Robert Gates' New Book Attacks Obama

I don't know how it's handled in the Federal government workforce but in the private institutions I've worked in, often but not always, when someone decides to leave for greener pastures, there is an exit interview, formal or not. This usually depends on how "important" you are, how long you've been there, whether you're direct hire or contract and how easy you are to replace. Your boss and/or the HR department want to know why you're leaving, what they could have done differently to make you stay, if you enjoyed your time working at Penetrode Inc., whether you might ever want to return, or if they would ever be interested in having you back. I've had a few of these. Usually both sides are professional and cautious. Although you and/or your boss might be secretly or not so secretly delighted that you are finally departing, the custom is often to play things close to the vest. After all no one wants to be sued or tip their hand about a possible lawsuit. And even ignoring legal unpleasantness, usually neither the employer or especially, a wise employee, wants to burn down a bridge they might want to come back across. So the employee mouths the necessary pieties about an exciting new opportunity he just couldn't pass up and the boss says she's sorry to lose such a key part of her team but happy that her former subordinate is moving on to bigger and better things.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates evidently decided that he would ignore those conventions in his new book Duty, which details his experiences under the Obama Administration. He himself says that he didn't really enjoy his time there. I think it's fair to infer that he didn't much like or respect many of the people he worked with. So if this book was his exit interview it was a big "F*** All Y'all!!" to his former team members.

• In a new memoir, former defense secretary Robert Gates unleashes harsh judgments about President Obama’s leadership and his commitment to the Afghanistan war, writing that by early 2010 he had concluded the president “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

• Leveling one of the more serious charges that a defense secretary could make against a commander in chief sending forces into combat, Gates asserts that Obama had more than doubts about the course he had charted in Afghanistan. The president was “skeptical if not outright convinced it would fail,” Gates writes

• “The controlling nature of the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,” Mr Gates writes. In one meeting, Mr. Gates says that he challenged Mr. Biden and Thomas Donilon, then Mr. Obama’s deputy national security adviser, when they tried to pass orders to him on behalf of the president. “The last time I checked, neither of you are in the chain of command,” Mr. Gates says he told the two men. Mr. Gates said he expected to deal directly with the president on such orders.

• In particular, Mr. Gates said he was incensed by the National Security Staff and their controlling nature. “Much of my conflicts with the Obama administration during the first two years weren’t over policy initiatives from the White House but rather the NSS’s micromanagement and operational meddling,” he writes. “For an NSS staff member to call a four-star combatant commander or field commander would have been unthinkable when I worked at the White House – and probably cause for dismissal. It became routine under Obama.”

• In “Duty,” Gates describes his outwardly calm demeanor as a facade. Underneath, he writes, he was frequently “seething” and “running out of patience on multiple fronts.”

I don't think this is all that big of a deal nor is it unprecedented. Sometimes I think that everyone who is anyone in a Presidential Administration (and many who aren't) will write a book purporting to give the inside scoop and tell the "real story" of how everything went wrong when the President didn't listen to him. I'm sure that right now some intern in the event planning office is writing a book designed to settle scores. Controversy sells. But Gates' book does show that the President's initial team of rivals approach had some limitations. Perhaps the next President, when faced with the question of whether s/he should keep on a cabinet member from the opposite political party will remember Robert Gates' book and think better of it. 

Is this no big deal?

Have you ever badmouthed former employers/co-workers? 

Is it a mistake to keep people from a different party in key positions?

Do any of Gates revelations about the President's managerial style concern you?

Book Reviews: Dying Is My Business, Insomnia

Dying Is My Business
by Nicholas Kaufmann

If you like the Harry Dresden series or any of the numerous other urban fantasies about modern day magic then you really ought to get this book. I bought it when I was looking for something else. When I finally started to read it I didn't want to put it down. I think I finished it in two days. I'm sure it wasn't more than three. So I can't really give it higher praise than that. I think this is first in a series.
Trent is a "collector" for a Brooklyn, NY crime boss named Underwood. By collector I don't mean he collects monetary debts though he's done that in the past. No, Underwood sends Trent out on "special" assignments. Underwood craves information, antique, rare or legendary items, or people who can provide him leads about the first two things I mentioned. Trent usually tries to leave the rough stuff to Underwood's other primary enforcers but this isn't always possible. Underwood could care less if Trent or anyone else gets hurt in the process of collection. Mostly this is because Underwood is sociopathic but it's also because Underwood and his goons know that Trent can't be killed. Any time Trent is killed, he rises again. But the person in closest proximity to Trent dies in his place. Trent feels guilty about this and has actually started keeping a journal of the people who have died in that manner. But his memory doesn't go past a year. He doesn't know his real name or where he's from. Underwood claims to have some of that information and be looking for more. Trent is almost certain that Underwood is lying to him but he's desperate for information and wants to believe Underwood.

After Trent delivers a man to Underwood, Underwood assigns Trent to retrieve a very special box that's in someone else's possession. Trent is ordered to bring the unopened box back to Underwood without peeking inside it. And lastly, Underwood wants Trent to kill the people who currently have the box. He is particularly insistent on this last order. Although Underwood can't really kill Trent, as he reminds him he could easily make Trent wish he were dead or refuse to share information he's discovered about Trent's background, which to Trent, would be just as bad as physical torture.

