Golden Globe list of foreign-language contenders, I've seen some of them, but not enough to make a decent prediction:
"9th Company" (Russia/Ukraine/Finland)
"After the Wedding" (Den-mark)
"Ahlaam" (Iraq)
"Alatriste" (Spain)
"Along the Ridge" (Anche libero va bene) (Italy)
"Angel-A" (France)
"Apocalypto" (USA)
"Avenue Montaigne" (France)
"Black Book" (Zwartboek) (The Nether-lands)
"The Blossoming of Maximo Oliveros" (the Philippines)
"Bosta" (Leba-non)
"Children of Glory" (Hungary)
"Chronicle of an Escape" (Argen-tina)
"Cinema, Aspirins & Vultures" (Brazil)
"Climates" (Iklimler) (Tur-key)
"Curse of the Golden Flower" (China).
"Days of Glory" (Algeria)
"El benny" (Cuba)
"Family Friend" (Italy)
"Family Law" (Ar-gentina)
"Frozen Days" (Israel)
"The Golden Door" (Nuovomondo) (It-aly)
"Grbavica: The Land of My Dreams" (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
"Il Cai-mano" (Italy)
"Ice Cream I Scream" (Turkey)
"The Island" (Rus-sia)
"King and the Clown" (South Korea)
"Lage Raho Munnabhai" (In-dia)
"La Mujer de mi Hermano" (Mexico)
"The Last Train" (Ger-many)
"Letters from Iwo Jima" (Japan)
"Libertas" (Croatia)
"The Lives of Others" (Germany)
"Love for Share" (Indonesia)
"Mario's War" (La guerra di Mario) (Italy)
"The Missing Star" (La stella che non c'e) (It-aly)
"Nomad" (Kazakhstan)
"Offside" (Iran)
"O Major Amor Do Mundo" (Brazil)
"Omkara" (India)
"Pan's Labyrinth" (Mexico)
"Playing the Victim" (Russia)
"Pretendiendo" (Chile)
"Prince of the Himalaya" (China)
"The Protector" (Thailand)
"Rang De Basanti" (India)
"Reprise" (Norway)
"Requiem" (Germany)
"Retrieval" (Z Ozysku) (Poland)
"Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles" (China)
"Sweet Mud" (Adama Meshuga'at) (Israel)
"The Valet" (France)
"Vitus" (Switzerland).
"Volver" (Spain)
"Water" (Canada)
"The Yacoubian Building" (Egypt)
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Friday, November 24, 2006
The return of the quebec menace.
Preliminary designs exist for up to 56 star flags have already been prepared by the US Govt.'s Institute of Heraldry.
What does this have to do with anything? Well we’re going to discuss the possible future of a country which some people think has no right to exist: Canada.
No one in the US government has advocated the annexation of Canada in well over a century, and as far as I know, nobody in either the Bush or Clinton administrations even WANT that to happen.
However, there are quite a few Canadians who want to destroy Canada, and in reaction, a number of Provincial premiers have advocated joining the United States if they succeed.
I am, of course, talking about Quebec. Since 1970, “Le Belle Province” has been beating up on it’s minorities, and has twice held referenda on secession, albeit not in those exact words. They had two, one in 1976 and one in 1995, the first was defeated by a wide margin, the second almost passed, and according to the memoirs of Jacques Parizeau, the premier at the time, if it did, He would have would have issued an immediate declaration of independence, and we might have had to take one of those flag designs out of the filing cabinet.
The reason I bring this up, is that yesterday, Prime Minister Steven Harper tabled a resolution before the Canadian parliament proclaiming the French Quebecois, “a ‘nation’ within Canada. The reason he did this, is, allegedly, to forestall a similar resolution by Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe, which didn’t include the magic words “within Canada.”
Without the magic words, it may have been construed as an endorsement Quebec independence. Still, this proposal, which is basically a declaration that somehow the French Quebecois, unlike say, the Ukrainians and Italians, both of whom have larger communities in Canada outside of Quebec, are superior,
This is quite clearly, appeasement, and will encourage a referendum after the provincial election next year, should the Quebec Nationalist party (PQ) actually win. (they’re currently running first in the polls)
The recognition of French Canadians as “special” has always ticked off those in the Rest of Canada (RoC), and there are Western Nationalists (they nearly took power in Saskatewan in 2003), who sometimes threaten secession themselves. But to those in the Great White North, all this is old hat and boring,
Since 1995, and especially the Liberal victory in Quebec in 2003, talk of the destruction of Canada has been mostly speculative blather by commentators, and not taken seriously by anyone. This is going to change and the whole stupid circus is going to start up anew. In fact, it already has. One of the reasons this is because the Conservative Harper government is a minority, and they’re leaning on the BQ to stay in power. With the new Liberal leadership in place next month, there’s no reason to keep Harper in power on the part of the BQ or the Liberals, and there’s going to be a big political mess.
What does this have to do with anything? Well we’re going to discuss the possible future of a country which some people think has no right to exist: Canada.
No one in the US government has advocated the annexation of Canada in well over a century, and as far as I know, nobody in either the Bush or Clinton administrations even WANT that to happen.
However, there are quite a few Canadians who want to destroy Canada, and in reaction, a number of Provincial premiers have advocated joining the United States if they succeed.
I am, of course, talking about Quebec. Since 1970, “Le Belle Province” has been beating up on it’s minorities, and has twice held referenda on secession, albeit not in those exact words. They had two, one in 1976 and one in 1995, the first was defeated by a wide margin, the second almost passed, and according to the memoirs of Jacques Parizeau, the premier at the time, if it did, He would have would have issued an immediate declaration of independence, and we might have had to take one of those flag designs out of the filing cabinet.
The reason I bring this up, is that yesterday, Prime Minister Steven Harper tabled a resolution before the Canadian parliament proclaiming the French Quebecois, “a ‘nation’ within Canada. The reason he did this, is, allegedly, to forestall a similar resolution by Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe, which didn’t include the magic words “within Canada.”
Without the magic words, it may have been construed as an endorsement Quebec independence. Still, this proposal, which is basically a declaration that somehow the French Quebecois, unlike say, the Ukrainians and Italians, both of whom have larger communities in Canada outside of Quebec, are superior,
This is quite clearly, appeasement, and will encourage a referendum after the provincial election next year, should the Quebec Nationalist party (PQ) actually win. (they’re currently running first in the polls)
The recognition of French Canadians as “special” has always ticked off those in the Rest of Canada (RoC), and there are Western Nationalists (they nearly took power in Saskatewan in 2003), who sometimes threaten secession themselves. But to those in the Great White North, all this is old hat and boring,
Since 1995, and especially the Liberal victory in Quebec in 2003, talk of the destruction of Canada has been mostly speculative blather by commentators, and not taken seriously by anyone. This is going to change and the whole stupid circus is going to start up anew. In fact, it already has. One of the reasons this is because the Conservative Harper government is a minority, and they’re leaning on the BQ to stay in power. With the new Liberal leadership in place next month, there’s no reason to keep Harper in power on the part of the BQ or the Liberals, and there’s going to be a big political mess.
Monday, November 13, 2006
The Return of the Geriatrics.
