Hung Up On A Dream

A Legacy Celebrated, A Legacy Ignored

2012-01-15T23:12:00.000-08:00

Dr. King is most known for his work in racial conciliation in America, but he was not merely motivated by overturning Jim Crow for the sake of American blacks, but by an abiding belief in justice itself, doing right in all spheres, not just those that affect us personally, but a global, universal, concern for the well-being of all mankind. "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" he wrote. "I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. I believe that what self-centered men have torn down, men other-centered can build up." The "liberty and justice for all" of our pledge of allegiance turned outward.

King's social justice vision is rooted in the so-called social gospel, as taught by Jesus and Paul and other writers of the Biblical epistles. Read the Sermon on the Mount or the book of James; feed the hungry, care for the poor, the widow, the orphan. Do we do these things? Honestly? Some do, but most, myself included, do not, not with any real fervor. This is a terrible conviction. It's easy to sit and "celebrate" MLK and his accomplishments and pat ourselves on the back saying, "look how far we've come" on his appointed day and move along, back to our lives, but the fact is the work to which he dedicated, and ultimately gave, his life continues on today, from the folks at Amnesty International to The Innocence Project to the streets of Syria and all over the world, and we would pay far more respect to his legacy by redoubling our personal and collective effort to the causes of justice and rightness than any national holiday or massive marble monument ever could. King would urge you to make your life a monument to righteousness. He would appeal to us to shake off comfortable satisfaction with the status quo of our own lives knowing others are suffering somewhere and there may be something that could be done about it. In need of a New Years resolution? Here it is.

...we have adopted a sort of a pragmatic test for right and wrong-whatever works is right. Nothing is wrong but that which does not work. If you don’t get caught, it’s right. That’s the attitude, isn’t it? It’s all right to disobey the Ten Commandments, but just don’t disobey the Eleventh: Thou shall not get caught. That’s the attitude. That’s the prevailing attitude in, in our culture...we must remember that it’s possible to affirm the existence of God with your lips and deny his existence with your life. The most dangerous type of atheism is not theoretical atheism, but practical atheism- that’s the most dangerous type...And I think, my friends, that that is the thing that has happened in America. That we have unconsciously left God behind. Now, we haven’t consciously done it, we, we have unconsciously done it. We just became so involved in things that we forgot about God...All I’m trying to say is our world hinges on moral foundations. It’s not enough to know all about our philosophical and mathematical disciplines. But we’ve got to know the simple disciplines, of being honest and loving and just with all humanity. If we don’t learn it, we will destroy ourselves.

Unabashed Self-Promotion

2012-01-14T09:53:00.000-08:00

After all that writing about and promoting other movies, I forgot to mention I actually made a few shorts myself last year and now here they are:

"Put the Money in the Bag"

"The Return of the Boyband"

"Behind the Music: The Shallow End"

Church Fall Clothing Give-Away

Best of 2011! Movie Edition

2012-01-01T09:54:00.000-08:00

I actually wrote reflections on each of the top 10 this year! and Certified Copy at #20 because the piece kinda wrote itself once I started thinking about it again.
I probably won't get around to writing about the others, but they're all really worth seeing.

Top 20 Movies:
1. Hugo
2. Of Gods and Men
3. Melancholia
4. Young Adult
5. The Tree of Life
6. Midnight in Paris
7. Attack the Block
8. The Princess of Montpensier
9. Rango
10. Take Shelter
11. Uncle Boonme Who Can Recall His Past Lives
12. Warrior
13. Cold Weather
14. The Rise of The Planet of the Apes
15. Another Earth
16. Moneyball
17. The Trip
18. Cave of Forgotten Dreams
19. X-Men First Class
20. Certified Copy
The next ten: Meek's Cutoff, The Descendants, A Better Life, Margin Call, Source Code, 50/50, Drive, My Week With Marilyn, The Muppets, Winnie the Pooh
Last and least: I Am Number Four

Hugo

2011-12-31T23:58:00.000-08:00

Things you may not know about me: One of my all-time favorite movies is Disney's Pollyanna. I LOVE that movie (and you should too...I also love the black-cast musical version, Polly, that Debbie Allen made in the 1989 that seems to have vanished into the Disney vault). Anyway, Hugo really reminds me of a gender-swapped Pollyanna. In that movie, Pollyanna is an orphan who moves to town to live with her aunt and ends up bringing life and wonder and magic to the whole town, particular the elderly. But that takes time. Initially she's isolated and lonely...until she befriends a boy named Jimmy Bean (note: in Hollywood in 1960 a boy and a girl could actually be friends). His friendship helps propels her forward into the situations that help her help everybody else.
In Hugo, the titular boy is an orphan who goes to live with his uncle in a train station, where he meets Isabelle (a positively irrepressible Chloe Grace-Moretz, not unlike Pollyanna herself) who pulls him out of his isolated existence and into the greater world where he can bring magic and life and romance (it is Paris after all), especially to the aging Papa Georges. So, yeah, watch Pollyanna. And Hugo.

Hugo's doggged determination to reassemble the automaton is heartbreaking and ultimately uplifting because he feels its his life's work. Whatever you think of its usefulness as an endeavor, it is his animating passion, and seeing it work out for him is heartwarming, perhaps even life-affirming, in a world where so few people get to work at anything that means anything to them, trudging through one rote day after another. Here's Alyssa Rosenberg on the subject:

We may not face the same dire circumstances as orphans in the pause between the World Wars — or filmmakers who have fallen out of vogue and been reduced to clever tinkering. But that doesn’t mean that the desire for work that is spiritually as well as materially sustaining is the stuff of fairy tales...Not everyone is going to work in a creative industry, or fight for the disadvantaged in court, or run a thriving small business that operates like a genuine family rather than a corporate facsimile of one. But that doesn’t mean that people don’t want to do work that feels in some way meaningful, and that they believe themselves not just qualified for but suited to. And even if economic reality is harsh, you’re not a flake to want those things and to strive for that sense of meaning.

In the movie, Hugo and once-popular filmmaker Georges Melies are flip sides of the same abandoned coin. Melies retreats into the role as tinkerer, feeling forgotten when people turned (briefly) away from movies in the aftermath of WW1. Hugo keeps winding the clocks after his uncle leaves him but he does so discreetly hoping no one knows and lives all alone. When Hugo is locked up by the station master and the clocks aren't wound, it's clear that he has a purpose, just as the discovery that Melies is still alive allows him to return to the life of the cinema as an icon and instructor. As Self-Styled Siren writes:

Hugo scurries around the station and maintains the clock that keeps everyone on the hop, but he’s apart from it all...Hugo is as isolated from Paris as a prince in a tower; or, say, as isolated as a boy in bed with asthma while his schoolmates play in the street...no truant officer comes to see why Hugo isn’t in school, no station worker knows Hugo also labors there, let alone tries to feed or shelter him. Scorsese knows that a child’s fears of abandonment, the reality of his neglect, are close kin to the fears of age--that no one cares anymore, that your accomplishments won’t even survive as long as you do.

Toward the end of this picture, we see a montage of the early years when Melies and his wife and their collaborators were at the top of their game working on their movies. It's ideal that it's Martin Scorsese filming these scenes, as the most prominent advocate for film preservation to be able to make his own version of filmmaking in the first decade of the 20th century had to be the joy of a lifetime. If we see those films today, the "special effects" look crude, but without the aid of computers or big-studio budgets, they had to be both incredibly clever and incredibly disciplined, so it was fitting that Melies had a background as a magician/illusionist. What must it have been like to be there, essentially creating the medium that we know today as the cinema? It's maybe my favorite sequence in anything I saw this year. Glenn Kenny expresses the effect well:

And when the film flashes back to Melies' glory days as a filmmaker, his glass-house studio and the magnificent and magnificently eccentric costumes and sets for his films (which were often adaptations of the man's stage magic act), the sense of wonder becomes practically intoxicating. Cinema, Scorsese is saying explicitly here, is the re-creation of dreams into moving images to be wallowed in and cherished, and the resolutions of the film's varied story lines represent a very humane recognition of the way our dreams mirror our hearts.

For me, this was, easily, the best movie I saw this year.

Melancholia

2011-12-31T22:40:00.000-08:00

This was, for me, the most spectacularly ambitious movie of the year. From it's brilliant painterly prologue, to it's inevitable, cataclysmic finish (that's not a spoiler here, it's in the aforementioned prologue), Melancholia is one of the most exhilarating cinematic experiences I had all year. If I were in the business of giving awards, Kirsten Dunst would have the performance of the year award from me for her work here.
I really would love to write more about Melancholia and how beautiful the whole thing is from start to finish, but honestly, Kim Morgan wrote a mini-essay for MSN Movies top 10 wrap-up (expanded and expounded upon at her own blog) that so wonderfully encapsulates most everything I'd say anyway and much more, I shudder to think how much my piece would pale in comparison, so just read hers.
Now here's Kim (excerpted):

Universal and personal, blatant and mysterious, sorrowful and funny, nihilistic and yet, sublimely, romantically, celebratory, Lars Von Trier’s 'Melancholia' takes the black bile of its namesake -- the depression of its heroine -- and transforms the “humor” into exaltation. A planet -- a terrifying, dazzling planet that, true to Dane Von Trier’s inspired swan dive (black swan dive) into German romanticism, is set to destroy life on earth: Götterdämmerung via "Tristan and Isolde" (which he uses in the picture’s rapturously beautiful overture), via Ophelia via Cassandra via Von Trier’s own personal mythology.

And then comes planet Melancholia, inching closer and closer, leaving stable sister Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg) panic stricken while Justine, calmly, grimly and at times, cheekily, accepts annihilation, not as easy suicide but as a kind of cosmic extension of despair. Yes. Finally. Justine isn’t wallowing in depression, she’s embracing, seducing it, and in one of the picture’s most exquisite moments, lying beneath it naked -- basking in the glow of doom.

With 'Melancholia' he grants depressives a gift. Taking Justine’s depleted darkness and imbuing her with celestial life through doomsday, he, to recall another German Romantic, creates an Ode to Joy through heartbreaking and gloriously inspirational…woe.

Rango

2011-12-30T17:29:00.001-08:00

Sometimes its hard to get people to shake the "animation equals kids movie" notion; but seriously, have these people never watched South Park? or Fox on Sunday night in the last 20 years? or heard of Adult Swim?
Similar complaints sprang up about Fantastic Mr Fox a couple years ago, which was also most excellent and decidedly not a "kids movie" (though I'm sure plenty of kids enjoyed it while their parents unnecessarily squirmed, wondering if their kids were "getting it")

Rango was so very good. The obvious antecedents here are Chinatown, Sergio Leone, and Hunter S. Thompson, which would be strange starting points for a kids movie, but once again, it's not really a kids movie (not even in the sense that Pixar makes kids movies).
When the mayor shows up in those overalls talking about "The future, Mr Rango" I was jumping outta my seat, but also knowing the many kids in the theater (and probably most of their parents) had no idea why I was laughing. And that's ok with me because I was laughing because it's a good joke. As is a joke that heaven involves "eating Pop Tarts with Kim Novak".

Rango had, for my money, the best villain in a movie this year: Rattlesnake Jake.

A terrifying beast of unmatched size, strength, and smarts with a gatling gun at the end of his tail! Rango had to attempt to outsmart him. He is impossible to defeat, and thankfully, unnecessary to defeat in the end, because anything they could've done to kill him off would've felt like a cheat.

Rango is a classic example of what Joseph Campbell would call a "reluctant hero". He's not interested in saving the day, he just wants to go home. Until he finds himself so enmeshed in the local drama that its impossible to stay away. "The spirit of the west" tells him no man can run away from his own story.

The animation is gleefully cartoonish. Gore Verbinski and his animators make no attempt to create "real-looking" animals. The characters ride ostriches in the desert of the American West (why not?) and everyone and everything is about the same size (save Rattlesnake Jake). The film is bright, colorful, and fast. What's not to love?

Another Earth

2011-12-30T17:21:00.001-08:00

As I wrote in my earlier piece on Attack the Block, so often sci-fi is imagined on a grand scale. Here is another movie that takes a sci-fi backdrop (a new, mirror Earth has appeared in the near cosmos) on which to hang an understated tale of grief and redemption.

The movie has one of the most awesome (not to be confused with AWESOME!) scenes I saw in a movie this year, in which one of the characters plays a musical saw, which I had never seen/heard before and if you haven't either, prepare to be dazzled:

The things people can do astound me. Who first pulled out a saw and a violin bow and thought, "Yeah, this'll work"?

The other earth in the sky is not just a mirror earth, but the people on the other earth are the same as the people on this earth (that is, the scientist trying to make contact from this earth makes contact with the same scientist on the other earth, etc). The notion of another you on a mirror planet living the same life is interesting, but another you living a different life is the more fascinating because it means you have choices/free will, and your life if what you made/make it. You are not destined to live any one life, but you only have one life and what you do matters in that your life would be different if you did different things. You could be a different person entirely. In which case, is the person on the other earth really another "you" at all?

The ending is a perfect neo-Twilight Zone moment.

Midnight in Paris

2011-12-30T13:50:00.000-08:00

The #1 thing I remember about this picture is the warm glow of the lamp-lit interiors and exteriors in the 1920s and 1880s scenes. The elegant beauty of the pre-flourescent era when wall sconces and colored bulbs painted a room in amber. That and the gratuitous, leering shots of Rachel McAdams.

(At least mine is from the front!)
The great thing about the screenplay here is that the movie serves as both a romantic fantasy and a pinprick in the fantasy balloon. A tough balancing act, but one Woody Allen manages capably, probably because he's done it before (please tell me you've seen The Purple Rose of Cairo, about which, more later).
Gil's problem (if you can call it that) is that he wants to write "the great American novel" in the age of glistening vampires and dragon tattoos. If you wrote a truly great (whatever that means) novel today, who would know?
His fiancee's problem (if you can call it that) is that she is the least romantic person in the most romantic city in the Western civilization. It's not her fault she would rather go dancing than walk the storied streets of Paris.

Michael Sheen plays a pretentious, loquacious history buff masterfully (as ever) and Marion Cotillard is, brilliantly as always, equal parts magic and tragic as Picasso's mistress Adriana.

Now back to The Purple Rose of Cairo. If for some reason you haven't seen it, here's a quick run down. Cecilia is a lonely housewife in the Great Depression. She loves going to the movies, and the movie playing in town at the moment is The Purple Rose of Cairo starring Gil Shepherd as Tom Baxter, a globe-trotting archaelogist. She swoons over him each time. One day, Tom Baxter comes down off the screen and asks her on a date. The other characters on screen demand he come back so they can finish the movie but he walks out with Cecilia. Gil Shepherd comes to town with some studio executives trying to track down Tom Baxter to ask him to get back on the screen before other movie characters start doing the same (it's comic fantasy, stick with me here). Now, Cecilia likes Tom and Gil (both played by Jeff Daniels in a great dual performance) and has to make her decision as she finds herself caught up in the middle of the kind of romantic comedy she would love to go see. But being in it is no fun in reality, because reality is not the movies, which she finds out. But that said, she remains in love with the movies. Now, while all of this is going on, the other characters in Tom Baxter's movie that are waiting for him to come back are basically trapped in the drawing room of a mansion unable to move on, their polite society beginning to unravel. OK, back to Midnight in Paris. Gil (the Owen Wilson one) tells Bunuel and Man Ray that they should make a movie about a dinner party, where at the end no one can leave the room. Because they just...can't. Well in 1962 Bunuel made a movie called The Exterminating Angel with just such a premise (a mid-century surrealist arthouse 'comedy', which you should also see, if just for the sheep. And the bear. Like I said, you really should se it). And then in 1984 Woody Allen made a movie that made a joke about it, then in 2011 he made another movie that made a joke about Bunuel making the movie he made an extended joke about in 1984, which also has a similar plot about a character being drawn into the world of fantasy. Wheels within cinematic wheels.

This one is an absolute must for any Woody Allen fan. Or any fan of movies. Or Paris. Or Rachel McAdams.

"Purple Rose of Cairo"

"The Exterminating Angel"

Certified Copy

2011-12-30T07:41:00.000-08:00

From Baudrillard's Simulacra & Simulation

"It is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real...a hyperreal henceforth sheltered from the imaginary, and from any distinction between the real and the imaginary, leaving room only for the orbital recurrence of models and for the simulated generation of differences."

Yes this is one of those movies. One where the principal action is two characters walking around European cities talking about relationships and art and authenticity for 2 hours. But the really interesting thing about this movie is what Jim Emerson refers to as it's "slipperiness". The way the central relationship in the movie keeps shifting from scene to scence (Are we seeing a married couple? Are they divorced? Are they new acquaintances?) and they shift from speaking English to French to Italian. They move around from the city to the countryside, inside to outside and back in again. Ultimately, it seems the best way to take it in is to accept that THE objective reality of the film is whatever is on screen at the time, and that's all there is (Are we seeing a married couple? Yes. Are they divorced? Yes. Are they new acquaintances? Yes.) In that way, the film makes a kind of perfect, simple, sense. As Glenn Kenny writes at MSN Movies, "..this isn't a riddle film with a solution that, once sorted out, will add up to some sort of "Aha! THAT'S what it's all about!" moment...it's an experience that's intended to keep teasing things out of you, not a Chinese box puzzle yielding a pat solution."
The 'plot', such as it is, is more or less inessential as a unified event, but each moment has its own revelations and truths that may or may not add up to any one thing, and if you just kinda accept that and stop trying to 'figure it out' and you'll be carried along.

The Princess of Montenpsier

2011-12-30T07:26:00.000-08:00

I am genetically predisposed to love any movie about royal intrigue. Especially, as in this one, where it also involves forbidden romance, masquerade balls, sworfights, duplicitous family politics and scandals, and, just for kicks, religious wars. It really has it all. And it's set in beautiful, verdant, rural France. And its one of the rare movies that make interesting, purposeful use of color photography, as the yellows, greens, reds, and purples just pop right off the screen.

Lambert Wilson plays a once-ardent religious warrior who has seen too much and decides to lay down his arms and embrace pacifism and a role as advisor in the court of the Prince of Montpensier. He is viewed suspiciously by both sides of war, seen as a traitor by those he leaves behind, and a possible interloper by those he now moves among, but never betraying his core conviction that killing in the name of God is wrong, no matter which side. Between this and his role in Of Gods and Men, he makes the strongest case for real, contemplative faith seen in one cinematic year that I've seen.

(does this not look like a painting?)
The religious war between French Catholics and Huguenots rages and is filmed intensely, but as with just about every war movie since The Steel Helmet, struggles to balance showing "the absurdity of war" with images of bravura heroism glamorizing it. But the more interesting war rages within the titular princess, trying to fight the urges she has toward her husband's cousin, with his chiseled jaw and flowing locks. She can't help herself, try as she might to stay away from him. That obsessive attraction coupled with an intense desire, and need, to resist is fascinating to watch play out. As Little Richard once sang, "the girl can't help it".

In case you're not up on Little Richard:

Take Shelter

2011-12-29T08:39:00.000-08:00

Something's coming. Terrorists. Climate change. Financial collapse. Something's just not right. Everyone feels it. The world is closing in around us and we aren't safe. Don't say you weren't warned.

In Take Shelter, Curtis' sleep is curtailed by uneasy dreams. Storms of viscous, oily rain, strangers kidnapping his daughter on the road, his own dog attacking him. Then he wakes up feeling the latent effects of his dreams. He feels the dog bite from his dream all day the next day.

The movie not only deals with themes at a subtextual level, it also plays topically with the issue of health care. The daughter needs a surgery and an appointment is scheduled. Curtis has a steady job and good insurance. Then he takes out a large loan, gets fired, loses his insurance. It all seems to happen in an instant. His delusions (or premonitions) have direct, tangible consequences. It's not just his potential mental instability or financial difficulty, but his daughter's ability to hear could be permanently compromised.

This is the second collaboration between star, Michael Shannon, and director Jeff Shannon. Their first movie together was 2007's Shotgun Stories, a family saga about retribution among the estranged sons of a father's two families and it's every bit as good as Take Shelter, so I recommend you seek that one out too. I might even let you borrow it if you ask nicely.

Of Gods and Men

2011-12-26T05:34:00.001-08:00

"I didn't become a monk to be a martyr."
"You've already given your life. You gave it by following Christ."

This movie is about faith and doubt. It's also one of the most suspensful movies I saw this year, even when the outcome was never in question.
The plot concerns a group of Trappist monks living in Algeria in 1996. Islamist extremists are terrorizing the surrounding villages, the army is either powerless to stop them or complicit, we are never certain. The powers-that-be want the monks to leave, or at least accept their 'protection' at the monastery. Father Christian, the abbot, puts it to a vote. He asks them if they should leave or if they believe they have been called by God to this place to do a particular work and accept whatever fate may befall them, not to be heroic, but to be faithful. Willingness and want are to different things. No one wants to die for their cause. Even Christ prayed in Gethsemane to not have to endure the Passion:

He withdrew about a stone’s throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed, “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.

"yet not my will, but yours be done." just as he instructs in what's come to be known as The Lord's Prayer, "your will be done". Its one of the hardest parts of the life of Christian faith, to say or pray those words and truly mean it. To give up one's own will to God, not knowing what his will actually is and if it lines up with yourself. But it is required. It is the only way. Father Christian learns that his attempt to impose what he sees as God's will is not the same as allowing the brothers the chance to reflect and come to such a place for themselves if they are indeed to face what is to come willingly and with resolve.

One way the film projects thematic material is through passages of the monks chanting/singing. Its entirely possible that they sing/chant these words regularly, but the situation in which they are now placed gives them a new prism through which to reflect on the words.

Also, the narrative about encroaching Islamic extremism is naturally topical for the world today. Quoting at length from Andrew Sullivan:

There is a Christmas scene in which local Jihadists assault the monastery and demand medicines. Christian insists that he will not speak with anyone with weapons inside the monastery walls. This is a place of peace he insists. He is unarmed and defenseless but his manifest integrity disarms the thugs temporarily.

And outside, he calls the Jihadist leader's bluff by knowing the real Koran as well as he does. The name of Jesus literally defuses the conflict. This is the moment of hope here - before darkness descends again: a mutual Muslim and Christian reverence for Jesus. From that moment on, the monks' faltering, doubt-riddled, fear-ridden, gradual decision to risk martyrdom rather than compromise their faith seems to come from almost outside of them, beyond them.

Here's a great vlog review by Father James Martin for PBS:

Watch Father James Martin on "Of Gods and Men" on PBS. See more from Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly.

The Tree of Life

2011-12-26T04:36:00.001-08:00

What I loved about The Tree of Life was the headlong rush of images at times. Terrence Malick & Emmnauel Lubezki's probing camera, looking deep into, around, and through space and time to find a way to make sense and meaning of everything (in a sense, literally).

The discussion around the movie tends to center on its theology, or perhaps, teleology. If you haven't seen it, the movie features a 20 minute passage near the beginning that starts with the big bang and shows the process of formation of the cosmos, the planet earth, and the beginnings of life from amoeba to aquatic creatures crawling out of the sea to dinosaurs and on to humankind. The argument is whether the guiding force in evolution/nature is grace or random chance/chaos. This is certainly a valid argument, but I think Malick is less interested in this argument, than showing you that whatever the animating force, he wants you to see that life is indeed progressing in a forwardly direction; rushing forward, in fact, which circles us back around to what I loved about the movie: the images. The images of the mother at play with her children in and around the house in Waco. The images of a domineering father struggling to hold his family together. The cold reflective surfaces of the skyscrapers of Downtown Dallas. The waystation at the end of life on a beach where loved ones who've passed away can be reunited. Sartre said "Hell is other people." This film says so is heaven.

The scope here is certainly ambitious. The movie tells the story of existence in the universe through the frame of one person/family. Your one life has Meaning in the grand sweep of EVERYTHING because you were here at all, and if you hadn't been here life, quite simply (simply!) would have been infinitely, and infinitismally, different.

Young Adult

2011-12-24T10:16:00.001-08:00

Most people never move away. Statistics show that there is less geographic mobility (that is, people moving from one place to another) in each decade since they started tracking such statistics in the late 1940s. In 2004, only 18% of people moved, and of those 58% moved within the same county; only about 1 in 50 moved to a different state or country. The numbers are even lower as you go down the income ladder.

Everybody stays somewhere.

For most of the residents of Mercury, Minnesota they stayed in their hometown, took a job their mom or dad probably had before they retired, got married, sent their kids to the same schools they went to, and now watch soccer games from the sidelines of fields they once played on. Mavis Gary moved away, went to the big (relatively speaking) city, became a famous (relatively speaking) author. She was the one that got out. At least geographically. Emotionally, she was stuck at Mercury High (home of the Injuns! [ever interested in details, writer/director team Diablo Cody/Jason Reitman include the point that the mascot had been changed to Indians in the name of cultural sensitivity to local peoples.).
She is forever 18. Even the once-popular series of YA books she ghost-writes are high school dramas. The movie opens as she struggles to write the last book in the series. How does she write what happens at the end of high school if she never got there herself? How does she show her character has grown up after all this time, is moving on, putting away childish things when she still walks around in Hello Kitty t-shirts?

The idea of being stuck in a rut vis a vis personal development has been a topic of much discussion in our culture, what with the rise to prominence of the Judd Apatow man-child movies. Here’s a movie that reminds us that woman-child is just as possible and problematic, only Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody have the conviction of not letting her off the hook with a hunky, responsible white knight who redeems her. Her only meaningful connection in the movie is Matt, a character who, by being not dissimilarly stunted in the area of personal growth, offers her self-reflection. She claims to be in Mercury for Buddy, but she doesn’t have any interest in Buddy. What (not insignificantly, mind you, I wrote what, not who) she wants is "Buddy", the 18 year old big man on campus, the one that inspired the love interest in her books. When she tells him he might recognize the character based on his 18 year old self, you wonder if he would, and if he did if he would do so with the same approbation Mavis does.

There are conflicting impulses for people who leave home, especially when home is a small town: They want to get away and measure themselves against the world, but they also don’t want to feel like they are missing out on what’s going on back home. They want to come home and be a hero, an object of admiration. To come back and find out no one thinks about you much, they aren’t following your every move with baited breath can be humbling. What are they doing that’s so great, that I’m not THE topic of conversation?

In the end, Mavis has no great revelation or growth or change. In the first act we see her on a date with someone she met online; she's bored, barely listening (if at all) to what he says, but wakes up with his pasty arm draped over her just the same. At the end of the movie, she drunkenly, desperately, decides(?) to sleep with Matt. She wakes up with his pasty arm draped over her and maybe for the first time realizes that her station in life might be self-inflicted. This is the scariest thing. It's bad enough when things aren't going your way, worse still when it's your own fault.

