March 19th, 2009
CBS no longer allows its media player–which delivers all of the NCAA early-round games to your desktop–to work on Macs.
They will, however, allows you to stream the games on your iPhone, provided you pay for their app and are hooked into wi-fi.
Cold comfort, that.
Update: DO NOT buy the CBS iPhone app. It stinks.
0 commentsNCAA Day
March 19th, 2009
Czabe has a Sweet 16 tourney going on, pitting hotness against hotness. The most deadly region? The East Rutherford Models pod, which pits Bar Rafaeli against Marissa Miller in a first-round matchup.
The committee really blew that one.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb9HXE4UmWY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1]
0 commentsCarlson-Stewart II
March 18th, 2009
In which Galley Friend T.C. takes apart the only guy on Comedy Central less funny than Dane Cook.
You can dismiss this as payback or whatnot. And that’s fine. But it doesn’t change the fact that T.C. is, in every particular, dead right.
For instance, on the Cramer ambush:
Stewart summed up the significance of what Cramer had said on the tape: “You can draw a straight line from those shenanigans to the stuff that was being pulled at Bear and at AIG, and all this derivative-market stuff,” he said sternly.
Except that you can’t draw any such line. In the video, Cramer hadn’t mentioned derivates or securitized loans or credit-default swaps, or any of the other exotic financial instruments that caused the fall of AIG and the current recession. There’s no evidence that Jim Cramer had anything to do with any of that, and Stewart didn’t offer any.
Before Cramer could defend himself, Stewart moved on to a new charge: Cramer and his colleagues at CNBC had known that the financial sector was in imminent danger of collapse, but had pretended otherwise—a ruse that Stewart described as “disingenuous at best and criminal at worst.”
This was even more farther-fetched. A ratings-hungry TV network had the scoop of the decade but decided to sit on it? Why? In order to curry favor with soon-to-be-disgraced corporate executives? It didn’t make sense.
On Stewart’s real-fake-real journolistic treatment of Democratic presidential nominees:
at times Stewart seems like less a comedian than a courtier to the establishment. In August 2004, a week before the Republican convention, Stewart got an interview with then-candidate John Kerry. At the time, reporters covering Kerry couldn’t get closer than the rope line, so the interview qualified as a booking coup.
Stewart squandered it embarrassingly. His first question (after, “How are you holding up?”) was: “Is it a difficult thing not to take it personally” when your opponents are mean?
“You know what it is, Jon?” Kerry replied. “It’s disappointing.”
Four years later, Stewart had become, if anything, even softer. Over the course of a reverential eight-and-a-half minute interview with Barack Obama six days before the election, Stewart failed to ask a single substantive question, much less venture into policy (though, as with Kerry, he did open with, “How are you holding up?”). Instead, like the cable-news morons that he often criticizes, Stewart stuck strictly to the horserace, at one point even resorting to a sports metaphor.
And he sucked up, hard. “So much of this has been about fear of you,” Stewart empathized. “Has any of this fear stuff stuck with the electorate?”
Facing puffballs like this, Obama coasted through with snippets from his stump speech. The result wasn’t simply uninformative, it was boring. Obama didn’t say a single interesting thing, and Stewart wasn’t funny.
And on the fact–which no one else seems willing to say out loud–that Stewart simply isn’t funny:
A serious man needs a serious mission, however, and this is suddenly a problem. With Bush gone and the Republican Party in chaos, most of Stewart’s targets have disappeared. Yet rather than pivot with the times and challenge those now in power, Stewart continues to attack the same old enemies, at this point mostly straw men and pipsqueaks. A couple of weeks ago, he spent an entire seven minutes mocking the crowd at a CPAC conference.
His studio audience loved it, though that isn’t saying much. Stewart’s audience would erupt if he read the phone book, or did his monologue in German, a response that over time is a threat to any man’s soul. During many segments, Stewart’s audience doesn’t laugh so much as cheer, a distinction that would bother most comedians. Stewart keeps them around anyway. Uncritical praise corrupts absolutely.
As Stewart becomes more self-righteous, he inevitably becomes less funny. Sanctimony is the death of humor, and also of innovation. Where a show like South Park challenges its audience’s every conceivable assumption, The Daily Show has become safer than Jay Leno, pandering night after night to the converted.”
Seriously: Just give David Brock that time slot. He’d get the same numbers. The only difference would be that the rest of the media wouldn’t bother to pretend that Brock was either funny or sage.
Or give Dane Cook the slot. He’d get better numbers with material that might, every five episodes or so, earn an actual snicker.
0 commentsThe Supernote
March 18th, 2009
Galley Hero Bob Hamer has a post up over at Big Hollywood about a North Korean counterfeiting ring and Operation Smoking Dragon, an FBI sting operation that snared the guys passing around phony $100 bills so good that they’re dubbed the “Supernote.”
It’s a fantastic post but the kicker here is that Hamer is the UC agent who ran the operation. Stone. Cold. Stud.
0 commentsStill More Than Meets The Eye
March 18th, 2009
Variety reports that Paramount and Dreamworks studios have announced a release date for Transformers 3. Not 2, mind you, but 3. Which by then will probably match Autobots and Decepticons with Dinobots, Gobots, Voltron, or Space Giants. My vote is for Space Giants.
0 commentsCohen, Cramer, Stewart
March 17th, 2009
Richard Cohen dares to criticize John Stewart, which will no doubt anger Stewart’s hundreds of thousands of fans.
But Cohen seems to misunderstand the most vile aspect of the Cramer/Stewart fight: It was prompted not by Cramer’s shoddy financial advice, which people who pay close attention to this stuff have been mocking for years.
No, John Stewart only discovered what a contemptible figure Cramer was after Cramer had the audacity to criticize President Obama.
It’s not clear to me that there’s any foundational difference between Stewart and David Brock, except that people in the mainstream media feel the constant need to genuflect before Stewart.
0 commentsOne Shinging Moment
March 17th, 2009
The Czabe has a nice tribute to the history of the “One Shining Moment” montage–including the first-ever OSM!
0 commentsThe Rob Liefeld Obama
March 16th, 2009
What I don’t get is this: Where are the president’s pouches?
0 comments


