Bush Swerve coming right up!

You can learn a lot on life without ever really focusing on the matter at hand.  One of my most favorite recurring sketches on Sesame Street, namely the Jim Henson years, was Grover the Waiter.  It usually took place at Charlie's Restaurant, and involved Grover agitating his main customer, Mr. Johnson.  The sketches, which branched outside of Charlie's, would involve Mr. Johnson ordering something, and getting something entirely different from Grover.  And it didn't always mean food; often Mr. Johnson would be delayed of his appointment by Grover.  Now, these sketches needed Grover to muck up Mr. Johnson's plans in order to make an educational point, and it was always difficult to hate what Grover was doing because he is so fun and lovable and adorable.  None the less, Mr. Johnson always got the swerve handed to him, eventually ending with him fainting.  I do have some examples of Grover twisting Mr. Johnson's needs and wants from old YouTube videos.

I was thinking about this recently in light of the past week in our political world.  Now for myself, I should be enthralled; Sen. Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, she is leading in the polls, and my vote for her was counted.  In other news, all other campaigns are doing their part in self-immolating their campaigns.  Donald Trump, for one instance, is becoming unhinged and has now realized he got in to this campaign way over his head.  As I said, I should be happy about this; yet I know something is up.  The elite of this world of ours are not going to allow populism and chaos to erupt when there is plans for Continuity of Government.  In the mind of David Rockefeller, the goal of elite immortality supersedes all other needs of a population.  And Donald Trump knows this all too well.

There is not going to be a Clinton vs. Trump election this year.  See, here is what has happened.  Earlier last year, President Bill Clinton phoned Donald Trump, and during the conversation convinced Mr. Trump to throw his hat into the ring as a Republican candidate for President.  What Pres. Clinton and Mr. Trump were doing, as were their families, was a long-term approach in steering the Democratic nomination into Sec. Clinton's hands.  To that, the stated goal was to convince President Barack Obama to not disrupt the return of the Clinton people in leading the DNC.  Pres. Clinton, like many of us, have admiration for Pres. Obama yet feel abjectly disappointed in both Obama's policies and need to make everything a campaign. Indeed, Bill Clinton felt Mitt Romney should have won the election in 2012.  It was also their opinion, as well as mine, that Pres. Obama was helping to prop up all other Democratic candidates and potential candidates (Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vice President Joe Biden) in order to dilute Sen. Clinton's chances at the nomination.

On the side of the GOP, putting Donald Trump to the lead in polls and eventually the nomination was being utilized for ulterior motives by President George H.W. Bush, President George W. Bush, Jeb Bush and yes any Republican named Bush.  You see, Jeb Bush was supposed to be given the nomination easily.  And yet, a number of Republicans were aghast by this idea.  So, how does the Bush family get their way?  By allowing Donald Trump to run roughshod over all other Republican candidates!  Yes, Bush 41 and Bush 43 allowed for the Trump insurgence to happen, so that their long term plan gets implemented.

Here is how it works:  Jeb Bush is taken out of the race for now.  Donald Trump wins the GOP nomination, while Sec. Hillary Clinton wins the DNC nomination.  Since the Bushes are the only family the Clintons seemingly must adhere to, Sen. Clinton is given more than enough information and talking points to start the seed in having people in the Republican Party think twice about their initial Trump support.  Letting Mr. Trump get unhinged by his own foibles is an added bonus.  Give it at least another week from now, and many more Republicans will be calling for a do-over on the nomination; and this includes voters that pulled the lever for Trump.

What Donald Trump fears the most, along with harm to his family, is a full public audit of his finances.  Mr. Trump is a rich and powerful man, but he is not that rich and powerful.  As I write this, the GOP, the Bushes and the world elite have Mr. Trump's financial records.  It is not my business, but the revelations might prove embarrassing.  I am convinced that soon enough, or it may have happened already, Donald Trump will be will be told to meet privately with Pres. George H.W.Bush, and other elites.  In a deal that may not be refused, Trump will be told to end the campaign for President P.D.Q. (Bach:), else the Trump tax records and business ties with the Clinton family will be made public.  As part of this deal, in addition to spinning the end of the campaign however he sees fit, Mr. Trump will be awarded anywhere from $150 million to a near billion and the Trump University case will be settled out of court.  Of course, Donald Trump will need to take the money and run; he just might need that $150 million at least.

So who becomes the nominee for the Republicans then?  Why it is the only candidate endorsed by two past Republican Presidents: Jeb Bush!  But wait, the GOP does not want Bush.  Well, a lot can change when you are in a state of regret.  The GOP is now willing to have as their nominee the person they had chosen from the onset.  As it will be, the Convention will become a Bush love fest, there will be no riots, and Jeb Bush will take the lead in the polls along with whoever is the Vice-Presidential nominee.

And the Coup de Grace; Jeb Bush will become the 45th President of the United States.  I know, we all think it will be Sen. Hillary Clinton, and it should be Sec. Clinton.  Yet it will not be happening.  Putting Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee effectively ends the advantages the Clinton campaign has so far.  And as I mentioned before, the Bush family allow for when and how the Clinton family will be world leaders.  At this time, due to Hillary Clinton's relative lack of trust among the public, her age (69 on October 27), perceived scandals and health; a decision has been made that Jeb Bush will be given the Presidency.  These sorts of deals have happened before.  In the Terry Reed book regarding the Bush Sr. Iran Contra deals, Compromised, it was mentioned that in light of Judge Lawrence Walsh's indictments of senior Bush Administration officials and the ensuing drop in polls; a meeting between Bush 41 and Pres. Clinton took place.  In that meeting, Bush 41 allowed for Pres. Bill Clinton to get elected in exchange for Presidential Pardons of senior Bush Administration officials and a ceasing of Iran-Contra investigations and public revelations.  Do not be surprised that 24 years later, another meeting and understanding has been made regarding the elections.  Only this time, it will be Jeb Bush that becomes the President in exchange for the Republican party to cease any investigations and perceived problems regarding the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton family.

I can already hear from many of those in the alternative right wing internet media their opposition towards this done deal.  Many, such as the fraudulent Mike Rivero, are claiming that if Trump is not nominated, the GOP will have handed the vote to Clinton.  Frankly, the Paul bots have now become the Trump bots.  Never mind the fact that Corey Lewandowski, Donald Trump's campaign manager, was fired today.  You will not hear the Trump bots mention that.  Heck, their Trump offense has considerably been weakened.  They cannot anymore defend the indefensible.  So, all this talk of riots in Cleveland, the GOP tanking, low turnout, etc. is only talk.  You watch as Jeb Bush becomes the nominee the latest by the day before the RNC Convention starts.  And you want to know a little secret: those that are decrying this done deal today will vote for Jeb Bush on election day.  Because clearly their hatred of Sen. Hillary Clinton, which is a microcosm of all that they hate about themselves (is that not right, Mike Rivero?), and their mentality which is ABC (Anyone Besides Clinton), they will privately yet gladly vote for Jeb Bush.  You want to know why?  It is because these same people 16 years ago voted for George W.Bush for the Presidency, thinking that all would be well for themselves and the country in their utmost selfish behavior.  We all know what happened one year later.  And for a while there, the alternative media began to see the error of their ways.  None the less, the alternative media can never shake their right-wing ideals.

Well, you heard it here first.  Jeb Bush is the Republican Presidential Nominee after Donald Trump has self destructed by choice and by design.  Did any of you honestly think a Bush would be rejected for the nomination?  It was always supposed to be a Bush vs. Clinton election.  I had hoped that Clinton would prevail, yet I am convinced a deal was made to put Jeb Bush in the White House.  This has got to be the most impressive Bush Swerve in my political memory; rivaling the numerous swerves Vince Russo thought of during his years with WCW and TNA.  And those swerves put an end to my watching wrestling on a weekly basis.  And yet, I am not sure if we are Grover or Mr. Johnson in these situations.

I just realized I need to upgrade the blog to show video and audio files.  Just Google Grover and Mr. Johnson, and see what you think.  Also, I hope to eventually upload my own videos.  There is a lot more to come, and there is already something in the drafts that needed to be held over so I could mention this done deal.  

Talk to you soon,

Robert

PS.  A Blogger exclusive, for now.  Some of my favorite Grover and Mr. Johnson sketches.

The swerve is always revealed where you are least aware of it.  

Before the broadcast: Revolt of the Inductees.

Codifying an art form into legitimacy is in theory an interesting way of at least allowing the art form to become highbrow culture.  One way to do this is by presenting awards and treasures for what we may consider the best in one's respective fields and ideals.  In effect, the highbrow worlds intertwining business, commerce, governance, academia, history and medicine can use their theoretical stamps of approval on one such aspect of pop culture.  Rock and Roll and/or Pop Music is one such field.  How do you know if what you are seeing and hearing is Rock and Pop?  Well, I tend to agree with David Byrne when he mentions that a rock concert has so many interactions going on with the artists and audiences involved.  If you are required to attend in formal attire and play the music with notation in hand; not to mention make no personal gestures between audience and artists and, most importantly, do not make the show unique in your own way if dealing with no longer living writers; then you are watching a classical performance.  Which by the way is quite fine, albeit much of the music and performances you will see and hear resonate from a time long gone and rather ancient.

