Impressions on Show Me A Hero

In my previous essay, I gave a brief primer on what I think might be the most important miniseries of 2015.  That would be the David Simon & Paul Haggis 6 part miniseries Show Me A Hero.  Since I gave a synopsis and background on the events referenced in the miniseries, and mentioned some of the more noted actors and up-and-comers with great roles; I felt it best to mention some interesting aspects of what I saw that impressed me quite well.  Perhaps if you saw it, you may think the same.

Show Me A Hero begins with Nick Wasiscko (Oscar Isaac) getting out of his car and passing by the burial plot of his father.  Interspersed without much words is a cutaway shot of Wasiscko's beeper going off to remind him to call 911.  We see this scene two other times.  The second time is at the beginning of part 4, when we then see Nick looking at a person and thinking it is his father; although we do not see Nick regurgitating his Maalox.  The final time is at the end; which is the culmination of what would turn out to be his final day in life.  You see, on October 29, 1993, Nick Wasiscko killed himself right near his father's burial plot.  It was the culmination of a spiral which would have Mr. Wasiscko not be on a ballot on election day for the first time in 8 years.  By that point in his life, although married to a smart person and effectively free from the grind of Yonkers politics, Nick Wasiscko was despondent over a perceived investigation into finances accrued during his time as Mayor: although nothing relating to corruption was ever found. 

This reminded me of a technique Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu has used in his movies.  In that, Innaritu begins his films with a scene or dream that may mean something.  It is repeated at the end, only this time in an alternate fashion under a different point of view and/or an added context.  I must say I was impressed with this storytelling technique; which I think is more of a Paul Haggis trademark than you would expect from David Simon.  Initially, I did not place the scenes at the graveyard as being flash forwards until the final 20 minutes or so for Part 6.  The giveaway for me was seeing Oscar Isaac wearing the same green turtleneck as you see when Show Me A Hero starts.  That is when I realized the initial scenes at the graveyard would be repeated and enhanced at the end.  And indeed it does, coupled with a David Simon trademark ending montage and where are the rest now texts interspersed. 

This brings me to another observance about Show Me A Hero that rather stunned me.  In past David Simon series such as Homicide, The Wire, Generation Kill and Treme; characters eventually move on, many living yet some having passed.  Yet, particularly regarding The Wire, we are left with the realization that while there are changes, nothing really has changed.  Think of it: the Baltimore Homicide unit still fights an uphill cause of righting the wrongs of the city; The Game still continues even though as Slim Charles says "It just got more fierce"; we are still in Iraq and in other military zones in the Middle East; and New Orleans is still in a lengthy process of recovering. 

It is rather different in Show Me A Hero.  That is because the public housing project in Yonkers works, even to this day with some 200 projects developed each year.  Those still alive are still living in Yonkers and/or Westchester County, yet there lives are a heck of a lot better than decades prior.  As well, the legal matters regarding the City of Yonkers were eventually settled....in 2007!  None the less, they are settled.  Possibly the one leading constant in the past 28 years has been Judge Leonard B. Sand still on the bench; albeit as a senior district court judge but still quite active. 

In part 1 of this essay, I alluded to the Clarke Peters character,  Robert Mayhawk, as plausibly being a fictional composite character of the many different community organizers and land developers that were involved in the early 1990s.  I suppose I am correct in this assessment, as can be witnessed in the final end credits montage of the actor and his/her real life counterpart.  There clearly is not one for Clarke Peters.  I do feel however that Mr. Peters' role is an important piece of the puzzle when examining the matters pertaining to the housing project.  As well, similar to Peters' roles as Lester Freamon in The Wire and Big Chief in Treme, there is a sense of moral clarity and realistic ideals that his character provides to others.  I think of a scene in part 6, where Mayhawk, Oscar Newman (Peter Riegert) and others are hosting a seminar for proper neighbor policy.  Clearly, many of the African-American homeowners are feeling belittled and/or insulted.  Yet, Mayhawk responds with what TV Tropes likes to call an armor-piercing question.  I'm paraphrasing here, but what is said is that in wanting a better life, most things would be different.  Not necessarily better, but different.  So with that in mind, is it better to be in a different environment with a promising future, or a bleak future with same results?  Well, as we see towards the end, the homeowners understand these matters and are able to make different yet better lives for themselves.  Obviously it is best shown with Doreen Henderson (Natalie Paul), who has indeed become an important figure in the community. 

