Out of Control?

Yesterday in the Nation's Capital, a pregnant woman was arrested by a transit officer for "socially unacceptable behavior" - talking too loudly on her cellphone:Between Metro and Cell User, a Disconnect (washingtonpost.com)

Now, if all you read was my first sentence, then you might be inclined to agree with the actions of the subway cop. We've all witnessed rude cellphone users and were forced to endure their bothersome conversations. But according to the story, the Metro transit police officer arrested the woman AFTER her phone conversation...and AFTER he pushed her to the ground.

Say what? A police officer pushed a pregnant woman to the ground? Sometimes when I read the news I forget which country this is...but then I remember, this happened in the same city that CONTINUES to re-elect a proven criminal politician, Marion Barry.

Police Officer: "You have to lower your voice, ma'am"
Pregnant woman: "You can't tell me how loud I can talk."
Police Officer: "I can arrest you"
And a scuffle ensues. The officer forced her to the ground, called for backup, and detained the woman for three hours. I guess the officer was in fear for his life. NOT...

All of this happened, mind you, NOT on a subway car and NOT in a subway station, but OUTSIDE a subway station. And according to the article, the 23-year-old woman was charged with two misdemeanors: "disorderly manner that disturbed the public peace" and resisting arrest.

Response from Metro officials: "We need better enforcement to allow people to know we are serious and want to maintain the high-quality level of the system," said Robert J. Smith, chairman of the Metro board, adding that "ranting youth" have become a plague on the subway.

A plague of "ranting youth"? That's a mass transit problem? Sounds like a social problem to me.

Police state, here we come.

More later...
Paul

Poll Dancing

Read this article and then tell me if your faith in American politics has been restored...or destroyed: Yahoo! News - Campaign Puts Polling Methods Under Microscope

The very sad truth of the matter is that political opinion polls are almost never used to gauge opinion, but to INFLUENCE opinion. If you were able to audit the two major parties' campaign budgets, you'd find that an almost obscene amount of money is spent on polling. And the number of polling "styles" and methods is about as varied as the number of polling organizations. Truth be told, each organization makes up its own rules...and to a very troubling extent, the American media reports those results as the gospel truth, without EVER questioning the accuracy.

From a hard number standpoint, most polls are wildly inaccurate. To explain what I mean by this, I'll use the Presidential approval poll, the poll used to judge whether the American people feel the current President is doing a good job. Setting aside the subjective nature of the question (what, exactly, is a 'good job'?), there is NO WAY for any polling organization to question enough Americans to get an accurate read on this. Statistical experts, of course, beg to differ. And that's their job, so they have to protect their turf. But how can a poll of 20,000 people accurately reflect the thoughts of 250 million?

It cannot.

That's why I choose NOT to pay any attention to these wild-assed pre-election polls about who's "leading" who....they have no way of knowing or predicting what's actually going to happen at the REAL polls in November. And as we all learned last election, even THOSE polls can be compromised.

More later...
Paul

Would You?

Virgin's head madman Richard Branson is at it again, as always, in a big way:Telegraph | News | Branson promises to send tourists into space by 2007

The funny thing is, he sort of has the credibility to pull this off, even though the three-year timetable seems awfully short. Branson has proven to be the kind of man that does what he says he's going to do. And if anyone has the pulse of the ultra-rich adventurer market, it would be Sir Branson. I can't wait to see if he can make this happen. In the meantime, I'll just settle for one of those posh Virgin Atlantic flights...

More later...
Paul

The TSA is Idiotic

Hot on the heels of the Yusef Islam (formerly known as "Cat Stevens") story is this sober news about airline security...or the lack thereof: USATODAY.com - Airport screeners missed weapons

As someone who flies on a weekly basis, and has to endure the whole "empty your pockets, take out your laptop, remove your shoes, is that a belt?" ordeal at least twice a week, it finally hits me that this is all an elaborate ruse to coddle the American public. The entire TSA sham has nothing to do with actually improving airline safety...it's all about giving the APPEARANCE of improved safety...that's all.

Think about it. What is needed to hijack a plane? A bomb? A gun? A box cutter? A nail file? I have to put my nail file in my checked luggage, because they will definitely confiscate it (six inches of stainless, nail-filing steel!) should I be so bold as to carry it in my carry-on. The point is, the only thing that's needed to hijack a plane is INTENT...and a good poker face. One could crumple up a airline-supplied coffee cup with a couple bags of airline-supplied peanuts, stuff it into an airline-supplied vomit bag, then hold it up and yell "I'VE GOT A BOMB! EVERYBODY DO AS I SAY!" and successfully bluff a hijack. You don't need to have real explosives or weapons with you to do that.

The alleged 9/11 hijackers didn't have guns or explosives (so we're told), and look how much damage they did. Why on earth would you bring explosives on board what is already a flying bomb full of explosive jet fuel? That's like bringing sand to the beach.

The truth of the matter is this: if someone is determined to commandeer an airliner, NO amount of luggage pre-screening will stop them. The TSA already knows this, and they will even admit it if you back them into a rhetorical corner. No, the TSA is in existence for two very specific reasons: 1) to project a veneer of increased security and 2) to make someone a lot of money. Guess who?

More later...
Paul

And it just keeps getting worse

Our borders are like sieves, and we let all types of nasty people in this country. But every once in a while, we prevent REALLY dangerous people from entering: Yahoo! News - Ex-Pop Star Cat Stevens Deported from U.S.

Of course, I'm being facetious. There are a lot of strange and unsettling things about this story, not the least of which is the fact that the U.S. news media continue to identify Mr. Islam by a name he left behind DECADES ago...

But even worse is the fact that because he was simply on the airplane, U.S. authorities diverted the flight from it's original destination of Northern Virginia and forced it to land in MAINE. Why Maine? Ostensibly to protect the Northeast corridor, but when did Maine stop being in the Northeast?

Then after being illegally held and questioned - oops, my bad: under the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act they can detain and question at will WITHOUT proof - U.S. authorities transported Mr. Islam to Boston, where he was put on a plane back to London (from whence he originally came).

Isn't Boston in the Northeast, too? So much for "protecting" the Northeast...

As to the issue of WHY the artist formerly known as Cat Stevens was treated like a terrorist, well, read the article. But also note this quote that I pulled out of said article: "United Airlines spokesman Jeff Green said airline staff in London had cross-checked all the information on Islam and found nothing to stop him getting on the U.S.-bound flight. 'All I can say is that we followed all of our procedures and we came up with nothing. To suggest that the blame lies on a United employee is incorrect and unfair,' said Green. "

Well hell, if the airline didn't find anything objectionable about the presence of Mr. Islam, what did U.S. authorities find? Well, they're not saying exactly, but just mumbling something about something that might be something that has something to do with possible terrorist activities.

It's a slippery slope we traverse...

More later...
Paul

What Year is This Again?

I read this article and had to re-read the dates involved: Yahoo! News - Millions Blocked from Voting in U.S. Election. I have trouble believing that these types of activities are still occurring in the United States of America.

What's next, the return of Jim Crow?

More later...
Paul

You Tell 'Em, Ralph

Ralph Nader called the Democrats "gutless, spineless, clueless and hapless" today. Get down, Ralph! Ain't it a pity that neither of the Johns has the courage to speak out as strongly as Ralph Nader does. And it's a REAL pity that the DNC chooses to subvert our democracy out of fear of losing votes to a viable, third party candidate: Yahoo! News - Nader Blames Kerry for Ballot Access Fight.

The "Anybody but Bush" strategy was ill-advised in the first place. For me, it's getting to be "Anybody but Kerry"...

More later...
Paul

The Brown Bunny.

So I was falling asleep in the middle of Vincent Gallo’s new movie “The Brown Bunny”, when all of a sudden Cheryl Tiegs appeared on the screen. It was actually kind of a shock, because just as my mind began to recognize her famous features, her damaged goods, alcoholic, highway rest-stop whore character became visible as well. Wearing cheesy clothes and little to no makeup, Tiegs bravely tossed away her glamour girl past in order to wordlessly make out on a picnic table with Gallo. This is a woman who sold more pinup posters than Farrah Fawcett. She once had her own signature clothing line at Sears! Of course, the big question is why did she agree to it? That’s an even bigger mystery than the rationale behind Chloe Sevigny’s fateful decision to participate in this production.

This movie is kind of like a Jackson Pollack splatter painting: at first glance it just looks like a random mess, but then real art starts to peek out at you, leaving you to wonder if the artist deliberately arranged the aesthetic, or just got lucky. To be sure, there are moments in “Bunny” when most people would give serious consideration to walking out, but most people are sexual voyeurs, and so we sit and impatiently endure the questionable parts of the film in order to see what we all came for: Chloe Sevigny giving head to Gallo.

Now, blow jobs in the cinema are not all that remarkable. If you have watched ANY porn at all, you’ve seen at least one workable dick-sucking. Way back in the less-obvious ‘70’s, Marilyn Chambers became notorious for the movie “Deep Throat”. Imagine that: a whole movie devoted to head. So the early buzz around “The Brown Bunny” was that a semi-famous actress allows herself to be filmed sucking off the lead character (who also happens to be the writer/producer/director/DP). As a way to sell tickets, apparently fellatio has few peers.

