Addict

As a break from the Orwellian politics of USA 2006, here's a way to waste more time than reading blogs, with a lot less content to gum up your grain.

I've been a big fan of Corn Nuts in their original incarnation ("Ranch" flavored anything? Are you kidding me?) and enjoy their satisfying crunch. In keeping with the addictiveness of the snack brand, here's a puzzle they are running on their web site:

Ultra Block

I've linked to the Hedonista version because it was larger on my screen, hence more playable than the one that exists on the company's site, but I'm sure they have other fine games at Corn Nuts as well.

As with the Stronghold 2 mini-game I posted on a month ago, this is a very simple, very wasteful, very fun game. I've managed to reach Level 17, although it took awhile to get there. Think Tetris meets Minesweeper, and you've got the idea.

Looking forward to your cursing me out, but that's what the comments section is for, isn't it?

Moves

You heard it here first, right?

Well, I'm not going to say that Al Gore is in the race for 2008 yet, but he's doing some kind of campaign prep, per the NY Daily News "getting the band back together" with the hiring of presidential politics vet Roy Neel. Maybe it's just for his new movie and book, maybe it's just for a win in the marketplace of ideas. But the buzz is rising.

Check out this powerful movie trailer, and you'll find Al does something for the environment that the GOP do for terrorism: he hits the fear button. For some reason, his case seems so much more airtight than, say, WMDs in Iraq. As I said before, he's got ownership of a Big Vision Issue. Tie it in with igniting a countrywide alternative energy program to get off the oil, you've got a national security policy as well.

I'm looking forward to the Fox News smears against the picture, the phony scientists they'll trot out to "debate" the idea of global warming, the reheated Internet invention jokes. I just think Al's got a thicker skin now. He's been through the worst -- how could he care what they say?

Per my earlier argument, it's the New Nixon model, the New Gore. Just read non-Dem Roger Stone:

Mr. Gore must again borrow from the Nixon playbook and reinvent himself. The "“New Gore"” is more relaxed: He'’s had time to think and reflect on the great challenges facing America. In his wilderness years, he has found himself. He is more self-effacing, funnier, cooler, easier-going, yet articulate and firm. The Al Gore who appeared on Jay Leno'’s show after the 2004 Presidential election is the Al Gore that voters could find attractive, just as the "“New Nixon"” who emerged on Jack Paar after the 1960 election was far more palatable than the pale, sweaty, shifty-eyed Nixon of the Nixon-Kennedy debates.

Longtime political consultant Dick Morris lays out the historical precedent:

History indicates that candidates who won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College have all come back to win revenge in subsequent elections. Andrew Jackson, cheated in 1824, won in 1828. Grover Cleveland, cheated in 1888, triumphed in 1892. Samuel Tilden, who won the popular vote in 1876, never ran again, but he dealt away the White House in a deal for the withdrawal for federal troops from the South, allowing the Ku Klux Klan to take over.

I hear more negs on Gore from friends on the left than more on the right. They see a loser...until they watch the trailer for An Inconvenient Truth. Then they remember that it is in the realm of possibility, lo and behold, to have a nation's leader who can put complex ideas into normal sentences and communicate something real and important, even if the manner is a little more stilted than we all might like.

How about a President who's good at more than just breaking things?

My guess is that Gore has plenty of time now -- at least until after the mid-term elections -- to keep promoting his movie/book combo, test the waters, see if he generates buzz and if it sticks. That way, if his public reputation isn't salvaged, he can just keep on campaigning to save the planet as a private citizen, no harm/no foul.

As Dick Morris closes out:

But Gore has three things going for him: A perception that he was robbed of the White House and Hillary'’s possible stubbornness in continuing to back the war.

The third thing? The weather. As the evidence of global climate change impresses everyone who doesn'’t work at the White House, Gore looks more and more like a man whose time may have come.

Run, Al, run.

Croniest

Anyone who thinks Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is going to be chased out of office by a load of retired U.S. generals, thousands of errors, or dense assholishness is sadly mistaken. Not only does he have acting Presidente Bush's renown loyalty to count on, he's got actual President Cheney's -- after all, it's Rummy who gave then Congressman Cheney his first White House gig, back with Tricky Dick Nixon's administration. And we all know how well that turned out.

But the main reason Rummy stays is our upcoming Executive War with Iran. Like a sequence out of Groundhog Day, we're reliving the same build-up to a "preemptive" war with Iran as we did with Iraq, only this time the consequences are likely to blowback on us bigtime. Expect the same level of sensitivity to real world costs this time around.

The whole point is that this gang has the levers of power and they are not about to give them up. They plan on using them. They plan on using the strategies they have been developing in detail for the attack, to fire off those guns, missles and maybe even nuclear bombs they've bought, to use it all before they lose it.