There may come a time when certain forms of contemporary songwriting and music playing is given the same revenance and acquired taste given in classical music.  I suspect we are seeing that somewhat in Jazz music of the big band era (Glenn Miller, the Dorsey Brothers) and Broadway show tunes.  And yet, the Rock and Roll era has been around since the early blues era of the 1930's and has no sign of slowing down.  It does show signs of changing formats and popularity, but the idea of the now still stands.  So you can imagine what we collectively feel at this time every year when the annual Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony comes around.  And in 2016, this was the induction ceremony when the inductees that appeared more or less told the Nominating Committee, Jann Wenner, Play-Tone (Tom Hanks' production company) and the sponsors to go screw themselves with the rough end of a pineapple.

Yes, it actually happened, and apparently the brass at the RRHOF are unable to do a thing about it.  This year inducted were N.W.A. (I assume Dr. Dre will be inducted on his own later on), Deep Purple, Steve Miller, Chicago, Cheap Trick and Bert Berns (1929-1967).  I would like to focus on the leading four inductees in 2016 for this essay.  Each of them had issues with the Hall this year. The family of Bert Berns did not have any issues pertaining to Berns' posthumous induction, nor did Cheap Trick have any explicit problems.  I will say that Cheap Trick guitarist Rick Nielsen did thank the Rock Hall for limiting the amount of tickets so that Nielsen's family did not need to find seating for what will be his 9 grandchildren.

Perhaps the most obvious band drama this year came from Chicago.  You would not think this would be the case, seeing that many of the band members are still together after some 49 years in the business.  Well, just for a moment forget about who showed up and notice who was not there.  Many of you will say Terry Kath, and of course you would be right; although his daughter did accept the award on his behalf.  Mind you, Terry Kath died in a tragic accident in 1978.

I'm namely referring to Peter Cetera in who did not show up.  Knowing Chicago's history and a great deal of what went down with Cetera and the rest of the band during the 1980's, it was a certainty that he would not show up.  You can't say Peter Cetera didn't try to get a reunion going.  However, it appears that issues stemming from their 1981-1985 era when David Foster was their producer and collaborated with Cetera on songwriting, not to mention their resurgence of the time, is still a mixed blessing on the rest of the band's part.  Rightly or wrongly, that era did happen; and rightly or wrongly, Chicago has not been the same since Terry Kath died and Peter Cetera left.  I am also aware that financially Cetera is wealthier than the current version of Chicago put together.  So jealousy abounds.

If any band inducted this year were known to have personality issues, it would have to have been Deep Purple.  Let's get this out of the way: Ritchie Blackmore did not show up.  Apparently Blackmore did not consider the idea of showing up, nor did the current band want him there.  And yes, Rod Evans wasn't there either, Mr. Evans wouldn't be caught dead as it were showing his face in public relating to anything Deep Purple; not after the fake Deep Purple of 1980.  None the less, it appeared that the producers of the show and the RRHOF basically wanted to induct Deep Purple first and shorten the speeches of the living inductees who were there and limit the amount of songs to perform just to get it over with.  Glenn Hughes has come out and pretty much confirmed these theories.

N.W.A. did show up, including Dr. Dre for the first of what will be 2 inductions (Dre will go in on his own a couple years from now as a Non-Performer).  The living inductees were willing to perform with someone well known doing Eazy-E's impressive rapping.  However, the Rock Hall and the producers of the show had other ideas as to how performances and reservations would be approached.  Needless to say, both sides were at an impasse; and as is customary in certain matters, N.W.A. accepted and gave their speeches yet did not perform.

Okay, so issues with bands and groups; not a surprise.  It does become a surprise when an issue arrives regarding an individual artist.  In this year, Steve Miller may have done us all a great service.  Though quite honored and accepting of the induction, Steve Miller did expose a number of odd choices and hypocritical matters pertaining to how the RRHOF operates and the issues regarding the induction ceremony.

This was during the induction acceptance speech. After performing, Miller had some words to say in a press interview.

There has indeed been more to discuss about the events and revelations from last week, both from Steve Miller and regarding the flawed structure of the Nominating Committee and the voting process at large.  In a later essay, one in which I will cross-post alongside my involvement with the Future Rock legends website, a lot more will be said regarding how to effectively reform the RRHOF.  I think in essence it needs to be similar to how we at FRL promote our Revisited/Projected Rock Hall Project.

Tune in to this station,

Robert

Bots 2.0: The Trend Reversal

Nine years ago, in 2007, I became aware of a internet trend that lasted quite a while.  It was in February of that year when I went on to Alex Jones' primary website Infowars.  For quite some time, even to a certain extant now; I would frequent the site and become immersed in getting the truth out regarding 911, the Middle East, and honestly the machinations of what Mr. Jones names the globalists.  On that specific day, Dr. Ron Paul, a Texas Republican member of the US House of Representatives on and off from March 1976 through late 2011, had come on the program to discuss future plans.  Those plans included running for President of the United States in 2008; this time solely as a Republican, as opposed to running in 1988 on the Libertarian line.

This prompted Alex Jones to declare that Dr. Ron Paul, admittedly a rare political figure well known as an expert on foreign policy, finance and medicine; was the only choice for President that would fix everything.  That was not exactly what he said, but it was effectively what was said.  Pretty soon, virtually every important alternative internet website and political weblog was clamoring and begging people to vote for Dr. Paul.  I never took the bait.  How I saw it; if a Presidential candidate is going to offer you every wish your heart desires, nothing will ever be delivered.  If a candidate does not promise anything, yet offers realistic solutions; that candidate is who you need to vote for.  It also seemed patently absurd that the voting public would replace a Cheney-Bush Republican Presidency with a Paul Presidency from the same political party.  The only reason Dr Paul was anti-war, I deduced, was due to the knowledge of America's finances being in a collapsing stage.  Dr. Paul not once has ever, to my knowledge, opposed many of these Middle East conflagrations on a moral merit solely. As well, Dr. Paul's libertarian viewpoint on economic policy is equivalent to an old polemic on political ideologies:

A liberal will see a homeless person and provide him money, food, a coat, and/or a gift to alleviate his plight.

A conservative will see a homeless person and give him a book and/or pamphlet of religious and conservative writings.  That is if the conservative does anything about the plight. of the homeless person.

A libertarian will see a homeless person and will ask that a wall be built in front of and in back of the homeless population so that he does not have to see them when he next walks down the street.  In short, out of sight out of mind.

Not surprisingly, it turns out that nearly the bulk of the internet media were libertarian minded.  And lo and behold, they found Dr. Ron Paul as their champion.  The internet was awash with incessant pandering to the Paul family and their advancement in our political world.  Dr. Paul and Sen. Rand Paul have taken this hero worship and ran with it unabashedly.  However, their policies can be debunked and ridiculed if one takes the time to actually do it.  In 2007, I believe Dr. Paul's campaign cratered when he appeared on Meet The Press with Tim Russert and Mr Russert was quite proficient in poking holes at Dr. Paul's policies.  In 2012, Dr. Paul's campaign began to fail yet again when this time prominent Democrats like Mayor Ed Koch forcefully examined the perceived Anti-Semitism inherent in the Paul family; which then got other Democrats to publicly give Dr. Paul the same scrutiny as any other Republican.

However, it was in the 2012 Presidential Campaign that the internet media lost any and all sense of objectivity in effectively forcing Dr. Ron Paul into the Republican nomination at any price.  It started with the contested results at the Iowa Caucus, which I will admit had been won by Sen. Rick Santorum in a rather dubious manner.  Any momentum the Paul campaign had was neutered the next week in New Hampshire.  Dr. Paul came in third at best, and Mitt Romney began his ascension to winning the GOP Nomination in states won, delegates and the national popular vote.  In a related matter, the Paul family could deal with Mr. Romney as the Republican nominee as opposed to all the others; even Sen. Rand Paul endorsed Mitt Romney.  But of course, the internet media, so much in the tank for Dr Paul for over 5 years by that point, would have none of it.  When the primaries were completed and before the RNC convention, numerous YouTube figures led by Matt Larson and similar bloggers led campaigns to have Dr. Paul become the nominee by packing the delegates with Paul supporters.  The theory of this being that the delegates to each state would be those that voted and campaigned for Dr. Paul; and thus, in their own accord, would unilaterally place Dr. Paul as the candidate and not the rightful winner of the primary in former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.  This was a complete fantasy, one in which I and many other political science people knew would never work.  It would have been a brokered convention by any other name; and voters would defect from the GOP in droves.

But even then they were still not done.  Days after the convention, Michael Rivero of What Really Happened led a call for Dr. Ron Paul to declare an Independent Presidential run and announce it on his Labor Day week appearance on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.  I remember the calls and theories presented by these internet media types like Mr. Rivero throughout 2012; and was both amused and concerned over the more fantastical theories and hopes that had accumulated during the course of the year.  Well, by that point I had enough of at least Mike Rivero's tomfoolery.  Just before Dr. Paul's appearance on Leno, I wrote Mr. Rivero an e-mail telling him to effectively grow up and accept the loss.  I clearly asked him a question which no answer was needed:  did Rivero and co. want to have the Paul family in a rather volatile and bitter Holiday season if Dr. Ron Paul ran as an Independent while Sen. Rand Paul already endorsed Mitt Romney?  I would like to think that email helped in stopping Mr. Rivero's absurd thinking on these matters.  Neither WRH or other websites continued to drink the spiked punch afterwards, barring Ryan Dawson who has become rather embittered over the years.

