With the holidays firmly behind us, we can all focus on the new year with our respective obligatory resolutions to do a variety of things to improve our lives (e.g. eat right, drink water, exercise more, lose weight, help someone, attend church, etc.), most of which will be either discarded or forgotten by the end of this month, if not sooner. But one endeavor we cannot escape will be the ever increasing drumbeat to promote a select group of movies that are up for an Oscar this year. You know some of the contenders - The Artist, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, The Descendents, Hugo, The Help, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, Margin Call, Shame, Tree of Life, Bridesmaids, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and War Horse, just to name a few. However, there is one movie that is strangely absent from any best movie list for reasons that totally escape me - Another Happy Day, which I would like to plug. It certainly beats dwelling on the crazy scenes in Iowa and New Hampshire of the past few weeks.
To begin with, it has an outstanding cast which includes Ellen Barkin (one of its producers), Ellen Burstyn, Demi Moore, Thomas Haden Church, Kate Bosworth, George Kennedy and Ezra Miller. Yes, it centers around a totally dysfunctional family that makes one of my all-time favorite movies Parenthood, the prototype for the most popular series on TV by the same name, seem like Bambi, but it is beautifully written by Sam Levinson, as recognized by the Sundance Film Festival, and superbly acted. In reality it could have been more accurately titled Another Unhappy Day, but that would probably have driven even more viewers away than have seen it to date. In all honesty, my wife and I saw it only out of default because there was no other movie playing at the time which we were interested in seeing, and we were two of only three people in the theater at the time it showed.
While some critics have tried to frame it as a failed comparison to Rachel Getting Married just because a family gathering for a wedding is the setting, I never even gave that link a thought while watching this movie. From the opening scene to the final fade away, I was captivated by this family's history and dynamic. It all begins with Lynn's (Barkin) road trip to her parents Joe (Kennedy) and Doris' (Burstyn) home with two of her sons, Elliott (Miller) and Ben (played by Daniel Yelsky) to attend the wedding of her oldest son, Dylan (played by Michael Nardelli). Along the way young Ben can't help but record the event with a camcorder while his older brother Elliot, just out of drug rehab, continues to prod his mother with cutting and hurtful remarks. As expected, that ribbing culminates in an emotional reaction that exposes the torment Lynn feels about her life which stays with her pretty much throughout the movie. Naturally, her ex-husband Paul (Church) and his new wife Patty (Moore) will be there to add to her angst, but unknown is whether Lynn and Paul's daughter Alice (Bosworth) will even show up, as she has her own issues from the past with her abusive father. Add to the mix Lynn's absent-minded and ailing father and a mother who has also reached her breaking point in dealing with all of this family trauma, and you know this is not going to be a Father Knows Best experience for her. When Alice does finally appear, tension begins to rise, and you really begin to feel Lynn's pain. It is an adult movie with raw, powerful and poignant emotion true to probably more real life situations than most of us care to admit, which alone sets it way above most of the movies coming out of Hollywood today. For that reason, coupled with a wonderful screenplay, great cinematography and superb acting, it gets my nod for one of the best movies of 2011. But for the lousy distribution, Another Happy Day would have been more widely available in mainstream theaters, thus allowing a greater audience the opportunity to see it, in which case this movie might have earned the higher degree of respect from the critics it deserves. Thumbs way up for me!
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Was It Worth It?
As the military withdrawal from Iraq proceeds on schedule with the official end of the war declared in a ceremony today in Bagdad, no doubt we all can savor a collective sigh of relief that the major part of that conflict is now over. But, obviously, it remains to be seen if the government of Iraq will be able to provide a safe and flourishing environment for all of its people and thwart any outside intervention and interference from Iran or other neighbors in the region. Time will tell. However, the main question that is probably on the minds of most Americans is "Was it worth it"?
As we ponder that question, perhaps just a few of the known facts to date about the nine year war in Iraq might be helpful in framing an answer, so please consider the following and decide for yourself.