If you haven't read it yet, get your gutcheck with Seymour Hersh in his recent New Yorker article. Most chilling (or chillin', depending on your political bent) passage:

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was "absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb"” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do "“what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,"” and "that saving Iran is going to be his legacy."”

Let's party.

If you think you have any redress short of beaming high-powered microwaves into Dick Cheney's office and hoping for a pacemaker short, check out the huge layers of secrecy with which he surrounds himself. You, the tax-paying American, the one who pay's his salary and is supposedly, along with the rest of the country, his boss, you can even know who actually works for him.

His press people seem shocked that a reporter would even ask for an interview with the staff. The blanket answer is no -- nobody is available. Amazingly, the vice president'’s office flatly refuses to even disclose who works there, or what their titles are. "“We just don'’t give out that kind of information," says Jennifer Mayfield, another of Cheney'’s "“angels."” She won'’t say who is on staff, or what they do? No, she insists. "“It'’s just not something we talk about."” The notoriously silent OVP staff rebuffs not just pesky reporters but even innocuous database researchers from companies like Carroll Publishing, which puts out the quarterly Federal Directory.

Is it hyperbole to ask, "Is this fascism?"

To wit:

Benito Mussolini, the modern father of fascism, wrote that it "should be properly called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power" adding that "Fascism .. believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism .. . War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it."

Hey, don't listen to me; take it from Benito.

Business

The only reality show currently on my playlist is The Apprentice. I think this show gets way too little cred, maybe because Trump rubs certain folks the wrong way.

The only reality contest show that I think has a comparable reveal of character is American Idol, and I haven't been able to bring myself to watch it this season. I've lived through three seasons and it's enough for now. I had high hopes for Bo, but after that roller coaster I'm thinking no one will ever be a cooler Idol than Fantasia. She still has yet to make that awesomely legit post-Idol album, but she's got the uniqueness and raw talent to make good on the promise. "Get out there and get ugly," she advised when asked by the Idol finalists last year, right after getting out on the floor and getting uglier than Aretha Franklin, Tina Turner, and Janis Joplin combined. Right on, Fantasia, Idol's 1st single mom champion.

What keeps me coming back to The Apprentice is that there's a legitimate business lesson a week, acted out as morality play. Other folks I know in business, I mean any kind of business, often find it appealing the same way.

What's given the show legs is that supposedly The Donald took a more active hand in the selection process after the third season (almost all losers) and starting last season the 18-person candidate pool has overall been much better. They still throw in the time-bomb characters, but there appear to be 4 or 5 hirable contestants this year, more and more likeable as well.

I believe Season 1 pioneer Apprentice Bill Rancic will always be the topdog. Of any candidate I've seen, even in retrospect Bill seems the most all-together, and he's being heavily featured this season subbing for George as advisor. Bill had one or two guest advisor shots last season, but he evidently passed his screen test and is increasingly vocal; very, very tough in the boardroom and even during the tasks. He and Caroline are now like advance dogs for Donald, an elegant, attractive, sadistic duo out of a really excellent Fassbinder film, maybe Chinese Roulette.

The truly astonishing thing about Bill, and you know the producers see it because they shoot him in profile all the time, is how much he resembles Montgomery Clift.

After the first commercial on every show there's a title card with the business lesson of the week, then Trump addressing the camera on the topic intercut with stagy bits of him supposedly acting out the theme in real-life business. Often the business lesson you really learn is either off of the stated theme (which will then act as a kind of "B" theme) or it's much more compelling than you'd think from that introductory sequence. In any case, it's for real, because there is always a losing team and someone on that team is always fired. Sometimes more than one -- we've seen up to four at once (last season -- very funny squished into the exit cab together at the ep's end).

There's a lot of ritual to the show's format, and it gets especially juicy once the boardroom begins, the dramatic clock-tick music, the meeting at night, the jeopardy. As the cast shrinks we're heavy with the survivors, the ones we've taken a kinder to, the ones we're looking to fall. The falls now, when they come, can be epic. Thanks to the improved casting, our rooting interest is much higher than in, say, the first season, where it ended up being so much about Omarossa, happily playing the villain.

To anyone following or ready to jump in for this season, I'm liking Allie (a lot), Sean (and those two are looking like an item), Roxanne (if she proves it with another win as Project Manager), and am okay with Andrea if she stops being a Harryhausen blue eye-beam stone creature come to marauding life.

As for The Donald, he's blow-dried and self-important, but he's also a Mogul of the People. He's not afraid to say what he thinks New York style, he looks comfortable and genuine when he kisses the little African-American girl dying of cancer, he emphasizes corporate citizen charity over many episodes, and he makes fun of his own hair.

Most of all, he's made a show that, especially as the season hones down, is probably more made-for-adults as any competitive reality series on the air. The Ohio Players sing "Money" over the opening title and we read, "It's just business."

Yep. That's why I dig it.

Risk!