Show Me A Hero utilizes songs from two distinct singer songwriters.  One is Bruce Springsteen, which at times seems like during the run of the miniseries we are hearing a greatest hits package.  It is quite meticulously done and fits the scenes these songs are placed in.  A more specific and yet important example is Steve Earle.  Mr. Earle has appeared in supporting roles in The Wire and Treme; and in Show Me A Hero a deep cut from his album The Hard Way is played at the end of every installment.  It is a song named When The People Find Out.  Here is the initial recording from 1990. 

In the last installment, a newer acoustic version is heard which is more somber.  I personally prefer the newer version, which is far more biting and attentive to Earle's lyrical wisdom.  Now, there is another song played on the last installment which I am not too sure what it is, though it sounds quite good.

One final impression Show Me A Hero had on me, and I think I am not alone in this regard.  I found this miniseries to be more promising and important than a film Paul Haggis did 10 years ago.  That movie of course was Crash, which I did like and still think was a surprise gem in 2005; I do not think it was worthy of a Best Picture Oscar, as I would have preferred Munich or Syriana as better movies that year.  None the less, this is one of Mr. Haggis' best projects he has done recently.  And one of two this year, the other being his involvement in the Alex Gibney documentary Going Clear; of which I mentioned in an earlier post.

Quite honestly, I am looking forward to what will be the next David Simon series or film he and his team at Blown Deadline have up their sleeve.  Understandably, initiating a newer series or film or even book will take time; yet I look forward when the time comes.  I feel the same way for Paul Haggis and his team at Pretty Pictures.  Indeed, on a different matter, I am glad to see Mr. Haggis not need Scientology to advance in his endeavors.

Oh, one final thing.  The person in elderly care in Part 1 of Show Me A Hero looked fairly familiar.  I have now found out the actor was Rene Auberjonois; quite a nice cameo from one of the more iconic Hey, It's That Guy actors out there.  Here is one of his more known roles.

In short, Show Me A Hero is on my shortlist for the best television in 2015; it is already for me the best miniseries.  If this were a movie, it would definitely be among the best of this year.  In fact, if Show Me A Hero cannot get Emmy nominations; I do not see why it should not receive Oscar nominations.  It is that good.

All The Pieces Matter,

Robert

PS.  Related to Scientology.  I am becoming convinced that the Church of Scientology had a role in the death of Philip Seymour Hoffman.  I will explain more soon.

Show me a hero, and I will write you a tragedy.

This past Sunday night, while many my age and a number of others were watching the MTV VMAs in a year that did not honor the types of music you find on Fordham University's radio station; I was watching the concluding two hours of what I think is HBO's third important television event of the year.  The first two were the Andrew Jarecki documentary miniseries The Jinx and the Alex Gibney film Going Clear.  I could possibly add a third already in Andy Samberg's brilliant sports faux biography 7 Days In Hell.  Yet, this might have outclassed all three of them.

David Simon is clearly one of the most inventive writers and producers of TV out there today.  Show Me A Hero, a collaboration of ideas between Simon and his team along with noted filmmaker and Oscar winner Paul Haggis, is easily the best television program to have been shown this year.  It may not be at the same groundbreaking and innovative functions set forth in The Wire; yet this does come quite close in miniseries form.  Like many of Mr. Simon's projects, this delves in relations in a community in changing times.  However, this story told is one that is entirely true.

When Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was first elected to the US Senate in 1976, one of his goals relative to his home state of New York was to see implementation of housing for families and individuals with lower income levels relative to the norm in the state.  It was not until the 1982 election of Gov. Mario Cuomo, a fellow New York Democrat and political figure with a working class background, that Sen. Moynihan was able to have a statewide ally in housing plans.  At the time, New York was a state where there were an equalization between liberal minded areas and conservative minded areas.  Usually in the cities like Manhattan and the Five Boroughs, then as now, projects like public housing were given wide support. 

However, the suburbs and rural sections of the state were far more conservative and Republican oriented.  None the less, some of these enclaves like Long Island (namely Nassau County) were able to acquiesce to federal mandates for housing; willing to go along due to Republican Sen. Al D'Amato's approval of the projects.  A noted suburb that held out in initiating public housing was the Westchester County city of Yonkers.  Yonkers at that time, and now even, is a location for city dwellers without having to actually live in the city; that would include the Bronx.  Not making derogatory statements; just mentioning a fact that people who want to be close to NYC yet are not living there will prefer the housing locations in Westchester County as a more family friendly alternative.  Much of the demographics of Yonkers in the 1980s were for the most part well-to-do white families. 

That all began to change by 1987.  As a result of federally funded legislation to desegregate public housing, New York Southern District Court Judge Leonard B. Sand declared the city of Yonkers in contempt of court.  This was followed by an order to develop 200 housing quarters for lower income families in Yonkers' east side.  Many of the people living in Yonkers did not take this order lightly.  As I mentioned before, it was a predominately Republican community rejecting the more Democratic minded policies that needed to be done.  It is here that Show Me A Hero offers the stories and glimpses of many of these people who were either directly involved with providing the housing or were tenants for these projects.

Like many of David Simon's series, there is not one central person to look at when so many lives are intertwined.  Yet if there is a central figure, it would need to be Yonkers Mayor Nick Wasiscko, a Democrat who was elected to the city Council in 1985 at just 26.  Two years later, Wasiscko was elected as the youngest Mayor in the history of Yonkers at only 28.  In this miniseries, Oscar Isaac portrays Nick Wasicko in a role that were there any justice in this world he would have been given the Emmy for Best Actor in a Limited Series or Movie straight away.  In some respects, Mr. Isaac shows us a multi-tiered look at Wasiscko that does not make him look like the second coming of a Lincoln or a Roosevelt.  In fact, Wasiscko was elected Mayor on a platform of rejecting the housing decision.  Yet, after Wasiscko's election, the City of Yonkers' appeal was lost. 

There is a line in the miniseries that Oscar Isaac says during one of the more raucous council meetings which I think sums up the need to press forward with the housing projects.  The line, "Majority rules but it cannot rule contrary to the law", does give the noted conundrum on how certain matters of law need to be accepted.  And admittedly, the first three parts of this miniseries might be found by non political people to be a bit dry; what with the emphasis placed on the city council as well as the federal circuit courts.  Yet, there are not too many movies or shows that relate to the inner workings of local government when it is usually the decisions of a town council or city ordinance that will directly affect the needs and desires of its populace. 

As I mentioned earlier, Oscar Isaac and his portrayal of Nick Wasiscko may seem to be the central focus of this miniseries.  Yet, there are of course many other actor involved that merit recognition.

Catherine Keener:  her portrayal of Yonkers resident and advocate Mary Dorman would also be worthy of at least an Emmy nomination.  Keener does not show up until part two; yet it is an interesting yet understated role that reflects Mrs. Dorman's evolution from being against the public housing initiative to becoming one of the few white homeowners outside of public office willing to become friends and partners with the African-American and Hispanic communities.  There is no dramatic epiphany or any sort of emotional outburst making the change known.  Rather, similar to the gradual evolution of characters we saw on The Wire (and I am particularly thinking of Andre Royo's brilliant Bubbles), the eventual reversal of ideals comes without forewarning and yet feels as if these ideals were already in the making.

