellectual dishonesty or age-old decrepitude), in 2004 Flew changed his mind. Still denying much belief in a personal God, life after death, or the supernatural, he began to argue that discoveries into the DNA prove that an intelligent design of some sort must have brought such complex matter into existence. He went on to argue that although this proved that something-- never calling that something by a name-- had to have been involved in the first act of creation, what is called the Big Bang, the springing forth, of sentient matter from inanimate matter. What that something was, Flew didn't go into detail. It was a deism in the philosophical tradition of Thomas Jefferson.
To deists, nature's god first created the world and then let the world function with its natural laws, letting the great natural machinery of life evolve on its own, without any special assistance from this god. Life, in other words, is like a blind clockmaker created by an unknown clockmaker.
As Flew wrote, DNA had "shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved". It was not coincidental that during his lifetime, he advocated in Great Britain the teaching of creative intelligence, something that their American fundamentalist brethens have tried to push through the public schools for many decades now.
I've always had the intellectual and psychical need to know what's behind religious belief. Call me whatever you want, but to me it all hinges on whether life has or doesn't have meaning, though meaninglessness is something that troubles me because nature equipped us all to find meaning even in the most mundane, trivial acts of living. Since I was a little kid I questioned what it was most people referred to when they pray to god. Believing in the bible stories, I often glanced at the sky trying to see if I would take a sneek peek at that famous Jesus who died for our sins one day, really soon, would come back to take us back into the kingdom of heaven.
I kid you not, growing up in a communist society such as Cuba, my religious curiosity wasn't normal and it would have branded me into an anti-social element, a social deviate who should have been spending more time, instead, delving into the historical materialism of Hegel or Lenin, not Christ's second coming.
Fast-forward my timeline and years later living in the United States as a young adult enrolled in college, I remember the day I heard the well-known American atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair calling all believers idiots, all miracles as a form of mental illusion, and anyone who disagreed with her were just suffering from mental illness. If there were any gods, as she liked to whip, all you had to do is prove it to her and the whole assorted mess would be resolved.
I fell in love with the 70 year old atheist! Unlike Flew whose writings were dense and in the best philosophical tradition, O'Hair made it popular and chic to disbelief, to question god, to grapple with ideas and bring them down to their bare essentials. Her message was not unique, she was just titilating to watch.
As some of you may remember her, during her lifetime O'Hair was demonized. At one point in the 1960's, Life magazine called her "one of the most hated women in America", and indeed she was. Her ramblings, often peppered with nuggets of intellectual insights, didn't win her any fans. It seems that she had an equally dysfunctional family. In the 1980's her eldest son, William Murray, the litigant whose Supreme Court case won them infamy by banning bible and prayer recitation in the United States, had a religious conversion and turned into his mother's worst enemy.
Sadly for her and for her other son Jon and granddaughter Robin (William's daughter), in 1995 they were all abducted by their office manager, held hostage for a few months in a cheap motel in Texas and forced to take out of the corporate's account more than $600,000 in gold coins. They were then slowly and brutally murdered, their bodies dismembered, and disposed of in a farm in Texas. A nationwide search led by the FBI and then the IRS found their remains in 1999, five years after their infamous disappearance.
I was often like O'Hair herself. If it couldn't proven, it must be false. I still feel that way, but in less histrionic ways. These days, though, I can understand Flew more than I can understand O'Hair.
There are things unseen that the mind cannot know, that our rationalism by itself is not fit to know (or at least not evolved yet to know), and that although miracles and belief in the particular of the major religions may be forms of mental delusion and brainwashing, for all practical purposes life itself is a mystery.
It is that same Kantian unknowability, that the mind has not evolved to the point that we can know things as they are, that I think Flew hit on the nail. Still looking at most rational proofs of God as hogwash, Flew nonetheless still marvelled at the uniqueness and unlikely story of existence. His recant and intellectual postulation from outright disbelief to a form of agnosticism is not hypocritical, but I think it goes to the very core of what it is to question, to take ideas seriously, and to "follow the evidence, wherever it leads", a key element to any philosophy.
Anthony Flew and Madalyn Murray O'Hair's lives- and deaths-- were as ironic as the lives they led. One died brutally murdered and still unrecanted and uncommitted to belief. The other died in peace, with all the accololades that his profession accorded him. In the end, both of them agreed more than disagreed: we just don't know. Or as O'Hair herself may have said: "just f***cking prove it."
From Madalyn Murray O'Hair to Anthony Flew: My own intellectual journey in disbelief
by Jorge Reyes
Browsing the internet today, I read the obituary of the British rationalist philosopher Anthony Flew.
For most of his life Flew has been a consistent and strong advocate for natural philosophy, unemcumbered by belief in God or
miracles. To him, he advocated a negative form of atheism, placing the burden of proof of belief in any transcendence squarely on the shoulders of theists. Since propositions of belief in God cannot be disproven, he would say, then he argued that it would be senseless to even advocate a rational marriage between belief and unbelief, like much of philosophy has tried to do. One key to understanding much of Flew's philosophy: to follow evidence wherever it leads, something also said by Socrates more than two thousand years ago.