I've managed to keep up with a post each day while being on vacation this past week. While they may not be the longer/deeper pieces, I'm happy to have kept up the string started early last month.

Part of what has made it hard to post is that for the past few days I've been in Brooklyn, NY, where the evenings are usually spent playing perhaps the world's greatest board game, Risk, with my two nephews. They're vicious, and love to gang up on lil' ol' me, and our dealmaking is serpentine all along the way (although each of us does stand by his word -- no welching).

In honor of this fine game, I offer something to those who don't really know the game as well as for those who do.

For those who don't know the game, here's the Wikipedia page, which opens its entry with this broad description:

Risk is a commercial turn-based strategy board game produced by Parker Brothers, a division of Hasbro. It was invented in the early 1950s by the French movie director Albert Lamorisse. Risk shares many characteristics with wargames, yet relative to other war games, it is simple and abstract. It makes little attempt to accurately simulate military strategy, the size of the world, the logistics of long campaigns or real-world luck.

There's a weird movie connection in that Lamorisse directed the oft-viewed 1956 short, The Red Balloon (Le Ballon rouge). That's two nifty accomplishments for the guy -- a classic internationally successful short and the best mass-market board game since chess.

For the Risk fans, here's some interesting links:

A brief Risk history

A more personal yet more comprehensive evolutionary history of Risk

Several online clones -- can't tell you if these are considered copyright infringements on not, but they are available so one can only assume Hasbro can't cut them down -- some free, some free demos:

Lux Deluxe

MissionRisk

Final Conquest

Dominate

Conquest

I haven't checked them out so if anyone does and can vouch for quality, give us the word.

And remember, no matter how tense your game may be, it's like a relaxing vacation compared to the current high-stakes game of global domination unfolding in the real world right now...

Talk

I've turn a few friends onto this site, so excuse me if it's a rerun for you, but if you really want to waste some excellent time, check out Overheard in New York.

It's all reportage, purporting to be actual conversation snippets from the streets of America's greatest city (and arguably that of the world as well). Each quote comes with a snarky headline a la Esquire magazine's annual Dubious Achievement Awards (i.e. wiseguy editorial punchline comes first).

Here's a sample:

We Never Snorted Candy at Stuyvesant
Bronx Science boy: I have pixie sticks.
Bronx Science girl: I love pixie sticks. Have you ever tried to snort them?
Bronx Science boy: Yeah, once I snorted a lot because I wanted to get high and my nose started gushing blood.
--1/9 train
Overheard by: chella

And that's from last year.

Strangely enough, site editor/co-founder Michael Malice is now the subject of an American Splendor graphic novel written by Harvey Pekar. In it, according to reviews, Malice comes across as a know-it-all jerk until the last part of the book, when the humanity comes through.

How New York City of him!

1970

One of my favorite blogs from the comic book works is Dial B for Blog, which is a play on the title of DC Silver Age comic, Dial H for Hero, about a normal boy with a magical rotary phone dialer that could turn him into any hero appropriate for that issue's situation, i.e. villain. It was a great device for opening the imagination -- a different hero each month!

This week this Silver Age-oriented blog (mid-1950's to early 1970's) covers one of the most significant advances in the history of comic books, when certain comics creators broke from the strictures of the Comics Code Authority and at last started dealing with contemporary social problems. One of the first and best to do this was the celebrated writer/artist team of Dennis "Denny" O'Neil and Neal Adams (sometimes called Denny O'Neal Adams) and their remarkable Green Lantern/Green Arrow run. Check it out:

Great Art and Bold Storytelling

The focus here is on the last in their 12-issue run of relevant stories, which dealt with racism, heroin abuse, Native American rights -- all previously out-of-bounds due to comics industry strictures initiated in response to the Congressional horror comics hearings of the mid-1950's.

This final story in their run concerns a latter-day Jesus Christ who puts his life on the line to stop pollution. I don't want to steal any thunder from blogger "Robby Reed" (his nom de web the same as the boy hero of the Dial H comic). But let's just say they ended with a bang, and while I can't find that last page reprinted anywhere on the web, it's worth seeking out. Best last line of any comic I've ever read: "Send me the bill."

(If there's interest, I'll explain in comments.)

Theirs was a uniquely powerful writer/artist team, and their work included some of the best Batman stories, including the creation of Ra's Al Ghul, immortalized on the silver screen in last year's Batman Begins feature film.

Denny O'Neil was a big step up in comic book writer/editors, a man of his time who took the medium seriously. In Neal Adams, he had the perfect collaborator.

Adams brought a new graphic realism to the comic world, drawings that seemed more real than anything before and most of what has come after, adult in layout and use of line, nothing kiddie about it but still very easy to follow and appreciate.