But what’s truly interesting is what happens AFTER the act. That’s when the movie shifts into another gear and in fact, makes the whole thing worthwhile. Gallo almost comes off as some sort of low-end M. Night Shyamalan, with a little Gaspar Noe tossed in for flavor. He certainly gives you something to talk about when the lights come up.

There are a few things to like in this movie besides the end. Gallo’s character Bud is the motorcycle racer as cowboy, and he even treats his race bike like a mechanical steed. You never see him working on it or preparing for his next big race, not even to fill it with fuel, but he does take it out of his black van to exercise it. Even when he finally arrives at his mechanic’s shop in L.A., instead of performing any type of maintenance or prep, they just strap the machine to a stationary roller (actually, a dynamometer), and ride the bike on THAT for a few minutes. Then they herd it back into the van. I guess all his bike needs is a little attention.

And there are moments of, perhaps not exactly cinematic beauty, but interesting mixes of sound and picture as the road winds ever westward. But it really is the ending that makes the whole exercise worthwhile, and leads to further thought. At least for me. Don’t just go for the sex scene, go for the surprise. You’ll feel better about yourself when it’s over.

More later…
Paul

I Don't Care

I'm still voting for Nader, even though this story pretty much seals the deal against him:Yahoo! News - Democrats Score Win in Fight Over Nader in Florida.

Call me a fool; many have already. But I am still not satisfied with the words and so-called "ideas" that have been issuing forth from the Democratic camp. At this late date, the Dems are still acting as if the election is all about Bush losing, instead of their team WINNING. If the Democrats were serious about winning this damn thing, they would have never picked the two incredibly unexciting men that are John Kerry and John Edwards.

I mean, it's mid-September already: when are the debates going to start? When are the issues going to be discussed? Kerry's bullshit about providing "incentives" for health care is weak. I'd really like to see him debate Ralph on health care. Hell, Al Sharpton could smoke John Kerry in a debate on health care! Because Kerry is in the industry's pocket already, just like lil' Bush.

More later...
Paul

They must do a lot of drugs there...

Once again, the residents of Washington, D.C. have spoken...and once again, they have chosen the notorious B.A.R.R.Y., also known as "Mayor for Life" Marion Berry, for City Council: Yahoo! News - Barry In, 3 D.C. Council Incumbents Out.

Running and winning a council seat for the city's poorest (and blackest) Ward, Barry, at the grand old age of 68 (!) is once again on the City Payroll. Which prompts me to ask:

Where are all of the young leaders? It's the city council of the Nation's Capital, but it's also probably the most impotent city government in the Nation. Where are the men and women of the future? Who will answer the call to defeat the dinosaurs and take back the city? And who the heck is voting for Barry?

More later...
Paul

You Go, Girl!

Okay, I gotta give Oprah MAD PROPS for pulling off the television stunt of all time yesterday (PONTIAC | WILDEST DREAMS). Pontiac deserves kudos for going along with it, too, but wow! What a GREAT IDEA! Giving brand new cars to every single person in the studio audience!

Now, the cynic in me immediately thought about the fact that all of those winners will have to pay sales tax and registration and insurance and all of that other stuff, so the cars are not entirely free. But the rest of me has to yell SO WHAT!? Not only did Oprah make a TON of people (276, to be exact) ecstatically happy, but she virtually guaranteed her show will remain atop the daytime ratings for at least another season. And if you thought it was hard to get Oprah tickets BEFORE...

Seriously, this was not only an extremely cunning promotional move, it was also the kind of thing that only a big-hearted person would even think about doing. Just when you think she can't get any more impressive, Oprah knocks it outta the park. I am very, very impressed.

More later...
Paul

Terror takes on a New Face: White

This is truly a sad day in Russia, and the rest of the world: Yahoo! News - Russians Storm School; 100 Bodies Found.

Sad because innocent people have died, once again for political reasons. Yesterday, the media labeled the instigators "rebels"; today, they are called "terrorists". In any case, they were willing to kidnap and kill supposedly for their nation's independence. Should we call them freedom fighters? Or murderers?

More later...
Paul

Is that with a capital "T"?

Remember those two Russian airliners that crashed the other day, almost simultaneously? According to this article (NEWS.com.au Plane crash a terror attack: authorities (August 27, 2004), Russian "authorities" are saying that at least one of the tragedies "came as the result of a terror attack".

Now, this might seem like I'm making light of a horrific accident that killed nearly 100 people, but the wording of this article begs the question: terror attack? Is that like a panic attack? Was it a case of the heebie jeebies that brought the plane down? Was the pilot startled by something?

Okay, it might seem like I'm just playing around, but seriously, WHEN are we (the Western world) going to stop using this overused boondoggle of a word "terrorism" and start saying what we actually mean: "murderous acts by fanatical Muslims"? Because that's what we mean over here in the United States.

Face it, everytime you hear the word "Terrorist" in the American media, a picture of someone who looks a lot like Osama bin laden automatically pops up in your mind's eye. You can't help it, we've all been programmed to believe that a terrorist is a suicide bomber from a Middle-Eastern country. Sure, there are one or two people in Great Britain who have a different mental image of a terrorist, but their minds are changing with every minute they watch another show on one of Rupert Murdoch's many satellite channels.

When President Bush declared the "War on Terror", EVERYONE knew he meant we were gonna start bombing in the Middle East. Even the Middle Easterners knew it. Our so-called "War" is a blatant attempt to rid the world of Muslims. Not all of them, of course, but enough so that the rest step in line and stop complaining about Israel. It's that simple.

More later...
Paul

My problems with John Kerry.

Direct from the John Kerry for President website, his position on National Security:
“Today, we face three great challenges above all others - First, to win the global war against terror; Second, to stop the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons; Third, to promote democracy, freedom, and opportunity around the world, starting by winning the peace in Iraq.”

First off, this “war on terror” is Bush’s made-up war, not a real war. Why take it on? Why not tell the truth: we have to address the fact that there are people out there that hate us, and killing them all is not an option.

Second, stopping n/b/c weapons begins at home, where they were invented for the most part, and then sold to other nations by our fantastically profitable military industries. Is he promoting a shutdown of the weapons manufacturers? Of course not, he is promoting pre-emptive military strikes against non-aligned countries that have these weapons. World police, just like Bush. JUST LIKE BUSH.

Third, what the heck is he talking about? “Winning the peace” in Iraq? And that will promote “democracy and freedom” around the world? This is Republican jingoism, but it was found on Kerry’s website! And notice the namby-pamby words used: “promote”…what, is he gonna put up posters? Maybe do some radio ads? Or…is he gonna use the military…JUST LIKE BUSH?? I could be wrong, but it seems to me the best way to promote a form of governance is to actually EXERCISE IT….yet we continue to be a republic and not an actual democracy. Do as we say, not as we do…

Again, from his website, his position on healthcare: “Kerry and Edwards will allow reimportation (sic) of safe, FDA-approved prescription drugs to give Americans access to the substantial discounts for prescription drugs in Canada…” And again, what the heck?
Why not just attack the problem where it lives, here at home….and get those greedy pharms to drop their U.S. prices to more reasonable levels. That old “price of R&D” argument is getting stale and moldy, and they know it.

Or how about this statement on energy: “The Kerry-Edwards plan will increase energy conservation and create clean, renewable sources of energy that no terrorist can sabotage and no foreign government can seize. Their plan will also save billions by cutting waste and pork-barrel spending in Washington.” Again with the terrorist line. The DNC is getting really good at this fear-monger business. Please explain what type of clean, renewable source of energy hasn’t already been created, and cannot be sabotaged. Why is he reluctant to spell things out? Are we talking legalizing hemp or what? If so, excellent! Just say so and you have my vote.

But what does clean, renewable energy have to do with waste and “pork-barrel spending in Washington”? Once again, WHAT THE HECK IS HE TALKING ABOUT?? Digging deeper in the website, I found this: “They will create an “Energy Security Trust Fund,” which will encourage the development of new clean fuels and technologies of the future, and their plan will promote the diversification of energy sources like natural gas, coal, renewable and nuclear energy.” Oh, I see now…it’s all so clear to me….NOT.

You’ve got a website; why not use it to tell people WHY THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR YOU? Instead, we get the usual vapor-policies that will go up in smoke as soon as the pledge is finished at the inauguration. Kerry represents politics as usual, and I for one am not going to accept it any longer. Either put up or shut up, Mr. Kerry.

More later…
Paul

NADER
 
Yesterday I got a call from by buddy Lliam, telling me that Ralph Nader was going to speak at our local Vroman’s bookstore (the same store, incidentally, that hosted Hilary Clinton for her book signing last year) in a few minutes.  Coincidentally, I was headed into the area of that particular book store at the time, and for some reason, I decided to go hear what Mr. Nader had to say.
 
First off, let me tell you that I am extremely unhappy with the current set of so-called “candidates” we have to choose from for the upcoming Presidential election.  As far as I’m concerned, Mr. Kerry is no better than Mr. Bush, seeing how they are both members of the same secret society (Yale’s Skull and Bones).  Regardless of what their “platforms” say, these guys both answer to the same corporate interests, and I am convinced that even if Kerry were elected, the changes to this country would be minimal.
 
Yet at the same time, I was wary of the potential “spoiler” role that some say Nader is determined to play.  I have a lot of intelligent friends who sing the “Anybody but Bush” song loud and clear, and they are truly concerned that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, in that it takes away another much needed vote for their man John Kerry.  They may have a point.
 
