Umm, you might want to stop that

Earthquake in northern Ohio caused by fracking wastewater

Enough said.

Tennessee doesn't like illegals

I had previously heard about Tennessee's new voter ID law, requiring anyone voting to present a photo ID before voting. While these laws are meant to suppress voting among those who typically vote Democrat, I'm not shocked by it. Kentucky has a similar law, and it doesn't seem overly egregious, and probably won't have much of a chilling effect on turnout long term, although it could cause troubles in the short term (it's not going to matter in the presidential elections there, but could affect congressional races). Chances are it mostly will be used to harass funny-colored people, which is the Official Pastime of Tennessee, although I'm betting many of the poor, white Republican voters will have troubles with it, as well.

I hadn't heard about Tennessee's effort to purge non-citizen voters from the rolls, however. When I first read the synopsis, I thought it was going to be up to poll workers to racially profile potential illegal aliens voting. But upon further reading, I see that they are going to compare the list of those with a "temporary license" (given to those with green cards) or a "certificate to drive*" to the list of registered voters and attempt to kick out anyone who isn't a citizen. There are more than 20,000 people holding one of those licenses (only 1,043 with the certificate to drive).

* created under Democratic governor Phil Bredesen in an attempt to get some of the illegal aliens to at least have better driving skills, and since discontinued by the now Republican-dominated government

I'm sure there are some non-citizens registered to vote, and I'm sure they'll find some among those 20,000. But to make it seem like this is some big accomplishment is disingenuous at best; Colorado did a similar thing and found that 106 non-citizens had registered to vote since 2006. Does that shock anyone?

Fair elections are important, and folks who aren't entitled to vote shouldn't be allowed to vote. But it's an imperfect system, and the main thrust of this law is just more warfare on the right's favorite boogeyman, illegal immigrants.

Here's betting the NRA will try to make a martyr out of this

Tourist tried to check in gun at WTC site

The NRA types will love this example: licensed permit-holder from another state is at the 9/11 memorial and tries to do the "right" thing and check her gun -- never mind that carrying it in New York City is illegal.

They can use this as any example of why they want licensed carry permits to reciprocate in all 50 states.

I'll be shocked if NRA lawyers don't offer to help her.

....and she was from Tennessee, of course.

Update: A story in the Tennessean contains a pertinent bit that was not in the above-linked story:

...and when officers searched her they found two envelopes of what they suspected to be cocaine. She has not been arrested on any drug charges.

Not sure why they wouldn't charge her on the drug possession -- I'd imagine NYC officers know what cocaine looks like -- but with this tidbit, this story suddenly fits the narrative of the gun-control advocates slightly more than the NRA folks. A lot of folks want to carry concealed weapons for protection (which is dubious logic, but I digress), but a lot of folks carry concealed weapons because they're up to other more sinister deeds -- like buying/selling drugs.

Zany Newt and American exceptionalism

Does Newt Gingrich understand the Constitution? He loves to prattle on about it, then he comes out with awesome bits like this, wanting "radical" judges to be brought before Congress -- by U.S. Marshals, if necessary -- to answer for their decisions. I'm pretty sure that goes against one of the most basic rules of our government, that whole separation of powers thing. 

Because, after all, the definition of "radical" is "disagrees with me."

Newt is typical of many a conservative:

 “Do you want to move towards American exceptionalism, reassert the Constitution, reassert the nature of America, or do you, in fact, want to become a secular, European, sort of beaurocratic socialist society?”

I'm all for American exceptionalism -- I do believe we are a great nation. But to these folks, "American exceptionalism" means simply that we somehow shouldn't have to do things the way other normal, 21st century progressive first-world countries do.

So to answer his question, I'll, um, take a version that's closer to the second option.

Not a good experience

A quote from this story about a house fire not too far from where I live -- in which a person died -- rang eerily close to home for me.

A neighbor who tried to crawl into the house was greeted by smoke so thick he couldn't make it. His quote:

"It was eerie," she said. "There was no noise in the house at all. Just silence."

It's interesting to see that explanation of it, because once upon a time when I lived in Tennessee, our neighbor's house (doublewide, actually) caught on fire (the second time their house had burnt; just a year or so earlier, their single-wide trailer burnt, as well) in the middle of the night. Their dogs were still inside, so the owner insisted on crawling in after the one in the front bedroom, near the front door. I suggested he not go, but ended up crawling in behind him and keeping him in sight while he dragged out one of the dogs (the other apparently never moved and died in the fire).