If there's a cinematic equivalent of Neal Adams right now it might be George Clooney's work as director of Good Night & Good Luck and producer/star of Syriana. Both artists have created images that are sharp and clear yet with a certain stylishness all their own. Maybe that style is immediacy. Others may disagree, but I've found that in each case there's never too great an imbalance between pictorial values and social relevance.

I like being entertained where it's assumed I'm an adult. In no small part, such possibilities opened up for me way back in 1970 thanks to Mr. O'Neil and Mr. Adams, with their real life-meets-superhero breakthroughs.

Crucial

Okay, so while I'm dying to get back to the entertainment, there's just too much riding on the Bush response to Iran right now that I have to get some last licks in.

First off, don't believe the hype about "Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says" disseminating out of Bloomberg News. It's coming straight from the man who gave us the Niger bamboozlement that's led to the White House's Valerie Plame revenge outing, per Talking Points Memo. That means the very same Administration liars are at it again.

Second, Bush is just taking advantage of what the President of Iran, asshole Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is using to try and bolster that country's hard-line government's 15% approval rating. Right now, Iran can't make nuclear weapons.

So you have two hard-line leaders trying to shore up their pitiful numbers by fomenting war. Why do we have to play this game when Iran is asking for high-level talks?

If you think I've answered that question, think for a moment about George Bush and those hardcore followers of his who believe in the End Times. Last month in Cleveland he wouldn't even denying believing in The Apocalypse.

If nothing else, the informed public should just remember the deliberate lies that got us into the current Iraq debacle. Even Colin Powell does.

Fooled

With a deja-vu Iran debacle on our doorsteps (not an eminent threat, Bush Administration refusing entreaties for one-on-one talks), here's some more evidence that those who think had best speak loud and clear before it's too late:

Another Retired General who was Against the War

I just wonder why these clowns think that threats of war are actually going to deter any nuclear steps in Iran if there's absurdly blatant displays like this.

Doesn't that make one think some leaders over there want the U.S. to attack? How better to turn the most pro-U.S. country (that's the populace) against America than by igniting strident nationalism?

(In case you're looking for a sign, if you read about a bunch of U.S. Generals retiring in one short time period, that means George & Dick's WWIII is on.)

Fool me once, shame on you. "Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Kids

Haven't seen this yet, but the trailer looks great and all critical word is excellent:

Duck Season

I'm thinking, is the title along with the black & white photographed comedy some sort of reference to the Marx Brothers?

Looking at an extraordinary 91% score on Rotten Tomatoes as well. Seems almost everyone loves it, save some A-hole in the Village Voice...go figure.

If anyone sees it before me, drop a comment on what you think.

News

In case you're one of those blue-staters who wonders if the rest of the country is even aware of all the facts that seems so self-evident and mind-blowingly awful to even the least informed in your current events world, here's a visual rundown of how under siege our current Executive leadership is this particular moment in U.S. history:

Reckless Administration Headlines

I wish I could tell you with certainty this all this is going to lead to some sort of comment sense judgment day where GWB and cronies are called to task or at least neutralized before igniting WWIII, but I put too much stock in the smug vindictiveness at the top. Expect the Iran attacks to begin, Congressional authority (rubber stamp) or not, if Bush-Cheney-Rove & Co. think it will swing the mid-term elections their way in November.

I believe there's a point coming, not too long from now, where you will be called to speak out, louder than before we fomented war with Iraq, when the drums of war will be playing.

Get ready to make your stand or live -- or die -- with the consequences.

Buffs

The Writers Guild of America has just come out with their list of the 101 Greatest Screenplays, a.k.a. the 101 Greastest Hollywood Screenplays, or something like that. Except for The Third Man, 8 1/2, La Grande Illusion...you get the picture. In any case the main value of such a list is some fun exploration for film nerds like me and maybe you, hours of enjoyment.

Each entry on the list has a link to "Facts About the Film" so you can spend a lot of time learning some details you might not know about the making of these esteemed screenplays/flicks. Then there's a last layer of drilldown where you can "Read a Page from the Screenplay of" that particular movie. Annie Hall's is particularly funny.

There's the usual problems with a list like this. Taking Annie Hall for example. It's been widely documently that the movie was made in the editing room, with Allen completely restructuring what he wrote and shot, going out to shoot more material, creating a success that could not have come strictly from writing but required, uh, filmmaking.

There's most of the Hitchcock movies down near the bottom of the list. (Notorious at #101? Below When Harry Met Sally, Moonstruck, Thelma & Louise? No Vertigo??) There's injustices galore in the ordering and omissions, all good fun to rage over.

Yet there's one thing about the list that's a surefire insurance policy against total dismissal.

It's tough to argue that Casablanca doesn't deserve that #1 spot.

Leaktaker

Should the President of the United States, whoever he is, by nature of being elected to a four year term by the people, be able to eavesdrop on the telephone calls of any American citizen he so chooses? Should it only be when he suspects they are somehow connected to terrorist activity?

