The following interview was taken at the Direct TV Tribeca Press Center, on April 27th during the 2009 Tribeca Film Festival.
The interview is with Andrew Cockburn, producer of the independent documentary American Casino. The film is about the mortgage crisis, the people affected, and some of it's causes. The documentary takes place from January 2008 and follows the mortgage crisis through the year. It is a film I have seen and recommend to all my readers. A review of the film is forthcoming.
I hope you enjoy the interview as much as I did speaking with Andrew.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
The first 100 days of President Obama
** This post is political. It covers the first 100 days of President Obama. As such I believes it deserves to be discussed. Some thigs are too important to avoid. Thank you for bearing with me.**
So we have made it thru the first 100 days under President Obama. The nation is still called America. This is still a democracy. The public, and more importantly the major media, still love President Obama. But this is no longer the nation that I grew up in.
There have been many changes under the Obama Administration, some due to the President and other due to the Democrat-led Congress. All of the changes have been based in the goals of the far-left and selected campaign promises.
Let's start with the appointees. There are many critical Cabinet positions that have yet to be filled. Several have had a revolving door of nominees, leaving some of the most critical positions that effect the economy open. Worse yet, there has been an undeniable consistency that virtually every Democratic nominee has failed to pay taxes, in some cases for multiple years, until nominated. Which is troubling in a "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of way.
But beyond the appointees are other troubles.
President Obama has failed to live up to many of his campaign promises. The Guantanamo Bay Detention will be closed, eventually, though there is mass confusion on what to do with the detainees. Will some be imprisoned in American jails. If so at what higher cost than normal. If not in America then to where? So far only France has accepted exactly 1 detainee. So much for international support and their belief in President Obama.
President Obama has failed to increase transparency on 7 of 9 major laws since taking the Oval Office. This too was a campaign promise that was broken. The most notable case of this was the $787 billion stimulus bill. A stimulus package that does not spend all the money now, that limits the income level of those that can use it, that applies only to citizens that RECEIVE a paycheck, and is primarily a tool of social change.
There are numerous examples of millions being spent on projects like artwalks, skate parks, and non-existent homeless projects in cities without homeless problems. All of these are attributable to the stimulus package, and the fact that to this date almost none of the members of any level of the Government has read the full law. In fact almost no member of Congress or the White House read the entire bill before it was voted on and approved by Democrats. Nor did the public get a chance to read it before President Obama passed it into law. The reverberations of this are still being felt now.
Moving on, President Obama has enforced the ability to gain an abortion, even in later term pregnancies. Which is in line with his long-standing political beliefs, though not exactly the beliefs of the nation at large.
President Obama has approved the use of embryonic stem cells, another issue that flies in the face of overall public opinion.
President Obama allowed Congress to break the Constitution by retro-actively penalizing American citizens. This was in the form of specific and non-grandfathered taxes to the executives at AIG. These taxes were on bonuses that the executives received as part of their contract, that the Government did not renegotiate when they had the chance, and in fact guaranteed in the stimulus package that no one read. The Congressman that guaranteed the money? Senator Chris Dodd, a Democrat and in charge of the Banking Committee.
Also, while violating the Constitution - which President Obama taught at one point - the concepts of all contracts were broken. In violating the contracts that the Government itself assured, all contracts are theoretically void. Because if the Government can break one it can break them all.
Plus the Government asserted its ability to control private business. First in taxing the AIG executive, thus stating the Government can retro-actively dictate pay. Then in forcing the removal of the CEO of a major auto company, while demanding changes to the operations of that company along lines that only the Government desired.
All this before the Government requested the expansion of power to allow the Treasury Secretary, an un-elected position, the ability to take over any company that it deems is significant to the nation based on undefined criteria. Which if passes will allow the Government to theoretically take control of any and all companies it chooses to.
But President Obama has done more. He has ended the Iraq War, by removing troops (a campaign promise) in an extended timeframe with the exception of 50,000 troops (both violations of the same campaign promise).
President Obama has also proposed his new budget. This is separate of the $410 billion continuation bill that was passed, also funding 9,000 pork-barrel projects. It was passed the same day that President Obama made a public outcry to stop wasteful spending by the Government. And it violated a campaign promise to end pork-barrel spending.
But the $3.6 trillion dollar budget of President Obama does not include the continuation bill or the stimulus package. It does include some $600 billion for a nationalized healthcare plan, that does not exist today nor have any plans of how it might be implemented. And this budget, going by President Obama's own best case figures will reduce the budget by 50% in 4 years. This part has been highly publicized. What has not been publicized is the rest of the budget plan.
President Obama's budget goes on after year 4 for a total of 10 years. By the end of that time, according to the President himself, the deficit will have increased by 250%. Few in the major media discuss this outcome, nor question how any plan that creates a larger deficit than it starts with can be called positive or effective.
But like every Administration, there have been bumps in the road. Besides the appearance that no appointee in the Obama Cabinet pays their taxes, while demanding that citizens must do so in greater numbers, there have been other gaffes. Like the recent decision to fly a plane over New York City without notification of the Mayor or any public notification - creating a panic based on the 9/11 events. There has also been the bow that President Obama bestowed - which has been described as everything but what your eyes will see in the video. There is the publicly friendly, and privately harsh, discussion with Hugo Chavez. There was the embarrassing gifts to our strongest ally's leadership and monarchy.
Yes the Obama Administration has had a hit parade. And these are only the most public and notable points. There are many other quieter, even less publicized actions affecting law and governance, and the appearance of the nation.
Like the now unspoken manner in which North Korea essentially turned it's nose up to the U.S. and fired a rocket that in one move threatened our ally Japan, and our nation itself. This cemented the fact that America has less respect and instills less fear than ever before on the world stage. An idea confirmed as our Secretary of State, and President, issued apologies for the existence of America and our actions to continue to exist.
Yet on the domestic side of the table things are even more unstable. America now fights terrorists, and the ideal of terrorism, by giving it a new name. The idea must be that there cannot be a terrorist act if the Government cannot call anyone a terrorist. That is except of Americans themselves.
Yes, because the Government - in the guise of Napalitano - has sought to isolate those that disagree with the governance of the land. Those that hold ideologies separate of the Administration, that have vowed to defend this nation with their life, and/or those that believe a religion strongly have been placed at the top of the list of dangers to America. Quietly, and without public scrutiny. The Amish and bloggers like myself be warned.
This is but the briefest coverage of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration. Likely each point will be something ignored by the major media. Yet it is these things that define where America is truly going. And doing so with smiles. President Obama's approval rating is over 60%.
So though this has been used to describe President Bush, I think it more directly applies to the America that President Obama is shaping
But if the poll on my sites are correct, Democrats had best watch the clock carefully. Because their time in the sun may well be short. My poll results state that since the inauguration the total outlook by my readers that responded are
My poll may be small, but I believe that my readers are some of the most informed, intelligent in the blogosphere (well overwhemingly most are minus the ones that shout profanities), and those from America are real representations of America. Thus I would state that this is the real view middle America holds.
So in summary, President Obama promised change. He never clarified what that meant or what he would change. After 100 days we now have an indication. It is a change indeed. Though none I know would have voted for this.
Thankfully we will have the mid-term elections soon, and might be able to reverse or hold off the worst of that change.
So we have made it thru the first 100 days under President Obama. The nation is still called America. This is still a democracy. The public, and more importantly the major media, still love President Obama. But this is no longer the nation that I grew up in.
There have been many changes under the Obama Administration, some due to the President and other due to the Democrat-led Congress. All of the changes have been based in the goals of the far-left and selected campaign promises.
Let's start with the appointees. There are many critical Cabinet positions that have yet to be filled. Several have had a revolving door of nominees, leaving some of the most critical positions that effect the economy open. Worse yet, there has been an undeniable consistency that virtually every Democratic nominee has failed to pay taxes, in some cases for multiple years, until nominated. Which is troubling in a "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of way.
But beyond the appointees are other troubles.
President Obama has failed to live up to many of his campaign promises. The Guantanamo Bay Detention will be closed, eventually, though there is mass confusion on what to do with the detainees. Will some be imprisoned in American jails. If so at what higher cost than normal. If not in America then to where? So far only France has accepted exactly 1 detainee. So much for international support and their belief in President Obama.
President Obama has failed to increase transparency on 7 of 9 major laws since taking the Oval Office. This too was a campaign promise that was broken. The most notable case of this was the $787 billion stimulus bill. A stimulus package that does not spend all the money now, that limits the income level of those that can use it, that applies only to citizens that RECEIVE a paycheck, and is primarily a tool of social change.
There are numerous examples of millions being spent on projects like artwalks, skate parks, and non-existent homeless projects in cities without homeless problems. All of these are attributable to the stimulus package, and the fact that to this date almost none of the members of any level of the Government has read the full law. In fact almost no member of Congress or the White House read the entire bill before it was voted on and approved by Democrats. Nor did the public get a chance to read it before President Obama passed it into law. The reverberations of this are still being felt now.
Moving on, President Obama has enforced the ability to gain an abortion, even in later term pregnancies. Which is in line with his long-standing political beliefs, though not exactly the beliefs of the nation at large.
President Obama has approved the use of embryonic stem cells, another issue that flies in the face of overall public opinion.
President Obama allowed Congress to break the Constitution by retro-actively penalizing American citizens. This was in the form of specific and non-grandfathered taxes to the executives at AIG. These taxes were on bonuses that the executives received as part of their contract, that the Government did not renegotiate when they had the chance, and in fact guaranteed in the stimulus package that no one read. The Congressman that guaranteed the money? Senator Chris Dodd, a Democrat and in charge of the Banking Committee.
Also, while violating the Constitution - which President Obama taught at one point - the concepts of all contracts were broken. In violating the contracts that the Government itself assured, all contracts are theoretically void. Because if the Government can break one it can break them all.
Plus the Government asserted its ability to control private business. First in taxing the AIG executive, thus stating the Government can retro-actively dictate pay. Then in forcing the removal of the CEO of a major auto company, while demanding changes to the operations of that company along lines that only the Government desired.
All this before the Government requested the expansion of power to allow the Treasury Secretary, an un-elected position, the ability to take over any company that it deems is significant to the nation based on undefined criteria. Which if passes will allow the Government to theoretically take control of any and all companies it chooses to.
But President Obama has done more. He has ended the Iraq War, by removing troops (a campaign promise) in an extended timeframe with the exception of 50,000 troops (both violations of the same campaign promise).
President Obama has also proposed his new budget. This is separate of the $410 billion continuation bill that was passed, also funding 9,000 pork-barrel projects. It was passed the same day that President Obama made a public outcry to stop wasteful spending by the Government. And it violated a campaign promise to end pork-barrel spending.
But the $3.6 trillion dollar budget of President Obama does not include the continuation bill or the stimulus package. It does include some $600 billion for a nationalized healthcare plan, that does not exist today nor have any plans of how it might be implemented. And this budget, going by President Obama's own best case figures will reduce the budget by 50% in 4 years. This part has been highly publicized. What has not been publicized is the rest of the budget plan.
President Obama's budget goes on after year 4 for a total of 10 years. By the end of that time, according to the President himself, the deficit will have increased by 250%. Few in the major media discuss this outcome, nor question how any plan that creates a larger deficit than it starts with can be called positive or effective.
But like every Administration, there have been bumps in the road. Besides the appearance that no appointee in the Obama Cabinet pays their taxes, while demanding that citizens must do so in greater numbers, there have been other gaffes. Like the recent decision to fly a plane over New York City without notification of the Mayor or any public notification - creating a panic based on the 9/11 events. There has also been the bow that President Obama bestowed - which has been described as everything but what your eyes will see in the video. There is the publicly friendly, and privately harsh, discussion with Hugo Chavez. There was the embarrassing gifts to our strongest ally's leadership and monarchy.
Yes the Obama Administration has had a hit parade. And these are only the most public and notable points. There are many other quieter, even less publicized actions affecting law and governance, and the appearance of the nation.
Like the now unspoken manner in which North Korea essentially turned it's nose up to the U.S. and fired a rocket that in one move threatened our ally Japan, and our nation itself. This cemented the fact that America has less respect and instills less fear than ever before on the world stage. An idea confirmed as our Secretary of State, and President, issued apologies for the existence of America and our actions to continue to exist.
Yet on the domestic side of the table things are even more unstable. America now fights terrorists, and the ideal of terrorism, by giving it a new name. The idea must be that there cannot be a terrorist act if the Government cannot call anyone a terrorist. That is except of Americans themselves.
Yes, because the Government - in the guise of Napalitano - has sought to isolate those that disagree with the governance of the land. Those that hold ideologies separate of the Administration, that have vowed to defend this nation with their life, and/or those that believe a religion strongly have been placed at the top of the list of dangers to America. Quietly, and without public scrutiny. The Amish and bloggers like myself be warned.
This is but the briefest coverage of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration. Likely each point will be something ignored by the major media. Yet it is these things that define where America is truly going. And doing so with smiles. President Obama's approval rating is over 60%.
So though this has been used to describe President Bush, I think it more directly applies to the America that President Obama is shaping
"So this is how Democracy ends. With thunderous applause." - Princess Amidala in Star Wars Episode 3
But if the poll on my sites are correct, Democrats had best watch the clock carefully. Because their time in the sun may well be short. My poll results state that since the inauguration the total outlook by my readers that responded are
39% feel President Obama has kept his promises and is doing a great job
38% feel President Obama has BROKEN his promises and is doing a horrible job
16% feel they need more time to decide
13% feel President Obama is the same as any other President
My poll may be small, but I believe that my readers are some of the most informed, intelligent in the blogosphere (well overwhemingly most are minus the ones that shout profanities), and those from America are real representations of America. Thus I would state that this is the real view middle America holds.
So in summary, President Obama promised change. He never clarified what that meant or what he would change. After 100 days we now have an indication. It is a change indeed. Though none I know would have voted for this.
Thankfully we will have the mid-term elections soon, and might be able to reverse or hold off the worst of that change.
More from the 2009 Tribeca Film Festival
As I continue to edit and prepare the interviews that I had at the Tribeca Film Festival, I wanted to give my readers a heads up on what are some of the top movies at the festival. There are several that I noticed everyone speaking about, and holding quite a bit of buzz. I'm happy to say that the movies I have seen and had interviews on are in this group.
Looking at the realm of comedies the big winners from what I have heard seem to be 2 British films.
In The Loop
And My Last 5 Girlfriends (which I can't seem to find a movie trailer for - sorry, it's late).
In far more serious film there is the international documentary Yodok Stories
And of course the Iranian film About Elli (again no trailer)
Also in the documentaries category there is the film American Casino - directed by Leslie Cockburn and produced by Andrew Cockburn. I will have the interview up as soon as possible. I will also be posting a review of the powerful and timely film. As a side note I must say that my conversation before, during, and after the interview with Andrew was informative and pleasantly intriguing.
Other films drawing a buzz include Handsome Harry
(I really enjoyed speaking with Jamey Sheridan, Bette Gordon, and Mariann Mayberry. I will have that interview posted as well.)
