The (Windy Old Trout)(WOT?)

  (a Web Log) 

Monday, February 6th, 2012

Sunday, February 5th, 2012

My brilliant and beautiful daughter returned recently from a year's assignment in Seoul, South Korea, teaching English to an assortment of grade schoolers. No Korean, only English, was permitted to be spoken in the classroom and my daughter soon acquired the Koranglican appellation: 'Maggie Teacher'.

I was not quite seven years old in New Jersey on a late-July morning in 1953 when our nation was informed, by radio (many people still did not have a television...and even for those who did, programming was sparse), that a ceasefire agreement had been signed in Panmunjom, thereby ending 'major operations' in a war that had raged for more than four years and taken the lives of at least 1.5 million people...including nearly 37,000 Americans. I was about to enter Second Grade that Fall at the local (segregated) public school and, within weeks of the start of that school year, a uniformed GI was conscripted from our nearby Army base (Fort Monmouth) to deliver a brief ('current events') speech to our class about the now-suspended Korean War.

See...nobody 'won' that War! The situation (both martial and political) that obtained on July 28th, 1953...obtains today. At the end of his speech, the GI asked if any of us had any questions. Well...I wasn't a shy kid and, so, I raised my little hand to ask the soldier, 'what started the Korean War?'  This struck me then, and now, as an eminently reasonable query but, to my prepubescent surprise, the soldier (along with the bystanding faculty members) let out a (what I later understood to be a nervous) laugh. [I later came to realize that they were laughing not at the question itself but, rather, at the prodigious scope of my young mind. Yes...the laughs were a  'how about that!', if you will: a reflexive gasp of amazement at the fine intellect of one so young!] I don't remember the answer that came from the visiting drone [perhaps it had never occurred to him even to ponder such a question or, as a career military man in 1953, why it should even have mattered what 'started' it. Wasn't it enough to know that he had a job...to do?] because my attention was drawn away by snickers from my fellow classmates. Of course, the other little assholes were only snickering in misaligned imitation of the reaction of the adults in the room to the question. Convinced, between my pesky little ears, that I was 'on to something', I later challenged each snickerer, in turn...after the GI's presentation, to share with me just what was so fucking funny (or ridiculous) about my question. Of course, not one could tell me. The question was and is a good one but its answer is not a short one. It has to do with a country...a peninsula...conquered and occupied by Japan in 1910, 'liberated' in 1945 but then fought-over and capriciously divided (at the '38th Parallel North'...the Demilitarized Zone) at the (stalemated) cessation of conflict. 

To my profound relief, Maggie returned safely from Korea and reported an overall good experience in Seoul. Her only complaint (of substance) was in regard to the often-harsh weather...quite different from the mild (and coveted) climate of the San Francisco Bay Area. She brought with her a book that answered my nearly sixty-year-old question. Written by Barbara Demick, the book is called 'Nothing To Envy'. The title is derived from the lyrics of a patriotic (some would say 'propagandistic') North Korean song. I recommend this book, but only with reservations. It is not a light read. Ms. Demick has profiled six North Korean defectors (to the South) over a fifteen year period. While virtually all of it is heartbreaking, the descriptions of the years beginning in 1994...at the death of 'The Great Leader'...are the hardest to absorb. These years were marked by a food shortage...a famine...that took the lives of about 20% of the population.

Here's an excerpt wherein the author describes 'the killer' (famine) as targeting "the most innocent, the people who would never steal food, lie, cheat, break the law, or betray a friend. It was the simple and kindhearted people who did what they were told—they were the first to die. It was a phenomenon that the Italian writer Primo Levi identified after emerging from Auschwitz, when he wrote that he and his fellow survivors never wanted to see one another again after the war because they had all done something of which they were ashamed."

There's a lesson here for the evolution of our species. To 'survive' (to live long enough to pass on one's genetic material) one must 'do what one has to do'. Evolution is indifferent in the sense that it does not always (or, perhaps, even usually) reward our 'better nature'.

Saturday, February 4th, 2012                            The 38th Anniversary of the Kidnapping of Patty Hearst

Friday, February 3rd, 2012

It is impossible to recognize a wrong way without knowing the right way.

 This means that it is no use troubling oneself how to recognize a wrong way.

 One must think of how to find the right way.

George Gurdjieff, 1877-1949

Thursday, February 2nd, 2012                   Groundhog Day: midway between the Winter Solstice and The Vernal Equinox

Hard it is not to marvel at Mitt RobMe's comment about 'the very poor' which, to quote NYT Columnist Ashley Parker, seemed to 'ricochet around the Web and Cable News Channels'. RobMe's apologists insist that the remark was (oh yawn) 'taken out of context' but I say...however you 'take it'...the best you can make it is that it was a stupid thing to say. Virtually every commentator...from the comedic to the serious....has given it her or his attention. Christmas! Even Hack Limbaugh creamed RobMe for it! Mitt's still trying to 'walk it back'...as the phrase goes...blaming the 'Democrat Party' for something he (Mitt) said! Yes!

There is no context within which it was anything but an ugly and callous remark...especially coming from a man with hundreds of millions of dollars to his name. It was truly a 'Kinsley Gaffe'...wherein a politician reveals his true sentiments.  And it wasn't even the first time he said it! See...to appeal to the 'base' of his Party, Mitt cannot appear to look fondly on 'the welfare state' of 'The Food Stamp President'. Or, as the late Great Herman Cain put it: 'if you don't have a job and you're not rich...blame yourself!' Any other approach...anything that the government might do to help people at 'the other end' of the economic ladder...would reek of 'socialism'.

Wednesday, February 1st, 2012

Yes, I have renamed my Web Log in recognition of the reality that I have reached the age at which one is expected to be a gasbag.

My last gf informed me that the vulgarism, 'Old Fart', is a reference to the ‘fact’ (?) that, by the time one is a ‘Senior Citizen’...and eligible for Medicare, it is a given that one’s digestive system has lost much of its efficiency. I am unprepared to argue.

