Star Trek Into Darkness Or: My Final Farewell to Eileen.

Dear Eileen,

One month before your passing, our phone conversations varied among many topics, but they would, somehow, revert back to the science-fiction/fantasy genre. Granted, even before then, when we talked chatted on Facebook, the subject would return to the genre that made you a fangirl of said genre, from The Boy Who Lived and the Seven Realms, to Star Wars and Star Trek. Hell, I can't even remember how many times you you quoted the line where C-3PO tells Han that the chances of navigating through an asteroid field successfully was approximately three thousand seven hundred and twenty to one! (Damnit, now you've got me saying it!) Just before you passed, you continued to geek out over how you wanted to watch Star Trek Into Darkness, the big follow up to director J.J. Abrams' prequel of the original Trek movies. The other movies I was jazzed about seeing: Iron Man 3, The Hangover Part III, Man of Steel - they didn't hold a candle to how badly you wanted to see the continuing adventures of Captain James T. Kirk and his crew, traveling the realms of space at warp speed.

Unfortunately, you weren't able to get that opportunity.

I wish you had, if nothing else, for the opinions and analysis that we would have, because there's much doing on in this latest installment. After Kirk (played once again by Chris Pine) disobeys Starfleet's directive of extinguishing a volcano before it can destroy an indigenous race without being spotted by said indigenous people, now Rear Admiral Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood), along with the rest of the board in the Federation, strip Kirk of his status of the U.S.S. Enterprise, and his role as captain. The situation changes dramatically as the Federation is attacked by one of they own, the mysterious and deadly agent John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch of the BBC's Sherlock) through a series of terrorist attacks, from a bombing of the Starfleet library in London, to the attack at headquarters in San Francisco, killing several captains and officers in the process. Kirk is re-instated as Captain of the Enterprise  and he is given a green-light to find, capture and bring back Harrison to justice by Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller).

That's pretty much the plot to Abram's second outing in the Trek universe, and I'm not going to comment further because doing so would invoke spoilers, which I won't reveal here.What I can say to you, Eileen, is that Into Darkness is everything you'd expect from Abrams: an engaging story, great characters, and expertly staged action set pieces that dazzling and thrilling to watch. The entire cast returns for the second installment, including First Officer Spock (Zachary Quinto), Communications Officer Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Senior Medical Officer Leonard "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban), Chief Engineer Montgomery Scott (Simon Pegg), Lieutenant Commander Sulu (John Cho) and Ensign Checkov (Anton Yelchin)., and each character gets their chance to shine, though Yelchin's Checkov is mostly reduced to running around the engineer deck whenever the ship is thrown into chaos. In fact, Pegg, Saldana and Cho are give much more to do in this installment than last time, as all three become integral parts to middle section of the film.

Again, i'm being vague out of fear of spoilers, but i'd be doing a disservice if I didn't bring up the biggest flaw of Into Darkness, namely the fact that Abrams takes a crucial plot twist from the Star Trek movies of yesteryear and slaps it in this film. Granted, it did work, as it demonstrated that Kirk finally understands humility and that there are no-win scenarios in being the commander of a ship, but then, kind of like how Bill Condon pulled the rug right out under Twi-hards everywhere towards the end of Breaking Dawn: Part II, Abrams more or less does the same thing here, and for you, being the sci-fi/Trek fan that you were, it may leave a sour taste in the mouth.

Still, besides Abrams almost hitting the copy and paste keys with Into Darkness, there's still so much to like in this film. You would have enjoyed all the banter between the crew of the Enterprise, especially between Spock and Kirk. They may have settled their differences between each other in the first film, but their philosophies - Kirk leaping without looking, Spock searching for a logical solution before he leaps - still put the two men at odds with one another. And what good would a team of protagonists would do without a villain, and Cumberbatch has it in spades as Harrison. He's a cunning, ticking timebomb, always putting himself two steps ahead of Kirk and his crew and the Federation, who want nothing more than him in a body bag. You should see the interaction between him and Pine's Kirk on board the Enterprise as he says, "I am better than you...at everything." He's a brilliant actor, hiding the madness of his character's motives. Pine is also solid as Kirk, as he begins to learn this his arrogant, rule-breaking ways has consequences, as he must learn to respect his power as Captain. And I don't know what else I can say about Quninto as Spock, except that he was born to play this iconic character. Not only is he the spittin' image of Leonard Nimoy's character, he understands he is a man in war with himself - the cold logic of his Vulcan side, vs the emotional and feeling Human side.

I believe you would have enjoyed this movie, Eileen, and I wish to the Gods, both the Old and the New, that you could have seen it and we could talk about it. But maybe you already have, and that the Gods were able to get a copy of the movie and you were able to see it from the opening notes to Michael Giaccino's wonderful score, to the end credits which play the 60's Star Trek television theme. Maybe one day we'll get that chance to discuss and compare notes, but until then, to quote Spock himself: "I have been, and shall always be, your friend. Live long, and prosper."

*** stars out of ****

Thank you, Roger Ebert.

My tribute to the late, great Roger Ebert can be found at Mr. Brown Verses. if the Count wants to post the article here on BAD, he may do so if he so wishes.

