Dithering:
A highly nervous, confused, or agitated state.
According to former Vice President Dick Cheney, on the subject of Afghanistan, President Obama "...must stop dithering while America's armed forces are in danger." Like most comments by Dick, this one has left me a bit confused. When someone makes a statement like this, they had better be an expert on international affairs. Now, you may be thinking, this guy has held some pretty major posts in his history of public "service," and you'd be right.
Along with being Vice President from 2000-2008, Dick was Assistant to the President under Gerald Ford (insert your Dunder Mifflin/Dwight joke here). He represented Wyoming in the House Of Representatives from 1978-89, advancing to the position of House Minority Whip. Then, George H.W. Bush appointed him to Secretary of Defense in 1989. A position he held until 1993. So, Dick certainly has a lot of experience. But when college basketball coach John Calipari took over the downtrodden University of Memphis team in 2000, he was once told by a reporter that he was inheriting a lot of "experience" because of the large number of returning juniors and seniors . He replied, "yes, but it's all bad."
How bad is it you might ask? Well, consider some of these sage decisions by Dick. In 1979, Dick voted against a bill that would have made Martin Luther King Jr's birthday a national holiday. He voted against the creation of the Department of Education. He voted against funding Head Start. He voted against instituting economic sanctions against the Apartheid loving South African government. Hell, he even voted against a non-binding resolution that demanded the release of Nelson Mandela.
But wait, there's more. As Secretary of Defense, he downsized the military by 19%. He advised President George H. W. Bush against supporting Russian Premier Mikhail Gorbachev. Dick later made a deal with the Saudi's to put US military bases on their native soil. A decision that has stoked anti-US sentiment by Islamist extremists for years. In fact, Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that those bases are on Muslim holy ground and their presence "inspired" the 9/11 attacks.
Of course, the really good stuff comes after the election of the Bush-Cheney ticket in 2000. As the shrub's Vice President, Dick stated that the invasion of Iraq (post 9/11) was necessary because of the ties between Iraqi leader Sadaam Hussein and al-Quaeda, as well as Iraq's stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Dick insisted this was true despite the Pentagon's claims to the contrary. Even if you throw out the fact that most of the "evidence" came from a CIA informant who was given the code name "curve ball" due to his unreliability, it makes absolutely no sense that Bin Laden and Hussein would be in cahoots. First and foremost, Iraq, for better or worse, was a secular government under Sadaam which chafed Bin Laden to no end. I'm sure you've heard about this Bin Laden being a radical Muslim extremist, and well, it be so. And if there's one thing a radical Muslim extremist hates (even more than us Americans), it's a secular middle-eastern government. By the way, what ever happened to those weapons of mass destruction?
Ok, so fine, he bullshitted us into a pre-emptive war against a country that didn't attack us and scarcely had the means to do so even if they wanted to. But, how about that war planning? Here are a few of Dick's finer observations about the conflict in Iraq:
"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." --March 16, 2003
"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." --March 16, 2003
"In Iraq, a ruthless dictator cultivated weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. He gave support to terrorists, had an established relationship with al-Qaeda, and his regime is no more." –Nov. 7, 2003
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." -- on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005
It's been nearly 4 1/2 years later and we are only now looking at exit strategies. And here's the fascinating thing--- during the first Gulf War, Dick stated that occupying Iraq would be a "bad idea" that would lead to a "quagmire." Once again, what good is experience if it brings you no benefit?
With Afghanistan, like everywhere else, Dick is playing fast and loose with the facts. Dick seems to think that Obama should follow the advice of his Commander of Afghanistan Forces, General McChrystal, and give him the 40,000 troops that he is requesting. While reasonable minds can debate the wisdom of that advice, it's worth mentioning that during the last 8 months of the Bush presidency, a similar request by then Commander of Afghanistan Forces, General McKiernan languished on the President's desk without response. In fact, it was newly elected President Obama who added 21,000 soldiers in Afghanistan earlier this year.
So, Dick, a man who made an art out of dodging the draft during the Vietnam war by taking 5(!) deferments is criticizing the Obama administration for "dithering" over Afghanistan and being "too afraid" to make a decision. This from a man who has been wrong so often in his conclusions about middle-eastern nations that you would think he were a long lost spelunker. If only there had been some "dithering" prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Now, a reasonable person might think that someone this plainly and consistently discredited would find that special cave, disappear into it and not come out of it until another Bush (Jeb) runs for the Presidency (oh, the horror). You might think that, but then, you don't know Dick.
Sumo-Pop
October 30, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Heartworm
Because I love lists, I often make mental notes of the best this and thats in film, music, sports, etc. This week I was thinking of the best albums I have ever heard. Of course, all the usual suspects turned up pretty quickly. U2, Prince, David Bowie, Radiohead, blah, blah, blah. But what interested me more were the albums I thought the public missed.
I think everyone who takes popular music seriously has at least one album that they think "that should've been huge!" And while the thought that you're the only one who knows may give you a feeling of greater intimacy with the artist, it's an emotion with diminishing returns. Because in the end, don't we want to look in the eyes of some kindred spirit who "knows" too? Someone who reaffirms what you have been holding tight to for so long?
Which brings me to the 1995 release Heartworm by the undeservedly obscure Irish band Whipping Boy. At the time of the album's release, one would have thought the stars were aligned for a band like Whipping Boy. The record buying public was in a full-on love affair with "alternative" rock. These were the heady days before Creed and Candlebox came along and dried it all up. The pre-release buzz on the band was quite good. Four star reviews were in abundance. Still, they never broke through. And that's a damn shame.
Clearly inspired by the gloom of Joy Division and the Velvet Underground, but as sonically muscular and melodic as early Radiohead and Oasis, Heartworm is one of the ten greatest albums I have ever heard.
Led by thick-voiced crooner, Fearghal McKee, Whipping Boy's Heartworm is an album about failure, regret, and bitterness. You know you're in for it in the first moments when the ironically titled first track "Twinkle," begins with a mournful violin before giving way to a mid-tempo groove and McKee's opening words, "waiting to be bled, turning tricks just like your mother." He later sings "she is the air I breathe, not too cheap for me" just before bursting into the soaring chorus proclaiming, "she is the only one for me, now and always."
Once, when told that his stalker anthem "Every Breath You Take" had become a staple of wedding receptions, Sting replied that he loved pulling a listener in with a strong melody and then "kicking them in the teeth." Well, Heartworm is exactly that kind of album. You can absolutely sing along to every track and on the second or third listen go "what the hell did he just say?"
A great example is the catchiest tune. The shoulda been hit, "When We Were Young." Built upon a gorgeous, ringing guitar line, the song seems to be a positive reminisce on the glories of a misspent youth. But then the refrain hits you with "what might have been" sung bittersweetly by bassist Myles McDonnell. There are no happy endings here.