But I would like to embrace my new elderly status to discourse upon two mutually-exclusive viewpoints which might, at first reflection, seem to be upon a mostly intellectual matter:

whether or not one should express one's gloomy, sometimes angry, thoughts freely (i.e., ‘let it all hang out’) or limit oneself only to positive expressions…or 'projections'.

On one side of this ‘battlefield’, we have the Freudians...those who assert that to hold in one’s negative feelings (i.e., to 'repress' them) is a ‘bad thing’… something that will lead to psychological (and even physical) problems ‘down the road’. For these, there is 'talk therapy' ('psychoanalysis'), wherein one is encouraged to exhume one's dark past in the service of present-day self-understanding. Such self-understanding, the argument goes, will inexorably lead to 'self-improvement'. The Freudian view is a 'modern', secular view...one born of reverence for science and the dispassionate mind.

Alternatively, there are those from a contemplative (and ancient) school who assert that, as 'an eye cannot see itself' and 'a sword cannot cut itself', 'self analysis' is an ineffective instrument of personal change...and that, to have any control over our destiny, we must 'shape it' or, in finer language: we must 'project' that which we wish to be. Then, in time, and with perseverance (or so this argument goes), we will become whatever we imagine ourselves to be.  

Tuesday, January 31st, 2012

Monday, January 30th, 2012

Sunday, January 29th, 2012

Saturday, January 28th, 2012

We Lefty Pinko Commies were heartened, this past week, to read the results of a Canadian study which finds an association between social conservatism and low IQ. Stephen Colbert has famously noted that 'reality has a liberal bias', but this study concludes that people who missed out on smarts at birth and/or are poorly educated tend to embrace and maintain 'simple' world views.

What occurred to me when I heard about this study is that no less august a personage than John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) intuited these conclusions more than one hundred fifty years ago when he wrote that "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."  

Friday, January 27th, 2012                                                                    Ew!

It’s in our everyday life. It determines our hygiene behaviors. It determines how close we get to people. It determines who we’re going to kiss, who we’re going to mate with, who we’re going to sit next to. It determines the people that we shun, and that is something that we do a lot of. Kids in the playground accuse other kids of having cooties. It works! People feel shame when disgust is turned on them.

Valerie Curtis, from The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, speaking of  the evolutionary importance of the emotion we call 'disgust'.

Thursday, January 26th, 2012

Wednesday, January 25th, 2012                                         Mitt RobMe

Tuesday, January 24th, 2012

When did the phrase 'politically correct' become a smear? Wikipedia has an interesting article on the term itself which, in its earliest usage (from the late 1700's) was more descriptive than judgmental. My first memories of 'PC' are from the late (19)60's, when it became fashionable to (at least) pay attention when referring to women (they're not 'girls' if men are not 'boys') and ethnic minorities (it became polite to ask if someone wished to be known as 'black'...or 'African American'). Certainly, it was no longer PC to use terms like 'colored'...or even 'Negro'. Terms like 'Chink' and, especially, 'nigger' were consigned (and confined) to the realm of racial slurs. 'Indians' became 'Native Americans' or 'indigenous people'.

Bye and bye, the use of ethnically-charged monikers for sports teams became an issue which, lamentably, remains unresolved. We still live with the Atlanta Braves as well as the Washington Redskins.

But 'smart people' learned not to say things that are offensive to others...even if they'd grown up in environments where certain terms were simply part of  local jargon...and never intended to be slurs. The idea was to be inclusive and respectful and, if that entailed the modification of one's habits of speech...then that's what was required if you were to be 'politically correct'.

To put it another way, political correctness was a step in the direction of being cosmopolitan (i.e., a 'citizen of the cosmos')...less provincial. It was (and, IMO, should remain) a recognition that our world has gotten smaller in the last half century. To get along, one should go along by putting one's speech in 'neutral'.

But anymore, every reference to 'political correctness' (almost invariably from Right Wing Republicans and bloviating 'think tank' academics) carries with it a tone of condescension and mockery. Example: last week, when moderator Juan Williams challenged Newt Gingrich on his use of the term 'food stamp President' to refer to Barack Obama, Gingrich shot back, “I know, among the politically correct, you are not supposed to use facts that are uncomfortable.” The South Carolina mob cheered him. No matter that Gingrich's statements are a distortion (at best) of the 'facts'. What that mob was cheering was not so much his thinly-veiled racist allusion (to lazy black folks living on government handouts) but, rather, his slam of the 'elite liberals' who think they're better than 'real people'. Notice that Newt, on this occasion, turned 'politically correct' from an adjective into a noun. It makes for a better smear that way.

Yesterday's column by Frank Bruni was a gem! I'll quote a bit of it here:

With Gingrich, the distance between reality and rhetoric isn’t shrinking but growing, and the incongruities mount. He has lately fallen in love with his rants against “the elites,” and casts himself as their most determined foe, but I can’t for the life of me figure out a definition of elite that doesn’t include him.
Are the elites those hyper-educated intellectuals who use big words? Gingrich has a Ph.D. in history from a prestigious private university, Tulane, and when it suits him, he plays Cerebellum in Chief with nonpareil diction and derision.
Are the elites rich people with fancy ZIP codes? He and his third wife, Callista, made more than $3.1 million in 2010 and have an estimated net worth in excess of $6.5 million. Since 2000 they have lived in the posh enclave of McLean, Va., not Appalachia, and have personally stimulated the economy with expenditures at Tiffany, not Zales.
He lashes out against secularists and trumpets his and Callista’s Roman Catholicism, though the two of them lived for six years in explicit defiance of its tenets.

Monday, January 23rd, 2012

Sunday, January 22nd, 2012 

This morning, in the afterglow of his shocking defeat in the South Carolina Primary, Mitt Romney said he'll release his tax returns after all (on Tuesday). His problem, however, is that now, this merely reinforces the perception that he does not act out of any 'principle': that's he's reactive...not proactive. Not for the first time, he has demonstrated poor political intuition. For while he is (still) sure to take some heat upon the release of these documents ('cuz if there's nothing embarrassing in them, why has he not released them sooner?), he must now deal with the fact that he only released them when he could no longer not!