Four years alter, and I am seeing this happen again.  Yet surprisingly this time, it is not the Republicans that are in this pickle.  It sadly is the Democrats.  For the past 16 years, if not more than that, the heir to the throne of the Democratic party and by extension the heir to leadership has been Sec. Of State Hillary Clinton.  I am one that believes Hillary Clinton should have run for President in 2000 rather than get elected to the US Senate: that way, everything that has happened in these past 16 years would not have happened.  After the 2012 election, which involved both Pres Obama and Mitt Romney resorting to e-vote fraud and resulted in a 50%-48% Obama victory; the immediate reaction should have been to allow Sec. of State Clinton to obtain the Presidency by Election Day 2016.  And for a while there in late 2012 and early 2013, that narrative was being utilized.  In fact, one YouTube poster projected that there would be two-term Democratic Presidents through at least 2048.  It would start with Sen. and Sec. Of state Hillary Clinton, then Sen. Cory Booker, then Chelsea Clinton and finally Malaia Obama.  That seems about right, and I would be accepting of this lineage.

However, the current President, Barack Obama, is not pleased.  For one, it it meant that two Clintons and Sen. Booker would get elected before the next Obama was elected.  Secondly, Hillary Clinton works in a different outlook than Democrats coming from Obama's coattails.  So what has followed, I think, has been for three years now a purging from within the Democratic Party of continuity. Starting with the Boston Bombing inside job, the Democrats have been loosing the social political and economic narrative; resulting in net losses for Democrats in elections.  This accumulated in 2014 when the Senate went to a 54-46 Senate Majority.  By the way, the Senate elections in 2016 are projecting a 52-48 Republican majority, a far cry from last year when it was assumed the Democrats could easily regain the Senate and perhaps even reach 60 Democratic Senators.

Knowing this, the Democratic Party would gain momentum and relevance with a Clinton Presidency.  And yet, it has not been the typical GOP gawkers that have been problem for the Clinton campaign, as it would be expected.  No, this time it is an insurrection of Democrats not ever having engaged in realpolitik.  For instance, there is Sen. Bernie Sanders running for the nomination and putting forth votes that are a mirage of ideas at best.  There is former Sen. Jim Webb running an Independent bid which, while not going that far, will put a dent in Election Day votes.  There is Vice President Joe Biden, who based on what Clinton insider Larry Nichols  has recently been saying, is running a shadow campaign for the Presidency just on the off chance that an indictment is handed out to Hillary Clinton over the fake e-mail scandals.  There is Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who has not endorsed anyone yet precisely because Sen. Warren believes she is best qualified to be President.  There is Gov. Jerry Brown from California whom has never been a Clinton ally.  And yes, there is Pres. Obama, who has not endorsed anyone yet.

The immediate focus, and by all means the Paul family for the Democrats this year, is Sen. Bernie Sanders.  As I type this on the day of the New Hampshire primary, Sen. Sanders lost Iowa by only a tenth of a percent and is looking to win New Hampshire.  Now, as I said before, President Bill Clinton lost Iowa and New Hampshire but went on to winning the Presidency in 1992; in 2016 I would suspect Hillary Cinton to easily win New York, California, South Carolina, Texas, North Carolina and many other states; enough to effectively seal the deal by early May when New York has its primaries.  Yet, I am not entirely seeing it this year.  Instead, I am seeing a second attempt at dismantling the rightful heir to the throne in Sec. of State Clinton by fellow Democrats.  It is known that the Republican Party could theoretically be content with a Clinton Presidency, as they were under Bill Clinton's time in office.  We all know hat a Sanders Presidency will involve complete political gridlock.  If you think nothing is being done now, wait until a four year long standstill reminiscent of The Zax.

Now that I finish this, I am noticing that Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders have won their respective primaries in New Hampshire.  Both of them have them won by landslides, which is more than 10% of the difference between first and second.  While I still think these outcomes will be corrected next week, I am not pleased with these results.  As well, when the tide does turn, we will be seeing Sanders supporters getting even more obtuse and wanting their candidate at all costs.  I am telling you all: Sen. Bernie Sanders being the nominee will mean Michael Bloomberg runs as an independent. And when that happens, you will have Trump, Gov. John Kasich, Sen. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or even (gasp!) Jeb Bush as our President come election day.  We will be in ruins before this year is out.

We simply cannot afford another 9 11 or worse to occur.  We also cannot be the one developed nation to treat their women as fourth class citizens.  This needs to change soon.

I will have more to say in the days to come,

Robert

And the Oscar goes to...

It has been nearly a week since the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced the nominees for 2015 films in the next Oscars telecast on February 28.  This will be the 89th annual Academy Awards ceremony, the most prestigious and important night for the motion picture industry centered in Hollywood.  It also happens to be one of the few awards shows I tend to watch as much as I can: they easily run overtime.  So, what do I think of the nominations this year?

For the past three years, after Roger Ebert passed away, I have been attempting to see movies that I know will be excellent.  That fortunately results in getting to look at movies year round that are quite good and are easily Oscar caliber.  That is not to say there were some clunkers I saw this past year, but they were few and far between.  In this regard, I was able to see many of the nominated movies this past year; the most recent of which is the Lenny Abrahamson movie Room, which I highly recommend though it is not for the faint of heart.  A great deal of these movies that I saw have one thing in common:  the filmmakers and people involved with these movies are lily white mostly.  Half of the films I saw this year only had white people.  This was not a choice of mine; the fact is the bulk of what is considered best in 2015 were what we may consider white movies.  There are exceptions: the newest Spike Lee masterwork Chi-Raq, Straight Outta Compton, Creed, possibly Sicario, and I would surmise Star Wars: The Force Awakens.  Those movies dealt with issues and people that are minorities.  Let it be known, I have not yet seen Quentin Tarantino's new film The Hateful Eight.

I want to take notice of Chi-Raq for a moment.  Any one that has seen Spike Lee's latest joint would immediately consider this not only among the best of 2015, yet perhaps Mr. Lee's most coherent and innovative movie in recent years.  I tend to think all of Spike Lee's movies, including recent films like Oldboy, are interesting and innovative.  By the way, I hope the three hour plus director's cut of Oldboy is released soon enough.  Back to Chi-Raq, it was a marvelous film; Teyonah Parris is a star in the making, Nick Cannon can actually act, and anytime Angela Basset, Jennifer Hudson and Samuel L. Jackson appear in a movie of this sort you know to expect some of the best method acting around.

And I watched it on Amazon Prime.

Yes, Amazon Prime.  Indeed, Jeff Bezos of Amazon teamed with Spike Lee's 40 Acres And A Mule Filmworks along with Roadside Attractions in financing this film.  Rather than what would be perceived as a one time deal; online streaming and financing is going to be the future of how we view movies.  We are seeing this in the realm of American television, wherein Netflix, Amazon, Vimeo, YouTube, Apple and other providers are not only distributing shows; these businesses are financing newer talent and taking the risks to produce quality series that networks are not prone to carry.  As a result of the web's omnipresence, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (Golden Globes) and the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (Emmys) have allowed web shows to qualify for their respective awards.

Up to now, there has not been a need for the Oscars to look at this web presence.  However, that is going to change; what with Chi-Raq being shown on Amazon and Netflix co-financing Beasts Of No Nations, a movie I have not yet seen.  Rest assured, as the trend continues for most multiplexes to show only the movies guaranteed to fill the box office, more important and thoughtful films will be exhibited online first.  And I am sad to say, this will affect African-American cinema; notably non-action based films by African-Americans.  It is already a rare sight when a black culture film like Dear White People is able to be released to theaters nationwide, much less been seen willingly by white people.  I mentioned that when I saw that movie, which by the way also starred Teyonah Parris, there were about a dozen or so in the theater seeing it; maybe two people in there were white, including me.

This brings me to something that has been brought to my attention, along with others recently.  The membership of the Academy happens to be some 80% white, and 76% of that 80% being men.  The average minimal age for most Academy members is 60.  As well, as much as we do not like to admit this, nearly all Academy members have not gotten over the end of the New Hollywood era; that period of time when the studios and their parent companies allowed free reign in what movies were made. Thus, the voting members tend to look at awarding people from that time (1963-1993) or those that remind the voters of that time period.  A noble and understandable gesture; yet it has been 23 years since what I consider the end of New Hollywood, when Steven Spielberg changed course in his movies starting with Schindler's List.  I hope to explain why I think it marked an end of an era later on.

It is rather obvious that, in this post Roger Ebert, post movie house era of films, AMPAS will need to alter their membership and outlook.  There have been small steps recently, including Spike Lee receiving an honorary Oscar and Cheryl Boone Isaacs becoming the first female African American President of the Academy.  Yet those are just small measures; far more important will be issues pertaining to qualifications for movies shown online or on demand first.  This will go along with a greater emphasis on independent films and more avant garde choices.  Perhaps there will be a newer New Hollywood that can emerge.