What if he's the only one who believes it, or says he does. Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't. If he doesn't, if it's all an act for some other purpose, if his motives are impure, should those under him be required to follow his orders no matter what?

Should he be able to detain any American citizen that he avers, in public or private, to be a terrorist or aiding and abetting terrorists (Islamic? Northern Irish?) without any extra-Presidential, extra-Party oversight or accountability? Should he be able to order that American citizen taken from his or her home and flown to a hidden detention facility in another country? Does that chain of events automatically make it okay (and legal) to torture that citizen?

Should any elected or unelected (succession) U.S. President be able to, whenever he or she finds it politically expedient, blow the cover of an American citizen who has given their life in undercover service to their country, taken great risks to serve a government institution purported to protect our liberty?

Should such a President be able to do, like, electricity and pass that authority to anyone he or she wants? And should that person be somehow "vested" with the authority to have a third person blow the cover of that American citizen civil servant? Is that a Constitutional power of, say, a Vice President, that second leg of electricity?

Should our United States of America President, him or her, have the authority to personally shoot or kill anyone they want if they say that they believe this person is a terrorist? Does that have to be in time of war? Can the President declare wartime, kinda trumping the United States Congress' Constitutional authority just by saying so?

Should the President be able to sign anything he/she wants into law regardless of it being passed by Congress? Can he rule by decree, like in wartime? Should he?

Should the President be able to tell the guy next to him, maybe the Vice President, "Hey, shoot that guy right now, he's a terrorist," and the Vice President can shoot the guy or tell his underling to do it? And there's no punishment if they're wrong?

Is it true, as Richard Nixon said on the way to resigning amidst the biggest Presidential scandal in U.S. history, that "if the President does it, it's legal?"

Like a king?

Should it be?

If the President is out walking around downtown with his Secret Service detail and decides he or she just wants to take a leak on someone, maybe saying they're terrorist trash or are helping terrorists or hurting our chances of going to war, maybe the President is drunk or coked or mentally ill, maybe the President just likes being a son of a bitch, should this President be allowed to lay a long steaming yellow stream on that U.S. citizen?

Maybe a foreigner? Especially if it's a time of war or President He/She says it is?

Should that be legal?

Is it already?

Is that breaking the law?

Phony

... he started telling us how he was never ashamed, when he was in some kind of trouble or something, to get right down on his knees and pray to God. He told us we should always pray to God - talk to Him and all - whenever we were. He told us we ought to think of Jesus as our buddy and all. He said he talked to Jesus all the time. Even when he was driving in his car. That killed me. I can just see the big phony bastard shifting into first gear and asking Jesus to send him a few more stiffs.
- J. D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye

Two notable events today: a decent citizen excoriates President George Bush during one of his typically canned public snake oil events, and it is revealed that Scooter Libby, indicted for revealing the secret identity of a CIA agent, is claiming in court papers that Bush not only knew all about the leak, he fucking authorized it.

Let's start with Mr. Harry Taylor, looking as honest as a classically American Norman Rockwell figure. Somehow he made his way into the event, and stands up to say to Bush's face that:

“I feel like despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration. And I would hope from time to time that you have the humility and grace to be ashamed of yourself.”

Bush's response:

I'’m not your favorite guy.

Take a look at the video here, courtesy of Crooks & Liars.

Bush doesn't even answer his question directly, instead heading for the usual lies about wanting to do his NSA wiretaps constitutionally, that his lawyers told him it was constitutional, that he consulted with members of both parties in Congress on it.

It's easy to call Bush a liar, ever since his infamous 16 words claiming Saddam Hussain had sought uranium from Niger in his 2003 State of the Union address, the year he started the Iraq War, because he's never made amends for it. What's clear from watching the video of this Truman-esque Harry vs. Bush is that he's too phony to ever do anything of the kind.

Bush looks eager to answer, as if he's prepped with talking points for this kind of question, from this kind of mild-mannered citizen. It's a bit of a bully move from his bully pulpit, but most of what comes across is how insufferably smug El Presidente is. See how much pleasure he's getting in standing strong by his illegal activity, his power to drag America into war and not be held accountable, so perverse considering how much blood -- American and innocent Iraqi -- has been spilt.

This is a guy who enjoys being an asshole. Is it any surprise that away from the cameras he curses like a sailor? People think of him as a Texas boy, but he's a preppie, a smug, self-congratulatory, insular prep school kid who has an empathy deficiency.

As Holden Caufield says of his own prep school elsewhere in The Catcher in the Rye:

Pencey was full of crooks. Quite a few guys came from these wealthy families, but it was full of crooks anyway. The more expensive a school is, the more crooks it has - I'm not kidding.

