Cbs News

Jonathan Chait offers a caveat:

It isn't the only factor; but it is the strongest.

Human behavior is changing at a blistering pace.

Why, someone in Starbucks held the door for me today and actually waited until I could grab the door from him, rather than letting it swing tantalizingly before I could get there.

However, a British office worker called James Coleman has pointed us towards the perils of over-committed tweeting.

According to a report in the Telegraph, Coleman, 23, was jogging when he suddenly felt the enormous uncontrollable urge to pull out his BlackBerry and Twitter.

Perhaps you have experienced a similar sensation. The buttocks tighten, the eyebrows begin to quiver and your hand reaches into the pocket of your tracksuit, desperate to clutch your most precious jewel.

You grab your BlackBerry with the intention of informing your 25 followers that you have, indeed, just reached into your pocket to grab your BlackBerry while jogging.

Should there be "Danger. No Twittering" signs?

(Credit: CC Angelin Richmond/Flickr)

Coleman, as almost everyone on the streets of Manhattan, temporarily lost sight of his own proportions.

Twitter can do that to you.

Before he could even finish his tweet, he thought he might have temporarily lost sight in an eye. Even more strangely, he was lying on the sidewalk and his head was beginning to throb.

Had a passerby, appalled at this arrogant thrust towards modernity, karate-chopped him to the ground? No, it was a tree.

More precisely, a substantial, low-hanging branch that decided to play lumberjack.

"I could only see through one eye for a couple of days afterwards, but the swelling has started to go down now," Coleman told the Telegraph.

The experience hasn't, however, dampened Coleman's enthusiasm for ensuring that his 27 followers stay close to his footsteps, as well as his missteps.

Monday morning, he tweeted: "I am somewhat disappointed that my 15 minutes of fame stem from running into a tree whilst tweeting..."

Sir, but we are not disappointed. You have taught us so much. You have made us think very carefully about the wisdom of jogging and tweeting. However, you don't seem to have been put off by your own Twittering headbanging.

As I see that your latest tweet reads: "Running home--looking out for curbs, lamp-posts, cars, trees and all things stationary and moving :)"

Oh, Coleman, I am worried for the future of British business.

VA State Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) is on the air in Northern VA today with a spot -- titled "Tradition" -- that pitches his endorsement by the Washington Post.

Script: "On June 9th, which Democrat has the most experience to carry on the policies of Mark Warner and Tim Kaine? The Washington Post says it's Creigh Deeds. Deeds 'would make transportation his first priority.'"

"Tradition" will air on broadcast and cable stations in NoVA, putting Deeds on the airwaves in every in-state media market through the 6/9 Dem primary. It's his first spot in the vote-rich DC suburbs and airs as one poll shows him surging past rivals Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran.

Reinaldo Normand is terrible at remembering dates, but Feb. 17, 2006, is one he won't easily forget. That afternoon he was chatting with colleagues during a break at the downtown So Paulo offices of Tectoy, a Brazilian gaming and electronics company, when an idea popped into his head. What if he were to make a living-room gaming console for emerging markets that would connect to the Internet over wireless phone networks and sell at prices middle-class families could afford? In Brazil, the choices weren't great: Consumers could pay $150 for a 20-year-old Sega console, $250 for a pirated version of Sony's nine-year-old PlayStation 2, or $1,000 for the latest Xbox 360 made by Microsoft.

Normand, who was then in Tectoy's mobile video games business, admits it was a crazy thought. In the $50 billion global video game industry, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo dominate the console market. They have spent billions of dollars developing the technology and marketing the machines and games that go with them. Their brands are well known globally. It would be financial suicide for a no-name with no money to take on such formidable tech giants.

But a half-hour later, Normand called his boss, Stefano Arnhold, who was traveling in Europe on a business trip. "I told him, 'We need to do this,'" Normand recalls. "'This will be a billion-dollar company. We need to find investors in America.'"

Multimillion-Dollar Investment

A day after Normand's epiphany, Mike Yuen was at his office in San Diego, writing up a business idea that bore similarities to Normand's. As a manager in the gaming division at mobile-phone chipmaker Qualcomm, Yuen had often heard developers complain that playing games on the tiny screens of mobile phones was an unsatisfying experience. He was determined to do something about it.

Two men, separated by nearly 9,500 kilometers [5,900 miles],...

Last Wednesday, Keith Olbermann falsely compared statements Samuel Alito made during his 2006 Supreme Court confirmation hearings to the now controversial and seemingly racist remark Sonia Sotomayor uttered during a 2001 speech.

In her lecture to the Boalt School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, Barack Obama's nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

By contrast, Alito in 2006 talked about his background indeed impacting his decisions, but never said that would make him "more often than not reach a better conclusion than" women of a different race.