__________________________________________

As a kid growing up, there were a few things I spend my time doing on Saturdays: getting up early to watch Saturday morning cartoons, going to the movies with my parents, playing outside with my roller-skates, and watching the latest edition of Siskel & Ebert on television. In fact, that was probably one of the moments of the day I was looking forward to. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert didn't just debate about the latest movies that had just been released; they didn't just argue back and forth about why this movie worked or why it was awful. These men didn't just love movies, they lived, breathed the power of cinema as an art form. And I don't think no one person exemplified this kind of mad-hot passion for, well....anything better than Ebert himself. Even after Gene's death in February of 1999, the man still carried on and talked about his love of the movies, with other critics and cinemaphiles, from Lisa Scwartzburn of Entertainment Weekly, to Harry Knowles of Ain't It Cool News, to legendary filmmaker Martin Scorsese. Richard Roper of the Chicago Sun-Times would eventually become his partner from 2000 up until 2006, when post-surgical complications with thyroid cancer left him unable to speak, but his love of the big screen wouldn't diminish. If anything, Ebert found a new voice in which to communicate his excitement for a movie, or his utter disgust for what had transpired on the screen through Twitter, and he still had his columns on his own personal website, and he still wrote reviews for the Chicago-Sun Times, and held film festivals. In short: his burning spirit wouldn't keep him from what he loved: the cinema. Ebert's place was in the balcony of a movie theater, and for one afternoon on a Saturday, I - along with everyone else who loved film as much as he did, or simply wanted to hear his thoughts - were allowed in to listen, argue, and debate the movies. The fact that tonight, we no longer have that voice with us, is a tragedy in of itself. Ebert is a big reason why I loved going to the movies: I wanted to capture the same passion for watching films as he clearly had, and is a continued inspiration for me as a amateur critic with a blog, and it's a continued hope of mine that it comes through with each review I write. For the days I spent sitting in the living room, watching him give the trademark "Thumbs Up," or "Thumbs Down" to eagerly seeking out his reviews on the latest movie to hit theaters, I say thank you Roger Ebert, for making me a lover of the cinema, and forevermore, the balcony will be closed. 

Shut the f*^k up, Ted Nugent!

I've not really made any political statements in the last few months, and this is mostly due to the busy time in my life at the moment. However, I want to keep writing and making observations in the world of politics for BAD, and I will make more of an effort to share my thoughts in a fair, balanced and nuanced way, as I always have. Ok, i'm going to continue to be the young liberal with a sailor's mouth, but I do get points for trying, right?

Anyway, let's get onto it: Unless you've just awaken from a 24-hour coma, you all know that yesterday was the re-inauguration of President Obama. I'll have more of my own thoughts about what I saw tomorrow, but for right now, let's just say not everyone was pleased that he's still the President of the United States. In particular - former rock star, turned rabid right-wing moron and gun nut,  2nd Amendment defender and conservative commentator Ted Nugent. You see, after President Obama called for an assault weapons ban and for universal background checks on registered gun owners, among other actions taken just last week, many gun enthusiasts and advocates for the 2nd Amendment saw potential reasonable gun laws  aimed at preventing more horrific massacres like the one at Newtown, Connecticut as a sign that the federal government was coming for their handguns, hunting rifles, pistols, shotguns, ammo rounds,  bullets and magazine clips. If you're familiar with Nugent's views on current events and politics, then you'll know that he explains his position on gun rights in a rational, reasonable way and in no way does he go off the rails and resorts to childish, schoolyard insults and all but threatens the Office of the President of the United States by using incendiary-charged rhetoric like how gun enthusiasts like him need to "fix" the fact that he's President. 

Wait a minute.........

The president of the United States goes to the Vietnam Memorial Wall and pretends to honor 58,000 American heroes who died fighting communism and then he hires, appoints and associates with communists. He pretends to pay honor to men who died fighting communism, and then he hangs out with, hires and appoints communists. He is an evil dangerous man who hates America and hates freedom. And we need to fix this as soon as possible.

 Uh, Ted -- even if you and your ilk did rise up and decided to take up arms against the homeland, you do realize that the President would have the authority to send in soldiers to put an end to the rebellion, then have the remaining survivors tried for treason and more than likely, either end up incarcerated in a federal prison for the rest of their days or face the rope. It's bad enough that this debate has been sullied by the NRA and their ad on using Obama's children as political cannon fodder, we don't someone like you dragging it further down into the mud with your talk calling for an armed rebellion against the government.

Mitt Romney Thinks Half of the Country Can Sod Off

What you currently hear right now is the last nail being directly hammered in the coffin of Mitt Romney quest to unseat Barack Obama for President of the United States.

During a private fundraiser earlier this year, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told a small group of wealthy contributors what he truly thinks of all the voters who support President Barack Obama. He dismissed these Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, who don't assume responsibility for their lives, and who think government should take care of them. Fielding a question from a donor about how he could triumph in November, Romney replied:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.

Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Yes, you really did read and hear that right: Mitt Romney thinks that half the country that supports President Obama are "dependent upon government, who believe the are victims, believe they are entitled to health care," and that if he's elected, he's not going to give a toss about half of the population that prefer Obama over him and his policies.

Now, faced with his own words, Mitt could have taken time to craft a deeply-felt apology and that his comments were wrong and that he would be a president for all Americans, even the ones that disagrees with his policies. But, as we have learned over the last 24 hours, a statement of this gravitas would require a deep recognition of his comments: how insulting they were and the depths of contempt said statement projected. Or he could have blamed the media for taking an entire statement out of context, the usual route to take when a candidate is faced with an oncoming 2-3 days of negative press in the news cycle. Any one of the solution outlined would have been a vast, vast improvement over the press conference Romney gave hours after the video leaked, in which be basically admitted that he wasn't sorry in the slightest for his reprehensible comments, or for the video capturing every thing he uttered in that private fundraising dinner! It was the equivalent of Chris Brown's infuriating and arrogant single "Deuces", in which Brown says bad things about a girl, then spends the rest of the song telling the ungrateful bitch to take a hike.There was no sense of remorse over his comments, or even the fact the tape was released.

Before the tape, I thought of Mitt Romney as a human chameleon: someone who changes frequently to adapt to his political surroundings and a businessman who cared more about how to keep his friends in the black than about middle and low-income Americans. Afterward, I think he's a spoiled, selfish son of privilege; a man born with a silver spoon in his mouth who only knows his lifestyle of luxury and doesn't really understand, much less care about the plight of ordinary people: the college student taking out student loans (i'm about to head into that process myself very soon) in order to pay for tuition, classes, books and housing among other things, the single mother working two jobs in order to provide for her baby girl, etc. To Mitt, they can go fuck themselves, plus, they're jut lazy mouth-breeders who expect the federal government to bail them out at the drop of a hat, and it's because of this "Let them eat cake," attitude that has the pundits from Bloomberg News to Politico all-but saying that this may have cost him the election.

I'm not saying he's an asshole, or that he's a cruddy human being. I'm sure he's a likable, business-savy person and that he's earned his vast sum of wealth though his venture at Bain Capital. He just doesn't have any business running for President of the United States.

