Why Obama Is Not A Liberal Version Of Reagan

In the aftermath of Obama’s election there were all kinds of wild notions of what it would mean to the future of the nation. One of the many suppositions that was foolishly asserted was the presumption that Obama would be able to project liberal politics into the mainstream. It was assumed that middle America would finally, with Obama as the spokesman embrace liberalism just as Reagan had transmitted conservatism a generation before. I want to take a moment to debunk the myth.

It is true that Obama, like Reagan and FDR inherited a tough economy. Reagan and FDR as opposite as they were politically, both shared an important trait. They were both capable of projecting optimism in harsh times and in the face of daunting challenges. It was their optimistic nature and the confidence it engendered in the nation that explains why both Reagan and FDR remain omnipresent figures today in modern American politics. Their shadows linger over both parties to this day.

Enough about FDR and onto Reagan. I was born in 1966. I remember growing up in Philadelphia and honestly most events from my birth to 1980 when Reagan was elected was all bad news. Vietnam,Assassination,Watergate,Abscam,Energy Crisis,Hostage Crisis,Double Digit Inflation and an outrageous Prime Rate. My remembering the interest rates from the 70’s as a kid, prompted my refusal to bite on a variable interest mortgage rate in 2002 when I bought my house. The only good things in those 14 years was the Moon Landing (I was 3) and the Flyers winning the Stanley Cup. Oh, and the Phillies winning the World Series in 1980 (a very good year). It was depressing growing up in America at this time. Back then they didn’t even have a family film industry, so I couldn’t even go to the movies.

Ronald Reagan changed that. He was so confident and it resonated. I remember people almost feeling embarrassed to be American. He changed that too. He wasn’t angrily asserting pride, but casually reminding us of what it really meant to be an American. History can’t record the morale of a nation, but it was palpably awful.

At first, for all Reagan’s optimism it looked like he was failing. In a city like Philadelphia he was openly compared to Herbert Hoover. It looked like our hope was misguided when you weighed the rhetoric as optimistic as it was to the reality. Inflation and Interest Rates were being dramatically reduced, but at one point in the fall of 1982, unemployment was at 10.4%. Reagan was actually being outpolled by Fritz Mondale!

Reagan, as many have reminded us has delivered many a memorable speech. From "A Time For Choosing" to Normandy to the Challenger Address to his speech at the 1992 Convention. My favorite speech were none of those and truth be told I don’t remember the exact words, but it doesn’t matter, because it was his demeanor and the underlying sentiment that remains with me to this day. I could look it up and find the exact words, but that misses the point. It was a moment in time that has shaped me ever since.

Bear with me now as I explain the setting. I grew up on the corner of Franklin and Fisher in the Logan section of the city. One of five kids, the middle child. When I was a little kid we had a floor model color TV that broke down and couldn’t be fixed. So, we ended up with a small portable black and white Japanese television. We could’ve afforded a color TV if my parents hadn’t insisted on sending us all through Catholic school and putting it towards tuition instead a more desired TV.

When Reagan was making his address I went to my parents room which was the back room where they had one of those cheap black and white tv’s. If you don’t know anything about portable TV’s, the most important part was that the antenna was really cheap. So shoddy that it snapped off at the base. The only way to get reception was to take a wire hanger and insert it into the hole where the antenna snapped off at the base. I never gave it a thought. My dad was lying on the bed, I was sitting upright on the floor with my back leaning on the end of the bed.  Reagan said something to the effect: "Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better". Was that exactly what he said? No, but I don’t care. When people tell you it isn’t "what" you say, but "how you" say it, that was Reagan to a tee. He struck a tone that inspired in the worst time. Just like FDR uttered "We have nothing to fear but fear itself". Building confidence with a tone of voice that says everything is going to be ok. That sentiment, that projection of abundant optimism that a brighter future is in the offing. I believed again. But more imprtantly, he was RIGHT! Things did get better, much,much better. For the first time in my life I could believe in someone and be confident they were true.

In remembering Reagan and studying FDR I was amused by those who believed Obama would be the liberal version of Reagan. Just as Reagan validated my nasceant optimism, so too has Obama’s detachment and professorial musings outraged middle America.

Reagan, unlike Obama and most of Reagan’s conservative admirers understood that Middle America is always looking over its shoulder. The working man is always concerned about money, in good times and bad. He expressed his conservative principles with a civil tone that allayed the perennial fears of the mainstream,the heartland of America. And when things did turn around as he calmly assured us it would, he was rewarded by the American people with an enduring love by his supporters and respect, however ruefully of his bitterest detractors.

Obama does not understand the mainstream because he is absorbed by his intellect and its’ conclusions. Obama may be a thoughtful man, but when times are bad he has consistently demonstrated an incapacity to project his liberal principles to allay economic reality as Reagan was successful in projecting conservatism.

Obama has admirers, but in the years and decades to come it is Reagan and FDR that will stand the test of time. If Obama can project hope in his tone, he has a shot a immortality. History will not be kind.

FREE SPEECH ON THE RUN AND IN HIDING

When Comedy Central decided to edit and subsequently refuse to rerun a two part South Park they created quite a furor. Due in large part to the long term success of the show. Molly Norris on something of a lark as a local Seattle cartoonist was inspired to draw a cartoon that promoted "Everybody Draw Muhammad" Day. That is described in this link: http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/archives/221489.asp.

Molly was informed that she was on a hit list cobbled together by American in Yemen exile, Anwar-Al-Awlaki, who inspired the Fort Hood Massacre. The FBI advised her to go into hiding. She is not in a witness protection program, but of her own accord has changed her name and is no longer in the area. Will someone explain to me why this is not a HUGE story? An American citizen has taken the extraordinary steps of changing her identity resulting from threats on her life because she has "blasphemed" Islam. Whatever one thinks of her idea, this is still a free country! Why will no one stand up and defend her? Why must she hide for exercising her God given right to speak freely? She is now in hiding not because of the threats on her life, but because NO ONE has defended her.

I continue to hear the drum beat about Islamophobia and how we must respect all religions. Well, what about our values as a people? As a Nation? We are a community bound together by an idea, however varied our interpretation of those ideals. It is a basic function of humanity to seek protection,find comfort and avoid conflict. Sometimes conflict cannot be avoided. It need not be a violent conflict. It is a conflict rooted in defending principles which are new to print and practice in human history but have forever endured in the hearts of men and women. 

Free Speech is a natural right! A NATURAL RIGHT! Speech is a basic function of our humanity,our biology and defines us as individuals and binds us as community. If we show the world that we will not stand up to those who label the most fundamental natural right "blasphemy", then why would they desist from further threats? It would be reasonable for them to conclude that we prefer life compromised by terror than the freedoms we express to cherish. 

Why is everyone so afraid to define the enemy? Do people really believe that to identify "jihadists" as a threat is to smear all of Islam? Have we grown incapable of clearly delineating  those who are peaceful in their faith and those who would exploit it for violent ends? Have we gotten so cozy with our liberty that we are unwilling to engage those who would deprive it? Have we become so gluttoned by benefits derived from the sacrifice of our forefathers that we are no longer capable of identifying those who espouse freedoms' eradication?  


I'm not fond of drawing mythical parallels or "what if's", but if this were an evangelical that made the threat, would everyone just lay off the story? In our effort to be tolerant we have become unwilling to confront violent intolerance. We used to believe in this country that to deprive one person's rights was a danger to all of our rights. Recently, the ACLU has sued the State Department to determine what steps we are trying to take to eliminate Mr. Anwar-Al-Awlaki, the new grand wizard of AL-Qaeda, stationed in Yemen. Curiously, in defending Mr Awlaki's civil rights, why have they not reached out to save Molly Norris and defend her?


It's a strange country where we value the civil rights of a terrorist mastermind, but look the other way as a free woman is compelled by that same man to live a lie and change her identity. It seems to me we all have our priorities backwards.

A Note To Imam Rauf

You can get the story here: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20100914_Imam__Mosque_not_on__hallowed_ground_.html.

So, now the proximity to Ground Zero is not "hallowed" because there are strip clubs and betting parlors nearby? Once again I must note that the nineteen 9/11 murderers are not representative of an entire religion. The fact, however that they acted in obedience to their faith, however extreme cannot be ignored. We, as a nation have never been engaged in a conflict initiated on faith. In most countries, the response would be extreme violence against those of the same faith. Not in the United States though. We were fearful of violence, so preached tolerance, as we should.Fear mongering aside, there has not and is not rampant Islamophobia. Sixty four percent of all hate crimes regarding religion is targeted against Jews, and seven percent against Muslims.