What's interesting is that for some reason the MSM, and many here seem to think that George H. W. Bush actually seems to know what the hell he's doing. People are going around saying that "Bush I's people are coming back and that's a wonderful thing seeing as they know how to run a foreign policy and all.
Yeah, right.
We're talking about that bunch of morons that gave us Iran/Contra and the LA riots and publically supported the anti-Gorbachev coup. They're the ones who, after victory over Iraq in Gulf War II (ONE being Iran/Iraq), publically BETRAYED the Iraqi people by pretending to support their thirst for freedom and then permitting Saddam to mow down hundreds of thousands of them.
We're talking about the guy who called his opponent infantile NAMES during the 1988 debates, and a Chief of Staff who appointed himself Secretary of the Treasury without actually informing the President, who was the guy who did the actual STEALING of the 2000 election.
The American people knew about this at the time. Remember, in 1992, Bush SR got only 37.45% of the vote. that's BEHIND Hoover's 39.65% in 1932, in the middle of the GREAT DEPRESSION, behind, George McGovern's 37.52% humiliation. (for the record, President Taft got 23.17% in 1912, but that's another story). The Father's presidency was a bigger failure than the son's.
Compare the unemployment rate in November 1992 (7.4%) to October 2006 (4.4%). Now I know that some here might think that many of these jobs are minimum wage things that people cannot live on, and that's true, but the Bush I administration was completely clueless on the economy, why do you think Ross PEROT, of all people got almost 20% of the vote. Why do you think he was running first in the polls that summer? After the LA riots, Bush I looked like a deer caught in the headlights.
The schoolyard bullying was Bush SR's idea. It worked because the Democrats are polite adults (except maybe around here) and didn't think that childish behaviour needed to be responded to.
The son fucked up big time, but don't expect the father and his band of geriatric imbiciles to save him, because they're just as bad, if not worse.
Yeah, right.
We're talking about that bunch of morons that gave us Iran/Contra and the LA riots and publically supported the anti-Gorbachev coup. They're the ones who, after victory over Iraq in Gulf War II (ONE being Iran/Iraq), publically BETRAYED the Iraqi people by pretending to support their thirst for freedom and then permitting Saddam to mow down hundreds of thousands of them.
We're talking about the guy who called his opponent infantile NAMES during the 1988 debates, and a Chief of Staff who appointed himself Secretary of the Treasury without actually informing the President, who was the guy who did the actual STEALING of the 2000 election.
The American people knew about this at the time. Remember, in 1992, Bush SR got only 37.45% of the vote. that's BEHIND Hoover's 39.65% in 1932, in the middle of the GREAT DEPRESSION, behind, George McGovern's 37.52% humiliation. (for the record, President Taft got 23.17% in 1912, but that's another story). The Father's presidency was a bigger failure than the son's.
Compare the unemployment rate in November 1992 (7.4%) to October 2006 (4.4%). Now I know that some here might think that many of these jobs are minimum wage things that people cannot live on, and that's true, but the Bush I administration was completely clueless on the economy, why do you think Ross PEROT, of all people got almost 20% of the vote. Why do you think he was running first in the polls that summer? After the LA riots, Bush I looked like a deer caught in the headlights.
The schoolyard bullying was Bush SR's idea. It worked because the Democrats are polite adults (except maybe around here) and didn't think that childish behaviour needed to be responded to.
The son fucked up big time, but don't expect the father and his band of geriatric imbiciles to save him, because they're just as bad, if not worse.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
The Day After
I was going to go to the Democratic Victory party, but there I was just out of the shower and it was getting to nine in the evening and I had to get to bed soon....aw, fuck it.
The Democrats got the Congress back. This is a pretty nifty stunt, especially with the computer-generated gerrymandering and the fact that most of the Senate seats were slam dunks.
The Democrats took the Senate. Yeah, there's the bruhaha about Montana and Virginia, but the Republicans are going to have to pay for the recounts out of their own pockets and I don't think that they've got the cash for it. One thing I haven't seen yet is whether or not the Democrats took over the state Senate or not. I'll find out soon enough. I'm glad Hevesi got a bigger margin than Coumo did. that's really cool.
So what now? The Republicans are going to feign shock for a few days and start to live with it, then we'll see if they could play nice. Tom DeLay said that this is a "Lame Duck Majority" from the get-go. I hope not, but I can see where he's coming from.
The Democrats got the Congress back. This is a pretty nifty stunt, especially with the computer-generated gerrymandering and the fact that most of the Senate seats were slam dunks.
The Democrats took the Senate. Yeah, there's the bruhaha about Montana and Virginia, but the Republicans are going to have to pay for the recounts out of their own pockets and I don't think that they've got the cash for it. One thing I haven't seen yet is whether or not the Democrats took over the state Senate or not. I'll find out soon enough. I'm glad Hevesi got a bigger margin than Coumo did. that's really cool.
So what now? The Republicans are going to feign shock for a few days and start to live with it, then we'll see if they could play nice. Tom DeLay said that this is a "Lame Duck Majority" from the get-go. I hope not, but I can see where he's coming from.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
The early exit polls....
Early Senate numbers (uncomfirmed and with caveats):
Democrats are leading in Pennsylvania (+15), Ohio (+14), New Jersey (+8), Rhode Island (+7), Virginia (+7), Montana (+9), Missouri (+2), Maryland (+7).
Republicans are leading in Tennessee (+4) and Arizona (+4).
Lieberman leading by 5 in Connecticut.
Democrats are leading in Pennsylvania (+15), Ohio (+14), New Jersey (+8), Rhode Island (+7), Virginia (+7), Montana (+9), Missouri (+2), Maryland (+7).
Republicans are leading in Tennessee (+4) and Arizona (+4).
Lieberman leading by 5 in Connecticut.
Voting: Six AM
The voting machine was broken, so for the first time I had to use a paper ballot (my first vote was for Carter/Mondale in 1976). I was very tempted to write-in Mickey Mouse or Daffy Duck, but I didn't and voted mostly for third party candidates, especially for governor, where I voted for the crazy on the "My Rent is Too Damn " high ticket. Spitzer is running like 70% in the polls so I figure that I can do that. I mostly voted for the Democrats on the sattilite party lines, except for the republican running against Tom Duane.
I hate Tom Duane.
So we'll have to see what's going on in the hours to come.
I hate Tom Duane.
So we'll have to see what's going on in the hours to come.
O days out
This is the final batch of polls. If you're one of those people who've been coming because you think there's actual political analysis here, please come back this evening starting around eight PM, eastern standard time, because I'm going to be at the NY Democratic headquarters and doing a live blog.
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 50%
Ned Lamont (D) 38%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 46%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 48%
Tom Kean, Jr. (R) 43%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 62%
Mike DeWine (R) 38%
Sherrod Brown (D) 56%
Mike DeWine (R) 44%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 52%
George Allen (R) 44%
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 50%
Ned Lamont (D) 38%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 46%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 48%
Tom Kean, Jr. (R) 43%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 62%
Mike DeWine (R) 38%
Sherrod Brown (D) 56%
Mike DeWine (R) 44%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 52%
George Allen (R) 44%
Monday, November 06, 2006
one day out.