Yes, while Romney has too often disappointed Party 'regulars', establishment Republicans are clearly terrified by the prospect of a Gingrich candidacy! Last night, I was shocked to see that Fox Noise (in the person of Britt Hume) was actually bashing Gingrich...citing his ghastly favorability/unfavorability ratings with the voting public: roughly twice as many view Newt unfavorably as view him favorably!

And so, in a bid to save the Party from an across-the-board loss (i.e., not only the Presidency but also many seats in the House and Senate) with Gingrich at the top of the ticket, a proverbial 'circular firing squad' has been assembled. That's right! Democrats will be all too happy to see Newt become the nominee, while 'realistic' Republicans are being encouraged to 'take him out'. Today, loudmouth New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called Gingrich 'an embarrassment'. Expect more of this over the coming weeks...from Republicans!

Saturday, January 21st, 2012

To me, the most striking thing about Mitt Romney is his neurotic personality. Or, to be trite, he doesn't seem 'comfortable in his own skin'.  People, usually without being able to say why, instinctively recoil from him to the degree to which they are exposed to him. His laugh and his smile...are mirthless. He is 'wooden'...'phony'...and sometimes he stutters! I suppose we could kick around the reasons for this...his Mormonism...and/or the fact that he has never known anything but wealth and privilege. But right away I can think of Mormons (Stephen Covey and Marie Osmond, for two) and rich people (Warren Buffet and the late Ted Kennedy) who are and were quite comfortable in public.

Mitt is, to use another cliché, politically 'tone deaf''...like when he mused about getting a 'pink slip' and, especially, when he said that almost $375,000 in speaker fees was 'not much'! Yes, there's not much (for the public) to like about Romney. He's 'charismatically challenged'.

Newt Gingrich, OTOH, seems 'quite comfortable' in his own skin...though perhaps he should not be. His win tonight in the South Carolina Republican Primary is the fruit of hateful pandering to the basest instincts of  White America (as well as a symptom of voters' absence of enthusiasm for Romney).

Newt's reference, earlier this week, to Andrew Jackson (about killing his enemies), was surely over the heads of that redneck mob in live attendance. President Jackson instigated what was one of our Nation's episodes of 'ethnic cleansing' (The Indian Removal Act of 1830)! Yet the SC mob hooted and hollered as if 'their man' had kicked an 80-yard field goal!

Then, in Thursday night's debate, Gingrich's ugly reply to John King of CNN (re King's question about the interview aired on ABC with Newt's second wife) succeeded in deflecting that audience's attention from the issue at hand: Newt's strident hypocrisy. Gingrich not only lashed out at Mr. King (as if King had somehow caused Newt to betray his ailing spouse of 18 years), but went further...claiming that the 'elite media' (in the service of Barack Obama) had failed to interview witnesses who could have 'proved' that his second wife's account of their conversation is  false. Uh...but if only two people are party to a conversation...then how could someone who wasn't there 'prove' anything about what was said...or not said? Alas...such reasoning seems beyond even the reach (let alone the grasp) of anyone who would actually vote for Newt Gingrich!

Friday, January 20th, 2012

Maizy Cat, ~9 months old.

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

Wednesday, January 18th, 2012

The following is excerpted from last night's column by Charles Blow:  

Mr. Gingrich has made racial resentment an integral part of his platform. He has traversed the country calling President Obama “the greatest food-stamp president in American history” and presenting African-Americans with the great revelation that they should prefer paychecks to federal handouts. When he was called on it at the debate by Juan Williams of Fox News, he took the measure of the crowd and doubled down.
“The fact is that more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history,” he announced, to wild cheers. “I know, among the politically correct, you’re not supposed to use facts that are uncomfortable.”

What you’re not supposed to do, actually, is mislead the public. The fact is that Mr. Obama has “put” no one on food stamps. People apply for food assistance, known officially as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, because they’re poor or out of work and their families are hungry. The number of people using the program, which is now at a peak, began rising with the recession, in 2007, and continued through four of the toughest years ever faced by the poor and near-poor in modern history. Non-Hispanic whites far outnumber blacks receiving SNAP benefits. As for the notion that these are people who somehow like their dependency, 30 percent of SNAP households have income from work — a reminder of the brutal impact of the recession on wages.
But these are inconvenient details to Mr. Gingrich, who implied that the rise in federal aid was a sad indication of the insufficient work ethic of black Americans. Asked by Mr. Williams why he has frequently suggested that poor children be employed as school janitors, Mr. Gingrich said his daughter worked as a church janitor at age 13 and liked earning the money and that it would be a good way for poor students to learn the value of work. But, he suggested, Mr. Obama doesn’t want them to work at all because liberal elites prefer to “maximize dependency.” Don’t try to follow any kind of logical thread as to why the president wouldn’t want the jobless rate to decrease; there isn’t one. This trumpet was sounded to feed the prejudice of people who already believe that blacks and other poor people don’t really like to work and to deflect the growing public awareness that the Republican Party’s highest priority is protecting the rich from higher taxes.
For these divisive thoughts, Mr. Gingrich earned his ovation and Mr. Williams won a round of boos. In South Carolina, where a Confederate flag still waves on the front lawn of the State Capitol, it remains good primary politics to stir up racial animosity and then link it to President Obama. Mr. Gingrich and the crowd that cheered him are following in a long and tawdry tradition, singling out a minority group for lectures while refusing to support policies that help all Americans.

Tuesday, January 17th, 2012

Who are these people? I couldn't bear to watch (in real time) the 17th Rethuglicon Primary debate last night, from Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, but today's airwaves crackled with samples of what went on:

Rick Perry disclosed that, as President, he would cut off all US Foreign Aid to Turkey. Seems his staff had failed to inform him that Turkey already receives NO US Foreign Aid.

Newt Gingrich, to thunderous applause, loudly played his racist dog whistle (about our 'food stamp President' and the 'dignity' of work).

