Washingtonpost news updates: Texas

Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts

Sunday, February 12, 2012

‘American Idol’ 2012: Auditions go down to Texas

Steven Tyler, Jennifer Lopez, Randy Jackson and Ryan Seacrest in Galveston, Texas. (Michael Becker - Fox)

Tonight, “American Idol’s” in Houston, home of the NASA Houston Space Center so the show opens with a weightless greeting from Cmdr. Dan C. Burbank aboard the International Space Station. Was that Simon Cowell we saw in orbit outside the window?

“We’ve been saying, Season 11, a new beginning,” judge Randy Jackson says, quoting himself from a previous show, as the judges arrive on the waterfront in – wait a minute! They’re in Galveston! They’re carrying on the theme from last night’s Denver-Aspen auditions, in which the judges were separated, by many miles, from the sweating masses of auditioners.

Phong Vu is a bit of a nutcase with grandiose ideas “Today my spirit will come alive”, he exults while posed down on the beach. But not so much of a nutcase he doesn’t correctly get Idol’s theme for the season” “Being American, ‘American Idol’ is just phenomenon, it’s just amazing,” he says, if ungrammatically.

Well, by Season 11 we’ve developed enough of an “American Idol” Sixth Sense to know that Vu is a lamb for the slaughter. His singing style on “Un-break My Heart,” by Toni Braxton, sounds like people you hear singing when they’ve got their iPod earbuds in, and are totally oblivious that anyone can hear them. The judges toy with Vu, then send him away. “Your hands are sweaty,” show host Ryan Seacrest tells him after the audition. Ryan knows a dead lamb when he sees one.

A montage of cowboys riding the range follows, while Ryan reminds us of Texas he-man heritage. Followed by some very very bad guy singers and two cowboys with adenoidal voices.

So we’re getting a Texas-sized hankering to actually be musically entertained already. Next up is Skylar Laine from Brandon, MS, and we get a taped bit about how she likes to kill deer. She even has the head of a deer she killed hanging on her bedroom wall, which “Idol” plays for laughs. She gives an okay country-style audition on Pistol Annies’ “Hell on Heels,” which the judges greet like she’s the next Carrie Underwood.

Baylie Brown from Nashville auditioned for Idol when she was 16 and now she’s back five years later. She got bounced after the group-sing event because of sabotage from her two Jersey partners, she strongly implies, although she forgot the words which might have contributed a bit. She performs Bon Jovi’s “Bed of Roses” and she’s a solid B, though the judges bestow the Golden Ticket like a big gift.

Next up, Ryan promises, an auditioner taking “her one and only shot to change her life.”

As it turns out that’s because Kristine Osorio is already 28 -- the final freshness date for “Idol” auditioners. Roll video: Kristine has three little kids and is in the middle of a divorce but she invested the money she set aside to pay her lawyer to buy a plane ticket to Houston. So she and her lawyer have got a lot riding on this. She has a good strong voice (“Thank you, god,” says judge Jennifer Lopez, as Kristine starts singing) and she’s through to Hollywood.

It’s Jennifer Lopez “versus the Boys Club”, Ryan tells us about the upcoming segment. We see a quick succession of partial auditions in which judge Steven Tyler and Randy reject a series of female singers with voices no better than the successful auditioners we saw earlier in the show, while JLo protests and protests. Then there’s the one chick the guys like and JLo pronounces “awful.” Well, there’s no accounting for taste. Maybe we should mention that ladies the guys rejected were plain and the one they put through to Hollywood was cute. “I was so angry, I almost had an anxiety attack!” Jennifer tells her makeup artist during a break.

Ryan decides they need some levity. He finds Alejandro Cazares. “I am The Revoultion,” Alejandro says. Today is the first day of Alejandro’s revolution. He speechifies to the crowd of Idol auditioners, then leads them in chants of “Revolution! Revolution!” As we know, any of the auditioners would gladly slit the throats of the others if it would get them ahead in the line, so we don’t really believe this group is going to rise up en masse and demand a redistribution of Golden Tickets from the greedy to the needy. But we’re still curious to see where this story line will lead.

It leads to a miserable rendition of Paramore’s “Things Are Looking Up” and Alejandro begging on his knees for mercy from the judges, before finally being shooed away by the “American Idol” bouncer.

We are now three quarters of the way through the show and “Idol” hasn’t shown us a memorable talent, or even a memorable auditioner’s back-story, and if ever there was a time for a Revolution, this is it! We’re refusing to drink a Coke or make a Verizon call till the entertainment value of this show gets redistributed from the greedy to the needy! Well, they send in Cortez Shaw, an amiable guy whose family was homeless when he was a kid. He affirms that “‘American Idol’ is opportunity at its greatest.” Enough empty promises. Entertainment now! Well, he’s gutsy enough to tackle an Adele song, “Someone Like You” and he’s pretty talented but at this point It’s Just Not Enough! “Good looking, sweet, great voice,” says JLo, hopefully.