Alfred Molina:  Molina plays Mayor Hank Spallone, whom defeated Wasiscko for the job in 1989 before Spallone himself was defeated two years later.  Mayor Spallone was a brash sort of political figure that felt more at ease with being the antagonistic pest, rather than running a city.  Mr. Molina is one of our greatest actors, and even in a kind of smaller scale role, when Molina is on screen, he owns the scene. 

Ilfenesh Hadera:  she is a newly minted actress that portrays Alma Febles; a single mother from Puerto Rico that would over the years become a success story in earning a decent living and providing well for her children and now grandchildren.

Natalie Paul:  another new actress who plays Doreen Henderson.  Ms. Henderson started out having drug problems which intensified after the death of a male companion in the inner cities (played by one of the kids from season four of The Wire; I think the one that played Namond.)  She did become a success story in effectively being the leading advocate for people living in public housing, similar to what Mary Dorman was for her community. 

LaTanya Richardson Jackson:  her portrayal of Norma O'Neal is rather interesting.  Ms. O'Neal was a nurse practitioner who eventually went blind due to diabetes.  She also was very much involved in matters relating to housing, yet did not fully integrate due to different forms of opinions with newer generations of civil rights leaders. 

Clarke Peters:  the important gem in any David Simon series.  Mr. Peters only shows up in the last two parts, yet it is his portrayal of Robert Mayhawk (possibly not an actual person) that provides the conscience and wisdom of the matters relating to housing and integration.  And like in previous roles, Clarke Peters has the lines which I think matter most.

Carla Quevedo:  her portrayal of Nay Wasiscko is quite important, namely as the eventual better half of the relationship.  I do hope we hear more from Ms. Quevedo to come.

There are of course other roles and many other actors to note for this miniseries.  Winona Ryder doing excellent work as Vinni Restiano, Jim Belushi in a rare dramatic role as Mayor Angelo Martinelli, Bob Balaban doing superbly as Judge Leonard B. Sand, Jon Bernthal providing some important ideals as NAACP lawyer Mike Sussman, Peter Riegert in the role of Oscar Newman that is an important insight into how housing plans are developed.  Dominique Fishback is another up and comer portraying young single mother Billie Rowan. 

I will have a second essay to explain a lot more on many of the interesting touches made to this miniseries.  Perhaps this one is quite long as is.  None the less, it is a great miniseries; one that I think should be required viewing for anyone involved with community services pertaining to local matters.

More coming; stay tuned,

Robert

PS.  I am liking the new Google logo.  And I am keenly interested in what Alphabet will bring to the table of new ideas.

Must I write about this again?

Earlier today, there was a shooting of two youngish news reporters and photographers from a local station in Virginia.  The victims' names were Alison Parker (24) and Adam Ward (27); two individuals whose lives were cut short without any concern for their futures.

The gunman was Vester Flanagan (41), better known by his reporter name Bryce Williams.  Mr. Flanagan, a fellow news reporter, was dismissed from his position recently after complaints regarding his work ethic and unfounded allegations of racism and homophobia.  You see, Mr. Flanagan was both an African-American and identified as a gay man.  This was not the first time accusations were made by Mr. Flanagan regarding fellow employees.  As a result of his dismissal, Mr. Flanagan this morning disturbed an interview Ms. Parker was doing and Mr. Ward was filming; by shooting Mr. Ward and then Ms. Parker and Vicki Gardner, who was being interviewed live.  Fortunately, Ms. Gardner is alive, though in intensive care.  As for Mr. Flanagan, he live messaged and Tweeted his reasoning while being pursued by law enforcement.  He then died from what amounted to a self-inflicted gunshot wound.  ABC News has obtained a copy of a 23 page statement from Mr. Flanagan which has not been fully released at this time.

I will have more to say on this shortly.  None the less, along with the obvious need for the banning of guns and automatic weaponry; we are going to need to provide mandatory evaluations for people under some form of distress.  Failure to do this could result in more of these tragic circumstances.  This needs to stop!