If we were attacked by nineteen strippers or blackjack dealers, Mr. Rauf would have a point. The fact that he made these remarks just prior to the 9/11 anniversary is pathetic. This from a man billed as a moderate. The insensitivity is appalling. For a man who says he wants to be a bridge builder I pose these questions: How can you bridge the divide when you willingly ignore those who dissent? How can you be a "moderate" if you are intolerant of the opposition? How can you be a man of peace if you so callously disregard the pain and suffering of a community? Their Families? Our Nation? How can you make progress if you are tone deaf to  pain and suffering? How can you express compassion and provide solace if you so whimsically discard objections as "disingenuous"?  

Mr. Rauf, if you are the "moderate" you say you are, how about a demonstration of compassion, rather than expressions of contempt? With every passing day, sadly you are being exposed as a fraud and your project a "Trojan Horse".

NFL PICKS WEEK ONE

1.) New York Giants at home (-6.5) over Carolina Panthers
Can you run against the Giants? We'll find out because it's gonna be a steady diet of Williams and Stewart for the Panthers. Both of these teams are typically well prepared, especially early in the season. With Kenny Phillips back and Antrel Rolle to help I just don't see the Panthers getting the plays in the passing game.
PREDICTION: GIANTS

2.) Miami Dolphins (-3) at Buffalo Bills
CJ Spiller, the Bills rookie back will get the start and you can bet they're going to run the ball. This is a rivalry game in Buffalo, but the Bills are just not worth the risk. They could steal a game early like this, but doubt it.
PREDICTION: DOLPHINS

3.) Atlanta Falcons (-1.5) at Pittsburg Steelers
This line reflects Dennis Dixon starting at QB for the Steelers. Can Rashard Mendenhall carry the rock? Can the Falcons get Michael Turner back in form? Dixon looks good and his mobility will mitigate blocking issues.
PREDICTION: STEELERS

4.) Chicago Bears at home (-6.5) VS Detroit Lions
The Bears can't block, at least not pass blocking. They can run and Matt Forte and Thomas Jones prove it. The problem is will Mike Martz as the new OC go with their strength or insist on pass happiness with no protection? The Lions are going to be better and the addition of the freaky Ndamukan Suh is going to add to Chicago's protection misery. Besides this is a rivalry game and 6.5 is too much.
PREDICTION: LIONS TO WIN OUTRIGHT

5.) New England Patriots at home (-4.5) VS Cincinnati Bengals
The Bengals are for real. Look for them to run the ball effectively and play pass. The Patriots are young on defense and will get burned early in this season before improving as it goes along. Even on the road this Bengals defense looks like a beast.
PREDICTION: BENGALS

6.) Tampa Bay Buccaneers at home (-3) VS Cleveland Browns
The Blacked out game. If this game goes the way I think, thee may be seven more blackouts to follow. Cleveland will run the ball and use Delholmme sparing to play off the run. Special teams makes the difference in this game too. That and the fact that the BUCS can't rely on consistent QB play.
PREDICTION: BROWNS

7.) Jacksonville Jaguars at home (-3) VS Denver Broncos
Everyone is down on the Broncos, but the Jags are awful. Except for Maurice Jones Drew. My guess is that Denver comes prepared and has enough in the tank. The Jags ran out of fumes last year.
PREDICTION: BRONCOS

8.) Indianapolis Colts (-2) at Houston Texans
You ready to get on the TEXANS bandwagon? I'm not.
PREDICTION: COLTS

9.) Tennessee Titans at home (-6) VS Oakland Raiders
The Raiders are now everybody's sleeper. Maybe, but not this week. They can't stop the run. What do you do if your opponent can't stop the run and Chris Johnson is on your roster? Do the math.
PREDICTION: TITANS

10.) Green Bay Packers (-3) at Philadelphia Eagles.
This is a poor matchup for the Eagles to start their season. I think the Eagles can "slow down" the Packers offense, but in turn I think that Packers defense is ready to swallow up the OL and confuse Kolb with its blitz package. Dom Capers can dial it up and he's got the tools and the talent to make this a nightmare. Look for those Packers LB's to key on Kolb's hot reads on Blitz downs and create turnovers. The Eagles defense just won't be able to hold out if the Offense can't score points. It would not surprise me if this were a complete,embarrassing blowout.
PREDICTION: PACKERS

11.) San Francisco 49ers (-3) at Seattle Seahawks
Well, we will find out a lot about these teams. Big rivals who typically play spoiler to each other. The 49ers are rising, and the Seahawks stink.
PREDICTION: 49ers

12.) Arizona Cardinals (-4) At St Louis Rams
The Sam Bradford era has begun and they will try to protect his legacy by running Steven Jackson. It won't be enough.
PREDICTION: CARDINALS

13.) Dallas Cowboys (-3.5) at Washington Redskins
This rivalry is as good as it gets. Simply said 3.5 points is too much between these two teams.
PREDICTION: REDSKINS to cover

14.) New York Jets at home (-2.5) VS Baltimore Ravens
Maybe a preview of the AFC Championship? Not likely. If this were in Baltimore, I'd pick the Ravens. But it's not.
PREDICTION: JETS

15.) San Diego Chargers (-4.5) at Kansas City Chiefs


The Chiefs are getting some buzz. If they have any chance, it'll have to be in a shoot out. San Diego, as dysfunctional as they are still has too many weapons.
PREDICTION: CHARGERS

RANTS

Why does the media inflate the importance of crackpots? A "minister" with about 50 congregants from Gainesville, Florida says he's going to burn the Koran,goes viral and the sky falls. How about we ignore loons instead of elevating them to international icon? Some common sense, maybe? We used to ignore the dirty guy with a sign reading "Repent now, for the end of the world is nigh". Now? We put him on Good Morning America. 

Then there's the response to the proposed Koran burning. If you burn the Koran, people will die. So don't burn it. Ok, I think we all agree that burning books is kooky, but allowable in a free country. Do you think committing acts of violence in the wake of such burnings a wee bit disproportionate? Burning printed matter justifies killing in the name of God? I seem to recall the Taliban killing several missionary workers in Afghanistan because they were Christian and each had a Bible. The one who was not killed was spared because he was not in possession of a Bible. Burning any book, much less a Koran is objectionable, but how about the families of those who were killed for possessing a Bible and professing their faith? No one should face martyrdom for their faith. But boy everyone is just so pissed when the Koran is burned. Geez, I do hope we don't piss off the Taliban again. They just might kill a few more unarmed, Bible toting missionaries. It's oh so refreshing to know that printed type is sacred and human life so cheap.

We now have the triumphant return of Imam Rauf, fresh from his taxpayer funded, State Department tour of the world. On Larry King Live last night he suggested that to not build the mosque at its present location could lead to violence around the world. The Cordoba House is designed to build bridges, but if the bridge doesn't get built, we'll surely face violent actions? Really? Wow, what a stirring, principled Constitutional defense that is. 100 mosques in New York and 2,000 in the country as a whole, but moving one would provoke violence? In the most tolerant,pluralistic country in the world? What a twit. Please mister don't hurt my dog! On second thought hurt the dog. At least PETA would fight back.    


It seems to me, President Obama is suffering from what I call "Sean Penn's Disease". Everytime you see him on television he looks like he just swallowed a lemon. Tough to be optimistic when the boss is always frowning.

So, a school named after Al Gore is on a toxic site. You have to love the irony. 

The only shows I watch on television now are "Family Guy", "The Cleveland Show", "The Simpsons", "American Dad" and "South Park". All of them prime time cartoons. It's a sad state of television affairs that cartoon characters are consistently more three dimensional than live action shows. It's true.

JUDICIAL OVER REACH AND D.A.D.T.

In 1993, President Clinton and a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress passed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" into law. It was an uneasy compromise, but a little progress. Whereas previously, gays and lesbians were automatically discharged the new policy basically applied the Victorian adage of "it's ok as long as you don't get caught".

The wisdom of not allowing gay men and lesbian women to serve openly is certainly in question. Whether one agrees with the compromise policy or not, no one has questioned the role of President as commander in chief of the armed forces or the role of Congress in oversight from setting policies regarding the services. As a matter of history, both President and Congress have sought appropriate counsel from the professional soldiers. Today, a federal judge has injected the courts into the historical Constitutional prerogatives of the Executive and Legislative branches of government. 