Oh, the arrogance. “Idol” producers now are flaunting their power by throwing some more bad acts at us. Some limber chick shouts Adele’s “Rolling in the Deep,” prompting Tyler to snark, “I’ll bet you’re great (beat) on the dance floor.” And here’s some earnest guy with a high voice, who Randy finds hysterically funny. Sure, you can laugh, rich guy -- your mortgage is paid.

It’s down to the last contestant to redeem this episode.

Last auditioner of the day. This is it, last chance for entertainment -- the equivalent of turning 28 for tonight’s show as far as we’re concerned. Only thing that would satisfy us at this point is somebody coming out and performing a Rage Against the Machine medley about five inches from Randy’s face. Of course, after 11 years, we’ve developed an “Idol” Sixth Sense that the last auditioner of the day is always the most uplifting among the thousands. But Ramiro Garcia better be about the Second Coming, is all we got to say. What you got, Ramiro? “I wasn’t born normal. I came out with no ears,” he says. Oh, well, alright then. Seems a series of heroic feats by surgeons gave Ramiro ears and the ability to speak. “Through time and faith I have a voice to speak with, even a voice to sing,” he says. And he gives a very heartfelt rendition of “Amazing Grace,” including a rarely heard verse. It’s touching. This guy has a future on the gospel circuit no matter what. “You’re a powerful example to say the least,” says Tyler, and Ramiro is on his way to Hollywood, as his father wipes away tears.

“54 got the Golden Ticket!” Ryan exults in voiceover and we see the judges congratulating themselves on how great things went in Houston, apparently for their private entertainment and not for the 99% of us viewers.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Supreme Court sides with Texas on redistricting plan

Supreme Court sides with Texas on redistricting plan - The Washington Post Print SubscriptionConversationsToday's PaperGoing Out GuideJobsCarsReal EstateRentalsClassifiedsHomePoliticsCampaign 2012CongressCourts &LawThe Fed PageHealth CarePollingWhite HouseBlogs & ColumnsIssues: EnergyTop Blogs

Election 2012 | Felicia SonmezThe Fix | Chris CillizzaFederal Eye | Ed O’KeefeFact Checker | Glenn KesslerOpinionsAll OpinionsPostPartisanLeft-LeaningRight-LeaningTolesCartoonsTelnaesAnimationsLocalColumnist IndexLocalDC: Politics| NewsMD: Politics| CommunitiesVA: Politics| CommunitiesCrimeEducationOn Faith/LocalObituariesTraffic & CommutingWeatherBlogs & ColumnsThe Root DCTop Blogs

Post NowThe BuzzCapital Weather GangDr. GridlockSportsRedskins/NFLCapitals/NHLWizards/NBANationals/MLBDC United/SoccerCollegesAllMetSportsOther SportsBlogs & ColumnsTop Blogs

The Insider| Mike JonesCapitals Insider| Katie CarreraWizards Insider | Michael LeeNationals Journal| Adam KilgoreNationalCorrectionsEnergy & EnvironmentHealth & ScienceHigher EducationNational SecurityOn FaithOn LeadershipInnovationsOn GivingBlogs & ColumnsTop Blogs

Ideas@InnovationsPost LeadershipUnder GodCheckpoint WashingtonWorldAfricaTheAmericasAsia &PacificEuropeMiddle EastNational SecurityWar ZonesSpecial ReportsCheckpoint WashingtonBusinessEconomyIndustriesLocal BusinessMarketsPolicy&RegulationTechnologyWorldBusinessBlogs & ColumnsInnovationsOn Small BusinessTop Blogs

Wonkblog | Ezra KleinPost Tech | Cecilia KangFaster ForwardPolitical EconomyInvestigationsLifestyleAdviceCarolyn HaxFoodHome & GardenStyleTravelWeddingsWellnessMagazineKidsPostTop Blogs

Arts PostAll We Can EatReliable Source | Roxanne Roberts & Amy ArgetsingerOn Parenting | Janice D’ArcyEntertainmentBooksCelebritiesComicsGoing Out GuideHoroscopesMoviesMuseumsPuzzlesTheater & DanceTVTop Blogs

TV Column | Lisa de MoraesCelebritology | Jen ChaneyClick Track | Chris Richards & David MalitzComic Riffs | Michael CavnaMultimediaInnovationsPhotosVideosThe Washington PostMake us your start page

PersonalizeThe Washington PostCampaign 2012CongressCourts &LawThe Fed PageHealth CarePollingWhite HouseBlogs & ColumnsIssues: EnergyIn the NewsSupreme Court SOPA and PIPA South Carolina debate GOP race Polarized news ???initialComments:true! pubdate:01/20/2012 11:12 EST! commentPeriod:14! commentEndDate:2/3/12 11:12 EST! currentDate:1/20/12 1:0 EST! allowComments:true! displayComments:true!