Attack the Block

2011-12-24T05:39:00.000-08:00

This is the alien-invasion movie people should've been watching this summer instead of Super 8 or Cowboys and Aliens. For my money, this was maybe the most pure fun movie of the year. A gang of up-to-no-good teenage punks in London are in the middle of a mugging when an alien falls from the sky. It attacks one of them and runs away. They chase it down, wound it and carry it off as a prize to their sci-fi loving friend to see if he knows what it is. Soon they see what appear to be dozens of meteors falling from the sky, they figure its more aliens and since they'd dispatched the first one with such ease, figure its time to go alien-bashing (wielding bats mostly, and, in one instance, a sword) they don't take kindly to anyone/anything invading their neighborhood, regardless of species/planet of origin), but things don't go as expected when they turn out to be a pack of pitch black creatures with glow-in-the-dark fangs (see above) which are a good deal more fierce than their initial conquest, and soon they are being hunted, hounded, really. Alien invasion, in the modern cinema, generally involves grand governmental plans to thwart attacks, surging, panicked crowds, momunets being destroyed, breathless TV reports, etc. Attack the Block envisions alien invasion on a much smaller scale. Much like the movie Monsters last year, it is a film where the limited budget requires the scope to be smaller, but the imagination to flourish. Also, those monsters are pretty awesome.

Literary Interlude: Hardboiled Edition

2011-11-16T13:34:00.000-08:00

      A door squeaked behind me. I whirled, but I needn't have bothered. A hard voice, about as English as Amos and Andy, said: "Put 'em up, bud."
     The butler, the very English butler, stood there in the doorway, a gun in his hand, tight-lipped. The girl turned her wrist and shot him just kind of casually, in the shoulder or something. He squealed like a stuck pig.
"Go away, you're intruding.", she said coldly.
He ran. We heard his steps running.
"He's going to fall", she said.
    I was wearing my Luger in my right hand now, a little late in the season as usual. I came around with it. Old man Jeeter was holding on to the table, his face gray as a paving block. His knees were giving. George stood cynically, holding a handkerchief around his bleeding wrist, watching him.
"Let him fall," I said. "Down is where he belongs."

Raymond Chandler, "Trouble is my Business" (1939)

United States of Space

2011-11-10T10:19:00.001-08:00

I love conspiracy theories!

Two former participants in the CIA’s Mars visitation program of the early 1980’s have confirmed that U.S. President Barack H. Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and was among the young Americans from the program who they later encountered on the Martian surface after reaching Mars via “jump room.”

Andrew D. Basiago , 50, a lawyer in Washington State who served in DARPA’s time travel program Project Pegasus in the 1970’s, and fellow chrononaut William B. Stillings, 44, who was tapped by the Mars program for his technical genius, have publicly confirmed that Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and that each later encountered Obama during visits to rudimentary U.S. facilities on Mars that took place from 1981 to 1983.

http://m.examiner.com/exSeattle/pm_76001/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=UniWuhAE

Head-Body-Head-Body, or: Learn How to Fight, Ya Bum!

2011-01-28T20:24:00.000-08:00

So I'm driving down the street, on my way back to the station after lunch. At the corner of Ventura and G Street, a place where migrant day laborers frequently hang around waiting for a truck to roll up looking for a couple guys for the day. I stop at a red light behind another car. Two guys on bicycles roll past up to the intersection. Out of nowhere, a random assailant rushes one of the cyclists and throws a haymaker right into his midsection knocking him from his bike. Then another swift blow to the head. The man cowered and tried to run. The attacker has fire in his eyes and looked ready to kill him. He was shouting in what I assume was Spanish and advancing on the two cyclists. They tried to talk him down but he had his fists clenched, his nostrils flared, and he was itchin to open up a can on those two guys. I was just hoping they got out of the road before the light turned green. They did, the bikes didn't. So I had to maneuver between the fight and the bikes to go on my merry way.

I didn't look back to see how it resolved. I just assume they solved whatever it was amicably, and all is now well. Probably a case of mistaken identity.
If the ruffian did go through with it and kill them I didn't want to be a witness to a murder, for two reasons
1) Eww, gross.
2) Such a hassle. I don't have time for that. Well, technically, I probably do have time, but still...inconvenience.

Anyhow, this little affair brought me back to the halcyon days of internet video, when people would look up, post, stage, and pay for footage of "bum fights". (That was one adolescent itch I managed to leave unscratched, though, my contemporaries more than compensated for my disinterest)
There's something strange, but almost instinctive in people to love to watch people fight. I think it's lazy to cast it as simply a love of violence or even desensitization. Recent events in Tuscon show that people don't love violence, at least not uncritically. No one turns on the local news or reads in the paper about stabbings and shootings in their neighborhoods and cities and is amused/entertained. So it's not simple bloodlust. But there is something. Whether indigent immigrants or professional pugilists, people the world over love a good fight.
Even when it's staged.

Which brings me, as most things do eventually, to the cinema, and particularly in this case, David O. Russell's The Fighter.

The fascinating thing to me about this movie is that the eponymous 'fighter' is the least aggressive character in the story. Everyone else is a tiger on the prowl, protecting turf and attacking with abandon; Mickey (as played by Mark Wahlberg) is, oh I don't know (note to self: no more animal metaphors) a wise old owl, or perhaps, a soaring eagle, surveying everything, picking his spots, but mostly hanging back. Much of the commentary around the film mentions him as a "passive" character, lacking the charisma of Dickie (played to great effect by Christian Bale). 2 things about this:
1) It's perfectly written in terms of family dynamics. The flashy older brother, full of promise and braggadocio contrasts with the mild mannered younger son, who developed this persona to cope with being in the wide shadow of his sibling, despite surpassing talent.
2) His passivity (if we agree to call it that) works as a serviceable means to an end. It's not as though he doesn't do/accomplish anything, he just does it so deftly you don't notice what he's doing til it's done. In the ring you can be more of a brusier (see Butterbean) or you can be a tactician (see Lennox Lewis). In a fight, Mickey is more of the former, but in life he is clearly the latter, able to outflank his entire family/entourage to create conditions for peacable reconciliation.
I thought the fight scenes in the movie were competent, if unremarkable, and as such, I thought the best place to end the picture would've been the shot of the whole clan walking toward the ring: Mickey (in the center) with Dickie, Mom, Charlene, George. There's nothing wrong with the last fight, and it certainly helps the commerciality of the thing, but in my view the 'fight' of the movie was resolved when he had everyone in tow.
Passive? Ha. A knockout, indeed.

Who Is This "Oscar", Anyway?

2011-01-27T21:36:00.000-08:00

If I had an award show/ceremony and/or statuettes to hand out for movies from the last year I would nominate the following and grant them thusly (winner in bold-face):

Best Picture:
Black Swan
The Kids Are All Right
Let Me In
Mother and Child
Please Give
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter's Bone

Best Director:
Darren Aronofsky, Black Swan
Lisa Cholodenko, The Kids Are All Right
Joel & Ethan Coen - True Grit
Claire Denis, White Material
David Fincher, The Social Network
Rodrigo Garcia, Mother and Child
Nicole Holofcener, Please Give
Edgar Wright, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

Best Lead Actor:
George Clooney, The American
Leonardo DiCaprio, Shutter Island
Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network
Colin Firth, The King's Speech
James Franco, 127 Hours
Ewan MacGregor, The Ghost Writer
Edgar Ramirez, Carlos

Best Lead Actress:
Annette Bening, Mother and Child
Isabelle Huppert, White Material
Catherine Keener, Please Give
Hye Ja-Kim, Mother
Joey King, Ramona and Beezus
Jennifer Lawrence, Winter's Bone
Natalie Portman, Black Swan
Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

Best Supporting Actor:
Christian Bale, The Fighter
Pierce Brosnan, The Ghost Writer
Vincent Cassel, Black Swan
John Hawkes, Winter's Bone
Samuel L. Jackson, Mother and Child
Mark Ruffalo, The Kids Are All Right
Geoffrey Rush, The King's Speech

Best Supporting Actress:
Cecile de France, Hereafter
Greta Gerwig, Greenberg
Chloe Grace-Moretz, Let Me In
Rebecca Hall, Please Give
Mila Kunis, Black Swan
Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Naomi Watts, Mother and Child
Kerry Washington, Mother and Child

Best Screenplay:
Black Swan
Let Me In
Monsters
Mother and Child
Please Give
Scott Pilgrim vs The World
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
White Material

Best Animated Picture:
Despicable Me
How To Train Your Dragon
Tangled
Toy Story 3

Best Cinematography:
The American
Let Me In
Mother and Child
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
The Social Network
True Grit
White Material

Best Editing:
The Ghost Writer
The Kids Are All Right
Mother
Scott Pilgrim vs The World
The Social Network
True Grit
White Material
Winter's Bone

Best Visual Effects:
Black Swan
Inception
Monsters
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
Tron Legacy

Best Score
Black Swan
Inception
Night Catches Us
Shutter Island
Tron Legacy
True Grit

Best Debut Feature
Lena Dunham, Tiny Furniture
Gareth Edwards, Monsters
Tanya Hamilton, Night Catches Us

Best Documentary
Catfish
Exit Through The Gift Shop

Best Foreign Language Film
Carlos
Mother
White Material

End Note #1: Obviously (hopefully it's obvious) this is based solely on what I saw, which was about 50-55 of the year's movies.
End Note #2: Most of the movie titles are from the back half of the alphabet, most of the actors/directors names are from the front half of the alphabet. Cosmic symmetry.

2010 Top 10s: Albums

2010-12-21T20:21:00.000-08:00

These rankings are intended to reflect only my favorites, given what I actually listened to, and I lay no claim to being able to proclaim these, or any album, the "best" of the year.

Please note: the excerpted reviews are not written by me, while I may be inclined to write effusively about each of these record so many have already done so that it would be redundant. So I'm just editing for space, with links to the full reviews are in the album title.

Also: a previous post for favorite songs of the year can be found by scrolling down, or if you're too lazy to scroll, just click here.

And now, the list:

1. Carolina Chocolate Drops - Genuine Negro Jig

For the most part this album’s an unashamedly foot-stomping countrified fiddle-and-banjo racket, and with it the trio reclaim what is usually assumed to be exclusively hillbilly property. But this historic black style is mountain music with something more, as these 12 tracks show how it fits between the European quadrilles and the Anglo/Celtic folk that came across the Atlantic and the rural blues and ragtime jazz that grew out the American South, informing so much contemporary music. And in the hands of the Carolina Chocolate Drops this history lesson is far from dry.

The relatively youthful threesome learned their craft from original Piedmont players and swap instruments – banjo, fiddle, jug, harmonica, guitar, snare drum and kazoo – with ease, and although they all sing, the guys, Dom Flemons and Justin Robinson, leave most of the vocals to the opera-trained Rhiannon Giddens. Cleverly, the group mix traditional songs with original compositions and a couple of surprising covers, allowing them to honour the past, then subtly nudge it forward linking it to the modern music they grew up with.

2. The Green Children - Encounter

From the opening notes of the title song, Encounter, you know you’re in for an album full of lush arrangements that owes as much to nature as to electronics. Or as the press notes call it “ethereal pop with post-modern dance beats.” Basically, the kind of music you’d expect to hear at a hip coffee house, a chill after hours lounge or that restaurant where it’s impossible to get a reservation.

But there’s more to The Green Children than simply their music. There’s also an important movement. Milla and Marlow also cofounded The Green Children Foundation to help raise awareness and funds for the Grameen Bank and Grameen Healthcare Services in Bangladesh. And when the band released a CD/DVD in Norway in 2006, through sales and donations, they raised about $500k, which helped open the Grameen Green Children Eye Hospital. And 100% of the money donated to the Foundation goes directly to the cause.

3. Local Natives - Gorilla Manor

For the L.A indie rock quintet Local Natives, it all comes down to voices. Sometimes they're up front, gliding over a haunting little Saharan-blues guitar lick; often they flit about in the margins, lighting up a song like a pulled curtain...The tipsy saloon piano that buoys lead single "Airplanes" and the coy, restrained fuzz of "Camera Talk" prove the Natives can wring evocative sounds from traditional instruments. Drummer Matt Frazier has an ambitious knack for accenting a song with bursts of clatter...but the band always comes back to the spectacle and possibilities of those vocals. There's a bit of Broadway, a touch of Motown and a tang of choir nerd to them, but Local Natives avoid the preciousness of Grizzly Bear or the gang-chorus rapture of Arcade Fire. It's a rare band that can use its chemistry as its own instrument.

4. LCD Soundsystem - This is Happening

Serving up a comprehensively postmodern survey of pop culture with wit, panache and an enviable dose of hooks, This Is Happening manages to avoid predictability by consistently keeping one step ahead of the listener yet sidestepping clever-clever irony with a genuine warmth that’s naturally layered within the giggling heathen at the heart of the record...What Murphy does best is balance these tendencies so that none of his whim-chasing expulsions ever feel crass or smug, and by finding the spirited inspiration in the nondescript, the self-effacement in our projected criticisms, and the fun in the commonplace, he’s able to keep us entertained in the process....by finding a way to be life-affirming while keeping our hips shaking, without casting off life’s woes and joys as either paltry or boring, LCD Soundsystem has succeeded at capturing both our minds and our bodies without sacrificing its head-nodding spirit or its heavy-hearted sense of purpose along the way.

5. Janelle Monae - The ArchAndroid

The songs zip gleefully from genre to genre, mostly grounded in R&B and funk, but spinning out into rap, pastoral British folk, psychedelic rock, disco, cabaret, cinematic scores, and whatever else strikes her fancy. It's about as bold as mainstream music gets, marrying the world-building possibilities of the concept album to the big tent genre-mutating pop of Michael Jackson and Prince in their prime. The first listen is mostly about being wowed by the very existence of this fabulously talented young singer and her over-the-top record; every subsequent spin reveals the depths of her achievement.

6. Eric Bibb - Booker's Guitar

[Eric] Bibb is a creative songwriter, an excellent singer and a masterful guitar player, and that's all on display here. The songs are understated little gems filled with the passion of honest expression. They're what I would call "soft blues" -- music inspired by and drawn from the tradition, but not necessarily in the traditional blues musical format. The tracks are all original, and all-acoustic, with Grant Dermody adding subtly powerful harp accompaniment...this is a gently swinging and thoughtful bluesy album for a cold winter night and a double shot of Jim Beam Black.

7. Justin Townes Earle - Harlem River Blues

On this project, Earle is less concerned with lyrics than with finding his sound, and he finds it in a fat-toned, unhurried country-blues. That greasy groove allows his handsome tenor to relax until he sounds as if he's talking off-handedly and confidentially, even as he hits every note with dead-on pitch and a resonant hum.
The 10 original songs are mostly juke-joint numbers, finger-snapping tunes about fickle women and footloose men. Some of the best musicians in Nashville lay down an understated but irresistible throb beneath such songs as "Move Over Mama" and the title track. But it is Earle's voice, shrugging off a thousand bumps and bruises to look forward to the next scene, that sells them.

8. The Soft Pack - The Soft Pack

Within the band’s stripped-down rock, there are hints of ‘50s surf and ‘60s garage rock, echoes of ‘70s punk and new wave à la the Modern Lovers, traces of ‘80s college rock, and more. Yet the Soft Pack’s music doesn’t feel overtly retro -- they’re just not trying hard to sound “modern.” Unlike some of their predecessors, their simplicity is more direct than arty, a bash-it-out and get-it-out-there approach...They’ve got the template of classic sounds down and failsafe pop instincts...compared to the increasingly delicate, intricate indie of the late 2000s, The Soft Pack sounds vital.

9. Francis and The Lights - It'll Be Better

Francis Farewell Starlite is a smart 28-year-old songwriter in love with Eighties R&B at its slickest, whitest and oddest — he sings a little like Peter Gabriel and mixes cutting jazz-piano chords and clever pop constructions like Steely Dan. That sensibility has earned him production work with Drake, and on his full-length debut, Starlite turns his faith in catchy tunes into a series of studies on the persuasive power of pop itself.

10. Fitz & The Tantrums - Pickin' Up the Pieces

Even if Fitz & company were to fall through a wormhole while performing and land in 1967, they wouldn’t be greeted as great innovators. Their sound is traditional genre to the point of being unabashedly cliché more often than not...yet the tracks that stretch the clichés the thinnest justify doing so by being the catchiest damn sweets on the album...To answer the question inherently presented by anything retro, this band’s debut represents a true revival, rather than an exhumation; Without heart, you’re just a zombie, and Fitz & The Tantrums are not lacking anything in that category. In fact, many of the compositions on Pickin’ Up The Pieces are so perfect and full of conviction that it’s hard not to call them classics without exaggeration...and to say that the flawless, heartstring-plucking album-closer Tighter gives Elton John a run for his money might not even be saying too much.

11. Aqualung - Magnetic North

Aqualung moves from track to track on Magnetic North wearing a variety of different personas. He can change from Beck to Coldplay to Radiohead all within a few bars. And quite often when artists breach that kind of mimicry it comes off as such, but he manages to maintain his identity while taking the form of (what I can only assume are) his greatest personal influences.
And the writing is equally enchanting. The beauty of his writing is found in its simplicity. He says exactly what he is saying…This record has a lot of integrity, and is extremely accessible. I’d recommend this to anyone who just loves music.

12. Seth Swirksy - Watercolor Day

Rejoice, pop fans: the first truly great record of 2010 has arrived, in the form of Seth Swirsky’s gorgeous “Watercolor Day.” The 19-track collection of sweet, summery sounds is equal parts Beach Boys (circa ’66/’67), Emitt Rhodes, Harry Nilsson and every great sunshine pop act from the late ’60s.
Swirsky has fashioned a marvelous mixture of beautifully understated lead and background vocals, perfectly placed horns and strings, and a host of intoxicating melodies that swing and sway.

And the rest of the top 20, loosely ranked
13. Darius Rucker - Charleston, SC 1966
14. Sara Bareilles - Kaleidoscope Heart
15. Jaheim - Another Round
16. Lana Mir - Lana Mir
17. JJ Grey & Mofro - Georgia Warhorse
18. PJ Morton - Walk Alone
19. Sugarland - The Incredible Machine
20. Sugar & Gold - Get Wet!

2010 Top 10s: Songs

2010-12-21T09:44:00.001-08:00

Please note: I make no claim that these represent the "best" of the year, merely my personal favorites.

1. Janelle Monae - Come Alive (War of the Roses)
Favorite song of the year. So much talent, so much range, vocally & musically.

2. Carolina Chocolate Drops - Don't Get Trouble in Your Mind
Saw these guys live back in the October and it was one of the best live performances I've seen. The recordings are great, but live, they go to another level.

3. The Green Children - Hear Me Now (Unplugged)
Easily my favorite vocal of the year. First time I heard it I fell in love with it and I could listen to this song all day.

4. Local Natives - Who Knows Who Cares

5. Fitz & The Tantrums - MoneyGrabber
Favorite music video of the year.

6. LCD Soundsystem - Dance Yrself Clean

7. Eric Bibb - Rocking Chair

8. Justin Townes Earle - Working for the MTA

9. Lana Mir - These Days

10. Francis and the Lights - Knees to the Floor

11. Carolina Chocolate Drops - Snowden's Jig (Genuine Negro Jig)
Live in Fresno! w/ Danny 'Slapjazz' Barber.

Rounding out the top 22, alphabetically:
Anthony Hamilton - Her Heart
Aqualung - Reel Me In
Black Rebel Motorcycle Club - Conscience Killer
Darius Rucker - Come Back Song
The Green Children - Skies on Fire
Jaheim - Finding My Way Back
JJ Grey & Mofro - Beautiful World
JJ Grey & Mofro - Hottest Spot in Hell
Sara Bareilles - Uncharted
Seth Swirksy - Watercolor Day
The Soft Pack - Parasites

And here are my 5 favorite gems from the past that I just discovered this year:
1. Jackie Wilson - That's Why I Love You So

2. Big Star - Watch the Sunrise

3. The Sonics - Keep A Knockin

4. Donny Hathaway - Sack Full of Dreams (live)

5. Buck Owens -Tall Dark Stranger

And, just for the heck of it, I'll round out a top 10 for the back catalog:
Twilight - We'll Be Special
Sam & Dave - Soothe Me
The Beach Boys - Be Still
Hall & Oates - Rich Girl
Otis Redding - Security

Hugh Grant as a proto-Nick Clegg in "Love Actually"

2010-04-21T21:16:00.000-07:00

Life imitates art once again. Richard Curtis wrote this guy five years ago.

So I Went to the Gym....

2010-02-22T18:52:00.000-08:00

I was on the elliptical machine. Pedaling (or whatever you call it on that contraption) and getting nowhere. Slowly. Allen, the trainer, had given me a sheet of paper which outlined the "Cardio" workout. 25 minutes on the treadmill at various speeds and inclines, followed by the dread elliptical. 25 minutes, Resistance 7. I had been at it 2 minutes when I was ready to quit. I'd already done 30 minutes on the treadmill (speed 3.2, incline 3.0). I was watching Dr. Oz on one of the several big screens in front of the various machines. You have to have a radio tuned to FM 97.5 to hear it, though, so I was reading along with the closed captioning. The people around me seemed pretty tuned in to their workouts and unaware of the woman who had gained 100 pounds since losing her job. Armbands with mp3 players. Sleeveless T-shirts. Speed 7.0, running, getting nowhere. Where am I?

Before I got on the treadmill I walked into the locker room looking for the trainer who told me to meet him at 3. It was 3 and he didn't seem to be around, same as last Friday. He was there in the locker room and looked surprised to see me. Looking more surprised, however, was the man of, oh, I'd guess 58 years, standing at a nearby locker, naked as a newborn. It's strange. We have this cultural juvenility when it comes to nudity on our various glowing screens, but in person it's no big deal. Can't square that one. Anyway, the naked man cowered and the trainer told me he'd go get the cardio workout sheet for me.

Maybe I misunderstood. I thought he meant he'd get it promptly. This is when I jumped on the treadmill. Figured I'd pass the time and look ambitious. 18:45/mile the machine blinked at me. My heart rate was 168. 174. 179. 164. I walked and walked and walked. Or at least I thought I had. After 20 minutes the machine tells me I'd walked 1.3 miles. Prove it, StarTrac. I'm exactly where I started. Nevertheless, I felt like a vague sense of accomplishment. (Please note: A sense of accomplishment does not always accompany actual accomplishment.). But now what? And where is Allen? Not seeing him anywhere, I jumped on the treadmill again, this time at the other end of the row, to watch Brett Baier on Fox News. According the closed-captions he thinks President Obama wants to "jam health care down our throats". Is this the only applicable metaphor? I began to sense futility seeing the timer back at 3:15, 3:16, 3:17. A faint whisper crept across my mind, "What are you doing?" Over by the door, there's Allen! No time to be caught slacking. I turn the speed up from 3.0 to 3.2 just in case he finally comes over. He doesn't. He's at his desk, chatting up one of the other trainers. 6:21, 6:22, 6:23. What is he doing? Did he forget I was over here? 7:55, 7:56. Here he comes! 8:10. Nope, there he goes! 9:25, 9:26. Here he comes again! 9:58, 9:59. "Here's your cardio workout".

It's been 4 minutes on the elliptical now and I don't know where to look any more. I can't see outside nor can I see the TVs and I don't know that I'd want to anyway. I close my eyes and try to see if that helps. It doesn't. I can't concentrate with this Rihanna song blaring out of the hidden, but ubiquitous speakers. "The wait is over, the wait is over." No it's not, I'm still waiting for this song to be over so I can think! It ends and Green Day starts whining about something or other. I open my eyes. 10:11, 10:12. How am I supposed to do this for 25 minutes? Then, there it was again, "What are you doing?" I try the eyes closed thing again. Sweat. Now my eyes burn. 12:10, 12:11. "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!?!?" I get off this ridiculous roller-coaster of an exercise machine, go down the stairs and leave. How long have I been here? I get in my car and drive home. What was I doing in that place? What were any of those people doing there? Really, what? How are you supposed to think in that place, all that noise, all those people? And no windows, the view never changes for mile after mile (or in my case, mile after .6 mile). If you can't put these things outside, at least give me a window. Where was I?
Exerting all of that energy, getting nowhere in particular, TV after TV after TV, incessant pop music, wasting whole swaths of time because "experts" tell us this is what we need to do. Fits with the rest of life. You haven't truly known existential dread until you've spent an afternoon on an elliptical machine while trying to figure out why.

I'm meeting Allen at 3 again tomorrow. Shoulders.

On Monotony

2009-10-18T22:10:00.000-07:00

From Portuguese poet Fernando Pessoa, translated by Richard Zenith:

In its essence life is monotonous. Happiness therefore depends on a reasonably thorough adaptation to life’s monotony. By making ourselves monotonous, we make ourselves equal to life. Thus we live to the full. And living to the full is to be happy.

Unhealthy, illogical souls laugh—uneasily, deep down—at bourgeois happiness, at the monotonous life of the bourgeois man who obeys a daily routine . . . . . . , and at his wife who spends her time keeping the house tidy, is consumed by the minutiae of caring for the children, and talks about neighbors and acquaintances. That’s what happiness is, however. It seems, at first glance, that new things are what give pleasure to the mind; but there aren’t many new things, and each one is new only once. Our sensibility, furthermore, is limited, and it doesn’t vibrate indefinitely. Too many new things will eventually get tiresome, since our sensibility can’t keep up with all the stimulations it receives.

To resign oneself to monotony is to experience everything as forever new. The bourgeois’s vision of life is the scientific vision, since everything is indeed always new, and before this day this day never existed.

He, of course, would say none of this. Were he capable of saying it, he wouldn’t be capable of being happy. My observations only make him smile; and it’s his smile that brings me, in all their detail, the considerations I’m writing down, for future generations to ponder.

As long as we're on the subject, behold the double-genius of Irving Berlin and Judy Garland in Easter Parade:

Gag reel from the latest movie

2009-02-24T19:55:00.000-08:00

Enjoy:

A Message for the Christmas Shopper

2008-12-17T21:16:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from Leonard Pitts at the Miami Herald:

Last week, a 34-year-old man was trampled to death by a mob rushing into a Wal-Mart to buy stuff. Jdimytai Damour was a seasonal worker manning the door of a store in Valley Stream, N.Y., as shoppers eager for so-called ''Black Friday'' bargains massed outside. The store was scheduled to open at 5 a.m., but that was not early enough for the 2,000 would-be shoppers. At five minutes before the hour, they were banging their fists and pressing their weight against the glass doors, which bowed and then broke in a shower of glass. The mob stormed in.

Four people, including a pregnant woman, were injured. And Damour was killed as people stomped over him, looking for good prices on DVDs, winter coats and PlayStations. Nor was the mob sobered by his death. As authorities sought to clear the store, some defiantly kept shopping; others complained that they had been on line since the night before.

Indeed, it is hard to imagine a starker illustration of our true priorities. Oh, we pay lip service to other things. We say children are a priority, but when did people ever press against the door for Parents' Night at school? We say education is a priority, but when did people ever bang against the windows of the library? We say faith is a priority, but when did people ever surge into a temple of worship as eagerly as they do a temple of commerce?