Mitt Romney was his trademark, neurotic and dissembling self, replete with graceless, fact-starved slams against Obama.

Rick Santorum explained (again) why, of all the candidates on the stage, he would make the best Pope...and how dare Mitt Romney let a Super PAC accuse His Holiness of wanting to grant ex-felons the right to vote! Would Jesus ever forgive these criminals...even after they'd served their time?

The only almost-surprise was delivered by the audience, which was so mob-like as to make one imagine that they were about to leave the Myrtle Beach Convention Center to overturn  cars and set fires. Even CNN remarked that the audience acted like a 'whooping football crowd' reminiscent of The Jerry Springer Show.

I mean...OK, months ago...Republican debate audiences cheered the number of criminals put to death in Texas on Rick Perry's watch...hooted their approval when Wolf Blitzer asked if someone without health insurance (but in need of urgent care) should be left to die...and booed an active duty (in Iraq) openly gay soldier for asking Rick the Saint about Don't Ask Don't Tell.

But last night, the mob actually booed the Bible! That's right! When Ron Paul suggested that US Foreign Policy ought to be in line with The Golden Rule...the suggestion was booed!

Who would Jesus boo? Who are these people?  

Monday, January 16th, 2012

Sunday, January 15th, 2012

The following is excepted from last night's New York Times Editorial:

Ever since Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry started criticizing Mitt Romney’s actions at Bain Capital — and talking about the thousands of people laid off as a result of Bain’s investments — party leaders have essentially told them to shut up. That response is a pretty good indication of how deeply party elders fear the issue of economic inequality in the campaign to come.
Mr. Romney said that issues of wealth distribution should be discussed only “in quiet rooms.” And he accused the president of using an “envy-oriented, attack-oriented” approach, “entirely inconsistent with the concept of one nation under God.”
Mr. Romney’s image of a country where workers have nothing but admiration for benevolent, job-creating capitalists (and no one is so impolite as to mention jobs destroyed) bears very little relationship to reality. But his suggestion that it is un-American to talk about rising populist resentment is self-serving and hypocritical. Republicans, in particular, have eagerly stoked such resentments against minorities and the poor.
Anyone who criticizes Mr. Romney’s business practices now faces the absurd charge of putting free-market capitalism on trial. But Mr. Romney has based his campaign on his business experience. Americans need to know how that experience was gained, and what values — if any — it represents. Class reality has nothing to do with class warfare.

Saturday, January 14th, 2012

Friday, January 13th, 2012

Thursday, January 12th, 2012

American law has very few 'gray areas' when it comes to the determination of what is...and what is not...a crime. Sure...after a defendant is arrested and brought before a judge...or a jury...a person's motive and mental competence may be explored and may...or may not...be found to mitigate the penalty attendant upon the offense.

But a story out of Lexington, North Carolina, cries out for mercy!

On New Year's Eve, Michael Fuller walked into his local Wal-Mart, loaded up about $500 of merchandise into his basket and stood in the checkout line. When his turn came, he presented a one million dollar bill to the cashier. It was only after Mr. Fuller insisted that the bill, which he had made himself (pretty good, actually...woulda fooled me!), was real...that the alert Wal-Mart 'associate', rather than count out $999,500 in change...called the police.

For the record (in case you're considering a career in counterfeiting), since 1969, the largest (legitimate) denomination of American currency is $100.  

What follows is excerpted from an insightful piece by Aaron Carroll. Mr. Carroll points out that, although Romney's political opponents have freely taken to quoting his recent 'fire people' remarks out of context...the remarks are far more damning (and puzzling) when taken in context: 

“I want individuals to have their own insurance. That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep people healthy. It also means if you don’t like what they do, you can fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. If someone doesn’t give me the good service I need, I’m going to go get somebody else to provide that service to me.” Mitt Romney...just last week.

Gov. Romney is not saying that he enjoys telling people that they no longer have a job. He’s saying that, when it comes to health insurance, if a company is doing a bad job, he would enjoy telling them to take a hike. Who wouldn’t?
But the real issue is that very few people have the luxury that Gov. Romney is endorsing. Let’s say that you are self-employed, and lucky enough to have found a company to provide you with health insurance. Then, let’s say you develop cancer. You suddenly find out that your insurance company stinks. So you fire them, right?
Of course not. You’re screwed. Now you have a pre-existing condition. There’s not an insurance company out there that wants to cover you. So you don’t fire them. You scream, and curse, and cry, but you’re stuck. Only healthy people have the luxury of picking and choosing.
Let’s also not forget that most people don’t find out that they’re not getting “good service” until they’re sick. Healthy people don’t make much use of their insurance, so they don’t know how bad it is. They only find out after they’re ill, and then it’s too late. It’s only fun to fire the insurance company if you’re sure you can go to another company to get what you need. But almost no one can.
Of course, you could be so assured if guaranteed issue was the law. It would be even better if there were community ratings, so you knew the next insurance company couldn’t gouge you for being sick. That’s the case in Massachusetts, under the very law Governor Romney signed, so it’s possible he’s just thinking back to that.
It’s also true under the Affordable Care Act [derisively known as 'Obamacare']. But if that gets repealed, as Governor Romney suggests, then very few Americans, excepting those that live in states like Massachusetts, will get to enjoy the firing he proclaims to enjoy.

Wednesday, January 11th, 2012                                                Oh God!

"For me so much of it is spiritual. I, I just feel like Rick said...when you're aware of our Lord and His presence in your life everyday, when you're moving through the crowds, when you're giving speeches and me as Rick's wife, I'm watching him, and the whole time he's speaking so often, I'm just there praying for him, ya  know asking the Holy Spirit to speak through him. And, ya know I feel like God's hand of protection is upon us."

Karen Santorum, in answer to a question posed by David Brody (of the Christian Broadcasting Network, CBN) about her husband's campaign to be our next Pope.