By a strange twist of intellectual honesty (some people call it intellectual dishonesty or age-old decrepitude), in 2004 Flew changed his mind. Still denying much belief in a personal God, life after death, or the supernatural, he began to argue that discoveries into the DNA prove that an intelligent design of some sort must have brought such complex matter into existence. He went on to argue that although this proved that something-- never calling that something by a name-- had to have been involved in the first act of creation, what is called the Big Bang, the springing forth, of sentient matter from inanimate matter. What that something was, Flew didn't go into detail. It was a deism in the philosophical tradition of Thomas Jefferson.
To deists, nature's god first created the world and then let the world function with its natural laws, letting the great natural machinery of life evolve on its own, without any special assistance from this god. Life, in other words, is like a blind clockmaker created by an unknown clockmaker.
As Flew wrote, DNA had "shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved". It was not coincidental that during his lifetime, he advocated in Great Britain the teaching of creative intelligence, something that their American fundamentalist brethens have tried to push through the public schools for many decades now.
I've always had the intellectual and psychical need to know what's behind religious belief. Call me whatever you want, but to me it all hinges on whether life has or doesn't have meaning, though meaninglessness is something that troubles me because nature equipped us all to find meaning even in the most mundane, trivial acts of living. Since I was a little kid I questioned what it was most people referred to when they pray to god. Believing in the bible stories, I often glanced at the sky trying to see if I would take a sneek peek at that famous Jesus who died for our sins one day, really soon, would come back to take us back into the kingdom of heaven.
I kid you not, growing up in a communist society such as Cuba, my religious curiosity wasn't normal and it would have branded me into an anti-social element, a social deviate who should have been spending more time, instead, delving into the historical materialism of Hegel or Lenin, not Christ's second coming.
Fast-forward my timeline and years later living in the United States as a young adult enrolled in college, I remember the day I heard the well-known American atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair calling all believers idiots, all miracles as a form of mental illusion, and anyone who disagreed with her were just suffering from mental illness. If there were any gods, as she liked to whip, all you had to do is prove it to her and the whole assorted mess would be resolved.
I fell in love with the 70 year old atheist! Unlike Flew whose writings were dense and in the best philosophical tradition, O'Hair made it popular and chic to disbelief, to question god, to grapple with ideas and bring them down to their bare essentials. Her message was not unique, she was just titilating to watch.
As some of you may remember her, during her lifetime O'Hair was demonized. At one point in the 1960's, Life magazine called her "one of the most hated women in America", and indeed she was. Her ramblings, often peppered with nuggets of intellectual insights, didn't win her any fans. It seems that she had an equally dysfunctional family. In the 1980's her eldest son, William Murray, the litigant whose Supreme Court case won them infamy by banning bible and prayer recitation in the United States, had a religious conversion and turned into his mother's worst enemy.
Sadly for her and for her other son Jon and granddaughter Robyn (William's daughter), in 1995 they were all abducted by their office manager, held hostage for a few months in a cheap motel in Texas and forced to take out of the corporate's account more than $600,000 in gold coins. They were then slowly and brutally murdered, their bodies dismembered, and disposed of in a farm in Texas. A nationwide search led by the FBI and then the IRS found their remains in 1999, five years after their infamous disappearance.
I was often like O'Hair herself. If it couldn't proven, it must be false. I still feel that way, but in less histrionic ways. These days, though, I can understand Flew more than I can understand O'Hair.
There are things unseen that the mind cannot know, that our rationalism by itself is not fit to know (or at least not evolved yet to know), and that although miracles and belief in the particular of the major religions may be forms of mental delusion and brainwashing, for all practical purposes life itself is a mystery.
It is that same Kantian unknowability, that the mind has not evolved to the point that we can know things as they are, that I think Flew hit on the nail. Still looking at most rational proofs of God as hogwash, Flew nonetheless still marvelled at the uniqueness and unlikely story of existence. His recant and intellectual postulation from outright disbelief to a form of agnosticism is not hypocritical, but I think it goes to the very core of what it is to question, to take ideas seriously, and to "follow the evidence, wherever it leads", a key element to any philosophy.
Anthony Flew and Madalyn Murray O'Hair's writings, and personal lives, leave us with more questions than answers. Their deaths were as ironic as the lives they led. One died brutally murdered and still unrecanted and uncommitted to belief. The other died in peace, with all the accololades that his profession accorded him, leaving life's most important question up for grabs. In the end, both of them agreed more than disagreed: we just don't know.
Browsing the internet today, I read the obituary of the British rationalist philosopher Anthony Flew.
