Web Gone Wild! Clinton Starts Blog War

Left And Right Battle Over Ex-President’s Combative Fox News Interview

(CBS)  Bloggers weren’t amused, and called it everything from dreadful to awful. The Los Angeles Times reported that the comments section of the blog became a feeding ground for bashers of both the stunt and the show. The newspaper said the comments included both assaults on the quality of the show and its directors.

Many bloggers thought the idea behind Defaker wasn’t necessarily bad, but mocked its execution. "The idea is brilliant…Unfortunately, Defaker imitates only the look of Defamer. The first (and, so far, only) post reads like a recap of the pilot episode. Considering how Studio 60 is such an inside baseball drama, there’s so much potential," Lyle Masaki writes at Crocodile Caucus.

Other bloggers just found it confusing, understandably. "So, real people attacked a phony blog about a fictional "NBS" show that's the subject of a real NBC show and draws inspiration from NBC's "Saturday Night Live"?," Frank at Blogspotter writes. "That’s real confusing."

Neverless, the show has plenty of online fans…which is more than can be said about the failed blog. "The show's good. You should watch it," Mister Hand writes. "What you should not do is read the fake blog they made for it."


Blogging For The Young At Heart

If you’ve read any of the latest studies about bloggers, you’d find that bloggers are mostly young. In fact, a Pew Internet & American Life Project study published in July found that more than half of bloggers are under 30.

But that doesn’t present the whole picture because there also bloggers like Donald Crowdis.

At the age of 92 (and a half), Don launched his blog "Don To Earth." He’s never been one to shirk new things — afterall, he was the first host of the popular CBC television series "The Nature of Things" — but he’s certainly defying the statistics about the young blogosphere.

And, Don is not alone. Seniors are becoming one of the fastest-growing groups on the Internet. A Pew study found that online use by seniors spiked 47 percent between 2000 and 2004.

So, what do senior citizens write about? As you might imaging, it seems age is more on their minds than, well, Suri Cruise. But many also write about current events and pop culture.

In a recent entry, Don Crowdis reflects on reaching 90. “Anyone over 90 who says they never give their age a thought is not being truthful. Every day I wake, I give thanks and check my pulse,” he writes. “Then I attend to the first pills of the day before I eat and listen to the morning news on TV, which is always bad these days, with various religious persuasions infiltrating and killing each other in and around the Holy Land. I want to keep up, even though I am old and do not have to do anything about it all.”

Millie Garfield of Delray Beach, Florida is a mere 81 year old, and reflects on her age as well. Her most recent post offers tips on how to stay young. “Keep only cheerful friends. The grouches pull you down,” she recommends, and also advises, “Keep learning.” “Learn more about the computer, crafts, gardening, whatever. Never let the brain idle. An idle mind is the devil's workshop. The devil's name is Alzheimer's,” she adds.

Millie also blogs with thoughts on other subjects, ranging from widowhood, to cooking, to pop culture.

Bob Kronish, 80, of Boca Raton, Florida, blogs frequently about world events. His current post, a hefty 2,000 words no less, concerns Singapore’s stem-cell research, but he also wrote about whether the U.S. is losing the war for innovation and the global oil crisis.

Kronish told the Florida Sun South Sentinel that researching and writing his blog posts keeps him mentally fit and engaged. "It helps me keep up with the world today," Kronish told the newspaper. "I'm addicted to the computer. It's a mental curiosity that compels me to find things I didn't know about. I enjoy it to no end."

So, watch out teens—your grandparents could soon be giving you some advice on how to blog!


Cardinal Goes Web Surfing

Cardinal O’Malley, Boston's Roman Catholic archbishop, is joining the ranks of bloggers. He launched a blog to give daily updates on his ten-day trip to Rome that began last weekend. Like any good blogger, the cardinal’s blog is complete with Internet slang and personal stories.