Thus properly motivated, Trent sallies forth to do his master's bidding, as he has many times before. This time proves to be different. The box was only temporarily in the possession of the targeted people, a woman named Bethany and a man named Thornton. They've hidden it somewhere else. And then before Trent can find out where he and his new companions are attacked by creatures that Trent previously didn't believe existed. Trent discovers that he has abilities that he didn't know he had. He also learns, though his resurrection abilities should have been evidence enough, that magic is real. Bethany is a sorceress and possibly of Sidhe heritage while Thornton is a werewolf. And they're the good guys. Although they may not know what's in the box Bethany and Thornton are part of an organization tasked to recover and archive items of great magical power, lest they be used by people of evil desires. They (primarily Bethany) have a wary trust for Trent as he came to their aid. Trent decides to work with them for a while. He finds that the world's real history includes magic, dragons, elves, and other supposedly fanciful beings. Trent drifts away from his employer's control. He gains a certain sense of independence and morality. This is not good for Trent's health. Underwood insists that employees follow orders exactly or be severely punished. Underwood has a strange ability to locate errant employees, who usually become late ex-employees. Several competing groups launch a search for the box. Trent's new powers surprise, impress or worry his new found friends. They tell him he does impossible things. To hear that coming from magicians, werewolves, healers, dragons and vampires is something which bothers Trent almost as much as Underwood's ability to track him down. Trent's also struggling internally over whether to betray Bethany and Thornton, who initially think that he randomly found them.

The story pacing kept me interested and might keep you excited as well. It's as much a chase story as anything else. It very adroitly balances the supernatural and the noir. This is written in first person. The characters are not as important as the plot. This book moves. It's like driving down the expressway the wrong way at 100 MPH and not hitting anyone...barely. There are only a few info dumps. Given that they're fighting for their lives and more almost through the entire book , Bethany and friends don't have the time or inclination to sit down and explain everything to the flabbergasted Trent. Whether they're asking for help from a dragon who lives under NYC or trying to find a way to kill immortal knights who can shift dimensions the good guys have their hands full every page. I was very impressed and really really hope that there is a sequel. I think I've figured out who Trent really is. I'm curious to see if I'm correct.






Insomnia
by Stephen King

Nobody gets out of this world alive. Depending on how you look at it that can be a source of relief or horror. King uses both points of view in his book Insomnia.  As I age I find myself unfortunately having to spend more time in and becoming more familiar with hospitals, usually but not always, because of older relatives. When you're walking through hospital lobbies or reading books in waiting rooms you can't help but notice the older and/or sick people, many of whom can't walk, can't talk or have other obvious frailties. It's sobering to realize that if I live long enough, one day that will be me. All of us will trade youthful energy or even middle aged maturity for old aged weakness and eventually death. So you had better enjoy your youth, your health and your independence of action while you still have it because some day you won't. That said, though as the joke goes just because there's snow on the mountain top doesn't mean there's not fire down below. King builds a sympathetic and effective depiction of older heroes and heroines, who may not have the bodies or strength they once had, but make up for it with experience, empathy and wisdom. Age is not always a bad thing even if we too often see its impacts as bad. It helps that there's a lot of humor in the book. King could have cut this story in half and just focused on the pains and irritations of age and loss. It still would have been a great read and something that was non-supernatural horror. But he didn't do that. The everyday horrors of age and physical or mental weakness are mirrored by an subtle and increasing supernatural threat.

Insomnia is an older book, which for some strange reason I just recently got around to reading during my all too short holiday break. As I nearly broke my ankle doing something stupid I had plenty of time to lay on the couch and read. Insomnia has allusions to King's Dark Tower series as well as to The Talisman, which King co-wrote with Peter Straub. It could possibly also have links to It and to Dreamcatcher. These are teased out throughout the book and I didn't pick up on them at first. I'm sure there are other links and references which I missed but will be obvious to other King fans. Parts of this story also reminded me of the Madeleine L'Engle A Wrinkle in Time  and Susan Cooper's The Dark Is Rising series.
Similar to many King stories this takes place in Maine, the city of Derry to be exact. As usual, King's eye for accents and everyday conversations firmly embed this story in reality, so much so that when the paranormal starts to intrude you are just as surprised and disturbed by this as the protagonists are.

Ralph Roberts is a seventy something man who, at the book's start is losing his wife Carolyn, the love of his life, to a brain tumor. Although other brain specialists tell him it's just one of those things and probably nothing could have been done, Ralph can't help but partially blame his wife's primary physician, Dr. Litchfield, for misdiagnosing his wife's headaches. Derry's citizens are also in the middle of an abortion rights brouhaha, as pro-choice activist Susan Day is coming to speak. She is fiercely opposed by Derry's pro-life contingent, who tend to be mostly older people except for a small radical anti-abortion splinter cell led by a young man named Ed Deepneau. Deepneau is Ralph's neighbor. He's formerly someone the genially and generally pro-choice Ralph considered a friend. That is until Ed went off the deep end and brutally assaulted his wife. This action, combined with some odd, really insane, things that Ed told Ralph, makes Ralph quite wary of Ed. After Carolyn dies, Ralph suffers really bad insomnia. He can't sleep. Ralph wakes up earlier and earlier each night until he's running on 2-3 hours of sleep. And then he starts to see things, things that if he told anyone about would likely get him involuntarily committed. But these things appear to be real. And some of the entities that Ralph sees also see him. Reality and hyperreality start to merge in an adult Alice in Wonderland sort of way. And what's seen can't be unseen. What's done can't be undone. Ralph and his friend Lois, who is the only other person who has his visions, are pulled into an eternal battle fought in a number of different planes of existence.