Democratic National Convention - Day 3

Tonight's the grand finale, and all eyes are on the President. How does Obama top what Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama delivers on the convention floor over the last 48 hrs? More importantly: what kind of crazy shit will Grampa Joe say next?

Edit by Jonathan (4:14 pm PT) - One of rock's biggest acts, the Foo Fighters, warming up for tonight's festivities.

 

8:09 CT The Count: John Kerry with one of the finest speeches of his life. The man reminds me of Missouri football in the 1970's  When's he on he can beat anybody. When he's not he can lose to anybody. Tonight he was on. His best line: "Sarah Palin talks like she could see Russia from her window. Mitt Romney talks like he's only seen Russia from Rocky 4."Great stuff.

Edit by Jonathan (6:32 pm PT) - Finally, i'm done with the evening class. I should be home in time for the Big Speech.

9:10 CT The Count: Joe Biden had some Joe moments but did fine. Solid speech. I won't lie when he starts I hold my breath.

9:42 CT The Count: Come on Barack say watch you should have said 4 years ago. If you want to get on board and fix this thing get on board but if you don't get the fuck out of the way. You've fucked this thing up enough now let me fix it. 

Piss off Bob. Re-elect Barack Obama

Democratic Convention Day 2.

You know the routine.

Finish this phrase...Let Detroit Go...

Edit by Jonathan (4;00 pm PT) -Tonight, we'll hear Sandra Fluke, Elizabeth Warren, and then Bubba himself. This could get tricky, flipping back and forth between the Cowboys vs. Giants.

Edit by Jonathan (4:20 pm PT) - It looks like the plans to close out the convention at Bank of America Stadium has been scrapped, due to heavy rainfall tonight and continuing all day tomorrow.

Edit by Jonathan (7:02 pm PT) - And here's Sandra Fluke.

Edit by Jonathan (7:25 pm PT) - The only thing missing from Fluke's speech was her dropping the mic. Ballsy and verbally brutal.

And here comes Bill!

Edit by Jonathan: ..................damn, Bubba!

Edit The Count 10:35 PM CT:

Republican Party Here Is Your Ass.

Democratic Convention Day 1.

 

All thoughts go here from all of you great sane people and yes you to Ralph provided you can do better than you did yesterday.

4:55 CT: From The Count OK. I'll say it. When the Democratic party says "we make ending poverty a national priority" That falls on deaf ears to me. The Democratic party which I am a proud member of doesn't do near enough to claim they make "ending poverty a national priority. 

I can almost read the mind of a RWNJ watching this video. "Lose weight fat asses I think I'll re-listen to Rush"

3:57 PT: From Jonathan - Sandra Fluke will be a speaker tonight, along with First Lady Michelle Obama. The keynote speaker will be Julian Castro, the Mayor from San Antonio, Texas and the first time a Latino delivers the keynote address to the DNC.

5:04 CT: Count: Great speech from Cory Booker is so far the highlight of  early day 1. Lot's of let Detroit go bankrupt.

Hear comes Harry Reid!...Slowly.

Harry Reid the first to mention teabaggers. If they won't stand up to Rush or Grover Norquist what would make you think they would stand up for you? Now he's going after Mitt's Taxes. SOLID!

4:40 PT: From Jonathan - In non-DNC converge news...I meant to post this on Saturday, but I forgot, so here it is now: 4 minutes of pitch-perfect, biting satire from Jon Stewart on Clint Eatwood's improvised speech/standup routine.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
RNC 2012 - The Road to Jeb Bush 2016 - A Fistful of Awesome
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

8:02 CT: The Count: This is an American Hero





8:56 CT From The Count: Deval Patrick with a powerful speech! The best line... "It's time for Democrats to grow a backbone and stand up for what we believe." Afuckingmen!

9:33 CT. From The Count: Julian Castro was fantastic. Up next is the first lady with the final speech of a strong first night. I am in the minority on this I thought Kal Penn was unfunny and unsuccessful. The only real #fail of the night. 

10:11 CT: From The Count Very strong first night capped off with a great speech from the first lady. I'd give the entire night an A-. Great start,

We Are Going To Have BullCra...Democratic National Convention.

It's our turn to spread it around now bitches! Starting Tuesday we will have coverage. I will be watching this one and sharing thoughts from time to time. Of course should anyone else want to join please feel free. Again I want to Thank Mr. Jonathan Holmes for his great RNC coverage.

Republican National Convention - Day 3

Here we are: the climax of the three day, pep-rally we call the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa. Tonight, a mystery guest will rally the base, get the crowd excited and emerge as a future leader for the Party. And then, Mitt Romney will take the floor and accept his Party's nomination for President. Ba-zing! If there's anything I could say about this year's convention,    is that the GOP, much like in 2008 when Sarah Palin was introduced to the world, are more excited and prefer a more exciting and charismatic figure like Governor Chris Christie and VP candidate Paul Ryan than the person they got stuck with in Romney. Unfortunately, I'll be stuck in my evening class, so once again, my coverage will be limited.


Edit by Jonathan (4:47 pm): A few notes on tonight's closing ceremonies: Newt Gingrich and Wife #3, Jeb Bush, Clint Eastwood, and then Mitt Romney will all give their speeches, complete with a video montage saluting Reagan. And Samantha Bee delivers some of the best (and funniest) coverage on the shortened three-day even that i've seen.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
RNC 2012 - The Road to Jeb Bush 2016 - The Republican Platform
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Edit by Jonathan (9:25 pm PT): I could talk about Mitt Romney's speech, but i'll leave that for the final recap coming up over the weekend. The only question I have tonight is simple: What the hell, Clint Eastwood?


Edit by Jonathan (9:46 pm PT): I got my picture taken with President Obama. He didn't say much.

Republican National Convention - Day 2

Welcome back to Day 2 of coverage of the Bullshit Parade Republican National Convention in Tampa! Now, yesterday was pretty thin, due to my evening class, so I hope today's coverage is more action packed and infuriating than the last 10 minutes of Chris Christie's keynote address! Speaking of, I promised that I would get to my thoughts of the highlights from last night's dog-and-pony show, and, as promised, here's what I have to say about last night's speeches.....