I don't have any idea of what went on in McKee's childhood, but the songs here are as darkly confessional and self-destructive as anything by Lou Reed, Ian Curtis, or Kurt Cobain for that matter. The whole album is akin to the "kitchen-sink" melodramas that briefly took over British cinema during the late 50's and mid 60's. Richard Burton's great 1958 film, Look Back In Anger seems a particularly apt comparison. In that picture Burton played a man trapped by his working class circumstances and so full of seething anger that he pushes away everyone who might care for him. This theme comes to full fruition on Heartworm's most harrowing track, "We Don't Need Nobody Else." McKee in a half-spoken vocal says "I hit you for the first time today, I didn't mean it, it just happened." Then the damn song spins into a seemingly hopeful chorus of "we don't need nobody else, just you and me." The effect is staggering.
In fact, they seemed to take great pride in having little to no similarities with their fellow Irish band U2. Abandon faith all ye who enter here, the album seems to say. McKee even takes half a shot at Bono's hopefulness and positivity on "We Don't Need Nobody Else." Where McKee states "they built portholes for Bono, so he could gaze out across the bay and sing about mountains, maybe. You are what you own in this land, you can be king and it all depends on the view and what you can see." Withering.
Once again, before I revel too much in the doom and gloom of this record, let me repeat, this album "sounds" fantastic. Massive in fact. Fantastically produced, hook-laden, with great guitar work by axe man Paul Page, it's a shockingly easy listen despite the subject matter. It will however, challenge you like few albums ever have. But isn't that what a great album should do? It sounds great, it's literate, thoughtful, and catchy as all hell. What more could one ask?
Alas, despite all the talent on display, Heartworm never even got a sniff of the mainstream. Perhaps it was too dark, too smart, and mispromoted by a record label (Sony) that had no idea what it had. Maybe, all of the above. The band only produced one more album, the worthy, self-titled, independently released follow up in 2000. A fine album that never even made it to these shores. In 2005 they briefly reunited and played a few shows in Europe. There were rumors of a new album, but that never came to be. In 2009 McKee formed a new band called Fearghal McKee and the Shitty Shit Shits. Self-destructive 'til the end I guess. So, all we're left with are 22 songs of extraordinary music from only two albums. Two albums that almost no one has ever even heard of.
But one of those albums deserves to be regarded as a stone cold masterpiece. As I listen to Heartworm close with the largely spoken word track "A Natural" that finds McKee confronting his own madness and finishes with him singing that "today is not a day for me, today is not for me," it leaves me thinking that this album is the aural equivalent of the great British author, Graham Greene's classic novel The End Of The Affair. A book that ends with the embittered and hopeless protagonist having lost the only one he ever loved saying to the highest of powers:
"O God you've done enough. You've robbed me of enough. I'm too tired and old to learn to love. Leave me alone forever."
This record is every bit as devastating.
Sumo-Pop
October 25, 2009
Here are a couple of youtube links to the two proper Whipping Boy videos I could find.
"When We Were Young"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IXmoMr3ecU
"We Don't Need Nobody Else"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IXmoMr3ecU
As well as a link to allmusic.com's 4 1/2 star review that will allow you to listen to snippets of each song.
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:gpfuxqthldae
A great, great thank you goes out to my friend, groomsman, and favorite DJ, Tim Williams, who special ordered Heartworm into the record store we worked at so many years ago. We may be the only two who know Timmy, but then "We Don't Need Nobody Else" do we?
I think everyone who takes popular music seriously has at least one album that they think "that should've been huge!" And while the thought that you're the only one who knows may give you a feeling of greater intimacy with the artist, it's an emotion with diminishing returns. Because in the end, don't we want to look in the eyes of some kindred spirit who "knows" too? Someone who reaffirms what you have been holding tight to for so long?
Which brings me to the 1995 release Heartworm by the undeservedly obscure Irish band Whipping Boy. At the time of the album's release, one would have thought the stars were aligned for a band like Whipping Boy. The record buying public was in a full-on love affair with "alternative" rock. These were the heady days before Creed and Candlebox came along and dried it all up. The pre-release buzz on the band was quite good. Four star reviews were in abundance. Still, they never broke through. And that's a damn shame.
Clearly inspired by the gloom of Joy Division and the Velvet Underground, but as sonically muscular and melodic as early Radiohead and Oasis, Heartworm is one of the ten greatest albums I have ever heard.
Led by thick-voiced crooner, Fearghal McKee, Whipping Boy's Heartworm is an album about failure, regret, and bitterness. You know you're in for it in the first moments when the ironically titled first track "Twinkle," begins with a mournful violin before giving way to a mid-tempo groove and McKee's opening words, "waiting to be bled, turning tricks just like your mother." He later sings "she is the air I breathe, not too cheap for me" just before bursting into the soaring chorus proclaiming, "she is the only one for me, now and always."
Once, when told that his stalker anthem "Every Breath You Take" had become a staple of wedding receptions, Sting replied that he loved pulling a listener in with a strong melody and then "kicking them in the teeth." Well, Heartworm is exactly that kind of album. You can absolutely sing along to every track and on the second or third listen go "what the hell did he just say?"
A great example is the catchiest tune. The shoulda been hit, "When We Were Young." Built upon a gorgeous, ringing guitar line, the song seems to be a positive reminisce on the glories of a misspent youth. But then the refrain hits you with "what might have been" sung bittersweetly by bassist Myles McDonnell. There are no happy endings here.
I don't have any idea of what went on in McKee's childhood, but the songs here are as darkly confessional and self-destructive as anything by Lou Reed, Ian Curtis, or Kurt Cobain for that matter. The whole album is akin to the "kitchen-sink" melodramas that briefly took over British cinema during the late 50's and mid 60's. Richard Burton's great 1958 film, Look Back In Anger seems a particularly apt comparison. In that picture Burton played a man trapped by his working class circumstances and so full of seething anger that he pushes away everyone who might care for him. This theme comes to full fruition on Heartworm's most harrowing track, "We Don't Need Nobody Else." McKee in a half-spoken vocal says "I hit you for the first time today, I didn't mean it, it just happened." Then the damn song spins into a seemingly hopeful chorus of "we don't need nobody else, just you and me." The effect is staggering.
In fact, they seemed to take great pride in having little to no similarities with their fellow Irish band U2. Abandon faith all ye who enter here, the album seems to say. McKee even takes half a shot at Bono's hopefulness and positivity on "We Don't Need Nobody Else." Where McKee states "they built portholes for Bono, so he could gaze out across the bay and sing about mountains, maybe. You are what you own in this land, you can be king and it all depends on the view and what you can see." Withering.
Once again, before I revel too much in the doom and gloom of this record, let me repeat, this album "sounds" fantastic. Massive in fact. Fantastically produced, hook-laden, with great guitar work by axe man Paul Page, it's a shockingly easy listen despite the subject matter. It will however, challenge you like few albums ever have. But isn't that what a great album should do? It sounds great, it's literate, thoughtful, and catchy as all hell. What more could one ask?