For most of his life Flew has been a consistent and strong advocate for natural philosophy, unemcumbered by belief in God or
miracles. To him, he advocated a negative form of atheism, placing the burden of proof of belief in any transcendence squarely on the shoulders of theists. Since propositions of belief in God cannot be disproven, he would say, then he argued that it would be senseless to even advocate a rational marriage between belief and unbelief, like much of philosophy has tried to do. One key to understanding much of Flew's philosophy: to follow evidence wherever it leads, something also said by Socrates more than two thousand years ago.
By a strange twist of intellectual honesty (some people call it intellectual dishonesty or age-old decrepitude), in 2004 Flew changed his mind. Still denying much belief in a personal God, life after death, or the supernatural, he began to argue that discoveries into the DNA prove that an intelligent design of some sort must have brought such complex matter into existence. He went on to argue that although this proved that something-- never calling that something by a name-- had to have been involved in the first act of creation, what is called the Big Bang, the springing forth, of sentient matter from inanimate matter. What that something was, Flew didn't go into detail. It was a deism in the philosophical tradition of Thomas Jefferson.
To deists, nature's god first created the world and then let the world function with its natural laws, letting the great natural machinery of life evolve on its own, without any special assistance from this god. Life, in other words, is like a blind clockmaker created by an unknown clockmaker.
As Flew wrote, DNA had "shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved". It was not coincidental that during his lifetime, he advocated in Great Britain the teaching of creative intelligence, something that their American fundamentalist brethens have tried to push through the public schools for many decades now.
I've always had the intellectual and psychical need to know what's behind religious belief. Call me whatever you want, but to me it all hinges on whether life has or doesn't have meaning, though meaninglessness is something that troubles me because nature equipped us all to find meaning even in the most mundane, trivial acts of living. Since I was a little kid I questioned what it was most people referred to when they pray to god. Believing in the bible stories, I often glanced at the sky trying to see if I would take a sneek peek at that famous Jesus who died for our sins one day, really soon, would come back to take us back into the kingdom of heaven.
I kid you not, growing up in a communist society such as Cuba, my religious curiosity wasn't normal and it would have branded me into an anti-social element, a social deviate who should have been spending more time, instead, delving into the historical materialism of Hegel or Lenin, not Christ's second coming.
Fast-forward my timeline and years later living in the United States as a young adult enrolled in college, I remember the day I heard the well-known American atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair calling all believers idiots, all miracles as a form of mental illusion, and anyone who disagreed with her were just suffering from mental illness. If there were any gods, as she liked to whip, all you had to do is prove it to her and the whole assorted mess would be resolved.
I fell in love with the 70 year old atheist! Unlike Flew whose writings were dense and in the best philosophical tradition, O'Hair made it popular and chic to disbelief, to question god, to grapple with ideas and bring them down to their bare essentials. Her message was not unique, she was just titilating to watch.
As some of you may remember her, during her lifetime O'Hair was demonized. At one point in the 1960's, Life magazine called her "one of the most hated women in America", and indeed she was. Her ramblings, often peppered with nuggets of intellectual insights, didn't win her any fans. It seems that she had an equally dysfunctional family. In the 1980's her eldest son, William Murray, the litigant whose Supreme Court case won them infamy by banning bible and prayer recitation in the United States, had a religious conversion and turned into his mother's worst enemy.
Sadly for her and for her other son Jon and granddaughter Robyn (William's daughter), in 1995 they were all abducted by their office manager, held hostage for a few months in a cheap motel in Texas and forced to take out of the corporate's account more than $600,000 in gold coins. They were then slowly and brutally murdered, their bodies dismembered, and disposed of in a farm in Texas. A nationwide search led by the FBI and then the IRS found their remains in 1999, five years after their infamous disappearance.
I was often like O'Hair herself. If it couldn't proven, it must be false. I still feel that way, but in less histrionic ways. These days, though, I can understand Flew more than I can understand O'Hair.
There are things unseen that the mind cannot know, that our rationalism by itself is not fit to know (or at least not evolved yet to know), and that although miracles and belief in the particular of the major religions may be forms of mental delusion and brainwashing, for all practical purposes life itself is a mystery.
It is that same Kantian unknowability, that the mind has not evolved to the point that we can know things as they are, that I think Flew hit on the nail. Still looking at most rational proofs of God as hogwash, Flew nonetheless still marvelled at the uniqueness and unlikely story of existence. His recant and intellectual postulation from outright disbelief to a form of agnosticism is not hypocritical, but I think it goes to the very core of what it is to question, to take ideas seriously, and to "follow the evidence, wherever it leads", a key element to any philosophy.
Anthony Flew and Madalyn Murray O'Hair's writings, and personal lives, leave us with more questions than answers. Their deaths were as ironic as the lives they led. One died brutally murdered and still unrecanted and uncommitted to belief. The other died in peace, with all the accololades that his profession accorded him, leaving life's most important question up for grabs. In the end, both of them agreed more than disagreed: we just don't know.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Corey Haim Dead at 38 of Apparent Drug Overdose
Corey Haim, the former teen idol who rose to fame in 1980s classics 'The Lost Boys,' 'Lucas' and 'License to Drive,' died Wednesday morning of an apparent accidental drug overdose in Burbank, Calif., the LAPD has confirmed. He was 38. Local news station KTLA is reporting that Haim was found in an Oakwood apartment believed to belong to his mother, who was at home at the time and called emergency responders. TMZ is reporting that four prescription drug bottles were found nearby, and that he had been gripped by flu-like symptoms in recent days.