Playground, Shadow Billionaire, and Pray the Devil Back to Hell (which I have the interview with Abigail Disney, and the review of the movie to post) round out the movies I heard the most about while I was at the Tribeca Film Festival.
This is not to say all the films at the Festival are not fantastic. The work by the various actors, directors, and producers all stand miles ahead of 90% of the commercial major studio releases so far this year, and likely of the last several years including this one. And I believe that this years festival included at least one movie that any fan might enjoy. But these were the ones that I heard mentioned the most.
Well it's time to get back to the editing and writing the reviews. More on this soon.
Looking at the realm of comedies the big winners from what I have heard seem to be 2 British films.
In The Loop
And My Last 5 Girlfriends (which I can't seem to find a movie trailer for - sorry, it's late).
In far more serious film there is the international documentary Yodok Stories
And of course the Iranian film About Elli (again no trailer)
Also in the documentaries category there is the film American Casino - directed by Leslie Cockburn and produced by Andrew Cockburn. I will have the interview up as soon as possible. I will also be posting a review of the powerful and timely film. As a side note I must say that my conversation before, during, and after the interview with Andrew was informative and pleasantly intriguing.
Other films drawing a buzz include Handsome Harry
(I really enjoyed speaking with Jamey Sheridan, Bette Gordon, and Mariann Mayberry. I will have that interview posted as well.)
Playground, Shadow Billionaire, and Pray the Devil Back to Hell (which I have the interview with Abigail Disney, and the review of the movie to post) round out the movies I heard the most about while I was at the Tribeca Film Festival.
This is not to say all the films at the Festival are not fantastic. The work by the various actors, directors, and producers all stand miles ahead of 90% of the commercial major studio releases so far this year, and likely of the last several years including this one. And I believe that this years festival included at least one movie that any fan might enjoy. But these were the ones that I heard mentioned the most.
Well it's time to get back to the editing and writing the reviews. More on this soon.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Tribeca Film Festival 2009
This will be a bit short as I am about to go into an interview with Abigail Disney, executive producer of Pray The Devil Back To Hell and Playground.
This has been a very exciting day so far as I have had video interviews with Andrew Cockburn (who I apologized to for Americanizing his last name) - the producer of the very well received documentary film American Casino.
American Casino is a film about the mortgage crisis, starting in January 2008. It covers multiple aspects of the crisis, and provides the stories of several people affected by the meltdown. This film is an emotional and honest portrayal of how regular Americans have been decimated by this international event. It's a film I am glad to have seen and recommend. The video interview will be up shortly.
Also I had the chance to speak with Bette Gordon, director of Handsome Harry. Our video interview covered the range of independant films Gordon has done, her influences and motivations. She gave me an insight to her artistic view, and the vision she eloquently shares with the audience in her films.
As she so simply and fully stated
I think everyone will enjoy that interview as well. Especially up and coming directors and entertainers.
I even had a chance to speak with Jamey Sheridan, which many may recall from the cable miniseries event, The Stand, or his role in Law and Order: Criminal Intent.
Sheridan is a bit taller than I expected. He was also very pleasant to speak with and shared with me an interesting bit of information. Though he has been acting for many years, and has been in many successful films, the Tribeca Film Festival is the first festival he has been at. Well with the exception of Venice, but that was not quite the same.
Sheridan is the lead of Handome Harry, Gordon's film here at the festival. Along with Steve Buscemi, Campbell Scott, John Savage, and Adain Quinn the film looks at a group of men, and their inner secrets and journey from their 20's to today.
There has been a huge buzz on each of these fims and several people I have spoken to have noted that each of these films are drawing massive attention. Honestly I am not surprised.
I want to thank Direct TV for the Direct TV Tribeca Press Center, which was an excellent location. I also want to than Fat Dot, and of course the directors, producers, and actors I was able to speak with today.
Look for the video interviews shortly.
This has been a very exciting day so far as I have had video interviews with Andrew Cockburn (who I apologized to for Americanizing his last name) - the producer of the very well received documentary film American Casino.
American Casino is a film about the mortgage crisis, starting in January 2008. It covers multiple aspects of the crisis, and provides the stories of several people affected by the meltdown. This film is an emotional and honest portrayal of how regular Americans have been decimated by this international event. It's a film I am glad to have seen and recommend. The video interview will be up shortly.
Also I had the chance to speak with Bette Gordon, director of Handsome Harry. Our video interview covered the range of independant films Gordon has done, her influences and motivations. She gave me an insight to her artistic view, and the vision she eloquently shares with the audience in her films.
As she so simply and fully stated
'I like to look for the uncomfortable moments, the bits of silence. Its those moments that say so much and reveal the inner truth.' - my paraphrase.
I think everyone will enjoy that interview as well. Especially up and coming directors and entertainers.
I even had a chance to speak with Jamey Sheridan, which many may recall from the cable miniseries event, The Stand, or his role in Law and Order: Criminal Intent.
Sheridan is a bit taller than I expected. He was also very pleasant to speak with and shared with me an interesting bit of information. Though he has been acting for many years, and has been in many successful films, the Tribeca Film Festival is the first festival he has been at. Well with the exception of Venice, but that was not quite the same.
Sheridan is the lead of Handome Harry, Gordon's film here at the festival. Along with Steve Buscemi, Campbell Scott, John Savage, and Adain Quinn the film looks at a group of men, and their inner secrets and journey from their 20's to today.
There has been a huge buzz on each of these fims and several people I have spoken to have noted that each of these films are drawing massive attention. Honestly I am not surprised.
I want to thank Direct TV for the Direct TV Tribeca Press Center, which was an excellent location. I also want to than Fat Dot, and of course the directors, producers, and actors I was able to speak with today.
Look for the video interviews shortly.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Nightlife Review: Scoreboard in Binghamton NY
Binghamton NY is a city that recently hit the national news. But the city is far more than that tragic event. Even now the city and its populace are trying to move forward from that day.
One aspect of the city that was not covered by the media is the nightlife. There is a robust college student presence in Binghamton. Like all college students a desire to go out and let off steam is as important as getting good grades. The Scoreboard Bar is an important, if somewhat new, part of that process.
The Scoreboard Bar is located on State Street, downstairs from the street level. It's a sports bar primarily, but also has a nightclub with a dance floor and DJ. The bar is split into 2 sections, which can be traversed with ease. Half is the sports bar with over 8 seperate flat screen televisions covering baseball, basketball, hockey, golf and other sporting events daily. The other half is the nightclub, with a dance floor, DJ booth, strobe lights, and more.
No matter which side you might choose to go to you can find plenty of room for dancing or just sitting at the bar and watching a game. On the sports bar side there is additional seating with booths that are open to the rest of the bar. Both sides feature a pool table with enough room for even the tallest player. And there are bathrooms for men and women on each side as well.
There is a lot that can be said for the Scoreboard, but I think the photos give a better indication of how well liked it is already. I say that because the bar has only opened up this month, and is still not known to the populace at large yet. And there are more things to come in the near future - including a kitchen.
The music is lively on either side (the sports bar side tends to play music later in the night after most sporting events are over) though the nightclub is a bit more danceable and festive. The sound system is powerful, but never so loud that your ear will be spliting. The bars are well stocked, with an attentive staff. Plus there are several bouncers on hand to ensure the safety and good time for all patrons.
In addition to all of that there are the various promotional events from time to time. One example is a wet t-shirt contest that recently occured on the nightclub side. It wa an idea that went over very well as you can see from the video. The entire crowd, young men and women, seemed to have a great time. I would imagine that the event will become more of a fixture in the future based on the response the crowd gave to the show.
There aren't a lot of things you can say about a bar beyond if it's worth going to or not. I would say that the Scoreboard is worth the time. It's safe, well located, roomy even when the crowd comes in, friendly, well-staffed, clean, and good music. There are many places in Binghamton, or any town for that matter, that can't say the same things.
If you are in Binghamton and want to watch a sporting event, or want to go out and dance, or even just want to go and play a game of pool going to the Scoreboard will let you do all of the above and more.
One aspect of the city that was not covered by the media is the nightlife. There is a robust college student presence in Binghamton. Like all college students a desire to go out and let off steam is as important as getting good grades. The Scoreboard Bar is an important, if somewhat new, part of that process.
The Scoreboard Bar is located on State Street, downstairs from the street level. It's a sports bar primarily, but also has a nightclub with a dance floor and DJ. The bar is split into 2 sections, which can be traversed with ease. Half is the sports bar with over 8 seperate flat screen televisions covering baseball, basketball, hockey, golf and other sporting events daily. The other half is the nightclub, with a dance floor, DJ booth, strobe lights, and more.
No matter which side you might choose to go to you can find plenty of room for dancing or just sitting at the bar and watching a game. On the sports bar side there is additional seating with booths that are open to the rest of the bar. Both sides feature a pool table with enough room for even the tallest player. And there are bathrooms for men and women on each side as well.There is a lot that can be said for the Scoreboard, but I think the photos give a better indication of how well liked it is already. I say that because the bar has only opened up this month, and is still not known to the populace at large yet. And there are more things to come in the near future - including a kitchen.
The music is lively on either side (the sports bar side tends to play music later in the night after most sporting events are over) though the nightclub is a bit more danceable and festive. The sound system is powerful, but never so loud that your ear will be spliting. The bars are well stocked, with an attentive staff. Plus there are several bouncers on hand to ensure the safety and good time for all patrons.
In addition to all of that there are the various promotional events from time to time. One example is a wet t-shirt contest that recently occured on the nightclub side. It wa an idea that went over very well as you can see from the video. The entire crowd, young men and women, seemed to have a great time. I would imagine that the event will become more of a fixture in the future based on the response the crowd gave to the show.There aren't a lot of things you can say about a bar beyond if it's worth going to or not. I would say that the Scoreboard is worth the time. It's safe, well located, roomy even when the crowd comes in, friendly, well-staffed, clean, and good music. There are many places in Binghamton, or any town for that matter, that can't say the same things.
If you are in Binghamton and want to watch a sporting event, or want to go out and dance, or even just want to go and play a game of pool going to the Scoreboard will let you do all of the above and more.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Terrence Howard still upset about Iron Man 2
As I have mentioned before, Terrence Howard will not be returning in the sequel for Iron Man. He is going to be replaced by Don Cheadle. That was a decision by Marvel Comics, reportedly because of a pay dispute.
But more information has come out about the whole situation. It seems that Marvel didn’t just toss Howard out with the bath water, they also decided to give Gwyneth Paltrow the shaft without so much as a thank you. At least that’s what Howard is stating
Now there is no question of the ability of Don Cheadle. Still I am upset. The character of Rhodes, Tony Stark’s (Robert Downey Jr.’s character) best friend and right-hand man, has been established. There was a chemistry between the leads and it worked. And Marvel made tons because all the pieces fit perfectly.
Do I think Cheadle will do a good job? I sure do. In fact Howard is not upset with Cheadle. He said
One thing seems clear to me, Marvel is hurting its potential franchise over greed. Movie makers generally jump through hoops to keep winning casts. Because they bring in the money. But when a movie studio’s greed starts to mess with such a basic and fundamental factor as returning actors, in a genre that relies heavily on fans of the source material, you have to question what else will be changed. Will they wind up with an Ang Lee version of the Hulk? Will sequels go down the path of Alien vs. Predator? Could this start a revolving door like as in the Punisher movies?
Marvel may have a host of storylines and characters to build on. They may have tons of money to pour into CGI effects and ad campaigns. But if they turn the movies into soap operas with character changes in each movie, they are building a tower in the sand.
I’ll still go to see Iron Man 2. I will support Don Cheadle and give him a chance in Howard’s role. But I now have a growing doubt about the film. The movie trailers better be spectacular or it will end up being a very costly decision.
But more information has come out about the whole situation. It seems that Marvel didn’t just toss Howard out with the bath water, they also decided to give Gwyneth Paltrow the shaft without so much as a thank you. At least that’s what Howard is stating
“They produced a great bounty with the first one, but they put it all in the storehouse and you were not allowed in," he says. "They did the same thing with Gwyneth Paltrow, from what I've been told.”
Now there is no question of the ability of Don Cheadle. Still I am upset. The character of Rhodes, Tony Stark’s (Robert Downey Jr.’s character) best friend and right-hand man, has been established. There was a chemistry between the leads and it worked. And Marvel made tons because all the pieces fit perfectly.
Do I think Cheadle will do a good job? I sure do. In fact Howard is not upset with Cheadle. He said
"I'm definitely looking forward to seeing the movie. I want to see Don Cheadle become me. No, I want him to do better than me. That's what I really want to see. Don Cheadle was the reason I got Crash, so I have a lot of love for him."
One thing seems clear to me, Marvel is hurting its potential franchise over greed. Movie makers generally jump through hoops to keep winning casts. Because they bring in the money. But when a movie studio’s greed starts to mess with such a basic and fundamental factor as returning actors, in a genre that relies heavily on fans of the source material, you have to question what else will be changed. Will they wind up with an Ang Lee version of the Hulk? Will sequels go down the path of Alien vs. Predator? Could this start a revolving door like as in the Punisher movies?
Marvel may have a host of storylines and characters to build on. They may have tons of money to pour into CGI effects and ad campaigns. But if they turn the movies into soap operas with character changes in each movie, they are building a tower in the sand.
I’ll still go to see Iron Man 2. I will support Don Cheadle and give him a chance in Howard’s role. But I now have a growing doubt about the film. The movie trailers better be spectacular or it will end up being a very costly decision.
Bones and just bones in Australian Miss Universe competition
When I saw the photo I just had to speak. My first thought was
That is Australian Miss Universe hopeful Stephanie Naumoska. If you look at her photo and think that she should have been competing for the poster-child for anorexia, I would agree. To say she is just bones would be only a modest exaggeration.
Naumoska is 5’ 11” and weighs just 108 pounds. There is no compliment or beauty in those numbers. The fact that she was allowed to even try-out for the pageant amazes me. Officials should have taken the woman to a hospital, or McDonald’s for emergency Big Mac’s.
I just don’t get it. Where is the beauty in having a figure only Olive Oyl might compare with? I suppose that somewhere in the world there exists someone who finds pipe cleaners sexual, but beyond that fetish is the reality that Naumoska looks horrendous. Because she is too thin.
There is no exaggeration when I say I have pre-teen nephews that weigh more than she does. I think I’ve owned dogs with more weight. I certainly would find such a woman repulsive to go out with. But isn’t there anyone in Australia with the guts and concern to say these things to this woman?
I pray that none of my readers every looks in a mirror or at this image and sees this kind of emaciation as a sign of anything but desperate need of food. Beauty cannot be found in a pair of jeans, and it certainly can’t be found with unhealthy diets.
Perhaps the worst thing about this situation is that there are some in the pageants and other industries that support and defend this kind of torture and slow death. One such foolish defender of anorexia, in my opinion, is pageant director Deborah Miller who said
What the hell does that mean? I’ve never heard of such a thing. In fact neither had nutritionist Susie Burrell who went on record with the Herald Sun disputing the assertion. As far as I am aware a Macedonian is Greek. And Greek women are healthy, which Naumoska is not.
