The best places on the web to get news FAST!

6:27 PM | 2 Comments


It seems like everyone is always on the run. We are so busy that we can not even take a phone call without multitasking other things like driving, grocery shopping, and exercising. The old fashioned ways of getting news (like tv, radio, and paper media) are still there, but compared to what an internet connection offers- the ways of the past are inconvenient and time consuming.

This week I have compiled a list of solutions to our time crunch crisis. Without further ado: TOP 10 WAYS TO GET NEWS FAST ONLINE!

10) Magazines: Many of the print magazines you know and love have added online elements.
  • Pros: They tend to target specific interests, and most are free.

  • Cons: Content may only be updated monthly, and is not very broad.

  • Suggested Site: Time Magazine: Has the same great content as the print version, plus many cool interactive features, and an archive!

9) Newspaper: Even small local papers have added online content.
  • Pros: Most are updated daily, or at least several times a week. Many are free and have established reputations as reliable news sources.

  • Cons: Many run the same story over and over again, only changing slight details as new information comes in, which can make it time consuming to find stuff you haven't already read if you have been following a story for awhile

  • Suggested Site: The New York Times: Very comprehensive, and easy to search.

8) Search Engine: We use them for just about everything, why not news?

  • Pros: It's easy to get a lot of results if you have specific search terms to look for.

  • Cons: If you don't know exactly what you want the results can be frustrating and hard to sift through. Some of the search results may direct you to very unreliable content.

  • Suggested Site: Google.com: If you search through their news section you are only directed to well known news sources; it is a great way to see what all the popular channels are saying about a certain topic.
7) News Site: Some popular all purpose websites have added news sections.
  • Pros: You can check the news from the same sites where you get email, music, and countless other things.
  • Cons: Because the sites don't specialize in news, some may be very lacking in content. Some also redirect you to other sites, which is annoying!

  • Suggested Site: Yahoo! News: You can search by key terms within this section of yahoo. They also are well organized, and easy to browse. Yahoo mostly uses AP News stories which is great because they tend to be pretty unbiased.

6) Newsletter Subscriptions: not just paper anymore!
  • Pros: They can be great if you are trying to follow a specific topic, and it is nice to be able to store and read it from your inbox.

  • Cons: Some are infrequent, and it's hard to find a good one that has broad content. RSS feeds also do pretty much the same thing, but better!

  • Suggested Site: Page One: A great way to keep up with what's going on in the literature community (if you can get past their awkward formatting).
5) Blogs: The fun way to get news.
  • Pros: There are so MANY of them, and they cover pretty much every topic! The good ones are easy to read, provide a lot of information, and are cleverly written.

  • Cons: Some don't verify their content, and can have unreliable information, or are mostly opinion (opinion isn't always a bad thing though). Some are very infrequently updated.

  • Suggested Site: Radical Middle: The author tries to be unbiased (though it is obvious that he leans a little liberal), the topics are interesting, and he very dependably updates it once a month.

4) Online TV: this is the greatest internet trend ever!

  • Pros: Commercial breaks are much shorter than on an actual tv (average is 30 seconds), you can watch specific programs whenever you want regardless of your schedule, some shows even provide extra content that they don't release to cable/satellite, and most are free!

  • Cons: If you don't have a fast internet connection you might have loading difficulties. Some require you to download media players which isn't convenient if you aren't using the site frequently, and some won't run on things like cellphones or PS3 internet browsers.
  • Suggested Site: Hulu: They stream live presidential addresses and legally show new episodes of "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" as well as some other popular talk shows. You can also catch up on your favorite sitcoms from almost any tv channel.

3) Discussion Boards: do more with your news than just absorb it!

  • Pros: You can put your two cents in about pretty much any topic you choose, and you can have a back and forth converstaion with many people who all have a different and interesting take on things.
  • Cons: A lot of what people say is propaganda, not based on any facts, and not backed up by any source or reason. Also some boards might not be well moderated, and occasionally on some forums people resort to personal attacks. Most sites also require that you create an account to participate which might be a nuisance if you don't plan on frequenting the site.

  • Suggested Site: US Politics Online: This is a great site if you like debate and you don't get offended easily.

2) Video Podcast: The new "news anchor" approach.
  • Pros: You get a lot of information packed into a small amount of time, most are free, and they are a great alternative for people who like to listen to someone talk instead of reading text.

  • Cons: You have to shop around a lot to find one that is interesting AND also has reliable information. If you have a slow internet connection you may experience loading issues, and the podcast you like might not run in a supportable mode for you mobile device.