But I decided to see for myself what Ralph had to say.  I arrived to see a fairly large crowd (not Clinton-esque by any standard, but still large), and I immediately scanned the room for free food and drinks.  No deal.  Just as I was about to complain to my friend, a hush settled over the room as four tall men walked through the crowd to the podium.  Dang, Ralph Nader is taller than me!  I don’t know why this matters, but it was pleasant surprise number one.  Warm, sustained applause greeted Ralph Nader’s Pasadena appearance.
 
After quickly thanking the crowd, Ralph got right down to business, making a very moving and eloquent case for a third party candidate.  He correctly pointed out that growing apathy among progressive voters is leading to their acceptance of substandard presidential candidates, the whole “lesser of two evils” mindset that many of my pro-Kerry friends have firmly adopted.  Nader focused on the fact that the duopoly that currently governs the country is fully funded and controlled by big business interests, and that’s why important issues like health care and a decent living wage for all Americans has been totally ignored by the Democrat and Republican rivals.
 
Pleasant surprise number two: Ralph Nader made me think.  And that’s a whole hell of a lot more than what Kerry/Bush make me do, with their clever speech snippets and carefully orchestrated campaign stops.  As I mentioned earlier, I am already unhappy with what we have to choose from in November.  In fact, I was seriously considering beginning a write-in campaign, urging other similarly-frustrated voters to write-in “I demand a better choice” on their ballots.  Yes, I realize that is in essence throwing away my vote, but my conscience will not allow me to just pick one because he’s not as bad as the other.  Say you were traveling across country, and during a particularly long stretch across the wilderness you stop in the only diner for miles, and the choice for dinner is rat or maggot soup.  What would you do?  Would you really try to convince yourself that there are appetizing qualities when none actually exist?  Or would you choose to leave without eating, and let your stomach growl and boil for the rest of the night?
 
I won’t vote for Bush.  I can’t vote for Kerry.  I am independent of either party, and I support an alternative choice.  I will vote for Ralph Nader in November, because I think he’ll make a better President than either Kerry or Bush.
 
More later…
Paul

Beating up on 6 year olds?

Former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan, in a PUBLIC APPEARANCE, called a six-year-old student a "stupid, dirty girl": sacbee.com -- Politics -- Furor grows over Riordan's remark to girl.

Hey, I'm trying to stay positive here, but these guys keep throwing softballs!

Read that crazy article. It goes on to state that a black assemblyman gets so up in arms about it, he schedules some type of NAACP press conference...only to cancel it when he learns that the little girl is white! Naturally, all outrage is now focused on the assemblyman, while Riordan stumbles along, with Arnold's full support and confidence. Unbelievable.

Shouldn't the man just apologize to the kid?

Hold the phone! I've just seen the video of the entire event, and while it was an ill-advised comment (to say the least), it was reasonably clear to the little girl and her classmates that Riordan was just teasing her. According the The Smoking Gun website, he even apologized later on...so I guess I got caught up in the media hoopla, passing judgement before I understood the whole deal.

Dick, I'm sorry...

More later...
Paul

The Rocket’s Red Glare

It was the second of July in Altadena, California (year of the lord 2004, etc, etc), one hour after sunset, when I was rousted from watching motocross DVD by the sounds of cannons going off a few blocks away.

Well, not really cannons…I know, after four decades of experience, what recreational artillery sounds like. Some of my fondest memories of growing up in the Nation’s Capital, Washington, D.C., involved a yearly visit to the fireworks street vendors.

The vendors always seemed like mysterious gypsies to me, a semi-organized cult that would suddenly appear to spread cheap fireworks across the city, pawning boxes of explosives to kids young and old, out of rickety, hastily-thrown-together plywood shacks.

But the Fourth of July in D.C., as far as fireworks were concerned, was all about seeing (and hearing and FEELING) the Nation’s Fireworks Extravaganza on the Mall (I’m not sure if that’s trademarked)….40 years of that and one gains the ability to discern the subtle differences in the audio signatures between a Glorious Golden Shower Sparkler shell and a howitzer (or maybe not).

My point, though, was that there were fireworks going off in my neighborhood. REAL recreational artillery. At first I thought it was just some crazy neighbors a few blocks away, blasting off a few consumer grade shells. After a particularly extended fusillade, though, I reconsidered: either I had more crazy neighbors than I first thought, or perhaps something else was going on.

I stepped out on my porch just as another barrage began. Coming from what was probably the Altadena Country Club’s golf course was the real deal. Fireworks. The show continued, the “whumps” occasionally becoming “WHUMPS” and even a few “WHUMPS!!!”, the night skies lighting up in luminous colors as the gunpowder ignited and spread burning remnants through the atmosphere. And I began to think about the fact that it was the start of the Fourth of July weekend in American, again…and here I was, watching a fireworks display, again. And here we go, again, as all over this fine country, Americans will celebrate the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence…by shooting off a whole hell of a lot of rockets.

We love rockets. Americans love rockets. And explosions. But we especially love rockets that explode. We even wrote a song about a rocket and made it our National Anthem. Okay, “The Star Spangled Banner” is really a song about a flag…a flag that the songwriter could see only because it was illuminated by an exploding rocket, accompanied by a violent soundtrack of “bombs bursting in air.” During a war, of course. Americans love war, too, and it’s fitting that we do so, because of our love of exploding rockets. However, we prefer shooting these rockets AWAY from us, sometimes just up in the air, sometimes just at people we don’t like. The latter usually meaning during a war.

How many displays of artfully burning powdered chemicals will exist as the centerpiece and/or climax of the Nation’s 2004 Independence Day festivities? The count has to be in the thousands, maybe even hundred thousands. It looks like my annual renewal of retina-tracing by fire streaking across the sky occurred two days early…and it had the added “benefit” of having a large red “Jack In The Box” sign (I’m pretty sure that IS trademarked) in my direct field of view during the entire display. At one point in the bombardment, the fiery bursts created a sort of “halo” effect around the huge advertisement, further strengthening, I’m sure, a subliminal argument in favor of that particular brand of fast fried food (I ate there the following afternoon. Coincidence?).

I gotta tell you, it all came together for me as I watched this scene. I recalled some of the more vividly gruesome scenes from our country’s current war (scenes that I had to pay to see in a commercial movie theater because the Nation’s “free” media refuse to air them), and I wondered if Iraqi people have the same view of recreational artillery that we Americans do? I wondered if they respond to the sound of cannons in their neighborhoods the way we Americans respond? Of course, this was all rhetorical wondering; I knew the answer. We all know the answer.

I count myself lucky to have been born in a country where I was able to grow to middle age without ever having the experience of being on the receiving end of military grade bombs and rockets. In fact, I am quite proud that I live in a country that lets us choose for ourselves if we want to experience such things. This country goes so far as to give us the opportunity to feel what it’s like to be targeted by bullets, grenades, mortars, rockets and missiles among other things, while we give people who live in other countries the very same opportunity. That, I’m not so proud of.

So this Fourth of July, as the news readers and newspapers and talking heads continually remind us to give thanks and warm thoughts to our troops as they put themselves in harm’s way in order to preserve our exploding-rocket-loving way of life, do not let yourself lose sight of the FACT that our wonderful fellow citizen-soldiers do NOT have to be at war. This proud Nation NEVER need be at war, with any country, cult, tribe or substance. We CHOOSE to be at war, because we love our rockets and what they do for us.

More later…
Paul

Get Down, Bill!

I can't vouch for CNN's sense of fairness or balance, but I did like this particular article:CNN.com - Bill Cosby has more harsh words for black community - Jul 2, 2004.

I think it's very interesting, not that Bill Cosby has something to say and is not afraid to say it, but that the mainstream press considers it "news". Here is a guy who is NOT an elected official, nor is even considered to be a so-called "black leader" (e.g. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton), but just a normal black person who happens to be a well-liked international celebrity. And when asked to speak, he speaks the truth as he sees it. Why is it "news"? It's more like gossip: "oooh, didja hear what Cosby said the other day? He said black people are stupid!"

On the face of things, as far as I'm concerned, Mr. Cosby was telling it like it is. I love hip hop, but despise rap songs that insist on using the "n" word, or tell degrading stories of women, or glorify immoral behavior...unfortunately, that describes most rap that's heard on the radio these days. I am also concerned by the illiteracy rate in the black community, and the social problems that are caused by poverty, joblessness and ill health. I also agree that it all comes down to personal choice...which is a matter of personal responsibility. And I think that's what Cosby is getting at. However, this article, and the ones that will surely follow, are signaling much more.

Look at the first sentence of the article: "Bill Cosby went off on another tirade against the black community..." Note the words chosen by unnamed Associated Press reporter (if I had written that, I wouldn't want my name on it, either). "Went off" is an implied negative; bombs "go off". "Another", implying that he's done it many times before, even though the article admits that he's done it only once before. "Tirade" means "a speech of violent denunciation". The subliminal message of this line: well-known black man violently denunciates his own community, again and again. The supporting quotes that follow strengthen and verify Cosby's statements.

So what's wrong with that? On the face of it, nothing at all. It's no secret that there are problems in the black community. Heck, there are problems in every ethnic community. Gangsterism, illiteracy, alcohol-, drug- and spousal-abuse are problems not limited to the black community. But the subliminal message in this news story is the suggestion that many if not most blacks are inferior, and they do it to themselves and then try to blame it on others. Since it's subliminal, it secretly reinforces a mistaken societal impression...a prejudice, if you will. The opposite, of course, is true.