District Court Judge Virginia Phillips has ruled that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is unconstitutional. The judges decision is in this link.(http://www.politico.com/static/PPM170_100909_logcabin.html) The Justice Department called no witnessed and offered a tepid defense, if you choose to call it a defense. 

The timing of this decision is strange given that there is now significant bipartisan support to undo the policy. This is the relevant point. Congress and the President are working, however slowly to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". It was Abraham Lincoln that decided black men should form fighting units in the Civil War, not a judge. It was President Truman who unilaterally ordered the desegregation of the armed services.It was not ordered by a judge. Judge Phillips' decision relieves our duly elected President and Representatives of legislating a change at a time when we need to hold them all to account and put them on the record. The American people as mid term elections approach are entitled by recorded vote to know where they stand. Judge Phillips has now given them a pass. Why legislate if the courts will decide? Both sides will then debate "judicial activism" rather than going on the record with a vote. Democracy deserves better.

Let me be clear. Serving your country in uniform is the noblest endeavor. But NOBODY has a right to serve. It is a privilege to serve, not a right. We have, in my view reached a point in this nations' history that we now recognize DADT as an anachronism. That's my view, but you see I'm not qualified to make that determination as it is not my responsibility to provide for the defense of the nation and to perpetuate liberty in its defense. We elect people to do that. I have never served and however archaic the present policy as constructed may be, I defer to those whose legacy it is to protect fat slobs like myself who never initiated an effort to serve a nation whose privileges I have enjoyed. 

Judge Phillips is simply not qualified or justified to make determinations that DADT has in military effectiveness and the morale of those who serve. In making such a declaration, she has crossed a line. The Constitution has clearly defined separation of powers. Service in uniform has restrictions that are necessary that would be unconstitutional in civilian life. The defense of the nation requires those in service to accept different conditions that are deemed necessary in the interest of the nation. Service is an act of conformity as an action to preserve individual liberty. 


The judges' decision will ultimately be over ruled by higher courts. The ruling is not confined to a policy (DADT). What is at stake here is not who can serve in uniform. The larger issue is a clear judicial over reach and a violation of the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution. The defense of this nation, whether we agree with those responsible for it, cannot be held hostage to judicial fiats. The stakes are higher than the relevance of sexual orientation in service. The judge's decision cannot stand. Now, we just need to hold our elected representatives to account and vote accordingly. For in a Republic such as ours it is the vote of a common man, not the compassionate musings of a judge that determine outcomes.  

Point Spread Gods

You have got to love the half point. Love it. I start out 1-0 thanks to 1/2 point.

THE LOWLY BUCS

To keep it short and the simple, this weeks home game by the BUCS against visting Cleveland is officially blacked out. I may be wrong, but the last time they were blacked out was in Week one of 1997 which was just three months after I moved to Tampa. It was at the immortal Sombrero and a young upstart Tony Dungy led team that defeated the vaunted 49ers. Of course this time the BUCS don't have Dungy,Sapp,Kiffin,Lynch,Brooks,Alstott,Dunn, etc. Sucks to be the BUCS, ESpecially if they LOSE to the Browns

Game One, Week One Preview NFL

New Orleans Saints (-5.5) over Minnesota Vikings
The Vikings are looking for payback and the absence of Darren Sharper may help. There is no Sidney Rice for Minnesota or Chester Taylor. The Saints will bring the pressure. but that Vikings defense is pissed that they didn't get to Brees last year too. Favre isn't as mobile and this is the first home game since the Super Bowl for the Saints. I think the Vikings will avoid the turnovers and cover. Five and a half is too much I think.
PREDICTION: VIKINGS TO COVER

Obama Can't & Won't Support Charlie Crist

Kendrick Meek’s crushing defeat of Jeffrey Greene in Florida’s Democratic Senatorial Primary sealed Charlie Crist’s fate. In the lead up to the primary, Charlie Crist had become all the rage amongst the pundit class. He’s doomed now.

Why is he doomed? Won’t President Obama quietly shift resources to him and shy away from Meek? Of course not. Kendrick Meek has proven he is a capable candidate worthy of his party’s nomination. And he is by all accounts a class act. Crist on the other hand, has had a set of flip flops that have provided an increasingly negative light on his opportunistic nature.

The mistake often made by those who believe Crist will receive tacit support from President Obama is grounded in the false assumption that Barack Obama needs Charlie Crist more than he needs Kendrick Meek. Meek is a four term Congressman representing a district handed over to him by his mother who represented the district for several terms. If Obama abandoned him in favor of Crist, how would that go down with the Meek Machine?

Well, some might argue, won’t he need Charlie Crist to win and caucus with Democrats to keep a majority in the Senate? Maybe. But politics is first about self preservation and secondly, accurately assessing the odds.
President Obama needs Florida in 2012. Kendrick Meek can help turn out votes in 2012 even if he is assuredly defeated in 2010. If Charlie Crist were to pull the upset in 2010 just how many votes can the former life long Republican Governor turn out for Obama in 2012? Especially if the Meek camp is still doing a slow burn?  Would Barack Obama risk losing Florida in 2012 by cutting a Democrat Congressman? Self preservation as the first rule says supporting Meek in defeat pays larger dividends for the President. For the President to support Crist, even if he won would be a short term “pyhrric” victory.

The other reason he can’t and won’t support Crist over Meek are the statistical probabilities and political realities. We now recognize that the Senate is in play, but a net gain of ten seats is daunting even under optimal conditions. If you’re Obama do you assume you need Crist’s caucusing with you given the probabilty that you will cling to a majority without him? Of course not. President Obama will continue to support Meek because it’s in his self interest.

Don’t worry my friends. Marco Rubio is going to win and Charlie Crist is toast, burned by a President who does not need him.

Christine O’Donnell: An Unqualified Conservative

Red State.com among many other sites have struggled with the candidacy of Christine O’Donnell for the U.S. Senate in Delaware. As a native Philadelphian I think I know a little bit about Delaware. Not a lot, but just enough. Long gone are Pete DuPont and Bill Roth, two genuine conservatives.

Is Delaware at present receptive to conservatives? No. It is a blue state that could be purple, but not very likely red. It’s just the way it is. So, why would Delaware voters embrace a self described conservative like Christine O’Donnell? Why would Delaware voters embrace a conservative who so poorly articulates conservative principles and is so lacking the values as a living example of those principles?

I’ve seen her interviewed by Neil Cavuto. She not a lightweight, she’s just strange. That’s my assessment. In a perfect world we could elect rock ribbed conservatves anywhere, but we know that’s not true. Moreover, why would we want someone who identifies as conservative repeatedly embarrassing herself in public interviews? Just because she shares our point of view does not mean she is qualified to be a United States Senator. Qualifications matter, regardless of the core beliefs. I can’t stand Russ Feingold’s politics, but he is a clear, articulate spokesman for liberalism and comports himself with the dignity that we as Americans ought to expect from a Senator. I hope he loses, but I respect his demeanor. It matters.

Christine O’Donnell does not possess the qualities,character and temperment that we ought to require from any candidate for public office. As conservatives we have an obligation to consider carefully those who would be public spokesmen or women for conservative principles.

I know what many will say. Do you really want Mike Castle? If I could get Pete DuPont or the late Bill Roth, then the answer is no, but they are not around amymore. For the first time this year every professional prognosticator has lined up with Dick Morris’ assessment that the Senate is in play. That assumes a pick up in Delaware. O’Donnell loses in Delaware. She would lose big. Castle would very likely win, barring a miracle by the DEMS. Were O’Donnell to beat Castle any chance of Jeff Sessions presiding over the Judiciary Committee goes up in flames. Castle will infuriate us, you and me both, but his victory puts the gavel all the more closer to Senators who will hold President Obama’s feet to the fire. Sometimes compromise does yield to a promising outcome.

I disagree with Mike Castle and I wish there were a viable and articulate conservative alternative. The alternative in Christine O’Donnell does not meet that criteria. The choice is between a respectable dissident from almost all things conservative and an incompetent, inarticulate conservative acolyte named Christine O’Donnell. She would embarrass not adavnce and cause more harm than good. Holding your nose sucks, but it is necessary in Delaware. The wise move is to settle for the dissident.

