<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Law and Order</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/law_and_order/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 22:31:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Law &amp; Order: SVU&#8221;: Dick Wolf has fatherly advice for Rihanna</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/rihanna_and_chris_brown_get_the_law_order_treatment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/rihanna_and_chris_brown_get_the_law_order_treatment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rihanna]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law & order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law & Order: SVU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SVU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tabloids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entertainment news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13214572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wednesday's episode depicts a musical couple who strongly resemble RiRi and Breezy. And it doesn't end well for her]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last night, “Law &amp; Order: SVU” aired a ham-handed, ridiculous-and-then-bleak episode based on the Rihanna and Chris Brown domestic violence saga. "SVU,” like all the “Law &amp; Order” franchises, regularly uses plots “ripped from the headlines.” As with movies based on cartoons, TV shows and other movies, there’s a built-in audience for this kind of thing, for the restaging of a story we’re already familiar with. (I haven’t seen an episode of "SVU" in some years, but I watched this one.) There is also a built-in voyeurism: The show fleshes out a tale we only know from tabloids and social media. It takes a real-life soap opera and turns it into a more regularly formatted one. It dials up the entertainment value on any salacious, disturbing, riveting true-life crime, crimes we don’t much like to discuss in terms of entertainment value, even as they sell magazines and fill endless hours of cable news.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/rihanna_and_chris_brown_get_the_law_order_treatment/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/rihanna_and_chris_brown_get_the_law_order_treatment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newtown enraged by Sandy Hook film</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/too_soon_for_sandy_hook_the_movie/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/too_soon_for_sandy_hook_the_movie/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 19:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newtown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indieagogo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kickstarter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filmmaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sandy hook massacre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Massacre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[csi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13192682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A filmmaker tries to fund a Newtown massacre project, enraging locals. But face it: We are addicted to grisly fare]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, somebody had to be first. And hey, it's been nearly two months. Cue the inevitable Sandy Hook movie.</p><p>This week, filmmaker Jonathan Bucari headed to Connecticut – and to a town just 20 miles from the scene of December's shooting -- to begin preliminary work on <a href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/director-plans-movie-related-newtown-shooting ">"Illness," a small, independent feature</a> about a mentally disturbed 13-year-old boy whose life becomes more unhinged after the massacre. Bucari told reporters this week he chose Ridgefield because "it has the same look and feel as Newtown."</p><p>The reaction to the film has been swift and so far strongly negative. Ridgefield film commissioner Allison Stockel told Newtown Patch.com that she's received <a href="http://newtown.patch.com/articles/ridgefield-officials-say-short-film-about-sandy-hook-wont-be-filmed">"at least 25 calls from angry residents asking about the film"</a> this week, and the town's First Selectman Rudy Marconi's office announced it "would never approve the filming of a movie related to the subject of the Newtown shooting."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/too_soon_for_sandy_hook_the_movie/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/too_soon_for_sandy_hook_the_movie/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Todd Akin: Blame &#8220;Law and Order&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/23/todd_akin_blame_law_order/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/23/todd_akin_blame_law_order/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legitimate rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Todd Akin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roe v. Wade]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12990318</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A handful of false claims help the right talk about "legitimate rape" -- and lots of them are from TV and movies]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Todd Akin opened up his maw on Sunday and started mouthing off about pregnancy and "legitimate rape" -- and then clumsily attempted to make amends by explaining that he just meant "forcible rape" -- he was invoking one of the oldest, most primal and persistent tales in the history of male and female relations. He was reminding us all of the Girl Who Cried Rape.</p><p>You know the one. She's a spurned seductress out for revenge against the man who didn't succumb to her wiles. She's a loose woman trying to deflect blame from herself upon an innocent man. She's just plain crazy. She exists in our fiction and, unfortunately, she sometimes exists in the real world, too. She ruins lives; she sends innocent men to jail. And every single time she appears like a recurring nightmare, she is promptly leveraged as an excuse to impugn the credibility of women in general and rape victims in particular.