That explains why the Associated Press/CNN/and all the other mainstream news outlets that will run with this "ball" display it as "news": to use subliminal messaging to reinforce negative impressions.

What? You don't think they would do something like that? Please, wake up.

More later...
Paul

I Know, I Know...

I said I would be positive from here on out, but then I read this today:Greenspan sworn in to fifth term as Fed chief.

I mean, c'mon! The man is 78 years old! You mean to tell me that after four long terms, the Fed has STILL failed to come up with a succession plan for their chairman?

And why was he sworn in on a Saturday at the home of Gerald Ford in Colorado of all places?

I wonder if Greenspan is a Bonesman?

More later...
Paul

Here We Go: Good Job, Pistons!

Those of you that know me, know that I'm a fair-weather Lakers fan. And I'm on record (so to speak) for predicting a runaway championship for Los Angeles. Well, with results like these (Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Pistons 88, Lakers 68), it appears that I could be mistaken.

But in the spirit of staying positive, instead of pointing out the Laker's inconsistencies, I want to give credit where credit is due: the Pistons are playing as if they really want to win this championship. Who would have guessed that Rasheed Wallace would calm down enough to be effective? Who knew that Chauncey Billups (who?) would be a scoring machine? Who, other than his father, expected Richard Hamilton to be so...Kobe-esque?

Perhaps the credit should really go to Larry Brown, who was defeated in the finals by the Lakers a couple of years ago, even though he had the magical Allen Iverson in his toolbox. Looks like Larry has figured out the triangle.

And how about that Detroit defense holding L.A. to 68 points? The Lakers are used to scoring 68 points in a half!

Here's the problem for L.A.: they HAVE to win this championship, or their entire season, what with the Malone/Payton experiment, will be deemed an abject failure. Karl, at least, has an injury to blame for his poor performance. Gary "The Glove" has yet to appear in this series...c'mon Payton, put it in place!

More later...
Paul

Time to turn a New Leaf.

I've been thinking, and I know that may alarm some of you, but I've been thinking that my posts have been too negative. I mean, I'm just responding to the wackiness in the world, and a lot of this so-called wackiness is just bad stuff. So it would seem that a negative comment or two would be called for. But I don't think it helps the world to continue to put negative energy out there. So I have decided it's time for a change.

From this date forward, I am going to focus on positive events, people and places. Instead of a scathing review of a P.O.S. moview, I'll try to write about whatever good I can find in the film, and if I can't find any good, then I'll forego the review entirely.

From now on, if I can't say something good about President Bush, then I won't say anything at all. You can count on not reading much about Bush here, then.

This change in approach started when I was feeling inundated with the Reagan funeral coverage. I am not, and have never been, a fan of Ronald Reagan, so you can imagine that I have plenty of negative things to say about the man. But I will leave that to others. The best thing that I can say about the former President is "a lot of people seemed to like him." I'll just leave it at that.

Let's see where this new philosophy takes us.

More later...
Paul

Pope: "I'll give ya 15 minutes, tops"

The headlines are blowing up about Bush meeting the Pope (Yahoo! News - Pope Calls for Free Iraq, Deplores Prisoner Abuse), but hidden in the middle of these stories is the fact that the two guys only talked for 15 minutes!

Wonder how much of that was small talk?

Pontiff: "Make it snappy, Bush. I'm a busy man."
Prez: "Me? YOU asked for this meeting?"
Pontiff: "Geez, I SAID I'll make it snappy. What, are you both deaf and dumb?"
Prez: "Wha...?"
Pontiff: "Whaddya got cameras in prisons for? What the heck are you guys thinking? Leave that amateur porn to the Mormons..."

(My apologies to the Mormons, the Catholics and everybody else. I got carried away!)

More later...
Paul

What the heck...?

This article was brought to my attention today, but note that this happened twenty days ago. Did you hear about it? Bush Cites Racism in Remarks On Iraq (washingtonpost.com)

Bush said, "There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern."

Same as "ours"? Who the heck is he talking about? America or just white people?

Well it becomes quite clear later in the article that he meant white people. And here I was thinking that the President of the United States of America represented all Americans, not just the caucasians. Silly me.

And why won't he identify those "people in the world", especially since there's a "lot" of them? Maybe the War on Terrorism needs to be expanded?

More later...
Paul

What he said.

One of my favorite comic strips has weighed in on this Iraqi prison nonsense: Yahoo! News - Boondocks.

Bush should reconsider his refusal to read newspapers...

More later...
Paul

My bad: Bush finally comes clean.
Or does he?

Per the following story, our President said "I can't tell you how sorry I am to them and their families for the humiliation".

Is that really an apology? If I said "I can't tell you how much I want to pay you back this loan" does that mean I am actually going to pay the money back? How about "I can't tell you how much I love you"...is it "CAN'T" or "WON'T".

I guess if the President had better control of the English language, this particular "apology" wouldn't seem so vague. But obviously that's just asking too much of the Nation's top leader.

Even stranger is that Bush went on to say that times are tough for the United States in the Middle East because "people don't really understand our intentions."

Well then, please explain our intentions Mr. President. You have the microphone in your face, USE IT!

Read it for yourself:Yahoo! News - Bush Again Apologizes for Abuse of Iraqis

More later...
Paul

Bush needs to take lessons from Rumsfeld.

Whether he's being sincere or not, no one will ever know. But at least he's apologizing, AND he's doing it to the right people:Yahoo! News - Rumsfeld Apologizes to Iraqi Prisoners.

Rumsfeld even goes on to say he takes "full responsibility". Wow, and here I was, thinking that the buck stopped with the Commander in Chief. I guess if you have enough lieutenants willing to fall on their own swords for you, you never have to get dirty with blame, eh Mr. President?

More later...
Paul

Tell me this doesn't sound fishy...

I think a lot of strange things happened on September 11, 2001, and the strangest events were the ones that involved the air traffic controllers, the FAA and NORAD (NORth American Air Defense). Supposedly indestructible "black boxes" were destroyed, bodies and huge sections of planes "disappeared"...and now this:Newsday.com: Tape of 9/11 Controllers Was Destroyed.

I believe that when the TRUTH of this story finally comes to light, it will be a dark, dark day in American History.

More later...
Paul

Crocodile Tears.

Big news today: The President said "I was sorry" Bush Sorry for Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners.

I haven't even read this entire article, and already I wanted to share it with the world. Why? Because no matter how ridiculous he seems when he does something, no matter how bad it gets, it can still get worse. President Bush has the uncanny ability to fall to the bottom of the barrel...and keep on falling. It's like he dug a hole in the barrel and is now burrowing underground. Lower than low.

He apologized to King Abdullah II of Jordan. Why? Did we torture some of his relatives or something? Seems like he should be apologizing to the prisoners that suffered the abuse, don't you think? You dent the car of the man across the street, and then you go apologize to his neighbor? HOW STUPID IS THAT?

HOW MUCH MORE INSINCERE CAN ONE MAN BE?

Bush speaks of being "sick to his stomach" from seeing the images. My god, what happens to his stomach when he sees the recon photos after we've dropped several hundred tons of bombs on a village?

More later...
Paul

This is Chickenshit, plain and simple.

First, the president doesn't want a commission investigating what happened on 9/11. Then he begrudgingly accepts it, but underfunds it. Then he approves decent funds, but doesn't agree to appear before the commission, nor let his National Security Adviser testify. Then he agrees to give them ONE HOUR of his time, and let's the NSA testify. Then he says he'll only testify in concert with his Vice President.

NOW, they're saying that the testimony will be 1) private 2) not recorded (!), no transcriptions will be taken and finally 3) the President and Vice President will NOT BE UNDER OATH! Yahoo! News - Bush, Cheney Coached for 9/11 Questioning

This is the Sham of all Shams. Mr. President, you should truly be ashamed of yourself. What are you hiding? Why do you need to be "coached"? Why does your Vice President need to be there with you? WHY WON'T YOU GO ON RECORD? WHY WON'T YOU TESTIFY IN PUBLIC?

This is an outrage.

More later...
Paul

Military 'R' Us.

These are very strange days, indeed. A mysterious war in Iraq, famous athlete-turned-soldier killed in military action in Afghanistan, Israel assassinating opposition leaders, bombs going off in other countries, and the U.S. election mud-slinging in full swing.

With all that, Godspeed Pat Tillman. I didn't know you or anything about you until you were killed in action and the media decided to make you a hero. Thank you for your service; I'm only sorry your life and talent were wasted in what I think are fairly meaningless actions in Afghanistan; I hope you disagree with me.

As we get swept up in the inevitable media whirlwind about this young man's unfortunate demise, let us not forget those soldiers who were NOT professional athletes, but still volunteered to leave their families and communities to serve...and die. War is, without a doubt, hell.

My more conservative friends and others on the extreme right want to constantly remind us of the "fact" that we owe everything we have in America to the brave men and women who serve in the armed forces. I find that idea very sad. If it were true, it means that the sole reason America exists, and continues to exist, is because we have a strong successful army that protects us from a world of people who would otherwise control us and deny us our current lifestyles.

People want to "take" our freedom? Do we still believe this? Who are these people?

People want to "take" our land, our belongings, our "things"'; are we still equating material goods with freedom?