  • Suggested Site: Sxephil: He crams a lot of cool news into podcasts that are normally less than 5 minutes. He is also very funny, and talks about stuff that you don't readily find in other news forums.

1) Audio Podcast: News you can take with you- ANYWHERE!

  • Pros: Most of these are compatible with just about any mobile device imaginable, which gives you the ultimate "on the go" experience. You can also find them on many different topics. You can also listen to podcasts with more than one host, and it is common to have group podcasts, so you might get more dimensions to a story.

  • Cons: Some of the hosts are "just along for the ride" and don't have much to offer, and "like minded" people tend to hang out together so you might get people just agreeing with each other on issues. Podcasts also tend to be very opinion based, and can suffer from the Bill O'Reilly "loudest voice wins" problem.

  • Suggested Site: This one I do not have a suggestion for, look around and find one that is right for you :)

The one thing that all these sources have in common is that they are not killing trees in order to be produced. If you care about the environment, switching to online media is a great way to live in a way that supports your beliefs.

If you enjoy the news you should also learn about RSS feeds, they make it easy to be up to date.

With all these wonderful options, there is no reason for anyone to not stay informed!



Political parties don't live up to old stereotypes...

3:43 PM | 1 Comments


Ideals that exist within political parties are nothing new.

Democrats are coined liberals and their party is known to support: expanded social welfare spending, cuts in military spending, increased regulation of business, a variety of consumer and environmental programs, minority and working class rights, increases in the power of the federal government, increases in taxes.

Republican party members are called conservatives and they support: high levels of military spending, cuts in social programs, tax relief for middle/upper class voters, tax incentives for businesses, conservitive religous agenda, decreases in the power of the federal government, fiscal conservatism.

It seems like even though the parties are stereotyped into two tidy factions many politicians are going outside their little boxes and moving into the opposite territory. Some examples of this include:



  • Former President Bush (Republican) pushed the limits of presidential power beyond all of it's former standards, increasing federal power to a new high.

  • The mostly Republican nominated Supreme Court has been accused of showing a lot of judicial activism over the past decade, which is generally considered liberal.

  • Both party presidential candidates last election promised to decrease the United States role in the middle east (decreasing military spending), not just the Democratic candidate.

  • Both President Obama and former President Bush, who are from two different political parties, have increased government spending substantially which is something only President Obama's party should have supported under established party values.

  • John McCain, a Republican Senator who has ran for president twice in the last decade, has a track record of siding with liberals more than conservatives. It's almost like he is an under cover agent for the Democratic Party, or maybe by being a Republican but acting like a Democrat he tries to be all things for everyone (which doesn't work).

  • Senator Joe Lieberman, a controversial Democrat, has sided with conservatives on issues like the Iraq War, the death penalty, and gun control. He has infuriated his party by voting unreliably and at one time even ran for senate as an independent candidate.

What does this mean? It means that those of us that check the box on our ballot to vote either all Democratic or all Republican are doing ourselves a disservice. As politicians move further from the principles of the political parties that they belong to we can no longer hope to have our values protected by taking a firm stand on either side of the party divide, which is okay since most people probably don't agree or disagree with each party 100% on issues anyway.

The best thing to do is to look at all the candidates for all the branches of the government and weigh their merit individually; this is the only way to ensure that we are furthering the type of government we want to have.

It sounds time consuming to be that involved in politics, and a lot of people live with the belief that their vote won't make a difference one way or another. Believing that is a self fulfilling prophecy, because if you don't cast a ballot then your vote CAN NOT possibly make a difference.

Why should you stay informed?

6:09 PM | 1 Comments


It seems like in this country everyone has gotten way too comfortable with being oblivious. Yes, we are all busy, overworked, and underpaid. Yes, we all have kids, jobs, school, and mortgages. There are a thousand reasons why people don't stay informed, but the one I find to be the most prominent is fear.

Lets face it, our last leader led through fear. Fox news trys to make us afraid of everything including the water we drink! All around us we are being told to be afraid!

In times like these we need to remember the words of President Franklin D. Roosevelt: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Well, that's true, and then again, it's not true. Fear is a property of a much bigger culprit called ignorance, and you should be afraid of that.

Right now our economy is in shambles, yet most people don't care until they lose their job or their house is foreclosed on. They are either too afraid to look at the big picture, too oblivious to know that anything is wrong, or too ignorant to acknowledge that there is a problem.

Every person in this country has something called spending power. Where we spend our money shapes the economy and United States business in general. When you spend half your paycheck on products that are not made in the United States you are hurting the economy and ultimately you are hurting yourself.

