VOD: Social Networking

There are a ridiculous number of social networking sites.  Picking and choosing the best ones for you can seem daunting.  Here’s a Current TV animated video covering the “Social Networking Wars,”  reminding us that site popularity is a fickle beast.

H/T AJ

True Blood: wishing I had HBO about now

After months of watching one sheets spackled to walls, and tear outs from magazines showing the lips of a female vampire post feeding or advertisements for synthetic True Blood, I got a look at the trailer for the series.  I watch most of my TV online, but I do wish I had cable to watch this series come September.

It looks as though True Blood could be on par with the greatness of Buffy the Vampire Slayer if this trailer is anything to go by.

McCain: not exactly the people’s Presidential candidate

Today’s political video brought you by the letter “E” for “elite.”

America the Beautiful: America’s obsession with beauty

Apparently, I missed this one in theaters.  Clearly, it’s going to piss me off when it finally shows on Netflix.

BtVS: the push to go animated.

Here’s a clip from the animated Buffy the Vampire Slayer series that never made it to air.

As a cult favorite, fans would like to lobby the powers that be, to finally make the show happen in one form or another (TV, web, DVD, etc). At the moment, fans aren’t too organized, having captured just 852 of the 50,000 e-signatures sought to rally for this animated format.

I’d love a reincarnation of Buffy for a Season 9, since 8 is covered by comic books.  What about you?

Good enough to serve, but not to vote

photo by pingnews

This year, Armed Forces Voters Week runs August 31st to September 7th.  The Department of Veteran Affairs is doing everything in its power to keep convalescing vets from registering to vote, and has denied permission to the 19 states that requested the opportunity to host voter registration drives at VA hospitals in their states.

The official word from the Department of Veteran Affairs:

This policy is the result of careful deliberation and consideration for the needs and rights of our patients, concerns about disrupting facility operations, and the need to ensure VA is not involved in partisan political activities. . .

That decision might seem fair, if not for that fact that registration drives are regularly held at hospitals around the country.  Promedica Health in Ohio offers encourages voter registration on its website, as does the New Jersey Hospital Assocation.

The Texas Hospital Association encourages registration drives to reach out to employees, which means patients are exposed to the get-out-and-vote message.  On their site, the THA offers a Time Line for Voter Registration. Among their recommendations:

If appropriate, send a news release about the voter registration drive to local media outlets. . . .

Display tent cards promoting the voter registration drive in the cafeteria and on patient trays. (see sample)

E-mail reminder to staff, if possible. . .

Place get-out-the-vote posters throughout the hospital (in elevators, lobby areas, cafeteria, employee break rooms, etc.)

Seems as though these outreach methods, could reach non-staff members, what with posters hung about the building, easily forwarded e-mails sent to staffers, tent cards delivered to each patient’s room with meals. . . not to mention registration events taking place in the lobby of the hospital.

Voter registration is a non-partisan undertaking.  These health facilities recognize their ability to remind their employees and the public to register and take advantage of their right to vote.

Why is it somehow different at VA hospitals? Perhaps our Republican administration is merely watching McCain’s back?

Last week, the Center for Responsive Politics released a study of military donors to political campaigns this year.

Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain’s haul.

Troops in the field sent Obama $60,642, while McCain received $10,665 and Paul took in $45,512.   When looking at military personnel overall, Obama is still ahead with $335,536 in donations, while $280,513 went to McCain.

The Center for Responsive Politics reminds us that:

In 2000, Republican George W. Bush outraised Democrat Al Gore among military personnel almost 2 to 1. In 2004, with the Iraq war underway, John Kerry closed the gap with President Bush, but Bush still raised $1.50 from the military for every $1 his Democratic opponent collected.

Seems like encouraging wounded vets to register to vote isn’t going to favor the GOP.

But I’m a cynic, it’s not like the Bush administration has used its office to act in favor of conservatives before, right?

The GOP: proud of ignorance and irony

The GOP makes it too easy. . .