Yes, there are crazy, murderous people out there who want to kill Americans and westerners. They want to deprive us of life, remove us from this world...but not necessarily contain our right to pollute our own country...or curtail our right to hunt animals...or many, many other rights. They don't want us to exist at all. Lucky for us, they are a microscopically small minority, and they only matter because the media is coerced into (or is willingly) blowing them out of proportion.

As far as those "superpowers" that actually have armies....which of them wants to deprive Americans of their rights? China, our trillion-dollar trading partner? Crazy North Korea, the pimple on the butt of Southeast Asia? Of course not.

More later...
Paul

Some folks have guts.

Got to give it up to Gary Trudeau for bringing the War in Iraq home to the comics page in a realistic way: Yahoo! News - Doonesbury

Currently, the strip is showing how long time character BD, a college football coach and the strip's classic right-wing warhawk, has been ambushed in Iraq and had lost his leg. Not your normal funny papers storyline. Yet there's still humor and empathy to be found...this story is gonna get bigger.

More later...
Paul

Yeah, but...

So the big news today is the release of some of the testimony made by senior administration officials to the so-called 9/11 Panel. Yahoo! News - Rumsfeld Counters 9/11 Panel Findings

What I'm reading so far is a bunch of hoohah about Afghanistan and Al Quaida. What about New York City? It seems that the panel is digging into the lapse in critical intelligence that led up to the tragedy. I wonder if they're ever going to address the issue of the slow response to the attacks while they were actually happening? Like, why NORAD was unprepared to intercept relatively slow-moving airliners? Why did it take so long to scramble fighter jets, and why did they send them from bases far from the target areas? And why did Bush insist on staying in the elementary school classroom AFTER he was notified of the attacks, instead of acting like the Commander in Chief that he is and taking responsibility for our Nation's immediate response?

Yeah, like they'll ever answer THOSE questions...

More later...
Paul

A Tale of Two Films.

First, “The Passion of the Christ.”

I finally went to see this one, and it has taken me a few days to gather some coherent thoughts to write about it. I assume that if you’re reading this, you’ve probably already seen the film, or by this time you’ve decided that you’re NOT going to see it. So please forgive me, as I intend to give a few plot points away in this essay.

Of course, even if you are only remotely religious, you already KNOW the story of Jesus’ crucifixion, so it’s not like I’m blowing any “surprise” endings. But this film, like many other films based on true events, is built on the filmmaker’s interpretation of the events, and it’s the little details that make the story come to life, so to speak. Unfortunately, it is Mel Gibson’s interpretation that I have the most problems with.

Actually, truth be told, the biggest problem for me is the limited scope of the film. It is literally the last day of the life of Jesus the Christ, and by focusing on that one fateful day, Mel and his co-writer give very short shrift to the rest of Jesus’ rather significant life. If you are Christian, you know that Jesus did a lot of very amazing things in his short 33-year life, but Mel has seen fit to leave that part of the story to other filmmakers. So “The Passion” is basically two hours of watching a man get brutally beaten and murdered, and we’re barely shown WHY Jesus is hated so much by his captors. Because of that, this is a deeply flawed film.

In an attempt to bring the gospels to life, Mel and his co-writer felt the need to exercise a little artistic license and add even more drama to the proceedings. However, I was repulsed by their attempts to make “sense” of the story. For example, some of the gospels note that after betraying Jesus, the apostle Judas committed suicide. What the gospels DON’T do is describe the suicide, or Judas’ descent into suicidal depression. So Mel took a shot at it, and instead of showing a man racked with guilt and remorse for cowardly and greedily betraying his close friend, they showed Judas as a man tormented and tortured by demonic children (!), who chase him out of town and cause him to…what? Go crazy?

This was part of a disturbing trend that the filmmakers chose to follow. It was apparently not enough to depict the brutal last day of Jesus’ life, but they also wanted to show that Satan exists and was a part of the entire proceedings, always broodily watching from the sidelines. Satan (or the devil, if you prefer) was depicted as a hooded, eyebrow-less albino. For shock value, Mel showed a maggot slowly crawl in and out of Satan’s nose. Whoa, now THAT’S evil!

Strangely enough, when Jesus finally died, Satan was shown to be mourning…or at least he was very, very disappointed. But there were no overt explanations of what that was all about…only “true believers” need apply.

Another strange “artistic license” taking was one of the too-few flashbacks to Jesus’ life. In this particular flashback, Jesus was shown “inventing” the normal-height table…! Beg pardon? When he demonstrates this new-fangled thing to his mother, Mary even quips, “It’ll never catch on…” See, God has a sense of humor…or is that Mel? It was such a jolting bit that I never could really catch on to what the filmmaker was trying to say with it. One of the frustrating things about the Bible, at least to me, is that the gospels of Christ have nothing to say about Jesus’ life as a young adult. The Good Book tells the story of his birth, a few stories of him as a pre-teen, and then there’s NOTHING until he’s in his thirties. So I guess Mel thought there would be no harm in portraying the Christ as the inventor of the modern table. Who knew?

Then there’s the controversy: Does this movie portray Jews as the murderers of Jesus? Oh yeah it does. Sure, it was the sadistic Roman guards that beat the shit out of our man, and it was the Roman guards who nailed him to the cross, and it was even the Roman ruler Pontious Pilate who, albeit reluctantly, condemned Jesus to death. But the film clearly placed the blame on the shoulders of the high Jewish priests and their Klingon-like henchmen. But isn’t that the way it’s written in the Bible? Mel’s defense has always been that his film is true to the word. Personally, I don’t see how this particular issue is controversial…but then, I was raised Catholic.

However, if truth was what the filmmakers were really after, how did they end up casting very-Anglo-looking Jim Caviezel as Jesus? Why didn’t they go with an actor that actually looked like he might have grown up in Galilee, as opposed to Western Europe? I wasn’t surprised that Mel made the decision to have a Western, instead of Middle Eastern, Jesus. But Mel, you can’t have it both ways, bro. You can’t claim historical accuracy on one hand, then willfully distort the facts on the other.

Ultimately, there have been better movies made about the life of the Christ. “The Passion” was just a voyeuristic exercise in cinematic evangelism. And a damn bloody one at that.

Then yesterday I returned to the cinema and took in a truly enjoyable little film, “Eternal Sunshine for the Spotless Mind”, Jim Carrey’s latest movie. This movie is a huge departure from the normal Carrey goofiness, and it was co-written by the fantastically inventive screenwriter Charlie Kaufman (“Adaptation”, “Being John Malkovich”).

This film is a treat for both the eyes and the mind. It is actually a romantic comedy, and a pretty funny one too, but it’s not like “When Harry met Sally”. It’s more like “Punch Drunk Love”, another great film that takes a normally goofy guy (that time Adam Sandler), and makes him ACT. Carrey did a great job anchoring a very challenging script, and making us care about his relationship with Clementine, a firebrand of a free spirit, wonderfully played by Kate Winslet.

Basically what happens in this film is that Joel (Carrey) discovers that there’s an obscure Doctor in New York City (well, somewhere on Long Island, actually) that is able to erase specific people and events from one’s memories. How Carrey makes this discovery, and what it means to his relationship with Clementine (among other people) is what makes this movie so much fun. And for me to describe any part of it is to give too much away. This is definitely one of those “oh, you just GOTTA see it!” type of movies, similar to “Memento” and “American Beauty”. There are plenty of plot twists and turns, and since the movie is dealing with memory (actually, memory LOSS), there are a lot of flashbacks (or what look like flashbacks…I can’t tell you any more than that)!

Accordingly, the visuals in this movie are extremely surreal and nothing short of fantastic. The special effects never seem gratuitous, and rarely intrude. They just do their not-so-easy job of depicting a life that is slowly losing some of it’s most cherished memories.

One of the best lines in this movie is an exchange between the Doctor and Joel, just before they begin the procedure. Joel asks if it’s a dangerous procedure and if there’s any chance that it will cause brain damage. The Doctor calmly replies, “Well, it actually IS brain damage…”!

“Eternal Sunshine” is a great movie, one that demands repeated viewing and will definitely be one to occupy a place in my growing DVD collection. I think it demands too much thinking for it to ever become a popular blockbuster, but for those who like to think before they laugh (and cry), this is the movie for you. And it was really nice to see a good movie again, especially after sitting through the (literal) torture that was “The Passion of the Christ”.

More later…
Paul

I swear I'm not inherently anti-Bush, but...

...the more he talks, it seems, the worse it gets. And this President has some of the finest speechwriters money can buy. Remember his address to the Nation after the attacks on 9/11? If they gave out Academy Awards for Presidential speeches, that one would have been sure to bring George the Oscar.

In stunning contrast, look at some of his words from his speech given today(Yahoo! News - Bush Marks First Anniversary of Iraq War), on the one-year anniversary of the start of the Iraq War:

"It is the interest of every country and the duty of every government to fight and destroy this threat to our people," the president said.

Now, is he REALLY saying that every other country has a duty to protect the American people? Isn't that what he means by "our people"? Or do his speechwriters not care about proper grammar? Damn, put the period after "threat" and call it a sentence.

Or how about this obfuscating gem:

"There is no neutral ground...no neutral ground...in the fight between civilization and terror, because there is no neutral ground between good and evil, freedom and slavery, and life and death," Bush said.

