2016 Politics and the Antichrist of NY

In June of 2015 Donald Trump, aka, the “antichrist of NY,” launched his presidential campaign and no one took him seriously. Fast-forward eight months later and the reality show guy has the republican establishment worried and desperate to find anyone who can stop him…  its no longer funny.

The sobering reality that Trumpeinstein might become the next President of the United States has far reaching consequences.  For instance, if the antichrist of NY keeps on winning, winning, winning and he becomes President: the GOP gets back the Whitehouse, Obama care is overturned, millions of people get deported, Wall Street and the rich get huge tax breaks, the shrinking middle class gets the bill, Reince Priebus (the chairman of the RNC) can breath a sigh of relief and keep his job. Happy ending all around, right?

Not so fast.

 If the antichrist of NY does indeed keep winning, and becomes the 45^th President, there will be some political fallout. In particular, Trump’s ascension to the Presidency will galvanize democrats and independent voters like nothing else. Voters could actually do the unthinkable and actually go out in huge numbers and vote. Huge voter turnout is typically not a good thing for the GOP; simply put, they lose elections when voter turnouts are huge.

The aftermath of Trump winning the Whitehouse could result in: a liberal tea party like revolution, which in turn, could result in the Republican Party losing the House and the Senate. Afterward, Reince Priebus will hang his head in shame, lose his cushy, high-paying job and might have to flee the country … maybe Mexico will take him in.

Establishment republican’s like Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. have made the above calculation and are understandably scared out of their minds. And they should be. The antichrist of NY is truly the gift that keeps on giving, and he could actually benefit the democrats by winning the republican nomination and becoming America’s next commander in chief.

I have no evidence to back up the following claim, but I think Debbie Wasserman Schultz (the chairperson of the DNC) probably keeps Donald Trump in her prayers, and wishes that he remains’ in great health and spirits. After all, it’s not everyday that the antichrist of NY helps you keep your job and dismantle’s the Party of Lincoln.

New Star Trek Running On Empty

JJ Abrams’ reboot of Star Trek was a bombastic, yet miraculous film. Despite its many flaws it holds up well as you watch it, but if you give it any serious thought and revisit the whole enterprise (sorry, couldn’t help myself) the movie was a colossal one trick pony held

together by our collective childhood nostalgia.

Four years later we get the inevitable sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, which is sadly an utterly mediocre, action movie that is willfully stupid and completely devoid of internal logic in its narrative structure. I don’t want to give away any major plot points or spoil the OMG moment in the movie so I will keep my examination as generic as possible.

Is the movie an action packed, thrill ride? Yes. Check your brain at the door, and you should be fine.

Is the movie good and does it keeps the essence of Gene Roddenberry’s dream alive?
No. 

Star Trek Into Darkness is a bad movie that is painfully dumb and pessimistic. Life-long Star Trek fans are probably burning Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof in effigy. To be sure there are plenty of great, eye-popping, mind-blowing scenes involving big explosions, spacedives, and starships crashing, that are wonderfully shot and edited, but action set pieces cannot save a movie that is built on an objectively bad and idiotic script.

For example:

Kirk violates the Prime Directive and subsequently is busted down to first officer in the opening moments of the movie and Pike is given back command of the Enterprise. Huh?

John Harrison the villain of the story (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) is a genetic superman who is being forced by the head of Starfleet (Peter Weller) to design weapons, ships and commit acts of terrorism. Huh?

A suicide bomber blows up an archive in London, which turns out to be a secret base for black ops guys Section 31. Huh?

The bombing triggers a meeting of important Starfleet personnel. Prompting that meeting was the true purpose of the attack, and a ship piloted by the ‘mysterious’ John Harrison destroys the meeting room. Pike is killed in the attack,  and Kirk is giving back command of the Enterprise (again) and sets out along with the rest of his crew to track down and kill Harrison. Huh?

John Harrison is able to beam himself from Earth to the Klingon homeworld Qo’noS, (which apparently has no sensor defense system) using a personal hyperwarp transporter device. The device can be carried in your hands, and it can beam you sixteen light years. Huh?!?


The list goes on, but I am trying to keep the spoilers down to minimum. Needless to say, the movie is littered with violations of internal logic and consistency. The whole thing craps out pretty fast and all that is left is a sense that Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof simply didn’t care. They had action set pieces and a clumsy, unsatisfying ending that they wanted and pesky little things like logical impediments weren’t going to get in their way.

Ironically, the cast is the biggest strength of the movie, but sadly they are so completely wasted, it’s almost criminal. In particular, the character of John Harrison in the hands of Cumberbatch could have been an iconic performance, but instead the crappy script hamstrings him and all he can do is growl bad lines, punch guys into the ground, jump about, and look menacing. Such a colossal waste and a missed opportunity.