1. American soldiers killed - 4,485.
2. American soldiers seriously injured 32,219.
3. Tax dollars spent through 2011 - $1 trillion.
4. Funds lost or unaccounted for funds - $9 billion.
5. Funds lost and reported stolen - $6.6 billion.
6. Lost or unaccounted for guns - 190,000.
7. Missing material provided to Iraqi security forces - $1 billion.
8. Funds mismanaged and wasted funds - $10 billion through just 2006.
9. Portion of $20 billion paid to KBR deemed "questionable" by Pentagon - $3.2 billion.
10. Cost of deploying one American soldier - $390,000.
11. Iraqi police and soldiers killed - 10,125.
12. Iraqi civilians killed - somewhere between 100,000 and 600,000.
13. Iraqis displaced inside Iraq - 2,225,000.
14. Percent of Iraqi professionals who have left Iraq - 40%.
15. Average daily hours Iraqi homes have electricity - 1 to 2.
16. Iraqis without access to adequate water - 70%.
So, it is not as if the population of Iraq has not suffered great loss, too. What is not known is the cost to America's prestige, credibility and moral leadership in that part of the world at the very time we need them the most in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. And then there is still Afghanistan to worry about. Yes, a malevolent dictator is gone, but many others still remain around the world. And even though an elementary form of democracy may exist, strong sectarian and tribal passions still boil underneath that seemingly calm surface which could erupt with a vengeance at the slightest of provocations. Consequently, it would be very interesting to know if the majority of Iraqis feel that they are better off today than they were nine years ago.
In any event, with Christmas just around the corner I think we all can at least share the joy of the thousands of American families who for the first time in almost a decade will be able to enjoy this holiday season together with the return of their military members from Iraq. It is in that spirit that I extend my very best wishes to all for a Merry, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Also, please note that future blogs will be suspended until after the first of the year.
As we ponder that question, perhaps just a few of the known facts to date about the nine year war in Iraq might be helpful in framing an answer, so please consider the following and decide for yourself.
1. American soldiers killed - 4,485.
2. American soldiers seriously injured 32,219.
3. Tax dollars spent through 2011 - $1 trillion.
4. Funds lost or unaccounted for funds - $9 billion.
5. Funds lost and reported stolen - $6.6 billion.
6. Lost or unaccounted for guns - 190,000.
7. Missing material provided to Iraqi security forces - $1 billion.
8. Funds mismanaged and wasted funds - $10 billion through just 2006.
9. Portion of $20 billion paid to KBR deemed "questionable" by Pentagon - $3.2 billion.
10. Cost of deploying one American soldier - $390,000.
11. Iraqi police and soldiers killed - 10,125.
12. Iraqi civilians killed - somewhere between 100,000 and 600,000.
13. Iraqis displaced inside Iraq - 2,225,000.
14. Percent of Iraqi professionals who have left Iraq - 40%.
15. Average daily hours Iraqi homes have electricity - 1 to 2.
16. Iraqis without access to adequate water - 70%.
So, it is not as if the population of Iraq has not suffered great loss, too. What is not known is the cost to America's prestige, credibility and moral leadership in that part of the world at the very time we need them the most in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. And then there is still Afghanistan to worry about. Yes, a malevolent dictator is gone, but many others still remain around the world. And even though an elementary form of democracy may exist, strong sectarian and tribal passions still boil underneath that seemingly calm surface which could erupt with a vengeance at the slightest of provocations. Consequently, it would be very interesting to know if the majority of Iraqis feel that they are better off today than they were nine years ago.
In any event, with Christmas just around the corner I think we all can at least share the joy of the thousands of American families who for the first time in almost a decade will be able to enjoy this holiday season together with the return of their military members from Iraq. It is in that spirit that I extend my very best wishes to all for a Merry, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Also, please note that future blogs will be suspended until after the first of the year.
Monday, December 5, 2011
The Other One Percent
With all of the recent publicity about the 1% of wealthy Americans who own 40% of the nation's total wealth but who pay a proportionately lesser personal income tax than the remaining 99%, there is another 1% of our population on whom we need to focus. They are the 1% who constitute our all voluntary military who are now fighting two concurrent wars in the Middle East, as well as defending our other interests all around the globe. In the process they are constantly separated from their families for extraordinarily long periods of time which Colin Powell contends even eclipses that experienced by our military during WWII. Furthermore, they are experiencing more life altering injuries to their brains and extremities due to the preponderance of IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices), land mines, armor-piercing rockets and suicide bombers. And, finally, they often times return home to find their domestic and financial situations in a total state of turmoil, compounded by such difficulty in finding a job that Vice-President Biden felt it necessary to make a public appeal just last week for employers to give special consideration in hiring our veterans.