Photos: Sarah Burke’s life on the hill

Newt’s ex-wife: He wanted ‘open marriage’

Photos: 50 most powerful in Washington

Photos: Wrecked cruise ship remains on Italian...

Supreme Court sides with Texas on redistricting plan

Andrew Harrer/BLOOMBERG - The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C.

Text SizePrintE-mailReprints By Robert Barnes,

The Supreme Court on Friday set aside Texas redistricting plans drawn by a federal court that were favored by minorities and Democrats, and ordered the lower court to come up with new plans based more closely on maps drawn by the Texas legislature.

In an unsigned opinion that drew no dissents, the justices said a federal panel in San Antonio “exceeded its mission” in drawing interim plans for the state’s upcoming primaries. It said the court was wrong to believe its plans needed to be completely independent of the ones passed by the legislature.

Comments

Weigh InCorrections?

Gallery

?From the American Red Cross to the Supreme Court, more and more institutions of power in the nation’s capital are seeing women take the lead.

More on this Story

Read more on PostPolitics.comThe Fix: South Carolina debate’s winners and losersFact Checker: 15 dubious statementsSOPA, PIPA votes delayedView all Items in this Story

Supreme Court sides with Texas on redistrictingPolarized in South Carolina GOP hopefuls rally S.C. primary voters

“A district court should take guidance from the state’s recently enacted plan in drafting an interim plan,” the justices wrote. They added, however, that courts must be careful not to incorporate parts of a state’s plan that might violate the Constitution and the federal Voting Rights Act.

Because of its population growth over the past decade, Texas was awarded four new congressional districts. Nearly two-thirds of that growth was in the Hispanic community, and Latino groups said the plans approved by Texas’s Republican-dominated legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Perry (R) improperly diluted their power.

The Texas decision was the court’s first involvement in the current round of reapportionment battles, but not its last. Two hours after issuing the ruling, the justices stayed a lower court’s decision that struck down West Virginia’s plan drawing new districts for the state’s three members of Congress.

On the national political landscape, the maps are important because some analysts believe they could play a role in deciding which party controls the House of Representatives.

They said the congressional plan drawn by the legislature could result in Republicans claiming three those new districts. The plan written by the three-judge panel in San Antonio could result in just the opposite results, the analysts said.

The Supreme Court’s mission was complicated by the fact that the Voting Rights Act had meant Texas’s redistricting was being considered in two courts with different objectives.

Because of past discrimination against minorities, Texas is one of the states covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That means its electoral laws cannot take effect until they are “pre-cleared” — approved by the Justice Department or a panel of federal judges in Washington.

Texas chose to go the judicial route, and a three-judge panel in Washington this week held a trial to consider the Section 5 challenges. It is not expected to rule until next month.

Until that is settled, the San Antonio judges were charged with drawing an interim map, so that Texas’s elections could proceed. The current plan cannot be used because the population growth means it would violate “one-man, one-vote” standards.

Texas already has delayed its primaries, which are among the earliest in the nation, because of the dispute. The state says it needs a new plan by Feb. 1 in order to hold primary elections on its new date of April 3.

Texas last month asked the Supreme Court to keep the judicial plan from being used even on an interim basis, and that was the request granted Friday.

The court’s order noted the difficulties facing the San Antonio judges. The plan passed by the legislature cannot be used, the justices agreed, because it has not been pre-cleared.

“But that does not mean that the plan is of no account or that the policy judgments it reflects can be disregarded by a district court drawing an interim plan,” the justices wrote. “On the contrary, the state plan serves as a starting point for the district court.”

The court was especially critical of the San Antonio judges for drawing a congressional district that appeared to be a “minority coalition” district. The justices said it was unclear whether the San Antonio judges intentionally drew a district in which they expected two different minority groups to band together to form a majority.

But, “if the district court did set out to create a minority coalition district, rather than drawing a district that simply reflected population growth, it had no basis for doing so,” the order said.

The court’s ruling seem to disregard the advice of the Obama administration. Even though it said there were problems with the court-drawn plan, it said it was better to use it on an interim basis.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately to say that he believed Section 5’s pre-clearance is unconstitutional. No other justice joined him, although the ruling did note that the court in a 2009 case from Texas said Section 5 raised “serious constitutional questions” because of its intrusion on state sovereignty.”

The challenges to the plan are collectively known as Perry v. Perez.

EmailTumblrRedditStumbleuponDiggDeliciousWeigh InDiscussion PolicyAbout Discussions, Badges Newest firstOldest firstMost Recommended first SuperFan Badge

SuperFan badge holders consistently post smart, timely comments about Washington area sports and teams.