WASHINGTON REDSKINS PREVIEW

Getting Donovan McNabb was a big deal of course and MIke Shanahan a bigger deal. If he can get winning football from this roster, they should erect a golden statue and offer up a blood sacrifice. I simply dont see this aging, veteran offense stacking up against a younger,faster, more physical Cowboys and Giants teams. Even the EAgles are getting younger and setting up for the long term. Add to that the bizarre Haynesworth scenario. This is starting to look like another bad Dan Snyder project. PREDICTION: 7-9

TENNESSEE TITANS PREVIEW

Vince Young is back and better than ever. Chris Johnson is a beast. The defense will get better as they will be spending less time on the field. Bounce back year for the Titans. PREDICTION: 10-6

TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS PREVIEW

I like Raheem Morris and they finished fine last year, but there is a real lack of talent to this team. No running game, no consistent QB play. Defense is good, but lacking. PREDICTION: 3-13

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS PREVIEW

I like this team a lot. Mike Singletary is my kind of coach. The stuck with Alex Smith and I think it will pay off. Not that he will be great but much better certainly. You've got MIchael Crabtree and now Ted Ginn Jr, who at the very least is a good kick returner. The OL is outstanding and deep.

The defense will be among the elite defenses, led by Patrick Willis who is the best LB in football. PREDICTION: 12-4

ST LOUIS RAMS PREVIEW

The Rams at least look like they have a franchise QB. If they can keep him healthy the rest of the franchise may follow. Whether Steve Spagnoula will be there by then is another story. Steven Jackson won't be enough to stem the tide. PREDICTION: 2-14

SEATTLE SEAHAWKS PREVIEW

Bad division as it is, the NFC WEST is not so bad that Pete Carroll can save the Seahawks. They just plain stink. Add to that is the resignation of OL coaching legend ALEX GIBBS of the zone blocking concept. They traded for Charley Whitehurst to play QB and he's awful. Matt Hasselback gets the call. AGAIN. They did however choose wisely by drafting Texas safety Earl Thomas. Pro Bowl written all over him. PREDICTION: 2-14

SAN DIEGO CHARGERS PREVIEW

This may be the most dysfunctional franchise in the NFL. Remember when they were going to be the next great dynasty? All that great Hall of Fame like talent on both sides of the ball? Yet the players and the team are always at odds. ALWAYS. Either they drafted highly talented malcontents repeatedly or they don't know how to manage a team. Philip Rivers is an elite QB. It's a shame he works for an elitist GM like AJ SMITH. This team won't get those championships because AJ seems to think you can treat talent anyway you like with consequence. Look for rookie HB Ryan Matthews to have a big year rushing. PREDICTION: 9-7

PITTSBURGH STEELERS PREVIEW

Can the Steelers survive the first four weeks without Roethlisberger? Of course. This team is poised for a rebound and has the tools to go a long way. It ought to be Dennis Dixon, of course, not Byron Leftwich who starts in the interim. They do have serious blocking issues though. PREDICTION: 11-5

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES PREVIEW

Ok now! Kevin Kolb looks fine, but did not seem to pick up blitz packages. Do you think that's going to be just a bit of a problem? The OL is makeshift at best. I expect serious problems if your right side can't block and the QB can't adjust protection on the blitz. I'm pretty sure DC's around the league might exploit this deficiency. LeSean McCoy is a fine back and will have a fine career, but he doesn't have the explosion I'm looking for. DeSean Jackson is a star and one can only hope that Jeremy Maclin doesn't regress by dropping as many passes in the regular season as he did in the pre season. Brent Celek will get a lot of catches.


The defense looks solid but is young. Nate Allen is the new starting free safety. He is the rookie we received with the 2nd round pick we got for Donovan McNabb. He is a gem and a future star. Stewart Bradley is back and Ernie Sims is there on the outside. Assante Samuel  leads the CB's and Ellis Hobbs seems to have improved. Rookie DE Brandon Graham looks like the real deal too. The Eagles kept 10 of their 13 draft picks on the roster as well as 2 undrafted rookie free agents, meaning that over 20% of the roster are rookies.


PREDICTION: 8-8

OAKLAND RAIDERS PREVIEW

I'm not buying the hype just yet. I thought Jason Campbell would be the sleeper, but he's hobbled. At least they had the brains to get rid of Jamarcus Russell. Can Darren McFadden get in shape now? Until I see them put together an entire season in the 21st Cenury, I will remain skeptical. PREDICTION: 6-10

NEW YORK JETS PREVIEW

Ah, now we get to everyone's pet favorite. Rex Ryan has the personality that is perfect for the venue. He gets the most out of his team and as I sit here typing Darrelle REvis has signed. So look out. The last holdout on the Super Bowl gravy train has climbed aboard. If you listen carefully, you hear JETS fans screaming somewhere out in the wilderness that the sky is about to fall. To the typical Jets fan the season is great, almost idyllic, that is until it starts to play out like a scene from "Bambi". You know it's a great day in the forest and then suddenly you hear shots and you see Vinny Testaverde holding his ankle and Ray Lucas reaching for his helmut. Admit it, be honest JETS fans, you're just waiting for the hammer to drop. EVERYBODY says you're headed to the big dance. Boy you are royally screwed. PREDICTION: 12-4

NEW YORK GIANTS PREVIEW

Another Enigmatic team. Kenny Phillips is back and Antrel Rolle in the fold as well. Good sign. Will we see the team from weeks 1-5 last year that seemed invincible and headed to the Super Bowl? Or will we see the mediocre team from weeks 6-17? They could content or fall back. Wait and see. PREDICTION: 9-7

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

Darren Sharper is on the PUP list and out for the firs six weeks. That hurts. The Saints were not injury free last year, but healthy in relative terms. They are clearly poised to make a run at a repeat, but I wouldn't hold my breath. This franchise is about to experience the thrill of a Super Bowl every week as everyone brings their A GAME. PREDICTION: 10-6

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS PREVIEW

It would be easy to discount this team given that everyone sees the JETS and DOLPHINS on the rise. They simply don't have the experience on defense anymore that we can automatically count them out. That being said, they have the feel of a team that will compete, but not enough for a real shot at the Super Bowl. PREDICTION: 10-6

MINNESOTA VIKINGS PREVIEW

Brett Favre is back. Will he be as effective as last year? No. Why not? Because no one puts together a season like like that two years running when you're soon to be 41 years old. Sidney Rice is out for the year,Percy Harvin has migraines and Chester Taylor is in Chicago. Someone Favre will make the receiving corps look good though. And if Adrian Peterson can hold onto the ball, well, write your ticket to Dallas.

The Defense is a beast. NUFF SAID. PREDICTION: 12-4 

MIAMI DOLPHINS PREVIEW

Another riddle of a team. They've added Karlos Dansby and Brandon Marshall. This team is solid but not very electric is it? Chad Henne? Ronnie Brown? Isn't he a bit beat up and getting older in the tooth? I'm just not feeling it. PREDICTION: 9-7

KANSAS CITY CHIEFS PREVIEW

Look out for this team this year! They are in a weak division and getting stronger. Matt Cassel will be under the tutelage of Charlie Weis. They have Thomas Jones and Jamal Charles in the backfield. Dwayne Bowe and Chris Chambers at WR. THey have drafted for the OL.


The defense now is being led by Romeo Crennel and will get better. Don't be surprised if they get out of the gate hot. PREDICTION: 8-8

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS PREVIEW

Jack Del Rio has done his amndest to get the most out this team. Not that anyone would notice from the stands. David Garrard looks like a deer in the headlights. If it weren't for Maurice Jones Drew, why would we bother? Maybe they can get out to L.A. and find Trojan fans just as disinterested in the NFL as Gator fans in Jacksonville. PREDICTION: 4-12

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS REVIEW

Easy as pie to review this team. Do I have to bother? They say a broken clock is right twice a day. The Colts are the gridiron equivalent of Big Ben. PREDICTION: 13-3 

HOUSTON TEXANS PREVIEW

So, they finally had a winning season? WHEW!!!!!!!! I guess they've arrived! Count me as a skeptic this year. The Titans will be better than last year for starters. Matt Schaub is erratic and their running game is uneven. Their defense plays in fits and starts. I'm not holding my breath on this team putting it togetrher. PREDICTION: 6-10

GREEN BAY PACKERS PREVIEW

Aaron Rodgers is as good as they get in the league at QB. They have some blocking issues and I'm not entirely sold on Ryan Grant making a comeback. THat said, they are loaded.


The Defense is as good as they get, but you wouldnt've noticed in the playoffs. That may be telling. As much talent as they have and in spite of the numbers are they a championship unit? Many will say that a second full season under Dom Capers will make all the difference. It had better. PREDICTION: 12-4

DETROIT LIONS PREVIEW

Like Cleveland, the LIONS are finally turning it around. Except, the Lions have a QB named Matthew Stafford, who if they can keep him upright is destined for NFL Super Stardom. Add Calvin Johnson & Nate Burleson with Brandon Pettigrew and the arrival of the explosive Jahvid Best. Bam! You've got points.