* First off, there were many speeches given, besides Ann Romney's and Chris Christine. There was Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, Speaker of the House John Bohener, and there's no way i'll be able to comment on all of them tonight, or tomorrow, so you might see them over the weekend, under the gone, but not forgotten files from the Tampa convention.

* Speaking of Mrs. Romney, her speech was terrific. No, really. It was great. One of Mitt's biggest hurdles was trying to come off as likable and relatable to the common man and from his awkward, straight-laced and bland persona, to his refusal to release his tax returns, he's failed to put a human face to his brand and his campaign. Ann not only made Mitt more a genuine and likeable person, but she did well by transferring the early years of the marriage, when the struggled and had a kid on the way, and made that into a story that millions of older voters could connect with. Well done, Ann Romney, I really was impressed, and that's coming from a very liberal person!

*  So, if you're trying to sell Romney's humanity and that he is, for lack of a better term, "one of us", then how do you sell him as a candidate that can get things done in Washington and as a true conservative when he's flip-flopped on just about every issue he stood for when he was Governor of Massachusetts? If your Chris Christie, you barely mention him at all and bolster your own brand name! I don't think i've seen a more self-serving and selfish display of personal gratification. It was the equivalent of the Governor from New Jersey whipping his cock out, jerking off in front of everyone, bragging about how much longer it is than the limp dick they got saddled with, and boasting about how much staying power he has. I know political positioning isn't a new concept during convention time, but never has it been this blatant and unapologetic about it. This speech (filled with one-liners, throwing red-meat and one insulting take about being fearful that the next generation of kids won't know what an American century looks like) was about Christie positioning himself for 2016, than it was about propping up Mitt Romney.

Now, onto tonight's round of rah-rah-rah-ing the home team!

Edit by Jonathan (5:15 pm): John McCain's speech made me thankful that he's nowhere near the Oval Office.

Edit by Jonathan (5:27 pm): McCain said he trusts Romney to lead. This is coming from the same man who trusted that Sarah Palin could be ready to take over if he died or was unable to perform the task appointed to him.

Edit by Jonathan (6:01 pm): A note on convention hats: why?? They always look really ridiculous. Am I watching a convention of a major political party, or is this a Lady Gaga concert?

Edit by Jonathan (6:39 pm): Mike Huckabee about to speak. Brace yourselves, folks...

Edit by Jonathan (6:42 pm): This was the explanation as to why Tim Pawlenty was trending. Best thing I've seen tonight.

Edit by Jonathan (7:03 pm): Mike Huckabee was duller than dogshit on the stage. Condi's takes the podium, and 20 seconds in, she brings up 9/11. What balls of her to bring up an event that her former boss sat on his ass, doing fuck all to respond to a report that said that Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.!

Edit by Jonathan (7:34 pm): Here's Paul Ryan!

Edit by Jonathan (7:45 pm): Ryan: how dare Obama try and make healthcare more affordable for the middle class and college students!!!

Edit by Jonathan (8:00 pm): I hope Joe Biden bitch slaps this little twerp at the VP Debate in October. Paul Ryan is a creep of the first order.

Edit by Jonathan (8;42 pm): Final analysis on the speech: give Ryan this much credit, he knows his base and he plays to them damn well. Oh and what do you know: Paul Ryan's claim that an auto plant closed in his home state under Obama was total bullshit. There are other aspects I want to touch on from Day 2 tonight, but i'll leave that for tomorrow afternoon. Goodnight, folks!

Republican National Convention Coverage: Day 1

Hello all, and welcome to the the equivalent of a Varsity football pep rally known as the Republican National Convention! This time, the GOP takes it's pomp and circumstance to Tampa Florida where for three days (originally, it was slated to be a four-day event, but due to the threat of Hurricane Issac hitting the gulf coast, the official first day was nixed), we'll get delegates in funny hats, bad dance moves, and top figures in the Party getting the base hyped and ready to vote on election day, ending with Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan  accepting the nomination to run against Barack Obama in the General. In other words, i'll be guiding you through all the bullshit because the count can't do it, and RalphyFan is currently on hiatus. Unlike last time when RF and I acted as a fly-on-the-wall through CNN and MSNBC News, I'll be going through the highlights of what was said, what I thought, and some of the bizarre things that will ultimately find it's way out of, and surrounding, the Convention floor.

Update by Jonathan (3:22 pm, PT): I'll be at my Math class from 5-6, so my watching power will be limited, but I can find some great stuff about the Convention, like this following story: Miners in Ohio had to give up their paycheck to attend a mandatory Mitt Romney rally, allegedly.

Earlier this month, Mitt Romney was welcomed for a campaign event at the Century Mine in Beallsville, Ohio, by hundreds of coal workers and their families. Now many of the mine's workers are saying they were forced to give up a day-worth of pay to attend the event, and they feared they might be fired if they didn’t, according to local news radio WWVA.
The claims have been mostly denied by Rob Moore, Chief Financial Officer of Murray Energy Company, which owns the mine. He acknowledges that workers weren’t paid that day but says no one was made to attend the event. Well, kind of.
"Our managers communicated to our workforce that the attendance at the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend," he told local news radio WWVA, which has received several emails from workers claiming that the company records names of workers that don't attend those types of events.

Update by Jonathan (4:45 pm, PT): Here's the Republican platform going forward.

TAXES: "We reject the use of taxation to redistribute income, fund unnecessary or ineffective programs or foster the crony capitalism that corrupts both politicians and corporations."
It says a Republican administration would extend the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, pending reform of the tax code. It says the party would strive to eliminate taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains altogether for lower- and middle-income taxpayers. It also would work to repeal the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax.
The party backs constitutional amendments to balance the federal budget and require a super majority for any tax increases.
MARRIAGE: The platform affirms the rights of states and the federal government not to recognize same-sex marriage. It backs a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
GUN CONTROL: The party says it opposes legislation intended to restrict Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines or otherwise restoring the assault weapons ban passed during the Clinton presidency.
ABORTION: The party states that "the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed." It opposes using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or to fund organizations that perform or advocate abortions. It says the party will not fund or subsidize health care that includes abortion coverage.
MEDICARE and MEDICAID: The platform pledges to move both Medicare and Medicaid away from "the current unsustainable defined-benefit entitlement model to a fiscally sound defined-contribution model." It supports a Medicare transition to a premium-support model with an income-adjusted contribution toward a health plan of the enrollee's choice. Age eligibility in Medicare must be made more realistic in light of longer life spans.
Medicaid services for low income people would be transformed into a block grant program in which the states would be given the flexibility to determine the best programs for their residents.