In an effort to circumvent labor laws most companies have sent their factories overseas where they can pay workers pennies an hour. This was so successful that companies decided to send other jobs overseas to save money. So back here in America we keep losing jobs.

The companies that have their products made overseas save a lot of money by not having to pay the American minimum wage, because of this they can sell their products for much less than companies that manufacture in the USA.

When you go to Walmart, or anywhere else, and you buy these cheap products you are supporting the loss of American jobs. You are making China and other foreign countries rich while our own country struggles with a 13 billion dollar deficit.

Do you want more proof that where you spend money makes a difference? Remember those economic stimulus checks we got last year? They were the Bush Administration's idea on how to fix the economy. Do you know why we aren't getting them this year? Because they didn't work, the majority of Americans chose to spend them on electronics that were made overseas. The only economy we stimulated was China's; we borrowed the money from them in the first place, and then we sent it right back to them when we bought our new tv, cellphone, and the like. And we still have to pay it back!

Another reason our economy is crap: war profiteering. Want another one? Read the news, stay informed, and don't complain about the economy if you are going to be a passive sheep. Our economy sucks, and it's our own fault.

How to spot some spin!

8:15 AM | 1 Comments

A bias is "an inclination of temperament or outlook ; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment."

Some reasons a person may be biased include:
  • Religion
  • Learned values, particularly from family or personal experience.
  • Ignorance, lack of information.
  • Motivation from another source (particularly monetary).

Having a bias in not necessarily a bad thing, especially if it is based on reason and logic, but the absense of those two qualities almost always leads you into dangerous territory

Biased news coverage can be especially dangerous. It is very easy for a reporter to skew a story so that it appears 180 degrees away from what it actually is; because of this it is important to know that the news coverage you are getting is as objective as possible.

If you are a busy person it might be hard to research your news sources. So how does someone with a crammed schedule get reliable news coverage? Here are some easy to spot signs that something is a little fishy:

  • The reporter says "some say" instead of giving the name of someone.
  • The article seems to use general statements more than specific.
  • The reporter does a "character attack" when an interview gets too hot.
  • The article is missing the author's name.
  • A quick google does not provide any similar stories.
  • The reporter seems more interested in keeping you afraid than keeping you informed.

It is not possible for journalism to be completely unbiased, so if all else fails find a news source that shares similar biases with you.

And the saga continues...

4:24 AM | 0 Comments




















George Bush has not been President for nearly a month, and yet everyday I continue to hear about how horrible/wonderful his administration was. I have spent the last eight years of my life listening to the media frenzy surrounding the Bush Administration, and I am in DESPERATE need of a break.

This week I have heard that George Bush:

And in the midst of hearing a parody of "Can't Get You Outta My Head" play in the back of my mind, there is another development in the endless waiting for George Bush to go away. Senator Patrick Leah has proposed a "truth and reconciliation commission" to air out the last administration's dirty laundry.

Part of me is predictably pleased with this new development, after all, with so much controversy surrounding the Bush Administration it would be nice to have the truth out in the open for every American citizen to know and believe.

On the other hand, what ever shady schemes Cheney and Bush were involved in, at least part of that was our fault. After all, what kind of nation looks the other way while it's president lines the pockets of his rich CEO buddies and rigs the election- twice? Wouldn't it have been better if we all had collectively decided that we were going to get to the bottom of "it" years ago?

President Obama has said that he's all for prosecuting "clear" wrongdoings anytime, but generally he prefers to look ahead. I am not one to rue the past either, but I sure don't mind making the past rue me. I just hope that if we spend millions of tax payer dollars on investigating the last administration that it moves us ahead- and not backwards.

About the jacket...

6:33 PM | 0 Comments


This picture has stirred up controversy on both sides of the party line.

The conservatives have weighed in, and they insist that not wearing a suit jacket in the Oval Office is disrespectful and a sign that Barack Obama is not taking his job seriously.

The liberals retaliated, and said that Obama was not wearing a jacket because he is getting down to business and doing "real" work.

The Democrats and Republicans are doing the only thing that they know how, which is to either venomously back or attack the President depending on what political party he is attached to. Their opinions are not honest, and it is an injustice to every American that our Politicians are marionettes that dance predictably depending on which way their strings are pulled.

The fact that we are even having this discussion is evidence of our gross materialism as a race and the shallowness we cling to as if what we wear makes a difference in anything but our body temperature.

Bottom line is this: a suit jacket can not make or break you