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/08/23/todd_akin_blame_law_order/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/23/todd_akin_blame_law_order/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Law and Order: SVU&#8221; diagnosed my Parkinson&#8217;s</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/21/law_and_order_svu_diagnosed_my_parkinsons/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/21/law_and_order_svu_diagnosed_my_parkinsons/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12379301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Watching a rerun, I saw my own strange symptoms. Three years later, I'm still navigating a mysterious disease]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People always want to know how you got a certain disease. They’re thinking of themselves, of course — the sore throat, the odd bruise on the wrist, that lingering cough. But people are surprised when I tell them how I discovered I had Parkinson's. I was watching "Law and Order: SVU."</p><p>I had flipped on a rerun, which I do when I’m tired and bored. It's better than reality TV, and it's reliable. There’s always an episode of "Law and Order" playing somewhere.</p><p>I’d seen this one before, so I was paying minimal attention. I flipped through a magazine. A man, shaking badly, was telling the detectives about his disease, Parkinson’s. Years ago he’d started having symptoms. He listed them.</p><p>I put down the magazine. A chill ran up the back of my neck. I had every single one.</p><p>Why hadn’t I suspected anything was wrong until then? Easy. I had found a way to explain away every problem I encountered. My car key didn’t open the door without a struggle? It must have gotten bent somehow. My can opener didn’t work anymore? Ditto. My favorite cutting knife couldn’t seem to do the job right? Fine, I’d replace it one of these days. What did any of this have to do with me?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/21/law_and_order_svu_diagnosed_my_parkinsons/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/21/law_and_order_svu_diagnosed_my_parkinsons/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Law &amp; Order&#8221; takes aim at &#8220;Spider-Man&#8221; musical</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/20/law_and_order_icarus/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/20/law_and_order_icarus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 17:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex and the City]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spider-Man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Viral Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/feature/2011/06/20/law_and_order_icarus</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cynthia Nixon shows up as a demanding director when "Turn Off the Dark" gets the Dick Wolf treatment]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"Law and Order: Criminal Intent" certainly had some hubris this week, making a "Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark"-like musical the scene of the crime and placing "Sex and the City" star Cynthia Nixon in the center of suspicion as a drunken Julie Taymor stand-in. "Icarus," the season finale, is set in a world where "Turn Off the Dark" already exists, so there are various references to both its massive flop and Taymor's illusions of grandeur. In the opening scene, we see a bleached-blond&#160; sitcom star absolutely ruining Nixon's vision!</p><p>     <iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7BHaUEvKXN4" width="425"></iframe>   </p><p>No Cobb salad for her! She needs a drink!</p><p>Who is that shady Bono wannabe who accompanies Mark on the sing-along? And what kind of song is that anyway? None of these questions are answered in the next scene, where Mark is eulogized with an equally terrible number called "Hubris" from the fake "Icarus" musical, <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/06/law_order_spider-man_criminal_intent.html">which Vulture point out is also a dig at Taymor</a>, since "the programs for 'Turn Off the Dark' included a section about the "hubris" of Arachne."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/20/law_and_order_icarus/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/20/law_and_order_icarus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV spot for &#8220;Hot Genius Jerks With Quirky Jobs&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/31/hot_genius_jerks_with_quirky_jobs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/31/hot_genius_jerks_with_quirky_jobs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 20:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Satire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fan Fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lie to Me]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/feature/2011/05/31/hot_genius_jerks_with_quirky_jobs</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Television is cashing in on its most popular commodity: Brilliant SOBs]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>     <em>Between "House," "Law &amp; Order: Criminal Intent," "Bones," "Lie to Me," and now this new show "</em><br />     <a href="http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/04/22/bones-finder-geoff-stults/"><br />       <em>The Finder</em><br />     </a><br />     <em>" (he's a guy who is the best at ... finding stuff), I'm starting to sense a TV trend here. I am over shows where actual science and police work are treated like magic tricks, as if magicians were all horrible people with perfect teeth. Are show creators running out of good ideas? Because it's not too long till we see this spot for this upcoming network season:</em>   </p><p>     <strong>Hot Genius Jerks With Quirky Jobs Promo</strong>   </p><p><strong>Announcer</strong>:</p><p>Coming this summer, your favorite characters are back ...</p><p>     <em>Int: Hospital, zoom in on House's cane, tapping impatiently.</em>   </p><p><strong>Announcer</strong>:</p><p>He's the world's most brilliant diagnostician ...</p><p>     <em>House is in hospital, limping away from patient's room trailed by Hot Nurse.</em>   </p><p><strong>Nurse</strong>:</p><p>How did you know that replacing her blood with Draino was the only way to save this child's life?</p><p><strong>Announcer</strong>:</p><p>The only thing he can't fix ... is his horrible social skills.