Olbermann, as he so often does with his agenda-driven drivel, missed this obvious distinction (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript):

KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: Good evening from New York.

"When a case comes before me involving, let??s say, someone who is an immigrant," said the nominee for the Supreme Court, "I can??t help but think of my own ancestors because it wasn??t that long ago when they were in that position. I have to say to myself and I do say to myself, you know, this could be your grandfather. This could be your grandmother."

"When I get a case about discrimination," the nominee continued, "I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender and I do take that into account."

Our fifth story on the COUNTDOWN: The smoking gun, the damming confirmation of reverse racism and reverse sexism from Judge Sonia Sotomayor? No, those quotes were from then-Supreme Court nominee, conservative judge, Samuel Alito, during his confirmation hearing in January 2006 when he was answering a question from Republican Senator Coburn.

So conservatives predicating their attempt at character-assassination of Judge Sotomayor on those exact points? You can collect your backsides from the coat check after the show because they??ve been handed to you.

Actually, no, because the issue here is NOT a jurist using his or her background and experiences to make legal judgements. The problem with Sotomayor's statement in 2001 was that she claimed someone with her background "would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Let's view her comments in their complete context (full lecture available here) :

In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

As such, Sotomayor was making the case that her experience and background as a Latina woman somehow makes her more qualified than white men to reach proper judicial decisions in certain cases.

As you can see from the following video and partial transcript of this 2006 exchange with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Ok.), Alito only talked about his background and how it impacts his decisions on the bench, but NEVER suggested that would make him more qualified than a non-white woman without the same experiences:

SENATOR TOM COBURN, (R-OK): You know, I think at times during these hearings you have been unfairly criticized or characterized as that you don't care about the less fortunate, you don't care about the little guy, you don't care about the weak or the innocent.

Can you comment just about Sam Alito, and what he cares about, and let us see a little bit of your heart and what's important to you in life?

SAMUEL ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.

SAMUEL ALITO: I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.

And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.

But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.

And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant - and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases - I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.

And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.

But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."

When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing - the barriers that it puts up to them.

So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.

COBURN: Thank you.

See anywhere in Alito's statement when he claimed his background and experience make him more qualified than anybody of differing background, gender, or race?

No, I don't either.

In the end, it seems possible that Olbermann and his crew once again channeled a member of the Netroots without doing any fact-checking, for from what I can tell, Salon's Glenn Greenwald was the first to uncover and publish Alito's comments as a "smoking gun" about five and a half hours before Wednesday's "Countdown" aired.

As NewsBusters has recommended in the past, it would be wonderful if a so-called news outlet like MSNBC might actually check the veracity of Netroots blog postings BEFORE echoing them.

Or, would that be too much like journalism?

President Obama declared June 2009 is "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month." No new rights or anything like that, but we got a proclamation.

Obama wants us to know he "continue[s] to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans." That's good. But, he's President now, not a candidate. A lot of worked very hard to elect Obama, due in part to his campaign promises of equal rights for LGBT Americans. But, now, we need action or at the least the inklings of a plan of action. So far, we've seen no indication of how Obama is going to turn his support of those measures into reality. We've seen words, nice words like the ones below, but nothing really concrete on the legislative front, besides the Hate Crimes bill, which already passed both the House and Senate back in 2007.

Here's the proclamation:

Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born. During LGBT Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under law for LGBT Americans.

LGBT Americans have made, and continue to make, great and lasting contributions that continue to strengthen the fabric of American society. There are many well-respected LGBT leaders in all professional fields, including the arts and business communities. LGBT Americans also mobilized the Nation to respond to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic and have played a vital role in broadening this country's response to the HIV pandemic.

Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before. I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.

The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect.

My Administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives. At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security. We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.

These issues affect not only the LGBT community, but also our entire Nation. As long as the promise of equality for all remains unfulfilled, all Americans are affected. If we can work together to advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded, every American will benefit. During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to turn back discrimination and prejudice everywhere it exists.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

Very nice and appreciated. But, this is 2009, not 1993. We need more than words, we need real action. And, from watching how activists on other issues are making progress with Team Obama, one thing is clear: we're going to have to be pretty forceful, loud and unrelenting about what we want if we expect any movement.

Also, as I've noted before -- and will continue to note, GLAD filed a lawsuit aimed at finding Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional. The government's answer is due by the end of June. During this LGBT Pride Month, if the Obama administration chooses to actually defend DOMA (and they do have a choice), that will speak much, much louder about his continued support for gay Americans than this proclamation. (I actually think if Obama wasn't hindered by his political advisers and consultants, he'd be much better on the issue. You know, in an off-the-record kind of way, he probably already is.)