As I mentioned before, I will have more on my opinions when possible.  I just really detest saying the same reasonable idea yet getting a reply of "meh". 

Talk to you pretty soon,

Robert

11 Years After Fahrenheit 9-11

I have often mentioned on this blog and elsewhere how my socio-political beliefs were at one point outside of the norm.  In some ways, they still are.  Yet I speak of course when after 911 nearly every person unaware of the truth had no hesitation to dive head first into endless wars and useless policy.  I specifically remember the 2002 mid-term elections, when the Republican Party not only gained back the full majority in the Senate; they also increased their governorships and their numbers in the House of Representatives.  It was a clear indication of an impending second front in a "war" of terror.  To say I was disappointed in the results would be an understatement. 

Yet, alongside the influx of movies and shows that provided allegorical truths the corporate media and the Cheney-Bush White House would never admit to: there was a documentary/social statement that when released began the changing of opinions on what had just happened.  Now, I think the full truth would have not gone over well for the vast majority of moviegoers.  Yet all it takes is to plant a seed in the minds of the populace for a greater truth to be discovered.  Michael Moore was that person who planted the seed, namely in his film Fahrenheit 911.  How important was Moore's documentary?  In my years of going to see movies in multiplexes, this might be the only time I went to a screening and it was sold out; unheard of for a documentary. 

And considering Michael Moore's previous documentary from 2002, Bowling for Columbine, did not get a wide release; seeing Fahrenheit 911 become financially successful was quite an amazing feat. Up to that point, Moore's films were given word of mouth mainly through the art-house circuit and video/DVD sales; not to mention the occasional TV airing.  Having said that, Michael Moore had already a pretty damn good track record.  Starting with Roger and Me, which presented the decline of Flynt, Michigan brought on my GM's cost cutting and outsourcing of jobs during the 1980s; Moore had brought an idea of using the film format as a way to make a statement.  While past influences such as Errol Morris focused on smaller scale issues that would nonetheless touch the human condition; I tend to think Michael Moore sought a bigger picture in focusing on both the low end and the high end of the totum pole.  That is to say, Moore is equally at ease with interviewing ordinary people as he is confronting and/or interviewing important figures. 

A constant shame

Every person that gives a worth for their fellow human needs to see this CBS News Sunday Morning report.

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/the-navajo-water-lady/

My apologies once again for forgetting to embed the video.  I will need to do a lot better next time. 

None the less, the continued negation and shaming of the Native Americans is resoundingly disgusting.  Not one other news organization has made mention of this problem.  Why is that?  Since it is rather late, I will have another multimedia essay on this issue at a date sooner than expected.  None the less, you need to see this; and then contemplate about who you are and what you have done for these people.  How would You like it if you could not afford clean water? 

Thank you for understanding,

Robert

That One Summer: One Hour Photo

It has now been exactly one year since Robin Williams died.  One year in which I and may others keep wondering what has changed since then.  One year that we have been asking ourselves if we were able to see the warning signs of a sad and troubled soul who had a gift for making people better in thoughts and laughter when needed.  When I heard that Robin Williams had committed suicide, I kept thinking to 12 years before, when I and many others saw an excellent movie Mr. Williams was in that I think would have been the game changer in how many saw him.  That movie was One Hour Photo; one of the few times I walked out of the theater feeling disturbed. 

One Hour Photo is quite possibly one of the better movies of 2002, and certainly amongst the creepiest films to have been produced.  It was one of those movies that needed repeated viewing and a thorough analysis to what was just seen.  Like many of the great horror films, it would leave audiences wondering what they had just seen, and unsure of the ending being presented.  In some ways, I think this was due to this movie being written and directed by Mark Romanek; an innovative filmmaker of music videos.  Amazingly, One Hour Photo was only his second film outside of the video music genre.  Yet as opposed to the usual jump cuts and flash photography involved in some of Mr. Romanek's videos (Scream, 99 Problems, Closer, The Perfect Drug, Speed Of Sound), One Hour Photo was sparse in its visual outlook.