Suffice to say this woman failed in her bid to become Miss Australia. The only real question is how she got past the door for the competition in the first place.
“Wow, that’s what Olive Oyl would look like in person.”
That is Australian Miss Universe hopeful Stephanie Naumoska. If you look at her photo and think that she should have been competing for the poster-child for anorexia, I would agree. To say she is just bones would be only a modest exaggeration.Naumoska is 5’ 11” and weighs just 108 pounds. There is no compliment or beauty in those numbers. The fact that she was allowed to even try-out for the pageant amazes me. Officials should have taken the woman to a hospital, or McDonald’s for emergency Big Mac’s.
I just don’t get it. Where is the beauty in having a figure only Olive Oyl might compare with? I suppose that somewhere in the world there exists someone who finds pipe cleaners sexual, but beyond that fetish is the reality that Naumoska looks horrendous. Because she is too thin.
There is no exaggeration when I say I have pre-teen nephews that weigh more than she does. I think I’ve owned dogs with more weight. I certainly would find such a woman repulsive to go out with. But isn’t there anyone in Australia with the guts and concern to say these things to this woman?
I pray that none of my readers every looks in a mirror or at this image and sees this kind of emaciation as a sign of anything but desperate need of food. Beauty cannot be found in a pair of jeans, and it certainly can’t be found with unhealthy diets.
Perhaps the worst thing about this situation is that there are some in the pageants and other industries that support and defend this kind of torture and slow death. One such foolish defender of anorexia, in my opinion, is pageant director Deborah Miller who said
“Naumoska, …had Macedonian heritage, which accounted for her extreme thinness.”
What the hell does that mean? I’ve never heard of such a thing. In fact neither had nutritionist Susie Burrell who went on record with the Herald Sun disputing the assertion. As far as I am aware a Macedonian is Greek. And Greek women are healthy, which Naumoska is not.
Suffice to say this woman failed in her bid to become Miss Australia. The only real question is how she got past the door for the competition in the first place.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Carlos Santana to get Lifetime Achievement Award
Thinking of most latin music stars, and really entertainers in almost any genre of music you wish, Santana stands out in a class of his own. So it’s no surprise that Carlos Santana will be receiving a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Latin Music Awards tonight.
Carlos Santana is one of those few entertainers that has withstood the test of time. His music is as popular today as when he started back in the 1960’s. Not only does he have a host of classics, but he is still creating new songs that new generations of fans are being introduced to.
Not too bad for a 61 year old Mexican, who rose up from washing dishes for a living. He is a violinist (learned at 8), one of the top all-time greatest guitarists, and a cross-over artist before such a term existed.
The influences that helped Santana create the unique sound that has endured for 4 decades? BB King, John Lee Hooker, and Jimi Hendrix. 23 albums, 8 platnium or multi-platnium, 7 gold, 9 solo albums, 6 top ten singles (just in the U.S.), and 8 Grammy Awards. And his music sounds like this since 1969
(This got his band their first record contract – no shock there)
So again I say it’s no surprise that Santana is getting a Lifetime Award. He deserves it. Congratulations.
Carlos Santana is one of those few entertainers that has withstood the test of time. His music is as popular today as when he started back in the 1960’s. Not only does he have a host of classics, but he is still creating new songs that new generations of fans are being introduced to.
Not too bad for a 61 year old Mexican, who rose up from washing dishes for a living. He is a violinist (learned at 8), one of the top all-time greatest guitarists, and a cross-over artist before such a term existed.
The influences that helped Santana create the unique sound that has endured for 4 decades? BB King, John Lee Hooker, and Jimi Hendrix. 23 albums, 8 platnium or multi-platnium, 7 gold, 9 solo albums, 6 top ten singles (just in the U.S.), and 8 Grammy Awards. And his music sounds like this since 1969
(This got his band their first record contract – no shock there)
So again I say it’s no surprise that Santana is getting a Lifetime Award. He deserves it. Congratulations.
Hitler paintings sell for $143,000
I’ve heard it all now. In England paintings supposedly made by Adolph Hitler were sold at an auction for $143,000.
Why?
I am amazed that anyone would want the art of a dictator and the mastermind of one of the greatest attempted genocides in the history of the world. Morbid fascination might lead one to view such work, but to own it?
One of the purchasers of the questionable art – there are disputes of the authenticity – is John Ratledge. His plan is to hang the self-portrait of Hitler in either his home or office. Honestly I can say that were I to be going to his office for a meeting, and saw that picture with Hitler’s signature, I would end the deal and leave. This is not a trophy worthy of anything beyond burning or perhaps a museum.
I just don’t get it. I realize that even the most evil person in the world has a humane side, as little it might be. But to have this art is not an investigation into the depths of evil and hatred that a human can sink to. I feel it’s a glorification of the man. An excuse that takes away from the atrocities this wretch did.
History has well recorded Hitler in its books. He will be remembered in 100 years as the equal of only the bubonic plague. He, and his warped dreams of superiority, died the cowardly deaths they deserved. If anything I can hope his eternity in hell is as painful as all the deaths he caused.
This disturbs me. Just as disturbing is the knowledge that in Germany another auction of the works of this madman will happen shortly. To think that these works might bring inspiration to some youth chills me to the bone.
Why?
I am amazed that anyone would want the art of a dictator and the mastermind of one of the greatest attempted genocides in the history of the world. Morbid fascination might lead one to view such work, but to own it?
One of the purchasers of the questionable art – there are disputes of the authenticity – is John Ratledge. His plan is to hang the self-portrait of Hitler in either his home or office. Honestly I can say that were I to be going to his office for a meeting, and saw that picture with Hitler’s signature, I would end the deal and leave. This is not a trophy worthy of anything beyond burning or perhaps a museum.
I just don’t get it. I realize that even the most evil person in the world has a humane side, as little it might be. But to have this art is not an investigation into the depths of evil and hatred that a human can sink to. I feel it’s a glorification of the man. An excuse that takes away from the atrocities this wretch did.
History has well recorded Hitler in its books. He will be remembered in 100 years as the equal of only the bubonic plague. He, and his warped dreams of superiority, died the cowardly deaths they deserved. If anything I can hope his eternity in hell is as painful as all the deaths he caused.
This disturbs me. Just as disturbing is the knowledge that in Germany another auction of the works of this madman will happen shortly. To think that these works might bring inspiration to some youth chills me to the bone.
The fat gene and BMI - wrong about people of color
It’s been a somewhat quiet day for me today, so I thought I’d discuss something that I found interesting. Now I’m sure everyone has heard about the fat gene that was found a decade ago. And you must have heard of the body/mass index (BMI). Both of these things are critical to the current cries of crisis about obesity in the nation.
But what if all that information was wrong? What if all the research was only relevant to a portion of the population. That changes a lot doesn’t it?
Well I wondered about that, and the fact is that the BMI and the fat gene don’t apply to African Americans as they are currently defined. That’s right, they apply to Whites – specifically a portion of them. Thus all the health nut fears, medication and news are faulty.
Fat mass and obesity associated (FTO) is the gene that was found to be linked to obesity. It is found in 45% of Whites, 52% of West Africans, and 14% in Chinese/Japanes people. Of those with this gene, 35% of European Whites have a variation that leads to gaining extra weight. Note that so far studies have not found this variant in non-Whites, inasmuch as I could determine.
Now consider this. The BMI was created based on Whites, generally from European descent, without consideration to age, gender, or race. Considering the facts above, learned in 1999, it should be clear than any absolute scale that is based solely on Whites of a single age is beyond flawed.
Just recently a study done at Baylor College of Medicine and the University of Houston found that the BMI index is wrong.
For example, the BMI for African American women is off by almost 2%, making them register on the scale as overweight when they are not. And for Hispanic/Latinas (1.65%), Asians (2.65%), and Asian-Indians (5.98%) the scale is off in the other direction, making them under their actual mass. It may not sound like a big deal, but it is.
That means that out of the 80% of African American women now considered overweight, many are perfectly normal. That means potentially millions of Black women are on diets (both fads and medially directed), taking medication, and suffering emotional stress for no reason at all. That’s potentially billions of dollars being wasted based on a chart that doesn’t work.
For Hispanic/Latinas, Asians, and others this means that they are at even greater risk of heart disease and medical complications to their health, and no one is telling them.
And these corrections to the BMI apply in similar levels for men of the respective race.
This doesn’t mean that suddenly everyone can stop trying to be healthy. But it does mean that money, time, and stress are being wasted on one side while others are put at unhealthy risk. Yet I haven’t heard a word about this in the major media. You aren’t hearing this in the cable news programs when they discuss health and diets. You don’t hear a whisper from the various diet gurus, or mega-corporations with pills for every aspect of weight loss.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming Whites for the fat gene. Nor am I saying the BMI is a bad idea. But I am saying that basing medical facts on a single proxy, as we learn that the proxy is inaccurate is more than just stupid, it is harmful.
Maybe this doesn’t matter to most people. Perhaps a few women (and men for that matter) might have a bit less stress, or get better medical information that can help their lives. Maybe it will help raise the self-esteem of even one woman (or man) who is hurting herself with fad diets to match a BMI target, or fight a fat gene, her body should never match.
If this helps even one, then I feel good.
But what if all that information was wrong? What if all the research was only relevant to a portion of the population. That changes a lot doesn’t it?
Well I wondered about that, and the fact is that the BMI and the fat gene don’t apply to African Americans as they are currently defined. That’s right, they apply to Whites – specifically a portion of them. Thus all the health nut fears, medication and news are faulty.
Fat mass and obesity associated (FTO) is the gene that was found to be linked to obesity. It is found in 45% of Whites, 52% of West Africans, and 14% in Chinese/Japanes people. Of those with this gene, 35% of European Whites have a variation that leads to gaining extra weight. Note that so far studies have not found this variant in non-Whites, inasmuch as I could determine.
Now consider this. The BMI was created based on Whites, generally from European descent, without consideration to age, gender, or race. Considering the facts above, learned in 1999, it should be clear than any absolute scale that is based solely on Whites of a single age is beyond flawed.
Just recently a study done at Baylor College of Medicine and the University of Houston found that the BMI index is wrong.
“Just because you weigh a certain amount doesn't necessarily mean you are overweight. Take, for example, an athlete who is very muscular and still weighs up to 300 pounds.” Dr. Molly Bray - associate professor of pediatrics - nutrition at the USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center at BCM and Texas Children's Hospital
For example, the BMI for African American women is off by almost 2%, making them register on the scale as overweight when they are not. And for Hispanic/Latinas (1.65%), Asians (2.65%), and Asian-Indians (5.98%) the scale is off in the other direction, making them under their actual mass. It may not sound like a big deal, but it is.
That means that out of the 80% of African American women now considered overweight, many are perfectly normal. That means potentially millions of Black women are on diets (both fads and medially directed), taking medication, and suffering emotional stress for no reason at all. That’s potentially billions of dollars being wasted based on a chart that doesn’t work.
For Hispanic/Latinas, Asians, and others this means that they are at even greater risk of heart disease and medical complications to their health, and no one is telling them.
And these corrections to the BMI apply in similar levels for men of the respective race.
This doesn’t mean that suddenly everyone can stop trying to be healthy. But it does mean that money, time, and stress are being wasted on one side while others are put at unhealthy risk. Yet I haven’t heard a word about this in the major media. You aren’t hearing this in the cable news programs when they discuss health and diets. You don’t hear a whisper from the various diet gurus, or mega-corporations with pills for every aspect of weight loss.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming Whites for the fat gene. Nor am I saying the BMI is a bad idea. But I am saying that basing medical facts on a single proxy, as we learn that the proxy is inaccurate is more than just stupid, it is harmful.
Maybe this doesn’t matter to most people. Perhaps a few women (and men for that matter) might have a bit less stress, or get better medical information that can help their lives. Maybe it will help raise the self-esteem of even one woman (or man) who is hurting herself with fad diets to match a BMI target, or fight a fat gene, her body should never match.
If this helps even one, then I feel good.
Ron White makes a move with Comedy Central
Good news for fans of comedian Ron White. For some time now White has been the least seen member of the Blue Collar Comedy troup. Which is a shame as the man is just funny.
It’s simple observational average joe funny. Unlike Larry the Cable Guy it does remain above elementary school intelligence, but White’s style is a far cry from say Dennis Miller or even the lightning pace of Dennis Leary. Though you can’t be surprised from a man who has a nickname of Tater Salad.
And in following his comedic style, with a uncharacteristic flurry of extra work, White will be launching a new comedy show on Comedy Central. A half-hour a week will be dedicated to The Ron White Show.
The exact nature of the show is still unknown. It will focus on stories about the American heartland. How that will happen is what boggles my mind. But I would expect that this will succeed, as have his specials.
So be prepared, the Tater Salad movie just might be down the road.
It’s simple observational average joe funny. Unlike Larry the Cable Guy it does remain above elementary school intelligence, but White’s style is a far cry from say Dennis Miller or even the lightning pace of Dennis Leary. Though you can’t be surprised from a man who has a nickname of Tater Salad.
And in following his comedic style, with a uncharacteristic flurry of extra work, White will be launching a new comedy show on Comedy Central. A half-hour a week will be dedicated to The Ron White Show.
The exact nature of the show is still unknown. It will focus on stories about the American heartland. How that will happen is what boggles my mind. But I would expect that this will succeed, as have his specials.
So be prepared, the Tater Salad movie just might be down the road.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Mia Farrow's hunger strike
There is nothing in the world quite like the feeling of standing by your convictions. It is a reward upon itself. Even better is when those convictions insist upon or cause to happen the improvement in the lives of another person. That is something worthy of discussing.
Such is the case with Mia Farrow. While the actress may not be the biggest name ever, and she is still remembered by her connection to Woody Allen, there is a better reason to remember her name. She is a human being that puts her money where her mouth is. Or in this case refuses to put food to her mouth.
Mia Farrow is about to embark on a hunger strike starting Monday the 27th. She will eat no food, only taking in water. The purpose of the hunger strike is to draw attention to the cessation of aid to the people of Darfur in the Sudan. Like millions that are now in danger of losing their lives, Farrow will share some of that risk.
This is a serious matter for Farrow. She is 64 years old. She’s not an athlete, just an ordinary woman with the ability to make the public aware of an issue the media seems more than willing to ignore. Just like Congress has done for 4 years now. That means Republicans and Democrats alike.
I commend Mia Farrow for being true to her convictions, and taking a potentially dangerous task in hand. Few people, celebrities and entertainers or anyone else, are brave enough to make such an endeavor. And if she is successful, hundreds of thousands if not millions will benefit.
If only Congress, and/or President Obama, had the resolve – even half the resolve – of people like Don Cheadle, Cynthia Basinet, Mia Farrow and others then perhaps there would be no genocide in Darfur. If bills like HR 180 IH can pass Congress, then maybe we could see world leaders create change in the troubled regions of the world.