Since when was the so-called "war on terror" a "fight between civilization and terror"? Since when is warfare "civil"? And since it's apparently such an important term, what the heck does he mean by "neutral ground" anyway? Isn't he basically saying "if you ain't with us, you're against us?" Hell, he already said THAT a year ago...back when he was insisting that we were in imminent danger from Hussein's WMDs.

I guess he's saying "you're either civilized, or a terrorist"; "you're either good or evil"; one can only be free or enslaved. One can only be either alive or dead. Well that last one I can agree with, but there are certainly shades of gray for the other examples. Let's take a Boeing 757 for instance; it can be both good and evil, depending on who's doing the flying, right?

It may seem that I'm nitpicking the President's figures of speech, but hey, my original point is that he has the best screenwriters in the world on his payroll, and THIS is the best they can do?

Finally, how about this conundrum:

"The war on terror is not a figure of speech," he said. "It is an inescapable calling of our generation."

What the hell...? You mean this is an actual War? Well then, what are the objectives of this "War"? About a year ago, Bush said his intention was to rid the world of evil. No one in their right mind would set, and expect to achieve, such an absurd objective. If the presence of evil is good enough for God, who are we to try to eliminate it? He couldn't possibly be serious, could he?

In this "War", who and where are the combatants? How will we know if we are, in fact, achieving our objectives? These major questions have NEVER been addressed in any meaningful public forum or document. Someone must know the answers to these questions, right?

Look, as long as this administration continues to sell us an unwinnable war, they will also continue to resort to rhetoric like that sentence. And now he asserts that this "war" is "inescapable". Bush and his speechwriters must take their lines from the George Orwell guidebook to mass hypnotism. They believe that if they say it long enough, it will eventually be believed by the masses.

If we don't bounce this clown in November, we deserve him.

More later...
Paul

Take as much time as you need, Mr. President.

Can you believe that Bush told the 9/11 investigation committee that he would only give them ONE HOUR to question him about the events that happened that day? And only after pressure from his presidential opponent did he agree to give them more time: Bush Might Be Questioned Longer by 9/11 Commission

This is the President of the United States, right? The Commander in Chief. The man behind the wheel of the most powerful country on the planet, the man in charge on that fateful day...the same man who chose to read to a classroom full of children, rather than give orders to shoot down those hijacked aircraft BEFORE they could crash into the buildings.

Okay, no one knows what Bush was thinking when he was informed that the country was under attack...all we know is that he decided to stay with the children for a few more minutes. But that's what the commission is supposed to do: ask questions and find out WHAT THE HECK HAPPENED!

C'mon Mr. President. Take your time, you don't have to rush through this.

More later...
Paul

Stuff you didn’t know about Haiti.

“A number of U.S. firms, including commercial banks, telecommunications, airlines, oil and agribusiness companies, and U.S.-owned assembly plants are present in Haiti. “

And yet… “Haiti has been plagued for decades by extremely high unemployment and underemployment. The precipitous decline in urban assembly sector jobs, from a high of 80,000 in 1986 to fewer than 17,000 in 1994, exacerbated the scarcity of jobs.”

And this… “Haiti is a major transshipment point for South American narcotics, primarily cocaine, being sent to the United States. To counter this threat, the U.S. has taken a number of steps, including signing a counternarcotics letter of agreement with the Government of Haiti in May 2002, vetting and training the counternarcotics division of the Haitian National Police, providing material assistance and training to the Haitian Coast Guard for drug and migrant interdiction, and obtaining the expulsion of several traffickers under indictment in the United States.”

But… “Although Haiti did not meet counternarcotics certification criteria the past three years, the country was provided a waiver of any sanctions on grounds of vital national security interest (my emphasis).”

Vital national security interest? Are we talking about the War on Terrorism or the War on Drugs?

Finally, this: “Foreign investment protection is provided by the Haitian Constitution of 1987, which permits expropriation of private property for public use or land reform with payment in advance. American firms enjoy free transfer of interest, dividends, profits, and other revenues stemming from their investments, and are guaranteed just compensation paid in advance of expropriation, as well as compensation in case of damages or losses caused by war, revolution, or insurrection (again, my emphasis. Wow!). The U.S. and Haiti have a bilateral agreement on investment guarantees that permits the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation to offer programs in Haiti. The two governments also signed a bilateral investment treaty in December 1983, but it was not ratified.”

Hmmm, and all this in a country with a 50% adult literacy rate, and a life expectancy of only 49 years!
(all information taken from the U.S. State Department website)

So, if this country were being run by a President we didn’t agree with, do you think there might be a remote possibility that we would…er… “request” his “resignation”?

More later…
Paul

Why is Haiti important now?

I have no idea. Is it because it's relatively close to the U.S.? Why do we care enough about what's going on there to send our troops there. And then this happens: Yahoo! News - Aristide Tells U.S. Contacts He Was Abducted.

The President of a sovereign nation tells a U.S. congressman and a U.S. citizen that the U.S. military has abducted his family and flown them across an ocean (!) against their will. U.S. spokespersons deny this, saying the Haitian president signed a letter of resignation. Even if true, why was he flown to Africa? Why not just bring him to the U.S.?

What the heck is going on? Why is the U.S. military involved? Of what importance is this small island nation to the U.S.?

There's got to be more later, but why should we even care?
Paul

Don’t give them the easy way out.

Tomorrow, California voters head to the polls to vote on some of the silliest propositions ever proposed. Euphemistically numbered (or not) Props 55, 56, 57 and 58, they’re basically asking the citizens of California to give the government the opportunity to INCREASE our already crippling budget deficit.

55: requests voter approval for the state to borrow $12.3 BILLION, to be paid back over 30 years. 30 years! No one is even talking about how much interest that will really cost. This money is supposed to be used to fund school construction and renovation. Hello? What happened to the current education budget? Did it get used for something else?

56: reduces the number of voters in the Legislature needed to pass a budget, from a two-thirds majority to only 55 percent. Aren’t we paying them to be present and vote? Why would we lower this requirement?

57: requests voter approval for the state to borrow $15 BILLION, to be paid back in 9 to 14 years. This money will be used to reduce the state’s deficit. How much interest does $15 billion generate? Oh, about another $6.5 billion. That’s nearly 50%! What a screaming deal…for the creditor. By the way, using bonds to pay for the deficit has been ILLEGAL in California since California became a state.

58: prohibits most (but not ALL) future bonds from being issued after Prop 57. As Arnold said so many times over the weekend in those unwatchable TV ads: “Prop 57 lets us refinance the deficit one more time; Prop 58 means we tear up the ‘credit card’”.

Dude, tear it up anyway, BEFORE we take on more debt.

Sorry Arnold, but you’re gonna have to go to Plan B, as far as I’m concerned. Get your braintrust working on other alternatives, like say….raising taxes and cutting spending. I’m voting NO, NO, NO and NO.

More later…
Paul

It’s “SchwarzeNEGGER”.

It’s one day before the California Primaries, and this past weekend was filled with televised political commentaries about this, that and the other. And all weekend long I had to endure people mispronouncing the governor’s name. It’s as if some people have been waiting for an excuse to let the word “nigger” back in their vocabulary, and now they have a chance to let it fly.

Look people, it’s “SchwarzeNEGGER”, and it sounds like “beggar”, not “bigger”. “Negger”, not “nigger”. Stop being lazy with your mouths and say it right.

More later…
Paul

This guy is cruising for a bruising.

Keeping in mind the fact that the Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE entity that does not answer to the U.S. Government in ANY way, what do you think about this gem:Yahoo! News - Greenspan: U.S. May Need to Trim Retiree Benefits

Soooooo, how in heck does this guy get the nerve to say this stuff? He wants to raise the retirement age AND reduce future benefits? Look, for the most part, if we're age 40 or younger, there's NO WAY we'll ever see any decent Social Security benefits when we reach so-called "retirement age". The problem is this: if we won't benefit from SS, WHY should we PAY INTO IT?

If these fools keep talking this madness, they're going to see a revolt the likes of which have not been seen in this country since the days of the Revolutionary War.

More later...
Paul

Miracle on Film.

So I’ve seen a few films lately, but I haven’t written much about them. I don’t know why; maybe because they didn’t move me all that much. That is, until last night’s movie.

Last week I saw “The Cooler”, which is actually a very entertaining film, a love story really, that demonstrates how love can conquer all problems. It stars William Macy as a guy who’s such a loser that he’s actually employed by a Las Vegas casino to “cool off” gamblers when they get on hot streaks. This guy’s luck is so bad that it literally rubs off! All he has to do is stand next to you, and no matter what game you’re playing…blackjack, craps, slots…you’ll lose. But when he falls in love, all bets are off….sorry, I couldn’t help myself!

One of the best parts of this film is Alex Baldwin’s portrayal of an old-school casino boss. He was fantastic!

So “The Cooler” was good, but it wasn’t “last night’s movie.”

Then I saw “The Dreamers”, Bernardo Bertolucci’s latest cinematic effort. This is an NC17 rated look at three young adults in Paris in the late ‘60’s, as they….well, as they romp around naked for the most part. An interesting movie for sure, and great gutsy performances by the young unknowns as they bared all…but what was it about? I still don’t know. There were aspects of incest, but to what end I have no idea. If anyone has any idea what Bertolucci was trying to say, please let me know.

So “The Dreamers” was fun to watch, but confusing. And it also wasn’t “last night’s movie.”