Alas, despite all the talent on display, Heartworm never even got a sniff of the mainstream. Perhaps it was too dark, too smart, and mispromoted by a record label (Sony) that had no idea what it had. Maybe, all of the above. The band only produced one more album, the worthy, self-titled, independently released follow up in 2000. A fine album that never even made it to these shores. In 2005 they briefly reunited and played a few shows in Europe. There were rumors of a new album, but that never came to be. In 2009 McKee formed a new band called Fearghal McKee and the Shitty Shit Shits. Self-destructive 'til the end I guess. So, all we're left with are 22 songs of extraordinary music from only two albums. Two albums that almost no one has ever even heard of.
But one of those albums deserves to be regarded as a stone cold masterpiece. As I listen to Heartworm close with the largely spoken word track "A Natural" that finds McKee confronting his own madness and finishes with him singing that "today is not a day for me, today is not for me," it leaves me thinking that this album is the aural equivalent of the great British author, Graham Greene's classic novel The End Of The Affair. A book that ends with the embittered and hopeless protagonist having lost the only one he ever loved saying to the highest of powers:
"O God you've done enough. You've robbed me of enough. I'm too tired and old to learn to love. Leave me alone forever."
This record is every bit as devastating.
Sumo-Pop
October 25, 2009
Here are a couple of youtube links to the two proper Whipping Boy videos I could find.
"When We Were Young"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IXmoMr3ecU
"We Don't Need Nobody Else"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IXmoMr3ecU
As well as a link to allmusic.com's 4 1/2 star review that will allow you to listen to snippets of each song.
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:gpfuxqthldae
A great, great thank you goes out to my friend, groomsman, and favorite DJ, Tim Williams, who special ordered Heartworm into the record store we worked at so many years ago. We may be the only two who know Timmy, but then "We Don't Need Nobody Else" do we?
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Bovine Scatology
"The richest 1 percent of this country owns half our country's wealth -- five trillion dollars," "One-third of that comes from hard work, and two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do -- stock and real-estate speculation. [And] it's bullshit. "You got 90 percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how the hell we did it. You're not naive enough to think we're living in a democracy, are you buddy? It's the free market. And you're a part of it."
---Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko in Oliver Stone's Wall Street.
That was in 1987. It's only gotten worse since. In 1965 the average CEO made 24 times the amount of the average worker. Which seems pretty reasonable when you consider that by 2005 that ratio had increased to 262 times that of the average worker. Over the last 8 years the average weekly earnings for the middle class has increased by 1% while the price of everything else has gone up exponentially. Gas: up 24%. College tuition up 28%. Health care premiums up 36%. Milk: up 26%. So the wages of the workers were essentially flat while during 2003-2004 corporate profits rose 30%.
Now, after the economic meltdown of 2008, the working class aren't even concerned with wage increases. No. They are primarily concerned with either keeping the job they have or replacing the job they lost. All this while the stock market continues to surge back from the depths of the meltdown (low point was about 6700) to this week cresting over 10,000. So happy days are here again on Wall Street. However, this "recovery" has as of yet not trickled down to the average American. To be fair, the last piece of the puzzle to fall in place after a downturn is job growth. But, one has to wonder what type of jobs will be out there and when. Will they be quality paying jobs? All the patterns and trends point in a negative direction for the average worker. However, the banks are having it both ways. They are reinstituting big bonuses as if nothing happened and denying credit as if they are still on the edge despite the tax payer funded bail out. And here's the terrible thing, if we hadn't bailed out the banks, we would have likely seen a complete cliff dive for the economy. Were these banks that became too big to fail (this means you: Citi and Bank of America) not propped up, then the Federal Reserve would have gone bankrupt (yeah, I know technically we can always print more money and devalue our currency, but still) and the people most harmed would not have been the guys in the penthouse, but us here on the ground looking up.
So, how in the hell did this happen? Why were these banks allowed to become so large that the failure of one or two would have produced mass economic casualties. I'm not even sure I understand as I'm writing this, but I'll try.
First, came a series of deregulation bills that slowly, inexorably created the bank as monster.
In 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act. This allowed banks to merge (too big to fail) and allowed financial institutions to charge interest rates at any level they would choose (screw you consumer).
Then in 1982, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act. This bill allowed for the creation of adjustable rate mortgages (screw you consumer part deux).
President Clinton followed by signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act which allowed banking, securities, and insurance institutions to traffic all three businesses under one roof, so to speak (too big to fail part deux). By the way, the Gramm whose name is in the title of the bill is the infamous former Republican Senator Phill Gramm of Texas who only last year while supporting John McCain for president referred to the American people as "a nation of whiners" when the economy was collapsing. He was about 6 percentage points from becoming Secretary of the Treasury. Excuse me, I just vomited in my mouth a little bit.
Perhaps even worse yet was the fact that the regulations that remained on the books were not enforced under the Bush administration. Of course, Phil Gramm was an F.O.B. so there were no real expectations that Bush would do anything to affect the free market anyway. To make matters worse, when Bush finally did react to the financial crisis with the unfortunately necessary bank "bail out" or Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in 2008, they included no stipulations regarding what the banks could do with the money. So, what did they do? They either sat on it or bought other banks (see JP Morgan Chase's purchase of Washington Mutual, PNC Bank's acquisition of National City, or Citi's merger with Morgan Stanley). This would be too big to fail part trois.
Of course, any discussion of the bank "bail out" is not complete without considering what they did to get themselves in this mess to begin with. While there are many issues at hand that effected their near collapse, I think there are two areas in particular where they were most culpable. Sub-prime mortgages and complex financial instruments.
Of the two, the sub-prime half is the easier to explain. Referring back to 1982 and the passage of the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act which allowed the creation of adjustable rate mortgages, this is where the banks and consumers overreached. Roughly 80% of all mortgages issued in the last few years were adjustable rate mortgages. As housing values began to plummet it became more difficult for consumers to refinance and the rates on their mortgages began to soar. This led to mass delinquencies and foreclosures, leaving banks with devalued homes and the former owners on the streets. Here was a case where people who could not afford homes at a higher interest rate were preyed upon by mortgage lenders who were being pushed to "make the sale" at all costs. As Alec Baldwin said in the classic David Mamet drama Glengarry Glen Ross, "A-B-C. Always. Be. Closing." Which is great advice in the short run. Unfortunately, this was proven not to be the way to run a successful business in the long term. Now, I know that the people who signed for these homes have to take some responsibility for their actions. However, I saw first hand while working in the execrable banking industry that these folks were sold a dream. A dream called home ownership. And the sad fact is, not everyone should own a home. Especially not one where the payments can increase by 30-40% in any given year. In other words, the lenders were the experts and they told people what they wanted to hear. This is how you ruin lives.