Tuesday, January 10th, 2012

Monday, January 9th, 2012

“I have no doubt that Mitt Romney was worried about pink slips — whether he was going to have enough of them to hand out because of all the jobs his company, Bain Capital, killed. I’m sure he was worried that he would run out of pink slips! If you are a victim of Bain Capital’s downsizing, it’s the ultimate insult for Mitt Romney to come to South Carolina and tell you he feels your pain — because he caused it! ”

Texas Governor Rick Perry, speaking this morning in Anderson, South Carolina, referring to Romney's off-hand (and thoroughly disingenuous) remark that he knows 'what it's like to worry about whether you're gonna get fired'...i.e., to worry about getting a pink slip. 

Sunday, January 8th, 2012

Time for a movie review:

On New Year's Eve, Oscar and I watched Margin Call. This flick is not bad...it's awful...terrible! In fact, it's almost as bad as Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps. Don't believe the upbeat (and even rave) reviews. They're 'bought & paid for'...and phony. No one can seriously argue that this movie does not simply suck.

Margin Call has a glittering cast, which includes Kevin Spacey and Demi Moore. It's not clear what Ms. Moore brings to the film. I suppose someone felt that she would 'sex up' the project. She doesn't, she didn't and she looks miserable...like she'd been up all night crying. Understandable. Virtually this whole 107 minute dud takes place inside a Manhattan high-rise. What passes for scenery changes follow elevator rides...yes, to a different office on, presumably, a different floor. Just to liven things up (variety in spite of lice, as it were), in one of these rides, Spacey and Moore are joined by a non-speaking maid...and her cart of cleaning supplies! Quite a pulse-quickener.

If there's a plot, it eludes detection. Much of the dialog is nonsensical. No development...no momentum...no suspense or sense of urgency. No twists. But there's plenty of blah blah blah and yak yak yak, punctuated by 'pregnant pauses'. No sex. No violence [although, sixty minutes in, I found myself expecting (or wishing) at least one of the 'A-list' actors would pitch himself off the roof (during one of the many views of The City...from on high)].

Then, about halfway through (the filler) in this 'thriller', none other than Jeremy Irons arrives...by helicopter! Wow! Golly! But his appearance only emphasizes the discontinuity...the lack of focus of the movie. Mr. Irons is cast in the role of British Actor Jeremy Irons...as if he's merely continuing to play whatever role he was playing in the movie (or in the five hundred or so movies) he was doing before this one. His energy and character are woefully out of step with the rest of the ensemble. There's one scene, in particular, with Demi Moore, in which it is painfully obvious that Mr. Irons and Ms. Moore are not, in fact, in the same room at the same time. That is, the dialogue was likely (re)written and the (pointless) scene (re)shot because the two had 'prior commitments' that made their joint (re)appearance(s) impossible. Sometime after that, the scene editing itself (which at the start of the film had been quite respectable) becomes comically sloppy...as if the editor could no longer pay attention...perhaps believing that the film would never be released anyway. It's THAT BAD and all the way to BORING!  So...if you paid to see it in a theater, then I offer my sympathy. But no refunds.

Saturday, January 7th, 2012

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Thursday, January 5th, 2012

Wednesday, January 4th, 2012

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012

This, courtesy of Baja Blonde, Debbie:

Monday, January 2nd, 2012

Sunday, January 1st, 2012

Some time after Jim Gordon's 1984 trial, which resulted in a second degree murder conviction for the June, 1983 hammer (and butcher knife) murder of his mother, his defense lawyer remarked that this was 'the saddest case of his whole career'. Yes. Let us hope that the attorney will never see a case any sadder...or more shocking. It still seems inconceivable that a man could go from being among the wealthiest, sought-after musicians on Planet Earth...to California Prisoner C89262. As of this writing, although sentenced to 'only' sixteen years, Jim has been confined for nearly twenty-nine years. Notwithstanding the fact that five psychiatric professionals had diagnosed him with 'acute paranoid schizophrenia'...a finding that went unchallenged by Los Angeles County Prosecutors and the trial judge...California law had recently been altered (in the wake of Dan White's successful 'Twinkie Defense') so as to make almost any insanity defense inadmissible...Jim Gordon's incarceration (for an indeterminate length of time) became inevitable. He now resides at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville.

There is still some hope of his being released...some day. There are numerous Web-based petitions...and the curious fact that he is actually quite wealthy (partly as the result of accumulating, unspent royalties) may yet energize the legal muscle that will be needed to open the iron gates.

I've not yet found a book dedicated to this subject, but there are innumerable short (and not so short) pieces online. Many points are thoughtfully discussed, including speculation as to what role the rock'n roll scene of the 60's & 70's might have played both in Jim's mental deterioration and in the late diagnosis of his illness. After all, it is accepted (if not expected) that famous, well-healed pop stars are drug-addled, routine-averse individuals....and among those I have known, this stereotype is not without foundation.  

If you want to learn more on this subject, then click on this link for what, among the many articles I've found (so far), is the most comprehensive telling of the tale.    

Saturday, December 31st, 2011

In the California Spring of 1974, I was living (illegally) in an office (by a creek) in the back yard of a real estate company. Although poor (by any American monetary standard), I was single (for the first time in my adult life), blessed  (perhaps congenitally) with unreasonable optimism and good health...as well as a blissful ignorance (of the vulnerabilities of my situation). And...I was making (as much as) $200 per week playing lame pop songs in a pizza parlor, a coffee house and two or three 'steak & lobster' restaurants. No health insurance (who needed health insurance who never got sick?). No car. Life was simple...and exciting!

Or...all that is how I remember it...today. I have since learned that memories are unreliable...and that youth is an un-permanent state of being. Among my few possessions in the office was a wrecked under-tuned (i.e., it could not hold standard, A=4440 Hz pitch) upright piano (sold to me for a proverbial pittance (and moved) by the legendary Ed Gong) along with a stereo tuner/amplifier by which I could listen to any of the three or four then-new Bay Area FM pop stations on my blonde Pacific Stereo 3-way stereo speakers which I had mounted (not without some effort) just above ear-height in opposing corners of the small room .