Most importantly, what mattered was the story being told and seeing Robin Williams at his most creepiest up to that point.  In short, Mr. Williams played a 50-plus year old loner, Sy Parrish, who spends his days as the photo developer at a CVS knockoff.  Over time, Sy becomes concerned about the dealings of a young family, the Yorkins.  What sends Sy over his limits is a drop off that Will Yorkin (Michael Vartan) delivers containing photos of Will and his mistress Maya (Erin Daniels).  And yet, the troubles and disintegration of the Yorkins, including that of Nina (Connie Nielsen), is secondary compared with Sy's inner turmoil and demons becoming more and more public. 

Now, since this movie was completed in 2002, I trust many of you have seen One Hour Photo.  With that in mind, some important matters relating to plot and storytelling are needed to be clarified. 

Did the kid know his father was cheating?
I think so.  One of the discussions on the IMDB and AICN message boards at the time noticed how Romanek showed the young man playing Jake seem a bit embarrassed at Connie Nielsen's character looking at the photos of Will and Maya at the beach.  In fact, there is no shock coming out of Jake.  I think, and so did others at the time, Jake took those photos of his father and his mistress; likely attending the same vacation at the same beach.  This may also explain how Jake seems to become more deadpan and apathetic during the course of the movie.  I found it to be a rather brilliant move for a film of this caliber.  Any sort of overacting and emphasis on the kid, and this movie fails. 

Why the obsession over a family who is not all what they seem?
Mr. Williams does not at any one moment in this movie give us reason to necessarily hate Sy.  I suppose this is because we in real life have noticed, or perhaps have ourselves been, lonely people without much to look forward to except our version of a hyper reality.  We may look at the photos, videos, stories and ideals of a family or group of people and choose to see only what we want to believe.  If for instance you see a family doing something wonderful while you are not; it is little surprise that any of us would feel even at the least jealous and envious.  Certainly, Sy getting fired and then discovering the photos of Vartan and Daniels kissing ends that form of obsession and unqualified need for acceptance into the Yorkin family, as it were.  This leads to an interesting debate that continues to infest message boards when discussing this movie.

Was Robin Williams' character, Sy Parrish, sexually molested as a child by his father?
The answer is yes.  A movie that is intelligent and disturbing as what One Hour Photo is does not need to explicitly tell you everything.  Mark Romanek has not ever in his fictional movies tried to hammer us with plot points and explicit revelations that are the bane of every cookie cutter horror movie.  What Mr. Williams says to Eriq La Salle at the end effectively reveals both Sy's past and I am certain what has happened to Jake. 

Did Sy take the pornographic pictures at the hotel?
You do not see them as evidence, yet I think those photos were taken and kept by Sy as an insurance policy or blackmail against Will.  The last shot of the movie of Mr. Williams integrated with the Yorkins can be taken as different interpretations as to whether it is real or imagined.  It could very well be real, and that the Vartan and Nielsen's characters will need to acquiesce to Sy whenever he sees fit.  Once again, a rather clever move of storytelling format. 

One Hour Photo remains a great movie to this day.  I had hoped that Robin Williams would have at least garnered a Best Actor nomination at the Oscars; though sadly it was not to be.  Perhaps this was not mentioned or even thought about at the time; yet I think if One Hour Photo had gotten a following similar to many of the horror franchises of the last 10 years, or perhaps even the word of mouth momentum the new Joel Edgerton film The Gift has received, certain career trajectories would have been altered.  I will believe till I am blue in the face that with both Insomnia and One Hour Photo, along with a sharp return to stand-up, Robin Williams was re inventing himself in a way that I think would have provided a newer fan base.  As I said, these movies were quite successful, and a lot of media attention  was made. Yet, and here is the kicker, not getting a Best Actor nomination  may have given Mr. Williams doubts about showing his darker side.  Or perhaps not; his Oscar in Good Will Hunting was quite edgy itself.  And of course, Robin Williams never stopped being funny. 