I hope that Farrow draws the fickle attention of the news media. I hope that average Americans are motivated by her selfless act, causing them to write to Congress or to President Obama and force them to act. Because more of the polispeak shuffle that has continued for years will result in only one thing, hundreds of thousands of more children, mothers and fathers will die.
And we can do something to stop it.
HR 180 IH may not be the best answer, and it is not the only answer, but it is an action. Only in action are there results. The time has long since come that America do more than turn a blind eye.
Such is the case with Mia Farrow. While the actress may not be the biggest name ever, and she is still remembered by her connection to Woody Allen, there is a better reason to remember her name. She is a human being that puts her money where her mouth is. Or in this case refuses to put food to her mouth.
Mia Farrow is about to embark on a hunger strike starting Monday the 27th. She will eat no food, only taking in water. The purpose of the hunger strike is to draw attention to the cessation of aid to the people of Darfur in the Sudan. Like millions that are now in danger of losing their lives, Farrow will share some of that risk.
This is a serious matter for Farrow. She is 64 years old. She’s not an athlete, just an ordinary woman with the ability to make the public aware of an issue the media seems more than willing to ignore. Just like Congress has done for 4 years now. That means Republicans and Democrats alike.
I commend Mia Farrow for being true to her convictions, and taking a potentially dangerous task in hand. Few people, celebrities and entertainers or anyone else, are brave enough to make such an endeavor. And if she is successful, hundreds of thousands if not millions will benefit.
If only Congress, and/or President Obama, had the resolve – even half the resolve – of people like Don Cheadle, Cynthia Basinet, Mia Farrow and others then perhaps there would be no genocide in Darfur. If bills like HR 180 IH can pass Congress, then maybe we could see world leaders create change in the troubled regions of the world.
I hope that Farrow draws the fickle attention of the news media. I hope that average Americans are motivated by her selfless act, causing them to write to Congress or to President Obama and force them to act. Because more of the polispeak shuffle that has continued for years will result in only one thing, hundreds of thousands of more children, mothers and fathers will die.
And we can do something to stop it.
HR 180 IH may not be the best answer, and it is not the only answer, but it is an action. Only in action are there results. The time has long since come that America do more than turn a blind eye.
Movie Review: Dragonball Evolution
If for some reason you found yourself bored and wondered if you should go see a movie, don't make it Dragonball Evolution. If you are a fan of Dragonball and/or Dragonball Z, or even GT don't see this movie. In fact if you are above the age of 5, are of normal intelligence, can draw stick figures, or know what a circle is, don't see Dragonball Evolution. Anyone else not covered by these things should see the film or buy the DVD.
I hoped that the preview of this movie would be wrong. With 68 million fans worldwide you would think that the producers might have bothered to watch the entire series. Or at least more than commercials for the show on TV. But that is not the case.
In fact I find it hard to explain how bad this movie is. It's slow paced to start. It has a plot that has the creativity of a mouse. It follows the storyline the same way that a Ferrari is akin to a Yugo.
I was so insulted and bored by the movie that I almost feel bad trashing it. Still the producers of the film did this to themselves. They trashed a great cartoon series, loved internationally.
Yet the worst movie has some positives. The fight scenes in the film are interesting, at least compared to the rest of the film. The kid playing Goku almost looks like he has hair like the main character in the series. There are Asians in the film. ChiChi is in the movie and is Goku's love interest.
The net result is the answer to the question is this worth paying money to see in a theater? The answer is a simple, no. In fact I would almost demand that I get paid to watch this film again. So would I pay to have the DVD? Again I would say no, if it costs more than a dollar.
If you are in any way interested in Dragonball from the cartoon series, buy a DVD of that and watch it. It is infinitely more interesting, better written, has deeper character development, better fight scenes, and entertaining. If you do pay to see this movie, you can now only blame yourself.
I hoped that the preview of this movie would be wrong. With 68 million fans worldwide you would think that the producers might have bothered to watch the entire series. Or at least more than commercials for the show on TV. But that is not the case.
In fact I find it hard to explain how bad this movie is. It's slow paced to start. It has a plot that has the creativity of a mouse. It follows the storyline the same way that a Ferrari is akin to a Yugo.
I was so insulted and bored by the movie that I almost feel bad trashing it. Still the producers of the film did this to themselves. They trashed a great cartoon series, loved internationally.
Yet the worst movie has some positives. The fight scenes in the film are interesting, at least compared to the rest of the film. The kid playing Goku almost looks like he has hair like the main character in the series. There are Asians in the film. ChiChi is in the movie and is Goku's love interest.
The net result is the answer to the question is this worth paying money to see in a theater? The answer is a simple, no. In fact I would almost demand that I get paid to watch this film again. So would I pay to have the DVD? Again I would say no, if it costs more than a dollar.
If you are in any way interested in Dragonball from the cartoon series, buy a DVD of that and watch it. It is infinitely more interesting, better written, has deeper character development, better fight scenes, and entertaining. If you do pay to see this movie, you can now only blame yourself.
Movie Preview: The Princess and the Frog
Ok, so call me late to the party. I don’t follow kid’s films much, nor do I follow Disney. So I missed a bunch of the controversy that is The Princess and the Frog. Perhaps you missed it as well.
The film will be released in December of this year. Here is a trailer.
If you think I might have problems with this film, you should hear what friends of mine mentioned when they heard about this film. The more we thought about the film the more issues came up.
The story originally went like this:
A prince from a fictional African nation comes to New Orleans to listen to jazz. While here he meets a spoiled brat rich White girl, and her Black maid. Both girls find him attractive. Somehow he comes afoul of a bad Voodoo priest that turns him into a frog. He gets the Black girl to kiss him, turning her into a frog. They both go to a good Voodoo Priestess and get changed back to humans, fall in love somewhere along the way, and live happily ever after.
Thus Disney gets to cash in on the influx of positive Black films, the popularity of President Obama, and make a claim at being racially sensitive.
Except there are problems. First the name of the Black girl has changed from Maddy to Princess Tiana. This is odd since America has no royalty. And why would royalty work as a maid?
Second, this is billed as the first Black Disney princess. Hello, did anyone watch Aladdin? The entire movie is filled with Black people. Princess Jasmine was the first Black princess, it’s just that everyone seemed to skip over the permanent suntan she and every character had. But as a friend mentioned, this will be the first American Black princess, which goes back to what I said above.
Third the film is situated after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment. But it is a period piece around the late 1800’s to early 1900’s. This means that Jim Crow and segregation were in full effect. Meaning that the prince would never have seen or spoken to Tiana, and if he did she likely would have been hung for her boldness. That was how the South was those days.
And of course this says nothing of the fact that a prince would never speak with a commoner in those days. Even now it is highly unlikely, and generally occurs due to other circumstances like Prince Edward fighting in Iraq.
Lastly, a White Southern woman of that time period would never be seen after a Black man, at least in public. Even if he was a prince. Her family would have disowned her, and likely killed or given extreme suggestions to leave to the prince.
What is effectively happening is that the South is being romanticized yet again. Facts are being thrown out the window so Disney can make money. And our youth are losing a piece of the truth and history of the nation yet again.
Add to this the fact that the animators at Disney seem to be very lazy of late. Princess Tiana looks remarkably like several other Disney princesses, just with a tan. She is hardly distinct, or drawn with any relative connection to any racial group.
But the film has a huge list of top names. Oprah Winfrey, Terrance Howard, John Goodman, and Keith David head the leading voices in the movie. Tiana will be voiced by Anika Noni Rose, who seems to be a singer (never heard her sing) and actress (she has been in several plays as well as the movie Dreamgirls). I really can’t recall her in anything, but I’ll blame that on being older.
Expect to see lots of hype about this movie. It goes with the trend right now to show a lot of Black people in things. Like the background of ads, or as additional characters in television shows. It’s the Obama effect. A limited effect where you get to see more people of color without them gaining any real importance or positions of leadership in anything.
Because if Disney really cared about being racially sensitive, or even aware, they could have added Black characters into movies for decades. They even could have promoted Aladdin as such. But instead they played down the thought of leading, or secondary characters, as anything but White. Up until now. [Though I should note that Lilo and Stitch did have a full cast of people of color – and were intended to be seen as people of color.]
Honestly, I don’t find the fact that this is a film focused on a Black character from Disney as a positive. It’s not like they never knew the color black was in their coloring inks. It just emphasizes that with the Civil Rights Movement, and decades of laws and action, it has taken nearly half a century for Disney to acknowledge African Americans. It just reminds me that taking all the people of color in front of and behind the cameras all add up to less than 10% of the people in Hollywood.
Perhaps I’m too sensitive, but that is my nature. At least I’m honest about what bugs me. At least I try to look at America’s past with open eyes to the good and the bad. At least I’m not trying to profit on the back of President Obama, like this is one big marketing experiment.
Disney is doing a film about a Black woman. It’s about time. Now let’s hope it’s good.
The film will be released in December of this year. Here is a trailer.
If you think I might have problems with this film, you should hear what friends of mine mentioned when they heard about this film. The more we thought about the film the more issues came up.
The story originally went like this:
A prince from a fictional African nation comes to New Orleans to listen to jazz. While here he meets a spoiled brat rich White girl, and her Black maid. Both girls find him attractive. Somehow he comes afoul of a bad Voodoo priest that turns him into a frog. He gets the Black girl to kiss him, turning her into a frog. They both go to a good Voodoo Priestess and get changed back to humans, fall in love somewhere along the way, and live happily ever after.
Thus Disney gets to cash in on the influx of positive Black films, the popularity of President Obama, and make a claim at being racially sensitive.
Except there are problems. First the name of the Black girl has changed from Maddy to Princess Tiana. This is odd since America has no royalty. And why would royalty work as a maid?
Second, this is billed as the first Black Disney princess. Hello, did anyone watch Aladdin? The entire movie is filled with Black people. Princess Jasmine was the first Black princess, it’s just that everyone seemed to skip over the permanent suntan she and every character had. But as a friend mentioned, this will be the first American Black princess, which goes back to what I said above.
Third the film is situated after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment. But it is a period piece around the late 1800’s to early 1900’s. This means that Jim Crow and segregation were in full effect. Meaning that the prince would never have seen or spoken to Tiana, and if he did she likely would have been hung for her boldness. That was how the South was those days.
And of course this says nothing of the fact that a prince would never speak with a commoner in those days. Even now it is highly unlikely, and generally occurs due to other circumstances like Prince Edward fighting in Iraq.
Lastly, a White Southern woman of that time period would never be seen after a Black man, at least in public. Even if he was a prince. Her family would have disowned her, and likely killed or given extreme suggestions to leave to the prince.
What is effectively happening is that the South is being romanticized yet again. Facts are being thrown out the window so Disney can make money. And our youth are losing a piece of the truth and history of the nation yet again.
Add to this the fact that the animators at Disney seem to be very lazy of late. Princess Tiana looks remarkably like several other Disney princesses, just with a tan. She is hardly distinct, or drawn with any relative connection to any racial group.
But the film has a huge list of top names. Oprah Winfrey, Terrance Howard, John Goodman, and Keith David head the leading voices in the movie. Tiana will be voiced by Anika Noni Rose, who seems to be a singer (never heard her sing) and actress (she has been in several plays as well as the movie Dreamgirls). I really can’t recall her in anything, but I’ll blame that on being older.
Expect to see lots of hype about this movie. It goes with the trend right now to show a lot of Black people in things. Like the background of ads, or as additional characters in television shows. It’s the Obama effect. A limited effect where you get to see more people of color without them gaining any real importance or positions of leadership in anything.
Because if Disney really cared about being racially sensitive, or even aware, they could have added Black characters into movies for decades. They even could have promoted Aladdin as such. But instead they played down the thought of leading, or secondary characters, as anything but White. Up until now. [Though I should note that Lilo and Stitch did have a full cast of people of color – and were intended to be seen as people of color.]
Honestly, I don’t find the fact that this is a film focused on a Black character from Disney as a positive. It’s not like they never knew the color black was in their coloring inks. It just emphasizes that with the Civil Rights Movement, and decades of laws and action, it has taken nearly half a century for Disney to acknowledge African Americans. It just reminds me that taking all the people of color in front of and behind the cameras all add up to less than 10% of the people in Hollywood.
Perhaps I’m too sensitive, but that is my nature. At least I’m honest about what bugs me. At least I try to look at America’s past with open eyes to the good and the bad. At least I’m not trying to profit on the back of President Obama, like this is one big marketing experiment.
Disney is doing a film about a Black woman. It’s about time. Now let’s hope it’s good.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The summer movies of 2009
Written by Michael Vass
The season is upon us, and Hollywood is ready. Well they hope they are at least. Because this year the summer season of blockbusters and mega-hits has consolidated into a morass of retreads, prequels, and revisioned ideas. And the timing is perfect, since this is also a summer of layoff and economic peril.
Hollywood is not known for the chances it takes, at least not in the last decade or so. Rather than risking truly entertaining the masses (or creating unimaginative embarrassments) we will be getting more of the same. But that is not always a bad thing.
So I will list, in order of my preference from best to worst, the movies that will hit a theater near you.
Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince
The series has been solidly entertaining. It’s stayed mostly true to the books, and has kept an edge that both adults and kids can enjoy. The actors have grown in their abilities and the storyline. This may be one of the best of the series.
Angels & Demons
Dan Brown can write. There is no question about that. Ron Howard can direct slugs and make them a spectacular adventure. And Tom Hanks has become the leading actor of our generation. The combination was a phenomenal hit in their first collaboration. There is nothing less that I would expect in this second showing.
The Taking of Pelham 123
I already discussed my thoughts on this remake starring John Travolta and Denzel Washington. This should be a tour de force. Definitely a must see, from what I can tell.
The next few films start the trend of either big hits or complete failure. The stories that these films are based on are well loved and rich in history. Because of fan devotion they will either get it right and we all will love them, or they will be so bad that DVD sales won’t even help them break even.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
As I have said before, a revisioned story, lots of action and glitz. Will it work? Iffy. The trailer has its good and bad points. As does the plot it seems. Will it be what fans have waited for? Time will tell.
Star Trek
Even more action and glitz, the word to describe this film is revisioned. Normally that spells doom for movie-goers. And if the Spock in this movie is any indication there will be an uproar of despair. But then again, it could be like Transformers and keep everyone’s eyes so busy their brain won’t notice if it is bad or good.
Terminator: Salvation
Can this work without the Governator? Will Christian Bale improve on the John Connor role? Will this revisioning live up to the story we all have come to love? There is just no way to know right now.
As for the rest of the films of the summer, well the list gets really dicey from here on.
Public Enemies
I already previewed this film. Johnny Depp is careful in picking his roles, so this should be good. The question is will anyone care about a gangster from America’s past?
