I wanted you all to be aware that we have made several significant improvements with comments on Propeller. We have been hard at work reading and heeding your feedback. Here's what we have fixed with this new upgrade:

• Comments have a newer, more compact design
• Comment text is now black, providing better color contrast
• Action buttons were rearranged
• When a comment is posted, it is immediately shown in the context of the thread
• A comment can edited after posting for 5 minutes, to correct spelling errors and the like
• With all new comments, if a URL is entered, it becomes clickable

You will also notice that group conversations and messages have the same new look.

We are still working on a few items with comments, namely better paging of comments, and the ability to see who rated your comments up and down.

We have also collected a fair amount of feedback about the homepage, look for a newer, tighter homepage very soon!

I will leave you with a look at the new comment display. As always, feedback can be sent in one of 2 ways, via e-mail and via the web.

Happy Propelling!
Tom

ACROSS THE POND

As Barack Obama made his barnstorming tour of Europe and the Middle East, the Propeller community greeted his progress with both applause and heightened skepticism. "100,000 expected for Obama Berlin speech," for example, rang up 112 votes and 309 comments. Locky12 thumbed his nose at the crowd (which apparently numbered closer to 200,000): "It's amazing how many people show up when you give them a rock band and free beer!" Said cushi: "It appears the people in Europe are more astute than you and the rest of the 28 percenters! [McCain] goaded him into making a trip abroad. Obama saw him and raised him, and now [McCain] and his neocon supporters are whining like overgrown crybabies!" Later in the thread, after the Democratic candidate had been compared to Hitler, Stalin, and the Antichrist (not bad for a junior senator from Ilinois), scott4261 replied: "You really do think Obama is the Antichrist, don't you? Funny, I recognized him in Dick Cheney nearly eight years ago!" A related story, "As Messiah Tours, Obama Fatigue Sweeps America, " rang up 100 votes and 352 comments. Goppy, who seemed to be having a temporary dalliance with the spellchecker, argued that America was not disenchanted in the least with Obama: "[He] seems to have struck a chord with America. I can only speculate that the reason is America is mesmerized by a black man carrying himself in such a calm, composed, presidential manner." This led to a mini-debate about affirmative action. Said pc25: "The only reason Obama is where he is, is because he is black.... He is the affirmative action candidate of the Democratic Party." To which splitrch replied: "I'm a middle-aged white guy from the suburbs of Northern L.A. County. In my experience, affirmative action doesn't level the playing field enough. If institutionalized racism in America was not a fact between the end of slavery and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, affirmative action programs wouldn't have been necessary to begin with." Other related stories included "Obama scraps visit to wounded troops," with 67 votes and 208 comments, and "Obama Camp Pins Scrubbed Troop Visit on Pentagon," with 28 votes and 158 comments.

FAMILY PLANNING?

"Contraception Is the New Abortion" bagged 112 votes and 151 comments. Discussing the reluctance of anti-abortion advocates to sell or even handle contraceptives, BB64 said: "In this case, the products violate a person's beliefs, so I think there is cause to protect them. I think the ACLU should represent them. In fact, both sides. Let them spend their billions fighting with themselves." Replied Tangent001: "The problem with pharmacists not dispensing birth control because it 'violates their personal convictions' is that pharmacists are licensed by the state.... Can a pharmacist refuse to dispense AIDS medication because he or she believes homosexuals are being punished by God?" Jaydee40 took it a step further: "People need access to birth control. If you don't feel comfortable dispensing it, find a new job--same for cabbie or check-out clerk. People should look up the job description before applying." And jordan11 added: "It's true that some idiots think women should be 'punished' with being forced to have a child. It's archaic, it's paternalistic, it's theocratic, and it's sick. Get out of women's uteruses and mind your own business." Meanwhile, RickyDawkins returned to a stage of innocence: "The baby grows in the mother's stomach, then it comes out of her belly button." (Replied Coatl: "You apparently saw Alien too many times!") And at least one member, Army_Wife_n_Mommy_Of_2, argued for the abolishment of almost every form of contraception: "Hopefully one day there will be no birth control. And if you feel the need to have sex out of wedlock or with a stranger, use some damned saran wrap if you are so desperate." (So that's why they call it Glad Wrap.)

MAC ATTACK

"A not-so-public man: the private character of John McCain" rang up 87 votes and 240 comments. Nixie raised her hand for the Republican candidate: "I know a lot of people slam McCain for his failed relationship with his first wife, but that can happen to anyone. It's the rest of what he's done, how he's lived, who he is, that shows what kind of a man he is. It's obvious that he's qualified to be president." Replied wtagg: "In 2000, I would have voted for him in a heartbeat. It is the changes in his convictions that concern me greatly.... The only assumption I can make for the changes in his position on so many topics is exactly partisan politics. He needed to cave to the Republican Party to get the nomination." As Obama fans swarmed McCain, pc25 rose to his defense: "I'll take him over the stumblin', bumblin', big-eared Howdy Doody-looking dorkus any day." To which bluetexasvalley replied: "Bush isn't running this time." A related story, "A Gallup Surprise: McCain 49% Obama 45%," showed the Arizona senator with a lead among "likely voters," and generated 86 votes and 156 comments. "Oooooh, this is a surprise!" said AlphaGnosis. "The surprise is these were not registered voters," said cowboygrandpa. "Probably convicts who have lost their voting rights." But SonOfTheMask saw the polls themselves as little more than a media sideshow: "National polls are fluff. State-by-state polling after the conventions will show you much more clearly than any national poll. Sometimes I think these polls are produced merely to get people interested in reading the particular news outlet." And on a satirical note, there was "McCain to Stay Awake Past 11 PM in Media Stunt," which clocked 106 votes and 38 comments, including this confession from Charlson: "I've got to admire his resolve and commitment. I don't last past 10:30 most nights."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

"Earthquake rocks Los Angeles," with 118 votes and 15 comments, was seen (luckily) as an anticlimax. "That wasn't nearly as scary as CNN is making it out to be," said Wil. "It was loud, and it lasted a long time, but it was a swaying earthquake, not a violent shaking earthquake." Replied mackiemesser: "Didn't feel a thing here in Virginia. Ah well, maybe next time." The conversation about Propeller's redesign quieted down a bit, but certainly didn't vanish, given that "Propeller 2.0: A Critique" racked up 184 votes and 372 comments. The Propeller Professor, alas, came in for a serious drubbing. Said obiefrommuskogee: "He's about as relevant as Broadway Joe at the Cinemark movies." Meanwhile, vor lamented "the cartoon guy who makes me feel like a 4-year-old every time I log on," Spadecaller dubbed him "Mr Spinhead," and gamahuche compared him to "a greeter at a Soho strip club in the 1950s." Elsewhere, Propeller members sounded off about gas prices, Ted Stevens, and habeas corpus. And finally, there was a welcome moment of levity: "Chinese TV Show Canceled After Drawing Only 180 Million Viewers." Said ind06, who posted the Onion story: "The next big Chinese sitcom will be about the hysterically zany antics of a one-party police state!"

Friends (and Idols),

I wanted to write to tell you how appreciative I and the Propeller staff are of all of the feedback we have received regarding the Propeller 2.0 launch. We have read all of the responses submitted so far. It's clear that in our quest to make the new Propeller easier, faster, and more fun, we have created a disconnected experience, where the social doesn't always coincide with the news.

Propeller members relish commenting on the day's top stories in a format that demands the utmost reliability and compact presentation. They also require the ability to edit comments (we all have second thoughts, not to mention slippery fingers). Propeller 2.0 has not yet achieved this level of reliability. We promise to do so.

Many have also commented on the new look. Some don't like the new mascot (don't worry, he's not listening in). Some have said that the homepage has too much white space and too few stories. Some just don't like the colors.