No, sale prices on iPods, that's our true priority. Jdimytai Damour died because too many of us have bought, heart and soul, into the great lie of American consumerism: acquiring stuff will make you whole. ''You, Happier,'' is how a sign at my local Best Buy puts it. As if owning a Jonas Brothers CD, an Iron Man DVD, a Sony HDTV, will elevate you to a level of joy otherwise impossible to attain. Hey, you may be a total loser, may not have a friend, may not have an education, may not have a job, may not have a clue, but it will all be OK as soon as you get that new Canon digital camera, especially if you get it for 50 percent off.

It would be nice to think -- I will not hold my breath -- that Damour's death would lead at least some of us to finally see that for the obscene lie it is, to realize that seeking wholeness in consumer goods is an act of emptiness, not joy.

You, Happier? No.

Just you, with more stuff.

The End of Genre?

2008-12-17T13:11:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from Bob Proehl for Popmatters in response to the Country Music Association Awards (acronymically known as the CMAs, not to be confused with the Academy of Country Music's ACMs):

You might not have caught it in Carrie Underwood’s quick introduction, but that sure enough was the remains of the Wailers backing up Kenny Chesney on a medley of “Everybody Wants to Go to Heaven” and Bob Marley’s hit “Three Little Birds”. Which would have won the best mash-up of the evening hands-down if it hadn’t been for Kid Rock’s “All Summer Long”, a surprisingly poignant hybrid of Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Sweet Home Alabama” and Warren Zevon’s “Werewolves of London” (although the live version leaned heavily toward the former) which has become Rock’s first hit on the country charts, performed with rapper Lil Wayne possibly playing guitar alongside a gentleman who looked oddly like AC/DC’s Brian Johnson in a “Joe the Strummer” T-shirt.

Kid Rock’s performance was a wild clash of symbols, with Detroit-born Rock’s unabashedly white trash appropriation of urban style grafting onto Skynyrd’s oft-misunderstood call not just for Southern pride but a reevaluation of the stereotypes of Southern culture. With his oversized Titans jersey, Lil Wayne at his side, and huge American flags projected behind him, Rock seemed ecstatic to be part of country music, and the audience seemed thrilled to have him there.

In an age where every possible type of music is instantly available to new audiences, where American Idol prioritizes vocal prowess while tossing soul, R&B, pop, and country into the massive blender of Celebrity, and the number of listeners who staunchly self-identify as fans of one particular genre dwindle without new devotees to replace them, the country-music industry seems to have made an astute decision. When more kids are following MySpace phenom Taylor Swift to Country Music Television than are looking to CMT for their next Taylor Swift, it might simply be that the first genre to unify in order to protect and encourage its own financial interests back in 1958 is, 50 years later, the first to embrace the death of genre as a concept.

Kid Rock and Lil Wayne

Kenny & the Wailers

History Lessons

2008-12-01T11:48:00.001-08:00

(for the college football fan)
The preseason USA Today/Coaches Poll, coupled with their current records:

1. Georgia (9-3)
2. USC (10-1)
3. Ohio State (10-2)
4. Oklahoma (11-1)
5. Florida (11-1)
6. LSU (7-5)
7. Missouri (9-3)
8. West Virginia (7-4)
9. Clemson (7-5)
10. Texas (11-1)
11. Auburn (5-7)
12. Wisconsin (7-5)
13. Kansas (7-5)
14. Texas Tech (11-1)
15. Virginia Tech (8-4)
16. Arizona St. (5-6)
17. BYU (10-2)
18. Tennessee (5-7)
19. Illinois (5-7)
20. Oregon (9-3)
21. USF (7-4)
22. Penn St. (11-1)
23. Wake Forest (7-5)
24. Michigan (3-9)
25. Fresno St. (7-5)

Not only are 5 of these teams not even bowl eligible this year, nearly half of them have at least 5 losses and more than half are unranked today. Make of it what you will

Free Dr. Pepper! and related musings.

2008-11-20T15:00:00.000-08:00

From AP:

Dr Pepper is making good on its promise of free soda now that the release of Guns N' Roses' "Chinese Democracy" is a reality.
The soft-drink maker said in March that it would give a free soda to everyone in America if the album dropped in 2008. "Chinese Democracy," infamously delayed since recording began in 1994, goes on sale Sunday.
"We never thought this day would come," Tony Jacobs, Dr Pepper's vice president of marketing, said in a statement. "But now that it's here, all we can say is: The Dr Pepper's on us."
Beginning Sunday at 12:01 a.m., coupons for a free 20-ounce soda will be available for 24 hours on Dr Pepper's Web site. They'll be honored until Feb. 28.

This is just great news for Dr. Pepper on the heels of a terrible 3rd quarter earnings report:

On Thursday, the company said net earnings in the third quarter dropped 31.2%, to $106.0 million, or 41 cents a share, from $154.0 million, or 61 cents a share, in the same period a year ago. Sales fell 2.0%, to $1.51 billion, from $1.54 billion a year ago and were just below the $1.52 billion expected by analysts.
The company now expects sales growth of 1.0% and adjusted earnings between $1.83 and $1.86 a share. Analysts have been projecting annual earnings of $1.95 a share.

Way to go, Dr. Pepper. That Texas-sized ego of yours just made a bad situation worse. Not only are you in fiscal freefall, but now you've got to give away millions of gallons of product FOR FREE because you decided to shoot off your mouth about something that has nothing to do with the beverage business. That's just the kind of stuff that's gotten Texas booted out of Washington leadership for the first time in...forever:

When President Bush turns the Oval Office over to Barack Obama, he might as well dump the Lone Star of Texas into the bed of his pickup and haul it off with him. The 28th state has loomed large over Washington for much of the past century — think the president, his father, Lyndon Johnson, Sam Rayburn, John Tower, Dick Armey and Tom DeLay.
But at noon on Jan. 20, Texas becomes — please don't throw things — just another state. Currently, only two Texas Democrats chair committees in the House — Silvestre Reyes (Intelligence) and Gene Green (Ethics) — and neither of them is standing.
Without a Texan in the White House or in a top-level leadership spot, members from the state may have to work across the aisle if they hope to bring home the bacon like they did in days of yore.

Seems we're on our way to saying, "So long, Texas!" Say hi to Alaska out there in the land of Obscurity. Coincidentally, the Texas-Alaska connection was established last week, in another Dr. Pepper related story. Quoth one Sarah Palin:

I never asked for anything more than a Diet Dr. Pepper once in a while.

Now, we can blame guilt by association with those pesky Alaskans, or chalk it up to a general Texan malaise, but I know the truth. The real reason for the demise of Dr. Pepper? Unleashing this unpardonable monstrosity on an inexplicably trusting public:

How do you expect the American people to respect you after you do something like that to them?

Pirates!

2008-11-17T19:31:00.000-08:00

So I was intending to write a post in praise of pirate movies and I still might, although it was turning into more of a post in praise of Michael Curtiz, anyway, and while a worthwhile venture, that post would require more work than I care to put in right now. Besides, real pirates suddenly started cropping up in the news like crazy so I turned the post in that general direction.

For those who haven't caught it in the news, and it's entirely possible you missed it, given the round-the-clock "Will he or won't he offer the Sec of State to Hillary" and "California is on fire again!!!!" noise, Somali pirates have been terrorizing the Gulf of Aden off Africa's east coast.

In their most audacious attack yet, Saturday they hijacked the MV Sirius Star, one of the world's largest oil tankers, laden with more than 2 million barrels of crude oil. The assault took place nearly 450 miles off the coast of the Horn of Africa.
Source: Forbes

Now, I know what you're thinking, "2 things: 1) Who cares about pirates in Africa? and 2) There are still freaking pirates? In 2008?!?"

On the 2nd question, yes, there are still pirates. The thing is, just like everybody else, pirates have adapted with the times.
This is our typical image of a pirate:

This is a modern day Somali pirate:

As you can see, not only have pirates updated their wardrobe (frankly, taking a step backward) and gone multi-culti (hurray, diversity!), they have 20th century technology like walkie-talkies and water-resistant quartz wrist-watches. Also gone are the requisite peg leg, parrot, and treasure map.

Piracy is actually growing in popularity among the desperately poor Somali youth:

The main lure is money. Most of the hijacked ships have brought ransoms of at least $10,000, and sometimes much more. Many pirates, particularly in the northern Puntland region, have quickly become local celebrities, flaunting their newfound cash by building palatial beachside villas, marrying extra wives or roaring around its dusty towns in flashy cars. And that has attracted many young men desperate for work in one of the poorest countries on the planet.
"Back in 2005, there were just five Somali pirate gangs, with fewer than 100 gunmen," Andrew Mwangura, head of the East African Seafarers' Assistance Programme, said, "Now that youths who used to work as bodyguards for warlords or militia for the government see the rewards available at sea, our estimate is that there are between 1,100 and 1,200 pirates."

I know it's illegal and would require I live in Somalia and amongst pirates, but I'd gladly sign up for a palatial beachside villa. Even one in Somalia.

Now, back to the first question, why you should care:
1. Oil!
From the aforementioned Forbes article:

Roughly 11% of the world's seaborne petroleum passes through the Gulf of Aden. If the incidents continue unabated, shipping vessels may opt to avoid the Gulf of Aden by taking the longer route to Europe and North America round South Africa's Cape of Good Hope, which would almost certainly drive up commodities prices.

2. Pirates could ruin Christmas
From 1up:

While Somali pirates have plagued the Horn of Africa for years, what's of particular concern now is that they've been encroaching into the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea, imperiling access to the Suez Canal -- a major shipping route that connects Europe to the Middle East and Asia. It's used by firms to transport oil, gas, coal, toys, and yes, videogames, but the attacks have gotten so frequent that firms are considering diverting shipments around Africa to the south, through the Cape of Good Hope instead. Doing so, according to PC World, could increase transit times by up to three weeks.
"Despite all the publicity over piracy it will really hit home when consumers in the West find they haven't got their Nintendo gifts this Christmas," said Sam Dawson, of the International Transport Workers' Federation, to Reuters. "If there isn't a let up and active intervention by navies in the region, the impact on trade will come within weeks or months because we've gone from one attack every couple of weeks to four in a single day."

3. It provides a new option for veterans/soldiers looking to go Blackwater
Just in case they're looking for something to do now that the Iraq shakedown is winding down:
Read:

The Moyock, N.C., company has a ship in Hampton Roads ready to begin patrolling the Gulf of Aden to protect merchant vessels against pirates. The company has spoken to about 10 shipping firms but as yet has no takers, said Bill Mathews, Blackwater Worldwide executive vice president.
"There's definitely a need and a desire," Mathews said during a tour of the 183-foot vessel, named McArthur, on Friday. It's moored at a commercial pier at Little Creek Naval Amphibious Base. Mathews said the crew and guards are qualified to provide maritime security, noting that the security teams would consist of former Navy SEALs. The force is highly trained in handling vehicle boardings and anti-terrorism missions.

The use of private companies to protect merchant ships has a long history, said Claude Berube, a former congressional staffer and professor who has written on the topic. The East India Co. employed private convoys about a century ago along the coast of Africa, he said.
Even today, the area remains at risk. As piracy threats have grown near the Horn of Africa, insurance premiums on ships have risen ten-fold, Berube said. The U.S. Navy and its allies cannot cover all the seas, and a private force could help fill the security gap, he said. "It would be feasible," he said. "I think we have to be open to all options."

4. There is that whole international terrorism thing
According to the State Dept.

Al-Shabaab is a violent and brutal extremist group with a number of individuals affiliated with al-Qaida. Many of its senior leaders are believed to have trained and fought with al-Qaida in Afghanistan.

So, there's the skinny on pirates. I have no idea what we should do to stop Somali piracy (short of simply blowing up pirate ships). I just kept seeing this pirate stuff on the news and figured I'd look into it. This is what I found and now you know. I resist the temptation to compare these folks to the Barbary pirates, because they are nowhere close to that level of naval prowess, but they are a real problem just the same. Someone should do something, but like most international problems dealing with Islamic terrorists, no one is sure just what.

A "Legend"-ary Blunder

2008-11-13T21:18:00.000-08:00

So, after giving John Legend a few more listens through the week, I'm certain I was a bit over the top in my criticism of the album. It's better than I gave it credit for. I still think it's the weakest of his three albums, but not so far off the mark. Just givin the man his proper due. The album is solid.

For Veteran's Day

2008-11-11T09:10:00.000-08:00

In case you didn't know, Veteran's Day was originally called Armistice Day, celebrating the signing of the Treaty of Versailles at the end of WW1. Here, in memoriam is an address from General Omar Bradley from 1948. Bradley was the last man designate a 5-star general and was the first Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff by Harry Truman.

An Armistice Day Address

By General Omar N. Bradley
Boston, Massachusetts
November 10, 1948

TOMORROW is our day of conscience. For although it is a monument to victory, it is also a symbol of failure. Just as it honors the dead, so must it humble the living.

Armistice Day is a constant reminder that we won a war and lost a peace.

It is both a tribute and an indictment: A tribute to the men who died that their neighbors might live without fear of aggression. An indictment of those who lived and forfeited their chance for peace.

Therefore, while Armistice Day is a day for pride, it is for pride in the achievements of others—humility in our own.

Neither remorse nor logic can hide the fact that our armistice ended in failure. Not until the armistice myth exploded in the blast of a Stuka bomb did we learn that the winning of wars does not in itself make peace. And not until Pearl Harbor did we learn that non-involvement in peace means certain involvement in war.

We paid grievously for those faults of the past in deaths, disaster, and dollars.

It was a penalty we knowingly chose to risk. We made the choice when we defaulted on our task in creating and safeguarding a peace.

It is no longer possible to shield ourselves with arms alone against the ordeal of attack. For modern war visits destruction on the victor and the vanquished alike. Our only complete assurance of surviving World War III is to halt it before it starts.

For that reason we clearly have no choice but to face the challenge of these strained times. To ignore the danger of aggression is simply to invite it. It must never again be said of the American people: Once more we won a war; once more we lost a peace. If we do we shall doom our children to a struggle that may take their lives.

ARMED forces can wage wars but they cannot make peace. For there is a wide chasm between war and peace—a chasm that can only be bridged by good will, discussion, compromise, and agreement. In 1945 while still bleeding from the wounds of aggression, the nations of this world met in San Francisco to build that span from war to peace. For three years—first hopefully, then guardedly, now fearfully—free nations have labored to complete that bridge. Yet again and again they have been obstructed by a nation whose ambitions thrive best on tension, whose leaders are scornful of peace except on their own impossible terms.

The unity with which we started that structure has been riddled by fear and suspicion. In place of agreement we are wrangling dangerously over the body of that very nation whose aggression had caused us to seek each other as allies and friends.

Only three years after our soldiers first clasped hands over the Elbe, this great wartime ally has spurned friendship with recrimination, it has clenched its fists and skulked in conspiracy behind it secretive borders.

As a result today we are neither at peace nor war. Instead we are engaged in this contest of tension, seeking agreement with those who disdain it, rearming, and struggling for peace.

Time can be for or against us.

It can be for us if diligence in our search for agreement equals the vigilance with which we prepare for a storm.

It can be against us if disillusionment weakens our faith in discussion—or if our vigilance corrodes while we wait.

Disillusionment is always the enemy of peace. And today—as after World War I —disillusionment can come from expecting too much, too easily, too soon. In our impatience we must never forget that fundamental differences have divided this world; they allow no swift, no cheap, no easy solutions.

While as a prudent people we must prepare ourselves to encounter what we may be unable to prevent, we nevertheless must never surrender ourselves to the certainty of that encounter.

For if we say there is no good in arguing with what must inevitably come, then we shall be left with no choice but to create a garrison state and empty our wealth into arms. The burden of long-term total preparedness for some indefinite but inevitable war could not help but crush the freedom we prize. It would leave the American people soft victims for bloodless aggression.

BOTH the East and the West today deprecate war. Yet because of its threatening gestures, its espousal of chaos, its secretive tactics, and its habits of force—one nation has caused the rest of the world to fear that it might recklessly resort to force rather that be blocked in its greater ambitions.

The American people have said both in their aid to Greece and in the reconstruction of Europe that any threat to freedom is a threat to our own lives. For we know that unless free peoples stand boldly and united against the forces of aggression, they may fall wretchedly, one by one, into the web of oppression.

It is fear of the brutal unprincipled use of force by reckless nations that might ignore the vast reserves of our defensive strength that has caused the American people to enlarge their air, naval, and ground arms.

Reluctant as we are to muster this costly strength, we must leave no chance for miscalculation in the mind of any aggressor.

Because in the United States it is the people who are sovereign, the Government is theirs to speak their voice and to voice their will, truthfully and without distortion.

We, the American people, can stand cleanly before the entire world and say plainly to any state:

“This Government will not assail you.

“You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressor.”

Since the origin of the American people, their chief trait has been the hatred of war. And yet these American people are ready to take up their arms against aggression and destroy if need be by their might any nation which would violate the peace of the world.

There can be no compromise with aggression anywhere in the world. For aggression multiplies—in rapid succession—disregard for the rights of man. Freedom when threatened anywhere is at once threatened everywhere.

NO MORE convincing an avowal of their peaceful intentions could have been made by the American people than by their offer to submit to United Nations the secret of the atom bomb. Our willingness to surrender this trump advantage that atomic energy might be used for the peaceful welfare of mankind splintered the contentions of those word-warmakers that our atom had been teamed with the dollar for imperialistic gain.

Yet because we asked adequate guarantees and freedom of world-wide inspection by the community of nations itself, our offer was declined and the atom has been recruited into this present contest of nerves. To those people who contend that secrecy and medieval sovereignty are more precious than a system of atomic control, I can only reply that it is a cheap price to pay for peace.

The atom bomb is far more than a military weapon. It may—as Bernard Baruch once said—contain the choice between the quick and the dead. We dare not forget that the advantage in atomic warfare lies with aggression and surprise. If we become engaged in an atom bomb race, we may simply lull ourselves to sleep behind an atomic stockpile. The way to win an atomic war is to make certain it never starts.

WITH the monstrous weapons man already has, humanity is in danger of being trapped in this world by its moral adolescents. Our knowledge of science has clearly outstripped our capacity to control it. We have many men of science; too few men of God. We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected the Sermon on the Mount. Man is stumbling blindly through a spiritual darkness while toying with the precarious secrets of life and death. The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about killing than we know about living.

This is our twentieth century’s claim to distinction and to progress.

IN OUR concentration on the tactics of strength and resourcefulness which have been used in the contest for blockaded Berlin, we must not forget that we are also engaged in a long-range conflict of ideas. Democracy can withstand ideological attacks if democracy will provide earnestly and liberally for the welfare of its people. To defend democracy against attack, men must value freedom. And to value freedom they must benefit by it in happier and more secure lives for their wives and their children.

Throughout this period of tension in which we live, the American people must demonstrate conclusively to all other peoples of the world that democracy not only guarantees man’s human freedom but that it guarantees his economic dignity and progress as well. To practice freedom and make it work, we must cherish the individual; we must provide him the opportunities for reward and impress upon him the responsibilities a free man bears to the society in which he lives.

Listen Up

2008-11-09T20:21:00.000-08:00

Politics and such aside, it's time to talk music.

John Legend - Evolver
Haven't listened to it enough to give it a fair hearing, but I can say I was not particularly enthusiastic about it, the middle of the album was a muddle of mid-tempo fluff and guest artists (Kanye, Estelle, Brandy) all sounding like will.I.am re-hash. Even the songwriting seems off compared to Legend's previous efforts. He leaves the signature grand piano at home for the most part, favoring synths and strings and drum machines. I never thought 'generic' would be a word that would apply to a John Legend album. It's not bad, mind you. There are some solid songs and Andre 3000 offers an entertaining rap verse on Green Light (which I understand was the first single, so if you listen to the radio or watch music videos, you've no doubt already heard it).
Quickly feat. Brandy

Robin Thicke - Something Else
Robin Thicke shows John Legend how to make 3rd album. Not content to simply replicate the soft-spoken manner of his breakout hit, "Lost Without U" (which, incidentally, I thought was one of the weaker tracks on his last album, but I digress) for 12-13 tracks, he dug deep and pulled out, well, something else. A throwback 70s funk/soul sound made fresh. Unlike the current (mostly) Mark Ronson-produced or imitating British retro-R&B which is digging up every Motown riff and drum beat from the 60s, Thicke looks to the 70s for inspiration and finds it in spades. And then he doesn't stop there; he drops a little Lou Reed meets Curtis Mayfield gem on us called Shadow of Doubt that stands out simply by being different from the rest of the album, and yet completely at home with the rest of the songs. It just works. And he makes room for his rap buddy Lil Wayne to take the lead on the album closer while Thicke just sings the chorus. That takes confidence that you know what you're doing. And he does. An excellent effort.
Sidestep

Leigh Jones - Music in My Soul
The first find and project from Kerry Gordy, son of Motown founder Berry Gordy. Carrying dad's endorsement, Kerry gives us Leigh Jones, a jazz-soul-pop-blues chanteuse, filling the gap between Alice Smith and Chrisette Michele. The first time I listened to her album I was more impressed by the songwriting/production (which are both top-notch) than by her as a singer. Then, I kept listening because the songs are so good and it just kinda grew on me. And then I realized why...it's fun. Sure, it's mostly jazzy ballads, but she knows how to sing the songs incredibly well, even though she's not the best singer, so they come alive. And when the bluesy I'm Leaving You comes on, I defy you to not sway along with that familiar groove.
Have It Your Way

One Flew South
One Flew South is basically a pop vocal harmony trio who play country music. Imagine The Eagles/CSNY singing Rascal Flatts (if the thought don't cause you to go into convulsions). The guys are older than most new artists coming out, but that only serves to make the songs sharper/better-written and the harmonies tighter. I know country is a divisive genre for some reason, but this should be tolerable to anyone who appreciates a good vocal. Having grown up on a steady diet of Beach Boys and Boyz 2 Men, I'm something of a sucker for a harmony group.
Life

Willie Nelson & Wynton Marsalis - Two Men With the Blues [Live]
Willie. Wynton. 'nuff said.
That's All

That's all. For now.

Community Organizer in Chief?

2008-11-06T15:00:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from Mary Sanchez:
It was a mistake for the McCain camp to dismiss Obama’s days as a community organizer as a bunch of airy-fairy nonsense. Obama has clearly learned how to motivate people, even if his style seems overly naive. At the top of his Web site is this quote from Obama: “I’m asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington … I’m asking you to believe in yours.”

OK, that sounds puffy nice, so easy to mock. Except that most people gravitate to goodwill if approached right. We’re a nation that put the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” series on best-seller lists, for goodness sake. What most people tend not to have readily available, however, are the political connections and savvy to change things they dislike about their neighborhoods, city governments and workplaces. Community organizing gives them that.

The Obama campaign has drawn a lot of people into the fold who had never been involved in politics. People found themselves in leadership roles, planning strategy, with access to voter rolls online — and they found themselves being held accountable for what they accomplished. That’s a far different concept than giving someone a sign to stand on street corner with on Election Day.

Community organizing believes that government should be of the people, by the people and for the people. You can’t get much more patriotic or democratic than that.

And I think we'll make that the last word on the 2008 presidential election. Onward.

Reflection on the Election

2008-11-04T22:36:00.000-08:00

I'll bet you can guess who delivered this speech without my telling you:

Excerpted:
I know it's really hard when we think of the tragic midnight of injustice and oppression that we've had to live under so many years, but let us not become bitter. Let us never indulge in hate campaigns, for we can't solve the problem like that. Somebody must have sense in this world. And to hate for hate does nothing but intensify the existence of hate in the universe. We must not use violence. Maybe sometimes we will have to be the victims of violence but never let us be the perpetrators of violence. For if we succumb to the temptation of using violence in our struggle, unborn generations would be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness and our chief legacy to the future would be an endless rain of meaningless chaos. We must not use violence. Oh, sometimes as we struggle it will be necessary to boycott. But let us remember as we boycott that a boycott is never an end. A boycott is merely means to awaken within the oppressor the sense of shame and to let him know that we don't like how we are being treated; but the end my friends is reconciliation, the end is redemption.

Oh, no matter how much we are mistreated there is still a voice crying through the vistas of time saying, "Love your enemy." "Bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you. And then, and only then, can you matriculate into the university of eternal life. We must get a hold of this simple principle of love and let it be our guiding principle throughout our struggle.

This means that through this period we will need leaders on every hand and at every scene who will stress this...Oh, this is a period for leaders. Leaders not in love with publicity, but in love with humanity. Leaders not in love with money, but in love with justice. Leaders who can subject their particular egos to the greatness of the cause.

Oh,
God give us leaders.
A time like this demands great leaders.  
Leaders whom the lust of office cannot kill;
 Leaders whom the spoils of life cannot buy;
 Leaders who possess opinions and will;
 Leaders who will not lie; 
Leaders who can stand before a demagogue and damn his  treacherous flatteries without winking.  
Tall leaders, sun-crowned, who live above the fog  in public duty and in private thinking.

And this is the need my friends of the hour. This is the need all over the nation. In every community there is a dire need for leaders who will lead the people, who stand today amid the wilderness toward the promise land of freedom and justice. God grant that ministers, and lay leaders, and civic leaders, and businessmen, and professional people all over the nation will rise up and use the talent and the finances that God has given them, and lead the people on toward the Promised Land of freedom with rational, calm, nonviolent means. This is the great challenge of the hour.

And if we will do this my friends we will be able to speed up the coming of this new order, which is destined to come. This new world in which men will be able to live together as brothers. This new world in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of all human personality. This new world in which men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Yes, this new world in which men will no longer take necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes. This new world in which men will learn the old principle of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. They will hear once more the voice of Jesus crying out through the generations saying, "Love everybody." This is that world. Then right here in America we will be able to sing with new meaning:
My country 'tis of thee,
 Sweet land of liberty,
 Of thee I sing.
 Land where my fathers died,
 Land of the Pilgrims pride, 
From every mountain side,
 Let freedom ring.

As I heard a powerful orator say not long ago that must become literally true. Freedom must ring from every mountain side. Let us go out this evening with that determination. Yes, let it ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado. Let it ring from the prodigious hill tops of New Hampshire. Let it ring from the mighty Alleghanies of Pennsylvania. Let it ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. But not only that. From every mountain side let freedom ring. Yes, let us go out and be determined that freedom will ring from every mole hill in Mississippi. Let it ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let it ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let it ring from every mountain and hill of Alabama. From every mountain side let freedom ring. And when that happens we will be able to go out and sing a new song: "Free at last, free at last, great God almighty I'm free at last."

There are still Black Panthers? In 2008?

2008-11-04T12:20:00.000-08:00

This nonsense is just as bad as that embarrassing Ashley Todd hoax. Come on, America. Do better.

Endorsements '08

2008-11-02T19:51:00.000-08:00

The election is just around the corner and since I've been MIA for a while I haven't gotten around to offering any kind of official endorsement on this thing yet so I figured I better slip it in just before the election.

That said, the presidential election is gonna be a rout and everyone is jumping on the Barack Bandwagon in the waning days of the campaign, even Joe Lieberman is making nice (especially since his pal John McCain found a new Joe to exploit).

Since there's no point in endorsing this late in the game, especially when the outcome is not in doubt, we've got to endorse elsewhere.