THen there's Ndamukan Suh. He's the defensive anchor and boy is he the real deal. He was just fined $7,500.00 by the NFL for a roughing the QB call. If I were a Lions fan though, I would be ecstatic. He plays with a high motor, is aggressive and will dominate. Look out. This team won't win a whole lot this year, but the Lions really are on the rise folks. PREDICTION: 6-10

DENVER BRONCOS PREVIEW

An enigma is what the Denver Broncos are. Let's get one thing out of the way. It's looks like their gamble on Tim Tebow will pay off. Eventually. He does have the skill and can make the throws. 

Elvis Dumerville is out for the season though and Knowshon Moreno has been banged up. They don't have the offensive firepower necessary so the defense will have to keep them close. PREDICTION: 8-8

DALLAS COWBOYS PREVIEW

Sadly, in my view this team clearly showed itself to be on a sharp incline at the end of last season. While, they do have problems on the offensive line, they have far too much talent for it to matter a whole lot. Here's wishing otherwise though. The addition of Dez Bryant will make them a far more daunting offense as it will likely free up Roy Williams.


The key to this team is defense. Except for the safety position, they are a dominant, aggressive force.
PREDICTION: 11-5

CLEVELAND BROWNS PREVIEW

I'm not much of a fan of Eric Mangini as a coach, but I must admit that he has an eye for talent in drafting and building a team. He showed that with the Jets. He clearly builds from the inside out, which is the right way of putting a team together. He, now along with Mike Holmgren have drafted well the last two seasons and they finished well last year. THey draft well. So, the Browns are on their way. Just not this year.

They sent Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn packing and started frsh at QB, forever ending that controversy. But Jake Delholmme? His arm is a dead wish floating on the sea. Seneca Wallace? Will someone finally admit he's just not Randall Cunningham already? They are clearly going to run the ball and they have the gubs to do it. They will get and be better, but not in that division against those rivals. PREDICTION: 6-10

CINCINNATI BENGALS PREVIEW

I'll believe it when I see it. That's my attitude on this team getting to the playoffs two consecutive years. This team is loaded with talent as they've cobbled together a team of malcontents. Defensively, they are as good as anyone in the league and aggressive. 

Offensively they have the potential to be explosive, but they are thin. The wrong injury in the wrong place starts a domino effect. This is a team that more than most must stay healthy to compete. Cedric Benson looks great but does he really have it right? If he regresses then they may be the BUNGLES all over again. Wait and see. This team has feast or famine written all over. PREDICTION: 8-8

CHICAGO BEARS PREVIEW

I'll say what I've said all along. The only thing Jay Cutler will accomplish in Chicago is to get Lovie Smith fired! Which is sad because I think Lovie has shown himself to be one of the best coaches in the league. But won't he perform so much better with Mike Martz as the OC? No. In fact this offense will need to run the ball which is clearly their strong point. But more to the point, how are you going to win if you can't block? Preseason should not be a judge, but judging the offensive line's matadorial disposition is painful.  


What about Julius Peppers? Overrated. Not bad. Not a bust. He just chooses when he wants to play. This defense is finally showing its age. The only thing that can save the Bears is finding holes in the running game to spare Cutler the punishment he so richly deserves. PREDICTION: 3-13

CAROLINA PANTHERS PREVIEW

Can Matt Moore get the ball to an injury prone Steve Smith? If not, then everyone keys on Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart and it's game over. Can the defense make up for the loss of Julius Peppers? Yes, because he had a habit of disappearing in big games anyway. 

I'm not sold on their defense. They're not flashy and are fundamentally sound, but not really a big play defense either. Contrast that to the Saints defense with less talent that makes big plays at critical moments. It also seems to suffer from a rash of injuries. They need a playmaker on defense and until they get one they will just be one more functioning defense. PREDICTION: 8-8

BUFFALO BILLS PREVIEW

If you have four QB's, then you have no quarterbacks. It all starts there. CJ Spiller is a great pick and will provide the only spark on a team without fire. They are going to be awful. PREDICTION: 3-13

BALTIMORE RAVENS PREVIEW

The lack of Ed Reed for the first six weeks is obviously bad news, but on the flip side when he's healthy he can get the defense up to speed for a mid to late season run. The addition of Anquan Boldin and the return of Derrick Mason makes them one of the elites in the AFC. The running game with Ray Rice is as potent as they come.


The Ravens defense is well, the Ravens defense. They open their season at the Meadowlands against the "vaunted" Jets. The loser may be on the road come playoff time as a result. PREDICTION: 12-4 

ATLANTA FALCONS PREVIEW

Matt Ryan will give them a chance to win in any case and if they can get the running game going with Michael Turner like two years ago, then look out.

Mike Smith can work wonders with a defense, but I'm not sold on the squad no matter how the numbers looked from last year. The FAlcons had their 2nd consecutive winning season for the first time in franchise history, so at least progress has been made in that regard.

I can't help but feel that in a division with the SAints that the Falcons are at best a wild card. We shall see. THeir first four games are at Pittsburg, at home against the Cardinals,at New Orleans and home against the 49ers. Tough start. Prediction: 9-7

ARIZONA CARDINALS PREVIEW

The Cardinals finally unloaded the disinterested Matt Leinart. He ought to use undrafted QB Max Hall's performance as an example of hard work. He won't but he should. Derek Anderson will be fine. He had a Pro Bowl year with the Browns and trailed off afterwards. In part because the talent was lacking. Larry Fitzgerald is to say the very least a tad more consistent than Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow Jr.

I'm not sold on their running game and the loss of Anquan Boldin cannot be mitigated by the underrated Steve Breaston. The loss of Carlos Dansby and Antrel Rolle has left a void that has not been filled. 

The Schedule is not too daunting. Prediction: 7-9

BILL McCOLLUM AND SOUR GRAPES

I've long held that if you're going to roll the dice on a candidate for office, you roll them for the House or Senate. Why? Because if you choose wrong they are just one in one hundred or one in 435. If you look at Governor's races however, traditionally, myself included people vote safe. Because if you elect the wrong governor (or President for that matter) they are in a position that can obstruct real change.

For that reason, I voted for State Attorney General Bill McCollum in the Florida Republican Gubernatorial primary. He lost. To Rick Scott. An unknown outsider who spent 50 million dollars. It paid off. At about 10:45 my candidate, Mr. McCollum came out. Not to concede, but to inform his supporters that it was going to be a long night and there were still many votes to count. That might've made me feel good if I hadn't had the website for Miami Dade Supervisor of Elections in front of me as he was speaking. I could see that he couldn't make up the difference, so he had to know. I was watching my candidate refuse to concede defeat when all who were watching and crunching numbers knew it was over.


To date, Mr. McCollum will not endorse Mr. Scott. Ok. He questions his integrity and character and ethics. Fair enough. If he feels that strongly, there is no law that says he must endorse or support the man who ended his political career. But then again, by losing he ought to let the General Electorate decide the fate in November of the nominee Mr. Scott. Criticizing him and refusing to endorse clearly smacks of sour grapes and any effort to undermine him publicly will discredit Mr. McCollum.

If Mr. Scott's ethics are as poor as Mr. McCollum says they are does he think Alex Sink won't notice or seek to exploit? For that matter as a McCollum voter myself does he think I won't notice? Barring an earth shattering revelation I will likely vote for Mr. Scott without regret and I do not regret voting for Mr. McCollum. I would still prefer he'd won the primary. If on the other hand Mr. McCollum having choked on his sour grapes publicly undermines the nominee in November, I will rue the day I reflexively vote for the "safe" choice". 

TOLERANCE and MUTUAL RESPECT

In the midst of the continuing debate on the mosque near ground zero the most annoying point is by those who preach tolerance. The idea of course is that to express a reasoned or for that matter unreasoned dissent is intolerant.

What is tolerance and why is it often used to squash dissent? Why is it frequently used to label those who exercise their right to free speech as hateful? Tolerance sounds great if you're the one granting it to another. It's not so hot if you are in fact the recipient of another's magnanimity in its offering. If I say to you, "Hey I can't stand you, but hey I'll put up with you anyway". Wow! What a great guy that I can "put up" with you huh? 