Is Star Trek Into Darkness the worst film in the franchise? No. The Final Frontier or Insurrection or Nemesis are far worse than STID. That being said, they are all pretty bad movies - Star Trek Into Darkness included – and I would rather have a root canal done by a pissed off Klingon dentist than be forced to rewatch any of them. At its best,  Star Trek is about the exploration of the human condition, something not remotely on display in either of J.J. Abrams’s films. 

Reportedly, Star Trek Into Darkness had a budget of a $190 million. That accounts for all the gee-whiz special effects … but what happened to the script? Star Trek Into Darkness is not the death knell for the franchise. But Abrams’ new Trek is clearly short on the hope and the optimism of Rodenberry’s vision.

According to Box Office Mojo, opening weekend was pretty weak for STID, it made $86.7 million in four days, impressive numbers to be sure, but well short of the $100 million Paramount executives were expecting. Some of that probably has to do with the state of the economy and the price of movie tickets, and worse yet, after a four-year wait for the sequel, the movie going audience might not be interested in Kirk and company.

Perhaps the most ironic movie trivia that comes to mind when I think about the new Trek vs. the real Trek is that despite its limited budget, and being over thirty years old, Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan is still the best movie in the franchise.

Go figure…

A Nice Quiet Place?

Fresh off his double-digit win in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday night, Mitt Romney wasted no time conducting a series of morning show interviews. And in the span of a few short minutes he succeeded in demonstrating the real venture capitalist behind the rehearsed smile   and “average-joe” campaign sound bites.

To recap:

Romney went on the Today Show Wednesday morning to celebrate his New Hampshire victory and during the course of his interview with Matt Lauer he was asked about his position on the issue of distribution of wealth and income disparity in our country. It should be noted that the Today Show is not 60 Minutes nor is Matt Lauer a “got you journalist” browbeating the guest with hard-hitting questions.

Towards the end of the interview Lauer asked a pretty straightforward question that should have been easily fielded by Romney.  

 Lauer asked, “Do you suggest that anyone who questions the policies and practices of Wall Street and financial institutions, anyone who has questions about the distribution of wealth and power in this country is envious? Is it about jealousy or fairness?”

Romney who is suppose to be a polished politician responded by saying, “I think it’s about envy. I think it’s about class warfare.”

Wow…

At this point in the interview (much to his credit) Matt Lauer provided Romney with the opportunity to clean up his response and clarify his position and take his foot out of his mouth.

Lauer asked, “Are there no fair questions about the distribution of wealth without it being seen as envy?”

Romany’s response, “I think its fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like. But the president has made it part of his campaign rally. Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires, billionaires, executives and Wall Street. Its very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach and I think it will fail.”

Romney’s response has the virtue of demonstrating two points that speak to many questions about his character and fitness to be our nations next commander and chief.

First, Mitt Romney is clearly out of step with the American people. It may come as a complete shock to him and his campaign staff, but a presidential campaign is indeed the proper forum to discuss pesky little things like wealth distribution and tax policy, and the like. The American people are pretty smart, and we don’t appreciate venture capitalist with delusions of grandeur deciding our fate in nice “quiet rooms” or “members only” country clubs.

Secondly, Mitt Romney is an elite, robber baron who lacks anything in way of compassion and empathy. The occupy Wall Street crowds and all the people who lost their jobs on account of his company, Bain Capital are irrelevant in his world view. Mitt Romney only cares about Mitt Romney and his super rich buddies. 

Is it any wonder why the Tea Party folk can’t stand him and the rest of the GOP is searching desperately for ABM….

 Anybody But Mitt.

Hank and His Rowdy Mouth

The marriage between Hank Williams Jr. and Monday Night Football came to end last Thursday when ESPN decided to permanently pull the “Are you ready for some football?” intro from its MNF telecast. The move came on the heels of comments that Williams made on Fox n’ Friends in which he made an analogy that President Barack Obama and House Speaker Rep. John Boehner golfing together was like Nazi leader Adolph Hitler and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu playing a round.

Understandably, ESPN decided to discontinue its association with Williams and on Thursday made it official. Williams' theme song has been part of "MNF" since 1989. The song was a version of his hit "All My Rowdy Friends Are Coming Over Tonight" that he altered to match each week's game. He owns the song and all the rights to it, so ESPN will not be able to use it in any way.

Many commentators and comedians have come to William’s defense, claiming ESPN was infringing on his right to free speech. His defenders included the left-leaning Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar of "The View" and Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" and on the other side of the political landscape Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.