Therefore, after much consideration (well, much might be a bit much), this blog is pleased to endorse in the 2008 election:

CNN's Campbell Brown as Best New Pundit of the Election Season

Why?

The transition from "hard news" White House correspondent to armchair analyst never looked so easy.

We are also endorsing:
Michelle Obama for First Lady
and
Meghan McCain for First Daughter
and
Darius Rucker for First Pop-Rocker turned R&B/Soul Man turned Pop-Country Crooner:

Mind Your Own Business, Alaska

2008-10-31T15:49:00.000-07:00

Maybe Todd Palin was on to something. The "Alaska First, Alaska Always" slogan of his former party might just be exactly what the doctor ordered for Alaskan politicians. Though I might proffer an additional clause: "Alaska Only".

You see, over the last year or so we've had a close-up look at Alaska's political elite and, plainly, it's not a pretty sight. If I may paraphrase Diane Court in Say Anything, "I've glimpsed our future with Alaskan politicians leading our country and all I can say is...go back." Please. Please, go back to your dog-sled races, moose burgers, and ice fishing. The combined effect of the loony Democratic primary candidacy of Mike Gravel, the through the looking-glass vice presidential candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that freshly-minted stain on the Senate courtesy of Ted Stevens create an unequivocal impression of unfitness for inclusion at the grown up table. And these are the folks you picked out the general population to lead you?

The travails of Gov. Palin are well known to all by now and need no rehash so, oh what the heck, here's Andrew Sullivan on a rant:

If you'll recall, we met Mike Gravel back in the Democratic primary. The crazy guy at the end of the stage who never got a question. You remember him, the one who made Dennis Kucinich appear reasonable by contrast. The one who gave this unforgettable ad:

The only thing more bizarre than this ad, is the former far-left Democratic senator's broad-minded support of Gov. Palin as a VP nominee...

Sarah has literally come to the national scene without owing anything to any party or corporate interest––not even McCain––he needs her more than she needs him. Imagine a person a heart beat away not owned by the military-industrial complex, Wall Street, corporate America or AIPAC. WOW! Can this last? Probably not. But she does have an uncanny sense of political direction and the ability to capitalize on change like putting the public interest above Republican Party interests.

...before taking a pot-shot at her running mate...

In the interest of full disclosure: I have no intention of voting for McCain. He is too steeped in the use of military power to solve problems and American imperialism—and the wars it creates. At times McCain has been a maverick, but, unfortunately, never that consistently. There are too many temptations in Washington, even for a man born on third base.

...before falling back into derangement...

Sarah: keep up the practice of having Todd hang out with you in your official capacities. Insist that he be given a clearance equal to yours, so that you are not excluded from the full depth of his counsel. If push comes to shove, he is the only one you can trust. He must study, read and grow in your office as quickly as you. What you face is more than one person can handle.

So, on behalf of everyone here in the Lower 48, go away. Leave us alone. You come down out of your crazy Alaskan/Aleutian time zone and offer naught but bewilderment. It's been a diverting reminder to all of us that you exist, but it's really time to go back where you belong: somewhere in the recesses of our collective consciousness. Let the Lower 48 handle it. We're fine, we're good, really. In the words of your own governor, "thanks, but no thanks" for your participation in national affairs. As we say (or rather sing) down here in contiguous states, "It's one (Gravel), two (Palin), three (Stevens) strikes you're out at the old ball game". Don't act like you don't know the song, I know you play baseball up there in the land of the midnight sun:

The Narratives of the Candidates

2008-10-30T20:02:00.000-07:00

Out of retirement with this highly recommended piece by David Bordwell about Obama and McCain and the narratives they've constructed for themselves (through their memoirs and the campaign). I don't think I can do it justice in capsule review, so just read it.

Excerpted:

If McCain’s book is an adventure tale, Obama’s is a detective story. The through-line, as screenwriters might say, is Obama’s search for his identity as a African American. If McCain’s plot is driven by honor and duty, Obama’s depends on race and social responsibility. McCain steers by a fixed star, and is shamed when he goes off course. Obama is scanning the heavens for some stable pole that will give him a sense of who he is.

Obama’s tale is more complex than McCain’s, but each one reflects the image of the protagonist. McCain lives in a world of clear-cut demands, called the Code, and so any problem comes from failing to meet the obligations of duty. Obama’s world is hazy and uncertain; there is no Code. How should a man like him, with his heritage, find a way to live with dignity?

...we can say that stories create curiosity about past events, suspense about future events, and surprise by means of unexpected events. Whatever other emotions a narrative evokes, we need to feel at least one of these three states. We can distinguish the two Presidential campaigns’ “master narratives,” along these dimensions.

In the ongoing electioneering, Obama’s campaign is now driven almost completely by suspense. He’s not asking us to find out more about what led to the war in Iraq or the economic collapse or the crumbling infrastructure; it’s assumed that we know enough backstory. Everything is about what comes next...The very image of suspense.

McCain, by contrast, is running a campaign driven by curiosity and surprise. Many of his talking points dwell on the past. Who is Barack Obama, really? What did he have to do with Ayers, Rezko, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives? Why did he sit in Jeremiah Wright’s church? And so on. These questions ask us to feel curiosity in the form of suspicion about McCain’s rival. The fact that most in his audience haven’t taken up the hint has driven the campaign to try to invoke another emotion: surprise. The pick of Sarah Palin is the most obvious instance, but several others have followed: suspending the campaign, promising to buy people’s mortgages, yanking Joe the Plumber out of obscurity as an emblem of small business, even the “not ready yet” tagline of a recent ad. There may be more surprises to come, as gloomy Democrats fear (which only increases their feeling of suspense). At this point, the act of winning would be the ultimate McCain surprise.

So the campaigns may teach us something of interest about narratives: You can’t have a gripping narrative without some suspense. You can do without curiosity or surprise, but a story lacking suspense won’t keep us turning enough pages to be curious or surprised. Maybe that’s why the McCain campaign never had a “compelling narrative.” It didn’t build up enough of a sense of how it would win or how, after the election, the future would be different.

Clinton Global Initiative

2007-09-28T18:00:00.000-07:00

For whatever reason, Bill Clinton's Global Initiative Summit didn't seem to get much press coverage this year, so for those who missed out or, for that matter, anyone who asks "where is the good news?" or "how can I make a difference?" just take a look at some of the highlights of the wonderful, philanthropic and forward-looking endeavors and commitments put forth over the last week:

From the official organization website:
"I'm ecstatic about the work that's been done here over the past three days. We have seen firsthand that one commitment of action inspires a myriad of others," President Bill Clinton said. "The quality and level of commitments that we have seen this year are a testament to the positive impact our CGI members and initiatives are having around the world."

Examples of the impact this year's commitments will potentially have around the world, include:

8.5 million out-of-school children will be enabled to enroll in school for the first time.
50 million people will have access to treatment of neglected tropical diseases.
170,031,331 acres of forest will be protected or restored.
11.2 million people will be empowered with increased access to sustainable incomes

In addition to the long list of new commitments made at this year's meeting, hundreds of commitments were made by more than 40,000 people who visited the newly launched MyCommitment.org. Through this online tool, nearly 200,000 hours of volunteer time and close to $130,000 were committed.

To help further cultivate a new generation of philanthropists and citizen-servants, President Clinton announced that CGI is launching CGI-U, an effort to expand CGI to college campuses.

"I believe the world has never needed a community of givers more than it does today. CGI-U will serve as a catalyst for commitments of action by young people around the country to make a difference in their world," Clinton said.

Several celebrites got involved:
"Actor Brad Pitt is expanding his commitment to New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward with his Make it Right project to create a community of 150 affordable and sustainable homes in one of the areas hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina. Pitt and his partner Steve Bing are challenging members of the Clinton Global Initiative to join them in rebuilding the Lower Ninth Ward by each pledging to match $5 million in contributions to the Make it Right project, for a total of $10 million.

"The heart and soul of New Orleans, specifically the people of the Lower 9th Ward, are paramount to this project," said Pitt. "The words of one elderly man who is determined to return to New Orleans led to the name of our organization: he asked us, directly simply and profoundly, to help make it right. So that's what we're doing. We're going to help to make it right with 150 sustainable, affordable houses - houses that stand out for their design both aesthetically and structurally, so that these people can live in beautiful safe structures that respect their spirit and provide a good quality of life."

Jessica Biel and her father Jon Biel founded the Make the Difference Network to allow everyone to be a "grassroots philanthropist" by creating a social networking site that brings thousands of small- to medium-sized non-profits together with millions of potential donors. Users will be able to search a list of specific "wishes" posted by non-profits and then fund those wishes. After the first year, $30 million will be donated to 5,000 non-profits at an average of $500 per month. The second year should see those numbers rise to 10,000 non-profits and $60 million donated, with a two-year total of $90 million.

"Shakira, known for her provocative outfits and sex-infused songs, looked downright prim and proper as she shook former President Bill Clinton’s hand--a gesture which brought Clinton out from behind the podium--as he announced her organization's $40 million commitment to help relieve the effects of natural disasters in Peru and Nicaragua through investment in education, sanitation and water systems."

Other commitments include:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Wal-Mart commits to reducing the water, plastic and cardboard used in laundry detergents, both by committing to stock only concentrated detergents, and by creating conditions that encourage other retailers to follow. By May, Wal-Mart will sell only concentrated detergent in all of its US stores. The impact of this effort will save more than 400 million gallons of water, 95 million pounds of plastic resin and 125 million pounds of cardboard.

Starbucks Coffee Co.
To aid the emerging African coffee industry, Starbucks will increase its regional coffee imports, and set up an on-site Farmer Support Center to provide technical assistance and credit access to aspiring coffee growers. Over this two year commitment, Starbucks will double the amount of coffee it purchases from East Africa and provide $1 million of credit to farmers.

H.J. Heinz Company Foundation & Helen Keller International (HKI): Sprinkles® for Rural India
HKI and the H.J. Heinz Company Foundation are making a $300,000 commitment to distribute Sprinkles, a vitamin and mineral supplement to 6.5 million children in India, providing the necessary iron, iodine and vitamin A for a healthy diet.

Mexican Reforestation by Coca-Cola Company
The $6.2 million Mexican program will plant 30 million trees to restore 25,000 hectares of important natural habitat with native species, helping to reduce greenhouse gases and remove more than 350,000 tons of CO2 over five years. Coca-Cola has also made a reforestation commitment in Brazil.

Princeton-Brown-Dillard Partnership
This commitment is the first example of a high-level partnership formed between relatively wealthy educational institutions and a relatively poor one. Brown University, in partnership with Princeton University, will give much needed academic, administrative, technical and consulting assistance to support Dillard University in New Orleans. Dillard University, a historically black institution, was devastated by Hurricane Katrina. This commitment will directly impact Dillard's 100 person faculty, as well as the more than 1,100 students currently enrolled.

Room to Read: Scaling Success: 10,000 bi-lingual libraries by 2010
By 2010, Room to Read aims to extend its geographic reach to 15 countries, including a launch in Latin America. As part of this $25 million commitment, Room to Read will expand its flagship Reading Room program to open 5,000 additional libraries, bringing the total to 10,000 libraries and self-publish more than 3.5 million children's books in local languages across three continents.

Harnessing Geothermal Energy in Africa
This $150m funded by the Geothermal Power Company of Iceland will help countries in the African Rift Valley to develop their geothermal energy resources helping them to develop sustainably. The project will invest in comprehensive research into the geothermal potential of Djibouti and if successful will build a large power plant driven on geothermal power.

Maternal and Infant Health Initiative
Maureen Mwanawasa, the First Lady of Zambia, made a 5 year, $2 million commitment with a number of partners to strengthen Zambia's maternal and infant healthcare system and improve the country's health statistics. The commitment will benefit more than 50,000 expectant mothers living in Zambia's Central Province annually.

Fighting Malaria with Bed Nets
The United Methodist Church commits to donating at least 150,000 insecticide-treated bed nets in the areas of the Côte d'Ivoire that are most affected by malaria. Because The United Methodist Church of Côte d'Ivoire is spread throughout the country, it has a "ready made" system for providing education and for distributing nets. In addition, members of the Texas Annual Conference and other US church leaders will help distribute the nets throughout the country. This action will affect the lives of 600,000 people.

Vehicle Leasing Program
The Skoll Foundation will provide credit support of $15.9 million to purchase 224 vehicles (motorcycles, double-cab pick-ups and ambulances) which will be leased to the Gambian Department of State for Health. These vehicles will be put into the established Riders for Health fleet management system in Gambia, allowing Riders to help Gambia to occupy a unique position as the first African country to have total health coverage for its entire population-every man, woman and child.

Micro-Land Ownership in India: Providing Economic and Social Opportunity for the Poorest
In this commitment that totals nearly $8 million, the Rural Development Institute together with nine partners will assist rural Indian families securing land rights for small plots of land. This will provide them not only with a place to live but an opportunity to produce food on their land from which they can make an income.

No, No, No, Laws Are For Criminals, Not Me

2007-09-23T23:21:00.000-07:00

While everyone with a TV camera and a week's worth of 24-hour news cycles to fill was down in Jena last week covering protests and asking Al Sharpton his opinion on things, a tiny hamlet up in New Hampshire was also being plagued by a high school legal scandal of it's own.

It appears that at the end of last semester a group of up to dozens of students conspired to cheat on their finals to ensure good grades, and in the process broke into the school one night to steal the exams. Well, after an investigation the authorities decided to press misdemeanor charges against several students, dubbed "The Notorious Nine", with the threat of having them bumped up to felony charges if the parents insist on taking the case to trial.

Here, as in Jena, no is arguing what happened, the students and parents admit and accept that they unlawfully broke into the school to steal the tests and beat a kid unconscious, respectively, and in both cases, the supporters of the students feel the charges, any charges, are too severe for the offense; outrageous that their children are being treated as though they were criminals for a "schoolyard fight" or pulling a stupid prank. What is it with these so-called "pranks" recently, anyway? Breaking into school? Just a prank. Hanging nooses? What's not funny about that?. Robbing a bank? Haha, it was a joke.

Thankfully, there are people in the town that get why this was serious and inexcusable:
"The parents need to be reasonable," she said. "This is technically a Class B felony offense. How can you reduce that to a violation-level offense - which is for something like spitting on the sidewalk? Although you don't want to hammer them, you want them to know this is serious."

"We have never called the police for a cheating incident. But there is never a time when we would not call the police when someone breaks into our building," said Wayne Gersen, superintendent that oversees Hanover High School.

"They're cheating. They're breaking into the school. They deserve what they got," said Hannah Stone, a freshman.

There is talk that because this city is home to Dartmouth, the students feel added pressure to perform academically that led these students to commit these otherwise inexplicable crimes (one might argue there can't be too much pressure otherwise they'd have been well-prepared to take their tests already instead of cheating). I wonder how many of these parents and pundits pushing this excuse would allow for the same defense for crimes committed by kids from urban areas, that environmental pressures excuse illegal activity.

Is it just men, or does there seem to be a real push toward getting knee-jerk public revenge, a kind of politically correct mob justice, instead of finding the facts and applying the relevant law, even if it doesn't immediately right itself with our internal sense of the due punishment for the offender. Michael Vick got caught in dogfighting (technically, interstate gambling) and the animal rights folks want him locked away forever. Of course, according to typical sentencing, first-time offenders for his offense don't even go to jail, but don't tell that to PETA, they'll call you a soulless dog-hater and flood your e-mail inbox with pictures of mutilated dogs. The law doesn't serve their bloodlust and they clamored loud enough and so now Vick is more than likely going to prison for 12-18 months. Public pressure affecting the justice system in this way goes against the founding principles of our nation, designed to protect the few from the tyranny of the masses. (Not to mention, one might take a gander at the 14th amendment, time permitting)

Moreover, we are told the Jena case is about race relations, but what is anyone doing in Jena to foster the desired racial reconciliation by calling the town a haven for racist behavior? If anything, wouldn't that drive the wedge deeper? In Hanover, NH, is anyone actually working to round out the lives of students so academic pressure doesn't lead to further anti-social behavior? Or will we just point fingers and assign blame on somebody else, anybody else.

*******************

In other news, the First Amendment Center released their annual "State of the First Amendment Survey" results last week -
This year’s survey, being released to mark both annual Constitution Day (Sept. 17) activities and the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, found:

** Just 56% believe that the freedom to worship as one chooses extends to all religious groups, regardless of how extreme — down 16 points from 72% in 2000.

**58% of Americans would prevent protests during a funeral procession, even on public streets and sidewalks; and 74% would prevent public school students from wearing a T-shirt with a slogan that might offend others.

**34% (lowest since the survey first was done in 1997) think the press “has too much freedom,” but 60% of Americans disagree with the statement that the press tries to report the news without bias, and 62% believe the making up of stories is a widespread problem in the news media — down only slightly from 2006.

**25% said “the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees,” well below the 49% recorded in the 2002 survey that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, but up from 18% in 2006.

“Americans clearly have mixed views of what First Amendment freedoms are and to whom they should fully apply,” said Gene Policinski, vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center. “To me the results of this year’s survey endorse the idea of more and better education for young people — our nation’s future leaders — about our basic freedoms.”

The right to practice one’s own religion was deemed “essential” or “important” by nearly all Americans (97%); as was the right to “speak freely about whatever you want” (98%) and to “assemble, march, protest or petition the government (94%),” Policinski said. “Still, Americans are hard pressed to name the five freedoms included in the First Amendment,” he said. Speech is the only one named by a majority of respondents (64%), followed by religion (19%), press and assembly (each 16%) and petition (3%).

Kant & Petraeus & Bush & Escher

2007-09-14T13:50:00.000-07:00

For anyone who has been living under a rock this week, the Commanding General of the Multinational Force Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus testified before Congress this past week. In the course of the various lengthy hearings, Sen. John Warner (R-VA) asked Petraeus if the current course of action in Iraq is "making America safer". The General responded that he believed the current course is the best way to achieve our objectives in Iraq. The senator asked again, but it is making us safer. Petraeus responded, "Sir, I don't know, actually. I haven't sat down and thought it through..." Many jumped on him for this, Joe Biden calling it "unconscionable", but ol 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant had his back....

Excerpted from Immanuel Kant's "What is Enlightenment':
"The enlightenment requires nothing but freedom: freedom to make public use of one's own reason in all matters....On the other hand, the private use of reason may frequently be narrowly restricted without especially hindering the progress of enlightenment. By 'public use of reason' I mean that use which man, as a scholar, makes of it before the reading public . I call 'private use' that use which a man makes of his reason in a civic post that has been entrusted to him...and where arguing is not permitted: one must obey....Thus it would be very unfortunate if an officer on duty and under orders from his superiors should want to criticize the appropriateness or utility of his orders. He must obey....This is nothing that could burden his conscience. He speaks as one who is employed to speak in the name and under the orders of another."

In other news, unfortunately, it looks as though I may have been more correct than I cared to be about 2 months back when I wrote a post entitled "We Are Not Leaving Iraq", in which I laid out why I thought we are probably stuck there for the long haul, no matter how much grandstanding and fervor comes out of the left, ending with the prediction, "We aren't leaving Iraq. Not today. Not 6 months from now. Not January 20, 2009. Maybe not ever."

Then the president addressed the nation last night with just such a proposal for perpetual presence :
"This vision for a reduced American presence also has the support of Iraqi leaders from all communities. At the same time, they understand that their success will require U.S. political, economic, and security engagement that extends beyond my presidency. These Iraqi leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America. And we are ready to begin building that relationship in a way that protects our interests in the region and requires many fewer American troops."

So we stay there "until the job is done" or we stay there because the job is done? Looks like M.C. Escher somehow saw this coming too:

Back to Kant, Mr. President:
The state of peace among men living side by side is not the natural state; the natural state is one of war. This does not always mean open hostilities, but at least an unceasing threat of war. A state of peace, therefore, must be established, for in order to be secured against hostility it is not sufficient that hostilities simply be not committed; and, unless this security is pledged to each by his neighbor (a thing that can occur only in a civil state), each may treat his neighbor, from whom he demands this security, as an enemy.

Bloomberg Is At It Again

2007-09-12T20:58:00.000-07:00

After eliminating trans-fats and banning the N Word already this year, Lil Mikey B. is at it again in the Big Apple.

Excerpted from Newsweek:
Paying kids for good grades is a popular (if questionable) parenting tactic. But when school starts next week, New York City will try to use the same enticement to get parents in low-income neighborhoods more involved in their children's education and overall health. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has raised more than $40 million (much of it from his own money and the Rockefeller Foundation) to pay families a modest amount for small tasks—$50 for getting a library card or $100 to take a child to the dentist—that could make a big difference.

The experimental program, called Opportunity NYC, is modeled on a 10-year-old Mexican program called Oportunidades, which has been so successful in reducing poverty in rural areas that it has been adopted by more than 20 countries, including Argentina and Turkey. International studies have found that these programs raise school enrollment and vaccination rates and lower the number of sick days students take. Bringing this idea to Harlem and the South Bronx may not make a radical difference, concedes Linda Gibbs, the deputy mayor for Health and Human Services. But, she adds, "It makes these activities matter in a new way...A mother might demand an early-intervention evaluation [to look for developmental or learning disabilities] for a child" to get the $150 payment, Gibbs says. "If she can't find a doctor to do it, the cash incentive might make Mom more likely to ask why those services aren't available in her community."

The idea behind Opportunity NYC is called conditional cash transfer, and the program is the first of its kind in this country. It's also the exact opposite of traditional social services for the poor, which hand out money without demanding much in return. In order to find out whether this reversal works, the city is enlisting 5,000 families to take part in the social experiment. They are being chosen randomly from lists of people getting housing assistance from the city. Half will receive the incentive money and the other half won't but will function as a control group, similar to clinical trials where some patients get a drug and others get a placebo.

"At first blush, this offends every sensibility I have," says James Oddo, the Republican minority leader of the New York City Council. "But then the fiscal conservative in me takes over and I think maybe it will cost me less as a taxpayer to pay a little on the front end." At this point, taxpayers aren't being asked to pay anything. Bloomberg decided to roll out Opportunity NYC with private funds in order to evaluate the program for two years without having to endure what could have been a bruising political battle.

But if it can help families who live in the city's poorest neighborhoods, it may be a risk worth taking. Some of the Opportunity NYC participants will come from East New York, a predominantly black and Hispanic corner of Brooklyn where half of the residents live below the poverty level and only half of all adults are high-school graduates. The local high school was shut down in June after years of abysmal academic performance and a graduation rate hovering around 29 percent. "The lack of education and of significant wage earners are the biggest challenges," says Bill Wilkens, coordinator of East New York's Local Development Corporation. "This is the last frontier."

Kanye vs. 50 vs. Kenny...Who Ya Got?!?

2007-09-11T17:39:00.000-07:00

From Entertainment Weekly:
"Whose new CD will sell more when they both drop on Sept. 11, 50 Cent or Kanye West? While those two rappers continue to busy themselves trading verbal jabs over that question, a third contender is now staking his claim to that week's hotly contested sales crown: country superstar Kenny Chesney.

''It's funny how with every record that comes out, we're aware of the urban [competition], and none of those acts acknowledge that I exist,'' Chesney tells EW via email. ''Until I have that No. 1 debut on the Top 200.''

Just Who I Am: Poets and Pirates, Chesney's 11th studio album, goes on sale the same Tuesday morning as 50 Cent's Curtis and Kanye West's Graduation. Chesney's last four studio efforts have opened atop Billboard's albums chart — including his most recent effort, The Road and the Radio, which beat the original soundtrack to 50 Cent's film Get Rich or Die Tryin' when both debuted in November 2005.
50 Cent has said that he will retire from his recording career if West outsells him."

I think the odds on favorite has to be Kenny, he is the most popular artist of the decade thus far by record sales and concert sales, (as I reminded us last November), he's still on top of the country world right now and that's a large fanbase that almost certainly won't have any interest in either Kanye or 50 who will split each other's sales, but Kanye's been pushing himself out there early this week, bashing MTV again and again about having Britney open @ the VMA's instead of him, so maybe that'll help him out. Either way, as long as we can all agree that 50 Cent must lose this competition and thereby retire.

If their respective most recent videos (to my knowledge) are any indication of the quality of album, I think Kanye wins, although Kenny puts up decent competition with a tug at the heartstrings).

VS.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure 50 will outsell Kanye and we'll be stuck with this mumbling gibberish for years to come.

Summer Movie Season '07 Recap

2007-09-06T15:15:00.000-07:00

August is over, and as a result so is summer movie season. Kids are back in school, football is back, and so on, so summer movie season is therefore over as well, at least as far as I'm concerned. There are still a few summer titles in theaters, but in my opinion September starts the weak, but brief 6-7 week fall movie season before the "prestige pictures" of Oscar season start to roll out in late October/early November. Ok? Great, on to the movies!

By my count and recollection I saw 20 films in theaters this summer and for the most part they were fairly enjoyable, (only Transformers was a real waste of time) which I think says at least 1 of 3 things: 1) I try pretty hard to find the good in everything, 2) I only watch movies I know I'm going to like, or 3) This was a good summer for movies.

I think they rank out fairly well. So here we go:

The Elite:
1. Stardust - Best movie of the summer. An sweeping adventure movie experience that reminded me of the first time I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark or The Princess Bride (though not quite on the level of those two), the way fantasy used to be made before it was hijacked and serialized by LOTR and Harry Potter. How this movie is not an absolute hit is beyond me.
2. Ratatouille: Best Pixar offering since their first (Toy Story). I had it pegged as the best of the summer, until I saw Stardust last week.

The Very Good:
3. Hot Fuzz
4. Hairspray
5. The Host
6. Waitress

The Good:
7. You Kill Me
8. The Simpsons Movie
9. Knocked Up
10. Superbad
11. Sicko
12. Mr. Bean's Holiday
13. Sunshine

The Respectable:
14. Becoming Jane
15. Oceans 13
16. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
17. I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry

The Forgettable:
18. Resurrecting the Champ
19. Spiderman 3
20. Transformers

WIth the 1st Pick in the 2008 United States Military Draft the Army Selects.....

2007-09-05T18:01:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from a Newsweek.com editorial by a marine calling for the reinstatement of the draft:
The real failure of this war, the mistake that has led to all the malaise of Operation Iraqi Freedom, was the failure to not reinstitute the draft on Sept. 12, 2001—something I certainly believed would happen after running down 61 flights of the South Tower, dodging the carnage as I made my way to the Hudson River [I worked at the World Trade Center as an investment adviser for Morgan Stanley at the time]. But President Bush was determined to keep the lives of nonuniformed America—the wealthiest Americans, like himself—uninterrupted by the war. Consequently, we have a severe talent deficiency in the military, which the draft would remedy immediately. While America’s bravest are in the military, America’s brightest are not. Allow me to build a squad of the five brightest students from MIT and Caltech and promise them patrols on the highways connecting Baghdad and Fallujah, and I’ll bet that in six months they could render IED’s about as effective as a “Just Say No” campaign at a Grateful Dead show.

