Archive - Jan 2, 2008 - topic

Date
Type
AP Photo/Marko Drobnjakovic

A U.S. army soldier from Ghostrider Company, 3rd Squadron, 2nd Stryker Cavalry Regiment jumps over a wall during a foot patrol on the outskirts of Baqouba, 60 kilometers (35 miles) northeast of Baghdad, Iraq, Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2008.

Featured Topic | Posted 45 weeks 6 days ago

What's the next step in Iraq?

John Edwards says that if elected president he would withdraw the American troops who are training the Iraqi army and police as part of a broader plan to remove virtually all American forces within 10 months.

Mr. Edwards’s plan calls for immediately withdrawing 40,000 to 50,000 troops. Nearly all of the remaining American troops would be removed within 9 or 10 months. The only force that would remain would be a 3,500-to-5,000-strong contingent that would protect the American Embassy and possibly humanitarian workers.

Read More

Edwards’s obstinacy

Commentary's Contentions

It is truly astonishing how little adjustment leading Democrats have made in their rhetoric or policy prescriptions in light of the changing
circumstances in Iraq. In this interview with theNew York Times’s ace military correspondent, Michael Gordon, John Edwards pledges to remove virtually all U.S. troops, including trainers, from Iraq within ten months of assuming the presidency—exactly the kind of step that could undo all the progress that has been made in 2007.

Read More

Top Ten Myths about Iraq

Juan Cole

Myth: Iraq has been "calm" in fall of 2007 and the Iraqi public, despite some grumbling, is not eager for the US to depart. Fact: in the past 6 weeks, there have been an average of 600 attacks a month, or 20 a day, which has held steady since the beginning of November. About 600 civilians are being killed in direct political violence per month, but that number excludes deaths of soldiers and police. Across the board, Iraqis believe that their conflicts are mainly caused by the US military presence and they are eager for it to end.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
AP Photo/Frank Franklin II

Members of the writers guild protest outside NBC's Studios Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2008 in New York. NBC's Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien and ABC's Jimmy Kimmel all said they were coming back reluctantly with the writers strike still on, and will be putting on shows unlike any they've done before.

Featured Topic | Posted 45 weeks 6 days ago

Leno and Letterman return: A strike shake-up?

Late-night TV hosts returned to the air Wednesday after a two-month hiatus, displaying support for striking writers, plenty of creative stretch marks — and at least two scruffy beards. David Letterman walked onstage amid dancing girls holding picket signs. His writers are back on the job, but NBC's Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien and ABC's Jimmy Kimmel returned without theirs. "You're watching the only show on the air that has jokes written by union writers," Letterman said. "I hear you at home thinking to yourself, `This crap is written?'"

Read More

Hollywood writers' strike: A recipe for disaster

Pajamas Media

The dream that each of us will some day get our “piece of the pie” is as American as apple pie. But, like everything else in life, there’s a catch. We must earn our slices again and again by keeping customers satisfied in an economy marked by constant change and innovation. As striking Hollywood workers seek their piece of the pie of online revenues, that’s the hard lesson they will soon have to swallow — and, it is not going to go down easy.

Read More

Opinion: Power relations define strike talks

Hollywood Reporter

It was 40 years ago that I learned my first Hollywood studio lesson as to "how it all works." I had made and reported a large feature sale to my company bosses. While discussing an allocation issue with a finance executive, he explained the underlying studio philosophy: "The producers screw us when they make movies for us, and we screw them when we release them."

As I saw it, that was the modus operandi very often during my career. The more powerful invariably exploit the less powerful.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
Featured Topic | Posted 46 weeks 15 hours ago

The right to life, liberty and high-definition TV?

If you're anything like us, your only New Year's resolution for this particular ride around the sun is to sign up for a converter box coupon in preparation for the 2009 digital TV transition -- even if, also like us, your only remaining analog set is gathering dust next to your laserdisc player in the basement. Still, a bargain is a bargain, so $40 off a product or products that we don't really need was more than enough motivation to race over to the official sign-up page only minutes after it went live.

Read More

Bad reception for HDTV subsidies

Ed Feulner/The Heritage Foundation

Anyone who wants to keep watching TV the old-fashioned way will need to buy a new set or plug in a converter box. And here's where Congress comes in. In 2005 lawmakers agreed to pay at least $990 million to subsidize the cost of converter boxes. They were even prepared to spend as much as $1.5 billion. That would be the same as every household kicking in $13 in taxes to help a handful of people buy converter boxes. This is absurd. Where's the compelling national interest to justify government subsidies for high-tech entertainment equipment?

Read More

Let's get started on HDTV

Mark Lloyd/Center for American Progress

The biggest problem with the transition to digital television in the United States is that the Federal Communications Commission under the Bush administration has locked the public out of the process of determining what those benefits might be. What's more, yesteryear's Republican-controlled Congress set the rules regarding this transition. Thus the public interest obligations of digital broadcasters remain undefined and insufficient money has been set aside for the digital conversion.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote