Sarah Palin not "buzzing" in Internet search trends

Ok, it's 4:12 PST and the long awaited interview between Sarah Palin and Oprah is on - and I'm missing it. I'm working online but had to click over and check Google Trends, expecting to find "sarah palin" among the top 10 search trends, but not. It's not there, and there's no derivative keyword term in the top 20 or 30 results.

Gov. Sarah Palin

It's not until number 39 that we see "oprah sarah palin interview" as a trend, and even then it's not a search trend that's "On Fire" or "Volcanic". Nah. It's just "Spicy". Moreover, its near the bottom of the list of 40 results, which means that since "sarah palin" hasn't been hot all day long, this term's going to drop from the list soon.

Why is it not a really hot search? Well, I think we're seeing a saturation of news and views on Sarah Palin. And while she's a top Yahoo Buzz search trend, that's for a longer period than just today and reflects the still respectable but not incredible level of interest in her. But Yahoo only controls at best 20 percent of the search market,

But there's interest in the interview. Oprah's instincts were correct. America's love of public displays of conflict and controversy created the desire to see Oprah and Sarah Palin together. It's no wonder Oprah, but not "Sarah Palin" or even "palin" is a top trend on Twitter. It's the interview more than Palin herself.

From a trend standpoint, this buzz surrounding her book Going Rogue will last for another month, then poof, gone. Without Sarah as Governor of Alaska there's nothing else to hang on to except the occasional blasts courtesy of newly minted porn start Levi Johnston.

A good source of evidence to support my claim is called "Google Insights for Search" (GIS) which is excelent at revealing long term keyword search trends. At GIS, a strongly searched or term is over 50. Sarah Palin didn't top that until last Thursday November 12th, peaked on Friday at almost 100 and then fell to just over 70 on Sunday.

If one drills down more, the two top terms containing "Sarah Palin" or "Palin" are some combination of sarah palin and oprah. In other words, again, it's not Sarah Palin herself, but the interview with Oprah fueling search trends.

All of this should give Sarah Palin supporters cause to question her real level of popularity as well as if it can translate into a Presidential run. I don't think she's as popular as some contend and I hold that her overall buzz-factor is weak on its own.

The best future course for Sarah Palin is as a talk show host but her future as a politician is just not there. A future Rush Limbaugh? For some reason I don't see that formula working in her favor. She has the capacity to build her own audience with its own unique flavor. It's just not going to translate into votes for the White House.

President Obama's bow: Fox News' silly attack on Obama

Fox News. I'm not surprised the latest mainstream media attack on President Obama's bow to the Emperor of Japan comes from Fox News, and equally I'm not shocked to see the captions "Take a Bow" and "Sign of Subservience" used in their telecast. Further, I'm not at all taken aback to see the Fox and Friends female host wearing a real short skirt and sleeveless blouse. Goes right along with my video on Fox News' habits:



It proves the point I've crafted and made all along. The Couch Potato Conservatives have no interest in applying, clear, intelligent, critical thinking to political matters. They'd prefer to use "red meat reporting" to appeal to what they perceive as the "Angry White Male" demographic.

And if you think I'm making that up to be provacative, click on the link and you'll find it comes right from a "Freeper" (Free Republic blogger and reader), Douglas Turner. Turner also mentions Fox News as a key player in the effort to stoke the passions of "Angry White Males."

Opposing Republican senators acted out a version of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” of appealing to angry white males, now backed by the drumbeat of hired brown-shirts wrecking Democratic town meetings in the August recess, racist cartoons flooding the Internet and the rant on Fox News that President Obama has a “deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.”

I can't figure out which one's I can't stand more: Angry Black Men, Angry White Men, Angry Black Women, or Angry Asian Men. Lot's of anger out there, but I digress.

The main point is right wing Fox News covers up the truth about the appropriateness of Obama's bow by showing its viewers a lot of female leg combined with a heavy dose of macho political ideology plus the creation of the idea that it's wrong to bow to a non-white monarch.

Unfortunately, this "Obama bow" issue is divided along racial and political lines, with black blogs like Jack and Jill Politics in agreement with me, and liberal blogs like the Daily Kos providing the evidence of Fox News' unfair and unbalanced reporting.

This Daily Kos video neatly displays the way Fox News distorts the "Obama bow"issue, and presents MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show presentation of President George W. Bush holding hands with and kissing Saudi King Abdullah.



Fox News: they report and they decide for you.

Cal 30, Stanford 21 - Golden Bears win Big Game (here's how)

The 113th annual Big Game is this Saturday at Stanford, and everyone's picking Stanford to wax California that evening. But I know the California Golden Bears are capable of beating the Cardinal and by the score of 30 to 21.

The Big Game

Here's how.

First, some sobering observations. The Stanford Cardinal carry the same 7 and 3 overall record into this game. Cal is 4 and 3 in the Pac-10; Stanford is 6 and 2. So in terms of record, Stanford and Cal are the same, but this game's important for Cal because it could place them at even with the Cardinal in the Pac-10 from a loss standpoint.  And Stanford and Cal are 17th and 25th respectively in the BCS rankings. So Cal has motivation and a way to beat the Cardinal.

Stanford has one glaring weakness that Cal must take advantage of: Quarterback Andy Luck.

(Yes. Luck is the weak link for the Cardinal. I know some of you scoff at my claim and mightly, but I argue forcefully that Luck can't carry a whole game for the Cardinal and win. The running game makes him a better quarterback.)

Unlike Kevin Riley, who's completion percentage virtually dictates if Cal wins or loses, Andy Luck's numbers have nothing to do with Stanford wins; in his last three games, including the blow-outs of Oregon and USC, he was below 65 percent in pass completion rate. Against USC, he was 12-of-22 for 144 yards passing and two touchdowns. Not superhuman numbers.

What this tells me is I can develop a game plan that places the ball in Luck's hands and forces Stanford to throw, where they're not as successful as when they run. Stanford uses the run to set up the pass, but so much so it's better to use eight-defenders, play tight coverage, blitz one or two backers (not more) - smother the run game, and force the pass.

Stanford's receivers both have over 16 yards average per catch, so throwing short is not Stanford's habit; blitz the Cardinal. (And blitz on the offenses left side where Stanford has had protection problems all year long with the injuries to their left tackle Allen Smith.)

Toby Gerhard, Stanford's terrific running back, is second in the nation in rushing with 1395 yards on 262 carries for a 5.3 yard average and 19 touchdowns. Stop him and Cal stops the Cardinal.

But stopping Gerhard also means keeping the ball away from Stanford, and Cal can do that but it must be willing to commit to throwing the ball short and often. If Cal can concentrate on installing high-percentage passes and working toward a 60-40 run-pass play mix it can move the ball downfield to score.

Where Cal gets into major trouble is in trying to force the deep throw and what bothers me is some of the passing plays of that variety lack an appropriate safety valve for the quarterback; a running back just running a short pattern.

The most successful pass plays against Stanford actually come out of spread dive play fakes (as Arizona runs and Cal does have in its playbook), pulling the linebackers in. So, play action passing is the way to focus on gaining yardage against Stanford.

But again, Cal can't get greedy in trying to gain yardage. (Got that Cal Offensive Coordinator Andy Ludwig?) The Golden Bears must focus on gaining four to six yards per play and let the plays open the way for more yardage after the catch or a missed tackle on a running play.

The only place where I break that rule is the opening play. Cal must make a statement here. It must say to the Cardinal, "We're here to blow you out of your house." The best way to do that is open the game with a flea-flicker.

Cal Coach Jeff Tedford was once known for trick plays (in fact he opened his Cal career with a flea-flicker against Baylor seven years ago) but hasn't called many this year, really almost none. A dive-play, toss back to the quarterback who throws to the split end out of a running formation, will fire up Cal players and fans, and it might just work for a touchdown because Cal's not done it this year.

That's just the "punch in the gut" that will lead to a Cal victory. Anything less, even a reverse, is just not daring and not what this game calls for. After all, it's the Big Game.

Cal can win the game, 30 to 21. If my pattern is used, Cal will go up by as much as two touchdowns before Stanford's running game takes hold, but then and because runs eat clock time, it will be too late.

Bears win!

(Hey Alumni! It's BIG GAME week! Get fired up!) 

Tom Hayes: Another gender barrier drops

Royal Air Force Flight Lieutenant Kirsty Moore is the first non-male pilot to join the Red Arrows, the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team. Moore was already exceptionally familiar with the Hawk aircraft used by the Red Arrows as she's a Qualified Flying Instructor coaching "fast jet pilots" on that aircraft at RAF Valley in Wales.

That's Lietuenant Moore, second from the left in the image above, returning from a flight with team-mates at RAF Scampton on Nov. 12 in Lincoln, England. From the left: Ben Plank, Moore, Zane Sennett, Ben Murphy, and Dave Davies following the launch/unveiling of the 2010 team line-up.

For a dozen more beautiful images, see the article Red Arrows present their first woman pilot at the Sacramento Bee. To see any of the images here in a larger scale, just click the pictures.

Footage from the RAF Red Arrow exhibition over Weymouth Bay watched by an admiring crowd on the Weymouth Beach and Esplanade during Weymouth Carnival 2009:

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, and political analyst who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Colts shock Patriots 35 to 34, remain undefeated and rule Twitter

I was watching the Colts v. Patriots game over dinner at 13 views at the Hyatt Regency San Francisco and saw my Twitter page light up with the Colts updates. It was better than ESPN. Before the Colts scored to shock Tom Brady and the New England Patriots, about 1,500 tweets were issued within a second; when the Colts scored, that number jumped to 9.648 tweets in a second.

Wow.

Twitter aside, that was one of the best games of the year. As the NFL Network's analyst seemed anxious to tell us, the Patriots passing game was giving the Colts Defense fits. On top of that, Quarterback Peyton Manning was throwing some ducks for a while there. But no matter because the Pats beat themselves.

In a game Tom Brady will relive in his dreams, New England thrice lost the ball on plays at the one or in the end zone. On top of that, New England Head Coach Bill Belichick thought his team was stronger than the Colts Defense and went for it on fourth and two - and didn't make it.

Why he did that is stuck in his fertile imagination, but he did it.

No matter. Colts win. But I have a feeling these two are going to see each other in the playoffs again. As a Colts fan, I can't wait. The Pats didn't get the Colts best game, and still lost.

Wow.

BCS rankings November 15: Five Pac-10 teams in

The BCS rankings for November 15th are out; I know Carrie Prejean must be happy that something's taking the Internet's interest away from her.

The BCS rankings have find Florida, Alabama, and Texas ranked one, two, and three, with the undefeated TCU Horned Frogs at number 4. But this week Pac-10 Football is well-represented, as five teams - Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, and USC - are in the BCS rankings.

After a dramatic 24 to 16 win over Arizona at Berkeley that left me so horse I could barely talk this morning, Cal knocked Arizona out of the BCS and was helped by Notre Dame's loss to Pitt, and Oklahoma's 10-3 loss to Nebraska, dropping the Fighting Irish and the Sooners out of the BCS as well.

The way Notre Dame's fallen I've got to believe Head Coach Charlie Weis' job's in trouble. Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick said:

"We said at the beginning of the season that we wanted to be in contention for and in the discussion of the (Bowl Championship Series) bowls, and for a while we were. But we didn't stay in contention as long as any of us would have liked.

"It's not like you don't evaluate during the year; you evaluate all year. But my practice is to make sure I've got the full season's worth of information and then conclude the evaluation."

That doesn't read good for Weis and if Stanford hammers Notre Dame the way the Cardinal nuked USC, Weis may see his final year at the helm of the Fighting Irish.
Meanwhile, the Cardinal rolls on.

After blowing out USC 55 to 21, Stanford is at 17th and one ahead of the same USC team it clobbered yesterday, which is now at 18.