First more polls:
CA SENATE
Dianne Feinstein (D) 60%
Dick Mountjoy (R) 31%
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 38%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 9%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 58%
Katherine Harris (R) 35%
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 36%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 50%
Michael Bouchard (R) 44%
Debbie Stabenow (D) 52%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 49%
Jim Talent (R) 45%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 50%
Conrad Burns (R) 41%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 42%
Bobby Menendez (D) 50%
Tom Kean, Jr. (R) 40%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 52%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 48%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 45%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 49%
Harold Ford (D) 46
VA SENATE
George Allen (R) 49%
James Webb (D) 46%
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 53%
Mike McGavick (R) 42%
Now some predictions for tomorrow:
California: Incumbent Senator Dianne Feinstein will easily hold her seat over little-known Republican Richard Mountjoy because Aaanold has no coattails.
Connecticutt: Joe Leiberman will be reelected as an independent. Making the Daily Kos crowd briefly unhappy.
Delaware: Democrat Thomas Carper will defeat Temple University professor Jan Ting because nobody knows who the hell he is.
Florida: Former astronaut Bill Nelson will hold his seat for the Democrats over Republican Congresswoman Katherine Harris because she is EVIL and Floridians know it.
Hawaii: Democrat Daniel Akaka, will wipe the floor with Republican state Rep. Cynthia Thielen.
Indiana: Thiis is the easiest on to prognosticate: Richard Lugar is unopposed.
Maine: Republican Olympia Snowe will easily defeat Democrat Jean Hay Bright before becoming a Democrat herself. That is if the results are 50-50 and the Democrats are smart.
Massachusetts: Ted Kennedy gets reelected because it's in the State Constituion somewhere, Republican Ken Chase was very happy just to be nominatied.
Mississippi: Republican Trent Lott will be returned to the Senate over Democrat Erik Fleming, partly because Lott was himself a victim of Katrina and could feel the Gulf Coast's pain.
Nebraska: Sen. Ben Nelson, but he will easily best Republican Pete Ricketts.
Nevada: Sons of Presidents rarely do well politically, and with the exception to the rule fucking up so badly in the White House, Jimmy Carter's eldest son, Jack, will get creamed by incumbent Republican John Ensign.
New Mexico: Democrat Jeff Bingaman is a popular incumbent who might get a committe chaimanship, he will beat Republican Allen McCulloch.
New York: Republican John Spencer beat Hillary Clinton?!?! Get serious.
North Dakota: Democrat Kent Conrad will beat GOP's Dwight Grotberg because he has seniority and the North Dakotans want that.
Texas: Kay Baliy Hutchison will defeat Barbara Ann Radnofsky for the simple reason that Lyndon Johnson is dead.
Utah: Orrin Hatch is a Republican from UTAH, Democrat Pete Ashdown never had a chance.
Vermont: Bernie Sanders is popular even though he's a Socialist.
West Virginia: Once and future President pro tempore Senate Robert Byrd destroy challenger John Raese because he's beein bringing in the pork since the 1950s.
Wisconsin: Democrat Herb Kohl will defeat Robert Gerald Lorge.
Wyoming: As this is "Dick Cheney-Land" Democrat Dale Groutage never stood much of a chance against Republican Craig Thomas.
CA SENATE
Dianne Feinstein (D) 60%
Dick Mountjoy (R) 31%
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 38%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 9%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 58%
Katherine Harris (R) 35%
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 36%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 50%
Michael Bouchard (R) 44%
Debbie Stabenow (D) 52%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 49%
Jim Talent (R) 45%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 50%
Conrad Burns (R) 41%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 42%
Bobby Menendez (D) 50%
Tom Kean, Jr. (R) 40%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 52%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 48%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 45%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 49%
Harold Ford (D) 46
VA SENATE
George Allen (R) 49%
James Webb (D) 46%
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 53%
Mike McGavick (R) 42%
Now some predictions for tomorrow:
California: Incumbent Senator Dianne Feinstein will easily hold her seat over little-known Republican Richard Mountjoy because Aaanold has no coattails.
Connecticutt: Joe Leiberman will be reelected as an independent. Making the Daily Kos crowd briefly unhappy.
Delaware: Democrat Thomas Carper will defeat Temple University professor Jan Ting because nobody knows who the hell he is.
Florida: Former astronaut Bill Nelson will hold his seat for the Democrats over Republican Congresswoman Katherine Harris because she is EVIL and Floridians know it.
Hawaii: Democrat Daniel Akaka, will wipe the floor with Republican state Rep. Cynthia Thielen.
Indiana: Thiis is the easiest on to prognosticate: Richard Lugar is unopposed.
Maine: Republican Olympia Snowe will easily defeat Democrat Jean Hay Bright before becoming a Democrat herself. That is if the results are 50-50 and the Democrats are smart.
Massachusetts: Ted Kennedy gets reelected because it's in the State Constituion somewhere, Republican Ken Chase was very happy just to be nominatied.
Mississippi: Republican Trent Lott will be returned to the Senate over Democrat Erik Fleming, partly because Lott was himself a victim of Katrina and could feel the Gulf Coast's pain.
Nebraska: Sen. Ben Nelson, but he will easily best Republican Pete Ricketts.
Nevada: Sons of Presidents rarely do well politically, and with the exception to the rule fucking up so badly in the White House, Jimmy Carter's eldest son, Jack, will get creamed by incumbent Republican John Ensign.
New Mexico: Democrat Jeff Bingaman is a popular incumbent who might get a committe chaimanship, he will beat Republican Allen McCulloch.
New York: Republican John Spencer beat Hillary Clinton?!?! Get serious.
North Dakota: Democrat Kent Conrad will beat GOP's Dwight Grotberg because he has seniority and the North Dakotans want that.
Texas: Kay Baliy Hutchison will defeat Barbara Ann Radnofsky for the simple reason that Lyndon Johnson is dead.
Utah: Orrin Hatch is a Republican from UTAH, Democrat Pete Ashdown never had a chance.
Vermont: Bernie Sanders is popular even though he's a Socialist.
West Virginia: Once and future President pro tempore Senate Robert Byrd destroy challenger John Raese because he's beein bringing in the pork since the 1950s.
Wisconsin: Democrat Herb Kohl will defeat Robert Gerald Lorge.