That being said, what are my Oscar predictions?  Well in short, I thought the best movie of 2015 was the Tom McCarthy directed Spotlight.  Quite obviously, Spotlight is a movie that fits the paradigm of what New Hollywood represented, and has the ability to show risk taking in a blockbuster or nothing environment.  It is my hope that Spotlight wins Best Picture, Tom McCarthy wins Best Director, and Mr. McCarthy along with Josh Singer win Best Original Screenplay at least.  I would like to see Leonardo Dicaprio win Best Actor in The Revenant, and I do hope Brie Larson or Soairse Ronan win Best Actress in either Room or Brooklyn, respectively.  I have not yet seen the Charlotte Rampling movie 45 years, yet I do consider Ms. Rampling to be one of the more iconic screen presences in her lifetime.  I think Rooney Mara should win Best Supporting Actress in Carol, though I have yet to see the Quentin Tarantino film The Hateful Eight which nabbed Jennifer Jason Leigh her first nomination.  Mind you, I did like Rachel McAdams in Spotlight.  And this might be a bit controversial; yet I think Tom Hardy is most deserving of a Best Supporting Actor win in The Revenant. Though of course, Mark Ruffalo is a great actor himself, particularly in Spotlight.

  Best Adapted Screenplay is a bit of a push: I liked what Emma Donoghue accomplished in writing her own screenplay to Room based on her novel.  I was also amazed at Adam McKay and Charles Randolph adapting Michael Lewis' book The Big Short into an impressive film.  Either one would be fine by me.  Best Cinematography should go to Roger Deakins who shot Sicario, though I would also think John Seale for his involvement with Mad Max: Fury Road would be a wise choice.  Best Editing should go to Margaret Sixel who edited Mad Max: Fury Road, though I was impressed with Tom McArdle and his approach to cutting Spotlight.  And I would like to see Carter Burwell finally win an Oscar for his musical score used in Carol.

There are of course other nominees and other categories to consider.  And I will be doing that in the week or so running up to the February 28 awards ceremony.  Right now, these are my inferences and hopes for who will take home the prize.  Just to let it be known: I will be watching and I do hope to either live blog the event or perhaps even record my reactions on video while it is still ongoing.  I commit to not delaying the live blogging like what happened last year; albeit that was also due to getting laid off from my previous job the day after last year's Oscars.  This time should be quite different.

One other thing I want to mention.  I am a subscriber to YouTube's Red paid membership site.  I am pleased that I can see content that otherwise would be restricted or ad driven on the free site.  None the less, I am hoping YouTube Red will be allowed to start streaming movies through the subscription service.  As of now, some movies of importance are allowed without paying extra.  Most of these films though are of this quality.

These are the sorts of films I watch when snow weekends are here.

One more week until the first primaries: stay tuned for my thoughts,

Robert

And then I woke up...

Something has been on my mind for a while now.  It deals with breakups and reunions.  I suppose this started when the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame announced 5 of their inductees for 2016.  Of the 5, only Steve Miller is going in individually.  Albeit, this will be the first induction for Dr. Dre when the rap super group N.W.A. get inducted this year; Dr. Dre will likely go in on his own shortly after.  So that leaves us with three active bands that could reunite with past members.


Cheap Trick in its current incarnation (Robin Zander, Rick Nielsen, Tom Pettersson and Dax Nielsen) are probably going to reunite with an original member (Bun E. Carlos).  Of course, this will not be easy; Carlos' interview with Rolling Stone magazine explains why.

Chicago will be for this one time reuniting with Peter Cetera.  Indeed, Mr. Cetera has been willing to initiate the summit.

Deep Purple is the clear uncertainty.  I am not sure if they will perform, and obviously Ritchie Blackmore is someone that will make sure bridges stay burned.

With that in mind, a similar hypothetical reunion is taking place at Coachella in April.  This is to go with the actual LCD Soundsystem reunion James Murphy has decided.  I am speaking of course on the purported Guns N Roses reunion.  For any GNR fan that is anxiously waiting for Axl Rose and Slash to be on the same stage in 23 years: do not hold your breath.  We will know it when we see it.

Like minded people come together when it appears joining forces will be most beneficial to create magic.  And there are times when someone decides to get involved with a budding or established project, hoping to improve upon the concept and add their input.  And yet, it only lasts for so long.

I think back to the era of the great american songbook; when Broadway was the place to be to hear new standards in song craft along with acting.  It was also the time when movie musicals were the highest form of entertainment for the masses.  It was an era of songwriting partnerships, buoyed by the likes of Rodgers and Hart along with Kern and Hammerstein.  The partnership of Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart was one of the better songwriting tandems for some 24 years.  By all means, Rodgers' melodies and Hart's sophisticated lyricism were the standard for proper collaborative songwriting.  And yet, Lorenz Hart had some difficulties in his life: namely not freely revealing his sexuality and coupled with his chronic alcoholism.  Just before Hart died in 1943, the Rodgers and Hart partnership had ended due in no small part to Richard Rodgers no longer finding the nerve to put up with Lorenz Hart's increasing erratic behavior.  Sadly, the loss of the partnership and Hart's mother earlier in the year prompted Mr. Hart to go on a two day drinking binge which ended in his death on an operating table on November 22, 1943.

Though not having the same amount of years or even exclusivity, Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein II were frequent collaborators for some 15 years.  By that point, Kern had the most impressive lyricist to work with and Hammerstein had the most interesting composer to be involved with.  That partnership ended at about the same time the Rodgers and Hart team disbanded, albeit Jerome Kern had other partnerships and interests to attend to. Thus in 1943, Oscar Hammerstein II became the lyricist for a project Richard Rodgers had started with Lorenz Hart but later needed to be changed.  The ensuing musical was Oklahoma.  For 17 years onward, Rodgers and Hammerstein held a partnership that eclipsed their other collaborations with other songwriters.  Several great musicals came from this tandem; not to mention a considerable amount of songs to add to the great songbook.

Rodgers and Hammerstein's partnership ended in 1960 when Hammerstein passed away from stomach cancer.  Throughout the remainder of his life, Richard Rodgers would collaborate with other noted lyricists.  And yet, while the songs were quite good, Rodgers never did reach the same heights as he did with Hart and Hammerstein.  Yet in a way, the fact that two well established and acclaimed songwriters teamed up and eclipsed their past partnerships was a better fit to combine their fine artistry.

I then think back to a band that formed in the late 1960's and were making inroads with an increasing popularity by the middle 1970's.  It was 1974-1975 and Genesis had completed a 2 LP concept album that is still considered their peak of creativity: The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway.  The making of the album was not an ideal setting to begin with, wrangling over the writing and creative process.  Yet in all fairness, The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway, like much of Genesis' output up till then, was pretty much Peter Gabriel's idea.  Indeed on The Lamb, Gabriel wrote the liner notes and story, wrote all lyrics except for one song which Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford wrote, wrote half of the title track with Banks, composed music for a few songs solely (namely The Carpet Crawlers), helped in producing the album and being credited with, along side singing, voices and flute "variations on the above and experiments with foreign sounds".  By that it meant, Peter Gabriel either overdubbed and/or played live every instrument and new soundscapes at any given point.

Starting around Thanksgiving and continuing through May 1975, Genesis went on tour with an elaborate stage show; which was fully functioning maybe 20% of all the shows.  They performed the whole album live and in sequence, buoyed by Gabriel's singing, costume changes and iconic stage presence.  This created a long simmering schism between Steve Hackett, Tony Banks, Mike Rutherford and Phil Collins on one end and Peter Gabriel on the other end.  That may not be entirely fair to say this: Gabriel and Hackett collaborated often enough and Banks, Rutherford and Gabriel began their music careers as schoolchildren.  And, despite what some may say, Gabriel and Collins were quite chummy with each other.  Still, the concerts and ensuing media attention focused on Peter Gabriel to the exclusion of the other Genesis members.  As well, a schism had emerged with respect to the band's approach of their songs and albums through 1975.  It still persists, with some of the Genesis members (namely Tony Banks) having clear reservations on the Lamb yet applauding everything else; while Peter Gabriel feels Supper's Ready and The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (the whole album and tour) were the high watermarks of his Genesis years and not thinking as highly on the other songs and albums.

The tour ended in early May, and with that so did Peter Gabriel's tenure in Genesis.  Steve Hackett left in 1977 based on similar artistic differences approached regarding Wind And Wuthering.  In all honesty, the four man lineup and the three man lineup were more commercially rewarding and artistically interesting.  I happen to like all Genesis eras, including the Calling All Stations late 1990's period when Ray Wilson was in the band in place of Phil Collins.  Indeed, I think Genesis were able to last as long as they did due to averting a band implosion with Gabriel leaving when he did.  I also feel Steve Hackett was able to expand his horizons by leaving Genesis.