I attended “last night’s movie” with a group of friends and business associates who usually don’t have the time to do such frivolous things as go to movies. But when they DO got to see a film, it’s usually an inspirational, positive-message-type of movie. So when they suggested we get together and catch of viewing of “Miracle”, I jumped at the chance, even though I had no interest in seeing the movie until they mentioned it. I guess it really does matter who you see films with.

“Miracle”, of course, is the dramatized re-telling of the story of the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team, and their “miraculous” gold medal run in the Winter Olympics at Lake Placid, New York. For those that don’t recall, back in those days the Olympic teams were still made up of amateur athletes…these were college players, not professionals…and the best team in the world was from the Soviet Union, a group of older men who had dominated the sport like no other team for at least 15 years up to that point.

In other words, there was no way in Hell that the U.S. team was supposed to beat them. Of course, what would an inspirational movie be if the underdog didn’t overcome the impossible odds and triumph? One of my movie-going friends joked afterwards “I knew what was going to happen, but I didn’t want to spoil the surprise for you!” Heck, EVERYBODY knows what the outcome will be (or was), but what we DIDN’T know was the story behind the story. And it’s one heck of a story.

Kurt Russell really impressed me as the gruff coach of the team. He’s the only name star in the film, and he’s all that’s needed. I have no idea where they got a bunch of skating actors to play the team, but they must have been real hockey players, and they did just fine with the acting.

Unless you are hopelessly cynical, this is a movie that will make you smile and clap and cheer and even cry. It is a FANTASTIC piece of inspirational material, proving that even the best can be beaten by the ones with the most heart. It showcases the values of determination, persistence, hard work and belief in oneself. The buildup to the showdown was edited perfectly, and even though we all know how it ends, the movie STILL has you sitting on the edge of your seat during the showdown.

“Miracle” is a great movie. Treat yourself to it, and take some youngsters with you. Today’s kids need to see this stuff.

More later…
Paul

Happy Birthday, Cortina!!

You're everything I always wanted in a sister! Enjoy your day!

Constitutional Discrimination?

Ya know, I really don't go around looking for things to complain about with regards to our "President", but he's a thought-provoking kind of guy, you have to admit. Now, in a blatantly political attempt to corral his religious right vote, he goes and does this: Yahoo! News - Bush Endorses Amendment Banning Gay Marriage.

There really is no separation of church and state, is there?

Is marriage a religious issue, a spiritual issue or a legal issue? In my mind, marriage begins when two people decide to commit the rest of their lives to each other, with the express intent of becoming a family. To me, marriage isn't about ownership rights, tax advantage (or disadvantages), income-sharing arrangements, census results. As far as I'm concerned, there is no particularly "correct" marriage ceremony; you can get married in a courthouse, your friend's house, or a house of worship; you can jump over a broom, step on a glass, wade in the surf, WHATEVER MAKES YOU HAPPY...IT'S YOUR MARRIAGE!

But when the government steps in to limit WHO you can marry, methinks the government goes too far.

You don't have to support any so-called "gay agenda" to realize that banning gay marriage is simple, blatant discrimination based on sexual preference. Writing this type of discrimination into the Constitution of the United States of America in the 21st Century is criminal. It opens the door wide for even more discriminatory amendments.

Let people be people. Let humans be humans. If you're opposed to gay marriages, fine, DON'T MARRY ANY GAY PERSON! But to make it illegal for one human to make a marriage commitment to another human is to ignore a very simple fact of life: we're all in this together, no matter our age, sex, economic status, race, creed, ethnic background, political belief or sexual orientation. We have been told to love each other as we love ourselves. Why don't we do that?

More later...
Paul

Happy Birthday, Rusty!

You're the best-est best friend a guy could ever have.

Paul

More proof that Bush is brain-dead.

The "edumacation" president is at it again. He's come up with his perfect solution for preventing unwanted teenage pregnancies and the spread of STD's among teens: Bush Advocates Abstinence-Only Education.
Here's a man who listens to the experts...and then ignores what they recommend.

You know, I really don't think he TRULY believes the things that he lets escape from his own mouth. I think he says just what he thinks his voters want to hear. Not that his voters really matter...if he finds himself behind in the vote count in November, he'll just have the Supreme Court install him again.

Shame on us if we let this happen.

More later...
Paul

Houston, we have a problem.

Talk about dumb. Talk about not thinking. Talk about selfish, self-conscious, self-promoting silliness. What were they thinking?

In an obvious attempt to outshine the now-infamous Britney/Madonna "kiss", Justin Timberlake exposed one of Janet Jackson's breasts...not only on national television, but during the Superbowl, the most watched tv broadcast in the world! Now, I'm no prude and I think the human body is beautiful and should be celebrated, but last night's cynical display only appeals to the worst. Innocent? Get real.

My biggest problem with it is the denial. All parties involved say they had no idea it was going to happen. Someone should go to jail just for lying so brazenly. OF COURSE it was planned; lil' Timberlake doesn't have enough strength in his hands to tear a leather bustier, or whatever the heck it was she was wearing. Look at the photos: the damn bra had tear off snaps! Janet and Justin at the Superbowl. Isn't it obvious that she wanted to flash that hideous nipple ring all along?

See, in an enlightened society, she would have come out naked anyway, and no one would have minded. In our current, still pretty much puritanical society, during our yearly beer and pizza party that we call the Superbowl, well...well, CHILDREN are watching, fer chrissakes! Keep your clothes on and finish the damn song...we want to watch the rest of the game.

It wasn't that long ago that Janet could get by on her music. Looks like she's going the way of her sister, LaToya...wonder when she'll appear in Penthouse...

More later...
Paul

Godspeed, Jason.

It's always sad when a youngster suddenly dies, for whatever reason. We hate to see a life full of promise cut short before its prime. Yet at the same time, you have to kind of smile when someone passes away engaged in doing something they love. When you hear about the retired gentleman who has a quiet heart attack on a golf course, you have to admit that if you have to go (and we all do), it's best to go doing something that has meaning to you. I believe that to be the case with this young gentleman from Riverside, California, who died this past Saturday at a supercross race in San Diego, the first fatality ever for the sport: AMA Press Release on Jason Ciarletta.

My deepest condolences go out to his family. Jason, say hi to God for me.

More later...
Paul

Hollywood Giveth and Hollywood Taketh Away.

Life is funny. A week ago, I saw a movie that literally took my breath away and restored my faith in cinema. Then this weekend, against my better judgement and ignoring the warnings of those in the know, I went to see another film. That one brutally reminded me of all that is wrong with this thing we call Hollywood.

First, the good film: “21 Grams”. I went to see this one with some close friends at a little art house in Encino on a Saturday night. The place was packed front to back, and I think the average age of the patrons had to be in the mid-to-late 30’s. It was a tiny theater (I overheard one guy say “my TV is bigger than that screen!”), but the audience was knowledgeable and appreciative. More to the point, however, is that the movie was so engaging that the theater itself quickly shrank in significance. I was transported into the story; I was no longer in Encino.

Now for the bad film: “Torque”. I checked this one out on a whim after work one day, catching an early evening discount showing in Glendale. I went in expecting the worst and was surprised that it was even worse than I expected. This film was screened in a very large theater. The screen had to be 100 feet wide, and the joint had something like 500 seats. Yet there were maybe 6 people in the place. Oh well, room to stretch out…

“21 Grams” featured everything one might want in a movie: a compelling storyline that progresses in an unpredictable fashion; attractive young actors at the top of their game; a risk-taking director that actually has something to say besides “show me the money”. And Hollywood (and by “Hollywood” I mean the major studios that control American cinema) saw fit to shunt this fine film off to the netherlands of little bitty art houses, to duke it out with all of the other so-called “independent” films. One wonderful fact of life is that good films somehow seem to find their audiences, if given half a chance.

“Torque” was jam-packed with all of the ingredients that any formula action film should have: lots of action, lots of gratuitous cheesecake (and beefcake), lots of special effects, and little to no plot. Let me make it plain here: this movie sucked. This was one of the dumbest movies I have ever seen, and that includes “Biker Boyz” and “Bad Boys 1 & 2”, and that’s saying A LOT.

You’re not going to see this, so I’m gonna give it away right now: Here’s what it was about: NOTHING.

This guy comes into some hick town in the desert…apparently he’s been away. Whatever. He looks up this chick he left behind. So what. Some people are pissed at him. He’s wanted by the FBI. The chick stays mad at him for about 30 seconds. Some people fight. One guy gets killed. A few chase scenes, a few shootouts. The guy and the chick ride off into the sunset (literally!) The end.

I was pissed that I even paid the evening discount price for this garbage.

I’m not going to give away “21 Grams” because I think most film lovers should see this flick. I will tell you that Sean Penn and Naomi Watts and Benicio Del Toro do FANTASTIC jobs and make this film most watchable. Sean and Naomi have great chemistry together, especially considering the twists of the plot. The basic story is this: Sean is a Math professor with a bad heart. He’s on the transplant waiting list, and it’s looking like he won’t make it. Naomi is a happily married mother of two beautiful girls. Benicio is an ex-con on the mend who apparently has trouble driving his big 4x4 truck. ‘Nuff said.

What’s really funny (in retrospect, of course) is that BOTH movies will move you to tears.