Wyoming: As this is "Dick Cheney-Land" Democrat Dale Groutage never stood much of a chance against Republican Craig Thomas.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
two days out
AZ SENATE
Jon Kyl (R) 49 %
Jim Pederson (D) 41 %
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 47%
Michael Steele (R) 44%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 53 %
Michael Bouchard (R) 37 %
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46 %
Jim Talent (R) 45 %
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47 %
Conrad Burns (R) 47 %
NJ SENATE
Bobby Menendez (D) 48 %
Junior Kean (R) 41 %
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 50 %
Mike DeWine (R) 44 %
Sherrod Brown (D) 62 %
Mike DeWine (R) 38 %
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 52 %
Rick Santorum (R) 39 %
RI SENATE
Lincoln Chafee (R) 46 %
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 45 %
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 50 %
Harold Ford Jr. (D) 38 %
Harold Ford, Jr. (D) 46%
Bob Corker (R) 40%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 46 %
George Allen (R) 45 %
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 54 %
Mike McGavick (R) 38 %
Jon Kyl (R) 49 %
Jim Pederson (D) 41 %
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 47%
Michael Steele (R) 44%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 53 %
Michael Bouchard (R) 37 %
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46 %
Jim Talent (R) 45 %
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47 %
Conrad Burns (R) 47 %
NJ SENATE
Bobby Menendez (D) 48 %
Junior Kean (R) 41 %
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 50 %
Mike DeWine (R) 44 %
Sherrod Brown (D) 62 %
Mike DeWine (R) 38 %
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 52 %
Rick Santorum (R) 39 %
RI SENATE
Lincoln Chafee (R) 46 %
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 45 %
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 50 %
Harold Ford Jr. (D) 38 %
Harold Ford, Jr. (D) 46%
Bob Corker (R) 40%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 46 %
George Allen (R) 45 %
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 54 %
Mike McGavick (R) 38 %
Friday, November 03, 2006
four days out
Here are more senate polls, sans where they come from. It doesn't really matter all that much this late in the game....
AZ SENATE
Jon Kyl (R) 46%
Jim Pederson (D) 41%
CA SENATE
Diane Feinstein (D) 55%
Dick Mountjoy (R) 33%
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 37%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
Joe Lieberman (I) 51%
Ned Lamont (D) 39%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 7%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 58%
Katherine Harris (R) 34%
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 33%
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 44%
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 43%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 49%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
MN SENATE
Amy Klobuchar (D) 55%
Mark Kennedy (R) 33%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46%
Jim Talent (R) 43%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47%
Conrad Burns (R) 46%
Jon Tester (D) 53%
Conrad Burns (R) 47%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 37%
Bob Menendez (D) 48%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 38%
Bob Menendez (D) 46%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 42%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 49%
Mike DeWine (R) 42%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 48%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
Bob Casey (D) 53%
Rick Santorum (R) 38%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 53%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 39%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 53%
Harold Ford (D) 43%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 45%
George Allen (R) 44%
George Allen (R) 45%
James Webb (D) 42%
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 53%
Mike McGavick (R) 41%
AZ SENATE
Jon Kyl (R) 46%
Jim Pederson (D) 41%
CA SENATE
Diane Feinstein (D) 55%
Dick Mountjoy (R) 33%
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 37%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
Joe Lieberman (I) 51%
Ned Lamont (D) 39%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 7%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 58%
Katherine Harris (R) 34%
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 33%
MD SENATE
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 44%
Ben Cardin (D) 49%
Michael Steele (R) 43%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 49%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
MN SENATE
Amy Klobuchar (D) 55%
Mark Kennedy (R) 33%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46%
Jim Talent (R) 43%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47%
Conrad Burns (R) 46%
Jon Tester (D) 53%
Conrad Burns (R) 47%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 37%
Bob Menendez (D) 48%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 38%
Bob Menendez (D) 46%
Tom Kean, Jr (R) 42%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 49%
Mike DeWine (R) 42%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 48%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
Bob Casey (D) 53%
Rick Santorum (R) 38%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 53%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 39%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 53%
Harold Ford (D) 43%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 45%
George Allen (R) 44%
George Allen (R) 45%
James Webb (D) 42%
WA SENATE
Maria Cantwell (D) 53%
Mike McGavick (R) 41%
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Five Days Out
Despite the fact that John Kerry's stuggle to get renominated for President two years hence has just self-destructed, the Democrats seem to be on target for retaking both houses. That's good, but I'll not truly belived it until I actually see it.
Some senate polls:
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 37%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 49%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 33%
MN SENATE
Amy Klobuchar (D) 55%
Mark Kennedy (R) 33%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46%
Jim Talent (R) 43%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47%
Conrad Burns (R) 46%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, JR. (R) 37%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 49%
Mike DeWine (R) 42%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 48%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 53%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 39%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 53%
Harold Ford (D) 43%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 45%
George Allen (R) 44%
George Allen (R) 45%
James Webb (D) 42%
Some senate polls:
CT SENATE
Joe Lieberman (I) 49%
Ned Lamont (D) 37%
Alan Schlesinger (R) 8%
MI SENATE
Debbie Stabenow (D) 49%
Michael Bouchard (R) 42%
FL SENATE
Bill Nelson (D) 59%
Katherine Harris (R) 33%
MN SENATE
Amy Klobuchar (D) 55%
Mark Kennedy (R) 33%
MO SENATE
Claire McCaskill (D) 46%
Jim Talent (R) 43%
MT SENATE
Jon Tester (D) 47%
Conrad Burns (R) 46%
NJ SENATE
Bob Menendez (D) 49%
Tom Kean, JR. (R) 37%
OH SENATE
Sherrod Brown (D) 49%
Mike DeWine (R) 42%
PA SENATE
Bob Casey (D) 48%
Rick Santorum (R) 40%
RI SENATE
Sheldon Whitehouse (D) 53%
Lincoln Chafee (R) 39%
TN SENATE
Bob Corker (R) 53%
Harold Ford (D) 43%
VA SENATE
James Webb (D) 45%
George Allen (R) 44%
George Allen (R) 45%
James Webb (D) 42%
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
San Francisco--the junket.
I know why they sometimes have these things. Advertising. The fawning press is supposed to ask some softball questions for the evening newscast, or get some background from a producer or something for a feature in a magazine or newspaper. You get everyone in the same place and it's actually pretty easy for all involved.
Now once can see why they do this for a film that's coming out. Even if the buzz is terriffic, the studios still need publicty in order for that all important first weekend. It's a major expense, but a neccessary one. Sometimes, during major film festivals, the survivors of some old films are trotted out for the press. Why just a couple of months ago, they had press confrences for El Topo and Reds, films with great reputations and which few had seen in many years. That's understandable, too. But what I couldn't understand is why they would have a full-fledges junket for a Cars.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the one they had last June, they should have had the one just before the film came out, no. I'm talking about having another one four months later for the DVD. Now, I've saw the film when it first came out TWICE, once for the regular press screening and the IMAX version, and I gave the thing a good review. Maybe that's why they invited me, I don't know, but going out there, on THEIR dime, and getting to see the innards of this magical factory, is something no one in their right mind would pass up.
That's what made this trip so dissapointing. We didn't actually see all that much. This was only what was advertised, nothing more. Damn!
I don't really want to seem ungrateful, I mean the food was wonderful and the Hotel Monaco has soft beds and a wonderful free wine tasting program. San Francisco is a wonderful city, and had I not had to get back when I did, I would have had an extremely enjoyable day hanging out on Market street, or Polk. But that was not why I was there, I was there to see Pixar, and if I saw nothing else, that would be just dandy.
The lot of us got together at a quarter of seven in the lobby, and got on a pair of minibuses where we headed out over the Bay Bridge and into Marin County, Passing Berkeley and into the town of Emoryville, which is sort of in Oakland, and where all the factories are. The scenery was very much like it was on the other side of America, with the beginnings of autumn changing the trees from green to orange and gold. It was all very California.