This book is almost 700 pages. I thought the build up might have moved a little more quickly. But even a verbose Stephen King, is well, still Stephen King. Good stuff and if you haven't read it already I think it's worthwhile. Of course I'm biased as King has always been a favorite. Like few other popular writers King remains unflinching in his ability to describe the good and bad in humans. Whether it's the sudden flash of resentment we feel towards someone who cuts us off on the road, the fierce love we have for family and intimates or the suspicion we have towards those unlike us, King captures these emotions in a quite realistic way. I think I know where King, the real man, stands on abortion rights and gun control. Doubtless some who disagree with his stances might not like certain depictions in Insomnia. But it's fair to say that King the author fairly and occasionally gleefully illuminates inconsistencies and failings in both the pro-choice and pro-life positions. His characters are messy, just like real life.  

Movie Reviews-Don Jon, 47 Ronin

Don Jon
directed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt

Don Jon is a nice heartwarming little comedy despite its unfortunate overreliance on broad stereotypes of East Coast Italian-Americans and its explicit subject matter. Although it's not really in the same universe as (500) Days of Summer, like that film it has something to say about how men and women see and use each other. There does appear to be another nod to that film when the protagonist's little sister can see things more clearly than the protagonist. The growth and change is once again done primarily by the male character.  I appreciated that this movie subtly called both men and women on the carpet for unrealistic and unhealthy expectations. Everyone has fantasies. They can be escapist but they can also shape what we desire in the real world. Some argue that these fantasies are completely socially constructed and unhealthy. I tend to disagree with that. But the cultural zeitgeist tends to be that male fantasies are nasty, degrading and disgusting and should be suppressed if not stamped out while female fantasies are wholesome, uplifiting and something that males should aspire to fulfill. Right. Well as anyone who's ever been intimate with anyone knows, the reality is usually very different than the fantasy. Often the reality is better in the long run though it's always more challenging. The film seems to be saying that there's nothing wrong with fantasies per se, but that you should never let fantasies prevent you from enjoying real life. 

Jon Martello (JGL) is a bartender who appears to have been a perfect fit for The Jersey Shore. As he explains in voice over there are a few things he really cares about. These include his friends, his family, his girls, his ride, his body, his church, his home and his porn. That's pretty much it. He and his friends Danny (Jeremy Luke) and Bobby (Rob Brown) do the dance club/night club circuit where they attempt to have as much meaningless sex as possible with the female versions of themselves. They can be friends because they all have slightly different tastes in women. Jon, aka Don Jon for his success at loving them and leaving them, prefers the leggy hourglass shape. Bobby likes a woman with a healthy bottom frame while Danny seeks a more slender figure. Their preferences all occasionally overlap of course but one thing that all three men can agree upon is that becoming attached to just one woman let alone getting married is completely out of the question. 

Jon however has found that no matter how much or what kind of sex he has there's no woman out there who can give him the physical and emotional transcendence he attains from visual pornography. So as far as Jon is concerned porn is a permanent part of his life. Any woman he's intimate with will just have to accept that. But when he has a chance meeting with Barbara Sugarman (Scarlett Johanssen) this is put to the test. Barbara meets or far exceeds all of Jon's physical requirements, so much so that he tells his stunned buddies that she is beyond a "10". When he admits to being in love his friends know he's lost his mind. Barbara's mojo is such that she can make Jon wait for intimacy until she's ready. This is unheard of! Barbara can even force Jon to go back to night college classes.The white collar worker Barbara doesn't see herself in a long term relationship with someone who didn't graduate college. Jon's parents, Jon Sr. (Tony Danza) and Angela (Glenn Headley) are super delighted that Jon finally appears to be on the verge of settling down and starting a family. 

Things look like they're going well. But both over time and in some darkly humorous sudden shock setpieces, Barbara reveals both deliberately and unwittingly that she has fantasies and expectations that if applied to real men, are just as restrictive and unfair as Jon's porn driven dreams of no holes barred sex are to women. Barbara doesn't like pornography and is not shy about letting Jon know it either. This leads to static and to Jon questioning his values and what he wants out of life. An older student in his class, Esther (Julianne Moore) provides a different sort of catalyst to Jon's growth. This was Gordon-Levitt's directorial debut. It worked. It's a smart funny film. It's ironic and probably just part of the human condition that we can see so clearly the weaknesses, contradictions and foolishness in someone else's fantasies while being blind to similar drawbacks in our own. Such is life. Be aware that Don Jon contains numerous brief clips from hard core adult movies which are used to puncutate Jon's thoughts or ridicule his oft-altered state of mind. His frequent confessions are also played for laughs.
TRAILER