One gig-less, balmy weeknight, a San Francisco DJ started playing a new release...over and over. It caught my ear (and, evidently, his) for its dark mood and rich texture...one that was quite unlike other releases of that time. The song was Rikki Don't Lose That Number by a group with the unhelpful name Steely Dan. The track featured a hypnotic introduction of drums and bass, then light finger-picked guitar strings with percussive bells segueing (one whole step down) into a lone male vocal accompanied by sparse strains of electronic keyboard (perhaps from an early synthesizer): "I hear you're leaving...that's OK." The production reeked of fine taste and brilliant musicianship...though it was never clear to me just what the song was 'about'. I came to assume that it was written to a teenage runaway...as that subject was well-represented in the news in those days of the SLA and kidnapped heiress Patty Hearst. I came to learn I was wrong.

About two weeks ago, I was wandering through the coal mine that is my second home and, in one of the shafts, a lab rat was tuned to an FM pop station through a cheap, portable radio. Yes, the tune was Rikki Don't Lose That Number. Still impressed by the track, I made a mental note to actually learn the details of its asymmetric structure. Last night I set about that task.

Of course, the track is on YouTube, the lyrics are online for the searching...and even the general chord progression has a page...saving a slob like me the trouble of working through it...instrument in hand. Hell! There're even several videos (on YouTube) showing exactly how to play the piano and guitar...as they are played on the recording!

How different this world is from that world of 1974, when such information (including access to the track itself) was far harder to come by. Every component of the recording is simply beautiful but my biggest surprise of last evening began when I read the list of musicians who had contributed to the project.

For perhaps a dozen years through the mid-seventies, San Francisco had a 'recording scene'. By that, I mean that not only local bands recorded here, but individuals would arrive from out of town to record within the ambiance of The City By The Bay. Too rarely, but on a few occasions, I got the opportunity to be a 'sideman' for a session...and make more in a day than my gigs might pay in a month. In 1972, I think it was, Art Garfunkel came to town and lived in Tiburon while recoding a solo (he and Paul Simon had parted professional company) album. During one such session at the now-long-shuttered Wally Heider Studios (the track was 'All I Know'...a dreadful piece of aural drivel with awkward, embarrassing lyrics which only prove that there's no accounting for taste), the drummer was a young fellow (about a year older than I) from Los Angeles named Jim Gordon. In the early 70's Jim was at the top of his game...and his trade. He went on to play on so many famous and successful records (including Rikki) that it is time-consuming to simply list them all. I remembered his being a handsome, confident and charismatic individual...one whom I could not help but like, admire...and envy.

So I decided to search online to learn what had become of this Adonis...whose name I had not heard in many years. What I learned is beyond shocking...a virtual morality tale...with strains of Richard Cory. More tomorrow.  

Friday, December 30th, 2011

Thursday, December 29th, 2011

Wednesday, December 28th, 2011

The most important thing in our war preparations is to teach all our people to hate U.S. imperialism. Otherwise, we will not be able to defeat the U.S. imperialists who boast of their technological superiority. It is necessary to expose the false propaganda of the imperialists and thoroughly dispel the illusion that the imperialists will give up their positions in the colonies with good will. The oppressed peoples can liberate themselves only through struggle. This is a simple and clear truth confirmed by history.  

North Korea's Kim Il-sung, born on the very day, April 15th, 1912, that the 'unsinkable' RMS Titanic went to her watery grave in the North Atlantic. The 'Great Leader' lived eighty two years and was succeeded, in 1994, by his son, 'Dear Leader' Kim Jong-il, who died almost two weeks ago (at the age of sixty-nine...or seventy)...to be succeeded by his twenty-seven (or twenty-eight) year-old son, Kim Jong-un who, just today, was declared 'Supreme Leader'.

Heard this morning on the BBC:  

The route of today's funeral procession for the Dear Leader, in Pyongyang, was lined by citizens who could be heard wailing in paroxysms of grief...real or otherwise.

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011

Monday, December 26th, 2011                                                        Boxing Day

Romney is arguably the most dangerous of the Republican candidates because he seems the most reasonable and pragmatic. "Corporatists" like Romney believe that the supreme value is efficiency and the creation of profits for favored, usually large and well-heeled, enterprises. They are not concerned about the welfare of society, or its members in any way, but mask their intentions with words such as "opportunity" and "freedom." What they are pushing is the freedom of the jungle, the freedom and opportunity of the strong and rich to devour the weak and poor.

Don Seekins of Waipahu, Hawaii, commenting on an article published last night on The New York Times Web site

Sunday, December 25th, 2011                                                         The Dreaded Day!

Saturday, December 24th, 2011

From my POV, in 2011, people who get off on Christmas have it ALL their way. From Halloween through New Year's Day, we are ALL (whether we like it or not...thanks, Gavin!) carpet-bombed by Yuletide this, Merry Happy that and...did you get your tree yet? Yeah, sure! Go out, kill a beautiful tree, bring it inside...desecrate it while it dries out and then...before it burns the house down, drag it outside (still festered with tinsel) and leave it at the curb for the garbage man. A job well done!

Now...much as I loathe this time of year...much as it brings me to a dark mood (after all, by this date fifty years ago I had already heard Silent Night and Jingle Bells at least five hundred times!), I make no attempt to stop anyone else from going as bonkers as they want in observance of the Winter solstice. Uh...'cuz no serious person can believe that Christ was actually born on December 25th. The observance long predates Jesus. It was merely a convenience for his followers to (let's call it) 'co-opt' a traditional observance...i.e., one that was already in place and has its Northern Hemispheric origins in the recognition that the longest night of the year has passed...the Sun has 'travelled' as far South as it will...and has now begun its annual journey North. The days will get longer! The nights will get shorter!  Death...then Rebirth! Great! [Play with it outside!]