We are listening. And we are responding. We have already made a number of fixes, restoring the Friends' Submissions link on the profile page and upgrading the site mail. Here are some other things we are working on right now:

• Comments: A tighter design, better paging, more reliability, ability to edit a comment after posting
• Stories: Restoring the story submission bookmarklet
• Member Profile: Add Member Recent Comments
• Just In (Tracker): Allow filtering for stories, comments, props, etc
• Avatars: We are fixing a known issue with avatar uploads, both for members and for groups
• Groups: Add a Groups A-Z directory

Here is what we will be fixing soon after:

• Homepage: Overall spacing, allowing for the mascot to be hidden/shrunk
• Stories: A better story submission process that will allow for a "one stop shop" of sharing your story with your friends/groups

We are also discussing restoring some of the old Propeller categories, such as Religion and Health & Fitness, as well as some of the member stats that existed on the previous version of the site. Meanwhile, we are working on a new Propeller blog design, which should be completed soon. We hope will the blog will be another good place to congregate and talk about the health of Propeller.

Again, thank you to all of our great Propeller members for helping us to work through this rough patch, including ind06, AlphaGnosis, mozzer, Beau7890, and many other stalwarts. You have been invaluable to the Propeller effort.

Sincerely,
Tom Drapeau

THE NEW NEW THING

The launch of the new Propeller platform certainly grabbed the lion's share of attention on the site this week. The immediate verdict from the membership was fairly negative. Here and there you found pockets of debate about whether the new site was an Edsel or a Cadillac. (Well, maybe not a Cadillac--more like a Dodge Dart.) A typical story was "Propeller: Fail," which generated 189 votes and 263 comments. DiffeeOnline, who posted the story, offered one of the more charitable assessments: "I personally think it's going to be okay, but I have some exploring to do." Dionys took a more negative tack: "It's far too glossy, not enough substance. Like America." But for sheer vividness, it was hard to beat this pan from nightcrawlerX: "I find it rather confusing, and I had just gotten used to the old format. It kinda feels like I'm the person who had just finished cleaning up a big mess, and all of a sudden, drunken coke-fueled monkeys are released in the room with a pile of mud." GWHayduke was somewhat milder: "I think we all would have been OK with improvements, but a complete 180 was a bit unexpected. The new format has few of the features of the old Propeller, and requires much more time and effort to navigate." And pc25 put a personal spin on the relaunch: "It's like a new girlfriend.... Takes a little getting used to." A related story, "Propeller Gets a Major Overhaul, But is It All Good?," bagged 116 votes and 344 comments and this comment from Formidable: "Looks like something Al Gore had a hand in." (There was also this wistful contribution from globalwarmer: "Maybe when I wake up tomorrow, it will all be back to normal. Next stop: the Twilight Zone.") And let's not forget "Propeller.com's New Layout Sucks!", with 180 votes and 146 comments. Please note: ladies and gentlemen, we are listening to your feedback. Look for ongoing improvements over the next couple of weeks.

MAC IS BACK (AGAIN)

The Republican candidate was once again the focus of some lively discussions. "John McCain, POW: A First-Person Account" bagged 184 votes and 613 comments. AlphaGnosis, who posted the story, was floored by McCain's narrative: "Wow, words can't describe what this article made me feel. Totally amazing. I can't believe I read the whole thing." Replied AntiNeoCon: "Touching story, but that doesn't qualify him as a great presidential candidate." There was a similar response from not2needy: "My heart has always gone out to McCain and ALL of the men/women who were POWs, then and now. They get all of my respect for their sacrifices and service to their country. However, it's not enough to get me to vote for any of them for president." To which TonyByron replied: "With all due respect, McCain is one tough, honorable SOB. He's served his country, met barbarism face-to-face, and still remains an exceedingly kind, compassionate person."

WHOOPS, I DID IT AGAIN

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's apparent endorsement of Obama's troop withdrawal plan led to nearly a half-dozen lively posts this week. The ball got rolling with "White House sends press corps al-Maliki's praise for Obama plan," which bagged 163 votes and 217 comments. ML2007 had a good chortle over the Oval Office's (unintentional) promotion of a rival agenda: "George's White house finally did something right even, if it was by accident. [Here's] something you NeoCons never thought you would hear me say: Thanks, George." Next came a burst of backpedaling from Maliki's office, documented in "UPDATE: Maliki Doesn't Endorse Obama Troop Withdrawal Plan." The latter story notched 179 votes and 548 comments. Glee leaped on the news and declared that the Democratic candidate had been busted: "Now the whole truth comes around. Amazing how that seems to happen, even to a Propeller Socialist like Obama." (Historic note: this may be the first time Obama has been called a "Propeller Socialist." Let's hope it catches on.) But Tango57 noted another about-face from the Iraqi PM: "On another note, Malakai agrees with Obama on timeline and is excited that he agrees.... It's on the wire, it's history now." And a third story,"Obama Campaign Welcomes Report of Maliki Support for Timetable, Maliki Government Demurs," bagged 156 votes, 170 comments, and this expression of vindication from Daylight: "McCain's position was that he wanted to bask in the Iraqi sun for another 100 years, and Obama wanted a timetable for withdrawal and he spelled it out, and Iraqi prime minister accepted it." (Said MRCOFFEECAKE: "I liked McCain back when he hated Bush, but I guess they neutered him.") Natureboy, meanwhile, saw ominous developments no matter which candidate you were backing: "Some are sounding pretty jubilant about all this, but what it means is that if either Obama or McCain get in, which is virtual certainty, we will be engaging in an escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan, a conflict which may well expand into Pakistan. Sorry, but I am not feeling like this is a good thing."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

In other stories, Propeller members sounded off about Harry Chapin, the advent of the solar taxi (can this be a coincidence, give Chapin's most famous song?), and the world-menacing gadget known as the Hadron Collider. And during an often contentious week, "As wars lengthen, toll on military families mounts" was capable of bringing the community to some sort of agreement. "God bless these young men and women," said Teech (reserving his vitriol for the administration that sent them to war.) Glendalee, whose son-in-law is currently on his second tour of duty in Iraq, spoke firsthand about the stresses: "It is very hard on my daughter, in fact I am living with her for support until he returns this time. Imagine every day not knowing where your spouse is or how he is." Replied baddad59: "Thoughts and prayers are with you and yours. I wish him a safe tour and hope he is home soon." As do we all.

Our long awaited upgrade to Propeller was released this morning. As mentioned previously, the Propeller team has been hard at work incorporating features in response to many months of your feedback and our own observations. Our goal was to make Propeller easier, faster and more fun to use. To accomplish this, we incorporated a new design, new technology powering the site, and new features.


By now, social news sites have been around for several years. Yet they are still relatively novel to most of us. The idea of you or I being able to post news we are interested in, and having that news served up to a global audience, gets at a core need: We all want to be heard. The Propeller platform should be the place where you are heard, and to pave the way, we have brought the site's features up to date.

Of course, we recognize that not everybody will start his or her day reading stories on the Propeller home page. There are still many folks who prefer a more traditional, top-down approach to the news. But even among this crowd, many enjoy certain aspects of the social news experience-the sense of community, the discussions, the long-distance friendships. We have designed the new platform with this audience in mind, too. And we have simultaneously begun a deeper integration with AOL News and AOL.com (where Propeller posts have begun popping up in the top box). The future of social news, we believe, will consist of a fusion between these two approaches: the freewheeling community and the fact-gathering capabilities of traditional media.