Tolerance, however as a matter of history still has an implied sense of superiority. No society can be sustained as long as such a sentiment exists. It is a foundation built upon sand. A great society grounded in free principles provides all with the motive to live their lives consistent with their values and live a life with a force of character that rather than demanding tolerance, commands respect.

The proper criteria in determining the civilizational merits of a nation hinges on its citizens willingness to live in a state of mutual respect. It doesn't matter if we all agree or like each other. Mutual respect, not tolerance provides a solid foundation and is a mighty fine bridge over that which has divided since the dawn of man.

THE MOSQUE

We can all thank President Obama for elevating the Mosque (community center?) near Ground Zero in Manhattan to an issue of national importance. Putting aside the fact that the President addressed an issue beneath his office, why did he have to effectively take one side? Here's what he should've said:


                "It has come to my attention that an effort to build a mosque in lower Manhattan
                 has drawn criticism of many New Yorkers and family members of 9/11 victims.
                 There is a right to worship freely and build houses of worship for that 
                 purpose. However, I believe given the expressed concerns of the American public
                 on this subject that all concerned parties should accept New York Governor David 
                 Patterson's effort to mediate. I support such an effort to reach a compromise
                 that addresses the concerns of interested and effected parties."

A statement like this would have accomplished the following.


1.) The President would have neutrally acknowleded the respective positions of all parties.
2.) He would have added the weight of the Presidency behind David Patterson and increased his position in reaching an accord.
3.) He would have affected an outcome through negotiation without taking sides and sullying the office of President.
4. He would've forced the hand of all parties to come to the table because to do otherwise would have undermined the public positions of each party. 

But he didn't do that. The President cannot as a practical matter express himself on everything he deems of consequence. A President can move people without public expressions. The danger is that now what was a genuine outburst of emotion relevant to the proposed mosque's proximity to ground zero risks being subordinated by more extreme or opportunistic elements with less than savory objectives. 


President Obama's remarks, which were prepared as part of a speech reflect poor political skills, skills which are necessary to achieve desired results with minimal insult. This was compounded by the White House's bizarre statement on polls relating to his faith. I disagree with President Obama on most issues which is fine, but as an American I think it is reasonable to expect a higher level of political acumen as a means of abating contentious affairs. The President's comments reflect an ignorance of the power of the Presidency. Obama, as is true of all Presidents, must understand that sometimes one can achieve a principled end without taking a principled public stand. Is it so much to ask that highest elected politician in the land possess a remedial knowledge in the art of politics?

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #299 "EAST OF EDEN"

Saturday, March 27, 2010

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME

THE LIST GOES ON:

299.) EAST OF EDEN (1955)

Directed by the brilliant Elia Kazan,the film adaptation of John Steinbeck's novel reeks with tension.Kazan used James Dean and Raymond Massey's dislike of each other to create genuine disaffection as they played father and son.

Dean,tries desperately to impress his father but fails to find commonality.Complicating his efforts are his brother and his pursuit to find and know his mother,played by Jo Van Fleet in an Oscar winning supporting performance.

This is high melodrama that barely avoids going over the top due to Kazan's deft direction.This is just one of many films that demonstrate complex relationships in a common,almost casual way that marks Kazan as one of the great film makers of all time.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #300 "STARS IN MY CROWN" (1950)

300.) STARS IN MY CROWN (1950)

A highly under rated film and a departure for Director Jacques Tourneur. A western, it stars Joel McCrea as a minister in a small town. This is not a typical western. There is no gunfight. It's a simple, eloquent film that deals with the hazards from tainted well water to racial divisiveness and a couple things in between.

I had never heard of this movie until I came upon it a couple years back and it stayed in my head. The antagonist, if there is one is played by James Mitchell, the town doctor who followed in his father's footsteps. The conflict is between Joel McCrea's faith and Mitchell's disdain for all things religion.

The cast also includes Lewis Stone, Alan Hale Sr., Dean Stockwell and Ed Begley Sr. It is Juano Hernandez, however that is at the center of simmering tensions. A lifelong resident of the town and a freedman, he is being intimidated into selling his property at a fraction of its value or be run out by locals in white hoods and sheets. The end of the movie in resolving the matter is refreshing and as moving as any ever filmed.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #265 "BATMAN BEGINS" (2005)

Thank God for Christopher Nolan. "Batman Begins" conclusively exorcised the Joel Schumacher era from the proud history of the Dark Knight.

Christian Bale was inspired casting, even if Katie Holmes was not. Include Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine,Gary Oldman,Tom Wilkinson & Ken Watanabe and you've got one great film true to its characters. Caine is perfect as a worldly Alfred, Freeman ideal as the wise Mr. Fox and Gary Odman is every bit the role of Gordon. Ken Watanabe has a nice role too

It is Liam Neeson, however that provides an effective villain bent on destroying Gotham, after having trained the Young Mr Wayne everything he knows. This film works on many levels and thankfully restored an iconic piece of Americana to its proper literary context. 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #267 "THE LITTLE FOXES" (1941)

All FUTURE POSTINGS CAN BE SEEN AT:

http://wardworldmovies.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, August 03, 2010

Based on the Lillian Hellman play, "The Little Foxes" provides one of the most towering performances by an actress in film history. Bette Davis was never more devious or perhaps just plain evil.

The plot is relatively simple. Bette is estranged from her wheelchair bound Herbert Marshall, but they butt heads when he discovers an illegal act centering around money of course. 

Teresa Wright, a greatly under appreciated actress plays their daughter, who reveres her father and is naive, but cautious towards her mother. Dan Duryea gives the best performance of his career.

The highlight of this movie is Bette Davis as a whole, but specifically the finale is as unforgettable as they come. William Wyler delivered a genuine film classic.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #268 "REBECCA" (1940)

Winner of the Best Picture Oscar for 1940, "Rebecca" was the first American film directed by Alfred Hitchcock, having finally been enticed by David O Selznick.

Joan Fontaine marries enigmatic widower Laurence Olivier. Of course things turn for the worse as she becomes fixated on the late Mrs de Winter. This fixation is driven aggressively by JUdith Anderson as Mrs Danvers, who worshipped the late mistress.

The tension between Olivier and Fontaine is palpable until a dramatic revelation by Olivier about his true feelings concerning his deceased wife. This film would be melodramatic soap operatic drivel if not for a stellar cast and direction. It has, of course great supporting performances by Anderson and George Sanders. This is a must watch movie. 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #269 "BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID" (1969)

"Who are those guys?". The quote that tells the tale of this great movie. Paul Newman and Robert Redford star as the title outlaws on the run from a posse. 

Butch and Sundance, notorious, but often comically rob trains as the leaders of the "Hole In the Wall" gang. Katharine Ross plays well opposite Paul Newman. 

It's difficult picking one scene or moment because this film is such a splendid, seamless piece of entertainment. It's simply great entertainment that should be viewed in its totality rather than piecemeal. This is a film driven by personality. 

If you had to pick great scenes, then I guess the scene when they jump into the river, or the finale in the Bolivian bank, but just enjoy.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #270 "SWING TIME"

The great and highly under rated George Stevens directed this Fred and Ginger vehicle. I must admit, I get all the films confused, because they are so alike. That's not really a bad thing as all of their film's are first rate.

Our Man, Fred Astaire flees a wedding fearing he can't earn his keep. Ending up in New York, he stumbles upon Ginger Rogers who as it turns out is a dance instructor. Simple as all that. Except that Fred and Ginger elevate what might otherwise be a forgettable project.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #271 "WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION" (1957)

Billy Wilder's adaptation of the classic Agatha Christie story. Brilliant script, great cast and superb direction.

Tyrone Power was the quintissential Hollywood leading man. His charm is at its height as he is accused of murder. Charles Laughton, whose career was revived with this performance as his defense provides what may be one of his greatest performances. 

Elsa Lanchester is fine as always and there is a fine supporting cast all around. The star of this show among the many, however is Marlene Dietrich. This was not the first time she was seeking to revive her film career, but just as with Laughton this role provides her with one of her very best and is worthy of resurrecting her career.

Ultimately, Billy Wilder brings a great story, resurrected stars and creates high drama with a deft hand. Tragically, this would be Tyrone Power's last film. He would die the following year at the age of 44. 

THOUGHTS ON IMMIGRATION

Immigration is once again at the forefront of the public consciousness and there has been no shortage of opinions. The following is an overview of my feelings on this subject.

Almost every American is a lineal descendant of an immigrant. As a people we have and ought to take pride in this tradition. However, previous immigrant waves have been specified by law with clear parameters to gain admission. My grandfather on my mother's side was literally "right off the boat" from Ireland. The conditions for immigration required him to have a sponsor and a job.