By contrast, service in the U.S. military has historically been an involuntary part of our national fabric dating back to 1778 when the Continental Congress first recommended states draft men from their militias to fight in the Revolutionary War. However, that early draft was not very successful so, subsequently, an attempt was again made to institute conscription during the War of 1812, but it, too, failed. It was not until the Civil War that there was any success with mandatory drafts when both the Confederate and Union forces employed them in 1862. But it was President Woodrow Wilson's Selective Service Act of 1917 that corrected most of the flaws of previous legislation by mandating military service for all male citizens for WWI. After that draft effort ended, another attempt was made by the Army in 1926 to develop an even more workable conscription program. That initiative became the basis for the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 which created the first peacetime draft in the United States when signed by President Franklin Roosevelt on September 16, 1940. In fact it became the cornerstone of manpower recruitment following the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 which continued throughout WWII, and with some later modifications in 1948, 1951 and 1955 formed the basis for the current Selective Service System. Oddly, the very existence of a draft prompted an estimated 11 million men to volunteer for military service either through active or reserve enlistments from January 1954 to April 1975.
However, for most male Americans born after 1973 service in the military became a non issue, as that was the year the mandatory draft ended and the United States went to our existing all voluntary military. That brings us back to that nagging "Other One Percent%" and whether it may be time to reinstate involuntary military service in America. Will that ever happen? Probably not, but there might be a rationale for requiring some form of mandatory service to this country whether in a military capacity or otherwise. First, it would definitely spread the sacrifices of war among the remaining 99%. That alone might just cause those in power who make such decisions, and may have never served one day in the military themselves, to think twice about sending our fathers, mothers, sons and daughters into harm's way. Just last week Mark Weisbrot of McClatchy-Tribune News Service opined in our local newspaper that a majority of Americans now want our troops out of Afghanistan and two thirds think we should have never invaded Iraq in the first place. I wonder if it would have taken ten years to come to these same conclusions if a broader cross section of America's young men and women had been over there fighting those battles since 2001. Another plus would be to instill in our youth a deeper sense of responsibility about serving their country and not just take their secure and safe worlds for granted. There are many other viewpoints on this issue, but please go to http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Mandatory_military_service and decide for yourself.
In just two days we will once again honor that Day of Infamy on December 7, 1941, which, as a direct result of the draft, was met with a huge mobilization of men and material to fight and win WWII. If nothing else, that terrible four year conflict should have at least taught us the value of not having just 1% of our population fight the battle for the remaining 99%.
By contrast, service in the U.S. military has historically been an involuntary part of our national fabric dating back to 1778 when the Continental Congress first recommended states draft men from their militias to fight in the Revolutionary War. However, that early draft was not very successful so, subsequently, an attempt was again made to institute conscription during the War of 1812, but it, too, failed. It was not until the Civil War that there was any success with mandatory drafts when both the Confederate and Union forces employed them in 1862. But it was President Woodrow Wilson's Selective Service Act of 1917 that corrected most of the flaws of previous legislation by mandating military service for all male citizens for WWI. After that draft effort ended, another attempt was made by the Army in 1926 to develop an even more workable conscription program. That initiative became the basis for the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 which created the first peacetime draft in the United States when signed by President Franklin Roosevelt on September 16, 1940. In fact it became the cornerstone of manpower recruitment following the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 which continued throughout WWII, and with some later modifications in 1948, 1951 and 1955 formed the basis for the current Selective Service System. Oddly, the very existence of a draft prompted an estimated 11 million men to volunteer for military service either through active or reserve enlistments from January 1954 to April 1975.