47 Ronin
directed by Carl Erik Rinsch

47 Ronin is a fantastical reinterpretation of the true story of 47 Ronin in Japan, who against the odds and the law avenged the unrighteous death of their feudal lord. 47 Ronin should have been a better movie. Unfortunately there is never a sense of massive scale or that these particular masterless samurai are such bada$$es that being outnumbered by high ratios is no big deal for them. If you wish to impress me that only 47 men pulled off an impossible task then you need to show me greater numbers of opponents so that I understand. Give me a way to tell the Ronin apart. Have some of them have an interesting backstory or special power. For example this was done to great effect in the first Matrix movie (where Neo and Trinity storm the building to save Morpheus), the movie Equilibrium (where Preston fought his way past all the bodyguards to kill Brandt and DuPont), or the classic Five Deadly Venoms movie (pick any scene). Unfortunately 47 Ronin doesn't really have any scenes like that until the very end where it's probably a bit too late. This is definitely a wait for DVD, Saturday afternoon kind of film.

Nevertheless the story is quite familiar even though I hadn't heard of it previously. Some things are just universal. We have familial rivalries, deceit, forbidden love, death before dishonor, the execution of a beloved father figure, the destruction of a clan's power and a princess captured by her family's enemies and forced to marry those who murdered her father. And bloody revenge. I wonder if George R.R. Martin was familiar with this story.
One thing that doesn't translate well in my opinion is the Japanese tradition of seppuku, or ritual suicide to avoid or atone for misdeeds or dishonor. It's one thing to fight to the last man giving no quarter and accepting none, blow yourself up in order to take down some of THEM with you, or take a position that you know will be overrun in the hopes that your fight until hell freezes over and then fight on the ice sacrifice will inspire fear in your enemies or give your distant comrades enough time to regroup and avenge you. I get that. It's something else again to kill yourself because you offended your military leader or broke some code of honor. No thanks. If I'm going to die anyway I'm taking some enemies with me.

When Kai (Keanu Reeves) is a child he is discovered running away from a witch/demon den by Japanese soldiers. He's half dead already. As the soldiers don't trust him anyway they are about to kill him but are prevented from doing so by their Lord Asano (Min Tanaka). Lord Asano is a kindly man and raises Kai as his ward. This doesn't prevent his soldiers from bullying Kai about his mixed ancestry or prevent Kai from having to accept his low non-Samurai status. As a child Kai grew friendly with Lord Asano's daughter and heir, Mika. As an adult he and the beautiful Mika (Kou Shibasaki) struggle with some obvious and complicated feelings for each other. Lord Asano is blind to this but his other samurai pick up on it and don't like it one bit.

During a hunt for a wild magical beast Kai notices some strange events in the forest but is ridiculed when he tries to bring this to others' attention, especially Oishi's (Hiroyuki Sanada). Oishi is Lord Asano's most powerful and loyal retainer. But he's not overly fond of Kai. The shogun (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa) and the powerful Lord Kira (Tadanobu Asano) are arriving for festivities and a tournament. Lord Kira has goo goo eyes for Mika, who isn't betrothed yet. He lets her know of his interest by the traditional time honored male tactics of the slow gaze that takes her in from head to toe, the invasion of personal space and of course the old mistaking her for her father's concubine routine. Do those moves still work ladies? Anyway via sorcery from Kira's concubine, advisor and much much more, Mizuki (Rinko Kukuchi):

• The Asano family loses the tournament.
• Kai is disgraced and sold into slavery.
• Lord Asano is forced to kill himself.
• The Asano lands pass into Kira's control.
• Asano's samurai are stripped of titles and expelled, except for Oishi who is arrested and tortured for months.
• Sansa Stark Mika Asano is compelled to marry the smirking Lord Kira, in order to bring peace between the two families.
• Revenge is strictly forbidden via direct order of the Shogun himself.

But if you want to stop revenge you never should have left Oishi alive. Inexplicably released from prison Osihi goes to find Kai. They're going to put the band back together. They intend to take bloody revenge and shake the pillars of heaven. This was okay just somewhat underwhelming. The penultimate battles were nice but most of the film just didn't live up to what I thought it could have been. As usual, Reeves is a bit vacant. There is a fair amount of magic and fantasy interwoven into the story. I've skipped the trailer here as the ones I've seen give away the film's only impressive surprise. And I don't know if anyone told Megyn Kelly but in the actual historical event there weren't any Caucasian or even semi-Caucasian Ronin. 47 Ronin is visually impressive at times but there wasn't enough there.

Phil Robertson, Justine Sacco and Free Speech

I didn't want to write about this until it had reached some level of closure and now that A&E has rescinded its non-suspension suspension of Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson I'd like to discuss a few things.
We've talked about this before here and here and here. People should understand what free speech means. With a few exceptions the government, (state, federal, municipal) can't physically prevent you from expressing or sharing your opinion, fine you or put you behind bars for your thoughts, pass laws to make your opinion illegal, or require you to get permission from the government before expressing your opinion. There are increasing attempts by governments at all levels to undermine these protections. The First Amendment limits government actions. Private actors are far different entities. The blog lawyers could detail the case histories but corporations and individuals often have the right to hire and fire as they see fit and associate with whom they want. Their money, their company, their rules. If you don't like it well go find another outlet that more closely approximates your belief system. So when Phil Robertson said: 

"Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers -- they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right" 

and 

"I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person," Robertson is quoted in GQ. "Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.” 