On a macro level, we are logistically weakened by the lack of a draft. It takes six to seven soldiers to support one infantryman in combat. So, you are basically asking 30,000 or so “grunts” to secure a nation of 26 million. I assure you, no matter who wins the 2008 election, we are staying in Iraq. But with the Marine Corps and the Army severely stressed after 3.5 years of desert and urban combat in Iraq—equipment needs replacing, recruitment efforts are coming up short—you tell me how we're going to sustain the current force structure without the draft? The president’s new war czar, Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, essentially said as much earlier this month, when he announced that considering the draft “makes sense.”

Of course, the outcry was swift and predictable. America has rejected selective service before, though always in the guise of antiwar movements. But they should really be viewed as antidraft movements, and they existed, en masse, when the wealthy could buy their way out of serving—as Teddy Roosevelt’s father and his ilk did during the Civil War, or as countless college kids did during the deferment-ridden Vietnam conflict. Not every draftee has to be a front-line Marine or soldier, but history shows us that most entrepreneurial young men, faced with a fair draft, almost always chose the front. A deferment draft, however, is a different story, and ultimately counterproductive because of the acrimony it breeds. By allowing the fortunate and, often, most talented to stay home, those who are drafted feel less important than what they are asked to die for. At the end of the day, it was this bitterness that helped fuel the massive antiwar movement that pushed Nixon to end the draft in ‘73.

I don’t favor a Vietnam-style draft, where men like the current vice president could get five deferments. I am talking about a World War II draft, with the brothers and sons of future and former presidents answering the call (and, unfortunately, dying, as a Roosevelt and a Kennedy once did) on the front line. That is when the war effort is maximized. Quite simply, the military cannot be a faceless horde to those pulling the purse strings of our great economy.

That last point is most interesting to me because I recall a few weeks back a reporter on one of these cable news shows or maybe Meet the Press said he had been talking, a few years back, to Korean War veterans who were still serving in Congress and asked them if they thought the coming generations of politicians who would never serve in the military would be more gun-shy about rolling out the Army. Almost to a man, he reported, they felt the exact opposite; that those who had never experienced combat and didn't really understand the military would be infinitely more willing to put troops into combat, thinking the military is simply a blunt instrument that can solve any and all problems around the world; unfortunately, to dare say there may be situations and problems the American military is incapable of solving is tantamount to treason in the eyes of many today.

So, is a draft the answer? Maybe, maybe not, but the calls for it are certainly getting louder, and as they do, so will the calls for us to simply end the current conflict instead.

Unnecessary Piling On

2007-08-31T20:50:00.000-07:00

Sen. Larry Craig did (or at least pleaded guilty to) a misdemeanor crime of a dubious nature. The whole incident from all accounts is at the very least bizarre and his present claims to having done nothing wrong seem to directly contradict his guilty plea. I would almost be willing to chalk this up to misunderstanding and police over-reach if it were not for that guilty plea. And his claim that the officer solicited him. According to the tape as I heard it, he tells the officer "you solicited me", but then the way he tells the story, there was no solicitation of any kind. He was simply reaching down to pick up a paper when he saw a police badge. It doesn't add up. At all. Go home, Sen. Craig, you are finished.

That said, there is no need for the incessant cries of "hypocrisy" and so on from the left, declaring incongruous the conservative stand for "traditional values" against a backdrop of never-ending corruption and moral morass (pun intended) from their end of the political spectrum. The problem is, when you set out as the champion of traditionally held beliefs and transgress them it is easier to be called a "hypocrite" than to call out someone who believes things need to change who then toes the conservative line. Conservatives are just happy you are "doing the right thing" on that particular issue. I think there should be less pointing fingers on moral issues, in a general sense, and more introspection (as an aside, I don't know how the Congress got tied up in making policy on "moral" issues in the first place. Where in article 1 of the constitution does it mention socio-cultural policy? [well, other than saying slavery could not be outlawed until at least 1808, which even then, I believe they'd argue had more to do with commerce than moral virtue]). There are no saints in Washington, and just because you don't (or can't) always live up to the ideal standard you believe in does not make you a hypocrite, does not make you a liar or a cheat or a criminal. It makes you human. But you have to try to do better or you are unforgivable and make fools of those who would forgive you. To quote Ben Franklin, "To err is human, to repent divine, to persist devilish".

That said, the conservatives need to realize that the sort of forgiveness they are advocating for Sen. Craig does not (or at the very least should not) only be extended to fellow conservatives. When are the Tom DeLay's of the world going to start advocating forgiveness for Michael Vick or Bill Clinton? No, forgiveness does not extend across the aisle, or out of the hallowed halls of Congress (unless it's for a fellow GOPer). Who cares if the other side piles on your guy when he falls, you should be the bigger pers...who am I kidding, these are politicians we're talking about; Bury the other side! Kill! Kill! Kill! Vote for me, because while I may not have anything to offer, look at those other guys, they're scum! Larry Craig was entrapped! Heckuva job, Brownie!

In other piling on related news:
Picking on kids is never the right thing to do, but nobody's perfect and this was too good to pass up (forgiveness please).

Remembering/Looking Forward to the Good ol Days

2007-08-28T20:30:00.000-07:00

We are a nation nostalgic for high school. The two big entertainment phenomena from the second half of this month were High School Musical 2, the Friday night premiere became the most watched event in the history of basic cable and the 2nd most watched program ever by the Disney target demographic 9-14 age group, and SuperBad, a hilarious raunchy, R-rated comedy about that one unforgettable night at the end of high school that should be instantly enjoyable to anyone who has ever been a 17-year old boy scored back-to-back #1 weekends at the box office despite the existence of the 2nd wave of threequels from Bourne and Rush Hour.
In both films, high school is idealized as the apex of acceptable irresponsibility and social freedom.

What I find interesting is that neither of these movies about the high school experience is really targeted toward high school kids (although I imagine high school boys will probably flock to see Superbad, they aren't technically supposed to be allowed in without an adult...but tell that to the group of unchaperoned 8th graders that were in the same showing of 300 that I attended). "Tweens" (a ridiculous designation if ever there were one) watch HSM 2 and are excited over the prospects of their coming high school year being filled with dancing, singing, and everyone gets along in the end tales. The out of high-school viewer of Superbad remembers the good ol days of high school and reminisces about the crazy adventures they had or wild schemes they concocted back in their own adolescene.

Now to the films themselves:
High School Musical 2
High School Musical 2 suffers from the worst fate that can befall a musical: the story doesn't 'sing'. Musical writers the years over stress the importance of telling a story that creates situations wherein the characters can't help but break out into song and HSM2 only has 1 such moment and its the first scene of the film. It is the last 2-3 minutes of the school year and when the bell finally rings and summer is here the characters break into song and dance in a number that compares favorably with a similar scene from Disney's mostly overlooked mid-90's stroke of genius that is A Goofy Movie.

Beyond that scene, which borrows heavily from the original High School Musical, right down to the dancing with basketballs, it descends into an extended episode of Saved by the Bell from the summer they spent at the Malibu Sands Beach Club, which isn't altogether bad, but there are several songs that are added in for the sake of having songs that aren't any good, feel needlessly tacked on, or go on too long, especially at the end of the movie. The only other song in the film that comes close to justifying its existence is I Don't Dance, a humorous number during a baseball game (once again, drawing heavily from the first movie).

The first film was carried by great musical numbers which made the meager acting/dialogue between tolerable and the sometimes surrealistic visuals of East High more acceptable, but this time around the bad songs only underscore the bad acting and lazy directing (other than in the scene with Sharpay's big number which is, at least visually, a great homage to the classic, lavish musical choreography of Busby Berkley).

I suppose this one is worth seeing if you loved the first one, but it really is forgettable by comparison. Probably better to just watch the first one yet again. Or better yet, introduce the youngsters (and face it, most likely yourself as well) to the dance-floor wizardry of Fred Astaire & Ginger Rogers in Swing Time or Shall We Dance.

Superbad
Superbad has that same winning formula of the other two comedies Judd Apatow has a hand in since switching over to movies (40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up after failing to find an audience with critically acclaimed television shows Freaks & Geeks and Undeclared) in that the characters spout off pop-culture rich, profanity-laden dialogue for 2 hours, but while the dialogue is full of raunch the movie is really fairly staid in terms of what actually takes place on screen. The characters tend to make the "right" choices when faced with moral dilemmas and there is a strong theme across all three films of male camaraderie and how the "loser" (the titular 40-year-old virgin, the unemployed illegal immigrant in Knocked Up, and the chunky kid and awkward kids in this movie) can ultimately be "the man" in the end, continuing the cultural oscillations on the definition of masculinity.

Though set in the present day, the movie features a great soundtrack of 70s music and new 70s-sounding music recorded for the movie which serves to underscore the sort of goofy tone the same way it did in Undercover Brother.

The thing that sets it apart from most high-school movies is the rejection of traditional high school archetypes/stereotypes in the characters. For the most part, there are no clearly defined "cool kids" or "nerds", although the Fresno Bee's high school movie reviewer perfectly describes the one truly nerdy character in the film as a cross between Urkel and Harry Potter.

Seth, Evan and the rest of the high school seems to be one big group of kids who've more or less known each other since forever, but have separated themselves out over the years for the sake of appearances, conveniences, whatever. There is no impenetrable social hierarchy that the characters feel they are fighting against. Jules says she is having a party and invites Seth to come. No strings attached, no qualifications, she just invites him. Perhaps as a joke, perhaps because she doesn't expect him to come anyway, but there's no evidence of that. She seems to genuinely think he's an okay guy. This sort of subversion of genre makes the film worth the ticket price. That and the first 10-20 minutes of this are as good as anything that's been out this year in terms of comedy. The jokes are vulgar, but come on, that's how it is with 17/18 year old boys and what else would you expect from a film called Superbad.

Recommended Reading: If you enjoy Superbad, you'll probably also enjoy I Love You, Beth Cooper, a highly amusing novel about, you guessed it, that one infamous night at the end of high school in the life of unpopular class president Dennis Cooverman (picture a male version of Diane Court in the high school classic Say Anything) and his buddy as he tries to hook up with the head cheerleader while being chased by her just-back-from-Iraq, slightly psycho boyfriend and his army buddies.

Up next: The War on....Gangs?

2007-08-27T17:07:00.000-07:00

A professed gang member was quoted in today's Fresno Bee saying, "None of my boys are changing. Maybe one out of 20 wants to get out. A lot of them are locked up, but they get out and do the same things - get faded and rob some fools."

Stanley Crouch of the NY Daily News offered up the following information in a recent op-ed:
Addressing a dilemma tantamount to terrorism, a few months ago Ben Stein wrote in the conservative American Spectator that, "In the five and a half years since Sept. 11, 2001, there have been roughly 40,000 killings by gangs and gang members in this United States of America, mostly in the African-American and Hispanic sections of large cities." ...Besides all of the human costs of these murders, the burden is estimated by the World Health Organization to cost an annual $300 billion. That amounts to about 150 weeks in Iraq, or three years.
This would seem a good subject for presidential debates, right? Wrong, apparently.

Given that there have presumably been nearly 10x as many Americans killed as a result of domestic gang violence as opposed to foreign radical terrorism in the half decade since we began our "War on Terror", it would seem to me that we have either a distorted set of national priorities or an unsettling lack of compassion for our fellow member of the body politic.

To those who are, in fact, concerned, the question remains what can we do about it? Local authorities have been trying, mostly in vain, to curb gang violence for decades. The problem continues to be that most gang members, seem to be impervious to reform, just recall that quote I started this post with. The only real solution to this is probably the very unspecific concept of prevention. Keeping kids involved, strong parents, focus on education and opportunities and so on. But these are the same notions and aspirations we have been telling ourselves are the cure for poverty and social disaffection for generations, and still we have the problems. We know "poverty" is a relative term and that the lifestyle maintained by some considered in poverty in America today would not have had such a distinction a century ago or in certain other countries; nevertheless, such comparisons are, perhaps, beside the point as the statistics fail to account for those today who either can't reliably be counted (i.e the homeless) or don't want to be counted (i.e. illegal immigrants) and their relative conditions would undoubtedly skew the statistics downward. Oh, the successes of the War on Poverty!

To Mr. Crouch's last point there, that the issue is not even on the general national radar, is an interesting one. I think the issue tends to be concentrated in certain areas (most notably California and Florida) so most of the country, at least geographically, isn't directly affected by gangs. I don't know if the FBI should be involved in ridding us of gangs, but I do know local level authorities have been struggling with it for decades, with decidedly mixed (if not downright disappointing) results. In England the answer the national government devised was a ban on handgun ownership, even to the point where the police do not carry guns (one of many facets of English life hilariously skewered in the unmissable Hot Fuzz, now on DVD), but the result was not what they expected):
In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

The Home Office figures - which exclude crimes involving air weapons - show the number of deaths and injuries caused by gun attacks in England and Wales soared from 864 in 1998-99 to 3,821 in 2005-06. That means that more than 10 people are injured or killed in a gun attack every day.
(More on the Brown/Blair adminstrations recent fudging of these stats here).

One commentator opined that much of this youthful aggression was abetted in previous generations through mandatory national service of some sort and maybe that is the case (a case Charlie Rangel has advocated bringing back and presidential candidate Chris Dodd advocates sans the mandatory-ness).

Ultimately, though, perhaps this is simply a sad fact of life that we will have to abide, and there is no real way to rid ourselves of gangs and other unprovoked acts of violent crime; there will always be young, out of the mainstream, frustrated individuals who will feel slighted/disrespected by "the system", don't want to change their ways and don't even necessarily even want to be broadly accepted, will likely act out in rash and often violent ways as a means of gaining some respect (read: fear) or status in the public eye. If that sounds like a form of domestic terrorism maybe that distinction is not too far off (see the death toll at the top of this post once again for a reminder of the devastation), although if you thought there was a ruckus about calling Katrina victims refugees, just imagine the maelstrom that would ensue from classifying fellow citizens as terrorists.

Laws Apply Even To Those We Don't Like

2007-08-23T17:18:00.000-07:00

From Leonard Pitts Jr at the Miami Herald:
Meet Jack McClellan. You might want to shower afterward. Nobody in the greater Los Angeles area will have to ask what I mean. In the last month or so, McClellan has roiled Southern California by saying in effect: I'm a pedophile, and there's nothing you can do about it.

The hell of it is, he's right. You cannot, or in any event, should not, be arrested for what you are, only for what you've done. McClellan has done nothing. Or at least, nothing for which he should be prosecuted, there being no law against making people nauseous.

The story goes as follows. In late July, McClellan was confronted by police. They had been summoned by a woman who saw him loitering around the children's section of a library in Santa Monica. McClellan, who, according to news reports, lives mostly out of his car, was cooperative even to the point of allowing officers to take his picture. He was also candid and unapologetic about his sexual attraction to little girls. But McClellan, 45, evidently has no arrest record or warrants anywhere in the country, so police had no choice but to let him go.

The bizarre encounter quickly catapulted McClellan onto the local news and talk show circuit, where people learned that he had a website (since taken down) featuring photos taken of little girls in public places and ranking the best places for pedophiles to see children. It was also said that McClellan was thinking of moving to the city of Santa Clarita.

Two Santa Clarita lawyers were sufficiently alarmed to seek a restraining order requiring McClellan to stay away from the city's children. A judge was sufficiently alarmed to give them even more: an order prohibiting McClellan from coming within 30 feet of any child in the state. In effect, the judge imposed house arrest on a man who had committed no crime.

Predictably, McClellan was twice arrested last week for violating an order it would be almost impossible to obey. Just as predictably, legal experts are now saying the obvious: The order is unconstitutional.

Yes, Jack McClellan is a reprehensible freak. And that opinion holds, by the way, even if, as some suspect, he turns out to be merely some kind of bizarre prankster. But for our purposes today, take him at his word that he really is a man with a sexual fetish toward children. The urge to imprison such a creature for the rest of its days is more than understandable.

The problem is, there is no legal rationale for doing so. The law is a broadsword and it is being used here to peel an apple. It can't be done. You only destroy the apple and smear the sword.

There are limits to what the law can do -- and sometimes you find yourself stranded beyond those limits, faced with behavior that is clearly wrong and yet, just as clearly, legal. To respond to that behavior with acts that please the crowd but stain the law is to cross the line that separates the citizenry from the mob.

Californians should publicize McClellan's face and fetish until every child in the state knows to run, screaming, on sight. Put up fliers, organize online. But they ought not prosecute him for what he has only said.

Yes, fliers and such are unsatisfactory options. But any option -- the restraining order included -- that did not involve closing a fist on McClellan's windpipe would be unsatisfactory. At least those don't require us to sell out fundamental values for the fool's gold of security.

Even Jack McClellan enjoys the privileges of the First Amendment. He is free to say he's a child molester. He's free to say he's a Satanist. He's free to say he's a racist.

You think it's terrible that a man can say such things? I agree. Indeed the only thing more terrible would be if we lived in a country where he could not.

In Defense of the Long-Shot Candidate

2007-08-22T21:03:00.000-07:00

As I mentioned earlier, I've been working on this movie all week so I just got around to watching the Democratic debate from Iowa this past Sunday. About 30 minutes into the forum Dennis Kucinich called out moderator George Stephanopolous for creating artificial divisions and drama between the two front-runners and attempting to marginalize the rest of the candidates. About 20 minutes later when George asked a question about belief in the power of prayer to each of the candidates, Kucinich replied, "I've been up here praying that you'd ask me a question for the last 45 minutes"

Bravo, Congressman Kucinich. Take every chance you get to call out the nonsense of the process as it stands at these forums, as there's no real point in delivering the message of your candidacy or your policy ideas (curtailing free trade, creating a state-run, not-for-profit health care system, expanded civil rights for homosexuals, repealing the Bush tax cuts, etc), because they aren't going to recount your ideas/arguments on any news programs later in the day or throughout the week, so only the few thousand viewers and the few dozen in the audience will ever hear it. Which is not to say you don't deserve to be heard, quite contrary, I think every candidate deserves an equal and fair hearing, instead of incessant coverage of whether Michelle Obama is taking veiled shots at Hillary Clinton, questions about Obama's "blackness", or the never-ending "Just testing the waters" drama of the Fred Thompson non-campaign, but if you're not going to get a real shot to lay out your message for the people, then at least attempt to open people up to the idea that the process itself is something that must be fixed, regardless of who becomes president.

Ruben Navarette of the San Diego Union-Tribune wrote about the long shot candidates today.
Excerpted:
Long-shot presidential hopefuls may not get elected, but they do tend to grow on you – especially when they're being marginalized, insulted and picked on by everyone else. With the first primaries about 150 days away, the front-running candidates and the media elite no doubt prefer to simplify things by getting rid of those who are given no chance to win.

And I thought the job of thinning out the crop of candidates went to voters, not to the powerful and the power-brokers.

Try telling that to George Stephanopoulos. In a recent interview with Ron Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas, the host of ABC's “This Week” asked the candidate for his definition of success. Paul predictably responded that it was to win. “That's not going to happen,” Stephanopoulos informed him. The candidate then asked the host if he was willing to bet “every cent in your pocket” that Paul couldn't win. Without hesitating, Stephanopoulos said, “Yes.” Ouch.

Then it was Mike Gravel's turn for a reality check. In an interview, Stephanopoulos asked the former senator which Democrat he intended to ultimately support. “I'm going to vote for myself,” Gravel responded. “But you're not going to be president,” Stephanopoulos told him. Double ouch.

Apparently, not even John Edwards needs to apply, despite the fact that he usually comes in third in polls behind Clinton and Obama. In fact, in an extra dose of humiliation, Stephanopoulos introduced the candidates with their standing among Iowa voters in a recent ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Obama had 27 percent, while Clinton and Edwards each had 26 percent – statistically a dead heat. Several weeks ago an open microphone caught him whispering to Clinton that “we should try to have a more serious and a smaller group.” Now, poetically, some folks in the media aren't taking Edwards seriously.

This will all sort itself out. But what's the rush? The field will be winnowed down soon enough. So why speed up the process? It's not fair to the candidates, and it's not healthy for our democracy. That's the message we hear over and over again from the long shots. And by spreading it, they're making a valuable contribution. Campaign 2008 would be much duller without them.

Where I've Been

2007-08-22T20:52:00.001-07:00

I apologize for the lengthy sabbatical from posting here, but for the last week I've been working like a mad man on a little short film and as a result, I had no free time or energy to give to anything else. As of 2 hours ago that project is officially complete (I say complete, but perhaps its more accurate to quote Leonardo da Vinci, "A work of art is never finished, only abandoned") so I'll be back to the blog tomorrow as lots has happened in the last week or so that I wish I'd had time to get to here. So, be on the lookout for that.

Ron Paul's Guerilla Tactics

2007-08-12T13:27:00.000-07:00

This is the third time I've seen stuff like this around town this summer, so I figured I should document it as something new in the political culture around here, a veritable guerilla marketing tactic for a national candidate, probably without any prompting from the candidate himself or his official "people":

The Ron Paul Revolution soldiers on...

More on Dr. No
ronpaul2008.com

(Not) Keepin' It Real

2007-08-09T22:00:00.000-07:00

Back in February, I wrote the following in regards to the phony righteous indignation I saw regarding the judge in the custody hearing for Anna Nicole Smith's child:
Well, here's my question. How would those, who now claim moral authority over this judge, know how he was handling the case unless they were watching? Don't tell me they have an overriding interest in family law or that Court TV is required viewing in their households; they were watching for voyeuristic entertainment value. They and virtually all media figures around the country were complicit in the exploitation of the Smith family and those around them over the past 2-3 weeks, gossiping about these lives for their own entertainment or profits. These are the same people who created Judge Judy, People's Court, and all of those other showcases for judge personalities that turned our judicial system into an attempt at entertainment. But none of them claim or take any responsibility, and now want to express indignation about this judge who might be trying to fit into their system.

Well it appears the phenomenon has reared its ugly head again and many notable folks are once again feigning outrage (to say nothing of the ridiculous self-imposed "bans" on Paris Hilton coverage back in June when she got of prison after the 'round the clock play-by-play leading up to her imprisonment):

Many of the candidates running for president have taken their pot-shots at Barack Obama for saying he would act on actionable intelligence if he knew where bin Laden was and the leaders of the harboring nation would not or could not act. The outcry from Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Chris Dodd and so on has been phony because they have all advanced similar ideas in the past and would do exactly the same thing in the situation outlined by Senator Obama, but they attack for the sake of political posturing, calling him naive for saying out loud what they might say in private. We all know they would do the same, so there is no practical sense in them pretending we don't know and pretending to be shocked B.O. would say so publicly. Joe Biden concurred with Mr. Obama, saying of course the U.S. would move in that situation, but no one has said anything about Biden's naivete. Perhaps it's because he's not a "front-runner" and the position is a good and honest one. Or maybe its just that no one heard him; the crowd at that candidate forum was pretty rowdy, so they could've just missed it.

In a press conference today, President Bush called out the Congress for holding too many politically-motivated hearings and not passing "meaningful legislation the American people require of them". Of course, this is phony indignation too because anyone who pays attention knows the president threatens to veto everything this barely Democratic-controlled Congress does manage to pass. And they wouldn't need to hold so many hearings if everything were on the up and up in his administration, the legislative branch wouldn't have to spend so much time doing oversight. But of course, it's easier to block any possibility of real progress and call them out for failing, calling it political expeditionism, as if that isn't exactly what he and his White House have been doing.

And then there's this, excerpted from Fresno Bee columnist Bill McEwen on Barry Bonds and the home run record:
Everybody who's mad about Barry Bonds, everybody who wants an asterisk next to his home-run record because they think he uses steroids, step forward. Raise a hand and repeat after me: "I'm sick of cheaters, and I'm not going to watch another baseball game, much less any movies starring actors with surgically enhanced noses, lips and breasts -- or 4-inch lifts in their shoes." Hey, where did you all go?

Bonds' home-run record is fine with me -- because professional sports is entertainment, and has been since Babe Ruth started making more money than the president...Fans and media covering these games desperately want to believe there's a big difference between the World Series and the movies. Or the Super Bowl and rock concerts. But there isn't. Professional sports and Hollywood are fantasy worlds constructed on a business transaction. Fans pay to see stars perform.

But the business interests behind professional sports go to great lengths to convince us that games matter, records matter and that athletes compete on level playing fields. Film is fake, but we have a great time anyway and have no problem supporting actors with more modified body parts than a customized '32 Ford roadster. Baseball? We want it "pure," whatever that means, and we want to believe it's possible to compare Ruth to Henry Aaron to Bonds.

Good luck.

Ruth played when blacks were banned from baseball. Aaron played a good part of his career at a time when pitchers dominated the game. Bonds is part of an era known for small ballparks, intense weight-training and voodoo elixirs that build biceps bigger than bikini-movie beach balls.

You might as well argue whether Kate Hepburn has a leg up on Meryl Streep or Humphrey Bogart is better than Jack Nicholson. Some people are born with special gifts. Others enhance pedestrian talents with hard work. Or surgical tinkering. Think Morgan Fairchild. Dylan Thomas drank himself to death and wrote raw, lyrical poetry. No one is demanding an asterisk next to "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night."

But Bonds hits 756 home runs, controversy erupts and it's much ado about nothing. He's an adult, and if he has pumped up his body with magic potions -- running the risk of early death along the way -- that's his business. He will have done what entertainers do. The sports leagues are free to make rules in their futile effort to maintain the cover story that sports is much more than entertainment.

All I ask is that if baseball wipes out Bonds' record, it happily return the ticket money to millions of fans who've watched, cheered and booed him during his nearly 3,000 big-league games. Ineligible for refunds: anyone tummy-tucked, chin-lifted, Lasiked or holding a prescription for certain wildly popular and heavily advertised male-enhancement drugs.

I say, rage on oh occasional defender of what you perceive to be right. Defend, every now and then, integrity and truth and honesty. From time to time stand up against all that is wrong with the world. Speak out against every 3rd evil that befalls mankind. The rest of us need your reliable moral vacillation to guide us through this truly trying, semi-charmed kind of life. I'm hoping for a famous person or two to screw up soon so you can let them pass by unscathed, because I know the next person after them is soooooo gonna get it and I can hardly wait for that.

756 and Other Semi-Related Musings

2007-08-08T19:26:00.001-07:00

Congratulations to Barry Bonds on attaining the most hallowed record in American sports (though on a personal note, I am still more amazed by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's 38,000+ career points and Cy Young's 511 career wins...and there is still the legend that Josh Gibson hit up to 920 HR in the Negro League).

And with that, I have fulfilled my baseball-related posting quota of 1 for the season. Let's move on, shall we?

Or so it seems to go in the sports media. I can understand the news media's quick shuffling off of this story, it's just sports and it's not like baseball means to the country today what it meant in say 1961 when Maris broke Babe Ruth's single-season HR record, heck it's even less relevant today than it was 5 years ago when Bonds broke McGwire's single-season HR record. The fact is, we live in a cynical culture in which we, as the axiom goes, know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Why else would we go straight away to the possible financial value of the Bonds ball? I understand the desire to become an instant millionaire (by the by, to whom is this ball worth $5,000,000 exactly, if everyone is interested in it only to sell it off for large sums?) Gone are the days when kids would hit the ballpark and try to get autographs and collect baseball cards and know the stats for all the players. It's much easier in a SportsCenter culture to catch the home runs, strikeouts and diving catches once a day on ESPN than to watch the games at all. The only people who do know the stats are the fantasy geeks and they have no allegiances to teams, only the individual players; they don't even care about the outcome of the games their various players are in (unless they have a pitcher in the mix and need him to get a win with at least 6 IP, 4 strikeouts and no more than 2 walks and 3 runs given up to lock up the top seed in his/her league playoffs).

