Gawker 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 2:25 PM
Thu Nov 26
41 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip Your Editors:
tips@gawker.com
Tipline: 646-214-8138
Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder | Email
West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield | Email
Contributing Editors:
Valleywag:
Ryan Tate | Email
Media:
Hamilton Nolan | Email
Politics:
Alex Pareene | Email
Investigations:
John Cook | Email
Entertainment:
Brian Moylan | Email
Nights:
Adrian Chen | Email
Azaria Jagger | Email
Ravi Somaiya | Email
Weekends:
Foster Kamer | Email
Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/13/09
As far as local news goes, the amount (in both LATimes and ChiTrib) doesn't appear to have changed much, which does not bode well if hyperlocal is truly the destiny of the metro dailies. The advantage to the new design is that it's not as ditsy and easier to read in many lighting schemes. I'm also happy to see print-from-web versions of stories coming out in B&W, instead of an off-grey shade.
Newsday? Meh.
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
Just like we read Glamour to stay up-to-date on the war in Iraq.
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
05/29/09
BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT A THOUSAND TIMES BULLSHIT.
05/29/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
We'll all just live in fear that our own day of judgement will come when God is on a cabbage soup diet. (For more than one reason.)
05/28/09
Well, that and jet lag at being on the East Coast, and waiting on overdue flights. This was so much more fun drunk.
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
I'm just having a problem seeing the foundation for this kind of criticism. Either the critics are stupid, or I am. Please enlighten whichever of us it is.
05/28/09
The great (liberal?) theory is that the best possible jurists come from a wide range of backgrounds and educations, such that there isn't one perspective directing the Court.
There should be no question that she is running with the big bulls. She has the education, experience, and bona fides to run with the best of them. What scares the white guys is that she isn't one of them. Clarence Thomas, for all of his black skin, walked among them, if only in terms of his privilege. Sotomayor not only doesn't share their upbringing, she made it in spit of her own, and even worse, unlike most of them, she isn't a showboater.
This might be the only thing she has in common with Thomas. I don't disrespect a SC jurist who doesn't want to showboat - there are a couple on there who don't - but I am disgusted by those who paint her as lacking in intellect as a result. I mean, shouldn't we sort of value a SC justice who doesn't have fameball aspirations? I think yes.
She'll be confirmed, and the Hispanic and Latin voters of this country will feel vindicated, and the crazy right will denounce her as liberal, and in the end, there will be a female, Latina justice on the court who is just less showboaty than the Chief Justice, and just as analytical and intellectual as the Chief Justice, and the country can get onto the business of fighting about abortions they don't want anyone to have, but would drive their high school daughter to get.
05/28/09
05/28/09
It just demonstrates a fundamental rejection of the diversity of the country. It's one thing to smartly work against her because you're privately afraid she won't support your interests, and it's another to blatantly declare out of fear that her race/culture is less "American" than yours, and it somehow disqualifies her from the SC.
It's kind of like picking out the grossest, most revolting crap from your backyard and throwing it vaguely in her direction. It's so far off the mark it doesn't affect her in the slightest, and all you've done is show the whole world just how disgusting your backyard really is.
The fact that people are listening is just downright scary.