We may never truly know how he felt.  Unless there is a biography of considerable regard on his life published, Robin Williams' inner feelings may well be considered foreign to us.  Sure, many of us get depressed; a number even think of ending it all.  And quite a few of us do suffer from illness.  Perhaps one day we will know.  None the less, we did have a renaissance in the life of Robin Williams in 2002, a rather interesting life we all looked up to That One Summer.

So was a great life in a weary world,

Robert

PS.  I will have more to say about The Gift coming shortly.  It is though a must see movie.  And I am still working the cogs at getting to upload videos, including my own. 

The one sane choice

It may be hard to believe, given not many alive now lived or remember this time period. Yet, the 1980s were not halcyon days for the United States or even the rest of the world. If or when Tom Hanks and Gary Goetzman decide to do a documentary series about the eighties, I would expect people's perception of so called good times to be completely shattered. A great deal of the Republican mindset that engulfed America in the 1980s and early 1990s can be attributed to a 1979 Address to the Nation from then President Jimmy Carter. Nominally, it was the 14th in a series of Addresses involving energy usage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kakFDUeoJKM My apologies for not directly embedding the video; I am using Microsoft Windows 10 and its new browser Microsoft Edge. I will see if Chrome does things differently. None the less, the speech I linked to was and still is unique in that President Carter pretty much told the American people to stop blaming their leaders for their problems and start blaming themselves. What a concept: taking responsibility for one's own actions and thoughts! How it related to energy was effectively consume less and perhaps, maybe, turning off the heater once in a while and wearing an extra sweater. Well, within the next year, much of the American public rejected these recommendations for self preservation and much like someone being told not to do anything stupid; they tripled down on their stupidity and elected President Ronald Reagan. The Reagan era lasted a total of 12 long years. I think the only reason why it lasted this long was because it became clear, after the Iran-Contra scandal blew up in everyone's face, that an actual third term campaign for President Reagan would have resulted in a defeat. So in came George H.W. Bush to be President in 1988, retaining many of the Reagan brain trust without the public image of a failed leader. Four years later, and with the "Cold War" now extinct, the Republican Party, and with that much of the bipartisan bull crap in maintaining a "war" mindset, began to shatter immensely. I can remember those times; Dan Rather every night for a month in early 1992 introduced reports on a false and troubling U.S. financial economy. Lawrence Walsh, independent counsel investigating Iran-Contra, obtained grand jury indictments for key Reagan-Bush officials, and likely was going to indict both Presidents if possible. I do remember on Halloween Eve a re-indictment of Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was obtained. It was also the year of the South Central L.A. Riots, among other social justice issues coming into view. Into this social political chaos emerged then Gov. Bill Clinton, a Democrat from Arkansas and by all accounts a Southern Centrist Democrat. And for the first time in 12 years, people were not only needing to hear the truth about their lives; they were willing to listen and make changes. If you need a visual aide on why the Clinton campaign and subsequent Presidency from 1992-2000 was successful; I would suggest watching once again the D.A. Pennebaker film The War Room, now a part of the Criterion Collection. Also of interest is Robert Downey Jr.'s opinion documentary The Last Party; though be aware this was when Downey was zonked out on booze and pills half the time. I have already alluded to and made note of the eight years of relative peace and security when William Jefferson Clinton was President. I, like you, are aware of what the past 15 years post-Clinton have been like. In short, apart from flashes of sanity within the Senate and the State Department, nothing good has come forward. You know, in only my second week as a student at Hofstra University, 9/11 occurred. One of my fellow travelers saw, like nearly all of us, the aftermath of the destruction and she said out loud "This would have never happened if Clinton was still President." And this woman, whose name I forget, was right. Indeed, there are certain times I play a what if game. That being, what if Bill Clinton decided to run for a third term? We know President Clinton would have easily been re-elected. Yet, as we know, a Clinton third term was set aside