The explanation of the silence struck me (gave me a chill, actually), because that's what I experienced. It was like entering some kind of warp zone. It was the middle of the night, and we were pretty much in the middle of nowhere, but it was a different silence, suffocating. And even though it was pitch black, the color in the house seemed brown, somehow. 

It's not like I went far into the house; I was only a matter of a few feet inside. But that was more than enough for an experience I won't forget. It makes me realize why people can so easily die in a house fire; it is very disorienting, and I can only imagine how quickly panic would set in.

This will win you the GOP nomination

Politician Admired For Sticking By Incorrect Statement | The Onion

The Repugnicans' new Medicare plan

New Medicare Law Would Require Never Mentioning Program To Anyone Born After January 1, 2012 | The Onion

Romney: Obama’s A Wimp For Not Destroying That Drone | TPM2012

Romney: Obama’s A Wimp For Not Destroying That Drone | TPM2012

If Pakistan was mad about an air strike in their country that killed 24 soldiers, wonder how Iran would have felt about a similar strike inside its borders?

Obama quote

“Ask Osama bin Laden and the 22 out of 30 top Al-Qaeda leaders who have been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement… or whoever’s left out there.”

Why is anyone paying attention to this?

I have been noticing the headlines in the Lexington Herald-Leader -- and even some in national media -- about some church in BFE, Ky., that voted against accepting interracial couples.

I had not read any of the stories, because the headline told me all I needed to know -- and I could never understand why this story was getting so much attention. Churches all over the rural south would vote this way, should it come up for a vote.

Ah, but thankfully, it's been resolved in a politically correct manner:

Pike church reverses course, votes to welcome people of all races


...yes, they will now "welcome" people of all races. Uh-huh.

Two things I learned after finally reading the story that had gone on too long: 1.) it was a free will baptist church, which is one of the more hellfire-and-brimstone of the bunch (I know from experience); and 2.) the original vote was 9-6, while the new vote to welcome all races was 16-0.

All this attention for 15-16 backwards honkies in Podunk?

Weak? How about crazy?

As I keep reading about Republicans being unhappy with their choices for the GOP nomination, it strikes me funny, especially when they call their choices weak.

The truth of the matter is that their candidates are weak because their politics are extreme. Right now, those in the field are either crazy (Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann, Paul, etc.) or having to lie about some non-crazy positions they've taken in the past (Romney). In order to win the nomination (and this has long been the case for either party) you've got to cater to the base. Right now, the Republican base has shifted farther right, and they've got no one but themselves to blame, with all the fear-mongering they've done over the past few years.

When it comes to electability, Democrats have figured out you need someone who can feel your pain and stare eloquently off into space; Republicans need some aw-shucks guy who just seems too friendly to be crazy. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama fit the bill, as do Reagan and Dubya. Jimmy Carter and Bush the First don't, so they were one-termers. And all of the losing nominees since the 1970s didn't fit the bill either, so they were no-termers.

Newt: Pro-socialized healthcare

Flashback: Gingrich Championed The Mandate As ‘300 Million-Payer System’ — In 2005

A lot of what Newt was for just a few years ago makes a lot of sense. The truth is, a lot of conservative thinkers know some version of a single-payer system is necessary -- but they also know they can't get elected as dog catcher if they say that.

11/22/63

I'm a longtime Stephen King fan, and I either have read, or plan to read, all of his books.

The reason there are several in that latter category is that while I like everything he writes, not everything is created equally -- some take me a little longer to get into. My personal opinion is that he's at his best when he's telling a story, and not trying to exorcise his own inner demons or trying to see how high he can take the body count.

So when I first read the plot to 11/22/63, I was intrigued, because it sounded like a book that would fit in with my King favorites.

And it didn't disappoint.

 The first good sign came in that the story would take King out of a couple of his comfort zones, namely, the main character is not a writer, and while the book starts in Maine, it mostly takes place in Texas. King's writer characters and the Maine settings, I've always thought, are just projections of his own life.

I'm not going to launch into a review of the book here. I liked it. What I am going to do, though, is analyze a little of the politics behind it (if anyone actually reads this blog and might want to read the book, stop here).