Now this brings me to the complex financial instrument portion of the program. Also know as derivatives. What's a derivative you might ask? Well here's the definition on Wikipedia:
A derivative is a financial instrument that is derived from some other asset, index, event, value or condition (known as the underlying asset). Rather than trade or exchange the underlying asset itself, derivative traders enter into an agreement to exchange cash or assets over time based on the underlying asset. A simple example is a futures contract: an agreement to exchange the underlying asset at a future date.
And if you understand what in the hell that means, please get in touch. Ok, fine. I'll give it a shot. Basically, derivatives allow investors to gamble on the future value of a security or commodity without actually buying the underlying investment. In other words, it's bullshit. It's a made up speculative value on something that is not even tangible. These derivatives also created incentives for false accounting practices. As the profit or loss of the derivative was booked by the company even though no actual money changed hands. This type of accounting is what led to the Enron disaster. All the value was on paper. And in many cases it wasn't worth the cost of a single 20# sheet. So, what you end up with is a phantom value that leverages real debt.
This is the bastardization of capitalism. I know, I know, capitalism is one of the things that made this country great. It came from the wellspring of democracy and created a system that rewarded risk-takers, entrepreneurs, and inventors. All well and good. But ask yourself, when this system sprung from the loins of our forefathers, is a complex financial instrument or a sub-prime mortgage what they had in mind? Would Alexander Hamilton, if he rose from the dead today defend this nonsense?
We are becoming a country that no longer makes anything, pays anything, or saves anything. It's all service and consumerism. But then what would you expect from a country that created the derivative and the sub-prime mortgage? A country whose leader after the terrible attacks of 9/11 told us to "shop." A leader who cut taxes for the richest one percent, nevermind the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, let alone the national debt.
There is a war going on. I'm not talking about Afghanistan or Iraq, no. I'm talking about the war at home. It's the haves vs. the have-nots. During last year's election there was a lot of talk about "socialism" and "wealth redistribution." What we have failed to notice is that the wealth redistribution has already started. It's being redistributed alright and up is the direction. Much of the modern economy has been affected by the Reagan administration's "trickle down" theory. The idea that if you continue to lesson the tax burden on the rich they will then take that money and create or expand business in a way that benefits the lower classes. So, ask yourself, how's that working out? Many people in this country decry the "welfare state" that exists for the poor, but what about the one that exists for the rich?
This used to be a country of multiple classes. The truly wealthy, the rich, the upper middle class, the middle class, the lower middle class, the poor, and the impoverished. How many people do you know that are struggling to keep there spot on that ladder? Forget climbing it. just holding on right now would be good enough for most.
For many years South Africa languished under the diseased form of government known as apartheid. The upper class white minority ran the government, controlled all the wealth creation, and repressed the black majority. All you have to do in this country is take away the racial component (for the most part) and the violence (physical that is), and it's not hard to see the road we're on.
So what do we do? Well, I remember something Bono once said when he was describing the difference between the Irish and Americans. He said that in our country we "drive by that big house on the hill and say, one day I'm gonna be that guy." Whereas in Ireland that we "drive by that big house on the hill and say, one day I'm gonna get that guy." Well, it's time to get that guy. Now, please understand I'm not suggesting violence (not yet anyway-half joking, calm yourself), I'm saying get vocal. The only way we can change anything is to put our leaders at risk of the thing they fear most, not getting re-elected. So, call, e-mail, fax, or even better write your congressman. Tell them "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take this anymore." The other night I was watching Hardball's Chris Matthews say that our congressmen are old school. The thing that gets their attention most is a carefully written, signed letter with a local return address on it. In other words, a piece of pulp from someone who can vote their ass out.
However, please, please, please don't confuse my suggestion of civil activism with that of Glenn Beck. Before you write this letter, e-mail, or make this phone call, do your homework. Know what you are talking about. It's so much harder for them to ignore the well-informed. In other words, "if you're gonna hate, then hate correctly" (thank you Bobcat Goldthwait).
Now, I know it's easy to feel hopeless and that things will never change, but as Morgan Freeman said in The Shawshank Redemption, "get busy livin' or get busy dyin." That's damn right. If you're going to go down, go down swinging.
Sumo-Pop
October 16, 2009
Here is a link for the contact info of Indiana congressmen: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=in
And Michigan:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=mi
---Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko in Oliver Stone's Wall Street.
That was in 1987. It's only gotten worse since. In 1965 the average CEO made 24 times the amount of the average worker. Which seems pretty reasonable when you consider that by 2005 that ratio had increased to 262 times that of the average worker. Over the last 8 years the average weekly earnings for the middle class has increased by 1% while the price of everything else has gone up exponentially. Gas: up 24%. College tuition up 28%. Health care premiums up 36%. Milk: up 26%. So the wages of the workers were essentially flat while during 2003-2004 corporate profits rose 30%.
Now, after the economic meltdown of 2008, the working class aren't even concerned with wage increases. No. They are primarily concerned with either keeping the job they have or replacing the job they lost. All this while the stock market continues to surge back from the depths of the meltdown (low point was about 6700) to this week cresting over 10,000. So happy days are here again on Wall Street. However, this "recovery" has as of yet not trickled down to the average American. To be fair, the last piece of the puzzle to fall in place after a downturn is job growth. But, one has to wonder what type of jobs will be out there and when. Will they be quality paying jobs? All the patterns and trends point in a negative direction for the average worker. However, the banks are having it both ways. They are reinstituting big bonuses as if nothing happened and denying credit as if they are still on the edge despite the tax payer funded bail out. And here's the terrible thing, if we hadn't bailed out the banks, we would have likely seen a complete cliff dive for the economy. Were these banks that became too big to fail (this means you: Citi and Bank of America) not propped up, then the Federal Reserve would have gone bankrupt (yeah, I know technically we can always print more money and devalue our currency, but still) and the people most harmed would not have been the guys in the penthouse, but us here on the ground looking up.
So, how in the hell did this happen? Why were these banks allowed to become so large that the failure of one or two would have produced mass economic casualties. I'm not even sure I understand as I'm writing this, but I'll try.
First, came a series of deregulation bills that slowly, inexorably created the bank as monster.
In 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act. This allowed banks to merge (too big to fail) and allowed financial institutions to charge interest rates at any level they would choose (screw you consumer).
Then in 1982, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act. This bill allowed for the creation of adjustable rate mortgages (screw you consumer part deux).
President Clinton followed by signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act which allowed banking, securities, and insurance institutions to traffic all three businesses under one roof, so to speak (too big to fail part deux). By the way, the Gramm whose name is in the title of the bill is the infamous former Republican Senator Phill Gramm of Texas who only last year while supporting John McCain for president referred to the American people as "a nation of whiners" when the economy was collapsing. He was about 6 percentage points from becoming Secretary of the Treasury. Excuse me, I just vomited in my mouth a little bit.