Edit by Jonathan (7:46 pm, PT): I'm back from my evening class and now i'm watching the Keynote address by Chris Christie of New Jersey.

Edit  by Jonathan (8:11 pm, PT): What litte I caught from Christie's speech, I came away with two things in mind: One - that the vast majority of people in that arena would rather have him be the Nominee than Romney. Two - his speech wasn't so much for advocating Romney in this election cycle than it was making himself a household name within the Republican Party in 2016. I'll have more on his speech tomrrow afternoon.

Bad Boys II: The Worst Film of the Decade

Over the last decade, i've watched some truly terrible movies that found their way to movie screens.
My Sister's Keeper, for example, took an already heartless and disgusting premise - a family with a terminally-ill daughter conceive another child for the sole purpose of using said child as a one-stop organ shop for Sofia's (Sofia Vassilieva playing the elder daughter) needs - and turned it into an over-dramatic ethical/courtroom/family drama of a mother at way with her youngest daughter, Anna (Abagail Breslin, fire your agent) that threatens to destroy the rest of the family that demands that you cry, damnit, cry!

Another movie, Good Luck Chuck, a rom-com  that churns out the same recycled sex gags we've seen in better and funnier films like The 40 Year-Old Virgin and American Pie, but goes one step further: it's premise of a dentist (a never unfunnier Dane Cook) who's cursed with getting laid but never being able to find true love, whist the other partner is, hearkens back to the stereotype that all men want is sex, and women, a relationship and children, and goes about beating this same drum almost mean-spirited way, and it never reaches your funny bone.

How about Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, a sequel to the 1999 movie, Charlie's Angels, which was stunningly lazy in its execution, lame in its action scenes, and filled to the brim with bad writing and terrible acting by everyone involved, especially from Demi Moore, who we all thought would be her triumphant return to the silver screen? Never had a sequel to a movie looked so lazy and lifeless.

And what else can I say about the entirety of the The Twilight Saga that I already haven't said before?

These movies are, again, really terrible movies in general. I haven't even mentioned other ghastly features, like Men In Black II, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Freddy Got Fingered, Battlefield Earth, The Happening, etc.

None of the movies i've mentioned hold a candle to Michael Bay's Bad Boys II, the most unpleasant, nasty, mean-spirited, and hateful piece of filmmaking i've seen in quite sometime. Before I get on with this review, allow me to take you back a decade and four year ago: the year was 1998, and Bay made it big with the sci-fi/disaster flick, Armageddon, grossing over $553 million worldwide. Despite the film recieving a drubbing by the critics, many of them saying Bay's blockbuster feature was filled with many plot holes, a ridiculous premise, underdeveloped characters, and staging overlong, loud and bombastic action scenes for the sake of stretching out the film's 150 minute-runtime, Bay's success at the domestic and international box office signated to him that the audience didn't really care about story, character developement or a plot that's logical or has continuity, and that all they wanted to see was carnage and destruction: shit blowing up and loud, long, head-pummeling acting scenes is what they want, the it's shit blowing up they'll get!

Little did we know, Bay's style of direction (which can be equated to a 12 year-old riddled with ADHD)  was just the beginning. Throught his career, he would go on an almost inturrped streak of blockbuster hits, Bad Boys II being part of that collection. Now, onto my review, and to do so, i'm going to quote one of my favorite movie critics, Peter Travers of Rolling Stone, because it really does sum of this.....thing, in a nutshell: "Bad Boys 2 has everything: everything loud, dumb, violent, racist, sexist and homophobic director Michael Bay and producer Jerry Bruckheimer can think of puking up onscreen." There is not a single moment in this film's 2 hour, 22 minute runtime that isn't ugly, that doesn't make you wish you were watching a better, more enjoyable action film.

Our "protagonists" are two Miami police detectives, Mike Lowrey and Marcus Barnett, who are once agian played by Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, respectively. I used "protagonists" in quotation marks because these two are, arguably, some of the worst on-screen heroes to come along in ages. The pair open fire in street corners, filled with innocent civilians, to adminsiter their brand of "justice" onto the criminal underworld in South Beach (and, by justice, I mean Will Smith takes out a semi-automatic rifle from the comaprtment of his Ferrari and starts pumping shells into one of the drug dealers trying to escape); they cause obscene amounts of damage on the freeways of Miami (because it's not a good day without getting into a reckless car chase that could serverly injure other drivers and/or pedestrians!), and endanger the lives and careeres of those working with the pair; this goes for Mike especially because his trigger-happy personality constantly ends up putting himself and Marcus in danger. Hell, even Marcus himself admits his partner's shoot-first, ask questions never mentality early in a scene:

"He's crazy! He has emotional anger issue problems! He goes to bed early for this sh*t, just to wake up to pop one in a motherfu**er!"

Seriously, it's a miracle that the Captain of the department (Joe Pantoliano) doesn't strip the pair of their guns and badges and have them kicked off the force for their behavior!

The "plot" of this movie is almost razor thin and it takes forever to get it going, amidst all the endless shootouts, car chases and "wacky" comedic segments (i'll get to those later): a Cuban drug lord (Jordi Mollà, in what can only be described as a fourth-rade impersonation of Pacino's iconic role as Tony Montana in Brian De Palma's Scarface) is smuggling hordes of exctacy from his homeland of Cuba to the shores of Miami, where he's on the verge of becoming the drug kingpin of South Beach. He does this by selling it at nightclubs, which is owned by the Russian mob (yes, the Russian mob cliche is used in this movie). In order to take full control of the drugs and the money, he takes out his partners....key members in the Russian mob, a scene shown in loving, graphic detail as Marcus and Mike infiltrate the home of the Cuban druglord. Entertained, yet, folks?