Coroner Lt. Cheryl MacWillie told reporters that Haim died at 2:15 a.m. at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center in Burbank. An autopsy to determine the cause of death is pending.
Coroner Lt. Cheryl MacWillie told reporters that Haim died at 2:15 a.m. at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center in Burbank. An autopsy to determine the cause of death is pending.
Monday, February 22, 2010
President Obama has unveiled his plan for health care reform.
President Obama unveiled his plan for health care reform Monday morning, four days before the summit at which Republicans and Democrats are scheduled to sit down with the president to forge a bipartisan compromise on the matter.
White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said Monday that Obama's proposal is designed to "bridge the gaps" between the different health reform bills passed by the House and Senate last year, and represents Democrats' "opening bid" for the talks with Republicans this week.
"The president is coming to the meeting with an open mind; we hope the Republicans will come with an open mind too," Pfeiffer said.
The plan, which is posted on the White House's Web site, keeps much of the health reform framework passed by Senate Democrats in December, including a mandate that requires individuals to purchase health insurance, a process for the federal government to subsidize people who cannot afford coverage, and taxes and fees to raise revenue to pay for those subsidies.
Like the Senate-passed bill, the president's plan would create health insurance exchanges, where individual customers could shop for insurance, in some cases across state lines. A public insurance option is not in the president's plan, although Pfeiffer said Obama "supports a public option."
The new proposal does make some significant changes to the Senate bill. For example, it eliminates the "Cornhusker Kickback," the provision negotiated by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to require the federal government to pay for his state's portion of the costs for Medicaid expansion in the bill. Instead, the federal government will pay for 100 percent of the Medicaid increase for all states through 2018, and will cover a declining share after that.
Also, the president's proposal delays the implementation of the excise tax for expensive insurance policies for all policy holders, not just union members (as had been negotiated), until 2018, and increases the threshold of plans that are subjected to the tax to $27,500 for a family plan, an increase from the $23,000 threshold in the Senate bill.
Finally, the White House proposal creates $40 billion in small-business tax credits to help employers pay for insurance for their workers, although only businesses with more than 50 employees will pay penalties for not doing so.
One element in the plan that neither the House nor Senate has passed is a proposal to give the federal government authority over insurance rates. Right now, rates are regulated only at the state level, and in some states are not regulated at all. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced a federal-rate-authority measure this month after California's largest insurance provider for individuals alerted its customers that their premiums could increase by as much as 39 percent this year.
White House adviser Nancy-Ann DeParle estimated that the changes proposed by the White House would increase the cost of the overall health care bill to $950 billion over 10 years, which she said will be offset by additional fees for health providers and penalties on large employers that do not cover their workers.
Democrats struggled earlier this year to move health care reform to a final vote, but House and Senate negotiators failed to come to agreements on several issues, including language restricting abortion funding. Pfeiffer said Monday that the president will recommend using the Senate abortion language, originally proposed by Nelson, rather then the stricter House language championed by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.)
Since the election of Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Democrats have searched for a process to move reform through Congress with or without his support, including the possibility of breaking the larger package into small pieces for individual votes, or using a Senate procedure known as "reconciliation," which allows legislation directly related to the federal budget to pass the Senate with 51 votes, instead of having to clear the 60-vote threshold required for most other bills.
With expectations low that Thursday's televised meeting will yield many real results, senior Democrats have refused to rule out any procedural tactic to pass health care reform this year. At the end of January, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi explained the approach Democrats are taking to pass health care reform.
"We will move on many fronts, any front we can," she told reporters at a press conference. "We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole-vault in. If that doesn't work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people for their own personal health and economic security and for the important role that it will play in reducing the deficit."
On Monday, White House advisers indicated that reconciliation remains a viable option. "There have been no determinations on which process we will use going forward," Pfeiffer said. But he warned that Democrats will examine all of their options, "if the opposition takes the extraordinary step of filibustering health care reform."
"The president expects and believes the American people deserve an up-or-down vote on health care reform."
White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said Monday that Obama's proposal is designed to "bridge the gaps" between the different health reform bills passed by the House and Senate last year, and represents Democrats' "opening bid" for the talks with Republicans this week.
"The president is coming to the meeting with an open mind; we hope the Republicans will come with an open mind too," Pfeiffer said.
The plan, which is posted on the White House's Web site, keeps much of the health reform framework passed by Senate Democrats in December, including a mandate that requires individuals to purchase health insurance, a process for the federal government to subsidize people who cannot afford coverage, and taxes and fees to raise revenue to pay for those subsidies.