Upon his arrival in Rome, Cardinal O’Malley reflected on his days as a young seminarian in Germany. “I have many fond memories of those days in the early 1960’s,” he blogged. “I will share with you, believe it or not, that I and everyone else were wearing lederhosen in those days…but, do not try to find those pictures because I assure you that the negatives have been destroyed….LOL!”

O’Malley may be the only cardinal to have a blog. Archidiocese spokesman Kevin Shea told the Associated Press that his office is not aware of any other blogging cardinals. And he says the blog may become permanent if it's a success.

The archdiocese said the cardinal was using the blog as an informal way to reach out to the public, particularly to young people active in the blogosphere. In general, the cardinal’s tone is casual. For example, in part of a recent post, he describes the ride from Rome to the San Giovanni Rotondo:
“…We hadn’t had anything to eat so at about 9:30pm we stopped at what I call an ‘Italian Howard Johnson’s’ which is sort a combination of Wal-Mart and Papa Ginos all wrapped up in one…lol…we had some very good pizza and sort of tepid coca cola, because ice is not a big feature of life in Europe.”

But unlike his fellow bloggers, don’t expect to hear any political rants. As the New York Times notes, Cardinal O’Malley’s blog has no political discourse, gossipy comments or tales of extremely bad behavior.

And, so far, bloggers have nothing but praise for the blog.

"Regardless of whether you're Catholic or not, or even if you can’t stand organized religion, I think this will prove some really interesting insight into the inner workings of Boston, Catholicism, and maybe even the Holy See,” a blogger at On The Other Hand writes. “At the very least we’ll learn something about the Cardinal himself.”

Adelle Tilton agrees. “It had to happen. And I think it is great. Now I am waiting for Pope Benedict XVI to launch his own blog - would that be cool or what?,” she writes at Catholic Windchimes. “I believe as does Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston, that bringing together the old and traditional practices of the Church together with modern technology is a great idea.”

Many bloggers say the Cardinal’s blog will help make the church more accessible to people. “I think it’s a refreshing change, something I think more bishops should be doing. As it is now, most Catholics receive communications from their bishops filtered through the news media,” Domenico Bettinelli writes at Bettnet.

But Bryan Person has a caveat for Cardinal O’Malley. “This blog certainly has the potential to become a successful — and meaningful — venture over time, but only if O’Malley is truly willing to connect to his readers on what concerns them,” Bryan writes at Bryper. “A ceremonial trip to Rome is one thing, but writing about the real everyday issues that concern Catholics — church closings, healing the wounds of the sexual abuse cases, etc. — would be quite another.”


Blogophile RSS Feed

[ndg1979]

This flat out proves to every American that FOX NEWS is REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED. With Bush's friends and family running FOX, it was not surprising how they were the first to report Bush as President. Now, just before an election, they are out to use high-level Democrats on national TV in a vain attempt to smear the image of the Democratic party.

Originally, the republicans were just going to acuse the dems of skyrocketing taxes to get you to vote for them! For Shame!

Face it - Clinton was justified!

Anyone who supports what FOX did, or what the Bush administration is doing now should be sent to join Al Queda because you are eroding the fabric of American society from the inside out.

Americans around the world are no longer respected by our peers and feared by our enemies. China and other countries are now doing better than us thanks to the republicans and terrorists are thanking us for creating mayhem.

If you vote Republican in November do us a favor - DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND (EVERYTHING) AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE ARE YOU TO CALL YOURSELF AN AMERICAN!

Instead - go back to college and major in ceramics!

[cindalu1]

CLINTON WAS LOOKING FOR A CHANCE TO TAKE A POLITICAL STANCE FOR THE DEMOCRATS-----HE DID, AND IT WAS NOT THE WAY AN EX PRESIDENT SHOULD PRESENT HIMSELF---HE IS STUMPING FOR THE DEMOCRATS AND HIS OTHER HALF, UGG HILLARY. I WOULD TAKE BILL ANY DAY OVER HILLARY. DID HIS MOTHER EVER TEACH HIM NOT TO POINT HIS FINGER IN SOMEONES FACE???????