Inglorious Basterds
Another film I previewed. Quentin Tarrantino means this will be a curse driven film. Brad Pitt means that it will draw women. WWII should mean that guys will want to see it. But the combination still leaves me with doubts. This may not work, at least not in any way that a fan of any of the above will enjoy.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra
They aren’t American heroes anymore. They aren’t cartoons. And there is little hype behind the film. Either it’s been so revisioned that no one wants to talk about this film, or they did a great job of keeping expectations down. Likely this will be a failure. There really isn’t much left of what fans loved about this to see on the big screen. But the volume of explosions and slow motion Ninja fights should be distracting enough for even the least MTV loving among us.
Transformers 2
I didn’t like Shia Lebouf in the first film. I hated the first film in fact. It was stupid, filled with plot holes, and revisioned to death. This second film intends to take all those things and amp them up to the nth degree. Last time I waited to see this on DVD, this time I’ll wait for it to be on free cable.
But as always, there is a wildcard in the summer movie season. This year it may well be
District 9
Based on the above video you can tell a couple of things. Like this is clearly about Apartheid. It’s a way of telling a story about human suffering in a format that is unusal at best. It’s kind of like the movie (and television show) Alien Nation, but without the American sensibilities and imagined democracy. This may be a sleeper film. It’s not action packed, or filled with explosions. But it has a message, and it is hands-down the most original film of the summer season. Plus the director is Peter Jackson. Which means it will be visually captivating if nothing else.
The season is upon us, and Hollywood is ready. Well they hope they are at least. Because this year the summer season of blockbusters and mega-hits has consolidated into a morass of retreads, prequels, and revisioned ideas. And the timing is perfect, since this is also a summer of layoff and economic peril.
Hollywood is not known for the chances it takes, at least not in the last decade or so. Rather than risking truly entertaining the masses (or creating unimaginative embarrassments) we will be getting more of the same. But that is not always a bad thing.
So I will list, in order of my preference from best to worst, the movies that will hit a theater near you.
Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince
The series has been solidly entertaining. It’s stayed mostly true to the books, and has kept an edge that both adults and kids can enjoy. The actors have grown in their abilities and the storyline. This may be one of the best of the series.
Angels & Demons
Dan Brown can write. There is no question about that. Ron Howard can direct slugs and make them a spectacular adventure. And Tom Hanks has become the leading actor of our generation. The combination was a phenomenal hit in their first collaboration. There is nothing less that I would expect in this second showing.
The Taking of Pelham 123
I already discussed my thoughts on this remake starring John Travolta and Denzel Washington. This should be a tour de force. Definitely a must see, from what I can tell.
The next few films start the trend of either big hits or complete failure. The stories that these films are based on are well loved and rich in history. Because of fan devotion they will either get it right and we all will love them, or they will be so bad that DVD sales won’t even help them break even.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
As I have said before, a revisioned story, lots of action and glitz. Will it work? Iffy. The trailer has its good and bad points. As does the plot it seems. Will it be what fans have waited for? Time will tell.
Star Trek
Even more action and glitz, the word to describe this film is revisioned. Normally that spells doom for movie-goers. And if the Spock in this movie is any indication there will be an uproar of despair. But then again, it could be like Transformers and keep everyone’s eyes so busy their brain won’t notice if it is bad or good.
Terminator: Salvation
Can this work without the Governator? Will Christian Bale improve on the John Connor role? Will this revisioning live up to the story we all have come to love? There is just no way to know right now.
As for the rest of the films of the summer, well the list gets really dicey from here on.
Public Enemies
I already previewed this film. Johnny Depp is careful in picking his roles, so this should be good. The question is will anyone care about a gangster from America’s past?
Inglorious Basterds
Another film I previewed. Quentin Tarrantino means this will be a curse driven film. Brad Pitt means that it will draw women. WWII should mean that guys will want to see it. But the combination still leaves me with doubts. This may not work, at least not in any way that a fan of any of the above will enjoy.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra
They aren’t American heroes anymore. They aren’t cartoons. And there is little hype behind the film. Either it’s been so revisioned that no one wants to talk about this film, or they did a great job of keeping expectations down. Likely this will be a failure. There really isn’t much left of what fans loved about this to see on the big screen. But the volume of explosions and slow motion Ninja fights should be distracting enough for even the least MTV loving among us.
Transformers 2
I didn’t like Shia Lebouf in the first film. I hated the first film in fact. It was stupid, filled with plot holes, and revisioned to death. This second film intends to take all those things and amp them up to the nth degree. Last time I waited to see this on DVD, this time I’ll wait for it to be on free cable.
But as always, there is a wildcard in the summer movie season. This year it may well be
District 9
Based on the above video you can tell a couple of things. Like this is clearly about Apartheid. It’s a way of telling a story about human suffering in a format that is unusal at best. It’s kind of like the movie (and television show) Alien Nation, but without the American sensibilities and imagined democracy. This may be a sleeper film. It’s not action packed, or filled with explosions. But it has a message, and it is hands-down the most original film of the summer season. Plus the director is Peter Jackson. Which means it will be visually captivating if nothing else.
How was your Monday?
Well things have been busy here. Just got back from New York City, where I met Cynthia Basinet. You may recall that I interviewed her a little while back.
Cynthia Basinet is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, who works on improving the lives of the people of the Sahara, women worldwide, was a model and is a singer of renown. I was very happy to have had the chance to meet her in person. She is even more interesting in person than in the interview.
Cynthia is currently working on several projects, which I can't reveal right now. I believe I can say that fans of her music, and acting, should have more to enjoy soon. And of course her humanitarian work is an on-going cause that will end one day because there will no longer be a need, I hope.
I can also mention that I expect to be at the Tribeca Film Festival and will likely be meeting a few of the directors of films presented there. This will be a first for me, so I'm very excited about this.
Plus, for those that follow my writing on the financial front, I spoke with a former colleague of mine while in NYC. I believe that in the next quarter or so there will be some huge news hitting the markets. This is not a stock related matter, and I really can't say any details yet. But if all goes as planned I will have a major story to present to my readers on the subject.
All in all this was a busy and positive weekend. Now I have to catch up with some work for clients, and the news since last week.
Cynthia Basinet is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, who works on improving the lives of the people of the Sahara, women worldwide, was a model and is a singer of renown. I was very happy to have had the chance to meet her in person. She is even more interesting in person than in the interview.
Cynthia is currently working on several projects, which I can't reveal right now. I believe I can say that fans of her music, and acting, should have more to enjoy soon. And of course her humanitarian work is an on-going cause that will end one day because there will no longer be a need, I hope.
I can also mention that I expect to be at the Tribeca Film Festival and will likely be meeting a few of the directors of films presented there. This will be a first for me, so I'm very excited about this.
Plus, for those that follow my writing on the financial front, I spoke with a former colleague of mine while in NYC. I believe that in the next quarter or so there will be some huge news hitting the markets. This is not a stock related matter, and I really can't say any details yet. But if all goes as planned I will have a major story to present to my readers on the subject.
All in all this was a busy and positive weekend. Now I have to catch up with some work for clients, and the news since last week.
Jackie Chan clarifies his Chinese control statement
As much as I wanted to jump on the story that Jackie Chan believes Chinese people need to be controlled, I just had to wait. There was no question in my mind that the news story had to have more details than what was first stated back on the 18th. And now it seems there is more to it all.
It all started when Jackie Chan was speaking at the Boao Forum. He was discussing censorship and restrictions in filmmaking when he stated
Now this statement was taken by the AP reporter (William Foreman) to be an affirmation of the communist Chinese Government, or at least that's the tone of his report. And the comments of Chan quoted in that article do tend to support that view, in part. They also go on to make a strong critique of recent debacles in China, like the tainted milk event.
The whole thing left me confused. Was Chan for less democracy? Were his comments about filmmaking just misinterpeted or misquoted? Was Chan upset with the modern Chinese culture?
Of course the international response didn't bother to wonder about these things. The international media focused in on the one line they cared about "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled."
There was outrage as some took his words as to mean that he was calling Chinese people pets, like Hong Kong pro-democracy legislator Leung Kwok-hung
This of course ignores the harsh denouncement Chan made of the Chinese Government after the Beijing Tiananmen Square event where hundreds of pro-democracy protesters were killed in June 1989.
So it has come to the final point where Jackie Chan had his spokesman clarify things. And like I wondered at the onset, he was taken out of context as his spokesperson stated
Chan was speaking about the entertainment industry. Just that industry. Which makes sense since that was why he was speaking in the first place, to talk about entertainment. And it makes his comment clearer what he was meaning. But the AP reporter stands by his account and the nature of how he made the quote.
But while Asia is in an uproar I still have to wonder. Chan has made millions because of the freedoms he has enjoyed. Why would someone who can directly tie his success with freedom be against it, especially for his own people? That just doesn't make sense.
Though it makes a lot of sense that a reporter might misquote or misinterpet a comment in a foreign language (I presume Chinese is not Foreman's fist language) that would create lots of coverage and promote a certain political view. It's a trend that we have seen in America since roughly October of 2007 with President Obama.
Even now the media reports on President Obama are short on details, missing the vigorous questioning given to other Administrations, and in some cases blatantly propagandist. Which says nothing of the trend in the mainstream media to become more entertainment oriented as opposed to true journalism.
Did Jackie Chan intend to insult the Chinese people, and support the Communist Government of mainland China? I think not. But that won't stop him from becoming the scapegoat those opposed to those ideals can use to whip up international outrage at China. If this were to destroy the career of Chan, thouse using his words for their own ends won't care. They just want headlines that get their message across.
Maybe I am wrong. Maybe I am too much of a Jackie Chan fan. Still I think that this is too odd and suspiciously politically adventageous for certain groups. Too bad there seems to be no transcript of the full speech to make this absolutely clear for everyone.
It all started when Jackie Chan was speaking at the Boao Forum. He was discussing censorship and restrictions in filmmaking when he stated
"I'm not sure if it's good to have freedom or not," Chan said. "I'm really confused now. If you're too free, you're like the way Hong Kong is now. It's very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic. Chan added: "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we're not being controlled, we'll just do what we want."
Now this statement was taken by the AP reporter (William Foreman) to be an affirmation of the communist Chinese Government, or at least that's the tone of his report. And the comments of Chan quoted in that article do tend to support that view, in part. They also go on to make a strong critique of recent debacles in China, like the tainted milk event.
The whole thing left me confused. Was Chan for less democracy? Were his comments about filmmaking just misinterpeted or misquoted? Was Chan upset with the modern Chinese culture?
Of course the international response didn't bother to wonder about these things. The international media focused in on the one line they cared about "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled."
There was outrage as some took his words as to mean that he was calling Chinese people pets, like Hong Kong pro-democracy legislator Leung Kwok-hung
"He's insulted the Chinese people. Chinese people aren't pets. Chinese society needs a democratic system to protect human rights and rule of law."
This of course ignores the harsh denouncement Chan made of the Chinese Government after the Beijing Tiananmen Square event where hundreds of pro-democracy protesters were killed in June 1989.
So it has come to the final point where Jackie Chan had his spokesman clarify things. And like I wondered at the onset, he was taken out of context as his spokesperson stated
"Some people with ulterior motives deliberately misinterpreted what he was saying."
Chan was speaking about the entertainment industry. Just that industry. Which makes sense since that was why he was speaking in the first place, to talk about entertainment. And it makes his comment clearer what he was meaning. But the AP reporter stands by his account and the nature of how he made the quote.
But while Asia is in an uproar I still have to wonder. Chan has made millions because of the freedoms he has enjoyed. Why would someone who can directly tie his success with freedom be against it, especially for his own people? That just doesn't make sense.
Though it makes a lot of sense that a reporter might misquote or misinterpet a comment in a foreign language (I presume Chinese is not Foreman's fist language) that would create lots of coverage and promote a certain political view. It's a trend that we have seen in America since roughly October of 2007 with President Obama.
Even now the media reports on President Obama are short on details, missing the vigorous questioning given to other Administrations, and in some cases blatantly propagandist. Which says nothing of the trend in the mainstream media to become more entertainment oriented as opposed to true journalism.
Did Jackie Chan intend to insult the Chinese people, and support the Communist Government of mainland China? I think not. But that won't stop him from becoming the scapegoat those opposed to those ideals can use to whip up international outrage at China. If this were to destroy the career of Chan, thouse using his words for their own ends won't care. They just want headlines that get their message across.
Maybe I am wrong. Maybe I am too much of a Jackie Chan fan. Still I think that this is too odd and suspiciously politically adventageous for certain groups. Too bad there seems to be no transcript of the full speech to make this absolutely clear for everyone.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Where have I been?
I know some must be wondering why they have not heard anything from me in a couple of days. Sadly, I have not been on vacation.
I have been working on gaining interviews from directors that will have their film shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. I plan on meeting with Cynthia Basinet again to update what is going on with her.
I have decided to work on converting all my product found in the online store, into items available for direct sales. There are plans being made for several new calendars and photos shoots. I am reviewing several potential models for the shoots.
I am continuing to expand the company, and an interviewing a couple of potential new writers, to assist me in covering all the subjects and issues that matter most to you my readers. Plus I am working on several local projects.
All of this while I have picked up my own 9-ball team in the APA league I play in. My original team (we had to split the team) currently stands to win 1st place in 8-ball and 9-ball this season. In a month we go on to play for a chance at the nationals and a trip to Las Vegas.
And of course I am continuing to fix up and decorate my house.
All of this while having an increased work load with my clients, and trying to ensure both they and I are ok through this economic downturn.
It has been quite the month, and the last couple of days have been busy. But never fear. I am still on the job. More will come shortly.
I have been working on gaining interviews from directors that will have their film shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. I plan on meeting with Cynthia Basinet again to update what is going on with her.
I have decided to work on converting all my product found in the online store, into items available for direct sales. There are plans being made for several new calendars and photos shoots. I am reviewing several potential models for the shoots.
I am continuing to expand the company, and an interviewing a couple of potential new writers, to assist me in covering all the subjects and issues that matter most to you my readers. Plus I am working on several local projects.
All of this while I have picked up my own 9-ball team in the APA league I play in. My original team (we had to split the team) currently stands to win 1st place in 8-ball and 9-ball this season. In a month we go on to play for a chance at the nationals and a trip to Las Vegas.
And of course I am continuing to fix up and decorate my house.
All of this while having an increased work load with my clients, and trying to ensure both they and I are ok through this economic downturn.
It has been quite the month, and the last couple of days have been busy. But never fear. I am still on the job. More will come shortly.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Reply to John T. Simpson of Big Hollywood
This post is a response to John T Simpson, who cited my post on reparations on his blog. Please review his blog post at Big Hollywood to see what I am addressing.
John T. Simpson,
First I would like to thank you John for citing my blog and one of numerous posts I have made on the subject of reparations. This is a subject that I take very seriously and feel needs to be address for the health and future of the nation.
I will assume that you have read all or most of my blog posts on reparations and thus are familiar with my position. For visitors that are not familiar with the subject or my position I suggest they check here and here. Also searching at either of my blogs for Slavery will bring up other pertinent information.
So before I further discuss your position I will first summarize a few facts. First of which is the fact that millions of Africans did not emigrate to America as you suggest in your post. They were forcibly taken, with an estimate of at least 1 - 3 million dying during the transit from Africa to America.