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/05/31/hot_genius_jerks_with_quirky_jobs/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/31/hot_genius_jerks_with_quirky_jobs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Law &amp; Order&#8217;s&#8221; 10 greatest clich</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/14/law_and_order_best_cliches_slide_show/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/14/law_and_order_best_cliches_slide_show/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2010 17:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slide Shows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slideshow]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/feature/2010/05/14/law_and_order_best_cliches_slide_show</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Slide show: The iconic show's cancellation prompts a trip through the beloved plot gimmicks we could all see coming]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Thursday, news shot around the Internet: Famous original "Law &amp; Order," aka "the Mothership," aka "L&amp;O: Rasputin" -- <a href="http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/nbc-to-cancel-law-order/">canceled</a>? Who thought we'd live to see the day? This is the show that survived the wood laminate known as Elisabeth R&#246;hm, Fred Thompson's presidential aspirations, repeated attempts to bury it in crappy time slots, Rey almost cheating on his wife with Lauren Graham, and the bungling of former NBC head&#160;Ben Silverman -- and now, when the channel is desperate for prime-time programming thanks to the Leno debacle, <em>now</em> it gets the heave-ho? It's a television institution!</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/14/law_and_order_best_cliches_slide_show/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/14/law_and_order_best_cliches_slide_show/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Law &amp; Order&#8217;s&#8221; anti-choice propaganda</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/24/law_and_order_tiller/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/24/law_and_order_tiller/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet//feature/2009/10/24/law_and_order_tiller</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The latest "ripped from the headlines" episode smears the memory of slain late-term abortion provider Dr. Tiller]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Friday night's "Law &amp; Order," the abortion debate was represented by two separate, yet equally important, groups: The anti-choicers, who believe fetuses' rights trump women's, and the pseudo-pro-choicers, who are conveniently persuaded to agree with them by the end of the episode.</p><p>That sound?&#160;It's my head exploding.</p><p>Despite the usual "This story is fiction, any resemblance, blah blah blah" disclaimer, the episode was blatantly "ripped from the headlines" about <a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/05/31/george_tiller_murdered/index.html">Dr. George Tiller's assassination</a> by an anti-choice activist in May. Our fictional victim, Dr. Benning, is a late-term abortion provider who's already survived one attempt on his life and is shot to death at his church, just as Dr. Tiller was. But in an episode titled "Dignity," Tiller's memory, remaining late-term abortion providers, and women who choose to terminate pregnancies are afforded none. The writers made a weak pretense of "balance" by having two of the series regulars -- Detective Lupo and Assistant D.A. Rubirosa -- espouse pro-choice views, but both are ultimately shamed into thinking they just might be wrong. See how even-handed?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2009/10/24/law_and_order_tiller/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/24/law_and_order_tiller/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>110</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fred Thompson announces his latest announcement</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/31/thompson_5/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/31/thompson_5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 11:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mike Huckabee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John McCain, R-Ariz.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/31/thompson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The former senator and TV D.A. will make his presidential candidacy official next week, but he's already in reruns.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know the myth of <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/fred_thompson/">Fred Thompson,</a> the lurking dark horse, the "Law and Order" actor with big hands, big ideas and a bright red pickup truck. Next week you can finally meet the candidate. </p><p>The thespian/lobbyist/senator/attorney put out word Thursday that he was going to announce his presidential campaign in one week via a Web video. This was earth-shattering news for the <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/2008_election/">campaign</a> press corps, because it meant the certain end of nearly six months of pre-announcement announcements. </p><p>Back in March, friends of Thompson announced that he was considering a run for the White House. A few months later, the Republican non-candidate announced he was officially "testing the water," which meant raising money to pay for further announcements. Then he announced that he found the water "feeling pretty warm," even though he badly underperformed his announced fundraising goals. He made unannounced campaign swings around the country, where he coyly dodged questions about future announcements. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/08/31/thompson_5/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/31/thompson_5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thompson gets one step closer</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/06/01/thompson_33/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/06/01/thompson_33/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 19:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/06/01/thompson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The former Tennessee senator and "Law &#038; Order" star files the papers to form a presidential exploratory committee.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know how "<a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/law_order/">Law & Order</a>" gets, well, a little formulaic after a while? They get their suspect, there's a plot twist, there's a new suspect, everyone fights, the trial comes to some sort of conclusion, everyone sort of makes up? </p><p>Well, presidential politics is a little like that too sometimes. That's probably fitting, since former "Law & Order" star <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/05/08/fred_thompson/index.html">Fred Thompson</a> has just <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/01/america/NA-POL-US-Actor-Candidate.php">filed </a> the papers to establish a committee to help him decide whether to get in the race for the 2008 Republican nomination. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/06/01/thompson_33/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/06/01/thompson_33/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Conservatives flex muscles over Ashcroft</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2001/01/12/conservatives_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2001/01/12/conservatives_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//feature/2001/01/11/conservatives</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a pugnacious appearance, right-wing groups serve notice to "liberal ideologues" that there's a new sheriff in town.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conservative advocacy organizations want the world to know that Attorney General-designate <a href="/directory/topics/john_ashcroft/">John Ashcroft</a> has some friends. Thursday morning, the Concerned Women of America convened its own rainbow tribe of pro-Ashcroft crusaders with representatives from more than a dozen groups denouncing Ashcroft's opponents as an out-of-control left-wing Borking brigade. </p><p>"John Ashcroft is a man of integrity with experience and impeccable credentials," said Wendy Wright, director of communications for the CWA. "But since he has been nominated as attorney general, he has come under a vicious attack that is meant to destroy him as a person." Those vicious destroyers went largely unnamed at the press conference, with the exception of People for the American Way. </p><p>But the coalition doesn't express any real worry about whether Ashcroft will prevail. "This is a question about whether he is going to get 54 votes, or 58 votes or 60 votes," said the Rev. Lou Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, echoing Republican Senate leader <a href="/directory/topics/trent_lott/">Trent Lott's</a> assertion that all 50 GOP senators will vote to confirm Ashcroft. A simple majority of 51 is needed for confirmation; even if all 50 Democrats voted against Ashcroft, Vice President Dick Cheney would be able to cast the tie breaker. If 41 Democrats decided to filibuster, they could effectively kill the nomination -- 60 votes are required to override a filibuster. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2001/01/12/conservatives_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2001/01/12/conservatives_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Real Life Rock Top 10</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/02/marcus30/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/02/marcus30/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Gore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/col/marc/2000/10/02/marcus30</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>1-4) Campaign events (September)</b> </p><p>With <a href="/directory/topics/al_gore/">Al Gore</a> recently citing "He not busy being born is busy dying" as his favorite <a href="/directory/topics/bob_dylan/">Bob Dylan</a> quotation, David Hinkley of the New York Daily News suggested a contest on what Gore's favorite Dylan line <i>should</i> be. </p><p>"Bury the rag deep in your face/ Now's the time for your tears," sneered Nader supporter Dave Marsh. But Marsh also volunteered that perhaps more to the point would be a question recently raised by Berkeley, Calif., photographer Liz Bordow: "Everyone remembers where they were when they heard that Kennedy was shot; I wonder how many people remember where they were when they first heard Bob Dylan's voice. It's so <i>unexpected</i>." </p><p>Marsh: "Gore's answer? Bush's?" Yes, that would settle it -- assuming Bush <i>has</i> heard it. On the other hand, the recent <a href="/ent/feature/2000/09/15/concert/">Radio City Music Hall benefit for the Gore-Lieberman ticket,</a> where, at the end, Bette Midler, Sheryl Crow, Don Henley, Timothy B. Schmidt, Glenn Frey, Lenny Kravitz, Matt Damon, Paul Simon, Julia Roberts and Salma Hayek came out to sing "Teach Your Children," would have raised an even more awesome question, had Dylan been there too: When was the <i>final</i> time you heard Bob Dylan's voice? </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/10/02/marcus30/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/02/marcus30/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ripped from the headlines</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1999/12/03/mysteries_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1999/12/03/mysteries_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1999 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mysteries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/1999/12/03/mysteries</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New mysteries are lifting their plots out of the newspapers. And that&#039;s not a bad thing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>F</b>ictional works based on real-life causes cilhbres are nothing new, but fiction-nonfiction cross-pollination is particularly abundant these days. The much admired television show "Law and Order" has created years' worth of plots "ripped from the headlines" -- some are so transparent I wonder how the producers can use the fictional disclaimer at the end with a straight face. At first I found the show's swerving in and out of real-life elements disconcerting, and I was annoyed at what I took to be the writers' laziness in not thinking up their own stories. But soon, I too felt the tug that the anchor of reality provides. Now I plan my Wednesday evenings around the show. (Not that there still aren't some bafflers. Remember the one based on Hugh Grant's being caught with his pants down, only he's given a wife who then kills the prostitute? As if there weren't any other prostitutes in the world?)</p><p>R.D. Zimmerman's new mystery novel, "Innuendo," deals with the possible homosexuality of a very big, very married movie star. Even I, as sketchily informed as I am about such matters, had no trouble figuring out which Hollywood actor inspired the portrait. The murder of a gay runaway is thrown in to provide the narrative.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1999/12/03/mysteries_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1999/12/03/mysteries_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