[sokpuppet1]

Fact: The terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 didn't start their flight training until 2001-- the Bush Presidency.

Fact: Most of the terrorists weren't even in the U.S. prior to 2001-- the Bush Presidency.

Fact: Bill Clinton never received a report entitled "Bin Laden Determined To Strike In U.S." That report wasn't written until 2001-- during the Bush Presidency.

Fact: In section 8 of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission Report, the authors detail a period of time where "The System was Blinking Red" with warnings of an impending attack. When did this happen? The summer of 2001... when Bush was on vacation in Texas.

Fact: Evidence that Bin Laden and Al Queda was behind the USS Cole bombings didn't arise until January 2001-- The beginning of the Bush presidency.

Fact: Clinton had 8 years to get Bin Laden... but there was no evidence of an impending attack within the US. Despite this, Clinton still authorized strikes against Bin Laden targets, to great criticism from abroad and at home.

Fact: Bush had 8 months to get Bin Laden... as evidence showed he was behind the USS Cole bombing, and alerts were flashing all over the place that an attack would happen within months.

If anyone had the opportunity to stop Bin Laden, it was Bush.

[manner6]

There was a time when the Republican party was composed entirely of members of the human race. Since the takeover by the neocons that is no longer true. Does anyone have any idea what planet they're from? Judging by their comments here,it must be a place where the inability to tell s*** from shinola is highly prized.

[naturehaven]

There is posturing and and stretched truths on both sides. It is because we are in an election year.

I have done a lot of reading and studying on the lead in to 911 and they are both responsible. Clinton more so because he had longer and did nothing (or very little at best).

If I have to choose who to believe the most in this situation it would be the republicans.

In my opinion Clinton showed his true colors in the interview and they aren't pretty.

[observertrue]

Bill's List:

1. Confabulate with Monica
2. Confound Congress
3. Cuckold Hillary
4. Conspire Cover-up
5. Contrive Plausibility
6. Contraindicate Culpability
7. Collect Contributions
8. Cancel Capitalism
9. Concoct Contrition
10. Capture Bin Laden

[missyx1]

Fox news isn't even real, they make up fake news, bring in fake liberals, and when they can't defend themselves anymore, they blame others. All they can do is blame, blame, blame.

Tell me, what has Bush done. Wasn't he the one who let the bin laden family walk out of this country? Isn't he and his friends the ones in country of the oil in the US? Isn't he the one who said we won the war in Iraq? Wasn't it his vice president who said that 9/11 was connected to Iraq? Wasn't it Bush who said there were weapons in Iraq? Wasn't it Bush who said "You know, I just don't spend that much time on him" during 2002 white house news conference about Bin laden? (google the white house transcript if you want too, it's the 14 question down)

At least Clinton can admit he's didn't do all he can. Now, can you see bush saying that. No, Bush will just make some other *** up. That's all Bush can do. I wonder if bush would have the guts to go onto a liberal talk show (there's no liberal news show, he would have to go onto a liberal radio show)

[missyx1]

Clinton wasn't freaking out or anything he was just standing up for himself. When a Dem. defends himself, the right tries to spin it around saying he's freaking out but when Bush and his republicans try and defend what they're trying to do, it's cause they're trying to protect us. Clinton was right to stand up for himself. I'm tired of Fox's ***. I'm tired of Bush and his republicans. I'm tired of those who still support this president. They waited 8 months before they did anything about bin laden. They fire *** Clark, and now they say they didn't get the files about bin laden, well, if you fired the guy who had the information how do you expect to get it. Why doesn't condi get off her white-washed @ss and do something instead of always finding a way to blame the Dems.

All Republicans can do is blame others for what they did wrong, and take credit when things go right, but nothings gone right so far so all they've been doing is blaming others. How can they blame the Dems, when they're the majority. If they want it done they have the votes.

It's sad when the good republicans have to turn against their own party because Bush and his extreme republicans are too far to the right.