Like the Senate-passed bill, the president's plan would create health insurance exchanges, where individual customers could shop for insurance, in some cases across state lines. A public insurance option is not in the president's plan, although Pfeiffer said Obama "supports a public option."
The new proposal does make some significant changes to the Senate bill. For example, it eliminates the "Cornhusker Kickback," the provision negotiated by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to require the federal government to pay for his state's portion of the costs for Medicaid expansion in the bill. Instead, the federal government will pay for 100 percent of the Medicaid increase for all states through 2018, and will cover a declining share after that.
Also, the president's proposal delays the implementation of the excise tax for expensive insurance policies for all policy holders, not just union members (as had been negotiated), until 2018, and increases the threshold of plans that are subjected to the tax to $27,500 for a family plan, an increase from the $23,000 threshold in the Senate bill.
Finally, the White House proposal creates $40 billion in small-business tax credits to help employers pay for insurance for their workers, although only businesses with more than 50 employees will pay penalties for not doing so.
One element in the plan that neither the House nor Senate has passed is a proposal to give the federal government authority over insurance rates. Right now, rates are regulated only at the state level, and in some states are not regulated at all. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced a federal-rate-authority measure this month after California's largest insurance provider for individuals alerted its customers that their premiums could increase by as much as 39 percent this year.
White House adviser Nancy-Ann DeParle estimated that the changes proposed by the White House would increase the cost of the overall health care bill to $950 billion over 10 years, which she said will be offset by additional fees for health providers and penalties on large employers that do not cover their workers.
Democrats struggled earlier this year to move health care reform to a final vote, but House and Senate negotiators failed to come to agreements on several issues, including language restricting abortion funding. Pfeiffer said Monday that the president will recommend using the Senate abortion language, originally proposed by Nelson, rather then the stricter House language championed by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.)
Since the election of Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Democrats have searched for a process to move reform through Congress with or without his support, including the possibility of breaking the larger package into small pieces for individual votes, or using a Senate procedure known as "reconciliation," which allows legislation directly related to the federal budget to pass the Senate with 51 votes, instead of having to clear the 60-vote threshold required for most other bills.
With expectations low that Thursday's televised meeting will yield many real results, senior Democrats have refused to rule out any procedural tactic to pass health care reform this year. At the end of January, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi explained the approach Democrats are taking to pass health care reform.
"We will move on many fronts, any front we can," she told reporters at a press conference. "We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole-vault in. If that doesn't work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people for their own personal health and economic security and for the important role that it will play in reducing the deficit."
On Monday, White House advisers indicated that reconciliation remains a viable option. "There have been no determinations on which process we will use going forward," Pfeiffer said. But he warned that Democrats will examine all of their options, "if the opposition takes the extraordinary step of filibustering health care reform."
"The president expects and believes the American people deserve an up-or-down vote on health care reform."
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tiger Woods gives formal apology.
"I have a lot to atone for." Tiger Woods gave his first in-person public statement today after the affair scandal that linked more than 10 mistresses to him rocked the headlines in late November and December of last year. The golf great had tears in his eyes as he somberly apologized to his staff, family, friends, and fans. He said, with a sigh: "I have a lot to atone for."
He said he wanted to clarify one thing about his wife Elin Nordegren: "Some believe believe Elin either hurt or attacked me on that Thanksgiving night. There has never been an episode of domestic violence in our marriage, ever," he said. "Elin has showed enormous grace and poise throughout this ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame."
He admitted to his affairs, and to being in rehab for weeks, too. He solemnly pleaded for the media to leave his family alone, and that he is the "one that needs to change." He said: "I was unfaithful, I had affairs, I cheated. What I did was unacceptable, and I am the only one to blame."
He talked about the fans and children he has disappointed, and vowed to make amends. "I have disappointed all of you and made you question who I am and how I could have done the things I did," Tiger said. "I am embarrassed to have put you in this position for all that I have done. I am so sorry."
He ended the speech with a pointed request to his fans and those around him: "Today I ask for your help, to find room in your heart to one day believe in me again."
Then, he hugged his mom, Kultida Woods, who sat in the front row during the speech.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Drew Brees on the Oprah Winfrey Show
This is embarrassing... for Oprah.
Apparently, she didn't see New Orleans Saints quarterback and Super Bowl MVP ever before in her life. How else can you explain what happened when Drew Brees was a guest on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show'? Before we go to the tape, a few thoughts. First, what does it say about the staff research on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' that something as big as Drew Brees' birthmark, clearly visible on his right cheek didn't make it into the notes?Nobody ran a little tape on the guy? There were no football cards or an 8x10 glossy? It makes you think that somebody simply handed Oprah a set of cards and said, "Here you go. His team won the Super Bowl. He throws the ball. Go get him, O."
Clearly, Ms. O had no idea what Drew Brees looked like. She must not have watched the Super Bowl or she would have seen the birthmark on his face. She must not have seen any of the post-game appearances with Drew Brees or she would have asked someone about that mark on his face. She must not have cared very much about the interview to do the proper preparation. Fortunately for Oprah, Drew is a good-natured guy and he laughed off her attempt to clean his face.