Now, let's take a closer look at the new Propeller. The new design is likely to be noticed first. The Propeller mascot, who is part professor, part citizen journalist, beckons any and all to visit Propeller and sample our wares. He is placed strategically throughout the site, pointing out features and offering help to new members. The logo has changed as well, which shows our community and stories as moons orbiting the Propeller planet. We also decided that Propeller needed a new engine to keep up with our growing community and increasing traffic levels. With this new power, performance should improve, in some cases dramatically. Here are some other changes you will notice:

• New Ranking Scale: Instead of seeing an absolute count of votes next to a story, you will now see a Popularity Rating from 1-10. The scale is based on a new set of ranking algorithms, which take into account many more aspects of participation when determining popularity.


• Prop It!: We thought that "Vote" seemed too serious, especially with the elections coming up. So we took the root of Propeller and will now encourage our audience to "Prop" stories they find interesting.


• Groups: Users now have the ability to join groups and form groups of their own. Groups can be open to the public, or membership can be limited. Once you have joined a group, you can share stories and start conversations on topics of interest.


• Help!: There is a new Help Central area, where we consolidate Frequently Asked Questions and explain a bit more about Propeller.


• New and Improved Search: Not only has searching for stories returned, but new features allow for searching members and groups. Looking for that long-lost Propeller friend, or for some esoteric group? Now you can find them!


• Featured Groups and Members: To reward the movers and shakers in our community, we will feature members and groups on the homepage. This is an improvement on the old Top Propeller Contributors, since the featured member will have his or her avatar and biographical info displayed front and center!


• This Just In: The Propeller Tracker has a new name, This Just In.


• No More On Shift Icons for Editors and Scouts: Rest assured, we're still on the job! We're always here. But although we love looking at ourselves, we thought we could use the space for something new.


• Category Consolidation: Our categories are now Arts & Entertainment, Business & Finance, Family, Humor, News, Science & Technology, Sports and Style. By reducing the number of categories, we hope to cut down on clutter and ease the story submission process.

These are but a few of the changes in Propeller 2.0. We hope that you come to visit us, give our new features a spin, and let us know what you think. We're all ears!

OIL CHANGE

Petroleum was very much on the mind of the Propeller community this week. "Bush Says Drill, Drill, Drill--and Oil Drops $9!" topped the hit parade in terms of comments. AntiNeoCon treated the news with disdain: "Maybe oil dropped, but the price of gas rose here to a new record high. So where's the beef?" Immediately there was a debate about how quickly new drilling would impact the price of light, sweet crude. Said tiredofwhiners: "Please understand the price of oil is set by commodity traders, OPEC, and other oil producers. Often it is not realistic or reflective of the real oil supply-demand situation." Meanwhile, toph1973 questioned whether drilling was the right solution to begin with: "We needed to make a plan in the 70s that would get us off oil. Brazil did it--even with a dictatorial military regime, they had the foresight." There was also "How to break free of oil," with 198 votes and 148 comments. Said svensun: "How about achieving real energy independence by getting the World's Number Three Oil Producer to increase production? That country would be... US!" To which MRCOFFEECAKE replied: "There you go. Just disregard the entire article in your hearty support for Exxon, Mobil and Texaco. You are consistent." BB64 did a tap dance all over the article's call for energy independence: "Reduce, cut back, etc.--what a bunch of commie lefty crap from the 70s. Son, we're in a global economy now, we cut back [and] someone will still buy." But pongping wasn't convinced: "It might be commie crap, or it might be time to think about becoming more efficient and finding alternatives. Let your competitors be left holding the bag." And on a related note, there were two stories about solar energy, including "What Solar Energy is and How it Works," with 144 votes and 17 comments.

ROVE GOES AWOL

Love him or hate him (and there seem to be Propeller members on both sides of that equation), Karl Rove is usually capable of raising the collective temperature here. "Karl Rove Fails to Appear at U.S. House Hearing" generated 171 votes and 283 comments, many of them none too flattering. Teech waxed sardonic: "Just who in hell does that punk Congressional committee think they are in summoning the great and powerful Rove? He answers to no government lackeys, [only] to King George." Grrr concurred: "Congress does indeed have the power to compel Rove's testimony or jail him for contempt, executive privilege be damned. It's tough when it's near 50/50 partisan like it is, but neither Bush nor Rove have done representatives any favors lately, so that's where it's at." MajJohn disagreed: "In the due course of carrying out his duties in office, the President is entitled to have his communications kept private, or his office would become subordinate to Congress. Congress has the same privileges in its communications." Replied Goppy (in a strikingly lucid moment): "Now, tell me, MajJohn. When you swore an oath to our nation, was it to protect the Constitution... or to protect the Office of The Man Who Has Undermined that Same Constitution?" And vandee posed a similar query about executive privilege: "Bush invoked executive privilege four times in a single month alone when stonewalling the U.S. attorney investigation. If you believe that has anything to do with national security, send me an IM, I've got a bridge I want to sell you." Did anybody step up as a character witness for Rove? Not exactly, but Luis-Cifer did seem to make common cause with him: "By the way, Karl is laughing at these punks and I'm laughing with him."

ASKING AND TELLING

"'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' may go to Supreme Court" bagged 145 votes and 198 comments. For kboy, a gay-and-straight military remains a dilemma: "The problem still is 70 people living in one room and using one bathroom. The other 69 have a right to privacy and should not be subjected to sexual pressure." Charlson felt otherwise: "What alternate universe do you live on? In all communal situations, there is almost always an adjustment or accommodation that must be reached for the group as a whole to function." There was a similar response from tkyrchncs: "If you can't handle someone who might want to have sex with you and is unlikely in the extreme to do anything about it, how are you going to handle someone who wants to kill you and will try anything to do so?" While respecting the private lives of gays and straights, alakazam still wondered about them sharing the same foxhole: "I don't think anything that would be disruptive to unit cohesion is a good thing. This is going to cause problems, like it or not." But raats6662 fired right back: "They used all these same arguments to keep blacks and women from serving for decades. Guess what? The US Military did not fall into a black hole when blacks or women were added to the service. Nor did the Navy quit functioning properly when women started serving on ships and flying combat planes." A related story, "Mass. Senate votes to let out-of-state gays marry," bagged 100 votes and 174 comments. Several members, including ningyo, protested what they saw as an antidemocratic fiat by the legislature and judiciary: "Why let the voters pretend to vote on anything anymore? You can just take the results to your pet judge and have them thrown out." Replied Tangent001: "I think all this hollering about 'activist judges' or 'legislatures not listening to the will of the people' is a smoke screen. Y'all simply think gay marriage is wrong, and what you really want is a federal ban on gay marriage so even states won't be able to decide for themselves."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Several stories about John McCain made it into our Top Twenty, including "McCain faces backlash over top advisor Phil Gramm's comments," with 154 votes and 230 comments. The thread detoured into a debate about Wesley Clark's comments, and there were irate responses on both sides of the aisle. "Wesley Clark told the truth," argued cushi, "and he shouldn't have allowed anyone to pressure him into apologizing for it." Replied aniokly: "Wesley Clark lied through his teeth, and real Americans rebuked him." Radiofreeeuropa argued that Clark's comments had been cherry-picked for smear quotes, and were fair to the Republican candidate: "He prefaced [his comments] by stating that McCain's service was nothing but exemplary, patriotic, and admirable. However, the experience of being shot down and taken prisoner does not really give one any particular reason to assume [that person] would make a good chief executive." Elsewhere, the community sounded off about Sean Hannity and bilingualism. And finally, we're going to inaugurate a new feature: Propeller Livestock Pinup of the Week. Feel free to send in photos of your domesticated animals, although it will be hard to match this classic image of ranchhand's--uh, donkey.

Not long ago, Propeller user Aidenag submitted a story about the recent death of Army Spc. Joseph Patrick Dwyer, a former medic who'd served in Iraq and gained national attention after appearing in a photograph taken by Army Times photographer Warren Zinn. In the photo, Dwyer is seen carrying a young wounded Iraqi boy across a field. The Army Times described it this way: "The photo was hailed as a portrait of the heart behind the U.S. military machine, and Doc Dwyer's concerned face graced the pages of newspapers across the country."