Sooner than expected, there we were. They let us out of the vans and we walked into the building. the Pixar building is a two story structure with a huge interior "courtyard" surrounded by two wings which are connected on the second floor by a bridge. The schedule went something like this:
Breakfast.
Sign-in
The morning round tables
Lunch
The Afternoon screenings.
A tour of the campus.
Back to the Hotel.
Breakfast was really good. Various versions of scrambled eggs and cheese omelttes, and really good coffee and fruit. Then we had to sign in. I'm sorry. The sign-in was lame. Usually when you sign in for one of these things, you just sign your name on a register, grab some press materials and go on. That's lame too, but in the usual beaurocratic way. Nobody minds that.
This time, we had to go through a pseudo-DMV type thing, where we had to recognise some of the characters and do a quiz, followed by a demo of the video game (that part would have been fine, but I suck at that sort of thing). This was too cute by half. If there were little children there, that would be one thing, but you had a few dozen adults going through this none-too-pleased. Then we had some more food and wandered around the vast area that was the first floor for a bit before lining up and heading past the "unauthorized personell forbidden" signs and up the stairs for three round tables with a couple of the storyboarders and some technitions, who told us about how much work it is to do lighting in an all CGI film and how to make color packets for the techies doing the rendering. That was fine, then we went downstairs again where a couple of people showed us how wonderful all the extras were.
Now extras are important to a DVD. Nobody likes "vanilla," and no one did vanilla more annoyingly than Disney did back in the day [The original Roger Rabbit had a list of them where actually weren't on the disc]. Pixar knows this and they're justly proud of what they did on some of their earlier efforts. They gave us a brief tour of what's on there, and the whole presentation was mostly boring. Menus are like that. However, I want a plasma TV more than ever. God that was beautiful.
Then came lunch, and this was where the problems started. No. The food was terriffic, the buffet was to perfection and I enjoyed every morsel. The problem was stonewalling. I sat down and there he was. John Lassiter, sitting catty corner from me. He was very plesant, and I decided, since I was there, to find out what exactly was going on with the studio. Bang! He and his main flunkey are very good at stonewalling. They had just come out with a new short, called Lifted, and they had a few signs for it on the wall. I asked about it and they seemed very exited, although they wouldn't say anything specific. I asked about Ratatouille, which is the next project and the project after that, "W.A.L.-E". Stonewall. I persisted. "Do you see any posters for Meet the Robinsons do you?" he snarled at me. I was there to do journalism, right? But what was I supposed to do? I couldn't do what I wanted, after all it was on their dime and in their house.
This was a squandered opportunity on Pixar's part. If you're going to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to bring people THOUSANDS of miles, it would be really cool to dazzel them. Show them a tease here and there. Some character designs for Ratatouille, or Lifted, for example.
We've got something special for YOU! Not special like a tee shirt (which I'm wearing, by the way), something that you can tell your readers in confidence.
the afternoon sessions were rather boring. they showed us the specially made cartoon for the DVD, Mater and the Ghost Light, and that wasn't particularly good. The character of Mater in the feature was silly and colorful, but he was actually one of the more intellegent characters. Here he's just a moronic child. The punchline was cute but the build up wasn't.
But you can't say "This sucks" on their turf. The questions were for the most part polite and perfunctery. Lassiter made his official appearence and talked about how how he was inspired by a road trip he took with his family after Toy Story 2 was finished. Very sweet. Of course the original concept had nothing to do with the finished film except for the fact that all of the characters were automotive. I was still a bit ticked off.
Then we took the tour. We actually saw quite a bit of the preliminary art from Cars, and some from Finding Nemo. But we didn't see anyone working. That was all hidden. We did go outside and see the vollyball court.
We went back to the hotel and drank more free wine before having dinner on Disney's dime. It helped me sleep in the flight back.
Now once can see why they do this for a film that's coming out. Even if the buzz is terriffic, the studios still need publicty in order for that all important first weekend. It's a major expense, but a neccessary one. Sometimes, during major film festivals, the survivors of some old films are trotted out for the press. Why just a couple of months ago, they had press confrences for El Topo and Reds, films with great reputations and which few had seen in many years. That's understandable, too. But what I couldn't understand is why they would have a full-fledges junket for a Cars.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the one they had last June, they should have had the one just before the film came out, no. I'm talking about having another one four months later for the DVD. Now, I've saw the film when it first came out TWICE, once for the regular press screening and the IMAX version, and I gave the thing a good review. Maybe that's why they invited me, I don't know, but going out there, on THEIR dime, and getting to see the innards of this magical factory, is something no one in their right mind would pass up.
That's what made this trip so dissapointing. We didn't actually see all that much. This was only what was advertised, nothing more. Damn!
I don't really want to seem ungrateful, I mean the food was wonderful and the Hotel Monaco has soft beds and a wonderful free wine tasting program. San Francisco is a wonderful city, and had I not had to get back when I did, I would have had an extremely enjoyable day hanging out on Market street, or Polk. But that was not why I was there, I was there to see Pixar, and if I saw nothing else, that would be just dandy.
The lot of us got together at a quarter of seven in the lobby, and got on a pair of minibuses where we headed out over the Bay Bridge and into Marin County, Passing Berkeley and into the town of Emoryville, which is sort of in Oakland, and where all the factories are. The scenery was very much like it was on the other side of America, with the beginnings of autumn changing the trees from green to orange and gold. It was all very California.
Sooner than expected, there we were. They let us out of the vans and we walked into the building. the Pixar building is a two story structure with a huge interior "courtyard" surrounded by two wings which are connected on the second floor by a bridge. The schedule went something like this:
Breakfast.
Sign-in
The morning round tables
Lunch
The Afternoon screenings.
A tour of the campus.
Back to the Hotel.
Breakfast was really good. Various versions of scrambled eggs and cheese omelttes, and really good coffee and fruit. Then we had to sign in. I'm sorry. The sign-in was lame. Usually when you sign in for one of these things, you just sign your name on a register, grab some press materials and go on. That's lame too, but in the usual beaurocratic way. Nobody minds that.
This time, we had to go through a pseudo-DMV type thing, where we had to recognise some of the characters and do a quiz, followed by a demo of the video game (that part would have been fine, but I suck at that sort of thing). This was too cute by half. If there were little children there, that would be one thing, but you had a few dozen adults going through this none-too-pleased. Then we had some more food and wandered around the vast area that was the first floor for a bit before lining up and heading past the "unauthorized personell forbidden" signs and up the stairs for three round tables with a couple of the storyboarders and some technitions, who told us about how much work it is to do lighting in an all CGI film and how to make color packets for the techies doing the rendering. That was fine, then we went downstairs again where a couple of people showed us how wonderful all the extras were.
Now extras are important to a DVD. Nobody likes "vanilla," and no one did vanilla more annoyingly than Disney did back in the day [The original Roger Rabbit had a list of them where actually weren't on the disc]. Pixar knows this and they're justly proud of what they did on some of their earlier efforts. They gave us a brief tour of what's on there, and the whole presentation was mostly boring. Menus are like that. However, I want a plasma TV more than ever. God that was beautiful.
