RSS FeedAm I Serious About This?
Check out my latest posting on JohnDalyGolfShow. Is this just another talking head TV person or someone who is trying to capitalize on someone else’s internet traffic?
Baseball, Cuckoo’s Nest, Casablanca: Explain It All
T.S. Eliot wrote about writing: ”Words strain, Crack and sometimes break, under the burden…” Trying to explain what is really happening in this economy and changing world is a tough but invigorating battle. So in this column on JohnDalyLive, I use our national pastime, a classic film from the 1940s and another classic from the 1970s to help you understand what the freak is going on now. Please fill in any lost thoughts or words.
TV Review: John Adams and Politics Today
LAS VEGAS, NV (May 26, 2008) – I finally saw the HBO mini-series John Adams. It’s fabulous. Rent it or record it. Better yet, read the book by David McCullough.
I’m fortunate to have done both. As usual, the book is better. John Adams is at the top with Doris Kearns Goodwin’s work on Lincoln called Team of Rivals.
Thanks to David McCullough I lived with John Adams in my head for two weeks after finishing the book. That’s how good it was. More importantly, McCullough’s prose offers perspective of why John Adams, though not the marquee name like Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, was so critical to our nation. A TV production has a hard time doing that, although the Broadway musical 1776 correctly portrays Adams as the main character.
However, none of this media comparison can degrade the HBO version one bit.
The direction, cinematography, along with performances by Paul Giamatti (Adams), Laura Linney (Abigail Adams), David Morse (George Washington), and Tom Wilkinson (Ben Franklin), will all get a fair share of awards for this TV season.
As usual, I looked to see if the HBO production took creative license. Were there hidden comments on today’s politics? Certainly, there were lessons for today, but there was nothing partisan. The political innuendo, if any, seemed to target both Democrats and Republicans.
Clearly, any viewer would think of the border-fence conservatives as President Adams and Vice President Jefferson argued about a law that would ban all French from the U.S. in 1800 at a time when France was hinting at going to war with us. Adams weighed the security reasons while Jefferson said such a law would be impossible to carry out while violating the Constitution and every principle fought for in the American Revolution.
As this crisis waned, you couldn’t help but think there was a message for the current White House occupant. Eventually, France, and their new Emperor, wanted a peace treaty with the U.S. which Adams wisely allowed to happen by refusing to saber-rattle or build-up troops. Clearly, the message was this: hold out for peace.
Peace was at hand for Adams and our fledgling country. But the word of the treaty and the news that there would be no war came too late for Adams: he lost re-election. Yet, the attitude of Adams was that peace was more important. Here is a swipe at all politicians who manufacture scorched-earth campaigns to win at all costs.
And there was a message for Obama and Clinton: no matter how much you fight or how dirty you fight, you can end up respected friends. Adams learns that his presidency was undermined by Jefferson who paid Adams’ critics to write about Adams. Still, Adams and Jefferson ended their feud by corresponding at great length in their old age.
If you haven’t seen it, then hold off and break it out during the Fourth of July. It will help remind you what this country should be.
Perspective on Clinton Tax Returns. Play It Again
This is a posting on the release of the Clintons’ tax returns and how the reporting of it smacks of opportunism. Plus, I bastardize some great movie lines.
LAS VEGAS, NV (April 5, 2008) – To steal from the greatest movie of all time, Casablanca, I’m shocked, shocked that politicians are making millions after they leave office.
Billary Clinton made $109 million since Bill left office. The response has been … well… as expected. And your response should be: ignore it.
Why? It’s still the same old story. And it’s not the fight for love and glory.
Conservative talk radio lambasted the Clintons with the usual hypocrisy. While listening, I wondered where the free-market Right-Wingers have gone.
Did these same folks criticize Ronald Reagan when he took $2 million from a Japanese communications group in 1989? I doubt it.
I could spend plenty of paragraphs here to show how Reagan’s 9 days and two speeches were far more excessive than Bill Clinton’s 7 years of speeches and appearances – and vice versa. But I won’t because I’d be falling into the same trap the political parties and the media have set.
The release of the Clinton tax returns provides fodder for the media while allowing the political parties to continue their “Louie, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship” of raising money. However, I don’t see Bogey walking down that airport runway in this scenario; no, it’s Major Strasser (the Nazi) and Ferrari (the unethical fat businessman).
Core GOP donors who are endowed with the Hate-Clinton gene are writing checks right now. Meanwhile, the Obama faithful offer the theory that the Clintons can easily finance and buy the election.
The liberals and Clinton followers are just as two-faced. Most of them accused Ronald Reagan nearly 20 years ago, as the New York Times editorialized, of plunging “so blatantly into pure commercialism.” Will they write that today? I doubt it.
Do I find the amount of money the Clintons and the Reagans made reprehensible? No. They can make whatever they want – as long as it’s legal. That’s the American way.
I stick my neck out for no one, but I am joining a fight.
What sickens me is the amount of money politicians make while in office. You may call it campaign contributions; I call it legally sanctioned bribery. Sure, everyone’s restricted to a $2,500 limit, but someone can bundle that money into millions and deliver it to a politician – in return for favors.