Another point of fact is that these human beings were shipped in conditions that cargo was not treated to. I'm talking about inanimate objects as well as livestock received better care. The levels of inhumanity are unheard of. Which is important as we are speaking about a punitive judgement, which takes into account facts beyond just hours worked. Once these African slaves were on land they entered a life of 24/7 365 subservience, while regarded about the same as furniture or tools.
The average slave that was born into slavery and lived to be 40 would have worked some 233,600 hours by that time. That is without proper medical care, time off, proper living conditions and questionable food among other issues. If the average slave were to have been only paid .05 an hour, and there were some 4 million slaves from 1619 to 1865, they deserved to receive some $934 billion dollars NOT adjusting for inflation or real 2009 dollars according to my quick math right now.
This is the weakest estimate of what is due. And were it not for these Africans, America would not exist. The foundations of the nation LITERALLY was built upon the backs of these people. Which says nothing of the wars that they fought in. Another fact often overlooked, African Americans have fought in every battle America has fought. Also, there are well over 1000 inventions that African Americans created that allow modern America to exist. That includes stoplights and gas masks used by firefighters, as just 2 examples.
So when people argue reparations they are in fact arguing about America. How it was made, sustained, and improved since BEFORE its inception. We are arguing about the place in history, respect, and inheritance due. Reparations is not merely dollars and cents.
Also, let us remember that America has already set a precedence for reparations, TWICE. To American Indians and to Japanese Americans. In both cases these reparations took place long after the actual damage was done. So far, the American Government - my Government - has never apologized for slavery. In fact the best the nation has been able to do since 1619 is a feeble voice vote in the House of Representatives saying that they were remorseful. The House was not even willing to have their names recorded as being against Slavery.
This leads me to another point that is important. The argument that White Americans neither created or benefited from slavery. Which is only a half-truth.
Every American alive today benefits from the work of the slaves. Whether it is the buildings we work in, the roads we travel upon, the food we eat, or the goods we use. Every item in America can be traced back to the foundations and actions of the slaves. Because without their work, most every city would be without many of its oldest buildings. Without their work the agricultural nation that America was would never have existed and thus could never have survived. The roads would never have been separated from trees, fields never plowed, and on and on.
In addition, it is a fact that after slavery ended, segregation and Jim Crow laws took hold. These are de facto acts of slavery. African Americans were routinely denied schooling, proper pay, the Right to vote, the ability to move freely, and just about every other Right you can name up until at least 1965. Which says nothing of the persecution under the law, for real and imagined violations of law.
I say 1965 because the mere fact that the Civil Rights Movement needed to exist meant that every law and enforcement of those laws were biased prior to that time, at least. Thus Americans alive today did in fact benefit from the active persecution and prejudice against African Americans. Many either actively or passively allowed this to happen, making them culpable too. Which says nothing of the lessons of inequality and prejudice that were passed on to their children. Meaning that at least a residual effect of this instructional prejudice and bias was passed on to Americans that today are as young as 35, perhaps even those being born now.
And what is the effect of these generational actions? Well sub-standard education means that African Americans were denied the opportunity to get jobs. Restricted areas of living means that happiness and quality of life were affected. And the persecution in the law meant that the very Rights we all hold dear were denied. How much are those things worth today? How many billions are we spending on the military, education, and healthcare alone? How many of these things were the reason we created this nation in the first place?
Let me clarify something else. Rep. Conyers did not just start to try to pass a Reparations bill after President Obama was elected. He has been entering this legislation EVERY year for over 2 decades now. It has been ignored by Every President and Every Congress since he first brought it up.
Also, during the election cycle none of the Presidential candidates, except Kucinich, would even discuss Reparations. That's in either Party. Because this subject is considered taboo, and more dangerous politically than Social Security. No elected official who wants to remain elected discusses this on national television.
Beyond that lets take another look at the list you presented. It is a list of massive wealth there is no question. Indeed only in America are such changes in economic and political status possible. But what happens once you take out all the people in your list that are entertainers? It goes almost to zero.
Why is that? Because over the CENTURIES, entertainment has been considered a low profession. It was rarely ever considered a profession to bring sustained wealth. In fact up until the last half century it was a profession of relative minor success. But even with this look at how long it took for African Americans to be given roles that were not complete caricatures. Even in recent years we have writers that balk at African Americans portraying their characters (Shawshank Redemption).
Beyond that we also see the result of CENTURIES of denial and repression. Right now I believe that only 3 Forbes 100 companies are lead by an African American. Right now I believe that less than 3% of all the companies in the nation have African American senior management. Right now there is less than 7% of all characters on television in any recurring or major role, in movies, and the people behind the cameras that are all people of color, COMBINED.
So am I happy that a literal handful of entertainers have done well. Of course. But how many people of color have been denied opportunities because they were never given a chance to learn. How many people have lived lives of strife because they were given sub-standard educations. How many never had the chance to provide more for their families because they could only advance to the ceiling and not thru it.
Am I glad that President Obama got elected? Sure, it's a proud statement. But let's not confuse the facts with emotion. A huge number of people (of all races) voted for President Obama solely because he was Black. And no, Dr. King would not have been glad that President Obama was elected - not on the basis of his political beliefs. Neither would Malcolm X or most any political leader of the 50's and 60's. Because their reported political views at the time were more closely aligned with Republicans today than Democrats.
Yet again, the success of 1 or 2 people does not negate or supplant the difficulties of millions. Nor does it evaporate hundreds of years of persecution, reprimand, violence, and pain.
Will reparations heal all these wounds instantly? No. Will it end all the cycles of mistrust, bias, and inequality? No.
But there can be no remedy, no resolution, until we first admit our wrongs and take penitence for them. That is the basis of our legal system. And right now we are denying justice by not even addressing reparations.
And to address your thought that this will bankrupt America, that is a misconception. There are many proposals out there that provide reparations and BENEFIT America. I have even proposed a means by which jobs are CREATED, and the wealth returned to the nation in the form of GDP increases and technology advances.
If done properly reparations BENEFITS all Americans. But the subject has to be addressed to be possible.
Now I am sure some will feel this is long. But in fact this is a very short summary on why reparations are needed, and in fact are a fact of law. I have written on this subject for years, and I have a passion. It is not some new fad, or some wild idea. There are many who have addressed this, going as far back as the 1880's. I think that 120+ years is more than enough time to finally address this.
John, I could go on. But instead I suggest you review my various writting on the subject and then provide me whatever questions or thoughts you have on the subject. While I am passionate I am open to discussion. And only through reasoned passionate debate can we get to an answer that has eluded the nation for centuries.
John T. Simpson,
First I would like to thank you John for citing my blog and one of numerous posts I have made on the subject of reparations. This is a subject that I take very seriously and feel needs to be address for the health and future of the nation.
I will assume that you have read all or most of my blog posts on reparations and thus are familiar with my position. For visitors that are not familiar with the subject or my position I suggest they check here and here. Also searching at either of my blogs for Slavery will bring up other pertinent information.
So before I further discuss your position I will first summarize a few facts. First of which is the fact that millions of Africans did not emigrate to America as you suggest in your post. They were forcibly taken, with an estimate of at least 1 - 3 million dying during the transit from Africa to America.
Another point of fact is that these human beings were shipped in conditions that cargo was not treated to. I'm talking about inanimate objects as well as livestock received better care. The levels of inhumanity are unheard of. Which is important as we are speaking about a punitive judgement, which takes into account facts beyond just hours worked. Once these African slaves were on land they entered a life of 24/7 365 subservience, while regarded about the same as furniture or tools.
The average slave that was born into slavery and lived to be 40 would have worked some 233,600 hours by that time. That is without proper medical care, time off, proper living conditions and questionable food among other issues. If the average slave were to have been only paid .05 an hour, and there were some 4 million slaves from 1619 to 1865, they deserved to receive some $934 billion dollars NOT adjusting for inflation or real 2009 dollars according to my quick math right now.
This is the weakest estimate of what is due. And were it not for these Africans, America would not exist. The foundations of the nation LITERALLY was built upon the backs of these people. Which says nothing of the wars that they fought in. Another fact often overlooked, African Americans have fought in every battle America has fought. Also, there are well over 1000 inventions that African Americans created that allow modern America to exist. That includes stoplights and gas masks used by firefighters, as just 2 examples.
So when people argue reparations they are in fact arguing about America. How it was made, sustained, and improved since BEFORE its inception. We are arguing about the place in history, respect, and inheritance due. Reparations is not merely dollars and cents.
Also, let us remember that America has already set a precedence for reparations, TWICE. To American Indians and to Japanese Americans. In both cases these reparations took place long after the actual damage was done. So far, the American Government - my Government - has never apologized for slavery. In fact the best the nation has been able to do since 1619 is a feeble voice vote in the House of Representatives saying that they were remorseful. The House was not even willing to have their names recorded as being against Slavery.
This leads me to another point that is important. The argument that White Americans neither created or benefited from slavery. Which is only a half-truth.
Every American alive today benefits from the work of the slaves. Whether it is the buildings we work in, the roads we travel upon, the food we eat, or the goods we use. Every item in America can be traced back to the foundations and actions of the slaves. Because without their work, most every city would be without many of its oldest buildings. Without their work the agricultural nation that America was would never have existed and thus could never have survived. The roads would never have been separated from trees, fields never plowed, and on and on.
In addition, it is a fact that after slavery ended, segregation and Jim Crow laws took hold. These are de facto acts of slavery. African Americans were routinely denied schooling, proper pay, the Right to vote, the ability to move freely, and just about every other Right you can name up until at least 1965. Which says nothing of the persecution under the law, for real and imagined violations of law.
I say 1965 because the mere fact that the Civil Rights Movement needed to exist meant that every law and enforcement of those laws were biased prior to that time, at least. Thus Americans alive today did in fact benefit from the active persecution and prejudice against African Americans. Many either actively or passively allowed this to happen, making them culpable too. Which says nothing of the lessons of inequality and prejudice that were passed on to their children. Meaning that at least a residual effect of this instructional prejudice and bias was passed on to Americans that today are as young as 35, perhaps even those being born now.
And what is the effect of these generational actions? Well sub-standard education means that African Americans were denied the opportunity to get jobs. Restricted areas of living means that happiness and quality of life were affected. And the persecution in the law meant that the very Rights we all hold dear were denied. How much are those things worth today? How many billions are we spending on the military, education, and healthcare alone? How many of these things were the reason we created this nation in the first place?
Let me clarify something else. Rep. Conyers did not just start to try to pass a Reparations bill after President Obama was elected. He has been entering this legislation EVERY year for over 2 decades now. It has been ignored by Every President and Every Congress since he first brought it up.
Also, during the election cycle none of the Presidential candidates, except Kucinich, would even discuss Reparations. That's in either Party. Because this subject is considered taboo, and more dangerous politically than Social Security. No elected official who wants to remain elected discusses this on national television.
Beyond that lets take another look at the list you presented. It is a list of massive wealth there is no question. Indeed only in America are such changes in economic and political status possible. But what happens once you take out all the people in your list that are entertainers? It goes almost to zero.
Why is that? Because over the CENTURIES, entertainment has been considered a low profession. It was rarely ever considered a profession to bring sustained wealth. In fact up until the last half century it was a profession of relative minor success. But even with this look at how long it took for African Americans to be given roles that were not complete caricatures. Even in recent years we have writers that balk at African Americans portraying their characters (Shawshank Redemption).
Beyond that we also see the result of CENTURIES of denial and repression. Right now I believe that only 3 Forbes 100 companies are lead by an African American. Right now I believe that less than 3% of all the companies in the nation have African American senior management. Right now there is less than 7% of all characters on television in any recurring or major role, in movies, and the people behind the cameras that are all people of color, COMBINED.
So am I happy that a literal handful of entertainers have done well. Of course. But how many people of color have been denied opportunities because they were never given a chance to learn. How many people have lived lives of strife because they were given sub-standard educations. How many never had the chance to provide more for their families because they could only advance to the ceiling and not thru it.
Am I glad that President Obama got elected? Sure, it's a proud statement. But let's not confuse the facts with emotion. A huge number of people (of all races) voted for President Obama solely because he was Black. And no, Dr. King would not have been glad that President Obama was elected - not on the basis of his political beliefs. Neither would Malcolm X or most any political leader of the 50's and 60's. Because their reported political views at the time were more closely aligned with Republicans today than Democrats.
Yet again, the success of 1 or 2 people does not negate or supplant the difficulties of millions. Nor does it evaporate hundreds of years of persecution, reprimand, violence, and pain.
Will reparations heal all these wounds instantly? No. Will it end all the cycles of mistrust, bias, and inequality? No.
But there can be no remedy, no resolution, until we first admit our wrongs and take penitence for them. That is the basis of our legal system. And right now we are denying justice by not even addressing reparations.
And to address your thought that this will bankrupt America, that is a misconception. There are many proposals out there that provide reparations and BENEFIT America. I have even proposed a means by which jobs are CREATED, and the wealth returned to the nation in the form of GDP increases and technology advances.
If done properly reparations BENEFITS all Americans. But the subject has to be addressed to be possible.
Now I am sure some will feel this is long. But in fact this is a very short summary on why reparations are needed, and in fact are a fact of law. I have written on this subject for years, and I have a passion. It is not some new fad, or some wild idea. There are many who have addressed this, going as far back as the 1880's. I think that 120+ years is more than enough time to finally address this.
John, I could go on. But instead I suggest you review my various writting on the subject and then provide me whatever questions or thoughts you have on the subject. While I am passionate I am open to discussion. And only through reasoned passionate debate can we get to an answer that has eluded the nation for centuries.
Jamie Foxx - the apology
This didn't take long
(sorry for the quality, it's the best I could find)
So what did you think of the apology?
For me it was mostly heartfelt, though the sting of future Hollywood movie loses and advertising dollars floating away seemed to be right up front too.
I say that because the first thing that Foxx does is excuse his actions. He tries to justify what he did. He compares himself to Howard Stern. He blames the incident on comedy. He reminds us that this was a private radio station and that his radio programs content is 'blue'.
Then he gives the audience an apology. Only after that does he turn to the camera and apologize to the only person he needs to apologize to.
I did not accept it when Michael Richards excused his racist rant on being a comedian or a comedy act. I did not accept the excuses of shock radio excess and incredulity from Don Imus. I did not believe the sincerity of Dog the bounty hunter on national television. I see no reason to accept the reasoning of Jamie Foxx either.
The only reason that I don't believe that Foxx should be fired is because he is on Sirius Satellite Radio. These were not public airwaves, and to a minimal degree his target is a celebrity. The First Amendment and the ability of an entertainer to respond in kind or publicly are the only things that save Foxx. Barely.
He is wrong and he knows it. Had anyone said such things about his own daughter, he would have been incensed. I fully doubt that pleas of comedic license, and private radio exclusion would be enough to calm his anger. I doubt that his daughter would find solace in the First Amendment, or hearing that it was all just a joke.