Perhaps even worse yet was the fact that the regulations that remained on the books were not enforced under the Bush administration. Of course, Phil Gramm was an F.O.B. so there were no real expectations that Bush would do anything to affect the free market anyway. To make matters worse, when Bush finally did react to the financial crisis with the unfortunately necessary bank "bail out" or Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in 2008, they included no stipulations regarding what the banks could do with the money. So, what did they do? They either sat on it or bought other banks (see JP Morgan Chase's purchase of Washington Mutual, PNC Bank's acquisition of National City, or Citi's merger with Morgan Stanley). This would be too big to fail part trois.
Of course, any discussion of the bank "bail out" is not complete without considering what they did to get themselves in this mess to begin with. While there are many issues at hand that effected their near collapse, I think there are two areas in particular where they were most culpable. Sub-prime mortgages and complex financial instruments.
Of the two, the sub-prime half is the easier to explain. Referring back to 1982 and the passage of the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act which allowed the creation of adjustable rate mortgages, this is where the banks and consumers overreached. Roughly 80% of all mortgages issued in the last few years were adjustable rate mortgages. As housing values began to plummet it became more difficult for consumers to refinance and the rates on their mortgages began to soar. This led to mass delinquencies and foreclosures, leaving banks with devalued homes and the former owners on the streets. Here was a case where people who could not afford homes at a higher interest rate were preyed upon by mortgage lenders who were being pushed to "make the sale" at all costs. As Alec Baldwin said in the classic David Mamet drama Glengarry Glen Ross, "A-B-C. Always. Be. Closing." Which is great advice in the short run. Unfortunately, this was proven not to be the way to run a successful business in the long term. Now, I know that the people who signed for these homes have to take some responsibility for their actions. However, I saw first hand while working in the execrable banking industry that these folks were sold a dream. A dream called home ownership. And the sad fact is, not everyone should own a home. Especially not one where the payments can increase by 30-40% in any given year. In other words, the lenders were the experts and they told people what they wanted to hear. This is how you ruin lives.
Now this brings me to the complex financial instrument portion of the program. Also know as derivatives. What's a derivative you might ask? Well here's the definition on Wikipedia:
A derivative is a financial instrument that is derived from some other asset, index, event, value or condition (known as the underlying asset). Rather than trade or exchange the underlying asset itself, derivative traders enter into an agreement to exchange cash or assets over time based on the underlying asset. A simple example is a futures contract: an agreement to exchange the underlying asset at a future date.
And if you understand what in the hell that means, please get in touch. Ok, fine. I'll give it a shot. Basically, derivatives allow investors to gamble on the future value of a security or commodity without actually buying the underlying investment. In other words, it's bullshit. It's a made up speculative value on something that is not even tangible. These derivatives also created incentives for false accounting practices. As the profit or loss of the derivative was booked by the company even though no actual money changed hands. This type of accounting is what led to the Enron disaster. All the value was on paper. And in many cases it wasn't worth the cost of a single 20# sheet. So, what you end up with is a phantom value that leverages real debt.
This is the bastardization of capitalism. I know, I know, capitalism is one of the things that made this country great. It came from the wellspring of democracy and created a system that rewarded risk-takers, entrepreneurs, and inventors. All well and good. But ask yourself, when this system sprung from the loins of our forefathers, is a complex financial instrument or a sub-prime mortgage what they had in mind? Would Alexander Hamilton, if he rose from the dead today defend this nonsense?
We are becoming a country that no longer makes anything, pays anything, or saves anything. It's all service and consumerism. But then what would you expect from a country that created the derivative and the sub-prime mortgage? A country whose leader after the terrible attacks of 9/11 told us to "shop." A leader who cut taxes for the richest one percent, nevermind the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, let alone the national debt.
There is a war going on. I'm not talking about Afghanistan or Iraq, no. I'm talking about the war at home. It's the haves vs. the have-nots. During last year's election there was a lot of talk about "socialism" and "wealth redistribution." What we have failed to notice is that the wealth redistribution has already started. It's being redistributed alright and up is the direction. Much of the modern economy has been affected by the Reagan administration's "trickle down" theory. The idea that if you continue to lesson the tax burden on the rich they will then take that money and create or expand business in a way that benefits the lower classes. So, ask yourself, how's that working out? Many people in this country decry the "welfare state" that exists for the poor, but what about the one that exists for the rich?
This used to be a country of multiple classes. The truly wealthy, the rich, the upper middle class, the middle class, the lower middle class, the poor, and the impoverished. How many people do you know that are struggling to keep there spot on that ladder? Forget climbing it. just holding on right now would be good enough for most.
For many years South Africa languished under the diseased form of government known as apartheid. The upper class white minority ran the government, controlled all the wealth creation, and repressed the black majority. All you have to do in this country is take away the racial component (for the most part) and the violence (physical that is), and it's not hard to see the road we're on.
So what do we do? Well, I remember something Bono once said when he was describing the difference between the Irish and Americans. He said that in our country we "drive by that big house on the hill and say, one day I'm gonna be that guy." Whereas in Ireland that we "drive by that big house on the hill and say, one day I'm gonna get that guy." Well, it's time to get that guy. Now, please understand I'm not suggesting violence (not yet anyway-half joking, calm yourself), I'm saying get vocal. The only way we can change anything is to put our leaders at risk of the thing they fear most, not getting re-elected. So, call, e-mail, fax, or even better write your congressman. Tell them "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take this anymore." The other night I was watching Hardball's Chris Matthews say that our congressmen are old school. The thing that gets their attention most is a carefully written, signed letter with a local return address on it. In other words, a piece of pulp from someone who can vote their ass out.
However, please, please, please don't confuse my suggestion of civil activism with that of Glenn Beck. Before you write this letter, e-mail, or make this phone call, do your homework. Know what you are talking about. It's so much harder for them to ignore the well-informed. In other words, "if you're gonna hate, then hate correctly" (thank you Bobcat Goldthwait).
Now, I know it's easy to feel hopeless and that things will never change, but as Morgan Freeman said in The Shawshank Redemption, "get busy livin' or get busy dyin." That's damn right. If you're going to go down, go down swinging.
Sumo-Pop
October 16, 2009
Here is a link for the contact info of Indiana congressmen: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=in
And Michigan:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=mi
Sunday, October 11, 2009
The Three Little Pigs
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
---Abraham Lincoln
As I sat down to write about Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Ann Coulter, it occurred to me that I couldn't possibly summon the eloquence needed to express my opinion of them. So, what I've decided is to let them speak for themselves. Therefore, the following are some of the more infamous quotes of each with a little context provided as well:
Rush Limbaugh:
"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back".
Response to a black caller he was having a hard time understanding in the 1970s when he worked under the name "Jeff Christie" on a top-40 music program in Pittsburgh.
"The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."
As quoted in Flush Rush Quarterly (January 1993).
"They're 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?"