Mitt vs. Mitt

OK, so most political commercials are smear jobs, and we know that. But the DNC's commercial picking on Mitt Romney's flip-flopping is pretty damning -- although I'm sure Romney would have little trouble double-talking out of his positions that are highlighted.

The DNC has a website up, MittvMitt.com, that highlights his flip flops.

I thought the flip-flopper label on John Kerry in 2004 was unfair, because Kerry was more guilty of having nuanced opinions (such as progressives do), but it's hard to see Romney's varying positions as anything except political pandering.

The GOP just can't be excited about their candidates at this point...

What is this "mac and cheese?"

Pat Robertson Asks Black Co-Host: Is Mac And Cheese For Thanksgiving ‘A Black Thing?’

Another entry in the list of Craziest Things Pat Robertson has said.

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News | TPMDC

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News

Nothing more to say on this.

Edwards shows class and dignity in losing title

Edwards shows class and dignity in losing title


Although there are problems with the whole "Tony wasn't going to let someone else win the championship" theory*, I think Jenna Fryer does a good job of explaining the love affair with Stewart, while also giving credit to Carl Edwards for doing everything right, but still coming up short.


* namely, you can want it all baaaad, but there are so many variables in racing that sometimes you finish fifth even with the best car. Fact is, Stewart is a great race car driver, one of the most talented out there, but for most of the 10 races in the chase this year, he was also very lucky.

And people love Tony Stewart because?

Throughout the NASCAR Chase for the Sprint Cut this year, the media took turns slathering love on every contender, it seemed, except Carl Edwards, despite the fact that he led the points for quite some time during both the "regular" season and the "playoffs."

I understand the fascination with Jimmie Johnson during the chase, as he the five-time champion could never be counted out and had made a habit of being at his best during the final 10 races.

But Tony Stewart? During the telecast of the season finale, everyone fawned all over Stewart, and found every reason to dismiss Edwards' chances. Now, in the end, they were right -- but only by the narrowest of margins. As it turns out, Edwards lost doing exactly what had kept him in the hunt all year long; he finished second, while leading the most laps, but that wasn't enough as Stewart won the race and the title. They actually tied in points, but Stewart won based on his five race wins (all coming in the final 10 races).

Another great Krugman observation (even if he borrowed it)

This story is somewhat interesting, but what really struck me was Paul Krugman's line about Newt Gingrich.

"And Newt, although somebody said he's a stupid man's idea of what a smart man sounds like, but he is more plausible than the other guys that they've been pushing up."

I like that characterization of Gingrich, although it might be aimed at even me...

An intellectual conservative

Yes, you read that right. There are folks out there who are smart and who subscribe to conservative ideology. Newt Gingrich is one of them.

However, they'll likely never get elected, because their ideas are bat-crap crazy (case in point is this one, suggesting child labor laws are holding poor kids down). To summarize Newt:

Awesome. And folks in Tennessee say, "So?"

Rick Womick, GOP Tennessee state rep: All Muslims serving in the U.S. military should be removed

The thing about this is that while much of the nation may be shocked, this kind of language is going to play well with his constituents.

CBS should do political attack ads

I saw this story from CBS about Congressional leaders making trades that seemed similar to insider trading, and it does fit the narrative that our leaders are crooked and out for money. It certainly raised my eyebrows.

However, The Huffington Post points out several problems with the story, focusing on the leaders of each party in the House. For Boehner, the "insider" knowledge they point to was knowledge that really anyone could figure out, and for Pelosi, they make it sound like she got preferential treatment when in fact it was her husband taking part in a Visa IPO just like any other investor, and similar to Boehner, there was no real "insider" information being used.

Arab League to suspend Syria over bloody crackdown - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - msnbc.com

Arab League to suspend Syria over bloody crackdown 

Really, how bad do you have to be for Arab nations to say, "Whoa, you're out of control on the human rights issues..."

Seriously?

Penn State Students Clash With Police After Paterno Announcement - NYTimes.com:

I mean, really? For a guy who at the very least turned a blind eye and possibly even aided a child molester?

Tennessee making (bad) news

Seems the Republican-created teacher evaluation system in Tennessee is causing headaches, drawing the attention of NPR and the New York Times.

The key line from the NYT story:

In the end, it’s all about distrust: not trusting principals to judge teachers, not trusting teachers to educate children.