to focus on Hillary Clinton's 1999-2000 run for the Senate. She of course was elected. And I would say from that point forward, many of us that effectively were given the double deuce by the Cheney-Bush people, culminating in the 9/11 Inside Job, wanted to have the tide turn in favor of us once more. I had hoped Sen. Hillary Clinton would have ran for President in 2004. She did not, instead focusing on her 2006 Senate re-election bid. Fortunately after that election, Sen. Clinton began a process of running for the Presidency to which she was and still is entitled to I might add. In 2008, Sen. Clinton won the national Democratic Primary. Yet due to a myriad of reasons all found to be not worth my time, Clinton was barred from receiving the nomination in what amounted to a retread of the old back-room party bosses deals. We were left with then Sen. Barack Obama, the perpetual disappointment. None the less, President Obama was elected in 2008: the Clinton family's endorsement and a certainty for Sen. Hillary Clinton to be involved in the Cabinet was what sealed the deal for at least my voting for him. Yet Sec. Of State Clinton would not be in that title at the State Department for that long of a time. Sec. Of State Clinton left in 2012, which was followed as we see today of another Presidential run. Now, let me remind you I did vote for President Barack Obama again in 2012. However, I voted for Pres. Obama thinking that he would be defeated. It was more of an approval of the four years having gone by rather than the four years to come. We have seen though a continuation of a weak, egotistical, self-centered prick being a President more in line with wanting to be a celebrity more than anything. I do not know what a Republican presidency would have been like if one was elected in 2012. I sure as shit was not going to give the Romney and Paul people there fantasies. And I frankly have never liked Gov. Chris Christie; Now most people hate him, but it was not that easy being a lone voice at the time showing my disapproval on that lard. None the less, Pres. Obama winning re-election in 2012 assured a continuation of Democratic leadership for decades to come. We all were convinced after eight years of Obama there would be: Eight years of Hillary Clinton Eight years of Cory Booker Eight years of Chelsea Clinton Eight years of one of the Obama daughters. Well, now once again, there is a probability this will not happen. I have said before that Pres. Obama is actively seeking a third term. With the likelihood that he might lose, Obama and his people are setting up Vice President Joe Biden to fill the void. Interestingly, I think after Beau Biden passed away, there has been more of an incentive for VP Biden to run; fulfilling the last wishes of his son to have a Biden become President. I am not pleased with VP Biden running. This now means at least 8 Democrats are running for President! I expect Mayor Bill De Blasio to announce his candidacy shortly, and I am thinking there will be a Donald Trump equivalent for Democrats to consider before the year is out. My money is on Sen. Elizabeth Warren to make a move. By the way, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has come out in support of Sen. and Sec. of State Hillary Clinton. So too has Sen. Chuck Schumer and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Indeed, most of the Senate Democrats and nearly half of all House Democrats are endorsing Hillary Clinton. Same goes for several Diplomats, a number of businesspeople and quite a huge list of celebrities. Go look at the Clinton 2016 page on Wikipedia for an ever evolving list of endorsements. Each of these endorsees have one mindset in common: they want their political party back to where it can be in being effective in its leadership and trustworthiness. In short, they want the 1990s back. As do I. In 2008, after being given the double deuce by party bosses, we were assured that President Barack Obama would promise us everything us Clinton Democrats wanted and even more. Apart from the four years of relative decent International Diplomacy, we have been disappointed in most areas. Even certain beneficial acts like "Obama Care" were compromised from its needed intentions. I for one will not be led down a path of abject disappointment and voting for style over substance, celebrity over leadership. Taking a page from the misguided fanatics Dr. Ron Paul still continues to have, albeit in a mercifully dwindling number; my choice for President, the Only Same Choice for President, is Hillary Clinton. Should Sen. Clinton not receive the nomination, even before the primaries, if possible I will write her name in. If a write-in is not possible, then I will vote for the Democrat; albeit it will be nothing more than a protest vote. Hillary Clinton for President 2016 or no one at all. Our lives may just depend on it, Robert