National Republican Convention Overview

Unfortunately I wasn't able to watch the entire convention, but I did manage to hear some of the more important speakers (i.e. Romney, Christie, and Ryan).  Furthermore after listening to these speeches I felt like I was right back where I started when it came to political knowledge.  I was actually questioning the purpose of such a convention.  It seems to just be a gaudy celebration for republicans where there able to bring in Clint Eastwood to talk to a chair (a chair which I now believe may be in the  lead at the polls).  Anyways, the Los Angeles Times helped me contextualize the convention with this rather brief overview of the event by discussing Tropical Storm Isaac and a reference to Ron Paul fans to name a few items.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-romneys-convention-20120831,0,3064107.story

"5 Takeaway's from Mitt Romney's Acceptance Speech"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/30/five-takeaways-from-mitt-romney-s-convention-speech.html

"Paul Ryan's Speech in Three Words"

This is an interesting article that summarizes Paul Ryan's speech in three words. It even has a list of the facts that Ryan got incorrect during his speech, which were very handy. In my opinion, the three words that Kohn picked out are fairly accurate.  Also, it was ironic that Fox decided to publish such an article. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-speech-in-three-words/

Obama tells voters to watch Republicans, but he's not

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/29/us-usa-campaign-obama-idUSBRE87R18Q20120829

This article discusses how Obama puts his people first (Hurricane Isaac) instead of monitoring the Republican national convention. I thought this was interesting because people can interpret it as being honest or not. Does this only make him look good and better his own campaign?

Interesting take on Paul Ryan's speech

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/paul-ryan-convention-speech-12188956?click=pp

Charles Pierce dissects the speech, pulling out strong and weak paragraphs. What Pierce claims is Ryan's best paragraph is aimed at your generation. Do you agree with him?

The Left Wing at the RNC

I thought some of you might find this interesting - it's a small article on Labor Unions who were staging Dystopian "Romney's America" skits in the streets outside the Republican National Convention.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/labor-unions-romney_n_1841680.html?1346295829

Read the transcript of the Keynote Address at the Republican National Convention

Read (and/or watch) Chris Christie's keynote address at the Republican National Convention on Tuesday night: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80347.html

What The Newsroom Gets Right and Wrong

Interesting piece by a guy who worked in cable news for eight years.
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2012/06/the_fox_mole_on_what_aaron_sorkin_gets_right_and_wrong_in_the_newsroom_.html

Paul Ryan

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2018987143_krugmanryanrand26xml.html

This article offers some interesting insight into Paul Ryan and the Randian philosophy that has shaped his economic and political outlook. Krugman explores some of the ripple effects of such beliefs and he even suggests that Ryan suffers from this sort of detachment from reality. Basically, that he is "Atlas Shrugged" (and all its brutish philosophies) incarnate. I thought it was kind of related to our discussion of realism and the arts.

The Newsroom is wack

http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2012/08/26/159994780/its-who-you-know-predicting-how-the-newsroom-will-get-its-next-scoop

I was interested in learning a bit more about this show, despite my initial distaste for it.  I stumbled upon this article that touches on the realism factor we discussed in class.  It really captures my frustration with the convenience of the connections the character Stephen Harper has during the pilot episode.  It seems that this is a recurring theme in the show, which apparently deviates from the actual nature of a news room and all the grunt work involved.

Billboards for Messengers.

See Niall Ferguson's article on Obama and then take a look at Stephen Marche's article commenting on the Ferguson piece.  Here is an excerpt from the Marche piece:

Ferguson's critics have simply misunderstood for whom Ferguson was writing that piece. They imagine that he is working as a professor or as a journalist, and that his standards slipped below those of academia or the media. Neither is right. Look at his speaking agent's Web site. The fee: 50 to 75 grand per appearance. That number means that the entire economics of Ferguson's writing career, and many other writing careers, has been permanently altered. Nonfiction writers can and do make vastly more, and more easily, than they could ever make any other way, including by writing bestselling books or being a Harvard professor. Articles and ideas are only as good as the fees you can get for talking about them. They are merely billboards for the messengers.

There has been a lot of fire and counterfire regarding Ferguson's piece.  Here is Andrew Sullivan's initial response Ferguson's response via video followed by another Sullivan response.

Film Your Liberal Professor, Make $100

If your video of your liberal professor being liberal leads to a "news story," you could win $100!
https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/238728641213767682