However, for most male Americans born after 1973 service in the military became a non issue, as that was the year the mandatory draft ended and the United States went to our existing all voluntary military. That brings us back to that nagging "Other One Percent%" and whether it may be time to reinstate involuntary military service in America. Will that ever happen? Probably not, but there might be a rationale for requiring some form of mandatory service to this country whether in a military capacity or otherwise. First, it would definitely spread the sacrifices of war among the remaining 99%. That alone might just cause those in power who make such decisions, and may have never served one day in the military themselves, to think twice about sending our fathers, mothers, sons and daughters into harm's way. Just last week Mark Weisbrot of McClatchy-Tribune News Service opined in our local newspaper that a majority of Americans now want our troops out of Afghanistan and two thirds think we should have never invaded Iraq in the first place. I wonder if it would have taken ten years to come to these same conclusions if a broader cross section of America's young men and women had been over there fighting those battles since 2001. Another plus would be to instill in our youth a deeper sense of responsibility about serving their country and not just take their secure and safe worlds for granted. There are many other viewpoints on this issue, but please go to http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Mandatory_military_service and decide for yourself.
In just two days we will once again honor that Day of Infamy on December 7, 1941, which, as a direct result of the draft, was met with a huge mobilization of men and material to fight and win WWII. If nothing else, that terrible four year conflict should have at least taught us the value of not having just 1% of our population fight the battle for the remaining 99%.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Where Have All the Centrists Gone?
Was anyone really surprised with the recent failure of the "Super Committee" to find consensus on a debt reduction/increased income/tax reform package and move this country forward given the utter gridlock that has taken over and paralyzed the legislative process for months? With built-in automatic budget cuts of $1.2 trillion scheduled to kick in January 2013, no doubt we will see further jockeying to either postpone, reshuffle or eliminate them entirely. It makes one wonder what has happened to the elected representative model of legislative compromise that has been the bedrock of our democratic system for almost a quarter century. Ironically, even in 1776 our founding fathers sought common ground on issues including the very composition of Congress that has evolved into the stagnated body we endure today, which Ben Stein compared on CBS's Sunday Morning show this morning to a group of zombies.
According to a study of voting practices in the Senate over the past thirty years conducted by CBS News and the National Journal, moderates have been disappearing at drastic rates ever since 1982, as reflected by the table below which categorizes liberals as BLUE, moderates as YELLOW and conservatives as RED.
YEAR BLUE YELLOW RED
1982 10 60 30
1994 29 36 35
2002 45 9 46
2010 45 0 55
Not only does this study confirm the total absence of any centrists in the Senate today, it also reveals a marked trend toward conservatism during this period which has been obvious to anyone who follows the news. But even during Ronald Reagan's presidency there was at least a spirit of cooperation and compromise because of the existence of conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans who actually enjoyed socializing on a personal level with their counterparts. Although they may have fought heated battles in the chamber over policy issues, when push came to shove they recognized the absolute imperative of achieving legislative progress to avoid the very stalemates that have been the norm for the past several months. However, in today's world such interaction with one another seems to be taboo, and personal assaults seem to be the order of the day. But the over-riding question is why does this poisoned atmosphere exist? Matt Cooper, Editor of the National Journal believes it may be a result of:
1. Redistricting along more partisan divides.
2. Special interest groups which "pound" Senators to vote a particular party line even if they may represent a more moderate district.
3. Influence of highly partisan media which "stovepipe" their message to the exclusion of other views.
Let me add a fourth, MONEY, either through direct campaign contributions, unlimited funding of tax exempt organizations with set political agendas or personal gifts. So, is it any wonder that the Super Committee was destined for failure from the very beginning?
What is interesting about this poisonous divide is the fact that the fastest growing group of voters today is independents, who tend to be more moderate and centrist in their political views. Also, I find it interesting that you now hear rumblings about the formation of a Third Party and even a newer effort known as Americans Elect whose purpose, as reported by Krissah Thompson in The Washington Post, is to hold a political convention via the Internet to place a third presidential candidate on every state ballot in 2012. Could this approach possibly tap into that huge reservoir of centrist voters and break the current gridlock in Washington? I have no idea, but you can learn more about their effort at http://americanselect.org. In addition a host of really drastic measures may be necessary to mend the current sad state of affairs and restore a sense of true public service for the common good among our elected officials, including:
1. Forbid lobbying on Capitol Hill altogether. Elected representatives with the help of their paid staffs should be able to figure out for themselves what legislation is best for America. *
2. Outlaw paid staff members from ever becoming lobbyists. *
3. Outlaw gifts of any kind to elected officials. Simply put, the ethics law can be written in two words: "ACCEPT NOTHING"!