That pretty much sums up the problem with all state testing/teacher evaluation standards -- we need to just put good people in place and let them do their jobs. But we're not willing to do what it takes to get good people in the first place (pay them).

Could Democrats take a winning lesson from..

So, I was wondering if anybody had noticed this story, and apparently, they have.

The story is how easily Steve Beshear is going to win reelection as a Democrat in a heavily Republican state. I've thought for a long time there are lessons to be learned by the national party, although they're not ones that could be used nation-wide.

And we care what you think because...

Joe Arpaio, Arizona Sheriff, Calls On Obama To Release Birth Certificate Microfiche

Who are you, and why do we care?

What separation?

From a story in the Herald-Leader:

The Kentucky Office of Homeland Security has the right to publicly declare "dependence on Almighty God as being vital to the security of the Commonwealth," the state Court of Appeals ruled Friday. 

State law requires the Office of Homeland Security to publicize God's benevolent protective powers in its official reports and on a plaque posted outside the entrance to the state Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort.

Yeah, this seems like it will stand up to court challenges.

NASCAR cheating? Gasp.

This shouldn't be surprising:

Crack by Knaus draws NASCAR scrutiny

Crew chief Chad Knaus told driver Jimmie Johnson over the radio pre-race that if he won he had to damage the rear of his car after last week's race. No matter what their cover story is, there's zero chance this was for any reason other than to hide something done to the car that was outside the rules.

The most surprising thing about his isn't that Knaus would cheat (he's been caught before) but that he would be dumb enough to say it over the radio.

What? Tennessee cracking down on Occupy protesters?

State tells Occupy Nashville it must have permit, liability insurance

Who saw this one coming? Making protesters pay for a permit? Only if they're not Tea Partiers.

The state curfew bans anybody from being on the plaza from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. Protests would be allowed by permit between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Those permits would cost $65 a day and groups would also be required to buy $1 million in liability insurance coverage.

Wow.

The more I read about Steve Jobs...

...the clearer it becomes that he was crazy (i.e., he wanted to meet Obama but refused to ask him, instead insisting that Obama "make the first move." Egomaniac, maybe?).

The real reason why Steve Jobs drove without a license plate

What does he have against license plates?

Imagine that...

First, the story: After Alabama Immigration Law, Few Americans Taking Immigrants' Work

Now, Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report commenting on Alabama's efforts to use prisoners to take the jobs left behind by immigrants:

Turns out, Americans who've chose a life of crime don't have quite the same work ethic as Guatemalans who've walked through 500 miles of desert to feed their children.

Overly dramatic much?

Talladega exposes dark side of racing | www.thatsracin.com:

Jim Utter from That's Racin' seems infatuated with this whole "team orders" thing from the past weekend's Talladega race. Although it's been denied, it appears Ford drivers were told to work only with other Ford drivers, as they're in a tight points battle.

What is so shocking about this?

The tandem racing at Talladega is a ridiculous result of the rules in place. The fact that drivers need to work in pairs -- not just in packs, but pairs -- creates a fertile situation for this.

And frankly, it's about time the make of the car mattered. The Ford vs. Chevy debate used to mean something, but with the cars all looking the same, it's come to mean very little.

So I think it's nice to see drivers showing loyalty to the badge on the car.

This gif brings me joy

By the very definition....

....conspiracies don't die just because you "prove" them false. So yeah, I wondered where this was.

Keith Olbermann Lashes Out At Fox News

The above headline was on this story.

Is this really a headline?

Can I haz this meme, pleez?

Can I haz this meme, pleez?

(Taken from this story.)

If Obama does it, it must be bad

The GOP is clearly running on the "not-him" platform heading into 2012. It's great for its base, but it's really not necessary. The base clearly wants to vote against "him" (Obama, for those of you confused).

This story caught my attention as a great example of the "not-him" strategy. I would rhetorically ask who could possibly complain about removing a hated dictator from power and paving the way for a democracy with no loss of American lives and at a fraction of the cost of similar operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- all in around six months' time. But the answer, of course, is Lindsay Graham:

A problem for the GOP

It's tough to know just what to make of the Tea Party -- is it the last political gasp of a dying minority? (Anyone who has lived in a red state will doubt this.) Is it just the rantings of a vocal minority? (More likely; they are a majority in some areas, but nationally are a minority.)