Following a struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder, Dwyer died of an accidental overdose last month. And while that story gained attention on the site, another story--a Washington Post essay penned by Warren Zinn, the Army Times photographer--got lost in the shuffle. The opening line of Zinn's essay is chilling and effective: "My shot made Joseph Dwyer famous. Did it also help lead to his death?"

Zinn recounts his casual email exchanges with Dwyer after both returned to the U.S. The medic had difficulties adjusting to life back at home. Reports that Dwyer didn't like his newfound celebrity troubled Zinn, who also notes that so many heroic acts are never seen by the public.

"U.S. soldiers perform courageous deeds daily," he writes, "deeds that go undocumented--and unrecognized. The difference between Joseph's act and theirs is that I just happened to be in front of him with a camera when he did his job. If a camera could follow U.S. soldiers in action around the clock, newspapers would be flooded with images of their valiant actions."

Later Zinn adds: "Had I never captured that image of Joseph, it's likely that very few people would have paid any attention to this one soldier's death."

Zinn says he's gotten about 250 emails praising his piece. "I've heard from veterans from every war," he said, speaking to Propeller by phone from Miami, where he attends law school. He also has heard from Dwyer's wife Matina, who wrote: "Thank you for the great article and the great photo you took, I appreciate it." According to Zinn, Matina Dwyer has told him to discount those reports that Dwyer didn't appreciate his appearance in the famous photo. "She told me: 'It's not true.'"

Zinn quit working as a photographer in 2004. Regarding his own transition from Iraq and Afghanistan to Miami, Zinn says: "When you first get back, you have a hard time experiencing the mundane things, it's hard to just go out to a bar... You realize how trivial the basic things of life are. But it goes away. And it gives you a better perspective."

As for the original story about Dwyer, Propeller user Aidenag notes in an email that his interest in both the story and photography prompted him to submit the article. "I found the story so interesting due to all the exposure him carrying that child in the photo got. And being that my day job is as a photographer, and that I grew up an army brat, it really hit home for me."

CALL WAITING

After a patriotic intermission last week, we return with the latest, greatest, most popular stories of the last seven days. For starters, a telephonic post got a particularly rousing response from the community. "Senate Backs Wiretap Bill to Shield Phone Companies" rang up 131 votes and 156 comments. AtheismIsReality rapped the administration's knuckles for the entire package: "Of course, the telecoms were shielded from liability for past behavior--Ex Post Facto--utterly unconstitutional. The ACLU should push a civil suit to SCOTUS, get the law declared unconstitutional, and burn the telecoms to the ground." After quoting chapter and verse from the actual bill, capecoralIM had some kinder words for it: "This is a foreign intelligence collection program... Not domestic. It requires a court order as well from the FISA court." But walden3 was having none of it: "Don't be ridiculous. If Hillary or Obama were president and ordered every single phone call, email, and Internet search to be logged and analyzed, you would be going out of your gourd." Another member, buckncindykill, gave the Democratic nominee a hard time for his vote: "Who cares about the Constitution anyway? It is only a goddamn piece of paper, right? Yep, Obama agrees. He signed it too." But antibrainwasher saw the vote as pure realpolitik, with no particular shame attached to it: "Treason to vote one way or another? BS. Complete BS. There is a political reality, a veto-proof senate bloc.... And there is no reason to let trial lawyers profit from suing telecoms for what the Cheney regime asked them to do."

WIN, LOSE, DRAW?

On a similarly contentious note, "Cheer Up: We're Winning this War on Terror" notched the most comments of any story this week: 469. For donald51, the story was an exercise in denial: "McCain wanting to stay there for 100 years just guarantees three generations of Arabs will grow up to hate American occupation. Another record poppy crop out of Afghanistan! OBL still free! Gitmo a symbol to the world of American decadence!" FSU92grad disagreed: "No, Donald, they already hate us... have for some time. And they always will want to kill you and your family and mine too. You see, Donald, they hate the West and everything it stands for." Not surprisingly, the comment thread turned into a referendum on the war in Iraq. BB64, whose wife had flown into Baghdad to work for CENTCOM the very morning the story was posted, urged doubters to consult with the soldiers on the ground: "Perhaps you should actually get to know some of the troops over there. We're taking the fight to the terrorists. We are winning and that's very bad for liberals like you and Obama who really want to see America lose." Replied dunkirk: "Maybe you should get to know them instead of reading GOP talking points. If you did, you'd know they regard Iraq as a big mistake, ill-prepared and a boondoggle." A related story, "The 550 Tons of Yellowcake," earned 110 votes and 469 comments. Again, the thread divided along sharply partisan lines. Said libsRfunny: "Funny how [Saddam] had all that yellowcake yet somehow didn't have an illegal nuclear weapons program in the works." Scrimshaw attempted to deliver a (postmortem) message directly from the horse's mouth: "Saddam here, from the grave. That was sent by mistake, I actually ordered the cake AND candles for the annual 'Baghdad Bash.' Now where did those two idiot sons of mine put those damn candles?"

JOHNNY, BE GOOD

"How McCain Is Skirting His Own Spending Caps" generated 164 votes and 264 comments, including this somewhat cryptic comment from Secret Asian Man: "Confucius say hicks and politics don't mix." Back on topic, scott4261 scolded the Republican nominee for leaping through some fiscal loopholes: "The maverick' (a misnomer if ever there was one) is showing just how much faith he has in campaign finance reform... which is to say, none at all!" In response, tiredofwhiners accused Obama of exactly the same sin: "So good to know Obama has faith in campaign finance reform--well, not this time. Maybe in 2016." Meanwhile, fsev41 took a broader view of the mess: "Unfortunately, neither of the candidates have ultimate control of campaign spending, fund-raising, or tactics... What may be well-meaning, honest candidates enter the fray and suddenly become puppets of the party." JohnQPublic wasn't sure if this argument passed muster: "While I do agree that neither [candidate] has, as you put it, 'ultimate' control, they both do have the ability to exert a great deal of influence over how the money is spent." And as the argument got increasingly polarized and the negs started flying, willottica clocked in with a refreshing reply to an earlier commenter: "I'd neg myself if I could. Sorry, tiredofwhiners, I shouldn't whine about your whining, because I'm tired of whiners too." Firkins, anyone?

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

The late Jesse Helms got a predictably ambivalent sendoff from the Propeller community. "Former Sen. Jesse Helms Dies At 86," with 110 votes and 329 comments, revealed a pretty wide spectrum of opinion about the North Carolina senator. Hanyman represented what we might call the negative camp: "I guess hell has a new resident." ADAGUY found this appalling: "Regardless of political, moral, and ethical differences with Helms, bitter and hate-filled remarks are better left unsaid!" But it was V.O.R. who contributed a surprisingly personal slant on Helms, which deserves to be quote at length: "I knew Jesse growing up. He sometimes attended our church and his daughter taught my sister's first-grade class. Every night (ironically, before Walter Cronkite came on) we would see Jesse's editorial on WRAL in Raleigh. I knew then that I felt a certain distaste for his views. He was arrogant and condescending. Not physically imposing, but more like a Southern Baptist fire-and-brimstone preacher shouting out his condemnation. A bully without the brawn. Hard to relate that to the quiet little man who would sometimes bring us candy at school.... I remember him as the first political fearmonger I recall. [Yet] I won't overly condemn him today. I don't mess with the dead (don't like the karmic implications)." A handful of other stories, including "Jesse Helms: American Garbage" and "Farewell to Jesse Helms, Provincial Redneck" provoked similar differences of opinion. And finally, on a lighter note, there was "Rod Stewart Apologizes For 30 Years Of Crap Music," with 176 votes and 23 comments. "Apologies accepted!" said SenorCoconut. Citing the lyrics to "Cut Across, Shorty," hefaa1 chimed in: "If you can identify what Python Lee Jackson album (yes, album, not tape, cassette, CD) those lyrics came from, you're way too old. I can, but it's time for my nap and I get cranky if I don't get my nap." For BronxBomber, though, there was one thing to avoid at all costs: Rod the Mod in his tartan wardrobe. "As long as he didn't sing his songs in a plaid kilt," he said, "I'm OK with it. (I hear he has knobby knees)." And, as we all know, hot legs.

Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to review the case of Winter v. NRDC, a case ostensibly about the Navy's use of sonar during military training exercises, but in reality about the extent of President Bush's power in influencing court decisions. Backstory: Earlier this year, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with a previous ruling, which declared that in order to protect marine life such as dolphins and whales, the Navy must limit its use of sonar and abide by a "12-nautical-mile no-sonar zone" along the southern California coast. Additionally, the court ordered the Navy to end sonar use if a marine animal was detected within a 2,200-yard radius. In its ruling, the 9th Circuit Court rejected a previous attempt by the Bush administration to exempt Navy sonar from environmental laws.

But now the administration has taken its case to the highest court in the land. The San Jose Mercury News offered a handy precis of the arguments: "Restricting the use of this sonar 'jeopardizes the Navy's ability to train sailors and Marines for wartime deployment during a time of ongoing hostilities,' Bush administration lawyers said in their appeal to the high court. But environmentalists... point to the dead whales that washed ashore in the Bahamas, the Canary Islands and Madeira Islands after the Navy conducted war games nearby. Some of them appeared to have died of hemorrhages in and around their ears, brains and lungs."

By the Navy's own estimate, 170,000 marine mammals have been affected by its sonar exercises over the last two years. The military branch still argues that the exercises are vital to training. But when the Supreme Court hears the case this fall, the justices will not weigh in on whether the dolphins and whales are being harmed. As the New York Times point outs, the court is really considering "the balance of power between the executive branch and the courts in resolving such issues. In an effort to sidestep the courts, the Bush administration invoked national security to exempt the Navy from strict adherence to the two federal environmental laws that underlay the court decisions."

And the extent of the administration's power is one of the reasons that Propeller user TechnologyExpert was interested in the story. "It's another 'national security" ploy by the Bush administration to get their way," he wrote in an email. "Humans don't really care about any other organisms on this planet.... In this case, the evidence is strong that sonar harms whales. Yet, the attitude of most humans is, so what?"

Meanwhile, how will the judges will? Lawyers for the Natural Resources Defense Council told the Los Angeles Times that they "were not surprised by the court's willingness to hear the Navy's appeal but said they remained confident of winning. Richard B. Kendall, a Los Angeles lawyer who represented the NRDC, pointed out that the justices had recently rejected a similar claim from the administration that the military's need to hold 'enemy combatants' at Guantanamo Bay trumps the detainees' right to go to court."

But Technology Expert is less optimistic. "I don't expect a good result: the Supreme Court is conservative. But what gives us the right to decide the life and death of entire species? Our brains? We don't seem to use them well."

HATE MERCHANTS

Which story earned the most votes on Propeller during the last week? That would be "Hate Groups' Newest Target," with 268 votes and 632 comments. You would think that a story about the spike in white supremacist activity in the wake of Barack Obama's de-facto nomination would produce a fairly cut-and-dried comment thread. Who wants to defend the Klan? In fact, one member, salir, proposed a novel approach to the resurgence of such groups: "I say bring the troops home from Iraq and immediately deploy them into the forests and woods in the US where the paramilitary groups and Neo-Nazis hang out. Clean 'em out, put 'em away." But the thread soon detoured into a referendum on the candidate himself. "I live in a very unionized blue-collar town," said mrbs. "And the working man isn't voting against the black man because he's black... but because we are God-fearing ignorant gun-toting bigots." Replied cushi: "I don't believe Obama ever used the term 'ignorant' or implied it. At least, I never heard him say that. And I know that his words have been twisted into something they were never meant to be, because he is one of the most empathetic people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing." Nowalive, meanwhile, cursed the entire system: "Politics is now a full contact sport with no sense of sportsmanship. The loser of this 'superbowl' is always the American people no matter who the winner." Also worth noting: an exchange at the end of the comment thread, in which Klarissa suggested that the liberal contingent on Propeller derived most of its knowledge of current affairs from moveon.org pamphleteering. "Where do you get your news?" she asked. CRYMTYPHON listed a number of publications, then added: "I also get the weekly 'talking points' from Nancy Pelosi's secret broadcast in my fillings, but I assume everybody gets that."

CARLIN DEPARTS

"Comedian George Carlin dies in Los Angeles at 71" earned 251 votes and 91 comments. Tangent001 recalled some of the comedian's earlier triumphs, spilling the chronological beans along the way: "I remember when he was a regular on Tony Orlando and Dawn (okay, now I feel old), my sister and I would get so excited when his routine came on. I was fortunate enough to see him when he came through Denver this year. Got the t-shirt with 2,000 dirty words and phrases. Think I'll get it framed now." Said dadesider: "I have all his vinyl, from Hippy Dippy Weatherman to..." BronxBomber, heeding Propeller's PG-13 rating, said: "I have just 'seven' words as a personal dedication to yah George, but unfortunately, I can't use them here." Then there was Mutainia's expressions of sorrow: "I haven't felt so sick over the death of a comedian since blasphemous Sam Kinison died in that accident between LA and Vegas. May God be merciful." Another member, zohar10, speculated that the show might go on after all : "He was an atheist, as far as I know, so now that he's probably met his maker and existing somewhere in some other dimension, he's probably busy whipping up some fresh new Carlinesque material. It's too bad we won't ever get to hear it straight from the man. Any mediums in the room?"

JUST SAY NO?