This would have been a standard shoot-em-up action film, if Bay hadn't filled his movie with endless action scenes to pad out the movie's length and actually explored the character dynamics of the two partners. Oh, wait, they do! But in the worst, most offensive and tasteless ways ever concieved, passing off as "comedy". Brace yourselves, folks, for the two clips I have prepared for you demonstrate Bay's disdain for the audience. The first scene clocks in about 30 minutes in, where Mike and Marcus find a tape and have to go to an electronics store to watch the footage.


Yes, you really did watch that correctly: Bay goes for the lowest-common denominator in humor, so why not go for the gay sexual innuendos, the contrived portable camera that happens to be playing whilst the patrons watch the conversation takimg pace on ever screen in the establishment, complete with this homophobic and disgusting line, passed off as comedy: "IN FRONT OF MY BABIES, YOU GOT PORNO AND HOMO SHOWS UP IN HERE? WHAT KIND OF FREAK-A** STORE IS THIS? MMmm, and you two motha' f***s need Jesus! Cover your ears baby."

Surprisingly enough, that's not the worst of which Bay's comedic pratfalls comes rearing it's ugly head: here's another scene, in which Marcus and Mike grill the former's daughter taking her out on a date. Ladies and gentlemen, all of the film's spiteful and nasty nature in one mean-spirited, vulgar gag (note: this scene contains gratuious use of the n-word, so skip this clip if you find such coarse language to be distressing):


A few comments on this scene: First - what was the goddamn point to this scene, other than to add some cheap laughs to an already ugly and hateful picture? Did Michael Bay, Smith and Lawrence really think that this scene was actually funny, having their characters essentially threaten the boy's life if he had sex with Marcus' daughter!?And secondly - who's parents actually allowed the kid who played Reggie, to act out a scene like this?! Did the parents not read the fucking script before letting their son act in this vulgar and tasteless scene?

Add in a chace sequence in which Mike and Marcus manuver over dead corpses (and they run over a few of them in the process) while chasing drug dealers, rat fucking, the two police detectives objectifying a dead woman's corpse over her tits, and a finale that includes the Terrible Two ramming their Hummer H2 through a slum of Cuba, and you have Bad Boys II, a crass, despariring and spiteful example of excess that the film and the filmmakers happily wallow in. What makes this movie so godaful is the fact that this made almost $140 million domestically, and over $270 million internationally! People actually payed money to watch shit being flung at the screen and they enjoyed it so much, that there were repeated viewings. That's what makes this so painful: it's that Michael Bay will continue to make these kinds of repulsive movies and that he's laughing (at us) all the way to the bank doing it.

Andrew Breitbart - 1969-2012

The old saying goes, "If you don't have anything good to say about a person, then don't say anything at all." Yet there are a handful of times where a person's death isn't all that sad (Names like the Reverend Jerry Falwell, Jesse Helms, and Osama Bin Laden immediately come to mind). Andrew Breitbart, in my mind, is an exception to this rule. While I do offer my condolences to the parents, wife, and four children he left behind and I will not say he deserved to die from natural causes, i'm not going to shed any tears over his death. Breitbart was an asshole masquerading as a journalist; a jerkoff who twisted the facts to fit his viewpoints and ruined a few careers wile doing it. From Shirley Sherrod to spitting on Ted Kennedy's corpse on Twitter, the man was an unpleasant, mean-spirited creep.

Edit From The Count: It speaks volumes that the first reaction to his death was yeah right another publicity stunt. This man has destroyed lives with his lies. As I said elsewhere. 2 deaths in the last 2 days, both small people. One in stature only, the other in every way imaginable. 

My take on "Tebow Time"

Let me say this about the Quarterback from Denver:  The man finds ways to win. He's got the team, the city, and the national sports media talking (usually positively or negatively). He's got the "it" factor, and he's clearly inspiring his teammates that they're still in the thick of it. Having said all that: we all need to come down from the Tebow-high (and Skip Bayless needs to stop blowing him in public on First Take) and realize why the Denver Broncos are in 1st place in the AFC West Division, and little of it has to do with Tebow: Denver's revamped defense, with the sensational rookie Linebacker Von Miller with 12 sacks leading the charge, and solid seasons by DE Elvis Dumerville, LB D.J. Williams, and the Broncos Secondary. Head Coach John Fox, who came in with a defensive unit that was the worst in football last year, has done an incredible job turning that group around. That, and having my Chargers losing 6 straight doesn't hurt one's chances either. And yes, Tebow's been terrific in the last 5-7 minutes of every game he's played so far this season, but he's been a terrible QB in the first 45-53 minutes he's played. He can't play this way vs. Tom Brady and the Patriots on Sunday and expect the magic to come in and save the day, despite New England's godawful defense (holding this year's dishonor for the worst defensive group of the year), and it sure as hell won't fly vs. James Harrison, Troy Polamalu and the Steelers in the postseason. The bigger question: Is Tebow a legitimate starter in the NFL? That remains to be seen. Right now, as Jim Rome would say, "Scoreboard, look up at it."

Thoughts on Occupation

I confess I have been watching the Occupy protests worldwide with mingled pride and nostalgia. I remember being in grade school in the mid-1960s as the campus protest movements took steam, and knew even then that I was watching something momentous and earth-shifting in the making (despite my uncle's caustic background rants about how all those filthy, useless, long-haired hippie freaks ought to get a haircut).

The spirit animating the Occupy movement feels to me much like that behind the anti-war and civil rights movements of the 1960s: a shared interest in advancing human justice, around what is shaping up now to be today's central issue - economics and the corporate hostage-taking of what we all used to know as "the common good." These outpourings worldwide are not an astroturfed effort quietly fronted by a well-heeled lobbying organization (yes, Tea Party, I'm looking at you), nor a precisely orchestrated political convention populated by entrenched establishment types. This is a genuine grassroots movement. You can see that in the diversity of those it has attracted to the streets: all ages, all genders, all ethnicities, all occupations (except, perhaps, hedge fund manager). You can see it in the genuine character of all those hand-lettered signs.