Of African-Americans, as quoted in "Limbaugh Brings Baggage with his ESPN Blabber" by Derrick Z. Jackson in The Boston Globe
"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"
As quoted in "Limbaugh : A Color Man Who Has A Problem With Color?" by Jeff Cohen and Steve Rendall in FAIR and The Los Angeles Times (6 July 2000
"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society."
From "The 35 Undeniable Truths" (18 February 1994) by Rush Limbaugh
"I'm going to tell you, what's good for al-Qaeda is good for the Democratic Party in this country today. That's how you boil this down. And it doesn't have to be al-Qaeda. What's good for terrorists is good for John Kerry. All you got to do is check the way they react."
(15 March 2004) on his radio show.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."
About Fox's Parkinson's Disease, referring to his appearance in Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill's political ad (23 October 2006).
"Community service is one of the baby steps towards fascism."
September 11th, 2009 on his radio show.
Glenn Beck:
"I find this guy [father of Nick Berg] despicable. Everything in me says that. The want to be a better person today than I was yesterday says he's a dad, he's grieving, but I don't buy that. I'm sorry, I don't buy it. I think he is grieving, but I think he's a scumbag as well. I don't like this guy at all."
The Glenn Beck Program, May 14, 2004
Comment on Michael Berg, the father of murdered American businessman Nicholas Berg, who was captured and beheaded by Islamic extremists in Iraq.
"With that being said, you are a Democrat. You are saying, "Let`s cut and run." And I have to tell you, I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, "Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies. And I know you’re not. I’m not accusing you of being an enemy, but that’s the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way."
The Glenn Beck TV Show, November 14, 2006
Glenn Beck to Minnesota congressman Keith Ellison who happens to be a Muslim.
"Al Gore's not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization. The goal is global carbon tax.…You need to have fear. You needed to have the fear of starvation. You needed to have the fear of the whole place going to hell in a hand basket. Which — do we have that fear now with global warming?…Then you have to discredit the scientists that say 'That's not right.' And you must silence all dissenting voices. That's what Hitler did. That's what Al Gore, the U.N., and everybody on the global warming bandwagon [are doing]."
The Glenn Beck Program, April 30, 2007
Glenn Beck on Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth
"You pinhead. You think we would actually be sitting here and saying "well, look at the way she was dressed?" If she were Joan McCain, stop it. You self-centered self-righteous socialist out of control dangerous man-hating bitch. Shut your mouth. We might have bought into this crap in the 1960s because too many people were doing LSD. We're not on LSD anymore — we need to start making sense."
The Glenn Beck Program, March 3, 2008
In response to feminist Gloria Steinem's opinions on the John McCain/"Joan" McCain accusation.
"This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy — over and over and over again — who has a deep seated hatred for white people or white culture, I don't know what it is."
July 28, on Fox and Friends (apparently unaware that Obama's mother was white).
Ann Coulter:
"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."
Her column; December 21, 2005
"Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."
Her syndicated column, September 28, 2001 (apparently unaware of the existence of Timothy McVeigh and the Una Bomber).
"I don't know if [former U.S. President Bill Clinton is] gay. But [former U.S. Vice President] Al Gore - total fag."
From Media Matters; July 26, 2006
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
This Is War; September 12, 2001
"I'm a Christian first, and a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative second, and don't you ever forget it."
From her book, If Democrats had Any Brains, They'd be Republicans
"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much."
Comment made in reference to a group of 9/11 widows called The Jersey Girls who supported John Kerry. From her book Godless: The Church of Liberalism
What more could I possibly add? These are the three loudest and most persuasive (at least to the converted) voices of the radical right. A morbidly obese drug addict, a half a nut job who would cry at the opening of a gas station, and a cadaverish, fascist party doll.* They are the leaders of the Republican base. Even moderate republicans are loathe to draw their ire. RNC Chairman Michael Steele was only one republican who criticized Rush one day (referring to Limbaugh's rhetoric as "ugly" and "incendiary" on CNN, March 1st, 2009), only to find himself bending over backwards in apology to Limbaugh the next.
So, it is with great admiration and affection that I speak of Lindsey Graham's repudiation of Glenn Beck last week (October 4th) on clusterFOX no less. He referred to Beck as a "cynic" who "doesn't represent the Republican party." And here's the best part, days have passed and he has not backed down from his statement. Considering that Graham is a Republican Senator hailing from South Carolina (where Beck is certainly popular among his constituents), I consider this no small act of courage. Unfortunately for Graham and his party, there has been no one to join the chorus. And that's a shame, because it's going to take a lot more huffing and puffing by sensible Republicans to blow down the house of these three little pigs.
Sumo-Pop
October 11, 2009
*Richard Belzer said this about Coulter on Real Time with Bill Maher. One of my all-time favorite insults.
---Abraham Lincoln
As I sat down to write about Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Ann Coulter, it occurred to me that I couldn't possibly summon the eloquence needed to express my opinion of them. So, what I've decided is to let them speak for themselves. Therefore, the following are some of the more infamous quotes of each with a little context provided as well:
Rush Limbaugh:
"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back".
Response to a black caller he was having a hard time understanding in the 1970s when he worked under the name "Jeff Christie" on a top-40 music program in Pittsburgh.
"The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."
As quoted in Flush Rush Quarterly (January 1993).
"They're 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?"
Of African-Americans, as quoted in "Limbaugh Brings Baggage with his ESPN Blabber" by Derrick Z. Jackson in The Boston Globe
"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"
As quoted in "Limbaugh : A Color Man Who Has A Problem With Color?" by Jeff Cohen and Steve Rendall in FAIR and The Los Angeles Times (6 July 2000
"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society."
From "The 35 Undeniable Truths" (18 February 1994) by Rush Limbaugh
"I'm going to tell you, what's good for al-Qaeda is good for the Democratic Party in this country today. That's how you boil this down. And it doesn't have to be al-Qaeda. What's good for terrorists is good for John Kerry. All you got to do is check the way they react."
(15 March 2004) on his radio show.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."
About Fox's Parkinson's Disease, referring to his appearance in Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill's political ad (23 October 2006).
"Community service is one of the baby steps towards fascism."
September 11th, 2009 on his radio show.
Glenn Beck:
"I find this guy [father of Nick Berg] despicable. Everything in me says that. The want to be a better person today than I was yesterday says he's a dad, he's grieving, but I don't buy that. I'm sorry, I don't buy it. I think he is grieving, but I think he's a scumbag as well. I don't like this guy at all."
The Glenn Beck Program, May 14, 2004
Comment on Michael Berg, the father of murdered American businessman Nicholas Berg, who was captured and beheaded by Islamic extremists in Iraq.
"With that being said, you are a Democrat. You are saying, "Let`s cut and run." And I have to tell you, I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, "Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies. And I know you’re not. I’m not accusing you of being an enemy, but that’s the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way."