Let's be clear that most of those who enter the nation illegally do so with their family's best interests at heart. By any estimate they are hard working and industrious. Both of these virtues, however as a matter of history is true of every immigrant class. The fundamental distinction is legal status and entry. Additionally, the United States is a sovereign nation which is obligated to protect the interests of the nation and its citizens. Regulating the flow of immigration is a necessity in meeting one its most fundamental obligations. We are a nation of laws, not an employment agency for the rest of the world.


There is, in many quarters an interest in a new "comprehensive" immigration law. The key components of this is a "guest worker" program. Proponents of this also insist that the present system is broken and comprehensive reform is necessary. Who do they think they're kidding? In 1985, Congress passed and President Reagan signed "comprehensive" immigration legislation. Included in this was amnesty for approximately 2 million "illegals" in return for tighter border security. How did that work out?

Twenty five years later we are led to believe that with six times as many illegal entrants into the country that the system is broken. Really? If it's broken, could this possibly be due to the failure to secure the border by the feds? Why would a new set of laws or conditions be any more effective than the former "comprehensive" reforms. Why would the feds be any more motivated to secure the border with a new set of laws if they so willingly looked the other way on existing statutes?



Depending on which numbers you believe there are anywhere from 12-18 million "illegal" immigrants in this nation. It is correct, of course that most are from south of the border, "Latin America". The key word is "illegal". Many people are offended by its use as a prefix to immigrants from Mexico. Get over it. No one, regardless of this nations' history has a right to immigrate. No one. No Where. Immigration is not a right. 

"Racist" is a charge often maliciously leveled at those who require border security before any effort at broader reform and as such has further alienated parties that are not as far apart as we all may believe. Most who favor border security favor broader reform, but condition support on certifying a secure border and controlling the ebb and flow of entering the nation. There are millions more from every corner of the globe who have obeyed the law in seeking to immigrate to the United States. Are we being fair to those who follow the law? 


Why, however would we alter existing laws to meet the demands of those who have demonstrated an unwillingness to respect the law? The personal nobility in pursuit of a better life for oneself and their family is a characteristic worthy of American citizenship and human empathy. How valuable a reward is citizenship if we establish no standard? How valid is citizenship, if we allow non citizens and other nations dictate the legal standard? 

Every generation of Americans has been confronted with the cultural logistics of immigration in an ever evolving national identity and today is no different. Ultimately, we all must be governed by a respect for law. Many do not accept this, believing that it is unjust and inhumane and injustice must be confronted. After all wasn't slavery,separate but equal, Jim Crow, etc.  the law? That's true, but those chapters in American history dealt with historic, endemic injustice
that subjected Americans to humiliating second class citizenship by systemically depriving them of their Constitutionally enumerated natural rights. 

Immigration, not being a right does not qualify as historically comparable in any legal or moral context. What about morality? Is depriving entry immoral? Since immigration does not fulfill a spiritual or religious need morality is not an issue.


Ultimately, this issue is being driven by raw politics. It is the politics that has driven a wedge. The Chamber of Commerce's influence on the Republican Party is on display because the members want the cheap labor. As long as the cheap labor can't vote. The influence of Big Labor on the Democratic Party is on display because its  members assume the votes are there, but ultimately don't want them taking jobs away from union members. If you're looking for resolution, well I wouldn't hold my breath.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: # 272 "THE RIGHT STUFF" (1983)

In 1983, the Academy Awards erroneously provided "Terms of Endearment" with the Best Picture Oscar. Why? Because "The Right Stuff" is a far superior film to the James Brooks' drivel, no matter how well acted.

"The Right Stuff" starts out with Sam Shepard portraying Chuck Yeager trying to break the Sound Barrier. Strangely, he does not get chosen by NASA to be an astronaut.

The rest of the cast is superlative. Scott Glenn as Alan Shepard, Ed Harris as John Glenn, Dennis Quaid as Gordon Cooper and many more. It is a stirring film about courage,exploration,commitment and patriotism with overt jingoism. It projects complex characters where previously there was iconography.  

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #273 "42ND STREET" (1933)

"Sawyer, you're going out a youngster but you've got to come back a star!". Those are the abridged words used by Warner Baxter to inspire Ruby Keeler as she is about to make her stage debut.

"42nd Street" today would seem cliche' ridden, but this is one of the films that created that cliche of big musical production numbers. In 1928, MGM's "The Broadway Melody" won the Best Picture Oscar at the 2nd Annual Academy Awards. 

It was the first musical, but it did not set a trend for the future genre.                                                                 

"42nd Street" was a trend setting musical, that unlike "Broadway Melody" still has many entertaining qualities, however quaint it might seem today. Every musical that followed on film for a generation ultimately owes "42nd Street". It is an essential film in the evolution of sound and music in an industry that had only known sound and music for six years. 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #274 "THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA" (1925)

Most people have not or will not watch silent films. It is however, a strong bet that most people have witnessed the unmasking of Lon Chaney's Phantom in 1925's "The Phantom of the Opera".

There isn't much to say about this movie. It's the definitive telling. Often filmed, and staged but never equaled. Many of Lon Chaney's films have been lost in a cloud of nitrate dust, but we can still admire this towering performance. 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #275 "WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE?" (1962)

It was no great secret of the animosity felt between Bette Davis and Joan Crawford, but by 1962 both of their careers and their age respectively compelled both to take the great roles in "Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?".

By all accounts, the set for the filming was cordial and polite, likely due to the skills of Director Robert Aldrich.

The two great actresses play sisters living in the same home. Child stars in vaudeville, their lives are forever altered when Crawford is crippled and blame is put on Davis' being drunk behind the wheel.

The plot and the relationship is frankly irrelevant. This is a movie with larger than life women providing tour de force performances. Bette Davis would get few more good roles, including "Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte", but Crawford would get roles that were lesser in stature, after quitting the aforementioned Davis vehicle.

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #276 "THE COLOR PURPLE" (1985)

In 1985, "The Color Purple" was nominated for nine Academy Awards, but Steven Spielberg was not nominated for Best Director. Spielberg was still largely envied and this was his first real attempt at drama. 

Alice Walker's novel (I never read it) is of course the basis for the film of the same name. Ultimately, it is a tale of a woman's struggle to overcome a lifetime of abuse, ridicule and misogyny.

Whoopi Goldberg was introduced to the public in this film, ironically in a dramatic role for the comedienne.

Danny Glover is the critical character. It is Glover who is the abusive husband and father, who by hook or crook keeps Goldberg in her place.

Oprah Winfrey, who marries their son Harpo serves as a willful woman who cowtows to no one. That is, until she ends up in jail for confronting the Mayor's wife. Upon leaving prison, the will is lost.

Inevitably, the heroine, gets motivated to change her life for the better. She leaves the house, opens a business and shines.

Danny Glovers' character, however has a quiet moment of redemption, when he makes the effort to reunite Whoopi with her sister, and does it without her being aware of the effort.

This is the closet thing to a John Ford like film that Steven Spielberg ever directed. It has all those qualities down to ambient noise in the background as the camera closes up on its star. The sound of the swinging picket fence as he closes in on Whoopi's face when she finds no letter from her sister in the mailbox. Simple and poignant and effective. 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #277: "AN AMERICAN IN PARIS"

Gene Kelly is today best and justly remembered for "Singin In the Rain". Ironically, it was released as Gene Kelly was sweeping awards season with #277, "An American In Paris". It would go on to win the Best Picture Oscar for 1951. 

The story is simple. Gene is a former GI who remained in Paris to ply his trade as an artist. His work is noticed by Nina Foch, who clearly has more than his art in mind. Gene, however is conflicted with the obvious financial rewards of his new patron and his love for Parisian gal, Leslie Caron in her first film.

The real star of the film is the carefully choreographed numbers to classic George Gershwin music, a man whose skills are certainly the equal to the great classical composers. It ends in what is supposed to be a ballet like number. Irving Berlin, was convinced that ending a mainstream musical with a lengthy, but physical ballet was a terrible idea and wished them "good luck". But it paid off due to the diligence and talents of Gene Kelly and Vincente Minnelli.

LEADERSHIP IN CRISIS

It is quite obvious that I am no great fan of Barack Obama's politics or policies. The political disagreements, however do not extend to a personal assessment. He clearly is a devoted husband and father. He projects warmth and compassion, sometimes even in his discussion of policy.