And you can certainly see it in the rush by the right wing to de-legitimize Occupy, first with their baffled cries of "What do they want? Where are their concrete suggestions?" (apparently the phrase "economic justice" isn't in their dictionary) and then with the fearmongering by the likes of Glenn Beck to try and cast Occupy as a dangerous, deadly mob of malcontents. All those people in the streets are no longer quietly compliant about the misinformation bomb we've been pushing back at here, on Newshounds, and elsewhere, for years. And no longer are they afraid, of color-coded terror alerts or, frankly, even of police response and arrests. This is a movement with guts, and it makes the wingnut Wurlitzer-operators crazy that they can't either shut them up, or terrify them sufficiently not to call bullshit by its real name when they see it unfolding.

I hear a lot of people, even in my immediate family, making the argument that Occupy's best opportunity is ultimately at the ballot box, and working the system rather than taking to the streets to try and change the rules. I disagree.

The system, for one thing, has been so thoroughly rigged over these past decades to be beholden to the moneyed class and to a corporate-friendly/corporate-funded agenda, it is never going to change from within at this stage. I don't care who you put up for office or how progressive their policy thinking might appear: as long as the American political landscape depends on multi-month or even multi-year campaigns, and the crazy artificiality of pandering to obscure early-primary states like Iowa, any viable candidate will have had to acquire a huge chunk of campaign change just to be able to cut through the noise, much less have a real shot at electoral success. Honest campaign finance reform, previously given lip service to but never truly enforced, has been off the table for a while now, and nobody's going to put it back there anytime soon. The system runs on money, and it's not in the interest of any incumbents to change that for a more egalitarian model.

Second, when there have been seismic shifts in the social landscape before, they have never achieved success by playing the game as written. Look at the French and American Revolutions - how successful would they have been had the disaffected sat politely down with the aristocracy or the British to hammer out a compromise? Look at the rising union movement in the early 1900s - in a 1911 memorial speech following the disastrous Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, an activist put it very succinctly when she said, "I can't talk fellowship to you who are gathered here. Too much blood has been spilled. I know from my experience it is up to the working people to save themselves. The only way they can save themselves is by a strong working-class movement." Look at the persistence of the civil rights marchers of the Sixties, making themselves a thorn in the side of segregationists: had they not taken to the streets and stayed there with such tenacity, and spoken out with such fervor, we might well today still be looking at separate drinking fountains and the back of the bus.

No, the genius of Occupy so far is that it operates outside the corridors of power in order to make the point that we're tired of polishing them for the Italian-shod 1%. And, also, that it is finding strategies to be an ongoing rather than a fleeting presence. Rallies, once concluded and off our radar, are like county fairs or one-time concerts: out of sight for long enough, they become out of mind. Occupy by its nature cannot be dismissed because it is there and Not Going Away. And the longer it persists, the more it works to change the dialogue and the agenda, motivating voices otherwise of obstruction to sit up, take notice, and feel a keen motivation to preserve themselves by giving the people what they demonstrably, implacably, want.

Sometimes, it takes even a peaceful, non-violent crowd of peasants with torches to storm the castle. In Occupy, I think that's exactly what we've got...and not a moment too soon.

Thank you, Steve Jobs.

Ten years ago, any person would have laughed at you if you said that we would be living in a future where you could walk into a cafe where people could listen to their music digitally, or communicate face-to-face with a friend who was all the way in Chicago, and you were in Los Angles, or be able to access information on a phone that doesn't have keys, and is touch-sensitive. We live in that time now, and we have Steve Jobs to thank for it. I can't - or anyone can, for that matter - walk anywhere without seeing the iPod, or walk around campus and see students using a MacBook Pro to finish a term paper, or see people messing around on their iPhones. None of these products would have been possible without the efforts of the former Apple CEO. His passing will felt around the world, so I want to extend my thanks to Mr. Jobs for all the wonderful and innovative products he has crafted over the years. The times would have been radically different without your genius.

The Not Guilty Verdict And Why I Am Outraged

If you watched any cable "news" network today you'll know that Casey Anthony was found not guilty of murder and manslaughter. Some were outraged by the verdict. I was not. For one thing I didn't follow the trial at all. For another when I finally asked somebody "The Contessa" what the thing was about and to make it as brief as possible my first reaction was and this is a national story how? The whole thing to me was a story for the Orlando Florida press not CNN or MSNBC. Fuck Fox. The sad but truth about the matter is these things happen all the time. There was a case in Omaha that is almost exactly the same recently. So why am I outraged by this story?



There is your answer. I often joke that ___________________ is what is wrong with America often for purposes solely of humor. But in the case of Nancy Grace I mean it. She is what is wrong with America. Is she the soulless (you're guilty damn the facts damn the trial) shrew she portrays on TV or did she happen upon an act like the Limbaughs and Hannity's of the world and milk it for all it's worth? I do not know. But one thing I do know, She is no advocate of anything other than Nancy Grace. First there is the sob story of how she became the first bitch of victims rights that changes every-time she tells it. Honestly it would not shock me of the whole story is a hoax anyway. Then there is her you're guilty damn the facts, damn the justice system damn the American way routine. It's been said the woman leans liberal. It doesn't matter she hates America as much as any brain-dead unemployed teabagger ever has. Is our justice system perfect? Nope. For one thing it isn't color blind and I am not talking black and white the color our justice system sees and most and works for best is green. That being said I like it even if sometimes I do not agree with it. It's damn sure better than the Nancy Grace "you're guilty shut-up" justice system which never requires a trial by the jury of your peers. It only requires a quick judgement from an overbearing egomaniac. Yes I can live with the not guilty and the occasional verdict that I find suspect or just plain wrong. But it saddens me that in this great country that not only do we have Nancy Grace's but we make them superstars and somehow put value on their opinions that do such harm and damage to individuals our freedom and our country. Don't forget Nancy many of us think you yourself are a murderer and you never had to face a judge or a jury. That's ok for once I am sure you would pronounce the accused innocent with out hearing the facts.

Why Vancouver?

Funny almost none of these idiots look either Black, Muslim or Mexican.


I guess this also happened in 1994. Sad. A big part of the problem is that when the riot started it was only 8:20 at night. The fucking morons had a lot of time to destroy the city all in the name of losing the Stanley Cup.