Luckily for the world of music and mass media, Williams has cut a new song “I'll Keep My ..." calling out "Fox & Friends" and ESPN. Early in the song Williams says the U.S. is "going down the drain" and says it's becoming "The United Socialist States of America." He mentions keeping "Fox & Friends" and ESPN out of your home toward the end of the song.

Cool lyrics…I see a Grammy coming out of this.

For the record, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

Despite claims by Williams and his defenders, ESPN did not trample his first amendment rights and (I cant believe I am going to say this) Fox n’ Friends did not engage in “gotcha journalism.”

On the contrary, Williams got to exercise his first amendment right and shot off his rowdy mouth. Fox n’ Friends did not twist his words, and they provided him with the opportunity to clarify his statements. The Federal Government did not in any way violate his constitutional rights, he was not detained or arrested, nor was he beaten, tortured or coerced into making any false or misleading statements.

So in conclusion, Hank got to speak his mind, and because of the inflammatory nature of his comments, ESPN decided to no longer do business with him. This is within their rights as a “for-profit” private enterprise. One other point, private companies (which are now considered “people” thanks to the Supreme Court) are NOT constrained by the 1^st Amendment.

Many people do not understand free speech.

Yes, Hank Williams, Jr. has the right to free speech. But that right comes with strings attached; specifically a private citizen is not afforded 1^st amendment protections as an employee of a corporation. The employer has the right to stifle the speech or terminate the employee if the employee in question hurts the corporation’s image or bottom line. When one takes a job they agree to the conditions specified by the employer. The courts have ruled that one may either refuse the employment or quit the job.

 Williams spoke his mind (such as it is) and ESPN didn’t like the negative publicity that came their way as a result. In this country, private citizens, even wacky guys like Hank have to take responsibility for what they say. When you compare the President of United States to a psychopath who murdered millions of innocent people, you will find that most intelligent people will find that offensive. ESPN has every right to make sure their highest rated show does not start off every week with someone who offends people. That is their right.

Hank is still free to speak his mind just not on ESPN’s dime.

We're Mad As Hell part duh

Some politicians and mass media political pundits have gone on the record and have said that the Occupy Wall Street protests are staged events. According to people like Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cane, the demonstrations are political theater designed to deflect attention away from President Obama’s failed policies. Wishful thinking to be sure, but unfortunately, that is not the case.

The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are a real organic movement that has put a spotlight on the dysfunctional nature of our government and the gross economic disparity among the have’s and have’s not. The recession and social problems that currently affect our nation are not a new phenomena born into existence in the last three years. The issues that currently confront our nation have been looming in the background for the last four decades, and hoping that the problems will magical disappear or the next generation will deal with them is no longer a sustainable policy.

We have two choices before us; we can have a hard decade or a miserable century.

The problems that confront our nation are complex and daunting but not impossible to fix. But everyone, and that means, rich, poor, and middle class have to equally sacrifice in order to turn things around for generations of Americans unborn. Admittedly fixing what is broken wont be easy, but in order to gain some insight into how to proceed, we first need to examine the past…

The stock market crash and the resulting great depression came about in 1929. President Hoover and his administration were more concerned with fly fishing and putting Al Capone behind bars rather than helping reducing the 25 percent unemployment rate in the country. So FDR was elected and probation (18th amendment) was repealed and the country muddled along until 1933 when the American people demanded that the President and Congress do something. This resulted in the much-vaunted New Deal…

Fast-forward to 2011 … massive unemployment, foreclosures, rising poverty rates, out-of-touch-do-nothing Congress, well meaning but impotent President, crisis of confidence, protesters demanding, “do something.”

Sounds familiar? Of course instead of repealing probation, we hear vows to repeal and abolish Obamacare from the face of the Earth, but the similarities are pretty uncanny.

So what to do? Here are a few ideas…

We need to get the big money out of our political process. Super-pacs need to be outlawed. Corporations should not be allowed to pay for political outcomes. Our democracy should not be for sale.

We need to honest with our selves. Tell the truth about the state of our economy, and the plight of the 99 percent. Corporations are not people. Taxing the rich so they pay their fair share wont kill them. 

Close tax loopholes for corporations and over haul the tax system.

Arrest and prosecute the robber barons in Wall Street and the banking institutions that caused our economic meltdown. No individual or corporation should have free reign to destroy our economy and the American Dream.

Lastly, stop electing people who are unfit or unqualified to hold office. The crazies should not be running the asylum.

Our political leaders should care about protecting and advancing the interest of our nation rather than lining their pockets with donor money. They should be willing to compromise to serve a greater propose. But most of all they should have some damn empathy.

We have the democracy we deserve, and right now we have grid-lock because we are too easily distracted by the things that separate us rather than focusing on things that we share in common.