This reminds me of the way the passing of two master of the cinema, Ingmar Bergman and Michaelangelo Antonioni, last week, passed without much of a blip. People don't know who they are, nor do they care. The films remain, but folks today don't seem particularly interested in seeking them (or much of anything else) out. If it's not readily available, it's not worth my time to seek out seems to be the mantra of today. Youtube has become the preferred source of entertainment for a generation. How much longer can we see pet tricks and people running into poles or falling down in painful ways, 1:06 at a time, before we realize how low our standards have gone? Is this really the future of entertainment? And don't even get me started on what passes for entertainment on TV these days.

There's been an interesting running discussion across the web about who/what in our entertainment will stand the test of time the way The Beatles, Babe Ruth, Alfred Hitchcock (at least in name), or Shakespeare (to go a little further back) and the like have. I saw a great argument that we no longer live in a "must-see" world. The ability for any event/song/movie/show/speech to affect the culture widely and immediately no longer exists here. There is no longer the shared experience that creates a cohesive culture. What it means to be an American, culturally, is constantly expanding (or eroding, depending how you look at it). Whether this is a good thing remains to be seen, but it certainly represents a shift that I think is worth taking note of, no?

Are You Ready For Some Football!?

2007-08-05T13:34:00.000-07:00

Real football, not the Beckham-less MLS masquerading as "football". It's been 6 months since the Colts waxed the Bears in the Super Bowl and it's high time the boys get back out on the gridiron. Granted, we'll suffer through the requisite conversations and arguments about the necessity of a 4-game preseason, but who cares, really, it's football and bad football is always better than post-HGH baseball (except maybe the Yankees, I don't think they could be scoring as many runs as they are right now without doping). Football returns just in time to lift the us out of out of our collective athletic apathy and I'd say the American sports fan has earned it after another miserable summer of sports (other the Iraq-Saudi Arabia classic in the Asia Cup final and another Federer-Nadal classic at Wimbeldon.

Congrats to Michael Irvin, Thurman Thomas, Bruce Matthews, Roger Wehrli, and Gene Hickerson on being inducted into the Hall of Fame this afternoon.
In Hall of Fame Game tonight, I'm picking Mike Tomlin to lead the Steelers to victory in his head coaching debut.

For the 2007-08 regular season, I'm picking the Raiders to win the Super Bowl over the Eagles in a rematch of Super Bowl 15.
Raiders 27 Eagles 10

What's More Fun Than A Saturday Night on Capitol Hill?

2007-08-04T19:59:00.000-07:00

Wow, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), chief opponent of earmarks in the House was on fire tonight. Did anyone else see it? (Assuming you, too, found yourself riveted to C-Span on a Saturday night). Offering up nearly a dozen amendments to strike but a handful of nearly 1300 earmarks in the $460,000,000,000 Defense Appropriations bill, Flake took his time attempting to take on spurious, garrulousy worded earmarks for items like a charter school, glove manufacturers [cold-shielding hand protection-ware or something to that effect], Sherwin-Williams paint, and so on, "We cannot continue to go down this road with earmarks that are considered duplicative and wasteful".

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) continued to rise in defense of the earmarks along with several other members from both sides of the aisle (including the perfectly contemptible Jerry Lewis of California). Pressed on continuing to fund the National Drug Intelligence Center which the Bush administration has requested be shut down declaring it unnecessary, Murtha glibbly offered up, "The Bush administration has made a few mistakes in the past...The administration believes a lot of things I disagree with".

Then, a devastating rant by Flake: "I would gladly yield time to anyone who agrees with the chairman of the Appropriations subcomittee that 1) these earmarks are competitively bid. Anybody in agreement here? or 2) that the US taxpayer, after paying for these earmarks, has the rights to the technology developed by these earmarks? Any takers there? I didn't think so. That is simply wrong. An earmark by definition is a sole source contract, it is circumventing the competitive bidding process. Now maybe you don't like what the bureaucrats over in the Defense department do, but to say that this is a competitively bid contract is simply wrong...if anybody can contradict, please take time."

No one rose to argue this point. However, they did shout him down on every amendment he proposed to strike earmarks. Some Congress we have. Press on, young Mr. Flake, fighitng the good fight against wasteful spending; thank you for not sticking to your 2000 campaign pledge to only serve three terms in the House. Without you, things would....be exactly the same unfortunately. Spotlighted on last week's Bill Moyers Journal, Mr. Flake was credited with getting one earmark stricken from the last appropriations bill, saving taxpayers a negligible $129,000. It's a start, and though things may look bleak, lets hope that's not where it ends:

Perhaps the most frequent justification for the contemporary practice of earmarking is that, quote, 'Members of Congress know their districts better than some faceless bureaucrat in Washington' But, let's face it: when we approve congressional earmarks for indoor rainforests in Iowa or teapot museums in North Carolina, we make the most spendthrift faceless bureaucrat look frugal...The truth is, we can try all we want to conjure up some sort of noble pedigree for the contemporary practice of earmarking, but we are just drinking our own bathwater if we think the public is buying it. It seems that over the past few years we've tried to increase the number of earmarks enough so that the plaudits we hear from earmark recipients will drown out the voices of taxpayers all over the country who have had enough"

Can't Judge A Book By It's Cover, But After The First Chapter...

2007-08-01T20:43:00.000-07:00

From CNN, April 2001:
A panel examining media issues concluded Monday that coverage of the Bush administration has been affected by reporters with "low expectations" in their view of the White House.

Six panelists with Boston University's Washington Journalism Center on Monday applauded the Bush administration's management of the media during its first 100 days, but criticized the fourth estate for its apparent preoccupation with the outgoing Clinton administration.

One result, according to panelist and former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart, is that the media have "been managed quite well by the Bush political people."

Lockhart said even after the inauguration, there was an "obsession with following what Clinton was doing." He said that allowed an "opportunity for the new president and his staff to figure out where everything was in a way that if they did make mistakes they didn't get a lot of attention."

Members of the panel agreed that the Bush administration is far more restrictive with the flow of information from the White House compared to the Clinton administration.

But [Thomas] Edsall, a veteran political reporter for the Washington Post, gave the administration kudos for its managing of the press corps."You really have to give the Bush administration extraordinary credit for its media operations during these first hundred days, not in terms of good relations necessarily but well managed relations. They have succeeded in gaining credibility under very difficult, trying times with not a strong base to come in to office on."

What the Michael Vick Episode Can Teach Us About Us

2007-07-30T22:07:00.000-07:00

Michael Vick is in a heap of trouble, but his trouble points out a few troubling things in our society not that have little to do Mr. Vick.

#1: The Court of Public Opinion

How can you possibly get a fair trial after being convicted in the media, decried as "Barbaric!" (see the video above) on the Senate floor? Where can you find "12 good men and true" to hear that case impartially? Media coverage is so ubiquitous today it's almost impossible to not be innundated with the opinions of the various public figures (in this case those opinions are very one-sided), which will undoubtedly shape the opinions of anyone subject thereto and this makes it incredibly difficult to get a fair hearing. But legal ramifications aside, we publicly convict famous people immediately upon charges being leveled, for any occurence and it is nearly impossible to shake this label once applied, even if one is found not guilty or charges are dropped. It's possible that the very liveliehood of a person could be stripped away for false accusations and trumped up charges. I know that there is the public trust to win/lose, but in some cases, the public condemns you on the basis of not much other than emotion and you can never regain your same position or status even if you've done nothing wrong.

Syndicated columnist Earl Ofari Hutchinson puts it this way:
Even if Vick somehow beats the fed charges in his trial which is scheduled for November, that’s a doomed hope. In fact, as was the case with [OJ] Simpson, that will ignite even greater public fury. They will wag fingers at Vick and say that he was able to use his fame and name, and his A team, high priced attorneys to massage the legal system to skip away scot free, even though he’s guilty as sin. Vick will pay an even steeper price for that presumption.

He will lose any chance at endorsements. Sportswriters will rail against him. Animal rights groups will hound Vick in every city he sets foot in waving “Convick” signs in his face. Fans will rain boos and catcalls down on him when he sets foot on the field.

We show our (often justifiable) cynicism with the legal process by thinking any celebrity cleared of charges is only freed or offered leniency because they are rich. We forget that a jury of citizens hears the evidence and decides based on the facts presented. That's how the courts work and always have. It's this rational procedure that aids in our maintenance of civility instead of the vigilantism and mob justice, regardless of the facts/evidence, that rears its ugly head in the Court of Public Opinion.

#2: The Price of Fame or: The Blessing and Curse of Celebrity in America
You are beloved and popular and rich. But when you screw up, we will tear you a new one. Look at the ridiculing of Britney Spears these days. Mel Gibson became a punchline. The campout at Paris Hilton's house before she went to jail. Watch the Tonight Show sometime. We build 'em up so we can tear 'em down. Steven Spielberg tells a story that late New York Times film critic Pauline Kael told him after Close Encounters was a critical and commercial hit (his 3rd in a row to start his career) that there was chum in the water (an obligatory Jaws reference), as the critics' community was just waiting for him to make a mistake. 1941 was a slight misfire and they buried him (albeit very briefly, he followed up with Raiders of the Lost Ark, then ET and found himself back in their good graces forever). But the point is there. We want to tear down the idols so we love having paparazzos milling around like vultures waiting for some calamity to befall them, waiting for them to do something dumb/illegal. Why do think sites like TMZ and Perez Hilton and The Superficial are so popular? I wrote a couple months back about the phenomenon of not viewing high-profile celebrities as actual people, and I think that separation of them from their humanity is something they can start to do to themselves as well and it can become really problematic and creates the sort of problems we can see in folks from Vick to Lohan.

#3 The Race Thing
Two common arguments: "You're singling Vick out because he's black" and "You're only defending Vick because he's black". The first points to a deep-seated mistrust of the establishment (both state and media, though the distinction is increasingly blurring) and an entrenched perception of racial discrimination (if not an outright state of racial discrimination). The second points to stereotypes borne as a result of the first. If there were no feeling of the media conspiring to portray minorities negatively there would be no need to be overly protective of "one of your own" against perceived oppression.

While there are no doubt some who fall into the categories laid out, neither charge is necessarily accurate. It's possible to single Vick out because he is charged with a heinous crime. The fact is, even being tangentially connected to dog-fighting is problematic. Having the FBI say they have been tracking you and activity on your property for 4-5 years is problematic. Likewise, it's possible to attempt to defend Vick from the legal perspective by saying he is innocent until proven guilty, and the trial isn't set to commence until November and most who are out protesting haven't even read the indictment so though they may espouse, in that Howard Beale tradition, the "Mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore" attitude, they don't really know what exactly they are railing against.

#4: Pet the Dog, Eat the Cow
Sen. Robert Byrd stated, "God created the dog to be man's companion". A Sports Illustrated article quoted a few local Atlanta residents as saying this case was much worse than the case of Chris Benoit's double murder-suicide.

The Salt Lake Tribune reprints this Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed:

I watched cable news recently, and almost every anchor interviewed an official of the Humane Society, and all expressed horror, especially that Vick's indictment had accused him and his fellow defendants of executing dogs in ways apparently designed to be as cruel as possible: drowning, strangling, electrocution. One official compared the practice to child pornography. Then I went into town for some lunch, driving past all of the franchises peddling ground cow for human consumption - the same ones you'll find on every American highway exit. If killing dogs is the equivalent of child pornography, while eating cows is simply a way to put off mowing the lawn, we seem to be conflicted - or reeking with hypocrisy and confusion.

We have a set of intuitions, driven partly by our interactions with pets, that many animals can experience pain in a morally significant way, that they can suffer, or be used and degraded. Perhaps they have somewhat less of a claim on us than human beings do, but they make a claim. But another set of intuitions is driven by our dietary habits or our experience of thumping squirrels and armadillos on the road: that an animal is little more than an inanimate object, and can be used in whatever way a human being sees fit.

Our moral evaluation of animals seems to vary with their proximity to ourselves - both their everyday interactions with us and their perceived similarity to us - so that by the time you're done attributing love, loyalty and inferential reasoning to your dog, you have recognized her as a de facto human being, a member of the family. It works both ways, and your dog recognizes you as leader of the pack. Cows have big, sad eyes, but less personality of the sort that arouses our recognition. And these days, unless you're directly involved in the farming and food industry, your interaction with cows is limited to, let's say, the drive-through lane.

In practice, the moral claims of animals vary by species and track our sense of the animal's proximity - cognitive, emotional, physical - to ourselves. We become truly sentimental: We write memoirs with our dogs, talk baby-talk to them, let them lick our faces. But about other species we are as hard-nosed as possible. Essentially, we do whatever we feel like to them whenever we want. But there is no rational justification for this distinction. Pigs aren't more stupid, or less emotionally complex or less capable of experiencing pain than dogs, but they seem to lack that certain something (well, all except Charlotte's Wilbur).

We need to decide: (a) Do animals count? and (b) How, exactly, not as dwarfish, or four-legged, or stupid people, but as real things whose existence is, though connected to ours, profoundly external and different?

That last question is especially important, because we tend to think of our relationship to pets in human terms, and all other animals as a distinct other, yet how we arrive at that distinction is never really considered. What of those who have no pets and no real attachments to the "animal kingdom" (a phrase which itself confers human qualities on animals, the "king" of the jungle and so forth).

Well, that's all I got and I'm tired of writing. What say you? (I'm guessing nothing. That's usually how it goes 'round here).

RIP Ingmar Bergman

2007-07-30T19:31:00.000-07:00

The Cinema has lost one of its all-time greats, perhaps the best European filmmaker ever:
Death and demons haunted the anguished works that made Ingmar Bergman a film-making legend. But the Swedish director — one of the greatest artists in cinema history — had overcome his intense fear of death by the time it finally found him.
Bergman died Monday at age 89, at home on the Swedish islet of Faro, the Ingmar Bergman Foundation said. The cause of death was not immediately known.

"The world has lost one of its very greatest film makers. He taught us all so much throughout his life," said British actor and director Richard Attenborough.

Bergman's movies won numerous awards and international acclaim, including Oscars for best foreign film for "The Virgin Spring," "Through a Glass Darkly" and "Fanny and Alexander." The 1973 "Cries and Whispers" was nominated for Best Picture.
Bergman, who retired from films in 2003 after making more than 50 movies, first gained international attention with 1955's "Smiles of a Summer Night," a romantic comedy that inspired the Stephen Sondheim musical "A Little Night Music."
Bergman's works combined deep seriousness, indelible imagery and unexpected flashes of humor in finely written, inventively shot explorations of difficult subjects such as plague and madness.

More info on a legend for the unacquianted (an unacceptable status you should rectify post-haste should it apply to you):
The history of the cinema has seen directors whose works have been more "original" or "groundbreaking" (such as Eisenstein, Ozu or Godard). And there are plenty of directors who have made as many, if not more films (Griffith, Hitchcock or Chabrol). Yet the question remains: is there anyone who so epitomises the concept of the auteur – a filmmaker with full control over his medium, whose work has a clear and inimitable signature – as Ingmar Bergman?

One of the reasons one immediately recognises a Bergman film is that he is one of those rare filmmakers who has created his own cinematic world. (This is also the reason that we have a section on this website under the heading Universe.) Through recurring environments, themes, characters, stylistic devices, actors and film crews, Bergman has created his own kind of film, almost a genre in itself.
If Alfred Hitchcock is the epitome of the psychological thriller (despite the fact that he also made films in other genres), Bergman has become the hallmark for the existential/philosophical relationship drama (although he, too, has made other kinds of films). His films often use the narrative techniques of "classic" cinema with the addition of "modern" stylistic devices. Quite simply, Bergman fitted in perfectly with the ideal they wished to promote: the auteur who uses the film camera as a writer uses his pen.

In this mould Bergman's films rapidly came to typify the concept of "art house cinema". In a period when film was once again striving for legitimacy, Bergman demonstrated that film could be something more than entertainment: it could indeed be art. As such, it is important to remember that Bergman immediately preceded the other "modern" European directors with whom he is often mentioned: Antonioni, Buñuel, Fellini, Godard and others. The fact that film studies emerged at the end of the 1960s as an academic discipline in its own right is in many respects down to Bergman, whose films of existential exploration naturally lend themselves to systematic analysis.

To a large extent, Bergman's themes laid the foundation for his fame. His Strindberg-like conviction that marriage is hell on earth, and his recurring doubts about God were, ironically enough, and to put it crassly, not much more than a summary of the Scandinavian cultural tradition at the time, with its budding sexual freedom and its already far-reaching secularisation. Yet abroad at the time, not least in the catholic European and South American countries, or in the morally conservative United States and Eastern Europe, Bergman's films appeared revolutionary.

Neither can one totally ignore the contribution to Bergman's success of what were, for the time, quite daring depictions of nudity and "natural" sexuality. Bergman' films, with their unfathomable language, scenes of unspoilt natural beauty and blonde women, were widely regarded as the embodiment of a Scandinavian kind of exoticism.

A highly important director, Ingmar Bergman today seems ironically to have been virtually forgotten. His impact has been so all-pervasive, his influence so great and his films such obvious benchmarks, that his work has almost become invisible. Yet just as one occasionally has to revisit the Bible to understand something of western culture, one needs to see Bergman's films anew. For many it was a long time ago; for others it will be for the first time. Whichever it is, the films will feel familiar.

Mid-Summer Mix: Best of 2007 pt. 2

2007-07-27T18:45:00.000-07:00

It's that time again, it's the middle of the summer and the oppressive heat is beating us all into submission, and a result you are probably feeling a little worn down. In an effort to provide even a slight pick-me-up for the summer blues, I offer you free music!

The Best of 2007 pt. 2 (with just a few not from 2007 that needed to be included):
Tracklisting (with links to the albums from whence these songs emanate)
1. Devon Sproule - Old Virginia Block
2. Michael Buble ft. Boyz II Men - Comin' Home Baby
3. Fionn Regan - Hunter's Map
4. Chrisette Michele - Your Joy
5. JJ Grey & Mofro - By My Side
6. Electric Soft Parade - Misunderstanding
7. The Sleepy Jackson - Dream On (2006)
8. Kaki King - Happy As A Dead Pig In The Sunshine (2003)
9. Donnie - Over-The-Counter Culture
10. Norah Jones - My Dear Country
11. Maroon 5 - Little of Your Time
12. Roark - Letters
13. The Greencards - Waiting on the Night
14. Jon McLaughlin - Perfect
15. JJ Grey & Mofro - The Sun is Shining Down
16. Lewis Taylor - Song (Acoustic)

As usual, enjoy!.....or tell me I have terrible taste in music, either way, although I would ask you to showcase your superior taste by offering your own mix (that last statement of course being equal parts ego and desire for free music).

I think Ben has a new one due out this weekend as well, so when that becomes available I will link to that as well.

Crisis of Confidence

2007-07-26T21:41:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from a speech dubbed the "Crisis of Confidence speech", delivered by former president Jimmy Carter; July 15, 1979 (in it's entirety here):

"I know, of course, being president, that government actions and legislation can be very important. That's why I've worked hard to put my campaign promises into law -- and I have to admit, with just mixed success. But after listening to the American people I have been reminded again that all the legislation in the world can't fix what's wrong with America. So, I want to speak to you first tonight about a subject even more serious than energy or inflation. I want to talk to you right now about a fundamental threat to American democracy. I do not mean our political and civil liberties. They will endure. And I do not refer to the outward strength of America, a nation that is at peace tonight everywhere in the world, with unmatched economic power and military might.

The threat is nearly invisible in ordinary ways. It is a crisis of confidence. It is a crisis that strikes at the very heart and soul and spirit of our national will. We can see this crisis in the growing doubt about the meaning of our own lives and in the loss of a unity of purpose for our nation. The erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening to destroy the social and the political fabric of America. The confidence that we have always had as a people is not simply some romantic dream or a proverb in a dusty book that we read just on the Fourth of July.

It is the idea which founded our nation and has guided our development as a people. Confidence in the future has supported everything else -- public institutions and private enterprise, our own families, and the very Constitution of the United States. Confidence has defined our course and has served as a link between generations. We've always believed in something called progress. We've always had a faith that the days of our children would be better than our own.

Our people are losing that faith, not only in government itself but in the ability as citizens to serve as the ultimate rulers and shapers of our democracy. As a people we know our past and we are proud of it. Our progress has been part of the living history of America, even the world. We always believed that we were part of a great movement of humanity itself called democracy, involved in the search for freedom, and that belief has always strengthened us in our purpose. But just as we are losing our confidence in the future, we are also beginning to close the door on our past.

In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we've discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We've learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.

The symptoms of this crisis of the American spirit are all around us. For the first time in the history of our country a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years. Two-thirds of our people do not even vote. The productivity of American workers is actually dropping, and the willingness of Americans to save for the future has fallen below that of all other people in the Western world.

As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning. These changes did not happen overnight. They've come upon us gradually over the last generation, years that were filled with shocks and tragedy.

We are at a turning point in our history. There are two paths to choose. One is a path I've warned about tonight, the path that leads to fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure.

All the traditions of our past, all the lessons of our heritage, all the promises of our future point to another path, the path of common purpose and the restoration of American values. That path leads to true freedom for our nation and ourselves.

We know the strength of America. We are strong. We can regain our unity. We can regain our confidence. We are the heirs of generations who survived threats much more powerful and awesome than those that challenge us now. Our fathers and mothers were strong men and women who shaped a new society during the Great Depression, who fought world wars, and who carved out a new charter of peace for the world.

We ourselves are the same Americans who just ten years ago put a man on the Moon. We are the generation that dedicated our society to the pursuit of human rights and equality. And we are the generation that will win the war on the energy problem and in that process rebuild the unity and confidence of America."

We Are Not Leaving Iraq

2007-07-24T18:04:00.001-07:00

The Declaration of Independence was signed (on or around) July 4, 1776, those affixing their signatures in agreement that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It wasn't until nearly 100 years later, after the Civil War, that slavery was outlawed and people of color were granted the right to vote, own property, and go to schools (at least in theory).

It was another 55 years before women could vote.

Something to keep in mind while we wait for Iraq to come together on politcal benchmarks and reconciliation. If it took America, conceived under the auspices of liberty and democracy nearly 100 years to end slavery and 150 years from establishment to give women the vote, perhaps it's not really responsible to expect such grand movement from Iraqis in the course of 2 years, 3 years or a decade, especially when these ideas are not their own, and we have no real indication that even a plurality of those in power believe in these concepts. Even assuming they can "get it together" eventually, the question is what do we do in the interim.

If we leave, most believe it will lead to civil war, genocide and Al-Qaeda and Iran overrunning the country (what the Turkish/Kurdistan hostilities? How can Iran and Al-Qaeda co-exist when they detest each other? These and other such questions go unasked, nevermind unanswered). Also, according to a Thomas Ricks column in the Washington Post a week ago, recent Pentagon war games simulations resulted in the following:

If U.S. combat forces withdraw from Iraq in the near future, three developments would be likely to unfold. Majority Shiites would drive Sunnis out of ethnically mixed areas west to Anbar province. Southern Iraq would erupt in civil war between Shiite groups. And the Kurdish north would solidify its borders and invite a U.S. troop presence there. In short, Iraq would effectively become three separate nations.

That was the conclusion reached in recent "war games" exercises conducted for the U.S. military by retired Marine Col. Gary Anderson. "I honestly don't think it will be apocalyptic," said Anderson, who has served in Iraq and now works for a major defense contractor. But "it will be ugly."

Then again, if we leave what happens to our strategic position in the region, in terms of oil and potential threats. If we leave, will we be sacrificing a potential ally and regional foothold? And what of the 180,000 civilian/private contractors there? Do we leave them in without the military or mandate their withdrawal too? Or will they simply leave when the defense department money dries up?

On the other hand if we stay, what happens? The common line is we will "defeat" Al-Qaeda. The question that once again goes unanswered is how do we defeat a multi-national organization centered in Pakistan and Afghanistan, with cells throughout the region, eastern and northern Africa, Europe, and even, apparently, here in North America by keeping the majority of our army solely in Iraq? Even if we kill every member of the several "al-Qaeda"s, the Iranian Quds Force, Sadr, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taleban, and a whole host of other unknown, unnamed, undetected organizations will persist and what is to stop them from stepping in where bin Laden leaves off?

Also, what assurances do we have that the Iraqi politicians will ever buy into the philosophy of Locke, Paine, Jefferson, and the like. Muqtada al-Sadr has made his anti-Americanism quite clear, and as his faction is a stalwart of the support base for Prime Minister Maliki it makes one wonder how effective this government can be. A large block of Sunni MP's just ended a month-long (I believe) boycott, and the group just attained a quorom for the first time this summer last week before heading out for a vacation.

As I stated earlier it could take decades for the diplomatic-political brokering that needs to take place and if that's what the president and others of his ilk feel is the best course of action, why not be honest and announce and call for an open-ended commitment. Because it's dishonest to say "we cannot leave until the mission is accomplished because it is vital to national security" while at the same time saying "we are not in an open-ended commitment." If said mission is indeed as important as you say, the only responsible position is to stay until it is achieved, however long that may be, and if that isn't the defintion of open-ended, perhaps this year out of the classroom has atrophied my brain.

As usual, I'm left with more questions than answers, but the more I look at this situation I am increasingly convinced this will be the main issue in the 2010 mid-term congressional elections and probably into the 2012 presidential race. The framing of the "If we leave" scenario as absolute, untenable pandemonium seems to have won over the minds of the people and as a result, anyone who proposes withdrawal or anything similar is cast as naive or rash in their thinking.

We aren't leaving Iraq. Not today. Not 6 months from now. Not January 20, 2009. Maybe not ever.

Sicko and Summer Movie Syndrome

2007-07-19T20:16:00.000-07:00

I suppose it's the effect of the general malaise brought on by summer, but "Summer Movie Season" brings with it "Summer Movie Syndrome", a condition in which no one has any expectations or pre-conceptions other than the films will be big, dumb, loud, and occasionally funny. Transformers has all of those elements in spades (though I didn't particularly care for it, but review is not the aim of this post). The dumber the better, don't ask me to think too hard, just sit back and enjoy the ride. As one writer once put it, "They're not supposed to be good. Your eyes are supposed to be glazed". The problem with "Summer Movie Syndrome", though, it is has crept into the other seasons, and now seems to have been adopted as the status quo in cinema and life in America in general.