It's not exactly the same, but have you ever experienced this: you walk into the doctor's office. You meet with the nurse and explain what's wrong with you. The nurse writes it all down in your file and you sit and wait 30 minutes in a paper gown. The doctor walks in with your file. While you continue to wait, the doctor opens the file and just then starts to read. When they're done, they look up at you and say, "Now, what's wrong?" It's like they have not read or understood one iota of the material in the file. It's like they have no idea who you are.
Maybe it's not very much like that after all, but Oprah should be ashamed of herself for not reading the Drew Brees file before he walked out onto her stage. After all, she is Oprah. She's supposed to be better than that.
Apparently, she didn't see New Orleans Saints quarterback and Super Bowl MVP ever before in her life. How else can you explain what happened when Drew Brees was a guest on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show'? Before we go to the tape, a few thoughts. First, what does it say about the staff research on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' that something as big as Drew Brees' birthmark, clearly visible on his right cheek didn't make it into the notes?Nobody ran a little tape on the guy? There were no football cards or an 8x10 glossy? It makes you think that somebody simply handed Oprah a set of cards and said, "Here you go. His team won the Super Bowl. He throws the ball. Go get him, O."
Clearly, Ms. O had no idea what Drew Brees looked like. She must not have watched the Super Bowl or she would have seen the birthmark on his face. She must not have seen any of the post-game appearances with Drew Brees or she would have asked someone about that mark on his face. She must not have cared very much about the interview to do the proper preparation. Fortunately for Oprah, Drew is a good-natured guy and he laughed off her attempt to clean his face.
It's not exactly the same, but have you ever experienced this: you walk into the doctor's office. You meet with the nurse and explain what's wrong with you. The nurse writes it all down in your file and you sit and wait 30 minutes in a paper gown. The doctor walks in with your file. While you continue to wait, the doctor opens the file and just then starts to read. When they're done, they look up at you and say, "Now, what's wrong?" It's like they have not read or understood one iota of the material in the file. It's like they have no idea who you are.
Maybe it's not very much like that after all, but Oprah should be ashamed of herself for not reading the Drew Brees file before he walked out onto her stage. After all, she is Oprah. She's supposed to be better than that.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Rumors of divorce between Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie is not new
The rumors that super celeb couple Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are getting a divorce are not new.
In April of 2009, Blogger Ian Halperin reported that Brad and Angelina split and were trying to work out custody of their children, according to ShowBiz Spy, Brad has told pals that he can't take Angelina's volatile temper anymore and recently met up with ex-wife Jennifer Aniston to seek advice...
Also according to blogger Ian Halperin, a vicious custody battle has started, with Jolie seeking full custody of all the couple's adopted kids Maddox, Pax, and Zahara; and biological children Shiloh, Knox, and Vivienne.
Jolie has apparently hired a top lawyer to deal with their $300 million dollar fortune.
At one point she was considering moving to Washington but in the past few days she seems to have changed her mind. She thinks Brads has become an old coot.
At his blog, Halperin says he was roundly criticized for the blog post, which he removed, but now he says he's vindicated.
Stay tuned.
In April of 2009, Blogger Ian Halperin reported that Brad and Angelina split and were trying to work out custody of their children, according to ShowBiz Spy, Brad has told pals that he can't take Angelina's volatile temper anymore and recently met up with ex-wife Jennifer Aniston to seek advice...
Also according to blogger Ian Halperin, a vicious custody battle has started, with Jolie seeking full custody of all the couple's adopted kids Maddox, Pax, and Zahara; and biological children Shiloh, Knox, and Vivienne.
Jolie has apparently hired a top lawyer to deal with their $300 million dollar fortune.
At one point she was considering moving to Washington but in the past few days she seems to have changed her mind. She thinks Brads has become an old coot.
At his blog, Halperin says he was roundly criticized for the blog post, which he removed, but now he says he's vindicated.
Stay tuned.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
UNIVISION TO HOST ALL STAR GALA TONIGHT TO BENEFIT HAITI EARTHQUAKE VICTIMS
The Univision Network will air a special, four-hour telethon and entertainment show Saturday to benefit Haiti's earthquake victims.
Unidos Por Haiti will be staged live Saturday starting at 7 p.m. in conjunction with the network's popular variety show, ``Sabado Gigante'.'
Unidos Por Haiti will be staged live Saturday starting at 7 p.m. in conjunction with the network's popular variety show, ``Sabado Gigante'.'
Host Don Francisco will be live from Port-au-Prince, and co-anchor Nancy Alvarez, host of the very popular show "¿Quién tiene la razón?" will be from Miami.