So was this an act of contrition or preservation? I believe it was both. Was it enough? Only Miley Cyrus and time will tell. But I am left with a severely diminished view of Jamie Foxx. I thought he had more class than what he showed. I thought he was raised better, in fact I am sure of that at least. Extreme talent does not preclude a boorish demeanor.
Jamie Foxx may be at the top of the box office pay, but he now resides with the lowest class of entertainers and celebrities in my mind now.
(sorry for the quality, it's the best I could find)
So what did you think of the apology?
For me it was mostly heartfelt, though the sting of future Hollywood movie loses and advertising dollars floating away seemed to be right up front too.
I say that because the first thing that Foxx does is excuse his actions. He tries to justify what he did. He compares himself to Howard Stern. He blames the incident on comedy. He reminds us that this was a private radio station and that his radio programs content is 'blue'.
Then he gives the audience an apology. Only after that does he turn to the camera and apologize to the only person he needs to apologize to.
I did not accept it when Michael Richards excused his racist rant on being a comedian or a comedy act. I did not accept the excuses of shock radio excess and incredulity from Don Imus. I did not believe the sincerity of Dog the bounty hunter on national television. I see no reason to accept the reasoning of Jamie Foxx either.
The only reason that I don't believe that Foxx should be fired is because he is on Sirius Satellite Radio. These were not public airwaves, and to a minimal degree his target is a celebrity. The First Amendment and the ability of an entertainer to respond in kind or publicly are the only things that save Foxx. Barely.
He is wrong and he knows it. Had anyone said such things about his own daughter, he would have been incensed. I fully doubt that pleas of comedic license, and private radio exclusion would be enough to calm his anger. I doubt that his daughter would find solace in the First Amendment, or hearing that it was all just a joke.
So was this an act of contrition or preservation? I believe it was both. Was it enough? Only Miley Cyrus and time will tell. But I am left with a severely diminished view of Jamie Foxx. I thought he had more class than what he showed. I thought he was raised better, in fact I am sure of that at least. Extreme talent does not preclude a boorish demeanor.
Jamie Foxx may be at the top of the box office pay, but he now resides with the lowest class of entertainers and celebrities in my mind now.
NASA slaps Stephen Colbert
So I wonder how Stephen Colbert is enjoying the Government slap in the face he just got. It all stems from his recent push to have a new node on the new space station named after him. NASA placed the name of the node up to the decisions of the public, via a poll. Colbert won hands down by a 5-1 margin.
But like the current Administration, what is promised is not exactly what you get. The name of the station will not bear Colbert’s name, instead being called Tranquility. By the way, the 2nd most popular name was Serenity (likely due to fans of the television show and movie). So it seems NASA never had any intention of living up to the projected offer they made to the public.
I find this to be yet another example of the liberal mantra,
It’s one more example of a Government that really doesn’t care what the public wants. Instead they prefer to steamroll ahead with plans they already have in place. It’s an insult to Colbert, and all the people that got involved in an unpopular attempt by NASA to drive interest into the hundreds of millions they are spending of the public’s money.
I’m not against Colbert, liberals (sometimes), or NASA. I just think that when a Government Agency reaches out to the public, they should stand by their word and the public response. Since we are paying for the space station, and everything in or on it, given the opportunity to make a choice of a name it should be used.
Ultimately NASA has shot itself in the foot. Had they lived up to their word, they would have gained popularity with the next generation of taxpayers that will ultimately fund, or stop funding, their programs. Colbert has influence with this generation; a generation that is more interested with visions of space in the future than the limited reality of just circling the Earth. This will come back and bite them, down the road when NASA asks for more money and this generation will recall that what NASA provides is not what they promise.
There was a saying that I grew up with
You don’t hear it much these days. NASA apparently never heard it at all. The space station node should be named Colbert. Anything less is unacceptable.
But like the current Administration, what is promised is not exactly what you get. The name of the station will not bear Colbert’s name, instead being called Tranquility. By the way, the 2nd most popular name was Serenity (likely due to fans of the television show and movie). So it seems NASA never had any intention of living up to the projected offer they made to the public.
I find this to be yet another example of the liberal mantra,
“You can say and do anything you want, if it matches what I believe.”
It’s one more example of a Government that really doesn’t care what the public wants. Instead they prefer to steamroll ahead with plans they already have in place. It’s an insult to Colbert, and all the people that got involved in an unpopular attempt by NASA to drive interest into the hundreds of millions they are spending of the public’s money.
I’m not against Colbert, liberals (sometimes), or NASA. I just think that when a Government Agency reaches out to the public, they should stand by their word and the public response. Since we are paying for the space station, and everything in or on it, given the opportunity to make a choice of a name it should be used.
Ultimately NASA has shot itself in the foot. Had they lived up to their word, they would have gained popularity with the next generation of taxpayers that will ultimately fund, or stop funding, their programs. Colbert has influence with this generation; a generation that is more interested with visions of space in the future than the limited reality of just circling the Earth. This will come back and bite them, down the road when NASA asks for more money and this generation will recall that what NASA provides is not what they promise.
There was a saying that I grew up with
“My word is my bond.”
You don’t hear it much these days. NASA apparently never heard it at all. The space station node should be named Colbert. Anything less is unacceptable.
Jamie Foxx vs. Miley Cyrus - Foxx is a loser
"It takes a lifetime of work to create a reputation, and mere moments to destroy one."
I think we all have heard some variation of the above quote. Everyone except Jamie Foxx it would seem. Honestly, I know his grandmother taught him better than that.
Yes I am speaking about the attack that Jamie Foxx made against Miley Cyrus. Carried on Sirius Satellite Radio, it contains massive profanity and horrendous comments.
**Warning, the following has language not suitable for young visitors.**
Now I am no fan of Hanna Montana or Miley Cyrus. In fact I have never heard or seen a thing she has done. But she is a young child. She does not deserve this. No child does.
When this starts off, I was not instantly offended. Celebrities and entertainers all learn to have thick skins quickly as they are all critiqued and subjects of comments both fair and foul. While it's in poor taste to take on a child about their looks, as a celebrity it's not much different than when an entertainer walks the red carpet and hoards of bloggers and the media harshly comment about the clothes worn.
But the fact that someone would call the child a B**** just because of something they overheard about her is harsh. Even worse is that anyone would say that about a child because they don't like the child's choice. Such action is low, and speaks poorly of the person who does so. Even if they are in the Hollywood industry.
It's when Jamie Foxx starts into his tirade, calling for Cyrus to
"..make a sex tape and grow up. Get like Britney Spears and do some heroin... Do like Lindsey Lohan and [garbled] lesbian and get some crack in your pipe... Catch Chlamydia on a bicycle seat; That's what I want."
I just lost all respect for the man.
He is goading the child to do drugs. To ruin her life - professionally and personally. To become physically ill. What real man says these things to a child?
I somehow doubt that comments like this were the reason for Foxx's success. But such arrogance and insensitivity could likely be a cause for his failure. No matter how good he has proven himself to be, such behavior is unconscionable.
The difference between these comments and those of Don Imus are minor. While Cyrus is a celebrity and thus open to public comment, she is still a child and deserves respect and a modicum of decency. And the only real saving grace for Foxx is that he is on private radio. People made the choice to pay for this service and to hear such language and commentary, drivel really. Thankfully this is not something available on public airwaves. Had it been so, I would demand his being fired and a boycott, just as I did with Imus.
But while Foxx may save his work for now, his image is tarnished forever I believe. And he can only blame himself for this. His ego has written a check that his ass is going to cover to his detriment.
The thing that I don't get is that listening to Foxx speak about the lessons he was taught by his grandmother would seem to be diametrically opposed to the behavior he has displayed on the radio. I don't think its Cyrus that has something to fear but Jamie Foxx. He sounds like a man falling into the trap of quick fame that has claimed the lives and careers of countless Hollywood stars and entertainers.
That Oscar will not make fans, nor drive people to see his movies. That chip on his shoulder will not encourage people to see his portrayals in theaters. The audacious and blatant disrespect for a minor will definitely light a fire in families and kill ticket and DVD sales for a long time to come. And he deserves every bit of such retribution and displeasure.
If a man said such things about Jamie Foxx's sister, or grandmother, I bet he would be in a rage and want to kick their ass. How are his words any different? If a White man said such things about a Black woman, there would be an outrage among liberals across the nation. This there should be. But that same righteous indignation deserves to be directed at Jamie Foxx now.
"Stupid is as stupid does"
Living proof of that can be found in the words of Jamie Foxx and his cohorts on the radio. This isn't a Black/White thing. It's a dumbass thing.
Jamie Foxx needs to get on national television and apologize sincerely to Miley Cyrus. Because he should at least be man enough to do that. I'm sure his grandmother raised him well enough to know that.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Phil Specter is convicted and America yawns
Phil Specter was convicted of murder today. And basically no one cares.
Think about it, an entertainer from decades ago, with an odd lifestyle, brutally murdered his girlfriend, and was engaged in a long-running court battle with high paid lawyers pulling every trick they could manage. Does this sound familiar?
It should since these are the very things that were used to describe the OJ Simpson trial. A trial that kept the nation on its tiptoes. A trial that created the largest outburst of rage since Jack Johnson won the Heavyweight title.
But Phil Specter is guilty, and no one cares. In fact few television stations or cable networks covered the story on a regular basis. And everyone should ask why.
Why is it that the brutal murder of a woman should be so unimportant? Why is there such a difference in the coverage one celebrity trial received as opposed to another? Why is there no cries of national joy with this conviction?
Because Phil Specter is not Black. It’s just that obvious and blatant. And I am disgusted by it.
I’m not defending either crime, nor whomever did it. I’m just sickened by the reaction of the nation. Because a Black man accused of a crime must be guilty. And if he escapes justice, the nation must find a way to make him pay. For the rest of his life. I mean that has been the reaction at least among the majority of White America for over a decade with OJ.
And I can only come to this conclusion by the facts at hand. No 24/7 coverage of the Specter trial. No analysis on cable news networks of the judge, the lawyers, and every piece of evidence. No national outrage as the first trial ended in a mistrial. Yes, that’s right, there have been 2 trials for this same murder. How many knew that before reading this?
Americans should be disgusted with themselves right now. Our legal system, or more accurately our manipulation of the legal system via the media, is beyond fractured and racially biased. It’s so bad that there is no way to hide it. Instead the media just ignores it, and people assume that it must be right since that’s what TV says.
There isn’t one good reason that the Phil Specter case did not get 1/10 the coverage of the OJ Simpson case, beyond race. And it’s hardly the only one. The Robert Blake case has come and gone as well, without a whisper. As have other high profile cases.
The difference is abundantly clear when you think about it. Virtually every Black entertainer and celebrity that has had a problem with the law has been lambasted by the media, and those that are White have been forgiven.
Lindsey Lohan is apparently a drunk drug addict, but she needs help. Paris Hilton is a forgetful kid going thru a phase to figure out who she is. Britney Spears is under enormous pressure and needs our support. Blake wasn’t discussed.
Yet Lil Wayne needs to be locked up. TI is going to jail where he will pay for his crimes. And so on. It’s not about the crimes, but the legal system and the media – and the bias they have.
That’s what the legal system says every day. Ex-Officer Mehserle kills an unarmed, defenseless, co-operating Oscar Grant, and he is without charges for a month (even evading investigation when he resigned from the police). Were it not for the video tape and riots, and more than just a few bloggers spreading the story, Oakland authorities likely would never have pursued the case.
But the media bent backwards to highlight only some video that made the case questionable. In fact they tried to deny the existence of evidence of the cold-blooded murder, other extended raw video, even though it was simultaneously available on Youtube.
So is the legal system biased? Oh Yeah. And is the media a willful and decisive tool in ensuring that racial bias is embedded in potential juror’s minds long before any trial? Every day.
The examples are numerous. I could keep going and going. But just go back to where I started. Phil Specter. And try to recall any detail of the case covered over the past couple of years (yep it’s been going on that long) by the media. Then compare that to your memory of the OJ trial (actually any trial of OJ will do as they all got massive media coverage).
If you don’t see the bias, I have to believe you don’t want to. Perhaps that’s the only thing worse.
Think about it, an entertainer from decades ago, with an odd lifestyle, brutally murdered his girlfriend, and was engaged in a long-running court battle with high paid lawyers pulling every trick they could manage. Does this sound familiar?
It should since these are the very things that were used to describe the OJ Simpson trial. A trial that kept the nation on its tiptoes. A trial that created the largest outburst of rage since Jack Johnson won the Heavyweight title.
But Phil Specter is guilty, and no one cares. In fact few television stations or cable networks covered the story on a regular basis. And everyone should ask why.
Why is it that the brutal murder of a woman should be so unimportant? Why is there such a difference in the coverage one celebrity trial received as opposed to another? Why is there no cries of national joy with this conviction?
Because Phil Specter is not Black. It’s just that obvious and blatant. And I am disgusted by it.
I’m not defending either crime, nor whomever did it. I’m just sickened by the reaction of the nation. Because a Black man accused of a crime must be guilty. And if he escapes justice, the nation must find a way to make him pay. For the rest of his life. I mean that has been the reaction at least among the majority of White America for over a decade with OJ.
And I can only come to this conclusion by the facts at hand. No 24/7 coverage of the Specter trial. No analysis on cable news networks of the judge, the lawyers, and every piece of evidence. No national outrage as the first trial ended in a mistrial. Yes, that’s right, there have been 2 trials for this same murder. How many knew that before reading this?
Americans should be disgusted with themselves right now. Our legal system, or more accurately our manipulation of the legal system via the media, is beyond fractured and racially biased. It’s so bad that there is no way to hide it. Instead the media just ignores it, and people assume that it must be right since that’s what TV says.
There isn’t one good reason that the Phil Specter case did not get 1/10 the coverage of the OJ Simpson case, beyond race. And it’s hardly the only one. The Robert Blake case has come and gone as well, without a whisper. As have other high profile cases.
The difference is abundantly clear when you think about it. Virtually every Black entertainer and celebrity that has had a problem with the law has been lambasted by the media, and those that are White have been forgiven.
Lindsey Lohan is apparently a drunk drug addict, but she needs help. Paris Hilton is a forgetful kid going thru a phase to figure out who she is. Britney Spears is under enormous pressure and needs our support. Blake wasn’t discussed.
Yet Lil Wayne needs to be locked up. TI is going to jail where he will pay for his crimes. And so on. It’s not about the crimes, but the legal system and the media – and the bias they have.
That’s what the legal system says every day. Ex-Officer Mehserle kills an unarmed, defenseless, co-operating Oscar Grant, and he is without charges for a month (even evading investigation when he resigned from the police). Were it not for the video tape and riots, and more than just a few bloggers spreading the story, Oakland authorities likely would never have pursued the case.
But the media bent backwards to highlight only some video that made the case questionable. In fact they tried to deny the existence of evidence of the cold-blooded murder, other extended raw video, even though it was simultaneously available on Youtube.
So is the legal system biased? Oh Yeah. And is the media a willful and decisive tool in ensuring that racial bias is embedded in potential juror’s minds long before any trial? Every day.