If I thought that Barack Obama was in any way responsible for an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, I would not hesitate to be critical, but he is not responsible. If I thought that he had the ability to end the current tragedy with personal skill,knowledge or expertise, I would hold him accountable. He does not possess such skills and therefore must rely on professionals who have dedicated their lives to such matters.

The BP Oil  Spill in the Gulf is an epic tragedy and in almost every respect even President Obama, wielding such power as he does can feel a sense of helplessness. I remember the old deodorant commercial motto, "never let them see you sweat". If the President feels events are beyond his control and helpless to alter it, that's ok, but true leadership never projects impotence in the face of tragedy. That is exactly what our President is projecting, however unintentionally. 

If we cannot cap the well quickly, then the government at every level, must make every effort to try and contain the disaster from spreading. A daunting task to say the least. Many would say a futile gesture. Upwards of 14 million people in the Gulf Region are affected by this disaster and when so many livelihoods are hanging by a thread it is incumbent of those in a leadership position to address the crisis in stark terms.

A President must be a realist, but in our lowest moments as individual,family,community and nation everyone at some point needs to hear a calming voice that reassures us that we shall see through it,endure and prosper yet again. It is exemplified by FDR's declaration at the height of the Depression that "all we have to fear is fear itself". Leaders, even those constrained by real conditions must never fail to project confidence, for it is renewed confidence by the common man that establishes an historic legacy for Presidents such as Roosevelt,Kennedy and Reagan, because they inspired us to believe in ourselves again.      

President Obama has failed to project any sense of true leadership. The people of the Gulf Region have every right to expect his express attention to their plight. He needs to take every available measure to contain the damage and assure us that he will oversee efforts at recovery. If efforts to halt or contain this ecological calamity fail, that's ok, but we as a people also have every right to see that he TRIED. I, like most people relate to failed effort, but we all detest a lack or perceived lack of effort. 

Barack Obama is a gifted man. He has moved and inspired people with rhetorical flourishes that have rarely been equaled. Why, amidst tragedy is his capacity to inspire so noticeably absent? Millions of people are seeing their dreams, their future disappear. Maybe my perspective is clouded by politics, but our President seems to be in a state of remote detachment. This is supported by his failure to comment on historic flooding in Tennessee, besides our present predicament in the Gulf of Mexico.

The President will visit the Gulf this weekend, interrupting his vacation. Meanwhile, the EPA is obstructing designs by the State of Louisiana to contain the damage from the spill. Governor Bobby Jindal is trying to do something  and the Feds hold him back. Absurd.


We don't need the President or any other politician to tell us that BP is responsible. WE KNOW THAT ALREADY. They'll be held to account soon enough. In the meantime is it so much to ask that the gifted oratory that elevated him to the highest elective office in the world express the requisite empathy with an intent to restore faith and confidence? The devil as is said is in the "details", but the details only matter if we are inspired to make the effort. Inspiration requires a voice with innate skills to lead. 

He is not to blame but Barack Obama has demonstrated a capacity to lead,inspire and motivate. He needs to rediscover his voice. He needs to project HOPE, not helplessness. He must be seen to act, rather than project impotence. The country and specifically the people of the Gulf Region need a strong dose of HOPE. Find your voice Mr President because it is moments like this when we look to our President to lead. It's not too late.  
 

TOP 300 MOVIES OF ALL TIME: #278-"NOSFERATU" (1922)

F.W. Murnau created in "Nosferatu", the quintissential vampire film. They had wanted of course to make an official film adaptation of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", but the estate of the late author would not give their permission. 

Words don't really do justice to the eeriness of the set and cinematography. In the mysterious Max Schreck, we get a great lead performance. Justice to him would be paid by Willem Defoe in "Shadow of the Vampire".

This is a movie to be seen to be appreciated. 

PERSONAL APOLOGIES FOR CHARLIE CRIST

As a good Catholic, I suppose it’s time I made a confession. In the last thirteen years as a resident of Florida, Tampa to be specific I have voted not less than five times for Charlie Crist. Twice in primaries and three times in general elections.


You see, being a native a Philadelphia and a proud consservative, I had become convinced by experience that electability was of the highest priority. In a city where Republicans had not won a head to head city wide election since 1969 it was a simple compromise. That one was race was for Traffic Court, no less.

The concerns of electability for a Philadelphia Conservative should have submitted to a more pleasing electoral reality in my adopted home of Florida. Sadly, old habits died hard. In 1998, a then obscure State Senator from Pinellas County named Charlie Crist was the Republican nominee running against Senator Bob Graham. A suicide mission to be sure. If ever there was a Democrat that I could have “conceivably” voted for, Bob Graham was just that, but nonetheless I voted for the unknown Mr. Crist who lost 2-1 as I knew he would. That vote cast me as an enabler of political suicide.

Then came 2002. Charlie Crist ran as the unendorsed candidate for State Attorney General and easily won the Republican Primary. I gladly voted for him in his big primary victory and promptly again in the general election.

In 2006, instead of running for re election as state Attorney General, he decided to run for the open Governor’s seat. He was unendorsed and there were more conservative primary opponents, but my reflexive electability issues cast its vote in the primary which he easily won. Once again, I promptly voted for him in the general election.

Charlie Crist has been the most popular Florida governor and he could have easily been re elected, but our most opportunistic chief executive decided instead to run for the United States Senate. At first, I thought it was great. With Crist running we would be assured of holding onto the seat. A no brainer.

I had never heard of Marco Rubio and only began to notice as he was progressively gaining in polls with Crist. As I learned more, the more I was impressed. Genuine conservative with passion and conviction. I made up my mind that this time I was not going to vote for Charlie Crist, but Marco Rubio. I still liked Charlie, but had come to prefer Rubio as a genuine budget hawk at a time when our nation needs fiscal attentiveness.

Charlie Crist began with a lead of over thirty points and Rubio was at eight percent. In recent months that has been reversed and Crist is now down by approximately thirty points to Mr. Rubio. Charlie Crist had coasted, assuming he was unassailable. His downfall had more to do with Rubio’s effectively making a case that he rather than Crist is what Florida needs in the Senate.

Charlie Crist is where he is today, headed towards political oblivion precisely because he took the voters for granted. He took his place in the United States Senate in his own mind before the people of this state extended to him such a privelege at the ballot box. He seemed to feel that he was entitled to be a Senator, by a mere willingness to serve. By such presumption, we find his character revealed. Such a presumption clearly demonstrates his desire to serve his ego rather than the interests of the public.

Charlie Crist is going to announce he’ll run as an independent for the United States Senate and drop out of the Republican Primary. It is not going to occur because as Chris Matthews insists, conservatives are engaging in a Stalinesque like purge. It isn’t because moderates are unwelcome.

Charlie Crist is going to run as an independent because at heart he is a coward. Charlie liked being a Republican when he wasn’t being worked hard for a nomination. He liked being a Republican when his detractors supported him in the general elections. For the first time in his life, however, he was faced with a real challenge in the presence of Marco Rubio. He panicked.He attacked. Now that it is obvious he would lose big time in a primary, he bolts.

What does it say of a man who runs in the face of adversity? What does it say when one cannot accept defeat with grace and humility? How should I feel, having voted for such a man five times to see him betray my faith for the grossest of political motives? I’m not naive about politicians. I’m downright realistic, bordering on cynical. We are living in difficult times, but when our conscience is connected and committed, it must reject this most cynical example of political opportunisn represented in Charlie Crist.

Florida and the nation will see through our present quandries, but only if we utterly reject shallow men like Charlie Crist, holding his finger to the wind.

We all knew as kids that twerp in our neighborhood pick up games who threw a fit if he didn’t get his way. He’d ruin everyone’s fun because he was the one that had the bat, the ball or the Nerf football. That kid thought he would get away with it cause he had the means to our good time. If he didn’t get his way, he took the bat,the ball,the Nerf or whatever and walked. But that kid was right. He got his way. We caved, we compromised, because in our mind we needed the bat and ball. THat’s the true face of Charlie Crist . He’s that twerp we all reviled cause he’d throw a fit when we didn’t do it his way or get it his way. Except this isn’t a game and we’re not children anymore. This is about leadership in the United States Senate. Public office is no one’s bat and ball and no one, certainly not Charlie Crist is able to pick it up and take it home with him.

I sincerely apologize for the five times i voted for him. I thought Charlie Crist was a credit to elective public office. I confess a profound error in judgement. My votes helped create his sense of entitlement. This time however I can find absolution with millions of Floridians and send him home without his bat and ball.