Among the artists scheduled to appear, many performing from the network's Miami studio, are:
Gloria Estefan, Ricky Martin, Shakira, Thalia, Willy Chirino, Alejandro Sanz, Juanes, Paulina Rubio, Pepe Aguilar, Alejandra Guzman, Chayanne, Daddy Yankee, David Bisbal, Graciela Beltran, Luis Fonsi, Natalia of La Quinta Estacion, Olga Tanon, Pee Wee, In addition, over 50 personalities from Univision, TeleFutura, Galavision and Univision Radio will also be on-hand during the show to encourage viewers to donate to the Red Cross.
In addition to the performances, Unidos Por Haiti will also feature live segments from various cities across the U.S., including Los Angeles, New York, Washington D.C. and San Juan, Puerto Rico, as well as from Mexico, Dominican Republic and Haiti.
Viewers will be encouraged to donate to the American Red Cross's Haiti effort. An exclusive Spanish-language toll-free donation telephone number is being set up. It's 1-800-842-2200.
The special program will also be broadcast in 10 countries across Latin America.
For more information, please visit http://www.univisionhaiti.com/.
Among the artists scheduled to appear, many performing from the network's Miami studio, are:
Gloria Estefan, Ricky Martin, Shakira, Thalia, Willy Chirino, Alejandro Sanz, Juanes, Paulina Rubio, Pepe Aguilar, Alejandra Guzman, Chayanne, Daddy Yankee, David Bisbal, Graciela Beltran, Luis Fonsi, Natalia of La Quinta Estacion, Olga Tanon, Pee Wee, In addition, over 50 personalities from Univision, TeleFutura, Galavision and Univision Radio will also be on-hand during the show to encourage viewers to donate to the Red Cross.
In addition to the performances, Unidos Por Haiti will also feature live segments from various cities across the U.S., including Los Angeles, New York, Washington D.C. and San Juan, Puerto Rico, as well as from Mexico, Dominican Republic and Haiti.
Viewers will be encouraged to donate to the American Red Cross's Haiti effort. An exclusive Spanish-language toll-free donation telephone number is being set up. It's 1-800-842-2200.
The special program will also be broadcast in 10 countries across Latin America.
For more information, please visit http://www.univisionhaiti.com/.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Haiti's Earthquake
By Jorge Reyes
"On November 1 1755, a terrible earthquake approaching magnitude 9 destroyed the city of Lisbon, in Portugal. It has since come to be known by historians as the Great Lisbon Earthquake. For ten long minutes, the inhabitants of this important and bourgeoning European city seemed as if it was being witness to the end of the world. Seeking refuge many citizens of Lisbon who were fleeing the fires, the smoldering burning choking heaps of smoke and had hoped to save themselves had taken refuge aboard ships docked in the city's port. Right after the fire, though, a tsunami of huge tidal waves followed taking them all down to the bottom of the sea without as much as a whimper.
"These turn of events didn't escape the attention of the superstitious, the catholic church. Right after the earthquake, pandemonium set in almost immediately. Who wouldn't? Thousands of corpses lined the streets of Lisbon, bloated and putrefying under the sun. Estimates of the death toll neared 100,000 people. The destruction caused by the fire still threatened many of the few remaining buildings, though they all posed great structural dangers and they were inhabitable, so the people camped out in the streets. The port had ceased to exist. There was no commerce to speak of. Society, it seemed, was reverting to a state of brutal desperation. No wonder that historians call this the most destructive earthquake in history..."
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://the-reyes-report.blogspot.com/2010/01/earthquakes-why-haiti.html
"On November 1 1755, a terrible earthquake approaching magnitude 9 destroyed the city of Lisbon, in Portugal. It has since come to be known by historians as the Great Lisbon Earthquake. For ten long minutes, the inhabitants of this important and bourgeoning European city seemed as if it was being witness to the end of the world. Seeking refuge many citizens of Lisbon who were fleeing the fires, the smoldering burning choking heaps of smoke and had hoped to save themselves had taken refuge aboard ships docked in the city's port. Right after the fire, though, a tsunami of huge tidal waves followed taking them all down to the bottom of the sea without as much as a whimper.
"These turn of events didn't escape the attention of the superstitious, the catholic church. Right after the earthquake, pandemonium set in almost immediately. Who wouldn't? Thousands of corpses lined the streets of Lisbon, bloated and putrefying under the sun. Estimates of the death toll neared 100,000 people. The destruction caused by the fire still threatened many of the few remaining buildings, though they all posed great structural dangers and they were inhabitable, so the people camped out in the streets. The port had ceased to exist. There was no commerce to speak of. Society, it seemed, was reverting to a state of brutal desperation. No wonder that historians call this the most destructive earthquake in history..."
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://the-reyes-report.blogspot.com/2010/01/earthquakes-why-haiti.html
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
‘Horrific’ devastation from Haiti quake
PM fears death toll above 100,000; food, water needed, aid worker says
PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti - Death was everywhere Wednesday in this devastated city of 2 million. Bodies of tiny children were piled next to schools. Corpses of women lay on the street with stunned expressions frozen on their faces as flies began to gather. Bodies of men were covered with plastic tarps or cotton sheets.