And then of course, there is Peter Gabriel.  It has been 41 years since Mr. Gabriel left Genesis, and not once has he felt the need to go back.  Indeed, since 1979, although it has been hinted at, Peter Gabriel when he performs live does not perform any Genesis song.  Honestly, he does not need to.  Peter Gabriel's influence and excellence has eclipsed the influence and excellence of Genesis, a feat that does not often happen.  Look at it this way: Peter Gabriel has been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice; with Genesis in 2010, and on his own in 2014.  He did not attend the Genesis induction, yet accepted and performed at his own induction four years later.  In fact, the presenter, Chris Martin, mentioned Genesis a lot more than Peter Gabriel did (once in his speech, in passing.)  And that is quite alright, in part because a reunion of the classic lineup of Genesis involving Gabriel has no chance of ever happening.

Even when there are reunions of the five, as can be seen in the documentary Sum Of The Parts; everyone is quite nice and all, yet Banks, Rutherford and Collins pretty much have no intention of willingly allowing Gabriel and Hackett to be the lead figures in detailing the history.  Heck, Steve Hackett's post Genesis work was completely overlooked in the documentary.  And it felt like the interviewees were going over Peter Gabriel's individual works only because they really had to.  I can remember watching it on Showtime and the obvious realization that the Genesis that made The Lamb have no intention of ever reuniting in full probably sunk in more than any other time.

Those are just two examples.  In the end for both examples, the breakup of one partnership signaled the beginning of more fruitful experiences with either other partnerships or more often finding greater rewards and artistic merit as individuals.  I can understand that as well.  Not long ago, I became involved with groups and organizations that came at the right time for my growth and experience.  It went all so very well; this included some really great days and events to remember.  Everything went into an orderly and functioning process that involved budding friendships and a sense that the partnerships would last .

And then I woke up...

When I did, then and now,  newer options came about.  And it became clear that the partnerships and groupings had ended.  Reluctantly or with hope, we realize that we must change partners yet again

Do not worry, fellow readers.  I am still here and still blogging; perhaps that long-awaited video and multimedia output for future essays and commentaries will happen.  What I mentioned is relative to a a community involvement that has run its course.  This weblog has not and will never run its course!

Talk to you all sooner than later,

Robert

PS.  The Oscar nominations were announced two days ago.  And yesterday, I saw The Revenant.  I will have a lot more to say on these matters shortly.

PSA Fail

I want to show you some recent Public Service Announcements that were authorized by the New South Wales governmental premiership in Australia.  The first three are separate YouTube videos.

The next two are a bit difficult to embed, so here are the direct YouTube links.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoSudhJJE58

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NLUSDlUvcE

Now here is a compilation of all three videos.

Now, if you did not know any better, you would think the sloth ads espousing the need to cut sodium from your diet, recognizing the signs of crippling depression and telling people that it is okay to come out of the closet were the real ads.  Well, those ads were fake PSAs created with good intentions by YouTube user quolism.  The Actual three ads in the 2 minute compilation are the ones which, I think still. are being shown throughout Australia.

Let it be known; I do not use weed, nor any other drug for that matter.  None the less, weed is among the least problematic of drugs.  At worst, weed is basically a crutch with little purpose: apart from having a craving for foods, getting momentarily buzzed, aiding some medical issues and slowly but surely making someone feel odd.  I can think of far worse drugs and tranquilizers:

Tobacco one can find at a store, which causes cancers and health problems.
Alcohol, particularly if used daily.
Cocaine
Heroin
Meth
Quaaludes
Prescription medicines used beyond and above the needed amount; including over the counter medicines.
Crack cocaine

Indeed, the outdoor party commercial shows everyone except the sloth with an alcoholic drink of some kind.  You would think the ad would have showed the problems of drinking a bit much.

Clearly, the NSW government have little idea of how to do effective anti-drug messaging.  What should be sober ads are shown to be pretty damn funny.  As I said, the Stoner Sloth campaign dropped the ball on these messages.  And to think, the ads could have been more interesting and more worthy.

Do better next time should there be a next time,

Robert

An Award that means little and a Station that means a lot

This Sunday, I and others watched the American Music Awards.  Some of the performances were quite excellent; I really liked seeing Coldplay, Alanis Morrisette, Demi Lovato, Nick Jonas, Meghan Trainor and Celine Dion.  Yet, the others either had a bit of an off night; or they are not that great singers and performers as one may think.  I do not outright hate them; yet I am not one to buy their CDs or hear their new songs on Apple Music and iTunes.  Of the leading artists that either performed or were there, I can think of only one band or artist that is among the all time greats:

Coldplay.

The only other artists that come close to being legendary and influential singers that night were:

Alanis Morrisette
Gwen Stefani
Macklemore and Ryan Lewis
Carrie Underwood

The rest, even though I may like them; I do not think they will ever sniff the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or even receive a Lifetime Grammy, AMA, or MTV award.  It is quite clear that the mainstream music scene is running out of ideas.

And yet, there is some good music to still be found.  One place that I do find it, apart from the Apple Music service, is the radio station of Fordham University.  It is 90.7 WFUV, and it frankly is a godsend.  If you want to get a sampling of the best music of 2015, WFUV is the station to go to.  In fact, here are some songs I have heard on WFUV  released this year that might eventually make my personal best of music list next month.  Do have a look and see if you like these.


Adele - Hello

Kurt Vile - Pretty Pimpin

Tame Impala - The Less I Know The Better

Dawes - Things Happen

Josh Tillman aka Father John Misty - True Affection

John Grant and Tracey Thorn - Disappointing

Nathaniel Rateliff - SOB

Dave Gahan - All Of This And Nothing

New Order - Restless

And again this is just a Small sampling of some of the best music one can find: albeit, I doubt I Heart Media will play these songs on their stations, and you can forget MTV showing any of these videos.

One more song. This ties with the Christmas and holiday seasons upon us.

Mariah Carey - All I Want For Christmas Is You

More observations of the year to come as we draw it to a close.

Have a good night,

Robert

Same Old False Flag

Earlier today, I went to see the newest 007 James bond movie, Spectre.  It was quite good, though this Daniel Craig vehicle felt at times similar to the Roger Moore era.  There was something I had noticed during the course of the movie which revealed the nature of false flag inside jobs.

A proposed global intelligence operation is in the planning stages to be implemented in the United Kingdom involving 9 countries.  At one point, the proposal wins a majority of votes for approval, yet with South Africa being the lone holdout; the proposed Center for National Security can not go forward.  This obviously changes when CNS' financier, the longtime Bond nemesis Spectre, authorizes a false flag terror incident in South Africa.  Within days, South Africa joins the CNS.

Now, that was a movie; yet a movie at times reflects real life more so than what our leaders and news media would like for you to believe.  Just yesterday, a 27 year old British Arab agent for different organizations (MI5, Islamic State, CIA, KGB, does not matter) was targeted for death by a drone strike.  His name was Mohammed Emwazi, known to many as Jihadi John.  He purportedly was known for supposedly beheading supposed hostages on camera in a desert.  These videos, which I have seen, look fake; all of them.  They all follow the same script, with the same cutaway when the supposed beheading occurs.  In effect, in order to legitimize President Obama's recent news interview with George Stephanopoulous of ABC News that Islamic State is "contained" (and we wold know since IS is funded by US); Mr. Emwazi was killed.

A little over 24 hours later, and just one day before an important multi-nation conference regarding Climate Change which would include perhaps a plan to end the Syrian wars; purported IS sympathizers coordinated some 6 different hostage takings and dirty bomb assaults in the 10th and 11th districts of Paris, France.  As of now, 153 Parisians have since passed away; the largest one day death of French citizens since the end of World War II.  I am not sure who is responsible, and I am certain this was not a coincidence in respect to the killing of Mr. Emwazi.  However, it would be easy for so many to want to believe this was an us vs. them attack.  It usually never is; in fact, the culprits can be found in one's government and financial dynasties.  Who benefits, one may think?

The Rothschilds
MI5
IDF
the Military-Industrial-Security complex
A French government under President Francois Hollande that while liberal minded has seen a dip in public trust.
The United States Government.
the War Party.
Social organizations devoted to repressing minorities.
The New Conservatives and their Presidential candidate acolytes in the US.
The Departments of Defense in most Western countries.
Newspaper and traditional mass media; there is always a need to sell product that scares.
CIA
The financiers of IS, which are many and include our own leaders knowingly and unknowingly.
Law enforcement in the United States.
And a number of people and organizations that, you watch, will be willing to make money off of these events.  Mostly with bad intentions.


Another question to ask is; who loses?  Well, it is not a pretty picture.  Along with politically liberal minded and Democratic affiliated people and campaigns, the noted losers are ourselves.  Now, this sort of problem may not occur here in America for the time being; yet it sadly seems that a transformation of Europe to a more centralized structure reminiscent of the Catholic religious monolith in the Middle Ages might be forthcoming.  Of course, it was planned long in advance for these events to occur; most people will only alter their security concerns when a tragedy of significant proportions is in effect.  In all, I am extremely concerned about the reactions that will take place; exponentially from here in the United States should something in the likelihood of another 911 happen.