As Cal (25th ranked) and Stanford play in the Big Game this Saturday, the annual contest now means a lot more than just bragging rights. A Cal win could knock Stanford out of contention for the Pac-10 Championship.

BCS rankings November 15:

1 Florida 10-0
2 Alabama 10-0
3 Texas 10-0
4 TCU 10-0
5 Cincinnati 10-0
6 Boise State 10-0
7 Georgia Tech 10-1
8 LSU 8-2
9 Pittsburgh 9-1
10 Ohio State 9-2
11 Oregon 8-2
12 Oklahoma State 8-2
13 Iowa 9-2
14 Penn State 9-2
15 Virginia Tech 7-3
16 Wisconsin 8-2
17 Stanford 7-3
18 USC 7-3
19 Oregon State 7-3
20 Miami (FL) 7-3
21 Utah 8-2
22 Brigham Young 8-2
23 Clemson 7-3
24 Houston 8-2
25 California 7-3

President Obama's bow to Emperor of Japan and racism in media

Aside from "Miley Cyrus dead", which is not true or funny, the Internet's abuzz with media commentary on President Obama's bow to The Emperor and Empress of Japan upon his visit Saturday.

The LA Times' blog asked "How low will he go" in their complaint of the President's actions.   ABC News' Jack Tapper contacted a friend to ask if Obama's bow was correct.   The conservative blog HotAir said the President looked like "an idiot" and referred to Tapper's blog.  And of course Michelle Malkin can be counted on to offer her off-base and typically nasty view, calling the President a "waterboy." 


I don't know why some are surprised or for that matter angry about Obama's actions. It's not the first time President Obama's bowed to a foreign dignitary, and I think it shows the proper level of respect. There seems to be this macho idea that American Presidents have to show they're tough and one way to do that is to avoid bowing to the Emperor of Japan, or for that matter Saudi King Abdullah, as President Obama did in April of this year.

Obama bows to Saudi King Abdullah

Moreover, some Americans forget that kings and emperors are not elected officials, they're royalty. But in this, I have to point out a racial component to the conservative argument against Obama's bow to Japan's Emperor that's disturbing to me.

When Obama visited the Queen of England, much was made of what the protocol was for approaching Her Majesty. President Obama did bow slightly to her, but that was what he was supposed to do as one is to avoid overt gestures; a man is suppose to bow his head from the neck, and no more. That's what Obama did.

That fact escaped a number of people, particularly the Coach Potato Conservative "Freepers" over at Free Republic, who claim that Obama did not bow at all.

But Obama's correct "slight head nod" versus his full bow to King Abdullah was noted in this video, by CQBlogger on YouTube, but even then CQBlogger mistakenly wrote about the head nod as if Obama was in error; the President was not.



And the LA Times showed its total ignorance of Japanese culture, not even taking time to explain "bow" protocol in Japan, which I know all too well from my personal interest in Japanese Culture and visit to Japan.

There are three kinds of bows: the first is just about five degrees and is a greeting for friends; the second is about 10 degrees and is for a boss or senior in business; but the third one is at a full 15 degrees and is reserved for heads of state or The Emperor. 

Obama's 15 degree bow to The Emperor of Japan was correct.  I disagree with ABC's Jack Tapper in that it is proper for one to give their hand in greeting while bowing.   So both the right and Tapper are wrong.  But I do give Tapper credit for at least trying to check President Obama's effort with protocol, much as he would do if Obama were greeting the Queen of England. 

Are Couch Potato Conservatives and the mainstream media complaining when Obama bows to any non-white monarch, but scoring his or First Lady Michelle Obama's every small move with white royalty, what we should expect in the Age of Obama? It certainly seems that way and that's a very sad pattern for America to display.

If Couch Potato Conservatives  had their way, the kind of cowboy behavior of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney would be the order of the day: white monarchs would receive the proper greeting protocol and non-white royalty a simple hand shake.  It's no wonder President Obama has to do so much work to do in restoring America's popularity around the World.