> After Research in Motion beat Wall Street expectations with its quarterly earnings Thursday, co-CEO Jim Balsillie asserted on the company’s earnings call that the upcoming PlayBook 7-inch tablet is way ahead of Apple’s iPad. Apple has sold roughly 8-10 million iPads so far. Probably a lot more now that we’re in the tail end of the Christmas season. RIM has sold how many Playbooks? Oh, that’s right, the playbook won’t be out until April of next year, after a new generation of iPad is already shipping.

And that’s how he defines “way ahead?” Is this guy on crack?

> Dame Helen Mirren has condemned film-makers for aiming movies at young men, saying Hollywood “continues to worship at the altar of the 18- to 25-year-old male and his penis”. It’s hard to argue with her point. Hollywood most certainly caters to adolescent males. I’d be even more specific: immature and uneducated 18- to 25-year-old males. Which suggests to me that there’s a huge opportunity here for a studio that wanted to cater to women and/or smarter, more educated adults in general. Those films get made, but they most often get relegated to the tiny two-screen houses in the snobby part of town. Give those films a real push in the media, get them on more screens, and I think you could really make some money.

Mirren also notes that the situation is certainly improving, though not quickly enough. I don’t think we’ll see a real change in this situation until we allow more female directors and more female writers opportunities to get into the business. Men are going to make movies about men, for the most part. They do what’s familiar to them. It’s not a vindictive thing; they’re just sticking to what they know.

Maybe eventually we’ll get some female studio executives and owners? That would certainly shake things up a bit.

Get that idea into a billionaire like Oprah’s head, and you’re on your way.

> At least 200 Wal-Mart stores will roll out security > announcements within 24 hours, Wal-Mart spokesman Dan Fogleman > said. By month’s end, 588 stores in 27 states will be participating > in the program. A short video featuring Napolitano will appear on > TV screens at select checkout lanes, asking Wal-Mart shoppers to > contact local law enforcement to report suspicious activity. > > “If you see something suspicious in the parking lot or in the > store, say something immediately,” Napolitano said in the video. > “Report suspicious activity to your local police or sheriff. If you > need help ask a Wal-Mart manager for assistance.” Glad I never set foot in Wal-Mart.

So I guess I wasn’t wrong to suggest that our government might just want to expand the TSA’s reach beyond the airport. Give it a few years, if nut jobs like Napolitano get their way. We’ll be getting x-rayed and backscattered at the drive-thru at In-N-Out Burger.

Are we supposed to be stupid enough to think this has anything to do with stopping terrorism? Terrorists at Wal-Mart?

This is about driving us to stupidity with fear, plain and simple. Keep us looking at each other, and we stop looking at what they’re doing to us.

If you think it’s okay for your government to turn its citizens against one another in order to justify draconian, fascist nonsense like this, I seriously feel sorry for you.

> I’m able to make a distinction between you and me without > feeling the least bit hypocritical. I don’t watch snuff films and > you make them. You weren’t killing that animal for food or shelter > or even fashion, you were killing it for fun. You enjoy killing > animals. I can make the distinction between the two of us but I’ve > tried and tried and for the life of me, I can’t make a distinction > between what you get paid to do and what Michael Vick went to > prison for doing. I’m able to make the distinction with no pangs of > hypocrisy even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho > shitheads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face. > > So I don’t think I will save my condemnation, you phony pioneer > girl. (I’m in film and television, Cruella, and there was an insert > close-up of your manicure while you were roughing it in God’s > country. I know exactly how many feet off camera your hair and > make-up trailer was.) Couldn’t have written it better myself. Then again, I’m not a famous television and movie writer, so it only makes sense that I couldn’t have written it better myself.

Palin is not a candidate for President. She’s a media figure who gets paid to make everyone think she’s a presidential candidate. She’s the Paris Hilton of politics. Her goal is simple: continue to make millions of dollars fooling people into thinking she is of any significance to anyone. At this, I will admit, she is a master. At everything else, she’s a loser, plain and simple.

> Every line of pro-prosecution rationale cited by Feinstein applies equally to journalists — including especially the newspapers from around the world which are publishing all of the same diplomatic cables as WikiLeaks is, and which are publishing them **before WikiLeaks even does.**   How can it possibly be that WikiLeaks should be prosecuted for espionage, but not *The New York Times*, or *The Guardian*, or any other newspaper that publishes these cables?  > > In 2006, Alberto Gonzales [threatened to prosecute *The New York Times*](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/21/AR2006052100348.html) for revealing Bush’s illegal NSA program, and [*The Weekly Standard* ran numerous articles calling for the prosecution of *NYT* journalists and editors](http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/385jqmfk.asp) under the Espionage Act for having done so.  Bill Bennett [demanded the prosecution](http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_05_21-2006_05_27.shtml#1148648350) of *The Washington Post*‘s Dana Priest for revealing the CIA black sites.  How can all the Good Democrats who condemned that mentality possibly not condemn Dianne Feinstein and those who think like her?  What’s the difference? “I am… for freedom of the press, and against all violations of the Constitution to silence by force and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of their agents.” –Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10:78

That quote from Jefferson is most poignant to the Wikileaks discussion.

A disturbing number of people seem to think that journalists in this country should be legally obligated to hold back information at the behest of their government. That’s insane to me. The government can request that a story be held for “national security” reasons, but no journalist is legally bound to obey that request. It’s a professional courtesy, one that can be denied, if the journalist judges that people have a right to that information.

As far as I can tell, the New York Times, Guardian, and even Wikileaks itself made every effort to redact whatever information they may have felt could cause legitimate security issues. They requested help with that from their governments, but didn’t get it. So they used their best judgement.

Ultimately, if you think that your government should be able to arrest people for publishing information that was leaked in whatever fashion, then you are placing far too much trust in your government. A free press is a crucial part of the checks and balances system that has served us pretty well thus far. Start questioning whether or not the government can actually prosecute you for publishing something, no matter how sensitive, and you hand a tremendous amount of power over a very small group of individuals, who, let’s be honest, have not come close to proving themselves to have our best interests at heart.

What if one of our senators decided to murder someone in cold blood, just for spite? Then he or she declared it was a matter of national security. Are we no longer entitled to that information? Who gets to decide what constitutes a national secret, and who doesn’t? How do I know it’s in my own best interest not to know something?

It’s an awful lot of trust to put in another human being you don’t even know.

Put down the flag for a minute and use common sense. Particularly since 9/11, our government has been systematically usurping more and more power without a peep from us. Don’t fall for the patriotic nonsense that we should allow our government to do as it pleases without any consequences.

And to those in the government, you have two options: Plug the leaks in your boat, or STOP DOING EMBARRASSING, ILLEGAL, AND POTENTIALLY CATASTROPHIC THINGS. This stuff is leaking for a reason. Clearly, some people on the inside feel that you are doing some things you shouldn’t be doing. So much so that they are risking their lives to leak it.

We’re not all uneducated children. If you honestly think there’s a good reason why you have to break the rules every once in a while, level with us. Explain it to us. Because ultimately, no matter what you may think, YOU ANSWER TO US.