Then came lunch, and this was where the problems started. No. The food was terriffic, the buffet was to perfection and I enjoyed every morsel. The problem was stonewalling. I sat down and there he was. John Lassiter, sitting catty corner from me. He was very plesant, and I decided, since I was there, to find out what exactly was going on with the studio. Bang! He and his main flunkey are very good at stonewalling. They had just come out with a new short, called Lifted, and they had a few signs for it on the wall. I asked about it and they seemed very exited, although they wouldn't say anything specific. I asked about Ratatouille, which is the next project and the project after that, "W.A.L.-E". Stonewall. I persisted. "Do you see any posters for Meet the Robinsons do you?" he snarled at me. I was there to do journalism, right? But what was I supposed to do? I couldn't do what I wanted, after all it was on their dime and in their house.
This was a squandered opportunity on Pixar's part. If you're going to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to bring people THOUSANDS of miles, it would be really cool to dazzel them. Show them a tease here and there. Some character designs for Ratatouille, or Lifted, for example.
We've got something special for YOU! Not special like a tee shirt (which I'm wearing, by the way), something that you can tell your readers in confidence.
the afternoon sessions were rather boring. they showed us the specially made cartoon for the DVD, Mater and the Ghost Light, and that wasn't particularly good. The character of Mater in the feature was silly and colorful, but he was actually one of the more intellegent characters. Here he's just a moronic child. The punchline was cute but the build up wasn't.
But you can't say "This sucks" on their turf. The questions were for the most part polite and perfunctery. Lassiter made his official appearence and talked about how how he was inspired by a road trip he took with his family after Toy Story 2 was finished. Very sweet. Of course the original concept had nothing to do with the finished film except for the fact that all of the characters were automotive. I was still a bit ticked off.
Then we took the tour. We actually saw quite a bit of the preliminary art from Cars, and some from Finding Nemo. But we didn't see anyone working. That was all hidden. We did go outside and see the vollyball court.
We went back to the hotel and drank more free wine before having dinner on Disney's dime. It helped me sleep in the flight back.
Monday, October 30, 2006
San Francisco--pregame
It's ten of ten, eastern standard time, and ten of seven pacific time. I'm in an ex0pens8ven hotel which strangely doesn't have a television, waiting for the time we have to get together with group for the trip. I slept ten hours (including a couple pretending to sleep around two local time). I would have done this earlier, but I wasn't able to figure out specifically how to log on to the hotel's wai fi. (I sort of did, but it cut out.)
First I want to talk about United Air lines. I 've flown a couple of times this year, but not on them and they've had some bizarre and disturbing innovations. Like , charging for food and having free movies, and not the other way around as it traditoinal, and charging fifty bucks for extra seating and then, as in the case of the guy sitting next to me, not giving them it.
The big problem getting here was not the flight, or the fact that I was stuck in the middle for both legs of it (we had a stop in Denver), but getting to LaGuardia airport. The best shortcut is to take the R or W trains to Astoria blvd, and then get on the M60, something I've done lots of time, but this time the W was completely cancelled and the R was stuck underneith the East River. Only they didin't tell us this and the R I was on stopped at 57th street and we were told that that was the last stop. The only way to get to Queens was to head back to 34th street and get the F. Shit!!!
I was running late, so I figured I'd go to 42nd and take the shuttle to Grand Central and then take the bus to the airport, The Shuttle wasn't working for some reason and when I ran to GC, I discovered I had missed the bus by scant minutes, and the next one wouldn't have arrived until ten minutes before talkoff. So I had to blow $20 on a taxi...24, I forgot the fact that he charged me for the tolll under the river.
Getting from the airport to the hotel cost almost as much, but that was really easy as I had planned to do that from the getgo. The hotel is very nice, having a free wine-tasting (where I blew my alchohol quota for the month) and had a very good time discussing politics with a lobbyist. The polls look very good. The National Review website has the Democrats getting a 24 seat majority in the house and a tie in the senate. That should be cool, and we should probably do somewhat better. There only being eight days to go...more when we get to PIXAR.
First I want to talk about United Air lines. I 've flown a couple of times this year, but not on them and they've had some bizarre and disturbing innovations. Like , charging for food and having free movies, and not the other way around as it traditoinal, and charging fifty bucks for extra seating and then, as in the case of the guy sitting next to me, not giving them it.
The big problem getting here was not the flight, or the fact that I was stuck in the middle for both legs of it (we had a stop in Denver), but getting to LaGuardia airport. The best shortcut is to take the R or W trains to Astoria blvd, and then get on the M60, something I've done lots of time, but this time the W was completely cancelled and the R was stuck underneith the East River. Only they didin't tell us this and the R I was on stopped at 57th street and we were told that that was the last stop. The only way to get to Queens was to head back to 34th street and get the F. Shit!!!
I was running late, so I figured I'd go to 42nd and take the shuttle to Grand Central and then take the bus to the airport, The Shuttle wasn't working for some reason and when I ran to GC, I discovered I had missed the bus by scant minutes, and the next one wouldn't have arrived until ten minutes before talkoff. So I had to blow $20 on a taxi...24, I forgot the fact that he charged me for the tolll under the river.
Getting from the airport to the hotel cost almost as much, but that was really easy as I had planned to do that from the getgo. The hotel is very nice, having a free wine-tasting (where I blew my alchohol quota for the month) and had a very good time discussing politics with a lobbyist. The polls look very good. The National Review website has the Democrats getting a 24 seat majority in the house and a tie in the senate. That should be cool, and we should probably do somewhat better. There only being eight days to go...more when we get to PIXAR.
Friday, October 27, 2006
ten days out.
Some Senate polls.
RI
Chafee: 33%
Whitehouse: 43%
OH
DeWine: 43%
Brown: 54%
NJ
Menendez: 40%
Kean: 39%
FL
Nelson 64%
Harris (R) 29%
MT
Tester: 48%
Burns: 42%
TN
Ford: 47%
Corker: 45%
MD
Cardin: 52%
Steele: 40%
VA
Allen: 49%
Webb: 48%
MO
Talent: 50%
McCaskill: 48%
PA
Casey: 51%
Santorum: 39%
RI
Chafee: 33%
Whitehouse: 43%
OH
DeWine: 43%
Brown: 54%
NJ
Menendez: 40%
Kean: 39%
FL
Nelson 64%
Harris (R) 29%
MT
Tester: 48%
Burns: 42%
TN
Ford: 47%
Corker: 45%
MD
Cardin: 52%
Steele: 40%
VA
Allen: 49%
Webb: 48%
MO
Talent: 50%
McCaskill: 48%
PA
Casey: 51%
Santorum: 39%
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
I"m going to San Francisco over the weekend
This is going to be one hell of a daytrip. If I had to pay for it myself I wouldn't go, but they're going to pay for it, so what the hell? I'm going to blog the whole trip from Sunday morning to Tuesday morning.
This is gonna be cool.
This is gonna be cool.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
non-news from the Daily Mail
This is a British paper:
Fun fun fun. Still, I'm voting democrat.
It was the day that a host of BBC executives and star presenters admitted what critics have been telling them for years: the BBC is dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism.
A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues, especially concerning Muslims and the war on terror.
It reveals that executives would let the Bible be thrown into a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran, and that they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden if given the opportunity. Further, it discloses that the BBC's 'diversity tsar', wants Muslim women newsreaders to be allowed to wear veils when on air.