Low on empathy, high on smug. Why did Cindy Sheehan protest the President? It was a reaction to being invited to the White House in an event supposedly honoring 15 dead soldiers. Her experience:

"He wouldn't look at the pictures of [my son] Casey. He didn't even know Casey's name. He came in the room and the very first thing he said is, 'So who are we honoring here?' He didn't even know Casey's name. He didn't want to hear it. He didn't want to hear anything about Casey. He wouldn't even call him 'him' or 'he.' He called him 'your loved one.' Every time we tried to talk about Casey and how much we missed him, he would change the subject. And he acted like it was a party."

Now, the other incredible news today goes right back to that great big State of the Union lie. The Joe Wilson story has been covered well elsewhere, particularly by Juan Cole, and if you need the background I urge you to read it. But again, that phony-baloney Bush said, when the news of the leak first broke,

There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. If there's leaks out of my administration, I want to know who it is, and if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of.

Now, in the Bush Administration, "being taken care of" might mean being commendated for dereliction of duty or subversion of the public trust. However, he did later clarify that that if anyone on his staff committed a crime in the CIA leak case, that person will "no longer work in my administration."

So, if Libby is telling the truth and Bush somehow authorized Vice President Richard "Dick" Cheney to authorize I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to leak the name of a CIA agent to a reporter, putting that agent and anyone she ever associated with while undercover in foreign countries in grave danger, does this mean Bush will fire himself?

Ahh, the real Bush. Bush the vindictive. Bush the hypocrite.

I'm betting he'll give himself a medal.

Dashiell

For much of the past few years my favorite writer on film, the one who gives me the most pleasure to read, is Chris Dashiell. I watched him getting into the movie opinion mix on the Cinema-L mailing list starting in the late '90's (remember them?) and was fortunate enough to occasionally contribute to Cinescene during his fecund period as editor.

Since those early days Chris has developed into a the in-house film critic for KXCI radio in Tucson, Arizona, where he has the FLICKS on-line and podcast review series. For a guy who lives where he does, he sees a hell of a lot of really excellent movies. He's able to see a lot of them projected as well, although the DVDs augment his diet, which goes heavy on independent, foreign, classics and forgotten classics.

Chris refers to himself as The Film Snob and while his standards are relatively rigorous, he writes in an easily communicative style, one which tends to lay enough background to educate while giving a thorough, sharply observed, eminently readable opinion.

Here's Chris' Signs and Wonders: A Film Snob's Favorites of '05, published on Cinescene where he still contributes. I've seen three of his top ten and of six the "B-sides":

1. The Holy Girl (Lucrecia Martel)
2. 2046 (Wong Kar-Wai)
3. Kings and Queen (Arnaud Desplechin)
4. Last Days (Gus Van Sant)
5. Turtles Can Fly (Bahman Gohbadi)
6. Mysterious Skin (Gregg Araki)
7. A History of Violence (David Cronenberg)
8. Occupation: Dreamland (Garrett Scott & Ian Olds)
9. The Squid and the Whale (Noah Baumbach)
10. Born Into Brothels (Zana Briski & Ross Kauffman)

And now for the B-sides:

11. Nobody Knows (Hirokazu Koreeda)
12. Capote (Bennett Miller)
13. No Direction Home (Martin Scorsese)
14. Notre Musique (Jean-Luc Godard)
15. Grizzly Man (Werner Herzog)
16. Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (Nick Park & Steve Box)
17. Look At Me (Agnes Jaoui)
18. Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee)
19. Moolaade (Ousmane Sembene)
20. Howl's Moving Castle (Hayao Miyazaki)

There's a great archive of Chris' Cinescene Flicks series , some amazing pictures covered going back to the silents and all around the world, and it's possible to dig around the Dashiell archives there for more contemporary reviews by title and the index to his brilliant features, like his Katherine Hepburn piece, right after her death, 3,800 extremely well-chosen words covering her entire career.

But the writing that made the biggest impression on me and still does is a brilliantly researched 4-part piece on revolutionary Soviet directing genius Sergei Eisenstein's failed Que Viva Mexico. It's a great work of film history.

Eisenstein came to Hollywood in 1930, was feted by all the great filmmakers in town, couldn't make it work with the studios and eventually tried to make a movie in Mexico. Much of it was shot but not all or not enough, and he never edited it himself. In 1979 his assistant director from that time guided a "reconstruction".

Dashiell's piece interweaves scene-by-scene description of this reconstruction with the timeline of Eisenstein's history and analysis of his filmmaking practice, a very politically charged one due to the state-sponsored film system of post-revolutionary Russia. At a certain point under Joseph Stalin, Sergei was only allowed to teach filmmaking. At various points, Stalin sat next to him in the editing room.

And the final thing I like about Chris is his last name. I'm a big fan of the pioneering noir writer, Dashiell Hammett. I figure anyone with the same first name as Hammett has got to be cool.

So imagine how cool it must be to have Dashiell as your last name.

Downfall

The two themes of this blog are entertainment and politics, and how better to bring that combustible concoction back to the lab than how the fall from Congress of Tom Delay reminds me of my favorite film from 2005, the German picture, Downfall.