The examples are numerous. I could keep going and going. But just go back to where I started. Phil Specter. And try to recall any detail of the case covered over the past couple of years (yep it’s been going on that long) by the media. Then compare that to your memory of the OJ trial (actually any trial of OJ will do as they all got massive media coverage).
If you don’t see the bias, I have to believe you don’t want to. Perhaps that’s the only thing worse.
Lil Kim exposed on Dancing With the Stars - who cares
Some days I can almost be amazed by the news I hear. Yes, believe it or not Lil Kim had a wardrobe malfunction. Not that anyone really got to see it this time.
Honestly I don’t know what the big deal is about a bare breast. It’s not a shocking thing, especially compared to what you can catch on most movies, soap operas, and every music video you can imagine. But the hype over this accidental showing of breast is just too much.
The best example of what most did not see (it was edited out for re-cast) can be found here
Which honestly was nothing. Especially for a woman who is anything but bashful or reserved. I mean if you were wondering what was being hidden just look at what she wore, and was televised in, here
or what about this one, which even got Diana Ross to play with the almost exposed breast on national TV
Seriously it’s not a big deal. And it does take away from some really good dancing. Who knew that Lil Kim had a talent.
Oh, by the way, she nearly popped out again at the end of the video. I bet you didn’t notice. Like it matters anyway. That is if you are over the age of 12.
Honestly I don’t know what the big deal is about a bare breast. It’s not a shocking thing, especially compared to what you can catch on most movies, soap operas, and every music video you can imagine. But the hype over this accidental showing of breast is just too much.
The best example of what most did not see (it was edited out for re-cast) can be found here
Which honestly was nothing. Especially for a woman who is anything but bashful or reserved. I mean if you were wondering what was being hidden just look at what she wore, and was televised in, here
or what about this one, which even got Diana Ross to play with the almost exposed breast on national TV
Seriously it’s not a big deal. And it does take away from some really good dancing. Who knew that Lil Kim had a talent.
Oh, by the way, she nearly popped out again at the end of the video. I bet you didn’t notice. Like it matters anyway. That is if you are over the age of 12.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Marilyn Chambers passes at 56
In an industry that no one watches (porn), and yet generates more money that the entire Hollywood film industry every year, a star has fallen. Marilyn Chambers has died at the age of 56. She was just 10 short of her birthday.
Now I realize this may not be a big deal for many of the younger readers. These days the porn industry is popular and almost mainstream with the likes of Jenna Jameson and others gaining the same attention that some of the A- and B-list Hollywood icons receive. So the death of Chambers (born Marilyn Ann Briggs) may not seem important. But in her day, she created more attention in the taboo realm than virtually every actor or actress since.
It is an interesting side note that while Chambers was attempting to enter mainstream acting, she was the soap box model for Ivory Snow. The advertising tag at the time was "99 & 44/100% pure", something that her later work would dispute in multiple ways.
Chambers was a breakthru actress. Some may find that comment odd when describing the porn industry, but think about it. She was one of the first (perhaps the first known actress) to be involved in an interracial sex scene. It can be said that while this was an extreme manner to break the taboo of the time, it in some way helped to remind the masses (that never see or buy porn of course) that we are all just people. It's very much in the manner that Chambers' was one of the first to shave her genital area, or to have a genital piercing, which today are common and non-taboo acts.
But no matter how you might wish to view or think about the life and career of Marilyn Chambers, there are a couple of facts. She was a mother. She was young. She was a professional. The loss of anyone that can claim these things is always a saddness. So even for those that do not respect the career she chose, due respect should be observed for the person she was.
Now I realize this may not be a big deal for many of the younger readers. These days the porn industry is popular and almost mainstream with the likes of Jenna Jameson and others gaining the same attention that some of the A- and B-list Hollywood icons receive. So the death of Chambers (born Marilyn Ann Briggs) may not seem important. But in her day, she created more attention in the taboo realm than virtually every actor or actress since.
It is an interesting side note that while Chambers was attempting to enter mainstream acting, she was the soap box model for Ivory Snow. The advertising tag at the time was "99 & 44/100% pure", something that her later work would dispute in multiple ways.Chambers was a breakthru actress. Some may find that comment odd when describing the porn industry, but think about it. She was one of the first (perhaps the first known actress) to be involved in an interracial sex scene. It can be said that while this was an extreme manner to break the taboo of the time, it in some way helped to remind the masses (that never see or buy porn of course) that we are all just people. It's very much in the manner that Chambers' was one of the first to shave her genital area, or to have a genital piercing, which today are common and non-taboo acts.
But no matter how you might wish to view or think about the life and career of Marilyn Chambers, there are a couple of facts. She was a mother. She was young. She was a professional. The loss of anyone that can claim these things is always a saddness. So even for those that do not respect the career she chose, due respect should be observed for the person she was.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Lindsey Lohan pisses off Stevie Nicks
First there was Hillary Duff igniting a celebrity feud with Faye Dunaway with her acceptance of the role Dunaway made famous, Bonnie of Bonnie and Clyde. Now it seems another starlet of questionable talent is stirring up her own bit version of the Hatfield’s and McCoys.
This time around it is Lindsey Lohan how has ruffed up the ire of a far more talented and respected celebrity. Stevie Nicks, of Fleetwood Mac fame, has outright rebuffed the notion of Lohan buying the rights to portray Nicks in a movie of her life.
Strong words. I don’t think there is any question on the impression Stevie Nicks has of the acting ability and lifestyle Lohan has displayed for tabloids across the world. You can’t blame Nicks either, Lohan has done it all to herself.
Of course this comes at the same time that Lohan’s latest film has been deemed to horrendous to be shown in theaters. In fact it would seem the film is so bad it won’t even go straight to DVD. Yes, the only place that Labor Pains will be seen is on ABC Family Channel.
Which leads me to wonder, if Lohan’s last film was so bad it has been reduced to a TV movie, and her personal problems are so much of a factor in her struggling career, why is anyone looking to give her more work?
At least Duff had the job before being put in her place by an actress with more skill than Duff could hope to grow into.
This time around it is Lindsey Lohan how has ruffed up the ire of a far more talented and respected celebrity. Stevie Nicks, of Fleetwood Mac fame, has outright rebuffed the notion of Lohan buying the rights to portray Nicks in a movie of her life.
“Over my dead body. She needs to stop doing drugs and get a grip. Then maybe we'll talk,” stated Nicks.
Strong words. I don’t think there is any question on the impression Stevie Nicks has of the acting ability and lifestyle Lohan has displayed for tabloids across the world. You can’t blame Nicks either, Lohan has done it all to herself. Of course this comes at the same time that Lohan’s latest film has been deemed to horrendous to be shown in theaters. In fact it would seem the film is so bad it won’t even go straight to DVD. Yes, the only place that Labor Pains will be seen is on ABC Family Channel.
Which leads me to wonder, if Lohan’s last film was so bad it has been reduced to a TV movie, and her personal problems are so much of a factor in her struggling career, why is anyone looking to give her more work?
At least Duff had the job before being put in her place by an actress with more skill than Duff could hope to grow into.
Movie Preview: The Escapist
As I have been bored beyond my wit’s end by Hollywood over the last decade I have turned to some overseas movies for theatrical entertainment. More and more I see that innovation is coming from either the independents here, or overseas. And there are gems out there.
On such movie looks to be The Escapist. It may not be in every theater in the nation, but if you can see it I think it will be worth the time.
Brian Cox has always been a good actor, and I have enjoyed the films he has been in. Not the mega-star that you might expect for this film, I think that works in the movies favor.
The fact that this film is written with a second surprise, or rollercoaster drop as described by Cox and the first-time director/writer of the film Rupert Wyatt, makes me wonder what it could be. From the scenes in the trailer you get the feeling of tension and anxiety. And you can feel the determination of the prisoners as they plan and execute the escape.
Now here are a few thoughts to keep you guessing. The final scene shows just Cox walking to the exit. So does that mean all the other prisoners died at that point? Does he actually get away, or are the police just at the top of the escalator? Did all the other inmates die via accidents, or were they intended to die and thus cover the tracks of the escapee(s)?
Here is a big question. What if this was just a ruse, the daughter in trouble, to get Cox’s character an excuse to motivate the others?
Yes the film looks to have a few questions right up to the end. All that and the tension plus thrill of trying to escape. This isn’t Prison Break with a silly plot and eye candy for the ladies. This isn’t the slow paced Shawshank Redemption, no one here is seeking or can be redeemed – maybe. But it does look to be a good film.
On such movie looks to be The Escapist. It may not be in every theater in the nation, but if you can see it I think it will be worth the time.
Brian Cox has always been a good actor, and I have enjoyed the films he has been in. Not the mega-star that you might expect for this film, I think that works in the movies favor.
The fact that this film is written with a second surprise, or rollercoaster drop as described by Cox and the first-time director/writer of the film Rupert Wyatt, makes me wonder what it could be. From the scenes in the trailer you get the feeling of tension and anxiety. And you can feel the determination of the prisoners as they plan and execute the escape.
Now here are a few thoughts to keep you guessing. The final scene shows just Cox walking to the exit. So does that mean all the other prisoners died at that point? Does he actually get away, or are the police just at the top of the escalator? Did all the other inmates die via accidents, or were they intended to die and thus cover the tracks of the escapee(s)?
Here is a big question. What if this was just a ruse, the daughter in trouble, to get Cox’s character an excuse to motivate the others?
Yes the film looks to have a few questions right up to the end. All that and the tension plus thrill of trying to escape. This isn’t Prison Break with a silly plot and eye candy for the ladies. This isn’t the slow paced Shawshank Redemption, no one here is seeking or can be redeemed – maybe. But it does look to be a good film.
Kanye West sees gayfish and gets humble - for now
South Park hit it out of the park when they took on the ego of Kanye West. I didn’t see the episode but if you check youtube you will see no end to the copies of clips from that episode. And they all hit the mark.
The best part of the show is a much harder to find portion, where the exact nature of West’s ego is detailed. Considering that the ego of Kanye West is so large as it can’t be missed, I am not surprised this even got his attention. Though for once he actually understood what was going on.
Perhaps the self-proclaimed “voice of this generation” will change. Perhaps we won’t be treated to further meltdowns at award shows, or distracting comments during fundraising efforts. It would be a shock, because at this point we all really do find West to be unbelievable and a dolt.
The best part of the show is a much harder to find portion, where the exact nature of West’s ego is detailed. Considering that the ego of Kanye West is so large as it can’t be missed, I am not surprised this even got his attention. Though for once he actually understood what was going on.
“I ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON MY EGO THOUGH. HAVING THE CRAZY EGO IS PLAYED OUT AT THIS POINT IN MY LIFE AND CAREER. I USE TO USE IT TO BUILD UP MY ESTEEM WHEN NOBODY BELIEVED IN ME. NOW THAT PEOPLE DO BELIEVE AND SUPPORT MY MUSIC AND PRODUCTS THE BEST RESPONSE IS THANK YOU INSTEAD OF "I TOLD YOU SO!!! … I GOT A LONG ROAD AHEAD OF ME TO MAKE PEOPLE BELIEVE I'M NOT ACTUALLY A HUGE DOUCHE BUT I'M UP FOR THE CHALLENGE.”
Perhaps the self-proclaimed “voice of this generation” will change. Perhaps we won’t be treated to further meltdowns at award shows, or distracting comments during fundraising efforts. It would be a shock, because at this point we all really do find West to be unbelievable and a dolt.
David Caruso should have watched Eddie Murphy
David Caruso should have seen Eddie Murphy’s comedic take on the divorce of Johnny Carson.
Warning – this video contains language that is not for kids.
If he didn’t his ex-girlfriend did. Because after 4 years being together she is suing him for $1.2 million.
Now I understand that they have children together, and I fully believe that those kids must be taken care of. But that is not the basis of the lawsuit. There seems to be no question about Caruso taking care of his children. The lawsuit is about the needs of Ms. Marquez.
I understand that Ms. Marquez gave up her job, for whatever reason. I understand she needs a home to live in. But unless she had a home prior to the relationship that was worth a million dollars, and/or she was making money to the extent of what she is asking for, she is just being vindictive and gold digging.
How many stories have filled the airwaves and internet about a celebrity breaking up and losing millions. Johnny Carson and Paul McCartney are just a couple of the most visible having lost the most money – for no apparent reason. In this case there isn’t even the benefit of marriage involved. Yet, we can be sure that she will get most everything she is asking for.
Just like a friend of mine who has to work extra hours to pay his ex alimony he does not have. Because even though she gained his house, most of his money, and much of his retirement funds – the judge believed that the losses he suffered in the stock market (like the rest of American investors) were his fault, and he has to make up for those lost funds for the rest of his life.
Or like another friend of mine that had his wife go to the Government and declare he was a deadbeat dad. This is while he lived with his wife and kids, paid every bill, she did not work, and the kids had everything they needed. And the Government agreed with her. So he had to get another job just to make payments the Government believed he owed her.
I don’t know David Caruso. I have no idea how the relationship he had went. But I believe that the judicial environment is such that he has no chance of winning. And that is sad. Because it seems there is no question of his ability to take care of his children. Just accusation and demands of money from his ex-girlfriend.
It’s a shame. She doesn’t deserve it, if the best excuse for the money she wants for herself and not the kids is “he promised it to me”.
Warning – this video contains language that is not for kids.
If he didn’t his ex-girlfriend did. Because after 4 years being together she is suing him for $1.2 million.
Now I understand that they have children together, and I fully believe that those kids must be taken care of. But that is not the basis of the lawsuit. There seems to be no question about Caruso taking care of his children. The lawsuit is about the needs of Ms. Marquez.
I understand that Ms. Marquez gave up her job, for whatever reason. I understand she needs a home to live in. But unless she had a home prior to the relationship that was worth a million dollars, and/or she was making money to the extent of what she is asking for, she is just being vindictive and gold digging.
How many stories have filled the airwaves and internet about a celebrity breaking up and losing millions. Johnny Carson and Paul McCartney are just a couple of the most visible having lost the most money – for no apparent reason. In this case there isn’t even the benefit of marriage involved. Yet, we can be sure that she will get most everything she is asking for.
Just like a friend of mine who has to work extra hours to pay his ex alimony he does not have. Because even though she gained his house, most of his money, and much of his retirement funds – the judge believed that the losses he suffered in the stock market (like the rest of American investors) were his fault, and he has to make up for those lost funds for the rest of his life.
Or like another friend of mine that had his wife go to the Government and declare he was a deadbeat dad. This is while he lived with his wife and kids, paid every bill, she did not work, and the kids had everything they needed. And the Government agreed with her. So he had to get another job just to make payments the Government believed he owed her.
I don’t know David Caruso. I have no idea how the relationship he had went. But I believe that the judicial environment is such that he has no chance of winning. And that is sad. Because it seems there is no question of his ability to take care of his children. Just accusation and demands of money from his ex-girlfriend.
It’s a shame. She doesn’t deserve it, if the best excuse for the money she wants for herself and not the kids is “he promised it to me”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)