I want to comment on a few things I have heard: These are not fans but hooligans and thugs who would riot given any reason. Partly but not totally true. Many of these folks were wearing Canucks clothing and chanting Bruins suck. How were they not fans?

Alcohol has nothing to do with it: So completely false that just saying false isn't enough. Of course it has to do with Alcohol. These fools have been drinking all day according the bar owners and liquor store owners who liquored these fools up.

This is a small segment of people in Vancouver they do not represent the city of Vancouver: Absolutely true. This is always true. Even the shitheads who riot in Los Angeles are bigger shitheads than your average shithead who lives in LA. The difference is LA sucks Vancouver does not. The damage these fucking morons are doing to that beautiful city is just sad and pathetic. Why because you lost a game. And let's be clear you weren't screwed out of the Stanley Cup you got beat. In the 4 games you lost including the last 2 games when you had a 3-2 lead you got blasted. But hey overturn some cars and burn down some businesses that will make it all better. Yes we do this in America, though Dallas earlier this week was for the most part calm as is Boston tonight but I thought Vancouver was better than this. That's a great city going up in smoke tonight and a damned shame.

Barack Obama...You ARE A Natural-Born Citizen!!

If you have never watched a minute of The Maury Povich Show, the daytime talk show boils down to one simple sentence: "You are the father!", or "You are not the father!". Almost every day, the people who come on Maury's show are women in a bad relationship, the men who treat their women like shit, live in a trailer park, don't have a job, and cheat around often, and the ugly whores who start fights with the girlfriend and the audience, and claim that the man is really in love with her and is carrying his child. Regardless of the outcome, you can count on a few things happening on that show:

* There will be fights between the girlfriend and the mistress.
* Maury will announce whether or not he is the father of said mistress.
* The girlfriend will either have enough smarts to break off the relationship and the whore will be with the cheating ex-boyfriend, or she will idiotically stay with his lying ass and beleive that he will change his ways and will never see that home-wrecker ever again.
* Everyone on that show will act like the ignorant, ridiculous caricatures we see on The Jerry Springer Show.

By now, you know that billionaire Donald Trump, has been in the news lately and has once again rung the bell on the Birther conspiracy - that Barack Obama was not born in the United States, therefore unqualified to act as President of the United States of America. Conservative figures like Michelle Bachman, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, and the other right-wing talking heads of the world have, for months, played with, or hinted in interviews, that they believe, or have suspicions, that the Birthers are on to something: that Barack Hussein Obama, is not who he says he is. It had gotten to the point where a poll asking Republican voters whether they believed the current President wasn't born in the United States, almost half of them - 47% of GOP voters to be exact - actually believed that he wasn't an American-born citizen.

Well, after months (and years) of debate, the results of this are in...Barack Obama......you are a natural-born citizen of the United States!!!

The move came as a surprise to the press corps, many of whom had not shown up for Wednesday's early-morning White House briefing. By the time word had spread that Obama would be making a 9:45 a.m. statement on the matter, however, the top anchors at all the networks had scurried into the briefing room.

Once there, they received a presidential scolding for their concern with "silliness." Obama began his five-minute statement with the complaint that he wouldn't be able to get the networks to break into their regularly scheduled programming for a speech on policy proposals.

"I know that there is going to be a segment of people for which no matter what we put out, this issue will not be put to rest," Obama said. "But I am speaking for the vast majority of the American people as well as for the press. We do not have time for this kind of silliness. We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve."

There you have it: the man was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961 to a white mother and a Kenyan father. Thank you, birthers for wasting two years of our time on this issue and thank you Donald Trump, for lowering the debate and reaching out to the lowest common denominator of people's deep-seeded prejudice in order to position yourself in Iowa in 2012. This whole episode was like a taping of the Maury show: you had a rabid, hot-tempered guest, the once-in-a-while honest and sympathetic figure, and an audience that couldn't believe the nonsense spewing from the batshit and clearly prejudiced guest who dragged this out to begin with.

But at the end of the day, those papers the President decided to show to put to bed the nonsense of his citizenship won't be enough for the Birthers. Case in point: Orly Taitz, the Queen of the Birthers, her exchange with Lawrence O' Donnell, and O' Donnell finally having heard enough of her malicious lies.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama's birth certificate was never the real issue on the table. It was - and continues to be - his skin color. The Birthers cannot except a man of color as their Commander-In-Chief, or the fact many successful African-Americans have made huge strides in contributing to the continuing story of our nation's history. These are the people who are stuck in the Jim Crow-Era and miss the "good ol' days", like a wife misses her husband who's on a business trip cross country. Guys like Trump and Bachman may not be racist, but they are happily catering to the lowest common denominator in our country, which is much worse and more harmful to our society. It's time we moved on from this silly and stupid episode and turn our attention to more important matters, and put people like the Birthers and "The Donald" where they belong: back in the sandbox where they can continue to play pretend.

Shame on you, Peter King

During the 1950's, as America was under threat of the Red Scare, one elected official rode that wave and used it to shamelessly and carelessly exploit the fears Americans had about communism. His witch-hunt on "suspected" communists destroyed careers and ruined personal lives, and targeted those who had the courage of their convictions to show that the self-appointed emperor wears no clothes.

That man's name was Joseph McCarthy, the Senator from Wisconsin.

Decades later, one Congressman is shamelessly trying to follow in his disgraceful footsteps: Peter King, the chairman of Homeland Security Committee, of New York's 3rd District. Today was the first day of King holding hearings regarding the suspected radicalization of American Muslims, and it began with another Congressman, Keith Ellison of Minnesota's 5th District, recollecting the story of a Muslim-American firefighter who died trying to rescue other people on 9/11.



Not only is this hearing a waste of time, but this piece of political grandstanding by King is an insult to Muslim-Americans everywhere and a deeply cynical ploy used by King to further solidify himself in the eyes of many bigoted and paranoid lock-step members of the far-right as someone who's taking the fight to Al-Qaeda and keeping Americans safe. If you want to know why most Americans give Congress low approval ratings, stunts like the one Peter King pulled, are a shining example why.