4. Encourage legislators to quit signing silly pledges.
5. Establish term limits for all members of Congress.
6. Shorten campaign periods.
7. Fund campaigns with tax dollars.
8. Eliminate the Electoral College.
9. Somehow temper the partisan media.
10. Enforce the laws against tax exempt organizations funding political activities, or write new ones.
* Even Jack Abramoff, the former king of lobbying, agrees something has to be done in these areas (re: his fascinating November 6th interview on CBS's "60 Minutes" at http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57319075/jack-abramoff-the-lobbyists-playbook/).
In short, until major reforms, whether those listed above or others, are established to create a more level playing field for all who desire to run for office the opportunity to do so, nothing will probably ever change to break the current gridlock and allow for the return of the centrists to help balance the political extremes that exist today.
According to a study of voting practices in the Senate over the past thirty years conducted by CBS News and the National Journal, moderates have been disappearing at drastic rates ever since 1982, as reflected by the table below which categorizes liberals as BLUE, moderates as YELLOW and conservatives as RED.
YEAR BLUE YELLOW RED
1982 10 60 30
1994 29 36 35
2002 45 9 46
2010 45 0 55
Not only does this study confirm the total absence of any centrists in the Senate today, it also reveals a marked trend toward conservatism during this period which has been obvious to anyone who follows the news. But even during Ronald Reagan's presidency there was at least a spirit of cooperation and compromise because of the existence of conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans who actually enjoyed socializing on a personal level with their counterparts. Although they may have fought heated battles in the chamber over policy issues, when push came to shove they recognized the absolute imperative of achieving legislative progress to avoid the very stalemates that have been the norm for the past several months. However, in today's world such interaction with one another seems to be taboo, and personal assaults seem to be the order of the day. But the over-riding question is why does this poisoned atmosphere exist? Matt Cooper, Editor of the National Journal believes it may be a result of:
1. Redistricting along more partisan divides.
2. Special interest groups which "pound" Senators to vote a particular party line even if they may represent a more moderate district.
3. Influence of highly partisan media which "stovepipe" their message to the exclusion of other views.
Let me add a fourth, MONEY, either through direct campaign contributions, unlimited funding of tax exempt organizations with set political agendas or personal gifts. So, is it any wonder that the Super Committee was destined for failure from the very beginning?
What is interesting about this poisonous divide is the fact that the fastest growing group of voters today is independents, who tend to be more moderate and centrist in their political views. Also, I find it interesting that you now hear rumblings about the formation of a Third Party and even a newer effort known as Americans Elect whose purpose, as reported by Krissah Thompson in The Washington Post, is to hold a political convention via the Internet to place a third presidential candidate on every state ballot in 2012. Could this approach possibly tap into that huge reservoir of centrist voters and break the current gridlock in Washington? I have no idea, but you can learn more about their effort at http://americanselect.org. In addition a host of really drastic measures may be necessary to mend the current sad state of affairs and restore a sense of true public service for the common good among our elected officials, including:
1. Forbid lobbying on Capitol Hill altogether. Elected representatives with the help of their paid staffs should be able to figure out for themselves what legislation is best for America. *
2. Outlaw paid staff members from ever becoming lobbyists. *
3. Outlaw gifts of any kind to elected officials. Simply put, the ethics law can be written in two words: "ACCEPT NOTHING"!
4. Encourage legislators to quit signing silly pledges.
5. Establish term limits for all members of Congress.
6. Shorten campaign periods.
7. Fund campaigns with tax dollars.
8. Eliminate the Electoral College.
9. Somehow temper the partisan media.
10. Enforce the laws against tax exempt organizations funding political activities, or write new ones.
* Even Jack Abramoff, the former king of lobbying, agrees something has to be done in these areas (re: his fascinating November 6th interview on CBS's "60 Minutes" at http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57319075/jack-abramoff-the-lobbyists-playbook/).
In short, until major reforms, whether those listed above or others, are established to create a more level playing field for all who desire to run for office the opportunity to do so, nothing will probably ever change to break the current gridlock and allow for the return of the centrists to help balance the political extremes that exist today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
