wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Thanks, Gary. I decry your guilt by association remarks re: Obama but appreciate your real and helpful information regarding monitor displays.

continued:

Backgrounds that are set to olive green or neutral gray are considered among the healthiest for your eyes. However, be sure to set the intensity low enough to benefit from the reduced eye strain. THEREFORE, make sure that the numbers inside the 3 boxes in the lower right that read "red, green, blue" do not exceed 180 approximately. That will ensure that the background brightness is low enough, and the contrast between that, and the foreground text (which is usually black) is low enough to eliminate eye strain.

Making this change in your control panel will not adversely affect your computer in any way. That's why Microsoft permits you to make these adjustments. Also, making this change in how your windows are displayed on the monitor will not affect normal black letter printing on white paper. In other words, it only affects your computer display.

Kinseley is correct about eyestrain from reading off the monitor. BUT, here's the solution w/o printing to paper:

Reading text that's printed on paper with the aid of reflected light does not strain our eyes. But our eyes were never intended to peer directly into source (incident) lighting. The default background color on computer displays is white. The brightness is as strong as a 20 Watt light bulb. The affect of reading text against that background would be similar to staring at the words, "20 Watts", which is etched on the tip of that bulb---while it's illuminated!

You can solve this problem by editing control panels, on a Mac or a Windows PC.

On PCs, with Windows 98 installed, go to "Settings—>Active Desktop—>Appearance".
In Windows XP, go to "Settings—>Control Panel—>Display—>"Appearance" tab—>"Advanced" button.

Now click once inside the white background of the "active window" icon. Below, on the row where it reads "item: window", click on "color 1", then click on "other". This is the pallet that allows you to set the color and intensity for the screen backgrounds that appear in Windows Explorer, word processors and other programs, and Internet Explorer and other browsers, etc.

Michael forgets that Obama had a 20 year close relationship with Rev Wright.

Whereas McCain merely was fielding an endorsement from a religious leader who made ONE politcally incorrect comment.

Question: how many times in the past week have you discussed or overheard conversations about Obama's healthcare plan? How about intense debates over his plans for lowering gas prices?

How many times have you discussed or overheard conversations about Pastor Wright or Hillary's Bosnia trip? Maybe, and I'm going out on a limb here, it's because the latter topics are MORE INTERESTING. Say what you will:
1) we've already heard the candidate's plans on "issues" a million times
2) the difference between the two is infintessimal, and
3) these topics are boring.

Please, drop the obviously specious claim that Americans really care about these policy "issues" and not about character issues.

yes Crossfire was different, and they were not helping, they were hurting America

Hahaha, I didn't hear the entire call, but did she really mention an "overly ambitious" female?? NEXT.

Re: Jon Stewart's comments about Crossfire--under the final hosts, it was quite a different program than when Kinsley was there.

#3--That was a really weird call--why didn't Brian press the caller to name the "overly ambitios" female?

Was Mrs. Giuliani there?

Crikey!

Do you think Slate facilitated the rush to war in Iraq, in particular Christopher Hitchens seems to have been instrumental in suppressing 'liberal' discent.

Rick, Hagee is most definitely NOT ok. In the case of Hagee and McCain, I think we just expect such shenanigans from this end. We hold liberals to a higher standard, therefore any questionable religious affiliations will receive greater scrutiny. It's just like the sexism issue...the fact that a few bad apple Obama supporters are exhibiting blatant sexist tendencies is distressing because we don't normally associate sexism with liberals.

I disagree that the internet ultimately broadens the horizons of the people. So many specialized choices seem to be leading to people only reading/listening/watching the news with opinionated spin they already agree with. I hope these are just the growing pains of this new range of choice...

PS - I'm in my 20's and HATE reading long stories off of a screen :)

Does Mr. Kinsley know that the reporter who brought the "cling" to religion, guns, bigotry, anti-trade remarks was a "citizen journalist" working with Jay Rosen on the Off The Bus project co-sponsored by Huffington Post?

And she is an Obama supporter?

She writes that she was not initially going to write about the comments, but then became bothered by the tone and content, that is seemed Obama was viewing the rural and small town PA voters in particular as an anthropologist would observe them.

She also reported some other remarks, something about Obama viewing himself as having more foreign policy experience than any other candidate because he had lived in Indonesia as a child (ages 6-10), had relatives living in Africa. This struck her as cocky, at the least.

Anyway, yes, other MCM (mainstream corporate media) did grab onto the "cling" remarks--not so much the "cocky" remarks. And, yes, political opponents also found grist for their mills in them.

Does it make any difference that the reporter, Fowler Mayhill, reported her ambivalence about making her report on the "cling" remarks and came to the conclusion she did?

Perhaps if reporters in the MCM had revealed their ambivalence about WH and BushCo pronouncements in the run up to the Iraq Invasion we might not be there....

"Largely true, angry statements?" Which ones? AIDs was created by the government to decimate the African-American population? AmeriKKKa is an irredeemably racist nation? Wright got more attention because he was Obama's pastor for 20+ years. Hagee gave McCain an endorsement. The two are not equivalent.

McCain should be questioned on Hagee to the same extent that Obama's had to deal with Farrakhan and Ayers (i.e. one or two questions in a debate). That is the more relevant comparison.

All of our problems will be solved actuarially.

Hagee, Wright, and Bill Donohue should be locked in a room together until they can all act like real religious leaders.

this kinsley guy is right on with his comments about how boring the media's drumming up of non-issues has become.

Always good to listen to Michael Kinsley even on the points where I disagree with him. How refreshing to hear someone who thinks.
What has Bush said that the pieces fit together!

Thinking of the Gibson Stephanopolous debate priorities, perhaps the problem is that these people are celebrity journalists, they have been making millions of dollars for years and they are really out of touch with the people of this country. They run in circles of power and prestige, with lobbyists and rulers and fine wine and clothes and the revolving private public sector money machine. That is who whispers in their ear, that is who their friends are, etc.

it's OK for Rev. hagee to be hate monger because he's a right wing white guy (and an evangelical)- it's not ok for Rev. Wright to make largely true, angry statements about America because he's a left wing black man. very simple.

also, the Media sucks up to McCain, maybe even more than they did to Bush.

Ambition is neutral, it's how one uses it.

Not default good, but could be used for bad to or the other way.

What on earth was that caller talking about? Who the heck is "the lady in question"? Hillary? I had no idea what she was talking about so cryptically.

fyi, your introduction of Michael Kingsley stated he was the original liberal host of Crossfire. Tom Braden, Crossfire's cofounder, hosted 1982-1989. Kingsley hosted 1989-1995.

but what are we to do in a time when no one cares that the country is falling apart?