Yet...for an increasingly strident and vocal subset of Christmas lovers, too much is not enough. [Hardly impeded or even driven to reflection are they by obscene Holiday rituals of greed such as those exemplified by Friday morning's violence attendant upon the new sale of Air Jordans! Sneakers...Cabbage Patch Dolls...Tickle Me Elmo...Pet Rock...Playstation II...or III or IV...whatever...but you gotta get 'that perfect gift' or imagine the shame you will feel on The Big Day!] Phil Donahue got it right when he observed that Christmas has become all about (the exploitation of) guilt and obligation.

I just got back from a visit to our one remaining local video rental outlet. There was this forty-something dude struggling to spark a meaningful conversation with this twenty-something diminutive Asian chick who was working behind the counter. [Incidentally, she had a bizarre piercing protruding from below the left side of her lip. It was, like, a needle...about 1/2" long...sticking straight out! Either it's a statement ("Kiss me and you'll be sorry! ") or...she has 'issues'.]  Anyway, it was clear that she had no interest in this dude but, halfway out the door, DVD rentals in hand, he hadn't given up. So...he says, "Well, Merry Christmas!" She nods perfunctorily. Then he launches into a tired spiel about how "we're not supposed to say 'Merry Christmas' anymore". Oh God! Were he not inarticulate...and/or if the pierced cutie had offered him any encouragement, he surely would have added something (lame...inspired by Fox Noise) about how "it's no longer PC to say 'Merry Christmas' ". Yeah...unlike in the good old days (before all these foreigners...these other people...invaded our shores). And he might even have gone on to bemoan the fact that all the voice command 'customer support' lines ask him to "Press '1' For English". Such a hardship! And in his 'own country', no less!

Yes, Virginia, there IS a War On Christmas!

"You'll want all day to-morrow, I suppose?" said Scrooge.
"If quite convenient, sir."
"It's not convenient," said Scrooge, "and it's not fair. If I was to stop half-a-crown for it, you'd think yourself ill-used, I'll be bound?"
The clerk smiled faintly.
"And yet," said Scrooge, "you don't think me ill-used, when I pay a day's wages for no work."
The clerk observed that it was only once a year.
"A poor excuse for picking a man's pocket every twenty-fifth of December!" said Scrooge, buttoning his great-coat to the chin. "But I suppose you must have the whole day. Be here all the earlier next morning."

Charles Dickens, 1843

Friday, December 23rd, 2011

While the insincerity of Mitt Romney is of historic proportions, it must be said that never, in more than two centuries of American political theater, has hypocrisy been better represented and displayed than by (this year's edition of) Newt Gingrich. It may or may not be true that he served either (or both) of his first two wives with divorce papers as they lay in their respective sickbeds, but Newt himself has admitted that he carried on adulterous affairs during each of his first two marriages. In fact, his third wife, Callista, a Stepford Grad, twenty-three years his junior, was his paramour while he was still married to his second wife and while he was excoriating then-President Bill Clinton for his (sad and pathetic) interactions with Monica Lewinsky...going so far as to call for Mr. Clinton's removal from office!

All this might be shameful enough (and even excusable and forgivable) but for Newt's current 'family values' posturing, which includes the use of his robotic current spouse as a political prop. He has 'converted' to Catholicism (Callista's style of imaginary-friend-worship) and has appeared with her on quasi-religious talk shows to profess both his religiosity as well as his contempt for non-Christians and gays. Newt & Callista's Christmas Greeting says 'Merry Christmas' with a sense of  'so there...take that, you Jews and Muslims! '...a salvo in 'The War On Christmas'! Advisory: don't click on that last link if you've just eaten.

Newt's use of his wife (whose 'resting face' has been described as that of a woman who sees a speeding car coming toward her) has, not surprisingly, made her fair game for satirists. This lovely couple has been careful to choose only 'safe' interview formats for the dissemination of Callista's Godly drivel. Heaven forbid that someone ask her why..and how come, if she's such a devout Catholic and passionate devotee of Dope John Paul II (check out Nine Days That Changed The World), she had risked eternal damnation by engaging in sexual relations with a man she knew to be married...to someone else!  

Thursday, December 22nd, 2011                      The Longest Night of The Year

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

Tuesday, December 20th, 2011

“There is no need to endorse until that enthusiasm really is within me in my gut and I also believe that my endorsement and anybody else is really sometimes doesn’t amount to a hill of beans when you consider the independent thinking and the wisdom of the voters that they make up their own mind and personal endorsement doesn’t always, you know, it helps shape the race so I don’t put that at kind of credence or credibility in my endorsement at all, but as soon as I feel that that person who understands the fiscal crisis especially that America faces and know has to do about it then I will feel that enthusiasm and I will endorse but I'm not ready yet.”

Wordsmith Sarah Palin, on Fox Noise, explaining that she has yet to decide whom, if anyone (in the current Rethuglicon field of hopefuls), to endorse.

Monday, December 19th, 2011 

Be kind whenever possible. Whether one believes in a religion or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion.

Dalai Lama
 

Sunday, December 18th, 2011

Saturday, December 17th, 2011

Let me look at the foulness and ugliness of my body. Let me see myself as an ulcerous sore running with every horrible and disgusting poison.

The enemy is like a woman, weak in the face of opposition, but correspondingly strong when not opposed. In a quarrel with a man, it is natural for a woman to lose heart and run away when he faces up to her; on the other hand, if the man begins to be afraid and to give ground, her rage, vindictiveness and fury overflow and know no limit.

St. Ignatius Loyola, 1491-1156, Founder of the Jesuit teaching order 

Friday, December 16th, 2011

Mother Teresa was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction.

The governor of Texas, when asked if the Bible should also be taught in Spanish, replied that 'if English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for me.' 

Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are God. Owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are Gods!

Christopher Hitchens, 1949-2011

Thursday, December 15th, 2011

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011

While I'm often disappointed at his playing-to-the-bleachers-humor, I try to keep up with Jon Stewart's The Daily Show. At his best, Stewart showcases the hypocrisy and insincerity of our political figures and pundits...juxtaposing video clips of said figures...and satirizing the pro-Republican nonsense of the Fox Noise machine. And, too often, I think Jon yields the spotlight to people with whom he has long had a working relationship but who are simply not (or, at least, not any longer) particularly sharp...or all that funny. Usually I don't stick around for the second half of the show, which almost invariably is taken up by an interview with an actor/actress hyping his/her latest dumb movie...or an author/authoress, hyping his/her new book. 