The Glenn Beck TV Show, November 14, 2006
Glenn Beck to Minnesota congressman Keith Ellison who happens to be a Muslim.
"Al Gore's not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization. The goal is global carbon tax.…You need to have fear. You needed to have the fear of starvation. You needed to have the fear of the whole place going to hell in a hand basket. Which — do we have that fear now with global warming?…Then you have to discredit the scientists that say 'That's not right.' And you must silence all dissenting voices. That's what Hitler did. That's what Al Gore, the U.N., and everybody on the global warming bandwagon [are doing]."
The Glenn Beck Program, April 30, 2007
Glenn Beck on Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth
"You pinhead. You think we would actually be sitting here and saying "well, look at the way she was dressed?" If she were Joan McCain, stop it. You self-centered self-righteous socialist out of control dangerous man-hating bitch. Shut your mouth. We might have bought into this crap in the 1960s because too many people were doing LSD. We're not on LSD anymore — we need to start making sense."
The Glenn Beck Program, March 3, 2008
In response to feminist Gloria Steinem's opinions on the John McCain/"Joan" McCain accusation.
"This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy — over and over and over again — who has a deep seated hatred for white people or white culture, I don't know what it is."
July 28, on Fox and Friends (apparently unaware that Obama's mother was white).
Ann Coulter:
"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."
Her column; December 21, 2005
"Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."
Her syndicated column, September 28, 2001 (apparently unaware of the existence of Timothy McVeigh and the Una Bomber).
"I don't know if [former U.S. President Bill Clinton is] gay. But [former U.S. Vice President] Al Gore - total fag."
From Media Matters; July 26, 2006
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
This Is War; September 12, 2001
"I'm a Christian first, and a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative second, and don't you ever forget it."
From her book, If Democrats had Any Brains, They'd be Republicans
"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much."
Comment made in reference to a group of 9/11 widows called The Jersey Girls who supported John Kerry. From her book Godless: The Church of Liberalism
What more could I possibly add? These are the three loudest and most persuasive (at least to the converted) voices of the radical right. A morbidly obese drug addict, a half a nut job who would cry at the opening of a gas station, and a cadaverish, fascist party doll.* They are the leaders of the Republican base. Even moderate republicans are loathe to draw their ire. RNC Chairman Michael Steele was only one republican who criticized Rush one day (referring to Limbaugh's rhetoric as "ugly" and "incendiary" on CNN, March 1st, 2009), only to find himself bending over backwards in apology to Limbaugh the next.
So, it is with great admiration and affection that I speak of Lindsey Graham's repudiation of Glenn Beck last week (October 4th) on clusterFOX no less. He referred to Beck as a "cynic" who "doesn't represent the Republican party." And here's the best part, days have passed and he has not backed down from his statement. Considering that Graham is a Republican Senator hailing from South Carolina (where Beck is certainly popular among his constituents), I consider this no small act of courage. Unfortunately for Graham and his party, there has been no one to join the chorus. And that's a shame, because it's going to take a lot more huffing and puffing by sensible Republicans to blow down the house of these three little pigs.
Sumo-Pop
October 11, 2009
*Richard Belzer said this about Coulter on Real Time with Bill Maher. One of my all-time favorite insults.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Repulsion
Roman Polanski has been visited by two extraordinary tragedies in his life. Born in 1933 to a Russian mother and a Polish-Jewish father in Paris, the Polanski family later moved to Krakow, Poland in 1936. They were residing there in 1939 when Hitler's Germany occupied Poland and forced the Jewish population into the Krakow ghetto. While there, his father and mother were sent to separate concentration camps. His father in Mauthausen-Gusen and his mother in Auschwitz. Only his father survived. The young Polanski eventually escaped the Krakow ghetto with the help of multiple Polish Roman Catholic families whose faith he adopted. Polanski later made great art from his ordeal with the Oscar winning holocaust film, The Pianist in 2002.
Then in 1969 his wife, actress Sharon Tate was brutally murdered by members of the Manson Family in Los Angeles while Polanski was at their London home. Tate was stabbed 16 times in her 8 1/2 months pregnant belly. Perhaps understandably, Polanski lost his faith and returned to the agnostic roots of his parents.
These two horrors are more than anyone should have to bear. But bear it Polanski did. And in the 60's and 70's he made several great films. 1965's Repulsion starring the great French beauty Catherine Deneuve, is one of the most harrowing portraits of a woman's descent into madness ever committed to celluloid. He followed that triumph with 1968's Oscar nominated psychological horror film Rosemary's Baby. Next came his controversial, bloody Shakespeare epic Macbeth in 1971. Then his 1974 film noir masterpiece Chinatown starring Jack Nicholson made his ascension complete. These films in particular established him as one of the pre-eminent filmmakers of that era. His only true rival in form and content was the late, great Stanley Kubrick. Despite all he had been through, he was at the top of his profession with honors both critical and commercial.
Then in 1977 he did the unthinkable. Under the pretense of a photo shoot for the French edition of Vogue (which he was guest editing), Polanski convinced the mother of a 13 year old girl to allow a private photo shoot with only him and the young lady present. It's hard to understand what would compel a parent to allow her barely teen aged daughter to be photographed privately by a 41 year old man she barely knew. Maybe she was starstruck, or thought she might gain an opportunity at fame through her daughter. Regardless, the decision proved tragic. During the second(!) shoot, Polanski fed the girl a steady diet of champagne and quaaludes. He then, performed oral sex, intercourse, and sodomy upon her. And not that it should matter, but she claimed to have said "no" repeatedly during each sexual act.
Of course, the subsequent court case turned into a media circus. A lascivious act performed by a famed Hollywood director on an under aged girl would have produced plenty of heat on it's own. However, to make matters worse, the vain, headline seeking Judge Rittenband may have been "coached" by LA Deputy District Attorney, David Wells. A terrific 2008 documentary, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, covers the court case in excellent, clear-eyed detail. The documentarian's interviews with DA Wells definitely leads one to believe that misconduct was likely committed by both the judge and the prosecutor. After Polanski plead guilty, he and his attorney had been led to believe that the plea agreement would result in probation and 42 days of time served. Upon learning that the DA may have unduly influenced the judge, Polanski, fearing a possible prison sentence, fled to his London home then France where he still held citizenship. Since the French government has a non-extradition policy for it's citizens, Polanski has lived there freely ever since.
Until now. On September 26, 2009, Polanski traveled to Switzerland to receive a lifetime achievement award from the Zurich Film Festival. Polanski was arrested by Swiss police at the Zurich airport under the terms of the existing US arrest warrant (there is no statute of limitations for the crime). There are many questions surrounding the arrest. Polanski had been to Switzerland several times previous and even owned a home there. So why now? Did the Swiss government have some great moment of clarity and morality? Unlikely. There's probably some political grandstanding going on. After all, it has been over thirty years, leaving plenty of reasons to be suspicious.