At the secret meeting in London last month, which was hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians.
One veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness.
Fun fun fun. Still, I'm voting democrat.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Something to think about after the election
Here’s a nifty piece of trivia: There was a 1974 Democratic National convention.
It took place in Kansas City in December of that year and didn’t nominate anyone for anything. What it did do was adopt a charter for the party, which codified the McGovern reforems of 1971, and helped get the party ready for the ’76 elections slightly less than two years hence There was another one in 1978, and during the ‘80s the party bigwigs decided that the practice wasn’t worth the effort.
Well, I think a third midterm convention early next year might indeed be worth the effort.
I was at the 2004 convention and while there were a number of planning and issue conferences when the “con” wasn’t officially in session, the thing was obviously only a show for television with balloons and motivational speeches from famous politicians and a few people drafting a “platform” which went from the printer to the garbage can faster than you can say “Spungebob Squarepants.”
We have a chance to take back Congress three weeks hence, but what then? Yeah, there’s lots of stuff we can agree on, but we need an articulate program which everyone can rally around by the time primary season starts in January of 2008.
What we need is a 2007 Democratic National Convention. The delegates should be selected in the pre-1972 way. Local and state committees choosing party activists who want to network and plan. This is because we’re not going to select a president, but write a platform that actually MEANS SOMETHING. Find the issues that everyone in the party can actually agree on and work for. “Bush is a prick” is fine as far as it goes, but that’s a negative. It won’t cut the mustard because he’s going to be gone in 2009 whatever happens. If the current polls are close to being accurate, then we’re going to have to have the appearance of trying to do something in the new year, and an outline legislative program for the summer and fall of ’07 would be just what is needed.
The best place to do that would be at a midterm convention sometime in the early spring and a commitment from the new congressional leadership to try to pass some, if not most of these proposals during the summer and fall. This is because by the spring of 2008 the presidential election will be in full swing and everybody’s attention will be on that.
Whatever you think of him Newt Gingrich managed to get his “contract on with America” through the House with efficiency and speed. We should be able to do something like that, if only to have ads saying “We tried to pass A, B C and D, but the evil Bush administration vetoed it.”
If we (God Forbid) LOSE the midterms, a convention would be even more important, and would be a good place to figure out how best to start from scratch for the rest of the century.
So how about it?
It took place in Kansas City in December of that year and didn’t nominate anyone for anything. What it did do was adopt a charter for the party, which codified the McGovern reforems of 1971, and helped get the party ready for the ’76 elections slightly less than two years hence There was another one in 1978, and during the ‘80s the party bigwigs decided that the practice wasn’t worth the effort.
Well, I think a third midterm convention early next year might indeed be worth the effort.
I was at the 2004 convention and while there were a number of planning and issue conferences when the “con” wasn’t officially in session, the thing was obviously only a show for television with balloons and motivational speeches from famous politicians and a few people drafting a “platform” which went from the printer to the garbage can faster than you can say “Spungebob Squarepants.”
We have a chance to take back Congress three weeks hence, but what then? Yeah, there’s lots of stuff we can agree on, but we need an articulate program which everyone can rally around by the time primary season starts in January of 2008.
What we need is a 2007 Democratic National Convention. The delegates should be selected in the pre-1972 way. Local and state committees choosing party activists who want to network and plan. This is because we’re not going to select a president, but write a platform that actually MEANS SOMETHING. Find the issues that everyone in the party can actually agree on and work for. “Bush is a prick” is fine as far as it goes, but that’s a negative. It won’t cut the mustard because he’s going to be gone in 2009 whatever happens. If the current polls are close to being accurate, then we’re going to have to have the appearance of trying to do something in the new year, and an outline legislative program for the summer and fall of ’07 would be just what is needed.
The best place to do that would be at a midterm convention sometime in the early spring and a commitment from the new congressional leadership to try to pass some, if not most of these proposals during the summer and fall. This is because by the spring of 2008 the presidential election will be in full swing and everybody’s attention will be on that.
Whatever you think of him Newt Gingrich managed to get his “contract on with America” through the House with efficiency and speed. We should be able to do something like that, if only to have ads saying “We tried to pass A, B C and D, but the evil Bush administration vetoed it.”
If we (God Forbid) LOSE the midterms, a convention would be even more important, and would be a good place to figure out how best to start from scratch for the rest of the century.
So how about it?
Sunday, October 08, 2006
The Revolution has been postponed
The grand revolutionary demonstration which was supposed to "drive out the Bush regime" had only about 500 people in Washington, DC and about five thousand nationwide. Brilliant!
Friday, October 06, 2006
NYFF day three: Reds
This is one of the big ones, and the last major film to ever have a built in intermission:
Reds
Written and Directed
By Warren Beatty
“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it,” George Santayana famously said, and this maxim is no more apparent than in this golden oldie from 1981.
90 years ago, there was a presidential election going on, and there was a war. Snooty art exhibits and effete intellectuals looking down their noses at the unwashed masses and claiming to act in their name, too.
People wore strange clothing and the music was early ragtime instead of rock and hip hop, but other than that, the people are all very familiar. What’s strange about this film is that were it not for the strange music and costume, most of the dialogue could have come from the 2000s.
John Reed (Warren Beatty) was a journalist and intellectual who was slightly famous for his book on the Mexican revolution. Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton) was an early feminist who was outgrowing her husband and professionally latched on to Reed, following her to Greenwich Villiage and hanging out with the likes of playwright Eugene O’Neill (Jack Nicholson) and über-anarchist Emma Goldman(Maureen Stapleton)
The chattering classes then are the chattering classes now. The technology was more primitive but the people are the same. Disillusioned with the war and the status quo, they became radicalized and headed to Russia to watch the Revolution there. They had a real blast.
John Reed as Sean Penn. The silly infighting between far left factions still goes on, and the president still thinks he’s God.
To understand today, you have to understand the past.
The film is long, very long. In fact, it was the last major release to actually have a built-in intermission. The action in the film has the structure of a series of flashbacks in between genuine interviews with the last survivors of that time. The “witnesses” are really interesting and their reminisces, pertinent.
The acting is terrific and we’ve got a bunch of old masters back when they were still rather young doing what they do best.
The film’s coming out on DVD after a very limited theatrical re-release. Catch it if you’ve got the time and wait a couple of weeks and rent it if you don’t.
Reds
Written and Directed
By Warren Beatty
“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it,” George Santayana famously said, and this maxim is no more apparent than in this golden oldie from 1981.
90 years ago, there was a presidential election going on, and there was a war. Snooty art exhibits and effete intellectuals looking down their noses at the unwashed masses and claiming to act in their name, too.
People wore strange clothing and the music was early ragtime instead of rock and hip hop, but other than that, the people are all very familiar. What’s strange about this film is that were it not for the strange music and costume, most of the dialogue could have come from the 2000s.