Downfall (Der Untergang) tells the story of Hitler's final days in the bunker, and those around him. We follow three somewhat "good" characters, in the sense that we can identify with them more than the bastard at the center of the drama, Adolf himself. The movie bore some criticism in Germany when released for depicting Hitler (played by world class genius actor Bruno Ganz) as a human being rather than metatextual monster, but that seems to me exactly the point.

Evil is not something out of literature, evil is a collection of choices in everyday life. Hitler's were those of a major league asshole. Those around Hitler choose various degrees of evil. Joseph Goebbels gets a strong second place, with his wife, Magda. I won't spoil it for anyone, but these two really provide the heart of darkness for this picture.

It's the empathetic characters that draw us in, Hitler's secretary (upon whose real life story much of the picture is based), architect Albert Speer who later did twenty years in Spandau and renounced his Nazism (writing the bestselling memoirs Inside the Third Reich), and a doctor who from my research seems the most fictionalized.

What's interesting and what relates to the story of Delay and Bushism is that when I watched Downfall, I felt the pull towards these characters due to abstract qualities all of us hold dear, most importantly that of loyalty.

I was driving around listening to Warren Olney's Which Way L.A.? radio talk show tonight, and there was some friend of Tom Delay's on the air. He was obviously loyal to Delay, and cited his work ethic as an example of his wonderful attributes.

Now, I can't agree more that hard work is a foundation ethic, and admire anyone who devotes themselves to a job, gets in early and leaves late, is thorough and dependable, makes things happen. But when I say it is an abstract quality, that's because the next question we should never forget to answer is, he worked hard for what?

If that hard work is to push us into an unnecessary war, deplete our national treasury to the point where government as we know it cannot function, and subvert the democratic process, then I'd rather he were lazy.

And so it is in Downfall. As the idealistic fantasy world of Hitler collapses, the Russians reaching the Berlin Gates on his birthday, Reichsfuhrer-SS Himmler scrambling in vain to make a deal with the Americans, officers sitting around his bunker shoving pistols into their own mouths, we find the "center of good" if there is one to be the secretary, who's innocent loyalty to Hitler is in sharp contrast to the high level rats deserting his sinking ship.

I saw the movie as a metaphor for any evil system into which otherwise decent people have put their faith and allegiance. The fact is that in this world there are leaders and there are followers, and sometimes the leaders are just plain bad. So the "abstract" notion of loyalty isn't enough, it's only the first level of goodness.

What's important is, what or who are you loyal to?

As Ernest Borgnine put it in Sam Peckinpah's epochal film The Wild Bunch, it's not just that you gave your word, "It's who you give it to!"

Now, I'm not saying that Bush and Co. are putting Jews in concentration camps. But they are authoritarian, impunity-free lawbreakers, who hold themselves accountable to basically no one. Given my political bent, I saw Downfall as a potent metaphor for what I hope might happen to this whole power-hungry Administration, and all the Congressional sycophants and other cronies who have hitched their wagon to the charismatic star of this particular President.

Senator Robert Byrd was the first politician I recall to note that our current radical Republican hegemony will not last forever. His floor speeches in the Senate showed the conviction of a man with basic, decent, core values which could no longer be breached by the popularity of a current movement or those in positions of great power.

Nothing lasts forever, and the harder they come, the harder they fall. We'll see how it all plays out, but until then, check out Downfall, and tell me if I'm right; tell me if it resonates.

Patriot

The invaluable Crooks and Liars has the video of Senator Russell Feingold in the lion's den, i.e. being interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News.

This is what I like to see -- a straight-talking, unflappable, responsible U.S. Senator laying out a reasonable, common sense case for censure of Presidente Bush.

Click here for Straight-Talkin' Russ.

Sad

Sad news: Rep. Tom Delay has decided not to seek re-election, even though he won the GOP Primary in his district. What good is it to gerrymander a district if you don't end up running in it?

I say "sad" because I relished the idea of running against Tom. Not just in his district, but nationwide. As long as he was running, every Democrat in any House race anywhere could run against the threat of Tom coming back with a Republican majority. How sad not to have that chance.

Tom says, "This had become a referendum on me. So it's better for me to step aside and let it be a referendum on ideas, Republican values and what's important for this district."

Could this new revelation that his alleged bribery conspiracy goes back several years before previously thought be the real reason?

I'm sad that he had to change his address from his house in the 22nd Texas district to his condo in Arlington, Virginia as an excuse to step down.

I'm sad that the GOP can pretend they've cleaned house and maybe win that district with a "fresh" face.

Mainly, I'm sad that Tom can now be free of office to create mayhem through the private sector and maybe even become the type of lobbyist from whom he used to take money, further poisoning the Federal well.

Unless, of course, he goes to jail.