It was no violation of his free speech rights for A&E to have suspended him from Duck Dynasty (which was just PR as the new season was already filmed) or for other groups to have criticized him.

When  PR exec Justine Sacco sent out her joking tweet about AIDS and her employer decided that it could continue to make money and thrive without her contributions, again, there was no threat to her free speech. No one put her in jail. She is free to make all the jokes about AIDS and Africans that she wants to make. Go for it I say. At least for now she can make such statements without being encumbered by such constraints as gainful employment. But I'm sure she'll land on her feet eventually. She must find an employer with different values than her previous company, one that understands and accepts her odd (racist) sense of humor. I doubt that will take too long.

Those doggone white people

You would think that conservatives, who at least when it comes to contraception, abortion and racist speech, champion the rights of corporations and individuals to exercise freedoms of speech, religion and association, would understand that the door swings both ways. These freedoms apply to everyone, not just conservatives. Regarding the content of Robertson's statements I'll echo what most intelligent people already pointed out. Robertson was born in 1946. He was a boy when some of the first court decisions opposing segregation came down and a young adult by the time the South was forced, kicking and screaming, to allow desegregation. When Robertson says he didn't know any black people that were saying "those doggone white people" he might have considered the fact that many black people in 1950s and 1960s Louisiana would have thought twice before expressing their honest opinions to any white person, self-described "white trash" or not. It was after all often the "white trash" who were burning buses, beating sit-in protesters, and committing other violent acts. Robertson doesn't say if he or his family members were involved in the Civil Rights Movement. If he had been perhaps he would learned people's true thoughts. Or Robertson might have, if he were so inclined, when he was 18, travelled to Jonesboro, Louisiana and talked to the Deacons of Defense, a group of armed black men, who intended to protect themselves and their community from conservative violence both official and non-official. The Deacons shot back when they were shot at, something which infuriated racist whites. 

In fact given Louisiana's vicious history of segregation and violence, you have to wonder what planet Robertson was living on if he thought black people were happy with their lot in Louisiana or anywhere else in the Jim Crow South. I wish the GQ interview had delved a little more deeply into the difference between Robertson's claimed experiences and the reality of what was going on. Why the hell does Robertson think Nina Simone wrote Mississippi Goddamn?  Because that's not a very happy song. No it's not a happy song at all. Since I do happen to know and be related to black people who lived under Jim Crow I can safely say that Robertson doesn't know the whole story. "Welfare and entitlements" don't have anything to do with being harassed or murdered because you opposed the Southern terror state.

There is actually scripture that would seem to condemn gays. AFAIK there's next to nothing in the Bible that would seem to condone a GLAAD approved positive view about homosexuality. However there is also scripture that would seem to condemn just about anyone. Although Paul condemns homosexuality, Jesus doesn't speak on it. Theologians can argue but people tend to pick and choose which sins they condemn. Jesus talked about this hypocrisy in his Sermon on The Mount but apparently no one listened. When you set yourself up to judge, well that's not really a believer's job, according to Jesus. If you don't adhere to Robertson's views on gays, find a different Christian interpretation that's more to your liking. There's no shortage of sects. But this whole discussion about Biblical injunctions presumes that the Bible should be the basis of secular law or morality. Unless and until you're ready to start stoning disobedient children or allowing men who rape unmarried virgins to make amends by marrying them and paying their father fifty shekels, you might have to admit that the Bible might not always be the best basis for a modern legal or moral system. 

Robertson's comments bothered me less than the hypocrisy of conservatives who sought to cast him as a free speech martyr even as many of the same conservatives did their best to harm the careers of other people with whom they disagreed. Do you remember the conservative rush to protect the free speech rights of Lupe Fiasco, Ward Churchill, The Dixie Chicks, Martin Bashir, Louis Farrakhan, Van Jones and Reverend Wright to say what they wanted without criticism or danger to their careers. Of course you don't. 

Free speech is an endangered species. Those “intolerants” hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us.

-Palin speaking of Phil Robertson

"Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends.

-Palin speaking of Martin Bashir

All we learned from the Robertson and Sacco incidents is that money talks and bs walks.
Robertson is an integral part of cable's top show. His family backed him up. A&E and its advertisers, business partners and other corporations made the financial decision that they didn't want to lose millions in revenue. Sacco was not that valuable to her employer so they let her go and kept it moving. So if you're going to say something controversial or even outright vile, make sure you either work for yourself or are extremely valuable to your employer.

Thoughts?

Movie Reviews-American Hustle, Prisoners

American Hustle
directed by David O. Russell

Okay first things first. You should be prepared to see Amy Adams in a whole new light. Heh. There was a joke going around that she should win an award for least supported actress. In almost every scene Adams is braless in extremely low cut blouses, gowns or dresses. Perhaps this look will catch on. Snicker. You definitely notice her attributes, which, as she is playing a con woman, makes sense. The marks pay attention to her cleavage and not their cash. Decolletage aside this was a good film with some nice acting and writing. I'm not sure it was a great film because the film's ending third is somewhat telegraphed IF you were paying attention. It still had some interesting twists and turns, however. American Hustle is based on the ABSCAM scandal. The director uses that scandal as inspiration for his own story. American Hustle is set in the seventies but except for the music choices and tasteful use of hairstyles and vehicles this movie could pretty much take place today. Although American Hustle features four relatively young stars in Amy Adams, Jennifer Lawrence, Christian Bale and Bradley Cooper, it's an ensemble movie. Nobody dominates the screen. The rest of the cast all fit near seamlessly in their roles, including Robert DeNiro in a quick cameo.