GWB on America

I don’t see America having problems.

GWB on Russia’s attack on Georgia:

I expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia

A bonus!  Did you catch his shout out to Christian nationalists?

If you are a religious person, you understand that once religion takes hold in a society it can’t be stopped.

Are staffers even looking at McCain’s talking points anymore?

So when he says,

In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations

Is there a clause excusing attacks on countries whose citizens have darker skin color than those of us of Western European decent?

Obama and McCain, does VP selection matter?

photo by luanaveloso

Does VP selection matter in 2008? Or will it remain a race that focuses on the McCain’s attempts to derail the Good Ship Obama?

The Obama campaign has been very tight lipped about who it’s vetting for the VP slot.  The odds are most definitely not in favor of Hillary Clinton, and stray supporters still fume at the notion that another woman could be Obama’s running mate, despite several viable candidates that mesh well with Obama’s platforms.  (It begs the question, how effective were 18 million cracks  in the illusive glass ceiling for women in politics, if only women named Hillary Clinton are allowed to benefit from those cracks?).  Additionally, the recent announcement of the Democratic National Convention program including the VP candidate as a speaker on the night dedicated to veterans and “securing America’s future” leads some to suspect Gen. Wesley Clark or others, like Joe Biden, who have either military or foreign affairs experience could be #2.

For background, a recent AP-Ipsos poll shows Obama besting McCain with women, minority, and young voters.

Obama leads by 13 points among women, by 30 points among voters up to age 34, and by 55 points among blacks, Hispanics and other minorities, the poll shows.

Would picking a seasoned, white male make a difference with older, white Americans?

Where he’s lagging is among white voters, and with older ones in particular. Call me crazy, but isn’t it possible, just possible, that Obama’s lead is being inhibited by the fact that he is, you know, black? “Of course it is,” says another prominent Republican operative. “It’s the thing that nobody wants to talk about, but it’s obviously a huge factor.” . . .

In a number of key swing states, the percentage of voters who backed Clinton and who said that “the race of the candidates” was “important” in their decision was alarmingly high: in New Jersey, 9; in Ohio and Pennsylvania, more than 11. The writer John Judis reckons, therefore, that in the general election (where the voting population is markedly less liberal than in the primaries) in those states, “15 to 20 percent of Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents may not support [Obama] for the same reason.”

Would those who found race to be an issue in the primaries, be comforted by the sight of the typical, patriarchal, white male campaigning side-by-side with Obama until November, enough to mitigate the race factor for an Election mopping? Are we really having this conversation in 2008?

And since Obama is forced to put out the name of his VP candidate first, could McCain’s choice sway voters?  McCain is probably going to pick a younger (anyone will be younger than McCain) male Republican. Would a pairing with Lieberman help claims of maverick bipartisan effort, or just piss off independents who’ve watched a Democrat-turned-Independent-caucasing-with Democrats become one of the fiercest critics of every statement made by Obama? Regardless, if Obama wins and Democrats take back their leads in legislature, Lieberman will likely be booted from his leadership roles within Senate and be turned over the Republicans.

Alternately, the media would like us to believe that Hillary’s PUMAs are a sizable group that will potentially sway the election, though Pew Research shows Democratic women overall have only shown a slight dip in support for the presumed Democratic nominee compared to recent elections.  Could a female VP pick by McCain shift females tied to Obama and independent votesr? Or would it just be seen as the latest attempt at pandering by the candidates?

Even though Alaska’s Governor Sarah Palin is  currently involved in some frackas about using her office to seek retribution against her former brother-in-law and she gave two thumbs up to Obama’s energy policy, she’s an incredibly popular Republican Governor in her home state. And former HP executive Carly Fiorina has been stumping for McCain for months.

Would a white running mate for Obama and a female one for McCain negate any gains either candidate received as a result?