Different

I've had one request to write something about this new season of The Sopranos and I've had a subsequent request to avoid any spoilers. So I'm just going to give a short observation on theme and try to avoid spoiling anything, but caveat emptor, dude, I'm only human.

This season is all about The Different Man, specifically Tony's deep desire to be someone other than who he is. The very first episode lays out plain the impossibility of any mobster ever turning over a new leaf, no matter how sincere their effort. There's no retiring, there's only a box on the way out, with a sole exception.

From the very first season, the biggest danger to Tony has always been a successful government informer. But to be successful at it you have to go into Federal Witness Protection, which means you (and your family, if you have one) taking on an entirely new identity in an entirely different part of the country. You can't contact anyone from your old life, even non-mobsters, if you don't want to blow your cover.

In Soprano World, that's the only way to become a different person, and you can bet you'll still be the same underneath the new identity. Thinking ahead to the series wrap-up, which will be some sort of 8 episode mini-season after these 13 have aired and gone, you have to wonder what will happen to Tony.

Assassination or other homicide, always possible. Suicide unlikely, but not out of the realm of possibility (history of depression, code of ancient Romans). Execution legal in New Jersey (although none since reinstated in 1982, last was 1976). Quitting impossible.

So the only thing left is for Tony to do just what he's murdered other people for, including some closest to him. It would be in keeping with the show's general irony. Maybe he'll be wrestling with that choice by the end of the season? An offer if he flips on the New York City bosses?

Tony's extended fantasy made this "different man" theme liminal, but I finally got it when Tony was given Watergate co-conspirator Chuck Colson's autobiography and told Chuck gave himself over to God while in prison to come out "a different man."

Tony's problem has always been that Tony has a conscience. It's more than vestigial but obviously way underdeveloped, hooded even. Within his gangster world, it doesn't pay to follow it, but ever since starting treatment with Dr. Melfy (MILFy?) he's been grappling with it. There's a possibility that Tony receives some sort of heavenly grace, maybe if he renounces his evil ways as a lead up to taking a bullet.

I can see the moral relativism (Tony's conscience, candor and cunning are why he comes off better than everyone else) but I think the show invites you to take a moral absolutist view more than it lets on. Tony is the devil; everything he and his families touch turns to shit.

No matter how much we identify with his suburban family trials and middle class capitalist tribulations, this is a guy for whom death is too good a punishment. And he is the best of the lot.

Maybe Tony's ultimate punishment will be to become that different person, in the Program. Like Ray Liotta at the end of the show's big inspiration, Goodfellas, how about Tony in his bathrobe picking up his newspaper, only this time it's on the front stoop of his brand new Arizona home?

Righteous

Finally got to see V for Vendetta tonight. Phew.

As expected, Natalie Portman did a terrific job carrying the movie, the emotional core. At 25 years old I can't imagine a better actress of her generation, although we'll see who comes along in the next, say, 5 to 15 years. I don't want to go into a full analysis of the film and its style and politics just now, want to let some of it sink in, talk to friends, decide if it's even worth writing about, but I am itching to print some headlines.

The big news is that it's a hard rockin' rock & roll movie, the first good one in a long time, the first good Hollywood one since, unless someone can remind me otherwise, Fight Club. Don't start hammering that they're not in the same league, because I might just agree with you, but they both have a genuine anarchist sensibility in that the film artists give you a big anti-establishment ideological thrust but either stop short or blow past actually telling you what to think.

It's kickass spectacle with punk rock politics, even referencing the Sex Pistols with a doctored "God Save the Queen" poster. It is the most Brechtian Joel Silver movie imaginable. Although the plot is insane, it holds together with more narrative intention than any Wachowski Brothers script since The Matrix.

Since I am unfamiliar with the Alan Moore/David Lloyd comic I can't say how true it is to Mr. Moore's creator's vision, for all I know it's a travesty. On the other hand, who am I to rely on Mr. Moore's condemnation. He had his credit pulled early in production reportedly due to some lie Producer Silver said in public (how else would he expect Silver to stay in the guild?) and has made it clear that he's never going to see it.

As a movie, it's invigorating, unless you're the type of viewer who would find it irresponsible, that it will automatically inspire a bunch of kids to go terrorist and blow up the Capitol. If you believe this movie could cause that to happen, you may find yourself invigorated in a way perhaps contrary to how I felt.

V for Vendetta is a worthy big screen experience, evidently a hit with the kids in IMAX. Right from the beginning the images are complex and beguiling, lots of detail moving very quickly, that striking 1984 post-pop production design. The theater gets quite a buzz, and there were some confused patrons applauding as Rolling Stones "Street Fighting Man" kicked in over the end credits. If, like them, I had mistakenly thought I was at a stage play, I would have joined in.

In my book, all that spells entertainment.

Anyone else out there who's seen it feel strongly about this flick, one way or the other?