I don't know if Russell was influenced by Scorsese. But the multiple voiceovers, flashbacks and captions certainly reminded me of Goodfellas. So I was inclined to like this movie from those techniques alone. It's like sitting into an comfortable old chair. You know what you're going to get. There are few completely bad guys here. Everyone is a shade of gray. The four primary characters all have positive and negative traits. This film confirmed what I already believed. I don't like the federal government's seeming ability to convert almost anything into a crime and then pick and choose which crimes it will prosecute. But that's my pet peeve. So what's this movie about?

The story is less important than the characters and their interactions. It starts with the chance Long Island pool party meeting of con man/businessman Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) with Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams), a stripper and con woman. They bond over a shared interest in Duke Ellington. They discover that besides a similar taste in music they also share an interest in making it big. I have heard that Bale gained weight for this film. Perhaps but it didn't seem to have shown in his face much so maybe his frequently shown pregnant looking belly is a prosthetic? No matter. He's quite convincing in his role. With Sydney at his side, the put upon and one french fry away from a heart attack Irving is able to improve his fake art and fake loans scams. Nonetheless I think that if I were desperate enough to give someone $5000 as a "fee" for a loan that I never received I also might be desperate enough to return to their place of business and commit a crime upon their person. 

Anyway Irving and Sydney love each other, despite the fact that Irving is unhappily married to the shrewish Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence). Rosalyn is the sort of irritating individual who is never at fault no matter how stupid her actions were. Rosalyn is somewhat of a thankless role. Lawrence tries her best at making the character sympathetic. But then you remember that she's not. If Rosalyn can't manipulate Irving with the obvious she'll guilt trip him about his responsibility to their son. Irving's not too crazy about Rosalyn anymore but he does love her son, whom he's adopted. Rosalyn isn't book smart. But she is cunning and cagey. From Irving's POV she has a bad habit of knowing more about his criminal enterprises than he thought she did. For now Sydney accepts being the other woman.

This barely stable balance is disrupted when Sydney (pretending to be a British "Lady Edith") and Irving run across a too eager client. His spidey sense going off, Irving tries to abort the deal but Sydney pushes on and actually takes the check. The "client" reveals himself as FBI Agent Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper). He arrests Sydney and promises hard times ahead. Richie knows that Sydney and Irving have a personal relationship. He manipulates Irving into agreeing to set up four other con artists in order to have charges against Sydney dropped and no charges brought against him. Richie doesn't hide his attraction to Sydney, even though he has a fiancee. Each man has his own style but hitting on a woman you just arrested seems classless. When Irving declines Sydney's post-arrest suggestion that they run away together, we see Sydney drop her indifference about being "pretend-wifey". Some serious female rage emerges. Or is this a con too?

Richie's ambition requires bigger criminal fish than just small time con men. When Richie thinks he might be able to entrap more important folks, like the Camden Mayor Carmine Polito, (Jeremy Renner in the film's best role) he pushes ahead over Irving's objections and those of his FBI supervisor (Louis C.K). This leads to multiple cons, interactions with the Mafia, and hotel meetings with corrupt or altruistic Congressmen and Senators. 

This last is really important. It's something that is embodied in the Carmine Polito character. Some people seek to do good without enriching themselves but don't use kosher methods. If you can only help the people you care about by doing questionable things, does that make you a bad person? Polito's a genuinely decent guy. He cares about bringing jobs to Camden and New Jersey, especially for Black and Latino people. He's faithful to his wife, lives in a modest middle class home, hasn't stolen public funds and is respected across racial and class lines. Is he as culpable as killers who intend to skim casino proceeds, or Congressmen looking to pad re-election funds? It's something to think about. I'm not sure this was a great film but it was a very very very good one. Other actors/actresses include Jack Huston and Shea Wigham (both from Boardwalk Empire), Michael Pena, Robert DeNiro, Elisabeth Rohm, and Paul Herman.
TRAILER






Prisoners
directed by Dennis Villeneuve

Such disparate films as The Tortured, Unthinkable and Zero Dark Thirty have investigated the efficacy and morality of torture. Some famed civil libertarians as Professor Alan Dershowitz have even argued that the government should be able to seek torture warrants in certain situations. Most of us probably wouldn't agree with torture. But we're faced with the ugly fact that evil, for lack of a better word, often works. Evil can get things done where good can be impotent. If you live in the United States you're living on land soaked in the blood of Indians. If you live in the Western World period you're living in societies built on conquest and domination since 1492. Just about every group on this planet has done some dirty deeds. It is what it is. Some situations can't be undone even if we deplore the methods used. Even if you're a vegan Jain doing his or her best to avoid killing, it's still a fact that your very existence requires the death of other living things. 