With that in mind, I urge all of my fellow readers to vote early and vote often for a number of political candidates from the Democratic Party and their supported propositions.  In particular, we need to now make it known our endorsement for Sen. and Sec. of State Hillary Clinton in her Presidential bid.  Interestingly, this false flag in Paris took place one day before the second Democratic Presidential Debate; making the debate tomorrow a non-issue, as was intended by those against the Clinton or Sanders ideals.  Each day that passes seems more and more likely that without our voting, a Republican (Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson) will be elected President next year.  And then it is back to not only the 2000s, but also the 1980s.  And not in a good way.  30+ years ago, we all were as close to death as a populace could be.  This was squarely on the hands of the Reagan Presidency and his financiers.  Ask yourself; could you trust Trump or Carson with maintaining peace in this world?  I sure as heck do not.

A final word:  one way a person could tell this is a False Flag is when it is only the common people that are targeted for being killed. No one well known to all needs to deal with being near death, thankfully.  If these proposed terrorists were who people say they are; individuals like Presdient Francois Hollande and Josh Homme would not be secured.  But again, common people and those we know little about are sent to die; the elite will always be kept safe.  I am not condemning the Elite; I am just stating the obvious.

And another thing:  Where are any videos of the Eagles of Death Metal concert, if any?  Even one concertgoer would film something to bypass a no cameras policy.

Last thing to note:  you need to go watch this movie again, if you have not already,  We cannot allow our lives to end up like this.

https://vimeo.com/18781528

Ask Questions: Demand Answers,

Robert

An update on last week's elections

Well, I would have posted this earlier, yet other matters came to the forefront.  Since then, while most in the US and the world were focused on the 2016 Presidential Race, in particular the Republican candidates Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson; actual elections took place.

As expected, Gov. Phil Bryant (R-MS) was re-elected: Mayor James Kenney (D-Philadelphia, PA) was officially elected: and possible Gov. John Bel Edwards (D-LA) won the Jungle Primary with 39% of the vote.  I should point out that the Jungle Primary had actually took place on October 24; I mistakenly thought it was Election Day itself.  None the less, it looks like Bel Edwards will win the runoff on November 21, albeit the race is now tightening a bit.  What will happen to Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) afterwards remains to be seen.  I do think Sen. Vitter will remain in the Senate.

Although not a surprise, Gov. Matt Bevin was elected the Republican Governor of Kentucky.  Thus, Kentucky state politics is now mostly led by Republicans in a rather conservative state.

What I do want to focus on are the local elections that took place where I live in the Town of Oyster Bay, New York.  A fair deal of the incumbents running for a re-election bid were indeed re-elected.  It was not all bad; in Suffolk County, Steve Bellone, a Democrat, was re-elected County Executive.  however, Oyster Bay Republican Council members were all re-elected, and Republican operative Angie Carpenter managed to get elected Town of Islip Supervisor.  Yet, I had mentioned two important elections that were to take place last Tuesday, and did occur.

First and foremost, Madeline Singas, a Democrat, was fully elected Nassau County District Attorney against her Republican opponent, Kate Murray.  It was not even a close race; Singas won with some 54% of the vote!  It was obviously clear to a majority of voters that Kate Murray was uniquely unqualified to be District Attorney; and I could go on and name countless reasons why Ms. Murray had no reason to run.  Indeed, I am absolutely most ashamed at the endorsements from the leadership of Nassau University Medical Center, along with the policemen's unions in the region, that were full fledged in supporting Ms. Murray.  I can somewhat understand Rudy Giuliani's endorsement, as a statement of decreased relevance.

Fortunately, the voting public, and much of the New York papers, saw right through this flim-flam and voted for Ms. Singas.  This is a very pleasing vote.

Now, onto the Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor election.  It appears that Republican John Venditto, who also happens to be a medical doctor, was defeated for re-election by Democrat John Mangelli.  I say appears to be due to the fact that both Venditto and Mangelli received 50% of the vote, and Mr. Mangelli held a 68 vote lead.  This race, though, is likely to be protracted beyond reproach and might not be decided on until well after Thanksgiving.  That would be enough time for Mr. Venditto to bring forth absentee ballots showing a lead in votes for the incumbent.  However, I have been hearing that the absentee ballots came from within the town, thus Mr. Mangelli could also have his votes increase.  I am not surprised this came to be a close race; a changing of leadership usually does not involve a more clear-cut outcome.

In short, it appears that in some instances, voters in Nassau County, even in a record of low voter turnout, are welcoming a change in their leadership offices by electing Democrats to replace long standing and complacent Republicans.  For much of the rest of the country, not much has changed in the elections last Tuesday.  I would be rather shocked and stunned if the Louisiana Gubernatorial Runoff is won by Sen. Vitter, although I am not expecting that to happen.  I will have a lot more to say on the Town of Oyster Bay situations soon enough.

In a related note, I am watching Sunday Night Football, and it is the Cowboys vs. the Eagles.  Cowboys Defensive player Greg Hardy is playing; a fairly alright player though like most athletes not a decent man.  I am seeing NBC Sports people condemn Mr. Hardy's abuse of a white female last year under a psychotic episode.  And yet, with one month to go until the NFL's day of reckoning (the release of the Will Smith-Sir Ridley Scott movie Concussion), NBC Sports is whitewashing the situation.  So has much of the NFL and its media people.  Dollars before people, bros before women, violence before reason, patriotism before intellectualism, and ratings before innovation.

But that's none of my business.




I do wonder what Jim Henson would think of this image popping up.

Talk to you all sooner rather than later,

Robert

Election Day 2015

As most if not all of the United States is focused on the Presidential election in 2016, a race mind you that has yet to become the circus it will be once Pres. Obama announces he is running for a third term; there are indeed elections taking place this coming Tuesday, November 3.  These elections are mostly of a local value, though there are a number of statewide elections taking place.  One is a Mayoral race and three more are Gubernatorial races.

Philadelphia, PA Mayor Race:  In my opinion, the election already happened.  Philadelphia is fortunately a leading Democratic city, thus the Democratic primary is pretty much the election.  The current mayor, Michael Nutter, has yet to challenge the two-term limit policy bestowed upon the office of Mayor.  With that in mind, James Kenney was able to win the Primary last May, and will be at least in an official manner be named Mayor-elect this Tuesday,  My congratulations to Mayor Kenney, and hope that we have not seen the last of Mayor Nutter.

Mississippi Governor:  Republican Gov. Phil Bryant will be re-elected.  This should not come as a surprise.

Kentucky Governor's Race:  The current Democratic Gov., Steve Beshear, is not running for re-election.  One reason is last year Gov. Beshear was contemplating a run for the Senate for 2016 before electing not to run.  In that point in time, Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway announced his intention to run for the Governorship.  Along with that announcement, late in 2014 Attorney General Conway received the endorsement of Sen. Wendell H. Ford, a former Democratic Kentucky Senator and Governor who spent 23 years (1974-1997) in the US Senate.  Well, Sen. Ford passed away on January 22 at age 90, thus making Sen. Ford's endorsement one of his last for any candidate.
Jack Conway easily won the Democratic Primary, and should be likely to become the Governor on Tuesday. Indeed, until recently, most polling suggested a rather easy victory for Mr. Conway.  However, Mr. Conway is facing a rather important Republican favorite in the state with the Republican nominee, Matt Bevin.  Mr. Bevin, as you may know, ran in the 2014 Republican Senate Primary against Sen. Mitch McConnell, so a run for the Governorship was never out of the question.  Mr. Beivn's campaign has made inroads with potential voters, turning a race that seemed likely to remain Democratic into yet another Republican pickup. The most recent polling suggests both Mr. Conway and Mr. Bevin in a statistical tie.  So in this race, I am not sure who will be elected.  As I mentioned before, Kentucky has not been a state easily suitable for Democrats since Sen. Wendell H. Ford declined a re-election bid in 1997.  None the less, Sen. Ford was a titan among Kentucky politics, and was still well respected long after his Senate career ended.  Jack Conway has become the most important Democrat in Kentucky this year, and has the potential to change the Republican grip hold on the state.  Yet, now I am not so sure.  It is possible Matt Bevin gets elected Governor.  Should that happen, it would get more difficult for Democrats to get elected in years to come within Kentucky.

Louisiana Governor's Race:  Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal is leaving the Governorship to run for President of the United States, a race that is becoming rather quixotic as the days pass.  This is an interesting race in that Louisiana has a system of elections wherein All candidates of any affiliation are on the ballot for this Tuesday.  Thus there are multiple Republicans and multiple Democrats running for the same public office.  Unless the leading vote getter receives 50% of the vote, which is not likely this year, the top two candidates will continue their campaigns ending in a runoff election to be held November 21.  And as of now, the top two consist of a Republican and a Democrat.

The Democrat, state Rep. John Bel Edwards, is currently leading both the jungle primary and runoff polls.  Interestingly, the Republican is Sen. David Vitter; a rather risky venture that was supposed to go over well without any problems.  And yet, there is a problem; Sen. Vitter willing to trade in 11 years in the US senate for a more volatile elected office in being Louisiana's Governor.  Sad to say at times, yet a Senator becoming a Governor rarely yields the same rate of impact and success as when in the US Senate.  And in this case, there is an election for Sen. Vitter's Senate seat next year that needs to be considered.