Michael Moore's Sicko is not a "summer movie", though it is at times big, dumb, loud, and occasionally funny. The common wisdom is that Moore's picture is a piece of agitprop designed to convince us to adopt "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE". That's not what it' really is, no matter how many times Sean Hannity says it. This understanding of the film is simply the result of Summer Movie Syndrome run amuck. The way I saw it, Sicko is not so much an argument for "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE" so much as it is an attempt to force the discussion of the broader issue (perhaps even meta-issue) of the state of our health care system.

It's not as simple as "free-market" vs. "statist" in Moore's film, instead he is telling us that our system does not work as well as it should/could and shows a few select examples of things that work in other places. He has said himself in the many interviews he's done on the press tour for the movie that he knows there are problems with any system, but that it should make sense to try to incorporate as many functional aspects from good systems as possible.

A local radio hostess tonight was ranting about "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE", declaring, "I don't want the same people who run the DMV doing surgery on me. I don't want bureaucrats in Washington or the state capitol deciding which doctor or hospital I can go to". I'm sure most in her listening audience lapped up this nonsense, but make no mistake, it is nonsense because it is completely sidesteps the realities of the current system. Roger Ebert astutely points out in his review of Sicko, "Of course we have heard all about "socialized medicine," which among many evils denies you freedom of choice of hospitals and doctors. Hold on: That's the free-enterprise HMO system."

As an aside, we wouldn't be in a "HEALTH CARE CRISIS" is we took better care to look after our health in the first place. Instead, over half of adults are clinically overweight or obese; people are less active, more prone to excess portions and fast food, sleep deprivation, unsafe fad diets, and even perilous over-excercise now more than ever. Rush Limbaugh opined on radio today that in 20 years it will be skinny kids ostracized and teased and made outcasts by the legions of fat children. If we were more moderate, more sensible in lifestyle choices heart disease would not be the #1 killer in America. We wouldn't have to spend so much on cholesterol and blood pressure and diabetes medication. There would be fewer strokes, heart attacks, and fewer people in a doctor's office on any given day. This, however, is not in the best interest of the medical profession, which would suffer considerable financial harm if people were, oh, I don't know....healthy.

Winding our way back to Sicko. Mark Twain wrote a short story entitled "A Fable: A Cat, A Painting, A Mirror" (or some combination of those three). In the story, a painter hangs his latest painting on a wall facing a mirror so he can admire it in the mirror, because "...this softens it, and it is twice as lovely as it was before." Well, a housecat overhears the painter musing to himself on how wonderful his painting is and goes to tell all the animals in the forest. They want to know what a painting is, so the cat goes into the painter's room, but he doesn't know where to stand to look at the painting in the mirror, so he stands directly between the painting and the mirror and sees only himself. He reports to the animals that the painting looks like a cat. They want to see for themselves, so they all go and each stands between the painting and the mirror and sees only itself (Nevermind how an elephant got in the room or why a cow would be in the forest...it's summer, just go with it).

Twain's moral to the story: "You can find in a text whatever you bring, if you will stand between it and the mirror of your imagination. You may not see your ears, but they will be there." This, I think, is at least part of the brush-back against Moore, certain viewers came in expecting to hate it and stood in front of the mirror seeing their own opinions reflected instead of what is really going on and being said. Granted he does resort to cheap cinematographic gimmickry on occasion. In the film he edits a sequence such that the viewer assumes he and a group of 9/11 rescue workers sailed from Miami to Gitmo, when in fact they flew to Cuba commercially. As the boat nears international waters off the Florida coast, he cuts to a graphic that says something to the effect of "The Department of Homeland Security doesn't want you to see how we got to Cuba." The inside joke is, neither does Moore. But rather than reading all of that, isn't it just so much easier to rant about "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE" and Moore himself, rather than confronting the actual problems.

Unfortunately, the Summer Movie Syndrome does not stay in the moviehouse. It has extended in the political theater and the media at large. Rather than actual news reportage we have an incessant barrage of stories that read, "According to the latest _____ poll, ____% of the American people think ______". This is laziness. Especially irksome are the Fred Thompson-related polls. "Incredibly a man who is not even declared in the race is leading....". No, what's incredible is that a man who is not even declared in the race is IN THE POLL. Jim Gilmore was a declared Republican candidate who dropped out of the race over the weekend, but since your name is not Romney, McCain, Giuliani, or Thompson, you're already irrelevant, you leaving the race couldn't possibly matter. Who ever heard of anything more than a 3-horse race, anyway? Who cares that Ron Paul is more popular on the internet than even Obama? We already have one "maverick" in the race. We can't have two. That would make people think too much. And come on, it's summer, Rush Hour 3 is opening soon. And if that's too far away, there's always Obama Girl vs. Giuliani Girl if you want to catch up on politics.

Always Going Forward, Always Looking Back?

2007-07-16T21:31:00.000-07:00

Exerpted from Financial Times Deutschland by way of WatchingAmerica.com:
"For the people of the United States, respect for their own heritage is undoubtedly a source of strength and stability. It helped them endure the upheaval of four dreadful years of civil war which cost the lives of three percent of the population. It also kept the United States from succumbing to darkness in its domestic affairs, even during those times that the authority of the Supreme Court was ignored. In the 220 years of its history, the American republic has not always been a model - but it overcame break-downs like the Great Depression in the 1930s without succumbing to the temptation of totalitarianism; it overcame McCarthyism in the post-war era; and it will overcome the damage that the present President has done to its basic values and fundamental rights.

And while it is a pillar of American democracy, that healing strength that is founded in the cult of the founding fathers has a rather peculiar consequence: The intentions of these political actors of two centuries ago are the ultimate touchstone for conditions in the United States today; and to this day it is this backward-perspective that to a great extent influences America’s perceptions of the rest of the world.

Americans are hardly conscious of this, and since they never discuss it, the phenomenon is hardly registered in Europe. But anyone who listens to the way Americans discuss themselves is surprised at America's implicit self-comparison, less with real foreign countries than to another, mythical, abroad...It appears that the abroad against which the United States established and still defines itself is none other than the England of religious persecution lead by King George. Not: “We are no dictatorship” but: “We are not a monarchy,” is what editors and commentators tend to write whenever they condemn President George W. Bush’s excessive use of authority - and even then the emphasis is on the first word of the phrase. This raises the question of whom and what this refers to, and the answer points again and again to a past that serves as a point of departure for America.

In America, the collective image of foreign countries is a mythical one, preserved as if in formaldehyde, handed down from the time of the founding fathers with the Kingdom of England circa 1776 unconsciously serving as the main point of reference. This allows the United States to persist in describing itself as the freest country on earth, although by nearly every objective criterion, most European nations are more liberal and free than the United States. One only has to recall the repressive American culture of prohibition and punishment.

It is in this way that the tradition-arrested Americans protect themselves against the pressure to compare their own achievements and social structures against real foreign examples. Thus the myth and collective emotion stabilize society. But this happens at the expense of critical thinking and lessons learned. It is a double-edged phenomenon that has worked its way into every aspect of American public life.

Katrina? I Don't Know No Katrina

2007-07-15T16:43:00.000-07:00

If you recall, 6 weeks ago at the start of hurricane season (circa June 1), the forecasters predicted 13-18 named storms for this "hurricane season", with 6 or 7 reaching Category 3 or stronger hurricane strength making landfall stateside. Not much has happened thus far this year. Last year was pretty quiet too. 2005, however, saw the double catastrophe of Hurricane's Katrina and Rita along the Gulf Coast. I wonder what the news is on that front....

"Thousands of pounds of ice originally sent to Hurricane Katrina relief efforts are being melted after being stored in Gloucester [Massachusetts] for two years. A Federal Emergency Management Agency spokeswoman told the Gloucester Daily Times that the ice held at Americold Logistics and at 22 similar facilities nationwide is being melted to dispose of it for health reasons. The cost of storing the ice at all the facilities since Katrina is $12.5 million.
The ice was originally sent south to help Katrina victims, but in September 2005 the ice was sent back north by the federal government, and some of it ended up in the Gloucester.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers acknowledged at the time that it had ordered too much ice due to faulty estimates by local officials. Truckers received up to $900 a day to move the ice to storage sites around the country.
Gloucester received 118 truckloads of ice in September 2005, but 99 of those were sent to Florida in October 2005 to help with relief efforts after Hurricane Wilma. By November 2005, only four truckloads, weighing between 40,000 and 84,000 pounds each, remained in Gloucester.
FEMA contracts required disposal of the ice three months after purchase. But FEMA spokeswoman Alexandra Kirin told the Times that the agency decided to keep the excess ice for the 2006 hurricane season. With fewer storms than expected, the ice was not needed, and the agency decided not to save the ice for the 2007 season because it couldn't determine if the ice was safe for human consumption."

In the first few weeks after the hurricane hit, $127 million was raised by Habitat for Humanity International. They have been concentrating on rebuilding homes in St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, and Orleans parishes. However, since 2005, only 50 homes have been completed with 70 under construction. This is because only $29 million of the $127 million raised went to the project. About $15 million has been spent with $14 million left to finish what has been started. Habitat’s goal was to construct over 1,000 homes throughout the Gulf Coast, but so far only 100 have been completed or in progress.

Meanwhile, some would-be beneficiaries of PA [public assistance] grants fume about the slow delivery of help. Among them is Nicholas Felton, president of a union for New Orleans firefighters, who five months ago complained loudly about lack of progress in securing millions of dollars from FEMA for repairing uninhabitable firehouses that are plagued by sewage backups and rodents. "We have not seen any movement, any money, from federal, state or local officials," he said. "We have only been successful enough in repairing fire stations with generous donations from people around the city and country, and with firefighters putting in the work. I wish I knew where it (rebuilding money) is so that we could go tell folks to let it loose."

Officials in Nagin's administration who handle PA paperwork, including Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Cynthia Sylvain-Lear, say little, "other than they're working on it, and they're trying to get it. But it's been almost two years and we haven't gotten anything," Felton said. Sylvain-Lear...blamed the lack of progress on a broader problem: Project Worksheets prepared by FEMA that estimate repair or rebuilding costs using figures that are far too low, forcing the city to ask for an amended Worksheet. Without the use of higher figures, the city is forced to find money elsewhere in its budget to fill the gap, she said."

Senator [Ted] Stevens’ [R-Alaska...yes, that Ted Stevens] suggestion came after listening to frustrated Louisiana officials recount their problems with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) they said has stalled thousands of projects. "We need a new Marshall Plan for that -- not just FEMA," said Stevens during a subcommittee hearing.

Disaster Recovery Subcommittee Chairwoman Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana, agreed, saying if the reconstruction of France and Germany was conducted on a project-by-project basis like in the Hurricane Katrina recovery, "We would still be rebuilding Europe." She described some of the problems as "a nightmare." The subcommittee hearing this week focused on problems encountered with about $10 billion of the $110 billion Congress approved for public works projects such as canals, water and sewer projects, schools, and other public facilities.

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin leveled criticism at FEMA for underestimating the reimbursement to localities for projects, which he described as their "biggest obstacle." He and others also criticized FEMA for rotating its officials to the hard-hit areas, many of whom were inexperienced, and disputed project estimates previously approved by other FEMA personnel.

Hurricane Katrina nearly swept away the jazz traditions of New Orleans along with the rest of the city, but native son Harry Connick Jr. says the danger of losing that legacy still hasn't subsided even though the storm waters have. As Connick Jr. gets set to take his "My New Orleans" tour to the Montreal International Jazz Festival on Saturday (June 30), he admits the hurricane has given added significance to his work. "Performing is a lot more meaningful after Katrina," he told a news conference in Montreal on Friday. "If only because there seems to be so much attention focused on what's going to happen with this music, mainly traditional jazz music."

Connick Jr. is concerned that with so many musicians fleeing the city in the aftermath of Katrina, that distinctive New Orleans sound would be lost. "It's very difficult to get the city back on its feet when nobody lives there anymore," he said. "The traditional jazz scene wasn't doing particularly well before the storm. After the storm, everybody's gone."

Looks to me like nothing much is happening there either. At least it's not all bad news:
[Texas] State officials say more than $500 million for 22 southeast Texas counties is now beginning to make its way to thousands of people 21 months after the storm. State and federal officials say the delay is partly because of their determination to avoid the waste and fraud that plagued assistance efforts for Louisiana residents after Hurricane Katrina.
Unlike Katrina victims, Rita victims had to fill out detailed financial reports including information from family members, landlords, churches and others, proving they weren't getting substantial money from any other sources.

I would be remiss if I failed to credit the many charitable organizations and churches and such doing smaller recovery projects away from these federal and mainstream activities; they should not go unmentioned, as those volunteers (for the most part) are giving their time, money, and effort to aid their fellow man in his time of need, a quality far too rare in times such as these. So to those NoLA volunteers out there, I salute you. If you would like to plug your organization here, feel free; let us know where we can direct people who want to aid physically, financially or otherwise, as I'm sure there are still those out there willing to help, and from the looks of it, there is no shortage of need for private aid.

To the federal and local politicians keeping the people tied up in this endless bureaucratic rigmarole due to your ineptitude and tedium, shame on you.

A Little Summer Reading

2007-07-09T14:37:00.000-07:00

A post of things I've been reading of late for those long summer afternoons when you've got nothing to do, but don't want to turn on the TV because there are no sports to watch and you're already caught up on Making the Band 4 and you don't want to go outside because it's too freaking hot (ESPN Radio's Colin Cowherd was in Fresno last weekend for the local ESPY's and in recounting his experiences here on his show today he quipped something to the effect of "Fresno was great, but it was hot. It was so hot on Friday Jerry Tarkanian said it was too hot to illegally contact a recruit").
So, with said, I present you a full smorgasbord of this and that to munch on, most of it excerpted, because this post would've ended up longer and more ungainly that it already is.

Families Outside the Spotlight Also Grieve
by Mary Sanchez, Kansas City Star
"...is a murder that reaches the every-hour-on-the-hour status of CNN truly more of a loss? What if your child’s death is the one noted with a paragraph in the newspaper while another child’s mother is inundated with strangers offering comfort and financial support after reading a front-page story...Reporters and editors are often pressed to explain the varying degrees of coverage when murders occur. And they should continue to answer the questions. Because often the disparity cannot be justified except for convoluted explanations that do nothing to soothe the emotions of families left feeling that their loved ones are less worthy..."

Sometimes Our Suspicions Are Unfounded
Leonard Pitts Jr., Miami Herald
"My wife and I have a running joke. Say the doctor informs me he's going to administer some test that will hurt like heck. When he leaves the room, I whisper to Marilyn, ``You know why he's doing it, don't you? It's because I'm black.''
It is, of course, a joke with a point. Namely, that some black folks can read race into anything. Some of us keep indignation in our hip pockets and conspiracy on speed dial. But we'll get back to Isaiah Washington in a moment.

First, the obvious disclaimer: I am not saying race is never the reason bad things happen. Au contraire. One often gets pulled over because one is black. One often gets substandard healthcare because one is black. One often fails to get the job because one is black. Worse, because those in charge of pulling people over, giving healthcare or making hiring decisions are seldom clear and candid that race is their reason, it's easy to become paranoid, to believe everything is race until proven otherwise. So to be African American is often to walk a tightrope above a snake pit of suspicions, both founded and un."

Which brings us to two truths that may seem contradictory but aren't:
1) There is epidemic racism in this country.
2) You can find racism where it does not exist.

Forgive me, but [Isaiah] Washington seems far more illustrative of the second axiom than the first. For what it's worth, the creator and producer of Grey's is a black woman, Shonda Rhimes. And Washington is, by his own admission, a temperamental actor who used a hurtful word toward a colleague. Yet he thinks he was fired because he is black.

He -- like many of us, black and otherwise -- seems knee jerk where race is concerned. I mean is it so hard to believe people feared him because they thought he was a volatile jerk? Or that a white actor of middling fame who disrupted his workplace would have also been fired? In his rush to make himself a martyr, Washington fails to consider these and other obvious questions. He comes across as one of those brothers the running joke is meant to mock -- the kind for whom race is a get-out-of-jail-free card. Unfortunately, like the boy who cried wolf, such people trivialize what is serious and give others license to do the same.

The Cost of Failure
Cal Thomas, Syndicated Columnist
If you believe the Bush presidency is a failure, what then? Do you delight in whacking him like a piñata for the next 18 months with your only objective a Democratic blowout victory in the 2008 election? If that is your strategy, do you ask yourself what kind of country a Democratic president will inherit and whether he (or she) will have the ability to quickly turn things around after months of pummeling a weakened president?

Politics has always been a contact sport, but in the past - even during difficult times - there were those who transcended partisanship, putting the country first. In her book "Team of Rivals," Doris Kearns Goodwin writes of how Abraham Lincoln brought his severest critics into his administration to work with him, not against him, for the promotion of the general welfare. This is a foreign notion in our day of 24/7 cable news, talk radio, fundraisers and polarizers. These exist and profit from stirring the pot, never achieving harmony or consensus. Each has a vested financial, political and career interest in division, not unity. A fundraiser once told me he can't raise money by sending out letters stressing positive achievements, only negative threats. And thus, the cynicism deepens.

Leadership is something that is conveyed by the people, not imposed by the leader. If people trust you, they are willing to be led. If they don't, they rebel at your sense of direction, or they conclude you have lost your way. That is the conclusion an overwhelming majority of Americans - including many Bush voters and former supporters - have reached concerning this president and his presidency.

The president should name a panel of prominent Democrats and Republicans to help him during the next 18 months. That assistance would not be for the purpose of making him look better, but for tackling difficult problems that partisanship has not solved. He might call it "Americans United," or some other high-minded name that would elevate dialogue beyond the reach of partisan dividers. Didn't he say once that he is "a uniter, not a divider"? This could help him prove it.

Sadr-Maliki rift grows
BBC News
Iraqi Shia leaders linked to the radical cleric, Moqtada Sadr, have attacked their former government ally, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki. They accused Mr Maliki of bowing to US demands and sanctioning US attacks on Mr Sadr's Mehdi Army militia. Mr Maliki has said the militia must purge its ranks of criminals. Dozens of people have died in recent fighting between Iraqi forces and Mehdi Army militiamen, amid signs of a growing rift between the Shia groups.

In April, six cabinet ministers loyal to Mr Sadr quit their posts in protest at the government's refusal to demand a deadline for the withdrawal of US troops. Support from Mr Sadr's bloc was critical to securing Mr Maliki's appointment as prime minister last year. The Mehdi Army militia and its allies within the fledgling Iraqi security forces have been accused of operating sectarian death squads, targeting Iraqi Sunnis. The militia's stronghold of Sadr City, a vast slum in eastern Baghdad, was the focus of a major US military operation in late June.

On Saturday, Mr Maliki said the Mehdi Army had been infiltrated by criminals and by members of the Baath Party of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Mr Sadr's supporters said Mr Maliki's comments effectively gave US forces a "green light" to attack the Mehdi Army militia. According to [Sadr aide, Sheik Ahmed] al-Shaibani, Mr Maliki's comments indicated he was ready to implement the US agenda of "ending the Mehdi Army militarily and politically".

Moral Relativism & A Mighty Heart & July 4 (that title is all for one post)
Jim Emerson, scanners movie blog, editor of rogerebert.com
"...that is what "professional obscurers of moral clarity" do -- usually in the name of moral clarity. They distort, spin, and obfuscate. They propagandize. They exploit the blunders of their enemies. And they claim a monopoly on victimhood. Any casualties they cause on the other side -- whether it's the people on those planes or in those buildings on 9/11, or the random innocents who were also sent to Guantánamo -- are incidental. These propagandists are among the extremists who help ratchet up the levels of violence because they see only themselves as victims and consider everyone else an enemy combatant and therefore fair game.

To acknowledge that there are victims and extremists on either side is not to play into the enemy's hands, no matter how they may try to spin it, because then they are forced to acknowledge the same thing. What serves the enemy is behaving in ways that appear to give weight to their propaganda, by far the most powerful weapon in any war. Suicide bombers, by definition, destroy themselves along with their victims. And because of that, they are doomed to lose. The West's challenge is to avoid helping to create more suicide bombers by acting in ways that appear to lend credence to their feelings of paranoia, humiliation, and victimhood.

...the whole "War on Terror" concept, and particularly the inept invasion and occupation of Iraq it was used to justify, is precisely what Al Qaeda wanted: to create the perception of a war between the West and Islam. It's been a worldwide recruiting drive for Al Quaeda and other ideological camps seeking to convert Muslims to terrorism. [Director Michael] Winterbottom is quite specific about the similarities he sees between the stories of his two movies [The Road to Guantanamo and A Mighty Heart], and nowhere do I see him implying that the murder of Daniel Pearl and the secretive detainments at Guantánamo are equivalent. What he's saying, I think, is more like "two wrongs don't make a right" -- that, in war, victims are victims and aggressors are aggressors. No moral relativism there. Just a fact. Judea Pearl's son was savagely murdered, and nothing can rationalize or excuse that fact. Now, how do you explain to an Iraqi husband or father that the death of his children, wife or parents is less morally significant because they were accidental collateral damage?

Back when John McCain still appeared to have something of a moral compass, he criticized the inflammatory and ineffective Bush policies that allowed or encouraged "extreme interrogation methods" or "abuse" or "torture" (depending on whose PC term you want to invoke) by saying: "It's not about who they are. It's about who we are."

That is not "moral relativism." That is "moral clarity." We can't control who "they" are. We can only control who we are.

finally, and, arguably, most importantly:
Dan Patrick Leaving ESPN
Patrick, who has been with the network for 18 years, announced on his radio show Monday that he will appear on air for the last time Aug. 17. Norby Williamson, ESPN executive vice president for production, made a simultaneous announcement.
The final week of Patrick's radio show, which started in 1999, will include a look back at memorable moments, interviews and guests.
"If there was animosity, I wouldn't be doing any radio shows after today," Patrick said on his show, adding, "I hope to be doing radio somewhere, somehow, down the road."
In a news release, Patrick said: "I feel privileged to have had this opportunity and I have extremely mixed emotions about leaving. With that said, I told ESPN that I believe it's time for me to try something different, something that will also be challenging and rewarding. While I'm not sure what that will be, I am grateful to ESPN for its willingness to allow me to pursue new endeavors."

As Simple As Changing Guita...err...a Light Bulb

2007-07-07T20:06:00.000-07:00

I watched some of the Live Earth broadcasts throughout the day on Bravo!, CNBC, and NBC proper, and I enjoyed rousing performances by Alicia Keys, Kelly Clarkson, John Legend, Joss Stone (someone get her some shoes, please), Red Hot Chilipeppers, Shakira, and a cavalcade of other stars (actually, those are the only ones I saw. I turned it off after 2/3 of a song by Keith Urban and then again upon Al Gore's introduction of Bon Jovi, and if I'd had a brick I would have thrown it through the TV just now as I stumbled upon The Black Eyed Peas doing Where is the Love....good thing the remote was right next to me and there are no bricks in this room, although the external hard drive on the desk is sort of brick-like now that I look at it).

Do Your Part! or: At Least Sing Along
One thing I failed to see during all of these performances and puffery was any compelling call to do anything beyond "take a stand" and "act now for your children and their children" and "it's as simple as changing a light bulb". Hardly seems like a cause worthy of a 24-hour glorified telethon. The truth is, this event had very little to do with global warming (or climate change or whatever the euphemism du jour may be). The claim I heard was that this event was to raise awareness. It's possible that in some remote areas and developing or even non-developing nations they are unaware of the phenomenon known to us as global warming. Of course, those same people probably weren't within a fortnight's journey of a television with cable or satellite service to showcase the event, and even if they saw it, it's doubtful they speak English, and even if by some stretch there are English-speakers who haven't gotten baptized into recycle-reduce-reuse (and close the loop, we can close the loop), they would not have gotten a clear picture of what to do from the Live Earth festivities. Those of us fully aware that Al Gore won an Oscar and who have been getting this message since grade school are far more interested in hearing a gaggle of popular singers and bands of today and yesteryear all on one day than we ever will be about E85.

Is It As Simple As Changing A Light Bulb?
My gut instinct is that changing over to CFL's and hybrid cars in America won't reverse the warming trend or fundamentally change the climate, and I'd be willing to wager if I could interpret the science it would say something similar. Producing less CO2 is hardly substantive given how much we already produce (to say nothing of China and India eaching putting one new coal-fired power plant online every month). Assuming CO2 emissions are the culprit we've been told they are by the TV news (which I will probably rant about again any day now), cutting emissions in half would probably put us back where we were at some point in the middle of the last century which is, as I understand it, still part of the period of problematic emissions buildup. It's like gas prices: they were 2.50 or so for a while then skyrocketed up to 3.50ish and now they are back down around 3.00 even, which seems like a great decrease, but really we're still no better off than we were at this time last year. I'm not a global warming skeptic, I believe there is such a phenomenon. I am, however, increasingly a "global warming can be solved by going green" skeptic. It could just be that I was made a cynic upon the disappointing realization that Captain Planet would never come through on his promises (he was our hero, claimed he was going to take pollution down to zero....lies, a pack of lies, Captain.)

And Now For Something Completely Different...But Not Too Different
Live Earth officially being over (though still being re-transmitted) what does one do now? Go out and recycle plastic shopping bags? Turn the thermostat up to 78? Wait til after 7 to wash clothes? I think it's gotta be bigger than that. Much bigger. Something international and stringent, which could really upset our attempts to "protect our way of life" more than al-Qaeda or any illegal immigrant could ever imagine. The classic Platonic paraphrasing is "necessity is the mother of invention"; In this case, it would appear that there is a very clear necessity, except the generation currently running the country taught us all to live it up, live for today because who still cares what happened yesterday and who knows what tomorrow brings. Well, it appears a substantial majority of climate scientists have a working hypothesis of what tomorrow brings and it doesn't augur well for mankind nevermind civilization as we know it. Nevertheless, we carry on as if nothing will happen. And when the only "necessity" is carpe diem what do we invent?

A 4th of July Admonition and Admiration

2007-07-04T12:11:00.000-07:00

Shame on you, dear reader. Shame on you for letting me go so long without posting. I've been neglectful in by blogging duties of late and your silence in this regard makes you complicit. Please, let's get it together. All of us.

In other news, all is now right with the world as Takeru Kobayashi has been dethroned as hot-dog eating champion of the world by one Joey Chestnut of San Jose earlier today, proving once again that sometimes it just takes a Californian. Kobayashi showed his true colors last month when he claimed arthritis of the jaw had set in and he would likely not eat competitively again, coincidentally, just days after Chestnut had broken Kobayashi's record 53.5 hot dogs in 12 minutes by eating an unbelievable 59 earlier in June (a record he broke again today by taking down 66!). Despite beating the record, there was some speculation that Chestnut might fold in the head-to-head matchup. Of course, that all turned out to be nonsense, as Joey C. proved yet again that he is the greatest eater of this, or any other, generation. Just look at the nonchalance on the face of this beast, he could eat another dozen and not break a sweat. Goodbye and good riddance to the Kobayashi legend. The American re-ascension continues; say it with me now: U!S!A! U!S!A! U!S!A!

We're Baaaaaack!