Being a devout Catholic, the author J.R.R. Tolkien argued, especially in Morgoth's Ring, that the world is marred by the Evil One, so our choices are often bad ones. It can be hard to discover the good. Most would agree that the good, whatever it might be, does not include the harming of children. But how far would you go to prevent the harming of a child. If you're Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) you might do whatever it takes and worry about morality and consequences later. We can understand and accept this and yet realize that there absolutely must be consequences for such behavior. That's where Prisoners differs from such films as Zero Dark Thirty.

In Pennsylvania Keller Dover and his wife Grace (Maria Bello) are middle class folks on a tight budget. They go with their children to visit their friends the Birches, Franklin (Terence Howard) and Nancy (Viola Davis) and their kids for Thanksgiving dinner. The younger daughters want to walk around the neighborhood but are only allowed to do so with their older siblings tagging along. An unrecognized RV is seen. Everyone comes back but in the post dinner sluggishness both the Dovers' and Birches' youngest daughters go missing. And the RV is gone. It is scary that just that quickly someone's life can change forever.

An APB is put out. Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) finds the RV and its driver Alex Jones(Paul Dano). Dano is mentally slow, uncommunicative and down right spacey. He claims ignorance and just wants to go home to his aunt (a totally unrecognizable Melissa Leo). Despite being pushed in ways both hard and soft by Loki, he sticks to his story. There's no physical evidence that either girl was ever in the RV. Despite Keller's impassioned and vitriolic pleas, the police brass order the release of Alex. Keller gets wind of this and runs down to the event to beat up and/or beg Alex for information. Alex tells him "They didn't cry until I left them". Unfortunately no one else hears him whisper this to Keller.

But Keller knows what he has to do, even though it's wrong. He shortly afterwards kidnaps Alex and starts to torture him in increasingly vicious and inventive ways to get information about the girls' location. Remember, Alex is developmentally disabled. Keller gets reluctant help from Franklin (does Howard ever play men who don't whine or cry) and later Nancy. Nancy wears the pants in that marriage and has punked Franklin into letting her know what he and Keller are up to at nights. Grace is out of it. She spends most of the movie in a drugged daze.
Meanwhile, deprived of who he thinks might have been a witness, if not a perpetrator, Detective Loki continues to work the case, looking for links between past kidnappings and known sex offenders. Loki has a reputation for never letting a case go unsolved. Though he hides his sympathy from Keller, in part because he's starting to have suspicions about Keller and in part because Keller's not a cop, within the boundaries of the police department people think that Loki's lost his professional distance (and his mind) and has gotten too close to the case. Although it's very slow going both Keller and Loki think they start to make progress. Or maybe they don't.

This was a very dark intense thriller. I probably wouldn't want to upset Keller Dover. And neither would you. If love, especially of the parental kind, is essentially self-sacrificial, you might argue that this is at its core a love story. What would you do to save a family member? How much of your moral or religious core would you throw away to see them again? Jackman really brings it in this movie. But Prisoners never ever ever lets you forget that no matter how justified Keller feels, he is deliberately inflicting pain on someone who may lack the capacity to understand why. There are no easy choices here. Prisoners will excite you and may even make you cheer at times. It can also drain you. Just when you think things couldn't get more tense, the director ratchets up the suspense. Good stuff but sobering.
TRAILER

Edward Snowden Christmas Message

If you didn't see this or hear about this already it's worthwhile in my opinion to view a quick message from the man whose actions continue to have extended repercussions both domestically and internationally. We're living in interesting times. I guess one man can make a difference after all. Say what you like about Snowden but he wasn't the one lying to you. Your government was. Wake up.

Movie Reviews-The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
directed by Peter Jackson

I finally decided to see this movie. I was initially apprehensive of the invented female character butt-kicking elf-warrior Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly) and her involvement in battle. However while watching the previews, I saw an ad for 300: Rise of An Empire, which is a sequel to 300. This film stars Eva Green as a well, butt-kicking ship captain, Artemisia. What some may not realize though is that Artemisia actually was a real life Greek Queen, who did indeed command troops and fight in battle, most notably at the Battle of Salamis.

Queen Artemisia supported the Persians and was responsible for the death of many Greeks. The Greek war leaders hated her, viewing her not only as a traitor, which was bad enough, but as something almost unnatural. A woman fighting and leading men in battle was considered sinful. The Greeks had a special interest in capturing Artemisia alive. This wouldn't have ended well for her. I don't know how the film will depict this but history tells us Artemisia survived the Persian defeat at Salamis. Most Greek sources agree that despite her treason she was a skilled commander. She was the only female leader among the Persians. I mention this just to remind myself that life can be stranger than fiction. We (I) shouldn't automatically dismiss fantasy interpretations of female warriors, rare though they may be in real life. I'll have more on Tauriel in a minute.

Moving along.

The fundamental problem with the Hobbit movies is that Peter Jackson decided or had it decided it for him, to make three near three hour movies from a book that is just under 300 pages, depending upon your edition. To quote Bilbo Baggins, this is like butter that is scraped over too much bread. There just isn't enough source material there. So Jackson and company made up storylines and characters. Some filling in of details is ok. The book The Hobbit is exclusively concerned with the adventures of Bilbo, the Dwarves and Gandalf. Nothing happens except through Bilbo's eyes. We occasionally get some exposition from Thorin or Gandalf or authorial insight. In the movie, Jackson decided this wouldn't work and so we see every little thing that was only implied in the book or was spoken of off-handedly in the LOTR appendices. It's when Jackson starts getting too enthralled with his additions that he runs into his second major problem, which is related to the first.