"States Reject Bush's Abstinence-Only Funding" rang up 146 votes and 315 comments. AtheismIsReality said no to the very idea of abstinence-only programs: "Telling kids to simply not have sex is just like telling them to simply not speed. We know that some are going to speed, so do we refuse to teach driving skills that will help minimize them having an accident if they happen to speed?" For tanglang, the very idea of schools teaching sex ed was alarming: "Right now our schools are graduating morons. They are failing at teaching the basics, so why the hell do you think they should teach your kids about sex?" But TheNewsseeker argued that sweeping sex under the rug was an even more perilous course for schools to take: "Suppressed sexuality, burdened with the idea of sin, is much more dangerous than the natural discovery of the other sex, whenever it is the right time.... It is very necessary to talk about the dangers of an early pregnancy at school." The mere mention of sin set off another polemical mudfight. "Kids need to learn about ethics, not morality," argued david nwpa. "They can learn the difference between right and wrong at an early age without introducing the concept of 'sin,' which brings with it a goodly amount of guilt." DropkickaLib made a pitch on behalf of that much maligned emotion: "There's nothing wrong with feeling guilty when you've done something wrong. It's called a conscience." Replied dunkirk: "Yeah, let's turn out droves of maladjusted people, especially when the hormones say yes yes and they suddenly have this dilemma of a natural urge being called a sin." But it was wtagg who suggested that the federal government get out of the business altogether: "Let it be dealt with at a local level. If a local community wants to abstain, great. If they want to hand out condoms, great. Let them decide how they want to tackle their problem."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Can a single week go by without a spate of hotly debated Obama stories on Propeller? Perhaps--but folks, this ain't it. "Barack Obama Vows to Disarm America" accumulated more comments than any other post this week: 746. Should military spending be reined in? "I know the billionaires who feed off the military complex would be very sad if we stopped," opined jordan11. Said slate: "Yeah, I bet [Dianne] Feinstein's hubby will be very upset." According to scott4261, this jab at the California senator and her arms-procuring husband was fully merited: "Dianne Feinstein has been a sock puppet for the military industrial complex because of it. She's a DINO of the worst kind, and an example of the kind of Democrat that should be voted out of office." Meanwhile, CorbinDallas argued that our current high-tech arsenal was more than adequate to defend our interests, and that any danger stemmed from our strategic missteps: "What our military isn't good for, and isn't supposed to be used for, and is doomed to fail miserably at, no matter what the state of technology may be, is engaging in guerrilla warfare and police actions on foreign soil, against the indigenous population." But memestryker remained skeptical about Obama's plan to cut defense spending: "Criminals will always be armed. Disarmed countries like Congo are suffering horribly at the hands of armed thugs. So I disagree with Obama concerning several disarmament issues." A related post, "Gored: Obama could win vote, lose election," rang up 174 votes and 490 comments, including this pessimistic assessment from markmawn2 of the offshore drilling proposals now in front of the Congress: "It will take 5 years to produce anything in reality. If it is sweet crude, it will be sold abroad. By then, oil will be $200 and the price could only make a $2.00 max dent per barrel. You all are suckers if you believe otherwise." And then there was "Overlooked: Obama's Anti-Smear Site," with 133 votes and 305 comments. Said UnusualSuspect: "Obama's going to need this site, because I can see more swift-boating groups on the horizon than we ever thought possible, slinging all kinds of mud and garbage." Replied abntv: "Obama has some serious image problems [and] this is just another way of dealing with them." Elsewhere, the Propeller community sounded off on wolves, war, and detainee rights. And finally, there was "Lottery Winner Pulls Off 'Get Poor Quick' Scheme," which racked up 166 votes and 18 comments. Remarked cowboygrandpa: "Darn. I was hoping to get him to invest in my anti-gravity belt. It would have went well with his trampoline house." To which Uncle Dave replied: "He stole the trampoline house idea from me! I'm suing!" Good luck--these guys may have beat you to it.

Last weekend in Malibu, a group of paparazzi descended on the beach to take photos of actor Matthew McConaughy, who was surfing nearby. Their presence on the beach wouldn't have been notable--"paps," as these photographers and videographers are called, can be spotted most days in Malibu. But on this particular day, the group was confronted by a group of local surfers. Verbal sparring ensued as the surfers insisted on protecting both their beach and McConaughy. "Get off our beach," they told the paps. "Get a real job." Before long the incident escalated into violence. On video, the surfers can be see kicking one pap and throwing his camera into the water.

It's unclear who actually instigated the violence; the video would seem to implicate the local surfers, but the Malibu Surfside reports that the paps were the aggressors, and that one of the photographers pulled a knife on the men. Regardless, the incident, which was quickly picked up by the media, highlighted the ongoing problem of paparazzi in Malibu. And many Angelenos quickly took the side of the locals. "The general sentiment around here is that any time a paparazzo gets his camera smashed or gets popped in the face or gets dunked in the water, we're all for it," Brian Pietro, owner of Malibu General Store, told the Los Angeles Times.

Gossip scribe Joanne Molloy, who writes the Rush & Molloy column for the Daily News, says there's been an escalation in incidents involving citizens harassing the paps. "It used to be that celebrities like Chris Martin or Sean Penn or Alec Baldwin had to fight off the paparazzi themselves," Molloy writes in an email to Propeller. "But we've seen an increase in incidents like the one, with surfers in Malibu or clubgoers in New York who take the side of a star who's just trying to chillax."

As Molloy points out in yesterday's Daily News, the beach fight quickly spread online following last weekend's incident. Thousands of comments were left on the website of the X17 agency, which sells photos to magazines, and paps were quick to respond to the disparaging comments. "I'm a pap," writes one commenter. "I've made $94K a year and I'm only four months into it... because stupid white trash people like your fat mother buy the magazines. We hunt the very people you worship for no reason."

Also lost in the debate---and the media coverage--was an another response. Why attack the photographers when the real villains are the magazines editors and publishers who pay for the photos? A moot point, says Rebecca Fox, managing editor of media web site Mediabistro.com. "It's parallel to the meat industry," she tells Propeller. "People elect not to think about how they get their information." She adds: "I think people want their celebrity stuff however they can get it."

At least one photographer has filed charges, according to reports, while Malibu Mayor Pamela Conley Ulich and L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca announced that following last weekend's incident, a task force will consider whether paparazzi should be required to have special licenses. The task force will also "address what Ulich termed 'a new breed of paparazzi'," who "travel in packs, run red lights, make unsafe . . . U-turns in pursuit of their subject,' according to the Los Angeles Times.

Police also will be heading to the same Malibu beach this weekend. According to comments left on the X17 website, the two sides are planning to have a huge rumble on the beach either on Saturday or Sunday. "The common theme seems to be that one of the weekend days, the two sides are going to come together," one police captain told the Times.

Meanwhile, for all the fuss on the web, the submitted story got few votes here at Propeller. But it was a story that was noticed by locals--and by Propeller Scout Deirdre Woolard, who lives in Los Angeles. "I think that surfers always feel some ownership of the beaches that they frequent and so there is some ego there," she wrote in an email. "Also, it is at the core a sport which requires concentration and the proper environment. If the paparazzi were swarming a golf course (which they have started doing too), you'd hear about angry golfers whacking at cameras with five irons."

Deirdre also believes that paparazzi are indeed getting more aggressive, and using new tactics--like just staking out a spot and waiting for celebrities. "The groups have gotten bigger and bigger and can represent a danger to the community. I think keeping paparazzi off the beach is a good idea."

RUSSERT IS GONE

"Tim Russert Dies of Heart Attack at NBC" got the most votes of any story this week: 229. It also prompted an outpouring of sadness and sympathy in the comment thread, which indicated Russert's extraordinary status as a talking head. "Election night will not be the same," said TimALoftis. Replied ZiegfeldGirl: "I'm sorry he didn't get to see how this one turned out, he was so looking forward to it." Another member, spkguy, suggested that Russert would in fact be observing the returns from a celestial moderator's chair: "He will still get to see, it although from a higher perspective. A consummate professional and a real gentleman, he will be greatly missed by many!" For jimdoze, Russert's death was a kind of memento mori for us all: "His abrupt parting is a sad and frightening reminder that the measure of our hour upon the stage eludes contemplation and is beyond our control." And Bkumm imagined a heavenly conclave of the broadcasting greats: "Rest in peace, Tim. I know that if there is anything after this, then you and Edward R. Murrow and Peter Jennings are having a heck of a time right now." Most striking were the numerous expressions of personal sorrow, as if Russert had been a member of the family. "I was outside when I heard," recounted lvrofwolves. "My son came home from work almost in tears [and] said, 'I just heard on the radio that Tim Russert died....' Wow! It was a shock."

HOOP DREAMS

On a more cheerful note (for at least half the audience), there was "Celtics clinch 17th title in blowout fashion," with 168 votes and 35 comments. DeadXXXManXXXTalkin was in a festive mood: "Now all those people who were comparing Kobe to Jordan will finally shut up. The Celtics wanted it more and they took it. Better balance, better team." KicBoxStallion agreed: "Yep, way better team, and they proved it with a stomping triumphant blowout right back on home turf, Beantown! Sweet!" So did CaptainLucid, although for different reasons: "I am glad that Boston won, not because I like Boston but [because] I hate the Lakers above all." There was also a mini-dispute about the perennial Bryant-Jordan comparisons. "Kobe can only do so much, just like Jordan," argued newbie0420. "The difference in this series was Kobe's supporting cast, [who] played like garbage." But tanglang dismissed the whole argument: "Jordan could not live up to the hype of being the next Jordan. (Wizards) So what makes anyone think that someone else can?" Let's leave the last word to enginebin: "Celtics rule."

