Available from these sellers.
- Movie-like appearance
- Open mouth slightly to hear Chewbacca roar
- Open it wider, and the roar gets louder
- Use straps to adjust fit
- Includes mask and instructions.
Monday, June 6, 2016
Star Wars The Force Awakens Chewbacca Electronic Mask
Rubik's Cube Game
by Hasbro
| Price: | $9.99 & FREE Shipping on orders over $49. Details |
In Stock.
Want it tomorrow, June 7? Order within 14 hrs 51 mins and choose One-Day Shipping at checkout. Details
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available.
- Billions of combinations, one solution
- Comes with a display stand
- Rubik's Cube game challenges you to figure out how to get all the colors matched up on all 9 sides
- Includes Rubik's Cube and display stand.
checkout: http://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-A9312-Rubiks-Cube-Game/dp/B00I19QZX8/ref=zg_bs_toys-and-games_16
Friday, March 11, 2016
5 Real Ways to Actually Make Money Online
How many articles are there about making money online? Thousands? Millions? Enough? Probably. But there’s a problem. Too many of them are just sales pitches to convince you to sign up for some seminar, webinar, training session or some other way to become an online millionaire.
"How Everyday People Started Quitting Their Jobs... Everyone Thought
FREE Webinar Reveals...
"How Everyday People Started Quitting Their Jobs... Everyone Thought
They Were Crazy!
But What Happened
Next SHOCKED
Them"
Register Here: http://www.mohamedkheirmohamed.com/
If you want to have a one on one conversation you're welcomed to contact me via (2073339289) or add me on Facebook for more info Thanks!
Sunday, February 28, 2016
'Spotlight’ Wins Oscar as 2016 Best Picture; See the Complete List of Honorees
The ‘Spotlight’ cast and crew accepted Best Picture (Photo by Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP)
By Jake Coyle, Associated Press
In an underdog win for a movie about an underdog profession, the newspaper dramaSpotlight took best picture at a 88th Academy Awards.
Tom McCarthy’s film about the Boston Globe’s investigative reporting on sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests won over the favored frontier epic The Revenant. McCarthy’s well-crafted procedural, led by a strong ensemble cast, had lagged in the lead-up to the Oscars, losing ground to the flashier filmmaking of Alejandro Inarritu’s film.
But Spotlight — an ode to the hard-nose, methodical work of a journalism increasingly seldom practiced — took the night’s top honor despite winning only one other Oscar for McCarthy and Josh Singer’s screenplay. Such a sparsely-awarded best picture winner hasn’t happened since 1952’s The Greatest Show On Earth.
The night, however, belong to host Chris Rock, who launched immediately into the uproar over the lack of diversity in this year’s nominees, and didn’t let up. “The White People’s Choice Awards,” he called the Oscars, which were surrounded by protests (including one outside the Dolby Theatre by the Rev. Al Sharpton) and boycotts.
Streaks, broken and extended, dominated much of the evening. After going home empty-handed four times previously, Leonardo DiCaprio won his first Oscar, for a best actor in The Revenant — a gruff, grunting performance that traded little on the actor’s youthful charisma. DiCaprio, greeted with a standing ovation, took the moment to talk about climate change.
“Let us not take our planet for granted,” he said. “I do not take tonight for granted.”
His director, Inarritu won back-to-back directing awards after the triumph last year ofBirdman. It’s a feat matched by only two other filmmakers: John Ford and Joseph L. Mankiewicz. The Revenant also won best cinematography for Emmanuel Lubezki, who became the first cinematographer to win three times in a row (following wins forGravity and Birdman), and only the seventh to three-peat in Oscar history.
Inarritu, whose win meant three straight years of Mexican filmmakers winning best director, was one of the few winners to remark passionately on diversity in his acceptance speech.
“What a great opportunity for our generation to really liberate ourselves from all prejudice and this tribal thinking and to make sure for once and forever that the color of our skin becomes as irrelevant as the length of our hair,” said Inarritu.
The night’s most-awarded film, however, went to neither Spotlight nor The Revenant. George Miller’s post-apocalyptic chase film, Mad Max: Fury Road sped away with six awards in technical categories for editing, makeup, production design, sound editing, sound mixing and costume design. Roundly acclaimed for its old-school craft, Miller’sMad Max was assured of becoming the evening’s most awarded film.
“Us Mad Maxes are doing OK tonight,” said editor Margaret Sixel, who’s also Miller’s wife. The flurry of wins brought a parade of Australian craftsmen onstage, including sound editor Mark Mangini, who celebrated with a loud expletive.