2007-06-25T16:35:00.000-07:00

About a month ago, I wrote this diatribe against the multitudinous failings of American athletes in non-major sports. In the interim, things got worse: we let a Frenchman, a FRENCHMAN, walk away with the NBA Finals MVP (and Eva Longoria), an out-of-shape, chain-smoking Argentine held off Tiger Woods at the US Open, and the US Women's Soccer Team had adopted gold uniforms at the behest of Nike, eschewing the beloved red, white, and blue. Needless to say, the American athlete appeared to be in a state of disrepair, our physical hegemony more dubious than ever.
Red, White, and....Gold? Embarrassing.

So, imagine my glee when I found out (because I certainly didn't watch, and it's possible it wasn't even televised) the U.S. Soccer Team was stepping up out on the pitch, heeding my call for excellence in athletics. Yes, Team USA went on to win the CONCACAF Gold Cup, with (I'm told) a thrilling come from behind 2-1 victory over bitter rival, Mexico, with team captain Landon Donovan matching Eric Wynalda's record for goals in international competition in the process. Granted, this generation of Team USA always beats Mexico, but this was a big game and a big win. Hey Mexico, stop sending your undesirables across our border under the guise of being "poor, unskilled labor" when we all know it's nothing but a sinister nationalist plot to attempt to dilute the level of competition in the dominant breeding grounds that are our youth soccer leagues with your children and their soccer-deficient DNA.

Also, Tyson Gay became the newest American sprinting sensation, clocking the 2nd fastest 100m time into a headwind ever (9.84s), while winning by the largest margin of anyone in decades in the 100. Then he recorded the 2nd fastest 200m in history, 19.62s (personally, I don't think the record, 19.32s, will ever be broken. Michael Johnson was a 200m/400m deity, especially at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996). Times like that make him a legitimate contender to de-throne Jamaican 100m world record holder Asafa Powell, who has been mostly unbeatable in recent years.

Come on folks, let's keep the good times rolling and hope for some magic at Wimbeldon (which began today), the upcoming Tour de France (somebody call Lance!), and hope all accounts are correct and an American gets taken #1 at the NBA draft this year, reversing that shameful debacle of drafting an Italian #1 last year. (I'll allow an exception for the drafting of Yao Ming #1 in 2002 because I have no interest in drawing the ire of the Chinese).

Here's Comes the Sun, the Relentless, Scalding Sun...I Hope I Don't Melt....Away

2007-06-21T16:29:00.000-07:00

It is now officially summer, easily my least favorite season of the year. It's too hot, too many kids out and about during the day, no close parking spots, it's too hot, I get chastised for being in the house all the time, the only major sport in competition is baseball, there is a higher quotient of bad movies, overweight young ladies too scantily clad, mosquitoes, and did I mention it's too freaking hot.

Now, summer does offer a few positives: swimming, 4th of July, listening to the Beach Boys (who's latest collection of greatest not-quite hits, Warmth of the Sun, is very good).... Speaking of which, I feel the first day of summer is a fitting time to celebrate (one day belatedly) the 65th birthday of Brian Wilson, genius behind the Beach Boys, who gave us one of my favorite quotes of all-time, “Beware the lollipop of mediocrity; lick it once and you'll suck forever." and one of my favorite albums of all-time, Pet Sounds. Tom Petty put it this way, "I think I would put him up there with any composer - especially Pet Sounds. I don't think there is anything better that that, necessarily. I don't think you'd be out of line comparing him to Beethoven - to any composer. The word genius is used a lot with Brian. I don't know if he's a genius or not, but I know that music is probably as good as any music you can make."

As a means to get you through the doldrums of summer, a Brian Wilson track you may actually be unfamiliar with. Everyone knows the Beach Boys classics, but this one, Melt Away, is from his eponymous solo debut album. Not exactly a summer anthem along the lines of Surfin USA, it's more of a sunset on the beach song; one might call it a re-visiting of God Only Knows, 20 years later.

Anyway, enjoy. Here's to a surviving another summer. And stay away from that suck-inducing lollipop of mediocrity.

110 Years, 100 Movies!: The AFI's Self Re-evaluation

2007-06-20T11:10:00.000-07:00

Back in 1997, AFI celebrated the century mark of the cinema by releasing a list of what they dubbed the 100 greatest American films of all-time. Citizen Kane reigned supreme, Steven Spielberg was the most celebrated director, and animation was once again snubbed, garnering just 2 spots on the list.

Well, to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the 100th anniversary list, AFI is once again offering a list of the 100 greatest American movies, this time with the potential inclusion of those films made from 1997-2006, to be announced tonight at 8 on CBS, hosted by the ubiquitous Morgan Freeman.

According to the AFI website, the ballot consists of 400 movies (over 100 years? It seems like there have been 400 movies released just this year already) from which voters can choose, plus up to 5 write-ins if necessary.

Of course, the majority of the '97 list is predicted to hold steady, but the real question is just how many of the movies from the interim will make the list? There are several quality contenders (some that I would vouch for, others not so much, but they are relevant and have many fans): Gladiator, Moulin Rouge, Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, Fight Club, Shrek, Memento, Crash, The Sixth Sense, Almost Famous, Office Space, The Ring, Being John Malkovich, Sideways, Saving Private Ryan, Million Dollar Baby, Brokeback Mountain, The Big Lebowski, Black Hawk Down, and the list goes on. And then there are some films who have gained in reputation in recent years like The Shawshank Redemption (thanks to TBS' near-incessant airing thereof) or were otherwise omitted last time that could make the leap into the list.

What do you think? What should/shouldn't make the list? Should there be a list at all?
The Chicago Reader's indispensable (if intentionally contrarian) movie guru, Jonathan Rosenbaum, wrote, in his lament of the original list, "Is the list simply a commercial ploy dreamed up by a consortium of marketers to repackage familiar goods, or is it a legitimate cultural contribution that's somehow supposed to improve the quality of our lives? (Are we still capable of distinguishing between the two?) If it's the former, then surely it qualifies as front-page news only if we're living in the equivalent of Stalinist Russia. If it's the latter, then why does the list contain so many movies that lie--about Vietnam (The Deer Hunter, Apocalypse Now), about racism (The Birth of a Nation, Taxi Driver, Pulp Fiction), about countless other matters? And why are so many of the entries aesthetically bland or worse while recapitulating all the worst habits of Hollywood self-infatuation...my impulse is to defend the breadth, richness, and intelligence of the American cinema against its self-appointed custodians, who seem to want to lock us into an eternity of Oscar nights."

I hastily threw together a rough top 50 (minus Kubrick, because I never know if his movies are "American" or "British") to partake in the festivities, and I encourage you to do the same:
Adaptation
The Adventures of Robin Hood
Amadeus
Annie Hall
Before Sunset
Birth
The Body Snatcher
Captain Blood
Chinatown
Citizen Kane
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (Directors Cut)
Detour
Do the Right Thing
Double Indemnity
Duck Soup
The Front
The General
Ghostbusters
The Godfather
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Jaws
Kicking and Screaming
The Kid
The King of Comedy
The Lion King
Love and Death
The Magnificent Ambersons
Meet Me in St. Louis
Miller's Crossing
Million Dollar Baby
Miracle of Morgan's Creek
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Murder on the Orient Express
Night of the Hunter
North by Northwest
The Ox-Bow Incident
The Player
Quiz Show
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Rear Window
Requiem for a Heavyweight
The Set-Up
Shadow of a Doubt
Shop Around The Corner
Singin in the Rain
Sullivan's Travels
Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans
Sunset Boulevard
Trading Places
When Harry Met Sally
You Can't Take it With You

Dang it! Spielberg wins again.

Stop Holding Out On Us, U.K.

2007-06-18T20:08:00.000-07:00

After their wily concealing of Lewis Taylor (which I dutifully exposed earlier this spring), it appears that, once again, the British have been holding out on us musically, this time in the realm of female pop singers. Oh sure, they pitched us Joss Stone, Fergie, Corinne Bailey Rae, and Amy Winehouse, with varying degrees of merit, thinking we'll be appeased while they remain determined to hold back the best of them all: one Emma Bunton (better known to most as the former Baby Spice of Spice Girls fame).

Her U.S. debut, Free Me (2005), is one of the best mainstream pop albums of the decade. Unfortunately, her follow-up, Life in Mono, is not available this side of the pond after being released in the U.K. last fall. Nevertheless, Free Me mixes 60's Motown girl group harmonies/hooks with bossa nova/Latin Jazz flair, with a nod to Burt Bacharach-style composition, and modern pop drum programming. It's modern, yet retro, and it all hangs together gloriously.

But don't take my word for it, from the IGN review:
As with her work with the Girls, the 12 songs included here are pure bred pop, focusing on an incredibly light and airy musical motif that is inescapably catchy. And while her previous work sounded like she was trying to hard to be the next Madonna/Britney/J-Lo heir, here she takes a decidedly different tact, branching out into pre-fab '60s Euro pop terrain to rekindle the kitsch and be-pop aesthetics of the Shirley Bassey, Tom Jones, and Burt Bacharach with a sense of buoyant homage and retro love.

A lot of the success of the album comes from the fact that Bunton was wise enough to employ actual musicians, accomplished studio musicians at that, instead of relying on sample driven, ProTools laden production. The result is a full sounding album that pops, bristles, and bounces with a vibrant sense of self-awareness. The end result is an album that is both a throwback to a time when pop music was witty, smart, and resilient and a fresh sounding blast of PoPoMo dance music.

Oh, and it doesn't hurt that she looks like this:

For your viewing pleasurement:

Back From The Grave [and deteriorating], It's....It's...It's The Iraq Study Group Report!

2007-06-17T20:15:00.000-07:00

It appears that at some point in the last 6 months a few people actually took the time to read through the Iraq Study Group Report, (If you recall [or are new here] I noted back when it came out that the majority of those commenting on the report made remarks such as, "While I haven't read the thing cover to cover, blah, blah, blah, it sucks and here's why, blah blah blah"...Tony Snow, Tucker Carlson, I'm looking in your direction) and now it seems to have gained some fans. President Bush and Co. have returned to discussing the ISG Report, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sang the praises of the report on Face the Nation today, the Dem candidates for president regularly reference it in the debates.

Almost universally derided as over-reaching and implausible upon release (not to mention the use of the phrase "grave and deteriorating" to describe the situation practically writing the headlines for the newspapers by itself), I guess they're hoping we've all forgotten their initial disdain to accept their praise of it now uncritically.

Or perhaps the perpetually maligned Maliki government's inability to "meet the benchmarks" that keep being set has changed the hearts and minds of the Congress? (Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) quipped, glibly, "It's kind of odd for the Senate to be telling other politicians 'why can't you get your act together'").

Anybody want in on a bet that the weight currently being put on the magical mystery date of September by the GOP as the turning point in Iraq disappears 6 weeks from now, in favor of "we knew it was going to get worse before it gets better, but if we leave they'll follow us home" rhetoric?

Ahhh, what ever happened to colonialism? I hate summer; at least gas prices are plummeting. (down $.30-40 in 2-3 weeks!).

Forget Baghdad, What Do We Do About Bogota?

2007-06-16T09:18:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from The Washington Post:
When U.S. defense contractors were first hired by the U.S. government in 2000 to help the Colombian government under the multibillion-dollar Plan Colombia aid package, American officials assumed the contractors would be gradually replaced as they trained Colombians.

But a recent State Department report obtained by The Associated Press shows more U.S. aid going to private companies, igniting criticism of the spending in Congress. "We need to be working ourselves out of a job in Colombia but these contracts are creating dependency on U.S. contractors and are not helping build a sustainable or peaceful Colombia," said Congressman Sam Farr, a Democrat from California. "The Colombians should assume more responsibility," said Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who chairs the Senate subcommittee on foreign aid. "With the right training they could do the job better and cheaper."

Colombia, the largest recipient of U.S. aid outside of the Middle East and Afghanistan, is in the midst of five-decade civil conflict that pits rebels against far-right death squads and the government, a battle in part funded by the world's largest cocaine industry.

The State and Defense departments spent about $300 million on private contractors in 2006, just under half of the roughly $630 million in U.S. military aid for Colombia, the largest recipient of U.S. aid outside of the Middle East and Afghanistan.

Last year, Falls Church, Va.-based Dyncorp International Inc., whose pilots fumigate coca fields with armored crop dusters, took in $164 million for work in Colombia, according to the recent State Department report, or a quarter of all aid destined for Colombia's military and police. That was double what Dyncorp got in 2002. Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin Corp., which does much of the maintenance for Colombia's air fleet, saw the value of its contracts more than triple over the same four years to about $80 million.

Critics already were questioning the effectiveness of U.S. aid in Colombia. Despite record drug eradication efforts - the bulk of it carried out by the contractors - a U.S. survey earlier this month found coca planting in Colombia rose for a third consecutive year in 2006.

A 2002 report detailing Dyncorp's mission explained that a "primary responsibility" of contractors was to train Colombians, but that such training would occur some time in the future. Virtually identical language was used again in the report for 2006.

A U.S. Embassy statement suggested that the figures could be misleading. It said some projects have grown without an increase in costs because "the Colombian army is taking more responsibility for their systems." But increased eradication missions have left little time for training, the State Department said.

Happy Flag Day, Mel Blanc!

2007-06-14T20:24:00.000-07:00

Perhaps the most overlooked of the non-official holidays, Flag Day, celebrating the adoption of Betsy Ross' Flag as the national flag by the Continental Congress. From the official US Code:
TITLE 36 - Subtitle I - Part A - CHAPTER 1 - § 110
(a) Designation.— June 14 is Flag Day.
(b) Proclamation.— The President is requested to issue each year a proclamation—
(1) calling on United States Government officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Flag Day; and
(2) urging the people of the United States to observe Flag Day as the anniversary of the adoption on June 14, 1777, by the Continental Congress of the Stars and Stripes as the official flag of the United States.

And what better way is there to celebrate this most overlooked of American of holidays than by celebrating (albeit 2 weeks belatedly) the posthumous 99th birthday of one of our most overlooked geniuses, Mel Blanc.

The name may not readily familiar, but the voices no doubt will be. Blanc was, most famously, the voice of Bugs Bunny. In addition to Bugs, he also voiced Daffy Duck, Porky Pig, Woody Woodpecker, Sylvester and Tweety, Marvin the Martian, Speedy Gonzales, Foghorn Leghorn, Pepe Le Pew, Elmer Fudd, Yosemite Sam, Barney Rubble from The Flintstones, Mr. Spacely from The Jetsons, and many others. Dubbed The Man of a Million Voices, in short, he was Warner Bros. animation for 30 years. He was Chuck Jones' muse (Jones of course being one of the greatest artists in the history of American animation/cinema).

Imagine, if you will, living in 1939 going to a legendary picture palace to see a Michael Curtiz directed costume epic starring Errol Flynn and Olivia da Haviland (say, The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex), preceded by a Mel Blanc-voiced Porky and Daffy cartoon and a trailer for His Girl Friday. Makes me sad when I compare something like that to what we have at the multiplex today: a Sprite "Sublymonal" commercial [by the way, wtf is really going on with this sublymonal stuff anyway?], 2 spots telling me to turn off my cell phone, and a trailer for an Adam Sandler-Kevin James faux gay romp.

Showing he was more than just a cartoon voice, Blanc also did radio, particularly a recurring role on The Jack Benny Show (Benny was a fantastic comedian in his own right, as the progenitor of the sitcom format). If, by some unbelievably unfortunate chance, you have somehow not been exposed to the wonderful worlds of the characters of Mel Blanc, you must, must, do yourself a favor and seek the man and his brilliant work out on DVD/TV/youtube/however else video may be available.

Have You Been (to see) Knocked Up?

2007-06-14T16:19:00.000-07:00

I was trying to work up something about the film Knocked Up, but then I came across Jim Emerson's piece on it, and, well, it's pretty solid.

Excerpted:
Judd Apatow's "Knocked Up" ought to be the most-discussed (and argument-generating) movie of the year so far -- which means it's uncommonly smart and subversive and disturbing (and funny), especially for a summer sex comedy...Sometimes you don't even know if the scene is funny or not -- and those are inevitably the most revealing and rewarding kinds of laughs, when you surprise yourself by laughing at how awful and truthful the characters are behaving.

My first reaction to the Ben-Alison match was that she would never want to see him again after their one-night stand. But, like so many women, Alison is someone who falls in love with a guy for who she wants him to be, not for who he really is. (She doesn't even know who he is -- and vice-versa.)...Alison wants to be in love with the father of her child (their child, she insists), so she is determined to make herself believe that's the case, even when it isn't, because that's the way it should be. And maybe she can even make him believe it.

When it comes to pregnancy, men of my generation (and Ben's) are taught -- by society and by law -- that we had better get used to being unnecessary. ("A Woman Without A Man Is Like A Fish Without A Bicycle.") It's all about respecting the woman's right to do whatever she wants with her own body. It's her body, and there's no question about that. And I'm not saying that's wrong or undesirable. Just that there are... complications. What the movie suggests (and this is where it really starts to get subversive) is that this attitude actually lets men off the moral hook when it comes to questions of abortion and child-rearing. Hey, it's her decision, after all!

Read the rest here

200th post!

2007-06-12T18:57:00.000-07:00

Well, here we are, #200. It feels like there was less time between 100 and 200, but I think the reverse is actually true (I don't particularly care to go back and look it up). Either way, it's been a good ride, and one of these days I'll get back to posting more regularly, but today is just another day to celebrate. Speaking of celebrate, I had a birthday and turned 23 this weekend and have had enough cake to kill 3 diabetics in the last 3-4 days so I'm barely alive as it is, so give me a few more days.

While I continue my extended respite, and we dive full on into a summer movie season replete with sequels and threequels, I recommend you take a look at this defense of movie sequels (conceptually) from David Bordwell and a group of other film historians/researchers/professors.

Michael Newman writes: "Sequels exist in all narrative forms–novels, plays, movies, television, videogames, comics, operas. What is the Bible but a series of sequels? Didn’t Shakespeare follow up Henry IV with a part II? What of Wagner’s Ring Cycle and Updike’s Rabbit novels? Many novelists of high reputation have written sequels, including Thackeray, Trollope, Faulkner, and Roth. There is nothing intrinsically unimaginative about continuing a story from one text to another. Because narratives draw their basic materials from life, they can always go on, just as the world goes on. Endings are always, to an extent, arbitrary. Sequels exploit the affordance of narrative to continue."

Pistol Pete Is Back!

2007-06-01T12:34:00.000-07:00

Oh sure, every Thanksgiving we all take turns around the dinner table, spouting platitudes and insincerities about things for which we are "thankful". This November, however, there will actually be something worth mentioning:

Pete Sampras will play top-ranked Roger Federer in three exhibition matches throughout Asia in November.

Sampras, who retired in 2002, will challenge Federer on Nov. 22 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Two days later, they will play at the Chinese gambling enclave of Macau. The location for the third match on Nov. 20 has not been determined. “I am so excited to play Pete and I am really looking forward to visiting Malaysia for the first time,” Federer said. “There is no doubt that we will play some great tennis.”

The exhibitions originated after Sampras invited Federer to practice at his home in Los Angeles as part of Federer’s preparations for the Indian Wells tournament in March.

“Obviously he’s a great player, but I felt like I didn’t embarrass myself out there,” Sampras said. “I feel like I can hold my own.”

The greatest of this generation vs. the greatest of last generation in a Chinese gambling enclave? Count me in!

On the other end of the spectrum you can count out all Americans in both the male and female sides of the French Open already. Great job, folks. Way to represent the ol' red, white, and blue.

Just Kill Me Already?

2007-05-31T14:51:00.001-07:00

From BBC News:
The letter they sent to President Napolitano came from a convicted mobster, Carmelo Musumeci, a 52-year-old who has been in prison for 17 years. It was co-signed by 310 of his fellow lifers.

Musumeci said he was tired of dying a little bit every day, "We want to die just once...we are asking for our life sentence to be changed to a death sentence".

It was a candid letter written by a man who, from within his cell, has tried hard to change his life. He has passed his high school exams and now has a degree in law. But his sentence, he says, has transformed the light into shadows. He told the president his future was the same as his past, killing the present and removing every hope.

Under current laws, prisoners serving life can obtain the right to brief periods of release after 10 years and conditional release after 26 years of good conduct. The Communist Refoundation party's senator, Maria Luisa Boccia, has proposed draft legislation to abolish the life sentence and replace it with a maximum sentence of 30 years.

Pre-Summer Mixtape Bonanza!

2007-05-30T19:46:00.000-07:00

Spurred on by ben and his 'most favorite of 2007 so-far' mixtape released late last week, several others have been put together and here they are in no particular order:

First, my own, similar to ben's, it's a compilation of my own favorites from 2007 thus far (with the caveat that I limit myself to 1 song per artist, with one exception this time):
My Mix:
Loney, Dear - I Am John (Loney, Noir)
Aqualung - Rolls So Deep (Memory Man)
Ryan Shaw - I am Your Man (This is Ryan Shaw)
Fountains of Wayne - Strapped For Cash (Traffic and Weather)
Amy Winehouse - Tears Dry on Their Own (Back to Black)
Mika - Big Girl [You Are Beautiful] (Life in Cartoon Motion)
Lewis Taylor - Yeah (The Lost Album)
Joss Stone - Baby, Baby, Baby (Introducing Joss Stone)
Tyrone Wells - Dream Like New York (Hold On)
The Feeling - Fill My Little World (Twelve Stops and Home)
Bobby Baby - The Some Place New
Erib Bibb - Shine On (Diamond Days)
Lavender Diamond - Find A Way (Imagine Our Love)
The Broken West - Hale Sunrise (I Can't Go On, I'll Go On)
Norah Jones - Sinkin' Soon (Not Too Late)
Musiq Soulchild - Ridiculous (Luvanmusiq)
I'm From Barcelona ft. Loney, Dear - This Boy (Let Me Introduce My Friends)
Jon McLaughlin - People (Indiana)
Mika - Happy Ending (Life in Cartoon Motion)

Further mixes have also been cobbled together by Koan and Gee.

If you like to try before you buy (well, download to be exact), here are the tracks::
Koan's 'Glorious Songs of 2007' tracklist: Josh Ritter - Idaho, The Snake, The Cross, The Crown - Electronic Dream Plant, Loney,Dear - Saturday Waits, Marissa Nadler - Famous Blue Raincoat, The Papercuts - John Brown, Low - Pretty People, Panda Bear - Bros, LCD Soundsystem - Someone Great, Sea Wolf - You're A Wolf, Field Music - A House Is Not A Home, Brandi Carlisle - The Story, Lifesavas - Shine Language, The Besnard Lakes - And You Lied To Me, The Snake, The Cross, The Crown - Gypsy Melodies, Josh Ritter - Thin Blue Flame

Gee's 'Songs For The Summer' tracklist: Elvis Perkins - Without Love, Bela Fleck and the Flecktones - Aimum, Duke Ellington - Uph, Feist - One Evening, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah - Satan Said Dance , Elliot Smith - L.A. , Grizzly Bear - Central and Remote, Jack Johnson - Dreams Be Dreams, Jean-Luc Ponty - Caracas, John Lennon - Instant Karma, Johnny Cash - Ballad of a Teenage Queen, Kings of Leon - The Bucket, Led Zeppelin - Bron-Yr-Aur Stomp, Phish - Farmhouse

Enjoy!

Snap Out Of It, American Athletes in Non-Major Sports

2007-05-30T00:07:00.000-07:00

Sunday, the Indianapolis 500 was run again, except this time instead of the Indy 500, it was a pathetic Indianapolis 415, shortest 500 in 30 years. How can you crown a winner of a 200 lap race after only 166? Sure it was raining, but why can't we pull the cars back out Monday or Tuesday after the storm blows through and finish it up? And to top it all off, the event was "won" by a Scotsman. A freaking skirt, err, kilt-wearing, competitive log-throwing, Paolo Nutini-listening Scot. Sorry, Dario Franchitti, I know you got the jug o' milk on Sunday, but you will forever be asterisked in my book for winning some of the Indy 500.

Today (or yesterday) at the French Open, the American men went 0-8, including our last best hopes James Blake and Andy Roddick. Of course, Roddick already set his sights low coming into the event, ""Different goals. Going into Wimbledon or the (U.S.) Open, it's like, 'OK, I'm looking to make a run to a final here, and here, I want to make the second week." The next highest ranked American was reportedly forced to withdraw with injury sustained kicking a field goal during a visit with an NFL Europe team, as if we didn't already think poorly enough of tennis players. Getting yourself a notch below NFL Europe kicker in the sports pantheon is putting you down toward being on par with an MLS goalie. This view is only further enhanced by the controversy of Andy Roddick's super guns on the cover of a recent issue of Men's Fitness Magazine. Judge for yourself:

Regular Roddick

Super Roddick

And in a sad irony, the hockey team from Anaheim of all places in up 1-0 in the Stanley Cup finals over a team from Canada.

What is this world coming to?

Memorial Day Week: Closing Ceremony

2007-05-28T21:06:00.000-07:00

As this Memorial Day Week 2007, filled with the usual vigorous valorization of the military, comes to a close I am left with one lingering question: Throughout the day I heard several people in the media say, "Regardless of your politics or what you think about the war, you should support/thank the troops."

For the majority of people, this is a reasonable position, but what of the pacifist? If one believes in war as a concept, but not a particular war or other that is one thing, they should support those who serve today and have done so in the past (akin to the axiom that "you can't be a little pregnant, you either are or you aren't", one can't be a little pacifistic), but if one abhors violence of all kinds, are they, too, obliged to "support the troops"? And if they don't does that make them less "patriotic"? And if so, what does that mean for them?

I am reminded of an episode of Cartoon Network's The Boondocks (especially because my brother constantly references the show, which is really quite good if you haven't seen it. Season two is set to start this summer from what I hear, and I am already anxiously looking forward to the episode 'Invasion of the Katrinians'....wow that was a long side-bar, back on topic). In one episode, the main character has a dream in which it turns out Martin Luther King Jr was not killed when he got shot, he only went into a coma, and he wakes up in 2003 to much fanfare. He ends up on one of those cable news talk shows and they ask him if his ideas of non-violence still apply and if he has a problem that the US went "on the offense" (to use the GOP parlance of today). Dr. King responds that in the bible it says if a man strikes you, you are to turn the other cheek. Well, this causes an uproar, he is deemed a traitor and asked on a subsequent show "One question, Dr. King, why do you hate America?"

Is it just that simple? Pacifists hate America, liberty, and all that is right with the world? If denouncing violence is tantamount to a denunciation of America, what does that say about America, and possibly modern civilization as a whole? (I believe this was one of the themes in the Aussie Western The Proposition, which you should check out if you already haven't). Is violence, as Oliver Wendell Holmes posited here earlier in the week, man's natural state, and therefore not subject to the shifts of time, space, and culture and thus we should strive to incorporate, or at the least, sublimate it, into our culture, rather than make futile attempts to restrict or remove it altogether?

Once again, just questions. I have no answers; maybe you do.

And on that note, and as a Memorial Day gift, ben just posted his 'mid-year: most favorite of 2007 mixtape', available for free download; so should you share his musical tastes (or even if you don't for that matter). The tracklist can be found here. Commence pira...sharing.