REGARDING DUBYA

As his second term winds down, George W. Bush is still capable of igniting some lively debate here at Propeller. "President Bush: An Appreciation," with 162 votes and 571 comments, was an excellent example of the president's polarizing powers. Klarissa was quick to thank AlphaGnosis, who posted the story: "AG, so nice to hear something positive for a change." Justice4All jumped in with a dissent: "He's ruined the economy. He's done far more damage to the country than al-Quaida could ever have done." He was joined by hdthehn: "The earth hasn't been struck by asteroids, meteors, or comets, so under your premise, George W. Bush has done a great job of protecting us from the cosmic boogie men, too." Then the thread swerved into a discussion of the president's conduct on 9/11. Said lfergie812: "If I were president and my country was being attacked on 9/11, I would have gotten off my posterior and left the school immediately." AlphaGnosis defended POTUS: "He didn't want to alarm the children. And I'm sure he was just as shocked as you and I were." So did Nonnie22: "It's not like he hung out there, read two or three more books with those kids, got a pedicure, and moseyed on over to A.F. One and took a nap." A less complimentary assessment, "100 years to recover from Bush," bagged 186 votes and 415 comments. Locky12 questioned the whole point of the post, an interview with crusty contrarian Gore Vidal: "Since when was Gore Vidal worth reading/listening to?" Replied BLO2L: "Everybody is worth listening to." And KazamaSmokers sounded a stubbornly partisan note: "One party is more a slave to corporate interests (as opposed to populist interests) than the other. If you fail to recognize that, you've got the Kool-Aid in your veins." And let's complete the trifecta with "W. Regrets Almost Nothing," which earned 158 votes and 273 comments. One member, gbilly08, cut straight to the chase: "W is a moron." Another, gamahuche, filed a dispatch from the Old World: "The blazing hostility toward W. has faded to indifference and a sort of fatigued perplexity about how les imbeciles de regime cowboy got into office, and how America could have put the world through all this craziness." But slate insisted on putting things in perspective: "Other than maybe Nixon, which president has ever said he regretted what he did in office: Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Johnson, Ford, or Kennedy? Kennedy almost blew up the planet with his knuckleheaded handling of Russia, for God's sake, and you worship him."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

"Supreme Court Justices Rule Terror Suspects Can Appeal in Federal Courts" rang up 216 votes and 416 comments. Several members responded to Justice Antonin Scalia's widely reported assertion that the decision would "almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." Said Beau7890: "I'm AMAZED that he believes that giving a few people the right of judicial review will result in more American deaths. Too bad he couldn't spell out the logical process behind that--it almost reminds me of the way some folks on Propeller argue." Endoscopy advocated a non-judicial approach to oppose the court's decision: "If the courts are going to give civil rights to enemy combatants, we may as well just kill them. In a firefight anything can happen." Meanwhile, Teagen threw down the gauntlet to the legislative branch: "If Congress really wanted to do something this year, besides the non-binding resolutions, tax increases, and cutting the military, how about drawing up laws concerning terrorists? Carter gave non-uniformed combatants (at that time, the PLO) more protection than regular military troops have. Dump the UN bylaws and create something we all can live with." Elsewhere, the Propeller community sounded off about Al Gore, oil prices, and plastic surgery. A story about offshore drilling generated 144 votes and 248 comments, including this bit of electoral algebra from antibrainwasher: "Big Oil=John McCain=Cheney/Bush 4 more years." (Replied FSU92grad: "Leave it to an angry liberal to pee on everyone's parade.") And finally, there was "Theory Of Gravity Found To Be Wrong," with 155 votes and 113 comments. "First I find out that Pluto isn't a planet, now the Earth's center isn't dragon's blood!" lamented ind06. "Was anything they taught me in school correct?" Responded Mdiar: "Well... what did they teach you in Sex Ed?" Later in the thread, it appeared that BronxBomber and Beeboppin71 were heading straight for some kind of consummation--and that's where we'll draw the curtain, folks.

The modern age calls for modern political tools. Last week, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's campaign launched a new website solely dedicated to debunking untruths about his life. Called Fight The Smears, the site is laid out in a clean, simple style: it lists each rumor, then neatly debunks it. Example:

LIE: Barack Obama won't put his hand over this heart during the Pledge of Allegiance

TRUTH: View video of Barack leading The Pledge of Allegiance in the United States Senate

Here's the video of Obama communications director Robert Gibbs talking about the site:



Granted, addressing rumors is nothing new for the Obama camp. Previously, the campaign has used a different site, Fact Check Obama, to counteract untruths. But this new site is far more aggressive than its predecessor. And according to some news outlets, this is exactly not the tactic to take. According to Salon, conventional wisdom states that the best way to counteract a negative, rumor-filled attack is to ignore it. The Salon piece also takes the layout of the new site to task. Listing the smear first, says one expert, is a dicey tactic, "which often causes people to later misremember the lie as true."

Not so, says Drew Westen, author of The Political Brain, speaking on Good Morning America. "That is one of the biggest fallacies in politics--that if you respond to an attack, you are somehow dignifying it," he argued. "The reality is that if you don't respond to an attack, what you're allowing the other side to do is to shape the associations people have to your candidate. If you don't offer any counter-association, they come to believe those things. And those things will stick."

While Monicachenoa never got back to NewsQuake on what interested her about the story, look what was submitted to the site last night by IslandDog: "More Obama Lies: He was A Muslim." Now that Obama's site is up and running--and has debunked this very assertion--is this a case of ignorance or deliberate rumor-mongering?

Story: Obama site to debunk rumors
User: Monicachenoa

IMPEACHMENT FAILS

It's not often that a single article earns the most votes and the most comments in any given week. But this time around, that honor went to "Kucinich presents Bush impeachment articles," with 276 votes and 735 comments. The debate was, to say the least, spirited. JoseMadre predicted from the start that the Democratic majority would bury the impeachment: "Pelosi wants no part of it, because then she and Kerry and a lot of other Democrats would be exposed for their part in the war lead-up." Replied mesodude: "When Democrats and Republicans agreed to allow Bush to disarm Iraq, they didn't agree to anything like what this horrific three-hour tour has morphed into over the course of 5 years.... No way, Jose." Teech took it one step further, praising Kucinich and comparing him to Abraham Lincoln: "A renegade? No. A clear thinker? Seems to be. Hears the music of the Democrats, but marches to his own drum." Meanwhile, slate called for a nonpartisan sweep of the broom: "While you're at it, Denny, remember to finish off the guy with frozen money and Feinstein for lining her pockets with military money. Oh yeah, I'd also love for you to look into the carbon credit company that will rake in billions of dollars of payola." And while several members immediately labeled George W. Bush the worst president in U.S. history, there was a demurral from Mdiar: "I still support Buchanan for that title." A follow-up story, "House waves off impeachment measure against Bush," bagged 179 votes and 307 comments. Said libsRfunny: "To paraphrase a famous line from the Ali-Frazier fight: Down goes Kucinich!" There was a different reaction from unome2: "It astonishes me that the liberal media wasn't the least bit interested in this impeachment, concerning lies, murder, and the loss of our Constitution." Only Beau7890 seemed somewhat satisfied with the outcome: "We all knew the impeachment resolution wasn't going to go anywhere. I'm still glad it was introduced and read into the public record."