Best actress went to Brie Larson, the 26-year-old breakout of the mother-son captive drama Room.
But the wins at times felt secondary to the sharp, unflinching hosting of Rock, in his second go around. His much anticipated opening monologue left few disappointed.
“Is Hollywood racist? You’re damn right it’s racist,” said Rock, who also sought to put the issue in perspective. “Hollywood is sorority racist. It’s like: We like you Rhonda, but you’re not a Kappa.”
Rock had stayed quiet before the ceremony as the controversy raged over the second straight year of all-white acting nominees, leaving Hollywood and viewers eagerly awaiting his one-liners. He confessed that he deliberated over joining the Oscars boycott and bowing out as host, but concluded: “The last thing I need is to lose another job to Kevin Hart.”
There was another major surprise Sunday. The supporting actor win for Mark Rylance over Sylvester Stallone drew gasps. Stallone, nominated a second time 39 years later for the role of Rocky Balboa, had been expected to win his first acting Oscar for theRocky sequel Creed. He instead lost to the famed stage actor who co-starred in Steven Spielberg’s Bridge of Spies.
Adam McKay and Charles Randolph took best adapted screenplay for their self-described “trauma-dy” about the mortgage meltdown of 2008. McKay thanked Paramount Pictures for taking a risk on a movie about “financial esoterica.” Best known for broader comedies like Anchorman and Step Brothers, McKay gave an election-year warning to power of “big money” and “weirdo billionaires” in the presidential campaign.
Talk of election was otherwise largely absent the ceremony, though Vice President Joe Biden (whose presence added even greater security to the Dolby Theatre) was met by a standing ovation before talking about sexual assault on college campuses before introducing best-song nominee Lady Gaga.
Best supporting actress went Alicia Vikander for the transgender pioneer tale The Danish Girl. Vikander, the 27-year-old Sweden-born actress was ubiquitous in 2015, also winning awards for her performance in the sci-fi Ex Machina.
Best animated feature film went to Inside Out, Pixar’s eighth win in the category since it was created in 2001. Asif Kapadia’s Amy Winehouse portrait, Amy, took best documentary. Hungary scored its second best foreign language Oscar for Laszlo Nemes’Son of Saul, a harrowing drama set within a concentration camp.
“Even in the darkest hours of mankind, there might be a voice within us that allows us to remain human,” said Nemes. “That’s the hope of this film.”
The Academy Awards, normally decorous and predictable, were charged with enough politics and uncertainty to rival an election debate. Down the street from the Dolby Theatre, Sharpton led several dozen demonstrators in protest against a second straight year of all-white acting nominees.
“This will be the last night of an all-white Oscars,” Sharpton vowed at the rally.
The nominees restored the hashtag “OscarsSoWhite” to prominence and led Spike Lee (an honorary Oscar winner this year) and Jada Pinkett Smith to announce that they would not attend the show. Several top African American filmmakers, Ryan Coogler (Creed) and Ava DuVernay (Selma) spent the evening not at the Oscars but in Flint, Mich., raising money for the water-contaminated city.
Aside from pleading for more opportunity for black actors, Rock also sought to add perspective to the turmoil. Rock said this year didn’t differ much from Oscar history, but black people in earlier decades were “too busy being raped and lynched to worry about who won best cinematographer.”
In a quick response to the growing crisis, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, president of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, pushed ahead reforms to the academy intended to diversify its overwhelming white and male membership. But those changes (which included stripping older, out-of-work members of their voting privileges) precipitated a backlash, too. A chorus of academy members challenged the reforms.
In remarks during the show by the president — usually one of the sleepiest moments in the broadcast — Boone Isaacs strongly defended the changes, quoting Martin Luther King Jr. and urging each Oscar attendee to bring greater opportunity to the industry. She was received politely, if not enthusiastically, by the audience.
“It’s not enough to listen and agree,” said Boone Isaacs. “We must take action.”
How the controversy will affect ratings for ABC is one of the night’s big questions. Last year’s telecast, hosted by Neil Patrick Harris, slid 16 percent to 36.6 million viewers, a six-year low.
Original post found here
Sweden Remembers 30th Anniversary of Murder of Olof Palme
Swedes are marking the 30th anniversary of the murder of Prime Minister Olof Palme which shocked the country and still remains unsolved.The day's remembrance began with Social Democratic Prime Minister Stefan Lofven laying a wreath at Palme's grave and will continue later Sunday with a special memorial program at a cultural center in Stockholm.People laid flowers at the scene of the shooting in central Stockholm where Palme was gunned down as he left a cinema with his wife late on a Saturday night.Local media were filled with stories about the life and political career of one of the most charsmatic Swedish leaders to date. Police also appealed to the public for possible new clues to help solve the assassination that has been surrounded by conspiracy theories.