Though it seems completely absurd, could race or gender be a deciding factor in a Presidential election, which holds real world consequences for the nation and the world?  I ask because of a recent study released entitled: The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics: Oprah, Obama, and the 2008 Democratic Primary.

we use geographic differences in subscriptions to O! – The Oprah Magazine and the sale of books Winfrey recommended as part of Oprah’s Book Club to assess whether her endorsement affected the Primary outcomes.  We find her endorsement had a positive effect on the votes Obama received, increased the overall voter participation rate, and increased the number of contributions received by Obama . . .Our results suggest that Winfrey’s endorsement was responsible for approximately 1,000,000 additional votes for Obama.

If a celebrity endorsement can yield 1 million votes for Obama, shouldn’t the weightier issues of gender discrimination and racism have an effect in the voting booth as well, even if we’re less likely to admit to those charges?

PS. If you’re eager to be one of the first to know who Obama picks, you can sign up for text message updates via the Obama campaign.  Supporters who provide their cell phone numbers will be the first notified.

To my knowledge, the McCain camp is not offering the same service.   Anyone?

McCain aims for all war, all the time

photo by laubklein

John “I know how to win wars” McCain probably turned cartwheels that just as Obama went on vacation, an international incident was taking place. Russian troops have engaged with Eastern European neighbor Georgia, and an estimated 1500 are dead as a result of military action thus far.

The Obama campaign pressed for both sides to sit down and negotiate peacefully:

I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict. Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis.

McCain, on the other hand, prefers to be more hands on.

The government of Georgia has called for a cease-fire and for a resumption of direct talks on South Ossetia with international mediators. The U.S. should immediately convene an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to call on Russia to reverse course. The U.S. should immediately work with the EU and the OSCE to put diplomatic pressure on Russia to reverse this perilous course it has chosen. We should immediately call a meeting of the North Atlantic Council to assess Georgia’s security and review measures NATO can take to contribute to stabilizing this very dangerous situation. Finally, the international community needs to establish a truly independent and neutral peacekeeping force in South Ossetia.

Why let Georgia and Russia resolve the crisis diplomatically with outside support as needed, when the US can butt in to tell the two nations how to resolve the conflict?

>>>> sarcasm alert <<<<

In fact, this could be the makings of a new job creation plan supported by McCain!  Upwards of 8,000 jobs are at risk in Ohio, as a result of a DHL deal lobbied for by McCain campaign manager Rick Davis. Over 463,000 jobs have been lost this year, with more on the way as the economy continues its downward slide. Given the recruitment issues experienced by the Armed Forces, expanding US war activity to several more fronts could generate plenty of jobs via mandatory conscription. [Insert awkward smile.]

We could turn to our ally, Israel for a blueprint of such service. Without a valid reason for a waiver, men and single women join the Israel Defense Forces at 18.  All will serve 2 years (this requirement will be in place by 2010)  before being shifted to reserve forces until age 51 for men and 24 for single women.  Reserve duty requires 39 days of service per year.

In the name of gender equity,  all Americans*, including nationalized citizens, regardless of relationship status** will serve 2 years, with deferments offered for those pursuing higher education.  Those deferred for educational purposes would be expected to report for duty within a month of graduating.  For those not signing up for additional service they would be shifted to the reserves for an optional 30 days of service annually, until the age of 36.  (Incidentally, to run for President, one must be 36 years old; thus they can immediately run for office on a platform of dedicated service to the country.)

Currently, there are just under 1.5 million Americans serving in the military, with a matching 1.5 million in reserves.   Through a mandatory service requirement we could create jobs.  In lieu of contracting out to companies like Blackwater and Halliburton, we would instead have a fully stocked military ready to handle the infrastructure needs (male recruits can work on construction details rebuilding countries we level) and domestic needs (female recruits can keep bases tidy, prepare meals, and bake cookies for the hardworking males), in addition to our regular participation in regime changes and the liberation of the oppressed all around the globe.