You see, should Sen. David Vitter get elected Governor, he would be able to name his own successor to be appointed to the US Senate and likely have the benefits of incumbency against any potential Democratic or even Republican challengers.  However, were Mr. Bel Edwards be elected Governor effectively this Tuesday, then Sen. Vitter will need to consider his political future.  I would think Sen. Vitter will run for re-election to the Senate should he not be elected Governor; I do not know if his re-election would be a virtual lock.  So, I think Sen. David Vitter will remain a Senator after both the jungle primary and the runoff, and John Bel Edwards will be elected Governor.  I should point out thought that Louisiana is a Republican state; so this could change at the last minute.

Now I want to focus on elections far more closest to home.  I live in the Town of Oyster Bay in Nassau County, New York.  Unfortunately, while New York is a Democratic State, much of Long Island including Nassau County, is quite obviously Republican.  Quite obviously because Republican politics in this area of New York is terminally corrupt.  In some functions, the local political scene has not gotten over Sen. Al D'Amato's re-election defeat in 1998; thus what once worked does not in this day and age. Do not get me wrong; Sen. D'Amato and his people have helped out Long Island over the years.  Yet their political cronyism and neo-Tammany Hall outlook does not suit well with me.

Of course, now the Republican machine in this county is run by the likes of Kate Murray and John Venditto and Ed Mangano and their lieutenants.  Decent people on a personal level, yes.  I did appreciate Mangano, the Nassau County Executive, endorsing Gov. Andrew Cuomo in his re-election bid last year.  I was classmates with Oyster Bay Supervisor Venditto's eldest son, Nick; I even talked with him on several occasions, including our high school 10 year reunion four years ago. My family and I have even met Hempstead Supervisor Murray and her family quite a few times.  Yet, despite that, they are not to be trusted to do the right thing in our social, political and economic matters.

If you want to know why, there have been recent reports regarding the sheer audacity to continue obtaining contracts with a Mr. Singh, who has been negligent on his taxes involving his restaurants. This chiefly involves John Venditto and his seemingly iron grip on Oyster Bay leadership.  There is a YouTube channel devoted to exposing these issues, with videos such as this one,

Concurrently, Kate Murray is running for Nassau County District Attorney, running against the current DA, Madeline Singas.  DA Singas has had the experience of being a prosecuting attorney and is well versed in legal issues.  Ms. Murray, simply stated, does not know the law as she think she does.  And yet, here we are with both Murray and Venditto thinking they have their elections sewn to their liking.  Mangano, by the way, is not running this year.  And to compound these corruption revelations, the recent Venditto and Murray endorsements are rather troublesome.  Particularly NuHealth endorsing Kate Murray; a clear violation of neutrality measures needed for hospitals!  Including the same hospital where I was given birth and I got treated for lead poisoning!!

Needless to say, I have no intention of voting for any of these Republicans this year.  Yet you probably already knew that.  I am endorsing DA Madeline Singas to continue her tenure as District Attorney for Nassau County.  I am also endorsing Democratic challenger John J. Mangelli to be elected Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor.  As well, I am endorsing all Democrats running for the Town of Oyster Bay council and the offices of judges.

I do understand many who are reading this might think this may become a problem if the current Nassau Republican leadership is replaced.  A number of them are involved with town offices and will point to my participation with the GAP program since 2012 and continuing,  I need to mention; the corruption and ineptness needs to end.  I hope and believe this will not change the status of Town of Oyster Bay workers and volunteers, nor would it derail the GAP program and related services.  Yet, if changes will need to be made in order to end the corruption and allow for newer leadership; then we will need to adapt when the time comes.

Well, those are my thoughts on Tuesday's elections.  I implore my fellow readers to take the time and vote on Tuesday; and if needed, register to vote as soon as you can.

One final note:  As this was going to be published, I found word that Sen. and 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate Fred Thompson passed away at age 73.  I did not agree with Sen. Thompson's views; yet the Senator was a decent person that had a lifetime of service dating back to his involvement with the Senate Watergate Committee.  My thoughts go out to his family and loved ones at this trying time.

We got the system to alter the system,

Robert

This will not take 11 hours

Thursday was a day that was wasted.  Not by me; I worked that day.  No, it was wasted by many in the alternative media and the conservative/military apparatus in thinking perhaps faintly that some form of political victory would occur on their end.  I of course speak of Sen. and Sec. of State Hillary Clinton being questioned by 7 or 8 House Republicans and about 6 Democrats on the issue of the 9/11/2012 inside job that was the proposed beginning of a hostage rescue mission that was completely altered by the rape and assassination of four people involved with diplomatic and military matters in Libya.  This included United States Ambassador Chris Stevens.

In short, Sec. of State Clinton had no role in what had taken place in Libya, starting the year before with the complete overthrow of Libyan life signified by the assassination of Col. Muamar Gaddhafi. Matters of these foreign policy miscalculations should be placed on a number of other hands, not that of Sen. Clinton nor the Department of State.  Indeed, the State Department was what was keeping the US in good standing with the world until 3 years ago.  Yet, not one congress member on the Benghazi Libya committee managed to discuss the fault that lied with these groups or people:

Pres. Barack Obama
The Department of Defense
Certain figures in the Senate and House at the time, including then Sen. John Kerry I am sad to say.
CIA
Ambassador Stevens; a hard pill to swallow, yet it would have been best to consider asking for greater security before going into a war zone.  Irrelevant at the time, yet now a problem.
The US House of Representatives in their votes to cut funding for security measures.
Mitt Romney: I think  this was initially  a Neocon inside job and still believe certain factions carried out these provocations as was made obvious with their politicization of the assault.
The makers and financiers of a badly made trailer for a badly made movie done by a presumed Coptic Christian.
The individuals in Libya whom later were recruited to organize their terror-for-hire activities under the banner Islamic State.
Libyan leadership in the post-Gaddhafi era; this extends to a number of post Arab Spring governments.

I could name others, yet do not have the time.  In what came forth yesterday, only One congress member, Washington Democrat Adam Smith, mentioned any of the above as needing to be blamed; specifically mentioning Gen. David Patreaus.  As well, Sec. of State Clinton did imply the lack of in initial planning for security measures by Ambassador Stevens.  The rest of time, as it has been for a long while now, the blame has been shifted to Hilary Clinton.  Well, blaming her for the faults of others is a waste of time, paper, money and lives.  This will only help Sen. Clinton in her run for the Presidency: a good deal of Republican leaders and insiders have even mentioned the absurdity of this committee and its inane focus on Sec. of State Clinton, and if not her then Sidney Blumenthal.

What did 11 hours of a hearing and statements accomplish?  Not One Motherfucking Thing!  Excuse my language, yet nothing new was told, and no minds were changed.  I can tell you, at least one or two of the Republicans on that committee are looking at either facing a primary challenge or an outright re-election defeat.  Rep. Peter Roskam, Rep. Trey Gowdy and Rep. Martha Roby come to mind.  As well, I think now would be a fair time for Rep. Elijah Cummings to join Rep. Tammy Duckworth in leaving the House to run for the Senate.  The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, mind you, did not go this far and this wastefully with their hearings with Sec.of State Clinton two years ago.  In any matter, I think Rep. Cummings would be a darn good Senator, as would Rep. Duckworth should either of them get elected or much less run,

And yet, you know what was not even talked about once?  Just why we have been in Libya, Syria and the surrounding countries in the first place.  And just why our foreign policy these past 14 years has been mainly problematic; a continuation of American hegemony that finds no place in a changing and educated world where the US is, correctly, not the leader of all matters.

Interestingly, the last couple of days and nights I have been watching a series of interviews with the recently passed Ali Treki from 25 years ago regarding many of the same issues facing the world and the at the time failed Reagan and H.W. Bush policies.  I present these here for your consideration and ask you to find the time to watch and listen.

By the way, the interviewer, former SUNY professor Harold Channer, is still involved with interviewing important people on New York public access television.  Do have a look at Mr. Channer's YouTube page for some rather interesting interviews over the years.  A lot more informative than what you may have seen yesterday.  And if you managed to watch all 11 hours: you just wasted a day in your life you will never get back.  Same with those who were there.

HRC for 2016: Because at the least, our dream will become WRH's nightmare (I will say why soon),

Robert

PS.  This is too funny to not include as a postscript.  Too funny, and yet too sad.

PPS.  My thoughts on the Steven Spielberg film Bridge of Spies, the Guillermo Del Toro film Crimson Peak and the Danny Boyle film Steve Jobs are forthcoming.

We blew it!

The title refers to one of the iconic lines in movie history, when Captain America (Peter Fonda) disagrees with Billy (Dennis Hopper) on their success of their cross country trek in Easy Rider.  A little afterwards, both main characters are killed by a ragtag group of ignorant rednecks.  In retrospect, it may not have been the best idea to have the two leads make their money off of drugs and getting in on a wild mind trip.  These sorts of ambiguities are not shown in most movies.  Indeed, the rare times these ambiguities are shown involve the drug war.  We can go on a long discussion regarding the drug war and its abject failure; that will be for another time.