HIS BETTER HALF

Another hot-button story, "Michelle Obama's problem with 'Whitey'," rang up 174 votes and 644 comments. The tape, of course, has yet to be produced--even Republican spitfire Michelle Malkin seemed a little wary--and UnusualSuspect took a similar approach: "Just show me the tape. No judgment can be made at all until the tape is available and seen." Replied aniokly: "The tape will come out before the convention. You can bet your last tax dollar. They sold many copies before they shut down that part of their website in March." And in the blink of an eye, the conversation swerved over to John McCain's use of the word gook to describe his North Vietnamese captors. Was some equivalency being proposed? For abntv, McCain was merely conforming to custom: "If you are going to call everyone in the U.S. military that used the word "gook" [a racist], nobody that ever served in that war would be qualified to run for any office, including myself." Another member, nightschase, felt differently: "Being an Asian, I must say your comment is very disturbing for a couple of reason[s]. Just because a number of people have called Asians gooks in the past makes it in no shape or form okay at all to excuse such blatant racism." When the conversation drifted back over to the original topic, Candida dismissed Michelle Obama's comment as a minor faux-pas (assuming she actually made it): "There is absolutely no comparison between calling people 'whitey' and calling them 'N.' The emotional baggage simply isn't there. It's like calling someone filthy rich." Another story, "Michelle Obama Rumor Stolen from Novel?," earned 127 votes and 464 comments. "Figures," mused APixieInDixie. But it was mackiemesser who urged us, once again, to keep our powder dry and await further developments: "Well, I'll give this issue the benefit of a doubt and wait for the video to surface. I'm quite patient, as I've been waiting for a World Series win for a Washington DC baseball team for over 50 years now."

NORTH TO ALASKA

As gas prices continue to skyrocket, it's no surprise that "Alaska drilling needs to happen" got the community talking. FSU92grad was all for opening up ANWR as quickly as possible: "My family and yours come first, and most people in here know that they can safely drill and get this badly needed oil without leaving much of a footprint." For emandand99, that was only the first step: "Obviously, we know how to use oil, gas, coal and nuclear. We need to exploit those while we heavily research wind, solar, biofuels, geothermal, etc." Endoscopy pointed to earlier, failed efforts in the same area: "Carter had the government spend a ton of money on that. NASA headed up the scientific research on it. They put up a bunch of experimental wind turbines and other forms of generating electricity. All cost prohibitive." Replied zaphod: "Well, when gas gets to $10.00 a gallon maybe it will become cost effective." BB64 backed up Endoscopy's argument: "I sell components to GE Wind and then the replacement parts. It's a huge cash cow that wouldn't be possible without huge government handouts." But RickyDawkins was still rather skeptical about the benefits of Alaskan drilling: "There is no real need to drill in ANWR. The Bushites and their Big Oil pals know this, but are merely trying to exploit consumer frustration at the pump to ruin yet another wildlife area for the sake of short-term oil company profits." A related story, "Oil Prices Average Sets New Record," bagged 189 votes, 66 comments, and this indignant assessment from RichFatCat: "Shortage? Storage tanks are at full capacity! Like it or not, rampant speculation on oil as a commodity and as a hedge against a plunging dollar is mostly the cause. Billions and billions are made every day and one doesn't even have to get one's hands dirty." And then there was "Republicans block extra taxes on oil companies," with 151 votes and 254 comments. Again, there was room for plenty of disagreement. "Drill!" said Locky. "Let's drill in the Dakotas, off the California shelf, in Alaska." To which Bopi365 replied: "That's right, consume, spend, drill, consume, spend some more. I've got a full-size pickup that needs fillin'."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

"1.4 Million Bankruptcy Claims expected in 2008" sparked some lively debate. "This has been coming for years," said cowboygrandpa. "Reaganomics has caught up to us." Added reviewer: "The statistic is made worse when you consider that bankruptcy law is more strict now than during other troubling times of the late 70s and early 80s." But DPittman made a pitch for personal responsibility: "Wonder how many of those people that lost their jobs and can't pay their bills manage to find the money to pay for cell phones, IPods, Playstations, cigarettes, and beer. This has nothing to do with Bush or Congress--it has to do with people making bad decision and then looking for someone to bail them out." There were high-profile stories about stress, Hooters, and the impending Propeller redesign. And finally, there was "Go And Tidy Your Room, Say Scientists," posted by that maestro of mirth ind06. "Tidy-up fairies are a finicky bunch," noted chevydog. "They have to be wanted before they appear and do their stuff." But truthiness thought the whole neatness thing was overblown: "What's wrong with wearing the same pants all week?" Or all year, for that matter?

Story submission: Wedding Plans Underway In Calif. As Foes Rally Offensive
User: David-NWA

California saw two big events this week: First, opponents of California Supreme Court's May ruling (which granted gays the right to get married) gathered enough signatures to put an anti-gay marriage initiative on the ballot. Secondly, the Supreme Court stayed its decision to allow gay marriages to go forward beginning June 16th. California has been through this vote before: In 2000 voters adopted Proposition 22--with 61.4% in favor of the measure--that banned gay marriage. But in this case the legal twist is that the ban on gay marriage could come five months after couples are legally married in the state. To find out how gay groups are feeling about this latest round of events, Propeller followed up with Rachel Dowd, executive editor of The Advocate.

What is the mood, or general mood among your readers in terms of this being on the ballot?

The mood is cautious optimism. Even the fact that the Supreme Court decided to stay their decision and allow gay marriages to go forward on June 17th was a great symbol that we are moving forward.

But at the same time, the amount of money needed to beat this ballot initiative will be between $10 million and $20 million. That's an enormous amount of money for pro gay groups to raise. It will be the most ever they have raised and so it's an enormous task ahead. But it feels like winds have changed.

What will the money be spent on?

Media outreach, mostly. The main group [who helped put the initiative on the ballot] is the National Coalition for Marriage in California. They spent $8 million to get it on the ballot and they have plans to spend $15 million more.

Where do current polls show in terms of how the vote could swing?

A recent Los Angeles Times poll taken at the end of May showed that 51 percent of voters approved of same sex marriages. It's a dead heat. But that in and of itself is progress since Prop. 22 saw 61 percent of voters disapproving... so we are making progress.

One thing that is new now is that when Massachusetts passed their initiative, they got a $102 million boost to their economy in the first 18 months because of gay weddings [wedding and the related business, i.e., catering, florists, etc]. Now, you have to be a resident to Massachusetts to marry, you can't just drive there and get marry, but California won't have the resident clause. And it's estimated that it'll give a $375 million boost to our economy.

What happens to those marriages that happen before November if voters approve the amendment to ban gay marriage?

This has never happened before so there are issues.. but you can't take away something that was legal.

What kinds of implications will the November vote have for the rest of the country?

The California Supreme is the most-cited court in the country, it is used more often in arguments than in any other state. It's the most important Supreme Court in the country. There are other states, like Connecticut, that are close [to approving gay marriage] and looking to California right now.

With both candidates saying they are opposed to gay marriage, will this have any impact on the presidential race?

With the number of young voters who now plan to got to the polls [because of Obama] and vote this November, it's in our favor....Even though, he respects the right to choose, he has inspired younger voters.


Propeller also caught up with user David NWPA to find out what interesting him about the story. Here's what he wrote back: "I was most interested by the fact that some people in California (and elsewhere) are vehemently opposed to marriage equality and will stop at nothing to embolden their supporters. The reasoning behind why gay marriage is so offensive to some rests solely with religious beliefs and mythical ideas about marriage. That it is a heterosexual institution and has traditionally been so is sufficient reason to keep gays and lesbians from marrying. However, if one uses that logic, neither women, nor blacks could vote. They could not wed one another, and we would have slaves picking cotton in the south. Traditions can and rightly should change. Those who oppose gay marriage, like the ones mentioned in the article, fail to understand that position. Those ideas I found to be most compelling."