Whatever it is, it's clearly a thorn in the side of Democrats, but it's going to increasingly become a thorn in the side of Republicans when it comes time to actually win elections.

Was the Associated Press transcription of Obama’s CBC speech ‘racist’?

Was the Associated Press transcription of Obama’s CBC speech ‘racist’?

To answer this headline succinctly, no. I'm a bit of a journalist myself, or used to be, and I know well that you clean up things like people leaving off their "g's." But in this case, I think it was the point of the speech.

You'll notice in the rest of the quote from the AP, he didn't leave off the "g's," he only did it on the three specific words.

Just like I felt it was unfair to clean up George W. Bush's grammatical mistakes -- which are different than saying "gonna" rather than "going to" -- I feel like this tells part of the story.

From a journalistic standpoint, I think it is much ado about nothing. And this comes from someone who thinks latent racism is very dangerous.

I like people in the abstract

This blog entry by Paul Krugman is, as usual, spot on. But the key for me was seeing him put voice to a conservative "value" that I've only come recently to appreciate.

Easing your guilt doesn't always make you feel better

On Monday of this week I got gas at the Speedway on New Circle on the north side of town, near where my office used to be before we moved this spring, and I had a guy come up to me and give me a similar story to one someone had given me near there a few years ago -- the key element being that he started a job at the car wash tomorrow and just needed a little money ($7 in this case).

The first time I had heard the story was when Jennifer and I were leaving the City Buffet two or three years ago (about one or two miles from this Speedway). The guy came up to the car as we were pulling out, and told me this very solid story that sounded atypical and believable. I didn't give him money (I just never do), but felt bad because I thought he might actually be on the up-and-up. I clearly remember the part about starting at the car wash tomorrow, because there is a car wash in the direction he motioned during the story. 

I don't know if it was the same guy or they're just sharing story ideas -- at any rate, it made me glad I hadn't given money before. But it doesn't really make me feel any better overall.

There's a lesson here

HP's decision to ax its tablet and subsequent fire sale caused lots of pontificating among the techie crowd, including the assertion that the fire sale would further strengthen Apple's iPad. 

But this is exactly what I was thinking the lesson from this should be:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/238562/touchpads_lesson_tablets_cost_too_much.html

I've had a similar thought; I'm not an Apple guy, but I must admit that if I'm going to pay $300-plus for a tablet, I'm just going to go ahead and buy an iPad. Heck, the same might be said about Macs; there's no doubting their quality, and if it were based on that alone (it's not), then I'd recommend them for any computer purchase. However, quality PCs can be bought for one-fourth the price of a comparable Mac. 

The tablet makers haven't figured out that the same logic might apply to their products.

93 percent of statistics...

From a "friend's" Facebook page:

“25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it’s crazy. However, four out of five US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who’s crazy?” – Andrew Ford


OK, I get it. So 80 percent of the murders in the U.S. are in the half of the states with the most stringent gun laws. Proves that lax carry laws deter murder, doesn't it? (It sure worked in the Old West!)

Oh, but wait. What is the population rank of the 25 states with these lax gun laws? I'm betting you'd see a lot of Montanas and Wyomings in that list, with a Texas mixed in.

Want to convince me of something? Riddle me this: what is the per capita murder rate in those 25 states with more stringent laws compared to those without?

Ah, leave it to a liberal to get all scientific and ask for some commie number like "per capita"....

Update: According to my best estimates and based off what I can ascertain from Wikipedia (Open carry in the United States), the combined population of the 26 states with "open carry" laws (per my understanding of it, as these laws are not all the same) makes up 37.9 percent of the population (Texas isn't actually among them; Pennsylvania, at No. 6, is the largest population). So if that murder number is correct, then 62.1 percent of the country accounts for 80 percent of the murders.

Oh, but wait....! According to FBI statistics, those murder statistics might be off just a smidge...or a lot. See, when I added together the total murders from the FBI statistics for those 26 states (37.9 percent of the population, remember), I got 5,450 murders, out of of a total of 13,646. That's 39.9 percent of the murders in 37.9 percent of the population. That's just a little off from the "4 out of 5" number cited, making me think, oh, maybe it was pulled out of this guy's arse.