I’m not finished ragging on “Torque” (sounds like “Fork” as in “we got your money, hahaha….FORK YOU!”): action movies often require a certain suspension of belief on the part of the audience. In order to fully enjoy the movie, the viewer must be willing to engage in fantasy. “The Lord of the Rings” does not operate in our everyday universe, but we’re usually willing to go there with the filmmaker as long as there is SOME type of parallel with the reality that we live in. “Fork” is no different, but man, do they ask a lot of the viewer. Really, the movie insists that you are okay with the following concepts:

1) Speeding motorcycles generate shockwaves that can cause cars to spin out.
2) Motorcycles, in the hands of skilled operators, are able to stand on one wheel like horses, and pivot as the pilot desires.
3) San Bernadino Sherriffs will NOT immediately beat down belligerent black motorcycle gang members who give them attitude at the scene of a murder.
4) It’s okay to carry a loaded gun without a carry permit. Or, everyone has a carry permit.
5) If you abruptly abandon your longtime girlfriend and then come back 6 months later, she will not only take you back within 5 minutes, she’ll sleep with you in 15 minutes, even though you are wearing the same nasty leather pants and dirty t-shirt you were wearing when you left. In fact, those are all the clothes you own.
6) The FBI will allow a 28-year-old “special agent” to wear thrift store suits and Converse sneakers…and give him a Hummer H2 with custom wheels. Just because.
7) The same agent will kill (or attempt to kill) his partner over $1million worth of drugs.
8) The same agent will “forget” that his partner wears a bulletproof vest. Right.
9) It’s possible to ride a motorcycle at over 160 mph WITHOUT a helmet or goggles and STILL BE ABLE TO SEE.
10) People can have normal conversations while riding, even though they are wearing full-face helmets, their bikes have loud exhaust systems and people are shooting at them.
11) All black motorcycle gang members intrinsically hate all white people. Again, just because.

Just because WHAT? Just because this film was made by extremely lazy, opportunistic filmmakers who care not one whit about motorcycles or racial relations or even making a good movie. They just wanted to get paid. Voila.

Meanwhile, I don’t know the deal, but I would be willing to bet that Sean and Naomi and Benicio willingly cut their pay in order to make “21 Grams”. And it’s going to pay off for them in more ways than just filling their mutual funds. There’s talk of an Oscar for Ms. Watts. And that’s another column altogether.

More later…
Paul

Is this amazing or what?

D.C. United, a professional soccer team, selects a 14-year-old boy as the first pick in the Major Leage Soccer draft: Yahoo! News - Freddy Adu First Pick in MLS Draft.

Guess I'll be wearing a D.C. United jersey with the number 9 on it this spring.

I'm happy for the kid and his family, but I don't get how he qualifies to play a professional sport and he hasn't even finished high school! There's no question that the boy is qualified, but he's just a ...boy! His childhood is officially over. I hope he has good parental support, because the Michael Jackson story could serve as a warning to those who attempt to gain superstardom at such a tender age.

Good luck Freddy. Don't forget to have fun.

More later...
Paul

What can I do?

A former neighbor and friend of mine is a wonderful lady. She is so very proud that her son finally sold a script to Hollywood, and they actually made the movie. Unfortunately, this is the movie: Yahoo! Movies: My Baby's Daddy (2004)

Sooooooo, what should I say to her? I knew way back when she told me that Eddie Griffin was the star that there was a more than good chance that the resulting movie would be embarrasingly awful. But I feel an obligation of sorts to go see this thing, and then be nice to her about it, even if it turns my stomach and makes me run out of the theater, simultaneously wretching and screaming...which is not an easy thing to do, by the way.

I guess I should give the movie a chance, ignore the critics and just go see it with an open mind. But there's one review that I cannot forget: a guy said it would have been better if they just took your money, sat you down in the theater and flashed the word "Sucker" on the screen for two hours.

Ah, the things we do for friends...

More later...
Paul

What color are you?

You may not be the color you think you are. Check out this story: CBSNews.com: Air Passenger Code Plan In Motion

In the near future, if you get on a plane, someone will make a determination and mark you by your perceived "threat level". The big question is, what information will they use to make this judgement? Where will they get the info? And what happens if YOU happen to be classified as a "medium" threat? Will the flight attendants be instructed to look at you funny?

Another bad idea becomes reality. Will it ever end?

More later...
Paul

Yikes.

It's sometimes easy to forget that the U.S. Constitution does not extend to visitors: Yahoo! News - U.S. Begins Fingerprinting Foreign Visitors. But this new program is going to be a nightmare, at least from a bureaucratic standpoint.

What will be next? DNA samples from all tourists?

More later...
Paul

AMA Supercross, circa 2004.

On Saturday night, January 3rd, I attended my seventh consecutive opening round of the AMA Supercross series. As a diehard motocross fan, I think it is a MUST to attend the first race of the indoor motocross season. This year, I cut my East Coast vacation short just to make sure I was back in California in time to make the short drive to Edison International field in Anaheim, California to see the world’s best supercross racers hit the track for the first time this year.

It was a great race. The current World Supercross Champion from Australia, Chad Reed, took the 250 cc Main event on his factory Yamaha, suprising many since he is just coming back from a recent shoulder injury. And the 125 cc Main was won by New Mexico’s Ivan Tedesco on a new Kawasaki 250 fourstroke. Yeah, for the uninitiated it will seem strange that a 250 would be allowed to compete in the 125 class, but that’s old news to MX fans, and I’m not even gonna get into it here. Google it if you need to know more.

So the folks at Clear Channel Entertainment, the promoters of the series, got my disposable entertainment dollar for another year, and once again I think they missed a few great opportunities to make a good event even better. If anyone cares, here’s a few things that bugged me about the event:

Spectator access to the stadium. I still don’t know why they only let spectators exit and re-enter the stadium through one gate. There are bag checkers and pat-down people at every entrance, so why do we have to herd around one gate to get back in? We spend a long day at the race, and the parking lot scene is part of the draw, with a large number of people having tailgate parties with their friends. How is security enhanced by limiting exit/re-entry to one gate? I think that stadium management is trying to make exit/re-entry too much of a hassle, in order to discourage tailgate parties and force people to pay for the overpriced stadium food and drinks. Dream on guys, it’ll only happen if you find a way to make it illegal to bring food and drinks into the parking lot.

Parking fees. Seems like they’re just getting higher and higher. Blame it on inflation if you want to, I think it’s just opportunism. $10 is starting to get extreme. Make people happy and cut it in half. We’ll be more willing to buy your souvenir yearbook if you can save us money on the parking.

The souvenir yearbook. Hey, I buy this every year, religiously. I buy it as a keepsake, something to look back at over the years. I also buy it to get a listing of the racers’ names and numbers (not phone numbers…bike numbers). But in recent years, they only list the top 100 racers. CCE, we need to get a current listing of ALL riders competing in the event, especially the three-digit pros who struggle in the qualifiers. A good portion of the audience shows up early enough to see these guys fight it out in the afternoon portion…at least you could tell us who they are. A simple one page print out, handed out with each souvenir yearbook, is all you need. Heck, charge a buck for it ($6 total for the package), and then dedicate 50 cents from each sale to a special top non-qualifiers purse. At the very least, tell the kids you employ to sell the damn things that they are NOT selling “programs” to the night’s event.

Non-creative use of downtime. Guys, hire a band or something. The KTM Junior supercross event is not enough. Give the audience something to see between races. The bullshit “interviews with sponsors” are not appreciated. The Mickey Thompson award presentation was surreal…and not in a good way.

The KTM Junior supercross. Sure, they’re cute and if I had a kid I’d want him or her to ride this event, but there’s too much time given to this mini-spectacle. I was quite surprised to see them ride the entire track (that in itself says something about the difficulty of the track), but I was NOT surprised to hear the interview questions of the winners. Like most in the stadium, I used that time to go take a leak. This little race doesn’t have to go away, but it doesn’t deserve the pressure of being the ONLY between race entertainment.

The monster truck “preview”. I get that it’s a business, and it’s another series promoted by CCE and they will actually be in the very same stadium next week and all of that jazz. But if you’re going to promote the event, the DO it. I found it interesting that the field officials used BULLDOZERS to block off sections of the track, to limit where the monster truck guy could drive. Tease. You could tell who the real motocross fans were in the crowd…they were yawning when the truck was pulling wheelies. The people cheering for the truck…more power to them. They can see more next week…after they shell out $10 for parking, of course.

Blah, blah, blah. The announcing was more subdued this year, much to the credit of the promoters. Same lame team, though. None of it mattered up in nosebleed; we couldn’t hear most if it, especially when there were bikes on the track. It just seemed strange that they would play music right before the start of each main, AND try to talk over the sound of the music and the revving engines. Maybe one of these days the organizers will figure out why people go to see races, and then re-format their announcing structure to support that.

Fourstroke noise. Now, this is not the promoter’s fault, but the sound of the 125 events have changed the nature of the game for the worse. Gone are the days of the “ring ding” and the sweet smell of “castor” oil. The little 250 thumpers are just as loud as their 450 big brothers, if not as “deep” in tone, and their interminable drone made me miss the sound of twostrokes. I actually found myself daydreaming of a twostroke-only class.

Wow, that’s actually not a bad list of gripes. The truth of the matter is that CCE is doing a pretty good job of putting on what is actually a very tough event. And the audience left the stadium smiling, which is really what it’s all about. It’s just SO CLOSE to perfection, that it’s a shame that they don’t go all the way. One day I hope they will. All I know is that I will be there.

More later…
Paul