So how in the hell should anyone feel about this? A guy did a terrible thing over thirty years ago and may be returned as a senior citizen to the United States to face a possible kangaroo court and a media onslaught. He has apparently done nothing nefarious since. And what of the victim? She wants no part of any court case involving Polanski. In fact, she has forgiven him and has actually stated that she feels sorry for him. Of course, the fact that they reached a $500,000 settlement in 1994 may have something to do with it. Still, she's a private person who has no interest in taking the stand against her assailant for something that happened over three decades ago. Shouldn't her wishes be considered?
It's not as if she's the only one who has no desire to see a geriatric Polanski sentenced to prison. It's probably not much of a surprise that many of Polanski's friends from the film making community are asking for leniency. Of which, Martin Scorsese and Jack Nicholson have been the most vocal. Hell, even France issued a statement supporting Polanski (they have since reversed their position).
So, what is their argument in favor of Polanski? Their defense largely rests on the fact that it happened a long time ago and he's a great artist. True enough. However, the protests of Scorsese and Nicholson remind me of John Mellencamp's "free James Brown" argument of the late 80s. Brown had been arrested and jailed for domestic abuse and for shooting at police officers from his truck while he was high as a kite. Mellencamp said they should let James go because when he was a kid "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" meant the world to him. Ok, I think I know what John means. I love the Godfather of Soul too, but it's sort of like the joke Chris Rock once made about O.J. Simpson. He said "...if O.J. had been a bus driver, he would have been Orenthal, the bus driving murderer."
So, in the end here is what I think: Roman Polanski is a great filmmaker who has endured incredible personal hardship. The original court case against him was likely "fixed" (as far as the sentencing was concerned), and probably would have resulted in a mistrial. This terrible thing he did happened a long time ago and he has kept his nose clean ever since. However, in 1977 he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. And if he were a bus driver, he would be Roman the bus driving child rapist.
Sumo-Pop
October 3, 2009
Then in 1969 his wife, actress Sharon Tate was brutally murdered by members of the Manson Family in Los Angeles while Polanski was at their London home. Tate was stabbed 16 times in her 8 1/2 months pregnant belly. Perhaps understandably, Polanski lost his faith and returned to the agnostic roots of his parents.
These two horrors are more than anyone should have to bear. But bear it Polanski did. And in the 60's and 70's he made several great films. 1965's Repulsion starring the great French beauty Catherine Deneuve, is one of the most harrowing portraits of a woman's descent into madness ever committed to celluloid. He followed that triumph with 1968's Oscar nominated psychological horror film Rosemary's Baby. Next came his controversial, bloody Shakespeare epic Macbeth in 1971. Then his 1974 film noir masterpiece Chinatown starring Jack Nicholson made his ascension complete. These films in particular established him as one of the pre-eminent filmmakers of that era. His only true rival in form and content was the late, great Stanley Kubrick. Despite all he had been through, he was at the top of his profession with honors both critical and commercial.
Then in 1977 he did the unthinkable. Under the pretense of a photo shoot for the French edition of Vogue (which he was guest editing), Polanski convinced the mother of a 13 year old girl to allow a private photo shoot with only him and the young lady present. It's hard to understand what would compel a parent to allow her barely teen aged daughter to be photographed privately by a 41 year old man she barely knew. Maybe she was starstruck, or thought she might gain an opportunity at fame through her daughter. Regardless, the decision proved tragic. During the second(!) shoot, Polanski fed the girl a steady diet of champagne and quaaludes. He then, performed oral sex, intercourse, and sodomy upon her. And not that it should matter, but she claimed to have said "no" repeatedly during each sexual act.
Of course, the subsequent court case turned into a media circus. A lascivious act performed by a famed Hollywood director on an under aged girl would have produced plenty of heat on it's own. However, to make matters worse, the vain, headline seeking Judge Rittenband may have been "coached" by LA Deputy District Attorney, David Wells. A terrific 2008 documentary, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, covers the court case in excellent, clear-eyed detail. The documentarian's interviews with DA Wells definitely leads one to believe that misconduct was likely committed by both the judge and the prosecutor. After Polanski plead guilty, he and his attorney had been led to believe that the plea agreement would result in probation and 42 days of time served. Upon learning that the DA may have unduly influenced the judge, Polanski, fearing a possible prison sentence, fled to his London home then France where he still held citizenship. Since the French government has a non-extradition policy for it's citizens, Polanski has lived there freely ever since.
Until now. On September 26, 2009, Polanski traveled to Switzerland to receive a lifetime achievement award from the Zurich Film Festival. Polanski was arrested by Swiss police at the Zurich airport under the terms of the existing US arrest warrant (there is no statute of limitations for the crime). There are many questions surrounding the arrest. Polanski had been to Switzerland several times previous and even owned a home there. So why now? Did the Swiss government have some great moment of clarity and morality? Unlikely. There's probably some political grandstanding going on. After all, it has been over thirty years, leaving plenty of reasons to be suspicious.
So how in the hell should anyone feel about this? A guy did a terrible thing over thirty years ago and may be returned as a senior citizen to the United States to face a possible kangaroo court and a media onslaught. He has apparently done nothing nefarious since. And what of the victim? She wants no part of any court case involving Polanski. In fact, she has forgiven him and has actually stated that she feels sorry for him. Of course, the fact that they reached a $500,000 settlement in 1994 may have something to do with it. Still, she's a private person who has no interest in taking the stand against her assailant for something that happened over three decades ago. Shouldn't her wishes be considered?
It's not as if she's the only one who has no desire to see a geriatric Polanski sentenced to prison. It's probably not much of a surprise that many of Polanski's friends from the film making community are asking for leniency. Of which, Martin Scorsese and Jack Nicholson have been the most vocal. Hell, even France issued a statement supporting Polanski (they have since reversed their position).
So, what is their argument in favor of Polanski? Their defense largely rests on the fact that it happened a long time ago and he's a great artist. True enough. However, the protests of Scorsese and Nicholson remind me of John Mellencamp's "free James Brown" argument of the late 80s. Brown had been arrested and jailed for domestic abuse and for shooting at police officers from his truck while he was high as a kite. Mellencamp said they should let James go because when he was a kid "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" meant the world to him. Ok, I think I know what John means. I love the Godfather of Soul too, but it's sort of like the joke Chris Rock once made about O.J. Simpson. He said "...if O.J. had been a bus driver, he would have been Orenthal, the bus driving murderer."
So, in the end here is what I think: Roman Polanski is a great filmmaker who has endured incredible personal hardship. The original court case against him was likely "fixed" (as far as the sentencing was concerned), and probably would have resulted in a mistrial. This terrible thing he did happened a long time ago and he has kept his nose clean ever since. However, in 1977 he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. And if he were a bus driver, he would be Roman the bus driving child rapist.
Sumo-Pop
October 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)