But Monday night's show featured a tour de force takedown, by black comedian Larry Willmore, of Newt Gingrich's outrageous statements about our 'truly stupid' (Newt's words) child labor laws. Mr. Willmore gave a powerful illustration of so-called 'dog whistle politics', wherein a candidate can appeal to the basest prejudices of his audience...without actually saying what he means. References are oblique...with the message cloaked in metaphor.

Here's a transcript of the segment, courtesy of The Daily Kos [for the video, click here]:

JON STEWART: The Republican presidential race is heating up, and it's hit on a hot button issue: the poor. Here to discuss it, Senior Poverty Correspondent, Larry Wilmore. Larry, thanks for joining us. Appreciate you coming.
LARRY WILMORE: Thank you, Jon. Jon, I am excited, the Republicans have a new frontrunner, an idea man who's not afraid to take on a tough issue like poverty.

NEWT GINGRICH (12/1/2011): Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works. So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday.

LARRY WILMORE: I'm speechless, Jon. I mean, has he ever heard of the working poor? What, does he think if you have two jobs, they cancel each other out?

JON STEWART: Well, Gingrich did take some heat for that comment, and he clarified the comments soon after making them.

NEWT GINGRICH (12/5/2011): Some people who suggest that the working poor by definition know how to work, which is true, that's why they're called the working poor. I was talking about the people who come out of areas of neighborhoods where they may not have that experience.

LARRY WILMORE: Ohh, OK, he's not talking about poor people, he's talking about poor black people. Chuck, could you change my.... (graphic changed his title back to Senior Black Correspondent) Thank you.

JON STEWART: But Larry, he didn't say black.

LARRY WILMORE: No, Jon, those are his exact words. He said "in neighborhoods where they may not have that experience".

JON STEWART: (stares blankly) That's... that's code for black?

LARRY WILMORE: No, it's code for inner city, which is code for urban, which is code for black.

JON STEWART: It's a lot of code.

LARRY WILMORE: Well, Jon, it's 2011, you can't just call poor black people lazy.

JON STEWART: But he didn't use the word lazy either!

LARRY WILMORE: Right, he said we "have no habit of showing up on Monday".

JON STEWART: Code for lazy, I guess.

LARRY WILMORE: Well, technically, it's code for shiftless, which is code for lazy, which is code for black.

JON STEWART: But you know, it still feels like you're making a leap that he's talking about black people. Shouldn't we give him the benefit of the doubt?

LARRY WILMORE: Well, maybe, but let's play a little more.

NEWT GINGRICH (12/5/2011): You have 43% black teenage unemployment.

JON STEWART: It wasn't code! Look, shouldn't Newt Gingrich get credit for addressing what is a real issue, black poverty?

LARRY WILMORE: Right, but I didn't know there was a black poverty, Jon. I thought it was just poverty, OK? We can't even be poor as good as you guys?

JON STEWART: Larry, that's not true, you're very good at.... I mean... you're... I'm all screwed up now!!

LARRY WILMORE: Well, Jon, somehow when black people are poor, it's their fault. They're on welfare and lazy, but down in poor white Appalachia, you're not the problem. It's China's fault, or India's fault, or all the money we're spending on black people on welfare! I'm sorry, inner city government subsidy recipients. It's code, Jon.

JON STEWART: I get it, I get it. But does it really matter whose fault it is?

LARRY WILMORE: Yes, Jon, it does! Because it matters to the solution. Look, here's Gingrich's.

NEWT GINGRICH (12/2/2011): It would be great if inner city schools and poor neighborhood schools actually hired the children to do things. ... What if they cleaned out the bathrooms, and what if they mopped the floors?

(audience groans in disgust)

LARRY WILMORE: Wait, Jon, so his plan to fix America is for black kids to start cleaning toilets? "Hey, what'd you learn in school today, son?" "I learned black people need to chew their food better, dad." This is unbelievable, Jon! He wants to give kids jobs by firing their parents from one of the few jobs they can get to support their kids!

JON STEWART: Well, I'm sure Gingrich has a good reason, let's listen.

NEWT GINGRICH (12/2/2011): They had money on their own, they didn't have to become a pimp or a prostitute or a drug dealer.

(audience groans in disgust)

JON STEWART: Wow. Wow.

LARRY WILMORE: Yep, dream big, black people. Hey, you don't have to be a pimp, prostitute, or drug dealer. You can clean up people's shit! Hey, that sounds... come on! Gingrich 2012, Yes We Clean!

Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

Monday, December 12th, 2011              Frank Sinatra was born ninety-six years ago today.

Sunday, December 11th, 2011                        The 13th anniversary of a tragedy.

 “I know there are 9 Supreme Court Justices. I don’t know how '8' came out of my mouth, but the fact is can [sic] tell you – I don’t have memorized all of [sic] Supreme Court Judges. [But  Americans are] not looking for a robot that can spit out the name of every Supreme Court Justice.”

Texas Governor Rick Perry, being interviewed this morning on ABC and referencing his 'flub', earlier in the week, regarding the number of United States Supreme Court Justices. It's interesting to note that Mr. Perry made no mention of (nor apology for) his earlier 'flub' in New Hampshire...about the voting age and Election Day.

Uh...two (no...three) things:

 1) I was not aware that Americans were 'looking for' a robot...period...at least not one to be the next United States President and

2) since when and in what part of our country is ignorance perceived to be a virtue? With the exception of Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman and, OK...Newt Gingrich, each of these now and former Republican-nominee-wannabes fairly brags about his or her lack of intellectual heft! [Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann come off as downright learning disabled!] Dunno 'bout you, but I want a President I can admire...someone who knows more than I do!

3) If Rick Perry doesn't "know how '8' came out" of his mouth, then I suggest he look into (or put a sock in) it!