For now, our focus is the drug war's effect on law enforcement and public policy.  Two weeks ago, the newest film from Denis Villeneuve, Sicario, was released.  It marks Villeneuve's second collaboration with Academy Award nominated Roger Deakins, and involves a great screenplay from newcomer Taylor Sheridan.  As well, Thad Luckinbill (J.T. Hellstrom on The Young and the Restless) was one of the producers of this movie, along with his twin brother Trent, as part of their new Black Label Media company.  By all accounts, this is a great movie; in fact one of the best films of this year, along with some of the best acting people like Emily Blunt and Benicio Del Toro have shown in quite some time.  Like many of these sorts of fictional works, Sicario tells us a heck of a lot more about our failed drug policies than what we can usually expect from our leaders.  Rarely if ever will you see a political figure declare the "War On Drugs" to have failed and been bad policy from the word go.  Because to do that would reveal greater truths that would cause the public great outrage.

By this point, I am going to expose some important plot points this movie explores; although going in you should know that Denis Villeneuve does not go for happy endings. Just about every film of Villeneuve's involve moral ambiguity.  Sicario brings this to the forefront in the last hour or so. While not going into full detail, what seems like a clear cut operation to curtail the finances of Mexican drug lords turns into a continuation of US Government policy in effectively running the drug trade.  It is evident when Victor Garber's character pretty much sanctions these extrajudicial means of obtaining a drug cartel's finances; it is more pronounced when Emily Blunt's character gets into a one-night stand with a corrupt Texas cop played by Jon Bernthal that is found to be a bag man for the cartel's leaders.  And it is most obviously evident when twice in Sicario Benecio Del Toro's character is mentioned by his code name Medellin.

If you are not familiar with the word and meaning of Medellin, or if you only remember it as Vincent Chase's first movie he directed yet was panned (see Entourage), the Medellin drug cartel in Colombia was during the late 1970's through early 1990's the most profitable drug running operation known to man.  And while it was Pablo Escobar that ruled society with sort of an iron fist before he was gunned down in 1993; the financial whirlwind was benefited most by (gasp!) the United States Government.  This is pretty much explained after the second time we hear Del Toro's character mentioned as Medellin after Alejandro (Del Toro) pretty much seeks out his wife and daughter's killer alone.

It is that second time when Kate (Blunt) hears the phrase; leading to her punching Josh Brolin's character, a CIA task force leader, in the face.  Afterwards, Brolin's character states that the US Government needs to resurrect the Medellin cartel in order to curb the turf wars in Mexico.  And it is due to, as Matt (Brolin) states "20 million people snorting and smoking this stuff"; this stuff being cocaine, of course.  And yes, Alejandro does get to murder the drug cartel leader and his family while having dinner.  And it is implied that Kate leaves the agency after signing papers legislating the legality of the drug operations.  All the same, nothing is truly ended.  The side story of a father and cop from Juarez doing supply routes in order to get some extra money just to get by ends in that cop being killed by Alejandro.  The last scene shows his wife and son attending a soccer game the son is playing; you can hear gunfire as the game goes on.  Indeed, that reminded me of how for many in thee countries the way out is through sports, association football in particular.  Even so, there is no guarantee one will get out alive through sports.  The year after Pablo Escobar was killed; Andres Escobar (no relation) was gunned down by a rival cartel after accidentally causing Team Colombia to use their quarterfinal round in the 1994 World Cup: the infamous own goal game.

It is quite amazing yet sad that a great deal of policies and funding for programs and other matters pertaining to the United States is continually done through the proliferation of illegal drugs.  I know the easiest thing to do would be to have everyone stop taking this shit; yet it is this same shit that finances these extrajudicial operations the United States Government does without consequence.  I firmly believe a movie can tell people a greater truth than what we may witness in our real life news reports.  For me, this is the second film in as many years that exposes our country's double standards at least regarding drug usage and proliferation.  Last year Kill The Messenger, one of the better movies of 2014, did not get as much public attention as it should have; apparently the truth is still a bitter pill to swallow among moviegoers at large.  Fortunately, Sicario is still playing at theaters near you; and you can also eventually see it on demand or on Blu-Ray; same goes with Kill The Messenger.  Do go see this movie.  I will have more to say regarding the drug war culture soon enough.

Talk to you shortly,

Robert

Unintentional Inaction

Well, as we are all aware, there was this past Thursday a shooting at a Community College 150 miles north of Portland, Oregon.  And yes, what you thought were the protocols for a mass shooting were enacted upon again.  And oh yes, the story does not add up entirely.  The only difference now is the US East Coast is in a two-tiered storm system consisting of a Nor 'Easter and Hurricane Jaquin.  Thus, there are other matters on the minds of most people on the Atlantic seaboard.  By the way, Hurricane Jaquin may not hit us, but it is best to be safe and prepared.

The point of this essay though is regarding what occurred this Friday afternoon.  At about 3:30, President Barack Obama held a press conference stating that Secretary of Education Arne Duncan had resigned and will be succeeded by John King.  Afterwards, Pres. Obama continued on with complaining about matters that do affect us all; including but not limited to the need to abolish the sale and manufacturing of guns.  Sadly, this press conference ticked me off, as Pres. Obama's conferences have recently been ticking me off .  This is for two reasons.  First, Pres. Obama's press conference came at the same time that Sec. Of State Hillary Clinton was making a speech in Florida.  Now I would think most news media outside of C-SPAN would show this speech instead of a meandering press conference.  Alas, this is what we have come to expect from a main stream (lame stream?) media that is in the tank for ABC (Anyone But Clinton).  Equal blame goes to Pres. Obama for usurping the only worthy successor, provided he does not run for a third term.

What was really problematic for me was Barack Obama had more or less threw his hands in the air and asked for the Republican Party to pretty much do what Obama supposedly cannot do.  This has been a fallback for 7 years, and is not by any means emblematic of a President.  Look, a President can and must do whatever is deemed in the best interest of Americans regardless of opposition.  It is abhorrent to me that Barack Obama, the President, does not simply enact laws and bills by decree. 

What is that you say?  A President acing as if he is a king?  Well yes.  Every four years, the United States gets involved in electing a President; and in each campaign, the candidate uses his/her platform for public speaking and ideas to mention what will be enacted once the election is over on Election Night.  You will notice that the candidate does not use the term "we", referring to the Legislative and Judicial Branches working in tandem with the Executive branch along with other implied branches and estates.  What you do notice is the candidate uses the word that might just be the most important word in the English Language.  That word is I.  We see this even currently in this long campaign for 2016. 

And yet, what happens to some Presidents upon election?  They seem to forget that a plurality of the eligible voters in the United States elected a king to rule their lives, and subsequently they put the onus on leadership to their opponents.  Pres. Obama has continually done this for the past 7 years; thus showing a complete lack of leadership.  His statements of "I" later become statements of "We", and far later become statements of "They". 

Now why is that?  I have come to the knowledge over the years that Barack Obama has always wanted to be a celebrity President; all the perks and benefits yet none of the work.  We saw this outright during his 2012 re-election when he made a number of chat show appearances of no importance, alongside benefit dinners of little regard.  While those distractions wee ongoing; international diplomatic tragedies like the military assaults in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 were taking place.  Typical of Obama's lack of leadership  in critical issues during that time, blame was put on others besides the President himself. 

And now we are seeing this again; we should soon expect Pres. Obama to later paraphrase Mel Brooks in Spaceballs when he says "I can't make decisions here. I'm the President!"  I doubt that I have seen any other President in my lifetime feel as if he is this powerless, from either political party.  And yes, that does include Pres. George W. Bush, who brought forth disastrous proposals and actually enacted upon these proposals.  I firmly believe on this issue of gun violence and the need to end the likelihood of another Chris Mercer Harper coming into mental problems, Pres. Obama could be ending these events by effectively using his powers and do the following:

Abolish the usage of guns and gun manufacturing.
Allot for mandatory psychological profiling on all persons.
Criminalize gun owners for intent to kill family and others; this is important because when a person owns a gun, it is usually to bring a permanent end to a family squabble. 
Curtail the powers and responsibilities of other branches of Government, if not abolish them outright. 
Alter the US Constitution.

Any President has it in his/her powers to do such matters.  In the whole history of the United States, I can only think of just 1 President who effectively made a successful imperial leadership.  That would be President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and this was only possible due to being President the last 13 years of his life.  And yet, the US needed FDR from 1932-1945 to allot for these ideals to be put into place.  In contrast, President Barack Obama has been effectively punting the ball as a first option.   

You wonder why many voters are flocking to other candidates that will provide simple-minded solutions, in addition to ruling as if they were a king/queen.  Perhaps one could say this is Obama going through the motions in only having one year left of his Presidency.  That may be true; yet Pres. Obama has not indicated an endorsement of a candidate.  Thus, I fully expect Barack Obama to run for a third term; an idea which while sadly ending the Democratic nomination race, will ensure a re-election defeat.  Should Obama go through with this, then he should do what he was elected to do and, you know, actually Lead.  I have already given a number of suggestions in this essay.  Pres. Obama should act upon them. 

Well, those are my opinions on this matter.  Incidentally, 2015 marks the 20 year anniversary of one of my favorite movies, the Rob Reiner film The American President.  For 15 years now, we have seen Presidents allowing their voters to drink the sand.  Well, perhaps it is time to think differently. 

I am not the President, nor am I running for President,

Robert