Meanwhile, we’d decimate domestic spending on health care, welfare, education and social security to pay for the sharp increase in expenditures on weapons, tanks, fighter planes, etc. from munitions and vehicle manufacturers, thus creating jobs.  On top of this military paraphernalia, we’ll need additional health care workers to handle the psychological effects of sexual assault (at least 1 in 4 women) serving and the post-traumatic stress disorder experienced by 20% of vets. More new jobs!

With 10.8 million males and 10.2 million females between the ages of 20-24, we could grow our armed forces exponentially.  Even if we go to war with Iran, Russia, and China, it’s unlikely that we’ll need the full 10 million + that are active at any given time.  So we could finally take on that $1.6 trillion worth of infrastructure repairs — bridges, high ways, dams, levees, etc. — by shipping our excess troops throughout the country to take care of these projects.  All of the raw material purchases would stimulate local economies.  Even better! At the same time, a ubiquitous presence of armed military personnel at locations nationwide will discourage the naysayers and dissidents from speaking up about our warmongering overseas.***

It’s a win win situation.  Larger army = more wars. More wars means more supplies needed.  More supply orders means we’ll be stimulating the economy left and right.   So what if my math is a bit fuzzy, we’ve got an economic growth plan for America.

New campaign slogans

• John McCain — All War, All The Time.
• America: Mighty Like Sparta

* Homosexuals and Muslim-Americans are automatically disqualified for duty.

** Beauty Pageant winners and women willing to marry and forgo birth control in order to keep this great nation thriving will have their service requirement waived.

*** In the event we still have too many soldiers, we will defer to a site modelled off the quality web destination  HotOrNot to determine who stays or goes.  Called ServeOrNot, your fellow Americans can determine if you should stay or go based on looks alone.

Web Formula determines your gender

A friend in Dubai forwarde me this link to the blog Mike on Ads.  The blogger has modified some java script so that an automated guess of your gender can be produced.

I did is I modified the SocialHistory JS so that it polled the browser to find out which of the Quantcast top 10k sites were visited. I then apply the ratio of male to female users for each site and with some basic math determine a guestimate of your gender. The math is really quite simple, I just take:

1 / (1 + r_1 * r_2 * … * r_n)
where p_i is the ratio of men-to-women for the specific site. For example, if you had been to two sites that had a 2-1 ratio of men to women, the probability of you being female would be:
1 / (1 + 2 * 2) = 1/5 = 20%

I think my visits to Jezebel and Lifetime TV might have given me away!

Likelihood of you being FEMALE is 100%

Likelihood of you being MALE is 0%

Site	Male-Female Ratio
google.com	0.98
youtube.com	1
ebay.com	1.11
amazon.com	0.9
cnn.com	1.35
imdb.com	1.06
flickr.com	1.15
shopzilla.com	0.87
nytimes.com	1.13
careerbuilder.com	0.79
usps.com	0.9
netflix.com	0.79
wwe.com	1.04
overstock.com	0.68
fandango.com	0.82
foodnetwork.com	0.63
wamu.com	0.85
simplyhired.com	0.77
directv.com	0.87
scribd.com	1.25
huffingtonpost.com	1.35
linkedin.com	0.94
ivillage.com	0.57
mininova.org	1.63
citicards.com	0.9
perezhilton.com	0.75
nymag.com	0.92
cbs.com	0.6
rottentomatoes.com	1.17
msnbc.com	1.11
salliemae.com	0.63
eonline.com	0.69
stanford.edu	0.98
salon.com	1.13
mylifetime.com	0.31
sciencedaily.com	0.96
fancast.com	0.89
salary.com	0.77
comedycentral.com	0.9
amazon.co.uk	1.11
coach.com	0.54
ucla.edu	0.83
cwtv.com	0.67
lulu.com	0.96
comingsoon.net	1.06
usanetwork.com	0.59
usc.edu	0.92
sciam.com	1.56
jezebel.com	1.02
charter.com	0.8
gallup.com	0.77
totalbeauty.com	0.57
outback.com	0.75

Try it out for yourself!