Original post found here
Original post found here
How Hillary Clinton won the battle for the black vote in South Carolina
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Hillary Clinton began her campaign to win South Carolina years ago.
African-American voters carried Clinton to an overwhelming victory over Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, in the state’s Democratic presidential primary. African-Americans typically make up the majority of South Carolina’s Democratic electorate and, according to CNN’s exit polling, Clinton won with the support of 84 percent of the state’s black community.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, was famously dubbed America’s “first black president” because of his background, behavior and the admiration he earned from some in the African-American community during his time in office. But fond memories of Bill and the 1990s aren’t what cemented Hillary Clinton’s edge with black voters in South Carolina. Clinton managed to build a base in the Palmetto State through a years-long, under-the-radar operation to stay in touch and gather support from African-American leaders in the state she lost to Barack Obama in 2008.
Sanders, on the other hand, struggled to gain traction with black voters in South Carolina, hampered by the very thing that has lifted him elsewhere: his position as an outsider and newcomer on the state’s political scene. Attempts at outreach came late and were described by some local African-American leaders as ham-fisted.
The Clinton campaign’s South Carolina ground operation launched on the day she announced her presidential bid last April. At the time, she was the clear frontrunner and had the fundraising to match. That early edge let Clinton hire experienced local staff and set up shop in South Carolina, long before Sanders was seen as anything more than a long-shot challenger with little national profile.
“We were in this state first. The day we launched this campaign, we had staff in the state,” said Marlon Marshall, Clinton’s director of states and political engagement.
But Clinton’s presence in South Carolina began long before that day. Bill Clinton won the Palmetto State primaries in 1992 and 1996, which allowed Hillary Clinton to build relationships in the state and get to know its politics and leading personages. In fact, Clinton’s ties in the state predate her husband’s presidential bid. Clay Middleton, a native South Carolinian who served as state director of Clinton’s campaign, noted she first came into the state during the 1970s, while working as a young lawyer with the Children’s Defense Fund. And as first lady of Arkansas, Clinton co-chaired a task force on infant mortality with former South Carolina Gov. Richard Riley.
“She’s been working in and with South Carolinians since the ’70s, but every decade since then, she’s been in and out of the state working with people,” Middleton said. “She has deep roots here, and it has blossomed over the years.”
But all that support seemingly vanished in 2008, when Clinton faced off against Obama, the first African-American major-party presidential primary frontrunner. Rev. Joseph Darby, vice president of the Charleston branch of the NAACP, attributed Clinton’s loss that year to the simple fact that voters had — and wanted to take — the chance to elect the first black president.
“Before that possibility came, Hillary was actually doing quite well,” Darby explained. “She had nailed down a good number of endorsements.”
Nevertheless, even after being beaten by Obama in South Carolina, Clinton never retreated from South Carolina, Darby said.
“I don’t think Hillary’s ever been off the ground except for the little while when there was a tiff after the ’08 primary. She has stayed in touch with the community. She started laying groundwork for this run, oh, probably three or four years ago. She’s had people circulating. … She’s talked to the right folks,” Darby said, adding, “I don’t think South Carolina ever entirely left the Clintons. It might have parked them in the corner for one election, but they’ve maintained good relationships.”
In contrast, a source said the Sanders campaign did not begin to establish a large presence in the state until last September.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
How President Trump would govern
The candidate at a Trump rally in Las Vegas on Monday. (Photo: Erik Kabik Photography/MediaPunch/IPX)
Cheer up, Republican leaders!
OK, it’s true, your grand old party, which not long ago stood for family values and dime-store flag pins, is now on the verge of being taken over by a man who once likened hisrisqué sex life to a tour in Vietnam. And yes, perhaps the 168 members of the Republican National Committee are about to find out how janitors get treated at the Trump Taj Mahal.
But if Trump does become your nominee — and even I’m now persuaded, after months of being wrong, that it’s pretty likely — it doesn’t mean you’re destined for another Goldwater-type defeat in November.
On the contrary, Trump would likely face Hillary Clinton, who would be an underwhelming candidate even if she weren’t swimming against a powerful historical current in seeking a third term for her party. And if Michael Bloomberg jumps in as an independent next month (because, you know, two New Yorkers and one billionaire aren’t enough), Clinton’s path only gets harder.