His tone's all wrong. It's the wrong tone. Now while I certainly don't suggest that anyone stab Peter Jackson in the face with a soldering iron, the fact remains that this is really more LOTR- The Prequel, than The Hobbit-a standalone children's book. Forbidden love in the LOTR? We have that here too. Hobbit poisoned with Morgul weapon? We see that again. The film contains tons of violent scenes which never occurred in the original book. It's not aimed at kids. Until the book's end, when there is a slightly jarring nod to the fact that yes, good people really can die, The Hobbit retains a cheery, whimsical tone. This spirit is completely lacking from THDOS. This movie is very deliberately a prequel to LOTR, sometimes annoyingly so.

THDOS is an adaptation though some purists might call it a butchering. So the interpreter has the right and duty to alter the source material for reasons of commerce and media and his own caprice. The Hobbit, as a book, lacks women characters. I don't automatically see that as a flaw but many people do. THDOS, as a movie, pulls in women and girl characters from the LOTR and makes others up. This might be okay if the writers and director didn't seem to think, as many modern filmmakers do, that a woman must be "kicking a$$" in order to connect with moviegoers. I'm not sure that's the case. If we're saying that the only way a woman can be valued is to do exactly what a man would be doing, isn't that internalized sexism? YMMV of course.

Nevertheless Tauriel wasn't as bad as I had feared. She didn't ruin the movie. She's just a symptom of Jackson's compulsion to pad running times and basically create fan fiction from The Hobbit.She's an invented character that doesn't work. Jackson severely alters canon characters in worse ways. Beorn, your not so friendly neighborhood lycanthrope is turned from a gruff, brusque, solitary mountain man who nonetheless is capable of laughter and humor into an ugly scarred paranoid PTSD survivor. The book's introduction of Beorn to the dwarves is humorous. The movie's is violent. Thranduil, the elf king, is a cynical liar. There's little whimsy or sense of seeing a bigger world, which is critical to the book.

And yet, I can't quite fall into the Megyn Kelly trap of sneering and snarling that the source material can and must be only the way I imagined it. If there are some women Hobbit fans who might enjoy seeing a woman character who actually has something to do besides look frightened and hide in the caves with the children while the men battle the orcs, who am I to gainsay them? Similarly, the filmed human population of Laketown actually includes some humans of African and apparent other non-European descent. They have no speaking roles IIRC but nevertheless there they were. That's certainly not canonical but then again Laketown (Esgaroth) is a trading town where people from near and far do business.

Anyway.

When last we left our intrepid heroes they were within sight of the Lonely Mountain, and thus their lost realm of Erebor. Thorin (Richard Armitage) can finally start practicing his various acceptance speeches for his inauguration as king. Unfortunately the orcs have also caught up with the dwarves, Bilbo (Martin Freeman) and Gandalf (Ian McKellen). Gandalf leads them to Beorn's stables and locks them in. Beorn (Mikael Persbrandt), in bear form, is not exactly happy to see them but the next morning in human form he's a bit less dangerous. He loans them horses and ponies to take them through Mirkwood. The orcs, being cowards, do not attack while Beorn is around. When they get to the forest entrance the party sends the horses back to Beorn as he is a vegan animal rights activist who would look unkindly on dwarves getting his friends hurt or killed in Mirkwood. That's when Gandalf, having been in secret mind-meld conversation with Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) gets the request, really more order (this isn't right as old and powerful as Galadriel is, she's NOT the head of the White Council and can't really give orders to Gandalf but whatever) to look into what's going on at Dol Guldur where some young punk wizard named The Necromancer has set up shop. No one has heard of him before and both Gandalf and Galadriel have a bad feeling about him. So Gandalf tells his buddies see you on the other side. He's got to leave. He warns them to stay on the path.

Of course the dwarves and Bilbo don't stay on the path. They get attacked by giant spiders. Bilbo saves them, using his magic ring, but just as they are about to be on their merry way they get ambushed by wood elves, including Prince Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and his guard captain/semi-love interest Tauriel. Elves aren't overly fond of dwarves, or vice versa, as Thorin is keen to point out. So the entire party is arrested and taken to prison. Thorin refuses to kiss King Thranduil's (Lee Pace) skinny behind, confirm his treasure hunt or offer Thranduil any treasure. That's just how Thorin gets down. Meanwhile Kili (Aidan Turner) is trying to convince Tauriel that the rumors about dwarf men aren't true, if you know what I mean. 

Bilbo arrives to rescue everyone before Kili can finish running his game but such is life. This kicks off the second half. We learn that Bard the Bargeman Bowman (Luke Evans) has some unresolved feelings about his dad failing to kill Smaug, that the dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch) doesn't recognize the smell of hobbits but knows dwarves all too well, and that Gandalf isn't the most powerful wizard of the Maiar. To sum up, if you liked the first movie, I think you will like this one as well. If you didn't like the first movie, there's not a lot here that is done better...EXCEPT for the pacing. It's 161 minutes and still too doggone long for me but it did move a little more quickly than the first film. The special effects were well done. I liked Cumberbatch as Smaug. If you haven't read the book I suggest that you do.

TRAILER