John Reed (Warren Beatty) was a journalist and intellectual who was slightly famous for his book on the Mexican revolution. Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton) was an early feminist who was outgrowing her husband and professionally latched on to Reed, following her to Greenwich Villiage and hanging out with the likes of playwright Eugene O’Neill (Jack Nicholson) and über-anarchist Emma Goldman(Maureen Stapleton)
The chattering classes then are the chattering classes now. The technology was more primitive but the people are the same. Disillusioned with the war and the status quo, they became radicalized and headed to Russia to watch the Revolution there. They had a real blast.
John Reed as Sean Penn. The silly infighting between far left factions still goes on, and the president still thinks he’s God.
To understand today, you have to understand the past.
The film is long, very long. In fact, it was the last major release to actually have a built-in intermission. The action in the film has the structure of a series of flashbacks in between genuine interviews with the last survivors of that time. The “witnesses” are really interesting and their reminisces, pertinent.
The acting is terrific and we’ve got a bunch of old masters back when they were still rather young doing what they do best.
The film’s coming out on DVD after a very limited theatrical re-release. Catch it if you’ve got the time and wait a couple of weeks and rent it if you don’t.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
NYFF day two: Exotic stuff
Sorry it's taken so long, but there's been the high holy days and some other stuff I had to do. I should have even more stuff up tomarrow:
THE JOURNALS OF KNUD RASMUSSEN
Written and Directed
by Zacharias Kunuk
and Norman Cohn
This film has no real plot. The year is 19112, and it’s somewhere in the far, far north. The family of the aging shaman Avva (Pakak Innukshuk) and his rebellious daughter Apak (Leah Angutimarik) have been hired to take Knud Rasmussen (Jens Jorn Spottag) and his crew of anthropologists (Jakob Cedergren, Kim Bodnia and Pierre Lebeau) to the island of Iglulik, somewhere near the pole.
The Inuit family sings for the anthropologists, then Avva tells the story of his life, while in the background, Apak makes love with the ghost of her dead husband and insults his successor and her old boyfriend Nuqallaq(Natar Ungalaaq).
.
For most of the film, scratch that, for ALL of the film, nothing happens. There’s a point near the end of the film where the band sort of converts to Christianity in order to get some lunch, and the ending is completely out of place and badly done. This film is mostly an anthropological reconstruction of Inuit life a century ago and the unfortunate effects of those naughty missionaries. There’s too much exposition and not enough plot. We’re not even sure which white actor is playing the title role, here. What good is that. We’re promised the Journals of Knud Rasmussen, and we don’t even get to find out who the guy is!
The acting is okay, as far as semi-professional productions go. Ms. Angutimarik is very cute, and as the main character, pretty much dominates the movie. Unless you’re interested in Eskimos, give this film a pass.
Inland Empire
Written and Directed
By David Lynch
So David Lynch has done it again. What exactly he has done is hard to say, but he most definitely done it again. The most interesting part is the rabbits, but that’s only because he allegedly had the footage gathering dust for decades and wanted use it. But why would he do that?
The rabbits (voiced by Naomi Watts, Laura Harring and Scott Coffey), are on stage in a funny animal sitcom, which is being watched by Julia Ormond [I think], while she’s channel surfing and sobbing over something which may have happened before or will happen later. No one knows, for sure.
As part of a show on a possibly different channel, a mysterious stranger(Grace Zabriskie) who visits a glamorous movie star named Nikki(Laura Dern) in her Hollywood mansion [where the rabbits reside in a different dimension] and starts prophesying about her next movie role.
This prophesy is true, as the great director Kingsley(Jeremy Irons) has indeed hired Nikki and Devon(Justin Theroux) to play the lead roles of Sue and Billy, as well as lending Kingsley’s assistant Freddie(Harry Dean Stanton) money from time to time. For twenty minutes, we have a genuinely coherent movie, including a subplot about our two leads cheating on Nikki’s husband(Peter J. Lucas), then the whole thing falls apart into a million pieces, where the rabbits return and Nikki is sent to the planet of the bimbos and is forced to dance the Locomotion while her husband joins the circus.
But what’s happening in 1930s Poland? you may ask.
Were it not for the great performances, this would be the worst movie of the year. The last third makes no sense whatsoever, we think one thing and are then forced to realize that the entire thing is one big come-on, a giant bait-and-switch in which we get absolutely nothing, and that makes it all the more infuriating.
THE JOURNALS OF KNUD RASMUSSEN
Written and Directed
by Zacharias Kunuk
and Norman Cohn
This film has no real plot. The year is 19112, and it’s somewhere in the far, far north. The family of the aging shaman Avva (Pakak Innukshuk) and his rebellious daughter Apak (Leah Angutimarik) have been hired to take Knud Rasmussen (Jens Jorn Spottag) and his crew of anthropologists (Jakob Cedergren, Kim Bodnia and Pierre Lebeau) to the island of Iglulik, somewhere near the pole.
The Inuit family sings for the anthropologists, then Avva tells the story of his life, while in the background, Apak makes love with the ghost of her dead husband and insults his successor and her old boyfriend Nuqallaq(Natar Ungalaaq).
.
For most of the film, scratch that, for ALL of the film, nothing happens. There’s a point near the end of the film where the band sort of converts to Christianity in order to get some lunch, and the ending is completely out of place and badly done. This film is mostly an anthropological reconstruction of Inuit life a century ago and the unfortunate effects of those naughty missionaries. There’s too much exposition and not enough plot. We’re not even sure which white actor is playing the title role, here. What good is that. We’re promised the Journals of Knud Rasmussen, and we don’t even get to find out who the guy is!
The acting is okay, as far as semi-professional productions go. Ms. Angutimarik is very cute, and as the main character, pretty much dominates the movie. Unless you’re interested in Eskimos, give this film a pass.
Inland Empire
Written and Directed
By David Lynch
So David Lynch has done it again. What exactly he has done is hard to say, but he most definitely done it again. The most interesting part is the rabbits, but that’s only because he allegedly had the footage gathering dust for decades and wanted use it. But why would he do that?
The rabbits (voiced by Naomi Watts, Laura Harring and Scott Coffey), are on stage in a funny animal sitcom, which is being watched by Julia Ormond [I think], while she’s channel surfing and sobbing over something which may have happened before or will happen later. No one knows, for sure.
As part of a show on a possibly different channel, a mysterious stranger(Grace Zabriskie) who visits a glamorous movie star named Nikki(Laura Dern) in her Hollywood mansion [where the rabbits reside in a different dimension] and starts prophesying about her next movie role.
This prophesy is true, as the great director Kingsley(Jeremy Irons) has indeed hired Nikki and Devon(Justin Theroux) to play the lead roles of Sue and Billy, as well as lending Kingsley’s assistant Freddie(Harry Dean Stanton) money from time to time. For twenty minutes, we have a genuinely coherent movie, including a subplot about our two leads cheating on Nikki’s husband(Peter J. Lucas), then the whole thing falls apart into a million pieces, where the rabbits return and Nikki is sent to the planet of the bimbos and is forced to dance the Locomotion while her husband joins the circus.
But what’s happening in 1930s Poland? you may ask.
Were it not for the great performances, this would be the worst movie of the year. The last third makes no sense whatsoever, we think one thing and are then forced to realize that the entire thing is one big come-on, a giant bait-and-switch in which we get absolutely nothing, and that makes it all the more infuriating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)