No, the real question isn’t whether Republicans really have a chance to win with Trump, because they do. The question is what kind of president he would be. My guess is that President Trump wouldn’t actually be the reactionary, often venomous leader we’ve seen rallying the faithful these last few months.
He might well turn out to be something worse.
Let’s first dispense with the idea that Trump, should he continue his long march to the nomination unimpeded, will bring about the end times for politics as we’ve known it. I doubt that.
Trump will never be an orthodox candidate (nor would any sane person look at the results thus far and conclude he should be), but he’s shrewd enough to understand that general election campaigns aren’t the same thing as raucous primaries and that only a handful of people really know how to wage them. By convention time, you can bet he’ll have added a coterie of trusted hands to his campaign, and you’ll see pictures of him with Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan on the Capitol steps, projecting the grim sobriety of an Amish deacon.
Trump can play the game as well as anyone. He has no reason to overturn the board.
But what if he were actually inaugurated? Does he really have a governing philosophy, and what can we extract from it?
As Trump’s rivals never tire of pointing out (usually just before they flame out and quit the race), the full list of issues on which he’s radically changed course over the years is long. Thoughtful politicians evolve, of course, and we should applaud them for it, but this is less like an evolution than a brain transplant conducted by aliens.
Here’s a sampling. Trump supported single-payer health care; now he wants government out of the business altogether. He called for a steep tax on the wealthy; now he would cut so many taxes, you just wouldn’t believe. He was pro-choice and pro-gun-regulation; now he’s neither. He was an independent leaning toward Democrats; now he’s a Republican leaning toward Know-Nothings.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that Trump used to be a huge proponent of losing but has since come to embrace winning in all its myriad forms.
But it’s not right to say that Trump has no discernible ideology. That’s true only in the binary context of our politics, where we tend to see all governing constructs through the prism of left versus right.
INTERACTIVE: Where the candidates stand on the issues >>>
Trump has an ideology, and it’s all about ratings. The one constant, through his careers as a celebrity developer and then a reality TV star and now as a politician, is that he measures his own success by sheer affirmation.
Trump is, above all else, a supremely gifted entertainer, and like all entertainers, he must have your adoration, or at least your attention. He goes where the crowd is, and he finds it hard to respect anyone who doesn’t.
This is why he can’t get through a single debate without reciting his poll numbers and mocking his opponents for theirs. Polls, Nielsen numbers, “most wealthy” lists, building names — external validation, in whatever form, is his life’s urgent work.
And it’s why I suspect that, for all his nativist and anti-government rhetoric, Trump is no more of a right-wing culture crusader than I am an astronaut. He is, as I’ve written before, an emotional extremist, a reckless provocateur who wants to make you feel pride or love or revulsion — whatever it is, as long as you feel something visceral.
President Trump could just as easily end up a liberal president as a conservative one, an interventionist or a peacemaker, depending on where the applause was leading him. He could just as easily fill Justice Scalia’s seat on the court with Judge Judy as with Ken Starr, if that would please the masses.
You might take solace in the idea that Trump isn’t at heart a doctrinaire, anti-government nationalist. You might intuit in that a certain kind of pragmatism. You shouldn’t.
The system, after all, is built to repel extreme doctrines. You can’t just walk into Washington and enact some militant, right-wing agenda, or a left-wing socialist one. The voters won’t follow an ideological zealot too far down that path before reversing course. (And no, before you start with me, Obama’s health care plan isn’t close to socialism — just ask Bernie Sanders.)
But a president who is a vehicle for the mob of the moment, no matter which direction it’s coming from, is something else entirely. A president who wakes up every morning asking if his latest speech beat “The Big Bang Theory,” or if it made him more popular than his adversaries in the overnight tracking poll, poses a different kind of peril. A president like that will say anything — do anything — to feel the love.
All presidents are asked, at moments they can’t foresee, to act as a bulwark against what John Adams called the “tyranny of the majority.” (Had he lived in the social media age, Adams might have worried more about the tyranny of the loud.) Where George W. Bush sought to protect Muslim Americans from an outpouring of anger, Trump has already indulged it. Where Barack Obama moved cautiously to ease the racial tensions simmering in America’s cities, Trump might consciously inflame them.
What worries me about Trump isn’t that he’s not capable of making wise decisions, but rather that his core ideology prevents him from telling his audience anything that isn’t immediately and emotionally satisfying. Which is pretty much the definition of a demagogue.
All is not yet lost, Republicans. Trump could still turn out to be your savior.
But just remember: If so, he’ll be your responsibility, too.
Original post found here: https://www.yahoo.com/politics/how-president-trump-would-govern-1372330318045238.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)