The Obama campaign, evolved from the failed Dean campaign in 2004, is on the right track. A good portion of the donations come from online at $25 a pop. I doubt the janitor in Joliet will have sway with a President Obama because he made a PayPal deposit to Barack. Still, the Obama campaign is getting its fair share from big money interests too.
So, folks, please stop the conversation about politicians’ tax returns. It doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. Instead, let’s begin some conversations on Social Security, Medicare, education, and whether and how we fund two overseas wars.
No Country For A Drug War
LAS VEGAS, NV (March 2, 2008) – No Country For Old Men, the Oscar winning film for this year, usually elicits two responses.
The first is: “That’s the most haunting film I’ve ever seen and Javier Barden gives me nightmares.” The second is: “I don’t get it.”
I’ll address the second statement here. The first statement needs only this further comment: future film students will study this film for decades.
People “don’t get” the film’s ending, because there is none. Or better said: it’s not a Hollywood ending that offers secure irony or plot completion. No, this ending mirrors life and the haunting notion of not knowing.
If you need the writers and directors to deliver a film with a nice ending, then don’t see No Country For Old Men. Only the intellectually curious who can stand some domestic terror should witness this. It’s not a film that allows you to escape life as we know it. Instead, it rubs it in your face.
However, providing “You can handle the truth,” let me give you an underlying theme to place in the back of your mind as you watch this great flick.
Think about this: the failed American war on drugs.
Anton Chigurh, the character played by Javier Barden, is a Twenty-first Century Frankenstein and Hannibal Lecter – with a cattle prod gun and, as Jon Stewart said, “with a Dorothy Hammill haircut”. That’s as funny as it gets. He is a killing machine that leaves bodies in his wake. And he kills for one reason — to retrieve missing drug money.
Yes, there are moments in the film you need to suspend disbelief. My good buddy and writing partner, Eric Snyder, said there were times Anton Chigurh wouldn’t be able to walk away free from certain scenes. He’s right. But for the sake of this argument, many times we wonder how drug dealers like Pablo Escobar remained alive for so long as well.
In previous posts, I’ve mentioned Col. John B. Alexander, retired PhD. from the U.S. Army, the author of Winning The War: Advanced Weapons, Strategies, and Concepts for the Post 9/11 World, and a recent lunch guest of mine.
Although his book outlines winning the war on terror, he says the “illegal drug trade provides the largest source of terrorist funds.” In his book and at lunch, John explains that U.S. efforts to stop drug trafficking have only increased the price of drugs and the profits for drug warlords and cartels.
Besides reading John’s book, try this one – Reefer Madness: Sex, Drugs, and Cheap Labor in the American Black Market by Eric Schlosser. He shows how the conservative, anti-drug sentiment in America has placed too many people behind bars for truly petty crimes while creating an untaxed, underground economy.
I consider myself a conservative on a number of issues. For instance, military service is something I think every American should be required to do for two years. I’m a fiscal conservative who understands that cutting taxes is only half of a responsible fiscal policy.
However, the drug war is not one of my conservative issues. I think the Republicans and moderate Democrats who refuse to repeal these laws put us in danger. As John Alexander writes, “The drug trade has been estimated to cause up to 80 percent of the crime against property and 50 percent of the violent crimes against people in the United States.”
Think about that.
First, marijuana should be legalized. The police efforts to stop pot-heads are a waste of money and resources. Sure, marijuana use can lead to the use of more addictive drugs. Sorry, I don’t buy the argument. I’ll endure a few more pot-heads for a massive reduction in crime. And I’ll put the responsibility back on parents and employers.
Next, we need a systematic approach to legalize and devaluing other illegal narcotics like cocaine. Going cold-turkey to legalize all street drugs would cause too much turmoil in the short run.
At least, let’s get a dialogue started. This way an Anton Chigurh will remain just a fictional character.
Archives
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- July 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
Categories
- AIG (4)
- Baseball (7)
- Basketball/College (2)
- book (16)
- Boxing (1)
- Business Opportunity (6)
- Campaign Finance (2)
- China (8)
- Daly Websites (7)
- Economy (68)
- Energy (11)
- Film (5)
- Football (2)
- Foreign Policy (15)
- Futrell & Daly (1)
- Golf (7)
- Iran (1)
- Iraq (8)
- Ireland (1)
- Israel (1)
- John Daly Appearance (7)
- John Daly Radio (1)
- John Daly TV (4)
- John Daly's Sports-News Talk (2)
- JohnDalyGolfShow.com (3)
- JohnDalyLive (8)
- JohnDalySports (2)
- Las Vegas (4)
- LasVegasGolf.com (3)
- March Madness (1)
- Media (20)
- Media Bias (30)
- Mexico (2)
- New Media (23)
- Politics (55)
- Politics/Media (43)
- Religion (9)
- Russia (10)
- Silly Stuff (1)
- Sports (10)
- Travel (1)
- TV (14)
- Twitter (1)
- Uncategorized (38)
- Wealth (11)
- World Series of Golf (2)