We're As Mad As Hell

It was bound to happen, the disenfranchised and marginalized in our country taking to the streets and screaming for the world to hear, “We’re as mad as hell and we are not going to take this anymore!”

The Occupy Wall Street protests and all the other spontaneous demonstrations that have taken place in several cities is the American version of the Arab spring!

Many politicians like Rep. Eric Cantor, and mass media political pundits have proposed that the protesters that call themselves the 99 percent are nothing more than shiftless, unruly mobs. According to Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, the plight of the unemployed is their own fault. "Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself. It is not someone's fault if they succeeded, it is someone's fault if they failed."

Mr. Cain like Rep. Cantor and the rest of the naysayers and political pundits all seem to conveniently forget that wall street and the banking industry played a significant role in the 2008 economic meltdown. The recession that has gripped our nation and played havoc with the global finical markets is not a natural economic phenomenon. The ugly truth is our nation was robbed and the banks and people responsible got away it…. and worse yet, the robber barons and their cronies have gotten richer on the dime of the American taxpayer.

The numbers as they stand -- 14 to 20 million unemployed in our country, the nation's poverty rate rose to 15.1% in 2010, about 46.2 million people are now considered in poverty, 2.6 million more than last year.

And the guys responsible are sitting on trillions of taxpayer dollars bemoaning their lot in life and the anger directed their way. In case anyone who reads this blog is keeping count, a measly six finical institutions control over 60 percent of the assets of the United States of America! After “we the people” bailed them out because they were to “big-to-fail,” 3 out of the 4 of the largest finical institutions in question actually became bigger.

Another point that politicians and mass media political pundits have a problem grasping is the notion that every man, woman and child on the face of the planet have an inalienable human right, to peacefully gather and petition their representative governments for political redress.

Nothing in our collective human history has ever been changed for the better without somebody starting the process by saying,“This is wrong. I don’t know how to fix it, but this is wrong.” Then other likeminded people gather and say “this is wrong” and then a social movement develops which in turn demands that the government in question addresses their grievances, and passes legislation to correct the problem. Government “for the people, by the people.”

Admittedly this is a hard concept for some politicians and media intellectuals to understand, but it’s the nature of democratic governance.

The problems that face our nation are not insurmountable. We have been through worse times; slavery, the civil war, Jim Crow, segregation, the great depression, WW II, and we have always come out on top. Our nation doesn’t lack courage, ingenuity, education, or vision. We have all those things in abundance…what we lack is leaders that have the political courage to do what is right for our country rather than what is in their best interest.

It has become increasingly obvious to the Occupy Wall Street protesters and most like-minded Americans, that our political leaders, on both the left and right are incapable of fixing what is broken, of getting our nation back to work, and breathing life back into the American Dream.

We the people are going to have to hold their feet to the fire, force them, all of them, Democrats, Republicans and the President to do their jobs, or lose them.

Yet again …we're as mad as hell.

To Be Continued.

Meet The New Boss...Same As The Old Boss

All is not well in the land of the Tea Party.

First, according to a recent New York Times poll, the tea party is the most unpopular it has been since they started polling on the tea party’s favorability in April of last year.

Secondly, according to data compiled by two researchers and published late in  2010, and recently updated for a paper back edition (American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us), the tea party ranks lowest in the 24 separate groups of Americans’ or individuals who they polled on. They are among the least popular groups of any kind of Americans in politics and culture right now. They have a lower favorability ranking than Sarah Palin, Democrats, Republicans, Atheist (God Bless Them), and Muslims – who were vilified for trying to build a community center in lower Manhattan.

The authors examine the role of the tea party in American politics and the data is painstakingly researched and brutally honest. For instance, when polled, Americans overwhelmingly stated that given a choice between a tea party president and Muslim president, they would prefer a Muslim president. Not a fake Muslim president, but an actual Muslim.

Wow.

Needless to say, the billionaire sugar daddies (Rupert Murdoch, David and Charles Koch, Dick Armye’s Freedom Works) that are bankrolling America’s so-called spontaneous and leaderless populist uprising have a public relations problem that threatens their self-interested and at times radical agendas.

The other fascinating thing that becomes clear from the data collected is the undeniable fact that the tea party, which is often billed as an non-partisan grass roots political movement, is actually nothing more than the same old republican base with a fresh coat of paint. In fact, past republican affiliation is the single greatest predictor of tea party support today. Also, next to being a republican, the second criteria for being a tea party cardholder is the desire to see religion play a prominent role in American politics.

Despite what Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck might have you think about the tea party express – the data collected shows that the tea party movement is not a bunch of independents that are upset with the growth of government, fighting the good fight, but actually, the same old religious, conservative wing of the Republican Party. 

The curtain has been drawn back and the wizard as been exposed.

Meet the New Boss…Same as the Old Boss.