Moreover, untold numbers were still trapped after a powerful earthquake Tuesday crushed thousands of structures — from schools and shacks to the National Palace and the local U.N. headquarters.
As nations around the world mobilized to send help, Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive told Reuters that he believed the casualties would be "in the range of thousands of dead."
Soon after, however, Bellerive told CNN that "I believe we are well over 100,000" dead, while Haitian Sen. Youri Latortue said it could be 500,000.
President Rene Preval, for his part, told CNN that "up to now, I heard 50,000 ... 30,000" dead.
But he did not say where the estimates came from, and none of the officials were sure about the numbers. Other officials said it was too early to give an accounting of the toll.
Aid workers reported widespread destruction and suffering.
"It's the most horrific thing I've ever seen," Bob Poff, a Salvation Army worker in Port-au-Prince, told MSNBC. "We have to get food and water" quickly, he said, in describing conditions that range from stifling heat to numerous aftershocks. "We're trying to stay alive."
‘Please take me out’Sobbing and dazed people wandered the streets of Port-au-Prince, and voices cried out from the rubble.
"Please take me out, I am dying. I have two children with me," a woman told a journalist from under a collapsed kindergarten.
The International Red Cross said some 3 million people may have been affected.
Haitian Red Cross spokesman Pericles Jean-Baptiste said his organization was overwhelmed. "There are too many people who need help ... We lack equipment, we lack body bags," he said Wednesday.
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34829978/ns/world_news-americas/?GT1=43001
PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti - Death was everywhere Wednesday in this devastated city of 2 million. Bodies of tiny children were piled next to schools. Corpses of women lay on the street with stunned expressions frozen on their faces as flies began to gather. Bodies of men were covered with plastic tarps or cotton sheets.
Moreover, untold numbers were still trapped after a powerful earthquake Tuesday crushed thousands of structures — from schools and shacks to the National Palace and the local U.N. headquarters.
As nations around the world mobilized to send help, Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive told Reuters that he believed the casualties would be "in the range of thousands of dead."
Soon after, however, Bellerive told CNN that "I believe we are well over 100,000" dead, while Haitian Sen. Youri Latortue said it could be 500,000.
President Rene Preval, for his part, told CNN that "up to now, I heard 50,000 ... 30,000" dead.
But he did not say where the estimates came from, and none of the officials were sure about the numbers. Other officials said it was too early to give an accounting of the toll.
Aid workers reported widespread destruction and suffering.
"It's the most horrific thing I've ever seen," Bob Poff, a Salvation Army worker in Port-au-Prince, told MSNBC. "We have to get food and water" quickly, he said, in describing conditions that range from stifling heat to numerous aftershocks. "We're trying to stay alive."
‘Please take me out’Sobbing and dazed people wandered the streets of Port-au-Prince, and voices cried out from the rubble.
"Please take me out, I am dying. I have two children with me," a woman told a journalist from under a collapsed kindergarten.
The International Red Cross said some 3 million people may have been affected.
Haitian Red Cross spokesman Pericles Jean-Baptiste said his organization was overwhelmed. "There are too many people who need help ... We lack equipment, we lack body bags," he said Wednesday.
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34829978/ns/world_news-americas/?GT1=43001
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Tiger Woods Mistress, Loredana Jolie Ferriolo, Claims He Had Homosexual Encounters
One of Tiger's many mistresses, Loredana Jolie Ferriolo, is penning a tell-all book about the golf ace and claims that she witnessed him in gay encounters.
RadarOnline.com has learned exclusively that Loredana has claimed she saw Tiger having sexual relationships with other men. That shocking twist is something no other mistress has claimed and there has been no proof.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Kathy Griffin Banned From CNN
"Following her very controversial F-bomb-dropping New Year's Eve hosting gig, CNN executives have decided Kathy Griffin will NOT be getting a 2011 invite. "She was a total embarrassment to the network that calls themselves 'The Most Trusted Name in News.' Even Anderson (Cooper, her co-host) thinks it's time to say goodbye to Kathy," a CNN insider tells me.
"Not only did the potty-mouthed redhead drop the F bomb on live TV, she also made not-so-funny jokes about needing a "bump" of cocaine and asked Cooper if he pleasured himself while looking in the mirror. As sexy as the Silver Fox is ... that's just too much, Kathy."
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.popeater.com/2010/01/05/kathy-griffin-banned-from-cnn/?icid=mainhtmlws-main-ndl1link3http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popeater.com%2F2010%2F01%2F05%2Fkathy-griffin-banned-from-cnn%2F
"Not only did the potty-mouthed redhead drop the F bomb on live TV, she also made not-so-funny jokes about needing a "bump" of cocaine and asked Cooper if he pleasured himself while looking in the mirror. As sexy as the Silver Fox is ... that's just too much, Kathy."
FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.popeater.com/2010/01/05/kathy-griffin-banned-from-cnn/?icid=mainhtmlws-main-ndl1link3http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popeater.com%2F2010%2F01%2F05%2Fkathy-griffin-banned-from-cnn%2F
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)