What Townsend doesn't seem to understand is that iTunes is what saved the music industry. Prior to iTunes, we had Napster, Godzilla, and a whole host of other file sharing sites where people could download Pete Townsend's music for free. Mr. Townsend can't make any money if his property is being stolen. And if your product is being taken without compensation, those artist will stop making music. They have to eat and if they can't make money off their music, they will do something else (and not make music). iTunes saved the music industry and is the reason musicians continued to get paid. Digital music was the way of the future and Steve Jobs understood that. He saw a problem (stealing music) and came up with a solution. Everyone wins in this scenario. The consumer gets music at a reasonable price, the musician continues to get paid, and the record company makes money. Also, my understanding is iTunes gets 30% and the record company gets 70%. They can't be making that much money off iTunes (once you account for building and maintaining the infrastructure iTunes runs off of). I think Apple makes their money in selling the products that play the music.

I don't understand why the hate toward Apple or claiming Apple "personifies the worst excesses wrongly attributed to capitalism". Apple is an example of capitalism. They made a product that millions of people wanted. They are bad people for making something people want? I don't get that.

Doesn't the country tolerate a President that smokes?

Since Dan Wolfe is being accused of illegal activities, can't he lawyer up and request a full investigation be done to clear his name?

Why can't he hire an attorney and have the attorney do a full investigation, subpoena Weiner's twitter account, phone, etc. and get to the bottom of this? The media has already demonstrated they will not pursue this. But can't Dan Wolfe? Can't Breitbart help him out?

I see where Andrew is organizing a counter protest against the unions. Instead of organizing a counter protest, why don't you organize a grassroots neighborhood walk. Have the volunteers go door to door and explain the reality of the situation to the taxpayers?

You know the counter protest is not going to get a fair shake in the media and your voices will be drowned out by the unions, so wouldn't this be a more effective way to "protest" the protesters? They can have the taxpayers call their representative and express their support of the bill.

I just think this is better than standing outside with a sign, only for the purple people beaters to start punching people and then the Tea Party, conservatives, Republicans, etc get blamed for the uncivil discourse.

Oh....this is a tough one. Which victim group should I support? Is it more politically correct to support the Muslims and be thought of as homophobic, or should I support the gays and be thought of as Islamaphobic?

What a bunch of idiots. The discovery should be AWESOME. Sucks for Breitbert and gang, but it will keep this story in the news for a little longer and I am sure what we saw on film is just the tip of the iceberg.

If anyone in the media ever took the time to review Palin's policies and how she governed in Alaska, they would have found she isn't some right-wing nutcase. Just as an example, she veto a billed that would have banned state employee benefits for same sex partners. Hardly a right-wing thing to do. They allowed the fact that she is pro-life to color their better judgment.

I am curious if anyone in the media has actually taken the time to review her actual governance.

But I do think the important question here, which no one has asked, is what would Levi Johnston think?

How is this legal? Can the WH do that? can they use taxpayer's money to fund their PR campaign?