Now, this was some quick spreadsheet work on my part, so I wouldn't go before Congress to testify with it....but I bet people have testified based on less evidence than I put together in 10 minutes of research.

Oh, and the FBI statistics had the murders broken down by weapon used -- I won't throw out any random statistics here, but I bet you might find a correlation between states with lax gun laws and high rates of murder by gun. The million-dollar question there would be: if they didn't have easy access to guns, would those murder totals be lower? I'm 93 percent sure they would be.

Of Google and editorializing

Nashville residents take on Google Wi-Spy, join privacy lawsuit

As a journalist (or at least someone with a journalism degree), I'm more bothered by the editorializing in this story than I am by the content, specifically, the author's line "Google may have downloaded information such as user names and passwords if you were on the Internet when the street view car drove by." Without the bolded words, this is a factual statement; adding the bolded words is editorializing. Your readers can figure out what kind of things can be gathered from an open Internet connection.

He's also incorrect in the next paragraph, "Google says it tapped into wireless networks in an effort — unrelated to the street view feature — to improve its location-based services, such as those that allow smartphone users to map their location." The street view feature is part of the maps and location-based services. It's completely related.

There are other turns of phrase -- such as the wry "Google, however, wants a second opinion" -- that seem to betray a slight bias by the reporter.

Now, I'm a Google geek, so I'm not going to be too concerned about this. Frankly, this is no different than having a private conversation over a CB radio. If you want a secure conversation, you use secure channels, so to speak; if you want secure data, you don't make it public, you put some kind of security on it. And to be clear, Google wasn't "cracking" these open networks; the term "open" is used for a reason. And I may be naive, but I'm not buying that Google was gathering passwords -- umm, if Google wants to misuse personal information, it has much easier ways of getting it (hint: it's already got it...). It was trying to use open wireless connections to base locations on; this is another way of geo-locating, using public wi-fi hotspots. When you don't password-protect your connection, yours looks no different to a scanning computer than does the one at Starbucks. The lesson you should learn from this isn't that you should sue Google, it's that you should protect your network from people who are certainly up to no good.

Google has also elicited screams with its Street View technology by taking pictures of people's houses and posting them on the Internet. This is again a matter of public information; if your house is on a public road, then anyone can see it. Google just has a much bigger audience for its photos.

This will be an interesting test case, one of many that are defining the laws of our new digital age. But even more important than defining the laws may be the defining our attitudes toward all the capabilities of the digital age.

And now, taking the fight to the light bulbs

Support For Energy Efficient Bulbs Dims Among GOP

I've heard this complaint before, but for some reason hearing this story on NPR this afternoon really wound me up. Seriously, this is where we are as a country, spending time railing against light bulbs?

Anyone saying they get headaches or "the light from them just isn't the same" is full of crap.

It's just one more example in a long line of folks who not only aren't willing to make small steps to be environmentally friendly(er) -- they actually believe it's their God-given right as an 'merican to destroy the environment any way they can.

Justice?

Oklahoma pharmacist sentenced to life for killing would-be robber

This is the second story I've heard this afternoon that tells me a lot about the bad trajectory this country is on.

Long story short, this pharmacist shot a would-be robber in the head, then went and got another gun and shot him five more times while he lay on the floor unconscious.

The first shot is not a problem; he was protecting himself. Everything after that is just outlaw justice, and we supposedly left that behind in the 1800s. Unfortunately, a lot of Americans romanticize this, and it's no surprise this guy has a lot of supporters.

I am a little surprised that he was tried for first degree murder. I guess there was premeditation in the moments between shooting him the first time and coming back to "finish him off."

Top 20? Yeah.

Paste's Top 20 (so far)

Paste has a couple of top 20 best album lists for 2011. Jason Isbell’s “Here We Rest” doesn’t make the top 20 of the first half of the year? Come on.

In defense of Transformers 3

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43598173/ns/today-entertainment/

Not sure why folks hate so much on the Transformers movies ... I mean, I know they're not that great, but they're far from the worst. The above review says it about right, especially this part:

"You want to quibble about character development in “Dark of the Moon?” It’s a movie about ROBOTS IN DISGUISE! Save those debates for the holiday season, when Hollywood shamelessly panders for acclaim and awards with costumed dramas and weepy ensembles where some sickly person stares up at the skies with outstretched arms and rain on his face."